|Home||Switchboard||Unix Administration||Red Hat||TCP/IP Networks||Neoliberalism||Toxic Managers|
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Bigger doesn't imply better. Bigger often is a sign of obesity, of lost control, of overcomplexity, of cancerous cells
|News||Who Rules America||Recommended books||Recommended Links||Economic costs of American Exceptionalism||American imperialism: the attempt to secure global hegemony||What's the Matter with Kansas|
|Andrew Bacevich on the American militarism||Diplomacy by deception||American imperialism: the attempt to secure global hegemony||Big Uncle is Watching You||Industrial Espionage||Edward Snowden as Symbol of Resistance to National Security State||Damage to the US tech companies|
|National Security State||Corporatism||Resurgence of neofascism as reaction on crisis of neoliberalism and neoliberal globalization||Neoconservatism as a stage of development of Neoliberalism||Anatol Leiven on American Messianism||Understanding Mayberry Machiavellians (Rovism)||The History of Media-Military-Industrial Complex Concept|
|Narcissism as Key American Value||Anti-Americanism||Nation under attack meme||National Socialism and Military Keysianism||Corporatist Corruption: Systemic Fraud under Clinton-Bush-Obama Regime||Authoritarian Corporatism||Terrorism as a smokesreen for National Security State implementation|
|Elite [Dominance] Theory And the Revolt of the Elite||Fighting Russophobia||Is national security state in the USA gone rogue ?||American Exceptionalism as Civil Religion||Fighting Neo-Theocracy||Inside democratization hypocrisy fair||The Unlikely History of American Exceptionalism Walter A. McDougall|
|Quotes||Mark Twain Quotes||Niccolo Machiavelli||Reinhold Niebuhr||Propaganda Quotes||Politically Incorrect Humor||Etc|
|I call it a tribal phenomena. A tribe can be a religion, a nation, a gender, a race, or any group which is different
from the group you identify with. It is not confined to religion.
And it seems to be an inherent trait in the human species that was one aspect of our evolution. Only when we learn that it is better to cooperate with each other rather than kill each other will we be free from this deadly disease which may, in the end, destroy us all.
sheridan44 comment in The Guardian
“[American exceptionalism] is a reaction to the inability of people to understand global complexity or important issues like American energy dependency. Therefore, they search for simplistic sources of comfort and clarity. And the people that they are now selecting to be, so to speak, the spokespersons of their anxieties are, in most cases, stunningly ignorant.”
According to George Soros, the events of 9/11 renewed a "distorted view" of American supremacy that "postulates that because we are stronger than others, we must know better and we must have right on our side." In other words 9/11 was important step to the transformation of the USA in the "National Security State" with the permanent regime of Total survellance" over the population. The next step were events of 2008, which signified crisis of neoliberalism as an ideology. Neoliberalism now can mostly be propagated by brute force, via military intervention or some form of coup d'état (aka color revolutions) much like Trotskyites planned to propagate socialism to other countries via Permanent Revolution. With "Democracy promotion" instead of "liberation of proletariat".
Rise of American exeptionalism is also connected with the reaction to neoliberalism with its redistribution of wealth up by most of US population. Actually this is global phenomenon: neoliberalism gives strong impulse to the rise of neofascism in many countries, not only in the USA. As William I. Robinson noted in his article Global Capitalism Crisis of Humanity and the Specter of 21st Century Fascism
Yet another response [ to globalization] is that I term 21st century fascism.5 The ultra-right is an insurgent force in many countries. In broad strokes, this project seeks to fuse reactionary political power with transnational capital and to organise a mass base among historically privileged sectors of the global working class – such as white workers in the North and middle layers in the South – that are now experiencing heightened insecurity and the specter of downward mobility. It involves militarism, extreme masculinisation, homophobia, racism and racist mobilisations, including the search for scapegoats, such as immigrant workers and, in the West, Muslims.
Twenty-first century fascism evokes mystifying ideologies, often involving race/culture supremacy and xenophobia, embracing an idealised and mythical past. Neo-fascist culture normalises and glamorises warfare and social violence, indeed, generates a fascination with domination that is portrayed even as heroic.
American exceptionalism is unique in many ways as it does not include mass mobilization (see Inverted Totalitarism). "Go shopping" famously recommended George W Bush after 9/11. It should probably be more correctly called US-specific version of far right nationalism. The latter is a milder variant of one that existed in 30th of the last century in national-socialist countries of Europe, such as Italy and Spain, which does not necessarily employ physical violence against political opponents.
The sad fact is that the America of today is even more arrogant than the America in the days of Manifest Destiny and gunboat diplomacy. Indeed, the dissolution of the USSR cemented the national myth of superiority. The establishment of unparalleled industrial might, military victories in two world wars and on both sides of the globe, and the staggering economic defeat of Communism in the Cold War all have combined to cement America’s presumption of chapters in a long history of escalating national illusions of pre-eminence and blind national egoism. The dominant view about the USA from most countries is that it has a split paranoid personality, a “Jekyll and Hyde” America, “a democracy inside, an empire outside.” American policy makers, with their pretensions of global superiority after collapse of the USSR and with ever-increasing power of their military machine moved steadily toward making the whole globe a US preserve. Despite its vulgarity and borderline obsession with pornography (or may be because of that) the US culture made inroad all over the globe, and even in Europe and Russia despite rich cultural traditions of both. While the blatant American imperialism of the turn of the last century is now only a memory, today the nations face policies evidence more insidious brands of imperialism: cultural imperialism, economic imperialism, the imperialism of neoliberal ideology and forced globalization on the US terms. All are spread by the same national arrogance, the same cock-sure certainly that we are right. Many nations fear the United States practices a contemporary brand of “soft imperialism,” enslaving nations with IMF debt meachisms under the auspice of economic globalization. Converting the Third World in debt slaves or simply exploit it. In spite of such fears, and despite the setbacks, Americans remain convinced that eventually all nations are destined to fall into step and adopt “the American way.” All the while, the US politicians decry the rigid fundamentalism of our enemies while we remain utterly blind to our own.
Americans have been, and are today, exposed almost from birth to a particularly virulent strain of nationalism unlike that found in other modern nations. The resulting affliction stems from an unswerving faith in national superiority and uniqueness that is deeply ingrained in the American mind. Historically, these notions of superiority sprang from myths of the visions of chosen-ness, and high destiny; from the myth of frontier self-sufficiency; and finally from the perceived universality of American ideology and dominance of US culture and English language over the globe. While in some of us, nationalist feelings are not that pronounced, few of us are immune, and that is especially visible in times of anger, or fear. In spite of, and perhaps because of, our many strengths, practically all of us as Americans share this particularly prideful, unlovely, and potentially fatal weakness. In one form or another and to some degree or another, we carry national pride across the invisible boundary that separates benign patriotism from malignant far right nationalism. Hillary candidacy demonstrates that this process went too far and became really malignant:
Still, Americans are sure that they, like Woodrow Wilson, have seen “visions that other nations have not seen,” and that, accordingly, the United States’ mission has always been to become the “light of the world.”28 Indeed, from the very beginning, the American national identity was built on audacious visions of chosen-ness, destiny, and mission. Ronald Reagan was not the first nor the last in a long line of entrenched American visionaries to proclaim American exceptionalism, with its missionary implications of the Puritan “city on the hill,” no longer a stationary beacon, but an active force, the “leader of the free world” directing its forces against “empires of evil.”29
With such visions comes a warning: “the adoption of political and social values … as a framework for national identification is possible only if these values are based on some source of apparent ultimate truth which confers on them absolute validity — if they can claim universality.”30 If Americans unflinchingly believe that theirs is the single principle of Absolute Truth representing the universal interests of humankind, then any opposition will appear either criminal or inhuman.31 As Arthur Schlesinger Jr. puts it, “Those who are convinced that they have a monopoly on Truth always feel that they are saving the world when they slaughter heretics. Their object remains the making of the world over in the image of their dogmatic ideology — their goal is a monolithic world, organized on the principle of the infallibility of a single creed.”32 If Americans are so egotistical as to believe that their nation with its gleaming lamp of Ultimate Truth is the envy of the world, then they will perceive no wrong in trying to make the world over in America’s image, by whatever means. However, the world is a very complex and diverse place, and Ultimate Truth is a highly elusive and unstable substance. Thus, these are not only very arrogant ideas; they are also very dangerous ideas.
The way in which American elite as a whole relates with the rest of the world demonstrates a strong nationalistic (as in cultural nationalism) and chauvinistic point of view. That means that mass media presents events only from the particular point of view, that militarism is always encouraged and defended. With the considerable part of brainwashed lemmings (aka American public) believing that their nation, or culture, is superior to all others.
This view involves a unique mixture of prejudice, xenophobia and inter-group and in-group violence, with the latter directed at suppression of dissent. Indeed, the United States’ inflated sense of eminence create additional, non-economic stimulus for the country elite to act in fundamentally ethnocentric ways, and to to strive for unilateral rule of the world using military supremacy as door opener to resources of other nations. And first of all oil.
The other key support of American exeptionalism are large financial institutions, which depend on the success of the US "financial imperialism". We can view imperialism as ethnocentrism in action. And "financial imperialism" is very similar to "old-style" European imperialism, where European nations discovered new lands and imposed capitalism, their system of law and culture on the native peoples usually through violence. Like old colonies were forced to abandon their way of life and adopt a “superior” lifestyle and became resource base of metropolia, financial imperialism impose debt on other nations keeping them in a kind of debt slavery with the same result: they also became resource base for metropolia.
American exceptionalism might also have religious overtones as "citi on the hill" metaphor implies. It is not thus accidental that the first deep analyses of American exceptionalism was done by Niebuhr from the religious positions in his famous book The Irony of American History. Niebuhr as a theologian came to conclusion that it represents a sin that inevitably lead to the false allure of simple solutions and lack of appreciation of limits of power. In his opinion "Messianic consciousness" which constitute the core of American exceptionalism, was partially inherited form religious dogmas of early religious sects which came to colonize America. Those views were later enhanced and developed further by Professor Bacevich. See more details exposition of his views on the subject in the page New American Militarism
Any unbiased analysis of the nationalist activities leads to a disappointing conclusion: nationalists can behave as compradors: as enthusiastic servants of a foreign occupier of their own territory. In this case international banking cartel. Ukraine is one example, Serbia and Georgia are other but very similar examples. In the same way the USA can be viewed as a country occupied by financial oligarchy with most of its citizents converted into "debt slaves".
The policy which oppose exceptionalism is often called Noninterventionism
Noninterventionism is a rather clunky and unappealing label for a set of very appealing ideas: that the U.S. should mind its own business, act with restraint, respect other nations, refrain from unnecessary violence, and pursue peace. If future administrations took just a few of these as guiding principles for the conduct of foreign policy, America and the world would both be better off.
There were several important thinkers who contributed to understand of this complex and multifaceted, like any type of nationalism, phenomena. We will discuss (in breif) just four thinkers that made significant impact in understanding of this very complex concept. Among them:
American neo-conservatism is a closely related phenomenon. In this case the key point is that the pre-eminence of the USA as the sole superpower needs to be maintained at all costs and with wide use of military force. Among prominent neocons we can name Hillary Clinton and most of republican candidates for the presidency in the 2016 presidential race. That means that American exeptionalism is an establishment view, the view of the US elite, not some anomaly.
In his brilliant foreword to Niebuhr's book The Irony of American History Bacevich noted:
In Niebuhr's view, America's rise to power derived less from divine favor than from good fortune combines with a fierce determination to convert that good fortune in wealth and power. The good fortune cane in the form of vast landscape, rich in resources, ripe for exploitation, and apparently insulated from the bloody cockpit of [European] power politics. The determination found expression in a strategy of commercial and territorial expansionism that proved staggeringly successful, evidence not of superior virtue but of shrewdness punctuated with a considerable capacity for ruthlessness.
In describing America's rise to power Niebuhr does not shrink from using words like "hegemony" and "imperialism". His point is not to tag the United States with responsibility for all the world's evils. Rather, it is to suggest that it does not differ from other great powers as much as Americans may imagine.
...Niebuhr has little patience for those who portray the United States as acting on God's behalf. "All men are naturally inclined to obscure the morally ambiguous element in this political cause by investing it with religious sanctity," he once observed. " This is why religion is more frequently a source of confusion then of light in the political realm.". In the United States, he continued "The tendency to equate our political [goals] with our Christian convictions cause politics to generate idolatry."
In the introduction to American Exceptionalism and Human Rights Michael Ignatieff identifies three main types of exceptionalism:
I would add to it
The contributors to American Exceptionalism and Human Rights use Ignatieff's essay as a starting point to discuss specific types of exceptionalism -- America's approach to capital punishment and to free speech, for example -- or to explore the social, cultural, and institutional roots of exceptionalism.
The second important contribution to to the studies of American exceptionalism is Anatol Lieven. He correctly linked American exceptionalism with far right nationalism which Wikipedia defined as
Far-right politics or extreme-right politics are right-wing politics to the right of the mainstream centre right on the traditional left-right spectrum. They often involve a focus on tradition as opposed to policies and customs that are regarded as reflective of modernism. They tend to include disregard or disdain for egalitarianism, if not overt support for social inequality and social hierarchy, elements of social conservatism and opposition to most forms of liberalism and socialism.
"America keeps a fine house," Anatol Lieven writes in his probably best book on the American Exceptionalism (America Right or Wrong An Anatomy of American Nationalism ) "but in its cellar there lives a demon, whose name is nationalism." In a way US neocons, who commanded key position in Bush II and Barack Obama administrations are not that different from Israeli Likud Party.
While neocons definitely played an important role in shaping the US policy immediately after 9/11, the origins of aggressive U.S. foreign policy since 9/11 also reflect controversial character of the US national identity, which according to Anatol Lieven embraces two contradictory features.
Both of those tendencies are much older then 9/11. The first aggressive, expansionist war by the US was the war of 1812. See American Loyalists, The Most Important War You Probably Know Nothing About - By James Traub Foreign Policy
The War of 1812 matters because it was America’s first war of choice. The United States did not have to declare war on Great Britain on June 18, 1812, to survive as a nation and indeed President James Madison did not want to. The newly founded United States was growing westward but the “war hawks” in Congress pressed for a conflict with America’s former colonial masters in the hopes of gaining even more territory to the north. The term “hawk” was coined in the run-up to the War of 1812 and the hawks of U.S. foreign policy have been with us ever since.
The War of 1812 was America’s first neocon war. With an audacity that would become familiar, the war hawks appealed to a combination of personal pride — the British navy was forcibly conscripting Americans — and the prospect of material gain — the absorption of British Canada — wrapped up in love of country. No one said the conquest of Canada would be a “cakewalk,” but the hawks were confident the Americans would be greeted as liberators.
These two mutually-excusive impulses caused wild oscillations of the US foreign policy, especially in the Middle East and influenced the nature of U.S. support for Israel. Due to those oscillations those two contradictory impulses are undermining the U.S. foreign policy credibility in the eyes of the worlds and complicates reaching important national objectives.
Some attribute the term “American Exceptionalism” to Alexis de Tocqueville — though he never penned the phrase. In reality this term originated by German Marxists who were trying to explain weakness of worker movement in the USA. The idiom was popularized by neo-conservative pundits (aka former Trotskyites) soon after WWII.
In reality the term "American Exceptionalism is nothing but a disguised, more "politically correct" reference to America's Janus-faced nationalism. It has some mystical components like long vanished under the hill of financial oligarchy the "American dream" and its German-style refrain "God bless America". What is interesting about "God bless America" is that most founding fathers were Deists, profoundly critical of organized religions and they sought to separate personal -- what many of them described as mythologies -- from government. They were profoundly respectful of personal religious belief, but saw government as necessarily secular if freedom was to prevail. Not until the religious revivals of the 1820s through the 1860s can you find many identifying religion as a component of American exceptionalism.
As Martin Woollacott aptly noted in his review of Anatol Lieven book America, Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism ( Guardian):
He cuts through the conformist political rhetoric of America, the obfuscating special language of the "American dream", or the "American exception", which infects even foreign accounts. Even to use the word "nationalism" to describe an American phenomenon is, as he notes, not normal. Americans are not "nationalist", they are "patriotic". It is a patriotism which too often leaves no room for the patriotism of others, combining a theoretical care for all humanity with, in practice, an "indifference verging on contempt" for the interests and hopes of non-Americans. Nothing could be more distant from "the decent respect to the opinions of mankind" recommended to Americans in the early years of their independent existence
Lieven first paints a picture of an in some ways admirable American "civic nationalism", based on respect for the rule of law, constitutionality, democracy, and social (but not economic) equality, and a desire to spread these values in the world. But because this nationalism unrealistically holds that such "American" values can be exported at will, it blinds Americans to the different nature of other societies, sustaining the mistaken idea that if only particular rulers or classes can be displaced, "democracy" will prevail - a "decapitation" theory which contributed to the decision to attack Saddam. The American campaign to democratize other societies, Lieven says, harshly but fairly, "combines sloppiness of intellect and meanness of spirit". But, while in part mythic and not entirely rational, this side of American nationalism is of some value not only to the United States, but to the world as a whole.
...The result, Lieven argues, is that instead of the mature nationalism of a satisfied and dominant state, American nationalism is more akin to that of late developing and insecure states such as Wilhelmine Germany and Tsarist Russia.
"While America keeps a splendid and welcoming house," Lieven writes in his preface, "it also keeps a family of demons in its cellar.
His book supports Mark Twain quite to the effect that we are blessed with three things in this country, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and, thirdly, the common sense to practice neither one!
He also points at the very important side effect of Exceptionalism: "America's hypocrisy," (see for example Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair). An outstanding level of hypocrisy in the US foreign policy also is corroborated by other scholars, among them James Hillman in his recent book "A Terrible Love of War" in which he characterizes hypocrisy as quintessentially American (although British are strong competitors). Now after Snowden, Libya, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, etc we might be appear to be entering an new stage on which "The era of easy hypocrisy is over."
The regime of easy hypocrisy means that America position itself as a blessed nation created by God and (here’s the rub) therefore privileged in what actions it can take around the world and the nation that can safely ignore international norms, which are created only for suckers. It is above the international law.
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
This is pretty precise definition of the idea of introduced by Nazi idea of “decisionism” in which action is seen as a value in itself. Decisionism is a defining feature of any totalitarian state. By extension if you find decisionism exists in particular state, it is rational to expect other F-features of such states. Umberto Eco has listed fourteen attributes along with two major features: irrationalism and decisionism. Eco has them listed as attributes 2 and 3.
The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.
3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake.
Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Hermann Goering's fondness for a phrase from a Hanns Johst play ("When I hear the word 'culture' I reach for my gun") to the frequent use of such expressions as "degenerate intellectuals," "eggheads," "effete snobs," and "universities are nests of reds." The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.Fascism has an irrational element that rejects modern thought because it conflicts with traditional beliefs of the Christian religion and because fascism views communist ideology as a child of the Age of Reason and Jewish intellectuals. The Nazis were well aware that Karl Marx was a German Jew. Evolution is seen as modernist and is rejected in favor of Christian creationism. This debate is repeating itself today in American society with Christian fundamentalism attempting to gain control of state education.
Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt
Very closely related to irrationalism is “decisionism” in which action is seen as a value in itself. This is an existential element in fascism that elevates action over thought. Action is a sign of unambiguous power, and thought is associated with weakness and indecision. Carl Schmitt, a Nazi Law constitutional jurist, wrote that a decision is “(an actual historical event) and not within that of a norm (an ahistoric and transcendent idea).” The a priori is overshadowed by the posteriori. Actions over abstract principles, Fact over Idea, Power over pure thought, Certainty over ambiguity are the values and ideological norms that are primary in a totalitarian state.
After fleeing Germany, Marcuse wrote in 1934 a critique of German fascist society and attempted to identify those beliefs and philosophical themes found within fascist ideology. Marcuse believed that the seeds of fascism could be found in the Capitalist Democratic Liberal State, which over time mutate as Monopoly Capitalism gain control of the State as in the case of Germany. The evolution of Capitalism is also the concealed dialectic of Fascism. Those mutated liberal democratic ideas and values are betrayed by a totalitarianism based on action and force.
Using Germany as his example of a fascist society Marcuse writes:From what social idea in Capitalistic Liberalism did this decisionism evolve? It is none other than the economic hero, the free independent entrepreneur of industrial capitalism.The idea of the charismatic, authoritarian leader is already preformed in the liberalist celebration of the gifted economic leader, the “born” executive. Negations, page 18.
And within the political sphere all relationships are oriented in turn toward the most extreme “crisis,” toward the decision about the “state of emergency,” of war and peace. The true possessor of power is defined as beyond all legality and legitimacy: “Sovereign is he who decides on the state of emergency.” (Carl Schmitt, Politische Theologie,1922).
Sovereignty is founded on the factual power to make this decision (decisionism). The basic political relationship is the “friend-enemy relationship.” Its crisis is war, which proceeds until the enemy has been physically annihilated.
There is no social relationship that does not in a crisis turn into a political relationship. Behind all economic, social, religious, and cultural relations stands total politicization. There is no sphere of private or public life, no legal or rational court of appeal that could oppose it.
Negations, page 36.
The total-authoritarian state is born out of the Liberal state and the former concept of the economic leader is transformed into a Fuhrer. We can see this mutation of the concept of the “born” executive into the leader-state (Fuhrerstaat) in George Bush’s speech and actions.
An uneducated but privileged man, George Bush, has merged the idea of the CEO with that of the State Leader. But society has also made this same concatenation of ideas. He is a president of action and seen as a “strong” president. He is doer and not a thinker and his followers are proud of this persona. His opponents are “feminine” and members of the “reality based community.” Consequently, the Bush administration has attempted to engineer the executive branch to be the strongest in American history by claiming “inherent” presidential powers. It is precisely the concept of “state of emergency” that Bush has used to grab more and more state power in the name of security.
He has instituted the hyper-surveillance of Americas with the Patriot act, which is based on the same justification Nazi Law used to empower the Fuhrer. A Bush lawyer and advisor, John Yoo, wrote, Just two weeks after the September 11 attacks, a secret memo to White House counsel Alberto Gonzales’ office concluded that President Bush had the power to deploy military force “preemptively” against any terrorist groups or countries that supported them—regardless of whether they had any connection to the attacks on the World Trade Towers or the Pentagon. The memo, written by Justice Department lawyer John Yoo, argues that there are effectively “no limits” on the president’s authority to wage war—a sweeping assertion of executive power that some constitutional scholars say goes considerably beyond any that had previously been articulated by the department. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6732484/site/newsweek/
Carl Schmitt, a Nazi Law constitutional jurist in Hitler’s Third Reich, wrote a similar justification of power for the State Leader using the concept of the “exception” in his work “Political Theology,” Hence, the thundering opening of his treatise: 'The sovereign is he who decides on the exception.' It is a disturbingly 'realistic' view of politics, which, in the manner of Hobbes, subordinates de jure authority to de facto power: autoritas, non veritas facit legem. (The law is made by the one who has authority (i.e. power) and not the one who possesses the truth (the legitimate sovereign).)
The problem of the exception, for the constitutional jurist Schmitt, can only be resolved within the framework of a decision (an actual historical event) and not within that of a norm (an ahistoric and transcendent idea). Moreover, the legal act which decides what constitutes an exception is 'a decision in the true sense of the word', because a general norm, an ordinary legal prescription, 'can never encompass a total exception'. If so, then, 'the decision that a real exception exists cannot be derived entirely from this norm.' The problem of the exception, in other words, demarcates the limit of the rule of law and opens up that trans-legal space, that no-man's land of existential exigency, which is bereft of legal authority and where the decision of the sovereign abrogates the anomaly of the legal void. …against the legal positivism of his times, Schmitt seems to be arguing that not law but the sovereign, not the legal text but the political will, is the supreme authority in a state. States are not legal entities but historical polities; they are engaged in a constant battle for survival where any moment of their existence may constitute an exception, it may engender a political crisis that cannot be remedied by the application of the rule of law. From the existential priority of the sovereign over the legitimacy of the norm, it would also follow that according to Schmitt, law is subservient to politics and not autonomous of it. The Sovereignty of the Political Carl Schmitt and the Nemesis of Liberalism http://www.algonet.se/~pmanzoor/CarlSchmitt.htm
When the Bush administration argues that increased presidential power is needed to fight terrorism by suspending or overriding the constitutional protections against search and seizures, they are arguing the principles of Nazi constitutional law. Vice President Dick Cheney on Tuesday vigorously defended the Bush administration's use of secret domestic spying and efforts to expand presidential powers, saying "it's not an accident that we haven't been hit in four years." Talking to reporters aboard his government plane as he flew from Islamabad, Pakistan to Muscat, Oman on an overseas mission, Cheney said a contraction in the power of the presidency since the Vietnam and Watergate era must be reversed. "I believe in a strong, robust executive authority and I think that the world we live in demands it. And to some extent, that we have an obligation as the administration to pass on the offices we hold to our successors in as good of shape as we found them," he said.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/20/D8EK28B82.htmlAgainst these ever expanding powers of the State stand the once traditional individual freedoms upheld by the Liberal Democratic State. The theologian and philosopher of the Age of Reason, Immanuel Kant wrote…Human right must be kept sacred, no matter how great the sacrifice it costs the ruling powers. One cannot go only halfway and contrive a pragmatically conditioned right….All politics, rather, must bend the knee before sacred human right…
The same idea from slightly different angle is reflected in term "Faith-based community" vs. Reality-based community ( Wikipedia )
Reality-based community is a popular term among liberal political commentators in the United States. In the fall of 2004, the phrase "proud member of the reality-based community" was first used to suggest the commentator's opinions are based more on observation than on faith, assumption, or ideology. The term has been defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from judicious study of discernible reality." Some commentators have gone as far as to suggest that there is an overarching conflict in society between the reality-based community and the "faith-based community" as a whole. It can be seen as an example of political framing.
The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush:
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Commentators who use this term generally oppose former President Bush's policies and by using this term imply that Bush's policies (and, by extension, those of the conservative movement generally) were (or are) out of touch with reality. Others use the term to draw a contrast with the perceived arrogance of the Bush Administration's unilateral policies, in accordance with the aide's quote. Its popularity has prompted some conservative commentators to use the term ironically, to accuse the left-leaning "reality-based community" of ignoring reality.
The Republican Party — and more particularly the neo-con wing of the party — is particularly susceptible to imperial outreach. This imperial mentality is well exemplified by Fox News reporting.
For example, Matt Lewis, a conservative political Pundit on MSNBC attacked Barack Obama for saying “Any world order that elevates one nation above another will fall flat.” In response Lewis stated:
“I think that goes against the idea of American exceptionalism…most Americans believe that America was gifted by God and is a blessed nation and therefore we are better.”
For any conservative the concept of “American Exceptionalism” is rather bemusing. America is not more democratic, more free, more enterprising, more tolerant, or more anything else be it Canada, New Zealand or for that matter Australia. America is just a bigger country and due to its size, human resources and industrial potential it the leading Western country and the owner of world reserve currency, after Great Britain became financially exhausted after WWII. That means that American Exceptionalism is simply a politically correct work for a combustible mixture of nationalism (with Christian messianism component similar to Crusades with "democracy" instead Jesus) and Jingoism. In a very deep sense this is negation of the idea "all men are created equal" and as such is anti-American ;-).
America is a blessed nation as everybody in the country is an immigrant, the nation that at some point of time was freer and more prosperous than many others, but as a great Nazarene once said, “The first shall be last and the last shall be first.”
Bill Moyers Journal . Watch & Listen | PBS
Here is one of those neon sentences. Quote,
"The pursuit of freedom, as defined in an age of consumerism, has induced a condition of dependence on imported goods, on imported oil, and on credit. The chief desire of the American people," you write, "is that nothing should disrupt their access to these goods, that oil, and that credit. The chief aim of the U.S. government is to satisfy that desire, which it does in part of through the distribution of largesse here at home, and in part through the pursuit of imperial ambitions abroad."
In other words, you're saying that our foreign policy is the result of a dependence on consumer goods and credit.
Our foreign policy is not something simply concocted by people in Washington D.C. and imposed on us. Our foreign policy is something that is concocted in Washington D.C., but it reflects the perceptions of our political elite about what we want, we the people want. And what we want, by and large - I mean, one could point to many individual exceptions - but, what we want, by and large is, we want this continuing flow of very cheap consumer goods.
We want to be able to pump gas into our cars regardless of how big they may happen to be, in order to be able to drive wherever we want to be able to drive. And we want to be able to do these things without having to think about whether or not the book's balanced at the end of the month, or the end of the fiscal year. And therefore, we want this unending line of credit.
Quite logically the imperial actions is a source of widespread Anti-Americanism. As Ian Tyrrell noted in What is American exceptionalism
It is also important to realize that there is a “negative” version of exceptionalism, i.e. that the US has been exceptionally bad, racist, violent. While this is less a part of the common myths about American history, the attempt to compensate for American exceptionalism by emphasizing unique American evils is equally distorting. We need to think more about this matter, especially when we deal with racial divisions and gender prejudice. Is the US experience a variant on wider racial and gender patterns? While social history has provided new perspectives on the role of women, African Americans, and ethnics in the making of American history, has that new history discredited or qualified ideas of American exceptionalism?
The actual term “American exceptionalism” was originally coined by German Marxists who wished to explain why the US seemed to have by-passed the rise of socialism and Marxism. (Actually the US had much class conflict, some Marxist parties and theorists, and a lively socialist movement, though the latter was not on the scale of, say, France and Germany.) But exceptionalism is much more than about class conflict.
Some historians prefer the terms “differences” or “uniqueness?” Are these suitable substitutes? Whatever the terminology, the implications of American difference/uniqueness have long been debated. Some have said the difference was temporary, and eventually the US would be like other countries. Others have argued that American “specialness” stems from its political, intellectual, and even religious heritage, and is enduring.
Skeptic view on American Exceptionalism is valuable for different reasons some of which were listed by Stephen M. Walt in his The Myth of American Exceptionalism (Foreign Policy, November 2011)
The only thing wrong with this self-congratulatory portrait of America's global role is that it is mostly a myth. Although the United States possesses certain unique qualities -- from high levels of religiosity to a political culture that privileges individual freedom -- the conduct of U.S. foreign policy has been determined primarily by its relative power and by the inherently competitive nature of international politics. By focusing on their supposedly exceptional qualities, Americans blind themselves to the ways that they are a lot like everyone else.
This unchallenged faith in American exceptionalism makes it harder for Americans to understand why others are less enthusiastic about U.S. dominance, often alarmed by U.S. policies, and frequently irritated by what they see as U.S. hypocrisy, whether the subject is possession of nuclear weapons, conformity with international law, or America's tendency to condemn the conduct of others while ignoring its own failings. Ironically, U.S. foreign policy would probably be more effective if Americans were less convinced of their own unique virtues and less eager to proclaim them.
What we need, in short, is a more realistic and critical assessment of America's true character and contributions. In that spirit, I offer here the Top 5 Myths about American Exceptionalism.
Myth 1: There Is Something Exceptional About American Exceptionalism.
Whenever American leaders refer to the "unique" responsibilities of the United States, they are saying that it is different from other powers and that these differences require them to take on special burdens.
Yet there is nothing unusual about such lofty declarations; indeed, those who make them are treading a well-worn path. Most great powers have considered themselves superior to their rivals and have believed that they were advancing some greater good when they imposed their preferences on others. The British thought they were bearing the "white man's burden," while French colonialists invoked la mission civilisatrice to justify their empire. Portugal, whose imperial activities were hardly distinguished, believed it was promoting a certain missão civilizadora. Even many of the officials of the former Soviet Union genuinely believed they were leading the world toward a socialist utopia despite the many cruelties that communist rule inflicted. Of course, the United States has by far the better claim to virtue than Stalin or his successors, but Obama was right to remind us that all countries prize their own particular qualities.
So when Americans proclaim they are exceptional and indispensable, they are simply the latest nation to sing a familiar old song. Among great powers, thinking you're special is the norm, not the exception.
Myth 2: The United States Behaves Better Than Other Nations Do.
Declarations of American exceptionalism rest on the belief that the United States is a uniquely virtuous nation, one that loves peace, nurtures liberty, respects human rights, and embraces the rule of law. Americans like to think their country behaves much better than other states do, and certainly better than other great powers.
If only it were true. The United States may not have been as brutal as the worst states in world history, but a dispassionate look at the historical record belies most claims about America's moral superiority.
For starters, the United States has been one of the most expansionist powers in modern history. It began as 13 small colonies clinging to the Eastern Seaboard, but eventually expanded across North America, seizing Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California from Mexico in 1846. Along the way, it eliminated most of the native population and confined the survivors to impoverished reservations. By the mid-19th century, it had pushed Britain out of the Pacific Northwest and consolidated its hegemony over the Western Hemisphere.
The United States has fought numerous wars since then -- starting several of them -- and its wartime conduct has hardly been a model of restraint. The 1899-1902 conquest of the Philippines killed some 200,000 to 400,000 Filipinos, most of them civilians, and the United States and its allies did not hesitate to dispatch some 305,000 German and 330,000 Japanese civilians through aerial bombing during World War II, mostly through deliberate campaigns against enemy cities. No wonder Gen. Curtis LeMay, who directed the bombing campaign against Japan, told an aide, "If the U.S. lost the war, we would be prosecuted as war criminals." The United States dropped more than 6 million tons of bombs during the Indochina war, including tons of napalm and lethal defoliants like Agent Orange, and it is directly responsible for the deaths of many of the roughly 1 million civilians who died in that war.
More recently, the U.S.-backed Contra war in Nicaragua killed some 30,000 Nicaraguans, a percentage of their population equivalent to 2 million dead Americans. U.S. military action has led directly or indirectly to the deaths of 250,000 Muslims over the past three decades (and that's a low-end estimate, not counting the deaths resulting from the sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s), including the more than 100,000 people who died following the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. U.S. drones and Special Forces are going after suspected terrorists in at least five countries at present and have killed an unknown number of innocent civilians in the process. Some of these actions may have been necessary to make Americans more prosperous and secure. But while Americans would undoubtedly regard such acts as indefensible if some foreign country were doing them to us, hardly any U.S. politicians have questioned these policies. Instead, Americans still wonder, "Why do they hate us?"
The United States talks a good game on human rights and international law, but it has refused to sign most human rights treaties, is not a party to the International Criminal Court, and has been all too willing to cozy up to dictators -- remember our friend Hosni Mubarak? -- with abysmal human rights records. If that were not enough, the abuses at Abu Ghraib and the George W. Bush administration's reliance on waterboarding, extraordinary rendition, and preventive detention should shake America's belief that it consistently acts in a morally superior fashion. Obama's decision to retain many of these policies suggests they were not a temporary aberration.
The United States never conquered a vast overseas empire or caused millions to die through tyrannical blunders like China's Great Leap Forward or Stalin's forced collectivization. And given the vast power at its disposal for much of the past century, Washington could certainly have done much worse. But the record is clear: U.S. leaders have done what they thought they had to do when confronted by external dangers, and they paid scant attention to moral principles along the way. The idea that the United States is uniquely virtuous may be comforting to Americans; too bad it's not true.
Myth 3: America's Success Is Due to Its Special Genius.
The United States has enjoyed remarkable success, and Americans tend to portray their rise to world power as a direct result of the political foresight of the Founding Fathers, the virtues of the U.S. Constitution, the priority placed on individual liberty, and the creativity and hard work of the American people. In this narrative, the United States enjoys an exceptional global position today because it is, well, exceptional.
There is more than a grain of truth to this version of American history. It's not an accident that immigrants came to America in droves in search of economic opportunity, and the "melting pot" myth facilitated the assimilation of each wave of new Americans. America's scientific and technological achievements are fully deserving of praise and owe something to the openness and vitality of the American political order.
But America's past success is due as much to good luck as to any uniquely American virtues. The new nation was lucky that the continent was lavishly endowed with natural resources and traversed by navigable rivers. It was lucky to have been founded far from the other great powers and even luckier that the native population was less advanced and highly susceptible to European diseases. Americans were fortunate that the European great powers were at war for much of the republic's early history, which greatly facilitated its expansion across the continent, and its global primacy was ensured after the other great powers fought two devastating world wars. This account of America's rise does not deny that the United States did many things right, but it also acknowledges that America's present position owes as much to good fortune as to any special genius or "manifest destiny."
Myth 4: The United States Is Responsible for Most of the Good in the World.
Americans are fond of giving themselves credit for positive international developments. President Bill Clinton believed the United States was "indispensable to the forging of stable political relations," and the late Harvard University political scientist Samuel P. Huntington thought U.S. primacy was central "to the future of freedom, democracy, open economies, and international order in the world." Journalist Michael Hirsh has gone even further, writing in his book At War With Ourselves that America's global role is "the greatest gift the world has received in many, many centuries, possibly all of recorded history." Scholarly works such as Tony Smith's America's Mission and G. John Ikenberry's Liberal Leviathan emphasize America's contribution to the spread of democracy and its promotion of a supposedly liberal world order. Given all the high-fives American leaders have given themselves, it is hardly surprising that most Americans see their country as an overwhelmingly positive force in world affairs.
Once again, there is something to this line of argument, just not enough to make it entirely accurate. The United States has made undeniable contributions to peace and stability in the world over the past century, including the Marshall Plan, the creation and management of the Bretton Woods system, its rhetorical support for the core principles of democracy and human rights, and its mostly stabilizing military presence in Europe and the Far East. But the belief that all good things flow from Washington's wisdom overstates the U.S. contribution by a wide margin.
For starters, though Americans watching Saving Private Ryan or Patton may conclude that the United States played the central role in vanquishing Nazi Germany, most of the fighting was in Eastern Europe and the main burden of defeating Hitler's war machine was borne by the Soviet Union. Similarly, though the Marshall Plan and NATO played important roles in Europe's post-World War II success, Europeans deserve at least as much credit for rebuilding their economies, constructing a novel economic and political union, and moving beyond four centuries of sometimes bitter rivalry. Americans also tend to think they won the Cold War all by themselves, a view that ignores the contributions of other anti-Soviet adversaries and the courageous dissidents whose resistance to communist rule produced the "velvet revolutions" of 1989.
Moreover, as Godfrey Hodgson recently noted in his sympathetic but clear-eyed book, The Myth of American Exceptionalism, the spread of liberal ideals is a global phenomenon with roots in the Enlightenment, and European philosophers and political leaders did much to advance the democratic ideal. Similarly, the abolition of slavery and the long effort to improve the status of women owe more to Britain and other democracies than to the United States, where progress in both areas trailed many other countries. Nor can the United States claim a global leadership role today on gay rights, criminal justice, or economic equality -- Europe's got those areas covered.
Finally, any honest accounting of the past half-century must acknowledge the downside of American primacy. The United States has been the major producer of greenhouse gases for most of the last hundred years and thus a principal cause of the adverse changes that are altering the global environment. The United States stood on the wrong side of the long struggle against apartheid in South Africa and backed plenty of unsavory dictatorships -- including Saddam Hussein's -- when short-term strategic interests dictated. Americans may be justly proud of their role in creating and defending Israel and in combating global anti-Semitism, but its one-sided policies have also prolonged Palestinian statelessness and sustained Israel's brutal occupation.
Bottom line: Americans take too much credit for global progress and accept too little blame for areas where U.S. policy has in fact been counterproductive. Americans are blind to their weak spots, and in ways that have real-world consequences. Remember when Pentagon planners thought U.S. troops would be greeted in Baghdad with flowers and parades? They mostly got RPGs and IEDs instead.
Myth 5: God Is on Our Side.
A crucial component of American exceptionalism is the belief that the United States has a divinely ordained mission to lead the rest of the world. Ronald Reagan told audiences that there was "some divine plan" that had placed America here, and once quoted Pope Pius XII saying, "Into the hands of America God has placed the destinies of an afflicted mankind." Bush offered a similar view in 2004, saying, "We have a calling from beyond the stars to stand for freedom." The same idea was expressed, albeit less nobly, in Otto von Bismarck's alleged quip that "God has a special providence for fools, drunks, and the United States."
Confidence is a valuable commodity for any country. But when a nation starts to think it enjoys the mandate of heaven and becomes convinced that it cannot fail or be led astray by scoundrels or incompetents, then reality is likely to deliver a swift rebuke. Ancient Athens, Napoleonic France, imperial Japan, and countless other countries have succumbed to this sort of hubris, and nearly always with catastrophic results.
Despite America's many successes, the country is hardly immune from setbacks, follies, and boneheaded blunders. If you have any doubts about that, just reflect on how a decade of ill-advised tax cuts, two costly and unsuccessful wars, and a financial meltdown driven mostly by greed and corruption have managed to squander the privileged position the United States enjoyed at the end of the 20th century. Instead of assuming that God is on their side, perhaps Americans should heed Abraham Lincoln's admonition that our greatest concern should be "whether we are on God's side."
Given the many challenges Americans now face, from persistent unemployment to the burden of winding down two deadly wars, it's unsurprising that they find the idea of their own exceptionalism comforting -- and that their aspiring political leaders have been proclaiming it with increasing fervor. Such patriotism has its benefits, but not when it leads to a basic misunderstanding of America's role in the world. This is exactly how bad decisions get made.
America has its own special qualities, as all countries do, but it is still a state embedded in a competitive global system. It is far stronger and richer than most, and its geopolitical position is remarkably favorable. These advantages give the United States a wider range of choice in its conduct of foreign affairs, but they don't ensure that its choices will be good ones. Far from being a unique state whose behavior is radically different from that of other great powers, the United States has behaved like all the rest, pursuing its own self-interest first and foremost, seeking to improve its relative position over time, and devoting relatively little blood or treasure to purely idealistic pursuits. Yet, just like past great powers, it has convinced itself that it is different, and better, than everyone else.
International politics is a contact sport, and even powerful states must compromise their political principles for the sake of security and prosperity. Nationalism is also a powerful force, and it inevitably highlights the country's virtues and sugarcoats its less savory aspects.
But if Americans want to be truly exceptional, they might start by viewing the whole idea of "American exceptionalism" with a much more skeptical eye.
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
Jan 14, 2019 | peakoilbarrel.com
GuyM x Ignored says: 01/13/2019 at 8:26 pmIn support of RRC, I looked up their agency expenses, and found they are less than $50 million. That's to pay for keeping up with almost a half million oil and gas wells, thousands of operators, and multiple other duties, including taking care of a significant amount of State income. There is a grand total of about 725 employees. Hats off!Longtimber x Ignored says: 01/14/2019 at 8:24 pmCould have 1/2 of a F35 not including Fuel.
Jan 14, 2019 | www.unz.com
Like that scene in Orwell's 1984 where the Party switches official enemies right in the middle of the Hate Week rally, the War on Terror was officially canceled and replaced by the War on Populism. Or all right, it wasn't quite that abrupt. But seriously, go back and scan the news. Note how the "Islamic terrorist threat" we had been conditioned to live in fear of on a daily basis since 2001 seemed to just vanish into thin air. Suddenly, the "existential threat" we were facing was "neo-nationalism," "illiberalism," or the pejorative designator du jour, "populism."
John_M , , January 9, 2019 at 11:06 pm
Jan 10, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.comMitt Romney, Commander of the Fake Internationalists Newly-inaugurated Senator has been promoted to standard-bearer for the bipartisan War Party, filling in for John McCain.
No surprise: Senator Mitt Romney does not like President Donald Trump, as he recently explained in The Washington Post . But what, one wonders, was the former GOP presidential candidate thinking two years ago when he supped with the man he now claims to deplore while seeking an appointment as secretary of state?
Much of Romney's complaint is over manners. Yes, the president is a boor. Most people, including many of Trump's supporters, recognize that. Trump won not because of his etiquette but because of what he stood for -- and against.
Romney also defended The Blob, Washington's bipartisan foreign policy establishment. In his article attacking the president, he offered the usual vacuous bromides that characterize the interventionist consensus, which poses as internationalism but with plenty of bombing raids, illegal occupations, and nation-building. Most importantly, this perspective presumes permanent American domination, irrespective of cost.
Romney wrote: "America has long been looked to for leadership. Our economic and military strength was part of that, of course, but our enduring commitment to principled conduct in foreign relations, and to the rights of all people to freedom and equal justice, was even more esteemed." Indeed, "The world needs American leadership, and it is in America's interest to provide it. A world led by authoritarian regimes is a world -- and an America -- with less prosperity, less freedom, less peace."
In fact, Romney appears more committed to dependence on allies than American leadership. For him, these are two sides of the same coin. The only alternative he sees to Washington in control is the bad guys leading.
Related is Romney's apparent belief that foreign policy is fixed, irrespective of circumstance: the very same U.S.-dominated alliances created in 1950 are needed today. Although America's friends have raced ahead economically, politically, even militarily, Washington must forever treat them as helpless derelicts. For instance, Russia, a weakened declining power, faces the U.S. and Europe -- which together have more than 20 times its GDP. Yet Romney sees Moscow as the greatest threat facing America. It is 1945 all over again.
Romney's most important omission is Iraq. After the war there turned bad, he remained silent about his support for it. The Iraq disaster is an important reason why Trump won and other Republicans, including Romney, lost. In 2008, Americans rejected John McCain, the very symbol of promiscuous war-making. Four years later, Romney criticized President Barack Obama for leaving Iraq too soon, by which the Republican nominee probably meant leaving at any time. In saying he would keep more troops in Iraq, he ignored the fact that the Iraqis had refused to negotiate a status of forces agreement with the Bush administration.
Romney also failed to mention Afghanistan, both as a presidential candidate in 2012 and senator in 2019. After all, what good can be said for entering the 18th year of nation-building in a region of little strategic interest? As for Syria, last November, Romney predictably denounced as "recklessness in the extreme" exiting a multi-sided civil war in a country never important to America.Whose Side is Mitt Romney On? Robert Kagan's Jungle Book of Forever War
Now Romney is being touted as the new standard-bearer for the bipartisan War Party, filling in for John McCain. Bloomberg columnist Hal Brands theorized that Romney was attempting to "position himself as heir to John McCain as the congressional conscience of U.S. diplomacy" (defined as advocating policies designed to prolifically kill and destroy).
Towards this effort, Romney is articulating "a renewed Republican internationalism based on opposition to aggressive authoritarian regimes." Brands celebrates Romney's Russophobia, saying he "deserves credit for being anti-Russia before being anti-Russia was cool." No hint that the U.S. might have contributed to Moscow's hostility through the aggressive "internationalism" of Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama -- violating commitments not to expand NATO, dismantling Moscow's Slavic friend Serbia, and encouraging violent regime change against an elected government that neighbored Russia. After all, equivalent Russian intervention in Mexico would have triggered an extremely hostile reaction in Washington.
Neoconservative Max Boot lauded Romney for throwing "down the gauntlet to President Trump." Indeed, argued Boot, "it now falls upon Romney to champion the cause of principled conservatism in Washington." Boot hoped the freshman senator would lead a general opposition and seemed especially pleased at Romney's support for the interventionist status quo.
Yet the passion-less Romney is a poor substitute for the perennially angry McCain. It is difficult to imagine Romney leading Lindsey Graham and Joseph Lieberman on another apocalyptic ride, demanding that death and destruction be visited upon an enemy du jour. Indeed, Romney admitted as much, complained The New York Times , which noted that he said he "would only speak out against Mr. Trump on issues of 'great significance,' which means not much."
Worse, Romney is a typical denizen of Washington and lacks any connection to the disastrous consequences of his policies. Give McCain credit: he and his sons served in the military. Not Romney. He received four deferments during the Vietnam War, explaining that he "had other plans." This sounds eerily like Dick Cheney, who said his five deferments reflected "other priorities."
Moreover, none of Romney's five sons served. That is, of course, their prerogative. But their decision further insulated Romney from any consequences of his policies. His response to questions about their lack of service: "One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping me get elected because they think I'd be a great president." Did Romney believe working for him was as dangerous as fighting Iraqi insurgents in Fallujah? Or that his personal interest in winning the election was as important as the nation winning a war?
My friend William Smith at the Center for the Study of Statesmanship at Catholic University argued that Romney's article "is another clear sign that the bipartisan political establishment is largely oblivious to the terrible tragedy of wartime casualties disproportionately inflicted on certain communities." Candidate Trump did particularly well in states that so suffered. Complained Smith: "What is astonishing is that, after all this tragedy, Romney offers only cliched neoconservative bromides to the many heartbroken communities across the nation."
However, The Blob, which dominates foreign policy under both parties, poses an even larger problem. These policymakers consider permanent war to be America's natural condition. They seek to suppress dissident views to ensure united support for permanent war. Anyone who hesitates to back every proposed new intervention is demonized and marginalized.
The favorite technique, recently employed by Frederick Kagan in The Hill, is to call opponents, irrespective of their actual positions, "isolationists." Thus did Kagan urge left and right "internationalists" -- meaning military interventionists -- to work together to defend "the principle that the United States must remain actively engaged in the world," by which he meant warring without end on multiple countries.
Exclaimed Kagan: "The isolationists who have condemned the United States involvement in the Middle East and the rest of the world for decades are about to get their wish. We will witness what the world looks like when left to its own devices."
Egads. Imagine what might have happened had the U.S. not intervened in the Lebanese Civil War, armed Turkey to kill tens of thousands of Kurds and destroy thousands of Kurdish villages, invaded Iraq and triggered sectarian conflict, fostered civil war in Libya and the chaos that followed, supported decades of violent occupation over millions of Palestinians by Israel, backed murderous Saudi Arabia in Bahrain and Yemen, supported a coup against Iran's democratically elected government and a brutal invasion backed by chemical weapons against Iran's Islamist regime, actively underwritten tyranny across the Middle East, and tried to sort out the Syrian Civil War. Something bad might have happened.
In Syria, Kagan views as "isolationist" the withdrawal of an illegal military deployment that risks violent confrontation with Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Russia over minor stakes. In contrast, "internationalism" means war everywhere all the time, especially in a country like Syria.
Trump, complained Kagan, is leaving "Afghanistan for no clear reason whatsoever." No reason other than Washington long ago having achieved its objective of degrading and displacing al-Qaeda and punishing the Taliban for hosting al-Qaeda. And eventually having recognized, after more than 17 years passed, trillions of dollars were spent, and thousands of lives were lost, that using force to create a liberal democracy in Central Asia is a fool's errand. Why leave, indeed?
It has oft been recognized that Donald Trump is a flawed vehicle to achieve almost any foreign policy end. However, he still possesses far more common sense than Mitt Romney. It is time to rescue "internationalism" from those who love humanity so much that they would destroy the world in order to save it.
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 . MORE FROM THIS AUTHORAttack of the Pork HawksDoes It Really Matter If North Korea Denuclearizes?Hide 20 comments 20 Responses to Mitt Romney, Commander of the Fake Internationalists
EliteCommInc. January 9, 2019 at 11:01 pm"No reason other than Washington long ago having achieved its objective of degrading and displacing al-Qaeda and punishing the Taliban for hosting al-Qaeda."
One should avoid the back pedal here. the Taliban did not host Al Quaeda in the manner your reference suggests.
I truly voted against Romney when he ran for president because of his omnidirectional belligerence. I also didn't like his vulture capitalism style (and I did technical due diligence for venture capital activities as a side line).Own Goal , , January 10, 2019 at 2:22 am
I don't see that he has gotten any wiser.
Romney just guaranteed that he won't get the nomination. Amazing, really, stupid and gratuitous.steve mckinney , , January 10, 2019 at 2:48 am
He could at the least have shown a little "growth" in the direction of populist disgust with the wasteful, reckless, failed wars, not to mention concerns about the growth of government and corporate mass surveillance of the public, and the continuing unholy collaboration between Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and Washington in ripping off taxpayers and importing cheap labor to take American jobs.
Not Mitt. He seems to think he's running for president of our utterly discredited, pseudo-meritocratic "Establishment".
Let's all thank the knuckle-headed Utahns for delivering another unimaginative empty suit to the Nation's State House. Sure, Trump is often a boor, and unmistakably human, but give me a man-child with conviction and Devil-may-care determination over a dapper dolt whose ideas are contrived platitudes and whose passion is a Macbeth-like obsession with stature and power any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Well written Mr. Bandow! Keep fighting the good fight.polistra , , January 10, 2019 at 4:10 am
I get the sense that the "isolationist" line doesn't work any more. It was a commonly used rhetorical weapon 10 years ago, and it effectively silenced opposition. Now it's not used much, and it seems to be ignored or derided when it is used. Most Americans understand now that maintaining and expanding an empire is destroying us.Aunt Lila , , January 10, 2019 at 7:44 am
You really don't get Romney, do you. Who are you to decided what anyone sees or feels. Do you think you could use the word seems like a professional journalist. I don't construeDan Green , , January 10, 2019 at 8:12 am
Romney that way. You SEEM to put words in his mouth and thought in his head. Please be professional.
My take is Mitt see's himself as a Gerald Ford calming effect, for this 4 year disruption, the Swamp battles with. The Deep state needs an impeachment win and soon. With that said it will be ever difficult for the Beltway to change Americans perception , they don't trust the government.Kolya Krassotkin , , January 10, 2019 at 10:23 am
For someone so smart Romney should realize that Americans will reject him (again), when he takes up the mantle of McCain (again) as quickly as they did the last time. But that he fails to realize that substance trumps form, which is why 67 million Americans voted for the President, demonstrates what a shallow narcisst and sociopath he is. I mean, it's okay to rob your neighbor so long as you say "please" and "thank you," isn't it?Stephen J. , , January 10, 2019 at 11:31 am
The writer states: "Now Romney is being touted as the new standard-bearer for the bipartisan War Party, filling in for John McCain."prodigalson , , January 10, 2019 at 1:21 pm
I believe The "War Party" are:
"The Maniacs of Militarism"
The maniacs of militarism are creating wars
Countries are bombed by warmongering whores
Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and other countries too
Are hell holes of the earth, "The work," of this insane crew
Enabled by politicians in positions of power
These well dressed war criminals hide and cower
The generals salute their political masters
Then the brainwashed obey these bemedaled disasters
Cities are destroyed and reduced to rubble
Where are the perpetrators that created all this trouble?
They are residing in luxury and given fancy titles
War crimes trials are needed, and are so vital
But this is not happening: the system is corrupted
And these evil beings, by some are worshiped
Blood-soaked villains that never do the fighting
They are the "experts" that do the inciting
They are the producers of death and destruction
Others are profiteers of all the bloody actions
Missiles, bombs and horrendous weapons
There is no end to the endless aggression
Millions are dead, and millions are homeless
Millions are refugees, and all this is atrocious
Once they had jobs, families, and homes as well
Then their countries were bombed by the agents from hell
Setting the world on fire is what these war arsonists do
The money for their depredations comes from me and you
They have made us all accessories to their criminal acts
Our Taxes are the blood money and that is a fact
Will the people ever say: "We have had enough"?
And put all these villains in secure handcuffs
Then lock them up in maximum security prisons
Then, we can say "goodbye" to the maniacs of militarism
[more info at link below]
"More War "
More war is needed to keep armies trained and employed
More wars are needed so that countries can be destroyed
More killing, bombing, destruction and death
More of this is needed until the victims have nothing left
[read more at link below]
Romney is such an empty suit i'm not sure if he isn't weakening his position just by virtue that, he Romney, supports it.One Guy , , January 10, 2019 at 1:32 pm
Does this guy inspire anyone to any emotion other than revulsion? Along with Hillary, they both strike me both as elites who want to become president, not from any actual passions or desires, but because they've run out of other things to add to their C.V.
The only thing I can say with certainty that Mitt Romney believes in, is Mitt Romney. So I'm intensely skeptical that ANYONE in America, aside from the most firebrand resistance types, are going to take anything coming out of this corporate drone's mouth with any seriousness. And even for the resistance types the support would equally follow a labrador retriever, just so long as it opposed Trump, so Mitt doesn't even have that thin thread of loyatly going for him.
I guess that leaves him with the neocons as BFFs. They're welcome to each other.
Why are we ragging on Romney? Is it because he had the audacity to criticize Trump? Shouldn't we wait until he actually does something bad before ragging on him? Has he lied 6,000 times in the last few years, for example? Did he refuse to rake the forests?Mike Clements , , January 10, 2019 at 2:54 pm
Such trashing of Romney becomes a real challenge for me.Tim , , January 10, 2019 at 3:34 pm
I can't decide if it's the fevered imaginings or the straw man arguments that disappoint me the most.
I think Romney is simply miffed that the boorish Trump became president and he did not and sadly, he may be running for president again. I think someone used the word revulsion about Romney. I approve. It's ironic the boorish Trump isn't nearly as revolting as the urbane Mitt.Jeeves , , January 10, 2019 at 4:09 pm
@Mike Clementsfabian , , January 10, 2019 at 4:34 pm
For me it's the straw man arguments that are most egregious. As an Arizonan, I knew John McCain, and Romney is no McCain (whose like we will never see again, if we're lucky).
Just to single out one objection to Mr. Bandow's argument: Romney didn't refer to the SOFA, which supposedly required Obama to abandon Iraq, for the very good reason that Leon Panetta, who should know, has said that Obama, with plenty of time to do it, made no effort whatsoever to re-negotiate the SOFA 2011 deadline. Panetta regrets this and so do I.
Romney is the epitome of the decay of the USA. Further, he shows the complete inability of the Republican party to choose the correct casting. After Bush and Iraq they propose McPain. After the Great Financial Crisis they propose Mittens. It's akin to cast Dany de Vito to play Casanova. When Trump is gone, this party is finished.Kolya Krassotkin , , January 10, 2019 at 5:06 pm
I approve. It's ironic the boorish Trump isn't nearly as revolting as the urbane Mitt.Bacon , , January 10, 2019 at 10:11 pm
That Americans are revolted more by Romney than by Trump, in fact, speaks well for them. All morally mature folk should be repelled more by a polite, urbane, well-scrubbed pirate, who made his fortune destroying people's lives and wealth than by a loud-talking, crude womanizer, who creates wealth and, in fact, shows his concern for the people below him more than the polite, charming, well-bred pirate.
As I understand it, Romney's saying we need more Middle East wars, more Wall Street bailouts, and more immigrants.rta , , January 11, 2019 at 10:09 am
I think we already knew that Romney wants those things. It's why we don't want Romney.
Also, it's its unnecessary to counter Kagan's arguments. He's not taken seriously any more. Too many bad and wrong judgments about important things.
@Jeeves, Obama would have stayed in Iraq if the Iraqi's had allowed us to continue to kill with impunity. Thankfully, they said no. And why on earth would you regret us not negotiating a new SOFA?kswc , , January 11, 2019 at 11:24 am
Mitt Romney is the Republican's answer to the Democrat's John Kerry.WorkingClass , , January 11, 2019 at 5:06 pm
If Utah has a problem with Trump they could have elected a Democrat.
Romney is obsolete. Never Trump Republicans are sinking in a tar pit. Romney cannot be nominated much less elected even if Trump does not run. He can help with the impeachment of Trump if it comes to that. But again, a Democrat would be more useful.
Minnesota Mary , , January 11, 2019 at 5:13 pm
Jan 13, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com
about:blankThose Porky Pentagon Earmarks Never Really Went Away In fact, the new scheme is even more venal, underhanded, and wasteful. By Winslow T. Wheeler • January 11, 2019
https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fthose-porky-pentagon-earmarks-never-really-went-away%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.GTl3bn_Jf-4.O%2Fam%3DgQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAGLTcCMBs9jfUMDDcVzWid6H2RmszAw2BQ%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1547431651446&_gfid=I0_1547431651446&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&pfname=&rpctoken=99997436Michael Hogue In past years, Congress has become notorious for adding dubious items we call "pork" to spending bills. That way, senators and House members can advertise themselves to their constituents as bringing home the bacon, while picking up a few campaign contributions from thankful contractors along the way.
This practice was particularly notorious in defense bills, especially, and only became worse during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. After they were exposed spending billions of taxpayer dollars for earmarked projects like museums, artificial lungs, and VIP air transports for senior generals, bureaucrats, and lawmakers, Congress supposedly reformed the practice of earmarking -- first in 2007 by the Democrats in the majority, and again in 2011 by the Republicans in the majority, who claimed to have banned them altogether.
In truth, both parties in Congress have simply swapped the pork system for a scheme that is even more venal and underhanded. They've circumvented their own rules and are putting even more pork in defense bills than before. They hypocritically proclaim that their bills are earmark-free, while simultaneously boasting about the pork to constituents. They deceptively pay for the hidden earmarks by raiding essential accounts for soldiers' pay and military readiness, and they readily accept hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions from the very contractors who received huge chunks of the billions of dollars that Congress added.
The new pork system is deceptive and complex. It took all of my 31 years of experience on Capitol Hill to fully unravel it, with the help of some excellent research from two outstanding watchdog groups, Taxpayers for Common Sense and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.Advertisement
To explain, let's start with one of the more brazen acts of hypocrisy.
On October 22, Niels Lesniewski reported in Roll Call that 10 senators from both parties announced in a letter to the House and Senate leadership that they wanted to strengthen the existing ban on earmarks and make it impossible for anyone to "bring back earmarks" as President Donald Trump and others have suggested . Their new bill , they said, would impose even more serious procedural blocks on any earmark in any bill. But the bill, the senators' press release, and their letter are a sham. Another Roll Call reporter pointed out that gimmicks and various porky items in a new Department of Defense appropriations bill gave the lie to the idea that contemporary bills were free of earmarks. And Taxpayers for Common Sense and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance noted at the same time that the new DoD appropriations bill, just signed into law, was already stuffed with hundreds of earmarks costing billions of dollars.
The explanation of Congress's new, more deceptive and expensive pork system starts with Trump declaring that "America is being respected again" on September 28, while signing an appropriations bill into law that provided $675 billion to the Pentagon. The bill was passed in the House of Representatives with the vote of four of every five House members and in the Senate with almost nine of every 10 senators.
Speech after speech credited the bill with solving the problem of planes that cannot fly, ships with repairs delayed for years, and pay increases for soldiers who deserve more for their service.Mattis: One More General for the 'Self Licking Ice Cream Cone' Why the Regulators Went Soft on Monopolies
Notably, Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, the top-ranking Democrat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, praised the bill he helped to write, saying , "The priority of this defense bill is supporting our troops . This bill shows what Democrats and Republicans can accomplish when we work across the aisle to solve problems." The chairman of the subcommittee, Republican Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, who had an even larger hand in shaping the bill, said , "I am proud to present this legislation to my colleagues and urge their strong support."
The issues they didn't talk about
Despite numerous speeches in the congressional record praising the defense spending bill, important details attracted not one word of discussion. The bill was riddled with earmarks, and the very pay and military readiness accounts that member after member praised were being raided to pay for it. This is hardly new. In my three decades on Capitol Hill, this behavior was typical -- and even self-styled "pork busters" including, I regret to say, the recently passed Senator John McCain, were known to participate. Despite the rule changes in 2007 and 2011, nothing ultimately changed for the better. Today, the money flow for earmarks has greatly increased, and the process that was once evident with a little inspection has been almost totally obscured.
What earmarks? The legislation has none; it says so. The joint explanatory statement (JES) for the defense spending bill, which purports to clarify the statutory text, contains the following on page two : "The conference agreement does not contain any congressional earmarks as defined by clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives."
That rule defines an earmark as spending specifically requested by a member of Congress for "an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality or congressional district ." But simply fuzz up the authorship, recipient, or location of an added spending item, and it transforms from an earmark to a "congressional special interest item." There are hundreds of those, most of them buried in sparsely worded tables in the JES.
But these congressional special interest items are important: the conference committee that wrote the JES went to some length to cite them to the Pentagon for special treatment; they made the congressional special interest items subject to special rules to prevent DoD from reducing the amount to be spent. That conference committee, appointed to resolve differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, consisted of senior members of the same House and Senate defense appropriations subcommittees who wrote the original bills, such as Senators Durbin and Shelby.
Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS) reported that 68 procurement programs in this defense bill received $7.5 billion in new, unrequested spending, a large portion going to the Lockheed Corporation. These are blatant earmarks, as explained by TCS, which also pointed out that the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee added $5.6 billion to the procurement account for these items, while its Senate counterpart added a more generous $6.2 billion. The bill was "compromised" by the conference committee at a level above both: $7.5 billion.
The Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) tabulated all the add-ons in the bill -- not just the 68 in Procurement -- above the Pentagon's request. Again, the Senate Defense Subcommittee proved more generous than the House, and again the final conference was higher than either subcommittee's recommendation. TPA found 679 earmarks costing $19.3 billion.
Pigs in a poke
Are these earmarks all pork, that is, poorly justified spending slipped into bills to enable a member to boast that he or she can "bring home the bacon" for jobs back home or to appease defense corporations?
The authors of this bill don't want you to know. In the past, earmarks would specify things like "Intrepid Naval Museum," "Fort Richardson Running Trail," or "Fort Huachuca Readiness Center" as the recipient, and for a short period, committee reports identified them and their House or Senate sponsors.
Now, none of that is done. Instead, sparsely worded tables contain vague entries like "Program Increase." Many add a hint such as designating the increase for "modernization" or "silicon fiber research." But there is nothing to indicate the state or district, the contractor, or any other specifics. Hence, they do not technically qualify as "earmarks." However, after the bill is law, congressional staff contact the Pentagon to make sure it knows where the money is to go -- and what will happen if it doesn't.
The rules meant to reform earmarking have made the practice worse. It is now more opaque, and it gobbles up more money than ever. The $19.3 billion TPA found in 2019 absolutely dwarfs the amounts that I and others, such as the Congressional Research Service and the Committee Against Government Waste , found in these bills before the so-called reforms took hold.
Perhaps the biggest joke is the recent debate on whether it would be a good idea to "bring back earmarks." They never went away. The hypocrisy of the members who opine on this is only exceeded by the cluelessness of the press and the president, who raised it as something to ponder. Then there's the mendacity of those 10 senators who designed their phony legislation to pretend earmarks are gone and must not be allowed to come back. The last section of their bill reads as follows : "(e) APPLICATION. -- This section shall not apply to any authorization of appropriations to a Federal entity if such authorization is not specifically targeted to a State, locality, or congressional district."
Yes, you are reading that right: the bill exempts any earmark that fuzzes up the targeted location, and under the existing system that would be all of them. The 10 authors of this fraud are the following: Senators Claire McCaskill, Jeff Flake, Pat Toomey, Mike Lee, Ben Sasse, Rob Portman, Joni Ernst, James Lankford, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz.
Too big to be hidden
Despite the carefully applied opacity, some of the biggest giveaways and their authors are clear. The House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee chairwoman, Texas Republican Kay Granger, was widely identified as behind $726 million added for six additional F-35Cs to be built by Lockheed in her Fort Worth congressional district.
But is this an example of pork? Granger and official Pentagon witnesses would surely testify that more F-35Cs are urgently needed. Others, including myself and colleagues at the Project on Government Oversight, will tell you that the F-35 is an ineffective boondoggle and is not ready for initial operational testing, let alone expanded production. However, despite many critical Government Accountability Office evaluations and embarrassing official and leaked reports from the Pentagon, the majority of Congress rejects such advice and welcomes more F-35 spending. Pork is in the eye of the beholder.
However, such easily identified earmarks are few and far between.
Trump requested $676 billion for the defense bill; the final Conference Report reduced that by $1.1 billion to $674.9 billion. How was the additional $19.3 billion found by TPA for 679 earmarks stuffed into a bill that cut spending?
While publicly touting the "largest pay raise for troops in nearly a decade" and claiming the bill "improves military readiness," Defense Subcommittee Chairman Shelby, Ranking Member Durbin, and other authors actually cut the budget for both.
They reduced the Pentagon's request for military pay, the Military Personnel account, by $2.1 billion. That's right: while praising themselves for supporting higher pay, they actually cut the budget for it. The request was $148.2 billion; the bill provided $146.1 billion.
Praising their handiwork on supporting military readiness, they cut the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) request from the Pentagon by $5.8 billion. O&M is a huge diverse account, but it is also the heart and core of spending for training, maintenance, spare parts, military depots, and everything else that means "readiness." The Pentagon requested $199.5 billion; it got $193.7 billion.
The way they cut both the Military Personnel and O&M accounts was notably duplicitous. A veteran journalist, John M. Donnelly, reported in Roll Call that most cuts were obtusely justified with explanations such as "Revised Estimate," "Historical Unobligated Balances," and "Not Properly Accounted."
My own research shows $809 million of cuts in those "Revised Estimates." They are completely unexplained in any text and neither committee report from the House or Senate appropriations committees mentions any such reduction. They appear to have been an invention of the conference committee.
When I worked for a Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee member (Republican Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico), I observed staffers being instructed to phony up reductions with just such a ruse. In one case, to make room for all senators' earmarks, the subcommittee chairman, Republican Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, directed the staff to use the earmark dollar total to determine the cuts to be announced. I suspect this crude offset technique underlies the "revised estimates" that appeared out of nowhere.
In both R&D and Procurement, they cut $1.5 billion using "Historical Unobligated Balances" or "Historical Unobligations" as a reason. An unobligated balance is money that DoD has planned but not yet spent: the program may be behind schedule, or it may be on schedule, but the timetable for sending out the money has not occurred yet. Here, some unidentified actor took the money away without a word of explanation as to what parts of the program were being lost or why.
The "Not Properly Accounted" justification meant $706 million in unexplained cuts.
Another term in the bill is "Rate Adjustments"; they cut $124 million. How is this different from "Revised Estimate" or "Historical Unobligated Balances?" The House Defense Subcommittee contains not a word of explanation. The Senate Defense Subcommittee report contains assertions of "Improving funds management: Rate adjustments," but that is all the explanation you get.
Further indecipherable cuts included "Unjustified Growth," another $1.1 billion; "Excess Growth," $468 million; "Underexecution," $134 million; and "Insufficient Justification," $35 million.
Yet another ruse was to transfer $2 billion out of the O&M budget to Title IX of the bill that funds the "Global War on Terrorism." But there, only $1.4 billion of the transferred $2 billion is actually retained. The transfer is a shell game.
There are other ruses in other parts of the bill; the details are mind-bending, but you get the point.
They were cutting military pay and readiness accounts so they could add to the DoD Research and Development (R&D) and the Procurement accounts. That's where the vast majority of the earmarks -- rather, congressional special interest items -- are.
In R&D they added $3.9 billion to the Pentagon's request. The account went from $91 billion to $94.9 billion. In Procurement, they added $4.8 billion to the Pentagon's request of $130.6 billion. Some of the earmarks in these accounts were huge. The controversial F-35 got over $2 billion in several earmarks, the notorious Littoral Combat Ship got $950 million, unrequested C-130s got $640 million, and so on.
Other unspoken consequences
While money over the years was being redirected to earmarks, something very different was happening at the other end of the world -- among our operating military forces.
On January 8, 2014, 29-year-old Liuetenant Wes Van Dorn died when his MH-53E Sea Dragon helicopter, beset with maintenance problems the Navy had deferred, caught fire due to frayed wires and a leaking fuel line. He had been battling for three years to get adequate spare parts and much-needed refurbishment work to bring these old and unreliable helicopters up to minimally safe flying condition. His was only one of several lethal accidents involving the MH-53E resulting from inadequate maintenance, as reported by Mike Hixenbaugh and others in the The Virginian-Pilot and in a new documentary by investigative reporter Zachary Stauffer.
Such accidents resulted from raiding O&M money, such as in 2010 when, for example, Democratic Defense Subcommittee Chairman John Murtha of Pennsylvania cut O&M by a net $2.3 billion to stuff money into earmarks.
Advertising the earmarks they said didn't exist
Though their legislation proclaims earmarks banned, the authors of the defense bill changed their tune when they self-advertised to constituents.
In a press release from his personal office, Senator Dick Durbin declared , "From Rock Island Arsenal to Scott Airforce Base and Naval Station Great Lakes, Illinois [t]his bill safeguards Illinois defense jobs by continuing investments in our state's defense installations and initiatives." Durbin took credit for funding nine programs in Illinois, costing $2.8 billion, most of it for Boeing -- headquartered in Chicago and the producer of the Navy's F/A-18 Super Hornet and MQ-25 Stingray refueling drone.
Subcommittee Chairman Shelby claimed he helped acquire $8.3 billion for 25 projects in Alabama.
Granger claimed she helped win over $12.3 billion for Fort Worth -- including $9.4 billion for Lockheed's F-35, $1.8 billion for Lockheed's C-130J, and $1.1 billion for the Bell Boeing V-22.
Note that they each claimed credit not just for their add-ons but for the entire program expense, including both the Pentagon-requested money and money spent outside their states or districts. For example, the C-130 is assembled in Marietta, Georgia, not Durbin's Illinois, and the F-18's engines are contracted by General Electric in Ohio. In fact, the entire F-18 is fabricated in Missouri; Durbin is advertising himself not to workers but to the Boeing headquarters.
The ranking member on the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Pete J. Visclosky of Indiana, did not participate in these overblown claims. His website shows no press release listing defense budget goodies for his Indiana district.
The under the table incentives
On the other hand, Visclosky was no shrinking violet when it came to accepting campaign contributions from the corporations benefiting from the legislation's earmarks. OpenSecrets.org, a project of the Center for Responsive Politics that documents federal campaign contributions, shows that for his 2018 reelection campaign, Visclosky accepted $347,933 from defense-related donors, $59,800 of it from Lockheed . The $347,933 constituted 27 percent of Visclosky's total campaign contributions , reported as of November 2018. For these and other efforts, Visclosky is getting a promotion: with the Democrats taking over the House next year, he is slated to be defense subcommittee chairman.
Chairwoman Granger accepted $397,560 from defense aerospace and electronics donors, constituting 17 percent of her larger total of $2,371,044 in reported contributions. Granger's contributions from Lockheed were more than twice Visclosky's: $136,360 .
The Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member, Senator Durbin, does not run for reelection until 2020. The OpenSecrets.org data on his last election in 2014 show that Durbin accepted $236,549 from defense aerospace donors, making him the Senate's top beneficiary of such donations at the time. Adding other defense contribution categories, he took in $455,799 .
Senator Shelby's total reported defense-related contributions for his reelection in 2016, before he became defense subcommittee chairman, were $334,800. Commensurate with his elevation to chairman in 2018, he received $1,048,000 , nearly tripling his defense-related total, and he is four years away from his next campaign in 2022.
Granger, Durbin, and the others will resent any implication that their actions are influenced by the generosity of Lockheed or other defense contractors, lobbyists, and PACs. Indeed, campaign finance laws, as written by Congress, make it hard to conclude that contributions illegally influence congressional decision-making, and a recent Supreme Court ruling makes it even more difficult.
The bottom line
All this adds up to a Pentagon budget process in Congress that is:Dishonest : The bill and its authors proclaim it is free of earmarks, but it has 679 of them costing $19.3 billion according to research from an independent group. Deceptive : The bill's authors, with huge support from the rest of Congress, proclaim their dedication to better pay for the troops and military readiness, and yet cut those very accounts by almost $8 billion. The reductions are arbitrary and vague, and are used to offset those 679 earmarks. The senators and representatives circumvent their own rules on earmarks by fuzzing up sponsors, recipients, and locations, making the entire process opaque. Hypocritical : Imagine the gall of nine Republicans and one Democrat with their bill to profess earmarks gone and making sure they don't "come back." There is nothing new about members of Congress posing as pork reformers and actually being pork enablers; however, these 10 assume an unprecedented level of cluelessness among the press; in some but not all corners, they were right to do so. Mercenary : $19.3 billion in earmarks makes rich material for senators and representatives to advertise themselves, with considerable exaggeration, as successful porkers for their states and districts. They also accept hundreds of thousands of dollars from the contractors, lobbyists, and PACs that benefit from the millions, if not billions, of dollars that the Pentagon never requested.
All this is not illegal, but according to common English, it is venal.
Winslow T. Wheeler worked in the U.S. Senate for Republican and Democratic senators and in the Government Accountability Office on national security issues for 31 years. After he left the Senate in 2002, he ran the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, which moved to the Project on Government Oversight in 2012. He retired in 2016.
HenionJD January 11, 2019 at 4:43 pmWhat's 5 billion dollars for a largely useless wall compared to this. The mind boggles.
This is a rather long article but well worth reading. I am sick of the Washington 2-Step dance.Ed Lindgren , , January 11, 2019 at 7:48 pm
"People say the Pentagon does not have a strategy. They are wrong. The Pentagon does have a strategy; it is 'Don't interrupt the money flow, add to it.'" -Col. John R. Boyd (USAF Ret.) John Boyd (Fighter Pilot, Tactician, Strategist, Conceptual Designer, Reformer) died in 1997.Taras 77 , , January 11, 2019 at 11:16 pm
This is a solid article by a very respected critic of the obscene defense spending and weapons programs. I believe Mr Wheeler early on was on this F-35 debacle, labeling it the flying swiss army knife. (aplogies to the manufacturer of the knife and its fans.) Notable of recent are a series of feel good reports that the F-35 is combat ready, etc. Hopefully, the pilots of the F-35's will never have to face the real test.EliteCommInc. , , January 12, 2019 at 1:26 am
Thank you, Mr Wheeler, for the continuation of exposing this fraud.
Deeply appreciated this article.Brendan Sexton , , January 13, 2019 at 1:56 pm
Now that we are well into this new era of draining the swamp, we are all over our heads in muck and democracy AND prosperity are in danger of drowning. Venal is awfully polite.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
RobinG , says: July 24, 2018 at 4:59 am GMT@exiled off mainstreet #BROWDERGATERobinG , says: July 24, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT
A perfectly good article, I'm sure, but why diffuse ourselves [and engender feelings of fear and hopelessness as you express] when a strategic pressure point has presented? Johnstone makes no mention of Bill Browder. Nor do the [100, so far] commenters.
BILL BROWDER is a key figure in the anti-Trump, anti-Russia hysteria. The notorious Trump Tower meeting was about the Magnitsky Act, a fabrication by Browder to hide his financial crimes. Browder "testified" in the Senate expressly to demonize Putin. Browder's contacts in the IC, the Jewish Lobby, and the fawning media have enabled his propaganda assault this week. He's appeared -- unchallenged, virtually unquestioned -- on countless talk shows. But he's been running scared at the mention of interrogation by Russians. There are huge holes in his story, made clear in his deposition in the Prevezon case. The truth will bring him down! And perhaps his Deep State supporters, along with him.
Ask your Senators if they've heard/read Browder's 2015 deposition in the Prevezon case. (See comment 161 under The Untouchable Mr. Browder? by Israel Shamir for links.)
Research links to primary sources on #Browdergate --
https://populist.tv/2018/01/20/bill-browder-links-and-resources-to-understand-controversy/@yurivku How about Idiot AND Troll.Yurivku , says: July 24, 2018 at 5:26 pm GMT
BTW, have you seen "THE MAGNITSKY ACT – BEHIND THE SCENES" that Phil Giraldi posted today? Debunking anti-Russian criminal sociopaths like Bill Browder will go a long way to improving relations. Not to mention easing pressure on the unfortunate Trump.
Full research primary links available here, including Browder's 2015 deposition in the U.S. vs. Prevezon Holdings case. Every Senator who voted to support Browder should see this. [Any who already have, double shame!]
https://populist.tv/2018/01/20/bill-browder-links-and-resources-to-understand-controversy/@RobinG UWell, we here in Russia know all this (about Browder) for quite a time. What new did you find? It's just one story in long list of those written and spoken for western idiots like Scripals
, MH17, chemicals in Syria and WMD in Iraq, Russian meddling in f-n US elections and so on. Eat it all dummies.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
MK-DELTABURKE , says: July 23, 2018 at 12:40 pm GMT@Cagey Beast Yup. Furthermore, CIA is organized crime and organized crime is CIA. CIA recruits and runs agents in favored criminal syndicates in every illicit trade: drugs, child sexual trafficking, arms, fraud, bustouts, extortion, money laundering. Their purpose is not to interdict the trade but to control it.
CIA manages transnational organized crime to top up their budget for unauthorized clandestine operations, like killing JFK.
CIA protects its criminal proteges with their chartered impunity. They call off law enforcement with the magic words national security or 'sources and methods.' If the plan gets exposed, CIA's criminal cutouts insulate the agency from exposure.
RFK knew how it works. RFK junior explained the reason for RFK's focus on organized-crime until CIA whacked him. That's why his book was made to sink without a ripple.
Evenfurthermore, CIA is the government and the government is CIA. Decades ago Fletcher Prouty showed that CIA's deepest-cover illegal moles are embedded in our own government. Every agency with repressive capacity is infiltrated with focal points, who report to CIA handlers without the other agency's knowledge.
Of course Israel is trying to infiltrate it -- they understand the levers of power.
Assange has got some mighty stinkers in his insurance file. All we can do is hope they're enough to destabilize the CIA Reich that has ruled America since 1949.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
Halper , says: July 23, 2018 at 6:52 pm GMTCIA is boosting the volume of its anti-Russian vilification because more and more CIA assets are getting flushed out. Stephan Halper is an obvious spook. Page is the corniest traitor since Lee Harvey Oswald .Daniel Rich , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:35 pm GMT
Strzok has clearly got a dotted-line report to his real boss in CIA :
Publius Tacitus is incorrect, though, in making a distinction between the Obama administration and the intelligence community. Obama is a third-generation CIA spook he's a CIA spokesmodel, not a head of state (see Andrew Krieg's Presidential Puppetry.)@peterAUS It's impossible to asses [correctly] who's influenced by what, but it seems that telling lies doesn't work that well any longer. You can find some numbers in the following article: Democracy Dies in Debt? US News Outlets Slashing Staff Left and Right -- Link to Sputnik.Bill the Cat , says: July 24, 2018 at 12:06 am GMT
Excerpt : "A Pew Research analysis on Monday found that more than a third of the US' largest newspapers and more than a fifth of its largest digital outlets experienced layoffs between January 2017 and April 2018."To add to the list of things that the Russians had on Hillary . IIRC, she was Sec of State at the time the US election-meddling-and-color-revolution brigade tried to rig the Russian elections against Putin.skrik , says: July 24, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT
Putin does not seem to be the sort to let emotion be more important than policy, but I've always wondered that to the small extent the Russians did take a pop at Hillary's campaign, if it didn't bring a bit of a smile to Putin's face to know he was just giving back the hits he'd already taken from her.
Hillary of course was incompetent in having America interfere in Russian elections. That campaign never had a chance as Putin is a lot more popular in Russia than Hillary is in America. So, she took a pot shot at a rival world leader knowing (or at least some smart people did) that it would have no effect and that Putin would win that election anyways. And of course Hillary the Arrrogant could never imagine that another player in the game would get to take a turn, and that others might interfere in her election, and she knew she'd run and she knew she'd rig the Dem party to get the nod, in the same way the NED and the Soros NGO's tried to interfere in Russia.@NorthgunnerMulegino1 , says: July 24, 2018 at 9:55 pm GMT
'ruling class', 'elites'
I share your sentiments [in a slightly different vernacular]; of course they, the usurping 'rulers' are neither a class nor in any way 'elite,' but who/what ever they are [jews, oligarchs, 'simply' psychopaths or 'true' spawn of Satan], they do seem to be 'in control.' Proof of that is the coordinated criminal actions of 'the West.'
Find "CIA is the government and the government is CIA" above; it's the obvious place to expect a ccc = covert criminal cabal to establish itself. Add to that the truly weird concept of having spies a) out of all control and b) with apparently unlimited power. We 'shall know them by their deeds' which is almost unrelievedly a 'bad look.' Odd is that the 1st mention of any conspiracy that I heard of was that of 'jewish banksters ruling the world.' We since know that such was pilloried by the CIA, but it seems to me to be a case of the tar-baby: The more they [CIA, jews] howl/deny, the guiltier they prove themselves to be. rgdsI would say that what is affecting the western establishment elites at this juncture is not mere dementia but the madness which arises from acts of pure, hellish evil. These people are the Gadarine swine of the contemporary era; a good portion of them appear to be Satanic perverts and pedophiles, if we are to judge from recent revelations. I am not being hyperbolic when I write that Antichrist's reign has been postponed. They had imagined it would be installed by November of 2016 and this is driving them to despair. They hate Trump because his election blocked their lord and master's ascent and they hate Putin because he represents the great restraining power.Cagey Beast , says: July 24, 2018 at 10:16 pm GMT@yurivku He's of course is a bone in DC's throat, but his level of intelligence and real power seem to be extremely low.Jeff Stryker , says: July 25, 2018 at 4:12 am GMT
Yes, he's a golden chandelier stuck in the belly of the Beast. I think he's quite smart, in his own way, but can only do so much on his own. He also has some bad ideas and makes enemies when it isn't necessary but he's still the only hope for change at the centre of the American empire.@skrik Be that as it may, Romper Stomper took place 30 years after the Vietnam War began. The reverberations of the war were felt in Australia long afterwards.Jeff Stryker , says: July 25, 2018 at 4:27 am GMT@peterAUS That's an armchair rugby referee for you, encouraging a Civil War in a country he's probably never set foot. What do you believe would change its policy towards Oz.Jeff Stryker , says: July 25, 2018 at 4:31 am GMT
If you remember when Reagan broke the air-traffic control union strikes and 30,000 of them immigrated to Oz in 1981, what would happen would be that many qualified Americans would come to Australia and take Australian jobs.
That's how such unrest would affect you.
At any rate, the US would still have the same grip on popular culture (If not financial markets) and Vegemite would not suddenly replace McDonald's everywhere.
Also, though the Asians seem to slowly taking over your economy anyhow, if the US military was busy suppressing a civil war and Asian countries might get aggressive towards you militarily.@peterAUS The Asians might get more aggressive if the US military suddenly found itself preoccupied with a Civil War.peterAUS , says: July 25, 2018 at 5:12 am GMT
Asia is taking over your country economically anyhow but they might get a bit anti-social if suddenly the US were to lose all capacity to maintain its presence in your hemisphere.@Jeff Stryker O.K.skrik , says: July 25, 2018 at 6:15 am GMT
Good luck.@peterAUSRobinG , says: July 25, 2018 at 6:18 am GMT
I know, for your types. Feels comfortable
Aw, don't go all wussy -- you're acting like a wounded suitor. I suppose it was my rejection of your
I'd need to trust you and then we'd have a long chat somewhere in open public place
Similr to which you you offered Backstay
Have a quiet chat somewhere in a park, for example. Just two of us. Two
Try this google ; that the sort of place you had in mind? It's also reputedly a secret entrance to an ASIO bunker but I suppose you know that; I call attempted entrapment.@skrik . ? ccc = 'great financial consortiums' ?yurivku , says: July 25, 2018 at 6:52 am GMT
"As a matter of fact, the composition of the governments is predetermined, and their actions are controlled by great financial consortiums."
J. V. Stalin, Questions & Answers to American Trade Unionists: Stalin's Interview With the First American Trade Union Delegation to Soviet Russia
Pravda September 15, 1927 ___________(h/t, J.S.)@Cagey Beaststandall , says: July 25, 2018 at 7:39 am GMT
think he's quite smart, in his own way, but can only do so much on his own
But I think he's stupid, ignorant, spineless (as well as most of POTUSes), the only difference is -- he's not completely belongs to DC. Probably it's better than if Clinton was on his place, but who knows, Trump can make any stupid thing@exiled off mainstreet I agree.skrik , says: July 25, 2018 at 9:31 am GMT@RobinGAnon  Disclaimer , says: July 25, 2018 at 2:30 pm GMT
ccc = 'great financial consortiums' ?
G'day, q.possibly and glad you responded. Yeah sure, Stalin is 'close;' it's why some suggest oligarchs, but it demonstrably falls a bit short. My ccc = covert criminal cabal, each word of the highest significance; let's examine each one:
[COED:] covert = not openly acknowledged or displayed -- this is 100% true, since they operate from 'behind a curtain' of deliberate secrecy. Not declaring who they are is a lie of omission, then see after cabal below. Before moving on, let's consult Cicero:
mendaci neque quum vera dicit, creditor
= A liar is not to be believed, even when speaking the truth. That's never a 'good look,' and leads to the next:
criminal -- self-evident, then:
[COED:] cabal = a secret political clique or faction. Øarchaic a secret intrigue .
C16 (denoting the Kabbalah): from French cabale, from medieval Latin cabala (see Kabbalah).
Finally [COED:] Kabbalah (also Kabbala, Cabbala, Cabala, or Qabalah = the ancient Jewish tradition of mystical interpretation of the Bible .
I allow myself to propose an exactly apposite example of the latter: 'Xxx promised it to us!' -- Where Xxx comes directly from some "mystical interpretation of the Bible." 'Nuff said?
More? IF it were only "great financial consortiums" THEN one would need to explain the criminality, since I'm pretty sure oligarchs *could* work legally. Then, the 'normal' consortiums' business is to 'make money' [and cheating and/or theft may be sort of 'normal'], but the ccc goes *far* past that into [mass-]murdering for spoil, quite/most often for oil and/or *soil* . The latter is within Nuremberg class = supreme international criminality. That may complete the loop and explain why covert in the 1st place.
I wrote above that I would 'revisit' lies; here's a partial quote:
But it remained for the yyy, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood,
Feel free to 'guess' at the yyy, then I assert QED rgdsGreat article. Good to read someone not suffering from dementia!Jeff Stryker , says: July 25, 2018 at 3:00 pm GMT@peterAUS Good luck?EugeneGur , says: July 25, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT@peterAUSPoupon Marx , says: July 25, 2018 at 5:05 pm GMT
Or who are the guys, in Ukrainian Armed Forces, presently engaged against Donbass?
Besides those in "volunteer battalions", which tend to be nationalistic with distinct Nazi overtones, people in the regular Armed Forces are there for the money. There are very few paying jobs in today's Ukraine, so men enlist and hope for the best.
the ratio hate/don't care shall shift, hard and fast. Not in Russian favor, I suspect.
That could've been the case in 2014. Today I very much doubt it. Even the Right Sector people are fed up with the current power in Kiev, and even the dumbest nationalists are beginning to realize what a deep hole the country is in. Normal people all over the South-East are hoping and praying for the Russians to come. The problem is the Russians aren't coming.The moniker "journalist" should immediately by banished by replacement of "reporter", as in report the facts and observations, not interpretations or personal opinions.Eagle Eye , says: July 25, 2018 at 5:18 pm GMT@AuthenticjazzmanAuthenticjazzman , says: July 25, 2018 at 6:51 pm GMT
I am not a Scientologist, but I consider [L. Ron Hubbard] to be one of the most brilliant minds of the twentieth century
Interesting point. Serious question -- in your view, what else (other than psychotropic medication) was Hubbard "brilliant" about?@Eagle Eye " In your view what else was Hubbard brilliant about?"peterAUS , says: July 25, 2018 at 6:53 pm GMT
Well for example his bizarre sounding concepts regarding the sources of mankind, and the history of this insane planet, which are repeatedly ridiculed and labeled as absurd by the PTB, who of course have their own turf to defend, and their own concepts which they do not want to be brought into question.
AJM@EugeneGur Well can't say I disagree with the comment.Cratylus , says: July 26, 2018 at 5:49 am GMT
Or, better, can't provide any concrete evidence to the contrary, especially re the second paragraph.
The thing is, nationalism is a peculiar feeling.
So, while this
Normal people all over the South-East are hoping and praying for the Russians to come.
could be true, the rest of Ukraine could get into quite the opposite.
But, as you say
The problem is the Russians aren't coming.
so it's all academic.
Now, speaking of
people are fed up with the current power .
one could feel, probably, the same in Donbass.
Things aren't great there either.
In any case the conflict is there, frozen for the moment (not for the people along the front line) and can erupt, again, when the US Deep State wants it.
Interesting times.@Michael Kenny If one wants a clear example of the Russophobic or Putinophobic hysteria infecting the West, one need go no further than this demented fellow. And to that he adds a conspiracy theory about the gangsters ruling over it all.Uncle Bee , says: July 26, 2018 at 12:06 pm GMT@Cyrano Imagine if the WMDs get you attacked rule applied to Israel?Jeff Davis , says: July 26, 2018 at 3:17 pm GMT@seeing-thru You got it 100% Right my friend. That's the best reality-connected assessment of the Donald's performance that I've read. I'm going to swipe it for reuse elsewhere. Thank you, and may the force be with you.seeing-thru , says: July 26, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMT@Jeff Davis Glad you liked it. Yeah, go ahead use it any which way. BTW, my fear is that the Donald may not be able to succeed because of the massive line-up of forces against him. The whole lunatic asylum is out of their cages, snarling and clawing and planning all sorts of stuff to bring him down. Let us wish him success.Apolonius , says: July 26, 2018 at 9:54 pm GMT@Vojkan Bravo Vojkane!Jeff Davis , says: July 27, 2018 at 6:24 pm GMT@Lauri TörniMalcontent , says: July 29, 2018 at 8:59 pm GMT
So standing up for American citizens is considered a "mentally insane" thing?
You are utterly and completely out of your mind, virtually from another planet, another reality. A textbook example of insanity. The fact that you don't recognize it, simply confirms the fact.
The Deep state is not, repeat not , the American people.
Regarding the Intel community: There are the guys in the trenches. these are honorable guys. Then there is the leadership. The current leadership is on notice to behave itself, on account of the new "Sheriff" in town. The corrupt politicized leadership from the Clinton/Bush/Obama regimes however, now out of power, are attempting to overthrow the legitimately elected president of the United States. In so doing, they are pursuing treason-lite.
Clapper, Brennan, and Hayden are already full-on war criminals: Iraq & torture. Now, in their attempt to destroy the Trump presidency, they are adding betrayal of democracy and betrayal of the Constitution of the United States to their criminal resume. These are evil men who think it is their job to run the United States from behind a malleable (gutless?) figurehead who does what they tell him to do.
As I said in my original post, it is fascinating to observe people like you, utterly dominated -- brain-raped really -- by a neocon/neoliberal narrative that has reduced them to robotic -- even willing -- slaves of the 1%. Good for you. Enjoy. The others, who prefer self-mastery to self-enslavement, will benefit from your choice of enslavement.
That is what all of this boils down to; Trump treating Americans like s*hit in front of the whole world, while praising Russia and Russians.
The IC war criminals/traitors should not be equated with or allowed to hide anonymous behind the majority population of decent Americans. Which is what simpletons like you enable and then fall for.
I fully understood all the concerns for what the Left is doing to people and to the society.
Trump praises Israel and says that, "Securing Israel's safety is our most important task" not a peep comes from the Trump-supporters?!
Some Trump supporters do object. Others however grasp the political reality of Jewish political influence in the US. Politically incompetent simpletons like yourself think Trump should commit political suicide by taking on the Jews.
The Jews/Israel will be dealt with -- or not -- later, when Trump has secured his presidency. And then, the rebalancing of the US-Israeli relationship will not be grounded in hostility to the Jews, but will be more along the lines of America First.
Never ever did I expect, that it would be the Trump-supporters surfacing as the fifth column, giving the "finishing touch" to the destruction of American citizens.
The above is pure paranoid, "the sky is falling", TDS whackadoodle.
The Liberals seem to have woken up,
The country is in the throes of a cultural war between the bubble-wrapped snowflakes and "real" people. Thankfully, the "real" people will win, precisely because they have the advantage of being reality-connected. The snowflakes will benefit as well -- you will benefit -- by the resulting opportunity to reconnect with reality.
Good luck, best wishes, Trump is rapidly changing the world for the better.
And let me add: The Soviet Union is a quarter century gone, and with it Soviet Communism. Putin is the preeminent statesman of our times. Go to YouTube and listen to what he says. He and Trump, aligned, are a force for good in the world. Peace with Russia is coming, and with it a new era of peace and prosperity in the world.
Which leaves me to echo your closing comment:
Are you ever going to be able to comprehend this?
(Answer: Probably not for another six years, if ever.)@Cyrano Are you joking? Russia is the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world.Malcontent , says: July 29, 2018 at 9:01 pm GMT@Jeff Davis Bravo! Exactly my thoughts!peterAUS , says: July 29, 2018 at 9:27 pm GMT@Jeff DavisJeff Stryker , says: July 30, 2018 at 8:09 am GMT
Thankfully, the "real" people will win, precisely because they have the advantage of being reality-connected.
The last time when "real" people won against the US "Deep State" was let me see .well shame on me, can't think of it.
Let's see after the fall of the Wall:
Yugoslavia, then Serbia proper .no
Afghanistan .no .
Ah Iraq .no ..
Lybia no .
Syria well not so sure.
Ah, yes, those weren't Americans. Yeah.
I got concerned for a bit; all good now.
No need to think about M.A.D. anymore. (Re)focus on fishing. Snapper, preferably.@peterAUS Australia's problem is going to be an Asian economic overclass you Australians always obsess about country's located halfway around the world first the UK now the US.Jeff Stryker , says: July 30, 2018 at 8:15 am GMT
you're worried about blacks in the US in the ghetto's wealth inequality while Chinese business elite reduce you to paupers IN Australia and eventually you go the way of the black aborigines.
But you cannot see that because you're focused on US cultural colonization or things you have seen in Hollywood films.@peterAUS Sorry, countries not country's.James Bacque , says: Website July 31, 2018 at 7:16 pm GMT
Point is that in the sixties you were still obsessed with the British Empire though you are a bit of a lost colony now you are obsessed with the United States, another waning Empire.
Pretty soon the Chinese will have you sleeping in your cars and you will still be focused on the state of blacks in the US ghetto and inequality in America.
But see, the US won't be the problem in Australia. China will.
You compare yourself to the United States because it is a similar former British colony and white settler nation but it is Asia that will stomp you.She is most likely onto something important. My solution is that most people are double-minded because it suits us to lazily allow our leaders to control us while we (somewhat) hypocritically condemn them for faults and errors which profit us.peterAUS , says: July 31, 2018 at 8:18 pm GMT
St Paul, Shakespeare and Montaigne all complained of their own double-mindedness.
I hope that a column of mine on this topic will appear soon in The U.R.
James Bacque Penetanguishene ON@James Bacqueskrik , says: August 1, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
most people are double-minded because it suits us to lazily allow our leaders to control us while we (somewhat) hypocritically condemn them for faults and errors which profit us ..
I guess you are onto something here.
It could go a bit deeper, though, as:
. most people are double-minded because it suits us to allow our betters to lead us while we (somewhat) hypocritically condemn them for their and our faults and errors which profit us.@Jeff StrykerJohnj , says: August 2, 2018 at 11:48 pm GMT
But you cannot see that because you're focused on US cultural colonization or things you have seen in Hollywood films You compare yourself to the United States because it is a similar former British colony and white settler nation
If I may intercede, no, and that twice.
1. peterAUS, if my interpretation is correct, sees the world through 'military blinkers,' is assumed not to notice China et al. except as one 'enemy' among many, and probably thinks that ~100 F35s, xxx new warships, yyy new submarines and zzz new 'armoured cars,' costing the Aus-taxpayer nose-bleeding squillions will 'save his/their bacon.' As such, peterAUS cannot be addressed as any valid representative of 'the great Aus-unwashed.'
2. That great Aus-unwashed, hoovering up the trash err, sorry for the US-speak; hoovering up the horrendous rubbish 'presented' to them via their '1984-style telescreens' err, one-finger flat-screen distraction devices [when not actual television sets], is largely unconscious of any 'real world.'
Since the CIA-sponsored coup of 1975, the country has been 'going to the dogs' at an increasing rate. The sheople glory under their 'Lucky Country' delusion, not even knowing its full import: Lucky not to be even partly aware. Yeah sure, the corrupt&venal MSM+PFBCs [= publicly financed broadcasters] try to revive 'the yellow peril' scare, but that's just standard 'Bernays haze' scare mongering, to keep the proles from thinking: Der, they [as peterAUS] didn't think. rgds
PS The great Aus-unwashed, as any 'Western' citizen, has zero choice; so-called 'Western democracy' allows for as good as zero 'citizen input.' The 'choice' of Trump should be put down to an aberration -- some 'clever-clogs' manipulators -- *not* Russians -- pulled off a coup. But as they used to say: "Better red than dead;" better Trump than HRC.Do we have a democracy? Or even representative government? So what happened to our jobs off-shored. Who approved that? Who approved 100 million legal immigrants in the last 50 years?Johnj , says: August 3, 2018 at 12:10 am GMT
Why does anyone accept our stilted self-image, especially Diana?@Lauri Törni Good God, this Lauri reads the NYT and has the gall to post it as proof of her opinions. So that means she is nuts and brainwashed.Ace , says: September 15, 2018 at 5:55 pm GMTOutstanding article.Ace , says: September 15, 2018 at 7:59 pm GMT
On the point about the "world's greatest prison population" note that some one-third of the federal prison population consists of illegal alien criminals and the large U.S. black criminal underclass commits crimes at a higher rate than everyone else, so there are more blacks in our prisons. Oh, the horror.
If other nations enjoyed large illegal immigrant populations and a large black criminal underclass we would see similar inflated prison populations.
Spare us the silliness on this score as well as the "regular massacres of school children" garbage. No doubt you'll enlighten us with your anti-gun views on American gun nuts at a later time. I wait with bated breath.
Still, you almost got a lock on insightful commentary these days.@Lauri Törni Liberals fight for the existence of Americans?james bacque , says: Website October 24, 2018 at 6:51 pm GMT
Amazing. Do you intend to live on our planet or are you just visiting?Ron Unz
This is a very good blog, column, whatever, because it illuminates with the light of reason the mass madness of the Washington crowd, and probably much of the American population. See the New Yorker article in the current issue about the utility of caregivers lying to and/or deceiving demented patients to keep them content. That is what is happening now in the USA and your failure to understand my explanation for it, in my essay on double-mindedness, which I sent you last summer, I mind very much. You could lead the way out of the mess if you would re-read that essay and try to understand it.
I am a very ordinary guy and I understand it. Please try again. The world needs this.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
EugeneGur , says: July 23, 2018 at 9:30 pm GMT@Peter AkuleyevVojkan , says: July 24, 2018 at 8:25 am GMT
who has spent time in Ukraine knows how deep hatred of Russia goes
I don't know where is Ukraine you spent your time and in what company, but this is complete BS. The South-Eastern Ukraine hates the Western Ukrainian "banderovtsi" as much as the Russians do if not more -- after all, the followers of Bandera operated mostly on the Ukrainian soil. There are deranged individuals in every country, of course, and Ukraine has been subjected lately to intense hate propaganda as well as repressions, but there is no hatred of Russia. This is contradicted by both sociology and everyday behavior of Ukrainian, which move to Russia in droves, spend time in Russia, support Russian sport teams, etc.
we are supposed to dismiss the actual wishes of Ukrainians, Estonians, Poles, Georgians and other peoples who hate Russia (and love the US)
Nobody is asking about what the real Ukrainians, Estonians, Georgians or even Poles actually think, least of all the US. There are almost as many Georgians living in Russia as there are in Georgia, and they show no desire to move back. In 2008 during the conflict, their biggest fear was that they'd be deported.
The Ukraine's Maidan was a violent coup, where a few thousand militants armed and trained abroad overthrew a government elected by the entire country. Protests that immediately started all over the country were suppressed with force -- the one in Donbass still is.
How could anyone with an access to Internet remain unaware of these facts is beyond me.@Peter Akuleyev Why should anyone freaking care and put his ass in the line of fire because you bunch of primitives hate Russia? Between having a nuclear cataclysm because you pathetic dwarfs of nations are frustrated to have a neighbour you can't bully and Russia obliterating you, I say let Russia obliterate you, thus we won't have to suffer the ear-hurting dissonnance of your incessant whining any more. Though I doubt Russia would stomp on you. When you see shit, you don't stomp on it, you don't want you don't want your shoes to stink, you just walk around it.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
peterAUS , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:25 pm GMT@EugeneGur That's an interesting point. Even if true, doesn't matter. One could wonder ..who are the people populating Ukrainian Armed Forces?
Or who are the guys, in Ukrainian Armed Forces, presently engaged against Donbass? All of them. Including those is logistics/maintenance depots far away from the (current) line of separation?
The will to fight against "Russia" ranges from a deep hate to simply not wishing to go against the (current) Ukrainian government. The former are in those "shock" battalions. The later are manning the logistics train. And everything in between.
Now .if/when a real shooting starts, as soon as Russia, as expected (and desired) by the most of readers here, starts delivering ordnance into operational depth of Donbass enemy, the ratio hate/don't care shall shift, hard and fast. Not in Russian favor, I suspect.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Maj. Danny Sjrusen via AntiWar.com,
The president says he will bring the troops home from Syria and Afghanistan. Now, because of their pathological hatred of Trump, mainstream Democrats are hysterical in their opposition.
If anyone else were president, the "liberals" would be celebrating. After all, pulling American soldiers out of a couple of failing, endless wars seems like a "win" for progressives. Heck, if Obama did it there might be a ticker-tape parade down Broadway. And there should be. The intervention in Syria is increasingly aimless, dangerous and lacks an end state. Afghanistan is an unwinnable war – America's longest – and about to end in outright military defeat . Getting out now and salvaging so much national blood and treasure ought to be a progressive dream. There's only one problem: Donald Trump. Specifically, that it was Trump who gave the order to begin the troop withdrawals.
Lost in the haze of their pathological hatred of President Trump, the majority of mainstream liberal pundits and politicians can't, for the life of them, see the good sense in extracting the troops from a couple Mideast quagmires. That or they can see the positives, but, in their obsessive compulsion to smear the president, choose politics over country. It's probably a bit of both. That's how tribally partisan American political discourse has become. And, how reflexively hawkish and interventionist today's mainstream Democrats now are. Whither the left-wing antiwar movement? Well, except for a few diehards out there, the movement seems to have been buried long ago with George McGovern .
Make no mistake, the Democrats have been tacking to the right on foreign policy and burgeoning their tough-guy-interventionist credentials for decades now. Terrified of being painted as soft or dovish on martial matters, just about all the "serious" baby-boomer Dems proudly co-opted the militarist line and gladly accepted campaign cash from the corporate arms dealers. Think about it, any Democrat with serious future presidential aspirations back in 2002 voted for the Iraq War – Hillary, Joe Biden, even former peace activist John Kerry! And, in spite of the party base now moving to the left, all these big name hawks – along with current Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer – are still Democratic stalwarts. Heck, some polls list Biden as the party's 2020 presidential frontrunner.
More disturbing than the inconsistency of these political hacks is the vacuousness of the supposedly liberal media. After Trump's announcement of troop withdrawals, just about every MSNBC host slammed the president and suddenly sounded more hawkish than the clowns over at Fox News. Take Rachel Maddow. Whatever you think of her politics, she is – undoubtedly – a brilliant woman. Furthermore, unlike most pundits, she knows a little something about foreign policy. Her 2012 book, Drift: The Unmooring of American Military Power was a serious and well-researched critique of executive power and the ongoing failure of the wars on terror. Drift was well reviewed by regular readers and scholars alike.
Enter Donald Trump. Ever since the man won the 2016 election, Maddow's nightly show has been dominated the hopeless dream of Russia-collusion and a desire for Trump's subsequent impeachment. Admittedly, Maddow's anti-Trump rhetoric isn't completely unfounded – this author, after all, has spent the better part of two years criticizing most of his policies – but her zealousness has clouded her judgment, or worse. Indeed, that Maddow, and her fellow "liberals" at MSNBC have now criticized the troop withdrawals and even paraded a slew of disgraced neoconservatives – like Bill Kristol – on their shows seems final proof of their descent into opportunistic hawkishness.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this new "liberal" hawkishness is the pundits' regular canonization of Jim Mattis and the other supposed "adults" in the room . For mainstream, Trump-loathing, liberals the only saving grace for this administration was its inclusion of a few trusted, "grown-up" generals in the cabinet. Yet it is a dangerous day, indeed, when the supposedly progressive journalists deify only the military men in the room. Besides, Mattis was no friend to the liberals. Their beloved President Obama previously canned "mad-dog" for his excessive bellicosity towards Iran. Furthermore, Mattis – so praised for both his judgment and ethics – chose an interesting issue for which to finally fall-on-his-sword and resign. U.S. support for the Saudi-led starvation of 85,000 kids in Yemen: Mattis could deal with that. But a modest disengagement from even one endless war in the Middle East: well, the former SECDEF just couldn't countenance that. Thus, he seems a strange figure for a "progressive" network to deify.
Personally, I'd like to debate a few of the new "Cold Warriors" over at MSNBC or CNN and ask a simple series of questions: what on the ground changed in Syria or Afghanistan that has suddenly convinced you the US must stay put? And, what positivist steps should the military take in those locales, in order to achieve what purpose exactly? Oh, by the way, I'd ask my debate opponents to attempt their answers without uttering the word Trump. The safe money says they couldn't do it – not by a long shot. Because, you see, these pundits live and die by their hatred of all things Trump and the more times they utter his name the higher go the ratings and the faster the cash piles up. It's a business model not any sort of display of honest journalism.
There's a tragic irony here. By the looks of things, so long as Mr. Trump is president, it seems that any real movement for less interventionism in the Greater Middle East may come from a part of the political right – libertarians like Rand Paul along with the president's die hard base, which is willing to follow him on any policy pronouncement. Paradoxically, these folks may find some common cause with the far left likes of Bernie Sanders and the Ocasio-Cortez crowd, but it seems unlikely that the mainstream left is prepared to lead a new antiwar charge. What with Schumer/Pelosi still in charge, you can forget about it. Given the once powerful left-led Vietnam-era protest movement, today's Dems seem deficient indeed on foreign policy substance. Odds are they'll cede this territory, once again, to the GOP.
By taking a stronger interventionist, even militarist, stand than Trump on Syria and Afghanistan, the Democrats are wading into dangerous waters. Maybe, as some say, this president shoots from the hip and has no core policy process or beliefs. Perhaps. Then again, Trump did crush fifteen Republican mainstays in 2015 and shock Hillary – and the world – in 2016. Indeed, he may know just what he's doing. While the Beltway, congressional-military-industrial complex continues to support ever more fighting and dying around the world, for the most part the American people do not . Trump, in fact, ran on a generally anti -interventionist platform, calling the Iraq War "dumb" and not to be repeated. The president's sometimes earthy – if coarse – commonsense resonated with a lot of voters, and Hillary's hawkish establishment record (including her vote for that very same Iraq War) didn't win her many new supporters.
Liberals have long believed, at least since McGovern's 1972 trouncing by Richard Nixon, that they could out-hawk the Republican hawks and win over some conservatives. It rarely worked. In fact, Dems have been playing right into bellicose Republican hands for decades. And, if they run a baby-boomer-era hawk in 2020 – say Joe Biden – they'll be headed for another shocking defeat. The combination of a (mostly, so far) strong economy and practical policy of returning US troops from unpopular wars, could, once again, out weigh this president's other liabilities.
Foreign policy won't, by itself, tip a national election. But make no mistake, if the clowns at MSNBC and "liberal" hacks on Capitol Hill keep touting their newfound militarism, they're likely to emerge from 2020 with not only smeared consciences, but four more years in the opposition.
* * *
Danny Sjursen is a US Army officer and regular contributor to Antiwar.com 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 . Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet .
[ Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.]
turkey george palmer , 43 minutes ago linkRussianSniper , 46 minutes ago link
A the politicians carry their recordsike a ball and chain. Trump had no legislative baggage so in comparison he looked ok. There may be a chance that some plan to allow e wrything to sink to near chaos is happening, with that risk of a slip up being total collapse. It would appear total collapse is likely absent some very well thought out plan by a lot of people who appear to be moronsZero-Hegemon , 53 minutes ago link
The neowackjobs of the bush clinton bush bozo crime sprees must answer for their war crimes!
Put these monsters before a world court in Syria, Libya, Iraq, or Yemen.
Burn them alive on pay per view.dogismycopilot , 53 minutes ago link
In the US the neocons switch between parties like changing underwear. Now that the republicans are soiled they'll wear democrats instead, lobby for more war until they're good and soiled, and switch when republican populism is back on the rise (like during the Bush years, and then Obama).halcyon , 1 hour ago link
Lost me at calling Maddow a brilliant womanAI Agent , 1 hour ago link
Danny boy got sucked into the liberel-conservative-democrat fallacy. It is all one big party called the war party. The opposition is always theatrics.quesnay , 53 minutes ago link
Lost me when you said Rachel MadCow was a brilliant woman.
Brilliant people have ethics. If she's brilliant, she wouldn't be lying. If she's stupid, then she's not smart enough to know she's lying.Got The Wrong No , 31 minutes ago link
I don't watch her so can't comment on that, but brilliance and ethics have nothing to do with each other.Debt Slave , 1 hour ago link
Madcow is diabolical. A brilliant unethical he/she.lincolnsteffens , 1 hour ago link
We all know it. If libtards didn't hate America, they wouldn't be trying so hard to change it.
Remember the happy white culture middle class America of 1955? Libtards hate it with a passion that can only be an obsession. The first thing libtards started whining about in the 1950's was the the poor 'oppressed' negroes weren't allowed to burp and fart at the same lunch counter as the evil white man. We foolishly caved in to that first step of liberal stupidity and look where we are today. Mall shootings in Chicongo and New Jersey.
Everytime the (((media))) shows you these violent examples, just remember how we got here.
Compromising with liberals is nothing more than a highway to hell, paved with compromise and liberal 'good intentions'.
Now we have Donald Trump who is willing to tell the liberal idiots to shove their fake altruism and egalitarianism up their collective asses. This chance of a lifetime for our children may never come again.
i know who I am voting for in 2020 ...Escrava Isaura , 1 hour ago link
I voted for McGovern. I think that was the first time I voted. Now I can't stand either political Parties. I saw the games the Republicans pulled with the Massachusetts Caucus and Convention when I was an alternate delegate for Ron Paul. There is no trick dirty enough for either Party to pull. They are without a moral compass.AI Agent , 1 hour ago link
Bring 'some' troops home is just a political maneuver not a policy change. How can you tell?
Trump is an imperialist. That's why he fired Bannon.
And that's why Trump moved drones attacks operations from the military to the CIA.
There's no evidence that Trump is ending US intervention anywhere.
Now check this out when the President is Democrat.
52% of Republicans disprove withdrawing troops: Americans widely support President Obama's recent decision to withdraw nearly all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of the year, with 75% approving. That includes the vast majority of Democrats and independents. Republicans, however, are slightly more likely to disapprove than approve.quesnay , 57 minutes ago link
How does firing Bannon mean Trump is an imperialist? That doesn't follow, it's a non-sequitur.desertboy , 24 minutes ago link
I would argue that the Republicans are slightly more principled, although not necessarily in a good way. As your poll shows, when Obama was in power, 96% of Democrats were in favor of removing Troops. 96%!! And now only around 28% of Democrats support withdrawal - https://theintercept.com/2019/01/11/as-democratic-elites-reunite-with-neocons-the-partys-voters-are-becoming-far-more-militaristic-and-pro-war-than-republicans/ . This is almost a complete reversal.
The Republican position went from 50% supporting withdrawal with Obama to 70% under Trump. A change for sure, but not nearly as dramatic as the Democrats which have completely changed their positions i.e. their position has nothing to do with principles what-so-ever.smacker , 11 minutes ago link
So, I can interpret the deeper meaning of statements made by others, through your displayed intellectual acumen?
Really quite remarkable -- how utterly foreign is just a little introspection for some.
@Escrava Isaura: " Trump is an imperialist. That's why he fired Bannon. "
Not so sure of the connection there.
But America is an imperial nation (both major parties have supported this for years) and the problem now is that its imperialism is on an irreversible trajectory which will bring it to an end. As one might expect, they are trying to keep it alive but that will only delay the inevitable. What we don't know is whether it will end with a whimper or a big bang.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
Ilyana_Rozumova , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:46 am GMTHillary lost the election when she could not walk. she lost a shoe, she was shown in the van, and shoe was thrown after her. And that was arranged by Russians.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
lavoisier , says: Website July 23, 2018 at 11:47 am GMT@peterAUSGiuseppe , says: July 23, 2018 at 1:01 pm GMT
Anyone with an average intelligence can, in two hours trawling of Internet, get how false all that is. And, yet, here we are.
The same people who can spend hours on social media, shopping and entertainment online can't, for SOME reason, figure all that out.
Easy to blame "them" and media/academia/whatever. Maybe it's time to start passing a bit of blame to people in general. Not holding my breath.
I fully agree with this sentiment. The only reason the evil bastards who control our society can get away with their treachery is because most of the American people are out to lunch on the most important issues of our time. If the sheeple were to take responsibility to inform themselves of what is happening today they would be able to see the lies they are being constantly exposed to as just that -- lies. And then, they could put down the beer and turn off the damn sports channel and get angry at what has happened to their country.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for ignorant people to remain ignorant.Gordon Pratt , says: July 23, 2018 at 2:49 pm GMT
This screaming comes not only from the US mainstream, but also from that European elite which has been housebroken for seventy years as obedient poodles, dachshunds or corgis in the American menagerie, via intense vetting by US trans-Atlantic "cooperation" associations.
They are CIA assets who do what they're told.There is an unrecognized plague in our society called antidepressants. More than ten per cent of the people in the industrialized world take drugs which interfere with self doubt. They don't ask themselves whether an idea in their minds is true, fair or kind. They only ask if they believe it. And since the chemical they ingest prevents them from assessing the idea from all sides they always believe that if they think something it must be true.AnonFromTN , says: July 23, 2018 at 3:09 pm GMT
This is the perfect environment for the virus of groupthink to spread.
And since our leaders, both on the left and the right, may be ahead of the curve on drug usage the neocons and the politically correct may use antidepressants at greater levels than 10 per cent.
Other symptoms of antidepressant use include high levels of free floating anxiety (because useful anxiety is suppressed) and restlessness.
I am still asking myself what motivated a veteran politician like Hillary Clinton to violate a cardinal rule of politics by attacking not her opponent but his supporters with the "basket of deplorable" comment in the closing days of the 2016 campaign except chemically induced madness.
If history has recorded that the Roman Empire collapsed due to lead poisoning from the water pipes a future time may also conclude the US Empire was destroyed due to antidepressants.@Gordon Pratt I think you are mistaken trying to rationalize the behavior of the political class and their puppet masters. I believe the real driver are not antidepressants, but an obscene greed, which is so blinding that it made MIC profiteers forget that to enjoy the fruits of their thievery they have to be alive.anonymous  Disclaimer , says: July 23, 2018 at 3:49 pm GMTThe psychology of the mass of Americans with it's self-righteousness and self-centerdness is really amazing. Just in the last seventeen years the US has invaded or otherwise attacked numerous countries and has caused millions of people to die, become miserable refugees, become orphans and all other manner of evil.Jeff Davis , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:01 pm GMT
Not least of all has been it's creation and patronage of ISIS, one of the most heinous groups in history. Yet Americans have this massive blind spot to the war criminality of all this that their country has committed against the peace of the world. Instead they're being stampeded into some irrational Russia-phobia. It's the US that's been on the march everywhere, labeling those countries that resist it's aggression as being aggressors for being willing to defend themselves. It's all upside-down.Respect , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:10 pm GMT
"I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace than to risk peace in pursuit of politics."
I'd really like to know who wrote that line for the Prez. (Since I think it unlikely that he wrote that, or any of his "prepared remarks".) Stephen Miller? Whoever. But it was a genius comment.QUOS VULT IUPITER PERDERE DEMENTAT PRIUSJeff Davis , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:28 pm GMT
"Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad" obviously the Gods want to destroy the so called western man@Lauri TörniJeff Davis , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:34 pm GMT
Feel free to attack me.
TDS is a convenient shorthand for this form of disconnect from reality. That said it is absolutely fascinating to see and puzzle over this geopolitical tectonic event. The old narrative is crumbling, with the result that people like Lauri are fighting desperately to preserve their "sanity", dependent as it is on their tribal submission to the old order and its old narrative (its timeworn lies).
"Science advances one funeral at a time."
By which he means that people persist in believing in those "truths" (their belief system) they have held for a lifetime. Only when they die out will a new, revised belief system replaced the old. The same in geopolitics as in science.@Tulips "Malefactors of great wealth."Simple Pseudonym , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMTAmerican dementia is not new. It is current but after the false flags of almost all of our (US) wars going back as far as the Barbary Pirates, Americans have thrived on being the good guys in an evil world. We are SO GOOD, and the world thinks we are perfect and want to be part of US so much, that any other thought is treasonous.
The fact that getting along with Russia is necessary to NOT create armageddon, is irrelevant to the typical citizen because no matter how wrong, we are blessed and perfect in the eyes of the gawd we pretend to believe in.
So, same old same old
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
MK-DELTABURKE , says: July 22, 2018 at 8:25 pm GMT@Cagey Beast Aspen Institute does make attempts at outreach, but they invariably cock it up by eliciting, recruiting, or suborning every single person they bring in. The shitheads even tried to do it to me. You would think they'd have a dossier saying I hate those cobags.Cagey Beast , says: July 22, 2018 at 10:58 pm GMT
Their fundamental problem is, Aspen Institute is CIA. Their first and only instinct is to use people like toilet paper. They don't want popular support. They want agents in complete control.@MK-DELTABURKE Exactly.skrik , says: July 23, 2018 at 8:59 am GMT
Aspen Institute is CIA.
Yes, the Aspen Institute is the CIA and the CIA is the Aspen Institute. Or, to be more precise, the CIA is the armed wing of Washington's permanently governing technocratic party, in the same way the KGB was the armed wing of the Soviet Communist Party.
Poor Julian Assange is likely going to be in their hands not too long from now. The citizen of one Five Eyes country will be arrested by another and then sent off to the imperial metropole, to be kicked around like a political football. The rest of us Anglosphericals are expected to cheer or remain silent. Either is acceptable.@TGPancho Perico , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:27 pm GMT
there is nothing at all mindless or demented about them
Me: Oh yes there is; by *them* I don't mean "Zuckerberg, others" but the actual rulers of 'the West,' then see this:
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Aspen Institute is CIA
and [perhaps most critically] this:
may depend on support for Trump from Israel and the Pentagon!
Now, I term the actual rulers of 'the West' the ccc = covert criminal cabal. Of course they are in hiding -- acting from 'behind the curtain,' as some have it -- it has to be that *dishonest* way -- for them. Among their most notable 'fruits' are the JFK murder, USS Liberty outrage, inside-job 9/11 psyop and the utterly wicked destruction of Libya/Gaddafi, just 4 of many. The extended list is looong, and note that the 1st 3 in my list demonstrate the ccc 'murdering their own' -- except that to the ccc, anybody not actually in the ccc itself is not 'their own' but only exploitable/disposable objects. Of course the ccc causes lies to be promulgated, hence the Lügenpresse . Neoliberalism/austerity must also come from the ccc, causing misery wherever it's forced upon us, we the people. One of the spivs in suits who 'sold' neoliberalism to the Aus people called it 'economic rationalism' and jeered: 'What would you rather -- irrational economics?' Another ccc modus operandi item is coercion as demonstrated by the downstream effects of Downer's "Get a briefing!" -- which shows us that the CIA et al. is a 'command conduit' if not a command originator. What I'm trying to illustrate here is that the ccc does not merely operate like a mafia, it *is* a mafia, and one of the author's "may depend on" items suggests a name for this mafia, namely: Khazar. That's our miserable world, deliberately made that way by that mafia; if that's not 'mindless and demented' what is? rgds@MK-DELTABURKE The Aspen Institute is CIA, but the CIA is an organization created and controlled by the globalist conspirators at the Council on Foreign Relations, mostly the Rockefellers and other banksters.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
jilles dykstra , says: July 23, 2018 at 7:30 am GMTIn my opinion, no dementia. Too many careers and institutions are built on continuing hostility towards Russia. First ECB President Duisenberg's ph d thesis had as title 'The economic consequences of peace', something like that, his conclusion was that demilitarization was possible economically, when controlled sensibly.
Did anyone read 'The Iron Mountain Report', I never quite knew what to make of it, but it also is about if demilitarization is possible. Barbara Hinckley Sheldon Goldman, American Politics and Government, Glenview Ill.,1990 describes how the USA weapons industry skillfully prevents that spending on useless weapons diminishes. The history of the later Roman empire, the army in control.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
EliteCommInc. , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:04 am GMTIn my view, at the moment the deed is done. The president signed onto the report acknowledged the he accepts the report has even gone as far to say, he blames Pres. Putin
Another backtrack, just muddies the waters, and mat be acceptable because no one wants to accept the real consequences of a president who has repudiated the one state president he most desired to make a deal with -- the jig is up.
Whether kabuki theater or real gamesmanship --
A threshold has been crossed and uncrossing it is going to be tricky and in my further humiliation for the wh. The analysis here mattered before the president agreed with the report. But when he did, this analysis, becomes moot. Having a chit chat about de-escalating nuclear tensions is quaint in light of the president acknowledging that russia has in fact undermined the US democratic process. This is a serious charge and no amount of changing the subject, crying foul, or pretending it was all a big misunderstanding is going to change that.
I think it would have been prudent for the president to hold fire in Helsinki and read the report and then responded . He did make any of those choices. It matters not how exposed the establishment in wanton eagerness to have their way, wh has embraced the matter. it is on record and . . . oh well. I see merit in maintaining his original position of disbelief -- however, the president did a complete about face -- and there is no question of that or the implications.
Jan 13, 2019 | www.unz.com
peterAUS , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:35 pm GMTBack to topic. This link, I believe, points into a very interesting direction. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-23/imperial-naivete-american-public I don't think that "naivete" is a correct word there. Some, perhaps, interesting excerpts:
.a public lulled into a warm and fuzzy sense of moral superiority based on the notion that we only go to war to save the good and punish the evil, and if we meddle in other nations' domestic affairs and elections, we're only doing so for their own good.
If we weren't a kindly, generous Empire, we'd let them go down the drain without trying to set them straight.
Key expression " moral superiority "
There is more:
. the American public naively assumes that their Imperial Project is so god-like in its powers and prowess that no other great power should be able to meddle in our domestic affairs and elections.
I don't think it's "naive" though. It's something else like, again:
there are no limits on our execution of power because we're morally superior
That is the key. That is what, deep in their hearts, Americans believe. We .are .better than .anybody .else. So, blaming "them", media, whatever no no that's a copout. Weak one. The crux is simple, eternal, hard wired: "I am better than you". "I can be homeless punk here, but, I am better than YOU." Feels good. That's all.
Jan 12, 2019 | www.unz.com
But, seriously, all that actually happened back in the Summer of 2016 was the global capitalist ruling classes recognized that they had a problem. The problem that they recognized they had (and continue to have, and are now acutely aware of) is that no one is enjoying global capitalism except the global capitalist ruling classes. The whole smiley-happy, supranational, neo-feudal corporate empire concept is not going over very well with the masses, or at least not with the unwashed masses. People started voting for right-wing parties, and Brexit, and other "populist" measures (not because they had suddenly transformed into Nazis, but because the Right was acknowledging and exploiting their anger with the advance of global neoliberalism, while liberals and the Identity Politics Left were slow jamming the TPP with Obama and babbling about transgender bathrooms, and such).
The global capitalist ruling classes needed to put a stop to that (i.e, the "populist" revolt, not the bathroom debate). So they suspended the Global War on Terror and launched the War on Populism. It was originally only meant to last until Hillary Clinton's coronation, or the second Brexit referendum, then switch back to the War on Terror, but well, weird things happen, and here we are.
... ... ...
And then there's the battle for hearts and minds, which they've been furiously waging for the last two years, and which is only going to intensify. If you think things are batshit crazy now (which, clearly, they are), strap yourself in. What is coming is going to make COINTELPRO look like the work of some amateur meme-freak. The neoliberal corporate media, psy-ops like Integrity Initiative , Internet-censoring apps like NewsGuard , ShareBlue and other David Brock outfits , and a legion of mass hysteria generators will be relentlessly barraging our brains with absurdity, disinformation, and just outright lies (as will their counterparts on the Right, of course, in case you thought that they were any alternative). It's going to get extremely zany.
The good news is
Jan 12, 2019 | www.unz.com
Where to begin to analyze the madness of mainstream media in reaction to the Trump-Putin meeting in Helsinki? By focusing on the individual, psychology has neglected the problem of mass insanity, which has now overwhelmed the United States establishment, its mass media and most of its copycat European subsidiaries. The individuals may be sane, but as a herd they are ready to leap off the cliff.
For the past two years, a particular power group has sought to explain away its loss of power – or rather, its loss of the Presidency, as it still holds a predominance of institutional power – by creation of a myth. Mainstream media is known for its herd behavior, and in this case the editors, commentators, journalists have talked themselves into a story that initially they themselves could hardly take seriously.
Donald Trump was elected by Russia ?
On the face of it, this is preposterous. Okay, the United States can manage to rig elections in Honduras, or Serbia, or even Ukraine, but the United States is a bit too big and complex to leave the choice of the Presidency to a barrage of electronic messages totally unread by most voters. If this were so, Russia wouldn't need to try to "undermine our democracy". It would mean that our democracy was already undermined, in tatters, dead. A standing corpse ready to be knocked over by a tweet.
Even if, as is alleged without evidence, an army of Russian bots (even bigger than the notorious Israeli army of bots) was besieging social media with its nefarious slanders against poor innocent Hillary Clinton, this could determine an election only in a vacuum, with no other influences in the field. But there was a lot of other stuff going on in the 2016 election, some for Trump and some for Hillary, and Hillary herself scored a crucial own goal by denigrating millions of Americans as "deplorables" because they didn't fit into her identity politics constituencies.
The Russians could do nothing to build support for Trump, and there is not a hint of evidence that they tried. They might have done something to harm Hillary, because there was so much there: the private server emails, the Clinton foundation, the murder of Moammer Gaddafi, the call for a no-fly zone in Syria they didn't have to invent it. It was there. So was the hanky panky at the Democratic National Committee, on which the Clintonite accusations focus, perhaps to cause everyone to forget much worse things.
When you come to think of it, the DNC scandal focused on Debbie Wasserman Schultz, not on Hillary herself. Screaming about "Russian hacking the DNC" has been a distraction from much more serious accusations against Hillary Clinton. Bernie Sanders supporters didn't need those "revelations" to make them stop loving Hillary or even to discover that the DNC was working against Bernie. It was always perfectly obvious.
So at worst, "the Russians" are accused of revealing some relatively minor facts concerning the Hillary Clinton campaign. Big deal.
But that is enough, after two years of fakery, to send the establishment into a frenzy of accusations of "treason" when Trump does what he said he would do while campaigning, try to normalize relations with Russia.
This screaming comes not only from the US mainstream, but also from that European elite which has been housebroken for seventy years as obedient poodles, dachshunds or corgis in the American menagerie, via intense vetting by US trans-Atlantic "cooperation" associations. They have based their careers on the illusion of sharing the world empire by following U.S. whims in the Middle East and transforming the mission of their armed forces from defense into foreign intervention units of NATO under U.S. command. Having not thought seriously about the implications of this for over half a century, they panic at the suggestion of being left to themselves.
The Western elite is now suffering from self-inflicted dementia.
Donald Trump is not particularly articulate, navigating through the language with a small repetitive vocabulary, but what he said at his Helsinki press conference was honest and even brave. As the hounds bay for his blood, he quite correctly refused to endorse the "findings" of US intelligence agencies, fourteen years after the same agencies "found" that Iraq was bursting with weapons of mass destruction. How in the world could anyone expect anything else?
But for the mainstream media, "the story" at the Helsinki summit, even the only story, was Trump's reaction to the, er, trumped up charges of Russian interference in our democracy. Were you or were you not elected thanks to Russian hackers? All they wanted was a yes or no answer. Which could not possibly be yes. So they could write their reports in advance.
Anyone who has frequented mainstream journalists, especially those who cover the "big stories" on international affairs, is aware of their obligatory conformism, with few exceptions. To get the job, one must have important "sources", meaning government spokesmen who are willing to tell you what "the story" is, often without being identified. Once they know what "the story" is, competition sets in: competition as to how to tell it. That leads to an escalation of rhetoric, variations on the theme: "The President has betrayed our great country to the Russian enemy. Treason!"
This demented chorus on "Russian hacking" prevented mainstream media from even doing their job. Not even mentioning, much less analyzing, any of the real issues at the summit. To find analysis, one must go on line, away from the official fake news to independent reporting. For example, "the Moon of Alabama" site offers an intelligent interpretation of the Trump strategy , which sounds infinitely more plausible than "the story". In short, Trump is trying to woo Russia away from China, in a reverse version of Kissinger's strategy forty years ago to woo China away from Russia, thus avoiding a continental alliance against the United States. This may not work because the United States has proven so untrustworthy that the cautious Russians are highly unlikely to abandon their alliance with China for shadows. But it makes perfect sense as an explanation of Trump's policy, unlike the caterwauling we've been hearing from Senators and talking heads on CNN.
Those people seem to have no idea of what diplomacy is about. They cannot conceive of agreements that would be beneficial to both sides. No, it's got to be a zero sum game, winner take all. If they win, we lose, and vice versa.
They also have no idea of the harm to both sides if they do not agree. They have no project, no strategy. Just hate Trump.
He seems totally isolated, and every morning I look at the news to see if he has been assassinated yet.
It is unimaginable for our Manichean moralists that Putin might also be under fire at home for failing to chide the American president for U.S. violations of human rights in Guantanamo, murderous drone strikes against defenseless citizens throughout the Middle East, the destruction of Libya in violation of the UN mandate, interference in the elections of countless countries by government-financed "non-governmental organizations" (the National Endowment of Democracy), worldwide electronic spying, invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the world's greatest prison population and regular massacres of school children. But the diplomatic Russians know how to be polite.
Still, if Trump actually makes a "deal", there may be losers – neither the U.S. nor Russia but third parties. When two great powers reach agreement, it is often at somebody else's expense. The West Europeans are afraid it will be them, but such fears are groundless. All Putin wants is normal relations with the West, which is not much to ask.
Rather, candidate number one for paying the price are the Palestinians, or even Iran, in marginal ways. At the press conference, asked about possible areas of cooperation between the two nuclear powers, Trump suggested that the two could agree on helping Israel:
"We both spoke with Bibi Netanyahu. They would like to do certain things with respect to Syria, having to do with the safety of Israel. In that respect, we absolutely would like to work in order to help Israel. Israel will be working with us. So both countries would work jointly."
In political terms, Trump knows where political power lies, and is counting on the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, which recognizes the defeat in Syria and the rising influence of Russia, to save him from the liberal imperialists – a daring bet, but he does not have much choice.
On another subject, Trump said that "our militaries" get along with the Russians "better than our politicians". This is another daring bet, on military realism that could somehow neutralize military industrial congressional complex lobbying for more and more weapons.
In short, the only chance to end the nuclear war threat may depend on support for Trump from Israel and the Pentagon!
The hysterical neoliberal globalists seem to have ruled out any other possibility – and perhaps this one too.
"Constructive dialogue between the United States and Russia forwards the opportunity to open new pathways toward peace and stability in our world" Trump declared "I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace than to risk peace in pursuit of politics."
That is more than his political enemies can claim.Mass Dementia in the Western Establishment
exiled off mainstreet , says: July 20, 2018 at 7:02 am GMTThis is a frightening, accurate commentary on what we face as a result of an unaccountable power structure resorting to any and all means to retain power which, if this structure continues to exercise it, will lead to our extinction.Donatella , says: July 21, 2018 at 2:08 pm GMTThanks to say things that make me feel not alone.AnonFromTN , says: July 22, 2018 at 3:30 am GMTIn the establishment, it's not dementia as such, it's just serving the highest bidder. You can accuse only the elites of dementia: they forgot that to enjoy the fruits of your thievery you have to be alive. If only they die, it would be a great service to the humanity. Unfortunately, the way things go, they might take us all with them.Cyrano , says: July 22, 2018 at 8:42 am GMTThis mass hysteria over a country hostile to both democracy and gay rights (it's hard to tell which one is worse) has been seen in the west before.Cagey Beast , says: July 22, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
It's very reminiscent of the lead-up to Iraq war in 2003. I mean what's next? Are they gonna accuse Russia of having WMD's too?
They are pretty good at providing false evidence of WMD's, I wouldn't be surprised if they stage another presentation of evidence of Russian WMD's at UN, complete with satellite images of mobile trucks equipped with Uranium enrichment technology and all that.
That Nikki Halley can be quite persuasive, you know. I just hope that the world doesn't buy that BS again. Russia having WMD's? That's preposterous. They tricked us the last time, I hope that the people have learned their lesson – not to trust them anymore.Thank you, this is an excellent summary of the situation right now. It's worth noting too just how disconnected the establishment is from the wider public. They have enormous financial resources and access to the entire legacy media but seem to have almost no real base of support. Remember how the Never Trumpers had no one more prominent and well-known than Evan McMullan (!!) to run as their candidate? Note too the tiny number of views the YouTube videos of the Aspen Institute get: https://www.youtube.com/user/AspenInstitute/videos .Anonymous  Disclaimer , says: July 22, 2018 at 11:54 am GMT
On its own, these things aren't conclusive proof but together they add up. The Aspen Institute crowd is an almost entirely self-contained subculture. They seem to have no base of support, beyond their stacks of money, job titles and the power that come with the various offices they hold. That's probably why they can never stop calling their opponents "populists" or why Bill Kristol keeps tweeting about encountering scrappy shoeshine boys who shout "give Trump hell, Mr Kristol!" as he goes about his urban peregrinations.OTTulips , says: July 22, 2018 at 7:31 pm GMT
Diana Johnstone is not alone. Others on the alt-Left are starting to wake up, too. This is Joaquín Flores:
People are seeing through dishonesty, and the old language traps are used up and done for. If reconquista is the goal, then we need to have an honest conversation about that. If there's a Latino nation with self determination in the south-west US, or rights 'back' to the south-west US, then let's speak of it in such terms. Because then we'd be looking at a Euro-American nation also. Now of course there's issues of interpenetrated peoples, and identities we carry in our minds in diverse urban centers. But the point here is that we have to have an honest discourse, and stop hiding reconquista sentiments under the rubric of 'human rights'. Because European-Americans don't have right of return to Europe, so the left is promoting what will ultimately be a race war, full scale, if they don't chill the fuck out and back off this disingenuous approach to policy-wonkism on immigration.
The paradigmatic question today is, how is wealth made, and where does wealth come from? What is the balance of trade and debts, and how is that is no longer manageable? The US empire and NATO is no longer manageable. Trump is unwinding NATO. That can't be a bad thing.
Fort Russ News is really turning out to be a leading voice of the Third Way movement.@AnonFromTN Let's stop using the word "elites". That sounds too positive, as though they have some admirable traits acquired by hard work, as in "elite athletes". Instead, let's call them "oligarchs" so that we get the right nuances of wealth and power, and get the correct emotional connotations of our disgust with them. We should label them with labels that they will dislike: oligarchs, mob bosses, etc.AnonFromTN , says: July 22, 2018 at 9:44 pm GMT@Tulips You are right, of course, the word "elites" has too many positive connotations. In fact, they are oligarchs, mega-thieves, or something on those lines. Functionally, in our society they are puppet masters of all the venal puppets (politicians, journos, etc.).TG , says: July 23, 2018 at 4:56 am GMTI hear you, and I sympathize, but this is not mass dementia. The oligarchy that runs the United States was worried that Donald Trump might actually (!!) take some consideration for the national interest of the people of the United States of America. That will never do.peterAUS , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:48 am GMT
This is not irrational. The screaming, the hysteria, this is the utterly rational, breathtakingly brutal reaction of a ruling elite that has the moral sense of a reptile. And it's working. All of Trump's campaign promises to stop wasting trillions on pointless winless foreign wars of choice, and instead spend that on our own country? Gone. And so much else besides.
It's dangerous to underestimate an enemy. The useful idiot foot soldiers, screaming in mindless herd instinct, are one thing. The people behind them – the Koch brothers, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, others – there is nothing at all mindless or demented about them.@TG Agree.jilles dykstra , says: July 23, 2018 at 7:31 am GMT
Having a title "Mass Dementia in the Western Establishment" and approaching this effort as "mass insanity", "demented chorus" etc. is simply delusional.
They know exactly what they are doing and, it appears, they are doing it well. The are able to create their own reality. What puzzles me a bit isn't "them" or their servants (media etc.). It's people in general. They appear to be buying that manufactured reality with ease. In this era of instant communications it's .sobering. This constant shitting on "them" and their servants is fine and dandy but feels as just a feel good exercise. Perhaps some effort could be spared in trying to analyze and explain common people approach to all this. The buying, hook and sinker, that manufacture.
Anyone with an average intelligence can, in two hours trawling of Internet, get how false all that is. And, yet, here we are.
The same people who can spend hours on social media, shopping and entertainment online can't, for SOME reason, figure all that out.
Easy to blame "them" and media/academia/whatever. Maybe it's time to start passing a bit of blame to people in general.
Not holding my breath.@Tulips I suggest 'ruling class'Anon  Disclaimer , says: July 23, 2018 at 8:07 am GMT@Daniel Rich The Russians are by nature cautious. They are a conglomerate of individuals, many of whom remember times when they would be sent by communist tyrants to a gulag for Wrongthink. Of course they're cautious.Daniel Rich , says: July 23, 2018 at 8:13 am GMTH.E. Mr. Putin clearly knows what the USA/West is about – Link to Youtube [03:42]nagra , says: July 23, 2018 at 8:34 am GMTHow Hillary Clinton could even run for presidency after the murder of Moammer Gaddafi and Libya destruction, in any decent civilisation and society.Sean , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:12 am GMT
That's planetary shame and the most important question, not DNC hack or anything else, which just trace in wrong direction.
So, Trump should grow some balls and arrest not just her but Barack Obama as well on the same charges, as war criminals as they are, and prove that he really deserves to be trusted. And sacrifice himself in the process if needed as that would do any honest true US president, and he knew what to expect from such position from the start.
It's not TV reality show, as still it is. All he cares about is his ego and popularity, and he is loosing both.
Israel lobby finally see that they put their money in the wrong bank. I intend to believe more that West, namely USA and UK the most, keeps them more hostage in uncertainty for decades than in some Jewish conspiracy. Also, I also believe that only Russia can guaranty Israel security and peace in the region.Cagey Beast , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:42 am GMT
In political terms, Trump knows where political power lies, and is counting on the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, which recognizes the defeat in Syria and the rising influence of Russia, to save him from the liberal imperialists – a daring bet, but he does not have much choice.
Saudi Arabia spent 40 billion dollars helping Saddam's Iraq in its war against Iran, the cost of US efforts in the Syria civil war have largely been met by the Saudis. The coming attack on Iran will be as much to please the Saudis as to lock Israel into West Bank Arab expulsion mode. The Israel Lobby will is not pushing Donald Trump, they are playing catch up with him. Trump has already shown with the Jerusalem recognition that he is encouraging Israel in unilateral courses of action.@TG No, I agree with the assessment in this article and its title: the establishment is dangerously detached from reality right now. Our stagnant and locked-down political culture in the West allowed the "elite" to develop a false sense of security and and certainty. They thought they had things pretty much figured out a few years ago but now they're genuinely panicked.yurivku , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:43 am GMTLooking to this circus from Russia, to those insane speaches, insulting caricatures in MSM, I understand the huge amount of rotteness of Western society, mainly its high top part, but not only. Even here in comments (not in this particularly article) the percentage of trolls and brainwashed idiots exceeds all I could've imagined. So I stopped writing here – no sense, I beleive that something can change only after the dramatic changes in US/West society and that is possible only after a big war/revolution.
So, I'm afraid our future is vague
Jan 11, 2019 | www.unz.com
jacques sheete , says: Next New Comment January 11, 2019 at 1:04 pm GMTmacilrae , says: Next New Comment January 11, 2019 at 3:29 pm GMT
That is another surefire sign of degeneracy: when a regime can only produce incompetent, often old, leaders who are completely out of touch with reality and who blame their own failures on [everyone but themselves].
Another sign of degeneracy is that masses of people put their faith in such human garbage and fantasize that the essentially effortless task of casting ballots every few years will somehow, perhaps magically, improve their situations. Even more telling is the infantilism demonstrated by the attitude that they're special and "da gweatist" and that the world should cater to their every whim just like mommy and daddy did.
Dream on, darlings!
Unlike the Titanic, most collapsed regimes don't fully sink. They remain about half under water, and half above, possibly with an orchestra still playing joyful music. And in the most expensive top deck cabins, a pretty luxurious lifestyle can be maintained by the elites.
A clever metaphor.
incompetent, often old, leaders who are completely out of touch with reality and who blame their own failures on internal ("deplorables") and external ("the Russians") factors.
Dmitry Orlov's assessment rings dead true to me. The most terrifying factor is that a doomed and demented US administration may resort to the use of its vast air and missile power to save itself.
Dec 18, 2018 | www.unz.com
Cyrano says: December 14, 2018 at 7:44 pm GMT 100 Words
If I could pinpoint where the things went wrong for the west – I would say it happened when they invented the idiocy of multiculturalism. It was supposed to prevent socialist revolution and on the face of it, it seemed pretty clever, but it's actually a moronic idea.
The thing that you are supposed to prevent should be the absolute worst case scenario, replaced with more benign idea. With multiculturalism – its' actually the opposite.
The remedy is worse than the malady. Multiculturalism is going to destroy the western civilization.
With that in mind and in the spirit of public service, I propose to replace the propaganda slogan: Diversity is our strength (which doesn't make sense to anybody), with a more logical and understandable propaganda slogan:
Diversity is our perversity. What Lies Behind the Malaise of the West?
Pat the rat , says: December 14, 2018 at 11:10 pm GMTFeminism has been the cancer, pat.Corvinus , says: December 14, 2018 at 11:20 pm GMT
Elite double income families have enjoyed great prosperity and influence and required many desk jobs for their wives and daughters, preferably in government. They have been fine, had a kid or two now and again and are very keen on their own self perceived virtue. Deep down they know the two incomes they enjoy comes at the expense of working class men who might aspire to better but are now rarely satisfied.
Further down the ladder poor men and women can rarely form bond and form stable families. They have little money and their women would rather use Uncle Sam as a partner.
They are harassed by one do-gooding government department after another.
The same do-Gooders have no problem with poor communities being flooded with porn and smut, nor do they seem overly concerned about rising house prices and rent. Wonder why?
There is a cancer in the entire west, and it is leading to great inequality.
MEN MUST STOP CHASING SEX AND THINK OF THEIR NEIGHBOR PARTICULARLY THEIR POOR NEIGHBOR.@Ace "All if this combines to ensure that America is the go-to place for clowns everywhere. Nothing will be able to correct this cavalcade of lunacy, chaos, depravity, and destruction except economic catastrophe, coming soon to a neighborhood on top of you. Then to be followed immediately by dictatorship and years of statist and racial excess until, with luck, we reduscover what we have now uf we'd but lift a finger to protect it."
Congratulations, you are a doormat to the decline. So, what are you prepared to do about this dire situation other than lament and complain?
Jan 11, 2019 | www.unz.com
... ... ...
I emailed Dmitry Orlov and asked him the following question:
In your recent article " The Year the Planet Flipped Over " you paint a devastating picture of the state of the Empire:
It is already safe to declare Trump's plan to Make America Great Again (MAGA) a failure. Beneath the rosy statistics of US economic growth hides the hideous fact that it is the result of a tax holiday granted to transnational corporations to entice them to repatriate their profits. While this hasn't helped them (their stocks are currently cratering) it has been a disaster for the US government as well as for the economic system as whole. Tax receipts have shrunk. The budget deficit for 2018 exceeds $779 billion.
Meanwhile, the trade wars which Trump initiated have caused the trade deficit to increase by 17% from the year before. Plans to repatriate industrial production from low-cost countries remain vaporous because the three key elements which China had as it industrialized (cheap energy, cheap labor and low cost of doing business) are altogether missing. Government debt is already beyond reasonable and its expansion is still accelerating, with just the interest payments set to exceed half a trillion a year within a decade.
This trajectory does not bode well for the continued existence of the United States as a going concern. Nobody, either in the United States or beyond, has the power to significantly alter this trajectory. Trump's thrashing about may have moved things along faster than they otherwise would have, at least in the sense of helping convince the entire world that the US is selfish, feckless, ultimately self-destructive and generally unreliable as a partner. In the end it won't matter who was president of the US -- it never has. Among those the US president has succeeded in hurting most are his European allies. His attacks on Russian energy exports to Europe, on European car manufacturers and on Europe's trade with Iran have caused a fair amount of damage, both political and economic, without compensating for it with any perceived or actual benefits.
Meanwhile, as the globalist world order, which much of Europe's population appears ready to declare a failure, begins to unravel, the European Union is rapidly becoming ungovernable, with established political parties unable to form coalitions with ever-more-numerous populist upstarts. It is too early to say that the EU has already failed altogether, but it already seems safe to predict that within a decade it will no longer remain as a serious international factor.
Although the disastrous quality and the ruinous mistakes of Europe's own leadership deserve a lot of the blame, some of it should rest with the erratic, destructive behavior of their transoceanic Big Brother. The EU has already morphed into a strictly regional affair, unable to project power or entertain any global geopolitical ambitions. Same goes for Washington, which is going to either depart voluntarily (due to lack of funds) or get chased out from much of the world.
The departure from Syria is inevitable whether Trump, under relentless pressure from his bipartisan warmongers, backtracks on this commitment or not. Now that Syria has been armed with Russia's up-to-date air defense weapons the US no longer maintains air superiority there, and without air superiority the US military is unable to do anything. Afghanistan is next; there, it seems outlandish to think that the Washingtonians will be able to achieve any sort of reasonable accommodation with the Taliban.
Their departure will spell the end of Kabul as a center of corruption where foreigners steal humanitarian aid and other resources. Somewhere along the way the remaining US troops will also be pulled out of Iraq, where the parliament, angered by Trump's impromptu visit to a US base, recently voted to expel them. And that will put paid to the entire US adventure in the Middle East since 9/11: $4,704,439,588,308 has been squandered, to be precise , or $14,444 for every man, woman and child in the US.
The biggest winners in all of this are, obviously, the people of the entire region, because they will no longer be subjected to indiscriminate US harassment and bombardment, followed by Russia, China and Iran, with Russia solidifying its position as the ultimate arbiter of international security arrangements thanks to its unmatched military capabilities and demonstrated knowhow for coercion to peace. Syria's fate will be decided by Russia, Iran and Turkey, with the US not even invited to the talks. Afghanistan will fall into the sphere of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. And the biggest losers will be former US regional allies, first and foremost Israel, followed by Saudi Arabia.
My question for you is this: where would you place the US (or the Empire) on your 5 stages of decline and do you believe that the US (or the Empire) can reverse that trend?
Here is Dmitry's reply:
Collapse, at each stage, is a historical process that takes time to run its course as the system adapts to changing circumstances, compensates for its weaknesses and finds ways to continue functioning at some level. But what changes rather suddenly is faith or, to put it in more businesslike terms, sentiment. A large segment of the population or an entire political class within a country or the entire world can function based on a certain set of assumptions for much longer than the situation warrants but then over a very short period of time switch to a different set of assumptions. All that sustains the status quo beyond that point is institutional inertia. It imposes limits on how fast systems can change without collapsing entirely. Beyond that point, people will tolerate the older practices only until replacements for them can be found.
Stage 1: Financial collapse. Faith in "business as usual" is lost.
Internationally, the major change in sentiment in the world has to do with the role of the US dollar (and, to a lesser extent, the Euro and the Yen -- the other two reserve currencies of the three-legged globalist central banker stool). The world is transitioning to the use of local currencies, currency swaps and commodities markets backed by gold. The catalyst for this change of sentiment was provided by the US administration itself which sawed through its own perch by its use of unilateral sanctions. By using its control over dollar-based transactions to block international transactions it doesn't happen to like it forced other countries to start looking for alternatives. Now a growing list of countries sees throwing off the shackles of the US dollar as a strategic goal. Russia and China use the ruble and the yuan for their expanding trade; Iran sells oil to India for rupees. Saudi Arabia has started to accept the yuan for its oil.
This change has many knock-on effects. If the dollar is no longer needed to conduct international trade, other nations no longer have hold large quantities of it in reserve. Consequently, there is no longer a need to buy up large quantities of US Treasury notes. Therefore, it becomes unnecessary to run large trade surpluses with the US, essentially conducting trade at a loss. Further, the attractiveness of the US as an export market drops and the cost of imports to the US rises, thereby driving up cost inflation. A vicious spiral ensues in which the ability of the US government to borrow internationally to finance the gaping chasm of its various deficits becomes impaired. Sovereign default of the US government and national bankruptcy then follow.
The US may still look mighty, but its dire fiscal predicament coupled with its denial of the inevitability of bankruptcy, makes it into something of a Blanche DuBois from the Tennessee Williams play "A Streetcar Named Desire." She was "always dependent on the kindness of strangers" but was tragically unable to tell the difference between kindness and desire. In this case, the desire is for national advantage and security, and to minimize risk by getting rid of an unreliable trading partner.
How quickly or slowly this comes to pass is difficult to guess at and impossible to calculate. It is possible to think of the financial system in terms of a physical analogue, with masses of funds traveling at some velocity having a certain inertia (p = mv) and with forces acting on that mass to accelerate it along a different trajectory (F = ma). It is also possible to think of it in terms of hordes of stampeding animals who can change course abruptly when panicked. The recent abrupt moves in the financial markets, where trillions of dollars of notional, purely speculative value have been wiped out within weeks, are more in line with the latter model.
Stage 2: Commercial collapse. Faith that "the market shall provide" is lost.
Within the US there is really no other alternative than the market. There are a few rustic enclaves, mostly religious communities, that can feed themselves, but that's a rarity. For everyone else there is no choice but to be a consumer. Consumers who are broke are called "bums," but they are still consumers. To the extent that the US has a culture, it is a commercial culture in which the goodness of a person is based on the goodly sums of money in their possession. Such a culture can die by becoming irrelevant (when everyone is dead broke) but by then most of the carriers of this culture are likely to be dead too. Alternatively, it can be replaced by a more humane culture that isn't entirely based on the cult of Mammon -- perhaps, dare I think, through a return to a pre-Protestant, pre-Catholic Christian ethic that values people's souls above objects of value?
Stage 3: Political collapse. Faith that "the government will take care of you" is lost.
All is very murky at the moment, but I would venture to guess that most people in the US are too distracted, too stressed and too preoccupied with their own vices and obsessions to pay much attention to the political realm . Of the ones they do pay attention, a fair number of them seem clued in to the fact that the US is not a democracy at all but an elites-only sandbox in which transnational corporate and oligarchic interests build and knock down each others' sandcastles.
The extreme political polarization, where two virtually identical pro-capitalist, pro-war parties pretend to wage battle by virtue-signaling may be a symptom of the extremely decrepit state of the entire political arrangement: people are made to watch the billowing smoke and to listen to the deafening noise in the hopes that they won't notice that the wheels are no longer turning.
The fact that what amounts to palace intrigue -- the fracas between the White House, the two houses of Congress and a ghoulish grand inquisitor named Mueller -- has taken center stage is uncannily reminiscent of various earlier political collapses , such as the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire or of the fall and the consequent beheading of Louis XVI. The fact that Trump, like the Ottoman worthies, stocks his harem with East European women, lends an eerie touch. That said, most people in the US seem blind to the nature of their overlords in a way that the French, with their Gilettes Jaunes movement (just as an example) are definitely not.
Stage 4: Social collapse. Faith that "your people will take care of you" is lost.
I have been saying for some years now that within the US social collapse has largely run its course, although whether people actually believe that is an entire matter entirely. Defining "your people" is rather difficult. The symbols are still there -- the flag, the Statue of Liberty and a predilection for iced drinks and heaping plates of greasy fried foods -- but the melting pot seems to have suffered a meltdown and melted all the way to China. At present half the households within the US speak a language other than English at home, and a fair share of the rest speak dialects of English that are not mutually intelligible with the standard North American English dialect of broadcast television and university lecturers.
Throughout its history as a British colony and as a nation the US has been dominated by the Anglo ethnos. The designation "ethnos" is not an ethnic label. It is not strictly based on genealogy, language, culture, habitat, form of government or any other single factor or group of factors. These may all be important to one extent or another, but the viability of an ethnos is based solely on its cohesion and the mutual inclusivity and common purpose of its members. The Anglo ethnos reached its zenith in the wake of World War II, during which many social groups were intermixed in the military and their more intelligent members.
Fantastic potential was unleashed when privilege -- the curse of the Anglo ethnos since its inception -- was temporarily replaced with merit and the more talented demobilized men, of whatever extraction, were given a chance at education and social advancement by the GI Bill. Speaking a new sort of American English based on the Ohio dialect as a Lingua Franca, these Yanks -- male, racist, sexist and chauvinistic and, at least in their own minds, victorious -- were ready to remake the entire world in their own image.
They proceeded to flood the entire world with oil (US oil production was in full flush then) and with machines that burned it. Such passionate acts of ethnogenesis are rare but not unusual: the Romans who conquered the entire Mediterranean basin, the barbarians who then sacked Rome, the Mongols who later conquered most of Eurasia and the Germans who for a very brief moment possessed an outsized Lebensraum are other examples.
And now it is time to ask: what remains of this proud conquering Anglo ethnos today? We hear shrill feminist cries about "toxic masculinity" and minorities of every stripe railing against "whitesplaining" and in response we hear a few whimpers but mostly silence. Those proud, conquering, virile Yanks who met and fraternized with the Red Army at the River Elbe on April 25, 1945 -- where are they? Haven't they devolved into a sad little subethnos of effeminate, porn-addicted overgrown boys who shave their pubic hair and need written permission to have sex without fear of being charged with rape?
Will the Anglo ethnos persist as a relict, similar to how the English have managed to hold onto their royals (who are technically no longer even aristocrats since they now practice exogamy with commoners)? Or will it get wiped out in a wave of depression, mental illness and opiate abuse, its glorious history of rapine, plunder and genocide erased and the statues of its war heros/criminals knocked down? Only time will tell.
Stage 5: Cultural collapse. Faith in "the goodness of humanity" is lost.
The term "culture" means many things to many people, but it is more productive to observe cultures than to argue about them. Cultures are expressed through people's stereotypical behaviors that are readily observable in public. These are not the negative stereotypes often used to identify and reject outsiders but the positive stereotypes -- cultural standards of behavior, really -- that serve as requirements for social adequacy and inclusion. We can readily assess the viability of a culture by observing the stereotypical behaviors of its members.
It is possible to quote statistics or to provide anecdotal evidence to assess the state and the viability of a culture, but your own eyes and other senses can provide all the evidence you need to make that determination for yourself and to decide how much faith to put in "the goodness of humanity" that is evident in the people around you.
Dmity concluded his reply by summarizing his view like this:
Cultural and social collapse are very far along. Financial collapse is waiting for a trigger. Commercial collapse will happen in stages some of which -- food deserts, for instance -- have already happened in many places. Political collapse will only become visible once the political class gives up. It's not as simple as saying which stage we are at. They are all happening in parallel, to one extent or another.
My own (totally subjective) opinion is that the US has already reached stages 1 through 4, and that there are signs that stage 5 has begun; mainly in big cities as US small towns and rural areas (Trump's power base
Don't expect these two losers to fix anything, they will only make things worse
In the meantime, the US ruling elites are locked into an ugly internal struggle which only further weakens the US. What is so telling is that the Democrats are still stuck with their same clueless, incompetent and infinitely arrogant leadership, in spite of the fact that everybody knows that the Democratic Party is in deep crisis and that new faces are desperately needed. But no, they are still completely stuck in their old ways and the same gang of gerontocrats continues to rule the party apparatus.
That is another surefire sign of degeneracy: when a regime can only produce incompetent, often old, leaders who are completely out of touch with reality and who blame their own failures on internal ("deplorables") and external ("the Russians") factors. Again, think of the Soviet Union under Brezhnev, the Apartheid regime in South Africa under F. W. de Klerk, or the Kerensky regime in 1917 Russia.
As for the Republicans, they are basically a subsidiary of the Israeli Likud Party. Just take a look at the long list of losers the Likud produced at home, and you will get a sense of what they can do in its US colony.
Eventually the US will rebound; I have no doubts about that at all. This is a big country with millions of immensely talented people, immense natural resources and no credible threat to it's territory. But that can only happen after a real regime change (as opposed to a change in Presidential Administration) which, itself, is only going to happen after an "E2 catastrophe" collapse.
Until then, we will all be waiting for Godot.
peterAUS , says: January 11, 2019 at 5:13 am GMTStopped reading at:
The EU has already morphed into a strictly regional affair, unable to project power or entertain any global geopolitical ambitions. Same goes for Washington, which is going to either depart voluntarily (due to lack of funds) or get chased out from much of the world.
Well, it's O.K. to have online therapy with that brief dopamine rush every now and then. Does help, I guess.
But, looks like, in order to keep having the "fix" the blathering is becoming ludicrous. Starting to feel desperate.
Like: " unable to project power or entertain any global geopolitical ambitions. Same goes for Washington .".
Some "analysts". Not even funny.
Jan 08, 2019 | www.unz.com
Never before has any presidential administration been as all over the place in terms of national security and foreign policy as is that of Donald J. Trump. Indeed, one might well argue that there is no overriding policy at all in terms of a rational doctrine arrived at through risk versus gain analysis of developing international situations. Instead, there has been a pattern of emotional reactions fueled by media disinformation supplemented by "gut feelings" about a series of ultimately bilateral relationships that frequently have little or nothing to do with American national interests.
This is not to suggest that the "gut feelings" are always wrong. Established wisdom in Washington has long reflected the view that the United States must exercise leadership in establishing and maintaining the neoliberal consensus that gained currency after the devastation of the Second World War. Elections, free trade and a free media were to be the benchmarks of the New World Order but they also came packaged with U.S. hegemony to confront those who resisted the development. And it turned out that those "benefits" were frequently difficult to achieve as elections sometimes produced bad results while trade agreements and an uncontrolled media often worked against broader U.S. objectives. All too often the United States found itself going to war against nations that it disapproves of for reasons unrelated to any actual interests, routinely claiming inaccurately that dissident regimes were both "threatening" and disruptive of the universal values that Washington claimed to be promoting.
To consider how the neoliberal order works in practice one only has to consider the Clintons, who justified brutal military interventions in the Balkans and in Libya based on what they claimed to be humanitarian principles. Or Obama, who demanded regime change in Damascus and was prepared to launch a large-scale attack on Syria before he realized that there was no public support for such a move and backed down.
More recently, particularly since 9/11, neoconservatives have dominated U.S. foreign policy through their think tanks, access to the media and their ability to infiltrate both major political parties based on their essentially fraudulent appraisals of threats to national security. They have been so successful at selling their product that the bogus claims that Iran is a threat to the United States are generally accepted without question by both Democrats and Republicans, not to mention the White House. Russia, meanwhile, remains the target of bipartisan wrath, from the left over the results of the 2016 election and from the right due to fearmongering over alleged threats to Eastern Europe.
But hope springs eternal, even in 2019. There have recently been some encouraging signs that change is in the air. Donald Trump has declared that he will be pulling all American soldiers out of Syria and half of U.S. forces out of Afghanistan, though the timetable appears to have slipped somewhat and might slow even more as the Establishment pushes back. That Trump may have chosen to break with the interventionist model with Syria, if he succeeds in doing so, is certainly commendable, but one wit has observed that the departure will be somewhat like the line in the Eagles' song Hotel California , "you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave."
There are other indications that something is afoot. On January 3 rd , Trump offhandedly commented that Iran could do what it wishes in Syria, a comment that generated shock waves through the neoconnish Washington Post 's coverage of the remarks. To be sure, other Administration officials have continued to send different signals, with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo insisting that the U.S. will stay in Syria as long as Iran remains there.
Pompeo has also cautioned Iran against the development of ballistic missiles in connection with a claimed space program, a warning that Tehran has rejected. Israel meanwhile, presumably acting with U.S. connivance, has introduced a new destabilizing element into the Middle East cauldron, using civilian airliners to mask the approach of its military jets to attack targets in Syria. The possibility of an airliner being shot down with great loss of life by "accident" has thereby gone up exponentially.
To be sure, there are some who believe that the Trump anti-interventionist turn is essentially fraudulent. They cite the unrelenting hostility coming out of the White House regarding Iran, which is vilified on a nearly daily basis for its alleged threats not only to the Middle East region but also to Western Europe and the United States. That the Administration's fulminations have little basis in reality is beside the point as it would seem that Trump, Pompeo, John Bolton and the now departed Nikki Haley all believe that the case for disarming Iran and bringing about regime change has been made effectively. Indeed, warfare directed against the Iranian economy has already begun by virtue of a punitive series of targeted sanctions with much more to come when a complete ban on oil exports kicks in in May.
Iran has responded to the threats by restating in early December its intention to exercise control over all ship traffic leaving the Persian Gulf via the Straits of Hormuz if its own oil exports are blocked by the United States. The U.S. responded immediately by sending the aircraft carrier U.S.S. John C. Stennis to the Gulf, the first such deployment in the region in eight months. With all the pieces in place, the possibility that there will be some accident in the region, presumably involving Iranian Revolutionary Guards and U.S. naval units, will escalate just as the largely contrived Gulf of Tonkin incident famously accelerated American involvement in the Vietnam War.
Much of what happens in the Middle East will ultimately depend on the extent to which America's feckless allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel, succeed in selling their version of what is going on in the region. Trump, uncharacteristically, seems to be standing firm, telling a journalist that concerns about the Syria pullout are misplaced because "We give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And we give them, frankly, a lot more money than that, if you look at the books -- a lot more money than that. And they've been doing a very good job for themselves." Likewise, the much more important relationship, with Russia, will depend on the ability to ignore congressional hostility towards the Kremlin as well as the media bias that continues to promote Russiagate as a national security threat.
There is also North Korea, which has now indicated clearly that it is willing to talk to the U.S. but will revert to its nuclear development program unless sanctions are removed. And anyone for Latin America? Bolton has dubbed Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela as a "troika of tyranny," though fortunately suggestions that Venezuela might be invaded by the U.S. to restore order appear to have faded.
If one reads the neocon press one cannot help but notice that China is the anointed over the horizon threat, but it is also a major trading partner and the drive to somehow renegotiate the terms whereby the two nations are linked economically will be complicated. Care must be taken lest what now appears to be an aggravated sense of great power competition becomes something more dangerous. The detention of Weng Manzhou in Canada one month ago together with the implication that the United States can and will enforce U.S. imposed sanctions globally could easily develop into a major problem with China as well as with others, including some NATO allies. The arrest has already disappeared from the media but several Canadians have been detained by Beijing and the U.S. government has warned American businessmen about traveling to China at the present time.
All of the above sounds somewhat depressingly familiar, but the real question is whether in 2019 Donald J. Trump will have both the vision and the necessary gumption to fulfill his campaign promises to change the face of American foreign policy by withdrawing from useless wars overseas and mending fences with countries that are actually important like Russia. There is admittedly a long way to go and it is very much a work in progress, but Trump actually has the ability to overrule the hawks in his administration and change the entire conversation about America's place in the world.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is firstname.lastname@example.org .Trump Foreign Policy for 2019
renfro , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:26 am GMTOh for Gawds sake.renfro , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:30 am GMT
The reason the public cant figure out what the hell is up with Trump and his first pulling out of Syria forthwith and then back pedaling.
Is because no one will tell them about Bolton/Adelson and Bolton being in Israel yesterday telling Netanyahu the US will stay in Syria and wont tell them about the Kushner Jewish cabal deal with Saudi prince MBS.
And wont tell them about the neo General toddies who use war like a carpenter uses a hammer just cause that's all they know until they retire and get cushy jobs with the weapons industry.
Trump has run out of excuses for his many policy contradictions, even his supporters aren't buying them any more. A few are hanging in for the Wall, which they wont get either.
Trump is being taken down by the Dems and their liberal Jewish media and at the same time being taken down by his own installed Zionist Jews and their errand boy Bolton who every time Trump makes an announcement rushes out to contradict him.
Trump has one chance. There is no black mailable material on Trump that hasn't already come out since the NY AG is already looking into money laundering in Trumps businesses.
So Trump needs to blow every thing up .Fire Bolton, fire his son on law, fire all the zios and neos -- totally clean house and shock the shit out of everyone by bringing in some familiar names like realist Chas Freeman for the ME, Webb for Defense, etc that will have the zios, neos, deep state, the establishment and both parties pissing in their special interest bought and paid for pants.
Or he's done.And then .Realist , says: January 8, 2019 at 8:38 am GMT
The Myth of the Russian Crime Boss, Semion Mogilevich, He's Israeli by Larry Johnson
'One of the cornerstones of the meme that Donald Trump is beholden to the Russians–i.e. a Putin puppet–is his alleged ties to Semion Mogilevich, who is described in Wikipedia and other publications as the Godfather of all Russian mobsters. Only one tiny problem with the Mogilevich description–it is devoid of any actual evidence and ignores the simple facts that he was born in Ukraine and is a citizen of Israel. Not a Russian.
One of the best recent examples of building the Mogilevich myth is Craig Unger's 2017 article in the New Republic, Trump's Russian Laundromat. Unger wrote:
In 1984, a Russian émigré named David Bogatin went shopping for apartments in New York City. . . . he was fixated on the glitziest apartment building on Fifth Avenue, a gaudy, 58-story edifice with gold-plated fixtures and a pink-marble atrium: Trump Tower. . . .
The Russian plunked down $6 million to buy not one or two, but five luxury condos. The big check apparently caught the attention of the owner. According to Wayne Barrett, who investigated the deal for the Village Voice, Trump personally attended the closing, along with Bogatin. . . .
In 1987, just three years after he attended the closing with Trump, Bogatin pleaded guilty to taking part in a massive gasoline-bootlegging scheme with Russian mobsters. After he fled the country, the government seized his five condos at Trump Tower, saying that he had purchased them to "launder money, to shelter and hide assets." A Senate investigation into organized crime later revealed that Bogatin was a leading figure in the Russian mob in New York. His family ties, in fact, led straight to the top: His brother ran a $150 million stock scam with none other than Semion Mogilevich, whom the FBI considers the "boss of bosses" of the Russian mafia. At the time, Mogilevich -- feared even by his fellow gangsters as "the most powerful mobster in the world" -- was expanding his multibillion-dollar international criminal syndicate into America.
I have spent the last twenty years of my life working on money laundering cases and carrying out international financial investigations. I had never heard of Semion Mogilevich. Unger's claim piqued my interest. So I started digging.
I do not know if Semion is a genuine mobster. He certainly is portrayed that way in this very flawed FBI report. And that report has become ground truth for a host of writers who mindlessly repeat the fantastical claims and allegations without insisting on corroboration. Going back to my discussion about the busted gangster summit in Prague in May of 1995, I keep wondering if Mogilevich is actually an FBI asset or working for one of our friends, such as Israel. For a guy who is supposedly engaged in a broad swath of illegal activities that encompasses the gamut of bad behavior, Semion has enjoyed a relatively peaceful life. If he actually had such a record I would expect him to face a mountain of extradition requests. But that is not the case.
The final issue of relevance concerns Semion's ethnicity and citizenship status. He is not a Russian. Never has been. He is Ukrainian and a citizen of Israel. So why are media types so eager to claim Semion as proof that Donald Trump is under the thumb of the Russian mob? It does not compute."Excellent article. Things are coming to a head (it's about time). Here is another excellent article along the same lines.anon  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 9:00 am GMT
Predators and Saprophytes, by Robert GoreTrump is essentially trying to have the cake and eat it too.anonymous  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 10:30 am GMTRemember Helsinki? And then that creepy presser back home in Exceptionalia days later where, with Mr. Bolton dropping moustache dandruff down the President's collar, the talk of peace was walked back, and the lights literally went out?Bolteric , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:02 am GMT
So I'm afraid that the real answer to Dr. Giraldi's well put, real question is that in 2019 Donald J. Trump will lack both the vision and the necessary gumption to fulfill his campaign promises to change the face of American foreign policy by withdrawing from useless wars overseas and mending fences with countries that are actually important like Russia.
I hope I'm wrong, but this is nothing new and was foreseen by another of this website's best columnists:
"In 2008, Obama was touted as a political outsider who will hose away all of the rot and bloody criminality of the Bush years. He turned out to be a deft move by our ruling class. Though fools still refuse to see it, Obama is a perfect servant of our military banking complex. Now, Trump is being trumpeted as another political outsider.
A Trump presidency will temporarily appease restless, lower class whites, while serving as a magnet for liberal anger. This will buy our ruling class time as they continue to wage war abroad while impoverishing Americans back home. Like Obama, Trump won't fulfill any of his election promises, and this, too, will be blamed on bipartisan politics."
Linh Dinh, as published at The Unz Review, June 12, 2016 ("Orlando Shooting Means Trump For President")Great article as usual.George , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:22 am GMT
New World Order is usually capitalized."the real question is whether in 2019 Donald J. Trump will have both the vision and the necessary gumption to fulfill his campaign promises "jacques sheete , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:24 am GMT
Gumption? He has ordered things, and his orders are disregarded. Tweeting his disregarded orders is gumption. Any thoughts on what more than gumption is needed?
Trump's Neocons Reverse His Syria Withdrawal Plan
Trump's Neocons Reverse His Syria Withdrawal Plan@renfroAnon  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:46 am GMT
Or he's done.
He's done.@Bolteric Unless you are referring to a new world order.jilles dykstra , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:57 am GMThttps://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/2996129/russen-wij-leveren-goedkoper-gas-dan-vsjacques sheete , says: January 8, 2019 at 12:04 pm GMT
USA ambassador in the Netherlands and the Russian ambassador in a row about which country is going to sell us gas.
The Russian gas is cheaper.
Less dangerous too, maybe, liquid gas tankers are great objects for terrorist attacks.
As long as countries compete with each other about gas sales war does not seem imminent to me.Go, Chuck!mike k , says: January 8, 2019 at 12:18 pm GMT
one wit has observed that the departure will be somewhat like the line in the Eagles' song Hotel California, "you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave."If Giraldi is thinking Trump is going to show some kind of intelligence, or moral sense, or simply backbone against his numerous enemies – then he is indulging in a fruitless and foolish daydream. Get real. Remember who you are dealing with.Wally Streeter , says: January 8, 2019 at 1:18 pm GMTWhy Bolton hasn't been fired yet is a mystery. It's as if his real job is Presedential Minder and his appointment to that position was made by an unknown party. It'll be interesting to see what happens when Trump does try to fire him. It might even reveal who has the real power in this country.jacques sheete , says: January 8, 2019 at 1:36 pm GMT@mike kFed up Goy , says: January 8, 2019 at 1:50 pm GMT
If Giraldi is thinking Trump is going to show some kind of intelligence, or moral sense, or simply backbone
Rest easy, sir!@Mike G Actually AIPAC, Adelson, Kushner, and other assorted khazarian mafia slime are his boss. Chumps promises made are only kept if they're in line with AIPAC and HELL Avivjacques sheete , says: January 8, 2019 at 1:54 pm GMTEliteCommInc. , says: January 8, 2019 at 1:56 pm GMT
Why Bolton hasn't been fired yet is a mystery.
Why he was ever put in a position of power to begin with is an even bigger mystery than it is a disaster.
Fun quote borrowed from another good article over at LRC.:
"May God save the country for it is evident the people will not."
-- Millard Fillmore, 13th [purportedly in a Letter to Henry Clay (11 November 1844)]
A Farewell to 'Bargain Shopping'we'll see.Johnny Walker Read , says: January 8, 2019 at 2:02 pm GMTTrump is just another puppet for the moneyed powers of America and the western world. He is there to give the restless "deplorable's" the impression they have someone who is finally speaking for them and actually cares for them. The minute Trump steps to far off the reservation he is hauled back in. If he manages to get out of lasso range, other more deadly and final measures will be instituted.Harold Smith , says: January 8, 2019 at 2:10 pm GMT
If you have any doubt's about what I say, you can ask Sen. Paul Wellstone. Oh wait, no you can't, He's dead.
The Assassination of US Sen. Paul Wellstone, One of the Last Anti-War Populist Progressives"Donald Trump has declared that he will be pulling all American soldiers out of Syria and half of U.S. forces out of Afghanistan, though the timetable appears to have slipped somewhat and might slow even more as the Establishment pushes back."Ahoy , says: January 8, 2019 at 2:14 pm GMT
Didn't he also declare that he wants better relations with Russia? Yet he sees determined to take the world back to the darkest, most dangerous days of the cold war. So I guess we can't put any faith in the things he "declares."
"That Trump may have chosen to break with the interventionist model with Syria, if he succeeds in doing so, is certainly commendable, but one wit has observed that the departure will be somewhat like the line in the Eagles' song Hotel California, "you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave."
According to his pre-election rhetoric (e.g. tweets from 2013), he broke with the "interventionist model" a long time ago; so why did he expand the illegal, immoral and unconstitutional U.S. military footprint in Syria in the first place? Of course he can leave Syria whenever he "wants" to.
"There are other indications that something is afoot. On January 3rd, Trump offhandedly commented that Iran could do what it wishes in Syria, a comment that generated shock waves through the neoconnish Washington Post's coverage of the remarks."
The problem is, as we see, nothing that he says or does can be taken at face value. Among other things, he's an ignorant, arrogant, stupid, shallow, incurious, feckless, malignantly narcissistic, completely morally bankrupt pathological liar – whose strings are apparently being pulled by a coterie of jewish-supremacist madmen. This is why I variously refer to him as "teflon-don-the-con-man", "orange clown", "perfidious presidential poseur"; etc.
"To be sure, there are some who believe that the Trump anti-interventionist turn is essentially fraudulent."
Why wouldn't they when it's clear that his whole presidential campaign was obviously a fraud?
"All of the above sounds somewhat depressingly familiar, but the real question is whether in 2019 Donald J. Trump will have both the vision and the necessary gumption to fulfill his campaign promises to change the face of American foreign policy by withdrawing from useless wars overseas and mending fences with countries that are actually important like Russia."
Orange clown having "vision and necessary gumption"? Seriously? He's an unrepentant mass-murdering psychopath who "hears voices" and takes action. He's "Son of Sam" or the Zodiac killer in a suit and tie. He's leading us to planetary extinction, IMO.They took away from him his advisors Banon and General Flyn. What happens to them will be the litmus test if he has any power at all.renfro , says: January 8, 2019 at 2:32 pm GMTThe Zionist have neutered Trump. He'll keep floundering claiming he gonna do something but its clear Sheldon Adelson's boy Bolton is running the country and bringing in more zio jews to plan war, hot or cold, for IranDESERT FOX , says: January 8, 2019 at 2:46 pm GMT
Trump is finished.
John Bolton, national security advisor, is tapping Richard Goldberg of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) for a key post.
FDD President Mark Dubowitz confirmed the hire on Twitter late Monday: "Couldn't think of anyone better than my @FDD colleague @rich_goldberg to join NSC to maximize the maximum pressure campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran." The White House has not yet publicly commented.
The story was first reported in Jewish Insider . Goldberg has locked his previously-public Twitter page, following the course taken by other NSC hires, such as Fred Fleitz (who has since departed) and Anthony Ruggiero, formerly of FDD, who swiftly locked their Twitter pages upon ascension to the White House.What the U.S. has is a Zionist foreign policy driven by Zionist dual citizens who have as their number one agenda the goals of the Zionist satanic NWO! Zionists control every facet of the U.S. government and the so called congress might just as well be called the lower house of the Knesset as it grovels to kiss the hand that smites them continually in some type of Stockholm syndrome!anon  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 2:50 pm GMT
On 911 the Zionist controlled deep state and Israel destroyed the WTC and murdered some 3000 Americans and they got away with it and every American who has the ability to think for themselves knows that Israel and the deep state did 911! The Zionists not only got away with it but forced America into 17 years and counting of war and war crimes in the Mideast in support of the Zionist satanic goal of their NWO and in the process murdered untold millions of innocent civilians , men and women and children all for their Zionist masters who rule America!
America is under the control of the Satanist Zionists who have turned America into a nation that invades and bombs the hell out of countries and commits war crimes of the worst king and all this under the command of Zionist controlled U.S. government!
I do not know this government that is in control of America it is a foreign to me as if it came from Mars, and Trump is just another puppet in a long line of puppets going back to JFK , who was the last patriot POTUS and was shot in full view of America by the same ones who rule America today!
Zionists are going to destroy America , just as a parasite destroys its host!As long as Bolton and Pompeo are still in his cabinet, Trump has zero chance of pulling out of Syria. He needs to grow a pair and fire both of those clowns. He's gone this far, firing Haley, Kelly and Mattis, now he needs to finish the job so he can finally run the non-interventionist foreign policy that he promised his voters on the campaign trail.DESERT FOX , says: January 8, 2019 at 2:59 pm GMT
Rod Rosenstein also needs to be fired, and Pence needs to be iced.
The first step to showing us he's serious is to replace John Bolton with Tulsi Gabbard.Zionists control every facet of the U.S. government and every POTUS since JFK who they could not control so they shot him in front of America to show the people who was really in charge!jilles dykstra , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:09 pm GMT
911 was done by the zionists and the zionist controlled deep state and every thinking American knows that the zionists did 911 and used this false flag to push America into illegal uncontitutional wars in the mideast for 17 years and counting all for the zionist goal of a zionist satanic NWO!
Trump is just another zionist puppet in a long line of zionist puppets and congress is the lower house of the knesset and the zionists are going to destroy America just as a parasite destroys its host.My idea is that quite a few of the commenters here do not understand that no dictator anywhere ever had absolute power.Reuben Kaspate , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:13 pm GMT
Not Stalin, not Atatürk, not Hitler.
This is not to suggest Trump is a dictator, but to make clear that a USA president does not have absolute power.
Not even FDR had absolute power, as the diaries of Harold L Ickes make abundantly clear.
In my opinion Kennedy underestimated the forces against him.
Trump, again in my opinion, does not want suicide, not politically, not bodyly.
As long as he can handle fool Bolton, when he was at the UN staff had great difficulty not to laugh about his stupidities, why send the man away, escalate the conflict, and maybe has to accept a far more dangerous opponent ?
FDR's Bolton in my opinion was Henry L Stimson.
FDR fooled him with regard to the negotiations with Japan.
The saying is 'keep your enemies close', this was what all three dictators mentioned above did.
Trump won the elections, but he still has to annihilate Deep State.Maybe he wants to "Manzhou" herjacques sheete , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:14 pm GMTRon Paul asks,jacques sheete , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:15 pm GMT
Will President Trump stand by and watch this coup taking place under his nose?
Trump's Neocons Reverse His Syria Withdrawal Plan
By Ron Paul
Sorry Ron, but the guy's been gelded; he'll not merely stand by, he'll be an active participant in the 180 and he asked for it as he prances around bully-and-exhibition-queen fashion spouting off like an adolescent.
I wonder what the dolt is tweeting now.Anyone else having trouble reviewing and editing posts?Che Guava , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:17 pm GMTDear Doc. Giraldi,GamecockJerry , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:27 pm GMT
It seems that Trump is trying, that at least is a small good. The next thing he is needing to do is to dismiss Walrus Bolton, perhaps decapitation would be a richly deserved fate?
If you were to be offered the job, would you take it? Most of readers here who are sane would love to see you have a stronger influence, but I am supposing it is never to be.Trump may be POTUS but he is just one man but he is continually beating on the door and moving the Overton window. Who was the last President – as President – who made these statements about getting out of these various 'wars' we are in. Generals and congress critters are now having to produce proof, arguments and RESULTS on why we should stay. I have seen very little of that before Trump. He certainly has a growing population behind this direction.Ilyana_Rozumova , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:27 pm GMT
Obviously not much has moved in this direction, but I feel confident he will continue to batter this door and eventually it will fall. The sooner the better.@jacques sheete My advise! Do not bet on it. Trump will finish his term, and he will win another one.Harold Smith , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:29 pm GMT@jacques sheete "Sorry Ron, but the guy's been gelded; he'll not merely stand by, he'll be an active participant in the 180 and he asked for it as he prances around bully-and-exhibition-queen fashion spouting off like an adolescent.ChuckOrloski , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:30 pm GMT
I wonder what the dolt is tweeting now."
LOL! I couldn't have said it any better myself.@chris Regarding my use of the hit Eagles song "Hotel California" lyrics, as metaphor for ZUS war policy in Syria, Brother Chris noted & wrote, "PS BTW: awesome, Chuck for getting honorable mention in Phil's column via your Hotel California comment! ," and Brother Jacques Sheete also encouraged, said, "Go, Chuck!"DESERT FOX , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:32 pm GMT
First off, I thank Phil Giraldi for using the noun "wit" to describe me, instead of the alternative "nitwit," which doubtless several U.R. commenters would have preferred.
One talent where Donald Trump is either equal to, or > 1930's FDR on-the-campaign-stump, is his being expert at the Zio art of "baiting" voters with vows to avoid war, & then executing a "switch."
There is nothing that exhausts serious American voters confidence more than ambitious politicians' campaign 'bait & switch" tactics.
Tonight, it appears President Trump shall address the "Homeland" from Oval Office.
Doubtless, he'll try to reestablish communication with his adoring voter base, silence Democrats, and in the name of a decades-long (Soros?) engineered & foreseeable "National Security Emergency," determine to build his border wall at all taxpayer cost, including permanency of a ltd. government "shut down."
What American TV viewers shall not learn about is the president's virulent pro-Greater Israel foreign policy, and Trump's silent construction of an impenetrable WALL, consisting of freak war building block-personages, namely, Steve Mnuchin, John Bolton, and Mike Pompeo as a united cornerstone.
(Note: Absent in our Zio Corporate Media's vast conspiracy spin-machine is a voice which demands, "Tear down the F.P. wall!"
Regrettably, above, 'Merkins can not tear down that peace-prohibitive wall.
Thanks Phil Giraldi, Chris, and Jacques. Er , Welcome to Hotel California Discomfort Inns, D.C./Tel Aviv!@jilles dykstra Trump is under Zionist control and the Zionist bankers who hold the paper on all of his properties and so even if he wanted to, can not and will not go against the Zionist control of the U.S. government.jilles dykstra , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:34 pm GMT@jacques sheete Yesanonymous  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:36 pm GMTAmerica's feckless allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel, succeed in selling their version of what is going on in the region.]Anon  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 4:50 pm GMT
This is very laughable and only the propagandists make it.
Only the propagandists are making fake news to confuse the ignorant and illiterate people.
Trump is a war monger with different style, like criminal Obama had different style from mass murderers like Clinton family and the Zionist criminals in the different American regimes, especially since 911 staged as false flag operation by USG and Zionist Neocons to implement the plan they had against the Muslims and the region for hegemony and 'greater Israel'.
All evidence since 9/11 and before that proves that these wars are designed and carried out by the criminal and terrorist USG, its 'intellectuals', CIA, FBI and the rest of criminals in the American regime.
The 'nationalist' propagandists do not refer to 9/11 as FALSE FLAG OPERATION to protect the handas of the criminal and terrorists in American regimes to fool the public
Now, it is obvious, more than ever, that Donald Trump, a traitor and Jewish Mafia member, is trying the rest of the VICIOUS PLAN for 'American first' or racist 'American exceptionalism' with the help of US colony Saudi Arabia and one of the main master mind of the geopolitical assault plan, the Zionist Jews.
People are not dumb, and no propagandist can fool them.
Saudi Arabia and its terrorists army is US proxy army which Saudi Arabia follishly is fuding because USG terrorist state WANTS ITS COLONY TO DO THAT. Saudi Arabia cannot exist if does not OBEY THE ODER. The terrorist American regime is using the wealth of the Saudis (muslims) to kill and rob muslims. The dumb MBS must know that after they fund destruction of other states, then it would be their turn, is mbs that stupid? Then let them go down the tube. The west is milking Saudi Arabia for its geopolitical interest, staging false flag operation, to bring its dumb population on board. Is This so difficult to understand? USG has killed millions, millions, millions of people around the world. Every day is a new 'enemy', in Asia, Afria, even Europe. They construct enemy with the help of the criminal and fake media.
Now, people of the region know more than ever than NO one can trust US and their propagandists.
People of the region cannot trust the lies coming from the mouth of a Jewish Mafia member. They are not going to be fooled like American ignorant people who have been molded to be one.
The people of the region know that 'troop out of Syria' is NOTHING BUT A LIE. Because they see the activities of the criminal American and their mass murderer 'soldiers' and 'advisors' all around them.
The criminal US and jewish neocons' plan in Syria did not go according to plan. The mass murderer Obama DID EVERYTHING to implement accordingly, but were not successful due to sacrifices of Syrian people and army, Hizbullah and Iran. Russia a pro Zionist entity entered later in 2015 to fill 'a void' for its own interest and jewish mafia interest that Putin, like trump, is a member of.
Now, the jewish mafia stooge at the WH is changing the plan, but has NOT ABANDONED it. Now, the plan is to focus on Iraq as a base to weaken Iran more than ever.
To do that Trump is playing with Iraqi government, is trying to weaken its government to make it MORE dependent on Washington to follow orders with the help of TRAITOR KURDS and Turkey.
All evidence show that Trump has smuggled the terrorist MEK members, where have no influence in Iran, into Iraq to BE USED, ALONG WITH TRAITOR KURDS, for terrorist plot against Iranian people to put pressure on Iranian government.
But Iraqi Foreign Minister Mohammed Ali al-Hakim said:
"These sanctions, the siege, or what is called the embargo," imposed by the US is "unilateral, not international," and Iraq is "not obliged [to follow] them."
So, the plan is going to be continued by Trump, the war monger, but the propagandists tell you that IT IS THE 'DEEP STATE' DOES NOT ALLOW PEACE LOVING IDIOT TO DO ITS WORK.
They are lying to you. Trump is as criminal as the former American regimes.@renfro Thanks for the information. Verrry interesting.Rurik , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:09 pm GMTExcellent article as usual.c matt , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:10 pm GMT
the bogus claims that Iran is a threat to the United States are generally accepted without question by both Democrats and Republicans, not to mention the White House.
accepted as bogus, but the fraud is nevertheless enforced across the zio-fiefdom.
Russia, meanwhile, remains the target of bipartisan wrath, from the left over the results of the 2016 election and from the right due to fearmongering over alleged threats to Eastern Europe.
Not to split hairs, but the fake news of 'Russian collusion' in the election, is and always has been a laughable farce. Just as any threats to Eastern Europe by Putin's Russia is a preposterous absurdity.
The real reasons for the hostility towards Russia is Russia's unwillingness to go along with ((the unilateral power's)) agenda.
Putin was OK with the globalists until he confronted the Fiend in Syria.
So all their hysterical lies notwithstanding, our media and politicians are all hostile to Russia for Putin's intransigence in Syria. Not for 'hacking our democracy' or arresting Pussy Riot, or menacing Latvia or Poland. These are just more media turds for forced public consumption.
Also glad to see Brother Chuck get his mention!@mike k To be fair, not many men below the Second Person of the Trinity could succeed against the array of forces facing Trump. The best intelligence he could show is to survive, and the most I would hope for is for him to bring the whole mess crashing down on his way out.ariadna , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:14 pm GMT"the real question is whether in 2019 Donald J. Trump will have both the vision and the necessary gumption to fulfill his campaign promises to change the face of American foreign policy by withdrawing from useless wars overseas and mending fences with countries that are actually important like Russia."ChuckOrloski , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:24 pm GMT
I would put it differently and, I daresay, with more precision:
"If pigs had wings, AND if they were slender enough to enable the take-off, AND their flatulence did not create an outsize Coandă effect in flight, AND if and only if they had a strong desire to fly, then they might fly just as likely as Trump might do what Mr. Giraldi hopes he would."@DESERT FOX Hey Desert Fox!Deus ex machina , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:24 pm GMT
Below fyr, is a curious Daily Beast report on how 2016 candidate, Trump, accepted money from Mr. Open Borders Man, Except For Israel, George Soros.
One characteristic of a ZUS president is to capitalize on both the engineered successes and failures of their predecessors.
Hence, tonight, 'Merkins will hear President Trump speak accurately about how illegal immigration constitutes a present "National Emergency" threat; a western crisis which was promoted & established by cohort billionaire international Jew "Open Borders" engineers, & who Trump might chastise later on, but not by name.QUESTION: Is Adam Schiff, head, House Intelligence, a dual citizen?anon  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:26 pm GMT@ChuckOrloski You go Chuck!jilles dykstra , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:27 pm GMT
Must have been the Hail Marys.
btw -- re edit problems:
Problems on WP Software Upgrade?
RON UNZ • JANUARY 7, 2019
Problems on WP Software Upgrade?
also: Interesting post on SicSemperTyrannis: Cotton & Cruz are in Israel lobbying for recognition of Israeli annexation of Golan Hts
Don't Cheney & Biden & Kushner have financial interest in gas from Golan?@anonymousDESERT FOX , says: January 8, 2019 at 5:57 pm GMT
Now, it is obvious, more than ever, that Donald Trump, a traitor and Jewish Mafia member, is trying the rest of the VICIOUS PLAN for 'American first' or racist 'American exceptionalism' with the help of US colony Saudi Arabia and one of the main master mind of the geopolitical assault plan, the Zionist Jews.
People are not dumb, and no propagandist can fool them
Alas not obvious to me.
If you're fooling me, I do not know, what I do know is that a lot of assertions is not proof.@ChuckOrloski Trump, who I voted for , has been a disappointment and I have given up all hope for him, and with his being surrounded by Zionists, it is going to take a grass roots awakening of the American people to the Zionist control of the government and that I think will not happen.AnonFromTN , says: January 8, 2019 at 6:07 pm GMT
Soros , when 14 years old in Budapest Hungary lived with the Nazi commander who was charged with rounding up jews and Soros went out with the Nazis and pointed out where the jews lived and thus helped betray and send these jews to the death camps, this is true, and anyone can check this out, and not a peep out of the Zionists, they betrayed their own!
Soros and the Zionists are Satanists!Trump is always for real. Problem is, he is for real for the next 15 minutes or so.ChuckOrloski , says: January 8, 2019 at 6:25 pm GMT@Rurik Knowingly, Rurik said: "Putin was OK with the globalists until he confronted the Fiend in Syria."Moi , says: January 8, 2019 at 6:36 pm GMT
Above, I totally agree, Brother Rurik.
Have not done a search/study, but I would wager Russian representatives stood tall & mighty at past globalist assemblies, for example, Davos.
Fyi, I still think Putin and Xi are to some extent acceptable to Globalist control designs, but the ZUS & western European Zionist zealots insist that an Israeli personage must sit at the right-hand of the coming (globalist) Mes$iah.
One rather purposely forgotten thing, Rurik? At Davos, January 2017, populist-President Trump's business pal, Anthony Scaramucci, delivered a curious address.
"Mooch" assured the Davos assembly that Donald Trump is "the globalists last good chance for success."
Why? Well , if Putin's and the very powerful Xi's rule happens to weaken to international Jewry's applied internal & external financial pressure, the poor world must (regrettably) suck-it-up and, in reverse, & sing together the old song lyric, "Jesus will not be just right with me."
Thanks, Brother Rurik! And no doubt, P.G. reads the comments to his articles, & he may deploy themLoathed the man from the start and don't pay any attention to what he says.Winston2 , says: January 8, 2019 at 6:38 pm GMT@renfro Very blackmailable sadly.Charles Pewitt , says: January 8, 2019 at 6:54 pm GMT
Mueller has not even started,contrary to popular opinion.
Not sure what Trump won't do when his kids and biz are under threat of RICO charges and
Mueller will flip Alexander Slater the conduit for billions of Russian(Jewish)mafia money
laundered thru' the Trump organization.Cohen already flipped on Slater.
Mueller is involved in parallel construction of what the deep state organs already gave him.
He isn't looking for a crime,he already knows exactly what they are,he is looking for corroboration.Trumpy's foreign policy is more step-in-the-bucket than bait and switch.RobinG , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:07 pm GMT
Trump proposes some thing in regards to foreign policy and the globalizer Deep State ghouls in the WASP/JEW ruling class of the American Empire throw Trumpy some 97 mph chin music and Trumpy steps in the bucket out of fear of getting beaned in the coconut.
The Israel Firist globalizer goons in the GOP such as John Bolton and Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio and Tom Cotton do the bidding of the government of Israel and they do the bidding of wealthy Jew billionaires such as Sheldon Adelson. Jared Kushner, the money-grubbing Jewish real estate shyster, is also telling Trump to put the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the United States.
Trump is doing good work on China, but he is not going far enough. The treasonous rat whores in the WASP/JEW ruling class of the United States sold out the sovereignty and security of the United States by allowing China to use cheap labor to crush American manufacturing. Greedy shyster rats such as Robert Rubin wanted to fully expand financialization and globalization and mass immigration to concentrate wealth and power in the United States.
Greedy dirtbags in academia fully supported the flooding of Chinese students into the United States. This has allowed Chinese intelligence assets and other Chinese elements to infiltrate themselves into areas of operation that should have been disallowed to them.
Trump should immediately put into place a 95 percent prohibitive tariff on all goods or services coming from China. Trump should begin mass deportations of as many Chinese interlopers as possible, and he should ban the entrance of any other Chinese people from entering the United States.
China and the WASP/JEW ruling class of the American Empire are enemies of the American people.
George HW Bush and George W Bush did everything in their power to flood the United States with Chinese interlopers and Chinese manufactured products and goods. China boy George HW Bush is now rotting in Hell for pushing mass immigration and for colluding with the Communist Chinese against the best interests of the American people.
The disgusting, treasonous rats in the WASP/JEW ruling class have sold out the American people for cash and Trumpy is just now getting the American people to think in terms of US national interests when it comes to US foreign policy instead of some vague, nebulous "global economy" or some other abstraction.
In short, that German and Scottish and Irish guy named Patrick Joseph Buchanan has been right about US foreign policy and the WASP/JEW ruling class has been treasonously wrong.@renfroCharles Pewitt , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:22 pm GMT
'One of the cornerstones of the meme that Donald Trump is beholden to the Russians–i.e. a Putin puppet–is his alleged ties to Semion Mogilevich, who is described in Wikipedia and other publications as the Godfather of all Russian mobsters. Only one tiny problem with the Mogilevich description–it is devoid of any actual evidence and ignores the simple facts that he was born in Ukraine and is a citizen of Israel. Not a Russian.
Thanks, renfro.@Wally Streeter John Bolton is a treasonous baby boomer globalizer rat who puts the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the United States. That is treason.RobinG , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:33 pm GMT
John Bolton was a big backer of the Iraq War debacle.
John Bolton pushes nation-wrecking mass immigration and multicultural mayhem.
President Trump should fire John Bolton immediately.
Tweets from 2014:@RobinG The Myth of the Russian Crime Boss, Semion Mogilevich, He's IsraeliAhoy , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:33 pm GMT
by Larry Johnson
https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/01/the-russian-myth-of-semion-mogilevich-hes-israeli-by-larry-johnson.htmlThis man fought for humanity to reach high ground.MEexpert , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:39 pm GMT
This man wants humanity (the goyim part only) to burn in hell.
Americans are immersed in an existencial war for their values and beliefs. For starters start thinking what to do with poisonous Hollywood.@jacques sheeteChuckOrloski , says: January 8, 2019 at 7:55 pm GMT
I wonder what the dolt is tweeting now.
Trump: Jamal Al-Badawi, Leader In USS Cole Attack, Killed: "Our GREAT MILITARY has delivered justice for the heroes lost and wounded in the cowardly attack on the USS Cole," Trump tweeted Sunday.
Mr. President, now let us ask our GREAT MILITARY to deliver justice for the heroes lost and wounded in the cowardly attack on the USS Liberty.@renfro Great post on N.S.A. Bolton's hiring of Richard Goldberg! Below, fyr, is followup information from National Interest.SolontoCroesus , says: January 8, 2019 at 8:24 pm GMT
Unless the Islamic Republic of Iran is resisting ZUS demands, & has covert nuclear weapon & delivery systems, I am afraid that the post-WW2 (carved up) Germany landscape will become its terrible fate.
Thanks a lot for delivering such solid Gold(berg) information, renfro.@AhoyArt , says: January 8, 2019 at 8:33 pm GMT
Americans are immersed in an existencial war for their values and beliefs. For starters start thinking what to do with poisonous Hollywood.
Hollywood is one cesspit; another is the public library that you, Mr & Mrs Taxpayer support.
I'm acquainted with three major public library systems. Their shelves groan with fiction by authors such as those C Span featured last year in its series on (best selling) fiction writes. Among those interviewed:
Rabbi Manis Friedman's declaration triggered this rant:
Early in Meltzer's The Book of Lies , his main character asserts:
"If there was one constant in history it was that victors torched property, salted the earth, destroyed all the old idols. No sense warehousing the past when you could obliterate it entirely."
In, The Increment , David Ignatius praises: "The young Iranian scientist did the right thing: he betrayed his country and sold out to CIA."
Jodi Piccoult's "The Storyteller" is so full of holocaust propaganda she might as well be ghost writing for Simon Wiesenthal.
Baldacci is a hack sell-out. His writing -- as most of the others -- is two steps removed from Stratemeyer Syndicate / Hardy Boys – Nancy Drew. But be sure to mention Nazis in a bad light and Jews/Israel in a favorable light, and you're golden.
Meltzer is forthright enough to discuss his close relationship with CIA, Secret Service, and other US agencies that most of us do not have access to. What are the chances US government is subsidizing these authors to produce fiction to shape the minds of the American people?
There are non-profit organizations that work with publishing houses to send these books by the truckload to military service members in MENA and elsewhere.
Public libraries spend tens- if not hundreds of thousands of dollars acquiring these books, in print, large print, and CD. Writers in this grouping construct their stories to make them readily adaptable to Hollywood movies.
The networking is extraordinary: C Span, "sponsored as a public service by your cable companies," provides a platform for these writers to promote their work.
Cable companies are owned by interests that also own newspapers as well as the publishing houses that market these books.
Hollywood is incestuously related to all of the above.
The American people are screwed every which way: their tax dollars are used to fund public libraries that peddle propaganda; they pay for cable services that propagandize them; they pay to see movies that degrade and propagandize them.
While their tormentors collect fat paychecks and laugh at them.The fever pitch of Trump decent is off the charts.jilles dykstra , says: January 8, 2019 at 8:56 pm GMT
Trump saying. he was going to pull out the troops from Syria – is a cultural and diplomatic earthquake. The possibility of that happening, has shaken the Jews to the core.
Look at Drudge today – things are going crazy – the Jew media is fighting him on virtually everything that is going on in America. They are attacking him on every pronouncement. It is 24/7 get Trump.
Hmm -- just who owns and controls the US MSM – JEWS.
Sorry folks – it is all Jew intimidation – they are saying to Trump "screw with Israel's security, and we Jews will kill your presidency."
Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Art@Ahoy Crazy religious people are not just among jewsanonymous  Disclaimer , says: January 8, 2019 at 9:19 pm GMT
Dutch politician vd Staay is under fire here because of his ideas about homosexuality, the Nashville declaration.
Why anyone bothers about such nonsense is beyond my comprehension
Probably the Torah forbids homosexuality in order to get maximum population growth
Ideas resembling what I read here, because the Chinese population grows the USA must welcome migrants
Idiots@ArtHarold Smith , says: January 8, 2019 at 9:21 pm GMT
"ISTANBUL -- President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey denounced the White House national security adviser John R. Bolton for comments he made ahead of his arrival in the Turkish capital and refused to meet him on Tuesday, making any agreement between the two NATO partners over a United States withdrawal from Syria increasingly difficult.
Mr. Erdogan said Mr. Bolton had made a "grave mistake" when he said that Turkey must agree to protect Syria's Kurds in the event of an American withdrawal.
"It is not possible for us to swallow the message Bolton gave from Israel," Mr. Erdogan said in a speech to political party members in Parliament. Turkey was only opposed to Kurdish militant groups and not ordinary Kurds, he insisted."
-- -- --
Erdogan Cancels Meeting With Bolton, As U.S. Seeks To Reassure Allies On Syria
NPR January 8, 2019
"Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has apparently snubbed U.S. national security adviser John Bolton, canceling a planned meeting to discuss the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria as well as the fate of a U.S.-allied Kurdish militia fighting ISIS in Syria.
Bolton's meeting with Erdogan was canceled moments before it was to begin, reflecting Turkish anger at Bolton's insistence that those Kurdish forces be protected after more than 2,000 American troops exit northeastern Syria."@Art And then orange clown said: "Oh yeah? Screw with my "presidency" and I'll investigate the Sandy Hook elementary school "shooting," 9/11 and the attack on the USS Liberty."Wally , says: January 8, 2019 at 9:26 pm GMT
And then I woke up.@Ilyana_Rozumova I agree.bluedog , says: January 8, 2019 at 9:26 pm GMT
Hell, Trump wasn't even supposed to get this far per 'the polls' and the pre-election media onslaught, but here we are.
Strict immigration control is something way too may Americans want, even Hispanics & blacks are figuring it out, (1.3 of Hispanics actually voted for Trump in 2016), They see their wages taking a hit because of the cheap, illegal labor who pay no taxes, but access free stuff like they do.
And who will the ne0-Communists run against him? Airhead Ocasio-Cortez, Hillary? LOL
Trump would slaughter them.
The neo-Communists only chance is to get Trump out before the 2020 election with the fake Mueller thing, and that's not going to happen. Too many have seen through that scam, and Mueller has nothing or we would have seen it.@Ilyana_Rozumova Your probably right and nothing will have changed,as Putin said presidents come and go but policy remains the same .Greg Bacon , says: Website January 8, 2019 at 9:34 pm GMTTrump will do whatever the REAL bosses, the FED, those corrupt Wall Street casinos and Israel tells him to do. He's nothing more than a carny barker, a fool that keeps the gullible marks occupied so they won't bitch about never-ending war; endless monetary support for Israel and our nation's infrastructure turning into 3rd world status while the MIC gets a bigger share each year.Wally , says: January 8, 2019 at 9:35 pm GMT
Trump went bankrupt four different times, yet he's still a multi-billionaire? The ones who backed him thru that are now calling in their chits.
As No One Watched, Trump Pardoned 5 Megabanks For Corruption Charges -- Who He Owes Millions January 2018
While Americans celebrated the holidays, President Trump followed in the footsteps of his predecessors by acting in the interest of Wall Street and using the distraction to do something that was not in the best interest of the American people. He pardoned five megabanks for rampant fraud and corruption, which is especially notable because of the amount of money he owes them.
Trump has been using Deutsche Bank since the 1990s, and Financial Times has reported that he now owes the bank at least $130 million in outstanding loans secured in properties in Miami, Chicago, and Washington. However, a source told the Times that the actual number is likely much larger at $300 million.
Reports claimed that Deutsche was the only bank willing to lend Trump money after his companies faced multiple bankruptcies. The relationship has continued over the years, and an analysis from the Wall Street Journal claimed that Trump has received at least $2.5 billion in loans from Deutsche Bank over the last 20 years. http://thefreethoughtproject.com/trump-pardoned-megabanks-owes-millions-rampant-fraud-corruption/
Steal a couple hundred from a liquor store and you'll do ten years. Steal trillions and you'll get a pass, some money from Congress and the green light to steal again.@renfro The alternative was Hillary.Art , says: January 8, 2019 at 9:40 pm GMT
I'll take my chances with Trump over the likes of Hillary, Ocasio-Cortez and the other Communists who are waiting in the wings any day.@SolontoCroesus I'm acquainted with three major public library systems. Their shelves groan with fiction by authors such as those C Span featured last year in its series on (best selling) fiction writes.Art , says: January 8, 2019 at 10:19 pm GMT
S2C – Great comment – Thanks!
I love C-Span's weekend Book TV. It is the best programing on the tube.
They do all non-fiction except for this last year with the 3 hour long fiction writers. Most of them I turned off.
Art@anonymous Mr. Erdogan said Mr. Bolton had made a "grave mistake" when he said that Turkey must agree to protect Syria's Kurds in the event of an American withdrawal.renfro , says: January 8, 2019 at 10:21 pm GMT
Bolton and Pompeo are living in the last century when America was respected.
The aftermath of 9/11 has destroyed our credibility. The world correctly views the US government as being controlled by the Jews.
Clearly, fighting terrorist wars for the Jews, has diminished our moral standing and place in the world. Our military is weakened and dissipated – we are falling behind in new tech – we are losing out in the cyber conflicts. America is getting dangerously behind in a thousand ways.
Bolton and Pompeo are bad guys working for the Jews – and the world knows it. Those two think, that all they have to do is say "Iran" and everyone will fall in place – it is not happening! (The world has no respect for our killing the Iran nuke deal.)
Think Peace -- Art@Winston2Wally , says: January 8, 2019 at 10:38 pm GMT
He isn't looking for a crime,he already knows exactly what they are,he is looking for corroboration
I agree with that.@SolontoCroesus Let's not forget the fake Diary of Anne Frank and the ridiculous & easily debunked Destruction of European Jewry</i,. by Zionist Raul Hilberg*, to name just a few of the witchcraft equivalent books on the "holocaust" that plaque our libraries.Ilyana_Rozumova , says: January 8, 2019 at 10:40 pm GMT
" it is questionable whether one should accept improbable figures supplied by a not overly friendly source."
– American Jewish Year Book, , 1972, Vol. 73, p. 536
* Raul Hilberg quotes no less than 20 times as a source in his standard work about the "Holocaust" ,Filip Mueller, who described how he ate cake in an alleged cyanide-saturated gas chamber. : https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10426
Fraudulent "historian" Hilberg exposed in court : http://www.ihr.org/books/kulaszka/09hilberg.html
http://www.codoh.com@anonymous Your opinion is really nice. So tell me please. Which next country US will be destroying?Fatima Manoubia , says: January 8, 2019 at 10:51 pm GMTOh, I really would like to share this author´s New Year optimism with respect to the "US withdrawing from useless wars" , but, as far as I read over there, it seems quite certain the while possibly withdrawing ( in case this is going to happen anytime, or just they decide to remain so as to waste other´s victory ) from what has become useless wars in the Middle East and Central Asia, if not because of the presence of formidable opponents there, the US seems to not loose a minute to engage in others which could result much more usefull, mainly, if we remember Trump´s reproach on "we should had grabbed the oil" , and so, we have that preparations to disrupt countries in the Caribbean Sea , or intends to grabb portions of Africa even if necessary by usual method of kicking the door are next in the eternal list of unending agressions by the US and its "allies" .ChuckOrloski , says: January 8, 2019 at 10:55 pm GMT
After all, "it´s the oil" ..and other resources .
But I even do not discard extending IS/AQ jihad to European soil .now that the European "allies" have resulted so stubborn .
Thus, it is crystal clear to me that what we will have with Trump and the masters who put them in charge in the first place and move the strips behind him, is more of the same elevated to the nth potence .
I wonder what more is needed to have you all in the streets doing the only thing you can do to obligue them to do what you gratutiously affirm Trump is going to do ( whenever that is going to happen )
The information about what your country has always done, continue doing to date, and is all the way planning to do, is all out there for everybody to find and assess.
That you deny acknowledgment of this can only be for two reasons, willing blindness and deafness, so that your way of life does not change a bit, or willing collaboration with the so called "deep state"/"the borg" through taking part in disinformation operations, being the latter the highly likely case of, former or current, intelligence operatives/journalists/analysts .
May be, you, with your "fake stories", "fake news", "fake success", "fake victories" ..will manage to make the lives of increasingly more people increasingly miserable, but, that all that, sooner or later, will pay unto you, and, consequently, you will end rotten in hell believe me, that is a fact .@Wally Wally said: 'Too many have seen through that ("fake Mueller thing") scam, and Mueller has nothing, or we would have seen it."onebornfree , says: Website January 8, 2019 at 11:00 pm GMT
Speaking respectfully, "we" see what Zionist's want us to see, and they have no problem with 'Merkins' presumed capability to see through "fake" special prosecutor stuff.
I liken ZUS citizens' bizarre & engineered political situation to that which Simon & Garfunkel described in peppy song, "A man sees what he wants to see, and disregards the rest."
The Zio Corporate Media, including the often gripping DrudgeReport, feasts upon what appears to be a (combined) left & right flogging of what appears to be the wounded political carcass of President Trump.
But tonight, when the contentious & divisive border-wall address is completed, Oval Office lights out, and Trump tucks-in, the ruling darkness never sleeps.
Fyi, Wally, earlier and while in-between Scranton school bus runs, I indulged "Head- Start Program, 101; No Dumb Goyim Left Behind," by reading Andrew Bacevich's mind expanding & new U.R. article, below, subtitle, "Abizaid of Arabia."
Try Bacevich? For nothing "is" as to what Zio spinners appear to tell what it is "is."
Our Man in Riyadh
Nonetheless, I greatly appreciate all your Continued Education comments & the linked coda tomes, Wally!This just in!: The Wall Will Not Stop Illegal Immigration !RobinG , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:19 pm GMT
Even if built according "to plan" [an impossibility, of course, given the nature of governments], the border wall would not prevent illegal immigrants, except maybe in the very short term, until people found various ways around its presence.
A border wall would be just another government scam, a worthless boondoggle that would only benefit the contractors and the politicians, just like every other government program throughout history.
Why? Because so-called government "solutions" cannot work.
All one has to do to reach this conclusion is to look at the world around us with a cold, unbiased eye, and observe the massive failure of other government "solutions" to date such as:
1] the war on drugs.
2] government- run healthcare
3] government- run education
4] government environmental regulation
5] the government war on poverty via welfare programs
6] government racial integration policies
The list of failures is endless , and at the present time- ever expanding into new areas supposedly 'begging" for government "solutions" that will not work either, because , tah dah! : government "solutions " cannot ever work, [for reasons I will not get into here], although admittedly, in the very short term they might appear to work. but it never takes long for "the rot to set in"
Regards, onebornfree@SolontoCroesus Do I remember correctly that perhaps David Baldacci was the ghost writer of Bill Browder's fiction-posing-as-fact, Red Notice ?Talha , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:44 pm GMTWho's gonna be our guy in Pakistan, Musharraf? Potential tax dollars at work:Art , says: January 8, 2019 at 11:48 pm GMT
If you see Trump shaking hands with the old general, then get set for what's coming
Peace.@Harold SmithChuckOrloski , says: January 9, 2019 at 12:05 am GMT
And then orange clown said: "Oh yeah? Screw with my "presidency" and I'll investigate the Sandy Hook elementary school "shooting," 9/11 and the attack on the USS Liberty."
And then I woke up.
Is Trump going to wake up and smell the Jews destroying him?
Will he call out the editors and CEO's of the media by name?
Hmm -- we will see what he is really made of!@Fatima Manoubia Hey Fatima Manoubia!peterAUS , says: January 9, 2019 at 12:08 am GMT
WOW! What outstanding, let me say, poetic (prophet-like) following paragraph, which addresses the doomed soul of real evildoers: "May be, you, with your "fake stories", "fake news", "fake success", "fake victories" ..will manage to make the lives of increasingly more people increasingly miserable, but, that all that, sooner or later, will pay unto you, and, consequently, you will end rotten in hell believe me, that is a fact ."
Go, go, (Lady?) Fatima! Fyi, the sick U.S. Zio Corporate Media-directors and ZUS "Long War" practitioners cannot bear the reality of your warning. Thanks very much!
P.S.: During 1960's, Bob Dylan sang the pulsating "Masters of War" which for me, & decades later, rings to your tune.@anonymousrenfro , says: January 9, 2019 at 12:26 am GMT
A Trump presidency will temporarily appease restless, lower class whites, while serving as a magnet for liberal anger. This will buy our ruling class time as they continue to wage war abroad while impoverishing Americans back home.
and, overall, simply continue with the plan.
Change of demographics, as one element of it, will, probably, accelerate.@ChuckOrloski Here's another one for you.SolontoCroesus , says: January 9, 2019 at 12:43 am GMT
Last year Trump Named Sigal Mandelker, a Former Israeli, as Undersecretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence.
She devotes all her time now trying to destroy Iran and Hezbollah for Israel.
Israeli Born Deputy Treasury Secretary: Iran Tripled Hezbollah's Annual Pay to $700 Million
Israeli Born Deputy Treasury Secretary: Iran Tripled Hezbollah's Annual Pay to $700 Million
One reason I keep pointing out the Zios now in government is that they can use their positions to create fake reports on Israel's enemies leading the US into even more actions against our own interest.
I don't think Americans are paying attention to how dangerous this is. Too much of the talk about Jewish crimes and deceptions is ancient history and no one is going to punish or end Jewish manipulations over ancient history. ((They)) are only going to be stopped by exposing what they are doing TODAY.
John Doe doesn't give a shit about whatever Jews did 100, 1000 years ago. Joe Doe might give a shit about what the Jews are doing if they knew that they have taken over the US and are sending all US blood and tax payer treasure to wars for Israel TODAY.@RobinG RobinG -- most pertinent information I came across is that a British writer, William Nicholson, was working on a screenplay for a movie version of Red Notice.SolontoCroesus , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:01 am GMT
I've never heard of the book. From a New York Times review, it appears there's a great deal of insider financial/ Wall Street information, which is not Baldacci's strength -- James Grippando specializes in that arena. The NYTimes review mentions Browder's "grating self-regard." Would a ghost writer allow something like that to remain unedited? (Why did an editor allow it to remain unedited?)@renfro The office of Undersecretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence was created by uber Jew Stuart Levey, now legal counsel at HSBC.renfro , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:33 am GMT
When he left the post a few years ago, his former law partner, David Cohen, took his place.
Jews-who-hate-Iran created and have occupied the position at Treasury since they created it, specific ally for the purpose of bankrupting Iran.
You're right, renfro: people SHOULD know these things and SHOULD be outraged.
Thanks for putting it out there.
btw: Richie Goldberg has made a career of hating Iran. He was a student at a Chicago area Solomon Schechter school, whose website carried a front-page banner proclaiming their mission to "instill in students an undying devotion to Israel."
While still in his 30s, Goldberg became assistant to Illinois governor Bruce Rauner. He leveraged that position to make Illinois the first state to pass legislation divesting state pension funds from Iran-linked corporations.
Rich Goldberg is a proud defender of Israel and the United States, and that's not hyperbole; as Deputy Chief of Staff for Legislative Affairs for Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner and former Deputy COS to Senator Mark Kirk, Goldberg has helped advanced a number of initiatives to protect and benefit Israel and serves as an intelligence officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve.
In 2008, Goldberg spearheaded the deployment of X-Band missile defense radar to Israel and later played an integral role in the passage of economic sanctions against the Central Bank of Iran. This spring he helped Illinois become the first state to pass binding legislation countering the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel.
Goldberg is a board member of AJC Chicago and a regional governor of the Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity, for which he serves as the representative on Iran to the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations. http://www.juf.org/YLD/WYLD.ASPX (2015)
btw again: the Jodi Picoult book mentioned above focuses on the work of one Leo Stein, who occupies a US government office that searches out and prosecutes "Nazi war criminals," -- this novel revolves around a 93 year old "former SS" member that the main character ultimately kills. Jews use US institutions & tax $ to carry out their psychopathology@SolontoCroesus Excellent additional information SC thanks.jacques sheete , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:41 am GMT@anon Thanks! Thanks to jiles too.jacques sheete , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:46 am GMT@ChuckOrloskiRobinG , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:47 am GMT
Great post on N.S.A. Bolton's hiring of Richard Goldberg!
I second that.@SolontoCroesus "Grating self-regard" is the lesser fault with Red Notice . it's a tissue of lies. Anyway, ghost writers don't need their own depth of research, like biographers. They just take their subject's story and spin it well. His job was puffing up Browder as a hero.renfro , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:50 am GMT'Morning Joe' anchor wants network TV to keep Trump's Oval OfficeChuckOrloski , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:56 am GMT
Fox News-3 hours ago
MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski said Tuesday that television networks –including her own – should refuse to air President Trump's prime-time Oval@renfro renfro said: "I don't think Americans are paying attention to how dangerous this is."DESERT FOX , says: January 9, 2019 at 2:25 am GMT
Pitifully, Jews count on millions of curiously alert American people who are trained & predisposed to "pay attention" to that which the TV tells them, and count on all to believe it, and obediently follow Judas Goat-herd authority.
At present, am a lot like you.
Average "John Does" today would let Jews slide if he/she learned that the stilted Holocaust education served as the state of Israel's launch pad, a reason to be criminal.
Now there's fascinating excitement about America getting a real 9/11 terror attack investigation, the one then FBI Director Robert Mueller missed. Am saddened to say that the Al Qaeda-perp "whopper" fantasy is more entertaining, and legions of dumb goyim (Bible-thumping) believers would persist to agree with Netanyahu's incredible assessment, "9/11 was good for Israel."
So, renfro, the great proposition is, & as you put it: "Joe Doe might give a shit about what the Jews are doing if they knew that they have taken over the US and are sending all US blood and tax payer treasure to wars for Israel TODAY."
Big problem for me is the Protocols of Zion world takeover-plan, and how Jews will never let a bad (stinky) "taxpayer" finding fester out of control, for example, the facts you wrote, directly above.
As a pessimistic-optimist, here's how I see things: Contemporary Americans must dismount couches, reconcile to wear "do-rags" with bird feathers, fashion Anti-Zio War Paint instead of belly tattoos, and regain their stolen "Homeland."
Really hope/pray I'm nuts, renfro, but no Western Wall visit and yarmulke for me. Thank you!@renfro In 2001 a woman intern was found dead in then congressman Joes office with a gash on her head, and not one thing was done about this, who benefits?Rabbitnexus , says: January 9, 2019 at 3:52 am GMTI'd say they are getting out of Syria. If for no other reason than they lost and have nothing to do there, which is increasingly obvious despite the media held curtain of lies. I'm convinced Trump genuinely does want to withdraw US troops from some theatres but he is facing tremendous pushback from the bloated MIC and all it's little minions. Probably learning as he goes the real reasons for some of them, such as the minerals and opium in Afghanistan. I can't see them letting go of those goodies easily though replacing the troops with contractors is a likely option.Al Moanee , says: January 9, 2019 at 3:52 am GMT@chris "This is one crazy caper with us as 'the muscle,' Israel as 'the brain' and KSA is 'Mr. moneybags."Rabbitnexus , says: January 9, 2019 at 4:12 am GMT
Indeed. I like to refer to US/SA/IS as "the Axis of upheaval", with their (respective) moto: "Force, Fund and Finagle!"@ChuckOrloski People's capacity to ignore an uncomfortable reality is unlimited. I once had a shocking example of it when I and my 2 kids were witness to a massive triangle UFO, which moved silently, very low and slowly near a major road in the city I live in. My daughter hid under the dashboard and wouldn't even look. Even so that is how nearly everyone else from numerous cars reacted and even a bus which stopped and I tried to get a dozen people on-board to look at this thing. My gesticulating and waving to the cars passing to look to their right was absolutely ignored by ten or more cars which passed. They saw me alright but they would NOT turn their heads! I could see some of them staring ahead grimly and obviously refusing under any circumstances to look. They seemed angry at me for trying to make them look even. They all either laughed at me as they passed or gave me a nasty look. This is NOT how people treat others in Perth, Western Australia usually, indeed several would normally have stopped to see if we were OK.anon  Disclaimer , says: January 9, 2019 at 4:23 am GMT
The people on the bus giggled and made fun of me, yet would not no matter how much I implored them simply look out that window and acknowledge a freaking massive aircraft carrier sized black aircraft no more than a couple of hundred meters off the ground. It was dusk but still somewhat light and it had three lights on it also. Eventually ONE guy did stop and look but it was a long way away by then. He could see the odd light configuration and noticed even at that distance it was not making the sound a jet would but that was it. I was astounded not by the UFO so much as by the weird reaction of most people who should have seen it yet something in them was so powerful it could make them anticipate something before they even saw it and avoid seeing it even physically since to do so would obviously have shattered their world view too much I guess.
That is why the truth of 9/11, Kennedy's slaying, the Holocaust [TM] and virtually all the wars which is so easy to access, will never become common currency so long as their acknowledgement will have a major impact on people's paradigms. The media of course do their part in feeding into this cognitive dissonance for their sheeple but in the end it is what the sheeple want as well. They don't want to be informed they want to be validated and amused.John Bolton is the biggest piece of shite and no one is going to take Trump seriously as long as that traitor is still part of his cabinet.Rabbitnexus , says: January 9, 2019 at 4:30 am GMTMore truths that people will not acknowledge, even if they were shown widely to them via their usual information swill bucket. ETs as my example directly demonstrates, MH-17, the USS Liberty. The nuclear 'Energy' lie. (Nuclear "Power stations" are really just part of the nuclear weapons process) The medical swindle around most "incurable diseases". The true history of almost any nation, they're almost all based on great founding myths which would not stand the light of examination but nobody wants to know except those for whom knowing might bring some benefit. An excuse to reclaim something supposedly lost and which loss itself is more often then not another invented myth. I despair of the human race becoming enlightened or exalting the virtues inherent in mankind. It will only happen on an individual basis, there's no 100th monkey situation that is another myth anyway.peterAUS , says: January 9, 2019 at 4:44 am GMTWally , says: January 9, 2019 at 6:58 am GMT
They saw me alright but they would NOT turn their heads! I could see some of them staring ahead grimly and obviously refusing under any circumstances to look. They seemed angry at me for trying to make them look even. They all either laughed at me as they passed or gave me a nasty look.
. something in them was so powerful it could make them anticipate something before they even saw it and avoid seeing it even physically since to do so would obviously have shattered their world view too much I guess.
.will never become common currency so long as their acknowledgement will have a major impact on people's paradigms.
and, the most important:
.in the end it is what the sheeple want as well. They don't want to be informed they want to be validated and amused.
Actually, the only important when dealing with average person.
I've had plenty related experiences. Nothing such extraordinary; just the usual stuff about power, politics, social issues, even health. Always willful, derogatory, even hostile reaction to simple common sense.
And, TPTBs do know that. That's why they are where they are.
They know the truth and act upon it. Realists.
And idealists, no matter what type, stick to their delusions. "If we could just inform and educate people" and similar bullshit.
Feels good, though.@ChuckOrloski Chuck:Art , says: January 9, 2019 at 8:04 am GMT
Speaking of CODOH, coming soon from 'Holocaust Handbooks'
Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, An Introduction and Update to Jean-Claude Pressac's Magnum Opus , By Germar Rudolf
http://www.codoh.comOh my oh dear – surprise surprise' – Senator Marco Rubio pays back Jew sugar daddies with first bill of the 2019 Senate – killing free speech for BDS movement against Israel.anon  Disclaimer , says: January 9, 2019 at 9:31 am GMT
Heavens to Betsy – can you believe it – go figure' – the darling of American conservatism FOX JEWS defends the bill.
p.s. To her credit, the Jewess Senator Diane Feinstein opposes the bill.Anon  Disclaimer , says: January 9, 2019 at 11:10 am GMT
Bolton Threatens Syria: US Troop Withdrawal "On Hold". Permanent US Military Base on Syria-Iraqi border
"On Friday, a State Department official said "(w)e have no timeline for our military forces to withdraw from" the country. Delay may turn out to be not at all.
On Sunday, a senior Iraqi parliamentarian said
"(t)he Americans have built a military base in Erbil (in) the Iraqi Kurdistan region to use against Iraq's neighboring countries, in particular Iran and Syria."
Iraqi media said the Pentagon has 14 military bases in the country – along with a reported 18 in Syria. The US is highly unlikely to abandon them, especially ones considered most strategically important.
An earlier report indicated the Pentagon intends establishing a permanent base along the Iraqi border with Syria. Turkey reportedly established one or more military bases in northwestern Aleppo.
On Saturday, a senior Trump regime official said US forces may remain indefinitely at the (illegally established) al-Tanf base in southeastern Syria near the Iraqi and Jordanian borders "
-- -- -- -- -- –
There has been a major change in US propaganda. In its earlier versions , US has always downplayed whats it's interest are, what it is trying to achieve, how it is trying to achieve – whether the case was in Soviet or Iraq or Vietnam or Libya few years ago. Now the neocons declare what they plan how they plan and whats the objectives are . With that differences between former and current, one can see also so called victory before and the absolute defeat now.@Rabbitnexus I was going to say that you had better make sure of your St Paul before taking the decisive trip on your donkey But then I see he is there ready to go in the shape of PeterAus. So now you needn't wait: get yourself crucified after alerting all the media, mainstream and alternative. Pruning the gospels for some semblance of consistency you will, I'm afraid, just have to trust Your Father will look after.jacques sheete , says: January 9, 2019 at 11:30 am GMT@Rabbitnexusjacques sheete , says: January 9, 2019 at 11:40 am GMT
My gesticulating and waving to the cars passing to look to their right was absolutely ignored by ten or more cars which passed. They saw me alright but they would NOT turn their heads!
While I've never seen such a thing as a UFO, I've had similar responses from people when I've tried to warn them of potentially dangerous situations while driving on the freeway such as unlatched hoods on their cars to wobbling wheels on their trailers, to unsecured loads that were bouncing around.
Now as to the assertion that history is useless or foolish, I do agree with the idea that for most people a knowledge of history is wasted on them, but there are a significant few, I think, who see the light after understanding that what's being detailed today is largely the fruit of past efforts. I also am a proponent of exposing past crimes so that people are not surprised when they see how the methods are very similar to those being used at the present and will likely be used in the future. A further benefit is that people will begin to understand what is not effective and that it's imperative to look for ways to undermine the parasite classes.
Another reason why knowledge of history is important is that it helps immunize people against being lied to by the purveyors of fake news and fake history. Such knowledge really seems to help in assessing the verity, or lack thereof, of those who make excuses for bad behavior or try to downplay the seriousness of unacceptable and irresponsible behavior.
I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors.
It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more completely deprive the nation of its benefits, than is done by its abandoned prostitution to falsehood.
Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 14 June 1807@ArtRVBlake , says: January 9, 2019 at 12:09 pm GMT
p.s. To her credit, the Jewess Senator Diane Feinstein opposes the bill.
Mere theater, I suspect.
Can there be any doubt that the Senator, Diane Feinstein, merely pretends to oppose the bill?
Most of what the clowns say is meant to be laughed at, not believed, and almost all are clowns. Furthermore history shows that in that respect nothing's changed over the millennia.@Charles Pewitt Cheney does.jacques sheete , says: January 9, 2019 at 12:40 pm GMT@Charles PewittRVBlake , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:02 pm GMT
Trumpy's foreign policy is more step-in-the-bucket than bait and switch.
My take is that it's the good cop, bad cop routine. It's just another version of The Shrub's promises of implementing compassionate conservatism and a humble foreign policy or O-bomb-a's hope and change
Trump says something that the ever hopeful Trumpettes want to hear, then does exactly as his bosses desire. This allows The Trumpster to appear like the good guy while maintaining hope and simultaneously enabling his supporters to claim that da devil would't let him do it. The Boltons of the world no doubt enjoy their roles as devils.
And I agree that The Cackling Hyena would have been exponentially worse, but that's small consolation and no denying that the masses are being played, again.@jacques sheete This would explain Trump's heartening announcement of U.S. withdrawal from Syria, immediately followed by Pompeo and Bolton hustling and bustling amongst our valued Mid East allies, issuing consolations and moderations. Witness Bolton's recent twitterings of the U.S. now "coordinating" its withdrawal from Syria with Israel, downstream of Trump's original immediate withdrawal, then 4-month withdrawal.ChuckOrloski , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:23 pm GMT@jacques sheete Hey Jacques!Johnny Walker Read , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:31 pm GMT
Our Zio Media never tells us that John Bolton is a Neoconservative and is establishing presidential foreign policy geared to Israeli requirements and in fact against NATO ally, Turkey.
Israel likes the Kurds due to only an obsession to divide & conquer neighboring Islamic countries. As a ZUS-approved "good" terror state, the Kurds want territory spanning Syria, Iraq, and Iran.
A very shitty & transparent deception, please refer to article, below, Jacques? (Zigh)
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/01/08/585215/Erdogan-rebukes-Boltons-unacceptable-comment-on-Syrian-Kurdish-YPG-forces@DESERT FOX Agree with all except the worship of JFK. Kenned was the one that started the UN one world government ball rolling with Public Law 87-297. Truth be known every president, including Washington has been part of the plan to make America the "New Atlantis", with one possible exception, Andrew Jackson.ChuckOrloski , says: January 9, 2019 at 1:51 pm GMT
You be the judge@RVBlake RVBlake wrote: "Witness Bolton's recent twitterings of the U.S. now "coordinating" its withdrawal from Syria with Israel, downstream of Trump's original immediate withdrawal,"RVBlake , says: January 9, 2019 at 2:09 pm GMT
Re above; a question.
Why doesn't our Zio Media report on how Bolton managed to overturn Trump's 2016 presidential election, and how he easily managed to tweak & assume the role as US Commander in Chief of the armed forces?
Thank you. Please let me know what you think?@ChuckOrloski The MSM is part of the narrative, the septic tank melange of Pentagon, neocons, liberal interventionists No way they're turning on one of their own. They most likely sneer at his past political associations, i. e. Bush/Cheney, but they publicly endorse him as less evil than Trump.ChuckOrloski , says: January 9, 2019 at 2:50 pm GMT@RVBlake Hey RVBlake,Z-man , says: January 9, 2019 at 3:02 pm GMT
About my major point, re; the Kurds, their leaders know they have ZUS and Israeli miliary support, and such stuff can end up causing a major war, and US troops who remain in Syria are most regrettably in danger of becoming ritualistic & unnecessary "sacrificial lambs."
Thanks.@Fed up Goy Hell Aviv, I like that ..and I will use it, lol.Z-man , says: January 9, 2019 at 3:04 pm GMT@Ahoy Flynn was a NEOCON stooge and rabid anti Iran war hawk.Z-man , says: January 9, 2019 at 3:10 pm GMT@renfro Good find 'renfro', thanks.Z-man , says: January 9, 2019 at 3:21 pm GMT@c mattChuckOrloski , says: January 9, 2019 at 5:23 pm GMT
To be fair, not many men below the Second Person of the Trinity could succeed against the array of forces facing Trump.
Yeah at least he can blow the whole thing up as he leaves.Appears evident that Commander in Chief Trump is fighting to secure the US southern border (with Mexico), and his NSA Director Bolton has the job of securing Israeli expansion into Lebanon and Syria.bjondo , says: January 9, 2019 at 6:00 pm GMT@anonymous Note to Erdogan:bjondo , says: January 9, 2019 at 6:15 pm GMT
invite bolton and pompeo
for tea and baklava.
some amount of torture ok.
neither will hold out past 2 seconds.
America will bless you.@Winston2 according to tea leaves,renfro , says: January 9, 2019 at 6:24 pm GMT
mueller down and out before 90 days;
ruth ginsberg out before May ends;
bolton, pompeo gone before Dec.
THE WALL available for pics.
expansion by the yid toxic garbage dump is over.
death is waiting.
5ds@Johnny Walker ReadFatima Manoubia , says: January 9, 2019 at 6:46 pm GMT
Agree with all except the worship of JFK. Kenned was the one that started the UN one world government ball rolling with Public Law 87-297. Truth be known every president, including Washington has been part of the plan to make America the "New Atlantis", with one possible exception, Andrew Jackson
Getting your information from gun owner rights nut case sites is not a good idea.
Public Law 87-297 had nothing to do with the 2nd ammendment. It was a reaction to the arms race with Russia , nuclear fears and the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Basically a brain fart of the times but one that led to the eventual reduction of nuclear weapons in Russia.
Further, it was Eisenhower that was the biggest champion of the UN and international law after WWII.
Further you need to read Washington's Farewell Address if you think he was a 'globalist' -- he was the exact opposite.
Washington's Farewell Address 1796
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp@ChuckOrloski Comrade ChuckOrloski, you are really very kind, and generous, to consider that anything I could write with my scarce command of English language could be anytime qualified as "poetic", but I am glad if, in any way, it served you, or any other person, as inspiration or, at least, to be moved a bit from the wide conformism in front of what we are witnessing and are being directed to.roberthstiver , says: January 9, 2019 at 7:59 pm GMT
I thank you for the reference to Dylan´s song ( which I am not worthy of being compared to..), which I did not know so far, since not so heard at my country, and even at my times, which became a bit more cynic, despaired and self-destructive than yours ( when the anti-war movement was at its full heights of plenitude and strenght .Although they managed to fully disintegrate it be it through generalized introduction of drugs amongst the youth and hopeful ..or directly cutting the tongues of the troubadours ..), but, still, we had our bards too .
In this vein, you remind me of the fact that perhaps the lack of inspiration of these times lays in part, apart from in the general alienation by electronic devices, in the lack of bards .To kill the bards has always been one of their priorities as ancient leyends tell us .
But we will prevail .and will return to the streets . again .
Enjoy!Great work as always, Phil -- with the exceptions that you should have devoted due attention to (i) the nefarious, always-lurking Zionist presence/influence of Sheldon Adelson on Trump and our body politic and (ii) the neocon/Zionist/Israel-first (near) unanimity of our legislative branch in affairs of the Middle East and beyond that makes a mockery of any use of the term "US national [security] interests." Other areas: the MIC, the MSM, Ziothinktankdom, the Palestinians' fading hopes of justice and liberation .Harold Smith , says: January 9, 2019 at 8:08 pm GMT
(I can't find time and energy to review the comments; I'm sure there are some great ones.)@Charles Pewitt Its not China's fault that the jews and their loyal puppets targeted the American middle class for destruction.Harold Smith , says: January 9, 2019 at 8:18 pm GMT
China is not an "enemy of the American people".@Wally Being that our jewish-supremacist masters apparently wanted the perfidious orange clown over clinton, I have to assume that the orange clown is even more evil than clinton.ChuckOrloski , says: January 9, 2019 at 8:34 pm GMT@Fatima Manoubia Fatima Manoubia wisely noted: "To kill the bards has always been one of their priorities as ancient legends tell us,"Harold Smith , says: January 9, 2019 at 10:11 pm GMT
Greetings from Scranton, Pa, Fatima!
Am in complete agreement with your insight above.
US social engineers have accomplished insidious modification of the great art of poetry. Shall brand the hostile takeover as Zionist Infirmity in Art.
You are too kind to me, and no doubt, U.R. commenters, for example RobinG, shall second my motion. Nonetheless, thanks & I dig your enthusiasm for noble non-conformism!
Loved Bowie's performance of "Life on Mars." Will share it with dear friends.
And, maybe you will like Peter Gabriel, linked below, and his performing a classical version of David Bowie's great "Heroes," live in Verona.
P.S.: A bit disappointed, am not expecting the great Peter Gabriel to produce other tribute-songs in memory of real national heroes, as he did the stirring one for Stephen Biko, martyr. And Jewish Bob Dylan, has-been radical? He's doing Tony Bennett covers.@c mattAce , says: January 9, 2019 at 10:19 pm GMT
To be fair, not many men below the Second Person of the Trinity could succeed against the array of forces facing Trump.
To be even more fair, in order to succeed against the evil forces, orange clown would at least have to try to oppose them which means he would first have to stop being their willing agent.@anon My lifelong ambition.
Jan 09, 2019 | www.unz.com
Taras77 says: January 7, 2019 at 4:49 am GMT 100 Words
What is absolutely remarkable to me in a very bad way is that this piece of trash received 681 reviews on Amazon, only 21 with one star and the balance above that for an overall rating of 4.8 out of 5.
Absolutely remarkable, again, but it is reflective of the brain dead sheeple currently doing any reading at all of books by the rabid neo cons. I hesitate to guess what some extreme alarm sounding diatribe by Wolfowitz or the current "main man," max boot would register. Maybe Romney can lead us out of the wilderness (sarc)>
I know that this is Amazon and when it comes to the standards of what passes as accurate reporting and journalistic standards,"wapo and bezos leads the pack into the sewer. REPLY AGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER
Sean , says: January 7, 2019 at 5:15 am GMT@eahSean , says: January 7, 2019 at 5:35 am GMT
While secretary of state Hillary actually compared Putin to Hitler.@El Dato an American puppet inasmuch as he had Americans masterminding his political PR campaigns) start giving ground that the situation becomes fluid.nickels , says: January 7, 2019 at 4:48 pm GMT
Albright (and Nuland) had no idea what Russia as a normal nation state could be expected to put up with, because all they had to go on was Yelstyn who was drunk most days. So the US was slowly but surely drawn into the power vacuum in the territories the USSR withdrew from and Albright thought that was the way things were going to continue to be. The domestic situation in America was also one where the elite had things their own way to an unsustainable extent. What Albright does not like is the facts of life.Andrei Martyanov , says: Website January 7, 2019 at 6:00 pm GMT
The whole discussion is so asinine.
Facism is not a form of government that can just be inserted or deleted.
It is a very specific reaction to the communist takeover of a nation.
At that point, other forms of government are no longer viable: totalitarianism of one kind of another becomes an absolute necessity to rule.
We see western governments coming to this point-the moral law is lost, corruption reigns, and only pure force has currency.
So at this point you only have one of two choices, there simply are no alternatives:
communism or facism.
And it is quite clear that facism is a more reasonable and less murderous choice.@Taras77
for as long as neo con history is a subject for study (she has plenty of competition for that recognition).
Most "history" taught in the US (and combined West) is one or another iteration (sometimes extreme, sometimes less so) of US exceptionalism. Even American so called "realism" is built around exceptionalism. American military doctrines are written primarily on exceptionalism basis. Results are easily observable.
Jan 09, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Mattis: One More General For The "Self-Licking Ice Cream Cone"
by Tyler Durden Wed, 01/09/2019 - 21:55 20 SHARES Authored by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos via The American Conservative,
Big brass and government executives play both sides of the military revolving door, including "the only adult in the room."
Before he became lionized as the "only adult in the room" capable of standing up to President Trump, General James Mattis was quite like any other brass scoping out a lucrative second career in the defense industry. And as with other military giants parlaying their four stars into a cushy boardroom chair or executive suite, he pushed and defended a sub-par product while on both sides of the revolving door. Unfortunately for everyone involved, that contract turned out to be an expensive fraud and a potential health hazard to the troops.
According to a recent report by the Project on Government Oversight, 25 generals, nine admirals, 43 lieutenant generals, and 23 vice admirals retired to become lobbyists, board members, executives, or consultants for the defense industry between 2008 and 2018. They are part of a much larger group of 380 high-ranking government officials and congressional staff who shifted into the industry in that time.
To get a sense of the demand, according to POGO, which had to compile all of this information through Freedom of Information requests, there were 625 instances in 2018 alone in which the top 20 defense contractors (think Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin) hired senior DoD officials for high-paying jobs -- 90 percent of which could be described as "influence peddling."
Back to Mattis. In 2012, while he was head of Central Command, the Marine General pressed the Army to procure and deploy blood testing equipment from a Silicon Valley company called Theranos. He communicated that he was having success with this effort directly to Theranos's chief executive officer. Even though an Army health unit tried to terminate the contract due to it's not meeting requirements, according to POGO, Mattis kept the pressure up. Luckily, it was never used on the battlefield.
Maybe it shouldn't be a surprise but upon retirement in 2013, Mattis asked a DoD counsel about the ethics guiding future employment with Theranos. They advised against it. So Mattis went to serve on its board instead for a $100,000 salary. Two years after Mattis quit to serve as Trump's Pentagon chief in 2016, the two Theranos executives he worked with were indicted for "massive" fraud , perpetuating a "multi-million dollar scheme to defraud investors, doctors and patients," and misrepresenting their product entirely. It was a fake.
But assuming this was Mattis's only foray into the private sector would be naive. When he was tapped for defense secretary -- just three years after he left the military -- he was worth upwards of $10 million . In addition to his retirement pay, which was close to $15,000 a month at the time, he received $242,000 as a board member, plus as much as $1.2 million in stock options in General Dynamics, the Pentagon's fourth largest contractor. He also disclosed payments from other corporate boards, speech honorariums -- including $20,000 from defense heavyweight Northrop Grumman -- and a whopping $410,000 from Stanford University's public policy think tank the Hoover Institution for serving as a "distinguished visiting fellow."
Never for a moment think that Mattis won't land softly after he leaves Washington -- if he leaves at all. Given his past record, he will likely follow a very long line, as illustrated by POGO's explosive report, of DoD officials who have used their positions while inside the government to represent the biggest recipients of federal funding on the outside. They then join ex-congressional staffers and lawmakers on powerful committees who grease the skids on Capitol Hill. And then they go to work for the very companies they've helped, fleshing out a small army of executives, lobbyists, and board members with direct access to the power brokers with the purse strings back on the inside.
Welcome to the Swamp
"[Mattis's' career course] is emblematic of how systemic the problem is," said Mandy Smithberger, POGO's lead on the report and the director of its Center for Defense Information.
"Private companies know how to protect their interests. We just wish there were more protections for taxpayers."
When everything is engineered to get more business for the same select few, "when you have a Department of Defense who sees it as their job to promote arms sales does this really serve the interest of national security?"
That is something to chew on. If a system is so motivated by personal gain (civil servants always mindful of campaign contributions and private sector job prospects) on one hand, and big business profits on the other, is there room for merit or innovation? One need only look at Lockheed's F-35 joint strike fighter, the most expensive weapon system in history, which was relentlessly promoted over other programs by members of Congress and within the Pentagon despite years of test failures and cost overruns , to see what this gets you: planes that don't fly, weapons that don't work, and shortfalls in other parts of the budget that don't matter to contractors like pilot training and maintenance of existing systems.
"It comes down to two questions," Smithberger noted in an interview with TAC.
" Are we approving weapons systems that are safe or not? And are we putting [servicemembers'] lives on the line" to benefit the interests of industry?
All of this is legal, she points out. Sure, there are rules -- "cooling off" periods before government officials and members of Congress can lobby, consult, or work on contracts after they leave their federal positions, or when industry people come in through the other side to take positions in government. But Smithberger said they are "riddled with loopholes" and lack of enforcement.
Case in point: current acting DoD Secretary Patrick Shanahan spent 31 years working for Boeing , which gets about $24 billion a year as the Pentagon's second largest contractor. He was Boeing's senior vice president in 2016 just before he was confirmed as Trump's deputy secretary of defense in 2017. Last week he recused himself from all matters Boeing, but he wasn't always so hands off. At one point, he "prodded" for the purchase of 12 $1.2 billion Boeing F-15X fighter planes, according to Bloomberg.
But the revolving door is so much more pervasive and insidious than POGO could possibly catalogue. So says Franklin "Chuck" Spinney , who worked as a civilian and military officer in the Pentagon for 31 years, beginning in 1968. He calls the military industrial complex a "quasi-isolated political economy" that is in many ways independent from the larger domestic economy. It has its own rules, norms, and culture, and unlike the real world, it is self-sustaining -- not by healthy competition and efficiency, but by keeping the system on a permanent war footing, with money always pumping from Capitol Hill to the Pentagon to the private sector and then back again. Left out are basic laws of supply and demand, geopolitical realities, and the greater interest of society.
"That's why we call it a self-licking ice cream cone," Spinney explained to TAC.
" [This report] is just the tip of the iceberg. There's a lot more subtle stuff going on. When you are in weapons development like I was at the beginning of my career, you learn about this on day one, that having cozy relationships with contractors is openly encouraged. And then you get desensitized. I was fortunate because I worked for people who did not like it and I caught on quickly."
While the culture has evolved, basic realities have persisted since the massive build-up of the military and weapons systems during the Cold War. The odds of young officers in the Pentagon making colonel or higher are slim. They typically retire out in their 40s. They know implicitly that their best chance for having a well-paid second career is in the only industry they know -- defense. Most take this calculation seriously, moderating their decisions on program work and procurement and communicating with members of Congress as a matter of course.
" Let's just say there's a problem [with a program]. Are you going to come down hard on a contractor and try to hold his feet to the fire? Are you going to risk getting blackballed when you are out there looking for a job ? Sometimes there is no word communicated, you just don't want to be unacceptable to anyone," said Spinney. It's ingrained, from the rank of lieutenant colonel all the way up to general.
So the top five and their subsidiaries continue to get the vast majority of work, usually in no-bid contracts ($100 billion worth in 2016 alone) , and with cost-plus structures that critics say encourage waste and never-ending timetables, like the $1.5 trillion F-35. "The whole system is wired to get money out the door," said Spinney. "That is where the revolving door is most pernicious. It's everywhere."
The real danger is that under this pressure, parties work to keep bad contracts alive even if they have to cook the books. "Essentially from the standpoint of Pentagon contracting you are not going to have people writing reports saying this product is a piece of shit," said Spinney. Worse, evaluations are designed to deflect criticism if not oversell success in order to keep the spigot open. The most infamous example of this was the rigged tests that kept the ill-fated "Star Wars" missile defense program going in the 1980s.
* * *
Everyone talks about generals like Mattis as though they're warrior-gods. But for decades, many of them have turned out to be different creatures altogether - creatures of a semi-independent ecosystem that operates outside of the normal rules and benefits only a powerful minority subset: the military elite, defense contractors, and Congress. More recently, the defense-funded think tank world has become part of this ecology, providing the ideological grist for more spending and serving as a way-station for operators moving in and out of government and industry.
Call it the Swamp, the Borg, or even the Blob, but attempting to measure or quantify the revolving door in the military-industrial complex can feel like a fool's errand. Groups like POGO have attempted to shine light on this dark planet for years. Unfortunately, there is little incentive in Capitol Hill or at the Pentagon to do the very least: pull the purse strings, close loopholes, encourage real competition, and end cost-plus practices.
"We generally need to see more (political) championing on this issue," Smithberger said. Until then, all outside efforts "can't result in any meaningful change."
Son of Captain Nemo , 4 minutes ago linkMusicIsYou , 9 minutes ago link
So tell me again how "Mad Pedo" evaded Obama's axing of all the non-compliant General(s) and Admiral(s) in charge of the U.S. strategic command?!!!
Answered my own question. He's like the rest of them since the Balkans that just does counter insurgencies!...
"SUCCESS" in every direction on the weather vane you look!!!
Or... Another way of saying it.
How to build your successful U.S. military career turning $8 trillion in unfunded liability debt into $200 trillion in unfunded liability debt in less than 20 years!
Who wants to line up for that 'self help book"?!!!__name___3O4jF">Realname Wild tree , 31 minutes ago link
Mattis is just another self serving cockroach in a U.S uniform.Wild tree , 31 minutes ago link
It has nothing to do with the defense of our nation, or the unnecessary spilling of the blood of our nation.
It has everything to do with greed at the expense of our youths blood and the nations security. Follow the money.
As the light of truth shines as this article illustrates, the cockroaches scurry. Rumsfield's DoD 2 trillion missing comment the day before 9/11 comes to mind. Wonder how he knew.......hotrod , 39 minutes ago link
It has nothing to do with the defense of our nation, or the unnecessary spilling of the blood of our nation.
It has everything to do with greed at the expense of our youths blood and the nations security. Follow the money.
As the light of truth shines as this article illustrates, the cockroaches scurry. Rumsfield's DoD 2 trillion missing comment the day before 9/11 comes to mind. Wonder how he knew.......peippe , 39 minutes ago link
All this corruption in so nauseating. Yet Americans do nothingMr. Kwikky , 25 minutes ago link
These generals have been in the military a long time.
Not long enough to remember winning a real war....
It was and is never about winning, but keeping the US in perpetual war state (report from iron moutain). Cui bono? the mic
Jan 07, 2019 | www.unz.com
Monkhouse , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:55 pm GMTCarlton Meyer , says: Website January 7, 2019 at 5:40 am GMT
Agreed that the House of Saud and the salafist jihadis are to blame for so much that has happened in the ME since long before 9/11. And that the Long War is always projected as "defense" against the nefarious "terrorists" who are objects of the GWOT. But, dude, all the terrorists in the world still don't have anything that amounts to a real army, navy, and – how ridiculous can it be? – an air force. The Long War has never really amounted to anything more than a cover story and a smoke screen.
That's because, as we have been informed of late, the real enemy is Russia. And China. And everything else that counts in the Long Great Game of four-dimensional chess must necessarily conform to the strategy that ultimately is about "containment" of those two competitors for global power. This is not just my own opinion. It has come down from on-high, in statements conveyed by the highest ranks of military authority. News flash: The "enemy" is no longer the "terrorists" – if it ever was. The plan's best advocate may have been Paul Wolfowitz, whose "doctrine" was "no peer competitors" – forever. That's the Long War for ya.Gene , says: January 7, 2019 at 8:18 am GMT
To retain a respectable status, Mr. Bacevich skipped over the hard evidence that Prince Bandar directly funded the 9-11 terrorists (aka patsies) while all were in the USA, per the FBI:
From my blog:
Jul 17, 2016 – The 28 Pages
After years of controversy, the House Intelligence Committee declassified part of their December 2002 report on the 9-11 attacks, which shows direct Saudi involvement in supporting the 9-11 attackers. This major story has been ignored by most of our corporate media. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said: "This information does not change the assessment of the US government that there's no evidence that the Saudi government or senior Saudi individuals funded al-Qaida." The BBC reported the story, but assures us it proves no high level links to the Saudi government.
The House Committee report states that Saudi Ambassador to the USA and a close friend of the Bush family, Prince Bandar, and his wife sent the 9-11 attackers thousands of dollars on several occasions; but I guess the BBC does not consider him high-level, or their reporters didn't bother to read the 28 pages. BBC readers will not know these facts because the BBC report failed to provide a link to the 28 pages.
My blog has a link to the us.gov hard evidence:
But I now see it has been scrubbed:
Bad Request – Invalid URL
HTTP Error 400. The request URL is invalid.
This can be found elsewhere on the internet. His wife wired them money directly, but not news in the USA.Wizard of Oz , says: January 7, 2019 at 8:22 am GMT
Bacevich should rewrite: After 9/11, the Israeli envoy made the most of those connections, deflecting attention away from the role The Israelis had played in the events of that day while fingering Saddam Hussein's Iraq as the true font of Islamist terrorism.
The hard evidence to substantiate the role played by Israel is overwhelming.@Carlton Meyeronebornfree , says: Website January 7, 2019 at 10:33 am GMT
Unless you are saying that Prince Bandar may have been deliberatey involved in setting up the events of 9/11 you are just waffling to get attention. And if you are saying that you are spouting obvious BS.jacques sheete , says: January 7, 2019 at 11:29 am GMT
Andrew J. Bacevich says:
" .General, can you describe this Long War of ours? What is its nature? What is it all about?
Are we winning? How can we tell?
How much longer should Americans expect it to last?
What are we up against? ."
" ..What would be the criteria for removing our remaining troops from the Iraqi, Syrian, and more general Middle Eastern conflicts? Or, for that matter, from Afghanistan, where we have been trapped for more than 17 long years of still open-ended occupation?
If the answer to that question is that only when each of these countries is a healthy pro-American democracy, and Islamist terrorism has ceased to be an "enduring" threat to the West, then the answer, as the old Bob Mankoff joke has it, is "How about never -- is never good for you?" ":
See: " The Pentagon's "Never Ending War" Scam ":
Regards, onebornfreejacques sheete , says: January 7, 2019 at 11:36 am GMT
Recall that was a Saudi. So, too, were 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001.
Gimme a break.
When I saw Bacevich's name, I wasted no time reading. However, with that one statement, his credibility just dropped to zero. Just another unthinking garbage peddler, (I'm in a gnerous mood this AM), it seems.dimples , says: January 7, 2019 at 1:54 pm GMT
To retain a respectable status, Mr. Bacevich skipped over the hard evidence that Prince Bandar directly funded the 9-11 terrorists (aka patsies) while all were in the US.
While I have no hard evidence to either confirm or deny any of that, I commend you for the likely accurate use of the term,"patsies." I highly suspect that they were little more than actors in a false flag drama and think it would be more accurate to label them "alleged terrorists." No?@Wizard of OzMLK , says: January 7, 2019 at 2:19 pm GMT
That is what Mr Meyer is saying. Bandar was deliberately involved in setting up the events of 911. Unless you are a follower of the absurd belief that 'Saudi Arabia did 911', then the most rational explanation is that he was doing it on behalf of the deep state US/Israeli plotters. The Saudis were effectively the handlers for the fake hijackers. Bandar blundered somewhat by not having enough cutouts to make US govt claims that he was innocent totally believable.Anon  Disclaimer , says: January 7, 2019 at 4:58 pm GMT
With MBS in charge, is Saudi Arabia part of the solution or part of the problem?
This is exactly the wrong question to ask. It's a testament to how thoroughly a Regime Change mindset has disastrously taken hold that even seeming critics like you are captured by it.
The Real Enemy . . . militant Salafism
Your use "enemy," let alone "The Real Enemy" is depressingly telling. Particularly for pissant jihadis who we've variously funded and armed over the years.
Saudi Arabia is in the midst of a generational shift in its ruling factions.
How did our Regime Change Libya work out? Or Obama/Hillary's Morsi/MB gambit in Egypt?
The American foreign policy establishment is highly selective in who it deems beyond the pale (e.g. assassin in chief; perpetrator of atrocities).
What does President Trump's recent nomination of retired Army General John Abizaid to become the next U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia signify? That the President is focused on stabilizing the Middle East and our position in it. It means that the Saudis must reverse their military and strategic openings to Russia/China.@Wizard of Ozjilles dykstra , says: January 7, 2019 at 5:03 pm GMT
Prince Bandar's wife did send several thousand dollars to the terrorists who arrived in Los Angeles airport, went directly to nearby Culver City and met s contact st the big Culver City mosque and then to San Diego where they stayed a while.
The Saudi's claimed that the money sent to the terrorists was just the standard diplomat's duty to help their nationals in foreign countries Most countries aren't that generous to their traveling nationals. But most countries don't have the money that Saudi does.
Her sending the money was widely reported at the time.@wagelaborer
Harold L Ickes at the end of 1944 made Saudi Arabia a USA colony.
Saudi Arabia somehow resembles Israel, without USA support it cannot exist.
But there is, still is, a big difference, the Saudi kings are just USA puppets, jews still have enormous influence in the USA.
The other difference, Saudi Arabia has oil, Israel is just a nuisance.
Jan 07, 2019 | www.unz.comJACK KRAK DECEMBER 28, 2018 4,500 WORDS
Editor's Introduction: This article is about events that took place in 2012, but anyone who follows the news closely knows that nothing has changed. This is a remarkable account by someone who had an inside look at deliberate falsifications by what was once one of the most respected names in journalism.
In May of 2012, the BBC Panorama program broadcast a documentary about "racism" in the host countries of the 2012 European soccer championship: Poland and Ukraine. Those two countries were about to stage the second biggest event in the sport after the World Cup, and legions of journalists had arrived to cover it. The purpose of the BBC program -- aired strategically one week before the opening match -- was to argue that neither country was qualified to host the tournament because of their "hateful" soccer cultures. The message: All-white countries are hotbeds of violent racism, and non-white fans and players would be in danger.
I know a lot about the Panorama program because I helped produce it. I saw what is arguably the world's most famous and trusted media organization fabricate a false, sensationalist story. Through outright distortion -- and by using only those pieces that fit its predetermined views -- the BBC "documented" the vicious attitudes of people who live in countries that are not sufficiently "diverse." The program had a scripted conclusion before a single camera was turned on.
Panorama is the BBC's flagship investigative program. It is the longest-running such production in the world, having been on the air since 1953. The closest thing to it on American television is probably 60 Minutes . Panorama enjoys a reputation for hard-hitting and serious investigative journalism.
About three months before the tournament began, a BBC journalist got in touch with me through mutual media contacts and asked me to help with the part to be filmed in Poland. He said the program would be about aspects of the football culture -- hooliganism, trouble at stadiums, etc. -- that could cause problems for players and fans alike. This topic is something of a hobby of mine, and I have followed it carefully during my time in Poland. The BBC wanted me to be a "fixer" -- the person on the ground who arranges things in advance for the production team. That meant setting up interviews, scouting filming locations, getting press passes and access to events, arranging transport, and a hundred other odds and ends. I was also expected to contribute ideas based on my knowledge.
I suspected right from the start that they wanted things that make for good television rather than a true investigation -- conflict, tension, etc. -- but I was somewhat reassured because this was the BBC. Despite my reservations, I never thought they would make the television equivalent of sensationalist trashy tabloid headlines.
The producer and a cameraman made their first trip to Poland in March 2012. They had asked me to arrange an interview with Aviram Baruchian, an Israeli who played with Polonia Warsaw. They said the interview was supposed to be about "his experience as a football player in Poland," but the fact that they asked for him by name suggested they assumed he would have horror stories about being mistreated by fans because he is Jewish.
The press officer for Polonia was very accommodating, something I found again and again when dealing with officials from football clubs. People automatically trusted the BBC and went to extraordinary lengths to give them what they wanted.
I met the production crew for the first time the day after the interview. When I asked how it went, they joked about how useless it was. I was confused by their dismissive attitude and felt a bit responsible, but they told me not to worry. I learned later from the Polonia media spokesman that Mr. Baruchian had nothing but appreciative things to say about the fans and his experience in Warsaw -- which is exactly why he isn't in the final program.
There is a curious "Jewish" angle to Polish football that is easily misunderstood. Fans chant nasty things about Jews, but, strange as it may seem, it's not accurate to call it serious anti-Semitism.
Many of the older clubs originally had or are thought to have had Jewish financial backing. This is almost certainly true of the team in Lodz -- called Widzew Łódź -- since that city had a large Jewish population before the Second World War. These origins have become a source of cheap name calling for people who seize on any excuse to trade insults. When fans chant "death to the Jews," it sounds shocking -- and it certainly is brutish -- but this is mainly a way of attacking the other team rather than Jews.
There has been a similar situation with the London football club Tottenham Hotspur, which has had Jewish owners. Fans of rival clubs started chanting about the "Jewish" team. Tottenham supporters eventually embraced this and some even call themselves the " Yid Army ." The fans of one Polish club, Cracovia, were in the same position and did the same thing, now proudly calling themselves the "Jewish Sons of Bitches." When I told the BBC about that, they weren't interested.
Needless to say, there is a lot of anti-Jewish chanting in the final Panorama program, but it is presented without explanation. It falsely makes the fans look as though they want to send Jews to the ovens.
The Star of David is now used so much in soccer graffiti that a Polish teacher I met told me that the children in his class associate it with the sport. He also had a friend from Israel, so this seemed like gold for the BBC: a poignant combination of children, the star of David, racism, and a chance to talk to another Israeli and get what they missed from Aviram Baruchian.
I set up the interview, but it was another disaster. Both the teacher and his Israeli friend said that, yes, while there certainly are boorish people, just as there are in every country, most Poles are very nice etc. Again and again, the Israeli put a positive spin on things, even when asked melodramatic questions about the Second World War. It was another "useless" interview that didn't make the final cut. I remember that when we got back to the van everyone burst out laughing about what a complete waste of time it had been.
The first actual match we went to film was Legia Warsaw vs. Polonia Warsaw. This contest had an excellent chance of including all the things that make for great television, and it was before I understood what the real focus of the program was, so I was sure the BBC crew would not be disappointed. For about five hours, they filmed an army of police in full riot gear, flares and firecrackers being thrown around the stands and onto the field, an enormous banner unfurled by the home Legia fans declaring that Warsaw belonged to them, and a reply spelled out by the small but brave contingent of visiting Polonia supporters, who held up cards to form one big reply: "FUCK LEGIA." There was a hooligan with a bullhorn on an elevated platform and countless examples of a well-known hand gesture delivered straight into the camera. A section of the stadium was burned black by a flare that set fire to a banner.
The entire contingent of Polonia fans was still in that blackened section after the match, surrounded by hundreds of security guards who would escort them out of the stadium perhaps an hour or two later. This was to minimize the chance of contact with Legia hooligans who might be waiting for them. It was easy to capture the violent atmosphere of the game, and I was confident the production team was happy. As we made our way back to the van, I asked the assistant producer if he was pleased. He made a face that said "not really," and then out of nowhere asked, "Did you hear any racist or anti-Semitic chants?" He was visibly disappointed when I said I hadn't.
The lead producer said he was more or less satisfied with the "visuals" but was disappointed with the "substance." He asked again about something I had been unable to do: get one of the more committed hooligan types to go on camera. This time he explicitly said he wanted someone involved in "right-wing politics" as well as hooliganism.
I said it wasn't easy to get inside a violent crime syndicate. The higher-ups in any hooligan organization are wanted by the police, and anyone further down is too scared to speak to the media for fear of the "leaders." Believe me, anyone who goes on camera and says he's a hooligan is either a wannabe or gets a very personal lesson in media relations from his former friends. I did the best I could, striking up awkward and even dangerous conversations on dark streets, and I visited dodgy clubs in four different cities, but I never delivered. The closest I got was a conversation with the head of one club's "supporters organization," who demanded a "fee" for "security." To its credit, the BBC refused to pay.
Time to get serious
The team went back to London, and I continued to look into leads. I began to realize that what they wanted was bananas thrown at black players, Nazi salutes from the stands, and maybe some brutal beatings to add color.
In a phone conversation with the assistant producer at the end of March, I detected a note of urgency and in April, I got an e-mail message from him that said, "Our Executive Producer, Karen Wightman [who was in charge of the entire Panorama series], wants us to film black players and their experience of racism in Poland as a priority."
The BBC had dropped all pretense about what they were after -- at least with me -- though they kept up the charade of a neutral investigation with others.
The crew decided to come see a match in the city of Łódź between ŁKS Łódź and Widzew Łódź. Like the previous game in Warsaw, this was a derby, that is to say, a contest between two clubs in the same city. Derbies typically have the most intense atmosphere, and thus an elevated chance of the kind of incident the BBC was looking for.
Widzew had two Nigerian players, Princewill Okachi and Ugo Ukah, and the BBC wanted first-hand accounts of mistreatment. Mr. Ukah was of particular interest because he had played for Queens Park Rangers in London and could compare his treatment in diverse, tolerant, multicultural England with that of all-white, wicked Poland. Also, there would be two black men on the visiting team in a contest famous for its wild fans. Everything was lined up perfectly to provide the missing "substance."
I asked the BBC specifically what they wanted me to tell the press officer of Widzew and they told me to say we were interested in Poland's preparation for the Euro 2012 tournament. Someone else on the production team, who had also been in contact with Widzew by e-mail, sent me this note:
They don't know at this stage we want to specifically talk about racism in Polish football and their [the black players'] own personal experiences of abuse, so be prepared to schmuz [sic] and impress.
"At this stage" was after the club had agreed to make the players available -- on Easter Sunday, no less, to fit our tight schedule. We were supposed to "schmuz and impress" rather than be forthright about the reason for the interview. I remember wondering how often the BBC gets access and interviews under false pretenses. To my shame, I was helping set the trap.
Łódź was the BBC's last chance to find anti-black "racism." The broadcast date for the final program was already booked and Panorama was fully committed to a headline-grabbing account of the dark, racist side of what was soon to be Europe's biggest sporting stage. But they had no racism.
It was in Łódź that the host, Chris Rogers , finally parachuted into his own program. He was the one who had sold the BBC on the idea months earlier, and the entire Panorama episode is presented as "his" investigation. Mr. Rogers made something of a name for himself in 2007 with an undercover investigation of Romania's orphanages, and he has been dining out on it ever since.
He flew in to interview the two Nigerian players and to do PTC's (pieces to camera) the following day at the match to add to footage shot in Warsaw without him. He came across as a typical media type who was good at fake sincerity and spent a little too much time on his hair.
We went to the Widzew Łódź office to interview Mr. Okachi and Mr. Ukah. Mr. Rogers started with softball questions, such as how long the players had been in Poland, where else they had played professionally, etc. He turned things up a notch by asking about the reception they had received in Poland. Both players gave positive answers. Time and again Rogers dangled the carrot and time and again no one reached for it. Suddenly Rogers put on his best journalist Serious Face, turned to Mr. Ukah, and said "Why has Polish football been hijacked by racism?"
There was nothing in the interview up to that point to justify that question. It was so unexpected that Mr. Ukah was taken aback for a moment before he was finally able to give a suitably noncommittal answer. The next few minutes consisted of both Mr. Ukah and Mr. Okachi repeatedly stating that though they had heard of things happening to other people, they had never heard or seen anything that could be interpreted as racist abuse in Poland.
This went on for a few more minutes until both players had run out of nice ways to say "no" to the same question. Mr. Rogers had no choice but to wrap it up.
"For the hundredth time: No."
The players left quickly to enjoy what was left of Easter. I distinctly remember Mr. Rogers and the producer agreeing that they had "material to work with."
If you watch the final version of the program , you will see how they "worked" with it. They made it sound as though the players were talking about horrible things that happened to them . I was in the room the whole time, paying careful attention, and those bits were taken from rambling answers they gave about things they had heard happened to others . I was amazed at how editing and voice-overs transformed the interview into something I couldn't recognize. Needless to say, those were the only parts of the interview that were used.
I heard it. Trust me. Let's go.
The next day was the match. After filming the police using water cannons on fans, we went inside the stadium. We set up a camera behind one of the goals and a microphone at midfield in front the home fans. Mr. Rogers instructed me to be on the lookout for "anything good," and by then I knew what he meant. He also told me to keep an eye on the Nigerian players and look for any nastiness from the crowd. He constantly disappeared to sneak cigarettes and text his friends in England. He wasn't even there for the kickoff. When he finally reappeared he asked if I had seen or heard anything useful. When I said I hadn't, he disappeared again.
About 30 minutes in to the first half, we were still waiting for "something good," and Mr. Rogers was visibly anxious. He paced back and forth, checking his phone more than he watched the crowd or the match. Once, just to break the silence between us as we stood on the sidelines or maybe to vent his frustration, he actually said out loud "Come on! Sing some Jewish songs!"
At halftime, the five of us who were there got together to trade notes and suggestions, and we decided to switch places to maybe improve our "luck." I was with the producer and one cameraman; the other cameraman was high above the crowd on the opposite stand. Chris Rogers was . . . somewhere.
The second half kicked off and we went back to work. There was plenty of thuggishness in the stands -- you see a lot of it in the final version -- but still not what they wanted. There was a palpable feeling of frustration and hopelessness as another 30 or so minutes passed.
That's when Chris Rogers walked up and said he had heard monkey sounds coming from the crowd. No one knew quite what to say, but this certainly wasn't greeted with the kind of relief and interest you would have expected. For a moment it seemed as though we were just waiting for someone to say "Um . . . really?" but we just waited for Mr. Rogers to tell us exactly what happened. All he said was that the microphone at midfield had probably picked it up, and he told the producer to get ready to do a PTC about it. Thirty second later he was in Serious Face mode, intoning that he had just heard monkey sounds directed at a black player. I kept waiting for him to tell our cameramen what part of the stands the sounds came from so they could zoom in on it. Surely he wanted to watch those fans in the hopes that they would do it again, this time on camera?
No. Chris Rogers made no effort to get visual material for what was to be a key moment in a television program. And it wasn't as if we were in a massive stadium with 60,000 people, where it would be hard to pinpoint where sounds came from. The photo below is of the stadium, and the picture captures about 80 percent of the length of the stand from which the monkey sounds allegedly came. The banner says "This is how we have fun in Łódź." Not one of the BBC crew said, "OK, Chris, where should we look?"
The recording from the microphone is in the final version of the program, and I challenge anyone to detect what Chris Rogers claims to have heard. You might be at a loss to describe exactly what the noise is, but "monkey sounds" is way, way down on the list of possibilities.
In the broadcast version, this part of the recording is played over a shot they had taken earlier in the match of Ugo Ukah attacking the ball. However, the audio is from a microphone planted at the edge of the field. When they went back and "found" those sounds, they had no idea what was going on in the match at that moment. But in the program, the sounds start the moment Mr. Ukah is on the ball. The BBC took the audio from one moment and played it over a video from another moment. I would expect that from the North Korean press, not the BBC.
When we packed up to leave, we had to walk through the part of the stadium where the post-match press conference was to be held. It hadn't started, but print and video journalists were waiting. The BBC producer saw this, and asked Mr. Rogers if we should stop and ask about what he had heard at the match. What more perfect, made-for-television scene could there be? He could have walked into the after-match press conference and announced dramatically, "I'm Chris Rogers from the BBC and I want to know how it's possible that a black player was racially abused in a country that will be hosting the European Championships." That would be the dramatic moment they were looking for. But no, Mr. Rogers said we needn't waste the time. He wanted to go back to the hotel for dinner. He did not speak with Ugo Ukah after the match or the following day while we were still in Lodz.
Mr. Ukah never said anything about hearing monkey noises. No player from either team ever did. Nor did any of the many journalists from the Polish media, nor did a German television crew that was there.
I cannot say what Chris Rogers did or did not hear. However, I do know that in a stadium of around 5,000 people the only person who claims to have heard monkey sounds was the one person who flew to Poland for three days with the sole purpose of finding "racism."
The final version of the program stretches the truth in other ways. For example, Mr. Rogers says he has spent months on location studying local football culture, whereas he spent just a few days in the country. There is also a scene in which a British "anti-racist" named Nick Lowles is shown scanning the crowd with binoculars, looking for "hate." The voiceover says that "he has flown out to see what British fans can expect in Poland," and he obligingly gives an interview. The program makes it look as though the camera crew just stumbled onto him in the stands. In fact, the BBC flew him in just for that scene.
The team certainly didn't mind spending money. I was with the producer when he got a message from London telling him that they were well over budget. He said they had spent around £150,000 pounds (about $230,000). They stayed in expensive hotels and never thought about costs. I was amazed by how much they spent in restaurants and hotel bars. Remember: This is the BBC, to which mandatory payments of £150 pounds a year must be made if you own a television set in Britain. It is a criminal offense not to pay.
Just days before the broadcast, the BBC showed some of the footage to Sol Campbell, son of Jamaican immigrants and former captain of the English national football team. They happily filmed him claiming -- predictably -- to be shocked. He said it was enough to convince him not to go to the tournament and to warn other non-whites not to go.
This was brilliant publicity for Panorama . Polish and Ukrainian media picked up Mr. Campbell's comments, which pushed "racism" to the forefront of any British discussion of the tournament. The program cast a pall over the tournament before the first match was even played, and put a small army of journalists on alert, scanning the stands for "hate."
I watched the show when it first aired at the end of May. I had been dreading it, but my dread turned to shock when I heard what the episode was called: "Stadiums of Hate ." They had come up with a suitably provocative title for their contrived, deliberately misleading fairy tale about a football culture permeated with vile racism.
The program has disappeared from YouTube; it appears to be available only this much less trafficked site . But when it was broadcast, it made national headlines in Poland. The country's biggest television channel took the extraordinary step of broadcasting it just days later, dubbed in Polish.
Many Poles were outraged at what they recognized as a vicious smear. It is worth noting that within a week or so, every single person who appeared on camera in the Polish part of the program claimed publicly to have been misrepresented. This includes Jonathan Ornstein, the director of the Jewish Community Center of Krakow. I was present for the interview with him, and he gave thoughtful answers to all of Chris Rogers' questions, always emphasizing that ugly graffiti and idiots making trouble at stadiums do not represent larger Polish attitudes. In the program, however, he seems to be leading the charge against horrible, hateful, anti-Semitic Poland. Mr. Ornstein told me personally how disgusted he was by how his interview was cut apart and stitched back together.
Even Jacek Purski, director of Never Again , an organization dedicated to monitoring racism in Poland, says the program was one-sided . When a "watchdog" group calls a television program "one-sided," you can be sure it was outrageous.
The Polish government demanded a clarification from the BBC, and even the foreign minister complained. Newspapers throughout Europe expressed skepticism, and reader comments left online were overwhelmingly outraged. The BBC took the very unusual step of publicly responding to criticism .
Then the BBC got a huge break from Barack Obama, of all people. During a ceremony at the White House honoring someone who had survived Auschwitz, Mr. Obama referred to it as a "Polish death camp" rather than a Nazi death camp in occupied Poland. Angry demands for an apology from the US government pushed "Stadiums of Hate" off the front page. After that, the relentless media cycle quickly relegated the whole affair to yesterday's news.
Today, criticism of the "Stadiums of Hate" episode takes up more space on the Wikipedia page for Panorama than any other episode in its history. As the doubts and questions mounted, the BBC seems to have taken pains to get copies off the internet. There are any number of other full episodes of Panorama on YouTube , but not this one.
I was the least important man on the production crew and had no editorial influence, but I still felt responsible the episode that millions of people ultimately watched. At the height of the furor I got in touch with the Polish and foreign press. Their reaction was always the same: intense initial interest that quickly faded after a better understanding of what was involved. The explanation I heard over and over was that attacking a program that attacked racism looks like you're defending racism.
One editor of a major UK newspaper told me it was hard to attack Panorama without a smoking gun. When I asked for an example, he said one would be someone who admitted he was paid by the BBC to pretend to be a "racist" hooligan. The man seemed jaded and not at all surprised by what I told him; he also said he simply could not risk coming across as defending "racism."
As time goes by, doubts about the program's credibility fade. All anyone will remember is that the great Chris Rogers exposed horrible racists in Poland and Ukraine. You will have to dig pretty deep to get the real story. That is the power of the biggest name in news.
Mr. Krak does not expect to get any more work from the BBC.
Tyrion 2 , says: January 7, 2019 at 8:08 am GMTPhilip Smeeton , says: January 7, 2019 at 9:32 am GMT
The documentary was called Stadiums of Hate. I think the quote below, by itself, is enough to rename it a Documentary of Hate.
As an American-born Jew living happily and safely in Poland and working diligently to build Jewish life in that country, I am furious at the way the BBC has exploited me as a source. The organization used me and others to manipulate the serious subject of anti-Semitism for its own sensationalist agenda; in doing so, the BBC has insulted all Polish people and done a disservice to the growing, thriving Jewish community of Poland.
I have reason to believe the BBC similarly misrepresented the black African football players it used as sources in the same programme.
Moreover, the BBC knowingly cheated its own audience – the British people – by concocting a false horror story about Poland. In doing so, the BBC has spread fear, ignorance, prejudice and hatred.
I would urge the BBC to become more aware of its own negative stereotyping of Poles, before it goes pointing the finger of judgment.Simon Tugmutton , says: January 7, 2019 at 9:33 am GMT
Only causing physical harm to someone that you hate could be termed a hate crime. Hating someone or something and saying so is not a crime. Hate is a natural emotion and reaction to something that is unacceptable. Islam and what it teaches is unacceptable, therefore I hate Islam and I hate the followers of Islam that commit hate-crimes.jilles dykstra , says: January 7, 2019 at 10:23 am GMT
The same dishonesty taints nearly everything the BBC puts out. Even drama is hijacked to carry the globalist message. Whatever is devoid of politics is mindless pap about baking or dance, etc., to keep the proletariat in a state of goodthink docility.
The author errs when he says
mandatory payments of £150 pounds a year must be made if you own a television set in Britain
You need only buy a TV 'licence' if you watch TV as it is broadcast , on any equipment belonging to you. Licences are issued to households; a 'household' may also comprise a student's room or a communal area such as is found in retirement homes. The BBC, through agents, maintains a spotty database of every address in the UK. Any unlicensed address is targeted with letters threatening criminal prosecution. It is legal to own a set if you just use it for watching DVDs or videos from the net.
There are plenty of ways to thwart the BBC's bagmen, the simplest, healthiest and most time-efficient being to stop watching television of any description. I did this in 2005. Since then I have withheld from them the inflation-adjusted equivalent of about £2,000, plus interest, been blessed with many hours of more interesting, lucrative and enjoyable pursuits, and saved myself innumerable episodes of anger and disgust. Moreover I have no idea who any of these 'celebrities' are who grace the tabloids, and have been spared the pontifications of the assorted arseholes and big-heads whose cretinous and toxic opinions the BBC daily spews on the British public and, indeed, on the hapless citizens of the rest of the globe via a propaganda outlet called the BBC World Service.
I commend going TV-free to all. It does wonders for the capacity to think clearly, not to mention the blood-pressure.Stan d Mute , says: January 7, 2019 at 10:45 am GMT
BBC's neutrality ended when the BBC exposed Tony B-liar's lies about Saddam's 45 minutes WMD's.
The director was fired, replaced by a jew.
As to Polish antisemitism, it existed, still existed around 1967 when Polish jews were given the opportunity to leave. And of course, since Israel tries to make Poland responsible for a part of the holocaust, the gas chamber camps were on Polish territory, Poland responds, they have no desire whatsoever to be the next victim of the holocaust industry.
As to the why of Polish anti-Semitism, suppose it was in Poland more or less the same as in Lithuania in the thirties, Jews controlling the economy. Of course also Polish Catholicism may have played a role. Jews responsible for the death of the son of god.
Descriptions of Polish antisemitism one finds in
Jan T. Gross, 'Neighbours, The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland, 1941', 2003, London
Bogdan Musial, ´Sowjetische Partisanen 1941 – 1944, Mythos und Wirklichkeit', Paderborn 2009
The book describes antisemitism among all E European resistance fighters. Jews were not or hardly allowed among these resistance fighters.
André Schwartz-Bart, 'Le Dernier des Justes', 1959, 1980 Paris seems to have been to some extent autobiographical, with as country of origin Poland.
Described is on the one hand how jews resisted assimilation, wanted to remain jews, even, or especially, in clothing, on the other hand how non jews did not accept jews, even trying to prevent they visited the synagogue, or jewish children being insulted in schools.
As nearly always, one wonders why the antagonism., no explanation.forgottenpseudonym , says: January 7, 2019 at 10:54 am GMT
The program had a scripted conclusion before a single camera was turned on.
This seems self-evident and yet it's rarely or never said. Cameras and word processors don't operate autonomously. Somebody begins with a story, a narrative, they wish to convey. They then point their camera at things they choose, or cherrypick, to illustrate their narrative. Afterwards, they carefully edit, or censor, what they've recorded making sure that only that most sympathetic to their narrative is shown. It is ALL propaganda. And it is ubiquitous.
It is up to the viewer or reader to filter the information presented, to sift through it for specks of unbiased Truth that may have somehow survived their unlikely journey past the narrative writer, his editors, their advertisers and lawyers, to the end product. Thus we see a "News Report" about "a fight that broke out among a group of youths" where the amateur video shows us a pack of feral young negroes, without provocation, attacks a lone white and after knocking him unconscious rifles through his pockets removing his phone and wallet before running off in jubilation.
And yet, despite this being shown to us time and again, incessantly, most people still trust their "News" sources!
And, as Ron Unz has so often shown us on this very site, History is nothing more than yesterday's "News."
The open question, really, is whether or not it is even possible to obtain information assembled and presented by an organization that does not fit the paradigm described above. And, considering the amount of time and cognition required for one to even attempt to find Truth in media, what are the chances that an average viewer or reader (bear in mind illiteracy rates) of average intelligence (bear in mind the left side of the bell curve) can obtain anything resembling a sense of Reality on which he may inform his opinions and beliefs? How often do we hear older people say things like, "I remember when you used to be able to get straight News from Walter Cronkite.." oblivious to the Truth above?Heros , says: January 7, 2019 at 10:56 am GMT
The BBC twists the truth!? Having also worked in the UK tv industry, the only proper response is "do bears etc?" But thank you, Mr Krak, for having recorded your experiences.Bill Jones , says: January 7, 2019 at 11:03 am GMT
The truth is that the Cultural Marxism movement was about the take over of all institutions of white european culture and turning them against white europeans.
Professional sports was subverted almost a century ago. The racist anti-German propaganda of WWI and WWII was already strongly "semitic". The ascendence of Hollywood really marks the heeb takeover of American entertainment industry and the beach head for the conquest of the entire culture.
So as we enter 2019, I cannot think of one aspect of western European culture that is not heavily influenced by heebs, under their control or outright under their ownership. Even the alt-right "nazi's" are really just a bunch of jew cut-outs like Breitbard, Savage and Shapiro. Then there are all the crypto jews like Alex Jones or even Jordan Peterson. Many white Europeans are talmudists without having even a drop of jewish blood.
The BBC has been a Tavistock propaganda organ since its inception. After the Armistice and Versailles in 1919, the masonic-zionist propaganda war against the planet never stopped. Every new technology was first weaponized for use in mind control before release to the general population. Even the internet itself was also conceived at Darpa as a mind control tool and is closely linked to the trans-humanist and cultural marxist agenda.
So if you want to successfully attack the BBC, you also have to attack MI5, MI6, CIA, NSA, MIC, the entire 5 eyes spy network, the Queen of England, the Catholic Church, the US deep state, Israel, and ultimately their jewish god who in reality is Satan.
So to me it seems that obsessing about football hooligans is rather pointless, any movement to try to deal with any of the symptoms of our take over will quickly be subsumed. Like the occupy movement. Or the alt-right. Or the yellow-vests.
To kill this snake you will have to cut off its head.
The Grauniad is in the same business. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/dec/09/raheem-sterling-newspapers-fuelling-racism-alleged-abuse-chelsea
Jan 04, 2019 | www.unz.com
Cyrano , says: January 4, 2019 at 7:22 am GMTThere is no political left in US. There are only 2 right wing parties and it's only a matter of degrees. Policies define a party, not what they call themselves. You can call yourself whatever you want. It's not like it's against the Geneva convention or something.
Examples of mismatch between the official name and reality are: North Korea calling itself DPRK – where D stands for democracy and yet they have never had elections, not that it matters, the whole thing about "democracy" is a sham anyway. Also East Germany used to call themselves DDR – which of course stands for Deutsche Demokratische Republikische (I couldn't ressist making fun of the German language). Anyway, they called themselves"Democratic" with no elections ever taking place there.
Same thing with the Democratic party in US. Calling yourself Democratic doesn't make you a left wing automatically. After all, the Nazis used to call themselves "Socialists", which would imply leftist orientation, yet they were as far right as you can get.
In order for a party to qualify as left wing, they have to look after the interests of the working class. US has no such party, they probably never did. So, both Democrats and Republicans are right wing, but not as far right as the Nazis used to be. Yet, the Nazis were way smarter because they saw foreigners as the main threat to their country. Both domestic born and foreign born foreigners.
The 2 right wing US parties see their native born population as their main threat. Their "instincts" tell them that even after decades long propaganda, they haven't succeeded in completely lobotomizing the native born citizens, and that there is still some "revolutionary" potential left in them, who might one day reach for their pockets.
That's where the degeneracy of the elites comes into clear focus. Seeing the working class as a potential threat to them and their pockets. When it's actually the opposite. The degenerate elites are a threat to the working class (and frankly to themselves, but they are too degenerate to see that). They are threat because they off-shored millions of jobs of the working class, and if that wasn't enough, they imported millions of third world individuals to fill in jobs that are not even there anymore.
Who is a threat to whom? Multiculturalism is not a left wing policy. It's a fascist policy. The only difference is that the intended victims are domestic, rather than foreign. It's inward oriented fascism. The only hope for US is that under Trump, the republicans are starting to flip-flop between seeing the Americans and foreigners as a threat. Where the other right wing party – the "Democrats" are firm in their belief that the Americans are the threat.
I guess it's just a matter of perspective – who is Nazi to whom. The democrats think that the deplorables are potential Nazis towards the foreigners, while actually it's them – the Democrats that are currently Nazis towards the "deplorables".
Jan 04, 2019 | economistsview.typepad.com
Fred C. Dobbs , December 31, 2018 at 08:42 PM(Previous comments from me that Pentagon officersilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , January 02, 2019 at 01:30 PM
are not *necessarily* militarists not withstanding...)
Military Deletes New Year's Eve Tweet Saying It's
'Ready to Drop Something' https://nyti.ms/2RvcZwi
NYT - Matt Stevens and Thomas Gibbons-Neff - Dec. 31, 2018
The unified command responsible for the United States' nuclear strike capabilities drew attention on Monday when it tweeted a message and video that threatened the possibility of dropping a bomb.
In the tweet, which was posted as Americans prepared to celebrate New Year's Eve and was deleted about three hours later, the United States Strategic Command said the nation was "ready to drop something." A video that was part of the tweet showed a B-2 stealth bomber soaring across the sky before releasing two GPS-guided bombs that exploded into a giant ball of fire after hitting the ground below.
In the video, which was viewed more than 120,000 times, pulsing music beats in the background as the words "STEALTH," "READY" and "LETHAL" flash across the screen in white block letters.
"#TimesSquare tradition rings in the #NewYear by dropping the big ball...if ever needed, we are #ready to drop something much, much bigger," the tweet said, adding the hashtags: "#Deterrence #Assurance #CombatReadyForce #PeaceIsOurProfession." ...
A spokeswoman for the Strategic Command said the post "was part of our Year in Review series meant to feature our command priorities: strategic deterrence, decisive response and combat-ready force."
"It was a repost from earlier in the year, dropping a pair of conventional Massive Ordnance Penetrators at a test range in the United States," she said in a statement that did not elaborate.
About 30 minutes after the statement was issued, Stratcom apologized on Twitter, saying that its "previous NYE tweet was in poor taste & does not reflect our values."
"We are dedicated to the security of America & allies," the new tweet added. ...
Test run on twitter sort of likely it will not be run during the super bowl.Fred C. Dobbs said in reply to ilsm... , January 03, 2019 at 06:39 AM
Why not brag: the B-2 cost $2B, and is broke 56% of the time. Somewhere around $300K per flying hour.
The clip shows it dropping bombs that cost about $3M a piece, and are so complex they fail often.
Clip tweeted was an ad for the B-21 which will look just like B-2 and cost 70% more.
"Dedicated" to the security of the trough!The new Boeing 'flying fortress'Fred C. Dobbs said in reply to Fred C. Dobbs... , January 03, 2019 at 06:42 AM
should be called the B-2.1, but
I guess they don't do that, eh?Anyway, the Boeing B-2.1 is
actually from Northrup-Grumman.
Jan 04, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Gareth Porter, in an article published in the American Conservative, definitively shows that Trump's Dec. 19 announcement of the US withdrawal from Syria was, in fact, the end of a fight of at least a year, between Trump on the one side and his national security team, lead by Mattis and Dunford on the other. Published accounts of the policy process over the past year "show that senior national security officials and self-interested institutions have been playing a complicated political game for months aimed at keeping Trump from wavering on our indefinite presence on the ground in Syria ," Porter writes. "The entire episode thus represents a new variant of a familiar pattern dating back to Vietnam in which national security advisors put pressure on reluctant presidents to go along with existing or proposed military deployments in a war zone . The difference here is that Trump, by publicly choosing a different policy, has blown up their transparent schemes and offered the country a new course, one that does not involve a permanent war state."
Porter cites an April 2018 Associated Press account of an NSC meeting at which Trump's impatience with his national security team boiled over. At that meeting, Trump ordered them unequivocally to accept a fundamentally different Syria deployment policy. Instead, they framed the options as a binary choice -- either an immediate pullout or an indefinite presence in order to ensure the complete and permanent defeat of Islamic State. Mattis and Dunford, Porter continues, were consciously exploiting Trump's own defensiveness about a timeline–he had attacked Obama during the 2016 campaign for imposing a timeline in Afghanistan–"to press ahead with their own strategy unless and until Trump publicly called them on it."
"The Syria withdrawal affair is a dramatic illustration of the fundamental quandary of the Trump presidency in regard to ending the state of permanent war that previous administrations created. Although a solid majority of Americans want to rein in U.S. military deployments in the Middle East and Africa, Trump's national security team is committed to doing the opposite, " Porter concludes. "Trump is now well aware that it is virtually impossible to carry out the foreign policy that he wants without advisors who are committed to the same objective. That means that he must find people who have remained outside the system during the permanent war years while being highly critical of its whole ideology and culture. If he can fill key positions with truly dissident figures, the last two years of this term in office could decisively clip the wings of the bureaucrats and generals who have created the permanent war state we find ourselves in today."
Trump has called the bluff of the permanent warfare crowd and now has his decision, but the possibility of sabotage by that crowd's assets inside the Pentagon cannot yet be discounted. This is indicated by an exclusive Reuters report claiming that planners at the Pentagon are proposing that the YPG be allowed to keep the heavy weapons that the US has supplied it with, though Reuters' sources stress that the planning is still at an early stage and nothing's been decided yet. And yet, there must be a reason why this is being reported now. It obviously would throw a monkey wrench in the arrangements that Trump is trying to make with Erdogan to keep eastern Syria stable in the wake of the US withdrawal. It would also represent a back down from US promises made earlier to the Turks to retrieve the weapons and Erdogan would throw a fit. Certainly, the idea that the U.S. military can retrieve all of the weapons that it handed over is a dubious one, at best , and there are legitimate questions about whether or not Turkish troops could really operate in the Middle Euphrates valley near the Iraqi border, hundreds of kilometers from the Turkish border.
But the key to the proposal is this: The recommendation "is a rejection of Trump's policy to withdraw from Syria," a person familiar with the discussions told Reuters. So, really, it is an attempt at sabotage.
Barbara Ann , 6 days agoVery interesting. It is understandable that Trump does not read briefings, if all he is fed is a variety of permanent war options at odds with his strategic goals. The Syrian war that matters is clearly now being fought within the USG and Trump has won the latest battle. As Porter says, this war will only be won if Trump can successfully replace key Borg positions with people of his own.Pat Lang Mod -> Barbara Ann , 6 days ago
If the pullout can be completed without being sabotaged, Russia ought to be able to seamlessly step in guarantor of peace - and the SAG and Iraq between then can finish IS. The permanent war crowd with then just have to vent their frustrations elsewhere. A good outcome for all.He was IMO suckered into taking a lot of these people because he didn't know anyone in government. His problem will be to find people not already working for the other side.Walrus , 5 days agoTrump had lunch with Lindsay Graham who has allegedly said that Trump is "reconsidering ". The Neocons haven't given up..John Waddell , 5 days agoTaras77 , 5 days ago"that the YPG be allowed to keep the heavy weapons that the US has supplied it with"
I would love to find out what those "heavy weapons" were exactly. I have been putting up comments all over the place saying that as far as I have been able to find out the US has not supplied anything with a barrel bigger than an 80mm mortar or a vehicle heavier than a MRAP. Up to now no-one has contradicted me. The reason the US did this was precisely this situation, not to upset the Turks if gear was left behind.
Am I wrong? Is this equipment now regarded as "heavy weapons"?I have looked as to where I might post my comment on this important site; this article seems to be the best fit for my comment on another site about the retirement of Gen Kelly and a link to an interview with Gen Kelly (I hope Col Lang will be lenient in allowing a secondary posting of my comment from another site):English Outsider -> Taras77 , 3 days ago
My original comment follows:
On the subject of trump this AM, zerohedge has a summary of an interview with Gen Kelly which occurred just prior to his departure-to say that it was "bone crushing hard" probably is a long way from describing the difficulty of that Chief of Staff job in a chaotic white house working for a chaotic individual.
I have just a ton of respect for Gen Kelly-even in this totally mucked up country with all of its unending flustercucks, there are individuals still willing to step up and try, emphasis on try, to restore some sanity to the situations. God speed, Gen Kelly!!
https://www.zerohedge.com/n...Should he not have resigned earlier, or even not taken the job, if he was so opposed to his boss's policy?Stumpy , 6 days agoTwo factors not mentioned are the SAA and support from Russia. Turkey may be somewhat off the hook for a deep thrust if Syrian forces move in and convince the YPG to stand down, by force or otherwise. As Col. Lang points out, starving the YPG of ammunition is a practical approach. If the PMU links up with Syrian forces to secure the eastern border areas, the Kurdish interests should be balanced out. My point being that the so-called vacuum left for Iran to fill is an overplayed shadow puppet.
Jan 04, 2019 | theintercept.com
Veteran NBC/MSNBC Journalist Blasts the Network for Being Captive to the National Security State and Reflexively Pro-War to Stop Trump
A VETERAN national security journalist with NBC News and MSNBC blasted the networks in a Monday email for becoming captive and subservient to the national security state, reflexively pro-war in the name of stopping President Donald Trump, and now the prime propaganda instrument of the War Machine's promotion of militarism and imperialism.
As a result of NBC/MSNBC's all-consuming militarism, he said, "the national security establishment not only hasn't missed a beat but indeed has gained dangerous strength" and "is ever more autonomous and practically impervious to criticism."
The NBC/MSNBC reporter, William Arkin, is a longtime prominent war and military reporter, perhaps best known for his groundbreaking, three-part Washington Post series in 2010, co-reported with two-time Pulitzer winner Dana Priest, on how sprawling, unaccountable, and omnipotent the national security state has become in the post-9/11 era. When that three-part investigative series, titled "Top Secret America," was published, I hailed it as one of the most important pieces of reporting of the war on terror, because while "we chirp endlessly about the Congress, the White House, the Supreme Court, the Democrats and Republicans, this is the Real U.S. Government: functioning in total darkness, beyond elections and parties, so secret, vast and powerful that it evades the control or knowledge of any one person or even any organization."
Arkin has worked with NBC and MSNBC over the years and continuously since 2016. But yesterday, he announced that he was leaving the network in a long, emphatic email denouncing the networks for their superficial and reactionary coverage of national security, for becoming fixated on trivial Trump outbursts of the day to chase profit and ratings, and -- most incriminating of all -- for becoming the central propaganda arm of the CIA, the Pentagon, and the FBI in the name of #Resistance, thus inculcating an entire new generation of liberals, paying attention to politics for the first time in the Trump era, to "lionize" those agencies and their policies of imperialism and militarism.
That MSNBC and NBC have become Security State Central has been obvious for quite some time. The network consists of little more than former CIA, NSA, and Pentagon officials as news "analysts"; ex-Bush-Cheney national security and communications officials as hosts and commentators; and the most extremists pro-war neocons constantly bashing Trump (and critics of Democrats generally) from the right, using the Cheney-Rove playbook on which they built their careers to accuse Democratic Party critics and enemies of being insufficiently patriotic, traitors for America's official enemies , and abandoning America's hegemonic role in the world.
MSNBC's star national security reporter Ken Dilanian was widely mocked by media outlets for years for being an uncritical CIA stenographer before he became a beloved NBC/MSNBC reporter (where his mindless servitude to his CIA masters has produced some of the network's most humiliating debacles ). The cable network's key anchor, Rachel Maddow, once wrote a book on the evils of endless wars without congressional authorization, but now routinely depicts anyone who wants to end those illegal wars as reckless weaklings and traitors .
Some of the most beloved and frequently featured MSNBC commentators are the most bloodthirsty pro-war militarists from the war on terror: David Frum, Jennifer Rubin, Ralph Peters, and Bill Kristol (who was just giddily and affectionately celebrated with a playful nickname bestowed on him: "Lil Bill"). In early 2018, NBC hired former CIA chief John Brennan to serve as a "senior national security and intelligence analyst," where the rendition and torture advocate joined -- as Politico's Jack Shafer noted -- a long litany of former security state officials at the network, including "Chuck Rosenberg, former acting DEA administrator, chief of staff for FBI Director James B. Comey, and counselor to former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III; Frank Figliuzzi, former chief of FBI counterintelligence; Juan Zarate, deputy national security adviser under Bush."
As Shafer noted, filling your news and analyst slots with former security state officials as MSNBC and NBC have done is tantamount to becoming state TV, since "their first loyalty -- and this is no slam -- is to the agency from which they hail." As he put it: "Imagine a TV network covering the auto industry through the eyes of dozens of paid former auto executives and you begin to appreciate the current peculiarities."
All of this led Arkin to publish a remarkable denunciation of NBC and MSNBC in the form of an email he sent to various outlets, including The Intercept. Its key passages are scathing and unflinching in their depiction of those networks as pro-war propaganda outlets that exist to do little more than amplify and serve the security state agencies most devoted to opposing Trump, including their mindless opposition to Trump's attempts (with whatever motives) to roll back some of the excesses of imperialism, aggression, and U.S. involvement in endless war, as well as to sacrifice all journalistic standards and skepticism about generals and the U.S war machine if doing so advances their monomaniacal mission of denouncing Trump. As Arkin wrote (emphasis added):
My expertise, though seeming to be all the more central to the challenges and dangers we face, also seems to be less valued at the moment. And I find myself completely out of synch with the network, being neither a day-to-day reporter nor interested in the Trump circus.
To me there is also a larger problem: though they produce nothing that resembles actual safety and security, the national security leaders and generals we have are allowed to do their thing unmolested . Despite being at "war," no great wartime leaders or visionaries are emerging. There is not a soul in Washington who can say that they have won or stopped any conflict. And though there might be the beloved perfumed princes in the form of the Petraeus' and Wes Clarks', or the so-called warrior monks like Mattis and McMaster, we've had more than a generation of national security leaders who sadly and fraudulently have done little of consequence. And yet we (and others) embrace them, even the highly partisan formers who masquerade as "analysts". We do so ignoring the empirical truth of what they have wrought: There is not one county in the Middle East that is safer today than it was 18 years ago. Indeed the world becomes ever more polarized and dangerous.
Windrem again convinced me to return to NBC to join the new investigative unit in the early days of the 2016 presidential campaign. I thought that the mission was to break through the machine of perpetual war acceptance and conventional wisdom to challenge Hillary Clinton's hawkishness. It was also an interesting moment at NBC because everyone was looking over their shoulder at Vice and other upstarts creeping up on the mainstream. But then Trump got elected and Investigations got sucked into the tweeting vortex, increasingly lost in a directionless adrenaline rush, the national security and political version of leading the broadcast with every snow storm. And I would assert that in many ways NBC just began emulating the national security state itself – busy and profitable. No wars won but the ball is kept in play.
I'd argue that under Trump, the national security establishment not only hasn't missed a beat but indeed has gained dangerous strength. Now it is ever more autonomous and practically impervious to criticism. I'd also argue, ever so gingerly, that NBC has become somewhat lost in its own verve, proxies of boring moderation and conventional wisdom, defender of the government against Trump, cheerleader for open and subtle threat mongering, in love with procedure and protocol over all else (including results). I accept that there's a lot to report here, but I'm more worried about how much we are missing. Hence my desire to take a step back and think why so little changes with regard to America's wars.
In our day-to-day whirlwind and hostage status as prisoners of Donald Trump, I think – like everyone else does – that we miss so much. People who don't understand the medium, or the pressures, loudly opine that it's corporate control or even worse, that it's partisan. Sometimes I quip in response to friends on the outside (and to government sources) that if they mean by the word partisan that it is New Yorkers and Washingtonians against the rest of the country then they are right.
For me I realized how out of step I was when I looked at Trump's various bumbling intuitions: his desire to improve relations with Russia, to denuclearize North Korea, to get out of the Middle East, to question why we are fighting in Africa, even in his attacks on the intelligence community and the FBI. Of course he is an ignorant and incompetent impostor. And yet I'm alarmed at how quick NBC is to mechanically argue the contrary, to be in favor of policies that just spell more conflict and more war. Really? We shouldn't get out Syria? We shouldn't go for the bold move of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula? Even on Russia, though we should be concerned about the brittleness of our democracy that it is so vulnerable to manipulation, do we really yearn for the Cold War? And don't even get me started with the FBI: What? We now lionize this historically destructive institution?
That an entire generation of Democrats paying attention to politics for the first time is being instilled with formerly right-wing Cold Warrior values of jingoism, über-patriotism, reverence for security state agencies and prosecutors, a reckless use of the "traitor" accusation to smear one's enemies, and a belief that neoconservatives embody moral rectitude and foreign policy expertise has long been obvious and deeply disturbing. These toxins will endure far beyond Trump, particularly given the now full-scale unity between the Democratic establishment and neocons .
photosymbiosis1 hour ago
Just remembered something about Arkin. This book: Code Names: Deciphering U.S. Military Plans, Programs and Operations in the 9/11 World January 25, 2005 by William M. Arkin https://books.google.com/books/about/Code_Names.html?id=KXLfAAAAMAAJ In particular there was this one exercise called Vigilant Guardian, run by NORAD, simulating terrorist attacks by hijackers which, curiously enough, happened to be in operation on the very day the Saudi hijackers were actually conducting such attacks:NORAD's next Vigilant Guardian exercise, in 2001, will actually be several days underway on 9/11 (see (6:30 a.m.) September 11, 2001). It will include a number of scenarios based around plane hijackings, with the fictitious hijackers targeting New York in at least one of those scenarios (see September 6, 2001, September 9, 2001, September 10, 2001, and (9:40 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [9/11 COMMISSION, 2004; VANITY FAIR, 8/1/2006]
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=vigilant_guardian However, what's interesting from Arkin's book, as I recall, is that this operation name was then reused in Afghanistan (a very rare practice, apparently, to reuse an operation name, but perhaps if you wanted to hide the original program, etc...), in 2003 or so - here's a NYT article about Vigilant Guardian in Afghanistan: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/20/magazine/where-the-enemy-is-everywhere-and-nowhere.html It's just one of many stories that makes one wonder exactly how much pre-warning the Bush Administration had about the 9/11 attacks, and whether there was a deliberate decision to allow the hijackers to seize control of the planes without any interference. It did save the Bush presidency, it did open the door to the Iraq invasion, and the Saudi intelligence services were involved with helping the hijackers. All very suspicious, really. Point being, Arkin's book is one of the few sources that lay out all those covert/overt program names, and is a real treasure for anyone interested in the history of that era.
bobhope1: 2 hours agoDysnomia 3 hours ago
This has been clearly obvious for several years. Goebbels would be proud.open_hearted_jade 2 hours ago
If there were some kind of political realignment (similar to the realignment that took place in the 60s and 70s where racist white Democrats became racist white Republicans) where neoconservatives and warmongers become Democrats, and the Republican Party becomes the party of, surely not peace, but at least moderation in foreign military intervention, that might not be too bad, or at least not too much worse than the earlier post-9/11 status quo.
But I'm afraid this shift in discourse heralds something worse than that. So-called "liberal" media's embrace of neoconservatism and imperialism is likely to have the effect of narrowing the Overton window on issues of war and peace, making genuine anti-war positions even more unthinkable and beyond the pale. There will increasingly be no place for public anti-war discourse.
The single greatest threat to human freedom in the world today is the U.S. national security state. Inculcating public reverence for the state is perhaps the most dangerous thing that a media organization could do.Tom_Collins 2 hours ago ( Edited )
Neoliberal media has always embraced boundary transgression, always embraced invasiveness, always embraced adventurism, always embraced war.
... ... ...AtheistInChief 3 hours ago
...America as the single biggest threat to world peace, right? https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/08/07/polls-us-greatest-threat-to-peace-world-today.htmlLawrence_Hill 4 hours ago ( Edited )
Fox is a racist bully. MSNBC is poison, & CNN is a joke. If nothing else, Trump is right about one thing. The American media is the enemy of the people.Michael_Wilk 4 hours ago
Do we remember way back in the 80's/Reagan admin war involvement in the El Salvador civil war when NBC anchor Tom Brokaw openly questioned the US's support for death squad leader D' Auboissan's terror regime on the air? Shocking! A Walter Cronkite-Vietnam War moment Brokaw supposed, maybe?
I remember that in all the hullabaloo that followed one of our ruling class commented that Brokaw was being $5 million a year not to say such subversive things. Lesson learned, Brokaw nor any other gainfully employed MSM tool has made the same mistake again, and now Brokaw has emeritus status in the NBC "News" hierarchy.
That comment opened my eyes for the first time to the reality of American MSM...TimN 5 hours agoThat an entire generation of Democrats paying attention to politics for the first time is being instilled with formerly right-wing Cold Warrior values of jingoism, über-pat riotism, reverence for security state agencies and prosecutors, a reckless use of the "traitor" accusation to smear one's enemies, and a belief that neoconservatives embody moral rectitude and foreign policy expertise has long been obvious and deeply disturbing.
I have to take issue with your use of the word 'formerly' in describing Cold War values. They are still very much right-wing. They never stopped being right-wing, nor did the current and former government and security state apparatchiks polluting the airwaves with their lies.
haugeneder 6 hours ago
The neo-con and neo-lib argument against this unfortunate reveal of things present, and things to come: "But Trump! Trump!" I didn't think I'd see things unravel so quickly, but Goddamn. 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 are ascendant; stupid, scared, violent-minded, and very well-paid.Tlaloc 7 hours ago
Great piece. America is on the precipice and there are few who care -- very few. Time for an great economic depression -- not recession -- to shift the ground or open it to swallow us whole.Art 6 hours ago
Interesting that we might be seeing a shift on both parties, the republicans finally embracing their libertarian side (long being a part of the republican party) and the neocons trying to find a new home on the democratic party. I wonder where the progressive side of the DNC will go, they might be the ones pushed out of any national party :(Dysnomia 3 hours ago[...] the progressive side of the DNC [...] might be the ones pushed out of any national party
Fuck that! They're headed for permanent electoral failure on every occasion they put forward neocons on any ballot. We, The People, Are Fed Up With Neo-Cons and Neo-Libs!johnanderson 7 hours ago ( Edited )
Unfortunately, I think it's more likely that we'll see a shift only on the Democratic side. Democratic Party leadership has basically always been neoconservative supporters of the national security state, but there has been some resistance within the rank and file. The narrowing of the Overton window we're seeing will make such resistance increasingly beyond the pale.
But I don't think the Republican Party, in terms of leadership or rank and file, will become more "libertarian" (in the American sense of that word) or less pro-war. I think there's likely to be greater consensus among the political class in favor of U.S. imperialism generally, and Trump, to the extent he occasionally makes moves in the opposite direction, is a convenient foil to bring that about.open_hearted_jade 2 hours ago
There is no "means test" for the empire military spending supports energy supplies supports international banking supports global corporatism but the democrats will help republicans squeeze the peons with excessive education costs, unaffordable health care premiums and copays, expensive housing, and social security cutbacks because they are playing the same elite economic game against the majority true the democratic leadership has a better stance on abortion and a generally more rainbow-flavored social agenda. Because they want this stuff for their own social class however economic policy will be at our expense ... just watch Pelosi and CompanyMona 7 hours agoBut the democrats will help republicans squeeze the peons with excessive education costs, unaffordable health care premiums and copays, expensive housing,....
Those costs rise for one reason...trailgrub 7 hours ago ( Edited )
...And here's Joe Biden: ""Paul Ryan was correct when he did the tax code, what was the first thing we have to go after, Social Security and Medicare. Now we need to do something about Social Security and Medicare. It's the only way to find room to pay for it." Biden is after means testing and other "adjustments" slashing SS, as endorsed by his pal. Paul Ryan. (This is called Republican Lite.)
And then there's Nancy Pelosi with her neoliberal austerity economics; her budget rules that would preemptively block a #GreenNewDeal & #MedicareForAll : https://theintercept.com/2019/01/02/nancy-pelosi-pay-go-rule/photosymbiosis 8 hours ago ( Edited )
Thanks for publishing this story, Glenn, and putting your perspective on it. We've known for a long time that NBC & MSNBC "have become ground zero for these political pathologies of militarism and servitude to security state agencies." Before Comcast purchased them, General Electric owned these networks for many years. The public's interests are the last thing on their minds when they do "news reporting."
Have you watched when MSNBC's "prime time" talk shows are doing live sports-like camera angles, moves, and shots in their studio, trying to make it look all-the-more sensational on your TV screen? I mean, they're doing these intricate camera shots, rapid switching between cameras, zooming, panning, trying to make it look like a high-production-value shoot, and it looks like they've hired some live sports producers and technical directors to make this pathetic illusion on the air. All this shit for talking heads. Rotf-lmao.
What's next? Slow-motion HDTV instant replays of Rachel Maddow, utilizing zoomed-in camera shots of her mouth, when she's spraying spittle into her guests' faces? That's what happens when she launches into her infamous hissy fits.
The round table MSNBC uses in their cheap studio is only 4 feet in diameter. In other words, they're shooting these live action shots of people talking around an itty-bitty little table, and they're doing all this intricate camera work with approximately 8 cameras to make it look 'sensational', action-packed, and thrilling. Instead, it's extremely ugly, stupid, idiotic, disgusting, and ridiculous. It's not sensational. It's a disgusting cocktail of vomit, puss, and diarrhea.
I need reliable sources of news and weather so I can live my life sustainably with dignity while I maintain my values. My pride and dignity are invaluable to me. All these a-holes are doing for me is raising my blood pressure and pissing me off. That's why I read The Intercept. I'd like to have the option to just sit back and watch TI's reporting on a news channel someday SOON, if possible.
Again, what's our msm network news alternatives, besides Fox news, and why are they so pathetic? CBS news: Les Moonves in particular has cheered the Trump phenomenon, telling investors in 2016 that the Trump campaign "may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS." -- https://theintercept.com/2017/02/24/cbs-fcc-trump/ -- Moonves got fired and lost his pension -- The longtime chairman-CEO was forced out Sept. 9, 2018 amid a cascade of sexual assault and misconduct allegations. "The CBS board of directors has denied former chairman-CEO Leslie Moonves any of the $120 million severance he was due under his employment contract after conducting a five-month internal probe of his conduct and the corporate culture at CBS Corp." -- https://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/tv/ct-ent-les-moonves-denied-severance-20181217-story.html ABC news: Who owns ABC? Walt Disney bought ABC 22 years ago. Exactly, we're in Disneyland.
Fred_Cowan 8 hours ago
Some basic facts:
The US military presence in the Middle East has nothing to do with national security (i.e protecting American citizens from military attack by foreign nations, or even with disrupting the activities and funding of terrorist groups like ISIS or Al Qaeda, groups we financed and armed as part of the overthrow Assad strategy).
It has everything to do with controlling the region's oil flow and propping up regimes like Saudi Arabia who agree to invest the majority of their oil money in Wall Street banks. This is called petrodollar recycling, a strategy devised in the 1970s. Here is a foundational document discussing the plan, from 1974: https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/1974LONDON16506_b.html
"CENTRAL THESIS, BASED ON BELIEF THAT THERE IS NO EARLY PROSPECT OF BREAKING OIL CARTEL, IS THAT WE SHOULD SEEK EARLY DIALOGUE WITH PRODUCERS TO WORK OUT ARRANGEMENTS WITH ALL OR SOME OF THEM TO (A) INDEX PRICE OF OIL AND (B) BRING THEM INTO RECYCLING MECHANISM IN ORDER TO SHARE THE RISK. SECOND PAPER LARGELY DUPLICATES FIRST, THOUGH IT DOES ADD SOME STRESS ON LONGER RANGE PROBLEM OF MASSIVE SURPLUS OF OPEC COUNTRIES, ESTIMATED AT $400 BILLION BY 1980, FOR WHICH NO SOLUTION IS PROPOSED OTHER THAN NEW INTERNATIONAL RECYCLING AGENCY PROPOSED IN BOTH PAPERS."
One key point is that the proponents of this scheme in the United States, be they Democrats or Republicans, have zero interest in replacing fossil fuels with wind and solar and battery storage. That would sour the whole deal; nobody would buy Saudi oil. Of course the Russkies, the stated enemy, don't want to see Europe go 100% renewable either, any more than the Clinton-Bush-Obama-Trump Administrations did. The Russia-US conflict is mostly over who gets to sell gas to Europe, and neither dealer wants the addict to kick the habit, right?
This is a very consistent policy, year-to-year.
Now, why can't the corporate media honestly discuss this? Because they are the corporate establishment's propaganda monkeys, little more, regardless of whether they work at MSNBC or at FOX.
Oh, and this is why #Resist Trump is so nonsensical, when those supporting that them want to install a Joe Biden or Kamela Harris, who would continue right on with this status quo, i.e. blocking the development of renewable energy and continuing the idiotic military entanglements in the Middle East.Mona 8 hours ago
Real News vs "fake news" is almost impossible to find and dissect. Even looking for real reporting beyond echoing is hard to find. The real problems are ignored or misstated to the extent real solutions are impossible. Not just security and endless wars but every aspect of civil existence, education, healthcare, you name it. We exist in an echo-chamber where real knowledge and understanding have been all but banished.Mona 1 hour ago
@Tom Collins & Art
"Yeah one wonders if [Snowden's] cover would have been blown so decisively had he done it anonymously through Wikileaks"
No need to wonder! Snowden made clear -- explicitly stated-- he wanted Greenwald and Poitras, and not Wikileaks. He deeply desired journalists to exercise judgment over what should be released to the public and did not want a data dump.
Further, he insisted on outing himself , and did so several days after the first document was published. At his behest, Poitras videotaped a 20-minute video of him taking responsibility, which was then posted at The Guardian. He did this, among other reasons, to spare his co-workers from suspicion and investigation.DC_Reade 8 hours ago
Citizen 4 won the Oscar for best documentary in 2013 or '14. It's all Snowden, Greenwald, Poitras, and other real players.Mona 6 hours ago
If the only way someone can manage to frame any of these issues is as "Fox vs. MSNBC" or "Trump Corruption vs. Washington Establishment Defenders of Democracy", they've assented to a two-valued action-reaction Pavlovian conditioned response loop.
No way should that be confused with a process of independent thought.
Unsurprisingly, I don't read one mention in the above post to any of the specifics of the content in Glenn Greenwald's remarks, or to any of the observations made by Arkin in his email resignation.
You're too busy fitting everyone with Team Jerseys tailored to your preconceived ideas.MiltonWiltmellow 6 hours ago ( Edited )
"This article does not inform."
Oh, it does lots of informing, you just don't like what it informs us of, to wit, the first paragraph:A VETERAN national security journalist with NBC News and MSNBC blasted the networks in a Monday email for becoming captive and subservient to the national security state, reflexively pro-war in the name of stopping President Donald Trump, and now the prime propaganda instrument of the War Machine's promotion of militarism and imperialism . As a result of NBC/MSNBC's all-consuming militarism, he said, "the national security establishment not only hasn't missed a beat but indeed has gained dangerous strength" and "is ever more autonomous and practically impervious to criticism."
Any substantive response, Milton?Tom_Collins 5 hours agoAny substantive response, Milton?
As always, Mr. Greenwald's description is hyperbolic and bordering on unhinged. As DC_Reade suggested, I read Arkin's email. You should too. It seemed more like a Montaigne Essaiy or a reflective note for posterity than a thundering repudiation of MSNBC.
Mr. Greenwald turns it into a typical Greenwald crie du guerre™ against the evil Deep State (a term which he appears to have mercifully discarded. Too Foxy I suppose.) Here's his problem. Crying "wolf" only works for awhile. Eventually it becomes part of the information flood drowning everyone. Any bit of flotsam is as good as another.DC_Reade 4 hours ago ( Edited )
What's your point again? Do you even know?Tom_Collins 4 hours ago ( Edited )
Excerpts from Arkin's email:
"Seeking refuge in its political horse race roots, NBC (and others) meanwhile report the story of war as one of Rumsfeld vs. the Generals, as Wolfowitz vs. Shinseki, as the CIA vs. Cheney, as the bad torturers vs. the more refined, about numbers of troops and number of deaths, and even then Obama vs. the Congress, poor Obama who couldn't close Guantanamo or reduce nuclear weapons or stand up to Putin because it was just so difficult. We have contributed to turning the world of national security into this sort of political story. I find it disheartening that we do not report the failures of the generals and national security leaders. I find it shocking that we essentially condone continued American bumbling in the Middle East and now Africa through our ho-hum reporting..."
"...I argued endlessly with MSNBC about all things national security for years, doing the daily blah, blah, blah in Secaucus, but also poking at the conventional wisdom of everyone from Matthews to Hockenberry. And yet I feel like I've failed to convey this larger truth about the hopelessness of our way of doing things, especially disheartened to watch NBC and much of the rest of the news media somehow become a defender of Washington and the system..."
"...For me I realized how out of step I was when I looked at Trump's various bumbling intuitions: his desire to improve relations with Russia, to denuclearize North Korea, to get out of the Middle East, to question why we are fighting in Africa, even in his attacks on the intelligence community and the FBI. Of course he is an ignorant and incompetent impostor. And yet I'm alarmed at how quick NBC is to mechanically argue the contrary, to be in favor of policies that just spell more conflict and more war. Really? We shouldn't get out Syria? We shouldn't go for the bold move of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula? Even on Russia, though we should be concerned about the brittleness of our democracy that it is so vulnerable to manipulation, do we really yearn for the Cold War? And don't even get me started with the FBI: What? We now lionize this historically destructive institution?..."
Yes, William Arkin does go on to be gracious and complimentary of some of his (former) colleagues at NBC. Arkin mantains his professional composure. His critique of the focus and practices of NBC/MSNBC News is tempered and reasoned. But the critique is scathing, nonetheless.Mona 3 hours ago
You are missing Milton's point altogether. Like "Craig Summers", MW expects that his word alone is enough to dismiss the editorial/investigative/analytical work put in by Greenwald, Arkin or anyone else on the topics considered most important by the U.S. State Department.
When MW or CS weigh in on these things to dismiss or diminish these stories/opinions/facts with the wave of a hand or incorrect reading (and absolutely nothing of substance), we are supposed to defer to them respectfully and re-consider the respect we have developed for the professionalism, dedication and personal/career risks taken on by the people who bring us these stories that are inconvenient to the establishment government and media actors.OftenWrongSeldomInDoubt 9 hours ago
"As DC_Reade suggested, I read Arkin's email. "
Cool, Milton, and what are your substantive comments on this part:My expertise, though seeming to be all the more central to the challenges and dangers we face, also seems to be less valued at the moment. And I find myself completely out of synch with the network, being neither a day-to-day reporter nor interested in the Trump circus. To me there is also a larger problem: though they produce nothing that resembles actual safety and security, the national security leaders and generals we have are allowed to do their thing unmolested. Despite being at "war," no great wartime leaders or visionaries are emerging. There is not a soul in Washington who can say that they have won or stopped any conflict. And though there might be the beloved perfumed princes in the form of the Petraeus' and Wes Clarks', or the so-called warrior monks like Mattis and McMaster, we've had more than a generation of national security leaders who sadly and fraudulently have done little of consequence. And yet we (and others) embrace them, even the highly partisan formers who masquerade as "analysts". We do so ignoring the empirical truth of what they have wrought: There is not one county in the Middle East that is safer today than it was 18 years ago. Indeed the world becomes ever more polarized and dangerous. Windrem again convinced me to return to NBC to join the new investigative unit in the early days of the 2016 presidential campaign. I thought that the mission was to break through the machine of perpetual war acceptance and conventional wisdom to challenge Hillary Clinton's hawkishness. It was also an interesting moment at NBC because everyone was looking over their shoulder at Vice and other upstarts creeping up on the mainstream. But then Trump got elected and Investigations got sucked into the tweeting vortex, increasingly lost in a directionless adrenaline rush, the national security and political version of leading the broadcast with every snow storm. And I would assert that in many ways NBC just began emulating the national security state itself – busy and profitable. No wars won but the ball is kept in play. I'd argue that under Trump, the national security establishment not only hasn't missed a beat but indeed has gained dangerous strength. Now it is ever more autonomous and practically impervious to criticism. I'd also argue, ever so gingerly, that NBC has become somewhat lost in its own verve, proxies of boring moderation and conventional wisdom, defender of the government against Trump, cheerleader for open and subtle threat mongering, in love with procedure and protocol over all else (including results). I accept that there's a lot to report here, but I'm more worried about how much we are missing. Hence my desire to take a step back and think why so little changes with regard to America's wars. In our day-to-day whirlwind and hostage status as prisoners of Donald Trump, I think – like everyone else does – that we miss so much. People who don't understand the medium, or the pressures, loudly opine that it's corporate control or even worse, that it's partisan. Sometimes I quip in response to friends on the outside (and to government sources) that if they mean by the word partisan that it is New Yorkers and Washingtonians against the rest of the country then they are right. For me I realized how out of step I was when I looked at Trump's various bumbling intuitions: his desire to improve relations with Russia, to denuclearize North Korea, to get out of the Middle East, to question why we are fighting in Africa, even in his attacks on the intelligence community and the FBI. Of course he is an ignorant and incompetent impostor. And yet I'm alarmed at how quick NBC is to mechanically argue the contrary, to be in favor of policies that just spell more conflict and more war. Really? We shouldn't get out Syria? We shouldn't go for the bold move of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula? Even on Russia, though we should be concerned about the brittleness of our democracy that it is so vulnerable to manipulation, do we really yearn for the Cold War? And don't even get me started with the FBI: What? We now lionize this historically destructive institution?bluecurl3 9 hours ago
This is SO validating to read! Surely no other ruler in history with a cute butt and polite voice ordered killings in 56 countries in one year. I want someone to discuss this without accusing me of being pro-Rump. I guess, the Rachel Maddows of the world cannot criticize Hillary/Obama for expanding every awful thing for which the good people of the world hated Bush.
There are two giant problems in the world today-
1. the scale of people who lost their homes and countries because of the good guy's wars and
2. climate change which the good guy's 27,600 odd bombs of 2016 might or might not have exacerbated. After all, each bomb costs upward of $10,000,000. Who is measuring the greenhouse gases released by them?
The media needs to be equally adversarial to 'liberal' governments as they are to 'conservative' ones, so that majority parties cannot take credit for granting me bathroom and bedroom permissions that are surely my personal domain! The media must shed light on whether it is bad to tell 'aliens' not to cross a border or it is bad to win a Nobel Peace prize before raining bombs on brown people in other countries, never separating children from families, when blowing up ten civilians for every 'target' we extra-judicially decided to label as militant.
So thank you for this article!!Xavi 8 hours ago
Gotta hand it to the neocons, soon after the Vietnam debacle (I served 3 tours there), and Watergate, they quickly licked their wounds and devised a new playbook that, over time, would become a 'Project for the New American Century'. First things first, get rid of the draft. Go professional, and then only a very minuscule percentage of Americans have skin in the game, meaning their own sons and daughters at risk, while the rest of America can focus on the more important things, like watching the Housewives of New Jersey, New York, Beverly Hills, etc. etc., or sports, or the newest fashions, or the current fad diets, or the newest Trump tweet, bla bla bla.
Next, and this is genius because it incorporates that great American pastime, greed, spread all of that endless supply of taxpayer money around to each and every State, County, and municipality in the form of jobs tied to the military industrial complex. Now, lots of Americans have skin in the game, as long as the lobbyists, politicians, government and the military can provide a pipeline of endless wars and conflicts. Of course, in order to provide and maintain the patina of morality and righteousness, a subservient and corporate controlled media is vital.
And finally, silence and denigrate any meaningful opposition. As Kierkegaard stated, "Once you label me you negate me." Hence the long, ongoing labeling of opposition with terms like traitor, anti-American, unpatriotic, (insert name or country here) sympathizer. The sad part of all of this, too many Americans are gullible enough to swallow this crap, hook, line and sinker, as long as they get their daily ration of manna.firstpersoninfinite 9 hours ago
Orwellian times.firstpersoninfinite 8 hours ago
No, it's not rocket science. Otherwise you couldn't have proven Greenwald's point with your own views about "supporting" the security state so easily. You missed the entire point of the article, which is that the neocons and the neoliberals support the same cast of nefarious personalities that got us into the Middle East, over and over again. Why is NBC/MSNBC normalizing right-wing radicalism? Because they've joined hands with neocons and neoliberals to support the military/industrial complex. Your argument is akin to someone claiming that their Communion wafer is more holy than anyone else's because it has the Pope's imprint on it.Dysnomia 2 hours ago
Neocons, like Irving Kristol, Bill Kristol's father, were leftists in the 1930's. It's not a difficult term to come to terms with, historically. I don't wonder why anyone questions what Trump is doing. I never said such a thing.
What Trump has done during his first two years in office has not been questioned by the mainstream press at all. Only the imbecile tweets and the gaffes are of any interest to the citizens of such a redoubtable empire as our own. A friend of mine who fights anti-wolf and anti-bear laws in Montana, laws sent down by the Trump administration, says that these are the same laws they fought during 8 years of Obama. The mainstream of both parties are the two sides of the same coin. So I agree with the "role reversal."DC_Reade 10 hours ago
I think the problem is not that supporting the "deep state" is becoming a convenient excuse to oppose Trump, but that opposing Trump is becoming a convenient excuse to support the deep state.photosymbiosis 11 hours ago
Bravo, William Arkin. I only wish that you could have found some way for you to resign on the air in the middle of a broadcast. (I've been wishing such a scenario for decades. Preferably featuring one or more news anchors.)
Incredible that the USA has spent trillions of dollars in a game of whack-a-mole that's been extended over the entire globe with no time limitations, occasionally interspersed with declarations of surprise that the nation faces more emergent terror threats than ever. We spend more money on the military and warfare than we spent during the Cold War. And all that was required to trigger this spiral into perpetual militarism was a single special operation carried out 17 years ago by a small team of not-particularly-elite commandos who hijacked four airliners, thereby obtaining the one-time ability to repurpose three of them into cruise missiles.
By now, it should be no surprise that other large nations have taken notice of the American assumption of entitlement to police the world and begun their own rearmament campaigns. Also worth noting that the focus on the Terror Threat has served as the rationale for massive investment in a level of surveillance technology that's unknown in human history. As for the norms and values that international law was supposedly intended to provide for governments everywhere, all of that went out the window in 2003, with the unprovoked invasion of Iraq by the Benevolent Hegemon Hyperpower. American scolding of other nations for their armed territorial incursions and imperial designs has rung awfully hollow, ever since.
The emphasis on massive military escalation to deal with terrorism outbreaks is reminiscent of the War on Drugs- which, it should be noted, also remains largely in effect, notwithstanding occasional feints toward de-escalation. And we all know what the War on Drugs did in terms of empowering the criminal elite that it was supposed to eliminate.
What's that all about? The leaders of this country- and for that matter, the supposed leaders of the rest of the world- aren't leading. To me, almost all of them look like they're running from something: they're running from fossil fuels addiction and its toxic blowback, looming climate catastrophe, natural resource depletion, maldistribution of wealth and neglect of the commons.Benito_Mussolini 10 hours ago
What's the central reason MSNBC is so pro-war? Because the shareholders in its parent corporation, Comcas, have a deep vested interest in militarism, arms sales, and the capture of natural resources around the word:Comcast, a large cable operator, completed its purchase of a majority stake in NBCUniversal from General Electric in January 2011. The cable giant bought the rest of NBCUniversal in February 2013. NBCUniversal is the parent company of MSNBC, as well as NBC, Bravo, USA and other channels.
Comcast major holders, $US:
- Vanguard Group, Inc. 10,965,964,846
- Blackrock Inc. 10,179,872,652
- State Street Corporation 5,785,488,229
- Capital World Investors 5,427,547,692
- Massachusetts Financial Services Co. 4,787,803,825
Lockheed Martin major holders, $US:
- State Street Corporation 13,394,660,471 Vanguard Group, Inc. (The) 6,210,096,924
- Capital World Investors 5,098,130,465
- Blackrock Inc. 5,084,573,828
- Bank of America Corporation 2,826,426,091
ExxonMobil major holders, $US:
- Vanguard Group, Inc. (The) 26,661,034,588
- Blackrock Inc. 21,669,998,686
- State Street Corporation 16,964,902,104
- Northern Trust Corporation 4,566,789,988
- Bank Of New York Mellon Corporation 4,420,622,076
It pretty obvious once you look at the value of an outfit like Blackrock's investments in media, arms, and oil - they don't want any stories told on MSNBC that would threaten the profit margins of Exxon, Lockheed or Comcast.
The only real solution is government enforcement of anti-trust legisation which would require the likes of Comcast, TimeWarner(CNN) and NewsCorp(FOX) to divest their media holdings, creating dozens of independently owned outfits not beholden to some corporate master who won't let them discuss important topics like, say NAFTA....johnnyred 11 hours agoThe only real solution is government enforcement of anti-trust legislation
Hopefully, MSNBC will be smart enough to provide a friendly platform for ex-government officials. It means a great deal to government officials to know their influence, public visibility (and associated appearance fees) will continue into their retirement. I don't watch MSNBC, so I don't know if they have implemented this strategy, but the pictures in the article seem encouraging.Somewherearoundtikrit 11 hours ago
War is touted exclusively by those who've never experienced it. Get rid of the generals, put in some infantry casualties, those who've lost a limb or two.
Then we can have some informed comment.Tom_Collins 11 hours ago
Meanwhile, over at The Guardian, "In these critical times..." their "editorial independence" is in sincere need of your donation. They're just 80K away from their million dollar goal! Pardon me while I retch. Julian Assange is still being robbed of his freedom. In these critical times indeed. Thank you Glenn.Tom_Collins 11 hours ago
The Guardian can get its funding from the organizations for whom they carry water. Not a damn cent from me. After they caved in on the Snowden files, I was done with them for good.Somewherearoundtikrit 11 hours ago
Yeah one wonders if his cover would have been blown so decisively had he done it anonymously through Wikileaks, but I think they were onto him anyway. Ultimately the information got out, and media orgs like The Guardian were exposed for their fealty to the national security state(s).Orville 6 hours ago
Speaking of leaks, whenever I hear "water carrier," this inevitably comes to mind https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JGfXiIXTpE0MyInnocuousUsernameWasBanned 9 hours ago
Cryptome wouldn't have censored the releases, as WikiLeaks has. Still WikiLeaks continues to be one of the world's premier journalistic outlets.tigertiger 8 hours ago
Was anyone else surprised by how long it took them to get to a million? I've seen Kickstarters for video games that got to a million faster. The slow pace of the fundraising seemed like a rebuke. I was hoping they'd never hit a million.
And I say all of that as someone who has recurring donations set up for about a dozen podcasts and blogs. The nonprofit/fundraiser model is the way to go, but I also think that publicly owned media outlets, or privately owned but public-interest-minded news organizations, while editorially independent, can't be totally contemptuous of their reader/donors.
I would never donate to the Guardian for a million reasons, but to pick just one: they have played the lead role in smearing Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters as dangerous radicals and anti-Semites.
And I would never donate to The Intercept, for instance, because of the crucial role it has played in promoting Russiagate and amplifying voices like Mattathias Schwartz's. (I'll never stop reminding people that Schwartz non-jokingly advocated here for what would essentially be a coup -- Obama "putting a hold on the transfer of power" -- after the most recent presidential election. The Intercept published that. Amazing.) And the face of the Intercept, arguably, is no longer Greenwald but Mehdi Hasan, who publishes rank propaganda smearing peace activists as "Bashar al-Assad Apologists" who revere human rights abusers as "heroes." (Again: the Intercept published that. Amazing.)
My favorite line from that Arkin email is the one about the tension between worship of "officialdom" and respect for "public yearnings." To political elites and reporters (including the experts at the Intercept who spent a week running PR for Nancy Pelosi's speaker bid, and who constantly write off the 2016 election as a consequence either of sinister foreign interference or of the squalid bigotry, stupidity and ugliness of non-coastal Americans), officialdom always wins, and "public yearnings" are just the bleatings of deplorables.
If Glenn's excellent reporting was removed from this site, The Intercept would be as deserving of Arkin's critique as NBC and the Guardian are.TravisTea 11 hours ago
They didn't hit their million, which they wanted before the end of the year, but they're still begging. Not for lack of trying, that 'give us money!' pop up has to be about the loudest, most intrusive of it's kind I've ever seen.
And yes, TI is only marginally less repulsive (thanks to Glenn, Lee Fang, and Jon Schwartz). It amazes me that an outlet owned by a bajillionaire constantly begs for money. I guess they think it makes them more 'populist' or something- 'look, the peons are sacrificing their pennies to help us!'.Carlaly 11 hours ago
As an American author (and journalist) once wrote:
"Man is the only Patriot. He sets himself apart in his own country, under his own flag, and sneers at the other nations, and keeps multitudinous uniformed assassins on hand at heavy expense to grab slices of other people's countries, and keep them from grabbing slices of his . And in the intervals between campaigns he washes the blood off his hands and works for the 'universal brotherhood of man' -- with his mouth."
-- Mark Twain, Man's Place in the Animal World (1896)
P.S. As always, thank you very much, Mr. Greenwald (and thank you, Mr. Arkin).
Mona 11 hours ago
Just vindicates what you have been saying all along. Although I expect the denialists will dismiss Arkin as some anti-American, anti-troop stooge of Putin.Tom_Collins 11 hours ago
"The cable network's key anchor, Rachel Maddow, once wrote a book on the evils of endless wars without congressional authorization, but now routinely depicts anyone who wants to end those illegal wars as reckless weaklings and traitors."
She's just coming home. Liberals have long been dominated by hawks (after all, Vietnam was a Democrats' war, albeit Nixon/Kissinger took the war crimes up to 11.)
Maddow long ago described herself as a "national security liberal."Which leads to yet another element of Ms. Maddow's portfolio: the daughter of an Air Force captain who served stateside during the Vietnam War, she is an admitted defense-policy wonk. "I'm a national security liberal, which I tell people because it's meant to sound absurd," she said. "I'm all about counterterrorism. I'm all about the G.I. Bill."
brer_rabbit 11 hours ago ( Edited )
Madcow would like nothing more than to see open war with Russia.Tom_Collins 11 hours ago
maddcow . . my laugh of the day.brer_rabbit 11 hours ago
It's a common refrain in far-right reaches of the Internet. I almost felt bad for saying it, but that's what she's become on the topic of Russia.open_hearted_jade 11 hours ago
Yes, whenever is see her, or Anderson Cooper, or any of these guys for that matter (which is rare . . usually for a few minutes to catch a glimpse of the latest environmental disaster, mass shooting, or whatever) my first thought always goes to question the kind of upbringing that could have produced such vapid people, who enthusiastically shame themselves on a daily basis for money. What must they think of their audience?Tom_Collins 11 hours ago
Maddow is less respected by an awakening public -- therefore she must be a conservative right winger. Didn't you learn anything after 1945?endlesswar 11 hours ago
You've made made totally missing the point into a trolling form of art. Bravo.PatrickShaw 6 hours ago
Attacking an extreme right wing president from the right, while lauding unrepentant war criminals like Bush and McCain. Just about sums up what it means to be a liberal in this day and age.xochtl 12 hours ago
MSNBC and their national security contributors do not speak for liberals. They never invite liberal voices on who are anti-war/pro diplomacy.brer_rabbit 12 hours ago ( Edited )Still, that a network insider has blown the whistle on how all this works, and how MSNBC and NBC have become ground zero for these political pathologies of militarism and servitude to security state agencies, while not surprising, is nonetheless momentous given how detailed and emphatic he is in his condemnations.
perfect summaryclawhammerjake 13 hours ago. . if they mean by the word partisan that it is New Yorkers and Washingtonians against the rest of the country then they are right.
bingoSteeeve 13 hours ago ( Edited )
War is a business decision.TheManj 13 hours ago ( Edited )
I've been consistently surprised that anyone is still watching these things. Personally, I've already divested from special-interest funded media outlets and the DNC for that matter. It's always interesting when I run across someone parrotting their viewpoints though.pedinska2 13 hours ago
The greatest scam of the millennium, after cruptocurrency, was the use of Trump Derangement Syndrome to pervert "progressives" into acolytes of the security establishment.Benito_Mussolini 13 hours ago
Actually, TDS wasn't used in the original perversion so much as it was used as the cement to keep it firmly in place.
I lay blame for much of the greatest scam of the millenium on Obama with his drone policies, expansion of our involvement in the ME, retention of the same Smartest Guys in the Room who tanked our economy and wholesale conversion of liberals into acceptance of further erosion of our Constitutional rights with his warm embrace of the same criminals running the security state when torture became de rigueur. He was just so darn pretty and eloquent they had no choice but to believe all the lies dripping from those sexy lips. And have you seen Michelle's arms???!? /sErelis 13 hours ago
To herd people, it's more effective to use both the carrot (Obama) and the stick (TDS). The fact that progressives needed to be herded is a testament to their numbers and success.bluecurl3 4 hours ago
This essay is critical for every American to read. No exaggeration. NBC/MSNBC has become the proverbial spear tip in the march toward nuclear war with Russia. Every day, step by step, brick by brick, they are laying the foundation for the justification of war--in fact, for needing and demanding war, almost any war, but more particularly with Russia. Let's remember that when Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, 72% of Americans supported it to according to Gallup. That didn't happen overnight with some big propaganda event.Mike5000 13 hours ago
Perhaps, but I would suggest that Iran has become the most desired target for a war, and due in no small part to the aggressive advocacy for such a war by Israel and Saudi Arabia, and their subservient boot-licking, ass kissing American politicians. I'm all for pulling our troops out of Syria, but mark my word, Bibi and his zionist war-hawks will seize the opportunity to bomb the hell out of Syria, and use it as a pretext to launch attacks against Iran.PresumptuousInsect 13 hours ago
Maddow is not really pro-war or anti-war. She is just pro whatever Clinton and Pelosi happen to be pushing this week. It's a shame. She's a good presenter but hopelessly biased.Erelis 13 hours ago
I think she is more enthralled to the people who are paying her.Bill_Owen 10 hours ago
Maddows rhetoric and reporting is pro-war regardless of her motivations. She uses the language of aggression and conspiracy and accusation in describing the Russians and other Americans such as Jill Stein. She without exception imputes malevolent motives on "the enemy" which is Russia leading to a truly a bizarre clip telling Americans in somber and concerned tones that Russia and N. Korea share a border. The conspiracy has been exposed.MyInnocuousUsernameWasBanned 9 hours ago
What is it, exactly, about Hillary Clinton that enthralls Rachel Maddow so much that she now pretty much spends her days building a case (in-the-sky) for war on Russia? Seems pathological somehow.William 13 hours ago
Look at how her ratings and salary have been affected by her transformation. She's gone from "cable news anchor" to "superstar." The Russiagate scam has also given dozens of mediocrities like Seth Abramson a chance to be noticed and to feel important. Even the writers on the Intercept's "intelligence" beat have been doing some sort of Tom Clancy cosplay for the last two years. It's profitable and fun to be one of these people, as long as you don't have a nagging sense of shame.Tom_Collins 11 hours ago
Indeed, none of this is new. I read Norman Solomon's and Martin Lee's UNRELIABLE SOURCES: A GUIDE TO DETECTING BIAS IN NEWS MEDIA back when I was in college in the late 80s and they cite General Electric's ownership of NBC (before there was an "MSNBC") uncritically:
General Electric's Influence on NBC GE is by no means a hands off owner of NBC. Lee and Solomon in their book Unreliable Sources have detailed how GE insisted on the removal of references to itself in an NBC programme on substandard products. They also point out that NBC journalists have not been particularly keen to expose GE's environmental record and that TV commercials by a group called INFACT, urging a boycott of GE products, were banned by NBC as well as other television stations. NBC did however briefly report GE's indictment for cheating the Department of Defense which was reported more extensively in other media outlets. (Lee and Solomon 1990, pp. 77-81) Former NBC News Chief, Lawrence Grossman, claims that the head of GE, Jack Welch made it clear to him that he worked for GE and told him not to use terms such as 'Black Monday' to describe the stock market crash in 1987 because it depressed share prices such as GE's (Cited in Naureckas 1995). Todd Putnam, editor of National Boycott News, tells of how he was approached by the NBC's Today Show to do an interview about consumer boycotts. Their biggest boycott at the time was against General Electric and its nuclear defense contracts but the show wouldn't let him talk about that and was reluctant to have him mention boycotts against any large corporation preferring him to talk about "a boycott that was 'small,' 'local' and 'sexy'." (1991) Mark Gunther writing in American Journalism Review claims that references to General Electric's use of the bolts in an NBC Today Show on defective bolts in planes, bridges and nuclear plants, were edited out and only mentioned in a follow-up segment after criticism of the omission (1995, p. 40). In 1990 NBC Nightly News ran 14 minutes of coverage over three days of a breast cancer detection machine produced by GE, without mentioning that it was made by NBC's owners. The other two major television networks didn't bother to cover it at all. (FAIR 1991) Helen Caldicott who had been featured on the Today Show previously found that when she wrote her book If You Love This Planet, which used GE as a case study of an environmentally damaging company, her scheduled appearance was mysteriously cancelled (Anon. 1992). In 1987, one year after GE took over NBC, NBC broadcast a special documentary promoting nuclear power using France as a model. The promotion for the programme proclaimed that "French townspeople welcome each new reactor with open arms". The documentary won a Westinghouse sponsored prize for science journalism. (Westinghouse Electric Company also builds nuclear power stations.) Shortly after the documentary was screened, when there were a couple of accidents at French power stations and there was significant opposition to nuclear power amongst the French population (polls showed about one third opposed it), NBC did not report the story although some US newspapers did. (Lee and Solomon 1990, p. 78) Karl Grossman documents in Extra! (1993) how the programme What Happened? broadcast on NBC in 1993 gave a one sided account of the Three Mile Island nuclear accident and its aftermath. It showed local resident Debbie Baker saying that she was not as afraid of the nuclear plant as she used to be. However, according to Grossman, Baker, whose son was born with Down's syndrome 9 months after the accident and who has received $1.1 million in a settlement arising from the accident, was shocked at how the programme had been edited to imply her acceptance of the plant. She said she was still extremely uncomfortable with the plant and that what she had said was she felt safer since her groups set up a network of radiation monitors around the plant. Neither Baker's settlement nor the 200 or so others "made to families who have suffered injury, birth defects and death because of the 1979 accident" were mentioned. Instead a nuclear power industry expert was featured who said the plant's back-up safety systems worked successfully. When EXTRA! pointed out that no scientists critical of nuclear power appeared in the program, Jaffe [executive producer of the show] responded, 'That is correct. Maybe there is some misunderstanding. That show is not a journalistic show but an entertainment show to look into and to find out the reason and cause of various accidents and incidents.' (Grossman 1993, p. 6) NBC has not been alone in putting a positive spin on the Three Mile Island nuclear accident. On the tenth anniversary of the accident, the New York Times ran an anniversary article opposite the editorial page headlined "Three Mile Island: The Good News" which argued that the accident had been good for the nuclear power industry prompting better management and emergency planning. The paper did not report the fact that 2000 residents living near the plant had filed claims for cancer and other health problems they blamed on the accident, nor the 280 personal-injury settlements paid out to such claimants, nor the unusual clusters of leukemia, birth defects and hypothyroidism around the plant. (Lee and Solomon 1990, p. 210) This was not the first time Times reporting had fitted with General Electric's views. In 1986 the Times reported on the use of humans as subjects in tritium absorption experiments. Tritium is routinely handled by nuclear power plant workers. An early edition of the paper said: "The tritium study was financed by the Atomic Energy Commission and conducted by the General Electric Company at Richland, which abuts the Hanford [nuclear weapons] reservation." In the late edition the sentence ended after Commission and no longer named General Electric. (Tenenbaum 1990)
Art 11 hours ago
Sure, but the question then becomes: Why didn't the corporate networks and newspapers with whom NBC competed point these things out?Tom_Collins 11 hours ago
That's what my father always said about media - that it was self-correcting. But he was wrong. They're all influenced by the same thing, namely the ultra-rich and their money.Art 11 hours ago
But wouldn't another network stand to gain more clout from the ultra-rich, corporations, and their money from NBC's losing viewers/ratings due to exposure for their corrupt unwillingness to report negatively on their parent corporation's actions?Midwest 14 hours ago
They share a huge fraction of investors, that's the problem.TheManj 13 hours ago
Nothing has changed except that there is an outsider independent president. NBC was just as bad 20 years ago.Phil 14 hours ago
Project Mockingbird was publicly revealed years ago, but pretty much totally ignored by the audiences who lap contentedly from the MSM koolaid bowl.PresumptuousInsect 14 hours ago
William Arkin is right on point with his email to MSNBC, especially when he says:
"And yet we (and others) embrace them, even the highly partisan formers who masquerade as "analysts". We do so ignoring the empirical truth of what they have wrought: There is not one county in the Middle East that is safer today than it was 18 years ago. "
In that same vein I have problems with MSNBC et al also covering the farewell speeches of outgoing Senators and Representatives which are full of warnings as to how the current system is "broken" [Paul Ryan, ClaireMcCaskill, Orrin Hatch, Jeff Flake, among many] and not calling them out.
It's ironic that these politicians who have gorged themselves on literally millions of dollars in campaign funding from Big Pharma, Defense Contractors, Energy, Big Banking, and even insider stock trading now feel compelled to warn us of graft and corruption they all fostered. These politicians get elected as nobodies, sell their votes, retire as millionaires, then have the nerve to tell us how corrupted our government has become as they check out to become Lobbyist's.
Orrin Hatch was a Senator for 42 years but last week he woke up one morning to find the Senate needs fixing? Paul Ryan was Speaker of the House and fiercely defended Trump but now as he leaves he's suddenly discovers that things aren't right in Washington? And what about all those who are still in office now – where are their warnings and concern? The answer is it's difficult to talk while you're in office stuffing your mouths at the trough.
Sadly, MSNBC and the media carry these farewell speeches with no comment except that they are all great public servants and their viewers soak it all up because to do otherwise would be unpatriotic. And the march of the lemmings to the voting booths continues.shenebraskan 14 hours ago
I am so glad to see this man speak out. For the longest time, war and the military budget has been a third rail in politics, and "support the troops!"--however hypocritical that slogan might be--has been a rallying cry as well as an accusation of treason/unAmericanism/communism, etc., for those who have had doubts. But finally we are starting to see signs of dissatisfaction with the status quo among the political class, and even antiwar bullet points listed on some platforms. There are even calls for diplomacy, a word that seemed to have been deleted from all U.S. dictionaries. I hope that Arkin's outcry serves to move this agitation forward.
Dunno if you noticed (I did because I watch State Department briefings), but when Brett McGurk resigned as Syria envoy, in a similar huff to McMaster, he bemoaned the loss of his colleagues at State and Pentagon. State Department has become another branch of the MIC, not a diplomatic corps. And I am not saying this is all because of Trump. Probably started when we "won" the Cold War.
Jan 03, 2019 | www.unz.com
Cyrano , says: January 2, 2019 at 8:51 am GMT
... there is no hope for the humanity. The greed of the working class knows no boundaries. After all that the elites have done in the past 40-50 years to demonstrate their humanity – basically bringing a big chunk of the third world and resettling them in the west, the greedy underclass still demands proof from the elites that they are humanists.
Unfortunately the way they envision that the elites should prove their humanity is by opening their wallets and sharing their wealth with the poor in order to satisfy their ever increasing demands for better life by the undeserving poor.
Someone has to put a stop to it. Because if the poor underclasses succeed in draining the wealth from the innocent elites – the whole society will collapse. Why? Because there is no way that anyone can have respect for poor elites – which is where all this business with the yellow wests in France is going.
If the elites become poor – how can they maintain that magic aura of "we are better than you" that they project on the poor and which allows to govern them? No one can have a respect for poor elites. That's why I think it's time to step up the tried and trusted method – thankfully invented by US – that when somebody doubts the generosity of the elites – just import few hundred thousand fresh new faces from the 3rd world – to prove how much the elites care and that we are all equal – not with them, but among ourselves, which is where it really counts.
Jan 03, 2019 | www.unz.com
jilles dykstra , says: January 2, 2019 at 8:56 am GMT
I miss two things.
First, in just three EU member states referenda were held in 2005 on what was called European constitution. All three two thirds negative, with, especially compared with elections now, a high % of voting. Nevertheless, the Treaty of Lisbon was signed unanimously, a treaty in essence the same as the rejected 'consitution'.
According to Farrage it was said in EP 'they do not know what they're doing'.
And so the disappearance of the nation states continued, elections in the member states, hogwash, what still is called government is no more than errand boys of Brussels.
Second capitalism. It is a great pity that this word now is used to hide what the problem is, the disappearance of the nation state. Capitalism is as old as the world, as is global trading. Thousands of years BCE traders from what is now Indonesia sailed yearly to E Africa for trade, on regulated markets, regulated informally, even without any verbal communication. What is called capitalism now, the evil capitalism, has as only cause that nation states gave their sovereignty away.
As to the ideological basis of the EU, mainly the fairy tale of the evil Germans, two world wars and the holocaust.
I must admit that until say fifteen years ago I also believed these fairy tales.
One does not expect to be lied to consistently by nearly anyone and anything.
If spreading these fairy tales was lying, can even be discussed.
I'm inclined to see just concious lying as lying.
Anyhow, these fairy tales prevented common sense to understand that culturally there is no such thing as Europe.
Culturally, thus also not economically and socially.
The Brussels love of mass immigration, forcing member states to accept in fact any migrant, is caused, I fear, by the realisation that the European Reich can only exist if the 28 or so different cultures have been destroyed, even the probablity of civil war seems acceptable to Brussels, I fear.
Jan 03, 2019 | www.unz.com
In less than two months, the yellow vests (" gilets jaunes " ) movement in France has reshaped the political landscape in Europe. For a seventh straight week, demonstrations continued across the country even after concessions from a cowed President Emmanuel Macron while inspiring a wave of similar gatherings in neighboring states like Belgium and the Netherlands. Just as el uture EU designer was fortunate enough to have friends in high places. Schuman's clemency was granted by none other than General Charles de Gaulle himself, the leader of the resistance during the war and future French President. Instantly, Schuman's turncoat reputation was rehabilitated and his wartime activity whitewashed. Even though he had knowingly voted full authority to Pétain, the retention of his post in the Vichy government was veneered to have occurred somehow without his knowledge or consent.
... ... ...
Max Parry is an independent journalist and geopolitical analyst. His work has appeared in Counterpunch, Global Research, Dissident Voice, Greanville Post, OffGuardian, and more. Max may be reached at email@example.com
JLK , says: January 2, 2019 at 5:20 am GMTOMG , says: January 2, 2019 at 8:44 am GMT
Thierry Meyssan is reporting that Macron is more of a stooge for Henry Kravis (of the KKR corporate raider firm) than for the Rothschilds. He also alleges that Kravis has been funding ISIS/Daesh.
Rothschild made a comment the other day about the Italian government debt problem. French banks have heavy exposure. France has troops in Syria; has the French army been leveraged into a mercenary force for wealthy Zionists?Justsaying , says: January 2, 2019 at 10:54 am GMT
Not a bad article 'though I have read more profound philosophical discussions about the underlying historical underpinnings to this movement. [see eg. http://www.defenddemocracy.press/the-ghost-of-1789-looms-over-france-and-europe/ .
The article by Angela Nagle which is linked to is, however, absolutely excellent and I thoroughly recommend reading it as a very powerful argument against unfettered immigration.Alfred Barnes , says: January 2, 2019 at 11:17 am GMT
Very perceptive to place "Resistance" between quotes. Resistance is non-existent in the US. True resistance requires an educated working class; instead the US has a amassed one of the most stupefied and brainwashed workers on the planet.Paul C. , says: January 2, 2019 at 12:28 pm GMT
The Yellow Jackets movement isn't lost in the US, nor among those who support DJT. In fact, until the Tea Party movement and the Occupy movement, both grass roots organized, recognize they have a common enemy in the status quo, they will continue to conquered by it.
The merge of fiscal and social responsibility is something the NWO wants to avoid at all costs while they implement their global currency and totalitarian rule. Globalists want to replace God with the state.@Jeff Stryker
France and the US, like most nations, are controlled by the parasitical zionist central bankers and their deep state apparatchiks. They continue to squeeze the native populations into poverty and servitude, while destroying their culture with open borders, facilitating 3rd world immigration. The zionist controlled MSM won't cover the Yellow Vest movement in hopes to keep awareness low. Many would like to see it gain a foothold in the US. Unfortunately, Americans have been subject to fluoridation of their water supply, unlike France, and thus are docile. The pharmaceuticals and vaccines have rendered them zombies.
Jan 02, 2019 | www.unz.com
Digital Samizdat , says: January 1, 2019 at 7:28 pm GMT@Miro23
IOW time is running out for the neo-cons, and they're only going to get Iran destroyed and hold onto power in the US through an outright Bolshevik style coup against the public (some kind of fabricated National Emergency).
Well, we already had one "fabricated national emergency" -- the 9/11 false flag. Do you think there'll be yet another? I mean something big, not like the Skripal thing.
Jan 02, 2019 | www.unz.com
Danielson , says: January 1, 2019 at 5:17 am GMTAs usual Philip Giraldi out writes the NYT hacks. Stephens and his cohorts at the Times are constantly kvetching about Israel then they scream anti-Semitism if it's pointed out. It's exhausting. I'm exhausted with neocons.wayfarer , says: January 1, 2019 at 5:46 am GMTWally , says: January 1, 2019 at 5:54 am GMT
Trotskyism : the political, economic, and social principles advocated by Trotsky especially the theory and practice of communism developed by or associated with Trotsky and usually including adherence to the concept of worldwide revolution as opposed to socialism in one country.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrotskyismExcellent timing as I just found this at http://www.antiwar.comPaul , says: January 1, 2019 at 6:40 am GMT
!! American Legion Joins VFW in Calling for Congressional Investigation of Israel's Attack on USS Liberty !!
Contains significant text, images, &videos:
https://hubpages.com/politics/American-Legion-Joins-VFW-in-Calling-for-Congressional-USS-Liberty-InvestigationPro-Zionist liberals such as those at the New York Times have the dilemma of how to oppose President Trump, who pursues pro-Zionist policies. A solution seems to be to argue that Trump is not really that pro-Zionist.Low Voltage , says: January 1, 2019 at 6:52 am GMTJohnny Rottenborough , says: Website January 1, 2019 at 10:35 am GMT
American journalism has become in its mainstream exponents a compendium of half-truths and out-and-out lies.
When was it ever any different?Israel is Bad for America, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz ReviewIsrael Is Bad for AmericaMark James , says: January 1, 2019 at 11:05 am GMT
Inspired by the Scofield Bible, it is, regrettably, a fundamental belief of millions of voters that Israel is good for America. In John Hagee's words , '50 million evangelical bible-believing Christians unite with five million American Jews standing together on behalf of Israel.'
The linked article concludes: 'Not least among the many victims of the Scofield Bible are 5 million Palestinian refugees whose right to return is fervently opposed by America's Zionized Christians. Thanks to their indoctrination by Scofield's unholy book, they believe that Palestine belongs not to the Palestinians -- many of whom are fellow Christians -- but exclusively to "God's chosen people".'I'm pleased to say I was not for moving the embassy and as for the Iran deal it was better than the alternative, with the potential for further talks down the road. Stephens didn't approve but both aspects of US foreign policy were good for the US. So why would we expect him to?Franz , says: January 1, 2019 at 11:10 am GMT
Where the clash is going to come is the Democratic party is not going to put up with this rubbish anymore. Yes there will be some holdovers (Schumer, Cardin et al.) but blanket support is not going to play with the next congress. They will lose donor support as well as media acceptance –from the Times– but Christian Zionism isn't a factor for Dem's and constituents see that a brutal Israeli government that is focusing on attaching itself to kindred spirit states led by strongman types, doesn't deserve support.Try "bad for the world."Johnny Walker Read , says: January 1, 2019 at 1:36 pm GMT
"Israel is the sputtering fuse of World War III"
– Wilmot Robertson, December, 1981, The Dispossessed MajorityIsrael is Bad for America, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz ReviewDoes anyone else remember when liberal's were anti-war and despised the military?JC , says: January 1, 2019 at 1:41 pm GMT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=170&v=gv1KEF8Uw2kIsrael is Bad for America, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Reviewwhen we here about israel as the problem it is really not israel the country but israel the people. they are spread out over many countries but all still believe in their cult of israel i have read many times how the majority of them are not even ancestors of israel but are instead converts form centuries ago there are lawsutis in the US against the government aid to israel which vilotlates US law on providing aid to an undeclares nuke power,,,and against aipac for not registering FARA,,,they have gone nowhere In my opinion, their whole power comes from media control when the media goes on and on about bogus Russian influence and says nothing of israel influence you know you have a problemHamed Ghashghavi , says: Website January 1, 2019 at 1:55 pm GMTThe World will never be free and peaceful until we can liberate AMERICAN & European politcal, economic, military, intelligentsia, educational & cultural DECISION MAKING CENTERS from destructive & inhuman ZIONIST lobby. As Stephen Walt & John Mearsheimr wrote in their unique & worldwide known "US FOREIGN POLICY AND ISRAEL LOBBY" not only these lobbying organizations are anti US interests but they are as well against the long term interests of ISRAEL itself.AkumalJack , says: January 1, 2019 at 2:04 pm GMT
Briefly we should free mind of American people before all to have a ideal and productive world.
Hamed from TehranSocial Media has opened the door and continues to pave the path for the world to see the truth of the Apartheid State of Israel and the struggle of the Palestinian People. Most Americans are struggling themselves, so many won't make the effort to learn what's happening to foreigners living half a world away. It's perfectly understandable. On the other hand, there are others of us–and the number is growing exponentially–who feel a human bond with the suffering and humiliation Palestinian People experience daily from an Apartheid "ally" who we–through our American taxes–support. Our representatives in congress are heavily influenced to vote for measures to support Netanyahu's Apartheid Regime. Use your power of the pen to reach out to your local representative in congress to stop now. And keep it up my Brothers and Sisters. Social Media is the Way!AkumalJack , says: January 1, 2019 at 2:04 pm GMTSocial Media has opened the door and continues to pave the path for the world to see the truth of the Apartheid State of Israel and the struggle of the Palestinian People. Most Americans are struggling themselves, so many won't make the effort to learn what's happening to foreigners living half a world away. It's perfectly understandable. On the other hand, there are others of us–and the number is growing exponentially–who feel a human bond with the suffering and humiliation Palestinian People experience daily from an Apartheid "ally" who we–through our American taxes–support. Our representatives in congress are heavily influenced to vote for measures to support Netanyahu's Apartheid Regime. Use your power of the pen to reach out to your local representative in congress to stop now. And keep it up my Brothers and Sisters. Social Media is the Way!Z-man , says: January 1, 2019 at 2:25 pm GMTThis is what I said on Pat Buchanan's page about a comment, very apropos to this article, also from the NY Times "That comment from the NY Times exposes how aligned the globalist leftist elite is with the NEOCON globalist elite. There's 'no daylight' between characters like 'Linda' Graham and 'Up Chuck' Schumer when it comes to globalist hegemony. Thank God for Donald and keep America First!" The comment that Pat made his point on was this: 'In Monday's editorial celebrating major figures of foreign policy in the past half-century, The New York Times wrote', "As these leaders pass from the scene, it will be left to a new generation to find a way forward from the wreckage Mr. Trump has already created." This is what Pat attacked in his column.Z-man , says: January 1, 2019 at 2:34 pm GMT
Correct me if I'm wrong but America still has NO formal alliance treaty with the Jewish State, no?
And finally 'Bret Stephens'; How clever they are with their names.@Hamed Ghashghavi The problem 'Hamed from Tehran' is that the Main Stream Media and the political class in the USA is almost completely owned by the rich 'Zionist Lobby'.bucky , says: January 1, 2019 at 2:34 pm GMT@anon It is a lot more than 4 billion a year.Carroll Price , says: January 1, 2019 at 2:50 pm GMT
For example: aid to Egypt is necessary because of Israel. It is how we pay off the dictatorship for not pressing the Palestinian issue. So add another 1.5 billion.
Aid to Palestinians: another $500 million.
Tax deductible funds going towards settlement expansion: several hundreds of million if not billion.
Aid to Jordan. Aid to Lebanon.
Add it all up and it probably is $20 billion each and every year.I wish the hell Trump was "bad for Israel", but unfortunately, he's not.ChuckOrloski , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:05 pm GMT@Mark James New Year greetings, Mark James.bucky , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:05 pm GMT
I predict proactive Jewish Lobby Stink-Think Tanks have engineered plans to dramatically influence Democrat Congress & presidential candidate elections, and which are underway now.
Elections come and go but the Zio stump-song remains the same.
First, and as you should well understand Mark, particular campaigns for US Senate cost $millions simply to get a candidate's mere "name" in front of ever longing & frustrated American voters.
Of course, such efforts are enhanced by manifold "special interests" and billionaire campaign contributions.
Regrettably, U.S. election campaign "donor support" (uh, speech?) trumps the will of the paltry amount of Americans who indulge voting, and our Zionist Corporate Media obliges the biggest beneficiary winner$, and can finagle ideologically blind & typically GOP-Christian Zionist's to bloc vote for, i.e., brand-name & repackaged Zio Democrats, Pocahontas, Bloomberg, Biden, Bob Casey, etcetera.
In short, Mark, the "brutal Israeli government" expertly followed Protocols of Zion by neutering U.S. Congressional & Presidential democratic elections, and the Zionist Corporate Media entertainingly promotes the THEATER.
National rejection of the great "rubbish" work of, for one little example, NYT's Bret Stephens, is a giant step toward how America could become gallant/noble again, and afterward repent & focus upon strivation to "greatness."
Thanks, M.J., uh, not Jordan sneaker Nikes!The proximate reason why Iran is a problem in this region is because Israel cannot resolve the Palestinian issue. Iran is basically a gigantic wag the dog. Without this external ginned up threat, Israel is simply stuck in a Palestinian mire.JoaoAlfaiate , says: January 1, 2019 at 6:36 pm GMT
A war with Iran would also serve as a pretext and cover for Israel to expel its remaining Palestinians.
This is why they amp up the Iran threat. This is why they want to draw the United States into a war with Iran. Fundamentally because they refuse to take responsibility for the Palestinian issue that they created.Just what US interests in Syria justify the risk of war with Russia? Absolutely none! Bret is an israel Firster thru and thru.bike-anarkist , says: January 1, 2019 at 7:16 pm GMT"I still say that US and Russia should come to Israels help in hour of need.JLK , says: January 1, 2019 at 7:21 pm GMT
But Israel also should stop behaving like rotten spoiled child."
Russia can provide the "Jewish Autonomous Oblast" (already exists), and the U$A can provide the means to move them there. Of course the FORMER Israel will have to pay for everything.@EliteCommInc.
I support Great Britain and France, that does not mean I approve of colonial behavior or trouncing British or French identity. I can certainly support the existence of Is areal and chagrin their attacks and encroachments onto Palestine uninvited and without compensation or shooting protectors for the matter.
I tend to agree with you on this. No matter what one thinks of the morality of the events of 1948, most of today's Israeli Jews were born on the land and have a right to live there. They're no more responsible for the sins of their grandfathers than a modern German, except to the extent that they help perpetuate continued injustice.
With that said, what frightens me is the extent to which some of them have been emboldened by a combination of unchecked ethnocentrism and a sense of immunity from scrutiny and criticism. Particularly in the realm of ethnic bioweapons. Most of the leading DNA analysis companies seem to be Jewish-owned. It seems to be an area of emphasis with them. It was reported 20 years ago that Israel has an anti-Arab virus. Who else might be a target?
Israeli participation in spyware and their access to raw NSA data is also concerning. How do we know that the data isn't be used to intimidate Americans from speaking out, or to siphon money from ordinary investors by insider trading?
Jan 02, 2019 | www.unz.com
Ron T , says: January 1, 2019 at 5:37 pm GMT@polistra Israel is hardly a normal country. It is an Apartheid Colony. That's why it needs American support and will need it for the foreseeable future. It uses its co-religionists in the US to maintain an iron grip on US mideast policy, making sure that it is at the heart of it and that almost no dissenting voices can ever be elected in the US or get any mainstream media access. If that sounds like a normal country to you, I have a bridge for sale.
Jan 02, 2019 | www.unz.com
anon  Disclaimer , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:44 pm GMTBret Stephens and all his fellow Israel loving Zionists are foreign agents who should be stripped of their US citizenship.geokat62 , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:45 pm GMT@AdirDESERT FOX , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:45 pm GMT
but as far your critisisms of Israel policy and 'undemocratic' and 'illiberal' stances and actions.
well guess what
You're missing the thrust of Giraldi's position. Israel can do whatever it likes as long as it doesn't entangle the US in their fight. But, as you well know, Israel is not interested in fighting this fight alone. It has dragged others into it, including the US. As long as the American taxpayer is forced to pay an annual tribute of ~$4B, they have every right to condemn Israeli policies that clearly don't align with their values. So, get used to it.Israel is no friend of America , never was , never has been and never will be, and just a few examples, JFK was shot and killed in full view of Americans for his executive order 11110 which would have restored America to constitutional money bypassing the FED, who benefits?The Alarmist , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:51 pm GMT
The USS Liberty was attacked by Israel killing 34 and wounding 174 in an attempt to blame the attack on Egypt and bring the U.S. into the war against Egypt and of course Israel lied about the attack and got away with it!
... ... ...Israel is Bad for America, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz ReviewYou have to hand it to the Israelis for conquering like Romans.ChuckOrloski , says: January 1, 2019 at 4:10 pm GMT
As for the US in Syria, it has always had the potential for handing us a "Charge of the Light Brigade" moment where, like in the Crimean War, we manage to keep the Russians and the Iranians checked in the region for a few years, but at a cost where even the dulled senses of the US voter can't escape the toll taken to achieve this fleeting "strategic objective."@bucky Aware, Bucky said: "This is why they amp up the Iran threat. This is why they want to draw the United States into a war with Iran."Esaka , says: January 1, 2019 at 4:40 pm GMT
Appreciate your posting of the wise sentences, above, bucky. Thanks.
Israel will never allow their territory expansion/M.E. hegemon goals to get interrupted by mere U.S. elections.
The will and desires of American voters are easily manageable, manipulated, & another major & fear-provoking "Homeland" False Flag attack, and voila, it's Fire & Fury upon Syria and Iran.@polistra
Well, Israel itself isn't bad for us. Israel is a normal country defending its own interests fiercely. Every country SHOULD defend its own interests fiercely
But it is HOW they defend those interests that is problematic. Hungary has insisted that they will never tolerate a large number of migrants in their country. Hungary will be for Hungarians. They do not wage wars, they do not commit ethnic cleansing in other people's lands. They have merely closed their borders and that is a peaceful way in which they fiercely protect their interests. The same goes for Japan. Despite a stagnating economy caused by plummeting birth rates, the Japanese insist on a strict no immigrant policy. That is a peaceful way of fiercely protecting their interests.
Israel on the other hand is anything but peaceful. They engage in ethnic cleansing and drag the US (and whoever else they can con) into their conflicts. If we are looking for a foreign example to emulate, there's no question about it – we should emulate Japan and not Israel. Japan is a civilized nation where the people genuinely love their country. Israel is a thuggish and fascist state that justly deserves all the opprobrium they shamelessly whine about.
Jan 02, 2019 | www.unz.com
bucky , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:05 pm GMTThe proximate reason why Iran is a problem in this region is because Israel cannot resolve the Palestinian issue. Iran is basically a gigantic wag the dog. Without this external ginned up threat, Israel is simply stuck in a Palestinian mire.
A war with Iran would also serve as a pretext and cover for Israel to expel its remaining Palestinians.
This is why they amp up the Iran threat. This is why they want to draw the United States into a war with Iran. Fundamentally because they refuse to take responsibility for the Palestinian issue that they created.Israel is Bad for America
bucky , says: January 1, 2019 at 2:34 pm GMT@anon It is a lot more than 4 billion a year.Z-man , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:11 pm GMT
For example: aid to Egypt is necessary because of Israel. It is how we pay off the dictatorship for not pressing the Palestinian issue. So add another 1.5 billion.
- Aid to Palestinians: another $500 million.
- Tax deductible funds going towards settlement expansion: several hundreds of million if not billion.
- Aid to Jordan. Aid to Lebanon.
- Add it all up and it probably is $20 billion each and every year.@bucky It's more that that, specifically to Izruel . If you include 'Non Governmental Agencies', the 'Charaties' and hedge funds funneling unknown amounts of ZOG bucks to the land of Zion plus other underhanded methods of getting money to their Zionist bretheren, it's in the tens of billions .Carroll Price , says: January 1, 2019 at 3:20 pm GMT@anon
Other than brain-dead Christian fundamentalist, it come's as no surprise that Jews who wrote the Old and New Testament, granted themselves special permission to violate virtually every moral law and restriction known to mankind, including the right to steal land and resources belonging to others. While, at the same time, giving themselves the right to condemn anyone daring to point-out their lying and deceptive ways.
Realist, January 1, 2019 at 7:44 pm GMT
Add it all up and it probably is $20 billion each and every year.
Middle East involvement costs trillions of dollars.
Jan 02, 2019 | www.unz.com
geokat62 , says: January 1, 2019 at 7:50 pm GMT@wayfarer
How the Globalists Stole Our Home
Great video. I especially enjoyed these remarks:
In these times, the real political debate is centered around the issues of migration and national identity. It's what Brexit was all about. It's the reason the one thing all Trump supporters really want him to do, is to build the wall. It would be an international symbol of our longing for and right to nationhood a billion dollar monument to nationalism and a trigger for nationalist revival.
This is why the forces of globalism will throw everything at stopping it's construction. If Trump leaves office and that wall is not built, his presidency will have been for naught.
Jan 01, 2019 | www.unz.com
American journalism has become in its mainstream exponents a compendium of half-truths and out-and-out lies. The public, though poorly informed on most issues as a result, has generally figured out that it is being hoodwinked and trust in the Fourth Estate has plummeted over the past twenty years. The skepticism about what is being reported has enabled President Donald Trump and other politicians to evade serious questions about policy by claiming that what is being reported is little more than "fake news."
No news is more fake than the reporting in the U.S. media that relates to the state of Israel. Former Illinois congressman Paul Findley in his seminal book They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby observed that nearly all the foreign press correspondents working out of Israel are Jewish while most of the editors that they report to at news desks are also Jews, guaranteeing that the articles that eventually surface in the newspapers will be carefully constructed to minimize any criticism of the Jewish state. The same goes for television news, particularly on cable news stations like CNN.
A particularly galling aspect of the sanitization of news reports regarding Israel is the underlying assumption that Israelis share American values and interests, to include freedom and democracy. This leads to the perception that Israelis are just like Americans with Israel's enemies being America's enemies. Given that, it is natural to believe that the United States and Israel are permanent allies and friends and that it is in the U.S. interest to do whatever is necessary to support Israel, including providing billions of dollars in aid to a country that is already wealthy as well as unlimited political cover in international bodies like the United Nations.
That bogus but nevertheless seemingly eternal bond is essentially the point from which a December 26 th op-ed in The New York Times departs. The piece is by one of the Times' resident opinion writers Bret Stephens and is entitled Donald Trump is Bad for Israel .
Stephens gets to the point rather quickly, claiming that "The president has abruptly undermined Israel's security following a phone call with an Islamist strongman in Turkey. So much for the idea, common on the right, that this is the most pro-Israel administration ever. I write this as someone who supported Trump moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and who praised his decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal as courageous and correct . I also would have opposed the president's decision to remove U.S. forces from Syria under nearly any circumstances. Contrary to the invidious myth that neoconservatives always put Israel first, the reasons for staying in Syria have everything to do with core U.S. interests. Among them: Keeping ISIS beaten, keeping faith with the Kurds, maintaining leverage in Syria and preventing Russia and Iran from consolidating their grip on the Levant."
The beauty of Stephens overwrought prose is that the careful reader might realize from the git-go that the argument being promoted makes no sense. Bret has a big heart for the Kurds but the Palestinians are invisible in his piece while his knowledge of other developments in the Middle East is superficial. First of all, the phone call with Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had nothing to do with "undermining Israel's security." It concerned the northern border of Syria, which Turkey shares, and arrangements for working with the Kurds, which is a vital interest for both Ankara and Washington. And it might be added that from a U.S. national security point of view Turkey is an essential partner for the United States in the region while Israel is not, no matter what it pretends to be.
Stephens then goes on to demonstrate what he claims to be a libel, that for him and other neocons Israel always comes first, an odd assertion given the fact that he spends 80% of his article discussing what is or isn't good for Israel. He supports the U.S. Embassy move to Jerusalem, the end of the nuclear agreement with Iran, both of which were applauded in Israel but which are extremely damaging to American interests. He attacks the planned withdrawal from Syria because it is a "core interest" for the U.S., which is complete nonsense.
Contrary to Stephens' no evidence assertion, Russia and Iran have neither the resources nor the desire to "consolidate[e] their grip on the Levant" while it is the United States has no right and no real interest to "maintain leverage" on Syria by invading and occupying the country. But, of course, invading and occupying are practices that Israel is good at, so Stephens' brain fart on the issue can perhaps be attributed to confusion over whose bad policies he was defending. Stephens also demonstrate confusion over his insistence that the U.S. must "resist foreign aggressors the Russians and Iranians in Syria in this decade," suggesting that he is unaware that both nations are providing assistance at the request of the legitimate government in Damascus. It is the U.S. and Israel that are the aggressors in Syria.
Stephens then looks at the situation from the "Israeli standpoint," which is presumably is easy for him to do as that is how he looks at everything given the fact that he is far more concerned about Israel's interests than those of the United States. Indeed, all of his opinions are based on the assumption that U.S. policy should be supportive of a rightwing Israeli government, that of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who has recently been indicted for corruption and has called for an early election to subvert the process.
Bret finally comes to the point, writing that "What Israel most needs from the U.S. today is what it needed at its birth in 1948: an America committed to defending the liberal-international order against totalitarian enemies, as opposed to one that conducts a purely transactional foreign policy based on the needs of the moment or the whims of a president."
Stephens then expands on what it means to be liberal-international: "It means we should oppose militant religious fundamentalism, whether it is Wahhabis in Riyadh or Khomeinists in Tehran or Muslim Brothers in Cairo and Ankara. It means we should advocate human rights, civil liberties, and democratic institutions, in that order."
Bret also throws America's two most recent presidents under the bus in his jeremiad, saying "During the eight years of the Obama presidency, I thought U.S. policy toward Israel -- the hectoring , the incompetent diplomatic interventions , the moral equivocations , the Iran deal , the backstabbing at the U.N. -- couldn't get worse. As with so much else, Donald Trump succeeds in making his predecessors look good." He then asks "Is any of this good for Israel?" and he answers "no."
Bret Stephens in his complaining reveals himself to be undeniably all about Israel, but consider what he is actually saying. He claims to be against "militant religious fundamentalism," but isn't that what Israeli Zionism is all about, with more than a dash of racism and fanaticism thrown in for good measure? One Israeli Chief Rabbi has called black people "monkeys" while another has declared that gentiles cannot live in Israel. Right-wing religious fundamentalist parties currently are in power with Netanyahu and are policy making for the Israeli Government: Shas, Jewish Home, and United Torah Judaism. None of them could be regarded as a moderating influence on their thuggish serial financial lawbreaker Prime Minister.
And isn't Israel's record on human rights and civil liberties among the worst in the world? Here is the Human Rights Watch's assessment of Israel :
"Israel maintains entrenched discriminatory systems that treat Palestinians unequally. Its 50-year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza involves systematic rights abuses, including collective punishment, routine use of excessive lethal force, and prolonged administrative detention without charge or trial for hundreds. It builds and supports illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, expropriating Palestinian land and imposing burdens on Palestinians but not on settlers, restricting their access to basic services and making it nearly impossible for them to build in much of the West Bank without risking demolition. Israel's decade-long closure of Gaza, supported by Egypt, severely restricts the movement of people and goods, with devastating humanitarian impact."
Israel, if one is considering the entire population under its rule, is among the most undemocratic states that chooses to call itself democratic. Much of the population living in lands that Israel claims cannot vote, they have no freedom of movement in their homeland, and they have no right of return to homes that they were forced to abandon. Israeli army snipers blithely shoot unarmed demonstrators while Netanyahu's government kills, beats and imprisons children. And the Jewish state does not even operate very democratically even inside Israel itself, with special rights for Jewish citizens and areas and whole towns where Muslims or Christians are not allowed to buy property or reside.
It is time for American Jews like Bret Stephens to come to the realization that not everything that is good for Israel is good for the U.S. The strategic interests of the two countries, if they were openly discussed in either the media or in congress, would be seen to be often in direct conflict. Somehow in Stephens' twisted mind the 1948 theft of Palestinian lands and the imposition of an apartheid system to control the people is in some way representative of a liberal world order.
If one were to suggest that Stephens should move to Israel since his primary loyalty clearly lies there, there would be accusations of anti-Semitism, but in a sense, it is far better to have him stick around blathering from the pulpit of The New York Times . When he writes so ineptly about how Donald Trump Is Bad for Israel the real message that comes through loud and clear is how bad Israel is for America.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is firstname.lastname@example.org .