The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 George Szamuely Archive
NATO’s Fraudulent War on Behalf of Women
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Photo by Bill Smith | CC BY 2.0
Photo by Bill Smith | CC BY 2.0

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In a recent Guardian article titled “Why NATO Must Defend Women’s Rights,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Soltenberg and Hollywood movie star Angelina Jolie assert that “NATO has the responsibility and opportunity to be a leading protector of women’s rights.” NATO, moreover, “can become the global military leader in how to prevent and respond to sexual violence in conflict.” The two vowed to identify “ways in which NATO can strengthen its contribution to women’s protection and participation in all aspects of conflict-prevention and resolution.”

The pairing of a NATO bureaucrat and a famous movie actress may at first glance appear odd. However, this partnership has been long in the making. Some years ago, NATO, always on the lookout for a reason to justify its continued existence, not to mention its perpetual expansion, came up with a new raison d’être: It would be the global champion of women. “Achieving gender equality is our collective task. And NATO is doing its part,” said Mari Skåre, the NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative for Women, Peace and Security, in 2013. In March 2016, on International Women’s Day, NATO held a so-called “Barbershop Conference” on gender equality. Stoltenberg took the opportunity to declare that gender equality was a frightfully important issue for NATO because “NATO is a values-based organization and none of the Alliance’s fundamental values—individual liberties, democracy, human rights and the rule of law—work without equality.” Diversity was a source of strength. “We learned in Afghanistan and in the Balkans that by integrating gender within our operations, we make a tangible difference to the lives of women and children,” Stoltenberg explained. He stressed that NATO is proud of its record in embedding gender perspectives within its work. Last November, Stoltenberg was at it again: “Empowering women is not just the right thing to do, it’s the smart thing to do: it makes countries safer and more stable. NATO is determined to make a difference.”

NATO has indeed made a difference but not through empowering women. When it isn’t bombing, killing, blowing up bridges and buildings, destroying wedding receptions, empowering jihadis, triggering refugee flows and ruining the lives of countless women, NATO holds unctuous press briefings, organizes self-congratulatory conferences and publishes articles such as the one by Stoltenberg/Jolie seeking to present a gargantuan 29-state military coalition as a do-gooder charity helping out the needy.

This is where Angelina Jolie comes in. Jolie is a goodwill ambassador of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and, in that capacity, wanders around the world berating the “international community” for not doing enough to address humanitarian crises. Her take on these crises is invariably the same as that of NATO. “It is important that we intervene in a timely fashion,” she once explained, “diplomatically if we can, with force if we must.” In October 2011, following seven months of relentless NATO bombing, Jolie rushed to Libya and excitedly hailed the Libyan “revolution”:

I’m…here on behalf of the Libyan people to show them solidarity. I think this revolution on behalf of human rights, which is what I feel these people really have been doing and what they have pushed for, and to help them to implement these new laws and help them with the future of their country.

ORDER IT NOW

Sometimes it’s breathless enthusiasm for “revolution,” sometimes it’s tearful pleading for plain, old-fashioned “humanitarian intervention”—Angelina Jolie is nothing if not consistent in her advocacy for Western use of force. When it comes to Syria, Jolie has declared that “some form of intervention is absolutely necessary.” She sneered at the U.N. Security Council permanent members that stood in the way of intervention. “I feel very strongly that the use of a veto when you have financial interests in the country should be questioned and the use of a veto against humanitarian intervention should be questioned,” she said in an interview. Jolie was of course simply echoing the blustery words of the Obama administration. Recall Susan Rice’s tirade following Russia’s and China’s veto of a February 2012 Security Council resolution calling for Bashar al Assad to step aside and for the Syrian army to return to its barracks. Rice, then U.S. permanent representative at the U.N., called the vetoes “disgusting and shameful.” The countries “that have blocked potentially the last effort to resolve this peacefully…will have any future blood spill on their hands.”

This kind of attack on the veto-wielding Security Council members has become a staple of the humanitarian intervention crowd. For example, former French President François Hollande told the U.N. General Assembly in September 2013 that when mass atrocities were taking place, U.N. Security Council permanent members must give up their veto powers:

The U.N. has a responsibility to take action. And whenever our organization proves to be powerless, it’s peace that pays the price. That’s why I am proposing that a code of good conduct be defined by the permanent members of the Security Council, and that in the event of a mass crime they can decide to collectively renounce their veto powers.

Taking action, of course, means taking military action. It never means, say, the lifting of sanctions so that food, oil, medical supplies could get through. To the contrary, if military action is ruled out, the humanitarians immediately resort to demanding the tightening of sanctions. Interventionists such as Hollande, Rice, et al., never explain why it is necessary for U.N. permanent members to give up their veto if the right course of action is so self-evident. The unstated assumption obviously is that any reluctance to sanction the use of force must be motivated by moral failings such as greed, selfishness, political ambition or lack of compassion.

The heartlessness of the so-called international community was the message of the 2011 film she wrote and directed about the 1992-95 war in Bosnia, In the Land of Blood and Honey. The film, she said, points a “finger at the international community, which should have intervened in the Bosnian war was much sooner.” She proudly boasted that among the experts she consulted in making the film were Richard Holbrooke and Wesley Clark, two figures who played prominent roles in the devastation of Bosnia and Kosovo. The film, predictably, features villainous Serbs persecuting innocent Muslims. Asked whether her film should have been a little more balanced, Jolie replied “The fact is that the war was not balanced. I could not make a film where it’s 50-50. It’s inaccurate to what happened.” This is standard NATO stuff, particularly the part about NATO’s military intervention as having finally brought peace to Bosnia.

Jolie is useful to NATO not only because she can be relied on to echo the military alliance’s self-justifying rationales for its favored solution to any problem, namely, the threat to use force. Jolie’s is the glamorous face of NATO’s revamped PR campaign. NATO would have us believe that it’s not only bringing enlightenment to backward societies but also to us, NATO member-state citizens, by informing us about something of which we had hitherto been apparently unaware: sexual violence occurs during wartime. The obvious remedy—doing everything possible to avoid war—is not one that either NATO or Jolie favors. NATO can’t very well be expected to advocate itself out of existence. In NATOspeak you threaten and defend military action even as you bemoan in lachrymose terms its predictable consequences, namely, war crimes, including sexual crimes.

In April 2014, Jolie traipsed around the Balkans with British Foreign Secretary William Hague, visiting the Srebrenica memorial center in Potocari, Bosnia. During the visit, Jolie stated, “The use of rape as a weapon of war is one of the most harrowing and savage of these crimes against civilians. This is rape so brutal, with such extreme violence, that it is even hard to talk about it.” Hague and Jolie jointly launched a campaign called Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative, the goal of which was “to address the culture of impunity, ensure more perpetrators are brought to justice and ensure better support for survivors. We’re campaigning to raise awareness, rally global action, promote international coherence and increase the political will and capacity of states to do more.”

Hague earnestly explained, “I started this campaign with Angelina Jolie because foreign policy has got to be about more than just dealing with urgent crises—it has to be about improving the condition of humanity.” Then Hague warmed to his theme: “Tens of thousands of women, girls and men were raped during the war in Bosnia. We are visiting to draw the world’s attention to their search for justice, and to call for global action to end the use of rape as a weapon of war once and for all.” In a BBC interview Hague claimed that sexual violence in conflict was “one of the great mass crimes of the 20th century and the 21st century….If anything, this is getting worse—war zone rape as a weapon of war, used systematically and deliberately against civilian populations.”

Hague was of course British foreign secretary during NATO’s 2011 Libyan bombing campaign. It hardly needs to be said that NATO did nothing to help Libya’s women. To the contrary: Thousands of women lost their lives as a direct result of NATO and Hague’s humanitarian bombs. NATO destroyed government, law and public order, institutions that before its intervention had protected the women of Libya from sexual crimes. Most striking of all, NATO helped deliver perhaps millions of women into the hands of ISIS. Here is an account of the record of ISIS rule in Libya from Human Rights Watch (a reliably pro-interventionist outfit) in its 2017 country report on Libya: “In the first half of 2016, fighters loyal to ISIS controlled the central coastal town of Sirte and subjected residents to a rigid interpretation of Sharia law that included public floggings, amputation of limbs, and public lynchings, often leaving the victims’ corpses on display.”

Not to worry: In June 2014, Hague and Jolie co-hosted in London a grand three-day Global Summit to End Sexual Violence. Participants included Secretary of State John Kerry and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. According to one report, the summit cost £5.2 million to host. The food bill alone was more than £299,000, while total expenditure on taxis, hotels and transport reached £576,000. Jolie declared:

We need to shatter that culture of impunity and make justice the norm, not the exception, for these crimes. We need political will, replicated across the world, and we need to treat this subject as a priority. We need to see real commitment and go after the worst perpetrators, to fund proper protection for vulnerable people, and to step in to help the worst-affected countries. We need all armies, peacekeeping troops and police forces to have prevention of sexual violence in conflict as part of their training.

Punishing the perpetrators of sexual violence sounds laudable enough. The trouble is that NATO’s record of making incendiary charges and then failing to back them up with serious evidence is not one that inspires confidence. During the Bosnian war, for example, the media reported obsessively on the use of rape as an instrument of war. In 1992, Dame Ann Warburton’s European parliamentary delegation estimated that 20,000 rapes had already taken place in Bosnia. In January 1993, Newsweek carried a lengthy cover-story charging Serbs with the rape of as many as 50,000 women, mostly Muslim, as part of “deliberate programs to impregnate Muslim women with unwanted Serb babies.”

Systematic research on the subject however resulted in findings that were insufficiently dramatic to make it into the papers. On Jan. 29, 1994, the U.N. secretary-general issued a report on rapes in the former Yugoslavia, including Bosnia and Croatia, based on a study by the U.N. Commission of Experts. The report found “126 victims, 113 incidents, 252 alleged perpetrators, 73 witnesses.” The report also stated “some of the rape cases” were “clearly the result of individual or small-group conduct without evidence of command responsibility. Others may be part of an overall pattern. Because of a variety of factors, such a pattern may lead to a conclusion that a systematic rape policy existed, but this remains to be proved.”

Allegations of mass rape were a key component of NATO’s propaganda campaign during the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia. British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook regaled the public with lurid tales of Serbs forcing women “to endure ‘systematic rape’ at an army camp at Djakovica.” Clare Short, Britain’s international development secretary, added that the rapes were “deliberately performed in front of children, fathers and brothers.” The British Foreign Office followed up with claims of having discovered three more rape camps: “Refugees reported orchestrated rapes at Globocica, Urosevac and an unidentified point on the Kosovo-Albania border.” Subsequently, when it was too late to matter, the media sheepishly admitted that the rape-camp stories, like most of NATO’s allegations, were a fabrication. The Washington Post reported that “Western accusations that there were Serb-run rape camps in the cities of Djakovica and Pec, and poorly sourced allegations in some publications that the Serbs were engaging in the mutilation of the living and the dead—including castration and decapitation—all proved to be false.” Even Human Rights Watch’s Fred Abrahams, who had worked as an investigator for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, admitted in testimony that he had found no evidence to support the incendiary rape-camp allegations.

Still, NATO remained undeterred. During NATO’s next campaign, the one directed against Libya, rape stories made their appearance within days of the launch of the first bombs. Susan Rice, the U.S. Permanent Representative at the U.N., informed the Security Council that Libya’s leader, Muammar Qaddafi, was supplying his troops with Viagra in order to help them commit mass rape. Though Rice offered no evidence to support her claims, her charge was sufficient for the International Criminal Court prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, to announce that he had “information to confirm that it was a policy in Libya to rape those who were against the Government. Rape is a new aspect of the repression.” Moreno-Ocampo even accepted as confirmed Rice’s Viagra story: “We are finding some elements confirming this issue of acquisition of Viagra-type of medicaments to show a policy. They were buying containers with products to enhance the possibility to rape, and we are getting the information in detail confirming the policy.”

In the end, predictably enough, NATO’s rape allegations turned out to have been made up out of whole cloth. Donatella Rovera, a senior crisis response adviser for Amnesty International, reported that the organization had “not found any evidence or a single victim of rape or a doctor who knew about somebody being raped.” Rovera also dismissed the Viagra story. She said that “rebels dealing with the foreign media in Benghazi started showing journalists packets of Viagra, claiming they came from burned-out tanks, though it is unclear why the packets were not charred.”

Though one allegation after another has proved to be false, NATO will continue to make them, seizing on whatever is the hot-button issue of the moment. NATO does nothing for women and does nothing to stop sexual crimes, whether in NATO member-states or anywhere else in the world. What NATO does do well, thanks to its multimillion dollar sophisticated PR machinery, is seizing on highly emotional issues such as rape and turning them into justifications for bigger budgets, more weaponry, more expansion, more deployments in more countries and, in the end, military action.

George Szamuely, PhD, author of Bombs for Peace: NATO’s Humanitarian War on Yugoslavia, is Senior Research Fellow at the Global Policy Institute of London Metropolitan University.

(Republished by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 120 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Randal says:

    LOL! NATO as the military orders of the modern SJW world-religion, laying waste to benighted third world countries in order to make them safe for feminists, homos, and lobbied minorities of all kinds.

    And Angelina Jolie, exhibit one in the case against giving celebrity entertainers, whether actors and actresses, singers, dancers, sportsmen and women, or whatever, the kind of monetary and cultural influence they have attained over the past century or two, thanks to technological and legal developments.

    What a shitty world we are building.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Oh, shit!

    .....Stoltenberg and Hollywood movie star Angelina Jolie assert that “NATO has the responsibility and opportunity to be a leading protector of women’s rights.”

    Ending gender-based violence is a vital issue of peace and security as well as of social justice. Nato can be a leader in this effort.
     
    Is this what the #MeToo and Time's Up movements were geared up for?
    , @Wally
    And where is Jolie's calls for action & condemnation of the ongoing massive rapes perpetuated by US blacks?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. History is full of ironies. George Szamuely’s great uncle was Hungarian Bolshevik thug, Tibor Szamuely, who killed hundreds of civilians during the so called Hungarian Revolution in 1919. Certainly, far more than the Serbs ever did in Kosovo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    George Szamuely’s great uncle was Hungarian Bolshevik thug, Tibor Szamuely, who killed hundreds of civilians during the so called Hungarian Revolution in 1919
     
    Hungarian Bolsheviks killed thousands in the 1919 reverse pogrom-revolution-looting frenzy after WWI. Unless poor Tibor was too busy writing revolutionary pamphlets, we should credit him with more than just 'hundreds'. It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler. It scared the soap-using class into an irrational fear and we soon got WWII.

    But holding someone responsible for the acts of distant relatives is a slippery slope. Great uncle is 12.5% of one's DNA, I would give him a break. I once run into a proud grandson of a prominent member of Bela Kun's inner circle. And guess what? Yes, he was working for the State Department 'protecting innocents', again. It must run in the family. Irony, indeed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It is very depressing to see airhead celebrities become spokespersons for causes that they have no understanding of and to be applauded and given royal treatment as though they have some great insights. People who go into acting aren’t exactly our best and brightest. There’s a vast amount of stupidity out there, apparently, and using over-the-hill celebrities for the public face of propaganda campaigns such as this is really cynical. US-NATO have ruined the lives of millions yet have the effrontery to advertise themselves as being ‘humanitarian’ bombers and destroyers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Generals famously always re-fight the last war, correcting the mistakes made last time when times and circumstances have long changed and the “lessons” of yesteryear may no longer apply.

    Angelina Jolie is the U.S. military’s answer, 50 years later, to the “Hanoi Jane” PR disaster in Vietnam.

    It will end in tears.

    Perhaps some enterprising folks should start printing up AJ urinal targets?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. anon • Disclaimer says:

    You just know you are in a whacked out moribund military alliance when Angelina Jolie is helping to define its strategy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. SanityClaus says: • Website

    BritishEmpire/N.A.T.O. IS A HEROINE MAFIA.
    Angelina Jolie is a heroin pusher whore.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    The British Empire had a positive side to it. NATO does not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Alden says:

    I just had to laugh I remember that Bosnia Serb war. I never believed a word about the evil Christian Serbs abusing the innocent virtuous Bosnian Muslims.

    Funny how things change. For decades after WW2 liberals just adored the Serbians because communist Serbs took over Yugoslavia.

    In the 1990s they hated the Serbs because they were fighting Bosnian Muslims.

    What exactly is Angelina’s appeal? The only pretty thing about her is her hair color. Much too skinny arms and legs ugly face, fat cheeks, lips like two hot dogs Her cheeks look like she has grapefruits in her mouth. Even in her Lara Croft swim suit she was much too skinny.

    She’s trying to turn her oldest natural child, a beautiful girl who looks like the Pitts into a boy with hormone suppression therapy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. RobinG says:
    @Randal
    LOL! NATO as the military orders of the modern SJW world-religion, laying waste to benighted third world countries in order to make them safe for feminists, homos, and lobbied minorities of all kinds.

    And Angelina Jolie, exhibit one in the case against giving celebrity entertainers, whether actors and actresses, singers, dancers, sportsmen and women, or whatever, the kind of monetary and cultural influence they have attained over the past century or two, thanks to technological and legal developments.

    What a shitty world we are building.

    Oh, shit!

    …..Stoltenberg and Hollywood movie star Angelina Jolie assert that “NATO has the responsibility and opportunity to be a leading protector of women’s rights.”

    Ending gender-based violence is a vital issue of peace and security as well as of social justice. Nato can be a leader in this effort.

    Is this what the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements were geared up for?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. This is so bad, so disgusting, and inspires such contempt that I think it a good thing.

    Hypocrisy is something even a retard understands. So bring it on NATO. Next up, Explosions for Silence and Disembowlment to Settle the Stomach.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Wally says: • Website
    @Randal
    LOL! NATO as the military orders of the modern SJW world-religion, laying waste to benighted third world countries in order to make them safe for feminists, homos, and lobbied minorities of all kinds.

    And Angelina Jolie, exhibit one in the case against giving celebrity entertainers, whether actors and actresses, singers, dancers, sportsmen and women, or whatever, the kind of monetary and cultural influence they have attained over the past century or two, thanks to technological and legal developments.

    What a shitty world we are building.

    And where is Jolie’s calls for action & condemnation of the ongoing massive rapes perpetuated by US blacks?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Like every other American she probably had to read To Kill a Mockingbird in every grade from 6th to 12th and is convinced that evil White women lie about blacks raping them.

    She has to come up with new publicity stunts every few years. First cutting herself, tattoos and drugs Then adopting third world kids. Then living with Brad Pitt.

    When that got stale they finally got married but few paid much attention.

    Then she declared one of the kids had been wrongly assigned to be a girl at birth and gave the kid hormone therapy.

    Few paid attention

    Then she accused Pitt of child abuse and filed for divorce. Even the national inquirer didn’t pay much attention

    This is her latest PR stunt.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Alden says:
    @Wally
    And where is Jolie's calls for action & condemnation of the ongoing massive rapes perpetuated by US blacks?

    Like every other American she probably had to read To Kill a Mockingbird in every grade from 6th to 12th and is convinced that evil White women lie about blacks raping them.

    She has to come up with new publicity stunts every few years. First cutting herself, tattoos and drugs Then adopting third world kids. Then living with Brad Pitt.

    When that got stale they finally got married but few paid much attention.

    Then she declared one of the kids had been wrongly assigned to be a girl at birth and gave the kid hormone therapy.

    Few paid attention

    Then she accused Pitt of child abuse and filed for divorce. Even the national inquirer didn’t pay much attention

    This is her latest PR stunt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    Then [Jolie] declared one of [her own biological] kids had been wrongly assigned to be a girl at birth ...
     
    By Jove, this Cult-Marx/Marx-Cult "assigned" bullcrap is catching on even among people who should know better. The biological sex of a person is a fact that can be objectively verified, not a subjective "assignment" subject to multiple revisions at the whim of the "assigner(ette)."

    If I think I am a seagull, does that make me a seagull?

    The biological sex of a person is an objective fact which can be readily and reliably ascertained using modern diagnostic techniques. Cells with XX chromosomes are female, XY are male, XXY and XYY are very rare flukes.

    Bodies with primary sexual organs matching the chromosome patterns are biologically female or male. Mismatches between organ development and chromosomes happens only in very rare cases.

    Gender dysphoria is a real but relatively rare phenomenon. Importantly, however, there is a difference between a person feeling that she/he should be another sex, and a person feeling that he/she actually is a sex other than the one he/she was raised as.

    THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: If Jane weighs 150 pounds but wishes that she weighed 130 pounds, she may be suffering from a common weight dysphoria.

    On the other hand, if 150 pound Jane honestly believes in her own mind that she weighs 130 pounds notwithstanding the lies daily told by her bathroom scales, then her problem is of a very different character than mere weight dysphoria, and no mere diet is likely to bridge the cognitive dissonance.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. When the US, NATO, Mrs Angelina Pitt (Jolie), NATO Secretary-General Jens Soltenberg, Hollywood and the UN begin advocating that women put their lives on the line in the same manner as men in combat, I might consider their m oral edicts on a host of war related issues.

    I do appreciate the sincerity of Mrs Pitt, but her liberal advocacy is wanting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    American feminazis have pushed for women in combat for decades. And our military has agreed to put women in combat.

    As the American military goes, so goes NATO.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. In light of the allegations of sexual harassment by movie producers such as Harvey Weinstein, can we expect an invasion of Hollywood? That might be a genuinely useful NATO mission!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. Systematic research on the subject however resulted in findings that were insufficiently dramatic to make it into the papers. On Jan. 29, 1994, the U.N. secretary-general issued a report on rapes in the former Yugoslavia, including Bosnia and Croatia, based on a study by the U.N. Commission of Experts. The report found “126 victims, 113 incidents, 252 alleged perpetrators, 73 witnesses.” The report also stated “some of the rape cases” were “clearly the result of individual or small-group conduct without evidence of command responsibility. Others may be part of an overall pattern. Because of a variety of factors, such a pattern may lead to a conclusion that a systematic rape policy existed, but this remains to be proved.”

    This is a lie. So called UN “experts” were trying to cover up Serbian policy of ethnic cleansing which was supported by British, French, and in early periods, by USA. There were thousands of women systematically raped, and vast majority of them by Serbian paramilitary forces.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-croatia-rape/croatia-passes-law-to-compensate-war-rape-victims-idUKKBN0OE1M820150529

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_Bosnian_War

    Since I am a Croat whose family has participated, virtually all of us, in our War for Independence, I may be accused of partiality.

    But, I don’t care: Mr. Szamuely, as far as this question goes- you are liar.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Robjil
    The whole Yugoslav "independence" movement was a farce. It created in order for NATO to control Yugoslavia. It worked sadly for the people of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was the founder of the non-aligned nations movement. After the fall of the USSR, the Unipolar hubris Full spectrum dominance agenda of the US went in full spring. Yugoslavia and Iraq were the first victims of this agenda in 1990s. Albright said 500000 children dying in Iraq from sanctions in 1990s was "good" for the cause on 60 minutes. Here is an article about a CIA agent and his work to destroy Yugoslavia for the 1776 US's Full spectrum dominance agenda.
    http://www.ebritic.com/?p=213256
    , @Antiwar7
    The first article you reference shows one victim. The Wikipedia article is dominated by the accepted Western groupthink, that the Serbs were the unique villains, which is blatantly false.

    The number of claimed rape victims in the former Yugoslavia wars were themselves attempted acts of war (Haris Silajdzic claiming 50,000 rape victims with no evidence was intended to get arms and military intervention for his side, for example).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. NATO is not the UN.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Macintosh says:

    @ Bardon Kaldian
    If I were you I would avoid freely admitting that you and your family participated in the Croatian “independence” war. People may think you are war criminals with all the war crimes that were perpetrated there by the Croats allied with NATO…

    http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/croatia-s-operation-storm-crimes-unpunished-22-years-on-08-03-2017

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    If I were you I would avoid freely admitting that you and your family participated in the Croatian “independence” war. People may think you are war criminals with all the war crimes that were perpetrated there by the Croats allied with NATO…
     
    Don't worry, I'm accustomed to pro-Serbian ideological faggotry.
    Here what Serbs are, if you understand Serbian (it is from their eminent military analyst, Miroslav Lazanski who is known to be an almost lunatic hawk; it is about Serbian JNA war with Croatia in 1991):
    http://www.intermagazin.rs/miroslav-lazanski-sta-se-krije-iza-oslobadjanja-seselja/ But, basics are here, in translation:
    ................................................
    (Why were Serbian irregulars necessary)

    Out of 37 mobilized JNA brigades in Serbia, Montenegro & Bosnia and Herzegovina during 1991. & the beginning of 1992, 33 brigades either fell apart, or ran away. In Croatia the following brigades were running away: 145. Lika brigade, 4. and 5. Kordun brigade, 11. brigade from Dvor had been fleeing 7 times before (Croatian) ZNG, much less equipped & numerous. 2nd motorized brigade from Valjevo, Serbia, descendants of famous (WW I) Drina division, fled from Tovarnik (Slavonia, Croatia), leaving behind them 7 tanks & 50 armored vehicles.
    .........................
    No-we are not impressed, not at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Angelika Joly is the great person. She contributed greatly to the causes of feminism.
    She is the one who volunteered as a person in perfecting artificial boobs and creating artificial vagina.
    Her artificial vagina went through severe testing by multitude of Zionists, and she came out with flying colors. She is true pioneer.

    Read More
    • LOL: Alden
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Robjil says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Systematic research on the subject however resulted in findings that were insufficiently dramatic to make it into the papers. On Jan. 29, 1994, the U.N. secretary-general issued a report on rapes in the former Yugoslavia, including Bosnia and Croatia, based on a study by the U.N. Commission of Experts. The report found “126 victims, 113 incidents, 252 alleged perpetrators, 73 witnesses.” The report also stated “some of the rape cases” were “clearly the result of individual or small-group conduct without evidence of command responsibility. Others may be part of an overall pattern. Because of a variety of factors, such a pattern may lead to a conclusion that a systematic rape policy existed, but this remains to be proved.”
     
    This is a lie. So called UN "experts" were trying to cover up Serbian policy of ethnic cleansing which was supported by British, French, and in early periods, by USA. There were thousands of women systematically raped, and vast majority of them by Serbian paramilitary forces.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-croatia-rape/croatia-passes-law-to-compensate-war-rape-victims-idUKKBN0OE1M820150529

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_Bosnian_War

    Since I am a Croat whose family has participated, virtually all of us, in our War for Independence, I may be accused of partiality.

    But, I don't care: Mr. Szamuely, as far as this question goes- you are liar.

    The whole Yugoslav “independence” movement was a farce. It created in order for NATO to control Yugoslavia. It worked sadly for the people of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was the founder of the non-aligned nations movement. After the fall of the USSR, the Unipolar hubris Full spectrum dominance agenda of the US went in full spring. Yugoslavia and Iraq were the first victims of this agenda in 1990s. Albright said 500000 children dying in Iraq from sanctions in 1990s was “good” for the cause on 60 minutes. Here is an article about a CIA agent and his work to destroy Yugoslavia for the 1776 US’s Full spectrum dominance agenda.

    http://www.ebritic.com/?p=213256

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    You (and most people here) are utterly clueless about what had happened in past 4 decades in a country which was Yugoslavia. You don't know history, ideology, demography, national identity, economy, culture... spanning past 1000 or so years of nations that constituted this multinational (not "multiethnic"- English is too imprecise a language when it comes to national identity) land.

    So, it is absolute waste of time to argue about anything with anyone about this topic.
    , @polskijoe
    Its divide and conquer. Yugoslavia was a perfect example.

    It shows what happens to neutral countries who dont have a strong military.
    Someone will abuse them.

    I wish a future Visegrad 4 plus or V8 was neutral. It would make perfect sense. But either EU/NATO/Russia can exploit, because V8 still wouldnt be a superpower.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. This Jolie woman appears to be such an extreme example of “the useful idiot” that she slips over in cliche & the utterly ridiculous.
    That’s not to suggest though that she doesn’t behave from the most cynical & self interested motives: she’s not that kind of idiot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @animalogic
    Sorry, not "cliche" but "caricature".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. wayfarer says:

    Rothschild Zionist Israel, enabling a Muslim rape epidemic in the Western world.

    “Taharrush Gamea,” coming to a neighborhood near you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. @Robjil
    The whole Yugoslav "independence" movement was a farce. It created in order for NATO to control Yugoslavia. It worked sadly for the people of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was the founder of the non-aligned nations movement. After the fall of the USSR, the Unipolar hubris Full spectrum dominance agenda of the US went in full spring. Yugoslavia and Iraq were the first victims of this agenda in 1990s. Albright said 500000 children dying in Iraq from sanctions in 1990s was "good" for the cause on 60 minutes. Here is an article about a CIA agent and his work to destroy Yugoslavia for the 1776 US's Full spectrum dominance agenda.
    http://www.ebritic.com/?p=213256

    You (and most people here) are utterly clueless about what had happened in past 4 decades in a country which was Yugoslavia. You don’t know history, ideology, demography, national identity, economy, culture… spanning past 1000 or so years of nations that constituted this multinational (not “multiethnic”- English is too imprecise a language when it comes to national identity) land.

    So, it is absolute waste of time to argue about anything with anyone about this topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Robjil
    I know a lot about Yugoslavia. I have been there twice before the CIA's destruction of Yugoslavia in 1991-99. Here is another article about how the CIA destroyed Yugoslavia to control it.

    http://www.awdnews.com/top-news/ex-cia-agent-we-got-millions-to-destroy-yugoslavia
    , @Wally
    Except your claims against Serbia are fraudulent. Curious wishful thinking on your part.
    And you continuously believe in the scientifically impossible.

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    We're talking about an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000.
    There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

    Same for you fantasy about Serbian caused mass murders & mass graves.
    https://www.antiwar.com/justin/j082100.html

    , @voicum
    please enlighten us. what went on in the past four decades (since 1978)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Alden says:
    @EliteCommInc.
    When the US, NATO, Mrs Angelina Pitt (Jolie), NATO Secretary-General Jens Soltenberg, Hollywood and the UN begin advocating that women put their lives on the line in the same manner as men in combat, I might consider their m oral edicts on a host of war related issues.

    I do appreciate the sincerity of Mrs Pitt, but her liberal advocacy is wanting.

    American feminazis have pushed for women in combat for decades. And our military has agreed to put women in combat.

    As the American military goes, so goes NATO.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {American feminazis have pushed for women in combat for decades. And our military has agreed to put women in combat.}

    It's all show: a tiny, tiny percentage of any combat unit has a token presence of female 'warriors', but the heavy lifting - and being KIA - is still all-men. The way to level the field is to compel women who join the military to serve in combat units, to make up for all the years they have avoided combat. Also, stop discriminating against men and make the Selective Service (sic) registration mandatory for males and females.

    In Iraq and Afghanistan:
    [Just under 3 percent of the total fatalities were women, who make up 16 percent of the total DOD force. Men, who make up 84 percent of the total force experienced 97% of the deaths in the two theaters of operation.]*

    btw: people may remember the 'celebrated' Kurdish women-only units that supposedly toughed it out with the ISIS. Upon closer examination, it turned out to be a farce.



    _________________
    *
    https://www.thebalance.com/the-cost-of-war-3356924
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. NATO is one of the worlds leading terrorist groups ie right behind the CIA and the MOSSAD and MI6 with their OPERATION GLADIO which has spread terror and destruction through out Europe and the Mideast, their war is a war on women and children.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. @animalogic
    This Jolie woman appears to be such an extreme example of "the useful idiot" that she slips over in cliche & the utterly ridiculous.
    That's not to suggest though that she doesn't behave from the most cynical & self interested motives: she's not that kind of idiot.

    Sorry, not “cliche” but “caricature”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. The world, and in particular the US needs to get a handle on the present Jew infestation and concomitant mass-deception regimes perpetrated by these vile people. The present condition we all find ourselves in is best described as denial. The people of earth are in denial about the extent and damage being caused by this infestation. Children in the “West” stand to bear the very worst of what these monsters are doing. Just seeing an entire generation of youts whose minds are filled with the worst absolute nonsense about right and wrong, gender, sexuality, races, etc. It is truly sad and hard to watch. On top of that, I fear many of these kids are not even learning the real basics of achieving self sufficiency, they primarily push buttons and gripe a lot.

    If throwing a few million Jews in ovens again would make them stop these pogroms against our people, it would certainly be a good trade off. I stand by that claim.

    It’s really gone too far, and sown the seeds that will be the final nail in the coffin for the United States and the principles that it was founded on. Why our leadership has decided to support, unequivocally, a people who can truly only be described as the enemy of our people is beyond me. It’s tragic and perhaps too late to change course.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {If throwing a few million Jews in ovens again would make them stop these pogroms against our people, it would certainly be a good trade off. I stand by that claim.}

    You would throw all Jews into the ovens again?
    Including innocent bystanders?
    Including children?

    You are insane.
    , @Wyatt Pendleton
    "Why our leadership has decided to support, unequivocally, a people who can truly only be described as the enemy of our people is beyond me."

    American Christians are mostly carnal in their day-to-day dealings with doing what God told them to do in the Bible. They are PRO SIN to be blunt. BUT they know that God judges kingdoms (countries) in the here and now (rather than people who are judged after death) and they have to hedge their bets to extend God's Hand of Grace while they are telling God to go fuck Himself with their thoughts/actions.

    Enter the “Israel Can Do No Wrong Doctrine”. In Genesis 12 God tells Abram that He will "bless those that bless thee and curse those that curse thee". So by being the Champion of Israel in carrying their water no matter what they do, (when what Christians SHOULD do is preach the Gospel of Christ to the Jews) they rationalize that they OFFSET all of the blasphemy, abortions, sexual immorality, feminism, etc., that Christians and others do on American soil.

    Its rank heresy and sacrilegious (initially created by DC Beltway Episcopalians aka God's Frozen People and Roman Catholics but rapidly adopted by other Christian sects) but their rationale is that if America DID NOT do Israel's bidding God would have outright destroyed the USA decades ago and it's the only thing that keeps His judgement at bay so carnal Christians can keep on sinning. NO carnal Christian wants Christ to come back because once He does they will never be able to sin again and there’s nothing more fulfilling to a carnal believer than treating the Lord Jesus like their porch nigger.

    , @Anonymous
    Troll.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Avery says:
    @Alden
    American feminazis have pushed for women in combat for decades. And our military has agreed to put women in combat.

    As the American military goes, so goes NATO.

    {American feminazis have pushed for women in combat for decades. And our military has agreed to put women in combat.}

    It’s all show: a tiny, tiny percentage of any combat unit has a token presence of female ‘warriors’, but the heavy lifting – and being KIA – is still all-men. The way to level the field is to compel women who join the military to serve in combat units, to make up for all the years they have avoided combat. Also, stop discriminating against men and make the Selective Service (sic) registration mandatory for males and females.

    In Iraq and Afghanistan:
    [Just under 3 percent of the total fatalities were women, who make up 16 percent of the total DOD force. Men, who make up 84 percent of the total force experienced 97% of the deaths in the two theaters of operation.]*

    btw: people may remember the ‘celebrated’ Kurdish women-only units that supposedly toughed it out with the ISIS. Upon closer examination, it turned out to be a farce.

    _________________
    *

    https://www.thebalance.com/the-cost-of-war-3356924

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    I know the women in combat thing is just another liberal fraud. It’s ludicrous especially with those 90 pd packs and weapons combat troops have to carry around.

    But the feminazis are pushing it at the same time they want NATO to go to Africa and overturn 20,000 years of African culture.

    It’s a choice NATO can start a war with Russia and destroy E. And Central Europe or invade Africa and Arabia and destroy Europe with the resulting refugee invaders

    What’s wrong with White People?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. It’s not surprising that a creature of the anti-democratic and anti-republican technochracy EU, Mr. Hollande, would like to turn the UN into an institution that railroads nations into causes célèbre against the wishes of other major stakeholders.

    As for NATO supporting the cause of women, can’t they just change into black uniforms?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Avery says:
    @Linda Green
    The world, and in particular the US needs to get a handle on the present Jew infestation and concomitant mass-deception regimes perpetrated by these vile people. The present condition we all find ourselves in is best described as denial. The people of earth are in denial about the extent and damage being caused by this infestation. Children in the "West" stand to bear the very worst of what these monsters are doing. Just seeing an entire generation of youts whose minds are filled with the worst absolute nonsense about right and wrong, gender, sexuality, races, etc. It is truly sad and hard to watch. On top of that, I fear many of these kids are not even learning the real basics of achieving self sufficiency, they primarily push buttons and gripe a lot.

    If throwing a few million Jews in ovens again would make them stop these pogroms against our people, it would certainly be a good trade off. I stand by that claim.

    It's really gone too far, and sown the seeds that will be the final nail in the coffin for the United States and the principles that it was founded on. Why our leadership has decided to support, unequivocally, a people who can truly only be described as the enemy of our people is beyond me. It's tragic and perhaps too late to change course.

    {If throwing a few million Jews in ovens again would make them stop these pogroms against our people, it would certainly be a good trade off. I stand by that claim.}

    You would throw all Jews into the ovens again?
    Including innocent bystanders?
    Including children?

    You are insane.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Russian minister Count Witte said around 1900 to Herzl 'that he would gladly drown five million jews (those in tzarist Russia) in the Black Sea, but it was impossible'.
    The last division of Poland, 1800 or so, had as result that nearly all of the world's jews then, some five million, lived in tzarist Russia.
    Around 1900 was the tenth resignation of the Russian assimilation committee.

    The hatred was both ways, it seems, Solsjenytsyn wrote that the Bolsjewists, to a large extent jews, hated the Russians.
    How Ukrainians hated jews:
    Voline ( Vsevolod Mikhailovitsch Eichenbaum), ‘The unknown revolution (Kronstadt 1921 Ukraine 1918-21)’, New York 1955.

    At the beginning of WWII the Lithuanians, before the German troops came, led the jews of their villages to open places in the woods, and killed them all.
    Dan Jacobson, ‘Heshels Rijk Familiekroniek’, Amsterdam 1998
    Jacobson is the grandson of rabbi Heshel, who lived in Lithuania.
    Jacobson went there to find out how his grandfather died.
    Pictures of Lithuanians beating jews to death you can find in
    Christopher R. Browning, ‘Ordinary Men, Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland’, 1992, 2001, London

    How Poles hated their jews
    Jan T. Gross, ‘Neighbours, The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland, 1941’, 2003, London

    Already a long time ago I visited Lithuania, and spoke with a foreigner who had lived there for a decade or so, he spoke the language.
    He told me the Lithuanians did not want to speak about their past with the jews, the present capital, Vilnius, before WWII, was then seen as the jewish capitalof E Europe.
    Vilnius had a jewish university.

    This foreigner gave me to understand that before WWII jews controlled the Lithuanian economy, he implied, I think, without saying so openly, that the Lithunians had resented jewish economic domination.

    In
    Anne Applebaum, ‘Between East and West, Across the borderlands of Europe’, Londen, 1995
    you find an old woman saying 'Hitler did terrible things, but he liberated us from the jews'.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Singh says:

    High Low Vs Middle.

    There’s nothing funny about destroying entire societies to farm them out to HR departments addicted to farmville।।

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. MBlanc46 says:

    NATO was created to oppose Soviet expansionism in Europe. The Soviet Union ceased to exist a quarter of a century ago. It’s twenty five years past time that NATO ceased to exist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    NATO was, long ago, created to correct FDR's folly of giving away E Europe to Stalin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Malla says:
    @SanityClaus
    BritishEmpire/N.A.T.O. IS A HEROINE MAFIA.
    Angelina Jolie is a heroin pusher whore.

    The British Empire had a positive side to it. NATO does not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Could you explain that positive side ?
    Did you read George Orwell's 'Burmese Days' ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Malla says:

    I am not surprised. Hollywierd has always been the propaganda arm of the elites and NATO the military arm.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. I fear the Yugoslav war was just about Kosovo, the most mineral rich area in Europe.
    It is now ‘independent’, just as Brunai, Katanga, Quatar, and Kuwait.
    Serbia no longer can exploit the minerals.
    Milosevitch died in a The Hague jail, he was refused heart surgery, it is asserted.
    In september last year he was cleared posthumously of all accusations, it was hardly mentioned anywhere in western media.
    And who knows that Afghanistan seems to have rich lithium resources, you know, for electric cars and whatever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. Beckow says:
    @Verymuchalive
    History is full of ironies. George Szamuely's great uncle was Hungarian Bolshevik thug, Tibor Szamuely, who killed hundreds of civilians during the so called Hungarian Revolution in 1919. Certainly, far more than the Serbs ever did in Kosovo.

    George Szamuely’s great uncle was Hungarian Bolshevik thug, Tibor Szamuely, who killed hundreds of civilians during the so called Hungarian Revolution in 1919

    Hungarian Bolsheviks killed thousands in the 1919 reverse pogrom-revolution-looting frenzy after WWI. Unless poor Tibor was too busy writing revolutionary pamphlets, we should credit him with more than just ‘hundreds’. It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler. It scared the soap-using class into an irrational fear and we soon got WWII.

    But holding someone responsible for the acts of distant relatives is a slippery slope. Great uncle is 12.5% of one’s DNA, I would give him a break. I once run into a proud grandson of a prominent member of Bela Kun’s inner circle. And guess what? Yes, he was working for the State Department ‘protecting innocents‘, again. It must run in the family. Irony, indeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    He got the job through affirmative action for God’s chosen I assume?
    , @Verymuchalive
    The Tibor Szamuely Gang killed 600 minimum. Maybe considerably more.
    George Szamuely has never condoned his great uncle's actions.
    He has never been a Zionist, Neocon or Russophobe, unlike his late sister, Helen.
    , @Wally
    said:
    "It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler."

    Really? Says who?

    And what "influence" was that?

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. I am usually pretty hard on our Hollywood come lately to equal justice causes. And I am the first in line to acknowledge that Mrs Pitt (Jolie) is a hefty talent. She unlike many others in Hollywood has a depp and sincere care for others. This is not a Miss Fonda, getting the Vietnam conflict wrong on every level.

    The press here for me is that neither NATO, the UN or the US should be going to war to set women free. It seems part of the historical record that innocence is becomes the most vulnerable consequences of conflict — it is tragic. It does occur more during times of conflict. But even in warfare, especially modern warfare, rape is not a staple as a mechanism of war. The primary staple of war is killing and men in combat and not are the highest casualties. Perhaps not the most pitiful, because men are taught from birth that it is their lot in life to struggle, fight and die for causes narrated as defense of hearth and home — which includes their wives, daughters women and their children. And men have been engaging war long before Hellen’s face launched a single ship. Also a common staple is that if they lose, the winners will surely have their way with their women —

    I disagree with those who have made claim that we are following Europe. It is the other way around. In my view the first open advocacy to save women in the name of democracy was openly argued in the US — the rhetoric to invade Afghanistan was the first time in my lifetime when I heard in mass women to cause for war. The intellectual intelligentsia made this case and it was part of our polity invading both Afghanistan and Iraq. In fact, the tragic poster card for the war against both countries was the execution of a Muslim woman on a soccer field. It became the rallying moment and image of the horrors against women. Nevermind, that we have women on death row here in the US and we executive women. What was not discussed in the media or amongst are avant garde women for democracy cavalcade was why this women was executed. In the usual bid to make the case liberals told the tale on IFC in a bid for a sympathetic ear. Apparently, this women thinking her husband had uncovered her affair, and fearing the possible consequence if he had she murdered him.

    Now I think murder is an unbalanced response to one’s infidelity, not that I support infidelity, and I get why a murderous response might be the a legitimate emotional call to such deep betrayal – I get it. Even scripture noted that men or women so engaged could be liable to severe consequence. But that consequence is to the adulterer, not the betrayed. At any rate, the social configuration of male female relationships should not be decided by violating the sovereignty of any state, with rare exception.

    When the 1973, violent takeover occurred at the APA conference to force a change in the classification of same sex conduct, the Europena equivalent winced and took issue and thought the US a tad overwrought — they eventually followed suit, b ut it was not based on science. But it has been the peculiar ideology of US liberals that has led the way.

    The issue at hand,

    1. First NATO has never endorsed, ignored, or treated rape of women lightly. There are as with nearly every military around the globe, including Muslim militaries stiff penalties – death the most severe for any combatant, even noncombatant to have violated a women, child — somewhere down that list is men.

    2. Despite the harrowing stories of rape, and they do occur, the incidents even during conflicts are rare. Especially in modern times, the protocol is to protect women and children, even of one’s enemies. I am very embarrassed that I did not hang on to a book written several years ago that included studies of the instances , narrative, and use of rape during conflicts. I will reference it because, it did not find a huge media outlet. But the study, conducted by women, examining the phenomenon of rape in conflict concluded that despite it’s popular place in conflict narrative, rape comprised a minute practice (I use the word minute because compared to the advertising — actual incidents don’t come close to the reality – of male behavior towards women). They contention in this text was that “rape” served a valuable tool in gaining international attention and aide as well sympathy for various causes — now to the fore — democracy and equality for women.

    3. The rape scenario is one the most popular tools in the US to ensure that blacks be kept in their place. Used nationwide, even used by the US military regarding US black service men serving overseas during WWI and WWII. Enough said . . . wishing to avoid the rhetorical battle of low IQ’s black men against white virtue. A narrative Hollywood used to great effect. Hollywood unwilling to overhaul it’s own culpability if social misinformation regarding their own citizens is happy to cast aspersions abroad — ohh, Vietnam war protesters, it worked, why not continue to advance false narratives.

    4. I cannot remember the text or the study, but it was not what I expected when I read it. I am sure it’s out there somewhere ticked away in some researchers shelf, not to be touched or referenced for fear of reprisals that data should get in the way of a good cause. Iraq’s rape rooms, the supposed massive rape of Iraqi women . . . all myths of fancy and exaggeration. Part of the culture of rape fantasy held and advertised uniquely by white women – nevermind that rape in the US doesn’t rise to even a percentage point to the number of women. If a culture exists, it’s hardly popular on campus or not.
    ————————–

    l’est the accusations begin,

    -I am not an advocate for rape or any assault against anyone
    -rape does occur, it is tragic and should not be ignored
    -men are victims more than women
    -I am sure that NATO Secretary-General Jens Soltenberg and Mrs. Angelina Pitt (Jolie) have
    honorable intentions — reduce the incidence or violations.
    -I think in todays’ demand for equality when considering cause to war for women — I wonder if said
    causes would be as salient if women literally put themselves at risk in the endeavor. Blacks fought
    enmasse in the cause of union and every conflict to prove their worth, even when their sacrifice was
    ill regarded and rewarded — and on behalf of others. Even German prisoners rated front row seats
    before black troops — WWII.

    If one seriously wants to reduce the indents of rape during wartime, it might be a good idea to reconsider going to war for causes that are unwarranted. It is war that creates bands of unaccountable rovers who might engage in such behavior cut off from accountability. War breeds all manner of abnormal choices.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    A Dutch investigation, the Davids report, on how and why we joined the Iraq war condemned De Hoop Scheffer, later NATO Secretary General, as well as Balkenende, prime minister at the time.
    Both of them are not in jail, as are not Bush jr and Tony B-liar.
    So much for good intentions.
    Many, alas not enough, in Europe distrust NATO deeply, the suspicion is that NATO tries to provoke war with Russia.
    Our media are the collaborators, the villain is Putin.
    Luckily Putin is a very clever man, not to be provoked.
    And he speaks the truth about an atomic war, that it will be the end of mankind.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "She unlike many others in Hollywood has a depp"

    I doubt Angelina has a Depp. She did have a Pitt at one point, as I recall.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Linda Green
    The world, and in particular the US needs to get a handle on the present Jew infestation and concomitant mass-deception regimes perpetrated by these vile people. The present condition we all find ourselves in is best described as denial. The people of earth are in denial about the extent and damage being caused by this infestation. Children in the "West" stand to bear the very worst of what these monsters are doing. Just seeing an entire generation of youts whose minds are filled with the worst absolute nonsense about right and wrong, gender, sexuality, races, etc. It is truly sad and hard to watch. On top of that, I fear many of these kids are not even learning the real basics of achieving self sufficiency, they primarily push buttons and gripe a lot.

    If throwing a few million Jews in ovens again would make them stop these pogroms against our people, it would certainly be a good trade off. I stand by that claim.

    It's really gone too far, and sown the seeds that will be the final nail in the coffin for the United States and the principles that it was founded on. Why our leadership has decided to support, unequivocally, a people who can truly only be described as the enemy of our people is beyond me. It's tragic and perhaps too late to change course.

    “Why our leadership has decided to support, unequivocally, a people who can truly only be described as the enemy of our people is beyond me.”

    American Christians are mostly carnal in their day-to-day dealings with doing what God told them to do in the Bible. They are PRO SIN to be blunt. BUT they know that God judges kingdoms (countries) in the here and now (rather than people who are judged after death) and they have to hedge their bets to extend God’s Hand of Grace while they are telling God to go fuck Himself with their thoughts/actions.

    Enter the “Israel Can Do No Wrong Doctrine”. In Genesis 12 God tells Abram that He will “bless those that bless thee and curse those that curse thee”. So by being the Champion of Israel in carrying their water no matter what they do, (when what Christians SHOULD do is preach the Gospel of Christ to the Jews) they rationalize that they OFFSET all of the blasphemy, abortions, sexual immorality, feminism, etc., that Christians and others do on American soil.

    Its rank heresy and sacrilegious (initially created by DC Beltway Episcopalians aka God’s Frozen People and Roman Catholics but rapidly adopted by other Christian sects) but their rationale is that if America DID NOT do Israel’s bidding God would have outright destroyed the USA decades ago and it’s the only thing that keeps His judgement at bay so carnal Christians can keep on sinning. NO carnal Christian wants Christ to come back because once He does they will never be able to sin again and there’s nothing more fulfilling to a carnal believer than treating the Lord Jesus like their porch nigger.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    I had to take a break from this before responding. I don't think you know what it means to be a believer in the context of scripture. But there's is no singular consensus about the role christians are to have with Israel. The christian community, even among fundamentalists are not of one mind.

    But the description you suggest by either camp of how Christ operates or Christians understand him to operate is most likely a minority view, a very small minority.

    People of faith, long for Christ because it is a better offering than any sinful joys the world has to offer.

    I think even those who think they should help design the end -- think it will be better. They aren't pressing for a delay so they can steal candy from the local liquor store, maybe to get their lives in order -- but not many are hoping for an opportunity to kill their neighbor.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. NATO has certainly not been “on the lookout for a reason to justify its continued existence”. The only justification for NATO’s post-cold war existence has always clearly been to provide a legal pretext for maintaining US forces and military supplies close to Israel. The logic of that is obvious: Europe sits astride the most direct route from the US to Israel, allowing Israel to be supplied by air in case of necessity with a single fuel stop somewhere in the NATO area. The cold war “deal” was that the US would defend Europe against the Soviet Union and, in return, the European members would turn a blind eye to the US using its NATO bases for the defence of Israel. When the cold war ended, Bush the Father started talking about “turning NATO around”, i.e. turning it into an instrument for the defence of Israel. That wasn’t really to Europe’s taste. For Europe the “point” of Israel was that the Jews would leave Europe, not that Europe would have to fight wars to defend them. So the US (not NATO) has been “on the lookout” ever since for a reason to justify NATO’s continued existence in European eyes. Every attempt by the European members to set up a European defence system in place of NATO has been systematically obstructed and sabotaged by the US. Hence the assimilation by US cold warriors of the Russian Federation to the Soviet Union, using the linguistic device of calling both of them “Russia”. Hence the Ukrainian coup, where the most logical explanation of the known facts is that Nuland and Putin were in cahoots. Hence the “disaster” when Obama failed to stand up firmly to Putin, torpedoing the whole “new cold war” concept. Hence the frantic attempts of US cold warriors to prop up Putin and thereby save their anti-EU “asset”. The irony is that the more US cold warriors defend Putin and argue against defending Ukraine, the more they attack NATO, as this author is doing, or call for US withdrawal from it, the more they destroy European confidence in US determination to defend Europe (which, in its turn undermines Israel’s defence) and incite Europeans to set up the very independent European defence system they have spent the last 25 years trying to block! Given the mess that Nuland and Putin have made, the only choice the cold warriors have left is what foot they’re going to shoot themselves in!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    IOW, you voted for Hillary.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c2b23f01c561ecf941215052c8d637d0b719a8b18b7fbc0e4401b099d1e0fcf9.jpg?w=600&h=330

    www.codoh.com
    , @polskijoe
    The original plan for a unified Europe (before WW2), had some Catholic views in it.
    WW2 weakened Europe greatly.
    Back then USA influence was way smaller.

    After WW2, the movement became even more liberal, and the EU was created,
    but this time with the "aid" of US-CIA funding, etc. (Europe will side with US, with the Marshal Plan aid, against the "new" Soviet threat).

    US doesnt want a fully strong Europe, only so its under their agenda.
    (UK had similar ideas before).

    Habsburg (one of the founders of the original plan) basically said the Pentagon is Jewish occupied.

    The US absolutely hates anything like the French leader De Gaulle wanted of including Russia.
    Europe is still split, even the elites.

    And any attempts to become independant are stopped by elites from US.
    Look how fast Europe falls for the sanctions as soon as US tells them.
    Its no secret that US has significant say in EU.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. polskijoe says:

    Was never a fan of NATO. Why would any right wing person support this liberal expansionist organization is strange especially today.

    The Americanization (aka”globalization”) of Europe is kinda sad.
    So in Poland you get lots of German and American owned things.

    And boy I cant stand mass materialism. It will destroy any society in the long run.
    First by currupting, money, then lowering spirituality and morals, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. @EliteCommInc.
    I am usually pretty hard on our Hollywood come lately to equal justice causes. And I am the first in line to acknowledge that Mrs Pitt (Jolie) is a hefty talent. She unlike many others in Hollywood has a depp and sincere care for others. This is not a Miss Fonda, getting the Vietnam conflict wrong on every level.

    The press here for me is that neither NATO, the UN or the US should be going to war to set women free. It seems part of the historical record that innocence is becomes the most vulnerable consequences of conflict -- it is tragic. It does occur more during times of conflict. But even in warfare, especially modern warfare, rape is not a staple as a mechanism of war. The primary staple of war is killing and men in combat and not are the highest casualties. Perhaps not the most pitiful, because men are taught from birth that it is their lot in life to struggle, fight and die for causes narrated as defense of hearth and home -- which includes their wives, daughters women and their children. And men have been engaging war long before Hellen's face launched a single ship. Also a common staple is that if they lose, the winners will surely have their way with their women ---

    I disagree with those who have made claim that we are following Europe. It is the other way around. In my view the first open advocacy to save women in the name of democracy was openly argued in the US -- the rhetoric to invade Afghanistan was the first time in my lifetime when I heard in mass women to cause for war. The intellectual intelligentsia made this case and it was part of our polity invading both Afghanistan and Iraq. In fact, the tragic poster card for the war against both countries was the execution of a Muslim woman on a soccer field. It became the rallying moment and image of the horrors against women. Nevermind, that we have women on death row here in the US and we executive women. What was not discussed in the media or amongst are avant garde women for democracy cavalcade was why this women was executed. In the usual bid to make the case liberals told the tale on IFC in a bid for a sympathetic ear. Apparently, this women thinking her husband had uncovered her affair, and fearing the possible consequence if he had she murdered him.

    Now I think murder is an unbalanced response to one's infidelity, not that I support infidelity, and I get why a murderous response might be the a legitimate emotional call to such deep betrayal - I get it. Even scripture noted that men or women so engaged could be liable to severe consequence. But that consequence is to the adulterer, not the betrayed. At any rate, the social configuration of male female relationships should not be decided by violating the sovereignty of any state, with rare exception.

    When the 1973, violent takeover occurred at the APA conference to force a change in the classification of same sex conduct, the Europena equivalent winced and took issue and thought the US a tad overwrought -- they eventually followed suit, b ut it was not based on science. But it has been the peculiar ideology of US liberals that has led the way.

    The issue at hand,

    1. First NATO has never endorsed, ignored, or treated rape of women lightly. There are as with nearly every military around the globe, including Muslim militaries stiff penalties - death the most severe for any combatant, even noncombatant to have violated a women, child -- somewhere down that list is men.

    2. Despite the harrowing stories of rape, and they do occur, the incidents even during conflicts are rare. Especially in modern times, the protocol is to protect women and children, even of one's enemies. I am very embarrassed that I did not hang on to a book written several years ago that included studies of the instances , narrative, and use of rape during conflicts. I will reference it because, it did not find a huge media outlet. But the study, conducted by women, examining the phenomenon of rape in conflict concluded that despite it's popular place in conflict narrative, rape comprised a minute practice (I use the word minute because compared to the advertising -- actual incidents don't come close to the reality - of male behavior towards women). They contention in this text was that "rape" served a valuable tool in gaining international attention and aide as well sympathy for various causes -- now to the fore --- democracy and equality for women.

    3. The rape scenario is one the most popular tools in the US to ensure that blacks be kept in their place. Used nationwide, even used by the US military regarding US black service men serving overseas during WWI and WWII. Enough said . . . wishing to avoid the rhetorical battle of low IQ's black men against white virtue. A narrative Hollywood used to great effect. Hollywood unwilling to overhaul it's own culpability if social misinformation regarding their own citizens is happy to cast aspersions abroad -- ohh, Vietnam war protesters, it worked, why not continue to advance false narratives.

    4. I cannot remember the text or the study, but it was not what I expected when I read it. I am sure it's out there somewhere ticked away in some researchers shelf, not to be touched or referenced for fear of reprisals that data should get in the way of a good cause. Iraq's rape rooms, the supposed massive rape of Iraqi women . . . all myths of fancy and exaggeration. Part of the culture of rape fantasy held and advertised uniquely by white women - nevermind that rape in the US doesn't rise to even a percentage point to the number of women. If a culture exists, it's hardly popular on campus or not.
    --------------------------

    l'est the accusations begin,

    -I am not an advocate for rape or any assault against anyone
    -rape does occur, it is tragic and should not be ignored
    -men are victims more than women
    -I am sure that NATO Secretary-General Jens Soltenberg and Mrs. Angelina Pitt (Jolie) have
    honorable intentions -- reduce the incidence or violations.
    -I think in todays' demand for equality when considering cause to war for women -- I wonder if said
    causes would be as salient if women literally put themselves at risk in the endeavor. Blacks fought
    enmasse in the cause of union and every conflict to prove their worth, even when their sacrifice was
    ill regarded and rewarded -- and on behalf of others. Even German prisoners rated front row seats
    before black troops -- WWII.

    If one seriously wants to reduce the indents of rape during wartime, it might be a good idea to reconsider going to war for causes that are unwarranted. It is war that creates bands of unaccountable rovers who might engage in such behavior cut off from accountability. War breeds all manner of abnormal choices.

    A Dutch investigation, the Davids report, on how and why we joined the Iraq war condemned De Hoop Scheffer, later NATO Secretary General, as well as Balkenende, prime minister at the time.
    Both of them are not in jail, as are not Bush jr and Tony B-liar.
    So much for good intentions.
    Many, alas not enough, in Europe distrust NATO deeply, the suspicion is that NATO tries to provoke war with Russia.
    Our media are the collaborators, the villain is Putin.
    Luckily Putin is a very clever man, not to be provoked.
    And he speaks the truth about an atomic war, that it will be the end of mankind.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. polskijoe says:
    @Robjil
    The whole Yugoslav "independence" movement was a farce. It created in order for NATO to control Yugoslavia. It worked sadly for the people of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was the founder of the non-aligned nations movement. After the fall of the USSR, the Unipolar hubris Full spectrum dominance agenda of the US went in full spring. Yugoslavia and Iraq were the first victims of this agenda in 1990s. Albright said 500000 children dying in Iraq from sanctions in 1990s was "good" for the cause on 60 minutes. Here is an article about a CIA agent and his work to destroy Yugoslavia for the 1776 US's Full spectrum dominance agenda.
    http://www.ebritic.com/?p=213256

    Its divide and conquer. Yugoslavia was a perfect example.

    It shows what happens to neutral countries who dont have a strong military.
    Someone will abuse them.

    I wish a future Visegrad 4 plus or V8 was neutral. It would make perfect sense. But either EU/NATO/Russia can exploit, because V8 still wouldnt be a superpower.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Malla
    The British Empire had a positive side to it. NATO does not.

    Could you explain that positive side ?
    Did you read George Orwell’s ‘Burmese Days’ ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    How about laws like these

    Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_Sati_Regulation,_1829

    The Bengal Sati Regulation,[nb 1] or Regulation XVII, A. D. 1829 of the Bengal Code was a legal act promulgated in British India under East India Company rule, by the then Governor-General Lord William Bentinck, which made the practice of sati or suttee—or the immolation of a Hindu widow on the funeral pyre of her deceased husband—illegal in all jurisdictions of British India and subject to prosecution.

    Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_Infanticide_Prevention_Act,_1870

    The Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870,[1] also Act VIII of 1870 was a legislative act passed in British India, to prevent murder of female infants. The Section 7 of this Act declared that it was initially applicable only to the territories of Oudh, North-Western Provinces and Punjab, but the Act authorized the Governor General to extend the law to any other district or province of the British Raj at his discretion.[2]
    The law authorized the creation of a police force to maintain birth, marriage and death registers, to conduct census of the district at its discretion, enforce a special tax on the district to pay for the expenses and entertainment of said police officers.[2] The Act also stipulated a prison sentence of six months or a fine of thirty thousand rupees, or both, on anyone who disobeyed or obstructed the police officers enforcing the Act.[4] Section 6 of the Act allowed the police officer to seize a child from any person he suspects may neglect or endanger any female child, as well as force collect a monthly fee from that person.[5]

    Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Widows%27_Remarriage_Act,_1856

    The Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856, also Act XV, 1856, enacted on 26 July 1856, legalise the remarriage of Hindu widows in all jurisdictions of India under East India Company rule.[1]
    To protect what it considered family honour and family property, upper-caste Hindu society had long disallowed the remarriage of widows, even child and adolescent ones, all of whom were expected to live a life of austerity and abnegation.[2] The Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act of 1856, enacted in response to the campaign of Pandit Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar,[3] provided legal safeguards against loss of certain forms of inheritance for a remarrying Hindu widow,[2] though, under the Act, the widow forsook any inheritance due her from her deceased husband.[4]Especially targeted in the act were Hindu child widows whose husbands had died before consummation of marriage.[5]

    Age of Consent Act, 1891

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Consent_Act,_1891

    The Age of Consent Act, 1891, also Act X of 1891, was a legislation enacted in British India on 19 March 1891 which raised the age of consent for sexual intercourse for all girls, married or unmarried, from ten to twelve years in all jurisdictions, its violation subject to criminal prosecution as rape.[1][nb 1] The act was an amendment of the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 375, 1882, (“Of Rape”),[nb 2] and was introduced as a bill on 9 January 1891 by Sir Andrew Scoble in the Legislative Council of the Governor-General of India in Calcutta.[2] It was debated the same day and opposed by council member Sir Romesh Chunder Mitter (from Bengal) on the grounds that it interfered with orthodox Hindu code, but supported by council member Rao Bahadur Krishnaji Lakshman Nulkar (from Bombay) and by the President of the council, the Governor-General and Viceroy Lord Lansdowne.[2][3][nb 3] While an 1880 case in a Bombay high court by a child-bride, Rukhmabai, renewed discussion of such a law, the death of an eleven-year-old Bengali girl, Phulomnee, due to forceful intercourse by her 35-year-old husband in 1889, necessitated intervention by the British.[4] The act was passed in 1891. It received support from Indian reformers such as Behramji Malabari and women social organisations. The law was never seriously enforced and it is argued that the real effect of the law was reassertion of Hindu patriarchal control over domestic issues as a nationalistic cause.

    Indian Slavery Act, 1843

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Slavery_Act,_1843

    The Indian Slavery Act, 1843, also Act V of 1843, was an act passed in British India under East India Company rule, which outlawed many economic transactions associated with slavery. The sale of any person as a slave was banned, and anyone buying or selling slaves would be booked under the Indian Penal Code, with offence carrying strict punishment

    Child Marriage Restraint Act

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Marriage_Restraint_ActChild

    Marriage Restraint Act 1929, passed on 28 September 1929 in the British India Legislature of India, fixed the age of marriage for girls at 14 years and boys at 18 years which was later amended to 18 for girls and 21 for boys. It is popularly known as the Sarda Act, after its sponsor Harbilas Sarda. It came into effect six months later on April 1, 1930 and it applies to all of British India, not just to Hindus.[1][2][3] It was a result of social reform movement in India. The legislation was passed by the British Indian Government.[4]

    Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Monuments_Preservation_Act_1904

    The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 was passed in 18, March 1904 by British India during the times of Lord Curzon. it is expedient to provide for the preservation of ancient monuments, for the exercise of control over traffic in antiquities and over excavation in certain places, and for the protection and acquisition in certain cases of ancient monuments and of objects of archaeological, historical or artistic interest. Act preserves and restores ancient Indian monuments by Archaeological Survey of India.

    Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Inheritance_(Removal_of_Disabilities)_Act,_1928
    The Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928 was enacted to abolish the exclusion from inheritance of certain classes of heirs, and to remove certain doubts regarding their ability to inherit property. The Act specifies that persons who are diseased, deformed or physically or mentally handicapped cannot be disqualified from their right to own or share joint-family property unless the law specifies otherwise.

    Punjab Land Alienation Act, 1900

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab_Land_Alienation_Act,_1900

    The advent of British rule in India had led to a trend whereby ownership rights to land were increasingly concentrated in the hands of urban moneylenders and other commercial communities among the Hindu population. They were assigned the property previously held by poor peasants, who either sold or mortgaged for the short-term benefit derived from the increasing values of land caused by improved agricultural methods, irrigation and communications. Such transfers were enforceable under law but, in British eyes, potentially damaging to their colonial administration because they might ultimately result in a disaffected rural peasant population. British law was effectively supporting the growth of a class of people — the new owners — that might prove detrimental to its own purpose. In addition, historian Kenneth Jones says that the transfers were contrary to British sentiments: “Not only did this development threaten the stability and peace of the Punjab, it also struck at the British self-image of benevolent and paternalistic protectors of the lowly peasant”.
    , @Malla
    Jyoti Rao Phule

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyotirao_Phule

    Jyotirao Govindrao Phule[a] (11 April 1827 – 28 November 1890) was an Indian social activist, a thinker, anti-caste social reformer and writer from Maharashtra.[2][3]

    His work extended to many fields including eradication of untouchability and the caste system, women’s emancipation and the reform of Hindu family life. On September 1873, Phule, along with his followers, formed the Satyashodhak Samaj (Society of Seekers of Truth) to attain equal rights for people from lower castes. Phule is regarded as an important figure of the social reform movement in Maharashtra He and his wife, Savitribai Phule, were pioneers of women’s education in India.

    http://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/20647/1/Unit-12.pdf

    British rule had brought to an end the tyranny and chaos of the regime of the last Peshwa in Maharashtra. The colonial rulers had not only established law and order but also the principle of equality before law. The earlier regime of Brahmin Peshwas had imposed strict limitations on education, occupation arid living standards of the lower castes and women. The new rulers opened the 1 opportunities in education and mobility in occupation for the members of all castes. Missionary schools and government colleges were ready to admit any student irrespective of caste origins. New ideas of equality and liberty could reach the moderately educated sections of the lower caste. Phule was probably the best product of this process. High caste reformers and leaders also had welcomed the colonial rule. It is not surprising that Phule who was concerned with the slavery of the lower castes also favoured British Rule He hoped that the new government which believes in equality between man and man would emancipate lower castes, from the domination of the Brahmins.
    The British rule opened up new employment opportunities in the administration. The political power at local level was also being given to the Indians. Phule who had worked as a member of the Poona Municipality could visualise how lower castes wouid be able to acquire power at local level during the period of British rule and also enter the colonial bureaucracy. He believed in Colonialism, Cast Order and the Tribal Societies the benevolent attitude of the British rulers towards the lower castes and therefore asked for a number of things from them. He was not sure how long the British rule would continue. Therefore, he wanted lower castes to exploit the
    opportunity and get rid of the tyranny of Brahmins. Brahmin rulers used to collect huge wealth out of taxes levied on poor lower castes population, but never used to spend even a paisa for their welfare. On the contrary, the new regime was showing the signs of doing good things for the deprived people. Phule assured the colonial rulers that if the Shudras were made happy and
    contented, they need not worry about the loyalty of the subjects. He wanted the British government to abolish Brahmin Kulkarni’s position, and a post of village headman (Patil) filled on the basis of merit. In fact, Phule would have liked the Qritish government to put an end to the balutedary system which was connected with caste specific occupations in the villages. He asked the government to make laws prohibiting customs and practices which gave subordinate status to women and untouchables. Phule wanted Brahmin bureaucracy to be replaced by non-Brahmin bureaucracy. But if the non-Brahmins were not available, the government should appoint, he thought, the British men to these posts. He believed that the British officers would take impartial view and were likely to side with lower castes.
    He knew that education had not yet percolated to the lower castes. The masses had not yet become politically conscious. The high caste elites were claiming that they were the true representatives of the people and therefore weie demanding political rights. This process, Phule thought, would reestablish the political supremacy of the high castes.
    Phule advised his followers from the lower castes not to participate the-movement for political rights. He argued that
    the Indian National Congress or other political associations were not national in the true sense of the term because they represented only high castes. Phule warned his followers against the selfish and cunning motives of the Brahmins in forming these associations and advised them to keep themselves away from such associations. In his Satya Shodhak Samaj, he had made it a rule not to discuss politics. In fact, we find that he had expressed more than once a complete and total loyalty towards the new government. He firmly believed that the almighty God had dethroned the tyrannical rulers and had established in their place a just, enlightened and peaceful British rule for the welfare of the masses.
    , @Malla
    Yes but did you read, Catherine Mayo's book 'Mother India'?

    http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300811h.html

    especially this part

    When the Prince of Wales sailed to India from London, late in 1921, Mr. Gandhi, then at the height of his popularity, proclaimed to the Hindu world that the coming visit was “an insult added to injury,” and called for a general boycott.[13]

    [13. Gandhi's Letters on Indian Affairs, pp. 96-7.]
    Political workers obediently snatched up the torch, rushing it through their organizations, and the Prince’s landing in Bombay became thereby the signal for murderous riot and destruction. No outbreak occurred among the responsible part of the population, nor along the line of progress, which was, of course, well guarded. But in the remoter areas of the city, hooliganism ran on for several days, with some fifty killings and four hundred woundings, Indian attacking Indian, while arson and loot played their ruinous part.

    Meanwhile the Prince, seemingly unmoved by the first unfriendly reception of all his life, proceeded to carry out his officially arranged programme in and about the city. On the evening of November 22 it was scheduled that he should depart for the North.
    As he left Government House on the three- or four-mile drive to the Bombay railway station, his automobile ran unguarded save for the pilot police car that went before. Where it entered the city, however, a cordon of police lined the streets on both sides. And behind that cordon pressed the people–the common poor people of the countryside in their uncountable thousands; pressed and pushed until, with the railway station yet half a mile away, the police line bent and broke beneath the strain.

    Instantly the crowd surged in, closing around the car, shouting, fighting each other to work nearer–nearer still. What would they do? What was their temper? God knew! Gandhi’s hot words had spread among them, and God alone, now, could help. Some reached the running-boards and clung. Others shoved them off, for one instant to take their places, the next themselves to be dragged away. And what was this they shouted? At first nothing could be made of it, in the bedlam of voices, though those charged with the safety of the progress strained their ears to catch the cries.

    Then words stood out, continuously chanted, and the words were these:

    “Yuvaraj Maharaj ki jai!” “Hail to the Prince!” And: “Let me see my Prince! Let me see my Prince! Let me only see my Prince just once before I die!”

    The police tried vainly to form again around the car. Moving at a crawl, quite unprotected now, through an almost solid mass of shouting humanity, it won through to the railway station at last.

    There, within the barriers that shut off the platform of the royal train, gathered the dignitaries of the Province and the City, to make their formal farewells. To these His Royal Highness listened, returning due acknowledgments. Then, clipping short his own last word, he turned suddenly to the aide beside him.

    “How much time left?”

    “Three minutes, sir,” replied the aide.

    “Then drop those barriers and let the people in”–indicating the mobs outside.

    Like the sweep of a river in flood the interminable multitudes rolled in–and shouted and adored and laughed and wept, and, when the train started, ran alongside the royal carriage till they could run no more.

    And when he turned back from his transit of the Great North Gate–the Khyber Pass itself–a strange thing awaited him. A swarm of Untouchables, emboldened by news that had reached them, clustered at the roadside to do him reverence, “Government ki jai!” “Hail to the Government!” they shouted, with cheers that echoed from the barren hills.

    And when the Prince slowed down his car to return their greetings, they leapt and danced in their excitement.

    For nowhere in all their store of memory or of legend had they any history of an Indian magnate who had noticed an Untouchable except to scorn him. And here was a greater than all India contained–the son of the Supreme Power, to them almost divine, who deigned not only to receive but even to thank them for their homage! Small wonder that their spirits soared, that their eyes saw visions, that their tongues laid hold upon mystic words.

    “Look! Look!” they cried to one another. “Behold, the Light! the Light!”

    And such was their exaltation that many of them somehow worked through to Delhi to add themselves to the twenty-five thousand of their kind who there awaited the Prince’s coming. The village people from round about flocked in to join them–the simple people of the soil who know nothing of politics but much of friendship as shown in works. And all together haunted the roadside, waiting and hoping for a glimpse of his face.

    At last he came, down the Grand Trunk Road, toward the Delhi Gate. And in the center of the hosts of the Untouchables, one, standing higher than the rest, unfurled a flag.

    “Yuvaraj Maharaj ki jai! Raja ke Bete ki jai!

    “Hail to the Prince! Hail to the King’s Son!” they all shouted together, to burst their throats. And the Prince, while the high-caste Indian spectators wondered and revolted within themselves at his lack of princely pride, ordered his car stopped.

    Then a spokesman ventured forward, to offer in a humble little speech the love and fealty of the sixty millions of the Unclean and to beg the heir to the throne to intercede for them with his father the King Emperor, never to abandon them into the hands of those who despised them and would keep them slaves.

    The Prince heard him through. Then–whether he realized the magnitude of what he did, or whether he acted merely on the impulse of his natural friendly courtesy toward all the world–he did an unheard-of thing. He stood up–stood up, for them, the “worse than dogs,” spoke a few words of kindness, looked them all over, slowly, and so, with a radiant smile, gave them his salute.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @MBlanc46
    NATO was created to oppose Soviet expansionism in Europe. The Soviet Union ceased to exist a quarter of a century ago. It’s twenty five years past time that NATO ceased to exist.

    NATO was, long ago, created to correct FDR’s folly of giving away E Europe to Stalin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WHAT
    First of all, Stalin already had it anyway. Wasn`t Roosevelts` to give away too.
    And second, nobody cared about Eastern Europe. Military control of Germany is what NATO was actually about.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Alden says:
    @Avery
    {American feminazis have pushed for women in combat for decades. And our military has agreed to put women in combat.}

    It's all show: a tiny, tiny percentage of any combat unit has a token presence of female 'warriors', but the heavy lifting - and being KIA - is still all-men. The way to level the field is to compel women who join the military to serve in combat units, to make up for all the years they have avoided combat. Also, stop discriminating against men and make the Selective Service (sic) registration mandatory for males and females.

    In Iraq and Afghanistan:
    [Just under 3 percent of the total fatalities were women, who make up 16 percent of the total DOD force. Men, who make up 84 percent of the total force experienced 97% of the deaths in the two theaters of operation.]*

    btw: people may remember the 'celebrated' Kurdish women-only units that supposedly toughed it out with the ISIS. Upon closer examination, it turned out to be a farce.



    _________________
    *
    https://www.thebalance.com/the-cost-of-war-3356924

    I know the women in combat thing is just another liberal fraud. It’s ludicrous especially with those 90 pd packs and weapons combat troops have to carry around.

    But the feminazis are pushing it at the same time they want NATO to go to Africa and overturn 20,000 years of African culture.

    It’s a choice NATO can start a war with Russia and destroy E. And Central Europe or invade Africa and Arabia and destroy Europe with the resulting refugee invaders

    What’s wrong with White People?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Alden says:
    @Beckow

    George Szamuely’s great uncle was Hungarian Bolshevik thug, Tibor Szamuely, who killed hundreds of civilians during the so called Hungarian Revolution in 1919
     
    Hungarian Bolsheviks killed thousands in the 1919 reverse pogrom-revolution-looting frenzy after WWI. Unless poor Tibor was too busy writing revolutionary pamphlets, we should credit him with more than just 'hundreds'. It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler. It scared the soap-using class into an irrational fear and we soon got WWII.

    But holding someone responsible for the acts of distant relatives is a slippery slope. Great uncle is 12.5% of one's DNA, I would give him a break. I once run into a proud grandson of a prominent member of Bela Kun's inner circle. And guess what? Yes, he was working for the State Department 'protecting innocents', again. It must run in the family. Irony, indeed.

    He got the job through affirmative action for God’s chosen I assume?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow
    He didn't share how he got the job, but he truly believed in aggressive 'humanitarianism'. Perfect justice for 'all under-priviledged', even at a cost of dead bodies all around.

    It must be a strange concept of God that actively promotes killing in the name of 'justice'. Or maybe that particular God is just a hopeless busy-body. Others may call what is driving the Jolie-Stoltenberg-Bela Kun crowd some inner deamons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Robjil says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    You (and most people here) are utterly clueless about what had happened in past 4 decades in a country which was Yugoslavia. You don't know history, ideology, demography, national identity, economy, culture... spanning past 1000 or so years of nations that constituted this multinational (not "multiethnic"- English is too imprecise a language when it comes to national identity) land.

    So, it is absolute waste of time to argue about anything with anyone about this topic.

    I know a lot about Yugoslavia. I have been there twice before the CIA’s destruction of Yugoslavia in 1991-99. Here is another article about how the CIA destroyed Yugoslavia to control it.

    http://www.awdnews.com/top-news/ex-cia-agent-we-got-millions-to-destroy-yugoslavia

    Read More
    • Agree: Che Guava
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Wally says: • Website
    @Bardon Kaldian
    You (and most people here) are utterly clueless about what had happened in past 4 decades in a country which was Yugoslavia. You don't know history, ideology, demography, national identity, economy, culture... spanning past 1000 or so years of nations that constituted this multinational (not "multiethnic"- English is too imprecise a language when it comes to national identity) land.

    So, it is absolute waste of time to argue about anything with anyone about this topic.

    Except your claims against Serbia are fraudulent. Curious wishful thinking on your part.
    And you continuously believe in the scientifically impossible.

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    We’re talking about an alleged ’6M Jews & 5M others’ … 11,000,000.
    There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

    Same for you fantasy about Serbian caused mass murders & mass graves.

    https://www.antiwar.com/justin/j082100.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    What do Jews have with this topic at all?

    Of course you're clueless: you don't know Croatian (or Serbian, which is virtually mutually intelligible with Croatian); you don't know literature, history, ..nothing; you don't know anything save the usual agitprop trash.


    Enough with a waste of bytes ....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Avery
    {If throwing a few million Jews in ovens again would make them stop these pogroms against our people, it would certainly be a good trade off. I stand by that claim.}

    You would throw all Jews into the ovens again?
    Including innocent bystanders?
    Including children?

    You are insane.

    Russian minister Count Witte said around 1900 to Herzl ‘that he would gladly drown five million jews (those in tzarist Russia) in the Black Sea, but it was impossible’.
    The last division of Poland, 1800 or so, had as result that nearly all of the world’s jews then, some five million, lived in tzarist Russia.
    Around 1900 was the tenth resignation of the Russian assimilation committee.

    The hatred was both ways, it seems, Solsjenytsyn wrote that the Bolsjewists, to a large extent jews, hated the Russians.
    How Ukrainians hated jews:
    Voline ( Vsevolod Mikhailovitsch Eichenbaum), ‘The unknown revolution (Kronstadt 1921 Ukraine 1918-21)’, New York 1955.

    At the beginning of WWII the Lithuanians, before the German troops came, led the jews of their villages to open places in the woods, and killed them all.
    Dan Jacobson, ‘Heshels Rijk Familiekroniek’, Amsterdam 1998
    Jacobson is the grandson of rabbi Heshel, who lived in Lithuania.
    Jacobson went there to find out how his grandfather died.
    Pictures of Lithuanians beating jews to death you can find in
    Christopher R. Browning, ‘Ordinary Men, Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland’, 1992, 2001, London

    How Poles hated their jews
    Jan T. Gross, ‘Neighbours, The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland, 1941’, 2003, London

    Already a long time ago I visited Lithuania, and spoke with a foreigner who had lived there for a decade or so, he spoke the language.
    He told me the Lithuanians did not want to speak about their past with the jews, the present capital, Vilnius, before WWII, was then seen as the jewish capitalof E Europe.
    Vilnius had a jewish university.

    This foreigner gave me to understand that before WWII jews controlled the Lithuanian economy, he implied, I think, without saying so openly, that the Lithunians had resented jewish economic domination.

    In
    Anne Applebaum, ‘Between East and West, Across the borderlands of Europe’, Londen, 1995
    you find an old woman saying ‘Hitler did terrible things, but he liberated us from the jews’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "Russian minister Count Witte said around 1900 to Herzl ‘that he would gladly drown five million jews (those in tzarist Russia) in the Black Sea, but it was impossible’."
    LOL!! There is no proof for that and your citation does not have any.
    Just more laughable Zionist propaganda unsupported by proof.

    Citing Zionist 'books' is not proof. Anyone can say anything in a book, especially the notoriously lying Jews. But there is proof that the '6M Jews' is utter nonsense. Jews have been promoting the '6,000,000' lie since at least 1869.
    http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php
    http://balder.org/judea/billeder-judea/Scan-New-York-Times-Six-Million-Since-1869-Composite.jpg

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:
    http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here:
    http://forum.codoh.com

    We're talking about an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000.
    There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

    , @Lex
    If you cite JT Gross it means you are a moron and Zionist stooge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Che Guava says:

    That is very interesting, many interesting comments, too tired to attempt own real reply.

    However, Jolie, with her clown-like collagen-pumped lips, is just one of many (ooh, it will ruin my figure to bear a child) to adoptng a menagerie, Meg Ryan seems to be a pioneer, Madonna Ciccione, Nicole Kidman, many others, the same..

    The only comtact the exotic brood is having is with the hired nanny.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    As soon as she remarried after the divorce from Cruise Kidman had 2 natural children . The Pitts have 3 natural children Madonna has 2 natural children

    Easy to see I grocery shop weekly.
    , @Alden
    Did you ever see the movie Evita ? Madonna was pregnant and it was obvious in the last half of the movie.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Wally says:
    @Michael Kenny
    NATO has certainly not been “on the lookout for a reason to justify its continued existence”. The only justification for NATO’s post-cold war existence has always clearly been to provide a legal pretext for maintaining US forces and military supplies close to Israel. The logic of that is obvious: Europe sits astride the most direct route from the US to Israel, allowing Israel to be supplied by air in case of necessity with a single fuel stop somewhere in the NATO area. The cold war “deal” was that the US would defend Europe against the Soviet Union and, in return, the European members would turn a blind eye to the US using its NATO bases for the defence of Israel. When the cold war ended, Bush the Father started talking about “turning NATO around”, i.e. turning it into an instrument for the defence of Israel. That wasn’t really to Europe’s taste. For Europe the “point” of Israel was that the Jews would leave Europe, not that Europe would have to fight wars to defend them. So the US (not NATO) has been “on the lookout” ever since for a reason to justify NATO’s continued existence in European eyes. Every attempt by the European members to set up a European defence system in place of NATO has been systematically obstructed and sabotaged by the US. Hence the assimilation by US cold warriors of the Russian Federation to the Soviet Union, using the linguistic device of calling both of them “Russia”. Hence the Ukrainian coup, where the most logical explanation of the known facts is that Nuland and Putin were in cahoots. Hence the “disaster” when Obama failed to stand up firmly to Putin, torpedoing the whole “new cold war” concept. Hence the frantic attempts of US cold warriors to prop up Putin and thereby save their anti-EU “asset”. The irony is that the more US cold warriors defend Putin and argue against defending Ukraine, the more they attack NATO, as this author is doing, or call for US withdrawal from it, the more they destroy European confidence in US determination to defend Europe (which, in its turn undermines Israel’s defence) and incite Europeans to set up the very independent European defence system they have spent the last 25 years trying to block! Given the mess that Nuland and Putin have made, the only choice the cold warriors have left is what foot they’re going to shoot themselves in!

    IOW, you voted for Hillary.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. WHAT says:
    @jilles dykstra
    NATO was, long ago, created to correct FDR's folly of giving away E Europe to Stalin.

    First of all, Stalin already had it anyway. Wasn`t Roosevelts` to give away too.
    And second, nobody cared about Eastern Europe. Military control of Germany is what NATO was actually about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Very, very, true.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Beckow says:
    @Alden
    He got the job through affirmative action for God’s chosen I assume?

    He didn’t share how he got the job, but he truly believed in aggressive ‘humanitarianism’. Perfect justice for ‘all under-priviledged‘, even at a cost of dead bodies all around.

    It must be a strange concept of God that actively promotes killing in the name of ‘justice’. Or maybe that particular God is just a hopeless busy-body. Others may call what is driving the Jolie-Stoltenberg-Bela Kun crowd some inner deamons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Robjil says:

    Here is another interesting article about the real butcher of Balkans – NATO.

    http://www.greanvillepost.com/2018/01/08/the-real-butcher-of-the-balkans-was-nato/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. B. J. says:

    RE: NATO is a fraud.

    GERMANY:

    ”It is the declared policy of the United States to split Europe again, by means of a dividing wall extending from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea.”

    US, NATO and EU – a joint war coalition
    by Willy Wimmer, State Secretary in the German Federal Ministry of Defense retd

    https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/numbers/2017/no-3231-december-2017/us-nato-and-eu-a-joint-war-coalition.html

    NATO is a fraud: NATOCanada sides with NAZIS in Ukraine:

    ON TARGET: Canada’s Warmongering In Ukraine Is Dangerous

    December 18, 2017

    By Scott Taylor

    http://espritdecorps.ca/on-target-4/on-target-canadas-warmongering-in-ukraine-is-dangerous

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  54. @Wyatt Pendleton
    "Why our leadership has decided to support, unequivocally, a people who can truly only be described as the enemy of our people is beyond me."

    American Christians are mostly carnal in their day-to-day dealings with doing what God told them to do in the Bible. They are PRO SIN to be blunt. BUT they know that God judges kingdoms (countries) in the here and now (rather than people who are judged after death) and they have to hedge their bets to extend God's Hand of Grace while they are telling God to go fuck Himself with their thoughts/actions.

    Enter the “Israel Can Do No Wrong Doctrine”. In Genesis 12 God tells Abram that He will "bless those that bless thee and curse those that curse thee". So by being the Champion of Israel in carrying their water no matter what they do, (when what Christians SHOULD do is preach the Gospel of Christ to the Jews) they rationalize that they OFFSET all of the blasphemy, abortions, sexual immorality, feminism, etc., that Christians and others do on American soil.

    Its rank heresy and sacrilegious (initially created by DC Beltway Episcopalians aka God's Frozen People and Roman Catholics but rapidly adopted by other Christian sects) but their rationale is that if America DID NOT do Israel's bidding God would have outright destroyed the USA decades ago and it's the only thing that keeps His judgement at bay so carnal Christians can keep on sinning. NO carnal Christian wants Christ to come back because once He does they will never be able to sin again and there’s nothing more fulfilling to a carnal believer than treating the Lord Jesus like their porch nigger.

    I had to take a break from this before responding. I don’t think you know what it means to be a believer in the context of scripture. But there’s is no singular consensus about the role christians are to have with Israel. The christian community, even among fundamentalists are not of one mind.

    But the description you suggest by either camp of how Christ operates or Christians understand him to operate is most likely a minority view, a very small minority.

    People of faith, long for Christ because it is a better offering than any sinful joys the world has to offer.

    I think even those who think they should help design the end — think it will be better. They aren’t pressing for a delay so they can steal candy from the local liquor store, maybe to get their lives in order — but not many are hoping for an opportunity to kill their neighbor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wyatt Pendleton
    @EliteCommInc.

    I hate to disagree with you. The majority of "Christians" I run into in real life and the WWW are Preterists who heatedly disagree that Christ will rule 1000 years on the earth Himself, but will have a proxy made up of human believers who will enforce His will because we have to work for our salvation and there will be no Rapture of the Church before the Tribulation. Their eschatology prohibits them actually turning the other cheek regarding non-Christian religions. The Roman Catholic Church believes that the Pope is destined to rule the world from Jerusalem. Calvinists believe that the Church Militant is predestined to defeat Satan's minions (humans) in bloody battle for the glory of God.

    Preterists see the plain imagery of Revelations where Christ is coming to the earth in the air on horse back as a metaphor to conqueror all humanity via modern weapons of war like jets/bombers. The idea that Jesus Himself would do the killing while the Body of Christ is a witness who doesn't join the killing is outrageous! Ask military Christians what they think of "Thou Shalt Not Kill"? They will tell you what they told me back in 1988, that that Jesus is a soft cunt and they want nothing to do with Him. That's why they reject the King James Bible and adopt other versions like the Soldiers Bible that conveniently translates "Not Kill" to "Not Murder".

    Christians in the USA do not worship the Lamb of God Jesus Christ, they worship Mars/Ares.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. polskijoe says:
    @Michael Kenny
    NATO has certainly not been “on the lookout for a reason to justify its continued existence”. The only justification for NATO’s post-cold war existence has always clearly been to provide a legal pretext for maintaining US forces and military supplies close to Israel. The logic of that is obvious: Europe sits astride the most direct route from the US to Israel, allowing Israel to be supplied by air in case of necessity with a single fuel stop somewhere in the NATO area. The cold war “deal” was that the US would defend Europe against the Soviet Union and, in return, the European members would turn a blind eye to the US using its NATO bases for the defence of Israel. When the cold war ended, Bush the Father started talking about “turning NATO around”, i.e. turning it into an instrument for the defence of Israel. That wasn’t really to Europe’s taste. For Europe the “point” of Israel was that the Jews would leave Europe, not that Europe would have to fight wars to defend them. So the US (not NATO) has been “on the lookout” ever since for a reason to justify NATO’s continued existence in European eyes. Every attempt by the European members to set up a European defence system in place of NATO has been systematically obstructed and sabotaged by the US. Hence the assimilation by US cold warriors of the Russian Federation to the Soviet Union, using the linguistic device of calling both of them “Russia”. Hence the Ukrainian coup, where the most logical explanation of the known facts is that Nuland and Putin were in cahoots. Hence the “disaster” when Obama failed to stand up firmly to Putin, torpedoing the whole “new cold war” concept. Hence the frantic attempts of US cold warriors to prop up Putin and thereby save their anti-EU “asset”. The irony is that the more US cold warriors defend Putin and argue against defending Ukraine, the more they attack NATO, as this author is doing, or call for US withdrawal from it, the more they destroy European confidence in US determination to defend Europe (which, in its turn undermines Israel’s defence) and incite Europeans to set up the very independent European defence system they have spent the last 25 years trying to block! Given the mess that Nuland and Putin have made, the only choice the cold warriors have left is what foot they’re going to shoot themselves in!

    The original plan for a unified Europe (before WW2), had some Catholic views in it.
    WW2 weakened Europe greatly.
    Back then USA influence was way smaller.

    After WW2, the movement became even more liberal, and the EU was created,
    but this time with the “aid” of US-CIA funding, etc. (Europe will side with US, with the Marshal Plan aid, against the “new” Soviet threat).

    US doesnt want a fully strong Europe, only so its under their agenda.
    (UK had similar ideas before).

    Habsburg (one of the founders of the original plan) basically said the Pentagon is Jewish occupied.

    The US absolutely hates anything like the French leader De Gaulle wanted of including Russia.
    Europe is still split, even the elites.

    And any attempts to become independant are stopped by elites from US.
    Look how fast Europe falls for the sanctions as soon as US tells them.
    Its no secret that US has significant say in EU.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. voicum says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    You (and most people here) are utterly clueless about what had happened in past 4 decades in a country which was Yugoslavia. You don't know history, ideology, demography, national identity, economy, culture... spanning past 1000 or so years of nations that constituted this multinational (not "multiethnic"- English is too imprecise a language when it comes to national identity) land.

    So, it is absolute waste of time to argue about anything with anyone about this topic.

    please enlighten us. what went on in the past four decades (since 1978)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    Why would I write mammoth comments, replete with historical, economic, cultural, military...data & analyses?

    I will just pen a few sentences about a province that I don't care for, Kosovo, and leave it at that. To write anything extensively on any other controversial subject is simply-useless.

    What is now Kosovo had been an integral part of Serbian medieval state in 13th & 14th C. They have a strong cultural heritage there. After Ottoman conquest of Serbia in 14th & 15th C, the ethnic composition of the area remained, more or less, the same. But, after mass Serbian migrations at the end of 17th C to the northern, Austrian lands (now a Serbian province of Vojvodina), neighboring Albanians, most of them Muslims (Albanian people are ca. 70% Muslim, the rest are Catholics & Eastern Orthodox) moved in & became the majority.

    This was so until 19th C when Serbia, now a new duchy, then kingdom, during Balkan wars in 1913 occupied/liberated Kosovo. The region was then 63% Albanian, 25% Serbian & the rest were mostly Muslim Turks, Bosniaks and Gypsies. Serbian socialist Dimitrije Tucović openly wrote against that, condemning what he saw as extension of European imperialism to the provincial levels of Balkan tribalism (the classic work is "Srbija i Arbanija", 1-2). Albanians were suppressed & forced to emigrate, while Serbian colonizers took their place (this was not too successful because of Albanian high fertility rate & unwillingness of most Serbs to move in that backward area).

    After WW II, Yugoslav policy toward Kosovo was ambiguous: on one hand, Yugoslav Communists wanted to placate Albanians who had been promised full independence & integration with neighboring Albania; on the other, they wanted to keep Serbs satisfied. So, the region was, according to Soviet model, given a semi-autonomous status in Serbia. In reality, oppression of Albanians continued from 1945 to 1966, the fall of Tito's strongman Ranković (Serbian quasi-Stalinist politician). Until Tito's death in 1980, Kosovo had been, economically, Yugoslav black hole, sucking in vast amounts of money from all republics that contributed to keep it quiet; in the meantime, Kosovo Albanians rose from 65% to over 90% in population after Tito's death & created their own educated classes (Priština University has, after reforms in 1960s, taught both in Serbian & Albanian). The rise of modern nationalism among Albanians was not successfully quelled in the whole period leading to Milošević's struggle to transform Yugoslavia from an uneasy consensus of South Slavic nations controlled by (theoretically) supra-national Communist Party to the open Serbian hegemony. After Milošević (and most Serbs) lost all wars in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina, Albanians- who had been living in past 15 years under police terror & intimidation- rose in revolt, but were losing due to numerous factors (poorly armed, untrained, their area studded with Serbian Army garrisons,..).

    Now, NATO was fed up with Milošević & knew that they'd lose all credibility if they remained passive as they'd been in past 10 years. Bombing ensued & Serbs lost; in the aftermath, most Serbian population fled & they remain only in a small area covering less than 5% of the province along the border with Serbia proper, less than 5% of the province's population. Kosovo got independence, which is legally questionable, but politically not too much: Serbia, with some 6 million Serbs, would not know what to do or how to absorb extremely hostile 1.8 million Albanians- aliens in culture, identity, language, custom, religion,...-everything. And these extremely inimical aliens, now, unlike in all history from 19th C on, would be armed with tanks, howitzers, rocket launchers... anything they would like to possess.

    So, this is just a small piece on what was actually a sideshow in dissolution of Yugoslavia. These peoples are, with exception of Hungarians and Albanians, relatively related as are Scandinavian peoples (Danes, Swedes etc.). But- they differ in national identities, languages, religions, cultures, histories .. and had, in past 5-6 centuries, lived in parallel & non-intersecting economic, cultural, national & spiritual worlds.

    Small wonder that such an unnatural freak of a country did not fall apart earlier.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Wally
    Except your claims against Serbia are fraudulent. Curious wishful thinking on your part.
    And you continuously believe in the scientifically impossible.

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    We're talking about an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000.
    There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

    Same for you fantasy about Serbian caused mass murders & mass graves.
    https://www.antiwar.com/justin/j082100.html

    What do Jews have with this topic at all?

    Of course you’re clueless: you don’t know Croatian (or Serbian, which is virtually mutually intelligible with Croatian); you don’t know literature, history, ..nothing; you don’t know anything save the usual agitprop trash.

    Enough with a waste of bytes ….

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral
    You are so clever that you dare not share your unfathomable wisdom with the rest of us, it's a "waste of bytes", but here you are wasting a lot of bytes...

    People that say how clever they are, and then never end up saying anything of value, are not seen as clever for obvious reasons (I hope you are clever enough to know how stupid you come across).
    , @Wally
    You ridiculously adhere to the 'holocau$t' religion, that's why.
    Just like you wish that Serbs had committed 'genocide'.

    Of course you ignored my Justin Raimondo link debunking of your pathetic 'woe is me' BS.
    again:
    THE KOSOVO FRAUD – WILL THEY EVER ADMIT IT?
    https://www.antiwar.com/justin/j082100.html

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @EliteCommInc.
    I had to take a break from this before responding. I don't think you know what it means to be a believer in the context of scripture. But there's is no singular consensus about the role christians are to have with Israel. The christian community, even among fundamentalists are not of one mind.

    But the description you suggest by either camp of how Christ operates or Christians understand him to operate is most likely a minority view, a very small minority.

    People of faith, long for Christ because it is a better offering than any sinful joys the world has to offer.

    I think even those who think they should help design the end -- think it will be better. They aren't pressing for a delay so they can steal candy from the local liquor store, maybe to get their lives in order -- but not many are hoping for an opportunity to kill their neighbor.

    I hate to disagree with you. The majority of “Christians” I run into in real life and the WWW are Preterists who heatedly disagree that Christ will rule 1000 years on the earth Himself, but will have a proxy made up of human believers who will enforce His will because we have to work for our salvation and there will be no Rapture of the Church before the Tribulation. Their eschatology prohibits them actually turning the other cheek regarding non-Christian religions. The Roman Catholic Church believes that the Pope is destined to rule the world from Jerusalem. Calvinists believe that the Church Militant is predestined to defeat Satan’s minions (humans) in bloody battle for the glory of God.

    Preterists see the plain imagery of Revelations where Christ is coming to the earth in the air on horse back as a metaphor to conqueror all humanity via modern weapons of war like jets/bombers. The idea that Jesus Himself would do the killing while the Body of Christ is a witness who doesn’t join the killing is outrageous! Ask military Christians what they think of “Thou Shalt Not Kill”? They will tell you what they told me back in 1988, that that Jesus is a soft cunt and they want nothing to do with Him. That’s why they reject the King James Bible and adopt other versions like the Soldiers Bible that conveniently translates “Not Kill” to “Not Murder”.

    Christians in the USA do not worship the Lamb of God Jesus Christ, they worship Mars/Ares.

    Read More
    • Replies: @polskijoe
    Its usually American Protestants who tend to believe in millenialism or dispensationalism.

    I have read an Orthodox clergy say the millenialists are waiting for the AntiChrist.
    And the Catholic Church is amillienial.

    So right there you have 1.6 billion+ who dont follow the idea of "rapture".

    Protestants are all over the place. But clearly the Evangelicals tend to follow one of three millenialist ideas. No idea on the Mainline Protestant sects.

    I forget what Preterist means. Is that where millenialism already happened?
    , @EliteCommInc.
    Because I acknowledge that christians differ on the end times and consequently the role that Israel plays in that scenario. I will not challenge that in your experience some believers of various denominations have said views.

    But in making your case you demonstrate the complexity of the very indictment you are attempting to make. I think the historical record is clear that not even Catholics are on board with a single solitary understanding of Christ's return. I find the papal suggestion a tad hard to buy, I have never heard of it. And when a practicing Catholic whether in Colorado, Panama, Germany, New Jersey, Texas, etc . . . was never taught it.


    Because there is a good deal of disagreement about whether one is saved by works or faith I have to stand by my original contention that there is no universal understanding on end times - And for the record, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Quakers and others are well known for their practice of not returning fire with fire . . .

    The number of evangelical congregations number in the tens of thousands and many independently operating in serving Christ.

    https://www.theevangelicalchurch.org/about_us

    Note: nothing here indicating the importance of the rapture, but as is the case with most churches -- serving Christ in the here and now .

    Those numbers are not linked to any one central point of authority save scripture.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainline_Protestant

    Note: I usually don't use wkipedia, but in this case there are references to the various branches of faith With these numbers the claims you make are difficult to justify the positions -- entire congregations even chastise Israel.

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/07/01/affirming-dignity-all-people-mainstream-church-votes-divest-occupation-profiting

    http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=603

    https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4146945,00.html

    These are not people who hate Israel. They fully embrace Israel's place as a source of truth via God's unique messages. But they are not endorsing everything Israel does - clearly.

    As I noted -- the issue of Israel and the end times is not settled into a single monolithic belief. It gets a lot of attention politically, but the issue of the rapture, the beast and when -- and how is not settled. Frankly, Christ says, only the Father knows when such time of those days of tribulation will occur, the believer is to be ready for Christ's return. He notes the signs, but when - remains a mystery.

    But clearly --- it's not in agreement. Try telling the Jesuits it's a settled matter.

    https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/05/15/catholic-church-holy-land-says-israel-palestine-situation-cannot-be


    Revelations is a tricky place to engage in politics from. Israel has a right to exist. Israel is the peoples from which faith in Christ and all that went before is derived. But Christ does not demand any unique political loyalty to the secular state and navigating whether the old testament reference to the children of Abraham is immediate or eternal is debated among Christians as is the peculiar twist of what it means to be a christian which is to be a fully grafted into the promises of God given to Israel. That means fully embraced, so if the promises to Israel are eternal or at least until Christ's return ----

    the blessings are intended to christians -- so churches be blessed as they bless one another is a legitimate understanding not merely blessing Jews.

    -------------------

    Now the real issue is whether NATO is going to be calling women to serve in combat to prevent rape and which country are they going to attack first.

    As to your comments about people of faith in the military -- I have never heard any such expressed belief. Perhaps among a few select but as general understanding -- and practice -- never.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Eagle Eye says:
    @Alden
    Like every other American she probably had to read To Kill a Mockingbird in every grade from 6th to 12th and is convinced that evil White women lie about blacks raping them.

    She has to come up with new publicity stunts every few years. First cutting herself, tattoos and drugs Then adopting third world kids. Then living with Brad Pitt.

    When that got stale they finally got married but few paid much attention.

    Then she declared one of the kids had been wrongly assigned to be a girl at birth and gave the kid hormone therapy.

    Few paid attention

    Then she accused Pitt of child abuse and filed for divorce. Even the national inquirer didn’t pay much attention

    This is her latest PR stunt.

    Then [Jolie] declared one of [her own biological] kids had been wrongly assigned to be a girl at birth …

    By Jove, this Cult-Marx/Marx-Cult “assigned” bullcrap is catching on even among people who should know better. The biological sex of a person is a fact that can be objectively verified, not a subjective “assignment” subject to multiple revisions at the whim of the “assigner(ette).”

    If I think I am a seagull, does that make me a seagull?

    The biological sex of a person is an objective fact which can be readily and reliably ascertained using modern diagnostic techniques. Cells with XX chromosomes are female, XY are male, XXY and XYY are very rare flukes.

    Bodies with primary sexual organs matching the chromosome patterns are biologically female or male. Mismatches between organ development and chromosomes happens only in very rare cases.

    Gender dysphoria is a real but relatively rare phenomenon. Importantly, however, there is a difference between a person feeling that she/he should be another sex, and a person feeling that he/she actually is a sex other than the one he/she was raised as.

    THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: If Jane weighs 150 pounds but wishes that she weighed 130 pounds, she may be suffering from a common weight dysphoria.

    On the other hand, if 150 pound Jane honestly believes in her own mind that she weighs 130 pounds notwithstanding the lies daily told by her bathroom scales, then her problem is of a very different character than mere weight dysphoria, and no mere diet is likely to bridge the cognitive dissonance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. neutral says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    What do Jews have with this topic at all?

    Of course you're clueless: you don't know Croatian (or Serbian, which is virtually mutually intelligible with Croatian); you don't know literature, history, ..nothing; you don't know anything save the usual agitprop trash.


    Enough with a waste of bytes ....

    You are so clever that you dare not share your unfathomable wisdom with the rest of us, it’s a “waste of bytes”, but here you are wasting a lot of bytes…

    People that say how clever they are, and then never end up saying anything of value, are not seen as clever for obvious reasons (I hope you are clever enough to know how stupid you come across).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Linda Green
    The world, and in particular the US needs to get a handle on the present Jew infestation and concomitant mass-deception regimes perpetrated by these vile people. The present condition we all find ourselves in is best described as denial. The people of earth are in denial about the extent and damage being caused by this infestation. Children in the "West" stand to bear the very worst of what these monsters are doing. Just seeing an entire generation of youts whose minds are filled with the worst absolute nonsense about right and wrong, gender, sexuality, races, etc. It is truly sad and hard to watch. On top of that, I fear many of these kids are not even learning the real basics of achieving self sufficiency, they primarily push buttons and gripe a lot.

    If throwing a few million Jews in ovens again would make them stop these pogroms against our people, it would certainly be a good trade off. I stand by that claim.

    It's really gone too far, and sown the seeds that will be the final nail in the coffin for the United States and the principles that it was founded on. Why our leadership has decided to support, unequivocally, a people who can truly only be described as the enemy of our people is beyond me. It's tragic and perhaps too late to change course.

    Troll.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Fearless Woman was Wall Street’s brand moniker. You know Wall Street. NATO’s most important military base.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. @voicum
    please enlighten us. what went on in the past four decades (since 1978)

    Why would I write mammoth comments, replete with historical, economic, cultural, military…data & analyses?

    I will just pen a few sentences about a province that I don’t care for, Kosovo, and leave it at that. To write anything extensively on any other controversial subject is simply-useless.

    What is now Kosovo had been an integral part of Serbian medieval state in 13th & 14th C. They have a strong cultural heritage there. After Ottoman conquest of Serbia in 14th & 15th C, the ethnic composition of the area remained, more or less, the same. But, after mass Serbian migrations at the end of 17th C to the northern, Austrian lands (now a Serbian province of Vojvodina), neighboring Albanians, most of them Muslims (Albanian people are ca. 70% Muslim, the rest are Catholics & Eastern Orthodox) moved in & became the majority.

    This was so until 19th C when Serbia, now a new duchy, then kingdom, during Balkan wars in 1913 occupied/liberated Kosovo. The region was then 63% Albanian, 25% Serbian & the rest were mostly Muslim Turks, Bosniaks and Gypsies. Serbian socialist Dimitrije Tucović openly wrote against that, condemning what he saw as extension of European imperialism to the provincial levels of Balkan tribalism (the classic work is “Srbija i Arbanija”, 1-2). Albanians were suppressed & forced to emigrate, while Serbian colonizers took their place (this was not too successful because of Albanian high fertility rate & unwillingness of most Serbs to move in that backward area).

    After WW II, Yugoslav policy toward Kosovo was ambiguous: on one hand, Yugoslav Communists wanted to placate Albanians who had been promised full independence & integration with neighboring Albania; on the other, they wanted to keep Serbs satisfied. So, the region was, according to Soviet model, given a semi-autonomous status in Serbia. In reality, oppression of Albanians continued from 1945 to 1966, the fall of Tito’s strongman Ranković (Serbian quasi-Stalinist politician). Until Tito’s death in 1980, Kosovo had been, economically, Yugoslav black hole, sucking in vast amounts of money from all republics that contributed to keep it quiet; in the meantime, Kosovo Albanians rose from 65% to over 90% in population after Tito’s death & created their own educated classes (Priština University has, after reforms in 1960s, taught both in Serbian & Albanian). The rise of modern nationalism among Albanians was not successfully quelled in the whole period leading to Milošević’s struggle to transform Yugoslavia from an uneasy consensus of South Slavic nations controlled by (theoretically) supra-national Communist Party to the open Serbian hegemony. After Milošević (and most Serbs) lost all wars in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina, Albanians- who had been living in past 15 years under police terror & intimidation- rose in revolt, but were losing due to numerous factors (poorly armed, untrained, their area studded with Serbian Army garrisons,..).

    Now, NATO was fed up with Milošević & knew that they’d lose all credibility if they remained passive as they’d been in past 10 years. Bombing ensued & Serbs lost; in the aftermath, most Serbian population fled & they remain only in a small area covering less than 5% of the province along the border with Serbia proper, less than 5% of the province’s population. Kosovo got independence, which is legally questionable, but politically not too much: Serbia, with some 6 million Serbs, would not know what to do or how to absorb extremely hostile 1.8 million Albanians- aliens in culture, identity, language, custom, religion,…-everything. And these extremely inimical aliens, now, unlike in all history from 19th C on, would be armed with tanks, howitzers, rocket launchers… anything they would like to possess.

    So, this is just a small piece on what was actually a sideshow in dissolution of Yugoslavia. These peoples are, with exception of Hungarians and Albanians, relatively related as are Scandinavian peoples (Danes, Swedes etc.). But- they differ in national identities, languages, religions, cultures, histories .. and had, in past 5-6 centuries, lived in parallel & non-intersecting economic, cultural, national & spiritual worlds.

    Small wonder that such an unnatural freak of a country did not fall apart earlier.

    Read More
    • Agree: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Albanians are Gypsies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Beckow

    George Szamuely’s great uncle was Hungarian Bolshevik thug, Tibor Szamuely, who killed hundreds of civilians during the so called Hungarian Revolution in 1919
     
    Hungarian Bolsheviks killed thousands in the 1919 reverse pogrom-revolution-looting frenzy after WWI. Unless poor Tibor was too busy writing revolutionary pamphlets, we should credit him with more than just 'hundreds'. It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler. It scared the soap-using class into an irrational fear and we soon got WWII.

    But holding someone responsible for the acts of distant relatives is a slippery slope. Great uncle is 12.5% of one's DNA, I would give him a break. I once run into a proud grandson of a prominent member of Bela Kun's inner circle. And guess what? Yes, he was working for the State Department 'protecting innocents', again. It must run in the family. Irony, indeed.

    The Tibor Szamuely Gang killed 600 minimum. Maybe considerably more.
    George Szamuely has never condoned his great uncle’s actions.
    He has never been a Zionist, Neocon or Russophobe, unlike his late sister, Helen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. polskijoe says:
    @Wyatt Pendleton
    @EliteCommInc.

    I hate to disagree with you. The majority of "Christians" I run into in real life and the WWW are Preterists who heatedly disagree that Christ will rule 1000 years on the earth Himself, but will have a proxy made up of human believers who will enforce His will because we have to work for our salvation and there will be no Rapture of the Church before the Tribulation. Their eschatology prohibits them actually turning the other cheek regarding non-Christian religions. The Roman Catholic Church believes that the Pope is destined to rule the world from Jerusalem. Calvinists believe that the Church Militant is predestined to defeat Satan's minions (humans) in bloody battle for the glory of God.

    Preterists see the plain imagery of Revelations where Christ is coming to the earth in the air on horse back as a metaphor to conqueror all humanity via modern weapons of war like jets/bombers. The idea that Jesus Himself would do the killing while the Body of Christ is a witness who doesn't join the killing is outrageous! Ask military Christians what they think of "Thou Shalt Not Kill"? They will tell you what they told me back in 1988, that that Jesus is a soft cunt and they want nothing to do with Him. That's why they reject the King James Bible and adopt other versions like the Soldiers Bible that conveniently translates "Not Kill" to "Not Murder".

    Christians in the USA do not worship the Lamb of God Jesus Christ, they worship Mars/Ares.

    Its usually American Protestants who tend to believe in millenialism or dispensationalism.

    I have read an Orthodox clergy say the millenialists are waiting for the AntiChrist.
    And the Catholic Church is amillienial.

    So right there you have 1.6 billion+ who dont follow the idea of “rapture”.

    Protestants are all over the place. But clearly the Evangelicals tend to follow one of three millenialist ideas. No idea on the Mainline Protestant sects.

    I forget what Preterist means. Is that where millenialism already happened?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. …War on Behalf of Women

    We’ve seen all of the current tactics before.
    And reference to “War on Behalf of Women” is fundamentally misleading, what is really going on is war on men!

    … is actually War on Men

    It quite likely will not end up being any good for most women.

    One may well ask why is there a war on men, half the population of the planet?

    Well, first of all, it’s not on all men, is it?

    Only in the so-called ‘western’ democracies, i.e. countries whose governmental and non-governmental, not to forget extra-governmental agencies are effectively controlled by an occupying political entity in the middle east. Furthermore, I think one would be hard-pressed to find a male member of the alluded to global collective, in-observance, who will be having any difficulties in the current trend of criminalization of men in general, and northwestern eurasia-originating men, in particular, i.e. “white”.

    But, why is there a war on men?

    Because, biologically, men are the most likely to resist and rebel against alien take-overs and slavery.
    Evolution during since the neolithic period (and probably much longer back into human history), when competing tribes warred, typically men-against-men (though likely not always), any of the women of the defected tribe would have to either a. accept the new men, or b. die!
    In this way, evolution has, for thousands of years, favoured ‘cognitive plasticity‘ in women.
    Therefore, the trait of greater cognitive plasticity has been strengthened in women, and created a divergence between men and women, with women have greater cognitive plasticity compared to men.

    By systematically dis-empowering men, thereby leaving women as the more powerful decision-makers in ‘western societies‘ , difficulties in the take-over can be managed more easily.
    Also, the current exploding science of perception management works best via an emotive channel into sub-consciousness (versus fact-based rationale decision-making cognitive apparati). Here we have again an advantage to women being in the stronger decision-making position in target societies, whether by social or biological reasons, women are more amenable to emotive-based decision-making.
    .
    .
    .

    Not to dwell on it too much, but since you have referenced Ms. Jolie so frequently, I suggest that it is very likely that she is of unstable emotional/cognitive grounding, and thus easily manipulated by the various agencies coordinated in this program of the global subversion master strategy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. Antiwar7 says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Systematic research on the subject however resulted in findings that were insufficiently dramatic to make it into the papers. On Jan. 29, 1994, the U.N. secretary-general issued a report on rapes in the former Yugoslavia, including Bosnia and Croatia, based on a study by the U.N. Commission of Experts. The report found “126 victims, 113 incidents, 252 alleged perpetrators, 73 witnesses.” The report also stated “some of the rape cases” were “clearly the result of individual or small-group conduct without evidence of command responsibility. Others may be part of an overall pattern. Because of a variety of factors, such a pattern may lead to a conclusion that a systematic rape policy existed, but this remains to be proved.”
     
    This is a lie. So called UN "experts" were trying to cover up Serbian policy of ethnic cleansing which was supported by British, French, and in early periods, by USA. There were thousands of women systematically raped, and vast majority of them by Serbian paramilitary forces.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-croatia-rape/croatia-passes-law-to-compensate-war-rape-victims-idUKKBN0OE1M820150529

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_Bosnian_War

    Since I am a Croat whose family has participated, virtually all of us, in our War for Independence, I may be accused of partiality.

    But, I don't care: Mr. Szamuely, as far as this question goes- you are liar.

    The first article you reference shows one victim. The Wikipedia article is dominated by the accepted Western groupthink, that the Serbs were the unique villains, which is blatantly false.

    The number of claimed rape victims in the former Yugoslavia wars were themselves attempted acts of war (Haris Silajdzic claiming 50,000 rape victims with no evidence was intended to get arms and military intervention for his side, for example).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Robjil says:

    Boycott all movies with Jolie in them. She is supporting a terrorism organization – NATO. In the cold war era, it had the Operation Gladio program that terrorized all of western Europe. After the cold war era, it has the Operation Gladio program ( false flags, the use of radical islamics (al-aqaeda, isis, nusra, ect.) neonazis (Ukraine, Croatia) ). Here are some articles and videos on the first Operation Gladio program.

    https://www.constantinereport.com/nato-propaganda-due-and-gladio/

    http://physics911.net/pdf/DanieleGanser_Terrorism_in_Western_Europe-1.pdf

    http://themillenniumreport.com/2017/04/natos-secret-armies-operation-gladio-and-the-strategy-of-tension/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  69. @Wyatt Pendleton
    @EliteCommInc.

    I hate to disagree with you. The majority of "Christians" I run into in real life and the WWW are Preterists who heatedly disagree that Christ will rule 1000 years on the earth Himself, but will have a proxy made up of human believers who will enforce His will because we have to work for our salvation and there will be no Rapture of the Church before the Tribulation. Their eschatology prohibits them actually turning the other cheek regarding non-Christian religions. The Roman Catholic Church believes that the Pope is destined to rule the world from Jerusalem. Calvinists believe that the Church Militant is predestined to defeat Satan's minions (humans) in bloody battle for the glory of God.

    Preterists see the plain imagery of Revelations where Christ is coming to the earth in the air on horse back as a metaphor to conqueror all humanity via modern weapons of war like jets/bombers. The idea that Jesus Himself would do the killing while the Body of Christ is a witness who doesn't join the killing is outrageous! Ask military Christians what they think of "Thou Shalt Not Kill"? They will tell you what they told me back in 1988, that that Jesus is a soft cunt and they want nothing to do with Him. That's why they reject the King James Bible and adopt other versions like the Soldiers Bible that conveniently translates "Not Kill" to "Not Murder".

    Christians in the USA do not worship the Lamb of God Jesus Christ, they worship Mars/Ares.

    Because I acknowledge that christians differ on the end times and consequently the role that Israel plays in that scenario. I will not challenge that in your experience some believers of various denominations have said views.

    But in making your case you demonstrate the complexity of the very indictment you are attempting to make. I think the historical record is clear that not even Catholics are on board with a single solitary understanding of Christ’s return. I find the papal suggestion a tad hard to buy, I have never heard of it. And when a practicing Catholic whether in Colorado, Panama, Germany, New Jersey, Texas, etc . . . was never taught it.

    Because there is a good deal of disagreement about whether one is saved by works or faith I have to stand by my original contention that there is no universal understanding on end times – And for the record, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Quakers and others are well known for their practice of not returning fire with fire . . .

    The number of evangelical congregations number in the tens of thousands and many independently operating in serving Christ.

    https://www.theevangelicalchurch.org/about_us

    Note: nothing here indicating the importance of the rapture, but as is the case with most churches — serving Christ in the here and now .

    Those numbers are not linked to any one central point of authority save scripture.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainline_Protestant

    Note: I usually don’t use wkipedia, but in this case there are references to the various branches of faith With these numbers the claims you make are difficult to justify the positions — entire congregations even chastise Israel.

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/07/01/affirming-dignity-all-people-mainstream-church-votes-divest-occupation-profiting

    http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=603

    https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4146945,00.html

    These are not people who hate Israel. They fully embrace Israel’s place as a source of truth via God’s unique messages. But they are not endorsing everything Israel does – clearly.

    As I noted — the issue of Israel and the end times is not settled into a single monolithic belief. It gets a lot of attention politically, but the issue of the rapture, the beast and when — and how is not settled. Frankly, Christ says, only the Father knows when such time of those days of tribulation will occur, the believer is to be ready for Christ’s return. He notes the signs, but when – remains a mystery.

    But clearly — it’s not in agreement. Try telling the Jesuits it’s a settled matter.

    https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/05/15/catholic-church-holy-land-says-israel-palestine-situation-cannot-be

    Revelations is a tricky place to engage in politics from. Israel has a right to exist. Israel is the peoples from which faith in Christ and all that went before is derived. But Christ does not demand any unique political loyalty to the secular state and navigating whether the old testament reference to the children of Abraham is immediate or eternal is debated among Christians as is the peculiar twist of what it means to be a christian which is to be a fully grafted into the promises of God given to Israel. That means fully embraced, so if the promises to Israel are eternal or at least until Christ’s return —-

    the blessings are intended to christians — so churches be blessed as they bless one another is a legitimate understanding not merely blessing Jews.

    ——————-

    Now the real issue is whether NATO is going to be calling women to serve in combat to prevent rape and which country are they going to attack first.

    As to your comments about people of faith in the military — I have never heard any such expressed belief. Perhaps among a few select but as general understanding — and practice — never.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    One thing I’ve never understood.

    What does “Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior “. mean?

    Saved from what? And how can an entity that doesn’t exist help an individual person?

    What exactly does Lord mean? This isn’t medieval feudal times. Is it a reciprocal relationship like in medieval times between the Lord and his tenants who he is supposed to protect.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Bardon Kaldian
    Why would I write mammoth comments, replete with historical, economic, cultural, military...data & analyses?

    I will just pen a few sentences about a province that I don't care for, Kosovo, and leave it at that. To write anything extensively on any other controversial subject is simply-useless.

    What is now Kosovo had been an integral part of Serbian medieval state in 13th & 14th C. They have a strong cultural heritage there. After Ottoman conquest of Serbia in 14th & 15th C, the ethnic composition of the area remained, more or less, the same. But, after mass Serbian migrations at the end of 17th C to the northern, Austrian lands (now a Serbian province of Vojvodina), neighboring Albanians, most of them Muslims (Albanian people are ca. 70% Muslim, the rest are Catholics & Eastern Orthodox) moved in & became the majority.

    This was so until 19th C when Serbia, now a new duchy, then kingdom, during Balkan wars in 1913 occupied/liberated Kosovo. The region was then 63% Albanian, 25% Serbian & the rest were mostly Muslim Turks, Bosniaks and Gypsies. Serbian socialist Dimitrije Tucović openly wrote against that, condemning what he saw as extension of European imperialism to the provincial levels of Balkan tribalism (the classic work is "Srbija i Arbanija", 1-2). Albanians were suppressed & forced to emigrate, while Serbian colonizers took their place (this was not too successful because of Albanian high fertility rate & unwillingness of most Serbs to move in that backward area).

    After WW II, Yugoslav policy toward Kosovo was ambiguous: on one hand, Yugoslav Communists wanted to placate Albanians who had been promised full independence & integration with neighboring Albania; on the other, they wanted to keep Serbs satisfied. So, the region was, according to Soviet model, given a semi-autonomous status in Serbia. In reality, oppression of Albanians continued from 1945 to 1966, the fall of Tito's strongman Ranković (Serbian quasi-Stalinist politician). Until Tito's death in 1980, Kosovo had been, economically, Yugoslav black hole, sucking in vast amounts of money from all republics that contributed to keep it quiet; in the meantime, Kosovo Albanians rose from 65% to over 90% in population after Tito's death & created their own educated classes (Priština University has, after reforms in 1960s, taught both in Serbian & Albanian). The rise of modern nationalism among Albanians was not successfully quelled in the whole period leading to Milošević's struggle to transform Yugoslavia from an uneasy consensus of South Slavic nations controlled by (theoretically) supra-national Communist Party to the open Serbian hegemony. After Milošević (and most Serbs) lost all wars in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina, Albanians- who had been living in past 15 years under police terror & intimidation- rose in revolt, but were losing due to numerous factors (poorly armed, untrained, their area studded with Serbian Army garrisons,..).

    Now, NATO was fed up with Milošević & knew that they'd lose all credibility if they remained passive as they'd been in past 10 years. Bombing ensued & Serbs lost; in the aftermath, most Serbian population fled & they remain only in a small area covering less than 5% of the province along the border with Serbia proper, less than 5% of the province's population. Kosovo got independence, which is legally questionable, but politically not too much: Serbia, with some 6 million Serbs, would not know what to do or how to absorb extremely hostile 1.8 million Albanians- aliens in culture, identity, language, custom, religion,...-everything. And these extremely inimical aliens, now, unlike in all history from 19th C on, would be armed with tanks, howitzers, rocket launchers... anything they would like to possess.

    So, this is just a small piece on what was actually a sideshow in dissolution of Yugoslavia. These peoples are, with exception of Hungarians and Albanians, relatively related as are Scandinavian peoples (Danes, Swedes etc.). But- they differ in national identities, languages, religions, cultures, histories .. and had, in past 5-6 centuries, lived in parallel & non-intersecting economic, cultural, national & spiritual worlds.

    Small wonder that such an unnatural freak of a country did not fall apart earlier.

    Albanians are Gypsies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Again you are jumping into conclusion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. I was in Havana Cuba 1996 in famed Bodagido (sp?) hole in the wall where Hollywood actors like EFlynn and writer like Papa Hemingway; tons of black and white precursors to today’s “selfies”. One set of photos was obviously more recent vintage and quite prominent being the only ones in colour—TT (Ted Turner CNN at time and Havana errHanoi Jane!!); quite an embargo as Ted had the monopoly for cable services in the tourist hotels

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. Wally says: • Website
    @Bardon Kaldian
    What do Jews have with this topic at all?

    Of course you're clueless: you don't know Croatian (or Serbian, which is virtually mutually intelligible with Croatian); you don't know literature, history, ..nothing; you don't know anything save the usual agitprop trash.


    Enough with a waste of bytes ....

    You ridiculously adhere to the ‘holocau$t’ religion, that’s why.
    Just like you wish that Serbs had committed ‘genocide’.

    Of course you ignored my Justin Raimondo link debunking of your pathetic ‘woe is me’ BS.
    again:
    THE KOSOVO FRAUD – WILL THEY EVER ADMIT IT?

    https://www.antiwar.com/justin/j082100.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Wally says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Russian minister Count Witte said around 1900 to Herzl 'that he would gladly drown five million jews (those in tzarist Russia) in the Black Sea, but it was impossible'.
    The last division of Poland, 1800 or so, had as result that nearly all of the world's jews then, some five million, lived in tzarist Russia.
    Around 1900 was the tenth resignation of the Russian assimilation committee.

    The hatred was both ways, it seems, Solsjenytsyn wrote that the Bolsjewists, to a large extent jews, hated the Russians.
    How Ukrainians hated jews:
    Voline ( Vsevolod Mikhailovitsch Eichenbaum), ‘The unknown revolution (Kronstadt 1921 Ukraine 1918-21)’, New York 1955.

    At the beginning of WWII the Lithuanians, before the German troops came, led the jews of their villages to open places in the woods, and killed them all.
    Dan Jacobson, ‘Heshels Rijk Familiekroniek’, Amsterdam 1998
    Jacobson is the grandson of rabbi Heshel, who lived in Lithuania.
    Jacobson went there to find out how his grandfather died.
    Pictures of Lithuanians beating jews to death you can find in
    Christopher R. Browning, ‘Ordinary Men, Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland’, 1992, 2001, London

    How Poles hated their jews
    Jan T. Gross, ‘Neighbours, The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland, 1941’, 2003, London

    Already a long time ago I visited Lithuania, and spoke with a foreigner who had lived there for a decade or so, he spoke the language.
    He told me the Lithuanians did not want to speak about their past with the jews, the present capital, Vilnius, before WWII, was then seen as the jewish capitalof E Europe.
    Vilnius had a jewish university.

    This foreigner gave me to understand that before WWII jews controlled the Lithuanian economy, he implied, I think, without saying so openly, that the Lithunians had resented jewish economic domination.

    In
    Anne Applebaum, ‘Between East and West, Across the borderlands of Europe’, Londen, 1995
    you find an old woman saying 'Hitler did terrible things, but he liberated us from the jews'.

    said:
    “Russian minister Count Witte said around 1900 to Herzl ‘that he would gladly drown five million jews (those in tzarist Russia) in the Black Sea, but it was impossible’.”
    LOL!! There is no proof for that and your citation does not have any.
    Just more laughable Zionist propaganda unsupported by proof.

    Citing Zionist ‘books’ is not proof. Anyone can say anything in a book, especially the notoriously lying Jews. But there is proof that the ’6M Jews’ is utter nonsense. Jews have been promoting the ’6,000,000′ lie since at least 1869.
    http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php
    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:

    http://codoh.com

    No name calling, level playing field debate here:

    http://forum.codoh.com

    We’re talking about an alleged ’6M Jews & 5M others’ … 11,000,000.
    There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    I attributed some time ago the statement to Von Plehve, my memory is not infallible.
    Someone corrected me that it was Witte, the statement is in the diary of Herzl.
    Of course Herzl may have lied.
    But the great thing about truth is that it is consistent.
    The statement fits in what Solsjenytsyn writes about jews in Russia, one long struggle by jews against assimilation:
    Alexander Solschenizyn, ´Die russisch- jüdische Geschichte 1795- 1916, >> Zweihundert Jahre zusammen <<´, Moskau 2001, München 2002
    Then a reaction here is that Witte said it to the tzar, quite possible, this does not at all exclude that Witte also said it to Herzl.
    As I wrote before, around 1900 the tenth tzarist assimilation committee gave up.
    Another book on non assimilation is
    Klaus Hödl, ‘Als Bettler in die Leopoldstadt, Galizische Juden auf dem Weg nach Wien’, Wien, 1994
    Maybe the best is a book by a jew
    Ismar Schorsch, 'Jewish Reactions to German Anti-Semitism, 1870 - 1914', New York 1972
    or
    ‘From prejudice to destruction’, Jacob Katz, 1980, Cambridge MA
    Katz is or was a jewish Israeli historian.
    The one and only jewish historian who explains antisemitism by jewish behaviour, to my knowledge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. I am the only one who has brilliant ideas on this website.

    So here it is:
    In Brazilian forest are indigenous tribes who mark their territories by sculls on the poles.
    So US should do the same.
    US killed about 3 million of native population in the Levant.
    Lets not leave to waste of all those skulls.
    Lets put them on poles on Mexican border.
    …………………………………………………………………
    Saving of money and effort will be enormous.
    I am sure all Neocons will approve it, It will be forever their trophy for all times.
    And the same time it will be wall.
    I do know that people put their trophies of animals on the wall.
    This will be fantastic novelty.
    Trophies actually creating the wall

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    "I am the only one who has brilliant ideas on this website."

    No. This is not allowed. You must stop this immediately.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I take it that NATO troops will henceforth start wearing pussyhat style helmets?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  76. Alden says:
    @Che Guava
    That is very interesting, many interesting comments, too tired to attempt own real reply.

    However, Jolie, with her clown-like collagen-pumped lips, is just one of many (ooh, it will ruin my figure to bear a child) to adoptng a menagerie, Meg Ryan seems to be a pioneer, Madonna Ciccione, Nicole Kidman, many others, the same..

    The only comtact the exotic brood is having is with the hired nanny.

    As soon as she remarried after the divorce from Cruise Kidman had 2 natural children . The Pitts have 3 natural children Madonna has 2 natural children

    Easy to see I grocery shop weekly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Thanks for the correction, am out of date, was thinking they still had none.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Alden says:
    @EliteCommInc.
    Because I acknowledge that christians differ on the end times and consequently the role that Israel plays in that scenario. I will not challenge that in your experience some believers of various denominations have said views.

    But in making your case you demonstrate the complexity of the very indictment you are attempting to make. I think the historical record is clear that not even Catholics are on board with a single solitary understanding of Christ's return. I find the papal suggestion a tad hard to buy, I have never heard of it. And when a practicing Catholic whether in Colorado, Panama, Germany, New Jersey, Texas, etc . . . was never taught it.


    Because there is a good deal of disagreement about whether one is saved by works or faith I have to stand by my original contention that there is no universal understanding on end times - And for the record, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Quakers and others are well known for their practice of not returning fire with fire . . .

    The number of evangelical congregations number in the tens of thousands and many independently operating in serving Christ.

    https://www.theevangelicalchurch.org/about_us

    Note: nothing here indicating the importance of the rapture, but as is the case with most churches -- serving Christ in the here and now .

    Those numbers are not linked to any one central point of authority save scripture.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainline_Protestant

    Note: I usually don't use wkipedia, but in this case there are references to the various branches of faith With these numbers the claims you make are difficult to justify the positions -- entire congregations even chastise Israel.

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/07/01/affirming-dignity-all-people-mainstream-church-votes-divest-occupation-profiting

    http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=603

    https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4146945,00.html

    These are not people who hate Israel. They fully embrace Israel's place as a source of truth via God's unique messages. But they are not endorsing everything Israel does - clearly.

    As I noted -- the issue of Israel and the end times is not settled into a single monolithic belief. It gets a lot of attention politically, but the issue of the rapture, the beast and when -- and how is not settled. Frankly, Christ says, only the Father knows when such time of those days of tribulation will occur, the believer is to be ready for Christ's return. He notes the signs, but when - remains a mystery.

    But clearly --- it's not in agreement. Try telling the Jesuits it's a settled matter.

    https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/05/15/catholic-church-holy-land-says-israel-palestine-situation-cannot-be


    Revelations is a tricky place to engage in politics from. Israel has a right to exist. Israel is the peoples from which faith in Christ and all that went before is derived. But Christ does not demand any unique political loyalty to the secular state and navigating whether the old testament reference to the children of Abraham is immediate or eternal is debated among Christians as is the peculiar twist of what it means to be a christian which is to be a fully grafted into the promises of God given to Israel. That means fully embraced, so if the promises to Israel are eternal or at least until Christ's return ----

    the blessings are intended to christians -- so churches be blessed as they bless one another is a legitimate understanding not merely blessing Jews.

    -------------------

    Now the real issue is whether NATO is going to be calling women to serve in combat to prevent rape and which country are they going to attack first.

    As to your comments about people of faith in the military -- I have never heard any such expressed belief. Perhaps among a few select but as general understanding -- and practice -- never.

    One thing I’ve never understood.

    What does “Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior “. mean?

    Saved from what? And how can an entity that doesn’t exist help an individual person?

    What exactly does Lord mean? This isn’t medieval feudal times. Is it a reciprocal relationship like in medieval times between the Lord and his tenants who he is supposed to protect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    As a general rule, I don't discuss faith and practice with someone who has already decided that Christ or God does not exist. There's not really a point of reference that makes sense to atheists.

    If your questions are sincere, I will share my view(s).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Macintosh
    @ Bardon Kaldian
    If I were you I would avoid freely admitting that you and your family participated in the Croatian "independence" war. People may think you are war criminals with all the war crimes that were perpetrated there by the Croats allied with NATO...

    http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/croatia-s-operation-storm-crimes-unpunished-22-years-on-08-03-2017

    If I were you I would avoid freely admitting that you and your family participated in the Croatian “independence” war. People may think you are war criminals with all the war crimes that were perpetrated there by the Croats allied with NATO…

    Don’t worry, I’m accustomed to pro-Serbian ideological faggotry.
    Here what Serbs are, if you understand Serbian (it is from their eminent military analyst, Miroslav Lazanski who is known to be an almost lunatic hawk; it is about Serbian JNA war with Croatia in 1991):
    http://www.intermagazin.rs/miroslav-lazanski-sta-se-krije-iza-oslobadjanja-seselja/ But, basics are here, in translation:
    …………………………………………
    (Why were Serbian irregulars necessary)

    Out of 37 mobilized JNA brigades in Serbia, Montenegro & Bosnia and Herzegovina during 1991. & the beginning of 1992, 33 brigades either fell apart, or ran away. In Croatia the following brigades were running away: 145. Lika brigade, 4. and 5. Kordun brigade, 11. brigade from Dvor had been fleeing 7 times before (Croatian) ZNG, much less equipped & numerous. 2nd motorized brigade from Valjevo, Serbia, descendants of famous (WW I) Drina division, fled from Tovarnik (Slavonia, Croatia), leaving behind them 7 tanks & 50 armored vehicles.
    …………………….
    No-we are not impressed, not at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Alden says:
    @WHAT
    First of all, Stalin already had it anyway. Wasn`t Roosevelts` to give away too.
    And second, nobody cared about Eastern Europe. Military control of Germany is what NATO was actually about.

    Very, very, true.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Alden says:
    @Che Guava
    That is very interesting, many interesting comments, too tired to attempt own real reply.

    However, Jolie, with her clown-like collagen-pumped lips, is just one of many (ooh, it will ruin my figure to bear a child) to adoptng a menagerie, Meg Ryan seems to be a pioneer, Madonna Ciccione, Nicole Kidman, many others, the same..

    The only comtact the exotic brood is having is with the hired nanny.

    Did you ever see the movie Evita ? Madonna was pregnant and it was obvious in the last half of the movie.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    I saw it, didn't like it much, but that is also interesting, suppose I was too young to noticing.

    Liked the TV show, with Julie Covington, when an overseas student 12 or so, with two friends, wrote a mash-up (not even a word then) of Evita and Rocky Horror, between the three of us writing, it was a rare example of high-school theatrical art brilliance. Rare.

    Later, I was to meet a very bitchy gay man who was foaming at the mouth to me for finding Evita funny, 'fascist dictators are not funny you stupid arsehole.'

    My reply, 'sure can be at times'.

    I wish to be able to make a link to our play, but it was before CCD cameras, and, I am sincerely believing, 'If you never saw it, too bad', as a principle'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. “The pairing of a NATO bureaucrat and a famous movie actress may at first glance appear odd.”

    Not at all. It appears to be the work of a profoundly disturbed mind or two. At second glance it appears even worse than that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    I am the only one who has brilliant ideas on this website.

    So here it is:
    In Brazilian forest are indigenous tribes who mark their territories by sculls on the poles.
    So US should do the same.
    US killed about 3 million of native population in the Levant.
    Lets not leave to waste of all those skulls.
    Lets put them on poles on Mexican border.
    ...........................................................................
    Saving of money and effort will be enormous.
    I am sure all Neocons will approve it, It will be forever their trophy for all times.
    And the same time it will be wall.
    I do know that people put their trophies of animals on the wall.
    This will be fantastic novelty.
    Trophies actually creating the wall

    “I am the only one who has brilliant ideas on this website.”

    No. This is not allowed. You must stop this immediately.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Are you try to deny obvious truth?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @EliteCommInc.
    I am usually pretty hard on our Hollywood come lately to equal justice causes. And I am the first in line to acknowledge that Mrs Pitt (Jolie) is a hefty talent. She unlike many others in Hollywood has a depp and sincere care for others. This is not a Miss Fonda, getting the Vietnam conflict wrong on every level.

    The press here for me is that neither NATO, the UN or the US should be going to war to set women free. It seems part of the historical record that innocence is becomes the most vulnerable consequences of conflict -- it is tragic. It does occur more during times of conflict. But even in warfare, especially modern warfare, rape is not a staple as a mechanism of war. The primary staple of war is killing and men in combat and not are the highest casualties. Perhaps not the most pitiful, because men are taught from birth that it is their lot in life to struggle, fight and die for causes narrated as defense of hearth and home -- which includes their wives, daughters women and their children. And men have been engaging war long before Hellen's face launched a single ship. Also a common staple is that if they lose, the winners will surely have their way with their women ---

    I disagree with those who have made claim that we are following Europe. It is the other way around. In my view the first open advocacy to save women in the name of democracy was openly argued in the US -- the rhetoric to invade Afghanistan was the first time in my lifetime when I heard in mass women to cause for war. The intellectual intelligentsia made this case and it was part of our polity invading both Afghanistan and Iraq. In fact, the tragic poster card for the war against both countries was the execution of a Muslim woman on a soccer field. It became the rallying moment and image of the horrors against women. Nevermind, that we have women on death row here in the US and we executive women. What was not discussed in the media or amongst are avant garde women for democracy cavalcade was why this women was executed. In the usual bid to make the case liberals told the tale on IFC in a bid for a sympathetic ear. Apparently, this women thinking her husband had uncovered her affair, and fearing the possible consequence if he had she murdered him.

    Now I think murder is an unbalanced response to one's infidelity, not that I support infidelity, and I get why a murderous response might be the a legitimate emotional call to such deep betrayal - I get it. Even scripture noted that men or women so engaged could be liable to severe consequence. But that consequence is to the adulterer, not the betrayed. At any rate, the social configuration of male female relationships should not be decided by violating the sovereignty of any state, with rare exception.

    When the 1973, violent takeover occurred at the APA conference to force a change in the classification of same sex conduct, the Europena equivalent winced and took issue and thought the US a tad overwrought -- they eventually followed suit, b ut it was not based on science. But it has been the peculiar ideology of US liberals that has led the way.

    The issue at hand,

    1. First NATO has never endorsed, ignored, or treated rape of women lightly. There are as with nearly every military around the globe, including Muslim militaries stiff penalties - death the most severe for any combatant, even noncombatant to have violated a women, child -- somewhere down that list is men.

    2. Despite the harrowing stories of rape, and they do occur, the incidents even during conflicts are rare. Especially in modern times, the protocol is to protect women and children, even of one's enemies. I am very embarrassed that I did not hang on to a book written several years ago that included studies of the instances , narrative, and use of rape during conflicts. I will reference it because, it did not find a huge media outlet. But the study, conducted by women, examining the phenomenon of rape in conflict concluded that despite it's popular place in conflict narrative, rape comprised a minute practice (I use the word minute because compared to the advertising -- actual incidents don't come close to the reality - of male behavior towards women). They contention in this text was that "rape" served a valuable tool in gaining international attention and aide as well sympathy for various causes -- now to the fore --- democracy and equality for women.

    3. The rape scenario is one the most popular tools in the US to ensure that blacks be kept in their place. Used nationwide, even used by the US military regarding US black service men serving overseas during WWI and WWII. Enough said . . . wishing to avoid the rhetorical battle of low IQ's black men against white virtue. A narrative Hollywood used to great effect. Hollywood unwilling to overhaul it's own culpability if social misinformation regarding their own citizens is happy to cast aspersions abroad -- ohh, Vietnam war protesters, it worked, why not continue to advance false narratives.

    4. I cannot remember the text or the study, but it was not what I expected when I read it. I am sure it's out there somewhere ticked away in some researchers shelf, not to be touched or referenced for fear of reprisals that data should get in the way of a good cause. Iraq's rape rooms, the supposed massive rape of Iraqi women . . . all myths of fancy and exaggeration. Part of the culture of rape fantasy held and advertised uniquely by white women - nevermind that rape in the US doesn't rise to even a percentage point to the number of women. If a culture exists, it's hardly popular on campus or not.
    --------------------------

    l'est the accusations begin,

    -I am not an advocate for rape or any assault against anyone
    -rape does occur, it is tragic and should not be ignored
    -men are victims more than women
    -I am sure that NATO Secretary-General Jens Soltenberg and Mrs. Angelina Pitt (Jolie) have
    honorable intentions -- reduce the incidence or violations.
    -I think in todays' demand for equality when considering cause to war for women -- I wonder if said
    causes would be as salient if women literally put themselves at risk in the endeavor. Blacks fought
    enmasse in the cause of union and every conflict to prove their worth, even when their sacrifice was
    ill regarded and rewarded -- and on behalf of others. Even German prisoners rated front row seats
    before black troops -- WWII.

    If one seriously wants to reduce the indents of rape during wartime, it might be a good idea to reconsider going to war for causes that are unwarranted. It is war that creates bands of unaccountable rovers who might engage in such behavior cut off from accountability. War breeds all manner of abnormal choices.

    “She unlike many others in Hollywood has a depp”

    I doubt Angelina has a Depp. She did have a Pitt at one point, as I recall.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Laugh . . .

    depp --- should have been deep. I appreciate handling my notorious lousy writing and proof reading with humor.
    , @Delinquent Snail
    I like bad jokes. I do. They make me giggle. This was terrible and you should be ashamed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Albanians are Gypsies.

    Again you are jumping into conclusion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Are you somehow mentally impaired?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. H. S. says:

    Womens’ right in the USA: How can US-NATO pretend to be an exemplary leader, when American women are treated like this:

    From The Female Face of Poverty
    Maria Shriver

    {emphasis mine}

    [MORE]

    ”More than 100 million Americans either live near the brink of poverty or churn in and out of it, and nearly 70 percent of these Americans are women and children.

    [...]

    The new iconic image of the economically insecure American is a working mother dashing around getting ready in the morning, brushing her kid’s hair with one hand and doling out medication to her own aging mother with the other.

    For the millions of American women who live this way, the dream of “having it all” has morphed into “just hanging on.” Everywhere they look, every magazine cover and talk show and website tells them women are supposed to be feeling more “empowered” than ever, but they don’t feel empowered. They feel exhausted.

    Many of these women feel they are just a single incident—one broken bone, one broken-down car, one missed paycheck—away from the brink. And they’re not crazy to feel that way:

    ◾Women are nearly two-thirds of minimum-wage workers in the country.

    ◾More than 70 percent of low-wage workers get no paid sick days at all.

    Forty percent of all households with children under the age of 18 include mothers who are either the sole or primary source of income.

    ◾The median earnings of full-time female workers are still just 77 percent of the median earnings of their male counterparts. ”

    Source: https://atodmagazine.com/2014/01/15/female-face-poverty/

    Dennis Kucinich Addresses American People of the Cost of War:

    “DOD Spent $21,226,750,000+ on 215 individual contracts in November 2017
    DOD Spent $18,500,080,000+ on 178 individual contracts in October 2017
    DOD spent $45,526,070,000+ on 681 individual contracts in September 2017
    DOD Spent $35,654,013,000+ on 306 individual contracts in August 2017
    DOD Spent $20,411,123,000+ on 242 Individual Contracts in July 2017
    DOD Spent $20,359,809,000+ on 287 Individual Contracts in June 2017
    DOD Spent $48,984,468,000+ on 225 Individual Contracts in May 2017
    DOD Spent $21,752,085,000+ on 211 Individual Contracts in April 2017
    DOD Spent$34,050,000,000+ on 296 Individual Contracts in March 2017
    DOD Spent $26,544,044,000+ on 169 Individual Contracts in February 2017
    The Most Oppressive Regime on Earth Receives Nearly $8 Billion in US Foreign Military Sales Contracts”

    Source: Christian Sorensen
    Newsbud Contributing Author & Analyst

    https://www.newsbud.com/author/christian-sorensen/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  86. Wally says:
    @Beckow

    George Szamuely’s great uncle was Hungarian Bolshevik thug, Tibor Szamuely, who killed hundreds of civilians during the so called Hungarian Revolution in 1919
     
    Hungarian Bolsheviks killed thousands in the 1919 reverse pogrom-revolution-looting frenzy after WWI. Unless poor Tibor was too busy writing revolutionary pamphlets, we should credit him with more than just 'hundreds'. It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler. It scared the soap-using class into an irrational fear and we soon got WWII.

    But holding someone responsible for the acts of distant relatives is a slippery slope. Great uncle is 12.5% of one's DNA, I would give him a break. I once run into a proud grandson of a prominent member of Bela Kun's inner circle. And guess what? Yes, he was working for the State Department 'protecting innocents', again. It must run in the family. Irony, indeed.

    said:
    “It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler.”

    Really? Says who?

    And what “influence” was that?

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Are you doubting that the communist revolutions of 1918-19 affected Hitler’s view of communism and Jews?
    , @Anon
    He didn’t say it to Herzl; he claims he said it to the czar

    https://i.imgur.com/UMuXxwp.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Wally
    said:
    "It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler."

    Really? Says who?

    And what "influence" was that?

    www.codoh.com

    Are you doubting that the communist revolutions of 1918-19 affected Hitler’s view of communism and Jews?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Wally
    said:
    "It was a bloody mess and had a huge influence on young Hitler."

    Really? Says who?

    And what "influence" was that?

    www.codoh.com

    He didn’t say it to Herzl; he claims he said it to the czar

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Excellent. Thanks for that.

    This shows that the original comment was likely taken out of context. It's apparent that what Witte was saying is that it would be great if the "Jewish problem" would just disappear. It's apparent from this that being realistic, he was advocating the gradual abolition of the "disabilities" of the Jews. What Witte seems to be saying is that although the Jewish problem is a headache for him, he's recommending a "go easy" approach anyway. To imply from this that he was a rabid anti-Semite seems unjustified in the extreme.

    It's clear that he was not advocating their extermination. There's a huge difference between wishing for a problem to just vanish, and advocating a policy.

    One also has to remember that this is likely a translation and therefore subject to misinterpretation.

    As Wally mentioned, we are up against liars who are skilled at twisting things to their benefit. I would add that they rarely seem to miss a chance to vilify anyone who doesn't snap to their commands and preferences. Adding to that, different factions within a group may choose to interpret things in widely different ways and for some reason the most damning charges seem to stick permanently.

    This also brings up the fact that the Nazis were not as anti-Jewish as they've been smeared. In other words, successful, assimilated Jews were tolerated in the third Reich and Nazis and Zionists also cooperated.

    I bet this is news to most.:


    [Reed’s] chapter on the Jews, in Germany and elsewhere, is likely to stir up controversy. Though he castigates the Nazis and their racial phobias, he is not impressed by the tragedy of the Jews. While they have been hard hit in the professions, "the Jews have been left almost unmolested in their most powerful stronghold—that of trade and commerce." In Vienna, Prague, Bucharest, Budapest, Zagreb he "found Jews growing more and more numerous and prosperous.”…He goes even further and claims that the new Jewish prosperity is a sort of by-product of rearmament which in turn was undertaken in the name of anti-communism and antiSemitism. In other words, Hitler's anti-Jewish mania is really a species of blessing for Jews… In starting off for a visit to Russia, he remarks that he guessed Bolshevism to be "a political racket like Fascism and National Socialism." His Moscow experience did not invalidate that guess. This ability to penetrate beneath the clamorous slogans of politics to the self-interests at the core makes him a valuable reporter...



    -Eugene Lyons, The European Arena, (Review of Insanity Fair: A European Cavalcade, by Douglas Reed)
    The Saturday Review, May 28, 1938, p. 14
    http://www.unz.org/Pub/SaturdayRev-1938may28-00014

     

    To conclude that Witte was anti-Jewish on the basis of that quote is a flat out lie. What a surprise! (Not.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. @Alden
    One thing I’ve never understood.

    What does “Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior “. mean?

    Saved from what? And how can an entity that doesn’t exist help an individual person?

    What exactly does Lord mean? This isn’t medieval feudal times. Is it a reciprocal relationship like in medieval times between the Lord and his tenants who he is supposed to protect.

    As a general rule, I don’t discuss faith and practice with someone who has already decided that Christ or God does not exist. There’s not really a point of reference that makes sense to atheists.

    If your questions are sincere, I will share my view(s).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @Twodees Partain
    "She unlike many others in Hollywood has a depp"

    I doubt Angelina has a Depp. She did have a Pitt at one point, as I recall.

    Laugh . . .

    depp — should have been deep. I appreciate handling my notorious lousy writing and proof reading with humor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Twodees Partain
    "I am the only one who has brilliant ideas on this website."

    No. This is not allowed. You must stop this immediately.

    Are you try to deny obvious truth?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Yes. I am try to deny.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @Twodees Partain
    Again you are jumping into conclusion.

    Are you somehow mentally impaired?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Wally
    said:
    "Russian minister Count Witte said around 1900 to Herzl ‘that he would gladly drown five million jews (those in tzarist Russia) in the Black Sea, but it was impossible’."
    LOL!! There is no proof for that and your citation does not have any.
    Just more laughable Zionist propaganda unsupported by proof.

    Citing Zionist 'books' is not proof. Anyone can say anything in a book, especially the notoriously lying Jews. But there is proof that the '6M Jews' is utter nonsense. Jews have been promoting the '6,000,000' lie since at least 1869.
    http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php
    http://balder.org/judea/billeder-judea/Scan-New-York-Times-Six-Million-Since-1869-Composite.jpg

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:
    http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here:
    http://forum.codoh.com

    We're talking about an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000.
    There is not a single verifiable excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka, 1,250,000 at Auschwitz, or 250,000 at Sobibor, 34,000 at Babi Yar) even though Jews claim they still exist and claim to know exactly where these alleged enormous mass graves are.

    I attributed some time ago the statement to Von Plehve, my memory is not infallible.
    Someone corrected me that it was Witte, the statement is in the diary of Herzl.
    Of course Herzl may have lied.
    But the great thing about truth is that it is consistent.
    The statement fits in what Solsjenytsyn writes about jews in Russia, one long struggle by jews against assimilation:
    Alexander Solschenizyn, ´Die russisch- jüdische Geschichte 1795- 1916, >> Zweihundert Jahre zusammen <<´, Moskau 2001, München 2002
    Then a reaction here is that Witte said it to the tzar, quite possible, this does not at all exclude that Witte also said it to Herzl.
    As I wrote before, around 1900 the tenth tzarist assimilation committee gave up.
    Another book on non assimilation is
    Klaus Hödl, ‘Als Bettler in die Leopoldstadt, Galizische Juden auf dem Weg nach Wien’, Wien, 1994
    Maybe the best is a book by a jew
    Ismar Schorsch, 'Jewish Reactions to German Anti-Semitism, 1870 – 1914', New York 1972
    or
    ‘From prejudice to destruction’, Jacob Katz, 1980, Cambridge MA
    Katz is or was a jewish Israeli historian.
    The one and only jewish historian who explains antisemitism by jewish behaviour, to my knowledge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Are you try to deny obvious truth?

    Yes. I am try to deny.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Reklaw says:

    I remember in NYC in the 80′s a free weekly newspaper called, I think, Free Press, in which a George Szamuely often wrote good articles, and I’m wondering if this one, and that one, are the same

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. @Anon
    He didn’t say it to Herzl; he claims he said it to the czar

    https://i.imgur.com/UMuXxwp.jpg

    Excellent. Thanks for that.

    This shows that the original comment was likely taken out of context. It’s apparent that what Witte was saying is that it would be great if the “Jewish problem” would just disappear. It’s apparent from this that being realistic, he was advocating the gradual abolition of the “disabilities” of the Jews. What Witte seems to be saying is that although the Jewish problem is a headache for him, he’s recommending a “go easy” approach anyway. To imply from this that he was a rabid anti-Semite seems unjustified in the extreme.

    It’s clear that he was not advocating their extermination. There’s a huge difference between wishing for a problem to just vanish, and advocating a policy.

    One also has to remember that this is likely a translation and therefore subject to misinterpretation.

    As Wally mentioned, we are up against liars who are skilled at twisting things to their benefit. I would add that they rarely seem to miss a chance to vilify anyone who doesn’t snap to their commands and preferences. Adding to that, different factions within a group may choose to interpret things in widely different ways and for some reason the most damning charges seem to stick permanently.

    This also brings up the fact that the Nazis were not as anti-Jewish as they’ve been smeared. In other words, successful, assimilated Jews were tolerated in the third Reich and Nazis and Zionists also cooperated.

    I bet this is news to most.:

    [Reed’s] chapter on the Jews, in Germany and elsewhere, is likely to stir up controversy. Though he castigates the Nazis and their racial phobias, he is not impressed by the tragedy of the Jews. While they have been hard hit in the professions, “the Jews have been left almost unmolested in their most powerful stronghold—that of trade and commerce.” In Vienna, Prague, Bucharest, Budapest, Zagreb he “found Jews growing more and more numerous and prosperous.”…He goes even further and claims that the new Jewish prosperity is a sort of by-product of rearmament which in turn was undertaken in the name of anti-communism and antiSemitism. In other words, Hitler’s anti-Jewish mania is really a species of blessing for Jews… In starting off for a visit to Russia, he remarks that he guessed Bolshevism to be “a political racket like Fascism and National Socialism.” His Moscow experience did not invalidate that guess. This ability to penetrate beneath the clamorous slogans of politics to the self-interests at the core makes him a valuable reporter…

    -Eugene Lyons, The European Arena, (Review of Insanity Fair: A European Cavalcade, by Douglas Reed)
    The Saturday Review, May 28, 1938, p. 14

    http://www.unz.org/Pub/SaturdayRev-1938may28-00014

    To conclude that Witte was anti-Jewish on the basis of that quote is a flat out lie. What a surprise! (Not.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    What exactly is anti jewish here ?
    That tzarist Russia had a gigantic problem with the jews is clear.
    Jewry wanted to retain their autonomy, jews dodged the draft for the Russian army.
    That someone like Witte hated jews, I wonder.
    He personally, his life, was hardly affected by the jewish resistance to assimilation.
    Those that were affected, as Solsjenytsyn describes, were common Russians, especially the serfs liberated around 1860, who had never learned how to handle money.
    They got indebted to jews, who then sold their houses and land.
    This caused the pogroms.
    Yet aristocratic Russians were affected, count Von Plehve was blown to pieces on the Warsaw railway station, I have little doubt wo did it.
    , @Alden
    Eugene Lyons was a Jew. So he can’t be called anti Semitic
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @jacques sheete
    Excellent. Thanks for that.

    This shows that the original comment was likely taken out of context. It's apparent that what Witte was saying is that it would be great if the "Jewish problem" would just disappear. It's apparent from this that being realistic, he was advocating the gradual abolition of the "disabilities" of the Jews. What Witte seems to be saying is that although the Jewish problem is a headache for him, he's recommending a "go easy" approach anyway. To imply from this that he was a rabid anti-Semite seems unjustified in the extreme.

    It's clear that he was not advocating their extermination. There's a huge difference between wishing for a problem to just vanish, and advocating a policy.

    One also has to remember that this is likely a translation and therefore subject to misinterpretation.

    As Wally mentioned, we are up against liars who are skilled at twisting things to their benefit. I would add that they rarely seem to miss a chance to vilify anyone who doesn't snap to their commands and preferences. Adding to that, different factions within a group may choose to interpret things in widely different ways and for some reason the most damning charges seem to stick permanently.

    This also brings up the fact that the Nazis were not as anti-Jewish as they've been smeared. In other words, successful, assimilated Jews were tolerated in the third Reich and Nazis and Zionists also cooperated.

    I bet this is news to most.:


    [Reed’s] chapter on the Jews, in Germany and elsewhere, is likely to stir up controversy. Though he castigates the Nazis and their racial phobias, he is not impressed by the tragedy of the Jews. While they have been hard hit in the professions, "the Jews have been left almost unmolested in their most powerful stronghold—that of trade and commerce." In Vienna, Prague, Bucharest, Budapest, Zagreb he "found Jews growing more and more numerous and prosperous.”…He goes even further and claims that the new Jewish prosperity is a sort of by-product of rearmament which in turn was undertaken in the name of anti-communism and antiSemitism. In other words, Hitler's anti-Jewish mania is really a species of blessing for Jews… In starting off for a visit to Russia, he remarks that he guessed Bolshevism to be "a political racket like Fascism and National Socialism." His Moscow experience did not invalidate that guess. This ability to penetrate beneath the clamorous slogans of politics to the self-interests at the core makes him a valuable reporter...



    -Eugene Lyons, The European Arena, (Review of Insanity Fair: A European Cavalcade, by Douglas Reed)
    The Saturday Review, May 28, 1938, p. 14
    http://www.unz.org/Pub/SaturdayRev-1938may28-00014

     

    To conclude that Witte was anti-Jewish on the basis of that quote is a flat out lie. What a surprise! (Not.)

    What exactly is anti jewish here ?
    That tzarist Russia had a gigantic problem with the jews is clear.
    Jewry wanted to retain their autonomy, jews dodged the draft for the Russian army.
    That someone like Witte hated jews, I wonder.
    He personally, his life, was hardly affected by the jewish resistance to assimilation.
    Those that were affected, as Solsjenytsyn describes, were common Russians, especially the serfs liberated around 1860, who had never learned how to handle money.
    They got indebted to jews, who then sold their houses and land.
    This caused the pogroms.
    Yet aristocratic Russians were affected, count Von Plehve was blown to pieces on the Warsaw railway station, I have little doubt wo did it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. What exactly is anti jewish here ?

    That is exactly what I’m asking.

    It seems that someone is attempting to make the case that Witte was anti-Jewish, when in fact Witte seems to me to be anti-jewish problem.

    In other words he was actually pro-Jewish by advocating a “go easy” approach to the problem.

    All the rest of your comment I agree with, except for the pogrom part which, thanks to Wally I’ve reconsidered.

    Those that were affected, as Solsjenytsyn describes, were common Russians, especially the serfs liberated around 1860, who had never learned how to handle money.
    They got indebted to jews, who then sold their houses and land.
    This caused the pogroms.

    All of that is undoubtedly true, and I’m sure there were reactions against the usurers, but to call them “pogroms” is no doubt another stretch. We all should know how things like that get “embellished,” don’t we?

    They got indebted to jews, who then sold their houses and land.

    Sadly, this same phenomenon has been taking place in Amerika for some time, but the goyim here are particularly easily mislead, even the “high IQ” bunch. f you point it out, yer dismissed as a conspiracy theorist.

    Here’s a link to an article that suggests that at least some aspects of the so called “pogroms” may be a bit exaggerated.

    The Polish Pogroms The Literary Digest
    , January 4, 1919, p. 20 – PDF

    http://www.unz.org/Pub/LiteraryDigest-1919jan04-00020

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    One of the biggest reasons the Hees fled Russia after 1880 was to escape the draft

    When Jews were granted full civil rights along came civic responsibilities including the draft. The Russians wanted an army of professionals including the enlisted men.

    So instead of a standard 3 or 4 year enlistment, for Russians it was 25 years.

    They would have objected to 3 years or 1
    but 25 years was just too much. There were other reasons such as no longer having Jewish monopolies.

    In the archives of the state departments of every country in the Americas including ours and Europe are reports from diplomats on the scene that the reports are greatly exaggerated. The Jews were looking to immigrate and get money from help from wealthy Jews and Jewish organizations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. JEinCA says:

    The fact that NATO has resorted to using celebrity drug addicts and whores to push it’s neo imperialist cultural liberalism speaks volumes about the state of culture in the post Christian West.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. Lex says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Russian minister Count Witte said around 1900 to Herzl 'that he would gladly drown five million jews (those in tzarist Russia) in the Black Sea, but it was impossible'.
    The last division of Poland, 1800 or so, had as result that nearly all of the world's jews then, some five million, lived in tzarist Russia.
    Around 1900 was the tenth resignation of the Russian assimilation committee.

    The hatred was both ways, it seems, Solsjenytsyn wrote that the Bolsjewists, to a large extent jews, hated the Russians.
    How Ukrainians hated jews:
    Voline ( Vsevolod Mikhailovitsch Eichenbaum), ‘The unknown revolution (Kronstadt 1921 Ukraine 1918-21)’, New York 1955.

    At the beginning of WWII the Lithuanians, before the German troops came, led the jews of their villages to open places in the woods, and killed them all.
    Dan Jacobson, ‘Heshels Rijk Familiekroniek’, Amsterdam 1998
    Jacobson is the grandson of rabbi Heshel, who lived in Lithuania.
    Jacobson went there to find out how his grandfather died.
    Pictures of Lithuanians beating jews to death you can find in
    Christopher R. Browning, ‘Ordinary Men, Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland’, 1992, 2001, London

    How Poles hated their jews
    Jan T. Gross, ‘Neighbours, The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland, 1941’, 2003, London

    Already a long time ago I visited Lithuania, and spoke with a foreigner who had lived there for a decade or so, he spoke the language.
    He told me the Lithuanians did not want to speak about their past with the jews, the present capital, Vilnius, before WWII, was then seen as the jewish capitalof E Europe.
    Vilnius had a jewish university.

    This foreigner gave me to understand that before WWII jews controlled the Lithuanian economy, he implied, I think, without saying so openly, that the Lithunians had resented jewish economic domination.

    In
    Anne Applebaum, ‘Between East and West, Across the borderlands of Europe’, Londen, 1995
    you find an old woman saying 'Hitler did terrible things, but he liberated us from the jews'.

    If you cite JT Gross it means you are a moron and Zionist stooge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. @Twodees Partain
    "She unlike many others in Hollywood has a depp"

    I doubt Angelina has a Depp. She did have a Pitt at one point, as I recall.

    I like bad jokes. I do. They make me giggle. This was terrible and you should be ashamed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    I am, indeed, appropriately ashamed of my bad self.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Alden says:
    @jacques sheete

    What exactly is anti jewish here ?
     
    That is exactly what I'm asking.

    It seems that someone is attempting to make the case that Witte was anti-Jewish, when in fact Witte seems to me to be anti-jewish problem.

    In other words he was actually pro-Jewish by advocating a "go easy" approach to the problem.

    All the rest of your comment I agree with, except for the pogrom part which, thanks to Wally I've reconsidered.

    Those that were affected, as Solsjenytsyn describes, were common Russians, especially the serfs liberated around 1860, who had never learned how to handle money.
    They got indebted to jews, who then sold their houses and land.
    This caused the pogroms.
     

    All of that is undoubtedly true, and I'm sure there were reactions against the usurers, but to call them "pogroms" is no doubt another stretch. We all should know how things like that get "embellished," don't we?

    They got indebted to jews, who then sold their houses and land.

     

    Sadly, this same phenomenon has been taking place in Amerika for some time, but the goyim here are particularly easily mislead, even the "high IQ" bunch. f you point it out, yer dismissed as a conspiracy theorist.

    Here's a link to an article that suggests that at least some aspects of the so called "pogroms" may be a bit exaggerated.


    The Polish Pogroms The Literary Digest
    , January 4, 1919, p. 20 - PDF

    http://www.unz.org/Pub/LiteraryDigest-1919jan04-00020
     

    One of the biggest reasons the Hees fled Russia after 1880 was to escape the draft

    When Jews were granted full civil rights along came civic responsibilities including the draft. The Russians wanted an army of professionals including the enlisted men.

    So instead of a standard 3 or 4 year enlistment, for Russians it was 25 years.

    They would have objected to 3 years or 1
    but 25 years was just too much. There were other reasons such as no longer having Jewish monopolies.

    In the archives of the state departments of every country in the Americas including ours and Europe are reports from diplomats on the scene that the reports are greatly exaggerated. The Jews were looking to immigrate and get money from help from wealthy Jews and Jewish organizations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Alden says:
    @jacques sheete
    Excellent. Thanks for that.

    This shows that the original comment was likely taken out of context. It's apparent that what Witte was saying is that it would be great if the "Jewish problem" would just disappear. It's apparent from this that being realistic, he was advocating the gradual abolition of the "disabilities" of the Jews. What Witte seems to be saying is that although the Jewish problem is a headache for him, he's recommending a "go easy" approach anyway. To imply from this that he was a rabid anti-Semite seems unjustified in the extreme.

    It's clear that he was not advocating their extermination. There's a huge difference between wishing for a problem to just vanish, and advocating a policy.

    One also has to remember that this is likely a translation and therefore subject to misinterpretation.

    As Wally mentioned, we are up against liars who are skilled at twisting things to their benefit. I would add that they rarely seem to miss a chance to vilify anyone who doesn't snap to their commands and preferences. Adding to that, different factions within a group may choose to interpret things in widely different ways and for some reason the most damning charges seem to stick permanently.

    This also brings up the fact that the Nazis were not as anti-Jewish as they've been smeared. In other words, successful, assimilated Jews were tolerated in the third Reich and Nazis and Zionists also cooperated.

    I bet this is news to most.:


    [Reed’s] chapter on the Jews, in Germany and elsewhere, is likely to stir up controversy. Though he castigates the Nazis and their racial phobias, he is not impressed by the tragedy of the Jews. While they have been hard hit in the professions, "the Jews have been left almost unmolested in their most powerful stronghold—that of trade and commerce." In Vienna, Prague, Bucharest, Budapest, Zagreb he "found Jews growing more and more numerous and prosperous.”…He goes even further and claims that the new Jewish prosperity is a sort of by-product of rearmament which in turn was undertaken in the name of anti-communism and antiSemitism. In other words, Hitler's anti-Jewish mania is really a species of blessing for Jews… In starting off for a visit to Russia, he remarks that he guessed Bolshevism to be "a political racket like Fascism and National Socialism." His Moscow experience did not invalidate that guess. This ability to penetrate beneath the clamorous slogans of politics to the self-interests at the core makes him a valuable reporter...



    -Eugene Lyons, The European Arena, (Review of Insanity Fair: A European Cavalcade, by Douglas Reed)
    The Saturday Review, May 28, 1938, p. 14
    http://www.unz.org/Pub/SaturdayRev-1938may28-00014

     

    To conclude that Witte was anti-Jewish on the basis of that quote is a flat out lie. What a surprise! (Not.)

    Eugene Lyons was a Jew. So he can’t be called anti Semitic

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    There are terms for people like him in the Jewish community such as 'self hating Jew' or 'Court Jew'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Malla says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Could you explain that positive side ?
    Did you read George Orwell's 'Burmese Days' ?

    How about laws like these

    Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_Sati_Regulation,_1829

    The Bengal Sati Regulation,[nb 1] or Regulation XVII, A. D. 1829 of the Bengal Code was a legal act promulgated in British India under East India Company rule, by the then Governor-General Lord William Bentinck, which made the practice of sati or suttee—or the immolation of a Hindu widow on the funeral pyre of her deceased husband—illegal in all jurisdictions of British India and subject to prosecution.

    Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_Infanticide_Prevention_Act,_1870

    The Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870,[1] also Act VIII of 1870 was a legislative act passed in British India, to prevent murder of female infants. The Section 7 of this Act declared that it was initially applicable only to the territories of Oudh, North-Western Provinces and Punjab, but the Act authorized the Governor General to extend the law to any other district or province of the British Raj at his discretion.[2]
    The law authorized the creation of a police force to maintain birth, marriage and death registers, to conduct census of the district at its discretion, enforce a special tax on the district to pay for the expenses and entertainment of said police officers.[2] The Act also stipulated a prison sentence of six months or a fine of thirty thousand rupees, or both, on anyone who disobeyed or obstructed the police officers enforcing the Act.[4] Section 6 of the Act allowed the police officer to seize a child from any person he suspects may neglect or endanger any female child, as well as force collect a monthly fee from that person.[5]

    Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Widows%27_Remarriage_Act,_1856

    The Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856, also Act XV, 1856, enacted on 26 July 1856, legalise the remarriage of Hindu widows in all jurisdictions of India under East India Company rule.[1]
    To protect what it considered family honour and family property, upper-caste Hindu society had long disallowed the remarriage of widows, even child and adolescent ones, all of whom were expected to live a life of austerity and abnegation.[2] The Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act of 1856, enacted in response to the campaign of Pandit Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar,[3] provided legal safeguards against loss of certain forms of inheritance for a remarrying Hindu widow,[2] though, under the Act, the widow forsook any inheritance due her from her deceased husband.[4]Especially targeted in the act were Hindu child widows whose husbands had died before consummation of marriage.[5]

    Age of Consent Act, 1891

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Consent_Act,_1891

    The Age of Consent Act, 1891, also Act X of 1891, was a legislation enacted in British India on 19 March 1891 which raised the age of consent for sexual intercourse for all girls, married or unmarried, from ten to twelve years in all jurisdictions, its violation subject to criminal prosecution as rape.[1][nb 1] The act was an amendment of the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 375, 1882, (“Of Rape”),[nb 2] and was introduced as a bill on 9 January 1891 by Sir Andrew Scoble in the Legislative Council of the Governor-General of India in Calcutta.[2] It was debated the same day and opposed by council member Sir Romesh Chunder Mitter (from Bengal) on the grounds that it interfered with orthodox Hindu code, but supported by council member Rao Bahadur Krishnaji Lakshman Nulkar (from Bombay) and by the President of the council, the Governor-General and Viceroy Lord Lansdowne.[2][3][nb 3] While an 1880 case in a Bombay high court by a child-bride, Rukhmabai, renewed discussion of such a law, the death of an eleven-year-old Bengali girl, Phulomnee, due to forceful intercourse by her 35-year-old husband in 1889, necessitated intervention by the British.[4] The act was passed in 1891. It received support from Indian reformers such as Behramji Malabari and women social organisations. The law was never seriously enforced and it is argued that the real effect of the law was reassertion of Hindu patriarchal control over domestic issues as a nationalistic cause.

    Indian Slavery Act, 1843

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Slavery_Act,_1843

    The Indian Slavery Act, 1843, also Act V of 1843, was an act passed in British India under East India Company rule, which outlawed many economic transactions associated with slavery. The sale of any person as a slave was banned, and anyone buying or selling slaves would be booked under the Indian Penal Code, with offence carrying strict punishment

    Child Marriage Restraint Act

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Marriage_Restraint_ActChild

    Marriage Restraint Act 1929, passed on 28 September 1929 in the British India Legislature of India, fixed the age of marriage for girls at 14 years and boys at 18 years which was later amended to 18 for girls and 21 for boys. It is popularly known as the Sarda Act, after its sponsor Harbilas Sarda. It came into effect six months later on April 1, 1930 and it applies to all of British India, not just to Hindus.[1][2][3] It was a result of social reform movement in India. The legislation was passed by the British Indian Government.[4]

    Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Monuments_Preservation_Act_1904

    The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 was passed in 18, March 1904 by British India during the times of Lord Curzon. it is expedient to provide for the preservation of ancient monuments, for the exercise of control over traffic in antiquities and over excavation in certain places, and for the protection and acquisition in certain cases of ancient monuments and of objects of archaeological, historical or artistic interest. Act preserves and restores ancient Indian monuments by Archaeological Survey of India.

    Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Inheritance_(Removal_of_Disabilities)_Act,_1928
    The Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928 was enacted to abolish the exclusion from inheritance of certain classes of heirs, and to remove certain doubts regarding their ability to inherit property. The Act specifies that persons who are diseased, deformed or physically or mentally handicapped cannot be disqualified from their right to own or share joint-family property unless the law specifies otherwise.

    Punjab Land Alienation Act, 1900

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab_Land_Alienation_Act,_1900

    The advent of British rule in India had led to a trend whereby ownership rights to land were increasingly concentrated in the hands of urban moneylenders and other commercial communities among the Hindu population. They were assigned the property previously held by poor peasants, who either sold or mortgaged for the short-term benefit derived from the increasing values of land caused by improved agricultural methods, irrigation and communications. Such transfers were enforceable under law but, in British eyes, potentially damaging to their colonial administration because they might ultimately result in a disaffected rural peasant population. British law was effectively supporting the growth of a class of people — the new owners — that might prove detrimental to its own purpose. In addition, historian Kenneth Jones says that the transfers were contrary to British sentiments: “Not only did this development threaten the stability and peace of the Punjab, it also struck at the British self-image of benevolent and paternalistic protectors of the lowly peasant”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Malla says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Could you explain that positive side ?
    Did you read George Orwell's 'Burmese Days' ?

    Jyoti Rao Phule

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyotirao_Phule

    Jyotirao Govindrao Phule[a] (11 April 1827 – 28 November 1890) was an Indian social activist, a thinker, anti-caste social reformer and writer from Maharashtra.[2][3]

    His work extended to many fields including eradication of untouchability and the caste system, women’s emancipation and the reform of Hindu family life. On September 1873, Phule, along with his followers, formed the Satyashodhak Samaj (Society of Seekers of Truth) to attain equal rights for people from lower castes. Phule is regarded as an important figure of the social reform movement in Maharashtra He and his wife, Savitribai Phule, were pioneers of women’s education in India.

    http://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/20647/1/Unit-12.pdf

    British rule had brought to an end the tyranny and chaos of the regime of the last Peshwa in Maharashtra. The colonial rulers had not only established law and order but also the principle of equality before law. The earlier regime of Brahmin Peshwas had imposed strict limitations on education, occupation arid living standards of the lower castes and women. The new rulers opened the 1 opportunities in education and mobility in occupation for the members of all castes. Missionary schools and government colleges were ready to admit any student irrespective of caste origins. New ideas of equality and liberty could reach the moderately educated sections of the lower caste. Phule was probably the best product of this process. High caste reformers and leaders also had welcomed the colonial rule. It is not surprising that Phule who was concerned with the slavery of the lower castes also favoured British Rule He hoped that the new government which believes in equality between man and man would emancipate lower castes, from the domination of the Brahmins.
    The British rule opened up new employment opportunities in the administration. The political power at local level was also being given to the Indians. Phule who had worked as a member of the Poona Municipality could visualise how lower castes wouid be able to acquire power at local level during the period of British rule and also enter the colonial bureaucracy. He believed in Colonialism, Cast Order and the Tribal Societies the benevolent attitude of the British rulers towards the lower castes and therefore asked for a number of things from them. He was not sure how long the British rule would continue. Therefore, he wanted lower castes to exploit the
    opportunity and get rid of the tyranny of Brahmins. Brahmin rulers used to collect huge wealth out of taxes levied on poor lower castes population, but never used to spend even a paisa for their welfare. On the contrary, the new regime was showing the signs of doing good things for the deprived people. Phule assured the colonial rulers that if the Shudras were made happy and
    contented, they need not worry about the loyalty of the subjects. He wanted the British government to abolish Brahmin Kulkarni’s position, and a post of village headman (Patil) filled on the basis of merit. In fact, Phule would have liked the Qritish government to put an end to the balutedary system which was connected with caste specific occupations in the villages. He asked the government to make laws prohibiting customs and practices which gave subordinate status to women and untouchables. Phule wanted Brahmin bureaucracy to be replaced by non-Brahmin bureaucracy. But if the non-Brahmins were not available, the government should appoint, he thought, the British men to these posts. He believed that the British officers would take impartial view and were likely to side with lower castes.
    He knew that education had not yet percolated to the lower castes. The masses had not yet become politically conscious. The high caste elites were claiming that they were the true representatives of the people and therefore weie demanding political rights. This process, Phule thought, would reestablish the political supremacy of the high castes.
    Phule advised his followers from the lower castes not to participate the-movement for political rights. He argued that
    the Indian National Congress or other political associations were not national in the true sense of the term because they represented only high castes. Phule warned his followers against the selfish and cunning motives of the Brahmins in forming these associations and advised them to keep themselves away from such associations. In his Satya Shodhak Samaj, he had made it a rule not to discuss politics. In fact, we find that he had expressed more than once a complete and total loyalty towards the new government. He firmly believed that the almighty God had dethroned the tyrannical rulers and had established in their place a just, enlightened and peaceful British rule for the welfare of the masses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. Malla says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Could you explain that positive side ?
    Did you read George Orwell's 'Burmese Days' ?

    Yes but did you read, Catherine Mayo’s book ‘Mother India’?

    http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300811h.html

    especially this part

    When the Prince of Wales sailed to India from London, late in 1921, Mr. Gandhi, then at the height of his popularity, proclaimed to the Hindu world that the coming visit was “an insult added to injury,” and called for a general boycott.[13]

    [13. Gandhi's Letters on Indian Affairs, pp. 96-7.]
    Political workers obediently snatched up the torch, rushing it through their organizations, and the Prince’s landing in Bombay became thereby the signal for murderous riot and destruction. No outbreak occurred among the responsible part of the population, nor along the line of progress, which was, of course, well guarded. But in the remoter areas of the city, hooliganism ran on for several days, with some fifty killings and four hundred woundings, Indian attacking Indian, while arson and loot played their ruinous part.

    Meanwhile the Prince, seemingly unmoved by the first unfriendly reception of all his life, proceeded to carry out his officially arranged programme in and about the city. On the evening of November 22 it was scheduled that he should depart for the North.
    As he left Government House on the three- or four-mile drive to the Bombay railway station, his automobile ran unguarded save for the pilot police car that went before. Where it entered the city, however, a cordon of police lined the streets on both sides. And behind that cordon pressed the people–the common poor people of the countryside in their uncountable thousands; pressed and pushed until, with the railway station yet half a mile away, the police line bent and broke beneath the strain.

    Instantly the crowd surged in, closing around the car, shouting, fighting each other to work nearer–nearer still. What would they do? What was their temper? God knew! Gandhi’s hot words had spread among them, and God alone, now, could help. Some reached the running-boards and clung. Others shoved them off, for one instant to take their places, the next themselves to be dragged away. And what was this they shouted? At first nothing could be made of it, in the bedlam of voices, though those charged with the safety of the progress strained their ears to catch the cries.

    Then words stood out, continuously chanted, and the words were these:

    “Yuvaraj Maharaj ki jai!” “Hail to the Prince!” And: “Let me see my Prince! Let me see my Prince! Let me only see my Prince just once before I die!”

    The police tried vainly to form again around the car. Moving at a crawl, quite unprotected now, through an almost solid mass of shouting humanity, it won through to the railway station at last.

    There, within the barriers that shut off the platform of the royal train, gathered the dignitaries of the Province and the City, to make their formal farewells. To these His Royal Highness listened, returning due acknowledgments. Then, clipping short his own last word, he turned suddenly to the aide beside him.

    “How much time left?”

    “Three minutes, sir,” replied the aide.

    “Then drop those barriers and let the people in”–indicating the mobs outside.

    Like the sweep of a river in flood the interminable multitudes rolled in–and shouted and adored and laughed and wept, and, when the train started, ran alongside the royal carriage till they could run no more.

    And when he turned back from his transit of the Great North Gate–the Khyber Pass itself–a strange thing awaited him. A swarm of Untouchables, emboldened by news that had reached them, clustered at the roadside to do him reverence, “Government ki jai!” “Hail to the Government!” they shouted, with cheers that echoed from the barren hills.

    And when the Prince slowed down his car to return their greetings, they leapt and danced in their excitement.

    For nowhere in all their store of memory or of legend had they any history of an Indian magnate who had noticed an Untouchable except to scorn him. And here was a greater than all India contained–the son of the Supreme Power, to them almost divine, who deigned not only to receive but even to thank them for their homage! Small wonder that their spirits soared, that their eyes saw visions, that their tongues laid hold upon mystic words.

    “Look! Look!” they cried to one another. “Behold, the Light! the Light!”

    And such was their exaltation that many of them somehow worked through to Delhi to add themselves to the twenty-five thousand of their kind who there awaited the Prince’s coming. The village people from round about flocked in to join them–the simple people of the soil who know nothing of politics but much of friendship as shown in works. And all together haunted the roadside, waiting and hoping for a glimpse of his face.

    At last he came, down the Grand Trunk Road, toward the Delhi Gate. And in the center of the hosts of the Untouchables, one, standing higher than the rest, unfurled a flag.

    “Yuvaraj Maharaj ki jai! Raja ke Bete ki jai!

    “Hail to the Prince! Hail to the King’s Son!” they all shouted together, to burst their throats. And the Prince, while the high-caste Indian spectators wondered and revolted within themselves at his lack of princely pride, ordered his car stopped.

    Then a spokesman ventured forward, to offer in a humble little speech the love and fealty of the sixty millions of the Unclean and to beg the heir to the throne to intercede for them with his father the King Emperor, never to abandon them into the hands of those who despised them and would keep them slaves.

    The Prince heard him through. Then–whether he realized the magnitude of what he did, or whether he acted merely on the impulse of his natural friendly courtesy toward all the world–he did an unheard-of thing. He stood up–stood up, for them, the “worse than dogs,” spoke a few words of kindness, looked them all over, slowly, and so, with a radiant smile, gave them his salute.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Singh
    The thing with a convert like this is he'll refuse forest for trees.

    He'll forget this https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/951117274596851712?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    But see this

    https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/919463658576535552?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    Because https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/950464315827544064?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    You fail to see the continuous link between the problems of today & yesterday.

    An actual patriarchal brahmanical India wouldn't allow missionaries or muslim.

    Liberals run the country with white evangelicals trying to create old testament crusader states in the hinterland. You're an average deracinated urban cuck।।
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Singh says:

    Unz Review is basically a christian missionary site where praising british rule with multi para long excerpts is allowed but various duly referenced comments remain unapproved because ‘Hindu fanatics’

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    LOL typical Hinduwadi logic for everybody to see.

    Anybody who does not listen to their dumb propaganda and lies are missionaries, sickulars (seculars).
    NOBODY on Unz will believe this nonsense that Unz is a Christian missionary project..


    This is Brahmanwadi propaganda which their slaves parrot everywhere.
    , @Anonymous
    The Hindu thing is a bit niche.

    I'm sure you'll find places on the internet with lively intelligent discussion about the various South Asian religions, but I'm not sure this is the right place for it.

    We don't know much about it and we don't need/want to. We have more pressing issues to focus on.
    , @Alden
    Unz has little to do with religion, especially your very obscure Hindu offshoot. This is an English language American site. It’s readers are Americans, Europeans, Asians and others who come from cultures where Sati was unknown.

    You were the one whose software flagged the word Sati and jumped in preaching the virtues of Sati to non Hindus.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Singh says:
    @Malla
    Yes but did you read, Catherine Mayo's book 'Mother India'?

    http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300811h.html

    especially this part

    When the Prince of Wales sailed to India from London, late in 1921, Mr. Gandhi, then at the height of his popularity, proclaimed to the Hindu world that the coming visit was “an insult added to injury,” and called for a general boycott.[13]

    [13. Gandhi's Letters on Indian Affairs, pp. 96-7.]
    Political workers obediently snatched up the torch, rushing it through their organizations, and the Prince’s landing in Bombay became thereby the signal for murderous riot and destruction. No outbreak occurred among the responsible part of the population, nor along the line of progress, which was, of course, well guarded. But in the remoter areas of the city, hooliganism ran on for several days, with some fifty killings and four hundred woundings, Indian attacking Indian, while arson and loot played their ruinous part.

    Meanwhile the Prince, seemingly unmoved by the first unfriendly reception of all his life, proceeded to carry out his officially arranged programme in and about the city. On the evening of November 22 it was scheduled that he should depart for the North.
    As he left Government House on the three- or four-mile drive to the Bombay railway station, his automobile ran unguarded save for the pilot police car that went before. Where it entered the city, however, a cordon of police lined the streets on both sides. And behind that cordon pressed the people–the common poor people of the countryside in their uncountable thousands; pressed and pushed until, with the railway station yet half a mile away, the police line bent and broke beneath the strain.

    Instantly the crowd surged in, closing around the car, shouting, fighting each other to work nearer–nearer still. What would they do? What was their temper? God knew! Gandhi’s hot words had spread among them, and God alone, now, could help. Some reached the running-boards and clung. Others shoved them off, for one instant to take their places, the next themselves to be dragged away. And what was this they shouted? At first nothing could be made of it, in the bedlam of voices, though those charged with the safety of the progress strained their ears to catch the cries.

    Then words stood out, continuously chanted, and the words were these:

    “Yuvaraj Maharaj ki jai!” “Hail to the Prince!” And: “Let me see my Prince! Let me see my Prince! Let me only see my Prince just once before I die!”

    The police tried vainly to form again around the car. Moving at a crawl, quite unprotected now, through an almost solid mass of shouting humanity, it won through to the railway station at last.

    There, within the barriers that shut off the platform of the royal train, gathered the dignitaries of the Province and the City, to make their formal farewells. To these His Royal Highness listened, returning due acknowledgments. Then, clipping short his own last word, he turned suddenly to the aide beside him.

    “How much time left?”

    “Three minutes, sir,” replied the aide.

    “Then drop those barriers and let the people in”–indicating the mobs outside.

    Like the sweep of a river in flood the interminable multitudes rolled in–and shouted and adored and laughed and wept, and, when the train started, ran alongside the royal carriage till they could run no more.

    And when he turned back from his transit of the Great North Gate–the Khyber Pass itself–a strange thing awaited him. A swarm of Untouchables, emboldened by news that had reached them, clustered at the roadside to do him reverence, “Government ki jai!” “Hail to the Government!” they shouted, with cheers that echoed from the barren hills.

    And when the Prince slowed down his car to return their greetings, they leapt and danced in their excitement.

    For nowhere in all their store of memory or of legend had they any history of an Indian magnate who had noticed an Untouchable except to scorn him. And here was a greater than all India contained–the son of the Supreme Power, to them almost divine, who deigned not only to receive but even to thank them for their homage! Small wonder that their spirits soared, that their eyes saw visions, that their tongues laid hold upon mystic words.

    “Look! Look!” they cried to one another. “Behold, the Light! the Light!”

    And such was their exaltation that many of them somehow worked through to Delhi to add themselves to the twenty-five thousand of their kind who there awaited the Prince’s coming. The village people from round about flocked in to join them–the simple people of the soil who know nothing of politics but much of friendship as shown in works. And all together haunted the roadside, waiting and hoping for a glimpse of his face.

    At last he came, down the Grand Trunk Road, toward the Delhi Gate. And in the center of the hosts of the Untouchables, one, standing higher than the rest, unfurled a flag.

    “Yuvaraj Maharaj ki jai! Raja ke Bete ki jai!

    “Hail to the Prince! Hail to the King’s Son!” they all shouted together, to burst their throats. And the Prince, while the high-caste Indian spectators wondered and revolted within themselves at his lack of princely pride, ordered his car stopped.

    Then a spokesman ventured forward, to offer in a humble little speech the love and fealty of the sixty millions of the Unclean and to beg the heir to the throne to intercede for them with his father the King Emperor, never to abandon them into the hands of those who despised them and would keep them slaves.

    The Prince heard him through. Then–whether he realized the magnitude of what he did, or whether he acted merely on the impulse of his natural friendly courtesy toward all the world–he did an unheard-of thing. He stood up–stood up, for them, the “worse than dogs,” spoke a few words of kindness, looked them all over, slowly, and so, with a radiant smile, gave them his salute.

    The thing with a convert like this is he’ll refuse forest for trees.

    He’ll forget this https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/951117274596851712?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    But see this

    Because https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/950464315827544064?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    You fail to see the continuous link between the problems of today & yesterday.

    An actual patriarchal brahmanical India wouldn’t allow missionaries or muslim.

    Liberals run the country with white evangelicals trying to create old testament crusader states in the hinterland. You’re an average deracinated urban cuck।।

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    This is just dumb. many missionaries would complain that the British East India Company does not allow missionaries to come to India. many in the East India Company considered the missionaries as a head ache.

    An actual patriarchal brahmanical India wouldn’t allow missionaries or muslim.
     
    Of course they will not allow missionaries because that would destroy the slave society they built on the backs of dumb non brahmins Indians. LOL. They were having it too good. Sati, female infanticide, untouchability to just name a few. All brahmins had to do was chant some mantras while the kshatriyas protected him (who was made to feel special by being above the rest of the slaves), Vaishyas traded and farmed for him and Shudras did all the shitty jobs like cleaning gutter. Of course untouchablility went out of the window when it came to making love to underaged lower caste women kept as devdasi slaves in temples. A nice time the Brahmins had. Buddhism opposed their party and thus Buddhism in India was nearly destroyed. Missionaries came and told the lower castes that they are equal to anybody else, so now they are attacked. Brahmins want the muslims and Christians kicked out and to reabsorb Sikhism and Jainism in Hinduwadi caste system so that their party can restart again.

    What is so strange or not so strange, is that many Brahmins and upper castes who even today believe in their superiority over the lower castes become hardcore SJW/anti Whites in the West.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Delinquent Snail
    I like bad jokes. I do. They make me giggle. This was terrible and you should be ashamed.

    I am, indeed, appropriately ashamed of my bad self.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Malla says:
    @Singh
    Unz Review is basically a christian missionary site where praising british rule with multi para long excerpts is allowed but various duly referenced comments remain unapproved because 'Hindu fanatics'

    LOL typical Hinduwadi logic for everybody to see.

    Anybody who does not listen to their dumb propaganda and lies are missionaries, sickulars (seculars).
    NOBODY on Unz will believe this nonsense that Unz is a Christian missionary project..

    This is Brahmanwadi propaganda which their slaves parrot everywhere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Malla says:
    @Singh
    The thing with a convert like this is he'll refuse forest for trees.

    He'll forget this https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/951117274596851712?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    But see this

    https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/919463658576535552?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    Because https://twitter.com/Asipatravana/status/950464315827544064?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E0

    You fail to see the continuous link between the problems of today & yesterday.

    An actual patriarchal brahmanical India wouldn't allow missionaries or muslim.

    Liberals run the country with white evangelicals trying to create old testament crusader states in the hinterland. You're an average deracinated urban cuck।।

    This is just dumb. many missionaries would complain that the British East India Company does not allow missionaries to come to India. many in the East India Company considered the missionaries as a head ache.

    An actual patriarchal brahmanical India wouldn’t allow missionaries or muslim.

    Of course they will not allow missionaries because that would destroy the slave society they built on the backs of dumb non brahmins Indians. LOL. They were having it too good. Sati, female infanticide, untouchability to just name a few. All brahmins had to do was chant some mantras while the kshatriyas protected him (who was made to feel special by being above the rest of the slaves), Vaishyas traded and farmed for him and Shudras did all the shitty jobs like cleaning gutter. Of course untouchablility went out of the window when it came to making love to underaged lower caste women kept as devdasi slaves in temples. A nice time the Brahmins had. Buddhism opposed their party and thus Buddhism in India was nearly destroyed. Missionaries came and told the lower castes that they are equal to anybody else, so now they are attacked. Brahmins want the muslims and Christians kicked out and to reabsorb Sikhism and Jainism in Hinduwadi caste system so that their party can restart again.

    What is so strange or not so strange, is that many Brahmins and upper castes who even today believe in their superiority over the lower castes become hardcore SJW/anti Whites in the West.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Yes they are often hard core anti Whites even as they are putting in their hazel contact lenses and bleaching their skin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Malla says:
    @Alden
    Eugene Lyons was a Jew. So he can’t be called anti Semitic

    There are terms for people like him in the Jewish community such as ‘self hating Jew’ or ‘Court Jew’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Singh
    Unz Review is basically a christian missionary site where praising british rule with multi para long excerpts is allowed but various duly referenced comments remain unapproved because 'Hindu fanatics'

    The Hindu thing is a bit niche.

    I’m sure you’ll find places on the internet with lively intelligent discussion about the various South Asian religions, but I’m not sure this is the right place for it.

    We don’t know much about it and we don’t need/want to. We have more pressing issues to focus on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    I am sorry about that. both me and Singh are responsible for this because we are on opposite side over many issues pertaining to South Asia. But that I understand is that Singh is anti-leftist/anti- liberal and he is anti-Christian/ anti-Muslim but he is not anti-White. I think he comes to Unz to observe the negative effects of liberalism/ leftism on Western civilization and on Global geopolitics because right winged Hinduvadis also have a beef with Indian leftists.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Malla says:
    @Anonymous
    The Hindu thing is a bit niche.

    I'm sure you'll find places on the internet with lively intelligent discussion about the various South Asian religions, but I'm not sure this is the right place for it.

    We don't know much about it and we don't need/want to. We have more pressing issues to focus on.

    I am sorry about that. both me and Singh are responsible for this because we are on opposite side over many issues pertaining to South Asia. But that I understand is that Singh is anti-leftist/anti- liberal and he is anti-Christian/ anti-Muslim but he is not anti-White. I think he comes to Unz to observe the negative effects of liberalism/ leftism on Western civilization and on Global geopolitics because right winged Hinduvadis also have a beef with Indian leftists.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. All Indians are Gypsies . And all Indians are sexual perverts as Thugs. They are basically animals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  116. Gordo says:

    Support our troops, bring them home.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  117. Alden says:
    @Singh
    Unz Review is basically a christian missionary site where praising british rule with multi para long excerpts is allowed but various duly referenced comments remain unapproved because 'Hindu fanatics'

    Unz has little to do with religion, especially your very obscure Hindu offshoot. This is an English language American site. It’s readers are Americans, Europeans, Asians and others who come from cultures where Sati was unknown.

    You were the one whose software flagged the word Sati and jumped in preaching the virtues of Sati to non Hindus.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Alden says:
    @Malla
    This is just dumb. many missionaries would complain that the British East India Company does not allow missionaries to come to India. many in the East India Company considered the missionaries as a head ache.

    An actual patriarchal brahmanical India wouldn’t allow missionaries or muslim.
     
    Of course they will not allow missionaries because that would destroy the slave society they built on the backs of dumb non brahmins Indians. LOL. They were having it too good. Sati, female infanticide, untouchability to just name a few. All brahmins had to do was chant some mantras while the kshatriyas protected him (who was made to feel special by being above the rest of the slaves), Vaishyas traded and farmed for him and Shudras did all the shitty jobs like cleaning gutter. Of course untouchablility went out of the window when it came to making love to underaged lower caste women kept as devdasi slaves in temples. A nice time the Brahmins had. Buddhism opposed their party and thus Buddhism in India was nearly destroyed. Missionaries came and told the lower castes that they are equal to anybody else, so now they are attacked. Brahmins want the muslims and Christians kicked out and to reabsorb Sikhism and Jainism in Hinduwadi caste system so that their party can restart again.

    What is so strange or not so strange, is that many Brahmins and upper castes who even today believe in their superiority over the lower castes become hardcore SJW/anti Whites in the West.

    Yes they are often hard core anti Whites even as they are putting in their hazel contact lenses and bleaching their skin.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Che Guava says:
    @Alden
    As soon as she remarried after the divorce from Cruise Kidman had 2 natural children . The Pitts have 3 natural children Madonna has 2 natural children

    Easy to see I grocery shop weekly.

    Thanks for the correction, am out of date, was thinking they still had none.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Che Guava says:
    @Alden
    Did you ever see the movie Evita ? Madonna was pregnant and it was obvious in the last half of the movie.

    I saw it, didn’t like it much, but that is also interesting, suppose I was too young to noticing.

    Liked the TV show, with Julie Covington, when an overseas student 12 or so, with two friends, wrote a mash-up (not even a word then) of Evita and Rocky Horror, between the three of us writing, it was a rare example of high-school theatrical art brilliance. Rare.

    Later, I was to meet a very bitchy gay man who was foaming at the mouth to me for finding Evita funny, ‘fascist dictators are not funny you stupid arsehole.’

    My reply, ‘sure can be at times’.

    I wish to be able to make a link to our play, but it was before CCD cameras, and, I am sincerely believing, ‘If you never saw it, too bad’, as a principle’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored