The Unz Review - Mobile

The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection

A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 The Saker Archive
The Meaning of the US Saber-Rattling at the Borders of Russia

Email This Page to Someone


 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_173743964

Hardly a day ever passes without the western corporate media reporting that USN warships have entered the Black Sea, the US Army is sending instructors to train the Ukrainian military, US joint task forces are organizing maneuvers in the Baltic or US Army units are making highly publicized movements from the Baltic states to Poland. And every time this happens, Russian diplomats and officials make protests and declare that such actions are only making matters worse and contributing to the destabilization of an already very tense situation. Russian officials also like to remind everybody that NATO is roughly 4 times bigger than the Russian military and that the US has bases all around Russia. So are we to conclude that the Pentagon is preparing to attack Russia or to intervene militarily in the Ukraine?

I believe that such a conclusion would be premature. Here is why:

The first thing to keep in mind is there is absolutely no need for the USA to forward deploy anything to attack Russia. I would even argue that forward deploying units or systems close to Russia put them at risk and make them a much easier target for Russia to strike. This is especially true of any USN ship entering the Black Sea which is completely “covered” by Russian coastal defense missiles. One Russian expert declared that Russia could destroy any ship anywhere in the Black Sea is 20min or less. This is probably an accurate figure. If the Pentagon was preparing to attack Russia it would pull US units and systems *away* form the Russian border, not closer. The US has plenty of very effective long range strike capabilities including ballistic and cruise missiles.

The second undeniable fact is that under any conceivable scenario Russia does have the means to basically completely destroy the USA as a country in about 30min (the USA, of course, can do the same to Russia). Any US war planner would have to consider the escalatory potential of any military action against Russia. It is theoretically possible that in the future the USA might have a means to protect itself from such a retaliatory attack by using a combination of its future Prompt Global Strike system, the forward deployed Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defence system and the US National Missile Defense programs. Personally, I don’t believe that such a system would ever protect anybody against a Russian counter-attack, but even if it does, this will be far away in the future. Currently these systems are not operational and will not be so for the foreseeable future.

The entire notion of sending lethal aid to the Ukraine or instructors to train the Ukrainian military is utter nonsense. The Ukraine used to be in the Soviet second strategic echelon and it is absolutely full of weapons of all kind, and there are plenty of experts capable of using them. The problem of the Ukrainian military is neither a lack of weapons nor a lack of experts, but a lack of motivation by the vast majority of Ukrainian soldiers to go and fight in the Donbass against highly-motivated and very skilled Novorussian forces. Furthermore, it is abundantly clear for everybody (including the Ukrainians, of course) that should the Novorussian defenses crumble then Russia would have to intervene militarily to protect the Donbass. . The Ukrainians can claim that they are already fighting hordes of Russian solider and tanks (up to 200,000 according to a recent interview of Poroshenko), but everybody in the Ukraine fully understands that it would take the Russians no more than 24 hours to completely wipe out the entire Ukrainian military.

Some would argue that what the US is doing is setting up a “tripwire force”, just small enough to be attacked, but one whose destruction would warrant a full-scale US counter-attack. There are two problems with that theory. First, these deployments are happening in NATO member states whose areas are already protected by the “political tripwire” of Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. There is simply no need for any kind of tripwire force in a NATO member state. Furthermore, nobody in his right mind would seriously believe that Russia might attack any European country. Sure, the EU and US politicians will try to terrify the Europeans with images of Russian hordes invading the Baltics, Poland or even Germany, but they all know that this is utter nonsense. For one thing, the Russian military is simply not configured to execute such a mission as it does not have the required power projection capability. And there is no political force in Russia even suggesting such a move. And why would Russia do that anyway? I cannot think of a single reason for such a crazy move.

ORDER IT NOW

In reality, what the US military is doing is called “showing the flag”. This is purely a political statement and not, in itself, a preparation for an attack. In fact, I would argue that deploying US units in the Baltic states would be just about the worst possible way to prepare for an attack.

That does not mean that a war cannot happen. It very much can. First, there is the obvious risk of mistake and miscalculation. Then, it is really dangerous to see the kind of completely irresponsible statements regularly made by top US officials ranging from Obama’s idiotic claim that Russia is somewhere between ISIS and the Ebola virus in the list of major threats to the world or the more recent declaration of a JCS Nominee General Joseph Dunford who seriously declared that “Russia presents the greatest threat to our national security”. This kind of reckless fear-mongering can become a self-fulfilling prophecy and result in an actual war, if only because of the confrontational atmosphere it creates.

So why are the Russians so upset about this saber-rattling if it really presents no real risk for Russia?

The main reason is that these highly inflammatory actions and statements create a sense of crisis which contribute to isolate Russia from the rest of Europe – a key US foreign policy objective. This was also the main goal for all the US attempts at drawing Russian into the conflict in the Ukraine: to create a huge crisis and re-ignite a Cold War II in all of Europe. After all, the Europeans who are now busy with the Greek crisis, the tanking economy, social issues such as immigration and crime would rapidly turn to other issues if the main topic on all news shows became the “Russian threat to Europe”. The politics of fear are well-know: obedience, passive acceptance of the dismemberment of social, human, political and civil rights, the creation of a scapegoat on which any crisis could be blamed, etc. Having failed to re-ignite a Cold War II by means of a Russian “invasion” of the Donbass, the US now has fallen back on the option of acting as if such a military move did happen and that the rest of the Ukraine, the Baltics and Poland “are next”. Hence the need to “protect” them by such public display of the US military presence.

Russia is walking a tight line here: she needs to avoid looking weak or frightened while also avoiding contributing to the further degradation of the situation. Hence the apparent Russian policy of “one step forward, one step backward” towards the US/NATO/EU.

The US will probably only achieve a moderate degree of success in its desperate campaign to present Russia as a threat to the world. After all, there are only so many gullible doubleplusgoodthinkers out there willing to buy this silly notion. The problem is that regardless of the real feelings of most Europeans, the EU’s comprador ruling class will continue to act as if the threat was real. The same goes for the Empire’s propaganda machine (aka “corporate media”).

The current saber-rattling is therefore likely to continue as long as the EU is run by US-puppets.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Russia, Ukraine 

184 Comments to "The Meaning of the US Saber-Rattling at the Borders of Russia"

Commenters to Ignore
...to Follow
Endorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Pretty good for someone who obviously feels such a strong need to oversimplify so that he can feel, or at least project, great confidence that he knows who’s doing what and why?

    I think you should factor in, at the risk of more inevitably somewhat speculative oversimplification, the need for Putin to preserve his political power in aid of him and his approved kleptocrats holding on to their illgotten gains and power.

    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. The wiz is truly an expert in “projection” (?) Sentence construction, spelling and punctuation, not so much. It is difficult to hit that correct balance between over- and under-simplication, so he defaults to the latter (?)

    • Replies: ,
  3. The Wiz chose his pseudonym well. A little man on a box, hidding behind a curtain who pretends he knows everything

  4. …should be hiding…

  5. In a world historical sense, the most important conflicts of the Twentieth Century were the two Russo-German conflicts, as they laid the foundations for the supremacy of sea power projection of the Anglo-American-Zionist Empire.

    Occupied Germany (both in the military sense and even more important, the psychological sense) now is the linchpin of the Empire. It is necessary for the Hegemon to maintain this at all costs, even if it means the destruction of most of Europe.

    An independent Germany on friendly terms, or in alliance with a strongly nationalist and resurgent Russia would mean nothing less than the liberation of Europe from servitude to NATO and Washington and the end of the Empire.

    So it will be necessary at any and all costs to increase the strife between Russia and Germany, and Russia’s “near abroad” is the perfect world area to forward this strategy which appears to be that of provoking Russia to respond thereby activating the latent fear of the Russian behemoth in the heart of Europe, which then runs cowering to its NATO protector.

    Of course, Putin and his advisors are ahead of this game and are simply too intelligent to be provoked into a rash response; they know that time – and space – are on their side.

    By contrast, I’m not exaggerating when I say I believe that a preponderance of the leadership of the United States and the EU are either insane or demonically possessed – perhaps the latter has driven them to the former.

    • Replies: , , , ,
  6. Why would the most popular leader in Europe feel the need to “preserve his political power,” such machinations?” Nice sound bite, but it hardly holds up to scrutiny.

    I have visited russia many times. It very easy to understand russian peoples support of Putin. The worst experience they have had over the last 30 years was when they were ruled by the US puppet Yeltsin. They know that any russian leader that finds favor with the US is bad news for them. Same reason Iranians today don’t trust the US. The worst that they ever experienced was under the shah, another US puppet.. See a pattern emerging here?

    With regards to “Putin and his kleptocrats,” Russia has 13% flat tax, the US, much higher and progressive rates, US debt is well over 100% of GDP, Russia is 17%, russia has 300 billion in savings (currency stabilization fund/sovereign wealth fund), US has zero.

    It would seem to me that oligarchs (see Wall Street actions in 2008) in the US have stripped America to the bone much more so than “oligarchs” in russia. Stop reading/believing the mainstream media.. Makes you look like a wholly-owned tool

    • Replies:
  7. Great points, Mulegino1.

    I think what needs to happen, though is that Germany needs leadership who are not wholly-owned/controlled US assets, like Merkel. Of course if such a leader would emerge, he/she would get “Putinized” in short order.. Hence why leaders like Putin are so rare, yet should give us all hope that the Anglo-American-Zionist terrorist cabal can be eventually be unseated from power. My fear – like your own – is that these demonic psychopaths will not “go quietly in to that good night.” The Soviet Union was a very rare example of an empire that expired, without firing shot. In contrast to say, Winston Churchill, who went down with guns a blazing, and took the British Empire to the 3rd world status, it enjoys today. Great job there, Winnie!

    • Replies: ,
  8. “By contrast, I’m not exaggerating when I say I believe that a preponderance of the leadership of the United States and the EU are either insane or demonically possessed – perhaps the latter has driven them to the former.”

    They are lickspittles for Israel.

    • Replies: ,
  9. It’s a valid observation. I have spent considerable time in the US, Canada and Australia. The mainstream media and political sentiment in these countries (with special mention to the evangelical Christian Zionists in the US), I would consider to the right of the Likud Party itself! What an exemplary job of “manufacturing consent!” You have to marvel at the carnage they have wrought.

  10. And your contribution is?

  11. Like the preponderance of bloggers on this site you seem to be uncomfortable with scepticism and uncertainty. And that makes you unable to understand what people who are sceptical and interested but uncertain and dispassionate write.

    Then there is the logic problem. Tu quoque is hardly an answer to the suggestion that Putin, like Suharto, Mugabe and many others has a crew of crony capitalists, often referred to as kleptocrats.

    Only sheer ignorance of politicians could make you think that Putin’s present popularity means that he isn’t at least half as paranoid as Richard Nixon or Ivan the Terrible about threats to his power.

    You quote some interesting figures on tax and debt but I’m not sure why you think they make much of a contribution to whatever it is you are trying to say. One point that could be made is that the poor in Russia, now that low oil prices have stuffed the government’s revenues, may ask why Putin doesn’t tax his rich friends more than a flat 13 per cent. Even Mitt Romney paid more than that.

    • Replies: ,
  12. Thank you for your assistance. Belief in demonic possession tells me enough. Or are you assuming that your sanity and sobriety are so well established that you will be understood to be a secular sophisticate for whom demonic possession is obvious nonsense?

    • Replies:
  13. Thanks to Gilbert and Sullivan, and Ron Unz, this is easy…

    I’ve got s little list
    They never shall be missed

    I’ve put you on the list

    Goodbye Realist

    • Replies: ,
  14. I agree with you 100%. Germany would need an independent nationalist leader who could unify Europe in a pro-Russian alliance. At that point, the Empire just withers away. Once the Empire is gone – patriotic Americans can go about the business of building their own continental “great space” (which is what forward thinking leaders such as Henry Clay and Lincoln envisioned) and forget mad dreams of world conquest and domination.

    The Second World War (brought about by western elites) was fought for two primary purposes – the destruction of Germany and the German economy, and the liquidation of the British Empire so it could be brought under the control of the American-Zionist wing of the Empire. Pax Judaica-Americana is the heir of Pax Judaica- Brittanica.

    In the same way, the Cold War was initiated not to protect the USSR, but to encircle it and force its collapse via internal subversion and external chaos, which is precisely what happened. However, the big, big difference is that, by the grace of Divine Providence, the Russians kept their nuclear weapons. Ironically, the Russian arsenal has, so far, been the only factor in preventing a Third World War in Europe.

    • Replies:
  15. Insanity, demon possessions and “lickspittles for Israel” are mutually inclusive, not exclusive, terms.

  16. Pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain!

    • Replies:
  17. Don’t forget to include the full list of US kleptocrats in your list.. You must have forgotten.

    The reason I mention those comparisons between Russia and the US (I am surprised I have to explain this, actually) is because you cannot just “state unequivocally” as you have done that 1.) russia is a kleptocracy, and 2.) that the US is not.

    No sensible person is going to believe you, or me, so what I a trying to do is compare and contrast the current financial condition of each country, so a thoughtful person could ascertain which country looks to be “looted” and which one does not.

    Part of the reason we know about kleptocracies is the state of finances these kleptocrats leave their country in. The US, by any standard looks to be the “looted” country, not russia. Actually russia is one of the most “solvent” countries in the world, since Putin came to office, as opposed to insolvent UnitedStates. Without US$ as reserve currency, we’re hardly any different from Greece.

    Did I forget to mention one of the largest oligarch thefts in human history? The looting of Social Security Trust Fund (multiple trillions), to finance endless, wars? Does anyone here ever remember any “war tax” so as to pay for these endless wars? You could easily connect the dots that workers pension funds were stolen by US oligarchs to fund these wars, as no tax increase was ever levied to pay for them. The FED’s continued refusal to allow audits of The US Peoples gold stocks at Fort Knox. US refusal to return Germany’s requested gold holdings. More oligarch theft.

    Finally, the gini coefficient – signifying income inequality – is higher in the US than in Russia (a higher number means more income inequality). Furthermore the rate of change of income disparity is falling in russia and rising quickly in the US.. It’s been rising in the US for over 40 years, running.

    By the way, all my numbers are from The CIA Factbook, that bastion of left wing bilge, so good luck impugning my sources.

    One final thing, Oz.. How many time have you visited, Russia, and how fluent are you in Russian?

    Before complaining about other countries being kleptocracies, maybe you should solve these larger problems in your own country

    • Replies: ,
  18. “I think what needs to happen, though is that Germany needs leadership who are not wholly-owned/controlled US assets, like Merkel.”

    Yes, exactly. When Germany asked for their gold back, the US told them to go shit in their hat.

  19. Even a stupid person who is ordinarily civilised does people the courtesy of reading what they have written before purporting to criticise or contraduct them. Failure to do so makes conversation unfruitful.

    You say that I “state unequivocally” [your inverted commas to label, falsely, those words as mine] that Russia is a kleptocracy and that tht US is not. Absolutely untrue. Don’t you care? Don’t you think anyone will notice? But I’m becoming less patient…I’ve put you on my list…. so, goodbye

    • Replies:
  20. I agree with your sentiments virtually across the board, Mulegino1, but this comment:

    “The Second World War (brought about by western elites) was fought for two primary purposes – the destruction of Germany and the German economy, and the liquidation of the British Empire so it could be brought under the control of the American-Zionist wing of the Empire.”

    You believe that the dissolution of the British Empire was by design, by The Architects behind the war. I would be interested in some material on that. Do you have a book/author or articles?

    I always suspected as much given the Brits “break” with their taskmasters over issues related to The British Mandate for Palestine. Was this related?

    Appreciate you comments.

    • Replies: , ,
  21. It is a great honor to correspond with you!

    My own theory is that there were two aspects to the British Empire: the predatory aspect, i.e., the transnational corporate Indies companies, Rothschilds, Sassoons, Oppenheimers and Cecil Rhodes types – which were responsible for events such as the Opium Wars and the Boer War, and the actual colonial administration aspect – which oftentimes was a net benefit to the colonial subjects, as it brought the rule of law and a modicum of economic security to areas under Imperial control. One example of the “administrative” British Empire is the “White Paper on Palestine”!

    In my view, FDR was a complete fool, who was coopted by both the American and British (and Zionist) transnationalists. He hated the “colonial administrative” side of the British Empire as he was a “free trader” but was totally enamored of the idea that the American colonial model of free extraction of resources, coupled with the characteristic American push for “democracy and equality” would bring about utopian conditions throughout the former empire.

    Churchill’s reckless drive to destroy Germany at all costs blinded him to the fact that FDR desired that the British Empire be liquidated and that America (or the American-Zionist wing) come into complete economic possession of that portion of the British Empire deemed worthy of retaining.

    I believe that Stalin was wise to this widening fissure in British – American relations and played both sides against one another. One legacy of Stalin’s policy is, in my opinion, the Suez Crisis of 1956.

    Terry Bolton’s works on this issue have been a great source of enlightenment for me.

    • Replies: ,
  22. Another aspect of the “Colonial Administrative/Zionist Transnationalist” schism just dawned on me: the Jordanian Legion! The one fighting force which dealt the Zionist Haganah humiliating defeats in 1948, was led by British officers! Once this force was withdrawn (due undoubtedly to bribes offered to King Hussein) the ragtag “Arab Legions” were outnumbered and outfought by the Zionists.

  23. “I’ve put you on the list

    Goodbye Realist”

    You are a ridiculous little man.

  24. Sorry, “Kerry Bolton”, not Terry Bolton.

  25. Wonderful, on all main points reply. Just be aware that it is not wise to enter into discussion with WoO.

  26. Guys, guys, time to ignore the little man behind the curtain. He is a Spoiler/Diluter here, his goal to reduce the level of the discussion down to nonsense and personal sparing.

    Let us focus on the Saker’s great article, it does fantastic analysis of the military situation in Europe. Personally, I could not find a single point I would disagree with. His key point is the risk of miscalculation when desperately waving the US flag in Eastern Europe. Can it be clearer?

    Also, I have a personal admission to make. A while back, I criticized Saker for writing that Russia did not need the Southern Stream pipeline. I claimed that that was the best alternative for Russia to deliver gas to Europe avoiding Ukraine. Then Russia announced:
    1) longer term deal with China (a bit shaky, but promising),
    2) doubling of the North Stream (what, no color revolution in Germany?), and
    3) replacing of Southern Stream with Turkish Stream. As the cancellation of the Southern Stream exposed Bulgarian regime compradors, the Turkish Stream proposal caused a US color revolution in Macedonia. In other words, two Pyrrhic victories of the US empire.

    The Southern Stream is as dead as can be. I was wrong, Saker was right.

    • Replies: ,
  27. So why are the Russians so upset about this saber-rattling

    Imagine the reaction in America if Russia were doing something similar in Cuba or New Brunswick. It’d almost be like 1962 again. But myopia is normal for yanks, as with their endless hypocrisy in the middle east…

  28. You should have written this in Russian — that would have REALLY shown him you’re boss!

  29. ‘…General Joseph Dunford who seriously declared that “Russia presents the greatest threat to our national security”’.

    Isn’t that meant to be Venezuela?

  30. Hello Annamarina

    What is WoO refer to?

    Thanks

    • Replies: ,
  31. @Churchill’s reckless drive to destroy Germany at all costs blinded him to the fact that FDR desired that the British Empire be liquidated

    Serious doubts about the “blindness” of Churchill is offered by the Journal of Martha Bibescu.
    Princess Martha Bibescu in her ‘Journal’ relates a conversation with Churchill in March 1939. She said that Churchill came to her lodge at Covent Garden in a state of hyper excitement (he was probably drunk) and he started raving: “It is a grave moment, there will be war, probably we will lose it, the British Empire is doomed in any case, it perishes… it is possible that even England will perish, there will be hard, terrible moments… and I feel twenty years younger! His body is shivering with pleasure when he utters these words; he delights himself like a tomcat caressed by an invisible hand. When he left I felt like everything fell back into the general apathy”. And in 1940, when he was appointed PM, she wax lyrical: “How happy he must be… His triumphal day had come. For a man with his temperament is must be fascinating to come to power on the tidal wave, along with the greatest of all storms”. He knew in advance that the British Empire would vanish and he did not seem to care at all. There are other reasons for that than his “blindness”.
    And there is another detail that seems to be passed over lightly. When the Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill was planing the sinking of the Lusitania, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy of the USA was a certain … Franklin Delano Roosevelt! Did they plan it together? Did they plan the copy cat of Lusitania, Pearl Harbour, together? They were excellent friends.
    Besides Churchill was American also, an offspring of the same oligarchy as FDR. He knew where the future was.

    • Replies: , ,
  32. Great exchange, Mulegino1 and Saker.

    re Mulegino1 –

    In my view, FDR was a complete fool, who was coopted by both the American and British (and Zionist) transnationalists. He hated the “colonial administrative” side of the British Empire as he was a “free trader” but was totally enamored of the idea that the American colonial model of free extraction of resources, coupled with the characteristic American push for “democracy and equality” would bring about utopian conditions throughout the former empire.

    I don’t think FDR was a “complete fool” nor was he “coopted . . .by American, British and Zionists”.
    Zionists — especially zionists — and American transnationalists/ financiers had supported and influenced FDR since his days as Sec’y of Navy and governor of New York. Their thinking and ambitions were his milieu.
    Felix Frankfurter was the only person with whom FDR discussed whether he should run for a third term; Within hours of that conversation FDR threw his hat in the ring against Wendell Willkie, whom Frankfurter had also mentored and influenced and who was, contrary to the rest of the Republican party, an interventionist. One way or another there would be war. Roosevelt’s Second Act, by Richard Moe.

    Historian Thomas Fleming argues compellingly, and based on facts and documents, that FDR was fully invested in waging a war of Carthaginian destruction against Germany — The New Dealers War

    “Fleming contends the New Dealers were more comfortable with Stalin than the British Empire as a post-war ally, and they foolishly sought the destruction of Germany’s industrial capacity. “

    re FDR’s utopian vision of “democracy and equality,” imo that was as much window dressing — propaganda for the masses — in FDR’s administrations as it has been for every subsequent US administration. It’s a bell that causes the American public to salivate and acquiesce to the plunder of their treasure and shedding of their blood.

    According to Christopher O’Sullivan in FDR and the End of Empire, FDR entered the fray with the intention of fracturing the British empire.

    But FDR’s strategy regarding Italy suggest that his vision was even larger than just stepping into British shoes.
    Andrew Buchanan

    “argues that, far from being a reluctant participant in a ‘peripheral’ theater, the United States pursued a sustained grand-strategic interest in the region. By the end of the war the Mediterranean was an American lake, and the United States had substantial political and economic interests extending from North Africa, via Italy and the Balkans, to the Middle East. This presentation will examine the military, diplomatic, and economic processes by which this hegemonic position was assembled,looking in particular at the changing character of the Anglo-American alliance, the establishment of post-war spheres of influence, ” http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/events/events/2014/14-11-27-American-Grand-Strategy-in-the-Mediterranean.aspx

    see also http://www.c-span.org/video/?322137-1/discussion-us-engagement-italy-world-war-ii

    mulegino1 wrote:

    Churchill’s reckless drive to destroy Germany at all costs blinded him to the fact that FDR desired that the British Empire be liquidated and that America (or the American-Zionist wing) come into complete economic possession of that portion of the British Empire deemed worthy of retaining. “

    Churchill was not alone in the “reckless drive to destroy Germany at all costs.”

    In 1939 FDR signed an executive order for US Air Force to develop a facility at Dugway in the Utah desert to research and develop “chemical weapons” contemplating that Hitler would use them. US Air Force, Standard Oil, Jewish architects and Jewish-run Hollywood studios collaborated to design and build precise replicas of German workers housing. The planning was so realistic that

    “In the bedroom, the single beds were placed together in pairs, with a crib ■adjacent, reflective of a young family with an infant. ”

    Dugway Proving Ground, German-Japanese Village; HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD (HAER), U.S. Department of the Interior

    USA committed just as much energy and as many resources to the firebombing of Germany, with precisely the same strategic purpose — to terrorize and incinerate German civilians, even infants.

    • Replies:
  33. Well, if I ever need someone to GUESS about things, I know where to go.

  34. The US has two great defensive resources, the Atlantic and the Pacific. Who else has that? Only the English with their little teeney weeney English channel.
    So what’s with our spearbumping and shield clanging?
    Russia is separated by rivers, little rivers with bridges. To protect their turf they have to be….whats the word?…proactive.
    But we are tickling the hairs in the bears nose? why is that?
    Basically because we are the biggest assholes on the planet. Our dick is the biggest in the world, just look at it.
    The Wikipedia entry

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

    List of countries by military expenditures has a circle chart, whose big green dick spans half the globe?

    • Replies:
  35. I’m very interested in the phenomena of “professional trolling”, especially evidence of organized campaigns. Your allusion to various sub-types based on methods/goals, as well as various levels of competence, leads me to wonder if there isn’t a site devoted to this phenomena. The art seems fairly advanced, but the critical response seems fragmented and unorganized. The Saker has mentioned that the current war is about 85% propaganda, 10% factual and 5% kinetic. Given the importance of the informational aspect, I’m sure that all sides devote considerable resources to the study and practice, but as in all matters of intelligence, methods and techniques are held closely and amatuers can only speculate on these things. Do you know of any open resources that regularly speak of such matters?

    Lately, I’ve grown very suspicious of counter-trolling; those that engage with the diluters, often with very extensive factual and historical cut-and-paste jobs, especially on subjects that have been beaten to death (from my perspective), chiefly the holocaust and the general subject of Jewry, 9-11, and others. The subjects have been discussed at ludicrous length, nothing new is ever presented, and virtually no-one is dissuaded in their notions. I strongly suspect that 99% of this counter-narrative is in-house hasbara and the remaining 1% obsessives with greatly varying levels of knowledge and talent. Insulting Jews on Unz, especially on posts by such as Shamir, Gottfried, Mercer, Finkelstein is just so stupid and counterproductive, not to mention rude, that it’s difficult to believe that it isn’t simply bait for the unwary or damaged minds.

    In the meanwhile, do not feed the trolls!

    • Replies: , , , , , , , ,
  36. “Guys, guys, time to ignore the little man behind the curtain. He is a Spoiler/Diluter here, his goal to reduce the level of the discussion down to nonsense and personal sparing.”

    Ok, I agree, I’ll stop.

  37. When the Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill was planing the sinking of the Lusitania, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy of the USA was a certain … Franklin Delano Roosevelt! Did they plan the copy cat of Lusitania, Pearl Harbour, together? They were excellent friends.

    as noted in #32, Felix Frankfurter was close to FDR and also exerted influence over Wendell Willkie.
    Frankfurter also engaged in direct, back-channel communications with Churchill, sharing information that did not pass through Britain’s ministries. These communications began before Churchill was PM; though they dealt with the highest levels of policy, Frankfurter and Churchill did not include Chamberlain in their communiques..

    Various historians question the friendship of FDR and Churchill. It may be the case that Churchill was made the fool rather than FDR. FDR stabbed Britain in the back in Gen. Mark Clark’s unipolar conquest of Rome — which FDR planned with Bernard Baruch — as well as in Tehran. The British were not unaware of both slights.

    Churchill was “otherwise engaged” and did not attend FDR’s funeral.

  38. Wizard of Oz, the local commenter.

    Thank you for your outstanding analysis of Ukrainian tragedy.

  39. “Insulting Jews on Unz, especially on posts by such as Shamir, Gottfried, Mercer, Finkelstein is just so stupid and counterproductive, not to mention rude, that it’s difficult to believe that it isn’t simply bait for the unwary or damaged minds. “

    I agree, “insulting Jews” or anybody on this site or others is rude. It’s also counterproductive.
    OTOH there are very few outlets to get fact-based information about Israel, zionism, WWII, Germany, Nazism in the hands of a broader public.

    Unz serves that purpose.

    C Span is acclaimed by many as the “fairest” of MSM outlets.

    But I swear the C Span pay system must included bonuses for saying “should Iran be trusted;” “Iran has cheated;” “Iran lies.” Linking Iran and terror in the same sentence earns FICA-free pay.

    Paychecks are docked each time a C Span moderator fails to confront any caller or guest who says something negative about Israel. Greta Brawner sets the standard in that regard; her automatic response to a statement such as, “Israel has too much influence over US foreign policy” is “What is your source for that information?”

    But I have never, ever, not once heard her demand that a guest much less a congressperson state chapter and verse to defend the proposition that “Iran lies;” “Iran has cheated,” or challenge them to consider that Iran’s support for Hamas and Hezbollah can be compared to French support for American founders in their battle to liberate the USA from British oppression.

    Yesterday Ellen Tauscher appeared on C Span and educated Americans on what it means to be patriotic: if your information set about Iran does not include “lies,” “cheats,” “immoral;” “number one state sponsor of terrorism;” or on the flip-side, if your information set points to the bad acts of USA in Iraq or against Iran, or in arming Israel to attack Palestinians in Gaza, then you are not a patriotic American.

    /end of tangent – rant

    • Replies:
  40. . . .subjects that have been beaten to death (from my perspective)chiefly the holocaust and the general subject of Jewry, 9-11, and others. The subjects have been discussed at ludicrous length, nothing new is ever presented, and virtually no-one is dissuaded in their notions

    I disagree wrt to holocaust and zionism.

    The first has been promoted through a propaganda campaign that might be unprecedented in the history of civilization. Yet the full history of events, the “truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth” from both sides is scarcely know, and passionately obscured and concealed.
    How many people are aware of the Holodomor; of the US firebombing campaign against Germany & Japan; of the deliberate starvation of Germans, Belgians, and Iranians in WWI and WWII?

    Conversely, the general public has far too little sound information about zionism. It is a morbid ideology that was coupled with a militarist praxis. That linkage — zionist militarism– has become welded on to the American foreign policy mind frame.

  41. This is valuable information – I know that Churchill was half American, but never knew that he was actually thrilled at the prospect of dissolution of the Empire. I was always under the impression that he wanted the Americans as “junior partners” in some great Anglo-American-Zionist world order, but, in light of this, everything falls into place.

    It appears that Churchill drowned his inner conflicts over his divided loyalties in snifters of brandy and piles of caviar; this “courageous lion in winter” was really a drunken rat in the woodpile.

    • Replies:
  42. INSULTING WHITES, AMERICANS AND GOYIM ON MAIN STREAM MEDIA MAKES THE JUDAISTS LOOK SICK AND DISGUSTING.

    This is reply to your comment that: “Insulting Jews on Unz, especially on posts by such as Shamir, Gottfried, Mercer, Finkelstein is just so stupid. This sounds exactly the kind of a thing a Hasbara troll would say.

    But if you turn on the TV or pick up the Jew York Times, you see lies and propaganda and hate of the Judaists against whites and their insanity.

    The Jewish controlled media and the Jew York Times constantly calls patriots “racists”, promotes mal-cegenation of white women with black men, while printing classifieds with Obituaries of Jewish women who simply married a white non-Jewish man, lie constantly day and night by promoting the alien invasion (while supporting apartheid in Israel), lie in support of Israel, and just spew lies, lies and lies by promoting the holohoax and other Jewish scams.

    As a person who used to love and admire the Jewish people, the hate and the constant lies against whites and America and other white nations (but in favor of Israel) that I saw on the Jewish controlled main stream media disgusted me against the Judaists. That is why I cancelled all my subscriptions to MSM and visit unz.com instead.

    Unz.com is 100 times better than the Jewish controlled MSM.

    • Replies:
  43. Excellent points about FDR!

    We have bought what I call the neocon version of history – FDR as the dupe of Stalin (Cairo and Yalta) despite the vociferous protests of that mighty defender of Christian civilization Winston Churchill. (Bloodthirsty, cruel, drunken exhibitionist is more like it!)

    The reality appears to be that FDR appeared to attempt to play off his two allies against each other for his own ulterior motives. Stalin, who had not achieved power within the brutal and treacherous milieu of the Soviet party apparatus by being stupid or naive, was undoubtedly onto the game and also attempted to play FDR against Churchill with more success.

    Stalin really threw a wrench into the works of the planned world order when he (and Churchill) insisted on the veto in the UN Security Council. FDR wanted to forgo the veto for ostensibly democratic and egalitarian principles – in reality he knew that only the U.S. had the economic resources to suborn a majority of smaller nations in the UN General Assembly. This was the case when Israel was recognized.

  44. Sorry if I phrased it poorly, but my point was that almost all of this back and forth about Jews, especially historical controversies, is just squid ink to obscure any substantive discussion of the present situation. I notice there isn’t a lot of discussion about current events that doesn’t devolve into some controversies about events that happened even hundreds of years ago. This is even more common on Russian blogs, understandably because their story is much older and more tragic than ours, but people need to move on to what can be done now, by those of good will, some of whom I mentioned. Almost anything else seems to be intentional redirection. These topics have been drained of meaning, by overuse, and its not accidental. Fools and knaves, together; I’m fed up!
    I expect bull hockey from the MSM. The solution seems obvious…

    • Replies: , ,
  45. To compare the US to Greece is absurd. Greece owes its debt in essentially a foreign currency, in a fixed currency regime. The actions of the ECB and the EC make it so.

    Most U.S. debt is what we owe to ourselves. The debts owed to foreign countries are the result of inevitable current account shortfall/surplus conditions. If every country in the world were to have a surplus, we would have to be net-exporting to extra-terrestrials.

    That others hold varying amounts of US debt is by no means any indication of US “bankruptcy” or anything of the sort. One has to view debt as a financing instrument, along with “equity”. It is entirely irrelevant to the productiveness of the “Asset” that is being financed, what the varying combinations of debt and equity are. The Asset in this case is the Asset base of the sovereign United States of America and its principal allies (Europe, Japan, Korea and others). The U.S and allied complex, due to their unique endowments of natural resources in hydrocarbons, inhabitable and developed land mass, unassailable leadership in most legacy and emergent technologies (nanotech, genomics, heavy machinery), political stability, magnet for international human capital, holds the Premier Reserve Currency for the foreseeable future. Russia, China and others can try to foster their own currencies as the premier reserve, but I am willing to bet that they do not and will not have the essentials to replace the USD in the foreseeable future. They have their own serious problems (another topic altogether).

    What you say regarding the status of the US$$ as the reserve currency is true, insofar as that status makes it the banker/credit creator for much of global trade, investment and activity. However it is not the only reserve currency. The EUR, JPY are lesser ones, and the slowly the RMB could become one as well. Projecting 50 years into the future is simply sticking a finger up to gauge the direction of the wind.

    • Replies:
  46. NATO was created at the end of the Second World War in order to keep Russia out; keep the American Empire in and keep the Germans down. It has not changed one bit since its founding by the corporate American Empire. War is good for the Americans and always has been. They need to constantly pile the bodies up in order for them to live the way they do.

    • Replies:
  47. good luck with having “substantive discussions of the present situation” in order to frame policies for present day and future solutions, without knowing how things got the way they are.

    That’s like renovating a house whose walls have caved in without examining the foundation.

    heh.

    a neighbor was just saying that now that the paint has been stripped from exterior walls, but the brickwork not pointed, rainwater penetrates the open mortar joints causing the basement to fill with water in turn causing walls in the living room to mold. He’s solving the problem by running a dehumidifier in the basement.

  48. It’s shield rattling, not sabre rattling. There is a difference between tbe two, like the difference between defense and offense.

    • Replies:
  49. BBC radio Death of Ukraine , start at 19 minutes for a Ukrainian demographer saying they have 10 years to reverse things before reaching an ireversable tipping point.

    US troublemaking causing war in Ukraine may be good for Ukraine by reducing the flow of people out the Ukraine. It’s not the war that is the real problem for the country. Their world record low birthrate and migration means Ukraine is still on course to cease to exist within a generation, because it will not have the people to administer its territories.

  50. Churchill was an interesting human. He received money to finance his time in India and later in S Africa from Rothchild and Sasson. He got the job as war correspondent from recommendation of Rothchild. His finance was managed by Jewish finance manager who did great job. He was given more than 25000 pound as gift by the Jewish financier on his wedding.He told his mother not to publish a book that he came to know would be establishing some unsavory truth about the influence of British Jewish elite . First thing that occurred to him following death of Queen Victoria what would happen to Sasson.
    He quit Conservative party over the Alien Bill for the bill was hurting the emigration of the eastern European Jewish .
    He advised Zionist to remain steadfast in their pursuit of Jewish state in Palestine with patience,hiding the intention in words ,expressing confusing opinion to clueless Arab leaders.

    Churchill and the Jews by Martin Gilbert
    Later Chirchill would become a target for assassination same time his friend was assassinated by Zionist gang.
    It was Churchill who categorically informed the people round him that the Arabs would be defeated by force to pave way for establishment of Jewish state.
    He was a nation builder bit built a wrong country and in the process destroyed his own.
    It is no wonder Richrad Perle was aghast at British for denying another term to Blair ,comparing it to the deafet of Churchill writing inGuardian ( UK) – Why does the British ditch their best .
    Churchill was Blair without the religion..

    • Replies: ,
  51. Knowing soft spots of others.
    So Churchill was easy to buy… so much for his pretenses of grandeur. Funny how truth always emerges, particularly at out age of availability of information online.
    Poor Blair; most likely, he still hopes for some recognition of his “greatness,” yet all he he’s got is the inseparability from Lesser Bush (and a thick bank account, of course – the blood-spotted one, but this is of no concern for Pious Tony).
    Here in the US, the experts in soft spots have been profitably in action. On Kagans’ family: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/19/seeking-war-to-the-end-of-the-world/

    • Replies:
  52. Congratulations on the wisest comment I’ve seen on here in quite a while.

  53. It seems from this read,that no one believes in war as a practical solution,none believes that Russia would attack any EU country . Despite this being in the known of unknown , presidents and military chiefs warn of danger of imminent attack from Ebola infected ISIS influenced Russia
    So a narrative has developed around Russia. It is a tiger and it will be politically suicidal for anybody to dismount from this animal.
    But unless the myth is destroyed , it will lead to war oneday.
    Its the myth that led to Vietnam and to Iraq. Some fortune seeking psychopaths would come out of cow shade and woodwork and mesmerize the country in believing that the reliefs from miseries of all varieties lie in liquidating Russian.

  54. Are Russia’s oligarchs Jesuits?

    • Replies:
  55. Of course it is not “knowable” if the US would become another Greece, should the US$ lose its reserve currency status. But methinks that the debt monetization strategy as currently practiced by both Japan and the US will end in either hyperinflation or default, or both. The underlying “bid” keeping the US dollar afloat, allowing such insane levels of monetization, will cease to exist once the US$ loses that status.

    And it is clear that the US knows how important this is (retention of US$ as reserve currency). Let’s take a quick stroll down memory lane and have a look at recent countries who have chosen to settle major transactions in non-US$.

    Saddam moves to settle oil export sales in euros, in 2000. Chavez looks to barter oil for food with Portugal and oil for doctor services from Cuba. Iran sets up an Oil Bourse to trade oil in non-US$. And of course China and Russia’s massive trade deals in yuan, as well as a myriad of others.

    Anybody see a pattern here? Anyone not using the US$ is clearly, “Axis-of-Evil” material.

    So your implied non-chalance towards the US precarious financial situation is obviously not shared by our Taskmasters, or they would not act with such vitriol and vehemence towards anyone looking to disembark from the US$ train. A country in as great of shape as you claim would not care if others would look to choose to use alternative currencies in settlement of trade.

    No clothes left on this Emperor, Sam!

    • Replies: ,
  56. I too am interested in the sophistication trolling has tried to elevate it’s self to, @JeffAlbertson, and come to similar conclusions reading comments sections on sites… if I don’t get too bored with the obviousness involved and move on.
    The Saker is a worthwhile site. Trolling in all it’s forms should be flagged, is my humble opinion.
    Cheers.

  57. Hello Jeff, as another commentator wrote about your comment – what a wonderful comment! You do not write often, but when you write – it really raises important issues. May I please ask you not to leave this zine, we could do better with some real thinking power in this comments section.

    Regarding the science of trolling (let me call it that), I am not aware of a study of the types of trolling. There are several examples in the public domain of the organized trolling, including the JTRIG group of NSA, hasbaras etc, but I am not aware of a comprehensive summary of the techniques employed. My personal experience with trolling goes back to 1994 and especially 1999, when I have been engaging both the government trolls and amateurs on the Message Boards. Yes, this was the time when the Press was still healthy and unconcerned about the Internet and there were few comments sections online. Then, trolling was not a science as it is now.

    I would love to spend some time analyzing material on organized trolling (by governments and by interest groups) and writing a study on it, to make a small contribution to the community, just like Ron has made a much bigger contribution by starting up this counter-MSM zine. I hope I will one day.

    • Replies: , ,
  58. Wizard, another trolling hasbarist.
    A dead give away.

    • Replies:
  59. And with the Euro going bust and Merkel illegally “lending”/giving the Greek welfare bums German taxpayers money, it just a matter of time before Merkel is removed. It’s not if, but when Germany & Russia begin a new era in cooperation.
    My, my the filthy little Zionists won’t like that one bit.

    • Replies:
  60. Do, please, explicate. Share with us the grave external threats the US faces currently. I won’t provide extra points for any references to Munich or Chamberlain.

  61. Well the points you mention are appreciated. I am willing to bet (a connected one, to my previous, any amount you find reasonable and paid in a basket of USD/EUR) that hyperinflation will not occur. Certainly not unless some devastating war destroys our entire productive capacity.

    ‘Hyperinflation coming!” was the cry that we had heard from many, including Schiff, Ron Paul and others, soon after the Fed/ECB and BoJ started on their respective Large Scale Asset Purchases, OMTs and other forms of quantitative easing. That was back in 2008-2009. Notable economists including Paul Krugman, Stiglitz and Larry Summers, had predicted that we were in a global liquidity trap, and inflation and interest rates were about to plummet. Which is precisely what happened! Thus, we are still waiting for inflation (leave alone HI) to pick up in US and Europe!

    A great deal of global trade historically, is carried out on barter and exchanging based on a mutually agreed upon currency, other than the major reserve currencies. Perhaps as much as 20%. Especially in mutual arms trade. This might go up, but the notion that the U.S/Europe/Japan/Korea will then cease to be the major economic bloc, is not a reasonable conclusion. I am by no means arguing that other blocs cannot exist, on the contrary I think that as the Fed has argued, that would actually be a positive balance for the global economy.

    P.S: btw, I am sure you will agree, that if we end up with very high inflation some day in the near future, the internal balance can be managed with wage indexation. However the international holders of US/EUR/JPY debt are going to be utterly smoked!

    • Replies:
  62. But methinks that the debt monetization strategy as currently practiced by both Japan and the US will end in either hyperinflation or default, or both. The underlying “bid” keeping the US dollar afloat, allowing such insane levels of monetization, will cease to exist once the US$ loses that status.

    I am curious, did you leave out the ECB on purpose? I ask because the balance sheet of the ECB has been expanded more than that of the Fed. (Japan on a GDP percent basis is the largest).

    But it is really less important than the reason why the combined central banks had to do it. The short answer is global excess savings.

    http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/ben-bernanke/posts/2015/04/01-why-interest-rates-low-global-savings-glut

  63. You are right IMO to emphasise those relatively large sea defences (including the English Channel). It should make Anglophones suitably modest when claiming – correctly – that on balance they were leaders of mankind by a small margin in achieving the benefits of contemporary civilisation (I was about to list the obvious but decided that too much additional explanation would be needed once one got on to humane treatment of the incarcerated, abolition of capital punishment etc. **)

    **But I’m being unfair: even in the Red States burning of widows on the late husband’s funeral pyre hardly lasted beyond the last wild Amerindian.

    That last reminds me of some junk thinker who opined on another thread that all the British “did for India” (sic) was a lot of famines. Yep, you can’t have much fun burning a widow who’s got no fat on her.

  64. There are more valuable information about Churchill’s young years, obscured by the concentration of his histrionics on the big scene. It is passed over even in otherwise good biographies. And it is precisely about his relations with the American oligarchy.

    “Shortly before his twenty-first birthday, in November 1895, Churchill visited the United States on his way to his first military adventure, in Cuba. He travelled by steamship to New York, where he stayed for more than a week. In New York, he enjoyed his first taste of American high society, attending parties and social events and meeting people of wealth and power. In 1900 Churchill returned for a comprehensive lecture tour across the eastern United States and Canada. His aim was to capitalize on his fame as a British hero of the Boer War. The tour did not generate the profits Churchill had hoped, and he encountered American opposition to British action in South Africa. Yet it introduced him to the elite of American society, including Mark Twain, Theodore Roosevelt, and President William McKinley.”@http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/churchill/interactive/_html/about.html

    “One of the most curious events in the Spanish-Cuban-American war was the presence of Winston Churchill (1895) much before the U.S. entry into the war. Churchill was gathering information as a military observer. There are even some who infer that the information on tactics and methods used by the Spanish was put to work in subsequent Boer War, and led to the eventual victory of the British forces in that South African War….
    It is interesting to speculate that a much more complete military style copy of Churchill’s reports may exist somewhere in the vast archives of the British Empire, or in the private papers of his son Randolph. In support of this, one can infer tantalizing hints by Randolph, when he refers to his father Winston Churchill’s advice to him at the time of the Spanish Civil War so as not to appear to be a spy. In addition, it is noted below Winston Churchill at the time of his visit to Cuba was on a leave of absence from his regiment.
    However, one should bear in mind what a knowledgeable source points out (for further details see Davis 1906): “Churchill’s visit to the front was typical of ambitious British (and German, Japanese, Russian, Turkish, and even American) military officers of the day. They got experience in seeing combat, and the resulting reports filed at home could help boost one’s chances of promotion. In many cases it was also lucrative in that the observers would also write articles for popular magazines. The American and Spanish armies were loaded with observers. At times, however, the observers were not necessarily welcomed by their own units, who had to stand the boring times (with the lack of promotion) at home, while the officers of means could get a leave of absence and go gallivanting.” @http://www.spanamwar.com/Churchillcomments.htm

    Did Churchill learn the art of false-flag operations from the sinking of the USS Maine in Havana’s harbour, which was the pretext for working the American “public opinion” into and outraged frenzy, demanding revenge against Spain on whom the blame was laid. The War of 1898 ended by the capture of all Spanish colonies (extending the American “backyard” to the South China Sea)?
    And who was Assistant Secretary of the Navy at that time? A certain… Theodore Roosevelt! Who went to fight in Cuba and returned a war hero which propelled him immediately into the Governorship of the State of New York. And then Vice-President of President McKinley. And McKinley was assassinated in 1901 so Teddy became the 26th President!
    Theodore Roosevelt was the idol of FDR, besides being family. FDR married the niece of Teddy, Eleanor.
    How many more events happened “sub rosa”?

    • Replies:
  65. Interesting food for thought at #35 but your “importance of the informational” aspect and consideration of its implications made me wonder just what is important for achieving important outcomes in the real world. For example, how much evidence of anyone whose opinion on anything that matters writing anything on the Unz Review is there apart from Ron himself? (I would like to think Steve S, John Derbyshire, Peter Frost and Razib Khan were influential but don’t pause to assess how far they are exceptions to my gloomy supposition).

    Test case that you effectually raise: why aren’t there ready made telling replies to all the anti-Semitic, 9/11 and other junk on these threads?

  66. Some people may laugh at my term “science of trolling”, maybe I need to clarify a little, although this is a digression from the article’s topic.

    I have written before that the West has lost its natural science advantage together with its manufacturing base (which go hand-in-hand), firstly to Japan and now to China. But the West is still undisputed leader in Social Sciences. The best way to look at everything which has been going on, from the applied techniques of color revolutions, through general methods of spinning information and ubiquitous surveillance of the population, all the way to the online trolling (as a technique necessary for social influence in a two-way medium, as opposed to the old broadcasting of the information). I do not think the general scientific community even appreciates how much better the West is at controlling and steering societies (Social Engineering) than the Developing World, such as BRICS for example. See, many people have commented here how backward – how reactive the Russians are about Western Propaganda. The Russians are almost always on the defensive, trying to disprove “established truths” instead of spinning their own “truths” (although some claim that RT is Russian Propaganda). I always remind people of a story from the WW2. When the Germans tried to scare occupied Europe from listening to short-wave BBC they claimed that their surveillance trucks can recognize what station your radio was tuned to (a high quality lie). But the British propaganda experts did not say on BBC: oh, this is a German lie – no, instead they said that if you put a cup full of water on your radio receiver, then this will absorb the radio-oscillator emission from the receiver and prevent Germans from detecting you (an even higher quality lie). That is a scientific, pro-active approach to propaganda.

    Probably the best illustration of the Western domination in Social Sciences is the NSA surveillance. Imagine for a moment, if the NSA’s facility in Utah desert could be used for social research instead of to gain money & privilege advantage for the Western society’s chosen (the 0.01%-ers). I could only imagine the research sample size and what insights into human behavior some benevolent (academic, peer reviewed) researchers could gain from such database? I would not be surprised if the elite one day opens up this database to such benevolent social research. There, I am giving them a good promotional idea. They are never going to give up on this power to surveil, so let us get at least something good with all the bad that comes with surveillance of the population.

    • Replies:
  67. I pause putting you on my Skip list to ask two questions.

    1. What is the “dead give away”? I have to ask as it is so far from true that I hadn’t even heard the expression “hasbara” till a few weeks ago. It could be helpful to know as I so enjoyed my first visit to Israel in April that I would like to think I could con generous Israeli hosts into paying for more visits.

    2. How did you come up with Wally as a pseudonym? In the UK or Australia it would suggest you have a tin ear unless, just maybe, the urbandictionary site gives the clue and you are flattering yourself. I quote
    “Someone who is very intelligent in some areas but very stupid (almost unbelievably stupid( in others”.

    • Replies:
  68. You may use the word “rant” apologetically but it is comments like your complaints about journalists and presenters who don’t have the wit to cause outrage by asking why Iranian support for Hamas isn’t like French support for the American colonists**that keep you off the Wizard’s Koko list.

    **I have a fantasy of Adlai Stevenson answering such a question with “Indeed an interesting question. If those damned troublemaking French hadn’t interfered, sensible gentlemen of the English speaking world might have combined forces in aid of civilised modernity much earlier”.

  69. The entire American foreign policy changed during this period from one of American “continentalism” – the development of the American “Great Space” (pardon the anachronism) and non-interventionism in the affairs of Europe, to one of Imperial outreach across the globe.

    Britain was always viewed by the American establishment as enemy number 1 – then came Mahan’s “Victory through Sea Power”, the U.S.S. Maine false flag, the Spanish American War, the assassination of William Mckinley (who was essentially dragooned into the war), the elevation of TR and the American Empire was firmly in place.

    Germany and Russia (the only ally of the Union during the Civil War) replaced Britain as the real “enemies” of the U.S. (TR was known to be pro-Japanese during the Russo-Japanese War), and was the first president to speak of possible war with Germany – “I wouldn’t be surprised to see a brief spar with Germany” (or words to that effect) – in his casual talk of war he resembles the bloodthirsty drunken sot Churchill. TR called the Spanish American War a “splendid little war”.

    William Howard Taft, TR’s successor, was a conservative hard money candidate who opposed the creation of a central bank, i.e., what became the Federal Reserve. TR’s Bull Moose third party candidacy ruined Taft’s chances at reelection and handed the presidency to the disastrous Woodrow Wilson, possibly the worst president in American history. The world is still in grave danger of exploding due to the effects of Wilson’s absolutely catastrophic decision to involve the U.S. in the First World War.

  70. Yes, as something to study it would be a phenomenon which followed the decline of the print newspaper I think. Why study it?
    First to see if there can be reasonable agreement on definition.
    Second to allow software to be developed which performs a troll watch.

    Given the inevitable – and desirable – lack of certainty one could envisage alternatives being offered as part of the menu on the Unz Review. Thus “Ron’s Very Benign Troll Watch” button, the AIPAC button and “Kiza’s Very Savage and Damning Trollwatch” button:)

  71. #45 I”m not sure about “the solution seems obvious” but otherwise I concur.

  72. What a pathetic gibberish from a warmonger who should have been banished to the desert with 24 other neocons after Iraq war fiasco.

  73. Couldn’t agree with you more, Wally!

    Vichy France enjoyed far more independence and diplomatic freedom of action than 2015 Germany!

  74. #47 if you are going to make a valid point why spoil it by vast overstatement (or oversimplification). Sure, there’s always been someone to benefit from America’s wars, probably without exception but to say that war has always been good for America raises barriers to acceptance of your argument when you consider the Civil War (the war against free trade I can almost hear someone call it now that I have read accounts or allegations of its protectionist aspect) and the huge resistance of the sverage American to joining either WW initially – and, not least, the Vietnam War. I would wonder how you made your case on the Korean War and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars too.

  75. On trolling I meant to raise the issue directly of how it should be defined if there is to be any agreement on usage.

    The first use of the word I came across was in amused or accusatory allegations that someone was posting tongue-in-cheek to stir fury in those who didn’t notice the leg pull. Sometimes the humourless and over certain would tag as a troll someone whose contribution was merely to try and make people think on the optimistic view that they weren’t too stupid or obsessive to be part of a civilised sophisticated conversation. But I think you mean something a bit different?????

  76. Interesting stuff to follow up some time about Churchill and Jews. But are you saying you got all that from Martin Gilbert (Churchill’s major biographer, himself Jewish which you don’t mention)?

    Trouble is credibility sinks 50 per cent when you spell the name of the well known Sassoon family as Sasson. It shrieks “half remembered secondary sources” and makes one wonder which ones.

    • Replies: ,
  77. This phrase “hasbarist,” I must say, I had never heard of until today.

    This is a phenomenon so pervasive and prevalent it is truly worthy of its own dedicated word.

    They are everywhere, mostly adept, quite polished in their techniques.

    Interesting. They are really invested/obsessed in retaining what they have attained. They’ll overreach, in the end.. They always do.

  78. I love your story of the high quality lies. On the whole I get the impression that one thing the Brits were better at than the Germans in WW2 was intelligence and deception. H’bd?? No doubt it helped Britain to have a lot of highly intelligent refugees even if they weren’t immediately treated well, while Germany had the counterproductive Lord Haw Haw and P.G. Wodehouse making silly jokes.

  79. George Kennan urged US policymakers to read Russian literature to understand how Russians think (Kennan read the literature in Russian). It seemed like a good idea, so I’m reading Dostoevsky. He really had it in for the Jesuits. What is it about Russian Christianity and the Jesuits?

    • Replies: , ,
  80. @I hadn’t even heard the expression “hasbara” till a few weeks ago.

    That’s a good one!

    • Replies:
  81. In reality, what the US military is doing is called “showing the flag”.

    ie Imperial willy waving by men who never grew up from the little boys comparing the size of their wee penises with those of their mates. Such dick heads are increasingly in the ascendancy in the USA.

  82. Russkies Orthodox – Jesuits Catholics (like West Ukrainians)

  83. Nothing different from English or German Protestantism and the Jesuits.

  84. I can find virtually zero data to buttress your statement that 20% of global trade is barter or non-US$. I have been in the finance game for 25 years, so my knowledgebase would be considered pretty “deep,” on this issue.

    And let’s not get distracted with couscous trading between Algeria and Tunisia, let’s keep this bigger picture.

    On the larger commodity-complex traded items (oil, gas, coffee, wheat, gold ,silver, sugar), I can find no evidence of such claims. And your absence of any commentary with regards to my statements concerning US policy towards countries who attempt as much (trading in non-US$), is curious, at best. It was the main point of my message, after all.

    Thanks

    • Replies:
  85. I certainly agree that the subject of organized, “professional trolling” and how to target it is indeed quite important. Also fascinating.

    I am not sure that I agree that the art is, properly understood, all that “advanced”. It is more that the people trying to counter this, unfortunately, fall for the same basic handful of tricks. The trolls have a basic modus operandi which is that they are always adopting the position that it is up to you to respond to them. So they continually ask for proof of this, proof of that. A sub-tactic is that they construct a straw man version of what you are saying and then ask you to prove that!

    However, if you ask them to provide any proof of anything, they basically never will. So, for example, on the recurring 9/11 issues, they just keep asking you to prove that 9/11 was an inside job. And they bog you down in what are, properly understood, irrelevant details. For example, they will ask you to explain what exact explosives were used to blow up the towers, for example.

    What is amazing is that otherwise intelligent people allow themselves to get bogged down trying to answer these questions! It is quite clear to me that the correct rebuttal is to ask them what the strongest evidence for the official story is. Once you do that, the debate is over very quickly. This was demonstrated quite recently in the previous Saker article comments, where I asked this Sam Shama troll that question and he basically just shrivelled up like the Wicked Witch of West.

    In any case, this basic tactic, that they will ask you endless questions and then, if you ask them anything, just walk away — I do not know that this can be characterized as something very “advanced” or “expert”. It’s more that the people who fall for this continually are quite “backward” and “inexpert”. At least when it comes to this problem of countering the trolls.

    Now, as for your comments about the repetitive nature of some of the debates — revisionist history of WW2 and 9/11 — I have to say I am pretty much in complete disagreement with you. That these topics come up again and again is for a very basic reason: these things are key anglozionist ideological weapons.

    Example: just today, in my newsfeed there was an article about notorious neocon ideologue Bill Kristol saying that the agreement with Iran was another “Munich”. Well, he’s drawing at the well of this whole “History Channel”, comic book version of WW2 and its origins.

    This is one of their basic ideological weapons and the attempt to deprive somebody of their weapons in a fight is pretty well motivated. When they keep trotting out these things like “Chamberlain in Munich”, it makes sense that you would point out that this comic book version of history is not really true. Hitler’s claims to the Sudetenland were not prima facie that unreasonable. Sudetenland was about 90% ethnic German and the vast majority of people wanted to be part of Germany rather than Czechoslovakia. It was prima facie reasonable for Chamberlain to go talk to Hitler and try to resolve the issue. (If Chamberlain made mistakes, was a bad negotiator, or gullible, that is a separate matter, but the mere fact that he went and talked to Hitler to try to resolve the issue… that, in itself was a sensible thing to do.)

    Granted, all that is a long time ago, getting close to 80 years now, but these anglozionist imperialists are still using this oversimplified version of history as an ideological weapon. And the 9/11 false flag is, of course, a major ideological weapon. It is the central plank of the whole jihadi terrorist threat fable.

    Again, a central ideological weapon of the anglozionists — it is inevitable that it repeatedly comes up. Anyway, these are key ideological weapons that they are continually trotting out. It is quite well motivated in a battle, to try to deprive your enemy of their most cherished weapons, is it not!!??

    As for “insulting the Jews”, well, this is misguided discourse, I think. The great Gilad Atzmon never tires of saying that the key of Jewish power is the power of the Jews to silence any discussion of Jewish power. To say that organized Jewry has massive power through control of Wall Street and Hollywood and mainstream news media.

    The damnedest thing about this is that Jews (Zionist Jews certainly) constantly brag about this among themselves! There are videos of Ariel Sharon and Netanyahu bragging (in Hebrew) to Israelis about the grip of Jewish power over the U.S.

    So, to buy into the idea that for non-Jews (or actually, even Jewish ethnics) to point out the existence of this power configuration constitutes anti-semitism — essentially this amounts to being a complete chump and a dupe.

    It is no more antisemitic to say that the Judaeo-Zionist power configuration, a.k.a. world Jewry, was behind the Iraq war than it is racism to say that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

    Decrying this kind of thing is most certainly not antisemitism. Real racist Jew hatred would be like, say, hating Mrs. Morgenstern, your third grade teacher, because the sweet little old lady happens to be Jewish. That kind of antisemitism, actually, is currently close to non-existent. Criticizing Judaeo-Zionist control of the central bank and the foreign policy and the media is not racist or antisemitic really.

    That is one of the most basic Zionist hasbara tricks actually. To fall for that reveals a certain lack of criteria and judgment, that, I hope, is remediable.

    • Replies: , ,
  86. “Lately, I’ve grown very suspicious of counter-trolling; those that engage with the diluters, often with very extensive factual and historical cut——— ——— or damaged minds.”

    Interesting ! You decry the fixation on Holocaust with intention to deny it, 911 with intention to question the explanation offered by the government / media .
    But you don’t decry to the fascination of certain section to associate Nasser,Saddam,Arafat,Ahmednezad with existential threat and Iran,Syria,and erstwhile Iraq and Egypt with Holocaust at every decade for last 70 yrs .You don’t decry the tendency of the politicians to get seized with that fixation and run with that idea to impose harshest sanction on those regimes at different times . HOLOCAUST has been allowed to get into and shape American school curricula, holidays,observation/ memorial event in politics and academia, has become an yearly event in France and other countries in Europe.
    Its amazing that you don’t to see continued fascination of war against terror borrowed from the memory of 911 allowing war on innocent people in Somalia ,Yemen,and ,not so long ago a against Iraq by US ,and Israel against Lebanon,Gaza,Syria, and Sudan.

  87. The book also says” The prospect of defeat of Turkey stimulated British Territorialist ambition . One of the 2 Jewish Cabinet ministers,Sir Herbert Samuel suggested that,once conquered ,Palestine should be acquired by Britain as an eventual center of Jewish self- government” page 25

    On Balfour” the war cabinet hoped that inspired by the promise of a national home in Palestine, Jews would encourage Russia to stay in the war and Amerucan Jewry would be stimulated to accelerate the military participation of US. “. Page 28
    It continues” to secure these results Weizmann agreed to go first to US and then to Russia”

    CHURCHILL AND THE JEWS A LIFELONG FRIENDSHIP BY MARTIN GILBERT

    The reference to Sasson is on page 5
    It was Ernest Cassel who without charge took care of Churchill ‘s investment
    Cassel have him 500 pound equivalent to 25000 pound on his wedding

    Victor Rothchild 3rd baron was responsible for checking Churchill ‘s wartime gift of food and cigar to make sure they didn’t contain poison- page 2

    • Replies:
  88. Some are born . Some have to be trained

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/06/education-samantha-power”

  89. Thanks for the reply and clarifications.

    I can find virtually zero data to buttress your statement that 20% of global trade is barter or non-US$. I have been in the finance game for 25 years, so my knowledgebase would be considered pretty “deep,” on this issue.

    That is not entirely unexpected, since in the absence of a currency denomination typically barter escapes the accounting devices of the World Trade Organisation and other international trade groups. You will notice I said “Perhaps as much as 20%”, for that very reason. However the issue has been the subject of research in Industrial Organisation circles. It is often termed counter-trade.(you can check Wiki).
    More specifically, The IMF, UNCTAD, OECD have looked at counter-trade over the years:

    Prof. Monika Schnitzer’s work (look at page 5)

    https://books.google.com/books?id=ezfBYiO8cRsC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

    I don’t doubt that your knowledge base in financial matters is deep. So is mine; and I was not talking about couscous trade between Morocco and Tunisia either.

    You also remark:
    And your absence of any commentary with regards to my statements concerning US policy towards countries who attempt as much (trading in non-US$), is curious, at best. It was the main point of my message, after all.

    I did actually made the following remark: “I am by no means arguing that other blocs cannot exist, on the contrary I think that as the Fed has argued, that would actually be a positive balance for the global economy.”

    Do the sovereign issuers of USD/EUR/JPY not act competitively and certainly protectively of their own currency denomination in trades? Of course they do! Your point in this regard is well taken.

    In fact I think that having a strong Asian reserve currency will have a stablising effect on the world economy. However for the RMB to achieve that status, it has to first go through the process of opening up its current account and capital account controls. If people cannot freely move capital, the host currency cannot definitionally be a reserve currency: you need your reserve to be useful in times of trouble! (it is a simple idea and requires little knowledge of finance)

    In fact if one looks objectively at the trend of “dollarisation” in formed currency boards, pegged exchange regimes against the dollar, GDP linked to dollar have all steadily risen in the last 2 decades.

    http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci16-1.pdf

    Lastly, I challenged your certitude about Hyperinflation coming to the U.S.A. Hyperinflation is defined as 50% + inflation per month for at least a year. So to put some numbers to that notion, something that cost $1 at the beginning of the period, in 12 months would cost approximately $129.75 ~ $130.
    Your average $5 carton of milk, $50,000 car, would end up costing $650/- and $6,500,000 respectively. My bet is still open. We can define terms.

    I am not attempting flippancy. Quite the contrary, my goal is to see how serious people are when they speak of Hyperinflation.

    • Replies:
  90. Revusky,

    I realise that you are seething with anger.

    However anyone can find out for themselves, checking on the proceedings in the other excellent article by Saker, especially my comment to you

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/a-tale-of-two-world-orders/#comment-1016829

    rather puts into perspective what actually happened. @Geokat62 was in that debate as well. You Revusky, were the poster child for what not to do in a civilised debate. Your actions were a combination of expletives, ad hominem combined with the silly, unestablished axiomatic insistence of a state manufactured massacre. You asserted this at the very start, and yielded no proof of it, at all.

    Enough said.

    • Replies:
  91. 9-11, and others. The subjects have been discussed at ludicrous length, nothing new is ever presented, and virtually no-one is dissuaded in their notions

    Should, to your mind, these issues be verboten?

    Should we consider the issue of 911 closed?

    This is a great article and the comments are wonderful. Thank you Mr. Unz for making this site available.

    • Replies:
  92. I notice there isn’t a lot of discussion about current events that doesn’t devolve into some controversies about events that happened even hundreds of years ago.

    Virtually everything that’s being discussed in this article has its pedigree in what happened almost exactly one hundred years ago with the event of the Fed at Jekyll Island and with President Wilson’s singular treason.

    And there’s only one way through all of this, and that’s through the Fed. Either by ending it or by a slow death of the Federal Reserve Note. As long as a hand full of men can create several trillion dollars by hitting some keys on their computer keyboard, then they will call the shots. At least in the former, putative west.

    It is in fact those men (the literal blood descendants of the men at Jekyll) who are fomenting the strife being discussed in this article- as they have all of Europe’s governments in their back pocket, and want (demand) that Putin be there too.

  93. At the risk of taking another swipe at the tar-baby, knowing I’m out of my depth;
    “…That kind of antisemitism, actually, is currently close to non-existent.”
    This is what keyed me to the probability that much the anti-sem trolling is actually done by the pro- side; false flag by the Delta squad to get the ball rolling, away from whatever the inconvenient topic might be. Some of course, is from amateurs, for whatever reason, some is the equivalent of graffiti, the satisfaction of an annoying public presence.

    The only practical response, in all cases, is to not be drawn in, at least without considering whether the conversation is germane to the original topic. Just let it lie, walk away, don’t feed it. Sometimes this is easy, eg Armenian genocide, I don’t know or care. To cut the Gordian knot I use a simple heuristic: if the Yankees are for, I’m against. I know they are corrupt liars, thrives and murderers, I want them to fail, the sooner the better. As the Great Cassius Clay said, “Them Viet Cong never done nothing to me.”

    But I don’t intend to argue about it, though.

    • Replies: ,
  94. Your reference to Monika Schnitzers work – on page 5 of that link – of the 8 sources quoted on “counter-trade,” as a percentage of total world trade, looks to be exactly 10%, not “perhaps 20%,” as you had indicated, and I had questioned. Rounding up is one thing, but doubling the actual number makes anyone suspect your motives (why not just report the average? Why the need to embellish?).

    Secondly, that study is not only 13 years old (stale-dated, by anyone’s standard), but consistently refers oftentimes in its source material to Eastern European barter trading during the Soviet era. Please tell me I do not need to further explain the vapid nature of quoting non-US dollar trade studies in a closed communist economic model, during the Soviet era. That makes as much sense as quoting US$ trading levels back when the Roman denarius was the worlds reserve currency.

    “Thanks” for your time, Sam

    Look to “manufacture consent” elsewhere

    • Replies:
  95. Nothing should be off-limits, the 911 discussion is pointless until the secret information, including the 28 pages is released. We should realise that whatever actually happened, the official story is pure bullshit, and it served its purpose, to take us to war with a country that had nothing at all to do with it. Distressingly like the Boeing, come to think of it.

    Is Putin the greatest guy in the world? Possibly not, but he has the right enemies, G-d help him!

    • Replies: ,
  96. “It is in fact those men (the literal blood descendants of the men at Jekyll) who are fomenting the strife being discussed in this article- as they have all of Europe’s governments in their back pocket, and want (demand) that Putin be there too.”
    Excellent!

  97. I am reasonably sure that you are simply taking the average of the midpoints of those quoted ranges. As I pointed earlier, precise data does not exist due to a lack of currency denomination in barter (its obvious).

    Also Wiki shows:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_trade#cite_note-1
    A significant chunk of international commerce, possibly as much as 25%, involves the barter of products for other products rather than for hard currency. Countertrade may range from a simple barter between two countries to a complex web of exchanges that end up meeting the needs of all countries involved.

    There are reasons why I quoted that paper. It specifically demonstrates, why during the Russian era counter trade was not that successful, intra-republics. The table on page 5 on the other hand was for Global trade. That paper was also a central one discussed in Industrial Econ at Harvard and MIT seminars. More material on this can be found at WTO/IMF etc.

    So one supposes that you are not taking the wager on hyperinflation (it happens when people actually see the numbers). That is fine.

    Thanks very much

    • Replies: ,
  98. agreed, annamarina

  99. @For(SAKER)
    As an addendum, it might be considered equitable on your part, to note that I said “as much as 20%”, which signifies the top of the range instead of a point estimate. No embellishments at all.

    Furthermore that table had nothing whatsoever to do with “non-US$$ trades in the closed Soviet Era model”. It was for global trade percentages for counter-trade. Precision in words and numbers .

    If you think I am trying to “manufacture consent”, you are mistaken. I am fully aware that most commentators here would take the opposite attitude of what I say. Yet the curious might wish to entertain a pov that is diametrically opposite. Critically considering it might have the effect of clarifying one’s own positions. That is more or less why I do it.

  100. I realise that you are seething with anger.

    No, not really. This is projection on your part, I think. After all, you are the one who received the merciless drubbing in our “debate”. So you are the one who is upset. I am just taking calm satisfaction in the whupping I gave you.

    I summarized the state of the “debate” between the two of us here: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/a-tale-of-two-world-orders/#comment-1016520

    You Revusky, were the poster child for what not to do in a civilised debate.

    Oh, Sammy, Sammy, Sammy, poor little Sammy… so now, you’re just going to whine. Very unseemly of you, Sammy. I was mean to you, poor little Sammy, I was beastly. C’mon, Sammy, it’s a rough and tumble world. Do you think anybody here gives a damn that I said some harsh things to you? (To the extent that they have an opinion at all, I daresay they took vicarious pleasure in it! :-))

    Like, here you are, a Zionist hasbara spin doctor, posting this garbage about how Iran had something to do with 9/11 — you know the same garbage they were putting out a dozen years ago or so, but with the final ‘q’ in the country’s name replaced with an ‘n’.

    Everybody sees through this, but there you are, gamely going through the motions… so what’s a lying sack of excrement going to do now, but start whining that somebody (quite accurately) pointed out that he is indeed a lying sack of excrement? There you are, poor little Sammy, being asked what the proof of the government story on 9/11 is, and you post a link to the government story. So the government story is “proof” of the self-same government story. There are people out there who fall for this, but probably not here. This is a pretty high end site. The Saker writes here, people of that calibre, for crying out loud!

    And, for all of it, I gave you some friendly advice, after all. I told you to take your schtick somewhere else to some place that is at a lower level intellectually. Here, everybody sees through you and you’re a running joke. Think about it, man. Maybe you should just stop now. You’re way past the point of diminishing returns.

    • Replies:
  101. Nothing should be off-limits, the 911 discussion is pointless…

    Not absolutely. It provides a basic litmus test to sort out who is who here.

    …the 911 discussion is pointless until the secret information, including the 28 pages is released.

    What “secret information”???!!! What 28 pages are you talking about???!!!

    • Replies:
  102. This is what keyed me to the probability that much the anti-sem trolling is actually done by the pro- side;

    I’m not sure what you’re talking about. Could you point to a few concrete examples of some comments here that you consider to be egregious “anti-semitic trolling”?

  103. After all, you are the one who received the merciless drubbing in our “debate”.

    Not a bit. You are the one who is still receiving it as we speak.

    C’mon, Sammy, it’s a rough and tumble world

    Don’t I know it, and don’t you, I am sure, when removing your “kid gloves” revealed a limp-at-the wrist and light on the fingers hand.

    Sorry Yoni, you were the one that made teh forst assertion, for which you had no proof whatsoever.

    You speak of intellect rather too much. Bit of a simmering, just below surface, symptom of a deeper insecurity.

  104. Yes, my quoting a mid-range is entirely defensible, while your “perhaps 20%, not so much.

    From your wiki link on counter trade, showing how free and open the US is on free trade, with regards to the US$:

    “However, as a matter of policy the U.S. Government will not oppose U.S. companies’ participation in countertrade arrangements unless such action could have a negative impact on national security.” That’s a decent loophole, “perhaps.”

    Furthermore, the largest percentage of countertrades involve the arms trade, with offsets comprising the lions share . You care to take a guess at who is far and away the largest arms dealer, in the world, comprising the largest percentage of offsets?

    The United States. Need I point out that barter trading with the US as one party, does not help your case, and clearly would need to be excluded, you would agree. Funny an intelligent person like you did not care to point that out, as I am sure you were aware of this. But thanks for pointing it out to me, so as to further substantiate my case.

    Maybe you should stick with quoting communist eastern bloc studies, circa 1985. I think it will get you in the least amount of trouble!

    And no, I am not interested in silly bets with bloggers I do not know, as rule.

    You mentioned something that was quite hilarious in an earlier post, I must admit, and I would suspect you would agree, if but in retrospect:

    “I am by no means arguing that other blocs cannot exist, on the contrary I think that as the Fed has argued, that would actually be a positive balance for the global economy. ”

    So your position is that the FED, who is printing left, right and center – who wholly rely on worldwide dupes to support the US$ (with a gun pointed at their collective heads), so as to allow their continued monetization, actually would prefer other countries to use alternative currencies for settlement, which of course would bring their machinations (and the American Empire) to a screeching halt.

    That’s funny Sam. Your spelling and grammar are impeccable, Sam. Too bad MSFT has not invented a “coherency check,” as they have with spelling and grammar! It might have flagged that whopper!

    • Replies:
  105. Go back and read what you wrote. This normatively charged dribbling about “kleptocrats” comes from you. The idea that you are dispassionate is utterly farcical. The rest of your blabbering is similar up is downism. That Russia is ruled by oligarchs is a consequence of US influence, not Putin’s influence.

    The kleptocrats were present and entrenched when Putin arrived. What little he has been able to do to get rid of them has been met with a wall of vitriolic criticism from the West. Poor, innocent “tycoon” Khodorkovsky sent to prison! Imagine! He must be a great hero!

    • Replies:
  106. For a while, the Jesuits were very vigorous missionaries. Not the current kind of missionary (I went to a black country and fed children), but the real kind of missionary (I went to a heathen country and converted heathens). The Eastern Orthodox aren’t really down with people converting to Catholicism.

  107. 1. Again, I wrote “perhaps as much as“, which is different from “perhaps 20%”. I did not quibble with your calculation of the average 10%. I merely noted it.

    2.

    You further stated:
    Funny an intelligent person like you did not care to point that out, as I am sure you were aware of this. But thanks for pointing it out to me, so as to further substantiate my case.

    Once more, in fact I very much did. In comment #62, http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-meaning-of-the-us-saber-rattling-at-the-borders-of-russia/#comment-1016780
    I specifically noted:

    A great deal of global trade historically, is carried out on barter and exchanging based on a mutually agreed upon currency, other than the major reserve currencies. Perhaps as much as 20%. Especially in mutual arms trade. This might go up, …..[]

    3.

    You wrote:
    The United States. Need I point out that barter trading with the US as one party, does not help your case, and clearly would need to be excluded, you would agree.

    Yes of course I am aware that the U.S.A is the largest arms manufacturer and dealer in the world, and I repeatedly noted and agreed with you, that your position in this regard, is well taken, as in comment #90. The substantive portion of my argument was to observe that any currency that can feasibly aspire premier reserve status, needs to unshackle capital account controls.

    4.

    Lastly you wrote:
    So your position is that the FED, who is printing left, right and center – who wholly rely on worldwide dupes to support the US$ (with a gun pointed at their collective heads), so as to allow their continued monetization, actually would prefer other countries to use alternative currencies for settlement, which of course would bring their machinations (and the American Empire) to a screeching halt.

    Now this is a position, I am keenly aware, many “hard-money” types are rather shrill about. Yet this line of argument, is factually misleading and final-effect wise runs completely counter to their predictions. For many good reasons: The Fed is NOT the only CB that has engaged in QE:

    a. Fed -> balance sheet stands at $4.5tr at last count, having risen from $0.9tr in 2007
    b. ECB ->balance sheet stands at $2.7tr, having risen from $1.25tr in 2007
    c. BOJ -> balance sheet stands at $2.8tr, having risen from $0.8tr in 2007
    (all of these I have expressed in USD using current Fx. I think my numbers are corrrect, but will check again. Qualitatively, the reasoning that follows is unchanged)

    Additionally China has always used quantitative methods to effect its monetary policy. In the current year it targets about a 12% M2 money supply growth.

    All of this means that from a relative position basis, nothing much changed in global monetary positions! Most of this QE “printing” (which is basically a substitution of longer maturity assets for shorter term ones), is aimed to foster an increase in final demand, thereby stimulating the global economy out of the doldrums. And speaking of final effects, with balance sheets quadrupling, a naive expectation would have been a burst of very high inflation, correct ? (That ought to be the natural question for one to ponder on critically.) Yet it has not occurred. Most of this money is sitting in Bank Reserves, since the velocity of that money has absolutely plummeted, due to excess global savings. Put differently, in the current environment, MP is far less effective than a direct investment in infrastructure in the U.S. We should be doing what China has.

    Believe it or not the major global central banks have no wish to create instability, there is no gun pointed at anyone other than the demerits of an introduction of a yet immature, capital controlled currency unit, to replace the USD complex. It may sound self-serving, but a dispassionate study of the theory and practice will bear the truth out.

    • Replies:
  108. Nothing should be off-limits, the 911 discussion is pointless until the secret information, including the 28 pages is released.

    The 28 pages are just more slight of hand trying to impugn the Saudis (or anyone to distract from who was really responsible), imho.

    We should realise that whatever actually happened, the official story is pure bullshit, and it served its purpose, to take us to war with a country that had nothing at all to do with it. Distressingly like the Boeing, come to think of it.

    The same people are in power today who took us into those catastrophic and treasonous wars. If they were somehow complicit in 911, and/or used that event to cynically foment illegal wars of aggression, then they should be removed from power at least!

    I’d like to see the criminals who did 911 brought to justice. I’d like for Dov Zakheim to not know a safe place to hide from the truth. I’d like to see the truth reach into their inner sanctums and pull them out by the short hairs – if indeed, they had something criminal to do with the unspeakable evil of that day.

    If the truth about 911 were more widely known, then war with Russia might be the last thing our ruling elites would be maneuvering for. Rather they might be asking Putin for political asylum and a room next to Snowden and sanctuary from the wrath of the awakened American sheeple.

  109. I can show you plenty of countries who have been bombed or sanctioned by the US for using alternative currencies to settle oil/gas trades.

    Please provide me a list of countries that Japan , China or Europe have sanctioned or bombed when those countries chose not to settle trades in yen, yuan or euros, respectively.

    I wax tirelessly about US enforcing US$ hegemony on the world, and you point out that other central banks also monetize their debt. That’s a non-sequitur, and you know that. Could be effective, on lesser mortals. Try plying your wares on Facebook, instead. UNZ is a blog too far for you.

    Given that you consistently miss my points, and given your level of intelligence, tells me that is by design

    Let’s wrap this up.

    How much do your (our, actually) taskmasters pay you to dissemble/obfuscate full time?

    Do they dock you pay when people like me figure you out?

    I see from other posts that you (purport to) drink the official 911 Commission kool-aid, which really tells me all that I need to know. An intelligent person who has truly investigated that act of terrorism cannot believe the official fairy-tale narrative.

    I wish you and your ilk the worst of luck in your endeavours

    • Replies:
  110. I’m glad I didn’t say that I never read the NY Times, its occasionally useful:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/us/claims-against-saudis-cast-new-light-on-secret-pages-of-9-11-report.html?_r=0

    My only real complaint about discussions of 911 is that there are far too many ” known unknowns” to be able to draw any conclusions that would convince anyone not already disposed toward one’s viewpoint. Not to mention Rumsfeldian “unknown unknowns”. I concede that it’s an open question. I have very strong opinions, but my only support for them is based on other’s opinions, really (and so is everyone elses’). Enough for an indictment, maybe, but not a conviction.

    I do think that the facts of MH-17, OTOH, will come to light, because both sides probably do know them, and have since about day four, when the silence of the orcs became deafening.

    • Replies: , ,
  111. I agree, but I still believe that the way trolling is treated in the West is scientific. As soon as the psychology is involved, which can also be recognized relatively easily in the spinning (PR), it is science. Organized online trolling is just a version of the Public Relations common in the MSM, not any less scientific, just a version suited to a two-way medium.

    You mention repetitiveness of subjects and arguments. Definitely. Is not that the same as with MSM? Human brain reacts the best to a familiar setting, this is why endless repeats of Hitler, Munich Appeasement and the like. This is also why the organized trolls also repeat points from the MSM. One has to give the consumer of the information 90% of familiar stuff that he agrees with or considers an established truth, to give him the 10% of new info and spin.

    What convinces me the most is what happened after MH17 shootdown. We have experienced an online campaign of trolling unleashed at the same time as the MSM attacks on Putin and Russia. This was really impressive and should be a case study in how online medium is used for propaganda. As someone who used to organize marketing campaigns, it was easy to recognize campaign organization, within the usual online chaos.

    You seriously underestimate organization of things that happen online, it is just another medium.

    • Replies: ,
  112. I responded to your specific points. A dispassionate reading of the sequence will make it evident. Yet I have no wish to enter into a quarrel with you.

    P.S. No one pays me, but myself.

    Best of luck on your endeavours.

  113. Endless reference to Munich,Chamberline,and Hitler have been a regular fixture on TV and in the thoughts of the cabinet members particularly of previous administration.
    But one wonders would Hitler still have invaded France Austria,Poland had those countries agreed to the demands of Hitler.

    One thing is sure Cheney would have if he were in Hitler’s position as Chancellor . Despite total submission to the demands made by Iran,Iraq,and Syria , Cheney gang went out destabilizing and destroying these countries with blood letting as the prime aim

    Here is Syrian ref-

    https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/20/the-us-hand-in-the-syrian-mess/

    • Replies:
  114. Who are responsible to 911? Those who executed it or are those who obstructed the intelligence agencies,thwarted the efforts of the FBI,CIA ,Border patrol,and State Dept oversees employees after being told of the dangers of impending 911 and diverted the energies and attentions to Saddam?

    • Replies:
  115. “Go back and read what you wrote” you say and going back and reading seems to be a good idea for you too.

    What I first said was “I think you should factor in, at the risk of more inevitably somewhat speculative oversimplification, the need for Putin to preserve his political power in aid of him and his approved kleptocrats holding on to their illgotten gains and power”.

    I said later “Then there is the logic problem. Tu quoque is hardly an answer to the suggestion that Putin, like Suharto, Mugabe and many others has a crew of crony capitalists, often referred to as kleptocrats”.

    In logic your argument that I am not dispassionate, not to mention disinterested which is certainly true, seems to depend on my using the word “kleptocrat” at all in relation to Putin. Your passionate denunciation must therefore be a result of your rejecting the idea of Putin having “approved” crony-capitalists or kleptocrats that are part of his crew. Really? You admit that there are “kleptocrats” still in Russia, dating back – and here I do not disagree with you – in many or most cases to the pre-Putin days, and are you seriously wanting to elevate Saint Vlad above the other world leaders who must sup with the devil (or think they have to) while slaughtering other devils or mere opponents? It seems to be accepted by those trying to be impartial that the new leader of China is having to be a bit selective in who he goes after for corruption, for example.

    If you actually know anything useful about Russia perhaps you know who were the advisers who, as I understand it, told the Russians from about 1991 that they should privatise as a Big Bang and go for capitalism fast instead of thinking they could manage transition. I have some memory of Jeffrey Sachs being accused of giving such (supposedly bad) advice. ???

    Mind you after 70 years of Soviet communism in a society which had only ever touched briefly on modernity anyway, it is hard to see what managed change was possible. However, in retrospect it shouldn’t have been impossible to make sure that the aggregation of the best assets into few hands with practically no tax to pay wasn’t made to bear more fruit for the general population. Perhaps the economists were ignorant, not only of tax law but of much economic history.

  116. “diverted the energies and attentions to Saddam”. Yes, but didn’t that occur after 9/11? The received view seems to be that neo-con opportunists seized on 9/11 to pursue their Iraq ambitions.

    • Replies: ,
  117. Well, have another try. Did you see, just above your post about saying “That’s a good one”, (For)SAKER saying he had only just heard the phrase [sic] “hasbarist” that day?

    Whether of not it can be called “trolling” you and many other persons of passion might do well to recognise that some merely put careful points and questions to flush out the rants of those that they can then confidently place on their Skip lists.

    Unfortunately, some of the discussion on trolling above does suggest that working out who might be interested in and willing to have a sensible honest conversation is not necessarily easy. As I may take time to note elsewhere, the thought that some of the truly mad anti-Semites are really trying to put people off the Unz Review and are themselves partisans for Israel is of concern. It is not entirely beyond my (dispassionate) capacity to believe and may be a bit of a worry to Ron.

  118. On the same page I think. In a probabilistic world I agree that we will probably know enough of the truth about MH17 (as I have said before).

    Thank you for the NYT link. I was previously a bit mystified about the missing 28 pages. Everything seems to point to them containing preliminary staff research which now leaves a nicely balanced question about the possibles harm done if true or untrue things are published which reflect badly on members of the Saufi royal family even if the report of the committee in the end declared that the matters in question were either untrue or peripheral.

    In the end I haven’t seen any explanation of motive which lends credibilty to the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

    • Replies:
  119. Interesting thoughts are provoked by thinking of people who, for mischievous fun, out of malice, or with focused purposiveness may play elaborate games. While I have in the distant past had some fun on The Economist and other relatively mainstream blogs by adopting several different personae including some who appear to deride or criticise the others I wouldn’t even try that on the Unz Review which I am keen to see succeed. But, giving the matters raised some thought I am not at all sure I agree about the supposition that some offensive bloggers are amateurs. (Some I am willing to believe are genuinely mad and/or stupid).

    How would you tell? The wilder and stupider and less literate some anti-Whatever rant is the more likely it is to put people off the Unz Review altogether. Cui bono? It doesn’t have to be neo-cons or Israeli sympathisers. It could be some would be rival publisher who badly wants Ron’sRon’s circulation so he can cash in on ads….

  120. Well I concede defeat. I know some highly intelligent people dear to me who can’t spell and there you are with “Sasson” again!!

    You gave me reason to look up the Sassoon family again. The first member of that remarkable family I heard of was the WW1 army officer poet Siegfried. Although a descendant of the great David Sassoon who had eight sons and took the family and its business from Baghdad to Bombay he was not a Jew (at least I suppose so because his mother was a Thornycroft) and he eventually converted to Catholicism. Some of his Sassoon cousins were well known to Churchill but I didn’t pick up anything about their money helping Churchill. Is there anything in Martin Gilbert’s books about that?

    • Replies: , ,
  121. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/us/claims-against-saudis-cast-new-light-on-secret-pages-of-9-11-report.html?_r=0

    Oh, that! That’s all BS, man! It’s based on the assumption that the conclusions of the 9/11 commission report are broadly true, but that there are these extra details they are hiding. Nonsense. The 9/11 commission report is just a fable and the Arabs they claim did it were just patsies.

    There is nothing new here. This Saudi Arabia connection is the same disinfo that was fed to fat boy Michael Moore back when and he made that silly movie Farenheit 9/11 — you know, that one the Palme d’Or at Cannes. In that film, our hero Fatman follows every little cookie crumb trail that was set by the real perps and the cookie crumb trail tends to lead to Saudi Arabia, yes.

    So, they were already planting this kind of disinfo back then, over ten years ago.

    Maybe you disagree with me on this, but, if so, could you tell me what is the strongest evidence, in your opinion, that the Arabs they say did it (who I refer to as patsies) actually are the perpetrators?

    • Replies:
  122. The received view seems to be that neo-con opportunists seized on 9/11 to pursue their Iraq ambitions.

    Yeah, I guessed that’s the “received view”. They neo-con “opportunists” were just sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting for some bearded religious fanatic in Afghanistan to cause steel framed skyscrapers in Manhattan to collapse so that they could get their wars going.

    Just the same as those Nazis in early 1933 were just sitting around waiting for somebody to set fire to the Reichstag so that they could put their plans into effect.

    And it’s really quite extraordinary. In both cases, the key event happened just when they needed it to happen. And, yep, then they jumped off their asses and put their plans into effect…

    Yep, that’s how it happened and anybody who suspects otherwise is just a “conspiracy theorist”.

    • Replies:
  123. Endless reference to Munich,Chamberline,and Hitler have been a regular fixture on TV and in the thoughts of the cabinet members particularly of previous administration.

    It just occurred to me that this anglo-zionist secular faith does have one thing over Christianity (which it has largely replaced…).

    I mean, you can kind of understand why “Holocaustianity” would replace Christianity. It’s just more of an “action” religion. Christians have been waiting for Jesus Christ to return for nearly 2000 years. And they’re still patiently waiting… like… dude… no action…

    In a far shorter period of time, I’ve lost count of how many times Hitler has come back! Saddam was Hitler. Gadaffi was Hitler. Ahmadinejad was Hitler. Putin is Hitler…. the Ayatollah in Iran is Hitler too apparently.

    Fight a war to squash the current Hitler and pretty soon you’ve got to fight a new war because there’s a new Hitler just showed up… Constant action… so given the choice between that and a dull, no-action religion like Christianity…

    But one wonders would Hitler still have invaded France Austria,Poland had those countries agreed to the demands of Hitler.

    Austria is a moot point, since the annexation of Austria was before Chamberlain went to Munich anyway. It was a fait accompli by then and not on the table. As for France, it does not seem like attacking France or Britain was part of Hitler’s plans. He just wanted to get along with the western powers. His war aims were all about Central and Eastern Europe.

    But regardless, whatever you think about all that, this whole thing that the bogeyman du jour is Hitler redux — this is one of their basic talking points. Always. And a president who doesn’t want whatever war these people are trying to drum up is Neville Chamberlain. As I said before, this whole Hitler narrative is one of their core ideological weapons. So, WW2 revisionism is, properly understood, quite well motivated. It makes perfect sense to try to deprive your enemy of his favorite weapons, doesn’t it?

  124. Neocon cabal including Wolfowitz was blaming Saddam for WTC 1993 bombing while the intelligence was looking into the AlQuida angle.Wolfowitz ridiculed the men and women in intelligence who wouldn’t do so.

    Neocon cabal was challenging the analysts of pre 91 intelligence every step of the way and over pre 911 security situation. They actively ignored their version and challenged the findings ,analysis and the assertion of the intelligence community
    The neocon didn’t stop there . These neocons actively chastised these men and women for not finding any threat from Saddam .

  125. Sassoon was born in Baghdad in 1832 to Saleh Sassoon, a businessman and leader of that city’s Jewish community (the clan claimed descent from a Spanish family, the Ibn Shoshans).

    Sassoon initially owned a counting house and a carpet warehouse, but soon began trading in everything he could, including, most profitably, opium. When China’s emperor tried to outlaw the drug, which cut a wide swathe of destruction through the population of the country’s coastal regions, the British responded with war. The result was the 1842 Treaty of Nanking, which earned the United Kingdom a free hand in selling opium in China.

    Sassoon established a triangle of trade, bringing Indian opium and cotton to China, where he received silver, tea and silk in exchange. He then carried these products to England for sale. Finished products from Britain, as well as cash, were then brought back to India where they were used to buy more opium. By the 1870s, David Sassoon had come to dominate the trade of opium to China, having pushed the British firm Jardine Matheson and the “Parsi” traders of Bombay out of the business.

    In Jewish history books, David Sassoon, an observant Jew, is remembered mostly for his philanthropy, which included the construction of “Baghdadi” synagogues in Bombay (Magen David) and Pune (Ohel David), and also numerous schools and hospitals throughout India and other parts of Asia. David became a naturalized British citizen in 1853, although he continued to live in Pune.

    His son Albert Abdullah moved to England, where he married into the Rothschild family and was elected to Parliament on the Conservative party’s ticket. Another son, Sassoon David Sassoon, was the father of Rachel Sassoon Beer, who became owner and editor of the Sunday Times at the turn of the century, and grandfather of the great poet of World War I, Siegfried Sassoon.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/this-day-in-jewish-history/this-day-in-history-global-trade-tycoon-david-sassoon-dies-1.475878

    Haaretz does take a rather limited and rosy view of this man’s activities . China doesn’t. Neither does the descendants of the families of the farmers who cultivated those opium in India.

    • Replies:
  126. Siegfried is the Sassoon that does not count as a “true Sassoon”.
    The cousins surrounding Churchill are the offspring of the first one to settle in England. Sir Albert Abdullah David Sassoon, 1st Baronet, (25 July 1818 – 24 October 1896), who begot Sir Edward Albert Sassoon (1856–1912), 2d Baronet, and Conservative member of Parliament from 1899 until his death. He married Aline Caroline de Rothschild and begot Sir Philip Albert Gustave David Sassoon, 3rd Baronet, (4 December 1888 – 3 June 1939) who inherited and the Parliament seat (from 1912 until his death. Philip served in the First World War as military secretary to Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig and, during the 1920s and 1930s, as Britain’s undersecretary of state for air.
    These are the ones who inherited the huge fortune made in the very honorable Opium Trade.

    Siegfried was the son of Alfred Ezra Sassoon, son of Sassoon David Sassoon, who was disinherited because he committed the unforgivable sin of marrying “outside of the faith”, and therefore Siegfried was not Jewish (and he carried it further by converting to Catholicism). It might be understood that he was excluded from the hallowed community. Even Wikipedia, very generous with all members of the Sassoon family, doesn’t give him any attention. Dead for Jewry.

  127. http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/11/the-jewish-monopoly-on-opium-still-fuels-chinese-resentment-today/

    • Replies:
  128. In the end I haven’t seen any explanation of motive which lends credibilty to the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

    as a pretext to get Americans to destroy countries and murder, main and displace millions for Israel, silly

    With the ancillary benefit of making said Americans more and more like Palestinians- with assassinations, check points, and general overbearing militarized police / surveillance state treating us all like congenital terrorists who have no rights.

    vat’s not to like already?

  129. great David Sassoon… you mean the Baghdad thief whose business it was to force the Chinese into opium addiction during the great days of the British Empire. Very good Talmudist in action that man was.

    • Replies: ,
  130. You seriously underestimate organization of things that happen online, it is just another medium.

    Kiza, just to be clear… I was not disputing that this massive trolling is an organized campaign. It obviously is. What I was taking a bit of issue with was the characterization of these campaigns as being extremely “advanced” and “scientific”.

    Yes, okay, they leverage some heuristic psychological knowledge about what buttons they can press, but, in my view, the key thing is not so much the sophistication of the trollers, but the lack of sophistication of the people who try to respond to their BS. People, who I really think should know better, allow themselves to get sucked into a completely reactive stance vis-a-vis the trollers.

    The basic trollers playbook is that they always ask you to back up anything. You say anything and it’s always like: “Do you have proof for that?” And then the person responds with all sorts of fact and logic-based arguments. And then the troller sifts through it and asks for proof of this and proof of that. And the sucker (because this kind of reminds me of the sucker in a poker game) just continually gets… well… sucked into an endless waste of time responding to these demands for proof.

    What is notable is that if you ever turn the tables and ask the troll for any proof of anything, they just pretty much walk away. I thought that some of the exchanges that I got into very recently on this site, actually on a previous Saker article, the one on the “Tale of Two World Orders”, clearly illustrate this sort of thing.

    I ended up in a back-and-forth with two obvious trolls, this Sam Shama arsewipe and another one who signs Geokat62. Geokat is the higher end troll of the two, somewhat less obvious. At times, he even does have one wondering whether he is actually participating in good faith or not. He seems to have fooled a number of people. I don’t think Sam Shama fools anybody hardly.

    With Sam Shama, I simply asked him to outline what the strongest evidence was, in his opinion, that the government story on 9/11 was true. He walked away twice. Then he tried to answer, possibly (but not certainly) because I nailed him with the argument that Judaic law prohibits accusing people (in this case the alleged perpetrators) when you have no proof.

    In any case, after I asked him the question three times, what the proof was of the government’s 9/11 story, he attempted to answer. And it was extraordinary! He claimed that the video of the plane crashing into the building was proof of the government story, i.e. that Bin Laden was behind it etcetera. This is like claiming that the Zapruder video of JFK being shot is proof that Oswald did it! His other brilliant piece of evidence was the (obviously faked) OBL confession video. I pointed out to him that if a plane flew into a building today and tomorrow I put up a video saying I somehow caused it, this would be proof by that principle, as well, no? I had specifically asked him for not just any evidence, but the strongest evidence. This was as good at it gets? Did he have anything else?

    Basically, the debate was over. He had completely discredited himself. He then later tried to use as proof of the government story a page which was itself a synopsis of the government story. I pointed out that the government story is not proof of the government story.

    Exeunt Shama, Enter Geokat… I figured that I would use the same approach with Geokat. Again, he refused to answer the question. He is a more sophisticated troll. He takes the “it can’t really be known approach”, that there is just this haze of doubt around anything, like there is some doubt about even things everybody knows, like that the US gov was planning to attack Afghanistan well before 9/11, etcetera. He doesn’t so much even claim anything himself as just blow smoke to create a haze of doubt around everything, by asking you to provide “proof” of anything and everything. That’s that guy’s schtick.

    So I asked him the same question I asked the Shama shill: “What is the strongest evidence, in your opinion, that the government story on 9/11 is true.” Naturally, he just kept avoiding answering the question, constructing a strange (albeit clever) argument that only I was obliged to prove anything, since his position is just one of continual doubt.

    I have now pointed out to Geokat that if he is saying that there is great doubt about 9/11, that must mean that there is no solid proof of the government story. Otherwise there would be no doubt, right? And I demand yes/no confirmation of that.

    I think it’s Exeunt Geokat now.

    My point is here not to crow over these little victories of mine, or not exclusively anyway! The point is that you can never get the better of these people by reactively answering all of their demands for proof of this and proof of that. You ask them what the proof of something is. And then they basically self destruct.

    But, anyway, this is an important topic actually, how to deal with these scum. I believe I am on the right track in the above, but many refinements are surely possible. If anybody wants to discuss this or anything else with me in private, by the way, my email is my last name at gmail.

    • Replies: ,
  131. Thank you for the comprehensive response, I sincerely enjoyed reading your view and your experience with trolls. I think we are both correct, it is just a matter of shade.

    • Replies:
  132. You’re welcome! :-)

    I never thought we were in substantial disagreement about any of this. I was just taking the opportunity to make a couple of points. My point is that people are naive in terms of how they react to the trolls. They get sucked into endless wastes of time providing links and so on, basically “debating” these people as if they were legitimate, good-faithed participants.

    I mean, once you pose a straight well-defined question and somebody refuses to answer it, that person is a troll and you can just decline to waste any more time. That Geokat62 troll came on with this stuff about how I (and everybody, I guess) should read the Senate committee report on blah blah, asking me whether I had read it. I later asked him what literature he had read about the 9/11 truth question, specifically whether he had read David Ray Griffin’s book, the New Pearl Harbor.

    And he refused to answer the question. That’s a troll. Or when you ask a question of somebody who is a defender of the official story like: “What, in your opinion, is the strongest evidence that Bin Laden orchestrated these attacks from Afghanistan?” and the person just won’t answer, that’s a troll.

    Oh, another funny thing that comes to mind… One of these trolls, a while back, when I stated the obvious, that the WTC towers were blown up with explosives, asked me to tell him what kind of explosives they were.

    Think about this. This is like having the Zapruder film of JFK being shot and somebody asking you what exact firearm and bullets were used, and since you say you don’t know, this must not be the video of a man being shot!

    And then, of course, classic troll behavior is that when you just point out the first order fallacy they are engaging in, they just walk away, never concede your point as a good faithed person would.

    But, anyway, there are people here, who, when the troll asks them what kind of explosives were used to blow the buildings, they get into all this hypertechnical stuff about nanothermite or whatever. WTF!!!??? You have a video of a building being blown up and you say this is the video of a building being a blown up. The guy says no it’s not, because you can’t tell me the exact kind of explosives used! And you’re going to get sucked into this???!!!

    Okay, tThere is a time and place to debate the exact technology used, assuming you are one of the people with specialized knowledge who can debate this, but that time and place is NOT with some anonymous troll on these pages! Surely you can see that, no!!??

    WTF is wrong with a community if, collectively, we cannot deal with this kind of lame crap? Again…. yes, the trolling is organized, but don’t give these arseholes too much credit. It is not that “advanced” or scientific”!

  133. Completely agree. My only point in reference to the “28 pages” was to illustrate that the public will never know the facts of the matter. The perps would never hand any dynamite to the morons in Congress or the executive. My objection to discussions of 911 is that, whatever happened, Iraq had nothing at all to do with it. They had already stated that they needed “another Pearl Harbor” to scare the cattle into a stampede: a train derailment in North Dakota would have been sufficient. 911 got boots on the ground in Afghanistan. In for a penny, in for a pound. They already had everything in place, including full access to all electronic communications in the US, it only took a few white lies about WMD’s to steer the stampede over the cliff. An absolutely brilliant scam, hats off to the same bastards, pulling the same stunts in Ukraine.

    My point on trolling is (weirdly) the same as the wiz’s: I don’t want to see this absolutely unique site trashed by evil geniuses (geni?) or mouth-breathers, who of course are going to go to any length to make it go away. One would have to visit twenty other sites daily to read these people. I’m actually glad that even the obvious trolls here seem to be of high quality and not just smearing feces ( but if they are the Hasbarat A-team, that makes them more dangerous). Stay sharp, this will never end.

  134. WoO is so predictable. Sassoon’s are “remarkable” and “great.” A more despicable family and the history of their ill-begotten wealth you would be hard pressed to find. He falls all over himself to let us know he was not really jewish (his mother was a gentile) and he converted to Catholicism. Sassoon’s religion/race (ample fodder for another long discussion, no doubt), was not even remotely relevant to the discussion at hand. Vintage hasbarist technique.

    Reminds me a lot of media coverage of George Soros. When his was breaking the Bank of England with his despicable trading practices, impoverishing 100 million overnight who used the British pound, he was “Hungarian.” When he is being feted as a great philanthropist, oh, he be “Jewish,” then, natch!

    • Replies:
  135. “Hardly a day ever passes without the western corporate media reporting that USN warships have entered the Black Sea, …” yada yada – yawn.

    Meanwhile, as these paltry, too little, too late and non-lethal NATO moves occur, the rest of the story grinds on, unacknowledged and unrepented by Russia and its apologists: three Ukrainian servicemen killed in action outside Donetsk, six killed in terrorist bombing, destruction of civilian spaces all over the Donbas by Russian proxy forces etc.

    “So are we to conclude that the Pentagon is preparing to attack Russia or to intervene militarily in the Ukraine?”

    Of course not, and this is a ludicrous straw man, but that has not prevented its use by the Kremlin regime over the years to keep its still sovietized people on edge and ready to believe any bellicose Moscow rhetoric. What NATO has been responding to are the pleas of fearful members for some demonstration of solidarity, and this is what these deployments are, not a “tripwire”. But deployments can and do provide a much needed morale booster to these frightened neighbors of the bear.

    “nobody in his right mind would seriously believe that Russia might attack any European country.”

    More specious argument: The questions to answer are: 1. Is Putin in his right mind? 2. Are Russians capable of discerning their own interests, as opposed to the interests of those who emerged from the sewers of the KGB, nomenklatura, and “Red director” ranks to dictate policy today? Even the supporters of the Moscow regime speak schizophrenically on this: Saker says “…the Russian military is simply not configured to execute such a mission [attack a European country] as it does not have the required power projection capability.” Which is about as cognitively dissonant as you can get from what he said just above: “everybody in the Ukraine (sic) fully understands that it would take the Russians no more than 24 hours to completely wipe out the entire Ukrainian military.” Speaking of saber rattling!

    “the EU and US politicians will try to terrify the Europeans with images of Russian hordes invading the Baltics, Poland or even Germany,…”

    As if the people of these countries need any reminder of the horrors of Tsarist/Bolshevik/Soviet depredations over the centuries. This fear is already in their bones and needs no EU or U.S. help to stir it up – Putin’s actions and rhetoric have fully served the purpose. And as if a full-scale invasion is the only form of aggression they have to fear, when Moscow has so many other forms to choose from: hybrid war, assassination, economic warfare, border incidents/encroachments, “right to protect” skullduggery involving the Russian fifth column populations lurking within so many bordering nations.

    “Having failed to re-ignite a Cold War II by means of a Russian “invasion” of the Donbass, the US now has fallen back on the option of acting as if such a military move did happen…”

    How can anybody take this crap seriously? After Sloviansk, Debaltseve, Donetsk Airport, Mariupol; the captured Russian passport-carrying fighters; to try to claim that because they didn’t cross the border in corps and army formation it is not an invasion isn’t flying. These are sound reasons to believe that more mischief is coming from Muscovy, and no bordering country can afford to ignore the threat.

    • Replies:
  136. Frankly I respect the countless Jews who have contributed to humanity. Norman Mailer, Stanley Elkin, Richard Feynman , Karl Popper, the numbers are too large to enumerate. But they have to own their evil men too. I have noticed the phenomena you allude for some decades now. When Jews do something good, its Sergei Brin or Albert Einstein. When they do bad, they are Alexandr Orlov or Harry Dexter White. When they are the bloodthirsty executioners- Kaganovitch, Trotsky or Yagoda or indeed Joshua in the OT, its because its a historical necessity, a battle for scarce resources, or in retaliation for earlier depredations, or they are on a mission from God. But when their enemies act in their turn, this can only be due to intrinsic antisemitsm, or jealousy or the evil nature of the Amelikites.

    In recent years we have seen yet another chapter of this chameleon like reading of history. When Uncle Joe fought the Nazis, he was a hero, no praise was too high to be heaped upon him. When he turned on the Jews in the so-called Doctor’s Plot, possibly on account of their machinations with the Americans to take Crimea, he suddenly became the most evil man in history that he had been all along. The rewriting is so complete, that there is no hint in the later books coming out of Jews who lived n the Soviet Union, that there ever was a time when the Jews had it equally or a lot better than the other nationalities in such eras as in 1917-28, or during the War period .

    It is a great mystery to such people why after having staffed and served as spies, executioners, the ablest propagandists and all round troublemakers during the time when the Russian Empire was tortured to near death, that they are unloved.

    • Replies:
  137. Well yes, I suppose I do mean that David Sassoon. I’m glad to think that Baghdadi/Bombay Jews might share the modern PC opprobrium for the opium trade with Scots (doesn’t look as though those English evangelicals who were hard on good honest slave traders – with no regard to flow on effects on the West African economies – and hopelessly dogooding on Australian Aboriginals got even a bit part).

    But envy and awe are my reason for “the great”. How I would have liked to have had 8 sons. Actually one of my great- grandfathers did though only three reached adulthood. It’s a Greg Clark point really.

    • Replies: ,
  138. Thanks for the info on the Sassoons. As noted elswhere I am glad the Scots don’t have to take all the blame for selling calming tonics to Chinese which the FDA doesn’t approve.

  139. Why do you say that “it happened when they needed it to happen”? As opposed to ? months or years earlier or ? months or years later???

    Presumably you would say that Clinton would have been too smart so it would have been too risky earlier???

    And presumably you wouldn’t suggest that attacking Afghanistan was a great neo-con or “Anglo-Zionist” project. So you have to be saying that the inherently ridiculous idea of the need to punish Iraq for the 9/11 attacks was going to be a sure fire winner for them. A bit of a stretch isn’t it. Are you saying that it was beyond them to cook up some more plausible reason for attacking Iraq?

    Also, why Iraq rather than other ME enemies?

    You would have to admit that putting together the apparently necessary “coalition of the willing” was also a chancy element in their planning. That Tony Blair was such a moralising idiot was sheer luck.

    • Replies:
  140. Interesting link but it reminds of my noticing a major reason for not trusting Time mag when I first read it many years ago (I think my father’s company subscribed). On any subject I knew a bit about it was bound to make mistakes.

    I don’t trust the linked piece quite apart from its obvious bias because it is plain wrong on some well known things e.g. the Boxer Rebellion; and loose on matters of dates such as the Sassoon-Rothschild marriage.

  141. I have chosen this occasion for reply and to discuss trolling and the health of a site like this because you have said that it was well known that the US government was planning to attack Afghanistan before 9/11. (C’mon do you think George Minimus could have found Afghanistan on a map?).

    I do not ask for proof of that but what are the sources you rely on for that. I do not recall hearing any such view expressed anywhere.

    As to trolling, it is never a bad idea to be sure that key words in any serious conversation have the same meaning for all participants.

    Urban dictionary definitions to do with being deliberately provocative or attempting to cause argument and disruption are not sufficient for the discussion you have raised, I think. You seem to be focused reasonably enough on participants who are not seeking in good faith to advance understanding and acceptance of relevant facts or to clarify a genuinely uncertain or ambiguous utterance but are intent above all, by whatever it takes, to disrupt a coherent argument whose implications don’t suit them, regardless of truth or falsehood, and to ensure that no one takes their opponents’ arguments and assertions of fact as true or convincing.

    I am not sure whether you have made your case that your nominated villains are trolls by that definition. However I do , in any case, want to proffer alternative explanations that you might consider.

    One is simply the possibility that someone is hoping to insinuate into the mind of the nominated opponent or of anyone else who might be a sympathiser questions which, if followed up intelligently, might lead to a change of view. Wouldn’t you like to have every young person with strong religious faith asked, repeatedly, “how do you know” until perhaps with some decent education to help them they had at least become a little less certain about some things which matter in the sense that they could be at the root of conflict.

    For my part I often pose questions or make points in the hope of filtering out the irredeemable ranters who are so uncouth, ignorant or stupid that you don’t want to waste time on them in future.

    As I find it extraordinary that people whose past provides proof of intelligence can believe any of the main dogma required of adherents to religions I am not willing to give up on people whose views on 9/11 (say) may seem baffling to me as long as they don’t start emulating the style of those firebugs on the Holy Inquisitions or their Muslim counterparts.

    • Replies: ,
  142. As I find it extraordinary that people whose past provides proof of intelligence can believe any of the main dogma required of adherents to religions I am not willing to give up on people whose views on 9/11 (say) may seem baffling to me as long as they don’t start emulating the style of those firebugs on the Holy Inquisitions or their Muslim counterparts.

    Couldn’t agree more!

  143. This is a great summary of Faux News news.

    • Replies:
  144. I am ashamed to say that I actually read that tripe. I bemoan the idea that those 45 seconds of utterly wasted time are gone for me, forever.

    • Replies:
  145. Hello Wiz

    Very apt post.

    You may have noticed, with some mirth one expects, the totally uncalled for detritus hurled at you in your early comments to @For(SAKER) (“tool of the neocons”, “trolling Hasbarist” etc…). I brushed off a certain amount of the rubbish rained in my direction by another fellow as well.

    Some readers may have paid attention to my exchange with the chap who wrote this piece, starting with (http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-meaning-of-the-us-saber-rattling-at-the-borders-of-russia/#comment-1016130)

    In that serve and my volley sequence, I objected to his ludicrous comparison of the USA to Greece, based no doubt, on his “understanding”- not uncommon among extreme libertarian liquidationists – of economics, such as it is.

    He proceeded to inform me of his “Deep knowledge” of finance, the implication being that I ought to exercise caution, when chatting with him. Naturally, with my interest peeked, and competitive juices flowing in anticipation of a productive discussion, I informed him that I knew a thing or two in finance as well, and challenged his prediction of an impending Hyperinflation in the US. Having then defined and illustrated the meaning of Hyperinflation, I offered the man a wager as is customary on the banks of the Thames and Cherwell. As I suspected, he very sensibly declined the offer despite his earlier claim of superior knowledge.

    In every instance when he missed what I actually wrote (sentence, chapter and verse, in a manner of speaking), he, rather than acknowledging his errors, proceeded to fling the tired sobriquet “Habarist” at me, enquiring how much I got paid etc., etc….

    I closed the discussion by wishing him well, fully convinced, that whatever subject or trade, his expertise may lie in, “deep knowledge” in economics, indeed elementary finance, was not it.

    On a broader observation of the present forum, which I find rather interesting in general, the constant and thoughtless use of “Hasbarist” etc by some, is actually detrimental to its ultimate success, I would hazard to opine. It would tend to cause the loss of curious and well-informed readership. I am utterly convinced that many writers here, who so obviously resent a contrary opinion, would abjectly flounder and fail, if placed in the view of a wider audience, which one supposes is the objective of the UR, in the first place.

    • Replies:
  146. says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Members of the Sassoon family were most vocal in protesting to British officials every attempt by the Chinese to stop the trade.” (Kathleen L. Lodwick, Crusaders against Opium: Protestant Missionaries in China, 1874-1917, Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1996, p 168)

    According to Roth, the most lucrative part of the trade from India to China and beyond and, later on, much of the direct trade from England to the Far East came into the hands of David Sassoon, Sons, and Company. Their Bombay base was perfectly suited to this. They had a practical monopoly on the importing of opium, fabrics, and cotton yam.” (Jonathan Goldstein, The Jews of China. Vol. 1: Historical and Comparative Perspectives, ME Sharpe, 1999, p 147)

    “This was harvest time for David Sassoon & Sons. The Yangtze mud glinted with gold as soon as they laid a brick in it.” “Their wharves and godowns were bursting with opium”. (Carl A. Trocki, Opium, Empire and the Global Political Economy: A Study of the Asian Opium Trade, Routledge, 1999, p 115) By means of “the opium trade which had ensnared millions of Chinese in a prison of poverty and addiction.” (Chrisopher Hale, Himmler’s Crusade: The Nazi Expedition to Find the Origins of the Aryan Race, John Wiley & Sons, 2003, p 47)

    And its still harvest time today!

    Daud Pasha’s most prominent victim was David Sassoon, who was arrested in 1828.” (Myer Samra, Migration Patterns of Iraqi Jews in M. Avrum Ehrlich, Editor, Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora – Origins, Experiences, and Culture, ABC-CLIO, 2008, p 355) It looks like Daud Pasha had something against drug traffickin

    http://globheu.blogspot.com/2006/09/ch-19-jrm-in-afghanistan.html

  147. You know Sam, you and WoO should just cease with these antics. Given that you two are most likely sitting in nearby cubicles, hammering out these missives, painfully at times it would seem (you misspelled “piqued,” as “peeked,” a common mistake as the word does not translate well from Yiddish), I would suggest you two just give up the ghost. At least change your pseudonym’s as you both are clearly in need of a “disinformation-bloggers mulligan.”

    • Replies:
  148. “peeked” vs “piqued”

    Ah you got me there! Typically never happens, as I tend to be rather careful about what I write, including correcting word spelling and completion by the damned american version of software! :-)

    The King’s English is rather rare in these parts, and certainly not detectable in your turn of phrase. More is the pity.

    I should point out, more substantively, you own mendacity, when in the course of a day, you go from:

    comment #78
    This phrase “hasbarist,” I must say, I had never heard of until today.

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-meaning-of-the-us-saber-rattling-at-the-borders-of-russia/#comment-1017100

    (which to be precise is neither a “phrase” nor a word in a standard dictionary)

    To:

    Comment #135
    ………Vintage hasbarist technique.

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-meaning-of-the-us-saber-rattling-at-the-borders-of-russia/#comment-1020246

    Apparently the” vintage” of your wine is measured in days.

    May one use the American “Gotcha!” on matter more apropos of my last comment?

    • Replies:
  149. I have chosen this occasion for reply and to discuss trolling and the health of a site like this because you have said that it was well known that the US government was planning to attack Afghanistan before 9/11.

    I don’t even understand the above sentence. You might as well say that “I have chosen this occasion to blah blah because you have said that the sun rises in the east.”

    A simple review of the timeline is enough really. The full-scale military campaign against Afghanistan began on 7 October, 2001. That is 26 days after the the attacks of 11 September, 2001. Now, maybe you think that the U.S. military can put in place a full scale theatre of war in Central Asia in that kind of time frame, without there having been any advance planning. But I do not think that is the view of experts on military affairs.

    (C’mon do you think George Minimus could have found Afghanistan on a map?)

    Well, if you think this rhetorical question has any relevance, it shows that you have no understanding whatsoever of real deep politics. On the other hand, I suspect you know that it is quite irrelevant, because Bush was just a puppet anyway. So in that case, it’s typical bad-faithed troll material. In short, I do not deign to answer such a stupid question.

    I do not ask for proof of that but what are the sources you rely on for that. I do not recall hearing any such view expressed anywhere.

    A quick google search reveals a variety of sources: BBC, Guardian, Janes Defense Weekly. The latter is one of the most prestigious sources of information on military affairs. Regardless, a simple glance black at the timeline should be enough — less than 4 weeks between 9/11 and the commencement of full military operations in Afghanistan. That the attack on Afghanistan was being planned prior to 9/11 is not open to much debate. Digging not very deep into the google results, you see pretty reliable sources pointing out that the U.S. had been soliciting the collaboration of other countries in the area to prepare for the attacks. Russia, India, Pakistan… I’m talking about consultations with other countries in the region regarding an attack on Afghanistan; all of these consultations were prior to 9/11.

    As to trolling, it is never a bad idea to be sure that key words in any serious conversation have the same meaning for all participants.

    I feel little onus to provide you, of all people, some airtight definition of what a troll is. I would just tell you to look in the mirror.

    For me, the most important characteristic of these trolls is that they they don’t engage in the discussion in good faith. I already outlined in various long comments here the typical behavior patterns — the way they are just constantly asking you to prove anything and everything, but if you turn it around and ask them to back up anything, they just walk away.

    On further reflection, you know, this is an example of something that happens in non-virtual space, the warning signs when you are interacting with people who are… assholes… bad news.

    Healthy relationships with other people are based on a healthy give and take. I buy you a beer, and later you buy me a beer. Maybe today you forgot your money at home and, okay, but next time, you’ll treat.

    Well, you know, sometimes we give people the benefit of the doubt for a while, but, you know, like if you find yourself treating somebody for, I dunno, say, the 237th time, and you can never recall that person ever buying you a drink… maybe there’s a problem here… a certain imbalance… If somebody always asks you for favors and you try to help them out, and then one day, you could use a bit of help, but they just make excuses….

    When you get into dialogues with trolls, it’s characterized by the lack of balance, give and take, that there would be between two good-faithed people who just have a legitimate difference of opinion.

    Regardless, in the non-virtual world, somebody who continually takes advantage, the person gets a reputation as a freeloader and is shunned and that’s how a community deals with that. You want to not waste time and resources with somebody who only wants to take advantage of you.

    By the same token, in an on-line discussion forum, once it becomes clear that certain people don’t engage in discussions in good faith, it makes perfect sense for the the legitimate participants to figure out how to avoid getting sucked into these time-sinks.

    In the early days of the internet, the acronym FAQ was invented. Frequently Asked Questions. A discussion forum devoted to some technical topic just continually gets taken over by newbies showing up and asking the same questions over again. So there should be a FAQ page and you can just point people to it.

    It seems to me that there is maybe a clear need for some sort of FTT page. Frequent Troll Tactics. You just have a list of the FTTs and the best practice for responding to their BS. So somebody starts with whatever typical crap and you just point him to the FTT page. And then you can provide the canned response and just say: “That’s FTT #47, so get lost, Troll.”

  150. Why do you say that “it happened when they needed it to happen”? As opposed to ? months or years earlier or ? months or years later???

    The people who wanted their splendid little war got what they wanted, didn’t they?

    I suppose you know that the day of 9/11, there were all kinds of drills and exercises going on. At least one, amazingly, was to simulate things that actually happened on that day! Hijacked planes. One of them crashing into a building…. simulations thereof, I mean…

    What’s your explanation for the conjunction of all these drills with the actual event? Just a coincidence? Have you thought about it?

    Also, why Iraq rather than other ME enemies?

    Why are you asking me this? Just to ask me something? They obviously did want to attack Iraq. How do I know that? Because they did attack Iraq. Why? I don’t know for sure. Ask them…

    Why don’t you answer this: what was/were the main faction(s) in U.S. politics that wanted the war with Iraq? Why?

  151. ** “you own mendacity” should read “your own mendacity”
    ***”on matter more apropos” should read “on a matter more apropos”

    Prophylactics to prevent further nit-pickery (I can invent my own words ok?)

  152. There’s a lot of meat in your short post there, Ivan. I like it.

    As a student of history, I aspire to acquire knowledge that would seem to be difficult to obtain/ purposely hidden. The Jewish origins of the Bolshevik Revolution, US/Israeli financing of “radical” Muslim fundamentalism , the true intentions of Rudolph Hess flight, 9/11 Truth, among many others.

    Which brings me to your passing comment on The Doctors Plot and The Crimea. That interests me, yet I know very little about it. I believe that the bereft nature of significant scholarship concerning Stalins’ fallout with the Jews would tend to tell me that there is inherent substance that many would prefer to pass unnoticed. Yet an issue that would/should warrant scrutiny commensurate with the significance of the event itself.

    Any books, articles or links that you may have to color my deficiencies in this area would be appreciated.

    Thanks.

    • Replies:
  153. Notice the language of the sacker: Comprador…. ” In Marxism, the term comprador bourgeoisie was later applied to similar trading-class in regions outside of East Asia.[4][5]

    With the emergence (or re-emergence) of globalization, the term comprador has reentered the lexicon to denote trading groups and classes in the developing world in subordinate but mutually advantageous relationships with metropolitan capital.”

    This is the lingo of a marxist, western-type. The saker loves MLK and the wretched darkies of the planet. He hates White Nationalism (and me).

    If you do not know where someone is coming from, you are vulnerable. That said, most of his article sounds about right, but only because anybody with a lick of sense can figure it out.

    The sacker, is like Shamir, with a heavy burden of hatred for capitalism and a simple hatred of Jews. ( My hatred of Jews is complex, not simple; that is a joke by the way, as a disclosure.)

    The sacker hates the jews not because they stole a country, which they did, but because the principle of zionism is bio-cultural, evolutionary, and Normal for The Human Condition. That is, Everybody should be Free to Squat anywhere they want, Everybody is Equal, Europe and Russia should open their gates for Chechens and one billion Africans, we should all love one-another, and Love The Poor, like in Camp of the Saints by Raspail, every European family should move in a Third World hominem family. Anyone who objects is a racist and should be killed for Humanity.

    In other words, the saker hates White Nationalism, the only thing that can save Europe and N. America.

    The editor should ask the sacker for a column on Trump…let him , the sacker, spritz his spit on Trump, like the jewyorktimes.

    Joe Webb

    • Replies:
  154. ( My hatred of Jews is complex, not simple; that is a joke by the way, as a disclosure.)

    Care to elaborate a bit? (I am intrigued)

  155. Since Churchill, Sassoons and Opium trade came together in discussion, it is worth remembering another defining aspect of the British-American collaboration in the struggle to control the “Heartland of the World Island” by the buccaneers of the “Insular Crescent”. One of the first stages was the opening up of China “for civilization”, through the Opium Wars and through fomenting the Taiping Rebellion by American Baptist missionaries – like Issachar Jacox Roberts (Chinese: 罗孝全 Luó Xiaò Quán), who remained the advisor of Hong Rengan, important leader of the Rebellion, cousin of the movement’s founder and spiritual leader Hong Xiuquan.

    “During the early 19th century, the Bengal-to-China opium trade became the world’s most valuable commodity line, accounting for 15-20 percent of the British Empire’s revenues… Most of the opium-laced wealth found its way into British hands, since the American traffickers had to buy the drug on consignment from Turkey or India. But the Americans who participated, including the Delanos and other New England families who were expert seafarers, made out like the real-life bandits that they were. FDR’s grandfather Warren Delano first sailed for China at age 24 and, after a decade dealing drugs on the Pearl River, returned with a fortune that made him a highly eligible bachelor among New York’s elite. In letters home, Delano admitted that opium had an “unhappy effect” on the cadaverous, zombielike addicts he encountered, but said of its sale that “as a merchant I insist it has been … fair, honorable and legitimate,” likening it to the importation of wine and spirits to America… Delano settled along New York’s Hudson River, where he invested his earnings in real estate and railroads and started a family. Remarkably, after losing most of his money in the cataclysmic Panic of 1857, Delano, at age 50, returned to China — leaving behind a wife who was pregnant with their ninth child — to try to recoup his fortune. And while the Civil War raged on at home, Delano did indeed rebuild his fortune, in part by supplying medical opium to the U.S. War Department for treating Union soldiers.” (Oh, “Of course, Delano’s Chinese escapades were not a great source of pride for his distinguished descendants. “In a family fond of retelling and embellishing even the mildest sort of ancestral adventures,” Roosevelt biographer Geoffrey C. Ward observes in Before the Trumpet, “no stories seem to have been handed down concerning Warren Delano’s genuinely adventurous career in the opium business.”)

    Not that the Delanos were an exception:

    “Many other affluent New England families made their fortunes from dealing opium as well. “The Cabot family of Boston endowed Harvard with opium money,” says Bradley, “while Yale’s famous Skull and Bones society was funded by the biggest American opium dealers of them all — the Russell family.” And add to that list John and Robert Forbes — of the Boston Forbeses, whose line includes current U.S. Secretary of State John Forbes Kerry.”
    @http://www.ozy.com/flashback/the-drug-that-bankrolled-some-of-americas-great-dynasties/40555

    • Replies: ,
  156. All of 45 seconds? Overstretched your attention span, no doubt, since you don’t lay a finger of one glove on my statements.

    • Replies:
  157. Should you take the time to offer some original substance, and not just resort to cutting and pasting WH/Pentagon morning-fax talking points, I would be happy to respond. I would like to think you could do better. And you will have to so as to elicit a response from this crowd.

    • Replies:
  158. cutting and pasting WH/Pentagon morning-fax talking points,

    As do you more or less, from Zerohedge.com, speaking of the Fed “printing left, right and center”, apparently in its effort to monetise debt and thereby, somehow, playing a part in enforcing $ hegemony”. When I pointed out that all other CBs did the same, you called that a non-sequitur. Amazing!

    (you really believe that you understand economics right?)

    • Replies:
  159. Post my whole passage next time, verbatim., including my “bombing” reference. The selective nature of your re-posting only a portion of my comments only further confirms your intentions here… yet again.

    • Replies:
  160. Oz, the best predictor of how many children a couple can have is the age at which they marry. With a girl of sixteen and a man of eighteen, they should be able to expect a minimum of four to five children.

    • Replies:
  161. Hi (for)SAKER, try these links

    http://fortruss.blogspot.sg/2015/03/how-stalin-played-americans-with.html

    http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/164673/crimea-as-jewish-homeland

    As is usual with information about a complex subject, it is best to read the alternate sources but with due skepticism.

    My beef with the stories around the Doctor’s Plot is the standard line that Stalin slipped into criminal lunacy, and started picking on the Soviet Jews for no reason other than to relaunch the Terror of the 1930s. If there is truth to the material above, he had pragmatic reasons to suspect the loyalty of at least some Jews. He was after all The Commissioner for the Nationalities at one time. Having said that I have sympathy for anyone caught in the web of intrigue that the monster weaves once he is set on murder. I have no love for Stalin and actually wish the (alleged) assassins well, but the record has to be kept straight.

    • Replies:
  162. Fantastic!
    Great information that just proves the old dictum, “At the base of every great fortune there is a great crime.” Actually, this is paraphrase of “The secret of a great fortune made without apparent cause is soon forgotten, if the crime is committed in a respectable way” (Balzac).

  163. I am doubtful about that “15-20 per cent of British Empire revenues” partly because a Latin American economic historian once surprised me with data about 1830s Britain’s economy which I don’t remember as compatible but also because I don’t really understand what you mean by British Empire revenues. I suppose you don’t mean revenues with the most common meaning of state tax revenue – perhaps something like GDP? I suuppose those figures leave plenty of space for slave grown cotton and the coal and textiles that chold labour was still contributing to. What sources do you commend?

  164. I’m not 100 per cent sure what you are responding to but you raise a very important matter By contrast with the likely lifetime fertility of the 18 and 16 year old couple the late child bearing of educated professional women can properly be regarded as dysgenic for two reasons. The children of the young couple will themselves be ready to have children not long after the older professional couple have their first child. And of course the older couple are likely to have fewr children even if there is no physical reason for them not to have many.

  165. The following is what you wrote to me in comment #105 , http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-meaning-of-the-us-saber-rattling-at-the-borders-of-russia/#comment-1018411

    So your position is that the FED, who is printing left, right and center – who wholly rely on worldwide dupes to support the US$ (with a gun pointed at their collective heads), so as to allow their continued monetization, actually would prefer other countries to use alternative currencies for settlement, which of course would bring their machinations (and the American Empire) to a screeching halt.

    That’s funny Sam. Your spelling and grammar are impeccable, Sam. Too bad MSFT has not invented a “coherency check,” as they have with spelling and grammar! It might have flagged that whopper!

    So shall we dissect that passage? Your contentions are, that the Fed:

    (1) is “printing left, right and center”
    (2) relies on “worldwide dupes to support the US$ (with a gun pointed at their collective heads”)
    (3) with the sole aid of this metaphorical “gun” has continued monetisation
    (4) How could this same, devious organisation (packed with JEWS(!!!), shall we add for good measure?), possibly, consider it useful, the existence of other media or reserves of exchange?? For if they did so, “their machinations and the American Empire)……screeching halt”

    Let’s take a few numbers to put things in perspective, and start by asking a rather naive yet useful question (its not exactly correct, but has the effect of driving a key insight). The U.S. economy in nominal terms, generates an income (which is a ONE year flow) of $17.7 trillion and rising. Again, that is what it produces in 1 year! Compare that, against its Central Bank growing it balance sheet to $4.5 trillion, and ask the question “What is the Fed trying to do?” . What it is trying to do is purchasing longer dated bonds (5 yr, 10 yr+), by selling/exchanging short dated T-bills (or something similar, call it cash). That process tends to drive down yields of longer dated bonds, thus incentivising investors to move money to good projects, that would presumably drive up employment and the economy! Also the Fed’s purchases of longer term bonds provides it with a flow of interest from the U.S. treasury, which actually it promptly returns to the Treasury! (this is called pure seignorage, and therefore reduces the burden of the U.S. Treasury!). By the way, all holders of U.S. bonds (including China of course), have been making a nice pile of money as the yields have been driven down (value of existing bonds driven up).

    All other Central banks had been doing the same, as I explained in comment #108, for very similar reasons. My point was that given that all CBs were doing the same, and even if one believed (mistakenly) that the Fed’s actions were “debasing” the dollar, the concurrent actions of all the other major CBs would render the Fed’s actions, relatively speaking, neutral.

    (2) and (3) are basically therefore, assertions without merit. There are no worldwide “dupes”, especially in the international bond and currency markets, somehow deceived by the Fed. People who have been crying “debasement! debasement, I say!” are hopping mad (especially some hedge funds), are the ones that actually lost a great deal of money, after they shorted US bonds, based on, (what’s the word I am searching for?) fuck*ed-up economic analysis from the likes of Zerohedge.com. Period! The only “gun” that might be pointed at our collective heads, is if a premature currency is forced as Reserve, which then fails the world due to capital controls.

    (4) Is sort of tied to a post hoc, ergo propter hoc argument? (because the USD has gained strength against many others, it must therefore be the shenanigans of the Fed, and the “gun” which preceded it that caused it!) Superficially, it might appear counter-intuitive, if one believed this line of argument. I will say without reservation (as I have in comment #105 and #108), that the Fed-Treasury complex do act to protect the value of the currency, especially its premier status against competition. Why should it not? Its in the very basic interests of the U.S.A! The U.S. dollar is the premier reserve currency, not so much because of the Fed’s actions (since we saw that such actions were largely neutralised), but because of the asset base and economic performance of the U.S. So, the Fed does want other strong reserve currencies because it will make its own work a great deal smoother. Literally the benefit of a distributed shock-absorbing system during episodes of global economic stress . (In fact the Fed has said, that something such as Bitcoin, might actually serve an important function. Google Ben Bernanke and Bitcoin)

    Some related points to note: The World markets are truly enormous, no government including the U.S can somehow manipulate the value of the dollar against key goods, like technology, hydrocarbons and key commodities. What we have seen is the very opposite: the value of crude oil and other commodities have fallen rather spectacularly against the dollar (No, the U.S. and Saudi did not engineer it, but worldwide inventories and demand fall is the reason)

    Lastly, I wish to make something very clear. I am not interested in “manufacturing consensus”. I suffer a visceral reaction from conjectures/assertions on matters economic, such as incendiary claims of impending hyperinflation and U.S. default. Those things will happen, to borrow your own metaphor, when a “snowflake does not melt in Hell”!

    {
    /begin (rant)
    Other than that, I typically comment on matters I have some knowledge on. I am curious, and am in the process of forming an understanding, as to why people immediately label others “Hasbara”, when a well-expressed contrary opinion is presented. Its highly correlated with their held level of anti-semitic sentiment. This I fear, is actually inescapable, a feature of our history, indeed the human condition of the past 2015 years. For this reason, I speculate with some evidence, that those Jews who somehow feel that they are going to be spared possible future atrocities, due to their vociferous secularity and outrage, will at least be disappointed, but more likely a head shorter. The angry masses do not differentiate.
    /end(rant)
    }

    P.S. : I feel that your knowledge and understanding of defence, security and geo-strategic matters are superb, and I learned a great deal reading today’s article.

  166. Yes, that is excellent material. Thanks, Ivan.

    Assuming Jewish complicity in the death of Stalin (like Ivan, I shall shed no tears, regardless of who was complicit), you might think he would learned via recent history the perils of obstructing Zionist machinations regarding The Jewish State. To wit:

    Turkish rebuff of Herzl. According to Theodore Herzl’s Diary, in 1896, he (unsuccessfully) worked over Turkish Sultan Abdul Hamid II, to convince him to grant a Zionist homeland in Palestine, offering firstly to pay off Turkish debts, and secondly threatening him with a coup, by reaching out to The Young Turks. Coincidentally, that is exactly what eventually happened, after The Sultan rebuffed his overtures.

    British Cold Feet. Overzealously in need of Jewish support, the Brits offer up The Balfour Declaration. “Betraying” the Zionists, by actually trying to respect the Arab position (2 state solution) they too experience Zionist wrath (King David Hotel bombing, Lord Moyne assassination). UN mediator Folke Bernadotte assassinated as well, though he was a Swede.

    US misgivings. Harry Truman and James Forrestal (US Secretary of Defense) both were early supporters of a 2-state solution (Sam and others present, would refer to such people as “anti-Semites”, but I digress). After initially giving Forrestal the “Ezra Pound Treatment,” someone shoved him out a window to his death. Truman suspiciously turned fervently Zionist shortly after narrowly missing opening a letter bomb addressed to him, complements of the Stern Gang (Margaret Truman Daniels biography on her father, as well as a 1949 book by Ira R.T. Smith, a WH staff mail reader, circa 1949).

    “Bad luck” would seem to befall Zionist State opponents. Poor Uncle Joe.

    • Replies: ,
  167. (Sam and others present, would refer to such people as “anti-Semites”, but I digress). After initially giving Forrestal the “Ezra Pound Treatment,” someone shoved him out a window to his death. Truman suspiciously turned fervently Zionist shortly after narrowly missing opening a letter bomb addressed to him, complements of the Stern Gang (Margaret Truman Daniels biography on her father, as well as a 1949 book by Ira R.T. Smith, a WH staff mail reader, circa 1949).

    Blimey. I feel as if I am a member of the Gang, driven by the Hive mind. I don’t default to the “anti-semitic” accusation actually. I have never felt it to any appreciable extent in this country or the UK (This webzine, well!!!……and Europe are different stories). I am not an expert in the history of Truman’s support of Jewry, recalling only that he was influenced by an old Jewish haberdasher friend of his, who pleaded with him on behalf of the escaping Jews. (I could be wrong)

  168. says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    There has never been more evil people as the English nation if they are judged by what they did to others and are doing to others now. Both workd wars were strated and plotted by the English to destroy both Germany and Rusdia. Thrid world war under way has been started by the English parasites.

    • Replies:
  169. I agree.

    How many nations have fought wars to force a country into accepting the importation of narcotics like Britain did in the Opium Wars against China?

    How many nations interned women and children in concentration camps in order to seize gold and diamond fields like the British did against the Boers?

    And don’t forget about the incineration of entire cities via the area bombing policy adopted by the British during the Second World War. Historian F.P. Veale deemed it the most barbarous method of warfare since the Mongolian invasions.

    And what about the U.S. being the first to use atomic weapons – against civilian targets – merely to intimidate Josef Stalin?

    • Replies:
  170. I did not know who Secretary Forrestal was until I read the articles by David Martin

    http://ariwatch.com/VS/JamesForrestal/WhoKilledJamesForrestal.htm

    Now I cannot shake off the suspicion that anyone who ran afoul of Zionists schemes might end
    up either very sick or very dead. This goes for tough guys such as General Patton too.

    • Replies:
  171. Agreed, yes, I always wondered about Patton. He certainly escalated his stridency toward them (his diaries) in November of 1945. He died a month later. He sensed something was amiss with US irrational acquiescence to Uncle Joe.. And paid the ultimate price, in the end.

    There are others, too, of course.

    Israeli support for the OAS in their battle with de Gaulle (according to “Target de Gaulle,” by Demaret, he was on the receiving end of 31 assassination attempts).

    Swedish leaders are especially unlucky. Folke Bernadotte, I have mentioned. Olaf Palme (PM) and Anna Lindh (politician) were both outspoken critics of Israel and died mysterious deaths.

    JFK threatened Ben-Gurion (May 18th, 1963, Avner Cohen, “Israel and the Bomb”) with total isolation (end of US aid) if Israel did not allow Dimona inspections by the US. Ben-Gurion abruptly resigned a couple weeks later, Kennedy had his own bad day a few months later. And as luck would have it, LBJ was conveniently pro-Israel with regards to their nuclear policy. Rest is history.

    • Replies:
  172. I have some doubts about the Kennedy assassination like everyone else, I tend to think that it was the Mafia or corporate interests. My proximate angle is why Jake Ruby was all teared up at Kennedy’s death. On the face of it, it makes little sense that Jacob Rubenstein growing up the wrong side of Chicago, a hoodlum and pimp, would be totally distraught when Kennedy died. The famous son of Joseph Kennedy, who in Jewish-American hagiography is an antisemite right up there with Henry Ford and Charles Lindburgh, and a Catholic to boot, should not in the nature things have elicited much sympathy from the type of people with Ruby’s background.

  173. I think that all 3 recent coups in our history (JFK, Nixon and 9/11) most likely included all the usual suspects, including the CIA, corporate interests (oil, military-industrial complex), and quite possibly Jewish interests as well. All these groups stood to benefit by way of these coups. And certainly the Mafia with JFK.

    I always found it interesting how The Puppetmasters made it look like Oswald had these communist connections, trying to pin the rap on a Leftist Plot. If you are familiar with Operation Gladio, in Europe, it looks as if they attempted those same techniques (framing the Left for right-wing terrorist attacks) back here as well. Same thing with Nixon. Our Puppetmasters would have us believe it was Leftist hatred combined with Constitutional checks and balances that brought him down. I figure it was his hatred for the CIA, pulling out of Vietnam, detente with the Soviets, and recognition of Red China. He was the most leftist president since FDR (domestic policy too, for that matter). Could see why they wanted him out. Of course they continue with the narrative to this day, that he was Republican, conservative, staunch anti-communist, to keep us off their trail that they wanted this Leftist out of office, blaming the Left for his ouster. Classic Gladio operation. Mission accomplished, once again.

    • Replies:
  174. Whatever RM Nixon’s crimes were, and there would have been many considering that he was born poor and had to rise up bare-knuckled through the American political system, the rap sheet against him as to his crimes against the Constitution is laughable. He didn’t do anything that FDR did not do. Didn’t have a fawning press to cover up misdemeanors , like JFK’s supercharged sex drive. Instead the press hated him with a vitriol that bears no relation to his actual misdeeds. (But I suppose the Communists and their fellow-travelers in the press, never forgave or forgot his work in the HUAC.) Unlike Obama with his Guns for Mexican Drug Lords he didn’t pretend to be doing good while getting people killed. They didn’t like him since he was not one of them. The class system is alive and well in the US in another form.

  175. How many nations interned women and children in concentration camps in order to seize gold and diamond fields like the British did against the Boers?

    And don’t forget about the incineration of entire cities via the area bombing policy adopted by the British during the Second World War. Historian F.P. Veale deemed it the most barbarous method of warfare since the Mongolian invasions.

    Please don’t forget on whose behalf all this evil was/is being done. The war on the Boers was not perpetrated on behalf of the British people or even for the crown, but rather on behalf of the De Beers and the Oppenheimers.

    The British people are watching their ancient country come to ruin right in front of their eyes. As the British elites run pedophile rings and import Muslims to make life a living hell for the middle and working class Brits.

    It would be hard to imagine a more rotten and sinister cabal of scoundrels and demons than the British elite. Like the Russians of the last century, like the Americans today, it isn’t the British people who are and have been perpetrating atrocities the world over, it is that festering rot of satanic money worshipers and their eager British lickspittles like Tony Blair or David Cameron who wouldn’t think twice about handing over England to the devil himself it they thought they could benefit personally. In fact as far as I can tell, that is exactly what they have done. Going back to Churchill and even all the way back to Cromwell, who let them back in.

    • Replies:
  176. I agree with you totally. The “Merry Old England” of Shakespeare and Chaucer and Bede has nothing to do with this. This is the work of international Jewry and its masonic low church Protestantism.

    • Replies:
  177. The “Merry Old England” started to die with the Reformation, when the all symbols of it were systematically destroyed by the crazed crowned wife killer: dissolution of the monasteries and the plunder of their wealth for the benefit of the new “aristocracy”, profanation and destruction of the tomb of King Arthur at Glastonbury Abbey, the spiritual center of the Merry Old England, destruction of the images, covering the colorful and lively life of the Merry with the morose cloak of the deadly Protestant stale ‘piety’ and the fanciful mythology of ‘British Israel’. England suffered a tremendous spiritual and psychological shock from which it did not recover. Would it ever?

    • Replies:
  178. Well stated, Seraphim. You recommend a book or two (or author) along those lines?

    Thanks

    • Replies: