Discussion:
hitler, sorry shorty, invades another country to 'protect' germans...
(too old to reply)
abelard
2014-03-01 14:20:30 UTC
Permalink
no sorry, russians...

obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Snow_Flower
2014-03-01 14:58:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
yttiw
2014-03-01 15:09:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
Yes well, the US and their fawning supporters have the monopoly on hypocrisy.

The global policeman, don't forget - and we all know how honest and
virtuous all policemen are? Don't we?
abelard
2014-03-01 15:21:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by yttiw
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
Yes well, the US and their fawning supporters have the monopoly on hypocrisy.
The global policeman, don't forget - and we all know how honest and
virtuous all policemen are? Don't we?
unfortunately as long as there are irresponsible fools like you
around, a police force will be essential
even normal human dishonest sinful policemen are better that
letting you run wild and free...
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
abelard
2014-03-01 15:18:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
full dress dissent

ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...

afghanistan was anarchy and harbouring nuisances....
irak was ruled by a murderous socialist dictator...
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/just_war.htm

putin is a weakling who wants to play at being a great power...
america keeps international peace and works to spread freedom...
all shorty does is get underfoot...


putin regards the fall of the murderous russian socialist empire
as a great disaster...

'Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet
Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century.'
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Beli
2014-03-01 15:36:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
afghanistan was anarchy and harbouring nuisances....
irak was ruled by a murderous socialist dictator...
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/just_war.htm
putin is a weakling who wants to play at being a great power...
america keeps international peace and works to spread freedom...
all shorty does is get underfoot...
putin regards the fall of the murderous russian socialist empire
as a great disaster...
'Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet
Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century.'
Obama likes to support Al-Qaeda and neonazi's. And abelard seems to
have sympathies in that direction as well. Boosts the military
industry. 'Sieg Heil' as they said in Nazi-Germany.
And it comes in handy to Fuck the EU as well. Costs a few billions, but
then you've got your nice chaos.
abelard
2014-03-01 15:40:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beli
Post by abelard
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
afghanistan was anarchy and harbouring nuisances....
irak was ruled by a murderous socialist dictator...
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/just_war.htm
putin is a weakling who wants to play at being a great power...
america keeps international peace and works to spread freedom...
all shorty does is get underfoot...
putin regards the fall of the murderous russian socialist empire
as a great disaster...
'Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet
Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century.'
Obama likes to support Al-Qaeda and neonazi's
what is a neo-national socialist? all socialists are crazy/stupid...

even crazier than islamists...
Post by Beli
. And abelard seems to
why not try speaking for yourself...
Post by Beli
have sympathies in that direction as well. Boosts the military
industry. 'Sieg Heil' as they said in Nazi-Germany.
And it comes in handy to Fuck the EU as well. Costs a few billions, but
then you've got your nice chaos.
socialism always causes chaos...

you're babbling...i see you have yet another nym
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Topaz
2014-03-01 16:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Joe gets up at 6:00 AM to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot
full of good clean drinking water because some socialist fought for
minimum water quality standards.

He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His
medications are safe to take because some socialist fought to insure
their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers
medical plan because some socialists fought their employers for paid
medical insurance, now Joe gets it too.

He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe's
bacon is safe to eat because some socialist fought for laws to
regulate the meat packing industry.

Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is
properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents
because some socialist fought for his right to know what he was
putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he
breathes is clean because some tree-hugging socialist fought for laws
to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to
work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation
fees. You see, some socialist fought for affordable public
transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a
contributor.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay,
medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some
socialists fought for these working standards.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he'll get a worker
compensation or unemployment check because some socialist didn't think
he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below
market federal student loan because some socialist decided that Joe
and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned
more money over his life-time.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at
his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to
dad's; his car is among the safest in the world because some socialist
fought for car safety standards.

He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in
the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers
didn't want to make rural loans.

The house didn't have electricity until some big government socialist
demanded rural electrification.

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social
Security because some socialist made sure he could take care of
himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home. He
turns on a radio talk show. The host keeps saying that liberals are
for affirmative action and conservatives are also worthless because
they think socialism is the problem.

Joe agrees. "We don't need those anti-White liberals ruining our
neighborhoods, and we don't need those conservatives who only care
about the capitalist billionaires either.

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

The most annoying thing about the USA is affirmative action. This
means that women and Black people get the jobs and scholarships even
if the White man is more qualified. America is founded on the idea
that the White man is to blame for everything bad. And every time
women or Black people get to be president or whatever it's called a
great achievement. This is known as political correctness or PC for
short.

The problem with the schools is that they are PC. But the Jews and
their minions cleverly twist it so that "Socialism" is the problem and
not PC. Communism may of course be trash but so is Capitalism. Here is
a quote from Mein Kampf:

"the Jew seized upon the manifold possibilities which the
situation offered him for the future. While on the one hand he
organized capitalistic methods of exploitation to their ultimate
degree of efficiency, he curried favour with the victims of his policy
and his power and in a short while became the leader of their struggle
against himself. 'Against himself' is here only a figurative way of
speaking; for this 'Great Master of Lies' knows how to appear in the
guise of the innocent and throw the guilt on others. Since he had the
impudence to take a personal lead among the masses, they never for a
moment suspected that they were falling prey to one of the most
infamous deceits ever practiced. And yet that is what it actually
was."



http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
abelard
2014-03-01 16:50:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
Joe gets up at 6:00 AM to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot
full of good clean drinking water because some socialist fought for
minimum water quality standards.
and all you loons crawl out of the woodwork...

rest binned unread
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Topaz
2014-03-02 15:49:27 UTC
Permalink
Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:

"The urgent alarm sounded in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke in his letter
to Mr. Balfour (see page 25), denouncing bolshevism as a Jewish plan,
which if not checked by the combined action of the European powers,
would engulf Europe and the world, was no exaggeration. By the end of
that year the red flag was being hoisted in most of the great cities
of Europe. In Hungary the Jew Bela Kuhn organized and maintained for
some time a merciless and bloody tyranny similar to the one in Russia.
In Germany the Jews, Liebknecht, Barth, Scheidemann, Rosa Luxemburg,
etc., made a desperate bid for power. These and other similar
convulsions shook Europe; but each country in its own way just
frustated the onslaughts.

In most countries concerned a few voices were raised in the
endeavour to expose the true nature of these evils. Only in one,
however, did a political leader and group arise, who grasped to the
full the significance of these happenings, and perceived behind the
mobs of native hooligans the organisation and driving power of world
Jewry. This leader was Adolf Hitler, and his group the National
Socialist Party of Germany.

Never before in history had any country not only repulsed organized
revolution, but discerned Jewry behind it, and faced up to that fact.
We need not wonder that the sewers of Jewish vituperation were flooded
over these men and their leader; nor should we make the mistake of
supposing that Jewry would stick at any lie to deter honest men
everywhere from making a thorough investigation of the facts for
themselves. Nevertheless, if any value liberty, and set out to seek
truth and defend it, this duty of personal investigation is one which
they cannot shirk.

To accept unquestioningly the lies and misrepresentaions of a
Jew-controlled or influenced press, is to spurn truth by sheer
idleness, if for no worse reason."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
abelard
2014-03-02 17:40:18 UTC
Permalink
rest of your tripe binned unread...as usual
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Anti-Abelard Machine
2014-03-02 18:26:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
rest of your tripe binned unread...as usual
You globalist retards are going to get your arses well and truly
roasted if you so much as DARE to wave your flabby yankee dicks at
Russia over this.

Even the illegitimate Ukrainian "government"'s recently appointed
stooges want nothing to do with them.

New head of Ukraine's navy 'defects' in Crimea

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26410431

Bwaaahaaaahaaaaaaarrrrrghhhhh!!!!!!!!!!
Topaz
2014-03-03 17:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Germany's Declaration of War Against the United States
Here are some quotes from:
Hitler's Reichstag Speech of December 11, 1941
In it the German leader recounted the reasons for the outbreak of war
in September 1939, explained why he decided to strike against the
Soviet Union in June 1941, reviewed the dramatic course of the war
thus far, and dealt at length with President Franklin Roosevelt's
hostile policies toward Germany. Hitler detailed the increasingly
belligerent actions of Roosevelt's government, and then dramatically
announced that Germany was now joining Japan in war against the United
States. The day after it was delivered, an inaccurate and misleading
translation of portions of the address appeared in The New York Times!
Although this historic address should be of particular interest to
Americans, a complete text has apparently never before been made
available in English!
-- Mark Weber

After the repeated rejection of my peace proposal in 1940 by the
British prime minister [Winston Churchill] and the clique that
supports and controls him, it was clear by the fall of that year that
this war would have to be fought through to the end
The German people and its soldiers work and fight today not only for
themselves and their own age, but also for many generations to come. A
historical task of unique dimensions has been entrusted to us by the
Creator that we are now obliged to carry out.
The western armistice which was possible shortly after the conclusion
of the conflict in Norway [in June 1940] compelled the German
leadership, first of all, to militarily secure the most important
political, strategic and economic areas that had been won.
From Kirkenes [in northern Norway] to the Spanish frontier stretches
the most extensive belt of great defense installations and fortresses.
Countless air fields have been built, including some in the far north
that were blasted out of granite.
I am determined to make this European front impregnable against any
enemy attack.
Compelled by bitter necessity, I decided in the fall of 1939 to at
least try to create the prerequisite conditions for a general peace by
eliminating the acute tension between Germany and Soviet Russia [with
the German-Soviet non-aggression pact of August 23, 1939]. This was
psychologically difficult because of the basic attitude toward
Bolshevism of the German people and, above all, of the [National
Socialist] Party.
I may remind you, deputies and men of the German Reichstag, that
throughout the spring and summer of 1939 Britain offered military
alliances to a number of countries, claiming that Germany intended to
invade them and rob them of their freedom. However, the German Reich
and its government could assure them with a clear conscience that
these insinuations did not correspond to the truth in any way.
the best and strongest guarantee against the [Soviet] threat from the
East was Germany. When those countries, on their own initiative, cut
their ties with the German Reich and instead put their trust in
promises of aid from a power [Britain] that, in its proverbial
egotism, has for centuries never given help but has always demanded
it, they were thereby lost. Even so, the fate of these countries
aroused the strongest sympathy of the German people. The winter war of
the Finns [against the Soviet Union, 1939-1940] aroused in us a
feeling of admiration mixed with bitterness: admiration because, as a
soldierly nation, we have a sympathetic heart for heroism and
sacrifice, and bitterness because our concern for the enemy threat in
the West and the danger in the East meant that we were no position to
help.
Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that
the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and
thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation
of the build-up of Soviet Russian military power in the East during a
period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces
bordering Soviet Russia. Only a blind person could fail to see that a
military build-up of unique world-historical dimensions was being
carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was
being threatened, but rather only to attack that which seemed
incapable of defense.
What we call Europe is the geographic territory of the Occident,
enlightened by Greek culture, inspired by the powerful heritage of the
Roman empire, its territory enlarged by Germanic colonization. Whether
it was the German emperors fighting back invasions from the East on
the Unstrut [river, in 933] or on the Lechfeld [plain, in 955], or
others pushing back Africa from Spain over a period of many years, it
was always a struggle of a developing Europe against a profoundly
alien outside world.
Just as Rome once made her immortal contribution to the building and
defense of the continent, so now have the Germanic peoples taken up
the defense and protection of a family of nations which, although they
may differ and diverge in their political structure and goals,
nevertheless together constitute a racially and culturally unified and
complementary whole.
And from this Europe there have not only been settlements in other
parts of the world, but intellectual-spiritual [geistig] and cultural
fertilization as well, a fact that anyone realizes who is willing to
acknowledge the truth rather than deny it. Thus, it was not England
that cultivated the continent, but rather Anglo-Saxon and Norman
branches of the Germanic nation that moved from our continent to the
[British] island and made possible her development, which is certainly
unique in history. In the same way, it was not America that discovered
Europe, but the other way around. And all that which America did not
get from Europe may seem worthy of admiration to a Jewified mixed
race, but Europe regards that merely as symptomatic of decay in
artistic and cultural life, the product of Jewish or Negroid blood
mixture.
I have to make these remarks because this struggle, which became
obviously unavoidable in the early months of this year, and which the
German Reich, above all, is called upon this time to lead, also
greatly transcends the interests of our own people and nation. When
the Greeks once stood against the Persians, they defended more than
just Greece. When the Romans stood against the Carthaginians, they
defended more than just Rome. When the Roman and Germanic peoples
stood together against the Huns, they defended more than just the
West. When German emperors stood against the Mongols, they defended
more than just Germany. And when Spanish heroes stood against Africa,
they defended not just Spain, but all of Europe as well. In the same
way, Germany does not fight today just for itself, but for our entire
continent.
And it is an auspicious sign that this realization is today so deeply
rooted in the subconscious of most European nations that they
participate in this struggle, either with open expressions of support
or with streams of volunteers.
When I became aware of the possibility of a threat to the east of the
Reich in 1940 through [secret] reports from the British House of
Commons and by observations of Soviet Russian troop movements on our
frontiers, I immediately ordered the formation of many new armored,
motorized and infantry divisions.
We realized very clearly that under no circumstances could we allow
the enemy the opportunity to strike first into our heart.
Nevertheless, in this case the decision [to attack Soviet Russia] was
a very difficult one. When the writers for the democratic newspapers
now declare that I would have thought twice before attacking if I had
known the strength of the Bolshevik adversaries, they show that they
do not understand either the situation or me.
I have not sought war. To the contrary, I have done everything to
avoid conflict. But I would forget my duty and my conscience if I were
to do nothing in spite of the realization that a conflict had become
unavoidable. Because I regarded Soviet Russia as the gravest danger
not only for the German Reich but for all of Europe, I decided, if
possible, to give the order myself to attack a few days before the
outbreak of this conflict.
A truly impressive amount of authentic material is now available which
confirms that a Soviet Russian attack was intended. We are also sure
about when this attack was to take place. In view of this danger, the
extent of which we are perhaps only now truly aware, I can only thank
the Lord God that He enlightened me in time, and has given me the
strength to do what must be done. Millions of German soldiers may
thank Him for their lives, and all of Europe for its existence.
I may say this today: If this wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds
of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more
than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion
against the Reich, Europe would have been lost.
If the Slovaks, Hungarians and Romanians had not also acted to defend
this European world, then the Bolshevik hordes would have poured over
the Danube countries as did once the swarms of Attila's Huns,
If Italy, Spain and Croatia had not sent their divisions, then a
European defense front would not have arisen that proclaims the
concept of a new Europe and thereby powerfully inspires all other
nations as well. Because of this awareness of danger, volunteers have
come from northern and western Europe: Norwegians, Danes, Dutch,
Flemish, Belgians and even French. They have all given the struggle of
the allied forces of the Axis the character of a European crusade, in
the truest sense of the word.
And now let me speak about another world, one that is represented by a
man [President Franklin Roosevelt] who likes to chat nicely at the
fireside while nations and their soldiers fight in snow and ice: above
all, the man who is primarily responsible for this war.
When the nationality problem in the former Polish state was growing
ever more intolerable in 1939, I attempted to eliminate the
unendurable conditions by means of a just agreement. For a certain
time it seemed as if the Polish government was seriously considering
giving its approval to a reasonable solution. I may also add here that
in all of these German proposals, nothing was demanded that had not
previously belonged to Germany. In fact, we were willing to give up
much that had belonged to Germany before the [First] World War.
You will recall the dramatic events of that period -- the steadily
increasing numbers of victims among the ethnic Germans [in Poland].
You, my deputies, are best qualified to compare this loss of life with
that of the present war. The military campaign in the East has so far
cost the entire German armed forces about 160,000 deaths, whereas
during just a few months of peace [in 1939] more than 62,000 ethnic
Germans were killed, including some who were horribly tortured. There
is no question that the German Reich had the right to protest against
this situation on its border and to press for its elimination, if for
no other reason than for its own security, particularly since we live
in an age in which [some] other countries [notably, the USA and
Britain] regard their security at stake even in foreign continents. In
geographical terms, the problems to be resolved were not very
important. Essentially they involved Danzig [Gdansk] and a connecting
link between the torn-away province of East Prussia and the rest of
the Reich. Of much greater concern were the brutal persecutions of the
Germans in Poland. In addition, the other minority population groups
[notably the Ukrainians] were subject to a fate that was no less
severe.
During those days in August [1939], when the Polish attitude steadily
hardened, thanks to Britain's blank check of unlimited backing, the
German Reich was moved to make one final proposal. We were prepared to
enter into negotiations with Poland on the basis of this proposal, and
we verbally informed the British ambassador of the proposal text.
Proposal for a settlement of the Danzig-Corridor problem and the
German-Polish minority question:
The situation between the German Reich and Poland is now such that any
further incident could lead to action by the military forces that have
taken position on both sides of the frontier. Any peaceful solution
must be such that the basic causes of this situation are eliminated so
that they are not simply repeated, which would mean that not only
eastern Europe but other areas as well would be subject to the same
tension. The causes of this situation are rooted in, first, the
intolerable border that was specified by the dictated peace of
Versailles [of 1919], and, second, the intolerable treatment of the
minority populations in the lost territories.
In making these proposals, the German Reich government is motivated by
the desire to achieve a permanent solution that will put an end to the
intolerable situation arising from the present border demarcation,
secure to both parties vitally important connecting routes, and which
will solve the minority problem, insofar as that is possible, and if
not, will at least insure a tolerable life for the minority
populations with secure guarantees of their rights.
On the basis of these considerations, we make the following concrete
proposals:
1. The Free City of Danzig returns immediately to the German Reich on
the basis of its purely German character and the unanimous desire of
its population.
2. The territory of the so-called [Polish] Corridor will decide for
itself whether it wishes to belong to Germany or to Poland. This
territory consists of the area between the Baltic Sea [in the north]
to a line marked [in the south] by the towns of Marienwerder,
Graudenz, Kuhn and Bromberg -- including these towns -- and then
westwards to Schoenlanke.
3. For this purpose a plebiscite will be conducted in this territory.
All Germans who lived in this territory on January 1, 1918, or were
born there on or before that date will be entitled to vote in the
plebiscite. Similarly, all Poles, Kashubians, and so forth, who lived
in this territory on or before that date, or were born there before
that date, will also be entitled to vote. Germans who were expelled
from this territory will return to vote in the plebiscite.
4. Not included in this territory is the Polish port of Gdynia, which
is regarded as fundamentally sovereign Polish territory, to the extent
of [ethnic] Polish settlement, but as a matter of principle is
recognized as Polish territory. The specific border of this Polish
port city will be negotiated by Germany and Poland and, if necessary,
established by an international court of arbitration.
7. A simple majority of the votes cast will decide whether the
territory will go to Germany or to Poland.
9. If the Corridor returns to Germany, the German Reich declares that
it is ready to carry out an exchange of population with Poland to the
extent that this would be suitable for the [people of the] Corridor.
13. The German Reich government has protested in the strongest terms
against the Polish treatment of its minority populations. For its
part, the Polish government also believes itself called upon to make
protests against Germany. Accordingly, both sides agree to submit
these complaints to an international investigation commission, which
will be responsible for investigating all complaints of economic and
physical damage as well as other acts of terror.
This is the treaty proposal - as straight-forward and as generous as
has ever been presented by a government - that was made by the
National Socialist leadership of the German Reich.
The former Polish government refused to respond to these proposals in
any way. In this regard, the question presents itself: How is it
possible that such an unimportant state could dare to simply disregard
such proposals and, in addition, carry out further cruelties against
the Germans, the people who have given this land its entire culture,
and even order the general mobilization of its armed forces? A look at
the documents of the [Polish] Foreign Ministry in Warsaw later
provided the surprising explanation. They told of the role of a man
[President Roosevelt] who, with diabolical lack of principle, used all
of his influence to strengthen Poland's resistance and to prevent any
possibility of understanding. These reports were sent by the former
Polish ambassador in Washington, Count [Jerzy] Potocki, to his
government in Warsaw. These documents clearly and shockingly reveal
the extent to which one man and the powers behind him are responsible
for the Second World War. Another question arises: Why had this man
[Roosevelt] developed such a fanatic hostility against a country that,
in its entire history, had never harmed either America or him?
With regard to Germany's relationship with America, the following
should be said:
1. Germany is perhaps the only great power which has never had a
colony in either North or South America. Nor has it been otherwise
politically active there, apart from the emigration of many millions
of Germans with their skills, from which the American continent, and
particularly the United States, has only benefited.
Furthermore, there are no territorial or political conflicts between
the American and German nations that could possibly involve the
existence or even the [vital] interests of the United States. The
forms of government have always been different. But this cannot be a
reason for hostility between different nations, as long as one form of
government does not try to interfere with another, outside of its
naturally ordained sphere.
History itself has rendered its verdict on Wilson. His name will
always be associated with the most base betrayal in history of a
pledge [notably, Wilson's "14 points"]. The result was the ruin of
national life, not only in the so-called vanquished countries, but
among the victors as well. Because of this broken pledge, which alone
made possible the imposed Treaty of Versailles [1919], countries were
torn apart, cultures were destroyed and the economic life of all was
ruined. Today we know that a group of self-serving financiers stood
behind Wilson. They used this paralytic professor to lead America into
a war from which they hoped to profit. The German nation once believed
this man, and had to pay for this trust with political and economic
ruin.
After such a bitter experience, why is there now another American
president who is determined to incite wars and, above all, to stir up
hostility against Germany to the point of war? National Socialism came
to power in Germany in the same year [1933] that Roosevelt came to
power in the United States. At this point it is important to examine
the factors behind the current developments.
First of all, the personal side of things: I understand very well that
there is a world of difference between my own outlook on life and
attitude, and that of President Roosevelt. Roosevelt came from an
extremely wealthy family. By birth and origin he belonged to that
class of people that is privileged in a democracy and assured of
advancement. I myself was only the child of a small and poor family,
and I had to struggle through life by work and effort in spite of
immense hardships. As a member of the privileged class, Roosevelt
experienced the [First] World War in a position under Wilson's shadow
[as assistant secretary of the Navy]. As a result, he only knew the
agreeable consequences of a conflict between nations from which some
profited while others lost their lives. During this same period, I
lived very differently. I was not one of those who made history or
profits, but rather one of those who carried out orders. As an
ordinary soldier during those four years, I tried to do my duty in the
face of the enemy. Of course, I returned from the war just as poor as
when I entered in the fall of 1914. I thus shared my fate with
millions of others, while Mr. Roosevelt shared his with the so-called
upper ten thousand.
After the war, while Mr. Roosevelt tested his skills in financial
speculation in order to profit personally from the inflation, that is,
from the misfortune of others, I still lay in a military hospital
along with many hundreds of thousands of others. Experienced in
business, financially secure and enjoying the patronage of his class,
Roosevelt then finally chose a career in politics. During this same
period, I struggled as a nameless and unknown man for the rebirth of
my nation, which was the victim of the greatest injustice in its
entire history.
Two different paths in life! Franklin Roosevelt took power in the
United States as the candidate of a thoroughly capitalistic party,
which helps those who serve it. When I became the Chancellor of the
German Reich, I was the leader of a popular national movement, which I
had created myself. The powers that supported Mr. Roosevelt were the
same powers I fought against, out of concern for the fate of my
people, and out of deepest inner conviction. The "brain trust" that
served the new American president was made up of members of the same
national group that we fought against in Germany as a parasitical
expression of humanity, and which we began to remove from public life.
And yet, we also had something in common: Franklin Roosevelt took
control of a country with an economy that had been ruined as a result
of democratic influences, and I assumed the leadership of a Reich that
was also on the edge of complete ruin, thanks to democracy. There were
13 million unemployed in the United States, while Germany had seven
million unemployed and another seven million part-time workers. In
both countries, public finances were in chaos, and it seemed that the
spreading economic depression could not be stopped.
From then on, things developed in the United States and in the German
Reich in such a way that future generations will have no difficulty in
making a definitive evaluation of the two different socio-political
theories. Whereas the German Reich experienced an enormous improvement
in social, economic, cultural and artistic life in just a few years
under National Socialist leadership, President Roosevelt was not able
to bring about even limited improvements in his own country. This task
should have been much easier in the United States, with barely 15
people per square kilometer, as compared to 140 in Germany. If
economic prosperity is not possible in that country, it must be the
result of either a lack of will by the ruling leadership or the
complete incompetence of the men in charge. In just five years, the
economic problems were solved in Germany and unemployment was
eliminated. During this same period, President Roosevelt enormously
increased his country's national debt, devalued the dollar, further
disrupted the economy and maintained the same number of unemployed.
But this is hardly remarkable when one realizes that the intellects
appointed by this man, or more accurately, who appointed him, are
members of that same group who, as Jews, are interested only in
disruption and never in order. While we in National Socialist Germany
took measures against financial speculation, it flourished
tremendously under Roosevelt. The New Deal legislation of this man was
spurious, and consequently the greatest error ever experienced by
anyone. If his economic policies had continued indefinitely during
peace time, there is no doubt that sooner or later they would have
brought down this president, in spite of all his dialectical
cleverness. In a European country his career would certainly have
ended in front of a national court for recklessly squandering the
nation's wealth. And he would hardly have avoided a prison sentence by
a civil court for criminally incompetent business management.
Many respected Americans also shared this view. A threatening
opposition was growing all around this man, which led him to think
that he could save himself only by diverting public attention from his
domestic policies to foreign affairs. In this regard it is interesting
to study the reports of Polish Ambassador Potocki from Washington,
which repeatedly point out that Roosevelt was fully aware of the
danger that his entire economic house of cards could collapse, and
that therefore he absolutely had to divert attention to foreign
policy.
The circle of Jews around Roosevelt encouraged him in this. With Old
Testament vindictiveness they regarded the United States as the
instrument that they and he could use to prepare a second Purim
[slaughter of enemies] against the nations of Europe, which were
increasingly anti-Jewish. So it was that the Jews, in all of their
satanic baseness, gathered around this man, and he relied on them.
The American president increasingly used his influence to create
conflicts, intensify existing conflicts, and, above all, to keep
conflicts from being resolved peacefully. For years this man looked
for a dispute anywhere in the world, but preferably in Europe, that he
could use to create political entanglements with American economic
obligations to one of the contending sides, which would then steadily
involve America in the conflict and thus divert attention from his own
confused domestic economic policies.
His actions against the German Reich in this regard have been
particularly blunt. Starting in 1937, he began a series of speeches,
including a particularly contemptible one on October 5, 1937, in
Chicago, with which this man systematically incited the American
public against Germany . He threatened to establish a kind of
quarantine against the so-called authoritarian countries. As part of
this steady and growing campaign of hate and incitement, President
Roosevelt made another insulting statement [on Nov. 15, 1938] and then
called the American ambassador in Berlin back to Washington for
consultations. Since then the two countries have been represented only
by charges d'affaires.
Starting in November 1938, he began systematically and consciously to
sabotage every possibility of a European peace policy. In public he
hypocritically claimed to be interested in peace while at the same
time he threatened every country that was ready to pursue a policy of
peaceful understanding by blocking credits, economic reprisals,
calling in loans, and so forth. In this regard, the reports of the
Polish ambassadors in Washington, London, Paris and Brussels provide a
shocking insight.
This man increased his campaign of incitement in January 1939. In a
message [on Jan. 4, 1939] to the U.S. Congress he threatened to take
every measure short of war against the authoritarian countries.
He repeatedly claimed that other countries were trying to interfere in
American affairs, and he talked a lot about upholding the Monroe
Doctrine. Starting in March 1939 he began lecturing about internal
European affairs that were of no concern of the President of the
United States. In the first place, he doesn't understand these
problems, and secondly, even if he did understand them and appreciated
the historical circumstances, he has no more right to concern himself
with central European affairs than the German head of state has to
take positions on or make judgments about conditions in the United
States.
Mr. Roosevelt went even beyond that. Contrary to the rules of
international law, he refused to recognize governments he didn't like,
would not accept new ones, refused to dismiss ambassadors of
non-existent countries, and even recognized them as legal governments.
He went so far as to conclude treaties with these ambassadors, which
then gave him the right to simply occupy foreign territories
[Greenland and Iceland ].
But now the honorable wife [Eleanor Roosevelt] took his place. She and
her sons [she said] refused to live in a world such as ours. That is
at least understandable, for ours is world of work and not one of
deceit and racketeering. After a short rest, though, he was back at
it. On November 4, 1939, the Neutrality Act was revised and the arms
embargo was repealed in favor of a one-sided supply [of weapons] to
Germany's adversaries. In the same way, he pushed in eastern Asia for
economic entanglements with China that would eventually lead to
effective common interests. That same month he recognized a small
group of Polish emigrants as a so-called government in exile, the only
political basis of which was a few million Polish gold pieces they had
taken from Warsaw.
This man revealed his true attitude in a telegram of June 15 [1940] to
French premier [Paul] Reynaud. Roosevelt told him that the American
government would double its aid to France, on the condition that
France continue the war against Germany. In order to give special
emphasis to his desire that the war continue, he declared that the
American government would not recognize acquisitions brought about by
conquest, which included, for example, the retaking of territories
that had been stolen from Germany. I do not need to emphasize that now
and in the future, the German government will not be concerned about
whether or not the President of the United States recognizes a border
in Europe. I mention this case because it is characteristic of the
systematic incitement of this man, who hypocritically talks about
peace while at the same time he incites to war.
And now he feared that if peace were to come about in Europe, the
billions he had squandered on military spending would soon be
recognized as an obvious case of fraud, because no one would attack
America unless America itself provoked the attack. On June 17, 1940,
the President of the United States froze French assets [in the USA] in
order, so he said, to keep them from being seized by Germany, but in
reality to get hold of the gold that was being brought from Casablanca
on an American cruiser.
In July 1940 Roosevelt began to take many new measures toward war,
such as permitting the service of American citizens in the British air
force and the training of British air force personnel in the United
States. In August 1940 a joint military policy for the United States
and Canada was established. In order to make the establishment of a
joint American-Canadian defense committee plausible to at least the
stupidest people, Roosevelt periodically invented crises and acted as
if America was threatened by immediate attack. He would suddenly
cancel trips and quickly return to Washington and do similar things in
order to emphasize the seriousness of the situation to his followers,
who really deserve pity. He moved still closer to war in September
1940 when he transferred fifty American naval destroyers to the
British fleet, and in return took control of military bases on British
possessions in North and Central America. Future generations will
determine the extent to which, along with all this hatred against
socialist Germany, the desire to easily and safely take control of the
British empire in its hour of disintegration may have also played a
role.
After Britain was no longer able to pay cash for American deliveries
he imposed the Lend-Lease Act on the American people [in March 1941].
As President, he thereby obtained the authority to furnish lend-lease
military aid to countries that he, Roosevelt, decided it was in
America's vital interests to defend. After it became clear that
Germany would not respond under any circumstances to his continued
boorish behavior, this man took another step forward in March 1941.
As early as December 19, 1939, an American cruiser [the Tuscaloosa]
that was inside the security zone maneuvered the [German] passenger
liner Columbus into the hands of British warships. As a result, it had
to be scuttled. On that same day, US military forces helped in an
effort to capture the German merchant ship Arauca. On January 27,
1940, and once again contrary to international law, the US cruiser
Trenton reported the movements of the German merchant ships Arauca, La
Plata and Wangoni to enemy naval forces.
On June 27, 1940, he announced a limitation on the free movement of
foreign merchant ships in US ports, completely contrary to
international law. In November 1940 he permitted US warships to pursue
the German merchant ships Phrygia, Idarwald and Rhein until they
finally had to scuttle themselves to keep from falling into enemy
hands. On April 13, 1941, American ships were permitted to pass freely
through the Red Sea in order to supply British armies in the Middle
East.
In the meantime, in March [1941] all German ships were confiscated by
the American authorities. In the process, German Reich citizens were
treated in the most degrading way, ordered to certain locations in
violation of international law, put under travel restrictions, and so
forth. Two German officers who had escaped from Canadian captivity [to
the United States] were shackled and returned to the Canadian
authorities, likewise completely contrary to international law.
On March 27 [1941] the same president who is [supposedly] against all
aggression announced support for [General Dusan] Simovic and his
clique of usurpers [in Yugoslavia], who had come to power in Belgrade
after the overthrow of the legal government. Several months earlier,
President Roosevelt had sent [OSS chief] Colonel Donovan, a very
inferior character, to the Balkans with orders to help organize an
uprising against Germany and Italy in Sofia [Bulgaria] and Belgrade.
In April he [Roosevelt] promised lend-lease aid to Yugoslavia and
Greece. At the end of April he recognized Yugoslav and Greek emigrants
as governments in exile. And once again, in violation of international
law, he froze Yugoslav and Greek assets. Starting in mid-April [1941]
US naval patrols began expanded operations in the western Atlantic,
reporting their observations to the British. On April 26, Roosevelt
delivered twenty high speed patrol boats to Britain. At the same time,
British naval ships were routinely being repaired in US ports. On May
12, Norwegian ships operating for Britain were armed and repaired [in
the USA], contrary to international law. On June 4, American troop
transports arrived in Greenland to build air fields. And on June 9
came the first British report that a US war ship, acting on orders of
President Roosevelt, had attacked a German submarine near Greenland
with depth charges.
On June 14, German assets in the United States were frozen, again in
violation of international law. On June 17, on the basis of a lying
pretext, President Roosevelt demanded the recall of the German consuls
and the closing of the German consulates. He also demanded the
shutting down of the German "Transocean" press agency, the German
Library of Information [in New York] and the German Reichsbahn
[national railway] office.
On July 6 and 7 [1941], American armed forces acting on orders from
Roosevelt occupied Iceland, which was in the area of German military
operations. He hoped that this action would certainly, first, finally
force Germany into war [against the USA] and, second, also neutralize
the effectiveness of the German submarines, much as in 1915-1916. At
the same time, he promised military aid to the Soviet Union. On July
10 Navy Secretary [Frank] Knox suddenly announced that the US Navy was
under orders to fire against Axis warships. On September 4 the US
destroyer Greer, acting on his orders, operated together with British
airplanes against German submarines in the Atlantic. Five days later,
a German submarine identified US destroyers as escort vessels with a
British convoy.
In a speech delivered on September 11 [1941], Roosevelt at last
personally confirmed that he had given the order to fire against all
Axis ships, and he repeated the order. On September 29, US patrols
attacked a German submarine east of Greenland with depth charges. On
October 17 the US destroyer Kearny, operating as an escort for the
British, attacked a German submarine with depth charges, and on
November 6 US armed forces seized the German ship Odenwald in
violation of international law, took it to an American port, and
imprisoned its crew.
I will overlook as meaningless the insulting attacks and rude
statements by this so-called President against me personally. That he
calls me a gangster is particularly meaningless, since this term did
not originate in Europe, where such characters are uncommon, but in
America. And aside from that, I simply cannot feel insulted by Mr.
Roosevelt because I regard him, like his predecessor Woodrow Wilson,
as mentally unsound [geisteskrank].
We know that this man, with his Jewish supporters, has operated
against Japan in the same way. I don't need to go into that here. The
same methods were used in that case as well. This man first incites to
war, and then he lies about its causes and makes baseless allegations.
He repugnantly wraps himself in a cloak of Christian hypocrisy, while
at the same time slowly but very steadily leading humanity into war.
And finally, as an old Freemason, he calls upon God to witness that
his actions are honorable. His shameless misrepresentations of truth
and violations of law are unparalleled in history.
I am sure that all of you have regarded it as an act of deliverance
that a country [Japan] has finally acted to protest against all this
in the very way that this man had actually hoped for, and which should
not surprise him now [the attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941].
After years of negotiating with this deceiver, the Japanese government
finally had its fill of being treated in such a humiliating way. All
of us, the German people and, I believe, all other decent people
around the world as well, regard this with deep appreciation.
We know the power behind Roosevelt. It is the same eternal Jew that
believes that his hour has come to impose the same fate on us that we
have all seen and experienced with horror in Soviet Russia. We have
gotten to know first hand the Jewish paradise on earth. Millions of
German soldiers have personally seen the land where this international
Jewry has destroyed and annihilated people and property. Perhaps the
President of the United States does not understand this. If so, that
only speaks for his intellectual narrow-mindedness.
And we know that his entire effort is aimed at this goal: Even if we
were not allied with Japan, we would still realize that the Jews and
their Franklin Roosevelt intend to destroy one state after another.
The German Reich of today has nothing in common with the Germany of
the past. For our part, we will now do what this provocateur has been
trying to achieve for years. And not just because we are allied with
Japan, but rather because Germany and Italy with their present
leaderships have the insight and strength to realize that in this
historic period the existence or non-existence of nations is being
determined, perhaps for all time. What this other world has in store
for us is clear. They were able to bring the democratic Germany of the
past [1918-1933] to starvation, and they seek to destroy the National
Socialist Germany of today.
When Mr. Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt declare that they want to one day
build a new social order, that's about the same as a bald-headed
barber recommending a tonic guaranteed to make hair grow. Rather than
incite war, these gentlemen, who live in the most socially backward
countries, should have concerned themselves with their own unemployed
people. They have enough misery and poverty in their own countries to
keep themselves busy insuring a just distribution of food there. As
far as the German nation is concerned, it doesn't need charity, either
from Mr. Churchill, Mr. Roosevelt or [British foreign secretary] Mr.
Eden -- but it does demand its rights. And it will do what it must to
insure its right to life, even if a thousand Churchills and Roosevelts
conspire together to prevent it.
Our nation has a history of nearly two thousand years. Never in this
long period has it been so united and determined as it is today, and
thanks to the National Socialist movement it will always be that way.
At the same time, Germany has perhaps never been as far-sighted, and
seldom as conscious of honor. Accordingly, today I had the passports
returned to the American charge d'affaires, and he was bluntly
informed of the following:
President Roosevelt's steadily expanding policy has been aimed at an
unlimited world dictatorship. In pursuing this goal, the United States
and Britain have used every means to deny the German, Italian and
Japanese nations the prerequisites for their vital natural existence.
For this reason, the governments of Britain and the United States of
America have opposed every effort to create a new and better order in
the world, for both the present and the future. Since the beginning of
the war [in September 1939], the American President Roosevelt has
steadily committed ever more serious crimes against international law.
Along with illegal attacks against ships and other property of German
and Italian citizens, there have been threats and even arbitrary
deprivations of personal freedom by internment and such. The
increasingly hostile attacks by the American President Roosevelt have
reached the point that he has ordered the U.S. navy, in complete
violation of international law, to immediately and everywhere attack,
fire upon and sink German and Italian ships. American officials have
even boasted about destroying German submarines in this criminal
manner. American cruisers have attacked and captured German and
Italian merchant ships, and their peaceful crews were taken away to
imprisonment In addition, President Roosevelt's plan to attack Germany
and Italy with military forces in Europe by 1943 at the latest was
made public in the United States [by the Chicago Tribune and several
other newspapers on Dec. 4, 1941], and the American government made no
effort to deny it.
Despite the years of intolerable provocations by President Roosevelt,
Germany and Italy sincerely and very patiently tried to prevent the
expansion of this war and to maintain relations with the United
States. But as a result of his campaign, these efforts have failed.
Faithful to the provisions of the Tripartite Pact of September 27,
1940, German and Italy accordingly now regard themselves as finally
forced to join together on the side of Japan in the struggle for the
defense and preservation of the freedom and independence of our
nations and realms against the United States of America and Britain.
The three powers have accordingly concluded the following agreement,
which was signed today in Berlin:
Article 1. Germany, Italy and Japan will together conduct the war that
has been forced upon them by the United States of America and Britain
with all the means at their command to a victorious conclusion.
Article 2. Germany, Italy and Japan pledge not to conclude an
armistice or make peace with either the United States of America or
Britain unless by complete mutual agreement.
Article 3. Germany, Italy and Japan will also work very closely
together after a victorious conclusion of the war for the purpose of
bringing about a just new order in accord with the Tripartite Pact
concluded by them on September 27, 1940.
Ever since my peace proposal of July 1940 was rejected, we have
clearly realized that this struggle must be fought through to the end.
We National Socialists are not at all surprised that the
Anglo-American, Jewish and capitalist world is united together with
Bolshevism. In our country we have always found them in the same
community. Alone we successfully fought against them here in Germany,
and after 14 years of struggle for power we were finally able to
annihilate our enemies.
When I decided 23 years ago to enter political life in order to lead
the nation up from ruin, I was a nameless, unknown soldier. Many of
you here know just how difficult those first years of that struggle
really were. The way from a small movement of seven men to the taking
of power on January 30, 1933, as the responsible government is so
miraculous that only the blessing of Providence could have made it
possible.
Our adversaries today are the same familiar enemies of more than
twenty years.
When we think of the sacrifice and effort of our soldiers, then every
sacrifice of [those here in] the homeland is completely insignificant
and unimportant. And when we consider the number of all those in past
generations who gave their lives for the survival and greatness of the
German nation, then we are really conscious of the magnitude of the
duty that is ours.
The government of the United States of America, having violated in the
most flagrant manner and in ever increasing measure all rules of
neutrality in favor of the adversaries of Germany, and having
continually been guilty of the most severe provocations toward Germany
ever since the outbreak of the European war, brought on by the British
declaration of war against Germany on September 3, 1939, has finally
resorted to open military acts of aggression.
On September 11, 1941, the President of the United States of America
publicly declared that he had ordered the American Navy and Air Force
to shoot on sight any German war vessel. In his speech of October 27,
1941, he once more expressly affirmed that this order was in force.
Acting under this order, American naval vessels have systematically
attacked German naval forces since early September 1941. Thus,
American destroyers, as for instance, the Greer, the Kearny and the
Reuben James, have opened fire on German submarines according to plan.
The American Secretary of the Navy, Mr. Knox, himself confirmed that
the American destroyers attacked German submarines.
Furthermore, the naval forces of the United States of America, under
order of their government and contrary to international law, have
treated and seized German merchant ships on the high seas as enemy
ships.
The German government therefore establishes the following facts:
Although Germany on her part has strictly adhered to the rules of
international law in her relations with the United States of America
during every period of the present war, the government of the United
States of America from initial violations of neutrality has finally
proceeded to open acts of war against Germany. It has thereby
virtually created a state of war.
The government of the Reich consequently breaks off diplomatic
relations with the United States of America and declares that under
these circumstances brought about by President Roosevelt, Germany too,
as from today, considers herself as being in a state of war with the
United States of America.


http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
Snow_Flower
2014-03-01 15:58:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
afghanistan was anarchy and harbouring nuisances....
So no change then.
Post by abelard
irak was ruled by a murderous socialist dictator...
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/just_war.htm
Guess a change has been achieved, it is now an anarchy and harbouring
nuisances.
Post by abelard
putin is a weakling who wants to play at being a great power...
Never met the guy, but he does seem a bit gay, given his posing.
Post by abelard
america keeps international peace and works to spread freedom...
USA has been responsible for a lot of wars. While it is no worse than
others, it is no angel. It has certainly supported numerous vicious
dictators and has undermined many mass democracy based movements.
Post by abelard
putin regards the fall of the murderous russian socialist empire
as a great disaster...
'Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet
Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century.'
The transition from the old USSR has caused a lot of problems for many.
A desire for the "good old days" is common in many nations. The old
always seem to think it was better when they were young etc.
abelard
2014-03-01 16:01:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
afghanistan was anarchy and harbouring nuisances....
So no change then.
Post by abelard
irak was ruled by a murderous socialist dictator...
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/just_war.htm
Guess a change has been achieved, it is now an anarchy and harbouring
nuisances.
the perfect is the enemy of the good
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
putin is a weakling who wants to play at being a great power...
Never met the guy, but he does seem a bit gay, given his posing.
that thought has crossed between me ears several times
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
america keeps international peace and works to spread freedom...
USA has been responsible for a lot of wars. While it is no worse than
others, it is no angel. It has certainly supported numerous vicious
dictators and has undermined many mass democracy based movements.
it has removed several dictators, including some of the very worst...
it is by far the most charitable nation on the planet...
and has several times put itself on the line for freedom...

i see no such behaviour from shorty
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
putin regards the fall of the murderous russian socialist empire
as a great disaster...
'Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet
Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century.'
The transition from the old USSR has caused a lot of problems for many.
A desire for the "good old days" is common in many nations. The old
always seem to think it was better when they were young etc.
all very true...
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
j***@gmail.com
2014-03-09 09:27:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
afghanistan was anarchy and harbouring nuisances....
So no change then.
Post by abelard
irak was ruled by a murderous socialist dictator...
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/just_war.htm
Guess a change has been achieved, it is now an anarchy and harbouring
nuisances.
the perfect is the enemy of the good
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
putin is a weakling who wants to play at being a great power...
Never met the guy, but he does seem a bit gay, given his posing.
that thought has crossed between me ears several times
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
america keeps international peace and works to spread freedom...
USA has been responsible for a lot of wars. While it is no worse than
others, it is no angel. It has certainly supported numerous vicious
dictators and has undermined many mass democracy based movements.
it has removed several dictators, including some of the very worst...
That will be the same ones they put in power you clueless gobshite and then removed when they'd served their purpose and replaced with another puppet of their choosing, you couldn't make it up
Post by abelard
it is by far the most charitable nation on the planet...
and has several times put itself on the line for freedom...
rofl yeah course they have if you say so Baldrick

Redman
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-01 16:14:58 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
Beli
2014-03-01 16:25:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
Spot on. But then Victoria 'Fuck the EU' Nuland give 5 billion dollars
to the 'democrats', i.e. the neonazi's in twenty shades of brown.
Topaz
2014-03-01 16:40:56 UTC
Permalink
"We National Socialists have grown accustomed since our takeover in
1933 to the particular attention of the leading politicians of the
U.S.A. and of the international Jews who stand behind them. Our
defensive measures against international Jewry have aroused increasing
tirades against Germany in America. Sometimes it seemed as if it would
be impossible to increase the flood of hatred and lies...

After leading politicians such as the American Secretary of the
Interior Harold Ickes and Senator Pittman attacked the German
government in the foulest manner, President Roosevelt did even more in
his New Year address. He tried to persuade the American people that
world peace was not assured, and that it was the duty of the American
people to defend three vital principles: those of religion, democracy
and international good will. Roosevelt did not believe these
principles were threatened by Soviet Russia or Soviet Spain, rather by
authoritarian Germany and Italy.

Millions are dead in Soviet Russia and Spanish priests estimate that a
half million people have been murdered there only because of their
faith, but that is not important and proves nothing. The dead do not
trouble the American President's conscience, indeed they did not stop
him from being the single world statesman to congratulate the Soviet
Russian government on the anniversary of the Bolshevist Revolution. No
other statesman did this, which explains why no other statesman
received such praise from the Soviet press. The Soviet press praised
the "noble efforts of the great American statesman."

Roosevelt also ignored the murder of millions of people when it was
called to his attention by a letter from the former Spanish ambassador
in Great Britain, the Marquis de Merry del Wal. The ambassador told
Mr. Roosevelt the following:

Your country's press tells the world of Your Excellency's protests
against the "persecution of the Jews" in Germany. According to the
press, you are deeply distressed by these events. How is it then that
the murder and massacre of 400,000 defenseless men, women and children
in Spain has not resulted in the slightest distress on your part?
These unfortunate people did not die on the battlefields of a civil
war. They were torn from their homes and murdered in public not only
because of their political, but also their religious, beliefs. Their
murderers openly declared their goal of destroying the very
civilization that Your Excellency defends. They have intentionally
destroyed thousands of churches and monuments along with uncounted
works of art and private homes. They have torn the clothes from nuns
and revealed them to everyone's eyes. They raped women and looted to a
degree unknown in the annals of the Christian era.

Your own ambassador, Your Excellency, against all the laws, norms and
customs of international law, has been forced to live away from the
government to which he is accredited, since as he said his personal
security would otherwise be in danger. I further know, Your
Excellency, that you have received certain proof of my assertions, for
I have made efforts to ensure that you have received reports that
support what I have said. Despite that, Your Excellency, you complain
about events in Germany, events that cannot be compared with what is
happening in Spain-and you have not given even the slightest sign of
disapproval at the death of hundreds of thousands of people who have
18 million fellow believers who are among the best citizens of your
country, far more than the two million Jews.

These people have been murdered solely because of their beliefs. Mr.
Roosevelt however has never spoken of a threat to faith or religion.
But they were only believers in a Christian church, after all. Mr.
Roosevelt is conducting a crusade against the authoritarian states
under the banner of religion only because the religious compatriots of
his closest friends have been put in their place in the authoritarian
states.

If President Roosevelt believes that he has to take the field to
defend democracy, we may ask where and when we have ever threatened or
attacked democracy. In the past years Germany has done nothing more
than to partially undo the injustices inflicted on it by the
predecessor of the current president of the U.S.A. Germany has not
arbitrarily altered the map of Europe as he did, creating states
against the will of their peoples only for purposes of power politics.
It has only reclaimed its citizens who suffered a decade long under
governments foreign or hostile to Germany...

In a closed session, he told the Defense Committee of the Senate that
the United States must be ready to support England and France in the
event of a European war. The President reportedly even suggested that
definite agreements already existed to this effect. He further
proposed the unrestricted sale of war materials to Western Europe. The
only restriction was that they had to be able to pay for it. When a
member of the American Senate asked how this policy could be squared
with the law demanding strict neutrality over against Europe,
Roosevelt replied: "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it."
These revelations naturally were a sensation throughout the world. The
impact was greater than the master of the White House in Washington
wanted. He therefore denied the reports. The force of his denial was
somewhat weakened by excited reports in the American press in which
various members of Congress refused to be called liars, and
furthermore suggested that Roosevelt had said even more during the
session than has been reported. The force of the denial was also
weakened by a cynical article in a French newspaper that noted that
"the strength of the claim has not been weakened, for it is not a
matter of the letter of the law, but of the spirit."...

Roosevelt is acting as the mouthpiece and puppet of international
Jewry when he attacks the authoritarian states. They want to use every
means to destroy the newly awakened nations...

The leaders of the Soviet Union tried to persuade their people that
true communism could only develop after all the other states of the
world were allies of the powers in Moscow, and the Red rulers in
Soviet Spain tried and tried to conceal their governmental
incompetence by unleashing a world conflict. We are not surprised to
see the American President in such company. The real rulers of the
Soviet Union are the same as in the United States: international
Jewry.

The truth of this claim is confirmed by the behavior of the wife of
the American President. Mrs. Roosevelt, as a sign of her support for
the Spanish Bolshevist rulers, accepted a gift of stolen etchings by
Spanish masters. Mrs. Roosevelt chaired an exhibition of busts of
Spanish Communist leaders, made by the Jew Josef Davidson. She also
invited the well-known top Bolshevist Toller to lunch. She surrounds
herself with wounded bigwigs of Soviet Spain under whose orders
500,000 Spaniards were killed only because they were faithful to their
beliefs and their religion...

America today is not governed by men like Roosevelt, Ickes, etc.,
rather its fate is determined by the Jews who stand behind them, Jews
like Baruch, Frankfurter, Morgenthau, etc. They are the real rulers of
America, and Roosevelt, Ickes, etc., are only their tools. The fact
that this is known in America is evident from a variety of newspaper
articles. The "New York Daily News," for example, wrote that "the wave
of anti-Semitism in America has increased significantly in recent
weeks and months." The fact that the Jew Bernard Baruch, the
President's closest adviser, is called the unofficial president of the
United States is proof of this fact.

But enough of that. We refuse to interfere in the affairs of other
nations. We think that every country gets the Jews that it deserves.
But we demand the same principle be extended to us. Let Mr. Roosevelt
carry out his reforms and crusades in his own country. He will not
live long enough to do it all. We do not think we have yet seen
anything on the other side of the ocean that is worth imitating. We
think it not a sign of ability, rather of incompetence, that a nation
with such enormous resources and space, with all modern methods, finds
itself in such mass misery and is unable to do anything to alleviate
that misery.

Where would Roosevelt be if he had had to deal with the situation the
Führer faced when he took power in Germany? Mr. Roosevelt has
agricultural resources more than sufficient to feed the country, yet
his people are starving. His country has enormous resources, yet
millions are unemployed. There is only one conclusion to be drawn."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-01 17:09:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beli
abelard,
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
Spot on. But then Victoria 'Fuck the EU' Nuland give 5
billion dollars to the 'democrats', i.e. the neonazi's in
twenty shades of brown.
They seem to be not too squeamish.
abelard
2014-03-01 17:22:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Beli
abelard,
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
Spot on. But then Victoria 'Fuck the EU' Nuland give 5
billion dollars to the 'democrats', i.e. the neonazi's in
twenty shades of brown.
They seem to be not too squeamish.
who is 'they'?

your imaginary 'extremists'?
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Beli
2014-03-01 17:33:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Beli
abelard,
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
Spot on. But then Victoria 'Fuck the EU' Nuland give 5
billion dollars to the 'democrats', i.e. the neonazi's in
twenty shades of brown.
They seem to be not too squeamish.
who is 'they'?
your imaginary 'extremists'?
Abelard is blind, you must know. He didn't see the molotov cocktails
and rebel snipers.
abelard
2014-03-01 17:35:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beli
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Beli
abelard,
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
Spot on. But then Victoria 'Fuck the EU' Nuland give 5
billion dollars to the 'democrats', i.e. the neonazi's in
twenty shades of brown.
They seem to be not too squeamish.
who is 'they'?
your imaginary 'extremists'?
Abelard is blind, you must know. He didn't see the molotov cocktails
and rebel snipers.
use one nym instead of half a dozen and start to account for
yourself, until then you are not worth my time
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Topaz
2014-03-02 15:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
on December 10, 1940:

"In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must
possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their
wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people
themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their
convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The
decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In
those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing
more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are
more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.'
By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an
uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to
make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national
control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital
and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of
the 'freedom of the press.'

In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every
case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the
editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor
tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next
day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in
Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were always
one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that
families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a
liberal, and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three
sit together as members of the family, decide upon their common
attitude and determine it. A further point is that the 'elected
people' actually form a community which operates and controls all
these organizations. For this reason, the opposition in England is
really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the
opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in
agreement. They have one and the same conviction and through the
medium of the press mold public opinion along corresponding lines. One
might well believe that in these countries of liberty and riches, the
people must possess an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no! On the
contrary, it is precisely in these countries that the distress of the
masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in 'rich
Britain.'

She controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a
hundred million colonial workers with a wretched standard of living
must labor for her. One might think, perhaps, that at least in England
itself every person must have his share of these riches. By no means!
In that country class distinction is the crassest imaginable. There is
poverty - incredible poverty - on the one side, and equally incredible
wealth on the other. They have not solved a single problem. The
workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the
globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the
masses of the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to
have more than enough bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions
of the lower classes who have not even enough to fill their stomachs,
and go about hungry. A nation which could provide work for the whole
world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot even abolish
unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two and a
half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year
after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my
fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves?
It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such
are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters
is the existence of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the
factories and their stock and, through them, control the people. The
masses of the people do not interest them in the least. They are
interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties in former times
- only when elections are being held, when they need votes. Otherwise,
the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them.

To this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous
to hear a member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a
member of the Opposition is officially paid by the government - say:
'When the war is over, we will do something in social respects'?
It is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business
concerns - just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished
all that. A member of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of
Directors, except as a purely honorary member. He is prohibited from
accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise. This is not the case
in other countries.

They reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I
can well believe it, for that form of government certainly pays very
well.. But whether it is sacred to the mass of the people as well is
another matter.

The people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible
in the long run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in
return for ridiculous wages, while another jumps into an express train
once a year and pockets enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace.
On the other hand, we National Socialists equally oppose the theory
that all men are equals. Today, when a man of genius makes some
astounding invention and enormously benefits his country by his
brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something
and been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible
for idle drones to inhabit this country.

I could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that
two worlds are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite
right when they say: 'Nothing can reconcile us to the National
Socialist world.' How could a narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to
my principles? It would be easier for the Devil to go to church and
cross himself with holy water than for these people to comprehend the
ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we have solved our
problems.

To take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be
fighting for the maintenance of the gold standard as the currency
basis. That I can well believe, for the gold is in their hands. We,
too, once had gold, but it was stolen and extorted from us. When I
came to power, it was not malice which made me abandon the gold
standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently, quitting the
gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to part
with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign
exchange. They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the
previous fifteen years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret
it, for we have constructed our economic system on a wholly different
basis. In our eyes, gold is not of value in itself. It is only an
agent by which nations can be suppressed and dominated.
When I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to
build, namely, the efficiency and ability of the German nation and the
German workingman; the intelligence of our inventors, engineers,
technicians, chemists, and so forth. I built on the strength which
animates our economic system. One simple question faced me: Are we to
perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a phantom which
spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even though
we have no gold, we have capacity for work.

The German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with
this gold I can compete successfully with any power in the world. We
want to live in houses which have to be built. Hence, the workers must
build them, and the raw materials required must be procured by work.
My whole economic system has been built up on the conception of work.
We have solved our problems while, amazingly enough, the capitalist
countries and their currencies have suffered bankruptcy.

Sterling can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will
step aside to avoid being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by
no gold, has remained stable. Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed
by you and by your work. You have helped me to keep the mark stable.
German currency, with no gold coverage, is worth more today than gold
itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we owe to the German
farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we owe to
the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole
problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic.
My dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In
seven or eight years the problem of how to provide work for the
unemployed will be solved, and the problem then will be where to find
workers,' I should have harmed my cause. Every one would have
declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless to talk to him, much less to
support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a fantastic creature.'
Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only question for
us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the
blessing which work brings.

Work alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone
can create values, values with which to reward those who work. The
work of one man makes it possible for another to live and continue to
work. And when we have mobilized the working capacity of our people to
its utmost, each individual worker will receive more and more of the
world's goods.

We have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic
system; we have transformed another six millions from part-time into
full-time workers; we are even working overtime. And all this is paid
for in cash in Reichsmarks which maintained their value in peacetime.
In wartime we had to ration its purchasing capacity, not in order to
devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our industry for war
production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the future of
Germany...

One thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today
a state with a different economic and political orientation from that
of the Western democracies.
Well, it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel.
It is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that
traveling should be something not for millionaires alone, but for the
people too. In this country, the problem was solved some time ago. In
the other countries - as is shown by their whole economic structure -
the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of
democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by anyone.

It is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want
our world to be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The
English know full well that their Empire is not menaced by us. But
they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas that are popular in Germany
are not completely eliminated, they might become popular among our own
people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It would do no
harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as
narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they
prefer to remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish
to depart from them, and do not conceal the fact.

They say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.'
And what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have
destroyed nothing in Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully,
because I believe - as I have already said - that we cannot afford to
wreck anything. I am proud that the Revolution of 1933 was brought to
pass without breaking a single windowpane. Nevertheless, we have
wrought enormous changes.

I wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the
capitalistic democratic world the most important principle of economy
is that the people exist for trade and industry, and that these in
turn exist for capital. We have reversed this principle by making
capital exist for trade and industry, and trade and industry exist for
the people. In other words, the people come first. Everything else is
but a means to this end. When an economic system is not capable of
feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether a
few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good,
excellent; my dividends are splendid.'

However, the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn
the line. They may then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we
mean. You jeopardize liberty.'
Yes, certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense
of the community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British
capitalists, to mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76,
80, 95, 140, and even 160 per cent from their armament industry.
Naturally they say: 'If the German methods grow apace and should prove
victorious, this sort of thing will stop.'

They are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of
affairs. In my eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from
this 6 per cent we deduct one-half and, as for the rest, we must have
definite proof that it is invested in the interest of the country as a
whole. In other words, no individual has the right to dispose
arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the good of the
country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the
National Socialist state will intervene.

To take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called
directors' fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a
board of directors is. Once a year its members have to make a journey.
They have to go to the station, get into a first-class compartment and
travel to some place or other. They arrive at an appointed office at
about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to a report. When the
report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on it. They
may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2
o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward
journey, again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly
surprising that they claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation
for this: Our directors formerly did the same - for what a lot of time
it costs them! Such effort had to be made worth while! Of course, we
have got rid of all this nonsense, which was merely veiled
profiteering and even bribery.
In Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence.
They determine the principles of their government. In fact it has been
possible in this country to incorporate many of the broad masses into
the National Socialist party, that gigantic organization embracing
millions and having millions of officials drawn from the people
themselves. This principle is extended to the highest ranks.

For the first time in German history, we have a state which has
absolutely abolished all social prejudices in regard to political
appointments as well as in private life. I myself am the best proof of
this. Just imagine: I am not even a lawyer, and yet I am your Leader!
It is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing
the best among the people for every position. We have
Reichsstatthalters who were formerly agricultural laborers or
locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in breaking down prejudice in
a place where it was most deep-seated -in the fighting forces.
Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today. We have
done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers
and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In
this instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we
are building up our life for the future.

As you know we have countless schools, national political educational
establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we
send gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men,
farmers' sons whose parents could never have afforded a higher
education for their children. We take them in gradually. They are
educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to the Party, later to take
their place in the State where they will some day fill the highest
posts....

Opposed to this there stands a completely different world. In the
world the highest ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for
family possessions, for personal egoism; everything else is merely a
means to such ends. Two worlds confront each other today. We know
perfectly well that if we are defeated in this war it would not only
be the end of our National Socialist work of reconstruction, but the
end of the German people as a whole. For without its powers of
coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses
dependent on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone
are our own people. We remain ever aware of this fact.

On the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide
capitalistic system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold.
It is lying in our cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that
work is the decisive factor spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We
shall have bought our gold in vain. Our whole claim to world dominion
can then no longer be maintained. The people will do away with their
dynasties of high finance. They will present their social claims, and
the whole world system will be overthrown.'
I can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all
costs; it must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has
been reconstructed. You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a
state ruled by a numerically small upper class. They send their sons
to their own schools, to Eton. We have Adolf Hitler schools or
national political educational establishments. On the one hand, the
sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the children of
the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading positions
over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the State.
These are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb.
Yes, one or the other. But if we were to succumb, the German people
would succumb with us. If the other were to succumb, I am convinced
that the nations will become free for the first time. We are not
fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have nothing against
them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign policy. We
demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war
they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or
that of us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you
because the German system of Government does not suit us; because we
fear it might spread to our own people.' For that reason they are
carrying on this war. They wanted to blast the German nation back to
the time of Versailles, to the indescribable misery of those days. But
they have made a great mistake.

If in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting
against work, capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the
progress of humanity, then work, the peoples, and progress will be
victorious. Even the support of the Jewish race will not avail the
others.

I have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other
world? Nothing but the right for Germans to reunite and the
restoration of all that had been taken from them - nothing which would
have meant a loss to the other nations. How often have I stretched out
my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I had not the slightest
wish to rearm.
For what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who
regarded work as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ
the working capacity of Germany for other plans. I think the news is
already out that, after all, I have some fairly important plans in my
mind, vast and splendid plans for my people. It is my ambition to make
the German people rich and to make the German homeland beautiful. I
want the standard of living of the individual raised. I want us to
have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like the
theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all
the people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the
case in England.

The plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers
in order to realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made
proposals to limit armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I
received was 'No.' I proposed the limitation of certain types of
armament. That was refused. I proposed that airplanes should be
altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused. I suggested
that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That is
just how we wish to force our regime upon you.' ...



http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
abelard
2014-03-01 16:30:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
what 'coup'? parliament impeached yani and dismissed him...

or do you mean before the russian coup/invasion?
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Jan Panteltje
2014-03-01 16:43:06 UTC
Permalink
On a sunny day (Sat, 01 Mar 2014 17:30:58 +0100) it happened abelard
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
what 'coup'? parliament impeached yani and dismissed him...
or do you mean before the russian coup/invasion?
Look babbelart,
I once was pro-EU, but now EU starts grabbing territory to get more cheap labor
to replace jobs for people here, and uses dirty methods to create unrest,
I am against it,
and will vote that way.
Germany under SPD now is new Hitler playground and sort of dictates what happens.
No way ..
Putin is quite right, sending soldiers to force some rest probably already saved lives.
0bama will have to support him no matter what he blabbers, or if he wants escalation
WW3 is just around the corner, I can see its nose.
abelard
2014-03-01 16:49:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jan Panteltje
On a sunny day (Sat, 01 Mar 2014 17:30:58 +0100) it happened abelard
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 14:58:42 +0000, Snow_Flower
Post by Snow_Flower
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
After Afghanistan, Iraq etc, they are hardly in a
position to throw stones.
full dress dissent
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
what 'coup'? parliament impeached yani and dismissed him...
or do you mean before the russian coup/invasion?
Look babbelart,
I once was pro-EU, but now EU starts grabbing territory to get more cheap labor
to replace jobs for people here, and uses dirty methods to create unrest,
I am against it,
and will vote that way.
Germany under SPD now is new Hitler playground and sort of dictates what happens.
No way ..
Putin is quite right, sending soldiers to force some rest probably already saved lives.
0bama will have to support him no matter what he blabbers, or if he wants escalation
WW3 is just around the corner, I can see its nose.
black is white, war is peace...left is right...

you're doing fine, but i've heard your garbled tune so many
times from socialists
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Topaz
2014-03-02 15:53:18 UTC
Permalink
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:

"Human progress and human cultures are not founded by the
multitude. They are exclusively the work of personal genius and
personal efficiency."

"Does anybody honestly believe that human progress originates in
the composite brain of the majority and not in the brain of the
individual personality?"

"The devastating influence of the parliamentary institution might
not easily be recognized by those who read the Jewish Press, unless
the reader has learned how to think independently and examine the
facts for himself. This institution is primarily responsible for the
crowded inrush of mediocre people into the field of politics.
Confronted with such a phenomenon, a man who is endowed with real
qualities of leadership will be tempted to refrain from taking part in
political life; because under these circumstances the situation does
not call for a man who has a capacity for constructive statesmanship
but rather for a man who is capable of bargaining for the favour of
the majority. Thus the situation will appeal to small minds and will
attract them accordingly."

"One truth which must always be borne in mind is that the majority
can never replace the man. The majority represents not only ignorance
but also cowardice. And just as a hundred blockheads do not equal one
man of wisdom, so a hundred poltroons are incapable of any political
line of action that requires moral strength and fortitude."

"It is not the aim of our modern democratic parliamentary system
to bring together an assembly of intelligent and well-informed
deputies. Not at all. The aim rather is to bring together a group of
nonentities who are dependant on others for their views and who can
be all the more easily led, the narrower the mental outlook of each
individual is. That is the only way in which a party policy, according
the the evil meaning it has to-day, can be put into effect. And by
this method alone is it possible for the wirepuller, who exercises the
real control, to remain in the dark, so that personally he can never
be brought to account for his actions."

"Such people would raise an outcry, if, for instance, anyone
should attempt to set up a dictatorship, even though the man
responsible for it were Frederick the Great and even though the
politicians for the time being, who constituted the parlimentary
majority, were small and incompetent men or maybe even on a lower
grade of inferiority; because to such sticklers for abstract
principles the law of democracy is more sacred than the welfare of the
nation."

"the best form of government is that which makes it quite natural for
the best brains to reach a position of dominant importance and
influence in the community."

http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
Michael Swift
2014-03-02 00:37:58 UTC
Permalink
In article <let12b$nnc$***@os.motzarella.org>, Oleg Smirnov <***@gde.ru>
writes
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding off millions
to fund his wealthy lifestyle.

Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-02 06:16:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.

He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.

And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
Beli
2014-03-02 09:35:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
The economic crisis there was caused by the privatisations and
deregulations, the western precept. Russia offered a $15 billion
bailout. Strangely enough some Ukrainians would rather ask for help
from the IMF, who wouldn't offer more than $1 million. The new leaders
announced stringent measures, like those in Greece, cuts in health
care, pensions, slashing of jobs, in short the shock doctrine.
That was why this revolt was instigated. The west is not prepared to
help Ukraine in any way. The west wants free markets over there and low
wages.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
And the US fucked up the EU as well (Victoria Nuland said: "Fuck the
EU"), by creating the problem of right wing extremism and destabilising
the whole of Europe. This is not only a war by the US against Russia,
but also one against a stable Europe.
As in other countries the west has again brought a minority to power,
which is a guarantee for decades of unrest and violence.
I hope Russia will protect the Crimea and the whole south-eastern part
of the Ukraine.
abelard
2014-03-02 10:35:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
The economic crisis there was caused by the privatisations and
deregulations, the western precept. Russia offered a $15 billion
bailout. Strangely enough some Ukrainians would rather ask for help
from the IMF, who wouldn't offer more than $1 million.
please desist from blathering
Post by Beli
The new leaders
announced stringent measures, like those in Greece, cuts in health
care, pensions, slashing of jobs, in short the shock doctrine.
That was why this revolt was instigated. The west is not prepared to
help Ukraine in any way. The west wants free markets over there and low
wages.
the wages are already 'low'
which is why ukraine is a preferred manufacturing base
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
And the US fucked up the EU as well (Victoria Nuland said: "Fuck the
EU"), by creating the problem of right wing extremism and destabilising
yeah, yeah....
Post by Beli
the whole of Europe. This is not only a war by the US against Russia,
but also one against a stable Europe.
As in other countries the west has again brought a minority to power,
the minority is russians...who have been steadily seeded
into the ukraine by russian commies
Post by Beli
which is a guarantee for decades of unrest and violence.
you do blather so
Post by Beli
I hope Russia will protect the Crimea and the whole south-eastern part
of the Ukraine.
i'm sure you do, just like your hero 'protected' czechoslovakia
...and austria...and poland...and even tried to 'protect'
france and russia...

you're just another loon
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Beli
2014-03-02 11:38:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
The economic crisis there was caused by the privatisations and
deregulations, the western precept. Russia offered a $15 billion
bailout. Strangely enough some Ukrainians would rather ask for help
from the IMF, who wouldn't offer more than $1 million.
please desist from blathering
Post by Beli
The new leaders
announced stringent measures, like those in Greece, cuts in health
care, pensions, slashing of jobs, in short the shock doctrine.
That was why this revolt was instigated. The west is not prepared to
help Ukraine in any way. The west wants free markets over there and low
wages.
the wages are already 'low'
which is why ukraine is a preferred manufacturing base
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
And the US fucked up the EU as well (Victoria Nuland said: "Fuck the
EU"), by creating the problem of right wing extremism and destabilising
yeah, yeah....
Post by Beli
the whole of Europe. This is not only a war by the US against Russia,
but also one against a stable Europe.
As in other countries the west has again brought a minority to power,
the minority is russians...who have been steadily seeded
into the ukraine by russian commies
Post by Beli
which is a guarantee for decades of unrest and violence.
you do blather so
Post by Beli
I hope Russia will protect the Crimea and the whole south-eastern part
of the Ukraine.
i'm sure you do, just like your hero 'protected' czechoslovakia
...and austria...and poland...and even tried to 'protect'
france and russia...
you're just another loon
Your reaction is typical of a loon. It's pure indoctrination of the
worst kind. In Poland Solidarnosc wanted change. They got it. Now
Solidarnosc only exists as a 'political museum' of stupidity. The
shipyards were all closed. The Polish people had to flee their country
to find work in other European countries. That's capitalist progress.
They were duped.
Same now in Kiev. The streets are terrorized by neonazi's. Their
European fellow travelers applaud. They are not only loons, but
dangerous loons.
Beli
2014-03-02 11:42:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beli
Post by abelard
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
The economic crisis there was caused by the privatisations and
deregulations, the western precept. Russia offered a $15 billion
bailout. Strangely enough some Ukrainians would rather ask for help
from the IMF, who wouldn't offer more than $1 million.
please desist from blathering
Post by Beli
The new leaders
announced stringent measures, like those in Greece, cuts in health
care, pensions, slashing of jobs, in short the shock doctrine.
That was why this revolt was instigated. The west is not prepared to
help Ukraine in any way. The west wants free markets over there and low
wages.
the wages are already 'low'
which is why ukraine is a preferred manufacturing base
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
And the US fucked up the EU as well (Victoria Nuland said: "Fuck the
EU"), by creating the problem of right wing extremism and destabilising
yeah, yeah....
Post by Beli
the whole of Europe. This is not only a war by the US against Russia,
but also one against a stable Europe.
As in other countries the west has again brought a minority to power,
the minority is russians...who have been steadily seeded
into the ukraine by russian commies
Post by Beli
which is a guarantee for decades of unrest and violence.
you do blather so
Post by Beli
I hope Russia will protect the Crimea and the whole south-eastern part
of the Ukraine.
i'm sure you do, just like your hero 'protected' czechoslovakia
...and austria...and poland...and even tried to 'protect'
france and russia...
you're just another loon
Your reaction is typical of a loon. It's pure indoctrination of the
worst kind. In Poland Solidarnosc wanted change. They got it. Now
Solidarnosc only exists as a 'political museum' of stupidity. The
shipyards were all closed. The Polish people had to flee their country
to find work in other European countries. That's capitalist progress.
They were duped.
Same now in Kiev. The streets are terrorized by neonazi's. Their
European fellow travelers applaud. They are not only loons, but
dangerous loons.
P.S.: Just wait and see what kind of help the EU and the US will have
for the Ukraine. None. The Ukrainians will be much better off with a
union with Russia.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/27/us-ukraine-bond-idUSBREA0Q0E12
0140127
http://tinyurl.com/lznexxg
The IMF won't support the Ukraine, only demand more reforms and
austerity, more privatisations and deregulation, Greek style.
abelard
2014-03-02 11:43:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beli
Post by abelard
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
The economic crisis there was caused by the privatisations and
deregulations, the western precept. Russia offered a $15 billion
bailout. Strangely enough some Ukrainians would rather ask for help
from the IMF, who wouldn't offer more than $1 million.
please desist from blathering
Post by Beli
The new leaders
announced stringent measures, like those in Greece, cuts in health
care, pensions, slashing of jobs, in short the shock doctrine.
That was why this revolt was instigated. The west is not prepared to
help Ukraine in any way. The west wants free markets over there and low
wages.
the wages are already 'low'
which is why ukraine is a preferred manufacturing base
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
And the US fucked up the EU as well (Victoria Nuland said: "Fuck the
EU"), by creating the problem of right wing extremism and destabilising
yeah, yeah....
Post by Beli
the whole of Europe. This is not only a war by the US against Russia,
but also one against a stable Europe.
As in other countries the west has again brought a minority to power,
the minority is russians...who have been steadily seeded
into the ukraine by russian commies
Post by Beli
which is a guarantee for decades of unrest and violence.
you do blather so
Post by Beli
I hope Russia will protect the Crimea and the whole south-eastern part
of the Ukraine.
i'm sure you do, just like your hero 'protected' czechoslovakia
...and austria...and poland...and even tried to 'protect'
france and russia...
you're just another loon
Your reaction is typical of a loon.
you really don't expect me to take you seriously!!

at least oleg has a brain even if he is a mite confused...

you are simply terminally thick

rest binned unread
Post by Beli
It's pure indoctrination of the
worst kind. In Poland Solidarnosc wanted change. They got it. Now
Solidarnosc only exists as a 'political museum' of stupidity. The
shipyards were all closed. The Polish people had to flee their country
to find work in other European countries. That's capitalist progress.
They were duped.
Same now in Kiev. The streets are terrorized by neonazi's. Their
European fellow travelers applaud. They are not only loons, but
dangerous loons.
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Topaz
2014-03-02 15:58:24 UTC
Permalink
"We National Socialists have grown accustomed since our takeover in
1933 to the particular attention of the leading politicians of the
U.S.A. and of the international Jews who stand behind them. Our
defensive measures against international Jewry have aroused increasing
tirades against Germany in America. Sometimes it seemed as if it would
be impossible to increase the flood of hatred and lies...

After leading politicians such as the American Secretary of the
Interior Harold Ickes and Senator Pittman attacked the German
government in the foulest manner, President Roosevelt did even more in
his New Year address. He tried to persuade the American people that
world peace was not assured, and that it was the duty of the American
people to defend three vital principles: those of religion, democracy
and international good will. Roosevelt did not believe these
principles were threatened by Soviet Russia or Soviet Spain, rather by
authoritarian Germany and Italy.

Millions are dead in Soviet Russia and Spanish priests estimate that a
half million people have been murdered there only because of their
faith, but that is not important and proves nothing. The dead do not
trouble the American President's conscience, indeed they did not stop
him from being the single world statesman to congratulate the Soviet
Russian government on the anniversary of the Bolshevist Revolution. No
other statesman did this, which explains why no other statesman
received such praise from the Soviet press. The Soviet press praised
the "noble efforts of the great American statesman."

Roosevelt also ignored the murder of millions of people when it was
called to his attention by a letter from the former Spanish ambassador
in Great Britain, the Marquis de Merry del Wal. The ambassador told
Mr. Roosevelt the following:

Your country's press tells the world of Your Excellency's protests
against the "persecution of the Jews" in Germany. According to the
press, you are deeply distressed by these events. How is it then that
the murder and massacre of 400,000 defenseless men, women and children
in Spain has not resulted in the slightest distress on your part?
These unfortunate people did not die on the battlefields of a civil
war. They were torn from their homes and murdered in public not only
because of their political, but also their religious, beliefs. Their
murderers openly declared their goal of destroying the very
civilization that Your Excellency defends. They have intentionally
destroyed thousands of churches and monuments along with uncounted
works of art and private homes. They have torn the clothes from nuns
and revealed them to everyone's eyes. They raped women and looted to a
degree unknown in the annals of the Christian era.

Your own ambassador, Your Excellency, against all the laws, norms and
customs of international law, has been forced to live away from the
government to which he is accredited, since as he said his personal
security would otherwise be in danger. I further know, Your
Excellency, that you have received certain proof of my assertions, for
I have made efforts to ensure that you have received reports that
support what I have said. Despite that, Your Excellency, you complain
about events in Germany, events that cannot be compared with what is
happening in Spain-and you have not given even the slightest sign of
disapproval at the death of hundreds of thousands of people who have
18 million fellow believers who are among the best citizens of your
country, far more than the two million Jews.

These people have been murdered solely because of their beliefs. Mr.
Roosevelt however has never spoken of a threat to faith or religion.
But they were only believers in a Christian church, after all. Mr.
Roosevelt is conducting a crusade against the authoritarian states
under the banner of religion only because the religious compatriots of
his closest friends have been put in their place in the authoritarian
states.

If President Roosevelt believes that he has to take the field to
defend democracy, we may ask where and when we have ever threatened or
attacked democracy. In the past years Germany has done nothing more
than to partially undo the injustices inflicted on it by the
predecessor of the current president of the U.S.A. Germany has not
arbitrarily altered the map of Europe as he did, creating states
against the will of their peoples only for purposes of power politics.
It has only reclaimed its citizens who suffered a decade long under
governments foreign or hostile to Germany...

In a closed session, he told the Defense Committee of the Senate that
the United States must be ready to support England and France in the
event of a European war. The President reportedly even suggested that
definite agreements already existed to this effect. He further
proposed the unrestricted sale of war materials to Western Europe. The
only restriction was that they had to be able to pay for it. When a
member of the American Senate asked how this policy could be squared
with the law demanding strict neutrality over against Europe,
Roosevelt replied: "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it."
These revelations naturally were a sensation throughout the world. The
impact was greater than the master of the White House in Washington
wanted. He therefore denied the reports. The force of his denial was
somewhat weakened by excited reports in the American press in which
various members of Congress refused to be called liars, and
furthermore suggested that Roosevelt had said even more during the
session than has been reported. The force of the denial was also
weakened by a cynical article in a French newspaper that noted that
"the strength of the claim has not been weakened, for it is not a
matter of the letter of the law, but of the spirit."...

Roosevelt is acting as the mouthpiece and puppet of international
Jewry when he attacks the authoritarian states. They want to use every
means to destroy the newly awakened nations...

The leaders of the Soviet Union tried to persuade their people that
true communism could only develop after all the other states of the
world were allies of the powers in Moscow, and the Red rulers in
Soviet Spain tried and tried to conceal their governmental
incompetence by unleashing a world conflict. We are not surprised to
see the American President in such company. The real rulers of the
Soviet Union are the same as in the United States: international
Jewry.

The truth of this claim is confirmed by the behavior of the wife of
the American President. Mrs. Roosevelt, as a sign of her support for
the Spanish Bolshevist rulers, accepted a gift of stolen etchings by
Spanish masters. Mrs. Roosevelt chaired an exhibition of busts of
Spanish Communist leaders, made by the Jew Josef Davidson. She also
invited the well-known top Bolshevist Toller to lunch. She surrounds
herself with wounded bigwigs of Soviet Spain under whose orders
500,000 Spaniards were killed only because they were faithful to their
beliefs and their religion...

America today is not governed by men like Roosevelt, Ickes, etc.,
rather its fate is determined by the Jews who stand behind them, Jews
like Baruch, Frankfurter, Morgenthau, etc. They are the real rulers of
America, and Roosevelt, Ickes, etc., are only their tools. The fact
that this is known in America is evident from a variety of newspaper
articles. The "New York Daily News," for example, wrote that "the wave
of anti-Semitism in America has increased significantly in recent
weeks and months." The fact that the Jew Bernard Baruch, the
President's closest adviser, is called the unofficial president of the
United States is proof of this fact.

But enough of that. We refuse to interfere in the affairs of other
nations. We think that every country gets the Jews that it deserves.
But we demand the same principle be extended to us. Let Mr. Roosevelt
carry out his reforms and crusades in his own country. He will not
live long enough to do it all. We do not think we have yet seen
anything on the other side of the ocean that is worth imitating. We
think it not a sign of ability, rather of incompetence, that a nation
with such enormous resources and space, with all modern methods, finds
itself in such mass misery and is unable to do anything to alleviate
that misery.

Where would Roosevelt be if he had had to deal with the situation the
Führer faced when he took power in Germany? Mr. Roosevelt has
agricultural resources more than sufficient to feed the country, yet
his people are starving. His country has enormous resources, yet
millions are unemployed. There is only one conclusion to be drawn."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
First-Post
2014-03-02 12:00:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
The economic crisis there was caused by the privatisations and
deregulations, the western precept. Russia offered a $15 billion
bailout. Strangely enough some Ukrainians would rather ask for help
from the IMF, who wouldn't offer more than $1 million.
please desist from blathering
Post by Beli
The new leaders
announced stringent measures, like those in Greece, cuts in health
care, pensions, slashing of jobs, in short the shock doctrine.
That was why this revolt was instigated. The west is not prepared to
help Ukraine in any way. The west wants free markets over there and low
wages.
the wages are already 'low'
which is why ukraine is a preferred manufacturing base
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
And the US fucked up the EU as well (Victoria Nuland said: "Fuck the
EU"), by creating the problem of right wing extremism and destabilising
yeah, yeah....
Post by Beli
the whole of Europe. This is not only a war by the US against Russia,
but also one against a stable Europe.
As in other countries the west has again brought a minority to power,
the minority is russians...who have been steadily seeded
into the ukraine by russian commies
Post by Beli
which is a guarantee for decades of unrest and violence.
you do blather so
Post by Beli
I hope Russia will protect the Crimea and the whole south-eastern part
of the Ukraine.
i'm sure you do, just like your hero 'protected' czechoslovakia
...and austria...and poland...and even tried to 'protect'
france and russia...
you're just another loon
Probably just a stoned out druggie since they're posting from the
Netherlands.
Topaz
2014-03-02 15:57:30 UTC
Permalink
"Czechoslovakia provided Soviet Russia with landing fields for
aircraft, thereby increasing the threat against Germany." -- Adolf
Hitler

Here is part of Hitler's speech on April 1, 1939 in Wilhelmshaven:
"They say we have no right to do this or that. I should like to raise
the counter-question: What right, for example, has England to shoot
down Arabs in Palestine just because they defend their homeland; who
gives them this right?
Anyway, we have not slaughtered thousands in Central Europe but
instead we have regulated our problems with law and order.
However, I should like to say one thing here: The German people of
today, the German Reich of today is not willing to surrender life
interests, it also is not willing to face rising dangers without doing
something about them.
When the Allies, without regard or purpose, right, tradition, or even
reasonableness, changed the map of Europe, we had not the power to
prevent it. If, however, they expect the Germany of today to sit
patiently by until the very last day when this same result would again
be repeated - while they create satellite States and set them against
Germany - then they are mistaking the Germany of today for the Germany
of before the war.
He who declares himself ready to pull the chestnuts out of the fire
for these powers must realize he burns his fingers.
Really, we feel no hatred against the Czech people. We have lived
together for years. The English statesmen do not know this. They have
no idea that Hradcany castle was not built by an Englishman but by a
German and that the St. Vitus Cathedral likewise was not erected by
Englishmen but that German hands did it.
Even the French were not active there. They do not know that already
at a time when England still was very small a German Kaiser was paid
homage on this hill [Hradcany castle]-that one thousand years before
me the first German King stood there and accepted the homage of this
people.
Englishmen do not know that. They could not know that and they do not
have to know it. It is sufficient that we know it and that it is true
that this territory lay in the living space of the German people for
over a thousand years.
Despite this, however, we would have had nothing against an
independent Czech State if, first, it had not suppressed Germans, and,
second, if it had not been intended as the instrument of a future
attack on Germany. When, however, a former French Air Minister writes
in a newspaper that on the basis of their prominent position it is the
task of these Czechs to strike at the heart of German industry with
air attacks during war, then one understands that this is not without
interest to us and that we draw certain conclusions from it.
It would have been up to England and France to defend this airbase.
Upon us fell the task of preventing such an attack at all events. I
sought to accomplish this by a natural and simple way.
When I first saw that every effort of that kind was destined to be
wrecked and that elements hostile to Germany again would win the upper
hand, and as I further saw that this State had long since lost its
inner vitality - indeed, that it already was broken to pieces - I
again carried through the old German Reich. And I joined together
again what had to be united because of history and geographical
positions, and according to all rules of reason.
Not to oppress the Czech people! It will enjoy more freedom than the
suppressed people of the virtuous nations.
I have, so I believe, thereby rendered peace a great service, because
I have rendered innocuous in time an instrument which was destined to
become effective in war against Germany. If they now say that this is
the signal that Germany now wants to attack the entire world, I do not
believe that this is meant seriously: such could only be the
expression of a bad conscience.
Perhaps it is rage over the failure of a far-flung plan, perhaps it is
an attempt to create tactical preconditions for a new policy of
encirclement.
Be that as it may: it is my conviction that thereby I have rendered
peace a great service and out of this conviction I decided three weeks
ago to name the coming party rally the 'Party Convention of Peace.'
For Germany has no intention of attacking other people. What we,
however, do not want to renounce is the building up of our economic
relations. We have a right thereto and I do not accept any condition
from a European or a non-European statesman.
The German Reich is not only a great producer but also a gigantic
consumer, just as we as a producer will be an irreplaceable trade
partner, so as a consumer we are capable of honorably and fairly
paying for what we consume.
We are not thinking about making war on other peoples. However, our
precondition is that they leave us in peace.
In any case the German Reich is not ready everlastingly to accept
intimidation or even a policy of encirclement."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-02 12:01:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the
lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other wealthy
in Ukraine.
The economic crisis there was caused by the
privatisations and deregulations, the western precept.
Russia offered a $15 billion bailout. Strangely enough
some Ukrainians would rather ask for help from the IMF,
who wouldn't offer more than $1 million. The new leaders
announced stringent measures, like those in Greece, cuts
in health care, pensions, slashing of jobs, in short the
shock doctrine.
Yes that's true. That will lead to farther raise of
people's poverty. Especially in the eastern industrial
areas of Ukraine.
Post by Beli
That was why this revolt was instigated. The west is not
prepared to help Ukraine in any way. The west wants free
markets over there and low wages.
I think, the EU strategists hope that Ukraine may
become a new big source of cheap labor force
migration to the western Europe. It may be profitable
for Western business owners. Not so profitable for
the ordinary Westerners.
Post by Beli
Post by Oleg Smirnov
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However
those who orchestrated the protest have heated the
insane hateful passions to so much extent, and
encouraged so radical forces, that it made civilized
solution difficult. But any lawless solution usually
lead to a backlash, and the story proves that one more
time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup have
proven their basic imperialist instincts matter much
more than the democratic values, if there is a
'geo-political' interest.
And the US fucked up the EU as well (Victoria Nuland
said: "Fuck the EU"), by creating the problem of right
wing extremism and destabilising the whole of Europe.
This is not only a war by the US against Russia, but also
one against a stable Europe.
As in other countries the west has again brought a
minority to power, which is a guarantee for decades of
unrest and violence.
I hope Russia will protect the Crimea and the whole
south-eastern part of the Ukraine.
Ukraine already had ardently pro-Western / anti-Russia
president Youschenko, who ended up with 4% of electoral
support. The nominal leaders of the new order are no
less corrupt, and the oligarchs remain the same. The
main change is that the far right are now in top power.
abelard
2014-03-02 10:31:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist bleeding
off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the lifestyle
of those opposition leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However those
who orchestrated the protest have heated the insane hateful
passions to so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story proves
that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him, while
filing charges against yanny...

or do you mean the russian/shorty invasion?
or are you working to excuse yet another russian invasion?
Post by Oleg Smirnov
have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than the
democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political' interest.
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-02 11:20:39 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:16:13 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the
lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other wealthy
in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However
those who orchestrated the protest have heated the
insane hateful passions to so much extent, and
encouraged so radical forces, that it made civilized
solution difficult. But any lawless solution usually
lead to a backlash, and the story proves that one more
time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him,
while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement 'warranted'
by those three foreign ministers and ordered police to
leave the streets of Kiev, the leaders of the militants
unambiguously refused to recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported Yanukovich
before this 'victory', were harshly harassed and
threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the revolutionary
militants came to MPs' at home and threatened their
family members, it's known that (detached) house of at
least one of the MPs was set on fire. That's how the
obedience of the MPs for the new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards for
electronic voting and these cards were then used in the
absence of their owners.

Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only you're
extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.

I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of violence
of the revolutionaries and their political culture is
illustrated well by the videos I already gave links to:


or do you mean the russian/shorty invasion?
or are you working to excuse yet another russian invasion?
Post by Oleg Smirnov
have proven
their basic imperialist instincts matter much more than
the democratic values, if there is a 'geo-political'
interest.
abelard
2014-03-02 11:30:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:16:13 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the
lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other wealthy
in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However
those who orchestrated the protest have heated the
insane hateful passions to so much extent, and
encouraged so radical forces, that it made civilized
solution difficult. But any lawless solution usually
lead to a backlash, and the story proves that one more
time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him,
while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement 'warranted'
by those three foreign ministers and ordered police to
leave the streets of Kiev, the leaders of the militants
unambiguously refused to recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported Yanukovich
before this 'victory', were harshly harassed and
threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the revolutionary
militants came to MPs' at home and threatened their
family members, it's known that (detached) house of at
least one of the MPs was set on fire. That's how the
obedience of the MPs for the new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards for
electronic voting and these cards were then used in the
absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only you're
extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it didn't' defence

you've learned well from your marxist revolutionaries...
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of violence
of the revolutionaries and their political culture is
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...

your methods and excuses only convince your fellow
travelers...
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-02 12:08:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 15:20:39 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:16:13 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and
his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the
lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other wealthy
in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and
so the crisis could be resolved by a compromise.
However those who orchestrated the protest have heated
the insane hateful passions to so much extent, and
encouraged so radical forces, that it made civilized
solution difficult. But any lawless solution usually
lead to a backlash, and the story proves that one more
time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him,
while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement 'warranted'
by those three foreign ministers and ordered police to
leave the streets of Kiev, the leaders of the militants
unambiguously refused to recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported Yanukovich
before this 'victory', were harshly harassed and
threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the revolutionary
militants came to MPs' at home and threatened their
family members, it's known that (detached) house of at
least one of the MPs was set on fire. That's how the
obedience of the MPs for the new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards for
electronic voting and these cards were then used in the
absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only you're
extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it didn't'
defence
you've learned well from your marxist revolutionaries...
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of violence
of the revolutionaries and their political culture is
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to those who
shot at them. As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the 'socialsts'.
your methods and excuses only convince your fellow
travelers...
abelard
2014-03-02 12:27:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 15:20:39 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:16:13 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and
his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the
lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other wealthy
in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and
so the crisis could be resolved by a compromise.
However those who orchestrated the protest have heated
the insane hateful passions to so much extent, and
encouraged so radical forces, that it made civilized
solution difficult. But any lawless solution usually
lead to a backlash, and the story proves that one more
time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him,
while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement 'warranted'
by those three foreign ministers and ordered police to
leave the streets of Kiev, the leaders of the militants
unambiguously refused to recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported Yanukovich
before this 'victory', were harshly harassed and
threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the revolutionary
militants came to MPs' at home and threatened their
family members, it's known that (detached) house of at
least one of the MPs was set on fire. That's how the
obedience of the MPs for the new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards for
electronic voting and these cards were then used in the
absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only you're
extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it didn't'
defence
you've learned well from your marxist revolutionaries...
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of violence
of the revolutionaries and their political culture is
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to those who
shot at them.
your naivete is considerable...police always make that
excuse...

your willingness to believe what you want to believe is a considerable
road block to the development of your intelligence
Post by Oleg Smirnov
As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the 'socialsts'.
your 'english' is failing again...
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-02 12:52:27 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 16:08:44 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
abelard,
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 15:20:39 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
abelard,
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:16:13 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and
his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from
the lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other
wealthy in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and
so the crisis could be resolved by a compromise.
However those who orchestrated the protest have
heated the insane hateful passions to so much
extent, and encouraged so radical forces, that it
made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story
proves that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him,
while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement
'warranted' by those three foreign ministers and
ordered police to leave the streets of Kiev, the
leaders of the militants unambiguously refused to
recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported
Yanukovich before this 'victory', were harshly
harassed and threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the
revolutionary militants came to MPs' at home and
threatened their family members, it's known that
(detached) house of at least one of the MPs was set on
fire. That's how the obedience of the MPs for the new
order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards for
electronic voting and these cards were then used in the
absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only
you're extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it didn't'
defence
you've learned well from your marxist revolutionaries...
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of violence
of the revolutionaries and their political culture is
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to those
who shot at them.
your naivete is considerable...police always make that
excuse...
your willingness to believe what you want to believe is a
considerable road block to the development of your
intelligence
As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the 'socialsts'.
your 'english' is failing again...
All your rants don't change the fact that
the Western powers are supporting now illegal
swindlers in Kiev that seized power by coup.
abelard
2014-03-02 13:03:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 16:08:44 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
abelard,
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 15:20:39 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
abelard,
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:16:13 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and
his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from
the lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other
wealthy in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and
so the crisis could be resolved by a compromise.
However those who orchestrated the protest have
heated the insane hateful passions to so much
extent, and encouraged so radical forces, that it
made civilized solution difficult. But any lawless
solution usually lead to a backlash, and the story
proves that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him,
while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement
'warranted' by those three foreign ministers and
ordered police to leave the streets of Kiev, the
leaders of the militants unambiguously refused to
recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported
Yanukovich before this 'victory', were harshly
harassed and threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the
revolutionary militants came to MPs' at home and
threatened their family members, it's known that
(detached) house of at least one of the MPs was set on
fire. That's how the obedience of the MPs for the new
order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards for
electronic voting and these cards were then used in the
absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only
you're extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it didn't'
defence
you've learned well from your marxist revolutionaries...
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of violence
of the revolutionaries and their political culture is
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to those
who shot at them.
your naivete is considerable...police always make that
excuse...
your willingness to believe what you want to believe is a
considerable road block to the development of your
intelligence
As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the 'socialsts'.
your 'english' is failing again...
All your rants don't change the fact that
the Western powers are supporting now illegal
swindlers in Kiev that seized power by coup.
you really are a card...
the ukrainians unfairly objected to your moscow puppet...boo hoo...
who on earth do you suppose your agitprop convinces?

ps, did you get your controller to correct your 'english'?
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-02 13:24:26 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 16:52:27 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy
lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc,
and his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different
from the lifestyle of those opposition leaders and
other wealthy in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures,
and so the crisis could be resolved by a
compromise. However those who orchestrated the
protest have heated the insane hateful passions to
so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any
lawless solution usually lead to a backlash, and
the story proves that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed
him, while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement
'warranted' by those three foreign ministers and
ordered police to leave the streets of Kiev, the
leaders of the militants unambiguously refused to
recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and
the new order. With that, those MPs who supported
Yanukovich before this 'victory', were harshly
harassed and threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the
revolutionary militants came to MPs' at home and
threatened their family members, it's known that
(detached) house of at least one of the MPs was set
on fire. That's how the obedience of the MPs for the
new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards
for electronic voting and these cards were then used
in the absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only
you're extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it
didn't' defence
you've learned well from your marxist
revolutionaries...
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of
violence of the revolutionaries and their political
culture is illustrated well by the videos I already
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to those
who shot at them.
your naivete is considerable...police always make that
excuse...
your willingness to believe what you want to believe is
a considerable road block to the development of your
intelligence
Post by Oleg Smirnov
As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the
'socialsts'.
your 'english' is failing again...
All your rants don't change the fact that
the Western powers are supporting now illegal
swindlers in Kiev that seized power by coup.
you really are a card...
the ukrainians
Do speak for yourself, clown.

All these agitprop assholes are speaking for 'the
Ukrainians' and use 'the Russian elements' term,
and other dirty tricks like that.

The opinion and will of people becomes clear only
via proper democratic procedures but not via
insane roarers and militants, and what we see in
the Ukrainian case is a shameless trample of sane
democracy in favor of the Western 'interests'.
unfairly objected to your moscow
puppet...boo hoo... who on earth do you suppose your
agitprop convinces?
ps, did you get your controller to correct your 'english'?
abelard
2014-03-02 13:31:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 16:52:27 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy
lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc,
and his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different
from the lifestyle of those opposition leaders and
other wealthy in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures,
and so the crisis could be resolved by a
compromise. However those who orchestrated the
protest have heated the insane hateful passions to
so much extent, and encouraged so radical forces,
that it made civilized solution difficult. But any
lawless solution usually lead to a backlash, and
the story proves that one more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed
him, while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement
'warranted' by those three foreign ministers and
ordered police to leave the streets of Kiev, the
leaders of the militants unambiguously refused to
recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and
the new order. With that, those MPs who supported
Yanukovich before this 'victory', were harshly
harassed and threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the
revolutionary militants came to MPs' at home and
threatened their family members, it's known that
(detached) house of at least one of the MPs was set
on fire. That's how the obedience of the MPs for the
new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards
for electronic voting and these cards were then used
in the absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only
you're extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it
didn't' defence
you've learned well from your marxist
revolutionaries...
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of
violence of the revolutionaries and their political
culture is illustrated well by the videos I already
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to those
who shot at them.
your naivete is considerable...police always make that
excuse...
your willingness to believe what you want to believe is
a considerable road block to the development of your
intelligence
Post by Oleg Smirnov
As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the
'socialsts'.
your 'english' is failing again...
All your rants don't change the fact that
the Western powers are supporting now illegal
swindlers in Kiev that seized power by coup.
you really are a card...
the ukrainians
Do speak for yourself, clown.
All these agitprop assholes are speaking for 'the
Ukrainians' and use 'the Russian elements' term,
and other dirty tricks like that.
The opinion and will of people becomes clear only
via proper democratic procedures but not via
insane roarers and militants, and what we see in
the Ukrainian case is a shameless trample of sane
democracy in favor of the Western 'interests'.
more old-style moscow agitprop...

still, i expect they told you that you're a good patriot...
my country right of wrong...
it's time you tried to think for yourself

the bottom line is that shorty has invaded yet another country...

and that the puppet yanny's goons started shooting the
citizens...

there are no eussr troops in ukraine...and a new election
is being arranged...as long as shorty stays in his own
dung heap
Post by Oleg Smirnov
unfairly objected to your moscow
puppet...boo hoo... who on earth do you suppose your
agitprop convinces?
ps, did you get your controller to correct your 'english'?
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-02 13:42:42 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 17:24:26 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy
lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc,
and his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much
different from the lifestyle of those opposition
leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures,
and so the crisis could be resolved by a
compromise. However those who orchestrated the
protest have heated the insane hateful passions
to so much extent, and encouraged so radical
forces, that it made civilized solution
difficult. But any lawless solution usually lead
to a backlash, and the story proves that one
more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed
him, while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed
with anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement
'warranted' by those three foreign ministers and
ordered police to leave the streets of Kiev, the
leaders of the militants unambiguously refused to
recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and
the new order. With that, those MPs who supported
Yanukovich before this 'victory', were harshly
harassed and threatened. Some of MPs were beaten,
the revolutionary militants came to MPs' at home
and threatened their family members, it's known
that (detached) house of at least one of the MPs
was set on fire. That's how the obedience of the
MPs for the new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards
for electronic voting and these cards were then
used in the absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached
and dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if
only you're extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it
didn't' defence
you've learned well from your marxist
revolutionaries...
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of
violence of the revolutionaries and their political
culture is illustrated well by the videos I already
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to
those who shot at them.
your naivete is considerable...police always make that
excuse...
your willingness to believe what you want to believe
is a considerable road block to the development of
your intelligence
Post by Oleg Smirnov
As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the
'socialsts'.
your 'english' is failing again...
All your rants don't change the fact that
the Western powers are supporting now illegal
swindlers in Kiev that seized power by coup.
you really are a card...
the ukrainians
Do speak for yourself, clown.
All these agitprop assholes are speaking for 'the
Ukrainians' and use 'the Russian elements' term,
and other dirty tricks like that.
The opinion and will of people becomes clear only
via proper democratic procedures but not via
insane roarers and militants, and what we see in
the Ukrainian case is a shameless trample of sane
democracy in favor of the Western 'interests'.
more old-style moscow agitprop...
still, i expect they told you that you're a good
patriot... my country right of wrong...
it's time you tried to think for yourself
the bottom line is that shorty has invaded yet another
country...
and that the puppet yanny's goons started shooting the
citizens...
there are no eussr troops in ukraine...and a new election
is being arranged...as long as shorty stays in his own
dung heap
Hypocrites like you stay in dung heap.
abelard
2014-03-02 13:45:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 17:24:26 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy
lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc,
and his 'wealthy lifestyle' was not much
different from the lifestyle of those opposition
leaders and other wealthy in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures,
and so the crisis could be resolved by a
compromise. However those who orchestrated the
protest have heated the insane hateful passions
to so much extent, and encouraged so radical
forces, that it made civilized solution
difficult. But any lawless solution usually lead
to a backlash, and the story proves that one
more time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed
him, while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed
with anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement
'warranted' by those three foreign ministers and
ordered police to leave the streets of Kiev, the
leaders of the militants unambiguously refused to
recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and
the new order. With that, those MPs who supported
Yanukovich before this 'victory', were harshly
harassed and threatened. Some of MPs were beaten,
the revolutionary militants came to MPs' at home
and threatened their family members, it's known
that (detached) house of at least one of the MPs
was set on fire. That's how the obedience of the
MPs for the new order was provided.
They also forced some MPs to give them their cards
for electronic voting and these cards were then
used in the absence of their owners.
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached
and dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if
only you're extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
ah yes, the standard it didn't happen, really it
didn't' defence
you've learned well from your marxist
revolutionaries...
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I'm not exaggerating horrors, and the level of
violence of the revolutionaries and their political
culture is illustrated well by the videos I already
http://youtu.be/zNBtEF-eZVU
http://youtu.be/q8JC-ZjqFb4
as if i care for your 'links'...
the government shot the demonstrators...
So far it's known that the policemen shot back to
those who shot at them.
your naivete is considerable...police always make that
excuse...
your willingness to believe what you want to believe
is a considerable road block to the development of
your intelligence
Post by Oleg Smirnov
As usual you've no any rational to object with.
Only irrelevant pathetic bubbling about the
'socialsts'.
your 'english' is failing again...
All your rants don't change the fact that
the Western powers are supporting now illegal
swindlers in Kiev that seized power by coup.
you really are a card...
the ukrainians
Do speak for yourself, clown.
All these agitprop assholes are speaking for 'the
Ukrainians' and use 'the Russian elements' term,
and other dirty tricks like that.
The opinion and will of people becomes clear only
via proper democratic procedures but not via
insane roarers and militants, and what we see in
the Ukrainian case is a shameless trample of sane
democracy in favor of the Western 'interests'.
more old-style moscow agitprop...
still, i expect they told you that you're a good
patriot... my country right of wrong...
it's time you tried to think for yourself
the bottom line is that shorty has invaded yet another
country...
and that the puppet yanny's goons started shooting the
citizens...
there are no eussr troops in ukraine...and a new election
is being arranged...as long as shorty stays in his own
dung heap
Hypocrites like you stay in dung heap.
your reduction to blathering is most gratifying....
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Beli
2014-03-02 16:45:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
All your rants don't change the fact that
the Western powers are supporting now illegal
swindlers in Kiev that seized power by coup.
Some interesting links about the involvement of foreign entities:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-militia-commander-fights-to-protect-
kiev/

http://pando.com/2014/02/28/pierre-omidyar-co-funded-ukraine-revolution-
groups-with-us-government-documents-show/

http://retecool.com/post/de-coup-in-kiev
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-06 10:45:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:16:13 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by abelard
ukraine has a fairly functional democracy...
It was rather functional before the coup.
No it wasn't, the leader was a typical socialist
bleeding off millions to fund his wealthy lifestyle.
He was rather corrupt, but not a 'socialist' etc, and his
'wealthy lifestyle' was not much different from the
lifestyle of those opposition leaders and other wealthy
in Ukraine.
He didn't refuse to follow democratic procedures, and so
the crisis could be resolved by a compromise. However
those who orchestrated the protest have heated the
insane hateful passions to so much extent, and
encouraged so radical forces, that it made civilized
solution difficult. But any lawless solution usually
lead to a backlash, and the story proves that one more
time.
And the Western leaders by supporting the coup
i ask again, what 'coup'?
the ukrainian parliament impeached and dismissed him,
while filing charges against yanny...
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement 'warranted'
by those three foreign ministers and ordered police to
leave the streets of Kiev, the leaders of the militants
unambiguously refused to recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported Yanukovich
before this 'victory', were harshly harassed and
threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the revolutionary
militants came to MPs' at home and threatened their
family members, it's known that (detached) house of at
least one of the MPs was set on fire. That's how the
obedience of the MPs for the new order was provided.


3:40 "Enormous pressure against the members of parliament."

Estonian Foreign Minister confirms my point here.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Thus the pathetic claim that parliament impeached and
dismissed Yanukovich lawfully makes sense if only you're
extremely stupid or deep hypocrite.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-06 16:56:40 UTC
Permalink
<http://rt.com/op-edge/about-liz-wahl-media-wars-126/>

"And now we’ve got a genuine war going on – no, thank
God, it’s not in Crimea. It’s a media war. .. The storm
of articles posted about RT over the last couple of days
– literally tons of printed copy - looks as if it were
written to dictation."

I also have to say that what I see is, the mainstream
English-speaking media manifest their 'herd mentality'
very well.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-10 17:17:27 UTC
Permalink
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10687948/British-aid-to-train-Ukrainian-riot-troops.html>

The EU spent more than £1m of British-funded aid on instructing Interior
Troops from Ukraine's Ministry of Internal Affairs on how to control crowds
and arrest protesters, documents show.

<http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/ukraine-crisis-shots-fired-crimea-airbase>

German Green MP Hans-Christian Ströbele has released a statement revealing
that the German government advised Viktor Yankovych’s government on domestic
security matters between 2009 and 2013, Guardian Berlin correspondent Philip
Oltermann (@philipoltermann) reports:

As part of this exchange, regular meetings were set up between the German
Federal Criminal Police Office and the Ukrainian secret service SBU. Berkut
staff attended training seminars in Germany and were supplied with light body
armour and protective helmets.

...

Those who now call Yankovych 'pro-Russia puppet' and other bad names should
realize that *the only* thing that *suddenly* converted him from a good guy
to a very much bad guy was his rejection of the EU-association economic deal.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-10 23:31:48 UTC
Permalink
Meanwhile, campaign of intimidation is unfolding in
Ukraine against those who don't feel themselves happy
enough with the west-Ukrainian nationalism.

Here is an educational video made by the nationalists.
It shows what kind of treatment those in Ukraine who
are friendly to Russia or Russian language should
expect if they deny to admire the new order.


Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well,
by now at least two figures of civil activism were
captured and imprisoned without coherent charges.
Michael Swift
2014-03-11 00:27:36 UTC
Permalink
In article <lfli5r$iqr$***@os.motzarella.org>, Oleg Smirnov <***@gde.ru>
writes
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well,
by now at least two figures of civil activism were captured and imprisoned
without coherent charges.
A bit like the Russian Federation then, Pussy Riot anyone.

Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 00:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well,
by now at least two figures of civil activism were
captured and imprisoned without coherent charges.
A bit like the Russian Federation then, Pussy Riot anyone.
Those were about hooliganism but not politics.
Post by Michael Swift
Mike
Michael Swift
2014-03-11 11:35:58 UTC
Permalink
In article <lflmmh$fgi$***@os.motzarella.org>, Oleg Smirnov <***@gde.ru>
writes
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well,
by now at least two figures of civil activism were
captured and imprisoned without coherent charges.
A bit like the Russian Federation then, Pussy Riot anyone.
Those were about hooliganism but not politics.
Yeh, right.

Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Byker
2014-03-11 00:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Meanwhile, campaign of intimidation is unfolding in Ukraine against those
who don't feel themselves happy enough with the west-Ukrainian
nationalism.
Here is an educational video made by the nationalists.
It shows what kind of treatment those in Ukraine who are friendly to
Russia or Russian language should expect if they deny to admire the new
order. http://youtu.be/VivY94Cp0s0
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well, by now at least
two figures of civil activism were captured and imprisoned without
coherent charges.
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly absorbed into
Russia, it will drive the rest of Ukraine right into the arms of Europe,
something that Putin just wouldn't stand for. Ukraine could become another
Afghanistan, only without the suicide bombers (which could change should the
Tatars get involved).
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 00:58:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Meanwhile, campaign of intimidation is unfolding in
Ukraine against those who don't feel themselves happy
enough with the west-Ukrainian nationalism.
Here is an educational video made by the nationalists.
It shows what kind of treatment those in Ukraine who are
friendly to Russia or Russian language should expect if
they deny to admire the new order.
http://youtu.be/VivY94Cp0s0
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well,
by now at least two figures of civil activism were
captured and imprisoned without coherent charges.
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly
They want referendum.

That's not forcibly.
Post by Byker
absorbed into Russia, it will drive the rest of Ukraine
right into the arms of Europe, something that Putin just
wouldn't stand for. Ukraine could become another
Afghanistan, only without the suicide bombers (which
could change should the Tatars get involved).
The taxpayers of the US and EU will have to pay some
money to make the 45 million population of Ukraine feel
happy enough, otherwise it may become riskily instable.
Mr. B1ack
2014-03-11 01:30:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Meanwhile, campaign of intimidation is unfolding in
Ukraine against those who don't feel themselves happy
enough with the west-Ukrainian nationalism.
Here is an educational video made by the nationalists.
It shows what kind of treatment those in Ukraine who are
friendly to Russia or Russian language should expect if
they deny to admire the new order.
http://youtu.be/VivY94Cp0s0
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well,
by now at least two figures of civil activism were
captured and imprisoned without coherent charges.
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly
They want referendum.
That's not forcibly.
Post by Byker
absorbed into Russia, it will drive the rest of Ukraine
right into the arms of Europe, something that Putin just
wouldn't stand for. Ukraine could become another
Afghanistan, only without the suicide bombers (which
could change should the Tatars get involved).
The taxpayers of the US and EU will have to pay some
money to make the 45 million population of Ukraine feel
happy enough, otherwise it may become riskily instable.
Yes, we ARE going to bribe them ...

We want those videos of "democracy-loving"
Ukranians and their new coup government
praising the EU and USA. Great propaganda.

However I don't think Putin really cares very much
about the rest of Ukraine ... he wants what was
traditionally Russias - and all those ports and
air-bases. Those are where the real money and
power come from. Ukraine will have to negotiate
access and pay usage fees and Russia gets its
strategic warm-water ports. Then everybody is
almost happy ... which is about as good as it
gets with diplomacy.
Byker
2014-03-11 01:50:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
We want those videos of "democracy-loving"
Ukranians and their new coup government
praising the EU and USA. Great propaganda.
However I don't think Putin really cares very much
about the rest of Ukraine ... he wants what was
traditionally Russias - and all those ports and
air-bases. Those are where the real money and
power come from. Ukraine will have to negotiate
access and pay usage fees and Russia gets its
strategic warm-water ports.
If Putin decides to rattle sabers with NATO, all Turkey has to do is close
the Bosphorus and the Black Sea fleet will become ships in a bottle.
Mr. B1ack
2014-03-11 12:02:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
We want those videos of "democracy-loving"
Ukranians and their new coup government
praising the EU and USA. Great propaganda.
However I don't think Putin really cares very much
about the rest of Ukraine ... he wants what was
traditionally Russias - and all those ports and
air-bases. Those are where the real money and
power come from. Ukraine will have to negotiate
access and pay usage fees and Russia gets its
strategic warm-water ports.
If Putin decides to rattle sabers with NATO, all Turkey has to do is close
the Bosphorus and the Black Sea fleet will become ships in a bottle.
Um ... no. That's how to end the world - and
Ukraine (nor anything) is worth that.

19th-century military thinking works OK if your
foes are 2nd/3rd-world ... but 1st-world countries
just can't take each other on directly anymore
and that's that. Find alternatives and compromises
whether you like 'em or not.
Byker
2014-03-11 23:01:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
Um ... no. That's how to end the world - and
Ukraine (nor anything) is worth that.
As if the Russians would really nuke Istanbul over the Bosphorus. I would
consider it a revolutionary act if a third party scuttled a few junk ships
in the straits like the Russians did with the Crimean harbors
Mr. B1ack
2014-03-12 14:47:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Um ... no. That's how to end the world - and
Ukraine (nor anything) is worth that.
As if the Russians would really nuke Istanbul over the Bosphorus.
Nuke ? No, not immediately anyhow. Instead they'd send
forces to occupy the straights and install fortifications and
anti-aircraft and anti-sub defenses. It really *is* in their "vital
national interests" to keep the straights open, much more
than Iraq and Afghanistan were in *our" vital national interests,
so Russia definitely would act.

But then Turkey and NATO just couldn't *stand* a Russian
occupation there ... so what follows next, and next, and next ?

Eventually somebody gets boxed-in or fed up to
the point of being nutso ... and the global meltdown
commences.

Avoid global melt-down. Don't throw away a billion
years of hard-won evolution ... we might never get
past the slime-mold stage next time.
Byker
2014-03-12 18:27:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
Eventually somebody gets boxed-in or fed up to
the point of being nutso ... and the global meltdown
commences.
Let's see how Putin reacts when he realizes his ego has gotten the best of
him
Mr. B1ack
2014-03-12 19:13:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Eventually somebody gets boxed-in or fed up to
the point of being nutso ... and the global meltdown
commences.
Let's see how Putin reacts when he realizes his ego has gotten the best of
him
While he definitely HAS an ego, I don't think
the Crimea thing is a result of ego. Those
warm-water ports really are a Russian "vital
national interest". Russia HAS to make sure
they're secure against the anti-Russian coup
govt in Kiev.

Or do you think "vital national interests" apply
ONLY to the USA and friends ... ?
Byker
2014-03-12 20:31:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
While he definitely HAS an ego, I don't think
the Crimea thing is a result of ego. Those
warm-water ports really are a Russian "vital
national interest". Russia HAS to make sure
they're secure against the anti-Russian coup
govt in Kiev.
Traditional Russian rulers, whether Czars or Commissars, have to demonstrate
their "strong leadership" capabilites by invading nearby countries, crushing
peasant revolts, etc. The Russian people just wouldn't respect a leader who
was afraid to rule with an iron fist. You'd think that Putin have already
proven that in the Chechen Wars.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-12 20:42:34 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:27:08 -0500, "Byker"
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Eventually somebody gets boxed-in or fed up to
the point of being nutso ... and the global meltdown
commences.
Let's see how Putin reacts when he realizes his ego has
gotten the best of him
While he definitely HAS an ego, I don't think
the Crimea thing is a result of ego. Those
warm-water ports really are a Russian "vital
national interest". Russia HAS to make sure
they're secure against the anti-Russian coup
govt in Kiev.
Or do you think "vital national interests" apply
ONLY to the USA and friends ... ?
The 'warm-water ports' are still not of global
military importance, the most important Russia's
ports (from where the Russian submarines can
approach, say, the American coasts) are in other
places.

Whether it would be the Putin's ego or the ports
it's not of the first relevance, the roots of the
situation are in humanitarian issues.
Mr. B1ack
2014-03-12 22:34:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:27:08 -0500, "Byker"
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Eventually somebody gets boxed-in or fed up to
the point of being nutso ... and the global meltdown
commences.
Let's see how Putin reacts when he realizes his ego has
gotten the best of him
While he definitely HAS an ego, I don't think
the Crimea thing is a result of ego. Those
warm-water ports really are a Russian "vital
national interest". Russia HAS to make sure
they're secure against the anti-Russian coup
govt in Kiev.
Or do you think "vital national interests" apply
ONLY to the USA and friends ... ?
The 'warm-water ports' are still not of global
military importance, the most important Russia's
ports (from where the Russian submarines can
approach, say, the American coasts) are in other
places.
Whether it would be the Putin's ego or the ports
it's not of the first relevance, the roots of the
situation are in humanitarian issues.
I'd say the warm-water ports are "very handy"
for military/security needs - not anything you
would WANT to see slip into unfriendly hands.

The USA faced a similar threat from Manuel
Noreiga, who had taken power in Panama.
From his rhetoric, it seemed he wanted to
deny American military and commercial
vessels access. Although the Panama
canal was not irreplacable, it is "very
handy" - and the USA used military force
to secure the canal zone and take away
Noreiga.

Crimea also contains large numbers of
COMMERCIAL ports, which no doubt are
used for Russian imports and exports
all through the year. While you may be
able to slip submarines out under the
Baltic ice, trade vessels would be much
restricted. I'm not sure if Vladivostok in
the far east is open all year, but even if
it is there are not high-capacity rail lines
and roads for moving large volumes of
merchandise all the way to Moscow.

So, whether it's Putin or anyone else, there
would seem to be considerable motivation
to keep Crimean ports out of the hands of
anti-Russian agitators.

My guess ... Russia will not push further into
Ukraine, sticking with Crimea. It has some
historical claims, a population that is mostly
pro-Russian and then there's the "national
interests" argument. Putin will ignore any
demands that he abandon Crimea and
Russia has enough economic and political
influence to thwart almost any kind of
economic retaliation. So, consider it
fiat accompli ... Crimea is now Russia
and will stay that way.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-12 20:41:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Eventually somebody gets boxed-in or fed up to
the point of being nutso ... and the global meltdown
commences.
Let's see how Putin reacts when he realizes his ego has
gotten the best of him
There're many people living in Russia, not only Putin.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 06:10:03 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 04:58:43 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Meanwhile, campaign of intimidation is unfolding in
Ukraine against those who don't feel themselves happy
enough with the west-Ukrainian nationalism.
Here is an educational video made by the nationalists.
It shows what kind of treatment those in Ukraine who
are friendly to Russia or Russian language should
expect if they deny to admire the new order.
http://youtu.be/VivY94Cp0s0
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well,
by now at least two figures of civil activism were
captured and imprisoned without coherent charges.
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly
They want referendum.
That's not forcibly.
Post by Byker
absorbed into Russia, it will drive the rest of Ukraine
right into the arms of Europe, something that Putin just
wouldn't stand for. Ukraine could become another
Afghanistan, only without the suicide bombers (which
could change should the Tatars get involved).
The taxpayers of the US and EU will have to pay some
money to make the 45 million population of Ukraine feel
happy enough, otherwise it may become riskily instable.
Yes, we ARE going to bribe them ...
We want those videos of "democracy-loving"
Ukranians and their new coup government
praising the EU and USA. Great propaganda.
Ukraine was in economic trouble, and it was made
worse, under cover of the 'revolution' some smart
people seem to have stolen the last money there.

The Ukrainian protest movement was driven mostly
by national-socialist sentiments, and with that
it was hijacked by more radical far right.

The people certainly will be deeply upset if the
EU and IMF will dictate, as usual, the policies
of austerity and minimization of social support.

Add to that, that the far right got real weapons
during the coup, maybe including such things as
MPADSs, nobody disarmed them and hardly will do.

...
However I don't think Putin really cares very much
about the rest of Ukraine ... he wants what was
traditionally Russias - and all those ports and
air-bases. Those are where the real money and
power come from. Ukraine will have to negotiate
access and pay usage fees and Russia gets its
strategic warm-water ports. Then everybody is
almost happy ... which is about as good as it
gets with diplomacy.
Michael Swift
2014-03-11 11:40:30 UTC
Permalink
In article <lfln50$hv5$***@os.motzarella.org>, Oleg Smirnov <***@gde.ru>
writes
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep voting until they get
the correct result, if past Russian voting methods are followed there
will be a 105% yes vote.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
That's not forcibly.
No, it's corrupt.

Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 13:05:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep voting
until they get the correct result, if past Russian voting
methods are followed there will be a 105% yes vote.
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea
doesn't like very much what is going on in Kiev, they
are afraid of the new regime, and want back at home.
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
That's not forcibly.
No, it's corrupt.
You are biased.
Max Demian
2014-03-11 14:00:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep voting
until they get the correct result, if past Russian voting
methods are followed there will be a 105% yes vote.
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea doesn't like very much
what is going on in Kiev, they are afraid of the new regime, and want back
at home.
That's the Scottish method, where you only ask the people in the region that
wants to change its master.

Independent Yorkshire anyone?
--
Max Demian
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 15:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Max Demian
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Smirnov
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is
forcibly
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep voting
until they get the correct result, if past Russian
voting methods are followed there will be a 105% yes
vote.
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea
doesn't like very much what is going on in Kiev, they
are afraid of the new regime, and want back at home.
That's the Scottish method, where you only ask the people
in the region that wants to change its master.
All would be different if there was no militant
violence in Kiev that destroyed democratic legitimacy
of central authority.
Post by Max Demian
Independent Yorkshire anyone?
--
Max Demian
Michael Swift
2014-03-11 17:13:45 UTC
Permalink
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea doesn't like very much
what is going on in Kiev, they are afraid of the new regime, and want back
at home.
That's the Scottish method, where you only ask the people in the region that
wants to change its master.
Independent Yorkshire anyone?
Best idea of the week, or failing that a New Northumbria which
originally stretched from the Humber to the Firth of Forth.

Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
saracene
2014-03-11 18:17:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Swift
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea doesn't like very much
what is going on in Kiev, they are afraid of the new regime, and want back
at home.
That's the Scottish method, where you only ask the people in the region that
wants to change its master.
Independent Yorkshire anyone?
Best idea of the week, or failing that a New Northumbria which
originally stretched from the Humber to the Firth of Forth.
Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Back to the heptarchy. The Queen can become a Bretwalda.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 15:23:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is
forcibly
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep voting
until they get the correct result, if past Russian voting
methods are followed there will be a 105% yes vote.
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea
doesn't like very much what is going on in Kiev, they
are afraid of the new regime, and want back at home.


Why'd someone be afraid of democracy like this, really.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
That's not forcibly.
Mr. B1ack
2014-03-12 01:40:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is
forcibly
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep voting
until they get the correct result, if past Russian voting
methods are followed there will be a 105% yes vote.
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea
doesn't like very much what is going on in Kiev, they
are afraid of the new regime, and want back at home.
http://youtu.be/9fKIq8fE1CE
Why'd someone be afraid of democracy like this, really.
A nasty side-effect of any kind of "democracy" is
something called "the tyranny of the majority" ...
and that majority may decree things that are
absolutely unacceptable to a minority - even if
it's a rather large minority. This is how civil
wars get started.

Wise leaders can often negotiate compromises
and exceptions ... but truely wise leaders are few
and far between. Most wind up being oppressors
instead, forcing minority compliance sometimes
even at gunpoint. This is how really really BAD
civil wars get started.

The USA was among the first to try a "fix" in the
form of a "bill of rights" ... picking subjects known
to be the most common sources of civil wars and
guarenteeing there were lines not even the majority
could cross. This has worked with varying success,
lawyers and sharp politicians can often find ways
to skirt around "rights" when it serves them ... more
and more lately it seems ............

The other "fix" is representative 'democracy', a
republic, where a leadership is imposed between
popular will (or whim) and the apparatus of law
and power. This is where your "wise leaders"
are supposed to sit. Again, few are "wise".
Republics and enumerated 'rights' seem to DELAY
the worst of the problems of more 'pure' democracies
but not prevent them. Representatives are also more
convenient to bribe than entire populations, which
increases corruption.

Theocracy promises an absolute authority which
no man may question - the problem being that the
"will of god" is liberally interpreted by a power elite
to serve quite human wants and whims.

Frankly, there seems to be roughly seven billion
opinions as to "the way things ought to be" ... and
tomorrow x-percent of those opinions will have
changed somewhat. This means there IS NO
"perfect" or even "nearly perfect" form of government
or legal code. Any system will wind up oppressing
*somebody* and all real-world systems suffer from
entropy ... becoming more and more corrupt, mis-run
and centered on the power elite over time.

So, I'd say we're destined for an eternity of civil
wars and revolutions - small and large. Each will
make some people happier and some people
more angry and then it starts again.
Bob
2014-03-12 12:17:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is
forcibly
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep voting
until they get the correct result, if past Russian voting
methods are followed there will be a 105% yes vote.
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea
doesn't like very much what is going on in Kiev, they
are afraid of the new regime, and want back at home.
http://youtu.be/9fKIq8fE1CE
Why'd someone be afraid of democracy like this, really.
A nasty side-effect of any kind of "democracy" is
something called "the tyranny of the majority" ...
and that majority may decree things that are
absolutely unacceptable to a minority - even if
it's a rather large minority. This is how civil
wars get started.
Wise leaders can often negotiate compromises
and exceptions ... but truely wise leaders are few
and far between. Most wind up being oppressors
instead, forcing minority compliance sometimes
even at gunpoint. This is how really really BAD
civil wars get started.
The USA was among the first to try a "fix" in the
form of a "bill of rights" ... picking subjects known
to be the most common sources of civil wars and
guarenteeing there were lines not even the majority
could cross. This has worked with varying success,
lawyers and sharp politicians can often find ways
to skirt around "rights" when it serves them ... more
and more lately it seems ............
The other "fix" is representative 'democracy', a
republic, where a leadership is imposed between
popular will (or whim) and the apparatus of law
and power. This is where your "wise leaders"
are supposed to sit. Again, few are "wise".
Republics and enumerated 'rights' seem to DELAY
the worst of the problems of more 'pure' democracies
but not prevent them. Representatives are also more
convenient to bribe than entire populations, which
increases corruption.
Theocracy promises an absolute authority which
no man may question - the problem being that the
"will of god" is liberally interpreted by a power elite
to serve quite human wants and whims.
Frankly, there seems to be roughly seven billion
opinions as to "the way things ought to be" ... and
tomorrow x-percent of those opinions will have
changed somewhat. This means there IS NO
"perfect" or even "nearly perfect" form of government
or legal code. Any system will wind up oppressing
*somebody* and all real-world systems suffer from
entropy ... becoming more and more corrupt, mis-run
and centered on the power elite over time.
So, I'd say we're destined for an eternity of civil
wars and revolutions - small and large. Each will
make some people happier and some people
more angry and then it starts again.
Good analysis. Worth re-posting.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-12 20:39:42 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 19:23:31 +0400, "Oleg Smirnov"
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Michael Swift
Post by Oleg Smirnov
They want referendum.
Ha, that's the EU / Ireland type referendum, keep
voting until they get the correct result, if past
Russian voting methods are followed there will be a
105% yes vote.
But it seems the majority of the people in Crimea
doesn't like very much what is going on in Kiev, they
are afraid of the new regime, and want back at home.
http://youtu.be/9fKIq8fE1CE
Why'd someone be afraid of democracy like this, really.
A nasty side-effect of any kind of "democracy" is
something called "the tyranny of the majority" ...
How's it relevant to the above video?

The guys with bats and with the hammer aren't 'the majority'.
and that majority may decree things that are
absolutely unacceptable to a minority - even if
it's a rather large minority. This is how civil
wars get started.
Wise leaders can often negotiate compromises
and exceptions ... but truely wise leaders are few
and far between. Most wind up being oppressors
instead, forcing minority compliance sometimes
even at gunpoint. This is how really really BAD
civil wars get started.
The USA was among the first to try a "fix" in the
form of a "bill of rights" ... picking subjects known
to be the most common sources of civil wars and
guarenteeing there were lines not even the majority
could cross. This has worked with varying success,
lawyers and sharp politicians can often find ways
to skirt around "rights" when it serves them ... more
and more lately it seems ............
The other "fix" is representative 'democracy', a
republic, where a leadership is imposed between
popular will (or whim) and the apparatus of law
and power. This is where your "wise leaders"
are supposed to sit. Again, few are "wise".
Republics and enumerated 'rights' seem to DELAY
the worst of the problems of more 'pure' democracies
but not prevent them. Representatives are also more
convenient to bribe than entire populations, which
increases corruption.
Theocracy promises an absolute authority which
no man may question - the problem being that the
"will of god" is liberally interpreted by a power elite
to serve quite human wants and whims.
Frankly, there seems to be roughly seven billion
opinions as to "the way things ought to be" ... and
tomorrow x-percent of those opinions will have
changed somewhat. This means there IS NO
"perfect" or even "nearly perfect" form of government
or legal code. Any system will wind up oppressing
*somebody* and all real-world systems suffer from
entropy ... becoming more and more corrupt, mis-run
and centered on the power elite over time.
So, I'd say we're destined for an eternity of civil
wars and revolutions - small and large. Each will
make some people happier and some people
more angry and then it starts again.
It's obvious that the democracy can not work just
as a tyranny of the majority. For example, 50% + 1
of voters can unite, and adopt a law that the rest
50% - 1 must work twice more and pay triple taxes.
Such a democracy would indeed look not very fair.

I think it's understandable that democracy (in its
most general sense) may work if and only if there's
common understanding in the society that 'we need
a peaceful solution', - otherwise 'the whole system
will be destroyed', and it will bring no good for
all. This implies a necessity of some 'compensatory
mechanisms' for those who disagree, and that's what
you are talking about. But even more important,
taking into account the above hypothetical example,
it doesn't work without the 'ethics' and 'morals'.

But what we have in the case of the violent coups
is not a commitment to peaceful solution, the coups
raise the culture of coups, but not of democracy.
And such a situation when the militants are called
'peaceful protesters' is against sane morals. That
is why I think what has happened in Ukraine is not
good.
Mr. B1ack
2014-03-13 01:54:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Mr. B1ack
Frankly, there seems to be roughly seven billion
opinions as to "the way things ought to be" ... and
tomorrow x-percent of those opinions will have
changed somewhat. This means there IS NO
"perfect" or even "nearly perfect" form of government
or legal code. Any system will wind up oppressing
*somebody* and all real-world systems suffer from
entropy ... becoming more and more corrupt, mis-run
and centered on the power elite over time.
So, I'd say we're destined for an eternity of civil
wars and revolutions - small and large. Each will
make some people happier and some people
more angry and then it starts again.
It's obvious that the democracy can not work just
as a tyranny of the majority. For example, 50% + 1
of voters can unite, and adopt a law that the rest
50% - 1 must work twice more and pay triple taxes.
Such a democracy would indeed look not very fair.
Obama expects half the population to support
both themselves AND "the poor" ... and gets
away with it because his party has a (slim)
majority. A slightly wider majority can crush
all dissent, all hope for fairness.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
I think it's understandable that democracy (in its
most general sense) may work if and only if there's
common understanding in the society that 'we need
a peaceful solution', - otherwise 'the whole system
will be destroyed', and it will bring no good for
all.
There USED to be something like that in the USA,
but not anymore. I think the mass media, TV news
especially, contributed to the current psychology
of intolerance and intractible stubborness - the
"MY way or HELL" mentality. TV news thrives on
"controversey" and extremes. Reason, tolerance,
moderation and compromise mean lower ratings,
they're "boring". So, over the years, TV news has
helped push people into corners instead of
helping them meet in the middle.

No kind of 'democracy' can last for long under such
circumstances. The "majority/popular will" alone
simply cannot be what solely determines public
policy. Wisdom and an understanding that people
and causes have to meet in the middle somewhere
is required ... the velvet glove rather than the iron
fist. The minory HAS to be respected, HAS to be
allowed to have some effect on public policy and
its own destiny.

But that's the America that WAS .... an enlightened
way of doing things that's rapidly fading away.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
This implies a necessity of some 'compensatory
mechanisms' for those who disagree, and that's what
you are talking about. But even more important,
taking into account the above hypothetical example,
it doesn't work without the 'ethics' and 'morals'.
But WHOSE .... religious extremists, ideological
extremists, which religion, which ideology ........
"morals" and "ethics" SOUND like they mean
something definite, but in reality they do not.
They mean whatever each individual thinks they
mean, and especially what individuals in POWER
think they mean (or WANT them to mean).
Post by Oleg Smirnov
But what we have in the case of the violent coups
is not a commitment to peaceful solution, the coups
raise the culture of coups, but not of democracy.
Coups rarely change things for the better. It IS
an extreme way of dealing with problems and
extremism promotes more extremism. A coup
is a power-grab, seizing control of the existing
system, but that system is rarely changed very
much. It's just that it's now a tool for the coup
leaders to exploit just like the previous leaders
exploited.

Revolutions have more chance of accomplishing
something because they involve a lot more people.
The existing system is usually destroyed or altered
significantly. Even thus, most revolutions don't
seem to significantly improve things - just a change
from one crappy system and crappy leaders to
another. Central/South America is nefarious in
this respect ... a long history of popular revolutions
and things are as crappy as ever.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
And such a situation when the militants are called
'peaceful protesters' is against sane morals. That
is why I think what has happened in Ukraine is not
good.
Perhaps you can enlighten me ... how did so FEW
militants manage to break the government ? The
TV news showed violence and flames ... but they
were deceptive, disinformational reports because
all this was largely confined to a small section of
the city and didn't involve nearly as many protesters
as we've been seeing in Cairo.

That so few had so much impact ... it really does
suggest external tampering ; pay-offs to key govt
officials so they'd go along with the militants, play
their part in the staged drama.

Even now, the western press is putting a lot of
effort into portraying what happened as a "popular
revolution", widely supported, by wonderful
democracy-loving people yearning to be free
(to have euros in their wallets instead of
rubles apparently). Of course Ukraine WAS
already democratic, indeed the president had
only recently been elected - and nobody was
suggesting the polls were fixed. Western
propaganda does not jibe with Ukranian
realities.

Michael Swift
2014-03-11 11:38:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly absorbed into
Russia, it will drive the rest of Ukraine right into the arms of Europe,
something that Putin just wouldn't stand for. Ukraine could become
another Afghanistan, only without the suicide bombers (which could
change should the Tatars get involved).
My brother in law was Ukrainian, he hated Russians, I used to go to
Rochdale Ukraine Club with him and he wasn't alone.

Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Byker
2014-03-11 20:52:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Swift
My brother in law was Ukrainian, he hated Russians, I used to go to
Rochdale Ukraine Club with him and he wasn't alone.
Many Americans are unaware of the Ukrainian famine of 1932-33. While
general forced collectivization was mentioned in history books, there was no
"spotlight" on Josef Stalin creating a man-made famine to force Ukrainian
peasants into surrendering their land. It took Hitler six years to kill 6
million Jews. It took Stalin six MONTHS to kill 6 million Ukrainians. At
the height of the famine 25,000 people a day were dying of starvation.
You'd find a few sentences about it in one book, a few paragraphs in
another. Not until 1987 was there a full-length book available in English
regarding the Great Famine, Robert Conquest's "The Harvest of Sorrow."

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Harvest_of_Sorrow.html?id=Bp31GmfH-6YC


In 1984 "The Harvest of Despair," a one-hour documentary about the famine,
was produced by the Ukrainian Canadian Research and Documentation Centre in
Toronto, Canada. All three American networks -- ABC, CBS, and NBC --
refused to air it. An outraged William F. Buckley made arrangements with
PBS to show it, and it finally aired in April, 1986, with a half-hour
discussion afterwards with Buckley, Hedrick Smith (a NY Times correspondent
who spent many years in Soviet Russia), and Malcolm Muggeridge (then a young
reporter who was deported when he tried to report the truth about Stalin's
collectivization). To the best of my knowledge, it was never rerun. Thanks
to YouTube you can still see it:

Max Demian
2014-03-11 14:02:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Meanwhile, campaign of intimidation is unfolding in Ukraine against those
who don't feel themselves happy enough with the west-Ukrainian
nationalism.
Here is an educational video made by the nationalists.
It shows what kind of treatment those in Ukraine who are friendly to
Russia or Russian language should expect if they deny to admire the new
order. http://youtu.be/VivY94Cp0s0
Political prisoners begin to appear in Ukraine as well, by now at least
two figures of civil activism were captured and imprisoned without
coherent charges.
Somehow I get the feeling that if the Crimea is forcibly absorbed into
Russia, it will drive the rest of Ukraine right into the arms of Europe,
something that Putin just wouldn't stand for. Ukraine could become another
Afghanistan, only without the suicide bombers (which could change should the
Tatars get involved).
Ukraine isn't a barren mountainous country with no economic prospects.
--
Max Demian
Byker
2014-03-11 19:22:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Max Demian
Ukraine isn't a barren mountainous country with no economic prospects.
True. But after enduring Stalin's terror (the forced famine that killed six
million in the 1930's, etc.) the desire to "get even" with the Kremlin is
still very much alive in the hearts of the Ukrainians. It doesn't take much
imagination to one day turn on CNN and see Russians getting blown up with
IEDs, helicopters and jets being brought down by shoulder-fired SAMs, and
sniper bullets from nowhere picking off troops one by one.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 12:50:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
Post by Oleg Smirnov
After 'opposition leaders' and Yanukovich agreed with
anti-crisis plan and he signed the agreement 'warranted'
by those three foreign ministers and ordered police to
leave the streets of Kiev, the leaders of the militants
unambiguously refused to recognize the agreement.
Next day the militants seized all presidential and
parliament buildings, proclaimed their victory and the
new order. With that, those MPs who supported Yanukovich
before this 'victory', were harshly harassed and
threatened. Some of MPs were beaten, the revolutionary
militants came to MPs' at home and threatened their
family members, it's known that (detached) house of at
least one of the MPs was set on fire. That's how the
obedience of the MPs for the new order was provided.
http://youtu.be/ZEgJ0oo3OA8
3:40 "Enormous pressure against the members of parliament."
Estonian Foreign Minister confirms my point here.
Pyatt the wriggling.

<http://echo.msk.ru/programs/beseda/1275484-echo/>
Russian journalist (the anti-Putin opposition media, btw) is
interviewing Geoffrey R. Pyatt, the US Ambassador to Ukraine.
The question is, when exactly, according to official American
position, Yanukovich has lost his legitimacy? Mr Pyatt speaks
many pompous words about incredible horrors of Yanukovich
regime but still doesn't answer the question. Journalist says
there are many countries where some very similar incredible
horrors happen but still nobody doubts the presidents there
are legitimate. Mr Pyatt responds that Yanukovich lost his
legitimacy when he fled. Journalist says it's not convincing,
for example, there was similar precedent in the history with
Charles de Gaulle <http://is.gd/ugWA3I> who also ran away
from the angry protesters, but the US did not questioned his
legitimacy. Pyatt responds pathetically: but what I am saying
reflects the will of the Ukrainian people!

One more time who are you to speak for 'the people'. What the
bold hypocrisy actually leads to is, the American politicians
as well as their most obedient European poodles're losing any
moral ground. Even more dangerous, if they started to believe
in that virtual reality produced by their own propaganda.
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-11 15:19:31 UTC
Permalink
<http://nrada.gov.ua/ua/news/radanews/22015.html> original source

National Council of Ukraine on Television and Radio Broadcasting
demands from national telecoms to ban Russian TV channels in their
networks urgently (no later than today's evening).

Some of large providers in Ukraine have already banned Russian TV.
Barry Bruyea
2014-03-11 19:09:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oleg Smirnov
<http://nrada.gov.ua/ua/news/radanews/22015.html> original source
National Council of Ukraine on Television and Radio Broadcasting
demands from national telecoms to ban Russian TV channels in their
networks urgently (no later than today's evening).
Some of large providers in Ukraine have already banned Russian TV.
And Crimea has banned Ukrainian T.V.
Post by Oleg Smirnov
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Oleg Smirnov
2014-03-12 20:41:46 UTC
Permalink
<http://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/21931181/crimea-vote-website-launched-with-russian-domain-name/>

.. referendum, which will ask Crimeans .. An opinion poll ..
said that 77 percent of the 1,300 people polled in Crimea this
week had said they would vote to become a part of the Russian
Federation. It said there was a 2.6 percent margin of error.
Eight percent said they would vote for greater autonomy, five
percent said they would not take part in the referendum and 10
percent said they were not sure how they would vote, it said.
Topaz
2014-03-02 15:55:01 UTC
Permalink
Democracy is a cruel joke when the Jews control the media.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter."
Winston Churchill

"Jewry rules from behind the mask of democracy. What one calls
democracy today is concealed Jewish domination. Jews determine what
happens in the democratic states"
Julius Streicher, Der Stürmer, #34/1939.

"A couple of weeks ago I quoted a few sentences from a book published
in 1928 titled Propaganda, by ... Edward Bernays. Today I'll read to
you an expanded set of excerpts from Bernays' book to give you a
little more of the gist of his message. I quote:

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits
and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic
society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society
constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of
our country.

"We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes are formed, our
ideas suggested largely by men we have never heard of. This is a
logical result of the way in which our democratic society is
organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner
if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. . . .

"Whatever attitude one chooses to take toward this condition, it
remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in
the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our
ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of
persons . . . who understand the mental processes and social patterns
of the masses.
It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who
harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the
world. . .

"No serious sociologist believes any longer that the voice of the
people expresses any divine or especially wise and lofty idea. The
voice of the people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is
made up for it by the group leaders in whom it believes and by those
persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion. . . .

"Whether in the problem of getting elected to office or in the problem
of interpreting and popularizing new issues, or in the problem of
making the day-to-day administration of public affairs a vital part of
the community life, the use of propaganda, carefully adjusted to the
mentality of the masses, is an essential adjunct of political life." -
end of quote -

I should mention that Bernays' book is not profound or especially
valuable in itself. It merely states a few self-evident facts about
the way in which a modern society works. For the person interested in
propaganda, far more useful books are available. The fact that Bernays
was a Jew is not even especially relevant here except to emphasize
that propaganda, the mass media, psychology, and the manipulation of
others always have been subjects of special interest to the Jews. It
is not for nothing that they are as thick in these fields today as
they were in the time of Bernays and Freud. The reason I chose
Bernays' book to quote is that it provides a more concise and clear
summary, in a few quotable paragraphs, of the role of propaganda in
modern life than most other
books on the subject.

If I were you I wouldn't even waste time trying to hunt down a copy of
Bernays' book. All it does is state the obvious: namely, that the
whole concept of democracy is meaningless in an age where a few people
have in their hands the mechanism for controlling the attitudes and
opinions of a majority of the electorate. And Bernays also takes the
disingenuous position that not only is this control a fact of life,
but it is a good thing; it is necessary to control and regiment the
thinking of the public in order to avoid chaos, and it can only lead
us to greater progress and prosperity. He simply glosses over the
question of
who should exercise this control and what their motives should be.

If you really want to study the subject of propaganda, a good place to
start is with the 1962 book, also titled Propaganda, by the Frenchman
Jacques Ellul. That book is still in print and is available from the
sponsor of this program, National Vanguard Books. Professor Ellul
deals with the subject in much greater depth and with much greater
honesty than Bernays does, but he agrees with Bernays on the most
obvious and
fundamental conclusions: on the irrelevance of the idea of democracy,
for example. I quote from Professor Ellul's book:

"If I am in favor of democracy, I can only regret that propaganda
renders the true exercise of it almost impossible. But I think that it
would be even worse to entertain any illusions about a coexistence of
true democracy and propaganda." -- end of quote --

To me it is frustrating that a conclusion that seems so obvious is
nevertheless resisted by so many otherwise intelligent people.
Democracy has become almost a sacred concept to them, this idea that
the policies guiding our nation should be decided by counting the
votes of every featherless biped who has reached the age of 18. It's
like motherhood:
they're almost afraid to question it.

This seems to be as true of intellectuals in our society as it is of
Joe Sixpacks. The fact is that intellectuals are no more likely to be
independent-minded than people who work with their hands; most
intellectuals, just like most Joe Sixpacks, are lemmings. In fact, as
Ellul points out, it is precisely the intellectuals who are most
strongly controlled by propaganda, because they are more open to every
medium of propaganda.

And I must admit that it took me a long time to overcome the ideas
drummed into me when I was in school that under a democracy people are
more free than under any other political system, that under a
democracy we are all free to think and say whatever we want, and that
we have a greater responsibility as citizens of a democracy to make up
our own minds about things independently, and so on. Actually, we
still have some degree of individual freedom in the United States
today because more than 200 years ago men whose temperament was far
more aristocratic than democratic in the modern sense of the word were
willing to go to war against their legitimate government in order to
secure that freedom for us, and people with a truly democratic
temperament, who have been
gnawing away at that freedom ever since, haven't yet succeeded in
suppressing it completely.

Well, it should not be surprising to us that although books such as
Professor Ellul's Propaganda - and many others - are readily
available, almost no one has heard of them. Keeping the public
believing in the myth of democracy is an important element in
maintaining control over the thinking and behavior of the public. It
is simply immoral and
scandalous to question the reality of democracy. It's like questioning
the truth of the "Holocaust" story. And for that reason we're not
likely to be taught in our social studies classes in school or to read
in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal even the most obvious
and self-evident conclusions presented by Bernays or Ellul. We're
still
taught how democracy safeguards our freedom, even while those who
control the mechanism of propaganda in our democratic society are
working day and night to eliminate that freedom."



http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
Topaz
2014-03-01 16:38:11 UTC
Permalink
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)

Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and
His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941, translated by
Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October Central
Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik Party
during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by
secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception
of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin--133
out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131, Trotzky--131."

Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three were
known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile married to a Jewess. It
was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London Jewish
Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.

David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of
whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country
but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world-wide
revolution."

The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."

In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.

In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.

The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was Gerhart
Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist Party
in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.

In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film writers
of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of Congress
and sentenced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of the ten
were communist party members and the other four were flagrantly
pro-communist.

One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis and
the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National Secretariat of
the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two gentiles, three
nationality unknown.

Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
Here are some quotes from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.

"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated in the
heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were neither
Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing Jews at
all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.

"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl Marx,
though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
throughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."
"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two men
who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went throughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."

The book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and published
by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes Stalin in an
interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."

The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominent in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."

State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."

From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomey Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."

A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.

The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."

"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920

"In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the membership of the Soviet
communist party was Jewish, though Jews comprised only 1.8 percent of
the total population." (Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)

Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).

Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read
articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing
so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning
something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous
stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I
recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then
I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social
Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the
secretaries if the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere
the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the
row of names- Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellonbogen, and others. One
fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in
its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose
minor representatives I had been disputing for months past."

Solzhenitsyn in his book, "Gulag Archipelago Two", shows the top
administrators of soviet death camps; Yavguda, Berman, Frankel and the
rest, and most of them were Jewish.

Here is something the National Socialists wrote:
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
abelard
2014-03-01 15:06:25 UTC
Permalink
or is it because obarmy has no sense or guts?
perhaps he's stoned...or is his teleprompter is broken?



http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2014/03/01/sarah-palin-warned-in-2008-russia-might-invade-ukraine-if-obama-wins-election-n1802374
"In October 2008, then-Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin warned that
Putin, having been motivated by Obama's lack of response to the
Russian invasion of Georgia, would proceed to invade Ukraine if
then-Senator Obama was elected to the presidency.

After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator
Obama's reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind
of response that would only encourage Russia's Putin to invade Ukraine
next.

Foreign Policy dismissed this warning as "strange" and "far-fetched."

As we've said before, this is an extremely far-fetched scenario.
And given how Russia has been able to unsettle Ukraine's pro-Western
government without firing a shot, I don't see why violence would be
necessary to bring Kiev to heel."
....


meanwhile shorty pretends to ask his russian puppet parliament
for 'permission' to pour in more troops

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/crimean-leader-claims-control-asks-putin-22729336
"Russian President Vladimir Putin asked parliament Saturday for
permission to use the country's military in Ukraine, moving to
formalize what Ukrainian officials described as an ongoing deployment
of Russian troops in the strategic region of Crimea."
....

so obarmy asks shorty if he's allowed to rescue syrians
from shorty's murderous socialist dictator


obarmy says 'that's not fair, i'll get cross'
shorty replies with one finger
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Topaz
2014-03-01 16:37:01 UTC
Permalink
Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:

"Can we doubt but that Poland was encouraged to ignore the German note
of March which set forth eminently reasonable suggestions for a
peaceful solution of the problem of the Corridor?

Month after month no reply was vouchsafed by Poland to the German
note. Meanwhile, insult and outrage occurred with suspicious frequency
all along the German frontier, similar to the technique to which the
Jews later introduced the British in Palestine. Day after day the
British public was deluged with war propaganda and misrepresentation
of the situation. Finally their minds were closed against any further
regard to the demands of justice and reason by a new slogan, "You
cannot trust Hitler's word." With this lie the British public was
finally stampeded into throwing all reason and judgement to the winds
and accepting at their face value the war propaganda in the press.

This slogan was founded upon a misrepresentation of Hitler's
assurance given on more than one occasion after a "putsch" such as
that in into Sudetenland, that he "intended to make no further
demands.". The misrepresentation lay in the fact that the press
steadily obscured the major fact, that the "demands" to which Hitler
referred were all along five-fold in character; and covered those five
areas taken from Germany by a dictated peace in which the population
was overwhelmingly German, i.e. Sudetenland, part of Czechoslovakia,
parts of Poland, the Corridor and Danzig.

As German troops occupied each successive section, it is, I
believe, accurate to say that Hitler declared, that he had no
additional demands to make. But here it must be clearly stated in the
interests of justice that he never said that this entailed reducing
the demands which he had originally very clearly delineated, and
repeated on many occasions, namely, the five areas in question.

"The British public was deluded by its press into supposing that
when Hitler said he had no further demands, that there had never been
any statement of his full demands, some of which were still
unfulfilled. They were led to believe that Hitler either never had had
other demands, or that he had abondoned the rest as soon as he had
obtained some of them. When, therefore, the next installment was
added, the press built on this misunderstanding the fallacy that
Hitler's word could not be trusted. Honest dealing needs no such
trickery and and deception. Such methods are only necessary to bolster
up bad or unjust causes. Fortunately we have the calm and
disspassionate judgement in this matter by no less a person than the
late Lord Lothian, recently British Ambassador to the U.S.A. In his
last speech at Chatham House on this subject he remarked: "If the
principle of self-determination had been applied in Germany's favour,
as it was applied agaisnt her, it would have meant the return of the
Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, parts of Poland, the Polish Corridor and
Danzig to the Reich."

Here is a very different presentment of the case to the one which
was foisted upon the British public in 1939: and it is the true one.
Small wonder that these facts had to be withheld from the ordinary
citizen.

Had the British public realized the truth, that each of these
demands of Hilter rested on a foundation of reasonable fairness, the
people of this island would have ruled out any question of war; and it
was war, not truth or justice, upon which international Jewry was
resolved."


Here is another quote from the book:

"The urgent alarm sounded in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke in his letter
to Mr. Balfour (see page 25), denouncing bolshevism as a Jewish plan,
which if not checked by the combined action of the European powers,
would engulf Europe and the world, was no exaggeration. By the end of
that year the red flag was being hoisted in most of the great cities
of Europe. In Hungary the Jew Bela Kuhn organized and maintained for
some time a merciless and bloody tyranny similar to the one in Russia.
In Germany the Jews, Liebknecht, Barth, Scheidemann, Rosa Luxemburg,
etc., made a desperate bid for power. These and other similar
convulsions shook Europe; but each country in its own way just
frustated the onslaughts.

In most countries concerned a few voices were raised in the
endeavour to expose the true nature of these evils. Only in one,
however, did a political leader and group arise, who grasped to the
full the significance of these happenings, and perceived behind the
mobs of native hooligans the organisation and driving power of world
Jewry. This leader was Adolf Hitler, and his group the National
Socialist Party of Germany.

Never before in history had any country not only repulsed organized
revolution, but discerned Jewry behind it, and faced up to that fact.
We need not wonder that the sewers of Jewish vituperation were flooded
over these men and their leader; nor should we make the mistake of
supposing that Jewry would stick at any lie to deter honest men
everywhere from making a thorough investigation of the facts for
themselves. Nevertheless, if any value liberty, and set out to seek
truth and defend it, this duty of personal investigation is one which
they cannot shirk.

To accept unquestioningly the lies and misrepresentaions of a
Jew-controlled or influenced press, is to spurn truth by sheer
idleness, if for no worse reason."

http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
saracene
2014-03-01 17:39:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
On Newsnight last night they interviewed a few of the Ukrainian nationalists who had spearheaded the recent coup/revolution.


abelard
2014-03-01 17:59:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
On Newsnight last night they interviewed a few of the Ukrainian nationalists who had spearheaded the recent coup/revolution.
i saw it...
so they claimed...so the 'reporters' claimed...

meanwhile shorty is no use to the peace of the universe...

why choose to believe any of them?

claims are the easy part...one of the (2) 'groups' claimed to
have 200 members...whoop-de-doo...and if you believe
them...

meanwhile shorty is sending in the army...again...
Post by saracene
http://youtu.be/5SBo0akeDMY
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
saracene
2014-03-01 19:13:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Mar 2014 09:39:59 -0800 (PST), saracene <>
Post by saracene
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
On Newsnight last night they interviewed a few of the Ukrainian nationalists who had spearheaded the recent coup/revolution.
i saw it...
so they claimed...so the 'reporters' claimed...
meanwhile shorty is no use to the peace of the universe...
why choose to believe any of them?
claims are the easy part...one of the (2) 'groups' claimed to
have 200 members...whoop-de-doo...and if you believe
them...
meanwhile shorty is sending in the army...again...
You are too quick to take sides. Historical parallels are never exact.
The situation is complicated.
abelard
2014-03-01 19:42:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
On Sat, 1 Mar 2014 09:39:59 -0800 (PST), saracene <>
Post by saracene
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
On Newsnight last night they interviewed a few of the Ukrainian nationalists who had spearheaded the recent coup/revolution.
i saw it...
so they claimed...so the 'reporters' claimed...
meanwhile shorty is no use to the peace of the universe...
why choose to believe any of them?
claims are the easy part...one of the (2) 'groups' claimed to
have 200 members...whoop-de-doo...and if you believe
them...
meanwhile shorty is sending in the army...again...
You are too quick to take sides. Historical parallels are never exact.
The situation is complicated.
i thought that was what i said...

but shorty's russian soldiers are interfering...
thus, shorty is setting hisself up as 'a side'
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Super Trader
2014-03-09 09:29:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
no sorry, russians...
obarmy says don't be naughty....peace in our time
--
www.abelard.org
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
We Germans are in the middle of Europe - Hitler had to protect us.
Loading...