russia-insider--2020-04-22--1 in 5 Russians Advocate ‘Eliminating’ LGBT Community – Poll

Almost one in five Russians believe that LGBT people should be “ eliminated , ” according to the results of a new independent Levada Center poll .
The figures showed 18 % of respondents giving the response , marking a slight softening in attitudes toward members of the LGBT community since 2015 , when 21 % advocated their “ elimination.
” Similarly , 32 % said this year that gays and lesbians should be “ isolated from society , ” down from 37 % five years ago .
“ The stigmatization of socially vulnerable people has decreased over the past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helping and not isolating from them have expanded , ” Levada sociologist Karina Pipiya told the Kommersant newspaper Sunday .
Positive attitudes have also improved over the past five years , with 9 % of the respondents favoring helping the LGBT community , up from 6 % , and 32 % saying they should be “ left alone , ” up from 24 % .
Levada ’ s results showed similar improved attitudes toward sex workers , HIV-positive people and the homeless .
“ Besides state support measures , the development of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working to improve the image of vulnerable groups in the eyes of society play an important role , ” Pipiya was quoted as telling Kommersant .
Among other groups presented in Levada ’ s “ Social Distancing ” poll , terrorists elicited the least amount of tolerance , with 80 % of the respondents advocating for their “ elimination ” in 2020 .
They were followed by pedophiles at 75 % , murderers at 61 % and extremists at 44 % .
“ The rigid approach toward the need to destroy those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t contribute to society doesn ’ t mean that people are ready to take up arms , ” Kommersant quoted political analyst Alexei Makarkin as saying .
“ There ’ s now a new generation that has fewer [ Soviet-era ] frustrations .
Roughly speaking , these are people who did not stand in queues , ” Makarkin was quoted as saying .
Levada conducted the survey among 1,614 respondents in 50 Russian regions between Feb. 20 and Feb. 26 .

Stigmatization is falling. - Steven Saphore / EPA / TASS
Almost one in five Russians believe that LGBT people should be “eliminated,” according to the results of a new independent Levada Center poll.
The figures showed 18% of respondents giving the response, marking a slight softening in attitudes toward members of the LGBT community since 2015, when 21% advocated their “elimination.” Similarly, 32% said this year that gays and lesbians should be “isolated from society,” down from 37% five years ago.
“The stigmatization of socially vulnerable people has decreased over the past 30 years, and norms that require helping and not isolating from them have expanded,” Levada sociologist Karina Pipiya told the Kommersant newspaper Sunday.
Positive attitudes have also improved over the past five years, with 9% of the respondents favoring helping the LGBT community, up from 6%, and 32% saying they should be “left alone,” up from 24%.
Levada’s results showed similar improved attitudes toward sex workers, HIV-positive people and the homeless.
“Besides state support measures, the development of the non-profit sector and the emergence of organizations working to improve the image of vulnerable groups in the eyes of society play an important role,” Pipiya was quoted as telling Kommersant.
Among other groups presented in Levada’s “Social Distancing” poll, terrorists elicited the least amount of tolerance, with 80% of the respondents advocating for their “elimination” in 2020. They were followed by pedophiles at 75%, murderers at 61% and extremists at 44%.
“The rigid approach toward the need to destroy those who can do harm and even those who don’t contribute to society doesn’t mean that people are ready to take up arms,” Kommersant quoted political analyst Alexei Makarkin as saying.
“There’s now a new generation that has fewer [Soviet-era] frustrations. Roughly speaking, these are people who did not stand in queues,” Makarkin was quoted as saying.
Levada conducted the survey among 1,614 respondents in 50 Russian regions between Feb. 20 and Feb. 26.


russia-insider--2020-04-22--Belarus Keeps Churches Open for Easter, Country Not Locked Down, President Not Buying Into COVID Pan

Belarus Keeps Churches Open for Easter, Country Not Locked Down, President Not Buying Into COVID Panic  (Video)

Belarus and Sweden are taking the same approach to COVID .
The vulnerable are taking precautions , and the President remains firm in his conviction that COVID is not a big deal , not much worse than the flu .
Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko lit a candle in the Church of the Annunciation in Malye Lyady village .
With the rest of Europe on coronavirus lockdown , it 's still business as usual in Belarus .
Alexander Lukashenko has advised drinking more vodka , while the country 's top-flight football league is the only one still playing in Europe .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ chosen the right tactics to combat coronavirus .
He stated this today during a visit to one of the churches .
All churches , by the way , are open to parishioners , there are no prohibitions .
Meanwhile , the number of cases of COVID-19 in the country is approaching five thousand .
Anastasiya Sahovskaya reports whether life in Belarus changed because of coronavirus .
To come to the church , but not to go over the fence is not a sin today .
This was done , for example , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visit the church of Mary Magdalene regularly .
We decided to come and express gratitude to Our Lord Jesus Christ for protecting us all so that He would send health , health and more health to whole Belarus .
So for those who are sick to get well and for the rest not to get sick .
But you decided not to go to church in this case ?
No , we decided not to go to a church .
But the doors of churches throughout the country are open , and nobody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the principal decision of the authorities .
Today , President Alexander Lukashenko himself lit an Easter candle in the Holy Annunciation Church near Minsk .
He arrived with his son Nikolai , briefly talked with the parishioners and congratulated Easter to the faithful in Belarus and neighboring countries .
This year , for the first time , several television channels simultaneously broadcast services not only from the Minsk 's Holy Spirit Cathedral , but also from the famous monastery in Zhirovichi and St. Elisabeth Monastery .
Parishioners were encouraged to join the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At night the church was crowded , but there were only a few people at the morning liturgy .
I came to the temple to hear the ringing of the bell , to cheer up and move away from this coronavirus , in the end .
There are fewer people , much fewer , frankly , very few .
Do not linger for a long time inside the church , if it is permissible to stop by just to light a candle : many parishes made changes in the rites of preparation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ eggs and cake were set on the street , it was allowed to consecrate Easter cakes and eggs even at home .
And if the service nevertheless traditionally took place indoors , it was possible not to take off the mask and stay at a distance in the church .
People are complying with rules , everything is great and wonderful .
Happy Easter .
The responsibility of believers was recalled by the head of the Belarusian Orthodox Church : Metropolitan Pavel urged not to place rituals higher than human health and life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Radunitsa - is now the biggest risk that is seen in the Ministry of Health .
These days , it is customary to visit relatives , and these are mainly elderly people .
The department asks if possible this year to abandon the tradition , recalling that after Palm Sunday and Catholic Easter in some regions there was a sharp surge in the incidence .

Belarus and Sweden are taking the same approach to COVID. The vulnerable are taking precautions, and the President remains firm in his conviction that COVID is not a big deal, not much worse than the flu.
Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko lit a candle in the Church of the Annunciation in Malye Lyady village. With the rest of Europe on coronavirus lockdown, it's still business as usual in Belarus. Alexander Lukashenko has advised drinking more vodka, while the country's top-flight football league is the only one still playing in Europe.
Transcript:
Alexander Lukashenko is convinced that Belarus has chosen the right tactics to combat coronavirus.
He stated this today during a visit to one of the churches.
All churches, by the way, are open to parishioners, there are no prohibitions.
Meanwhile, the number of cases of COVID-19 in the country is approaching five thousand.
Anastasiya Sahovskaya reports whether life in Belarus changed because of coronavirus.
To come to the church, but not to go over the fence is not a sin today. This was done, for example, an elderly couple.
They live nearby and visit the church of Mary Magdalene regularly.
We decided to come and express gratitude to Our Lord Jesus Christ for protecting us all so that He would send health, health and more health to whole Belarus.
So for those who are sick to get well and for the rest not to get sick.
But you decided not to go to church in this case?
No, we decided not to go to a church. But the doors of churches throughout the country are open, and nobody is forbidden to attend them.
That was the principal decision of the authorities.
Today, President Alexander Lukashenko himself lit an Easter candle in the Holy Annunciation Church near Minsk.
He arrived with his son Nikolai, briefly talked with the parishioners and congratulated Easter to the faithful in Belarus and neighboring countries.
This year, for the first time, several television channels simultaneously broadcast services not only from the Minsk's Holy Spirit Cathedral, but also from the famous monastery in Zhirovichi and St. Elisabeth Monastery.
Parishioners were encouraged to join the service online and pray at home.
At night the church was crowded, but there were only a few people at the morning liturgy.
I came to the temple to hear the ringing of the bell, to cheer up and move away from this coronavirus, in the end. There are fewer people, much fewer, frankly, very few.
Do not linger for a long time inside the church, if it is permissible to stop by just to light a candle: many parishes made changes in the rites of preparation.
Tables for the traditional consecration of Easter eggs and cake were set on the street, it was allowed to consecrate Easter cakes and eggs even at home.
And if the service nevertheless traditionally took place indoors, it was possible not to take off the mask and stay at a distance in the church.
People are complying with rules, everything is great and wonderful. Happy Easter.
The responsibility of believers was recalled by the head of the Belarusian Orthodox Church:
Metropolitan Pavel urged not to place rituals higher than human health and life.
The long weekend - four holidays of Radunitsa - is now the biggest risk that is seen in the Ministry of Health.
These days, it is customary to visit relatives, and these are mainly elderly people.
The department asks if possible this year to abandon the tradition, recalling that after Palm Sunday and Catholic Easter in some regions there was a sharp surge in the incidence.


russia-insider--2020-04-23--Some Funny Racist Memes - Truth to Power - Wednesday, April 8, 2020

Here 's a recap of some of the memes I saw recently and enjoyed .
For more , check out @ @ @ @ @ : //t.me/TTPMemes If you think I missed any good ones , join the channel chat @ @ @ @ @ or put them in the comments section below !

× Disabling adblock
Disabling adblock for a specific site just takes a couple of clicks.
Usually it is as simple as clicking on the adblock icon in your browser, and choosing the ‘disable on this page or domain’ option.
If that doesn’t work this wikihow article gives more detail: https://www.wikihow.com/Disable-AdBlock
Thank you for your support!


russia-insider--2020-04-23--GAME OVER: The Swedish - Belarus COVID Herd Immunity Strategy Has Won

Great comment on the story by Jon Hellevig : Game over .
The Swedish-Belarussian model has won .
Herd immunity is the way to go .
Study and random testing shows that 600,000 or one-third of Stockholm county ’ s population have had the corona infection .
They had no symptoms or so little they did not even know they had it .
Some 1,500 died , mortality 0.25 % .
In tough competition , the seasonal flu is still leading .
0.25 % is share of those infected , the mortality to the whole population would be 0.015 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win hands down .
Hope when Putin hears about this today he orders Mayor Sobyanin to tear down his cybergulag , as fun as he might have in experimenting in hype technology and people ’ s lives .
Today , the Public Health Authority presented a new study that estimates that one third of everyone in Stockholm County will be infected with sars-cov-2 on May 1st this year .
There will be about 600,000 people .
The study is a mathematical modeling of the spread of the virus in Stockholm County .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study that was conducted a few weeks ago when randomly tested 700 Stockholmers and partly the new infected cases that are reported daily .
– What is surprising is that there are so many cases , 99 percent of all cases , that are completely unconfirmed , says Lisa Brouwers , head of analysis at the Public Health Authority .
The Public Health Authority study comes to the same results as the mathematician Tom Britton ’ s calculations .
This weekend he presented a study which also indicates that 30 percent of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What it looks like in the rest of Sweden there are no calculations yet , but the high proportion of infected in Stockholm differs from the rest of the world .
“ Preliminary data indicates that only a small proportion of the world ’ s population has become infected , no more than two to three percent , ” WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a press conference yesterday Monday .
Yesterday , French Institute Pasteur also presented a study that calculates that six percent of French people will have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The low numbers do not surprise the infection protection expert Johan Giesecke .
– Most countries have had a lockdown , they have not had distribution in their countries in the same way as Sweden .
We have had a spread of infection in the population , he says .
But there may also be dark figures in the international calculations .
– The data presented internationally may have been measured in different ways , either you have only measured antibodies or you have only counted those cared for in hospitals .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , says Anders Wallensten , Deputy State Epidemiologist at the Public Health Authority .

Great comment on the story by Jon Hellevig:
Game over. The Swedish-Belarussian model has won. Herd immunity is the way to go. Study and random testing shows that 600,000 or one-third of Stockholm county’s population have had the corona infection. They had no symptoms or so little they did not even know they had it. Some 1,500 died, mortality 0.25%. In tough competition, the seasonal flu is still leading. 0.25% is share of those infected, the mortality to the whole population would be 0.015%, which would make the seasonal flu win hands down. Hope when Putin hears about this today he orders Mayor Sobyanin to tear down his cybergulag, as fun as he might have in experimenting in hype technology and people’s lives.
Today, the Public Health Authority presented a new study that estimates that one third of everyone in Stockholm County will be infected with sars-cov-2 on May 1st this year. There will be about 600,000 people.
Many unconfirmed cases
The study is a mathematical modeling of the spread of the virus in Stockholm County. It is based partly on the so-called Stockholm study that was conducted a few weeks ago when randomly tested 700 Stockholmers and partly the new infected cases that are reported daily.
– What is surprising is that there are so many cases, 99 percent of all cases, that are completely unconfirmed, says Lisa Brouwers, head of analysis at the Public Health Authority.
Unknown number of infected other Sweden
The Public Health Authority study comes to the same results as the mathematician Tom Britton’s calculations. This weekend he presented a study which also indicates that 30 percent of the population in Stockholm has had covid-19.
What it looks like in the rest of Sweden there are no calculations yet, but the high proportion of infected in Stockholm differs from the rest of the world.
“Preliminary data indicates that only a small proportion of the world’s population has become infected, no more than two to three percent,” WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a press conference yesterday Monday.
Get in France
Yesterday, French Institute Pasteur also presented a study that calculates that six percent of French people will have been infected on May 11 this year.
The low numbers do not surprise the infection protection expert Johan Giesecke.
– Most countries have had a lockdown, they have not had distribution in their countries in the same way as Sweden. We have had a spread of infection in the population, he says.
Unrecorded
But there may also be dark figures in the international calculations.
– The data presented internationally may have been measured in different ways, either you have only measured antibodies or you have only counted those cared for in hospitals. We have tried to estimate the entire spread, says Anders Wallensten, Deputy State Epidemiologist at the Public Health Authority.


russia-insider--2020-04-23--Russian Athlete Blasts Media and Mayor: Lockdown Is 'F**Ing Nonsense!, No One Believes Your BS!' (Vi

Russian Athlete Blasts Media and Mayor: Lockdown Is 'F**Ing Nonsense!, No One Believes Your BS!' (Video)

This post first appeared on Russia Insider Former MHL ice hockey player Nikolai Starchenko launched into a verbal tirade at a supposed member of the media , not knowing it was , in fact , the city 's mayor in the Russian city of Novokuznetsk .
Starchenko , who has played two seasons in Russia 's junior ice hockey league ( MHL ) for Kristall Berdsk , was spotted in a public park and engaged in a conversation with a masked man , who was accompanied by members of the media .
Presumably thinking the masked questioner was just another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rant at the gentleman , after it was suggested he should leave and head back home , rather than be out during the lockdown period .
Why should I leave ?
Cause you ’ ve said so ?
- Because you break ... ( the quarantine ) I don ’ t think you f***ing got it right .
Why do I need this ( papers ) ?
I came here to work out .
Why should I calm down and listen to your nonsense ?
I am gone , you came here , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got it , I will just go to another place to work out .
I ’ ll come back here the next hour [ when ] there won ’ t be [ a problem ] .
Why all this fiction ?
Who needs all this circus ?
This is a circus .
All the people think it ’ s a circus .
Only you and the TV guys say this f**king nonsense .
People are f**king shocked , but you don ’ t give a f**k about what ’ s happening .
- @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was the most valuable for us .

This post first appeared on Russia Insider
Former MHL ice hockey player Nikolai Starchenko launched into a verbal tirade at a supposed member of the media, not knowing it was, in fact, the city's mayor in the Russian city of Novokuznetsk. Starchenko, who has played two seasons in Russia's junior ice hockey league (MHL) for Kristall Berdsk, was spotted in a public park and engaged in a conversation with a masked man, who was accompanied by members of the media. Presumably thinking the masked questioner was just another journalist, Starchenko let fly with a rant at the gentleman, after it was suggested he should leave and head back home, rather than be out during the lockdown period.
Transcript below:
Transcript:
Why should I leave? Cause you’ve said so?
- Because you break... (the quarantine)
I don’t think you f***ing got it right. Why do I need this (papers)?
- Relax...
I came here to work out. Why should I calm down and listen to your nonsense?
I am gone, you came here, you are filming...
OK, I got it, I will just go to another place to work out.
I’ll come back here the next hour [when] there won’t be [a problem].
Why all this fiction?
Who needs all this circus? This is a circus. All the people think it’s a circus.
Only you and the TV guys say this f**king nonsense.
People are f**king shocked, but you don’t give a f**k about what’s happening.
- Thank you very much for this interview.
It was the most valuable for us.


russia-insider--2020-04-23--The People vs Plutocrats: Hitler's Anti-Capitalist Legacy

Today marks 131 years since the birth of Adolf Hitler – the man whose life and legacy form a stark outline , the shape of which the entire present world order was constructed against .
Within the dissident right , there is a perceptible reassessment of Hitler under way .
For years , Hitler was seen by many as simply a meme – a kind of shorthand for the most radical defiance to oppressive PC culture .
Some within white nationalist circles , reacting to the omnipresent specter of Hitler as psychological weapon of the mass media , have sought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a figure of German history whose relevance is long past .
A few have gone to the other extreme , elevating Hitler to a figure of esoteric religious veneration .
What seems to be changing is a more serious political assessment of Hitler as leader of a revolutionary party , as head of a real government with real policies , and as founder of a definite ideology with vast implications for our own time .
Confronting the political issues and problems of the 21st century , there is a new interest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This trend is being driven by study and discovery of Hitler ’ s actual words and deeds , separated from popular myth and propaganda , partly made possible because of the increasing availability of accurate historical information .
Slowly but surely , the mountain of lies piled onto history by the victorious Allied powers is eroding down to nothing .
One sure sign of this trend is the subtle , yet unmistakable ongoing revision of Hitler scholarship by mainstream historians .
One of the most recent examples is the new book by Cambridge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : A Global Biography , ” published by Basic Books in late 2019 .
Simms ’ biography of Hitler is far from perfect .
He discounts critical biographical sources such as the memoirs of August Kubizek , and Hitler ’ s own autobiography , apparently only because they portray Hitler in a positive light .
And in spite of the author ’ s generally unbiased tone , free from moralizing , he repeats some of the more outlandish propaganda horror stories about the Third Reich with an intellectual laziness unworthy of the rigorous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As a Cambridge professor , he has his career to protect .
He also projects a bit too much of his own Anglocentrism onto Hitler .
The Fuhrer certainly admired many aspects of both the British and American cultures , but it would be foolish to suggest his first love wasn ’ t only and always for his own German people .
Crucially , the book quietly drops or revises dozens of long-standing propaganda myths .
Among them are the lies that Hitler was a “ lazy dictator , ” that he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he set out with the intention to “ exterminate ” the Jews , that he deliberately encouraged “ polycratic chaos ” within the Reich to enhance his own power , that he was driven by megalomania or narcissism , that he ever issued a “ Nero order ” against his own people , and significantly that he never went after or desired “ world domination.
” Most thoroughly demolished by this book is the myth that Hitler viewed Soviet communism as a greater threat than Anglo-American plutocracy .
The following passages speak for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s political career in the early 1920s : As Germany suffered under the enemy blockade which starved hundreds of thousands , even after they laid down their weapons in November 1918 , Hitler came to the following conclusions : The distinction is made between productive national and destructive international capital : In the period immediately before and after the 1923 Munich Putsch : Just as modern leftist “ woke ” ideology , which is a form of cultural Bolshevism , only softens up communities for the predations of global corporations , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1930s as the softening up of nations for international capitalist exploitation , led by the Jews : Hitler saw the League of Nations as a sham tool of the ruling capitalist powers : “ This meant that the world was run in accordance not with international law , but the law of capital : ‘ not the right of the peoples ’ , as he put it , ‘ but the rights of the bankers of the peoples ’ . ''
At times , this is framed explicitly in terms of what has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sandwich ” : And in all cases , communism prepared the way for ultimate international capitalist takeover : This theme continued all the way through the start of the Second World War : Later in the war : Hitler reiterated these themes over and over again : Hitler ’ s relative tolerance towards nonwhite races can be seen in many other passages : The Fuhrer is shown throughout the book to be a foreign policy realist , whose primary goal was the safeguarding of Germany first , then European civilization as a whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jewish Anglo-America and Bolshevized Russia .
His numerous peace overtures to Great Britain , even years into the war , are documented along with his extraordinary attempts to keep Germany out of war with the United States .
What might come as a surprise to most readers is that Hitler is shown to be extremely flexible on the question of Slavic peoples and eastern Europe .
To be sure , Hitler identified both racially and culturally as a German , but he displayed none of the fanatical anti-Slav hatred which was later attributed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have had the greatest respect for the Polish head of state , Marshal Jozef Pilsudski , who ruled from 1918 until his death in 1935 .
Hitler tried for years to form an alliance with Poland against the Soviet Union , and greatly lamented the British and American machinations which placed Poland in the role of an enemy by September 1939 .
He even briefly floated the idea , at a meeting with Molotov in mid November 1940 , of greater long-term cooperation with Soviet Russia to keep the Americans out of Europe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Soviet Union by the Axis powers was not just about defeating Bolshevism , but of building up a continental bloc which could resist the Anglo-American Jewish world blockade indefinitely .
One could easily extend the breakdown of nations along class lines in the West , to the present breakdown even along lines of gender , with feminism waging its war against men , the embittered but understandable male backlash , and disturbed individuals further muddying the waters by claiming to be transgendered .
All these divisions , sown by the left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communities to make international capital stronger .
In the same way , the Anglo-American plutocratic powers could not allow a nationalist populist government in Iraq or Syria or Libya , nor can they tolerate nationalism or populism in Europe , from Hungary to Russia .
Even in wartime , Hitler was concerned with social problems which the capitalist powers have still only managed to make worse , even after 70 years of ruling the planet .
At the peak of the war , the unequal nature of the contest emphasized why the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place : As the war turned against the Axis powers , they had no choice but to fight on or face total subjugation and eventual extinction .
Meanwhile , Hitler himself started to outwardly show the years of strain against the world enemy : Simms ' even dares to acknowledge the huge emotional and spiritual toll the war took on Hitler , including the destruction of German cities such as Dresden , and the sacrifice of so many brave soldiers at the front .
Even at the greatest extent of his territorial power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in ultimately defensive terms : Hitler didn ’ t set out to break up the British Empire or defeat the United States , and even after he shifted to a policy of alliances with the oppressed colonial peoples against the British , he never intended to conquer or occupy either England or America .
What Hitler wanted was security for Germany and Europe , a security which , after the outbreak of hostilities , could only be bought by the conquest of land wrenched from the Soviet Union , which had to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ambitions of world communism .
That the great Western powers were in the hands of criminals such as Roosevelt and Churchill is one of the great tragedies of history .
There is no doubt Hitler would have sought out cooperation rather than confrontation with a nationalist Russia , just as there is no doubt war between Germany and Britain would have been averted had the wiser heads of Oswald Mosley and the Duke of Windsor prevailed over Eden and Churchill .
There is also no doubt Germany would have fought shoulder to shoulder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
By the same token , a United States run by a populist President Huey Long would never have waged another world war against Germany .
Every Allied nation can at least be proud for having produced such patriots who stood up for reason and peace , against the global forces of capitalism and communism .
Hitler fought to the last , as the Simms biography correctly points out , not because of some nihilistic megalomania , but because the Germans continued to improvise desperate strategies right up until the end of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no choice .
Even when an outright military victory became impossible , the hope was to hold out until either the enemy coalition broke apart , which it did as soon as the war ended , or until one side blinked due to war weariness , as America did in Vietnam .
The demand for unconditional surrender and the exterminationist policies of blockade and mass terror bombing left not only Hitler , but the German people as a whole , with the impression they were fighting a war for existence or extinction .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hitler to the end .
Everything Hitler fought for , all his predictions and warnings , have been borne out since 1945 .
The victory of international capitalism and Bolshevism in the war set not only the Germans and Italians , but all Europeans on a path to extinction .
The living space of all whites is threatened by a demographic invasion , while global plutocracy grows fatter and richer than ever before at the expense of working people everywhere .
Even in death , Hitler did not give up : Hitler did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people should go down with him , but resisted to the last for the purpose of setting an example that would inspire the rebirth of National Socialism at some future date , when the peoples of the world had finally had enough of the Jews and their plutocratic world domination .
As the world groans under the strain of this domination like never before , the example of Adolf Hitler and the state he created will only continue to inspire new generations , long after that domination is broken forever .

Today marks 131 years since the birth of Adolf Hitler – the man whose life and legacy form a stark outline, the shape of which the entire present world order was constructed against.
Within the dissident right, there is a perceptible reassessment of Hitler under way. For years, Hitler was seen by many as simply a meme – a kind of shorthand for the most radical defiance to oppressive PC culture. Some within white nationalist circles, reacting to the omnipresent specter of Hitler as psychological weapon of the mass media, have sought to minimize his importance, dismissing him as a figure of German history whose relevance is long past. A few have gone to the other extreme, elevating Hitler to a figure of esoteric religious veneration.
What seems to be changing is a more serious political assessment of Hitler as leader of a revolutionary party, as head of a real government with real policies, and as founder of a definite ideology with vast implications for our own time. Confronting the political issues and problems of the 21st century, there is a new interest in taking the politics of Hitler seriously. This trend is being driven by study and discovery of Hitler’s actual words and deeds, separated from popular myth and propaganda, partly made possible because of the increasing availability of accurate historical information.
Slowly but surely, the mountain of lies piled onto history by the victorious Allied powers is eroding down to nothing. One sure sign of this trend is the subtle, yet unmistakable ongoing revision of Hitler scholarship by mainstream historians. One of the most recent examples is the new book by Cambridge professor Brendan Simms, titled “Hitler: A Global Biography,” published by Basic Books in late 2019.
Simms’ biography of Hitler is far from perfect. He discounts critical biographical sources such as the memoirs of August Kubizek, and Hitler’s own autobiography, apparently only because they portray Hitler in a positive light. And in spite of the author’s generally unbiased tone, free from moralizing, he repeats some of the more outlandish propaganda horror stories about the Third Reich with an intellectual laziness unworthy of the rigorous revisionism he applies to other subjects. As a Cambridge professor, he has his career to protect. He also projects a bit too much of his own Anglocentrism onto Hitler. The Fuhrer certainly admired many aspects of both the British and American cultures, but it would be foolish to suggest his first love wasn’t only and always for his own German people.
Crucially, the book quietly drops or revises dozens of long-standing propaganda myths. Among them are the lies that Hitler was a “lazy dictator,” that he was a “mad rug-chewer,” that he set out with the intention to “exterminate” the Jews, that he deliberately encouraged “polycratic chaos” within the Reich to enhance his own power, that he was driven by megalomania or narcissism, that he ever issued a “Nero order” against his own people, and significantly that he never went after or desired “world domination.”
Most thoroughly demolished by this book is the myth that Hitler viewed Soviet communism as a greater threat than Anglo-American plutocracy.
The following passages speak for themselves:
“While the connection between Hitler’s anti-Semitism and his anti-capitalism is often noted, and has been the subject of some individual studies, its centrality to his world view, and the extent to which he was fighting a war against ‘international high finance’ and ‘plutocracy’ from start to finish, has not been understood at all.”
From the start of Hitler’s political career in the early 1920s:
“It was the ‘international Jewish newspaper corporations’, Hitler claimed, who had prevented a Russo-German rapprochement. It was they who owned the large American companies supplying the Allied war effort and who tricked the ‘peaceful’ American people into [WW1] with Germany against their better natures and best interests. It was the Jews who tried to manipulate Germany’s food supply and who ‘precipitated the [communist] revolution through hunger’. All this happened because the ‘New York Stock Exchange’ – the ‘Headquarters of World Jewry’ – was determined to crush Germany, the last remaining Nationalstaat which was ‘not yet completely ruled by stock exchanges’. In short, Hitler remained firmly wedded to the idea of a deadly synthesis between world Jewry, international capitalism and Anglo-America as Germany’s nemesis.”
As Germany suffered under the enemy blockade which starved hundreds of thousands, even after they laid down their weapons in November 1918, Hitler came to the following conclusions:
“Moreover, in Hitler’s view the war was by no means over. Germany was still the victim of international capitalism, whose continuing power he repeatedly attacked. He spoke of ‘international stock exchange and loan capital’ as the main ‘beneficiaries’ of the peace treaty [of Versailles]. Ever since the ‘collapse of the Reich’, Hitler claimed, the country had fallen under ‘the rule of international, fatherlandless capital, independent of person, place and Nation’. International conferences – such as Genoa in April 1922 – were simply condemned as ‘stock exchange conferences’. Hitler saw Jewish international capitalism and western democracy as linked. ‘International Jewish stock exchange capital,’ he believed, ‘was the driving force of these western-democratic states.’ He set up the ‘equation’ of ‘democracy-capitalism-Jew’. For all these reasons, he argued, National Socialism was a ‘new force whose aim could always only be anti-capitalist’.
The distinction is made between productive national and destructive international capital:
“Hitler was not completely opposed to all forms of capitalism, though he sometimes gave that impression. He contrasted the blanket hostility of Social Democrats and Marxists to capitalism in general with his own distinction between allegedly pernicious and largely Jewish ‘international loan capitalism’ and nationally oriented ‘productive industrial capitalism’. ‘Factories and industrial capital,’ he told an audience of SA, ‘is national’ and ‘the capital of every country remains national’. For clarity, he stressed that National Socialism ‘struggled against every form of big capital, irrespective of whether it is German or Jewish, if it is grounded not in productive work, but in the principle of interest, of income without work or toil’. .. In Hitler’s view it was the determination of international capitalism to subjugate independent national economies which had led to the world war and the brutal peace settlement.”
In the period immediately before and after the 1923 Munich Putsch:
“The main danger of Germany’s internal weakness was that it made her vulnerable to external attack, especially from the enemies that Hitler feared most: international capitalism, Anglo-America and the associated forces of world Jewry. Hitler critiqued the economics of inequality and exploitation, the ‘jarring juxtaposition of poor and rich so close to each other’, the ‘role of money’, in which ‘money [became] God’ and ‘the false God of Mammon was offered incense’. He became increasingly convinced that ‘the heaviest battle to be fought was no longer against enemy peoples but against international capital’. Here Hitler insisted more than ever on his earlier distinction between national capital, which the state could control, and pernicious international capital, which controlled states or sought to do so. One of its principal instruments of subjugation was revolutionary Marxism, which undermined national economies, societies and governments. Others were economic immiseration and racial contamination, both of which also reduced the capacity of nations to resist international takeover. For Hitler, maintaining an independent national economy was therefore absolutely central to the defense of national identity, sovereignty and racial purity.”
Just as modern leftist “woke” ideology, which is a form of cultural Bolshevism, only softens up communities for the predations of global corporations, so did Hitler perceive the communism of the 1930s as the softening up of nations for international capitalist exploitation, led by the Jews:
“Hitler violently objected to international capitalism even when it was not Jewish, but he assigned the Jews a particularly malevolent role within the global capitalist system. In Mein Kampf, as in his earlier rhetoric, Jews were inseparably linked with money and the whole capitalist system as ‘traders’, as ‘middlemen’, who levied an ‘extortionate rate of interest’ for their ‘financial deals’. Jewry, he claimed, aimed at nothing less than the ‘financial domination of the entire economy’. Yet because ‘a Bolshevized world can only survive if it encompasses everything’, a ‘single independent state’ – such as a revived Germany – could bring the whole juggernaut to a standstill.”
Hitler saw the League of Nations as a sham tool of the ruling capitalist powers: “This meant that the world was run in accordance not with international law, but the law of capital: ‘not the right of the peoples’, as he put it, ‘but the rights of the bankers of the peoples’."
At times, this is framed explicitly in terms of what has recently been jokingly dubbed “the kosher sandwich”:
“Hitler had not changed his view that Bolshevism was allied with and subordinated to the forces of international capitalism. He claimed that while the Marxist parties condemned the capitalist economy in the strongest terms, they worked hand in hand with ‘the forces of international high finance, and supra-state world capital’.”
And in all cases, communism prepared the way for ultimate international capitalist takeover:
“The subordinate relationship of communism to capitalism was emphasized again during the Reichstag election campaign. ‘Marxism,’ one Nazi poster headlined, ‘is the guardian angel of capitalism’.”
This theme continued all the way through the start of the Second World War:
“Even at this early stage, therefore, the nature of the war was becoming clear. It was Hitler’s response to the German predicament at the heart of Europe, an attempt to escape what he saw as her historic encirclement and subjugation. Now that he had given up all hopes of a British alliance, and of accommodation with Anglo-America, his language shifted from that of Nordic solidarity to that of a global class conflict in which he substituted nations for the classic Marxist social categories. The United States and the British Empire, on this reading, were the ‘haves’, the lords of all they surveyed. The Germans, by contrast, were firmly among the ‘have-nots’, ground down by the forces of ‘plutocracy’, which were determined to extirpate the contagious social model of the Nazi Volksstaat.”
Later in the war:
“He inveighed against the ‘money magnates’, the ‘Jewish and non-Jewish international bank barons’ who were trying to destroy the Germany of the ‘welfare laws for workers’ which had ‘removed class distinctions’ in the Reich and eliminated unemployment. So fearful were Germany’s enemies of this model of ‘welfare and social compromise’, he claimed, that they fear ‘that their own people might be infected by it’. In this respect, apparently, Nazism was for export after all. The regime attached such importance to this passage in Hitler’s speech that it was reprinted in the official journal of the Reich Labor Ministry shortly afterwards.”
Hitler reiterated these themes over and over again:
“In his 1940 New Year’s Day address Hitler asserted that the aim of the ‘Jewish-capitalist world enemy’ was to ‘destroy Germany’ and ‘the German people’. This was because the Third Reich represented a youthful, dynamic and popular challenge to the international ruling elite, which he understood in national and generational rather than class terms. The Germans, Hitler claimed in late January 1940, were one of the ‘young peoples’ of the world. They were challenging the ‘so-called propertied classes among the people’ who had ‘robbed’ Germany and were simply sitting on their ill-gotten gains. On this reading, the Germans were, so to speak, at best the poor whites of the international system. In this spirit, Hitler professed sympathy with the other wretched of the earth who groaned under the weight of imperialism and capitalism, particularly that of the British Empire. His empathy extended to not merely the Nordic Boers, but also the decidedly non-Aryan Arabs. Hitler reminded his listeners again that it was the British who ‘invented the concentration camp’, and argued that the blockade of Germany was simply the latest version of the age-old method of waging war against women and children.”
Hitler’s relative tolerance towards nonwhite races can be seen in many other passages:
“[The approximately 120,000 black French soldiers captured in May and June 1940] were held in POW, not concentration camps. The only recorded intervention by Hitler in this question was an OKW directive requiring the transfer of non-white French captives to the unoccupied zone. His concern, which dated from the occupation of the Rhineland in the 1920s, was to prevent any ‘contamination’ of the German population. The general trend was that while conditions for blacks in the camps generally improved over time, those of Jews radically worsened. Hitler’s racial war was not primarily one of white against black, but of Aryan against Jew.”
The Fuhrer is shown throughout the book to be a foreign policy realist, whose primary goal was the safeguarding of Germany first, then European civilization as a whole, from the rising external threats of Jewish Anglo-America and Bolshevized Russia. His numerous peace overtures to Great Britain, even years into the war, are documented along with his extraordinary attempts to keep Germany out of war with the United States.
What might come as a surprise to most readers is that Hitler is shown to be extremely flexible on the question of Slavic peoples and eastern Europe. To be sure, Hitler identified both racially and culturally as a German, but he displayed none of the fanatical anti-Slav hatred which was later attributed to him. Hitler is shown to have had the greatest respect for the Polish head of state, Marshal Jozef Pilsudski, who ruled from 1918 until his death in 1935.
Hitler tried for years to form an alliance with Poland against the Soviet Union, and greatly lamented the British and American machinations which placed Poland in the role of an enemy by September 1939. He even briefly floated the idea, at a meeting with Molotov in mid November 1940, of greater long-term cooperation with Soviet Russia to keep the Americans out of Europe. In the event, the invasion of the Soviet Union by the Axis powers was not just about defeating Bolshevism, but of building up a continental bloc which could resist the Anglo-American Jewish world blockade indefinitely.
“Nazi moves to create a ‘continental bloc’ were flanked with another dose of anti-Anglo-American, anti-capitalist, anti-Semitic and anti-imperialist rhetoric. If the British Empire and the United States were the ‘haves’ of the world order, Hitler argued, the German Reich was the leadership of the ‘have-nots’... In Hitler’s reading, inequality was manifested at both the national and the class level, and the two were connected. Germany as a whole was subject to an international ruling class, which had divided Germans from each other....”
One could easily extend the breakdown of nations along class lines in the West, to the present breakdown even along lines of gender, with feminism waging its war against men, the embittered but understandable male backlash, and disturbed individuals further muddying the waters by claiming to be transgendered. All these divisions, sown by the left, serve only to atomize families and communities to make international capital stronger.
“The breaking-down of class barriers within Germany, division the Fuhrer believed to have been carefully cultivated by the external enemy, was part and parcel of national liberation. Hitler wanted to transcend, as he said in early September 1940, the ‘legacies of the past, of origin, of estate, and of profession’. For obvious reasons, the Fuhrer argued, this grand social project was a threat to the established order, especially the British, who would stop at nothing to frustrate it. This, Hitler told an audience of German armament workers in mid November 1940, was why ‘plutocratic-capitalist Britain’ had gone to war against the German ‘welfare state’. The British, Hitler repeated right at the end of the year, ‘hate us for our social convictions and our plans and actions [in the social field] seem dangerous to them.”
In the same way, the Anglo-American plutocratic powers could not allow a nationalist populist government in Iraq or Syria or Libya, nor can they tolerate nationalism or populism in Europe, from Hungary to Russia.
“This was why Hitler was determined to maintain as much as possible of his transformative socio-economic programme and to promise the German people a better life, at least after the war. In early 1940, even before the western campaign, he gave Robert Ley the task of looking into the idea of ‘a comprehensive and generous old-age pension for the German people’. Later in the year, after much deliberation, he issued his ‘Decrees for the Preparation of German Residential Construction after the War’. Victory, he explained, would confront the Reich with tasks ‘which it could only fulfill through an increase in population’. The purpose of the decree, therefore, was to promote the ‘health life of child-rich families’ and thereby bring about a larger birth rate.”
Even in wartime, Hitler was concerned with social problems which the capitalist powers have still only managed to make worse, even after 70 years of ruling the planet.
“In Hitler’s rhetoric, the Reich was the vanguard of a global war of liberation to free Germany, the European continent and ultimately the entire world from the clutches of international capitalist plutocracy.” Even in the Middle East, already there existed “hope that the Third Reich would provide a third way between Anglo-American capitalist imperialism and Soviet communism”.
At the peak of the war, the unequal nature of the contest emphasized why the “have-nots” were fighting in the first place:
“What was clear even at the time, in any case, was that whoever was in charge in Berlin, the chances of matching the production of the enemy coalition, especially that of the United States, were slim. The problem was not the level of mobilization, which was already very high, but the imbalance in resources and industrial capacity. Nobody was more aware of this than Hitler himself. As we have seen, the immense American industrial potential had been a staple of his thinking in the 1920s, and had dominated his strategy since the late 1930s. He did not know the extent of Allied deliveries to the Soviet Union, which were substantial, but he was well aware they were taking place. The basic problem, which Hitler identified quite clearly, was that whereas Germany controlled most of Europe, it was at war with most of (the rest of) the world, or at least with its resources. The enemy coalition controlled the global commons: the sea lanes and the financial system. The mines, factories and farms of the world were mobilized by Anglo-American capital, transported in Allied shipping and directed against the Reich. By contrast, the Third Reich was confined to a European reservation, whose economies were cut off from the world markets and raw materials they had depended on. Hitler’s New European Order was – economically – much less than the sum of its pre-war parts. It was no match for the Anglo-American global cartel.”
As the war turned against the Axis powers, they had no choice but to fight on or face total subjugation and eventual extinction. Meanwhile, Hitler himself started to outwardly show the years of strain against the world enemy:
“The stress of total war took its toll.... Hitler’s physical condition was deteriorating rapidly. This was visible even in the carefully edited newsreels. To those who saw him close up the decline was unmistakable. Goebbels noted after his visit on 20 March [1942] that Hitler had ‘already gone very grey’ and that he ‘looked much older’ when speaking of the winter crisis [of Stalingrad]. The Fuhrer struck him as ‘sick and frail’.... Yet, even in April 1945, his general Kesselring “spoke of his continuing ‘intellectual vigor,’ which stood ‘in conspicuous contradiction to his bodily feeling’. Donitz, whose final meeting with Hitler was nine days later, states that ‘there can be no question of any kind of reduction in his intellectual powers’. Hitler, he insisted, remained in full control of his senses.”
Simms' even dares to acknowledge the huge emotional and spiritual toll the war took on Hitler, including the destruction of German cities such as Dresden, and the sacrifice of so many brave soldiers at the front.
“Conscious that he was asking ever more of his soldiers and the German people, the Fuhrer reminded them of what they were fighting for, and why young men were being sent thousands of miles away from their homes. In February 1942, he already let slip that they might have to fight their way to the Caucasus. Now, as the final touches were being put to the plan, he returned to his primary war aims in two speeches in April and May 1942. The Germans, Hitler argued, were a ‘subjugated’ people who had been put in ‘chains’ by ‘democracy’, the ‘Jewish brain trusts’ and ‘stock exchanges and banks’, supported by Bolshevism. In order to secure their ‘daily bread in order to live’ as ‘have-nots’, they would have to confront the international ‘propertied’ class. This was a global enemy, but Hitler announced it would be beaten in Russia. ‘The east is the battlefield,’ he explained, ‘in which the outcome will be decided.’ It was there, Hitler told another audience of officer cadets in late May 1942, that Germany would find the resources and the living space to prevent itself from disappearing off the face of the earth.”
Even at the greatest extent of his territorial power, Hitler conceived of his war aims in ultimately defensive terms:
“[In mid August 1942] the Lebensraum and resource objectives of the Russian campaign appeared on the verge of realization.... Yet even at the pinnacle of his power, as autumn loomed, and the decisive blow eluded him, the Fuhrer was beginning to draw back. His strategy, he explained to Raeder on 26 August 1942, was to crush Russia and thereby secure a ‘blockade-proof and defensible Lebensraum from which the war could be waged [against the Anglo-Americans] for many more years’. This would enable the Fuhrer to determine the ‘outcome and length’ of the broader war, which he defined as the ‘battle against the Anglo-Saxon seapowers’, in order to make them ‘ready for peace’. In other words, victory in Russia would pave the way not for world domination but for a negotiated peace with Anglo-America.”
Hitler didn’t set out to break up the British Empire or defeat the United States, and even after he shifted to a policy of alliances with the oppressed colonial peoples against the British, he never intended to conquer or occupy either England or America. What Hitler wanted was security for Germany and Europe, a security which, after the outbreak of hostilities, could only be bought by the conquest of land wrenched from the Soviet Union, which had to be confronted anyway because of the global military ambitions of world communism.
That the great Western powers were in the hands of criminals such as Roosevelt and Churchill is one of the great tragedies of history. There is no doubt Hitler would have sought out cooperation rather than confrontation with a nationalist Russia, just as there is no doubt war between Germany and Britain would have been averted had the wiser heads of Oswald Mosley and the Duke of Windsor prevailed over Eden and Churchill. There is also no doubt Germany would have fought shoulder to shoulder with Poland, had Marshal Pilsudski survived. By the same token, a United States run by a populist President Huey Long would never have waged another world war against Germany. Every Allied nation can at least be proud for having produced such patriots who stood up for reason and peace, against the global forces of capitalism and communism.
Hitler fought to the last, as the Simms biography correctly points out, not because of some nihilistic megalomania, but because the Germans continued to improvise desperate strategies right up until the end of the war, because they felt they had no choice. Even when an outright military victory became impossible, the hope was to hold out until either the enemy coalition broke apart, which it did as soon as the war ended, or until one side blinked due to war weariness, as America did in Vietnam. The demand for unconditional surrender and the exterminationist policies of blockade and mass terror bombing left not only Hitler, but the German people as a whole, with the impression they were fighting a war for existence or extinction. This is why the Germans fought with Hitler to the end.
Everything Hitler fought for, all his predictions and warnings, have been borne out since 1945. The victory of international capitalism and Bolshevism in the war set not only the Germans and Italians, but all Europeans on a path to extinction. The living space of all whites is threatened by a demographic invasion, while global plutocracy grows fatter and richer than ever before at the expense of working people everywhere.
Even in death, Hitler did not give up:
“On 23 April, Hitler let it be known through Goebbels that he had taken over personal command over the defense of Berlin’... Privately, in Hitler’s presence, Goebbels spelled out the thinking behind the decision to remain in Berlin. ‘If things go well,’ Goebbels continued, ‘and if the Fuhrer were to find an honorable death in Berlin and Europe were to become Bolshevik,’ then ‘in five years at the latest, the Fuhrer would be a legendary personality’. ‘National Socialism’, he went on, would become ‘a myth’ and the Fuhrer would be ‘hallowed by his last great action’, so that ‘everything human that they criticize in him today would be swept away with one blow.’”
Hitler did not intend that Europe or the German people should go down with him, but resisted to the last for the purpose of setting an example that would inspire the rebirth of National Socialism at some future date, when the peoples of the world had finally had enough of the Jews and their plutocratic world domination. As the world groans under the strain of this domination like never before, the example of Adolf Hitler and the state he created will only continue to inspire new generations, long after that domination is broken forever.


russia-insider--2020-04-24--HALF of Italians Want to Leave the EU - Italexit Is Now a Real Possibility (New Polls)

As heated negotiations over financial aid for countries affected by the coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) pandemic have dragged on in Brussels , anti-EU sentiment is rising in many countries .
This is particularly apparent in Italy , which has been the hardest-hit member of the bloc during the crisis .
Belgium , France , Greece , Ireland , Italy , Luxembourg , Portugal , Slovenia , and Spain have been pushing for the issuing of so-called “ corona bonds , ” which would distribute the debt among all countries in the bloc .
The “ Frugal Four , ” however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Netherlands — are rejecting the suggestion , and have called for the activation of the European Stability Mechanism , which would allow member states to take out loans in the form of bond purchases from the European Central Bank .
Nowhere has disappointment in the EU been stronger than in Italy , and new polls show that Italians are fed up with what they see as the bloc ’ s inadequate measures to respond to the crisis .
49 % of Italians are now in favour of leaving the EU and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll conducted earlier this month by the Tecne Institute that was reported by Express .
This represents a 20 % increase from 18 months ago , the last time such a poll was undertaken .
Another recent survey conducted by Termometro found that nearly 40 % of Italians are in favor of leaving both the EU and the Eurozone , suggesting that the Tecne poll is accurate , as reported by Il Sussidiario .
The Tecne poll recorded that only 40.9 % of respondents want Italy to remain in the bloc .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only leave the Eurozone , or in some cases for Italy to remain in the Eurozone but leave the EU .
These numbers suggest that if Italy were to hold a referendum on remaining in the EU today , pro-European Italians would lose .
Lega MEP Antonio Maria Rinaldi , who is also an economist , suggested last week that Germany was following a “ diabolical plan ” by pressuring the Netherlands into objecting to the coronabonds measure when in fact it is Germany itself that wants the notion defeated , as previously @ @ @ @ @ @

As heated negotiations over financial aid for countries affected by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic have dragged on in Brussels, anti-EU sentiment is rising in many countries. This is particularly apparent in Italy, which has been the hardest-hit member of the bloc during the crisis.
Belgium, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain have been pushing for the issuing of so-called “corona bonds,” which would distribute the debt among all countries in the bloc. The “Frugal Four,” however — Austria, Finland, Germany, and the Netherlands — are rejecting the suggestion, and have called for the activation of the European Stability Mechanism, which would allow member states to take out loans in the form of bond purchases from the European Central Bank.
Nowhere has disappointment in the EU been stronger than in Italy, and new polls show that Italians are fed up with what they see as the bloc’s inadequate measures to respond to the crisis. 49% of Italians are now in favour of leaving the EU and the Eurozone altogether, according to a poll conducted earlier this month by the Tecne Institute that was reported by Express. This represents a 20% increase from 18 months ago, the last time such a poll was undertaken.
Another recent survey conducted by Termometro found that nearly 40% of Italians are in favor of leaving both the EU and the Eurozone, suggesting that the Tecne poll is accurate, as reported by Il Sussidiario.
The Tecne poll recorded that only 40.9% of respondents want Italy to remain in the bloc. The remaining 10% either want Italy to only leave the Eurozone, or in some cases for Italy to remain in the Eurozone but leave the EU.
These numbers suggest that if Italy were to hold a referendum on remaining in the EU today, pro-European Italians would lose.
Lega MEP Antonio Maria Rinaldi, who is also an economist, suggested last week that Germany was following a “diabolical plan” by pressuring the Netherlands into objecting to the coronabonds measure when in fact it is Germany itself that wants the notion defeated, as previously reported by Voice of Europe.


russia-insider--2020-04-24--Russian Activists Advocate Christianity, Tradition, Family, and Nationalism - Israel-Loving Pompeo S

Russian Activists Advocate Christianity, Tradition, Family, and Nationalism - Israel-Loving Pompeo Says 'That's Terrorism!' (RIM)

The US government has formally designated the Russian Imperial Movement ( RIM ) – a small Christian monarchist outfit based in St. Petersburg – as a terrorist organization , and has imposed sanctions on the group and its leaders .
This characterization is groundless and hypocritical .
Remarks in a statement by Secretary of State Michael Pompeo to support his labeling of RIM as a “ white supremacist terrorist group ” also raise troubling questions .
Pompeo justifies the designation by claiming that the Russian group ’ s activities “ threaten the national security and foreign policy of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to support this far-fetched assertion .
RIM 's only working presence on the internet at the time of this article is their page on VK.com : https : //vk.com/rus_imperia Pompeo misrepresents the group ’ s principles and activities .
For years RIM has been candid about its goals and work – in its publications , in interviews , and on its website .
It ’ s only by the most twisted logic that the group can be called “ neo-Nazi ” or “ white supremacist.
” It certainly does not regard itself as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used less often to describe than to smear . )
“ We stand for traditional values , Christianity , and monarchy .
We not have a single document on our site , not a single word , about white supremacy , ” RIM spokesman Stanislav Vorobyev said recently .
“ Everything we do is strictly within the law , ” he added .
As another RIM spokesman explained in an interview , the group ’ s central outlook is Christian , monarchist , and nationalist .
RIM , he said , organizes conferences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christian religious events .
It offers athletic , weapons , and military-style training courses , which are open to the public .
And it supports orphanages and other charitable activities .
Pompeo says that the group “ provides paramilitary-style training to neo-Nazis and white supremacists , and it plays a prominent role in trying to rally like-minded Europeans and Americans into a common front against their perceived enemies.
” Even if that were true , such activities are not illegal – not even in the US .
They are also not intrinsically dangerous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ terrorist ” label and US government sanctions .
Pompeo goes on to explain that two Swedes who “ attended ” a RIM training course later carried out bombings in Sweden – crimes for which they were convicted .
He also says that “ the Swedish prosecutor credited RIM for their terrorist radicalization and relevant training.
” But Pompeo provides no evidence that RIM encouraged the Swedes to carry out any illegal or terrorist acts , or that any RIM leader knew of any criminal act that they may have been planning .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this little-known Russian group seems to be more a publicity gesture by a beleaguered administration than a serious effort to counter any real threat .
Fighting terrorism is , of course , a priority task for US authorities .
But they should act in a principled and effective way , and only against those who actually threaten “ the national security and foreign policy of the United States.
” On Feb. 25 , 1994 , Baruch Goldstein carried out a mass shooting of Palestinians at a mosque in Hebron .
The US-born Israeli @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He received training to carry out this shooting as an Israeli soldier .
His Zionist radicalization apparently took root while attending a Yeshiva Jewish school in Brooklyn , New York , and while serving with the Israeli military .
On the basis of the justifications given by Pompeo for calling RIM a “ white supremacist terrorist group , ” should the US government designate the Israel Defense Forces a “ Jewish supremacist terrorist ” organization because it provided Goldstein with “ relevant training ” for mass killing , and because it tries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a common front against their perceived enemies ” ?
If what the US government says about RIM is true , why are authorities in Russia and Sweden – who are presumably more familiar with the group than officials in the US – seemingly less concerned about its activities than Secretary Pompeo ?
No Russian or Swedish agency , it ’ s worth noting , has designated RIM as a terrorist group .
Does Pompeo really believe that it ’ s wrong to “ rally like-minded ” people “ into a common front @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t that what American presidents have often done ?
Isn ’ t that what every venerated fighter for freedom and justice throughout history has done ?
It ’ s likely that Russian officials have explained to the US government that their own authorities are aware of RIM and its activities , and that , however unwelcome those activities might be , they are not illegal .
Russian authorities may have also pointed out that , in both Russia and the US , “ paramilitary-style training ” is legal , and that holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of RIM , is likewise not forbidden .
If Secretary Pompeo is serious about what he says , shouldn ’ t the standards he cites be applied conscientiously here in the United States ?
Should the US government introduce mass screening to ban “ white supremacists ” from membership in gun clubs , practicing in rifle ranges , and service in police forces ?
Should the US armed forces refuse to accept young men who hold “ white supremacist ” views – that is , views in line with those of nearly all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this country ’ s history ?

The US government has formally designated the Russian Imperial Movement (RIM) – a small Christian monarchist outfit based in St. Petersburg – as a terrorist organization, and has imposed sanctions on the group and its leaders. This characterization is groundless and hypocritical. Remarks in a statement by Secretary of State Michael Pompeo to support his labeling of RIM as a “white supremacist terrorist group” also raise troubling questions.
Pompeo justifies the designation by claiming that the Russian group’s activities “threaten the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” He provides no evidence whatsoever to support this far-fetched assertion.
RIM's only working presence on the internet at the time of this article is their page on VK.com: https://vk.com/rus_imperia
Pompeo misrepresents the group’s principles and activities. For years RIM has been candid about its goals and work – in its publications, in interviews, and on its website. It’s only by the most twisted logic that the group can be called “neo-Nazi” or “white supremacist.” It certainly does not regard itself as either. (Those labels are anyway used less often to describe than to smear.) “We stand for traditional values, Christianity, and monarchy. We not have a single document on our site, not a single word, about white supremacy,” RIM spokesman Stanislav Vorobyev said recently. “Everything we do is strictly within the law,” he added.
As another RIM spokesman explained in an interview, the group’s central outlook is Christian, monarchist, and nationalist. RIM, he said, organizes conferences, rallies, discussion groups, and Christian religious events. It offers athletic, weapons, and military-style training courses, which are open to the public. And it supports orphanages and other charitable activities.
Pompeo says that the group “provides paramilitary-style training to neo-Nazis and white supremacists, and it plays a prominent role in trying to rally like-minded Europeans and Americans into a common front against their perceived enemies.” Even if that were true, such activities are not illegal – not even in the US. They are also not intrinsically dangerous – certainly not enough to justify the “terrorist” label and US government sanctions.
Pompeo goes on to explain that two Swedes who “attended” a RIM training course later carried out bombings in Sweden – crimes for which they were convicted. He also says that “the Swedish prosecutor credited RIM for their terrorist radicalization and relevant training.” But Pompeo provides no evidence that RIM encouraged the Swedes to carry out any illegal or terrorist acts, or that any RIM leader knew of any criminal act that they may have been planning.
The US government’s action against this little-known Russian group seems to be more a publicity gesture by a beleaguered administration than a serious effort to counter any real threat. Fighting terrorism is, of course, a priority task for US authorities. But they should act in a principled and effective way, and only against those who actually threaten “the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”
On Feb. 25, 1994, Baruch Goldstein carried out a mass shooting of Palestinians at a mosque in Hebron. The US-born Israeli killed 29 worshippers, and wounded 125. He received training to carry out this shooting as an Israeli soldier. His Zionist radicalization apparently took root while attending a Yeshiva Jewish school in Brooklyn, New York, and while serving with the Israeli military. On the basis of the justifications given by Pompeo for calling RIM a “white supremacist terrorist group,” should the US government designate the Israel Defense Forces a “Jewish supremacist terrorist” organization because it provided Goldstein with “relevant training” for mass killing, and because it tries “to rally like-minded” people “into a common front against their perceived enemies”?
If what the US government says about RIM is true, why are authorities in Russia and Sweden – who are presumably more familiar with the group than officials in the US – seemingly less concerned about its activities than Secretary Pompeo? No Russian or Swedish agency, it’s worth noting, has designated RIM as a terrorist group.
Does Pompeo really believe that it’s wrong to “rally like-minded” people “into a common front against their perceived enemies”? Isn’t that what American presidents have often done? Isn’t that what every venerated fighter for freedom and justice throughout history has done?
It’s likely that Russian officials have explained to the US government that their own authorities are aware of RIM and its activities, and that, however unwelcome those activities might be, they are not illegal. Russian authorities may have also pointed out that, in both Russia and the US, “paramilitary-style training” is legal, and that holding dissident or unpopular views, including those of RIM, is likewise not forbidden.
If Secretary Pompeo is serious about what he says, shouldn’t the standards he cites be applied conscientiously here in the United States? Should the US government introduce mass screening to ban “white supremacists” from membership in gun clubs, practicing in rifle ranges, and service in police forces?
Should the US armed forces refuse to accept young men who hold “white supremacist” views – that is, views in line with those of nearly all American presidents and military officers during most of this country’s history?


russia-insider--2020-04-24--Russia Commissions World's Largest Nuclear Icebreaker Ship for Arctic - It's a Monster

Russia gives go-ahead for the first Lider-class icebreaker amid big uncertainties in global trade , shipping and potential for huge income from Arctic oil and gas .
With the coronavirus outbreak still not under control , big ceremonies , and long-distance travel have to be avoided .
So also when the contract for building the largest and most powerful nuclear icebreaker is to be signed .
On April 23rd , a video-link for the remote signing of the contract by the buyer and the builder was established between Murmansk and Vladivostok .
Murmansk is homeport for Russia ’ s powerful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to build the first Lider-class , Zvezda , is located in Bolshoi Kamen near Vladivostok in the Far East .
“ Today , an important step is taken in the history of the nuclear icebreaker fleet , ” said Mustafa Kashka , Director of Atomflot in Murmansk in a pre-prepared statement posted by Rosatom , Russia ’ s state corporation for nuclear energy .
Kashka added that the new icebreaker “ will guarantee safe and regular operations in the eastern region of the Arctic by providing year-round navigations along the Northern Sea Route.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ contract , the icebreaker is planned to be commissioned in 2027 .
The Lider-class will be an icebreaker of a kind the world has never seen .
Equipped with two RITM-400 type nuclear reactors , the total power will be 120 MW which will allow the icebreaker to crush through ice thicker than four meters .
The Lider-class icebreaker will have a displacement of 55,000 tons , about twice the weight of the current Arktika-class icebreakers like the « Yamal » and « 50 Let Pobedy » .
Lider is 13,5 meters wider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 22220 class currently under testing and construction at the yard in St. Petersburg , with the first , the “ Arktika ” to be delivered later this year or next year to Rosatomflot .
Crushing the ice along the most difficult part of the Northern Sea Route , from the Laptev Sea and eastbound , the Lider icebreakers can open a much wider ship lane through the ice for big vessels , including the largest LNG tankers sailing east from the Yamal region towards the Pacific region .
It was former prime minister @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secured 127 billion rubles ( €1,85 billion ) in state funding for building the first Lider-class icebreaker .
Two more of the giant icebreakers are planned with deliveries in 2030 and 2032 .
Funding for those two is yet to be granted .

Russia gives go-ahead for the first Lider-class icebreaker amid big uncertainties in global trade, shipping and potential for huge income from Arctic oil and gas.
With the coronavirus outbreak still not under control, big ceremonies, and long-distance travel have to be avoided. So also when the contract for building the largest and most powerful nuclear icebreaker is to be signed.
On April 23rd, a video-link for the remote signing of the contract by the buyer and the builder was established between Murmansk and Vladivostok.
Murmansk is homeport for Russia’s powerful fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers while the shipyard to build the first Lider-class, Zvezda, is located in Bolshoi Kamen near Vladivostok in the Far East.
Here's a promotional video of the ship
“Today, an important step is taken in the history of the nuclear icebreaker fleet,” said Mustafa Kashka, Director of Atomflot in Murmansk in a pre-prepared statement posted by Rosatom, Russia’s state corporation for nuclear energy.
Kashka added that the new icebreaker “will guarantee safe and regular operations in the eastern region of the Arctic by providing year-round navigations along the Northern Sea Route.”
According to the terms of the contract, the icebreaker is planned to be commissioned in 2027.
The Lider-class will be an icebreaker of a kind the world has never seen.
Equipped with two RITM-400 type nuclear reactors, the total power will be 120 MW which will allow the icebreaker to crush through ice thicker than four meters.
The Lider-class icebreaker will have a displacement of 55,000 tons, about twice the weight of the current Arktika-class icebreakers like the «Yamal» and «50 Let Pobedy».
From his desk in Murmansk, General Director of FSUE Atomflot Mustafa Kashka signed the contract in a video meeting with General Director of the Zvezda shipyard, Sergey Tseluyko, sitting in Vladivostok. Photo: Rosatom
Lider is 13,5 meters wider than the next generation icebreakers of the 22220 class currently under testing and construction at the yard in St. Petersburg, with the first, the “Arktika” to be delivered later this year or next year to Rosatomflot.
Crushing the ice along the most difficult part of the Northern Sea Route, from the Laptev Sea and eastbound, the Lider icebreakers can open a much wider ship lane through the ice for big vessels, including the largest LNG tankers sailing east from the Yamal region towards the Pacific region.
It was former prime minister, Dmitry Medvedev, that in January secured 127 billion rubles (€1,85 billion) in state funding for building the first Lider-class icebreaker.
Two more of the giant icebreakers are planned with deliveries in 2030 and 2032. Funding for those two is yet to be granted.


russia-insider--2020-04-24--Some Funny Racist Memes - Truth to Power - Saturday, April 11, 2020


russia-insider--2020-04-27--No Matter Who Is Elected, Foreign Policy Will Continue to be a Zionist Train-Wreck

Now that the Democratic Party has apparently succeeded in getting rid of the only two voices among its presidential candidates that actually deviated from the establishment consensus , it appears that Joe Biden will be running against Donald Trump in November .
To be sure , Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard are still hanging on , but the fix was in and the Democratic National Committee ( DNC ) made sure that Sanders would be given the death blow on Super Tuesday while Gabbard would be blocked from participating in any of the late term debates .
It is widely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg on the eve of Super Tuesday that targeted Sanders was arranged through an intervention by ex-President Barack Obama who made a plea in support of “ party unity , ” offering the two a significant quid pro quo down the road if they were willing to leave the race and throw their support to Biden , which they dutifully did .
Rumor has it that Klobuchar might well wind up as Biden ’ s vice president .
An alternative tale is that it was a much more threatening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refused ” coming from the Clintons .
Tulsi meanwhile was marginalized after being smeared by Hillary Clinton ’ s claim that she was a “ Russian asset ” being “ groomed ” by the Kremlin .
She was then denied her rightful place in the March 15th debate by a sudden and unexpected rules change in the format which was deliberately designed to exclude her .
So much for the internal democracy of the so-called Democratic Party .
Now that the line-up for November seems set , the discussion has moved to specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ play much of a part in the Democratic Party debates , but it is expected to be more visible in the presidential race , particularly in light of some of the more visible blunders committed by Donald Trump and his associates .
The latest mistake by the White House , the January 3rd airstrike in Iraq that killed Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani and eight Iraqi associates is still resonating , having just last week produced an attack on a U.S. base that killed two American and one British soldiers , followed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah , which is reported to be supported by Iran but has also been integrated into the Iraqi armed forces .
The U.S. unilateral action is taking place without Baghdad ’ s consent and in spite of Iraqi government demands that Washington close its bases and withdraw its remaining troops , numbering approximately 5,000 .
Ironically , killing Soleimani and the consequences is unlikely to be a theme picked up on by the genial but muddled Biden as both major parties are firmly in the grip of the Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killing a senior Iranian official .
Nor will the next president , whoever he is , reverse the disastrous Trump decision and rejoin the JCPOA agreement of 2015 which was intended to monitor Iran ’ s civilian use nuclear program .
Both Trump and Biden might reasonably described as Zionists , Trump by virtue of the made-in-Israel foreign policy positions he has delivered on since his election , and Biden by word and deed during his entire time in politics .
When Biden encountered Sarah Palin in 2008 in the vice-presidential debate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other in enthusing over how much they love the Jewish state .
Biden has said that “ I am a Zionist .
You don ’ t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist ” and also , ridiculously , “ Were there not an Israel , the U.S. would have to invent one .
We will never abandon Israel — out of our own self-interest .
[ It ] is the best $ 3 billion investment we make.
” Biden has been a regular feature speaker at the annual AIPAC summit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as both paranoid and narcissistic , meaning that he sees himself as surrounded by enemies and that the enemies are out to get him personally .
When he is criticized , he either ridicules the source or does something impulsive to deflect what is being said .
He attacked Syria twice based on false claims about the use of chemical weapons when a consensus developed in the media and in congress that he was being “ weak ” in the Middle East .
Those attacks were war crimes as Syria was not threatening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself on withdrawing from Syria when he ran into criticism of the move and his plan to extricate the United States from Afghanistan , if it develops at all , could easily be subjected to similar revision .
Trump is not really the man who as a candidate indicated that he was seriously looking for a way out of America ’ s endless and pointless wars , no matter what his supporters continue to assert .
Biden is on a different track in that he is an establishment hawk .
As head of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2002-2003 he green lighted George W. Bush ’ s plan to attack Iraq .
Beyond that , he cheer-leaded the effort from the Democratic Party benches , helping to create a consensus both in Washington and in the media that Saddam Hussein was a threat that had to be dealt with .
He should have known better as he was privy to intelligence that was suggesting that the Iraqis were no threat at all .
He did not moderate his tune on Iraq until after 2005 , when the expected slam-dunk quick victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certainly privy to the decision making by President Barack Obama , which include the destruction of Libya and the killing of American citizens by drone .
Whether he actively supported those policies is unknown , but he has never been challenged on them .
What is clear is that he did not object to them , another sign of his willingness to go along with the establishment , a tendency which will undoubtedly continue if he is elected president .
And Biden ’ s foreign policy reminiscences are is subject to what appear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ articulate , illustrated by a whole series of faux pas during the campaign .
He has a number of times told a tale of his heroism in Afghanistan that is complete fiction , similar to Hillary Clinton ’ s lying claims of courage under fire in Bosnia .
So , we have a president in place who takes foreign policy personally in that his first thoughts are “ how does it make me look ?
” and a prospective challenger who appears to be suffering from initial stages of dementia and who has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ establishment line , whatever it might be .
Though Trump is the more dangerous of the two as he is both unpredictable and irrational , the likelihood is that Biden will be guided by the Clintons and Obamas .
To put it another way , no matter who is president the likelihood that the United States will change direction to get away from its interventionism and bullying on a global scale is virtually nonexistent .
At least until the money runs out .
Or to express it as a friend of mine does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we Americans wind up getting John McCain.
” Goodnight America !
Philip Giraldi , Ph.D. , is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest .

Now that the Democratic Party has apparently succeeded in getting rid of the only two voices among its presidential candidates that actually deviated from the establishment consensus, it appears that Joe Biden will be running against Donald Trump in November. To be sure, Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard are still hanging on, but the fix was in and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) made sure that Sanders would be given the death blow on Super Tuesday while Gabbard would be blocked from participating in any of the late term debates.
It is widely believed that the abrupt withdrawal of candidates Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg on the eve of Super Tuesday that targeted Sanders was arranged through an intervention by ex-President Barack Obama who made a plea in support of “party unity,” offering the two a significant quid pro quo down the road if they were willing to leave the race and throw their support to Biden, which they dutifully did. Rumor has it that Klobuchar might well wind up as Biden’s vice president. An alternative tale is that it was a much more threatening “offer that couldn’t be refused” coming from the Clintons.
Tulsi meanwhile was marginalized after being smeared by Hillary Clinton’s claim that she was a “Russian asset” being “groomed” by the Kremlin. She was then denied her rightful place in the March 15th debate by a sudden and unexpected rules change in the format which was deliberately designed to exclude her. So much for the internal democracy of the so-called Democratic Party.
Now that the line-up for November seems set, the discussion has moved to specific policy issues. Foreign policy did not play much of a part in the Democratic Party debates, but it is expected to be more visible in the presidential race, particularly in light of some of the more visible blunders committed by Donald Trump and his associates.
The latest mistake by the White House, the January 3rd airstrike in Iraq that killed Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani and eight Iraqi associates is still resonating, having just last week produced an attack on a U.S. base that killed two American and one British soldiers, followed by a retaliatory bombing by U.S. forces directed against Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah, which is reported to be supported by Iran but has also been integrated into the Iraqi armed forces. The U.S. unilateral action is taking place without Baghdad’s consent and in spite of Iraqi government demands that Washington close its bases and withdraw its remaining troops, numbering approximately 5,000.
Ironically, killing Soleimani and the consequences is unlikely to be a theme picked up on by the genial but muddled Biden as both major parties are firmly in the grip of the Israel Lobby and are unlikely to complain about killing a senior Iranian official. Nor will the next president, whoever he is, reverse the disastrous Trump decision and rejoin the JCPOA agreement of 2015 which was intended to monitor Iran’s civilian use nuclear program.
Both Trump and Biden might reasonably described as Zionists, Trump by virtue of the made-in-Israel foreign policy positions he has delivered on since his election, and Biden by word and deed during his entire time in politics. When Biden encountered Sarah Palin in 2008 in the vice-presidential debate, he and Palin sought to outdo each other in enthusing over how much they love the Jewish state. Biden has said that “I am a Zionist. You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist” and also, ridiculously, “Were there not an Israel, the U.S. would have to invent one. We will never abandon Israel — out of our own self-interest. [It] is the best $3 billion investment we make.” Biden has been a regular feature speaker at the annual AIPAC summit in Washington.
Trump might be described as both paranoid and narcissistic, meaning that he sees himself as surrounded by enemies and that the enemies are out to get him personally. When he is criticized, he either ridicules the source or does something impulsive to deflect what is being said. He attacked Syria twice based on false claims about the use of chemical weapons when a consensus developed in the media and in congress that he was being “weak” in the Middle East. Those attacks were war crimes as Syria was not threatening the United States.
Trump similarly reversed himself on withdrawing from Syria when he ran into criticism of the move and his plan to extricate the United States from Afghanistan, if it develops at all, could easily be subjected to similar revision. Trump is not really the man who as a candidate indicated that he was seriously looking for a way out of America’s endless and pointless wars, no matter what his supporters continue to assert.
Biden is on a different track in that he is an establishment hawk. As head of the Senate Foreign Affairs committee back in 2002-2003 he green lighted George W. Bush’s plan to attack Iraq. Beyond that, he cheer-leaded the effort from the Democratic Party benches, helping to create a consensus both in Washington and in the media that Saddam Hussein was a threat that had to be dealt with. He should have known better as he was privy to intelligence that was suggesting that the Iraqis were no threat at all. He did not moderate his tune on Iraq until after 2005, when the expected slam-dunk quick victory got very messy.
Biden was also certainly privy to the decision making by President Barack Obama, which include the destruction of Libya and the killing of American citizens by drone. Whether he actively supported those policies is unknown, but he has never been challenged on them. What is clear is that he did not object to them, another sign of his willingness to go along with the establishment, a tendency which will undoubtedly continue if he is elected president.
And Biden’s foreign policy reminiscences are is subject to what appear to be memory losses or inability to articulate, illustrated by a whole series of faux pas during the campaign. He has a number of times told a tale of his heroism in Afghanistan that is complete fiction, similar to Hillary Clinton’s lying claims of courage under fire in Bosnia.
So, we have a president in place who takes foreign policy personally in that his first thoughts are “how does it make me look?” and a prospective challenger who appears to be suffering from initial stages of dementia and who has always been relied upon to support the establishment line, whatever it might be. Though Trump is the more dangerous of the two as he is both unpredictable and irrational, the likelihood is that Biden will be guided by the Clintons and Obamas. To put it another way, no matter who is president the likelihood that the United States will change direction to get away from its interventionism and bullying on a global scale is virtually nonexistent. At least until the money runs out. Or to express it as a friend of mine does, “No matter who is elected we Americans wind up getting John McCain.” Goodnight America!
Philip Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest.
(Republished from Strategic Culture Foundation by permission of author or representative)