');
The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Topics Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 American Media American Military Censorship China CIA Civil Liberties Conspiracy Theories Deep State Democratic Party Donald Trump Economics EU Fake News Federal Reserve Feminism Foreign Policy Free Trade Gold Government Surveillance Greece Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration Iran Israel Israel Lobby Julian Assange Neocons Neoliberalism Police State Political Correctness Race/Ethnicity Russia Russiagate Syria Terrorism Trade Ukraine Unemployment Venezuela Vladimir Putin Wall Street 2018 Election 2020 Election Abraham Lincoln Academia Adam Schiff ADL Affirmative Action Afghanistan Africa AI Alexei Kudrin Alt Right Amazon.com American Debt American Jews American Left American Prisons Amnesty International Anthrax Anti-Semitism Anti-white Animus Antifa Antitrust Armenia Article Assange Assassinations Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack Obama BDS Movement Benjamin Netanyahu Bill Binney Bill Clinton Bill Of Rights Bitcoin Black Lives Matter Blacks Bolivia Boston Marathon Bombing Bradley Manning Brazil Brexit BRICs Britain Capitalism Charlie Hebdo Charlottesville Child Services Christianity Christine Lagarde Christmas Civil Rights Civil War CNN Cold War Confederacy Confederate Flag Constitutional Theory Corruption Counterpunch Cuba Cultural Marxism Czech Republic Dallas Shooting David Irving David Stockman Debt Deficits Democracy Democrats Department Of Justice Deregulation Development Developmental Noise Dissidence Diversity Dollar Dominique Strauss-Kahn Don Siegelman Duterte Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Ebola Ecuador Edward Snowden Emmanuel Macron Employment Environment Europe European Right European Union Eurozone False Flag Attack FBI Ferguson Shooting FIFA Financial Debt Flight From White France Free Speech Freedom Of Speech Freedom Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla George W. Bush Germany Glass-Steagall Global Warming Globalism GMO Google Government Shutdown Gun Control Guns H1-B Visas Hacking Health Care Healthcare Hispanics Hitler Holocaust Housing IMF Inequality Inflation IQ Iraq Iraq War ISIS Islam Israel/Palestine James Comey Japan Jeffrey Epstein Jews JFK Assassination Joe Biden John Bolton John F. Kennedy John McCain Judicial System Jussie Smollett Khashoggi Labor Day Las Vegas Massacre Latin America LGBT Libya Lithuania Macedonia Magna Charta Malaysian Airlines MH17 Marine Le Pen Martin Luther King Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Meritocracy Merkel MH 17 Michael Hudson Microsoft Middle East Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Minimum Wage Multiculturalism Muslims NATO Nazi Germany Nazis Neoconservatives New Cold War New York Times New Zealand Shooting NFL Nicaragua North Korea NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Nuremberg Obamacare Oklahoma City Bombing Orlando Shooting Osama Bin Laden Pakistan Paris Attacks Patriotism Paul Krugman Philippines Pornography Portugal Poverty Privatization Propaganda Prostitution Public Schools Putin Qatar Racism Real Estate Republican Party Republicans Revisionism Richard Nixon Robert Mueller Robots Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Sandy Hook Saudi Arabia Science Slavery Slavery Reparations Social Media Social Security South Africa SPLC Stephen Cohen Story Student Debt Supply-Side Economics Supreme Court Sweden Switzerland Syriza Tax Cuts Taxes The Confederacy The Saker Tony Blair Torture TPP Transgenderism TTIP Tulsi Gabbard Turkey Twitter Unions United Nations USS Liberty Vaccination War On Christmas War On Terror Watergate White America White Americans White Guilt White Nationalism White Nationalists White Supremacy Wikileaks Wikipedia Winston Churchill Workers Working Class World War I World War II Yemen Youtube Ban Zbigniew Brzezinski Zionism
Nothing found
 TeasersPaul Craig Roberts Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
🔊 Listen RSS

Help Truth Survive — Support Your Website

Donate: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/pages/donate/

NOTE: Some readers have asked why I’m not writing about the impeachment proceedings. The answer is that there are no grounds for impeachment. This is a purely partisan exercise of power by the House Democrats and the presstitutes. It is a pointless exercise as I cannot imagine that the Senate would convict a President on the basis of complaints by Jewish bureaucrats that Trump won’t let them run US foreign policy the way Israel wants.

The House Democrats are not sincere. Their hope is that some mud will stick on Trump and affect his reelection chances. Probably also the CIA is using its media assets to run an experiment to see if Americans are sufficiently braindead that a media campaign can succeed in bringing down a President despite the absence of any offense or evidence. It is a test to see the extent to which the presstitutes can be used to create a generalized false reality. I doubt it will succeed. As Russiagate failed to convince the public, the public is likely to see the second attempt to unelect Trump as another hoax.

As for the subject of today’s column, European governments have destroyed the quality of life for their own citizens by importing huge numbers of rape-prone men from cultures that are too different from European culture to assimilate. European women especially are paying a very high price for the idiotic policy of the European governments. Scandinavian readers in particular have asked me to report on the plight of women in Scandinavia as domestic media and police are not permitted to reveal that the extraordinary explosion in rape is due to immigrant-invaders and that the rapists are seldom punished.

Swedish police officer Peter Springare, frustrated by the blackout of migrant-invader crime statistics by the Swedish government which has refused to publish official statistics for over a decade, revealed that almost all of the explosion in major crimes, rapes, and gang-rapes are the result of the government’s immigration policy. Officer Springare was denounced as a racist, reported to the police and subjected to an internal investigation for inciting racial hatred. A police communications manager actually said that Springare had possibly harmed the public’s trust in the police by telling the truth. https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/02/14/swedish-whistleblower-cop-notice-gang-rape-cultural-phenomenon/

The rape situation is out of control both in Sweden and Norway. Women are actually raped on street corners and on ferryboats despite the presence of other people who fail to intervene either out of fear of violence by the immigrant-invaders or fear of being charged with a hate crime for interfering with the immigrant-invaders’ pleasure. As rapes by migrant-invaders are seldom punished, recently a rape of a young Swedish girl was livestreamed on Facebook while it took place.

Sweden has the highest incidence of rape of all countries except Lesotho. Norway ranks 10th, which is extremely high considering that there are about 200 countries. Moreover, only one-tenth of rapes in Norway are believed to be reported. If the incidence of rape in Norway is based only on reported rapes, then Norway would have the highest incidence of rape in the world.

In both Sweden and Norway feminist government officials are more determined to protect the immigrant-invaders than they are to protect women from being raped. The likely reason is that the governments do not want to have to acknowledge the total failure of their policy about which they had ample warnings. The governments protect the rapists as a way of protecting themselves.

Why Do Western Governments Favor Immigrant-invaders Over Law-abiding Citizens?

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has never represented Germans. She represents Washington, the CIA, and immigrant-invaders. Recently she gave a speech in the German parliament in which she put the right of immigrant-invaders not to be offended above the free speech of Germans. In Merkel’s sick mind, for German citizens to complain about the cost of supporting immigrant-invaders and the rape of German women by immigrant-invaders is offensive to the immigrant-invaders. She calls this spreading hatred and violating the dignity of immigrant-invaders. The violated dignity of raped German women is not her concern. Neither are the raped budgets of the German taxpayers. https://voiceofeurope.com/2019/12/merkel-claims-freedom-of-speech-must-be-limited-to-maintain-a-free-society/

In once Great Britain criminal jihadists are released early from prison because a “compassionate” justice system doesn’t want to marginalize the immigrant-invaders. It is only guiltless Julian Assange who is kept in prison.
https://www.rt.com/uk/474743-london-
bridge-suspect-released-early/

The hapless Swedish population are the Europeans who are the worst afflicted by the importation of diversity. Swedish women are afraid to leave their homes. According to some reports only 7% of immigrant-invader rapists are convicted. Conviction would make the poor dears feel unwanted and unappreciated. The idiot Swedish government actually works to attract gang-rapists into Sweden by advertising the benefits available to immigrant-invaders. Little doubt that the absence of punishment for rape ranks up there with free housing and food.

The advocates of immigrant-invaders say the high numbers of Swedish rapes are the result of Swedish husbands raping their Swedish wives. The official position is that only racists and white supremacists complain about immigrant-invader rapists.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2019/10/swedish-dystopia-nearly-one-in-four-women-are-afraid-to-leave-their-homes-at-night/

Swedish “justice” lets rapists of 11-year old girl go free:

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/11-year-old-girl-gang-raped-in-sweden-perpetrators-walk-free-and-laugh-in-her-face/

When the rare and light punishment of migrant-invaders for rape is compared to the destruction of white Julian Assange who was never even accused of rape, it is clear that justice in Sweden is race-based. I know of no statistics to consult, but I bet white ethnic Swedes who rape are punished more severely than immigrant-invaders.

When migrant-invaders gain citizenship, they feel freer to rape:

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/10/migrant-celebrates-swedish-citizenship-by-raping-woman-and-tells-her-now-i-can-do-what-i-want/

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: EU, European Right, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

On December 31 this website will be eight years old. It originated when readers called me out of retirement—all two months of it—and put me back to work. The readership has expanded dramatically, but the financial burden is carried by a relatively few core group of monthly donors, supplemented by responses to my quarterly calls for donations. These occur in March, June, September, and December. This is my quarterly call for donations in December 2019.

I never expected to still be working at my current age. It is hard work. Reliable information is harder and harder to come by, even on the Internet, which is filling up with websites sponsored by corporate interests, intelligence services, the Israel Lobby, and every interest group that benefits from controlled explanations. They control the print and TV media and NPR, and are gaining control over the Internet media.

The cost of this website is only partly monetary. Designated as a “dissident,” I pay for it by being labeled a “conspiracy theorist,” an “anti-semite,” a “holocaust denier,” a “Putin stooge” and “Russian agent,” a “crazy person,” and so on. Any low grade moron can create his or her website and take everything a truth-teller says out of context and demonize him or her—pronouns no longer considered legitimate. We have today the spectacle that people of no accomplishment or intelligence can put brands on distinguished persons of accomplishment. PropOrNot, a website set up to libel those who prefer peace to war with Russia, adds “leftwing” to my assortment of labels. PropOrNot even has a fake Russian postage stamp with my portrait to illustrate how highly I am regarded as a Russian asset. This must amuse the leftwing which sees me as a Reaganite conservative.
https://usefulstooges.com/tag/paul-craig-roberts/

The purpose of these labels is to scare readers away from those labeled. “Conspiracy theory” was introduced into the media by the CIA for the purpose of preventing the public from paying attention to skeptics of the Warren Commission Report and was used again to protect the 9/11 Commission Report. The term is now used generally to protect controlled explanations. It works because most people are accustomed to letting others do their thinking for them and adopt as their own whatever beliefs are considered to be the peer group views. Noam Chomsky-also labeled a Russian agent by PropOrNot-has explained how consent is manufactured and how the meaning of democracy has been changed to rule by elites.

In the days of print media, it wasn’t possible to demonize a writer. Letters to the editor had to have a point and could not rely on ad hominum attack, although such attacks sometimes occurred. But anyone can create a website and begin demonizing people. Demonizers also have access to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube—-as long as they demonize those whose demonization is approved of by the ruling Establishment. Truth, however, is almost totally missing from the world created by the Digital Revolution, a great catastrophe for mankind. I am almost convinced that the digital revolution means the death of truth. Truth will become a myth like the Unicorn.

On this website and a few others—the percentage of sites that are honest and reliable is very small—you can still get some of the truth. I try not to make mistakes, but in a world in which truth is not respected, it is a challenge to be truthful as truthful information necessary to write truthfully is suppressed.

I can confidently say that unless it is an announcement of a traffic accident (terrorist unrelated) or the death of some notable person, everything you read and hear from NPR and the print and TV media is false. The “news” is propaganda designed to control explanations to serve the agendas of the ruling elites. The “news” is nothing else. The “news” is extremely hostile to truth and to those who speak it.

We all live in The Matrix. I am still escaping from it. Recently, I have been sharing with readers my escape from the long ago WW II lies taught to me as a child. These lies are so institutionalized that I doubt that most Americans—and even Germans—will ever be able to free themselves from them. Think about that for a minute. The outlook of the human population is formed by lies, and these lies are so much a part of them that they cannot escape from them.

What shall we call a dystopia such as this?

History is generally a result of self-serving elites manipulating masses. But on occasion the masses have responded to leaders who spoke and acted in their interest. These are the rare periods of reform and revolution. I write for several reasons. One is out of a sense of responsibility to truth. One is out of hope that leaders will arise from truth.

The question is whether those few who tell the truth will be supported. Support for Manning was inadequate. Support for Julian Assange was inadequate. Support for the Palestinians, dispossessed by Zionists of their country, their villages, their homes, their culture, their lives, was inadequate. I could go on, and I am certain that my readers can add to the picture.

The question before me is: Can I expect support for this website when Manning cannot expect support, when Assange cannot expect support, when the heavily abused Palestinians cannot expect support?

Who values truth in a world when a man can declare himself a women and be permitted to compete against women in female sports? How can it be that when prominent female sports stars complain of this farce that they have to apologize for offending the self-declared “transgendered” person? Are we experiencing a new form of decadence far worst than Sodom and Gomorrah, worst than the declining days of Rome?

Who values truth when some non-entity can close down truth by declaring that it offends them?

Who values truth when it can no longer be expressed in universities?

Who values truth when dogmas cannot be examined or questioned?

Many years ago I read a science fiction story—don’t remember who wrote it or where—of a dystopia, a country where at birth babies were tested to see if they had a “truth gene.” If they did, they were exterminated. Truth was an enormous threat to the system, and every precaution was taken to suppress anything resembling truth.

The suppression of truth is the most serious problem of our times. It is the defining characteristic of every Western nation and all of Washington’s vassal states.

Truth was a liberating force. This liberating force is escaping our grasp. We are being cast back in time to when truth was impotent and power in its brutality ruled.

This website is fighting against the organized destruction of truth. If you value truth, you must support this website. Otherwise, you are an accomplice in the extermination of truth.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media 
🔊 Listen RSS

Third and Final Installment of Ron Unz’s “Understanding World War II” http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-understanding-world-war-ii/

When we want to demonize someone the worst epithet we can think of is to call him a Nazi or compare the person to Hitler, as Hillary Clinton did when she declared Russia’s President Putin “the new Hitler.” This ingrained habit comes from the influence of the massive anti-German World War II propaganda. Revisionist historians who have actually dug up the buried evidence and examined it have made a case that whatever the Nazi crimes, they were rivaled, if not exceeded, by those of Churchill and the Americans.

Unz, a prolific reader with a knack for tying things together reviews some of the true history in what follows. To condition yourself for the coming shock, keep in mind that the same Hitler that is said to have hated Jews and systematically gassed and burnt them, had 150,000 half-and quarter-Jews serving in his armies, “mostly as combat officers, and these included at least 15 half-Jewish generals and admirals, with another dozen quarter Jews holding those same high ranks. The most notable example was Field Marshal Erhard Milch, Hermann Goering’s powerful second-in-command, who played such an important operational role in creating the Luftwaffe. Milch certainly had a Jewish father, and according to some much less substantiated claims, perhaps even a Jewish mother as well, while his sister was married to an SS general.”

When truth-tellers rattle our cages, we get upset over having our comfortable make-believe world disturbed and shout invectives. Rather than condemn the messenger, the more mature response would be to condemn those who lied to us and institutionalized false history into our consciousness. Keep in mind that the few who tell you the truth pay a high price for doing so; therefore, you should refrain from adding your invective to the copious amount heaped on them by the Establishment. Think about it. Which is your true friend, the one who tells you the truth, or the one who controls the explanations you receive in order to advance his own agenda?

I again state my admiration of Ron Unz. He is Jewish. He is highly intelligent. He is a Harvard graduate. He is an entrepreneur who made himself a multi-millionaire. He could have held his fire and risen to the top of the establishment. Instead, he chose to tell us the truth. Ron Unz is the person who should be President. Unlike Trump, Unz would know how to staff a government that would put truth and morality back in charge of our future.

Here is Ron Unz weighing for us the historical evidence on who was the worst war criminal. The emphasis is added:

For most present-day Americans, the primary image associated with Hitler and his German regime is the horrendous scale of the war-crimes that they supposedly committed during the global conflict that they are alleged to have unleashed. But in one of his lectures, Irving made the rather telling observation that the relative scale of such World War II crimes and especially their evidentiary base might not necessarily point in the direction of implicating the Germans.

Although Hollywood and those in its thrall have endlessly cited the findings of the Nuremberg Tribunals as the final word on Nazi barbarism, even a cursory examination of those proceedings raises enormous skepticism. As time passed, historians gradually acknowledged that some of the most shocking and lurid pieces of evidence used to secure worldwide condemnation of the defendants—the human lampshades and bars of soap, the shrunken heads—were entirely fraudulent. The Soviets were determined to prosecute the Nazis for the Katyn Forest massacre of the captured Polish officer corps even though the Western Allies were convinced that Stalin had actually been responsible, a belief eventually confirmed by Gorbachev and the newly-opened Soviet archives. If the Germans had actually done so many horrible things, one wonders why the prosecution would have bothered including such fabricated and false charges.

And over the decades, considerable evidence has accumulated that the Gas Chambers and the Jewish Holocaust—the central elements of today’s Nazi “Black Legend”—were just as fictional as all those other items. The Germans were notoriously meticulous record-keepers, embracing orderly bureaucracy like no other people, and nearly all their archives were captured at the end of the war. Under these circumstances, it seems rather odd that there are virtually no traces of the plans or directives associated with the monstrous crimes that their leadership supposedly ordered committed in such massively industrial fashion. Instead, the entirety of the evidence seems to consist of a tiny quantity of rather doubtful documentary material, the dubious interpretations of certain phrases, and various German confessions, often obtained under brutal torture.

Given his crucial wartime role in Military Intelligence, John Beaty [The Iron Curtain Over America] was particularly harsh in his denunciation of the proceedings, and the numerous top American generals who endorsed his book add considerably to the weight of his verdict:

He was scathing toward the Nuremberg Trials, which he described as a “major indelible blot” upon America and “a travesty of justice.” According to him, the proceedings were dominated by vengeful German Jews, many of whom engaged in falsification of testimony or even had criminal backgrounds. As a result, this “foul fiasco” merely taught Germans that “our government had no sense of justice.” Sen. Robert Taft, the Republican leader of the immediate postwar era took a very similar position, which later won him the praise of John F. Kennedy in Profiles in Courage. The fact that the chief Soviet prosecutor at Nuremberg had played the same role during the notorious Stalinist show trials of the late 1930s, during which numerous Old Bolsheviks confessed to all sorts of absurd and ridiculous things, hardly enhanced the credibility of the proceedings to many outside observers.

By contrast, Irving notes that if the Allies had instead been in the dock at Nuremberg, the evidence of their guilt would have been absolutely overwhelming. After all, it was Churchill who began the illegal terror-bombing of cities, a strategy deliberately intended to provoke German retaliation and which eventually led to the death of a million or more European civilians. Late in the war, military reversals had even persuaded the British leader to order similarly illegal poison gas attacks against German cities, along with the initiation of even more horrific biological warfare involving anthrax bombs. Irving located these signed directives in the British archives, although Churchill was later persuaded to countermand them before they were carried out. By contrast, German archival material demonstrates that Hitler had repeatedly ruled out any first use of such illegal weapons under any circumstances, even though Germany’s far deadlier arsenal might have turned the tide of the war in its favor.

Although long forgotten today, Freda Utley was a mid-century journalist of some prominence. Born an Englishwoman, she had married a Jewish Communist and moved to Soviet Russia, then fled to America after her husband fell in one of Stalin’s purges. Although hardly sympathetic to the defeated Nazis, she strongly shared Beaty’s view of the monstrous perversion of justice at Nuremberg and her first-hand account of the months spent in Occupied Germany is eye-opening in its description of the horrific suffering imposed upon the prostrate population even years after the end of the war. Moreover:

 
• Category: History • Tags: Hitler, Nazi Germany, World War II 
🔊 Listen RSS

Over the course of my life I have watched integrity shrivel up and die everywhere in the Western world. It is not like it was ever really abundant, but there was a goodly amount of it, and it had authority. People, especially those in public life, weren’t shameless as they are today.

In the past decade I have watched the disappearance of free speech. An independent media disappeared in the last year of the Clinton regime when 6 mega-corporations were permitted to concentrate 90% of the media into their hands. Today free speech protected in the US Constitution is not valued as highly as the “feelings” of self-described “victim groups” who are offended by everything from truthful statements to traditional figures of speech. Even scientific discussion of the genetic basis of intelligence gives “offense” as does the use of gender-specific pronouns such as he and she.

Obviously false statements can be self-declared as true as when a biological male declares himself female and competes in women’s sports. Those who object to the obvious charade are declared “transphobic” and have to apologize. Sometimes they are fired for insisting on biological fact.

Exercising press freedom, as Julian Assange did, today brings charges of espionage and is misrepresented as a threat to national security. The media speak with the same voice, and it is the voice that serves the ruling elites. Truth is nowhere in the picture. The only purpose of the media today is to control the explanations for the elites. The media throughout the Western world is merely a Ministry of Propaganda. The young, never having experienced a free press or free speech, do not know what they are.

America today is a country that my parents and my grandparents would not recognize. If they were to be resurrected, they would think they were living in George Orwell’s 1984. And they would be.

I, and others of my generation, which is now passing away, are unable to accommodate The Matrix that elites and their media whores have created for the peoples of the Western world. Consequently, we are marginalized, despite our accomplishments and our grand honors, and if we persist we are libeled and slandered.

For example, Wikipedia has described me at various times as “a conspiracy theorist,” an “anti-semite,” and “a holocaust denier. These labels were used despite the facts that I have never written a “conspiracy theory,” I have many Jewish friends and financial supporters and have had Israeli house guests, and I have never studied the holocaust or written about it.

I have been described in this way by Wikipedia despite the absence of evidence because Wikipedia is part of the mechanism for discrediting those who challenge official explanations. Whether this is by intent or from the opportunity that an open source provides to one’s opponents to libel and slander I cannot say.

Zionists don’t like me, because on occasion I republish on my website articles by non-zionist Jews and Israeli citizens who are critical of Israel. It is still possible to criticize US policy without being labeled “anti-American,” but if you criticize Israeli policy, or republish someone who does, it means you hate Jews. For me, this is really funny. My hand-picked principal deputy in the Treasury was a Jew. My Oxford University professor, Michael Polanyi, to whom my first book is dedicated, was a Jew. The Nobel prize winner, Milton Friedman, a Jew, was a supporter of my academic career. My favorite academic co-author was David Meiselman, a Jew. Ron Unz, a Jew, republishes my columns, as does Rob Kall, a Jew. Jews contribute to the support of my website. But according to Wikipedia I hate Jews.

There are many Jews who respect the truth and who fight for it. They are not in the Israeli government, but they exist. Zionist call them “self-hating Jews.” In other words, even Jews who criticize Israeli policies are labeled anti-semites. They are accused of criticizing Israel out of self-hate. The question many have is why alone among all countries of the world is Israel so determined to prevent any criticism of itself. Why only Israel?

Until recently—and who knows, perhaps again tomorrow—Wikipedia was calling me a “holocaust denier.” The “evidence” was a book review I wrote of two of David Irving’s books, neither of which was about the holocaust, but in one of the books Irving reported his findings that there were massacres and deportations of Jews. He concluded that there was a holocaust of sorts, but that he had been unable to find any evidence that there was the organized extermination portrayed in the official holocaust story. I quoted Irving’s conclusions, and Wikipedia misrepresented my quotation of Irving’s findings as my views.

A struggle ensued between the Israel Lobby and CIA trolls that inhabit Wikipedia and a number of my readers who would inform me that they had corrected the false attribution only to contact me 24 hours later with the news that the trolls had re-established the misrepresentation. At the moment the passage reads more or less correctly:

Review of David Irving’s books, Hitler’s War and Churchill’s War
In 2019, Roberts wrote in a review of David Irving’s books, Hitler’s War and Churchill’s War that “Irving, without any doubt the best historian of the European part of World War II, learned at his great expense that challenging myths does not go unpunished… I will avoid the story of how this came to be, but, yes, you guessed it, it was the Zionists”.[37] Roberts reported without endorsement Irving’s conclusion that “No German plans, or orders from Hitler, or from Himmler or anyone else have ever been found for an organized holocaust by gas and cremation of Jews… The “death camps” were in fact work camps. Auschwitz, for example, today a Holocaust museum, was the site of Germany’s essential artificial rubber factory. Germany was desperate for a work force.”

The question that remains in my mind is why, of all the many book reviews I have written, was a few lines from my report of Irving’s findings singled out for inclusion in my bio? Was the purpose to have a cover for misrepresenting the views of a historian, who has spent 40 years studying the subject, as my views, a person who has not spent 5 minutes studying the holocaust?

Attorneys thought that I might have a libel case against Wikipedia and offered to take a look. I was more interested in Wikipedia’s invasion of my privacy. I haven’t given permission to be included in their corpus of work that somehow they must market. The holocaust libel case bothered me, because it implied my consent to the idea that denying or challenging some aspect of the holocaust was disreputable and a reflection on a person’s character. But if those who challenge the official holocaust story are correct, what is disreputable about being a “holocaust denier?” As I haven’t studied the holocaust or the works of those who have, I thought a libel case committed me to a position that I had not examined. The issue is further complicated by free speech and free thought issues.

Looking at Wikipedia’s account of me I noticed other strange emphasis. For example, Wikipedia thinks it is important biographical information that Darrell Delamaide in USA Today, Luke Brinker of Salon, and Michael C. Moynihan of The Daily Beast have described “Roberts as a conspiracy theorist” and “as partaking in Putin worship.” By refusing to respond to Washington’s provocations in kind, Putin has reduced the risk of nuclear war. Why is acknowledging this fact “Putin worship?” Is this accusation anything more than the portrayal of people who do not help Washington demonize Russia as “Russian agents?”

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Censorship, Wikipedia 
🔊 Listen RSS

Former US Attorney Joe diGenova predicts that US Justice (sic) Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report on the Obama regime’s FISA court violations and US Attorney John Durham’s criminal investigation of the Russiagate hoax perpetrated by the CIA, FBI, Democratic National Committee, and presstitute media will be “very bad for people in the Obama administration. . . . it’s going to be devastating . . . it’s going to ruin careers.”

For the sake of accountable government, I hope that Mr. diGenova is right. But I have my doubts. Cabinet departments and government agencies are not very good at investigating themselves. Attorney General Barr’s job is to protect his department. He knows, and will be often told, that to bring indictments against Justice Department officials would discredit the Justice Department in the public’s mind. It would affect the attitude of juries toward DOJ prosecutions. John Durham knows the same thing. He also knows that he will create a hostile environment for himself if he indicts DOJ officials and that when he joins a law firm to capitalize on his experience as a US Attorney, he will not receive the usual favors when he represents clients against DOJ charges. Horowitz knows that his job is to coverup or minimize any illegalities in order to protect the Department of Justice from scandals.

In Washington coverups are the rule, and the DOJ coverup might already have begun. One sign of a coverup is to announce a future release date of the report. This has now occurred with Horowitz’s report on the FISA violations. The purpose of such announcements is to allow the report to be discredited in advance and to be old news by the time it appears.

Another sign of a coverup is the use of leaks to shift the focus from high level officials to lowly underlings, and this has happened with the Horowitz report, which has leaked that a low level FBI attorney is under criminal investigation for allegedly falsifying a document related to the surveillance of former Trump campaign official Carter Page in 2016. According to the leak, the FBI attorney has acknowledged that he did alter the document. In other words, it seems we are being prepared for a false story that the plot against Trump originated in lower levels and not with CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey, FBI Deputy Diretor Andrew McCabe, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and the rest. This is the way the coverups of the US torture prison, Al Ghraib, in Afghanistan was handled and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. Only the underlings take the hit as if they were in charge acting on their own, independently of their superiors.

Another sign that a coverup is in place is Attorney General Barr’s assurance that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself and that evidence to the contrary is just a series of coincidences that, misunderstood, resulted in a conspiracy theory. Caitlin Johnstone gives this short shrift. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/11/23/barr-says-epstein-died-by-a-series-of-coincidences-ending-all-conspiracy-theories-forever/

Barr claims to have personally reviewed security footage that no one entered the area where Epstein was imprisoned. Previously we were told that the security cameras were not turned on, so what security footage did Barr review? Can the rest of us see the “evidence”?

Barr also in his pronouncement evaded the remarks of the Chief Medical Examiner, who stated clearly that the damage to Epstein’s neck is not consistent with suicide but is associated with strangulation.

There was no reason whatsoever for Epstein to kill himself. He had so much dirt on the Western political elite that he could not be given his day in open court. So he was murdered. The question is, why was he picked up and murdered? Was he using the pedophile information to exact blackmail payments from those he had provided with underage sex? Is it possible for an elite society to be more corrupt than the Western elite society is? How can the West survive when its elites are corrupt beyond comprehension?

That Epstein did not kill himself is completely obvious, so when AG William Barr covers up Epstein’s murder, this is an indication that he will cover up the military/security complex/DNC/presstitute coup against President Trump.

From what I know of Washington, I am certain that Washington, the cesspool of the world, will never rat on itself.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Corruption, Deep State, Donald Trump, FBI, Russiagate 
🔊 Listen RSS

This is the second installment of Ron Unz’s long report on the emergent truth about World War II. (http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-understanding-world-war-ii/) Unz has a facility for summarizing vast works of scholarship into their essentials. Unz is also intellectually honest and has massive intellectual courage. He saves the rest of us a lot of work.

The aims of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, a mass movement that came to power legally in Germany, to correct the unemployment caused by unjust reparations forced on Germany by a starvation policy imposed by the British following World War I and to put Germany, dismembered by the unjust and demonic Versailles Treaty, back together, has been demonized and its intentions mischaracterized by most Western historians. There is no worst, or more uninformed, epithet than to be called a Nazi.

World War II began when the Churchill government and the French, quickly betrayed and abandoned by the British, declared war on Germany. The declaration of war on Germany resulted from an unenforceable “guarantee” given by Britain to the military dictatorship in Poland, a guarantee designed to provoke a German invasion of Poland. The German leader, Adolf Hitler, had re-acquired German territories given to Denmark, France, and Czechoslovakia by the humiliating Versailles Treaty and had united with German Austria without war. But three wanted war with Germany: Zionist Jews who saw war as a path to a Jewish state in Palestine, Winston Churchill, who dreamed of repeating the military conquests of his famous ancestor, and Franklin D. Roosevelt who intended to ruin Britain with war and take over the British pound’s role as world reserve currency and destroy Britain’s control of world trade. The British guarantee emboldened the Polish military dictatorship to refuse to negotiate the return of German territory and population.

World War II was a war started by private agendas. Jews understood these agendas and encouraged them. Roosevelt’s lust for world hegemony and Churchill’s lust to rival his famous ancestor’s defeat of the Sun King of France with his defeat of Germany traveled roads paved for them by Jewish anti-German propaganda. All Hitler contributed was to force countries given German territory by the Versailles Treaty to release the lands and the Germans, who were heavily persecuted in Czechoslovakia and Poland. Hitler’s restoration of Germany’s national boundaries was misrepresented in the British and US press as “German aggression.”

This fake news story of German aggression was used to build the case that Germany, which was merely recovering its national territory and rescuing German people from persecution in Czechoslovakia and Poland, was an aggressor with world conquest as its goal. The American people and in Britain the Chamberlain government resisted this false story for a long time, but as historians have revealed the British and American press was controlled by Zionist Jews, and these Jews had all the entrances they needed into Churchill and Roosevelt.

It is difficult to believe that a world war that killed 50, perhaps 60, million people and doomed the world to permanent war and misunderstandings was the product of a few personal interests. Hitler stated many times that he did not want, or intend, war with Britain and France and only intended to recover the lost German populations stolen from Germany by the unjust Versailles Treaty. No less an important Englishman than John Maynard Keynes, the father of modern economics, denounced the Versailles Treaty as certain to lead to a new war. Keynes was correct.

Never was a war as unnecessary, and only the US profited from it. Britain was ruined. Britain lost the reserve currency role and its control of world trade, which were Roosevelt’s intentions, and Britain lost its empire, also Roosevelt’s intention.

David Irving describes how Roosevelt played the drunken British Prime Minister into mortgaging the British Empire to America in support for his war against Germany. Roosevelt understood how war could rescue his administration from the Great Depression. He also understood how war, by bankrupting Britain, would leave the United States as the world hegemon.

Hitler had nothing to do with any of this. The war was forced on him. As established stories have an immunity to facts, Unz’s report has a tough row to hoe.

Viktor Suvorov has produced documented books that Hitler had no choice but to invade Russia as Stalin had assembled on Germany’s border the largest and most formidable invasion force in history. Hitler struck first before the Soviet invasion force was prepared. Consequently, the enormous early victories of German arms were a product of Soviet bases being overrun with enormous losses in men and equipment. John Wear’s findings support Suvorov’s conclusion. https://russia-insider.com/en/history/germans-cut-through-red-army-1941-because-soviets-were-only-prepared-attack/ri27845

The war forced on Germany was too much for Germany. Faced with having to occupy defeated Europe, with the threat of an American invasion, faced with a Russian front, and faced with having to rescue Italy in Greece and North Africa, German resources, despite the magnificence of the German Army, were too thin to prevail. Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin, each for his own reasons, had forced Germany into a war that Hitler did not want.

Unz reports that revisionist historians have “implicated FDR as a pivotal figure in orchestrating the world war by his constant pressure upon the British political leadership, a policy that he privately even admitted could mean his impeachment if revealed. Among other testimony, we have the statements of the Polish and British ambassadors to Washington and the American ambassador to London, who also passed along the concurring opinion of Prime Minister Chamberlain himself. Indeed, the German capture and publication of secret Polish diplomatic documents in 1939 had already revealed much of this information, and William Henry Chamberlin confirmed their authenticity in his 1950 book. But since the mainstream media never reported any of this information, these facts remain little known even today.”

With Churchill having set the stage for war with Germany, Franklin D. Roosevelt initiated the outbreak by exerting diplomatic pressure on the British and Polish governments to avoid any negotiated settlement with Germany. The Polish government’s mistreatment of Germans in territories under Polish control forced Hitler’s hand. The joint German and Soviet invasion of Poland, with the Soviet Union taking half of Poland resulted in England and France declaring war only on Germany. It was alright for the Soviets to invade Poland, but not for Germany.

Roosevelt orchestrated the Japanese “surprise” attack on Pearl Harbor to take the US into the war against Germany. The Polish ambassador to the United States, Count Jerzy Potocki, described the overwhelming Jewish hostility to Germany and its impact on American attitudes toward Germany in a secret report to the Polish Foreign Minister in Warsaw:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

“The Lies About World War II” (https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/05/13/the-lies-about-world-war-ii/) is my most popular column of the year. It is a book review of David Irving’s Hitler’s War and Churchill’s War, the first volumn of Irving’s three volume biography of Winston Churchill. A person does not know anything about WW II until he has read these books.

Historians, and even book reviewers, who tell the truth pay a high price. For reasons I provide in my review, generally it is decades after a war before truth about the war can emerge. By then the court historians have fused lies with patriotism and created a pleasing myth about the war, and when emerging truth impinges on that myth, the truth-teller is denounced for making a case for the enemy.

Wars are fought with words as well as with bullets and bombs. The propaganda and demonization of the enemy are extreme. This is especially the case when it is the victors who start the war and have to cover up this fact as well as the war crimes for which they are responsible. When decades later the covered up crimes of the victors are brought to light, truth is up against the explanation that has been controlled for a half century. This makes the truth seem outlandish, and this makes it easy to demonize and even destroy the historian who brought the truth to the surface.

This makes a problem for a reviewer of revisionist history of World War II. If a reviewer gives an honest review, he faces the same demonization as the historian who brought the truth about the war to the surfice.

This happened to me when I reviewed Irving’s books, both of which were researched for decades and completely documented. I was supposed to denounce Irving, in which case my stock would have gone up, but giving him an honest review got me branded “a holocaust denier” by Wikipedia, in my opinion a CIA front created in order to protect the official stories by marginalizing truth-tellers.

I have never studied the holocaust or written anything about it. I simply reported Irving’s assessment based entirely on documented evidence that many Jews were killed, but there was not the organized holocaust that is taught in the schools and which is a crime to dispute in many European countries.

So, this is how bad it is. I am, according to Wikipedia, a “holocaust denier” for the simple reason that I honestly reported Irving’s findings instead of jumping on him with hob-nailed boots for giving evidence contrary to the protected official story. Anyone who does not protect official explanations is “suspect.”

In my opinion what makes historians suspicious of the official holocaust story is the extreme resistance to any investigation of the event. One would think that investigation would support the story if it were true. It would seem that it is the Jews who raise questions about the holocaust by placing it off limits for open discussion. I personally am not very interested in the holocaust, because WW II itself was a holocaust. Tens of millions of people were killed. The Russians themselves lost 26 million, 20 million more than the holocause figure of 6 million Jews. The Germans after the war was over lost considerably more thn 6 million in the forced resettlements and General Eisenhower’s murder of 1.5 million German POWs by starvation and exposure. ( See John Wear, Germany’s War, and James Bacque, Other Losses, for the massive evidence. )

Somehow World War II has become the Jewish holocaust, not everyone else’s.

My interest is the predominance of propaganda and lies over truth. Ron Unz has the same interest. Four months after my column, “The Lies About World War II,” appeared, Unz took the story further in his long report, “Understanding World War II” ( http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-understanding-world-war-ii/ ). Unz’s columns tend to be monographs or small books, well beyond the attention spans of most Americans. Unz has given me permission to republish his monograph in installments. This is the first installment.

I learned from Unz’s article that getting rid of truth-tellers has been the practice of the West for a long time. Unz got interested in WW II when Pat Buchanan’s book, The Unnecessary War, became an issue for The American Conservative, a magazine for which Unz was the major money man. Unz couldn’t find that much difference between Buchanan’s book and that of A.J. P. Taylor’s The Origins of the Second World War. Yet The American Conservative, fearful of challenging WW II myths, was disassociating from its own founder, Pat Buchanan.

Disassociation from official truth cost Taylor his lecturership at Oxford University. Taylor’s publication of The Origins of the Second World War, caused Oxford to decline to renew Taylor’s appointment as a university lecturer in modern history. Taylor left Oxford for a lecturership at the University College London. Note that England’s best historian at the time was a mere lecturer, not a professor of modern history. Truth-tellers don’t advance very far in the world of information.

Harry Elmer Barnes explained that the origins of World War I were in France and Russia, not in Germany, which was the last to mobilize but was blamed for the war, resulting in the Treaty of Versailles, which led to WW II. Unz was stunned to find that Barnes, a historian of great stature, was unknown to him. Unz writes:

“Imagine my shock at later discovering that Barnes had actually been one of the most frequent early contributors to Foreign Affairs, serving as a primary book reviewer for that venerable publication from its 1922 founding onward, while his stature as one of America’s premier liberal academics was indicated by his scores of appearances in The Nation and The New Republic throughout that decade. Indeed, he is credited with having played a central role in ‘revising’ the history of the First World War so as to remove the cartoonish picture of unspeakable German wickedness left behind as a legacy of the dishonest wartime propaganda produced by the opposing British and American governments. And his professional stature was demonstrated by his thirty-five or more books, many of them influential academic volumes, along with his numerous articles in The American Historical Review, Political Science Quarterly, and other leading journals.

“A few years ago I happened to mention Barnes to an eminent American academic scholar whose general focus in political science and foreign policy was quite similar, and yet the name meant nothing. By the end of the 1930s, Barnes had become a leading critic of America’s proposed involvement in World War II, and was permanently ‘disappeared’ as a consequence, barred from all mainstream media outlets, while a major newspaper chain was heavily pressured into abruptly terminating his long-running syndicated national column in May 1940.”

 
• Category: History • Tags: American Media, World War II 
🔊 Listen RSS

With the entirety of the presstitute media endeavoring to turn second-hand hear-say into an impeachable offense, do not expect to hear any contrary news. Such as:

This on Zero Hedge: Adam Shifty Schiff involved in illegal sodomite drug den EXPOSED: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-10-20/adam-shifty-schiff-involved-illegal-sodomite-drug-den-exposed

This on en Volve: BOMBSHELL: Feds Investigating Adam Schiff’s ‘Disturbing Behavior’ At Ed Buck’s Sex House Of Death!: https://en-volve.com/2019/10/09/bombshell-feds-investigating-adam-schiffs-disturbing-behavior-at-ed-bucks-sex-house-of-death/

This on Infowars: NBC MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT, FRIEND OF ADAM SCHIFF ARRESTED FOR SEXTING 9-YEAR-OLD: https://www.infowars.com/nbc-medical-correspondent-friend-of-adam-schiff-arrested-for-sexting-9-year-old/

This on thefederalist.com: Adam Schiff’s Star Witness Just Admitted Burisma Should Be Investigated For Corruption: https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/13/adam-schiffs-star-witness-just-admitted-burisma-should-be-investigated-for-corruption/?utm_campaign=ACTENGAGE

This on https://www.theepochtimes.com/criminal-indictments-could-be-coming-in-russiagate_3130866.html : Are Criminal Indictments Forthcoming: “All this suggests criminal deception of the FISA court, coordinated criminal leaks of classified information by U.S. intelligence agencies to disrupt the Trump presidency, the secret use of an asset by U.S. intelligence agencies to entrap a low-level Trump campaign aide, and the entrapment of Flynn, coupled with the criminal alteration of an FBI 302 to at least partially fabricate federal crimes against him.” https://www.theepochtimes.com/criminal-indictments-could-be-coming-in-russiagate_3130866.html

This on https://www.theepochtimes.com/barr-says-democrats-courts-are-engaged-in-efforts-to-cripple-presidential-power_3148046.html: Barr Says Democrats, Courts Are Engaged in Efforts to Cripple Presidential Power

With the absence of any integrity in the American print and TV media and the large presence of CIA, State Department, and Israel Lobby funded internet sites, Americans have no sure-fire way of knowing what information can be trusted. We do know that nothing said on CNN, MSNBC, NPR or written in the New York Times and Washington Post can be believed.

The question that needs asking and an answer is: What are the Democrats up to? Why is the Democratic Party, once a representative of the working class, helping the military/security deep state unseat a president elected by the working class? Why has the major figure in the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, defined the American working class as “the Trump deplorables”?

When you start thinking along these lines other puzzling questions come to mind. For example, why does the leadership of the Democratic Party seem to be in the hands of feminists and people of color on one side and crooks like Joe Biden on the other. What holds a party this naturally divided together?

Why does an anti-white odor emanate from the Democratic Party, especially an anti-white heterosexual male odor? Why are all of Epstein’s pedophile clients Democrats? Has the Democratic Party become the party of immigrant-invaders and sexual perverts?

Republicans come across as impotent, powerless, and stupid. They have stood there impotently while two of their more effective fundraisers and political advisers, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone, were framed in broad daylight by the utterly corrupt Russiagate special prosecutor Robert Mueller and sentenced to prison. This never happens to Democrats. Only to Republicans. The Epstein case has disappeared.

Mueller was empowered to investigate Trump’s cooperation with Russian influence on his election. No one gave Mueller the task of investigating the long ago and unrelated financial affairs of Manafort and Stone.

Trump with the weakest response against an impeachment devoid of any evidence is afraid to pardon Mueller’s victims, people convicted of offenses that are unrelated to the Russiagate investigation. The entire purpose of the false convictions of Manafort and Stone is to prove that Republicans are too scared to protect their own. Mueller’s purpose was to break-up the ranks of Trump supporters and turn them against one another. Once one runs for the exit, the rest follow.

Trump first let his National Security Advisor, General Flynn, the only sensible appointment Trump ever made, be falsely prosecuted by Mueller. Gen. Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, was framed in broad daylight while President Trump stood there sucking his thumb.The word went out everywhere in Republican circles: DO NOT Compromise Yourself By Standing By President Trump. He will not rescue you from false prosecution.

Manafort and Stone are Trumps’ latest victims. Note that the only victims are Republicans. No Democrat victims.

Barr’s indictments of the perpetrators of the Russiagate hoax are still missing.

Does Donald Trump only fight for himself? If so, we will see if he can by himself save himself.

Is Trump unable to fight because his own team belongs to the deep state?

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Jeanine Anez, one of the Bolivian Spanish elite, has declared herself the President of Bolivia. She is one of the elite allied with Washington who accused Evo Morales of rigging his reelection. But the CIA’s Bolivian lackeys who forced Morales to resign his presidency don’t bother with elections. They just declare themselves president like Juan Guaido, the CIA creep in Venezuela, who hoped to unseat Maduro, the elected president, by declaring himself president. Neither Anez nor Guaido ran for the office. They just self-appointed themselves president. The organization of American States, a CIA front organization, accepted the unelected presidents as rightful rulers. President Trump declared the CIA coup to be an increase in freedom and democracy.

As Trump approves of the attempted coup against Venezuela’s Maduro and the successful coup against Bolivia’s Morales, how can he complain about the CIA/DNC ongoing coup against him?
Live by the sword and die by the sword.

The whores that constitute the Western “media” pretend that self-declared “presidents” are the real presidents, and those elected by the people are not. Every Latin American election that does not elect Washington’s candidate is reported by the Western presstitutes as a “disputed election.” It doesn’t matter if the winning candidate gets 85% of the votes. As he is the wrong candidate from Washington’s standpoint, his election is disputed and illegitimate.

Washington paid the corrupt Bolivian military to unseat Morales, the elected president. This has always been the way Washington has ruled the entirety of Latin America. Buy the corrupt military. They will prostitute their wives for money.

In Latin America everyone is accustomed to being bought. Only Cuba and Venezuela and perhaps Nicaragua have avoided this subservience to Washington. With the pressures on them mounting, how long these three progressive regimes can hold out against Washington remains to be seen. I wouldn’t bet my life on their survival as independent countries. Even Russia and China are threatened by regime change, and both governments seem to be in self-denial about it.

It is a mystery why any Latin American country or any country that hopes to be independent would permit any US presence in the country. US presence in a Latin American country or any country precludes any independence on the part of the country’s government. I suppose it is the money. Latin Americans would rather have Washington’s money than their independence.

In order to have an American presence in Russia, the Russian government accepts all sorts of humiliations. China is the same. Look at what Washington has done to China in Hong Kong. It is extraordinary that the Chinese government was so insouciant that China set itself up for this embarrassment.

Russia’s sizeable investments in Bolivia will now be lost. With the Spanish elite put back in control by the CIA, Russia’s investments will be appropriated by US firms. One wonders why Russia didn’t do more to protect Morales, the legitimate President. If Putin had sent Morales a regiment of Russian troops, the Bolivian military would have stood down, and democracy, instead of American Imperialism, would still exist in Bolivia.

What has happened everywhere in the world is that nothing is any longer important but money. Therefore, everything is sacrificed for money. There is no shame, no honor, no integrity, no truth, no justice.

Maybe the biblical prophesies are true, and Armageddon is our future. Who can say we don’t deserve it.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Bolivia, CIA 
🔊 Listen RSS

The fake “whistleblower’s name— Eric Ciamerella—has been known for a long time, but not officially. Now it is official. Senator Rand Paul has officially released his name. Funny, isn’t it, that only the Republicans want Ciamerella to testify. The Democrats won’t hear of it. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/rand-paul-drops-c-word-names-whistleblower-demands-testimony

If the American people are paying attention, the Democrats are in trouble. When Russiagate fizzled out on them, Adam Schiff (D,CA) orchestrated a fake “whistleblower” who the Democrats cannot risk putting on the stand to testify. The Democrats’ focus shifted to sleazy State Department types who could offer nothing but second or third hand hearsay followed by a hearsay second telephone call that cannot be confirmed.

Why are the Democrats out on a limb like this? They can rely on the presstitutes to cover up for them in every respect and to continue to repeat endlessly without any verification their charges against Trump, but after going through the hoax of Russiagate are the American people stupid enough to fall for the replacement hoax?

Some analysts believe that the House Democrats are using the so-called impeachment not to produce any evidence, as they have none, but to gin up hatred of Trump especially among the youth who are known to want to be included in whatever is cool. The Democrats’ project is to make hating Trump cool and to convince young people to base their vote on being cool and hating Trump.

I recently asked where are Attorney General Barr’s indictments of Obama regime officials for the attempted Russiagate coup against Trump. Some Republicans explained that Barr is waiting until closer to the election in order to get maximum impact on the voting public. If so, this is a mistake. The longer Barr waits, the longer the presstitutes and Democrats have to discredit the indictments in advance as Trump’s effort to produce a countervailing news story. The longer Barr waits, the more of Trump’s presidency is given up to the impeachment circus. The longer Barr waits, the longer Republicans have to become demoralized by the complete absence of integrity among the American media and House Democrats. It is really very disgusting for anyone not caught up in the emotion of hating Trump at all costs. Honest people with integrity don’t want to be associated with such dirty business.

There actually are a lot of Americans who have been conditioned to hate Trump so completely that they would accept his removal by a coup. They are so emotional that they are unable to think about the consequences for democracy of a coup. This is the slippery slope the Romans went down. Once an emperor was removed by a coup, every emperor could be, and often was, removed by a coup. The subsequent internal disorder contributed greatly to the fall of Rome.

There are many issues on which Democrats could legitimately challenge Trump in the forthcoming presidential election that would resonate with many honest Americans. Democrats could challenge Trump for the coup against Bolivian President Morales. They could challenge Trump for dismantling environmental protections and for permitting mining and energy companies to loot national monuments and wildlife refuges. They could challenge Trump for persecuting Julian Assange for practicing traditional journalism. They could challenge Trump for serving Israeli instead of American foreign policy interests. These and other issues would make a real campaign, one worthy of a democracy. Instead, we get hoax scandals.

What this tells us is that there is not enough integrity in the Democratic Party and American media for democracy to survive. When the political process consists of nothing but lies and hatred, democracy is not possible. Why are the House Democrats and the American media destroying democracy?

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Russiagate, Ukraine 
Paul Craig Roberts
About Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, journalism, public service, and business. He is chairman of The Institute for Political Economy.

Dr. Roberts has held academic appointments at Virginia Tech, Tulane University, University of New Mexico, Stanford University where he was Senior Research Fellow in the Hoover Institution, George Mason University where he had a joint appointment as professor of economics and professor of business administration, and Georgetown University where he held the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy in the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Dr. Roberts was associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal and columnist for Business Week and the Scripps Howard News Service. He was a nationally syndicated columnist for Creators Syndicate in Los Angeles. In 1992 he received the Warren Brookes Award for Excellence in Journalism. In 1993 the Forbes Media Guide ranked him as one of the top seven journalists in the United States.

President Reagan appointed Dr. Roberts Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and he was confirmed in office by the U.S. Senate. From 1975 to 1978, Dr. Roberts served on the congressional staff where he drafted the Kemp-Roth bill and played a leading role in developing bipartisan support for a supply-side economic policy. After leaving the Treasury, he served as a consultant to the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of Commerce.