|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 6:07 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Titus wrote: |
| Russia was culturally and economically destroyed, with tens of millions killed, and then economically ruined and looted, with living standards destroyed, both by non-Russians, twice in the last 100years. |
Yeah, damn the Germans for funding Lenin during WWI. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wasn't going to get into it, but Kuros snarked.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-first-soviet-government-was-mostly-jewish/
| Quote: |
JTA — Russian President Vladimir Putin said that at least 80 percent of the members of the first Soviet government were Jewish.
|
These Jews then went on to kill tens of millions of Christians and worked aggressively to remove Christian and European culture from Russia.
Then, when the Soviet Union fell, a bunch of Jews stole 65% (Amy Chua) of Russian wealth.
Then Putin started de-Jewifying the Russian power structure.
Then Jews in the USA lost their minds and started working to, once-again, ruin Russia.
That's why the Jewish propaganda machine (aka American media) is focused like a laser on Putin.
^ True.
xxx
Or, yeah, the Germans. Whatever Kuros. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Parvus, Ganetsky and the 'German Key'
From Lenin: A New Biography, Dmitri Volkogonov, 1994
| Dmitri Volkogonov wrote: |
Besides the Bolsheviks, however, the German High Command was also interested in getting Lenin back to Russia. For some time they had not only been watching the Bolsheviks with interest, they had also been giving them substantial financial help through various front-men. German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg had been encouraged to do so both by the General Staff and some German Social Democrats, but in particular by Alexander Helphand, then the publisher of Die Glocke. In conversation with the German ambassador in Copenhagen, Count von Brockdorff-Rantzau, Helphand insisted that there was danger in a separate peace with Russia, for the tsar would survive to stamp out the revolution. Only a German victory was acceptable. Helphand did not kno that Lenin would soon state publicly that he had always been opposed to a separate Russo-German peace. In an article entitled 'Where is the Regime and Where is the Revolution?', published in July 1917 in Listok Pravdy, Lenin stated categorically that he had 'always and unconditionally repudiated separate peace with Germany in the most decisive and irrevocable way!!' As we have seen, Lenin wanted the defeat of Russia and a civil war. It was a position the German High Command found deeply sympathetic, for their own 'defeatists' were hardly to be heard. As First Quartermaster General Erich von Ludendorff, the 'military brain of the German nation', was to write of this episode: 'In helping Lenin to travel to Russia, our government accepted special responsibility. The enterprise was justified from a military point of view. We had to bring Russia down.' The Bolshevik revolution, when it came, would offer Germany a unique opportunity to win the war. Ludendorff would declare frankly that the Soviet government 'exists thanks to us'. It is worth noting that in May 1920, when the Politburo discussed the publication in Russian of Ludendorff's memoirs, it was unanimously decided that 'only those sections dealing with the Brest negotiations should be translated and published'. Being in power, the Bolsheviks were not especially afraid of exposure, but it would nonetheless be embarassing. Having secured the defeat of Russia, they had not only served their own interests, but those of German militarism.
The 'German factor' in the Russian revolution has been extensively treated, especially in non-Soviet literature. The Russian Marxists preferred to say nothing, following Lenin's request (which curiously was not published immediately) 'again and again to all honest citizens not to believe the dirty slander and dark rumours'. The Bolsheviks never attempted to disprove the accusation that they had made a deal with the Germans to 'bring Russia down.' While the financial connections had evidently been indirect, it was impossible to deny the call for Russia's defeat. It was best either to say nothing, or simply 'Don't believe the slanderers.' |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2014 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
^ AH would have agreed with that, which is why he cleaned out the German establishment.
xxxxx
http://russia-insider.com/en/tv_politics/2014/11/01/12-38-37pm/top_us_journalists_agree_putin_hitler_worse_isis_worse_stalin
| Quote: |
“Putin is an angry man, Stalin wasn't angry. Dangerous, homicidal, but not angry.
He is like Hitler, Putin is in that he has a grievance. Hitler had the Versailles treaty and the humiliation of World War I settlement. Putin has the grievance against NATO, which was the architect of what he calls the great geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century, which was the defeat of the Soviet Union.
Compared to Putin playing with his nuclear forces, the Islamic State is child's play.
And frankly, the Ukraine is merely the appetizer. It seems to me he does want to destroy NATO. And the way to do that is to take a bite out of one of the Baltic States and watch Article 5, an attack on one is an attack on all be ignored by NATO which I have complete confidence it would be.”
Krauthammer agreed, arguing that yes, Putin is like Hitler, but "more subtle", that he is challenging the idea that Eastern Europe is "free", that Putin is threatening the Baltics, trying to destroy NATO, and that Obama is weak in his response." |
The American media is full of lunatics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2014 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus wrote: |
I wasn't going to get into it, but Kuros snarked.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-first-soviet-government-was-mostly-jewish/
| Quote: |
JTA — Russian President Vladimir Putin said that at least 80 percent of the members of the first Soviet government were Jewish.
|
These Jews then went on to kill tens of millions of Christians and worked aggressively to remove Christian and European culture from Russia
|
Please site historical source for this claim.
| Quote: |
| Or, yeah, the Germans. Whatever Kuros. |
Yes. The Germans funded the Bolsheviks in order to get Russia out of the war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 2:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
| Titus wrote: |
I wasn't going to get into it, but Kuros snarked.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-first-soviet-government-was-mostly-jewish/
| Quote: |
JTA — Russian President Vladimir Putin said that at least 80 percent of the members of the first Soviet government were Jewish.
|
These Jews then went on to kill tens of millions of Christians and worked aggressively to remove Christian and European culture from Russia
|
Please site historical source for this claim.
| Quote: |
| Or, yeah, the Germans. Whatever Kuros. |
Yes. The Germans funded the Bolsheviks in order to get Russia out of the war. |
The early governments couldn't say no to Lenin and later Stalin. How is it that a group of Jews who believed Communism should be the law of the land are now responsible for the killing of tens of millions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaparrastique
Joined: 01 Jan 2014
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus wrote: |
| Russia was culturally and economically destroyed, with tens of millions killed, and then economically ruined and looted, with living standards destroyed, both by non-Russians, twice in the last 100years. |
Russia did the same to Germany in 1945. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where does it say that 80% of the first Soviet government were Jewish?
That this was a Jewish conspiracy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2014 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Where does it say that 80% of the first Soviet government were Jewish?
That this was a Jewish conspiracy?
|
The 80% number is from Putin. The book describes the who/whom of bolshevism.
Back on topic:
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/jerusalem-babylon/.premium-1.626359
| Quote: |
It was like a scene out of “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” Two immensely wealthy Jews, key financiers of the main political parties of the world’s superpower, discussing how to wage war on the enemies of the Jews, and control the media and presidents. Only, instead of taking place at the dead of night in a Jewish cemetery in Prague, they were sitting on stage in a Washington, D.C....
|
Sailer posted it because the link above is behind a wall:
http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-protocols-of-the-elders-of-zion-national-park
| Quote: |
It was like a scene out of “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” Two immensely wealthy Jews, key financiers of the main political parties of the world’s superpower, discussing how to wage war on the enemies of the Jews, and control the media and presidents. Only, instead of taking place at the dead of night in a Jewish cemetery in Prague, they were sitting on stage in a Washington, D.C hotel conference room, in full view and making no attempt to hide their intentions.
If the Czarist secret police officers who published the original edition of “Protocols” at the start of the 20th century had been at the Hilton, or just reading the reported dialogue between Power Rangers impresario Haim Saban and casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, they would have had little need for the embellishment, plagiarism and forgery they used to concoct their best seller.
If you haven’t yet read the musings of these two gentlemen on the best way to confront Iran (bombing “the daylight out of these sons of bitches” is an option), the shortcomings of Barack Obama’s presidency, the need (or lack of) for Israel to be a democracy, the best way to take over The New York Times, and how to ensure a sufficient supply of latkes at the White House Hanukkah party, then you really should. It would be no exaggeration to call it a historic event.
The joint appearance of the two billionaires at the Israeli American Council’s inaugural conference last weekend was the moment that Jewish benefactors, who have always preferred to use financial influence on behalf of their brethren as far behind-the-scenes as possible, chose to do so out in the open.
Not that they had anything to be ashamed of. Jewish financiers using their fortunes to protect and promote a small scattered nation, persecuted for much of its history by vastly superior forces, is an honorable tradition. Only, it was always a tradition considered to be much more effective when carried out discreetly. Why give the haters more ammunition to incite with? …
Whether or not they [British Jewish political donors] are satisfied with their party’s candidate, Jewish philanthropists do not voluntarily discuss in public their political donations.
This is probably all you need to know about the difference between American and British Jews. Both communities are phenomenally successful, and for the past few decades have enjoyed a disproportionate prominence in just about every walk of life – unparalleled since the Golden Age of the Jews in Middle-Ages Spain, perhaps even surpassing that. But while Jews in the United States routinely celebrate their extraordinary position of near-dominance in finance, the creative arts, media, and now also political influence, among British Jews there is still a prevailing anxiety, and even sense of shame, whenever the words “Jewish” and “money” are used in the same sentence. Whenever a politician or media commentator combines the two, there is an outcry of “anti-Semitism.”
There is ample historic justification for this defensiveness. “The Protocols” were not the first or last time the insidiousness of Jewish moneymen was a central plank of Judeophobia. And it’s still around. Even today, when you start typing “Jewish bankers” into the world’s most powerful search engine (founded by two Jews, of course), it automatically suggests “control the world.” But then, the Web is full of the most vile conspiracy theorists, and we can’t let them dominate our lives.
The influence and power of big money in capitalist democracies are a fact of life. You can try and legislate to close loopholes and create a more level playing field, but you can’t eliminate it. Unless, that is, you want to live in a country like Vladimir Putin’s Russia, where troublesome oligarchs are packed off to a penal colony in Siberia or forced to flee and live in permanent exile.
The best we can do is try and take the Internet – that wonderful tool our capitalist economies have created – away from the conspiracy theorists and use it to truthfully increase transparency, so we at least know who is using money to acquire influence. …
For all the vulgarity of the Saban-Adelson dialogue, we should commend them for holding it in the open. Especially since now we have heard Adelson publicly state that as far as he is concerned, “so what” if Israel is no longer a democracy, we know the ugly truth about the man who is our prime minister’s number one patron.
It doesn’t matter whether or not we supply the Israel-haters and Judeophobes with fodder. They will warp facts and invent lies, anyway. We will have to continue facing their poisonous propaganda, and we have never been in a better position to do so.
But we need to know whatever we can about how “pro-Israel” tycoons use their money and what they believe in, because they are now in a far more powerful position than any hostile newspaper or biased blogger to cause Israel untold harm.
|
So what does this have to do with this thread?
This:
| Quote: |
The influence and power of big money in capitalist democracies are a fact of life. You can try and legislate to close loopholes and create a more level playing field, but you can’t eliminate it. Unless, that is, you want to live in a country like Vladimir Putin’s Russia, where troublesome oligarchs are packed off to a penal colony in Siberia or forced to flee and live in permanent exile.
|
Also note that the oligarchs at that conference want two things:
1) war
2) more media control |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2015 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mark Adomanis comments on the new NYTimes investigation concerning the violent fall of Viktor Yanukovych's gov't.
http://readrussia.com/2015/01/05/how-yanukovych-fell/
| Mark Adomanis wrote: |
The anti-Yanukovych protesters were obviously not some dark fascist horde of “Banderites,” as they’ve been presented in Kremlin propaganda. At the same time, the Times makes clear that the people manning the barricades were also not the smiling, peaceful group of youngsters of the Western narrative: there were some pretty rough characters in the mix who did a lot of the heavy lifting.The Times makes clear something that I’ve long suspected, that the primary reason that the security services melted away so quickly and so suddenly was the pure terror they felt at the prospect of violent death. Numerous former security officials quoted by the Times spoke in almost identical terms of their dread at being set upon by a mob armed with weapons that had recently been seized from an armory in Lviv, and of their general desire to get their men the hell out of Kiev before there was a bloodbath. Now perhaps the former Berkut officials interviewed by the Times are lying. It wouldn’t be the first time that a current or former government official in the Former Soviet Union had taken liberties with the truth. You could also, I suppose, argue that the Berkut officers were genuinely scared for their lives but that they shouldn’t have been: that, when everything was said and done, the anti-Yanukovych protesters would have treated them with kindness and respect.But “people power” wasn’t really the death-knell for Yanukovych’s late and unlamented regime, it was the security services’ desire to keep themselves from going six feet under. History is never short of irony, and the success of a revolution based on “European values” because it opponents were scared of being torn limb from limb is a particularly delicious one.
At the same time, the Times story ought to put to rest some silly conspiracy theorizing from the likes of Oliver Stone, people who think that Yanukovych would be happily sitting in Kiev today were it not for the dastardly interference of the CIA. The story make it quite clear that through his characteristic combination of indecision, stupidity, and brutality, Viktor Yanukovych had managed to comprehensively isolate himself even from his putative allies in parliament. It takes a rare talent in politics to alienate everyone at the same time, but dear old Viktor actually managed to do it. Yanukovych was brutal enough that he earned the burning hatred of the protesters but not brutal enough that he earned the loyalty of the police: as the Times notes, the security forces wanted to act much more decisively much earlier in the protests and were appalled at what they viewed as Yanukovych’s weakness and indecision. There was no need for complicated CIA subterfuge to oust Yanukovych, he’d managed to do almost all of the heavy lifting by himself. |
Yanukovych was so incompetent that his security forces would not withstand violence to preserve his position. Even if the security forces survived and prevailed, they believed that Yanukovych would prosecute them for the violence necessary to preserve his position.
| Quote: |
| So to summarize: Yanukovych was overthrown not by some kind of abstract political concept but by protesters whose violence and determination scared the daylights out of the security services (who ultimately fled Kiev in fear for their lives). But Yanukovych was overthrown by the Ukrainian people, not the CIA, the grand masons, or the Bilderberg group. Any foreign influence in his ouster was of (at most) secondary or tertiary importance. The true story doesn’t neatly comport with a narrative, but that’s the way the world works. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON — A study from a Pentagon think tank theorizes that Russian President Vladimir Putin has Asperger's syndrome, "an autistic disorder which affects all of his decisions," according to the 2008 report obtained by USA TODAY.
Putin's "neurological development was significantly interrupted in infancy," wrote Brenda Connors, an expert in movement pattern analysis at the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, R.I. Studies of his movement, Connors wrote, reveal "that the Russian President carries a neurological abnormality."
The 2008 study was one of many by Connors and her colleagues, who are contractors for the Office of Net Assessment (ONA), an internal Pentagon think tank that helps devise long-term military strategy. The 2008 report and a 2011 study were provided to USA TODAY as part of a Freedom of Information Act request.
Researchers can't prove their theory about Putin and Asperger's, the report said, because they were not able to perform a brain scan on the Russian president. The report cites work by autism specialists as backing their findings. It is not known whether the research has been acted on by Pentagon or administration officials.
The 2008 report cites Dr. Stephen Porges, who is now a University of North Carolina psychiatry professor, as concluding that "Putin carries a form of autism." However, Porges said Wednesday he had never seen the finished report and "would back off saying he has Asperger's."
Instead, Porges said, his analysis was that U.S. officials needed to find quieter settings in which to deal with Putin, whose behavior and facial expressions reveal someone who is defensive in large social settings. Although these features are observed in Asperger's, they are also observed in individuals who have difficulties staying calm in social settings and have low thresholds to be reactive. "If you need to do things with him, you don't want to be in a big state affair but more of one-on-one situation someplace somewhere quiet," he said. |
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/02/04/putin-aspergers-syndrome-study-pentagon/22855927/
I think that some people will have interesting responses to this. For the record, I do not think it is true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaparrastique
Joined: 01 Jan 2014
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| For the record, I do not think it is true. |
Me neither. I highly doubt anyone with aspergers would be able to rise through the ranks from virtually nothing to become one of the worlds most powerful people.
Asbergers makes a person unaware and oblivious of social signals. They don't know how to read situations. Those do not apply to the russian president.
| Quote: |
| whose behavior and facial expressions reveal someone who is defensive in large social settings. |
Duh of course he's going to appear defensive when at conferences when surrounded by western leaders who are villifying him and ganging up on him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 07, 2015 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Authoritarian regimes, at least in recent history, have use the frame of mental illness both to shame dissenters and to provide a framework for a closed-elite to understand dissenters.
xxxx
Saakashvili, who was recently profiled as a fat hipster in Brooklyn (how utterly apropos) is a complete idiot: http://www.unian.net/politics/1041425-ukrainskaya-armiya-smojet-zahvatit-vsyu-rossiyu-saakashvili.html (he says Ukraine can colonize Russia if Americans give her enough arms).
xxxx
The American regime simply does not understand what is going on over there and how they can not possibly win. The Russians, and this includes the ethnic Russians in Ukraine, are fighting for their civilization. They will not surrender. They'll return humanity to the stone age before they surrender.
Europeans leaders are coming around too:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31185027
| Quote: |
| Mr Hollande told French TV that eastern Ukrainian regions would need extensive autonomy. "These people have gone to war," he said. "It will be difficult to make them share a common life." |
This is what the Russian state wants. It never wanted eastern Ukraine as it did Crimea. Western people, including our idiot elite, have been informed by media, which has used "Russian backed separatists" so many times that we're unable to leave that frame. It makes no strategic sense for Russia to absorb the east. Russia benefits from a portion of Ukraine representing her interests inside of Ukraine. If she absorbed it then Ukraine would immediately become a vassal of the USA. Nobody is thinking this through, except the Russians.
http://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-passes-law-shoot-deserters-304911
| Quote: |
| Ukraine Passes Law to Shoot Deserters |
If you need such a law, you have already lost.
xxxx
It is very encouraging that the negotiations in Moscow today are between Putin, Merkel and Hollande. No other diplomats or advisers are present.
What is remarkable is that the Americans and British are not involved. When was the last time the British were not consulted on matters of war in Europe? The Americans?
Kerry and Lavrov are meeting, though this is clearly subordinate to the real discussions between Putin and Merkel.
xxxx
Not a single mainstream American paper has touched this story:
http://www.infowars.com/editor-of-major-german-newspaper-says-he-planted-stories-for-the-cia/
| Quote: |
| Saying he believes a medical condition gives him only a few years to live, and that he is filled with remorse, Dr. Udo Ulfkotte, the editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, one of Germany’s largest newspapers, said in an interview that he accepted news stories written and given to him by the CIA and published them under his own name. Ulfkotte said the aim of much of the deception was to drive nations toward war. |
His book is a best-seller (millions of copies) in Germany. Not a single German, British or American media organization has reviewed or even mentioned his book. God bless the internet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
