James DiEugenio

I said nothing about about Pelosi and Kerry. And there is more to Hunter Biden than the MSM is letting on. https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-companys-campaign-to-burnish-its-image-stretched-beyond-hunter-biden-11573154199

I said nothing about about Pelosi and Kerry. And there is more to Hunter Biden than the MSM is letting on. https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-companys-campaign-to-burnish-its-image-stretched-beyond-hunter-biden-11573154199

What does that mean? I not only saw the film, I read the book it was based on.

This is what I like. Movie reviews from people who have not seen the film.

Uh, geez Kirk. Somebody lies about how much they made doing nothing and you say give them a pass. Fine, just like Jim McCord I guess.

Paul: TO my knowledge, there are no regular Russian troops in Donetsk. The Russians shipped weapons, aid and advisors there. The reason they did is simple. Donetsk has many Russians in it, slightly more than Ukrainians. Once they saw what happened in the coup and Crimea, they wanted to hold a referendum. After seeing what happened in Crimea, the Bandera/Lebed thugs said nope. And that is what started the violence. Bob: The violence in Maidan was not started by the police. They were quite restrained. It was by the Bandera/Lebed thugs. They brought in a huge Xmas tree and the police intel unit later figured out that this was really a cover to bring in arms. And this is what raised the violence level there. In looking at the films, the police were really too restrained.

Looks interesting.

Dulles and LeMay were pals, on a first name basis and exchanged gifts. https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80B01676R001200020047-8.pdf I have never thought that the JFK murder worked through any kind of formal channels.

WN: In a very real sense, this trial is about more than Trump's obvious crimes on behalf of Putin's oligarchic, fascist police state. Can you explain to me what Trump holding up aid for an inquiry into Biden had to do with Putin's oligarchic police state? BTW, Putin's whole policy once he took over was to go after the oligarchs who ransacked Russia under Yeltsin.

Why are not the Dems screaming about this? I sure would be. Not long ago I read that a US Assistant Secretary of State, or perhaps it was a member of the National Security Council, said that now that Washington had reestablished control over Ecuador, it would not be long before the governments of Bolivia, Venezuela, and Cuba would be overthrown. Venezuela is proving to be hard for Washington to crack. Washington was banking on its NGO forces paid to stage protests, together with monetary bribes to the Venezuelan military, to chase Maduro out of office. But so far the Venezuelan military has refused to desert their country for Washington. Washington can, of course, raise the offer to the generals. Perhaps the generals are awaiting larger bribes. However, the Bolivian military took the money and on the basis of protests organized by US-financed NGOs and the National Endowment for Overthrowing Democracy forced Evo Morales out of office. This is a huge loss for Bolivia. Morales is the first president since the founding of Bolivia to come from the indigenous population. His seventy-nine predecessors were all members of the Spanish colonial elite allied with Washington. Together they plundered the country. Washington considers Morales “leftist” because he focused on using Bolivian resources to reduce Bolivian poverty and to create a better life for Bolivians instead of for the profits of US corporations and banks and the Spanish elites who ruled Bolivia for Washington. Self-determination in the southern hemisphere is simply not permitted by Washington or by its overthrow agent, the misnamed US “National Endowment for Democracy,” which is a well-financed organization for overthrowing real democracy.

Nice work if you can get it. Hunter Biden was not getting 50 K per month. http://www.stationgossip.com/2019/11/ukrainian-officials-release-records-of.html

1.Bob, you did not read that story i posted. Gallup and Forbes admitted a year later that Crimea did not want to be part of Ukraine, they wanted to be part of Russia for a lot of different reasons. For one, the economic mess that is Ukraine. Also, Russia did not invade Crimea. They already had a military force there. 2. Is Marvin Kalb part of RT? This is what he wrote about the neo Nazis in Ukraine under the Bandera influence: Describing the neo-fascist flavor of the Maidan protests, Kalb writes that a number of far-right groups who were increasingly at the center of the action “would have made the Nazi-era Gestapo look like a happy band of bigots and bandits.” Nazi symbols on helmets worn by members of Ukraine’s Azov battalion. (As filmed by a Norwegian film crew and shown on German TV) Kalb, unlike many of his peers in the think tank community (Kalb is a nonresident fellow at the Brookings Institution) also notes with distaste that a leader of the neo-Nazi Azov battalion was named chief of police in post-Maidan Kiev. “Instead of reining in far-right militias,” writes Kalb, Kiev “has actually been providing them with tanks and armored personnel carriers.” Kalb is equally clear-eyed about the tactics that Ukraine’s new leaders employed to garner Western aid. “A number of unethical Ukrainian politicians” seem to have found the magic formula, which, according to Kalb, is this: “bedazzle the West into believing that Ukraine is a vital strategic asset in a continuing East-West struggle between democracy and autocracy, between freedom and oppression…”

Now are both Forbes and Gallup part of the RT network also. That is who Parry reports on in this article. He also notes that Russia had three times the pension amounts that Ukraine offered. And since the overthrow those Ukraine pensions had been cut further. Note what Nuland said: well work harder. How hard do you think she and her hubby work? Crimea did not want to be part of the fascist Ukraine state. And unless you think Gallup rigged its polls, that was proven out a year later. https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/

OMG, what Putin did in Crimea is what Hitler did to the Sudetenland? I will just try and make like you did not say that OK William. The legal grounds upon which Putin held the referendum are: The fact that the overthrow of the original Ukraine government constituted a coup, therefore the bilateral treaty was negated. Did this occur in 1938? It is a canon of international law that one can protect nationals living abroad from military or paramilitary forces. Were the Germans in Sudetenland being attacked by the Czechs?

Are you guys deliberately trying to make me giggle? First Bob makes like he does not know that those Bandera groups began to surface in the nineties. Bob, is the BBC part of RT? I really do not think so, do you? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27173857 Note how they mention Bandera. I mean we mention Thomas Jefferson today do we not? Well, that is what he is to the RIght Sektor.

Relevant? Why was the Lemay portion cut out for all those years? Also, Prouty told Oliver Stone that Lemay was there that night also. And I stand by your analysis. IMO, the CIA pulled off the plot, and Lemay was then the guy who organized all that military brass to be there that night. Why? To control the autopsy and make sure no one would ever know how many bullets or from what direction JFK was hit. Another way Lemay was intertwined with CIA was through SAC.

Back to real life. Bob, I cannot comprehend how you could make that argument about Crimea could only secede if Ukraine allowed it to. In fact, I find it hard to type that sentence. I mean, the Bandera neo Nazi thugs were already spilling over into Crimea. There are films of them setting fire to buildings with people inside. The majority of residents in Crimea were Russians not Ukrainians. And by a large margin. The Yanukovych overthrow was illegal. It was done by violence, scores of innocent civilians were shot dead, and the legal process was subverted upon the urging of the EU. And you really think that under those circumstances, Crimea and the RUssian governmnet should have let the Bandera neo nazis spill over into Crimea and terrorize and brutalize the Russian nationals there? I mean, really?

Kirk: I will now imitate that fine actor, Claude Rains from Casablanca. Do you mean to tell me that there is corruption in these states that broke away from the USSR in the nineties? Disgraceful, I mean how dare you say such things.

William: I can hardly believe you wrote the following: by-passing official U.S. State Department policies supporting Ukrainian democracy in its ongoing struggle against the encroachments of Putin's fascist police state. Are you serious? Why ignore the history? When Ukraine broke away from the USSR in the early nineties, this unleashed the neo Nazi undercurrent that was already there. That came from the leadership of the likes of Bandera and Lebed. They had been Nazi collaborators during WW 2. And they helped the Nazis in systematic slaughters of both Jews and Poles on Soviet soil. 33,000 Jews at Babi Yar in 1941 and 36,000 Poles at Galicia in 1943. In the latter the Bandera/Lebed corps outnumbered the Nazis by a significant factor. I won't go into all the gory details, but let us just say that the Ukrainians used axes and saws to torture the victims before they died. After the war, Bandera and Lebed escaped justice and became sources for the CIA. (Remember Mr. Gehlen?) . In other words, forget all those innocent people you killed, the Cold war was on. It was the KGB that hunted Bandera down and assassinated him. Lebed's group OUN became potent in the US with the rise of the neocons after Reagan' s election. This is all really important to understand. And if you do not, you have no idea what is happening in Ukraine or how it became a cesspool. When Ukraine became independent these neo Nazi forces were now once again slowly but surely unleashed. The idea was to back an American type even if that person liked Bandera and Lebed. Which is what the US did. Therefore the Russian oriented candidates like Kravchuk, Kuchma and Yanukovych were now opposed by Yushchenko. Advised by and supported by people like Soros and Dickie Morris and the NED, Yushchenko won the presidency. There was a big problem though. He was a bad leader; except in one area: putting up statues to people like Lebed and making Bandera a national hero. He could not even make it out of the first round in the next election. So Yanukovych won. But there were two problems with the neo Nazi thugs. First, Yanukovych displaced the ethnic cleanser Bandera as a national hero. Second, Yushchenko had made such a mess of the economy, Ukraine needed a loan. The EU made an offer. But they wanted associated state status. Bringing NATO to the Russian frontier. Putin made a better offer. But now people like John McCain and Democrats like Chris Murphy and Biden began to stoke the opposition. And the Obama neocons in the embassy, like Nuland and Pyatt, went into high gear. The Bandera followers now started shooting people and a mini civil war started. The thugs threatened to kill Yanukovych. So he left. Crimea wanted no part of the Bandera/Lebed gang so they declared a referendum and reunited with Russia by a huge margin. The country has been a basket case ever since. Same thing just happened in Bolivia, due to the neocon express. What William wrote reminded me of the drivel I used to read about President Thieu being a democratic leader in Vietnam.

KG: Congratulations Jim, now you're nothing but partisan conspiracy biases and a two time stooge. Kirk somehow thinks 19 year CIA agent Jim McCord made a "mistake" by taping something like 8 doors a the Watergate, and then retaping one of them after the guard found it. McCord is the guy who worked security at Langley. Let us spell it out since Kirk has a hard time understanding things due to his political biases: The security guard, Frank Wills, had found these doors and removed the tape. (Hougan, p. 196) When the burglars entered the building at about 1:10 AM, they found a previously taped door that was now stripped. McCord then conferred with higher-ups Hunt and Liddy. According to everyone but McCord, it was he who insisted on not aborting the mission. (Hougan, pp. 197-98) The door was retaped. But after McCord entered the building, he told his low-level cohorts that he himself had removed the tape on the doors. This was not true. (Probe, Vol. 3 No. 2, p. 14) Now, if Kirk thinks its only a coincidence that: 1. It was McCord who insisted on going forward with the operation after Wills discovered the tape. 2. That he told the low level cohorts he himself had removed the tape 3. It was McCord who was the guy who ratted every one else out before Sirica, after he was the one who got them caught. If Kirk buys all of this then he probably thinks that HRC should run again. Who is the stooge again?

I guess Patrick Lawrence has fallen for it also: https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/12/patrick-lawrence-the-impeachment-pantomime/ There is more to this Biden story than the MSM is telling. As Mr. Lawrence says, there is a double standard at work and Schiff was working with Mr. C

DM: How many clients have now said he acted against them? He's clearly a power broker or else he'd be disbarred. This is what former CIA officer John Kirakiou told me he could not figure out. BTW, is HRC a little fruity or what? https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/12/hillary-clinton-presidential-run-2020-070318 Who are the many people? Bill and Chelsea?

So Zaid did another one with Schipp. This is getting almost funny. If Ciamarella is the whistleblower, that would be priceless. RB: Well Jim, you seem to have hit a nerve with this thread. Its not just here Ron. This is the highest rated article at Kennedys and King since my James McCord piece. That was seven months ago. I think its the Zaid issue.

ROn: This is an ambiguous sentence: "On May 13, 1960, after hearing a briefing from Allen Dulles, President Eisenhower ordered Castro "sawed off". He did not use what CIA security director Sheffield Edwards later called "bad words", but everyone present understood this as a presidential directive to remove Castro from power by any means including assassination". It could easily mean that the CIA decided this is what Eisenhower meant.

Does anyone have this book by Peter Scott? If so, can you contact me via personal message?