Allen Dulles and his Nazi Pals in Ukraine 🇺🇦

[Paul Rigby]

Garland Nixon in fine form:

Biden is facing political civil war

https://youtube.com/live/r06F-Auyx3U?si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE

 

 

[Paul Rigby]

9 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

     I have posted several comments about the Nordstream demolition as an act of war (in which no one was killed.)

     For example, on page 16 of this lengthy thread, I wrote;

My point about Nordstream is that it was a source of funding for Putin's genocidal war in Ukraine.

Putin is committing mass murder of civilians in Ukraine with missiles and drones. 

Is it ethical in this situation to establish a blockade on his military resources and funding?

...

Is democracy worth defending?  And at what cost?

Perhaps Biden and the U.S. military should have left that Nordstream issue up to you Europeans.

But we Americans waited too long to intervene against Hitler, and you Europeans paid a high price for our isolationism prior to 1942.

The pipeline had not been commissioned by Berlin at the time of American demolition, thus it was NOT funding Putin's liberation of the Donbass. You can't even get that obvious fact straight.

Second, the N2 pipelines were not merely or even primarily a Russian project: Germany wanted them as cheap and abundant gas was the basis of its shift to a greener energy future and the foundation of its economic prosperity. America, in conjunction with self-interested Norwegian quislings, has has now destroyed both.

Third, Putin isn't committing mass murder of civilians in Ukraine: the most remarkable feature of Russian missile attacks on the dual-use infrastructure of the puppet junta are their precision and thus the small number of civilian casualties. To the contrary, the appalling casualties among Ukrainian forces are the direct responsibility of Washington, which refused to honour binding agreements (Minsk I & II), continued to direct the bombardment of the Donbass, sabotaged negotiations mediated by Turkey and Israel, and continues to throw ill-armed, forcibly conscripted late middle-aged men into battles they can't win.

Fouth, what democracy in Ukraine? There was a US-managed, corrupt, oligarchical Russophobic farce post-coup, predicated upon torture, assassination and blackmail. In short, a standard CIA-controlled nightmare.

Fifth, your history of the US' involvement in inter-war Europe conveniently neglects the massive increase in Wall Street and corporative investment in Germany following Hitler's accession to power; and the continued support of US business for the National Socialist war-machine throughout the period 1941-1945.

[Paul Rigby]

On 2/12/2023 at 3:07 AM, Benjamin Cole said:

Paul-

I think a face-saving armistice, leaving battle lines where there with nobody recognizing them as permanent, might be in the cards and the most humane result as of now. 

Trump was right: NATO is a weak sister, giving less to the Ukrainians than the US, and prolonged dithering over tanks and fighter jets. And this horrible military invasion is on their doorstep. They should be doing more, not less. 

I am skeptical of US "experts" on the progress of the war. They first predicted a rapid Russian victory. They also predicted a US victory in Vietnam. They promised US victories in Afghanistan. Let's say we don't know how this war turns out.

History shows occupations are very expensive and difficult.

Will Putin change goals from occupation to annihilation?  

In the end, Putin's war was volitional, thus criminal. No one was planning to invade Russia, a nation with nukes, tactical nukes and 12,000 tanks, rail lines to the front. 

An interesting digression: In 2008, President Obama instigated a military surge into  Afghanistan, a nation posited to harbor threats to the US, although located as far from the US as possible, when still in the Northern Hemisphere.

Obama felt his military occupation of Afghanistan was justified---but it also appears volitional. 

Obama as a war criminal? 

 

 

Ben,

There can't be peace in Ukraine while Biden and his fellow-Neocons remain in power. Biden, in and of himself, would be an insurmountable obstacle as he's vain, corrupt, compromised, bellicose, over-committed, and hubristic. In terms of his politics, he's essentially a descendant of those urban, machine-pol, frequently Catholic, Democrats of the 1930s who supported Franco and opposed FDR. 

I agree with you on Obama.

Paul

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Paul Rigby said:

Ben,

There can't be peace in Ukraine while Biden and his fellow-Neocons remain in power. Biden, in and of himself, would be an insurmountable obstacle as he's vain, corrupt, compromised, bellicose, over-committed, and hubristic. In terms of his politics, he's essentially a descendant of those urban, machine-pol, frequently Catholic, Democrats of the 1930s who supported Franco and opposed FDR. 

I agree with you on Obama.

Paul

 

Paul-

Well, we are worlds apart in our views on Putin, but that is what a forum is for. 

Biden is a deep state apparatchik---but no excuse for Putin, who is now a war criminal. 

Obama's surge into Afcrapistan was criminal extension of a fantastically expensive, counterproductive war, started by Bush.  Sad. 

 

 

[Matthew Koch]

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Paul-

Well, we are worlds apart in our views on Putin, but that is what a forum is for. 

Biden is a deep state apparatchik---but no excuse for Putin, who is now a war criminal. 

Obama's surge into Afcrapistan was criminal extension of a fantastically expensive, counterproductive war, started by Bush.  Sad. 

 

 

Ben could you elaborate how Putin is a war criminal, because it is my understanding that he used the exact pretext that NATO used in Kosovo. Just like NATO did in the Balkan peninsula with cruise missiles Putin is attacking military targets with drones. I don't really see the difference personally.. 

[Paul Brancato]

1 hour ago, Matthew Koch said:

Ben could you elaborate how Putin is a war criminal, because it is my understanding that he used the exact pretext that NATO used in Kosovo. Just like NATO did in the Balkan peninsula with cruise missiles Putin is attacking military targets with drones. I don't really see the difference personally.. 

they are all war criminals.

[W. Niederhut]

8 hours ago, John Cotter said:

So US Machiavellianism is good but Russian Machiavellianism is bad.

Good man, William.

John,

     Your persistent reading comprehension problems are duly noted.

     Apparently, you failed to understand my explicit comments (above) condemning the Machiavellianism of the Neocon/Bush/Cheney administration's "War on Terror," and Nixon's bombing of Cambodia.

     I can't say it any more clearly.  

    As for your (above) comments about alleged U.S. "terrorism" in the (reported) demolition of the Nordstream pipeline, how many casualties resulted from that act of "terrorism?"

    And, as Kirk asked, do you believe Nordstream was demolished without NATO acquiescence?

    Next question.  How many Ukrainian civilians have been massacred by Putin during the past year?  Any idea?

    And why are you and Paul Rigby refusing to acknowledge Putin's war crimes in Ukraine?

[Matthew Koch]

Aaron Maté looks at how blowing up the pipeline was used to escalate the conflict in Ukraine

 

[W. Niederhut]

I'm responding to Paul Rigby's latest salvo of Kremlin disinformazia in red (below.)

Paul Rigby wrote;

The pipeline had not been commissioned by Berlin at the time of American demolition, thus it was NOT funding Putin's liberation of the Donbass. You can't even get that obvious fact straight.

The "liberation of Donbas," eh, Paul?  From what, exactly?

The region is part of the internationally recognized, sovereign nation of Ukraine.

The Russian Federation signed off on acknowledging Ukrainian sovereignty in Budapest.

Meanwhile, what sort of "liberty" exists in Putin's fascist police state nowadays?  Do tell.

 

Second, the N2 pipelines were not merely or even primarily a Russian project: Germany wanted them as cheap and abundant gas was the basis of its shift to a greener energy future and the foundation of its economic prosperity. America, in conjunction with self-interested Norwegian quislings, has has now destroyed both.

Burning natural gas in a shift to greener energy, eh?

That makes about as much sense as your other concepts.

Third, Putin isn't committing mass murder of civilians in Ukraine: the most remarkable feature of Russian missile attacks on the dual-use infrastructure of the puppet junta are their precision and thus the small number of civilian casualties.

How many Ukrainians has Putin murdered during the past 12 months?  Any idea?

As for Putin's destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure prior to, and during, the past bitter winter, weren't you and John Cotter just lamenting the plight of Western Europeans deprived of Nordstream natural gas in winter?

Do you have similar humanitarian concerns for Ukrainians freezing as a result of Putin's infrastructure demolitions?

To the contrary, the appalling casualties among Ukrainian forces are the direct responsibility of Washington, which refused to honour binding agreements (Minsk I & II), continued to direct the bombardment of the Donbass, sabotaged negotiations mediated by Turkey and Israel, and continues to throw ill-armed, forcibly conscripted late middle-aged men into battles they can't win.

That's rich.  I think we all know which side in this brutal Russian invasion has been most notoriously sending poorly-trained and poorly-equipped conscripts and convicts to their deaths.

Fouth, what democracy in Ukraine? There was a US-managed, corrupt, oligarchical Russophobic farce post-coup, predicated upon torture, assassination and blackmail. In short, a standard CIA-controlled nightmare.

What an absolute joke.  The nightmare is Putin's totalitarian police state.

I think we are all capable of discerning the difference between Putin's corrupt puppet, Yanukovych, and Zelensky.

Fifth, your history of the US' involvement in inter-war Europe conveniently neglects the massive increase in Wall Street and corporative investment in Germany following Hitler's accession to power; and the continued support of US business for the National Socialist war-machine throughout the period 1941-1945.

Hardly the case.  I have long been a critic of Prescott Bush, Allen Dulles, and other N-a-z-i financiers and sympathizers in the the 1930s-- including your own Duke of Windsor.

Fortunately, FDR helped turn the tide in that debacle.

[John Cotter]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

     Your persistent reading comprehension problems are duly noted.

     Apparently, you failed to understand my explicit comments (above) condemning the Machiavellianism of the Neocon/Bush/Cheney administration's "War on Terror," and Nixon's bombing of Cambodia.

     I can't say it any more clearly.  

    As for your (above) comments about alleged U.S. "terrorism" in the (reported) demolition of the Nordstream pipeline, how many casualties resulted from that act of "terrorism?"

    And, as Kirk asked, do you believe Nordstream was demolished without NATO acquiescence?

    Next question.  How many Ukrainian civilians have been massacred by Putin during the past year?  Any idea?

    And why are you and Paul Rigby refusing to acknowledge Putin's war crimes in Ukraine?

Lesson # 1 for William the self-styled logician: An ad hominem is a logical fallacy (in other words nonsense) which discredits the perpetrator rather than the target because, inter alia, it signifies the perpetrator's failure and probable inability to logically rebut the target's argument.

Lesson # 2: Machiavellianism = Machiavellianism. Or, to paraphrase George Bernard Shaw, "We know what you are, madam; the only question is how much you charge".

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Lesson # 1 for William the self-styled logician: An ad hominem is a logical fallacy (in other words nonsense) which discredits the perpetrator rather than the target because, inter alia, it signifies the perpetrator's failure and probable inability to logically rebut the target's argument.

Lesson # 2: Machiavellianism = Machiavellianism. Or, to paraphrase George Bernard Shaw, "We know what you are, madam; the only question is how much you charge".

John,

Let me help you out with your latest misinterpretation.

 Lesson # 1-- An ad hominem fallacy is an irrelevant comment attacking the person rather than addressing the substance of their arguments.

My pointing out how you have persistently misinterpreted my comments about the U.S. and the Russian Federation (above) is not an ad hominem fallacy per se.

I didn't call you an intellectually dishonest Irish peater potter.  That would have been an ad hominem fallacy.

Instead, I pointed out how you have inaccurately characterized my comments about Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the U.S./NATO response to the invasion.

[Guest]

On 2/13/2023 at 8:13 PM, Matthew Koch said:

Kirk, Chris currently can't reply or use the message function as the moderators are presently applying a restriction to his account. All he has been told is that Lance complained that his profile wasn't filled in enough. Chris, added some detail complying with this request. He has heard nothing from Mark Knight or any of the other moderators. 
He said it's very odd as to so many members either don't have their profiles filled in or have minimal detail. This includes moderator profiles. He'd like a moderator to explain..

Hi

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[John Cotter]

18 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

Let me help you out with your latest misinterpretation.

 Lesson # 1-- An ad hominem fallacy is an irrelevant comment attacking the person rather than addressing the substance of their arguments.

My pointing out how you have persistently misinterpreted my comments about the U.S. and the Russian Federation (above) is not an ad hominem fallacy per se.

I didn't call you an intellectually dishonest Irish peater potter.  That would have been an ad hominem fallacy.

Instead, I pointed out how you have inaccurately characterized my comments about Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the U.S./NATO response to the invasion.

William,

By misrepresenting what you said you have proved my point.

Thanks.

Edited February 14, 2023 by John Cotter

[John Cotter]

1 hour ago, Lance Payette said:

At such time as Chris reappears, I hope he will share whatever he received from the moderators. I have no inside knowledge apart from what I actually reported about him skating on the edge of defamation, but I'd wager a small sum the reason he's not here now isn't because he was told "Lance complained his profile wasn't filled in enough." He can prove me wrong by posting what he received from the moderators, eh?

I do see that a number of highly questionable posts, and even a thread or two, have disappeared. So perhaps the moderators are actually doing some moderating.

Since it has precisely nothing to do with the JFKA, it should also be moved to a more appropriate forum such as Political Discussions.

I did notice the preponderance of non-U.S. participants who feel compelled to pontificate about the evils of America. Even at that, this seems like an awfully obscure place to do it.

Lance,

How did an individual of your prodigious perspicacity not see how wide of the mark Matt's comment was? Do you not understand the difference between criticizing US imperialism and criticising the US per se?

Regarding the relevance of this thread to the JFKA, it isn't surprising that you as a lone nut advocate wouldn't understand it, but many forum members are not lone nutters.

Edited February 14, 2023 by John Cotter

[W. Niederhut]

3 hours ago, John Cotter said:

William,

By misrepresenting what you said you have proved my point.

Thanks.