The Dream Ticket
[McCain and Soros: The Most Dangerous Man in America, Bankrolled By the Most Evil Man in the World]
“While the natural instincts of democracy lead the people to banish distinguished men from power,” Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America, “an instinct no less powerful leads distinguished men to shun careers in politics, in which it is so very difficult to remain entirely true to oneself or to advance without self-abasement.”
Some 170 years and 36 presidents later, the choice presented to the American people at this year’s presidential election does not merely confirm the correctness of the Frenchman’s assessment; it amplifies his verdict in an absurd, almost surreal manner.
Among America’s presidents—many of them impressive and some great, especially in the early years—there have been a few warmongers, neurotics, ignoramuses, and dullards. No single chief executive has been marked by all of those traits, however.
Jackson was famously feisty and a true American hero. Polk waged a war of aggression, but at least that war could not be lost, and it increased the power of the country. Tyler, Fillmore, Buchanan, and Pierce have been maligned ex post facto after 1865 by the winners. Andrew Johnson, Grant, and Harding were personally flawed, rather than systemically destructive. Theodore Roosevelt was a trigger-happy imperialist, yet he was also intelligent, rational, and understood the uses and limits of American power in a multipolar world. George W. Bush has no such understanding, of course, but to his credit, he advocated a “humbler” foreign policy in 2000. His subsequent transmutation was mainly because of his malleability coupled with his delusional belief in divine guidance, rather than a preexistent pernicious design.
John McCain is the most dangerous man in today’s America because this likely next occupant of the White House combines a muddled world outlook with an imbalanced personality, limited intelligence, and low character. Like Vladimir Ilich Lenin or Ted Kaczynski, he needs dehumanized adversaries and loves to hate, never mind the ideology. He pours scorn on powerful countries such as Russia or China, or weak ones such as Serbia, not because it makes any sense from the point of view of this country’s security interests, but because they resist—or may resist—what his archneoconservative advisor Robert Kagan terms America’s Benevolent Global Hegemony. He screams at his subordinates, red in the face and foaming at the mouth, and calls them names. He graduated 894th of 899 from the Naval Academy in Annapolis and famously lost five jets over Vietnam before finally being taken prisoner. He has taken money from his party’s declared enemies while simultaneously seeking that same party’s presidential nomination.
In brief, it is unsurprising that John McCain has attracted the attention of, and found a benefactor in, one of the most evil men in the world, George Soros.
As our readers may recall (“George Soros, Postmodern Villain,” Views, February 2004), there is hardly a bad cause that the Philanthropist From Hell does not sponsor. From open borders and one-world government to gun control and Kosovo’s independence, Soros is there, in person or through his Open Society Institute and a myriad of fellow-traveling outfits. In his “American” guise (he has a few others), he supports the Democratic Party because he sees it as the primary vehicle for the promotion of his agenda. Being an astute speculator, he is not limiting his options. In McCain he has discovered a nominal Republican who is willing to pursue key points of that agenda, to get the GOP to accept them as its mainstream position, and—potentially—to impose them on the country as official U.S. policy.
The point of contact was campaign-finance reform, and the channel of support was the Reform Institute, founded in 2001 and headed by the Arizona senator until 2005, when he resigned in order to prepare for another presidential bid. The RI was initially funded by Soros’s Open Society Institute and by Teresa Heinz-Kerry’s Tides Foundation. They were excited by the McCain-Feingold bill because it had the capacity to limit private groups’ ability to challenge the institutionalized leftist bias of the mainstream electronic media with “issue ads”—such as those Swift Boat ads that inflicted so much damage on John Kerry in his subsequent presidential bid.
The rapport between McCain and Soros was cemented during the 2000 presidential campaign. On July 30, McCain delivered the keynote speech at Arianna Huffington’s “Shadow Convention” in Philadelphia, an event bankrolled by Soros. That ultraliberal political forum was set up as a counterevent to the Republican National Convention, which was held in the same city two days later. Senator McCain was the only person to speak at both events. It was like a pretender for the presidency of the John Randolph Club giving the keynote speech to the Southern Poverty Law Center, in the same city, two days before the JRC’s annual meeting.
[amazonify]192865326X[/amazonify]When the Reform Institute opened shop under McCain’s chairmanship in July 2001, Mrs. Huffington—a close associate and confidante of Soros—was on its advisory committee. The Institute was a pseudo-think tank designed to keep McCain’s staff assembled and gainfully employed in anticipation of another presidential bid. Its offices were in the same building in Alexandria as his election committee, his PAC, and the lobbying firm of his 2000 campaign manager, Rick Davis. The Institute hired three other key campaign staffers: legal counsel Trevor Potter as legal counsel, finance director Carla Eudy as finance director, and press secretary Crystal Benton as . . . communications director.
The Constitutions and Legal Policy Program of Soros’s Open Society Institute donated “above $50,000” to the RI while McCain was at its helm. In addition, the OSI distributed $300,000 in grants to different groups that defended McCain-Feingold from threatened legal challenges during its passage through Congress in 2002.
Last April, McCain tried to distance himself from his benefactor, with his old/new campaign manager Davis describing Soros as a “liberal mega-donor” who wants to “buy this election.” The performance was as convincing as George H.W. Bush decrying the influence of “those Washington insiders.” What matters is that McCain has not given back any money to Soros. He has not returned the $200,000 that the Reform Institute received in donations from Cablevision in 2002 and 2003 either, when McCain was on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. It was undoubtedly coincidental that, in a letter to the FCC written at that time, McCain supported Cablevision’s proposal for the introduction of a more profitable cable pricing scheme.
The Reform Institute has promoted another important pillar of Soros’s agenda: open and unlimited Third World immigration. According to an Investor’s Business Daily editorial (September 27, 2007), vast pro-illegal immigration rallies across the country in 2006 were anything but a spontaneous uprising of hundreds of thousands of angry Mexicans. Soros’s OSI had money-muscle there, too, through its $17-million Justice Fund, which included involvement in the immigration rallies and funding of illegal-immigrant activist groups for subsequent court cases: “So what looked like a wildfire grassroots movement really was a manipulation from OSI’s glassy Manhattan offices. The public had no way of knowing until the release of OSI’s 2006 annual report.”
This is not to say that McCain’s support of illegal immigration correlates exclusively with the money he is getting from Soros. By all accounts he is an “honest” amnesty enthusiast. His man in charge of immigration reform at the RI was, until two years ago, one Juan Fernandez, who holds dual U.S. and Mexican citizenship and is a former member of Vicente Fox’s cabinet in charge of Mexicans abroad. This man believes that anyone of Mexican ancestry, even after going through the motions of becoming an American citizen (as he has done), remains a Mexican forever and should “think Mexican first.” Such a one should never contemplate—let alone accept—assimilation as an option. Dr. Fernandez now serves as John McCain’s Hispanic Outreach Director and is seen as a potential Cabinet-level appointee in a McCain administration.
McCain’s additional overlap with Soros is in Eastern Europe. The Arizona senator broke ranks with his party in March 1999 and voted for Clinton’s war against Serbia, which Soros enthusiastically supported directly and through generous donations to the International Crisis Group. The war was illegal, since the House refused to authorize it under the War Powers Act, but McCain was its enthusiastic advocate then and remains a supporter of Kosovo’s self-proclaimed independence now.
When it comes to other disputed regions, McCain is firmly in the sovereignist camp—provided that it is anti-Russian. Any post-Soviet frozen conflict area’s nominal title-holder—Moldova vis-à-vis Transdnistria, or Georgia under the Sorosite Mikheil Saakashvili vis-à-vis Abkhazia or South Ossetia—is in the right, he asserts, and should be supported by the United States in reasserting sovereignty over the rebel provinces, regardless of the wishes of the inhabitants. He condemned a large poster in the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali hailing Putin as “our President”: “I do not believe that Vladimir Putin is now, or ever should be, the president of sovereign Georgian soil.”
No such scruples apply to sovereign Russian soil, however. In December 1999, McCain accused the Clinton administration of turning a blind eye to Russian “crimes” in Chechnya, attacking Russia’s “brutal to the extreme” military campaign and announcing that if he were president, he would move to cut off IMF loans to Moscow. “McCain was the first senior American politician to say that what the Russians are doing is genocide,” cooed the Washingtonian Russophobe in Chief Zbigniew Brzezinski. “It was a gutsy call, and he called it just right.” In the same “gutsy” vein, McCain boasted earlier this year of staring into Putin’s eyes and seeing the letters KGB. The difference from 1999 is that, today, Russia is better poised to offer much needed loans to America than the other way round.
China fares hardly better. In 1999, the country’s leaders were, in McCain’s view, “ruthless defenders” of an “inhumane regime.” A decade and a couple trillion dollars in trade deficits later, he is still committed to “keeping pressure” on China “to improve its human rights record.”
[amazonify]1928653111[/amazonify]Elsewhere around the world, mere readiness to talk is a sign of inexcusable weakness to McCain. Last May, he accused Barack Obama of “inexperience and reckless judgment” for saying that, if elected, he would be willing to talk with Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions during his first year as president. According to McCain, such talks would only embolden “an implacable foe of the United States.”
He is equally critical of Obama’s readiness to talk to Raúl Castro of Cuba and Hugo Chávez of Venezuela.
A man that would be seen in a normal country as a dangerous charlatan—at best a dilettante in need of tutoring—has made it so far because the bedlam known as the U.S. foreign-policy community approves of “engagement” abroad and wide-open doors at home. The “community’s” impulse is neurotic; its justification, gnostic. It reflects the collective loss of nerve, faith, and identity of a diseased society, producing a self-destructive malaise that is literally unprecedented in history. The intoxication is the arrogant belief, in general, that our reason and our science and our technology can resolve all the dilemmas and challenges of our existence and, in particular, that enlightened abstractions—democracy, human rights, free markets—can be spread across the world and are capable of transforming it into one big Wal-Mart. Both the madness and the intoxication have a “left,” Sorosite narrative, and a “right,” McCainite one.
McCain’s global outlook is virtually identical to that of George Soros. He supports NATO’s further expansion into Russia’s backyard, not because it would enhance American security but because it would bring us a step closer to a neoliberal globalized world. Addressing the Hoover Institution last year, he called for a “global League of Democracies—one that would have NATO members at its core—dedicated to the defense and advancement of global democratic principles,” and he repeated the call in May in his “vision for 2013.”
McCain could have copied his one-world idea word for word from the mission statement of the Democracy Coalition Project (www.demcoalition.org), a Soros-funded NGO led by two former Clinton White House officials. More remarkably still, there is little if any difference between McCain’s “League of Democracies” and the “Concert of Democracies” suggested by Obama’s advisors. The League/Concert would be Washington’s standing mechanism to circumvent the U.N. Security Council, which throughout the Cold War was the closest approximation of the 19th-century “Concert of Powers” that helped avoid a major European war from Napoleon to 1914.
The identity of the two mind-sets became obvious when Obama’s advisor Ivo Daalder and McCain’s advisor Robert Kagan coauthored an article in the Washington Post supporting the concept. As a former long-serving GOP Senate staffer who knows McCain warns, those who expect that the post-Bush era will mean a return to some kind of normalcy from the current neoconservative fever are sadly mistaken: “Think of the League/Concert as a permanent Iraq ‘Coalition of the Willing’ on steroids. The conscious goal of such a mechanism would include institutionalized hostility to Russia and China.” Come 2013, Iraq really might seem to have been a cakewalk.
A former top Clinton official, Strobe Talbott, praised both McCain and Obama as “moderate pragmatists” in foreign affairs, “with the demonstrated ability to reach across party lines.” This is “good news,” according to Dr. Talbott—the man who believes that the United States may not last until the end of this century because the very concept of nationhood will have been rendered obsolete, and all states will recognize a single, global authority. The ideological foundation for George Soros’s global vision is the same: Nations are social arrangements, artificial, temporary, and dangerous. In John McCain, they both recognize a man who can be manipulated by themselves, or people like themselves, in the service of global goals and political objectives that are contrary to American interests and detrimental to peace in the world.
In 1999, the Economist wrote that the United States bestrides the globe like a colossus: “It dominates business, commerce and communications; its economy is the world’s most successful, its military might second to none.” Less than a decade later, the U.S. economy is structurally weak, and its once-powerful manufacturing base moribund. The financial system is on the verge of collapse, no longer sustainable by dwindling infusions of foreign cash and ever-rising domestic borrowing. Eight years of George W. Bush have taken us further away from the Republic of yore and into a postmodern empire devoid of cohesiveness at home or a credible narrative abroad. Iraq is a disaster that indicates the limits of American power as clearly as the rise of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the demise of the dollar. The military is still second to none, yet barely able to deal with the insurgency in two small faraway lands.
This country’s problems are huge, but they are not insoluble. It is as possible and necessary to control the borders at home and to spend no more than is earned as it is possible and necessary to disengage from foreign entanglements that do not contribute to the well-being and security of the United States. It is possible and necessary to establish a realistic balance between ends and means in American foreign and security policy on the basis of the Golden Rule.
John McCain does not understand this because he is obtuse. He will refuse to consider its merits because he is deluded and bellicose. He will not accept any responsibility for the consequences of that refusal because he is morally challenged. Like Napoleon III in 1870, Franz Josef in 1914, or Leonid Brzehnev in 1979, he will try to prop up an ailing empire with reckless diplomatic gambles and military adventures. The results will be similar, or worse.
May God help us all.
Srdja Trifkovic is Chronicles’ foreign-affairs editor.
This article first appeared in the July 2008 issue of Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. New subscribers can call (800) 877-5459 for 12 hard-hitting issues.
36 Responses »
Trackbacks
- Conservative Heritage Times » The Dream (Nightmare) Ticket: McCain-Soros
- Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture | Your Home for Traditional Conservatism » Obama the “Patriot”
- Obama the “Patriot” : Novakeo.com
- The Dream Ticket ... - Marijuana Growing
- McCain, Soros, & Evangelical “Conservatives” « Riley Dad’s Weblog
Entries(RSS)
"Nations are social arrangements, artificial, temporary, and dangerous."
As a John Taylorite republican and localist I actually agree with that statement as it applies to the system we currently live under. One can identify a Russian or a Serb. There was a Southern people before the United States, and I pray there will be one after the U.S. is gone.
The United States in the abstract is not keeping us from one worldism; it is hurling us toward it.
Yes, Soros is dangerous, and also both McCain and Obama. In this rapidly developing worst possible constellation of economic factors we have the worst possible candidates. America is rushing toward economic disaster.
This McCain guys a true evil scumbag.
As far as Chechnya goes he didn't seem to mind there invading its neighbouring region and massacring and slaughtering its civilians and when this is going on Putin then PM calls to Chechen foreign minister to Moscow on 3 seperate occasions to negotate disarming militants invading the country and he refused he didn't issue a statement condemning the invasion. Hes know in the US on the pay of the CIA being a NED scholar and given a Reagan grant that includes free health care and research funds.
Also didn't mention they were running terrorist training camps in Dagestan and kidnapping and killing Russia civilians are far away as St Petersburgh even selling them as slave in markets in Grozny.
It was obvious that the invasion was intended to get a responce from Russia to invade. Years pior they were training Chechen militants in Bosnia, Kosovo, Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan. In fact it dates back to Bosnia in 1992.
The same tactic was used in Kosovo in 1999.
Similar mythical genocide stories that were used against the Serbs were used against Russia. Lies like Russia carpeted bombed the capital, used to thermobaric bombs to wipe out whole villages, soldiers conduct mass rape and the 250,000 death toll (exact same used in Kosovo). Of course no mention of the thousands of ethnic Russians killed or the ethnic cleansing campaign conduct before the first war by Chechen militia.
I think calling Brezinski Russophobic a little generous. This guy hates Russia so much hes psychopathic using islamic proxies to infultrare and Balkanise Russia into 3. He is the director of ACPC and lobbied for the above mentioned foreign minister to seek asylum in the US calling it the happiest day of his life.
This should be our most serious issue. If we thought Iraq our Iran was a problem then a full scale proxy war against Russia would make that look like a vacation.
Doesn't George Soros also fund Obama. So much for democracy no wonder the founding fathers wanted a constitutional Republic rather than a democracy. [Most Evil Man in the World] is a front man for the most evil family in the world Rothschild banking dynasty.
James: Same goes for Obama; Brezinski is his adviser. It doesn't matter who gets elected, Obama or McCain, both are surrounded by russophobes. US/EU policy in the Balkans drove Russia into strategic alliance with China, and it is drawing in India and Iran.
@5Arius
Actually there also using muslim militants in Xinjiang province to destabilise China.
I can see what will happen with Iran. Like the Iraq war they'll say Russia provided intelligence and weapons, they might even involve China somehow.
Actually Srdja Trifkovic Ted Kaczynski if were talking about the same one I'm thinking about the unabomber had a very high IQ, 170 I believe and in his writings and theology talked about current trends in society and how technological society is a determent to human development. Although he went about it in an extreme way hes more sane and less of a criminal than McCain.
When I first learned about one John McCain, years ago, I had a feeling that he was the first and the only POW who was actually kicked out of prisoner camp in Vietnam. On constant demands of everyone who had contact with him. Guards and inmates alike. He depressed them so much. He irritated them to the point of desperation.
I was probably right.
Dr. Trifkovic is also right:
God help us all.
Dr. Trifkovic, you do not go far enough in this article. John McCain is an enthusiastic supporter of many of George Soros's causes. Soros is the most evil man in the country, perhaps the world. If McCain is so supportive of his causes, why can we not label him according to the fruits that he bears, or wishes to bear? Along with Soros, McCain is also one of the most evil men in this country, not just bellicose, ignorant, and blinded by ideology. We must recognize wicked deeds and intentions for what they are.
Obama is evil, McCain is evil, Soros controls everything and everybody. But there are many other multi-billionaires in America. You guys at Rockford Institute with all your high-powered analysis and intelligence should have been able to find yourself one a long time ago and we wouldn't be in this mess now.
One-worlders of this sort are very likely motivated by the wildest power-greed, and are dangerous especially because they are willing to smash nations and the loyalties thereto. This could be a common element among Soros the Kapo, Obama the closet leftist and racial activist, and McCain the disabled veteran.
McCain must be disqualfied from the nomination either for not being a Natural Born Citizen, or for being not really eligible for the highest security clearance.
Alarmingly we see the left and the moderate right uniting and mimicking each other in hatred against national loyalty now; almost the way leftists used to hunger to smash the bourgeoisie.
Vigilance is needed, and particularly as to the national loyalty, sovereignty and citizenship questions, perhaps now more than ever.
Comparing John McCain to Vladimir Ilich Lenin or Ted Kaczynski, stating incorrectly that he wrecked 5 planes, betrays an obvious personal animus. The author of this article is obviously very intelligent, but his persuasiveness is hampered by his lack of rhetorical restraint. I'm no fan of John McCain, but he still seems slightly better than his inexperienced neo-Marxist competition.
To quote:
"non serviam."
That is with whom we are dealing.
A quibble: it was Pres. Polk's plan to purchase what became the Mexican Cession; the Mexicans' plan was the re-conquest of Texas.
I dont believe his BS tortue story. If he was tortured for 5 years in Vietnam there would have been permanent scares that US medical examiners reports would confirm his allegation. I want to see proof. I want to see his medical records.
Hes just another phoney pushing another fake war story like the other candidates that I listed in comment 4 http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=636.
Looks like McCain is going to take his misguided shot at personal freedom (a quelling of his personal pain) by mindlessly revenging himself upon the rest of us and the world. That is called in the therapeutic world : 'acting-out'. It's why you try not to discuss religion or politics in a bar while drinking and attempting to 'chill.' Both of those areas, religion and politics (regardless of their merits or demerits themselves within their own context) tend to attract those predisposed to some serious 'acting out.' Sort of like George W. Bush for example to get elected talking about an American foreign policy that prudently minded its own business. Then as Dr. Trifkovik pointed out instead of maturely sticking to his alleged convictions and recognizing the foundation for such maturity is that the world to quote Dr. T. "has it's own pre-existent 'pernicious' design"; which although I agree I would have chosen 'perspicacious' as the adjective to emphasize. ... W. Bush, instead, chose to 'act out' by belieivng himself suddenly to be the recipient of 'divine guidance.' Personally I like to stick with 'perspicacious', and admit I've *never been otherwise contacted 'directly' (fortunately.) But with McCain in the acting-'out' department, what we may see rather than a bogus re-incarnation of Jesus, is something more akin to Attila the Hun. I noticed, have you, HOLLYWOOD has a new movie out singing Attila's praises (apparently the old'fellow was 'misunderstood') called: The Mongol. Perhaps they ought to have called it: The Ashkenazi ... I hear they're some of his relatives, not surprisingly, these days. He probably was also a Leftist.
With George Soros in the wings, whose own acting-out (there) takes the form of 'believing' he actually can think well. And due to an acquisitive nature of his own in the accumulation of capital, that he 'thinks' so well he really ought to be doing it for the rest of us.
All three of these manifestations or types in terms of how they choose to address their largely unaddressed personal pain in their acting out; they are the types if on the bar stool next to you, the short-hairs on the back of you neck tend to rise as you subsequently scope out another seat for yourself somewhere if possible in the same establishment or leave. Most of us have left.
And, as some other poster above has pointed out, I guess it is too bad though, Chronicles has not seemed to be able to find its own counter-balancing billionaire to help underwrite its obvious maturity and sanity in these matters. Perhaps there simply aren't any such sane, even-keeled billionaires, if they have yet tried to relocate to another bar stool within the same establishment? Maybe their own 'acting out' takes the form that hope even their false hope-?-springs eternal. As for Obama-?-well, there's some more false hope no doubt.
Cheers.
I have no disagreement with the author and his analysis of McCain.Furthermore,Dr. Trifkovic is a great and courageous writer in a time marked by neither in the US.But I must dissent to the extent that one might believe Obama to be a better alternative.Obama is run by essentially the same crowd as McCain.Was the ever a worse enemy of the ,say,Serbs than Obama's crowd of Holbrooke,Albright,etc.Is there a worse Russophobe than Zbig?Obama is a real weasel:for all the talk of withdrawal from Iraq,there are hints of new wars in even crazier places like Darfur.And Obama's grovel-fest in front of AIPAC just about embarrassed everyone.The reality is that American power is in decline no matter who wins.Neither candidate will have the material resources to pursue an invasion of say South Ossetia.What I fear about Obama,however,is that the world may give a moral credence to the Boy Messiah and that could prolong Washington's claim to leadership of a"multi-cultural" world.Obama may love habeas corpus for foreign terror suspects but why would you believe he would extend the same to domestic enemies of "multi-culturalism"?
Excellent piece!
@14Leo
Zbignew also backs the North American Union. In fact its not just Zbignew its his whole family dynasty his daughter is a news anchor at CBS , he has a nephew who writes articles in the Wall Street Journal, another relative whos a major international lawyer on the worlds stage and another relative who has a top government position directing US government policy in Eastern Europe (instigating a divide and conquer strategy against Ukraine and Russia like Zbig did between Russia and China during the Cold War ).
Actually they dont need to invade they can use there Chechen militants to invade South Ossetia like they did in 1999 in Dagestan and in Kosovo. They attacked Ossetia militia before not that long ago.
Although I agree with Dr. Trifkovic's point-of-view regarding the odious John McCain, in all fairness it must be said that he did not lose five planes over Vietnam. He lost four in his career, I believe, and only one over Vietnam, for which he was severely made to pay in physical agony. Although the Chronicles staff is certainly overworked to provide us with our monthy treat, Dr. Trifkovic's error fell through the editing cracks.
It's a dream ticket! Both men have much in common: Neither ever worked an honest day in his life and neither has any idea what it is like for the overwhelming number of us to find or keep decent jobs without these jobs being sent overseas or filled by H1B visas.
McCain demonstrated the degree to which he was in touch with the multitudes when he told blue-collar workers in Middle America that he is a great supporter of Free (for all) Trade. (Hundreds of thousands of their jobs are now in Corporate America East - China, that staunch ally and great sea of cheap labor). And some say McCain is confused. Such nonsense! (However, there may be an alternate explanation: McCain is in bed with Wall Street and doesn't care a bit about those millions of Americans that he is supposed to represent as President. I like the theory that he is confused and in bed with the Wall Street crowd and, like Bush, couldn’t care less for those who are among the richest people in the country.)
I really think the Republicans are ambivalent about McCain being elected. He, like Bush, is the modern equivalent of the old crazy Roman emperors like Nero and Caligula. These emperors played in their own little world while the Roman Senate, Roman elite and the Roman Army "did their thing".
Soros is no different. He makes pronouncements that contradict - he wants the American people as a whole to prosper and yet he champions an economic situation where that prosperity is crushed by greed.
All the way with the dream ticket!!!
@19Derek Leaberry
No one can confirm his torture story only that he was held with other POW's who were tortured. Given his moral character I doubt its true. He has as much moral backbone and credability as the late Tom Lantos both of which supported the slaughter and torture of ethnic Serbs in Kosovo.
I hope people start questioning that his family fortune is linked to Bronfman organised crime and that he and his daddy helped cover up the attack on the USS Liberty.
James thank you for your interesting reply.Did you know the Armenians crushed a combination of Chechen and Taliban jihadists in the war over Artsakh(Nagorno-Karabakh)? There is a belief that the US recruited the jihadists to help the floundering Azeris.This was in the mid-90s and obviously pre-9/11.I trust(hope)the Ossetes can also defend their homeland?I believe they are also Christians?
Leo,
Chechen, Taliban, as well as Arab jihadists fought on the side of Azerbaijan. You are correct, the US was supporting the Chechens, and you are also correct that US VIPs supported Azerbaijan (and still do), but I have not heard that the US recruited jihadists against the Armenians. I move in Armenian circles and have not heard that but you could be correct, I just don't have any information one way or the other.
But I will tell you something that is little known. When the fighting started, CNN started pushing Azeri agitprop against the Armenians very similar to what the western media did to the Serbs. In this case it didn't work because the Armenians stopped it in its early stages. Actually the Armenians threatened CNN with physical violence, a little known fact.
Islamic violence in Europe works to activate the EU and national governments against anyone that speaks ill of Islam because the western media is staffed by little people that are cowards that know it's safe and makes them money to take a cheap shot against a western interest vs. publishing the truth about Islam. They know that Islam might kill them but that western natives are harmless and therefore easy prey.
James,
You are right about Zbignew. He is one of many American traitors that take Muslim money to betray the interests of the US and of the west. Zbignew is especially dangerous due to his intense Russophobia. He doesn't care about Muslim blowback. He will support the jihadists to the end as long as they also fight the Russians.
I have nothing but an intense loathing of those in the west that will betray their culture to the Muslims. They can go to hell!
Arius,thank you for your follow up. Richard Secord(from Iran-Contra),Gary Best and Alderholt (I can't remember his first name)all American retired military did the jihadi recruiting for Baku.They brought in thousands of jihadis.They were ostensibly behind an oil firm called Mega Oil.None of that is in dispute.What is unknown and perhaps never to be known is whether they were acting on their own or in coordination with the United States.In my opinion,likely for both profit and Washington.
@22Leo
I knew Chechens and Azerbajanis fought together against Christian Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh but I didn't know other international jihadists were involved although I cant say I'm suprised. The logistical base for Chechen and international terrorists against Russia are given haven by the Azerbajani regime like Khattab and Abu Hafs (Hafs is descibed in Powels Iraq UN presentation).
@23Arius
US, Europe and Middle Eastern States have and still are supporting Chechen militants dating as far back as 1992 training them in Bonia (Zbig meet the first chechen pres in Harvard in 92).
There strategy is to cut off Russia access to the caspain oil basin.
Despite the international media saying theres no international terror organisation operating in Chechnya if you examine the terror attacks in Europe the terrorists involved have a link to either Bosnia/Kosovo or Chechnya or both including 9/11. Paul Murphys book Wolves of Islam had a good section on 9/11.
Leo: Thank you for the update on American military recruiting of Azeri jihadis. Even if the US government didn't actively support it, it encouraged it by allowing it since it must have known.
It will be much appreciated if you can provide any references to the Americans that recruited the jihadis against the Armenians.
Ditch the "party" loyalty mentality and look at 3rd parties. This election year particularly, we have some decent, intelligent and pro-American people who would love to help heal and return this country in the right direction, if American's would come out from under the elitist establishment's ether and realize they do have choices.
Either Baldwin or Barr would be far superior for the future of America and it's people than McCain or Obama.
The article has added more reasons for disliking McCain to the ones I already had. But if we are voting for lesser evils, McCain is still the man. I hope conservatives won't throw away their votes by writing in someone other than one of the two we have been offered by the two major parties.
The next president will probably appoint several Supreme Court Justices who will have the power to plague the nation by improvising on the constitution for the rest of our lives.
I can’t understand why more people can’t see it. McCain is the Frog Boiler!
What do I mean? There is an old allegory about how to boil a frog. It is said that if you drop a frog into a pot of boiling water it will immediately jump out.
But if you drop a frog in water that is slightly warm and turn up the heat gradually then the frog just sits there and lets itself be boiled alive, without attempting to jump out of the pot, without even knowing that it is indeed being boiled alive.
This allegory has been applied again, and again regarding the American people’s reaction to liberalism/socialism. And it is pretty clear who is who if you apply this allegory to this year’s election.
So let's vote for the candidate who will make the frog jump out of the pot so we can have a true conservative in 2012. Otherwise we will all get gradually boiled alive.
After all it took Carter to get us Reagan.
"May God help us all." An interesting ending to the excellent article by Srdja Trifkovic. And one of the ways God helps us is by blessing us when we obey Him. And one of the ways we, as Christians, must obey Him is by having a Christian/Biblical litmus test and voting only for knowledgeable Godly/Christian men to rule over us in God-ordained civil government offices. This, however, is not being done and has not been done for generations --- the result being (in case you haven't noticed) Godless government. We're getting the government we deserve.
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com