Gods we don’t believe in anymore, but pray to

Every large organization, especially nations and civilizations, is held together by a mythology, or narrative. What they do and how they do it is driven by the foundational narrative that instructs all of the participants.

Organizations fall when some inherent/foundational tenets in their narrative eventually come up against an uncooperative physical reality. Often, this is because the physical world has changed, and the myths now contradict the new reality. When that happens, you’d think the primary task of an organization’s elites is to manage the modification of the narrative myth to accommodate the new reality and continue as a renewed/redefined entity thereby.

However, what they typically do is try to save the narrative at all costs. That narrative, after-all, is what places them in a privileged position, and so they have a vested interest in keeping it alive. Change is necessarily going to place their position at risk. As long as fundamental concepts need only modification, this can be handled. If fundamental concepts have to be jettisoned, the enterprise and their place in it is necessarily subject to far greater risk of going out of control. I suspect this is largely what happened to the Soviet Union as it tried to modify its fundamental principles. It went out of control, and was hi-jacked in a weak moment. So, the result is inertia until a dam breaks somewhere and the floodwaters carry the whole thing away.

The USM’s mythology/narrative problem is a fractal of the West’s much larger mythology/narrative problem. The whole Western enterprise is founded on a 500+ yr old mythology that is running headlong up against new realities. Its ideas of Progress, of Exceptionalism, of being the pinnacle of Development of Justice and Governance, are running into the realities of resource depletion, economic and martial decline, and a lazy, decadent & corrupt political elite, as against competitors who are on the opposite trajectory. To the the extent that the Pentagon’s mythology was written in the context of a surging West, it borrows much of Western mythology. The Pentagon hasn’t re-written its mythology, and probably can’t until the West re-writes the larger version.

In classical physics, inertia is proportional to mass. As the largest organization on the planet (or at least employer), it shouldn’t surprise us that the US DoD exhibits the most organizational inertia.

Solzhenitsyn’s Damning History of the Jews in Russia – a Review


“The Jews accumulated wealth by cooperating with each other. (p. 31).”

“They made profits by taking the peasants’ grain to the point of impoverishing them (and causing famine), turning it into brandy, and then encouraging drunkenness. (p. 21, 24).”

“Jews forced peasants into lifelong debt and crushing poverty by requiring payment, in cattle and tools, for liquor. (p. 31).”

Jan Peczkis

The translation of Solzhenitsyn’s book appears to have been done without permission from his family, and this might be why this lengthy and detailed review is no longer available on the page of the book on Amazon.com, where it originally appeared.

The book might disappear altogether from Amazon, so if you want to get your Kindle copy, act now. Otherwise you can find it on many sources on the internet.

Jews had enormous influence in the English and American media at the turn of the century – this is what most people in America and UK were told about Russian Jews (Click for Hi-Res image)
The translator, Columbus Falco, describes the censorship of this book when it appeared in 2002:

“Published in the original Russian in 2002, the book was received with a firestorm of rage and denunciation from the literary and media world, from the Jews, and from almost the entire intelligentsia of the established order in the West…

Immense efforts have been made by the Russian authorities and also by the Western liberal democratic power structure to ignore 200 YEARS TOGETHER, to suppress it as much as possible, and above all to prevent and interdict the book’s translation into foreign languages, most especially into English, which has become essentially the worldwide language of our epoch…

The Russian authorities have to this date refused to allow any official English translation of the book to be published”. (p. 2).

So what is so naughty, naughty about this book?

Most of it consists of unremarkable information that can be found in standard, non-censored texts. [For details, see comments.]

Agree with author Solzhenitsyn or not, but recognize the fact that he is no lightweight. Solzhenitsyn goes into considerable detail about many different historical epochs, and clearly has a deep knowledge of the issues that he raises. His approach is balanced. He is sympathetic towards Jews as well as critical of Jews.

The latter evidently does not sit well with many, because it does not comply with the standard Judeocentric narrative, in which Jews are just victims and can do no wrong. Worse yet, a famous writer is bringing sometimes-unflattering information about Jews to light, and this is threatening. Hence the censorship.

Far from living in oppression, Russia’s Jews not only had more freedom than the serfs, but also more than the Russian traders and merchants. (pp. 16-17), and this was also true of more recent times. (p. 45). Soon after the Partitions of Poland, Derzhavin visited the area and reported on the Jews in the then-current manorial society. The Polish nobility had turned over the management of their estates to the Jews (p. 21), and the Jews engaged in conduct that brought them short-term profits and long-term antagonisms.

Consider the PROPINACJA. The Jews accumulated wealth by cooperating with each other. (p. 31). They made profits by taking the peasants’ grain to the point of impoverishing them (and causing famine), turning it into brandy, and then encouraging drunkenness. (p. 21, 24). Jews forced peasants into lifelong debt and crushing poverty by requiring payment, in cattle and tools, for liquor. (p. 31).

In addition, a system of bribery protected this arrangement. Thus, the Polish magnates were on the “take” of part of the wealth squeezed by Jews out of the peasantry, and, without the Jews and their inventiveness, this system of exploitation could not have functioned, and would have ended. (p. 22). Solzhenitsyn adds that, “…the Jewish business class derived enormous benefit from the helplessness, wastefulness, and impracticality of landowners…” (p. 54).

The Jews kept moving around in order to prevent an accurate count of their numbers—in order to evade taxes. (p. 25). A delegation of Jews travelled to St. Petersburg to try to bribe Russian officials to suppress Derzhavin’s report. (p. 28). In 1824, Tsar Alexander I noticed that Jews were corrupting local inhabitants to the detriment of the treasury and private investors. (p. 32).

Jews were not forced into “parasitic” occupations: They chose them. (p. 31). By the late 19th century (the time of the pogroms), Russian anger had boiled over, focusing on such things as Jews not making their own bread, massive overpricing and profiteering, enriching themselves while impoverishing the muzhik, and taking control of forests, lands, and taverns. (pp. 78-80).

Nor is it true that the Jews were kept out of “productive” occupations. To the contrary. A concerted 50-year tsarist effort to turn Jews into farmers attracted few participants (p. 33), and ended in failure. (p. 58). None of the rationalizations for its failure are valid: Other newcomers to Russian agriculture (Mennonites, Bulgarian and German colonists, etc.), facing the same challenges as the Jews, did quite well. (p. 36). Jewish farmers neglected farm work (pp. 34-35), and kept drifting back into selling goods and leasing of their property to others to farm. (pp. 56-57). The century-later efforts by the Communists, to get Jews into farming, fared no better. (p. 208, 251).

Jewish resistance to assimilation is usually framed in terms of the GOY excluding the Jew. It was the other way around. For the first half of the 19th century, rabbis and kahals strenuously resisted enlightenment, including the proffered Russian education to Jews. (p. 38).

Jews have always tended to exaggerate the wrongs they have experienced from others. (p. 42). This applies to such things as double taxation, forced military service, expulsion from villages, etc. (p. 42, 46, 50).

The Jews of the Vilnius (Wilno), Kaunas, and Grodno regions sided with the Russians during the Poles’ ill-fated January 1863 Insurrection. (p. 69). This confirms Polish sources.

Mainstream Judaism did not conduct ritual murder. However, it is possible that some Jewish cults did so. (p. 40). [For more, see my review of BLOOD PASSOVER]. As for the PROTOCOLS, their authenticity was rejected early-on by the tsarist government. However, this did not erase legitimate grievances about Jewish influence. (p. 174).


We often hear that Communist Jews were “not real Jews”. This nonsense is equivalent to saying that Lenin and other Russian Communists were “not real Russians”—a contrived distinction that Solzhenitsyn refuses to make. (p. 117). [For more, see comments].

One common exculpation for Jews supporting revolutionary movements, and then Communism, is that of the tsarist system preventing Jews from improving their lot. This is nonsense. Once the Jews accepted the Russian education system, their numbers increased, to such a spectacular extent (by about 1870: p. 63, 71), in Russian higher education, that quotas (numerus clausus) had to be imposed upon them. This nowadays-called affirmative action became necessary because Jews were wealthier and thus unfairly advantaged in schooling-related matters. (p. 88).

Hungary is instructive. There, Jewish grievances were the least valid. Hungarian Jews had enjoyed atypical freedoms and a high standard of living, and there had been no pogroms. Yet the 1919 Hungarian Communism was especially dominated by Jews, and was odiously cruel. (pp. 153-154).

Another exculpation for Jews in Communism was the alleged need for defense against pogroms conducted by the Whites. Not so. The massive influx of Jews into the Soviet apparatus occurred in late 1917 and 1918, but the White pogroms did not begin until 1919. (p. 121).


One can easily make lists of Jews in high positions in the Soviet Union. Influential Jews commonly occurred at a rate 10 or more times the abundance of Jews in the USSR. (e. g, pp. 143-on, 225-on). [For more, see comments]. Whether or not motivated by “ethnic solidarity”, Jews in authority tended to promote other Jews to high positions. (p. 138).

However, the Jewish role in Communism goes far beyond what is apparent in any such “grocery list”. For instance, consider what some call the Judaization of academia, and its impact on the bloody events of 1917. Solzhenitsyn comments, “The February Revolution was carried out by Russian hands and Russian foolishness. Yet at the same time, its ideology was permeated and dominated by the intransigent hostility to the historical Russian state that ordinary Russians didn’t have, but the Jews had. So the Russian intelligentsia too had adopted this view.” (p. 98).

Now consider the October Revolution. Lenin contended that the Bolshevik success in the revolution had been made possible by the role of the large Jewish intelligentsia in several Russian cities. (p. 119). Furthermore, according to Lenin, the October Revolution was preserved by the actions of Jews against the attempted sabotage by government officials. (p. 128).

The energy and high intelligence of the Jews made them indispensable. (p. 129, 189). In fact, Solzhenitsyn suggests that Soviet Communism lost its ideological fervor, and began slowly to die of “Russian laziness”, already in the late 1960s, all because the Jews were largely gone. (p. 317).


Dekulakization was not just an economic measure. It was a tool to uproot peoples and destroy their traditions and culture. For this reason, Stalin’s dictatorship can in no sense be accepted as a nationalist (Russian) phenomenon. (p. 221).

Religious Judaism was never persecuted as intensely by the Communists, in the 1920s and 1930s, as was Russian Orthodox Christianity. (p. 306). High-level Jew Lazar Kaganovich directed the destruction of the Church of the Redeemer. He also wanted to destroy St. Basil’s Cathedral. (p. 223).

The famous mobile gas chambers were not invented by the Nazis. They were developed, in 1937, by Isai Davidovich Berg, a leading Jew in the NKVD. (p. 237).


Solzhenitsyn notes the irony that, in the West, there was little effective concern about the victims of Communism until it turned on the Jews. He quips,

“15 million peasants were destroyed in the ‘dekulakisation’, 6 million peasants were starved to death in 1932, not even to mention the mass executions and millions who died in the camps, and at the same time it was fine to politely sign agreements with Soviet leaders, to lend them money, to shake their ‘honest hands’, to seek their support, and to boast of all this in front of your parliaments.

But once it was specifically JEWS that became the target, then a spark of sympathy ran through the West and it became clear what sort of regime this was.” (p. 346; Emphasis is Solzhenitsyn’s).


Alexander Solzhenitsyn describes the standard double-standard (one which Poles are all too familiar with), as he describes current Jewish attitudes,

“There are so many such confident voices ready to judge Russia’s many crimes and failings, her inexhaustible guilt towards the Jews—and they so sincerely believe this guilt to be inexhaustible almost all of them believe it! Meanwhile, their own people are coyly cleared of any responsibility for their participation in Cheka shootings, for sinking the barges and their doomed human cargo in the White and Caspian seas, for their role in collectivization, the Ukrainian famine and in all the abominations of the Soviet administration, for their talented zeal in brainwashing the ‘natives’. This is not contrition.” (p. 335).

Of course, Solzhenitsyn is not insinuating that Jews are collectively guilty for Communism. However, Jews should accept collective liability for Communism and its crimes in much the same way that Germans accept collective liability for Nazism and its crimes. (p. 141, 321). Until they do so, this issue of the Zydokomuna (Judeo-Bolshevism) will not go away.


We keep hearing that Jews at no time constituted a majority of the leadership in Communism. This is technically true, but it does not tell the whole story.

Refer to: Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews, by Albert S. Lindemann:

To begin with, Jewish Communists were noted for their high intelligence, verbal skills, assertiveness, ideological fervor, etc. (p. 429).

Not surprisingly, few non-Jewish Communist leaders approached the caliber of the Jewish Communist leaders. For example, Lindemann reminds us that, “Jewish or gentilized, Trotsky was a man of unusual talents.” (p. 447). In addition, “Trotsky’s paramount role in the revolution cannot be denied…” (p. 448). This can be generalized, “Other non-Jews might be mentioned but almost certainly do not quite measure up to Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Yoffe, Sverdlov, Uritsky, or Radek in visibility inside Russia and abroad, especially not in the crucial years from 1917 to 1921.” (p. 432).

Finally, influential Jews did not have to act alone. In fact, Jews had the skill of influencing non-Jews to think in Jewish ways. Lenin can validly be understood as a “Jewified gentile” (pp. 432-433). The same can be said for the renegade-Pole Dzerzhinsky (p. 442, 446), as well as the Russian Kalinin, who was called by Jewish Bolsheviks “more Jewish than the Jews”. (p. 433).


Let us elaborate on Feliks Dzerzhinsky. Refer to: The Cheka: Lenin’s Political Police:

Author Leggett describes how Dzerzhinsky grew up in Vilna [Wilno, Vilnius], which he describes as a cosmopolitan city with a strong Jewish element and a focal point of socialist ferment in Tsarist Russia. (p. 34). He adds that, “Dzerzhinsky came under the influence of Martov, future leader of the Menshevik Party, by whom he was introduced into Jewish circles, both proletarian and of the intelligentsia; he made many Jewish friends and zealously learned Yiddish. The Bund—Jewish social democratic workers’ organization in Lithuania, Poland, and Russia, founded in 1897—helped Dzerzhinsky in his political activity, for instance in late 1899. Dzerzhinsky’s close friend and schoolmate in Vilna was Mikhail Goldman…” (pp. 24-25).

The strong Jewish influence very much extended to Dzerzhinsky’s personal life. Leggett continues, “Goldman’s sister, Julia, was for several years Dzerzhinsky’s romantic love…formed a deeply romantic attachment, lasting from 1905 to early 1910, for another Jewish woman, Sabina Feinstein, sister of a prominent SDKPiL member. Very soon afterwards, in November 1910, Dzerzhinsky married Sofia Sigizmundovna nee Mushkat, who was likewise Jewish…” (p. 25).

As if to underscore the fact that Jewish influence in Communism is much greater than just the “grocery list” of Jewish Communists, Leggett writes of “Rosa Luxemburg [Luksemburg], celebrated for her intellectual brilliance and her political passion.” (p. 24). So intoxicated had “Bloody Feliks” (“KRWAWE FELEK”) Dzierzinski become of Luksemburg’s ideas that he actually clashed with Lenin on the resurrection of the Polish state. Only that it was the non-Pole Lenin supporting the restoration of the Polish nation and renegade-Pole Dzerzhinsky opposing it, in accordance with Luxemburg. (pp. 23-24).

The foregoing can be generalized. Refer to: The Crucifixion of Russia: A History of the Russians and the Jews A new English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn comments,

“The February Revolution was carried out by Russian hands and Russian foolishness. Yet at the same time, its ideology was permeated and dominated by the intransigent hostility to the historical Russian state that ordinary Russians didn’t have, but the Jews had. So the Russian intelligentsia too had adopted this view.” (p. 98).


See my review of: The Rulers of Russia


See my review of: The new Poland,


See my review of: Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia


Refer to: Flags Over the Warsaw Ghetto

(My Review was Feb 12, 2012)

Moshe Arens wrote: “The years preceding World War II were a time when Socialists throughout the world were preaching the `class struggle’ and `solidarity of the proletariat.’ Many of them, not only avowed Communists, saw the Soviet Union as the pioneer and leader of this `struggle.’ This was also true in Palestine, where the Socialist Zionists had achieved a dominant position in the Jewish community.” (p. 7). The so-called “proletarian” camp included the Socialist Zionists and the non-Socialist Bund. (p. 9). Arens notes: “The Socialist Zionist movements, attached to Marxist ideology…” (p. 44). ZOB leader Anielewicz was a member of Hashomer Hatzair with its “Marxist approach to Zionism”. (p. 113). Hashomer Hatzair and Left Po’alei Zion showed their true colors (pardon the pun) in preferring that the red flag be hoisted over the fighting Ghetto instead of the blue-white Zionist flag. (p. 287).

ZOB leader Hersh Berlinski exhibited undisguised disloyalty to Poland as he said that his support was to the USSR over Poland. (p. 142). As for the Warsaw Ghetto rank-and-file soldiers, Arens refers to them as: “…younger generation, their orthodox Marxist thinking giving rigidity to their arguments.” (p. 106). Who can blame Poles for their reluctance to support the Uprising owing to its taint of Communism? (p. 71; 200-201; 226)


See my review of: “Them”: Stalin’s Polish puppets


See my review of: Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism


CONCLUSION: Since Jews Take Collective Credit for Their Albert Einsteins and Jonas Salks, Should They Not Also Assume Collective Liability for Jewish Mass-Murderers Such as Genrikh Yagoda and Lazar Kaganovich?


The ZYDOKOMUNA (Judeo-Bolshevism) cannot be wished away. In addition, the Jewish share of blame for Communism is not erased just because there were non-Communist Jews. Finally, since Jews regularly call on Poles to “come to terms with the past”, in a collective sense, for the actions of only SOME Poles, the Jews should be held to the same standard.
To learn of the dominance of Jews in the leadership of the early decades of the Soviet Union, please click on, and read my detailed review of, The Jews of the Soviet Union: The History of a National Minority (Cambridge Russian, Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies).
See also THE RULERS OF RUSSIA, by Denis Fahey. (1940). Condon Printing Company, Detroit.
For details on the massive long-term Jewish overrepresentation in the leadership of the Soviet Communist Secret Police (the NKVD), responsible for the murder of millions of innocent people, please click on, and read my detailed review, of Polin: Studies in Polish Jewry, Volume 26: Jews and Ukrainians.
Also see THE JEWISH CENTURY. My Amazon review is dated October 29, 2010.
For a scholarly Russian-language primary source on the Jewish leadership that had dominated the NKVD, please click on, and read my detailed English-language review, of Kto Rukovodil NKVD, 1934-1941: Spravochnik.

Anyone is free to republish, copy, and redistribute the text in this content (but not the images or videos) in any medium or format, with the right to remix, transform, and build upon it, even commercially, as long as they provide a backlink and credit to Russia Insider. It is not necessary to notify Russia Insider. Licensed Creative Commons.

Syria-Israel encounter – February 10, 2018

A long and overdue report regarding what happened on Feb 10, 2018 when the SyAAD engaged the Zionists; but we had to wait for a personal reason; and as always on this page, the blunt truth.

On 05:00 Feb 10, 2018 a formation of Zionist jets launched 16 Popeye Turbo ALCM (320km range) from Lebanese airspace toward Riyad Qayasa AFB (aka T4 AFB) which the SyAAD managed to detect and intercept the majority of. (we cannot disclose any more) after foiling their attack, SyAAD fired a single long range missile against the Zionist formation which after exploding the fragmented warhead hit a Zionist F-15 damaging it.

When the Zionist’s raid was foiled, a second Zionist formation took off to reattempt an attack on the SyAAF base; at 0600 few minutes after taking off, a Syrian S-200VE missile scored a direct hit against an enemy F-16I over the occupied Golan Heights and we all saw the aftermath. (The jet was downed while fully armed contradicting the Zionists’ media story that it was shot down after it “successfully” raided the Syrian airbase)

When their F-16I was shot down, the Zionist air force was put on full alert and attempted what is known as SEAD or “Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses” like they did back in 1982 in Southern Lebanon.

The first batch of long-range and anti-radiation missiles fired by the Zionists were completely shot down and non of it made it to its targets. They were hit with that surprise and for the first time in their history they Zionists attempted to overwhelm the Syrian Air Defenses by firing projectiles from outside of Syrian Airspace but most were without a specific target; and mainly to overwhelm the air defenses so that the projectiles and anti-radiation missiles might have a chance in hitting their attempted targets.

SyAAD also fired a short/medium range missile and destroyed an AH-64 Apache helicopter, while another one was damaged. The enemy claimed one of their choppers was out of services due to a mechanical error

After their miserable failure to hit anything significant, the enemy thinking that they had already overwhelmed the SyAAD, they sent an armed drone that entered the Syrian Airspace from the Lebanese airspace and was shot down over al-Zabadani

They only managed to hit a single air defenses guidance radar in the South, and a single launcher (we cannot specify but it was NOT an S-200 as they claimed)

An enemy F-15 formation attempted to target the Syrian Air Defenses from over Jordanian airspace, and again, an SyAAD S-200 scored a direct hit against another enemy F-15 near the Jordanian/Palestinian border line; parts of the missile and the F-15 were recovered in Jordan, but Zionist media and officials claimed that it belonged to the same F-16 that was downed in Occupied Golan Heights (So basically they are saying a jet that was hit with a 217kg warhead was still able to fly North where there are not airbases to land after being hit; this lie might work on civilians but not on us)

Syrian Air Defenses imposed what is known as A2/AD or Anti-Access/Area Denial that extended from Northern Damascus all the way over Southern Syria, Southern Lebanon, Northwestern Jordan and Northern Palestine; in which not a single enemy fighter was able to move freely and the enemy was going crazy trying to hit the Syrian Air Defenses batteries and failed. And you all saw SyAAD missiles and missile boosters over Lebanon and Jordan.

To give you an example of how the enemy lie regarding whether they hit their target or not; they claimed they hit all of their targets but wasn’t it few weeks ago when the Zionists claimed they have destroyed the S-200 regiment that fired a missile at one of their F-16s in Lebanon and we told you back then their claims are baseless and there was minor material damage?! Well evidently, the same battery they claimed they destroyed shot down one of their jets just few weeks after.

Finally, the Syrian Air Defenses put down the enemies “long hand” and showed the enemy again that just because Syrian command chooses not to move in certain occasions, it does not mean SyAAD is not capable of reacting; never mistake patience with weakness, and choice with inability. And we`ve always said that on this page way back since 2013.

This is what happened to the best of our ability to share in terms of details. Those who follow us know very well that we never share anything we are not sure of, and we never sell dreams nor sugarcoat events. Another post is coming regarding the aftermath and our personal thoughts.

Syrian Arab Army

Russiangate: Melania? . . . Et tu?

An acquaintance told me recently that Melania is ‘almost certainly a KGB asset‘. There you go, case closed…

Erebus says:

Your acquaintance is not wrong, but it was the GRU, who took over the operation when the KGB disbanded, in collusion with rogue, communist elements in SOVA (who recruited Melania in the mid ’80s and managed her early career) that added some of the clever touches we’re seeing today.

It is, of course plain to anyone who knows him that Trump had no plans to run for any Presidency, but that Melania’s constant insinuations skilfully massaged his ego to the point where he imagined himself in the Oval office, barking “You’re Fired” at anyone who came in. Once his candidacy was announced, the Kremlin’s political experts created and managed the strategies and tactics that Melania’s handlers fed to her and the later recruited Ivanka, who in turn fed them to Jared and the campaign staff. Everyone, you may recall, said they wouldn’t work, that they weren’t working, and that the polls were right, but Melania/Ivanka stuck to their guns. Of course, they themselves had no idea, but that’s why Trump thinks Ivanka walks on water.

Meanwhile, other GRU operatives were sowing weak, easily debunked evidence of “Russian collusion” amongst the American intelligence agencies, the DNC, Hillary campaign officials, and of course the media, selectively reinforced by verbal communications from deep, “reliable & trusted” sources from inside the Kremlin itself. This had the effect of causing the Crappers to believe they were on to something big, focused their attention on Trump (who remains oblivious) and his aides, but also manoeuvred them into exposing themselves publicly as the fools and serial liars they had ever been. Totally discredited, they’ll serve to cover Melania’s trail by making laughable anything they may say later should her’s and/or Ivanka’s operational covers be blown.

And that is how the Office of the President came to be run from the Kremlin via Trump Tower in NY, while the nominal POTUS goes to rallies, tweets, plays golf, and occasionally enjoys a little sword dancing. All in all, a daring operation, brilliantly executed. I swear that I’ve often seen the hand of the Serbian, and even elements of Czech intelligence services in this operation, but it’s all plausibly deniable. Wheels within wheels…

Anyway, one of the greatest intelligence coups in history, and the hand of Putin is evident throughout. We’ll see how good a POTUS Putin will turn out to be. Running the Presidencies of two opposing super-powers simultaneously, one of them by remote control, would normally present a challenge for any man, but the general consensus in E. European intelligence circles is that Putin’s actually enjoying himself. FWIW, those same circles say he’ll run off with Melania when this is all over, so take that with a grain of salt.

The US is Executing a Global War Plan

Authored by Finian Cunningham via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Washington is moving inevitably on a global war plan. That’s the grim conclusion one has to draw from three unfolding war scenarios.

Ultimately, it’s about American imperialism trying to assert hegemony over the international order for the benefit of US capitalism. Russia and China are prime targets for this global assault.

The three unfolding war scenarios are seen in Syria, North Korea and Ukraine. These are not disparate, disassociated conflicts. They are inter-related expressions of the American war plans. War plans which involve the moving of strategic military power into position.

Last week’s massacre of over 100 Syrian government forces by American warplanes near Deir ez-Zor was an audacious overt assault by the US on the Syrian state. The US, along with other NATO allies, have been up to now waging a seven-year proxy war for regime change against Russia’s ally, President Assad. The massacre last week was certainly not the first time that US forces, illegally present in Syria, have attacked the Syrian army. But it seems clearer than ever now that American forces are operating on the overt agenda for regime change. US troops are transparently acting like an occupation army, challenging Russia and its legally mandated support for the Syrian state.

Heightening international concerns are multiple reports that Russian military contractors were among the casualties in the US-led air strike near Deir ez-Zor last week.

Regarding North Korea, Washington is brazenly sabotaging diplomatic efforts underway between the respective Korean leaderships in Pyongyang and Seoul. While this inter-Korean dialogue has been picking up positive momentum, the US has all the while been positioning nuclear-capable B-52 and B-2 bombers in the region, along with at least three aircraft carriers. The B-2s are also reportedly armed with 14-tonne bunker-buster bombs – the largest non-nuclear warhead in the American arsenal, designed to destroy North Korean underground missile silos and “decapitate” the Pyongyang leadership of Kim Jong-un.

American vice-president Mike Pence, while attending the Winter Olympics in South Korea, opening last week, delivered a blunt war message. He said that the recent detente between North Korea and US ally South Korea will come to an end as “soon as the Olympic flame is extinguished” – when the games close later this month. This US policy of belligerence completely upends Russia and China’s efforts to facilitate inter-Korean peace diplomacy.

Meanwhile, the situation in Eastern Ukraine looks decidedly grim for an imminent US-led invasion of the breakaway Donbas region. Pentagon military inspectors have in the past week reportedly arrived along the Contact Zone that separates the US-backed Kiev regime forces and the pro-Russian separatists of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. Donetsk’s military commander Eduard Basurin warned that the arrival of Pentagon and other NATO military advisors from Britain and Canada indicate that US-armed Kiev forces are readying for a renewed assault on the Donbas ethnic Russian population.

Even the normally complacent observers of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), charged with monitoring a nominal ceasefire along the Contact Zone, have lately begun reporting serious advancement of heavy weapons by the Kiev forces – in violation of the 2015 Minsk Peace Accord.

If the US-led Kiev forces proceed with the anticipated offensive next month in Donbas there are real fears for extreme civilian casualties. Such “ethnic cleansing” of Russian people by Kiev regime forces that openly espouse Neo-Nazi ideology would mostly likely precipitate a large-scale intervention by Moscow as a matter of humanitarian defense. Perhaps that is what the US planners are wagering on, which can then be portrayed by the dutiful Western news media as “another Russian aggression”.

US-based political analyst Randy Martin says: “It is undeniable that Washington is on a war footing in three global scenarios. Preparation for war is in fact war.”

He added: “You have to also consider the latest Nuclear Posture Review published by the Pentagon earlier this month. The Pentagon is openly declaring that it views Russia and China as targets, and that it is willing to use nuclear force to contest conventional wars and what the Pentagon deems to be asymmetric aggression.”

Martin says that it is not clear at this stage what Washington wants exactly.

“It is of course all about seeking global domination which is long-consistent with American imperialism as expressed for example in the Wolfowitz Doctrine following the end of the Cold War,” says the analyst.

“But what does Washington want specifically from Russia and China is the question. It is evidently using the threat of war and aggression as a lever. But it is not clear what would placate Washington. Perhaps regime change in Russia where President Putin is ousted by a deferential pro-Western figure. Perhaps Russia and China giving up their plans of Eurasian economic integration and abandoning their plans to drop the American dollar in trade relations.”

One thing, however, seems abundantly clear. The US is embarking on a global war plan, as can be discerned from the grave developments unfolding in Syria, the Korean Peninsula and Ukraine. Each scenario can be understood as a pressure point on Moscow or China to in some way acquiesce to American ambitions for global dominance.

To be sure, Washington is being reckless and criminal in its conduct, violating the UN Charter and countless other international laws. It is brazenly acting like a rogue regime without the slightest hint of shame.

Still, Russia and China are hardly likely to capitulate. Simply because the US ambition of unipolar hegemony is impossible to achieve. The post-Second World War order, which Washington was able to dominate for nearly seven decades, is becoming obsolete as the international order naturally transforms into a multipolar configuration.

When Washington accuses Moscow and Beijing of “trying to alter the international order to their advantage” what the American rulers are tacitly admitting is their anxiety that the days of US hegemony are on the wane. Russia and China are not doing anything illegitimate. It is simply a fact of historical evolution.

So, ultimately, Washington’s war plans are futile in what they are trying to achieve by criminal coercion. Those plans cannot reverse history. But, demonically, those plans could obliterate the future of the planet.

The world is again on a precipice as it was before on the eve of the First and Second World Wars. Capitalism, imperialism and fascism are again center stage.

As analyst Randy Martin puts it: “The American rulers are coming out of the closet to show their true naked nature of wanting to wage war on the world. Their supremacist, militarist ideology is, incontrovertibly, fascism in action.”

What Joe Biden — Thinker and Strategist — thinks

Former US Vice President Joseph Biden delivered an impassioned speech which alternated between attacking Russia and praising the US-led world order, while omitting the essence of the ongoing Cold War redux.

Biden, a former senator and America’s second-highest official for two terms, took to the podium at the Munich Security Conference (MSC) on Friday evening to deliver a moving speech about the threat posed by Russian President Vladimir Putin to the “liberal world order.” He said NATO members must oppose these “malign activities” and stick to their values, even though the US did not do this under the administration he was part of.

Russia-bashing is a popular game for Western politicians nowadays. Biden was not the first speaker at the MSC to focus on the menace of the East, although unlike Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, he didn’t address his anti-Kremlin rally cry to a nearly deserted hall. On the contrary, it was packed full, including by some former Obama officials like John “you don’t invade a country on phony pretext”Kerry, the ex-Secretary of State.

And the audience heard a lot about how the Kremlin is so weak that it threatens the very core of the world order (don’t ask, just take his word for it).

Russia is a “nation in a serious decline,” Biden said, and it suffers from the stranglehold oil and gas have on the economy (Russian energy exports were 11.78 percent of GDP in 2016, amid the oil price crisis, compared to 20.32 in 2000). Russia maintains a “network of partnerships solely through coercion,” said the former vice president of a nation which has over 1,000 military bases throughout the world. Russia’s population is “aging and shrinking” (Russia’s demographic situation is typical among countries in which women can make careers, birth control is not frowned upon, and people are not forced to rely on their children in old age, although it is enduring a birth gap stemming from three generations ago, when 26 million people were lost in World War II).

The Kremlin is dealing with its weakness by undermining the West in general and “democratic ideals” on its borders in particular, the former VP believes, because “any alternative that can attract support jeopardizes the wealth, power and privilege of those oligarchs in charge.” For instance, Ukraine – which could be called Biden’s pet project – supposedly chose those “democratic ideals” in 2014, when armed mobs kicked out its democratically-elected president who already submitted to the demands of the opposition leaders. And then, the new Kiev went after Ukrainian people in the east who didn’t share such ideals, sending tanks against unarmed civilians and later shelling cities engulfed by rebellion.

But at least the government in Kiev enjoys a steadfast protection of its sovereignty – another value that Washington holds in great regard, according to Biden, and Moscow sees as nothing but a nuisance. The vice president can attest to that personally. He ordered Poroshenko to sack his prosecutor general or else kiss US-backed credit goodbye. But, well, the man was allegedly a “corrupt son-of-b***h.”

So how exactly is the Kremlin “abusing its power,” according to Biden? “By using its hard military power,” said the man who helped oversee the NATO destruction of Libya, once Africa’s most socially developed and richest nation. By “manipulating energy supplies” said Biden, a staunch opponent of having more gas pipelines from Russia to Europe – which would undermine Ukraine’s ability to blackmail Russia and Europe by holding its gas transit hostage, and incidentally prevent LNG (from America and Qatar) from being a more attractive alternative source for Europe. By “weaponizing corruption,” said the man whose son joined the board of directors of Burisma – a Ukrainian oil company – shortly after the US supported the Euromaidan.

But, of course, the biggest offense is Russia’s alleged election meddling all around the world. He berated Russians for buying political advertising on Facebook, which, according to the FBI, had no tangible effect on the outcome of the election. Biden called the ads “thousands of attempts to meddle” in the 2016 campaign.

“They have no damn right!” he roared. “No right whatsoever. It’s our sovereign right to be able to conduct our elections unfettered. Period!”

Yes, we know. American intelligence officials believe meddling in other nations’ elections is their job and won’t allow anyone else to cut in. America first!

But Biden has a few ideas on how to deal with the ‘weak-yet-very-dangerous’ Russia. The West needs more NATO, more cybersecurity, and more sanctions on Russia – sanctions which the US, conveniently, is not damaged by, unlike European nations. The West also needs to inform the public about how bad Russia is – because they are apparently not convinced that heating their homes with Russian gas or hearing what Russian media have to say compromises their ‘core values.’

The West also needs to “tell the Russian people the truth and where we stand,” which, Biden believes, will erode public support for the “small group in the Kremlin willing to do whatever it take to protect themselves and keep their illegal grip on power.” Because, again, this worked so well for the Ukrainians, who are now governed by honest, liberal-minded officials accountable to their people. Mikhail Saakashvili, Washington’s darling, used the term “mafia state” to describe them in a recent interview, but he may have a chip on his shoulder after being kicked out of Ukraine.

“I am still hopeful that the time will come – it may not come in the near future – but eventually the people of Russia will look West and out of that deep black hole they have been staring into for the last 150 years or longer,” Biden mused.

But Russians have been looking West for quite some time. And they have even been led “by the power of the US example,” as the whole world has been told to do. They are now simply ignoring the stipulation to “do as we say, not as we do.”

Alexandre Antonov for RT

Total Debt

Global Sovereign debt is now roughly equal to Global GDP – about $60T. Private debt is greater. Globally, according to the World Bank it was at 140% global GDP in 2016, and is probably higher now. In some cases like US & JP, private debt approaches 2x GDP. The entire world – all the land, mines, factories, houses, sub-surface minerals, etc, etc – is valued at roughly $200T. That’s how much the planet is “worth” if some aliens came along and wanted to buy it. We’ve collectively borrowed some 60-70% of the value of everything there is. Debts at those levels are unsustainable except at very high growth rates and even then one wonders about the real collateral left to borrow the necessary currency against. Growth is nowhere to be found, so big time defaults are coming our way.

On top of that basic fact regarding debt-backed currency issuance, the financial world has built a staggering edifice of currency swaps, credit default swaps, mortgage backed securities, and a bewildering collection of various derivatives, many of impenetrable complexity. All of them, repeat all, amount to little more than bets on bets derived from that original debt obligation that brought the currency into existence. Thus, at the end of the day all are subject to counter-party risk however “hedged” they may claim to be.

This is particularly so for the large currencies that underpin the system, namely the EUR & USD and the banks embedded in the FR & ECB systems. The total, nominal value of this edifice is >$1Q, or some 5x the value of the planet. It’s mostly “hedged” in a matrix of counter-party obligations, but that matrix fails when a default at a critical node cascades through the system.

The Israel-Lebanese oil dispute – part of US-Russian Mid-East energy battle


via debkafile

Instead of accepting a US-brokered deal for Block 9, Hizballah and Iran make Israel’s offshore gas and oil fields a fourth war front.

When six years ago, the US tried to mediate the dispute over Block 9, which straddles the maritime waters of Lebanon and Israel (offering 60 percent to Lebanon; 40 percent to Israel), Russia, Iran and Hizballah had not yet intervened militarily in that early stage of the Syrian civil war. At the time, too, the US controlled Middle East energy markets and Israel cherished the belief that its offshore gas and oil fields were rich enough to supply Europe’s annual consumption and make the Jewish state a Middle East energy power.

But Beirut flatly rejected the US compromise then – just as it does now, except that, today, Lebanon speaks with a stronger and more aggressive voice, backed since then by Hizballah’s and Iran’s victories in the Syrian war arena.

Israel, for its part, missed the train. Major international energy firms have since drawn away from investing in the development of Israel’s Mediterranean gas and oil fields, and it has fallen back on supplying its own needs and sales to neighbors, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinians. Most of all, Israel has reason to rue its rejection of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s repeated offer to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for Russian state firms to develop those fields, finance a pipeline network to Europe and provide security for the project. Putin maintained that neither Iran nor Hizballah would venture to attack rigs and pipelines under Russian ownership and protection. This rationale worked effectively in October 2017, when Iraqi and Shiite militia forces seized the oil city of Kirkuk from the semiautonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, while refraining thus far from laying hands on the oil fields supplying Turkey, because the Kurds had earlier handed them over to the Russian Rosneft energy giant.
Netanyahu spurned Putin’s proposition at the time for the sake of Israel’s close ties with Washington.

In the present geo-strategic circumstances, DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources are strongly skeptical of the chances of US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Acting Undersecretary David Satterfield pulling off their bid to broker a deal between Lebanon and Israel over Block 9. Even if a compromise is negotiated, Beirut will flout it before the ink is dry, just as it did UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which prohibited Hizballah from rearming after its 2006 war with Israel or positioning armed strength in South Lebanon.

Five compelling impediments stand in the way of the US mediation bid:

  1. The Block 9 issue has evolved from the latest turn in the Syrian war into part and parcel of a broader test: US controls the oil fields and gas plants of eastern Syria which the US-backed SDF seized from ISIS last year, including the Conoco natural gas facility. Against this, Iran, Hizballah and Syria are in position for holding Israel’s Mediterranean oil and gas facilities hostage.
  2. A resolution of this impasse is contingent on the US and Russia reaching understandings on Syria. In their absence, US forces on Feb. 7, for the first time attacked Russian “mercenaries” helping Syrian and pro-Iranian attempting to cross the Euphrates and seize control of the Tabiyeh oil fields on the eastern bank; and Moscow, for its part, will not lift a finger to stop the Iranian Al Qods commander, Qassem Soleimani, or Hizballah’s chief, Hassan Nasrallah, from continuing to threaten Israel’s offshore rigs. Nasrallah said explicitly on Friday, Feb. 16: The region has entered “the battle of oil and gas. No one should look at this as a separate dispute,” he said. If the Lebanese Defense Council so decides, we [Hezbollah] are ready to disable Israel’s offshore gas installations in a couple of hours.”
  3. The Israeli-Lebanese dispute is not the only energy-related quarrel in the region, which Secretary Tillerson is trying to tackle. For months he has been trying without success to settle the feud which oil-rich Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt are fighting with Qatar. Just as the former is tangled up in the Syrian crisis, the latter is caught up in the challenge the US and Saudi Arabia is presenting to Iran’s bid for control of the Red Sea and determination of the outcome of the Yemen war.
  4. The Trump administration’s perception of Lebanon’s government and mlitary structures is unrealistic. Its officials appear to believe that they are not fully under Iranian and Hizballah control and can still be rescued from those Shiite-imperialistic claws. Washington therefore continues to remit arms and funds to Beirut, although Hizballah takes the first cut.

For Israel, the dispute over Block 9 is a major handicap for its strategic position against its foes. Until now, Israel had to contend with three belligerent Iranian-Hizballah fronts building up from Quneitra on the Syrian Golan, southern Syria and southern Lebanon. Hizballah’s threat to its offshore gas and oil fields has added a fourth.

Scofield Reference Bible — From Christ Killers to God’s Chosen People


by Indian Gentile

Since it was first published in 1909, the Scofield Reference Bible has made uncompromising Zionists out of tens of millions of Americans. When John Hagee, the founder of Christians United for Israel (CUFI), said that “50 million evangelical bible-believing Christians unite with five million American Jews standing together on behalf of Israel,” it was the Scofield Bible that he was talking about.

Although the Scofield Reference Bible contains the text of the King James Authorized Version, it is not the traditional Protestant bible but Cyrus I. Scofield’s annotated commentary that is problematic. More than any other factor, it is Scofield’s notes that have induced generations of American evangelicals to believe that God demands their uncritical support for the modern State of Israel.

This annotated Bible contained several innovative features. It printed what amounted to a commentary on the biblical text alongside the Bible instead of in a separate volume. It introduced a chain crossreferencing system that tied together related verses of Scripture. It featured an attempt to date the events of the Bible chronologicaly. It was in the pages of the Scofield Reference Bible that many fundamentalist Christians encountered Archbishop James Ussher’s calculation fixing the date of Creation at 4004 BC, and it was largely due to Scofield’s Bible notes that creationism became a major issue among Christian fundamentalists.

Cyrus Scofield was born in Clinton Township, Lenawee County, Michigan, the seventh and last child of Elias and Abigail Goodrich Scofield. Elias Scofield’s ancestors were of English and Puritan descent, but the family was nominally Episcopalian.

In 1866, he married Leontine LeBeau Cerrè, a member of a prominent French Catholic family in St. Louis. Scofield apprenticed in the law office of his brother-in-law before moving to Atchison, Kansas in late 1869. In 1871, Scofield was elected to the Kansas House of Representatives.

In 1873 he was appointed U. S. District Attorney for Kansas—at 29, the youngest in the country. Nevertheless, that same year, Scofield was forced to resign “under a cloud of scandal” because of questionable financial transactions, that may have included accepting bribes from the railroads, stealing political contributions intended for Ingalls, and securing bank promissory notes by forging signatures. It is possible Scofield was jailed on forgery charges, although there is no extant evidence in the public records. Source

Scofield abandoned his wife and two daughters during this period. Leontine Cerrè Scofield divorced him on grounds of desertion in 1883, and the same year Scofield married Hettie Hall von Wartz, with whom he eventually had a son.

In 1879 Scofield the crooked lawyer became a“born again preacher”

However wo years after Scofield’s reported conversion to Christianity in 1879, the Atchison Patriot was less than impressed. Describing the former Atchison resident as the “late lawyer, politician and shyster generally,” the article went on to recount a few of Scofield’s “many malicious acts.” These included a series of forgeries in St. Louis, for which he was sentenced to six months in jail.

Being a “born again” preacher did not preclude Scofield from becoming a member of an exclusive New York men’s club in 1901, either. In his devastating biography, The Incredible Scofield and His Book, Joseph M. Canfield suggests, “The admission of Scofield to the Lotus Club, which could not have been sought by Scofield, strengthens the suspicion that has cropped up before, that someone was directing the career of C.I. Scofield.”

That someone was the Talmudic lawyer Samuel Untermeyer just one in the long line of “Presidential Advisors” who made and unmade American Presidents

Untermeyer is reputed to have blackmailed President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 into picking Louis Brandeis as a Supreme Court judge

When Hitler had been soundly established, Untermeyer, a New York Jewish lawyer, called for war on Germany. This call was made through radio station WABC on August 7, 1933. Heres a text of that speech

As Canfield intimates, Scofield’s theology was “most helpful in getting Fundamentalist Christians to back the international interest in one of Untermeyer’s pet projects—the Zionist Movement.”

Others have been even more explicit about the nature of Scofield’s service to the Zionist agenda. In “Unjust War Theory: Christian Zionism and the Road to Jerusalem,” Prof. David W. Lutz writes, “Untermeyer used Scofield, a Kansas City lawyer with no formal training in theology, to inject Zionist ideas into American Protestantism. Untermeyer and other wealthy and influential Zionists whom he introduced to Scofield promoted and funded the latter’s career, including travel in Europe.”

John Nelson Darby

On one of these European trips, Oxford University Press publisher Henry Frowde “expressed immediate interest” in Scofield’s project. According to a biography of Frowde, although the OUP publisher was “[n]ot demonstrative in his religious views, all his Christian life he was associated with brethren known as ‘Exclusive.’” The “Exclusive Brethren” refers to the group of Christian evangelicals that, in an 1848 split in the Plymouth Brethren, followed John Nelson Darby, the Anglo-Irish missionary generally considered to have been the most influential figure in the development of Christian Zionism, and a major influence on Scofield.

Central to Christian Zionist belief is Scofield’s commentary (italicized below) on Genesis 12:3: “‘I will bless them that bless thee.’ In fulfillment closely related to the next clause, ‘And curse him that curseth thee.’ Wonderfully fulfilled in the history of the dispersion. It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jewwell with those who have protected him.The future will still more remarkably prove this principle.”

Drawing on Scofield’s rather tendentious interpretation, John Hagee claims, “The man or nation that lifts a voice or hand against Israel invites the wrath of God.”

“The fourth judgment is the judgment of the nations. All the nations of the earth will be judged before God Almighty and His holy angels for the manner in which they treated the Jewish people. (See Matthew 25:31-46)”[28 July 2009, John Hagee, Charisma Magazine]

Zionist shyter Samuel Untermeyer ‘s small “investment” in a crooked ex lawyer changed the opinion of millions of American Chriatians towards Jews from Christ Killers to God’s Chosen People.

Antisemitism Nonsense

Bardon Kaldian says:

I don’t want to write long stuff, so just a few c/p notes & I’ll go…

1. Are Jews a separate, non-white “race” ? In all likelihood, they are, phenotypically -not “people of color”. They’re, visually, Mediterranean types we can find in Greece, southern Italy etc. Of course, some Jewish racial nationalists will disagree: http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/yes-ashkenazi-jews-including-gal-gadot-are-people-of-color/

Well: a) not all Caucasians are white. You can be both Caucasian & non-white- for instance most Iranians and Arabs. b) Jews are a mixed bag & most of them look white. And now we come to the “social construct” element of race: those Jews who look white & identify with Western civilization will sign for white race/identity; on the other hand, nationalist, Judaist Jews who identify “whiteness” with their historical enemy, Europe, both pre-Christian (Greece & Rome) & Christian will opt for non-white MENA “race”.

2. Can we conflate ancestry & identity ? So, for instance, Karl Marx was not a Jew in his own eyes, only a person of Jewish ancestry. For his opponents like Bakunin and Duhring he was a “Jew” because they saw Jewishness as a genealogical stain, and therefore Marx could be a “Jew” without knowing anything of Jewish culture, either religious or secular, or possessing a sense of loyalty toward “real”, Judaistic Jews.That was label they put on him, not manifestation of his self-consciousness.
Also, atheist Jews can claim Jewish identity (tribal secular culture), but I’m skeptical about Jewish converts to Christianity. Judaist Jews, generally, don’t consider them to be Jewish anymore. Cultural gap is too wide.

And now summing up- I don’t see hyper-analysis of various areas would change much..

Jews are an ethnic religion or religious culture. They are not a “race” (except in the 19th C sense), but they do have a non-negligible genetic homogeneity (apart from Ethiopian “Jews”, most Jews are Europeanized Middle Easterners).

Theirs is a tribal ethnic religion, similar to Parsis or Sikhs: that’s why Ivanka Trump is not a Jewess, although she may think so. If a William Bond from Tuscaloosa converts to Sikhism, he won’t become a “Sikh” (although he may consider himself to be, similar to James Jesus Angleton’s progeny). Due to the tribalism, Jews remain something like a people (which is impossoble in universalist religions like Christianity, Islam or Buddhism).

In past two centuries, European Jews – with Haredi & a few other exceptions- have
assimilated into host societies: German, Russian, French, British, Austrian, Italian, Polish,..

The highest level of assimilation had been achieved in pre- Hitler Germany where most German Jews had considered themselves to be Germans primarily, and Jews only
secondarily. This can be seen from their high participation in all-German national efforts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judenz%C3%A4hlung & high percentages of intermarriage, which fluctuated from 25% to 40% during 1920s.

How it all ended, we know.

American Jews, most of them, have their roots in Russian Empire (they’ve swamped earlier, more “European” German Jewish immigrants). They have retained their national culture (Yiddish, written in Hebrew script), numerous dietary laws & other customs. In short, US got mostly unassimilated ghetto Jews.

Due to their work ethics, culture, slightly higher IQ & ethnic networking, they thrived in the US in various areas & became very influential. From early 1900s to, perhaps, Six Days War in 1967, most of them tried to assimilate & become virtually indistinguishable from WASPs.

But then, things changed & many US Jews had recovered their primary ethnic-cultural identity as Jews first. Because this is a sensitive issue, there is no profusion of reliable sociological investigation data, graphs, categorizations. Just, as a rule of thumb, we can divide Jewish Americans into a few categories:

1. JINOs. Many US “Jews” are assimilated & don’t think of themselves as Jews primarily. They account for anything between 20% and 50%.

2. secular & religious Jews who possess partial Jewish identity, but for them it is blended with broader American loyalty. It is hard to tell how many people belong to this category.

3. religious Orthodox Jews who may be annoying as neighbors, but are not too politically minded.

4. the last segment would be American Jews (as different from Jewish Americans). They can be secular or religious; rich or poor; intensity of their commitment to Israel or Jewish ethnic activism may vary, but they are basically cultural aliens in US & Europe. For secularists, Auschwitz & Israel have replaced Torah & Talmud as chief emotional anticorrosives that shield them from assimilation.

My guess is that they are somewhere between 15% and 25% of all US Jews. This segment can be further divided into subsegments (for instance, some are anti-Christian, while others are not). But, what is common to them is their clear differentiation from host national cultures, stubborn insistence on their ethnic-national individuality & a sense of being an “endangered species”. Some subsegments of this portion of American Jews are true aliens in the US & through their ethnic activism, frequently masked as moral universalism, try to subvert dominant cultural values & change host society into a shapeless mess.

This is a minority of Jewish Americans, but they have economic, societal, cultural & political impact by far surpassing their numbers. And they seem not to learn from history: Brazilian Jews, because of slow but inevitable future collapse of multiracial Brazilian society are just trying to “get out”. Jewish elites, across the world, are still in thrall to Nazi-Aryan iconography & mythology as the central threat to their existence, while the world has moved past it long ago.

In this, last portion of Jewish Americans one can find typical traits of cultural alienation, ethnic paranoia, “us” vs. “them” mentality, ..basically, a sense of being a perpetual stranger who wants to shape the dominant discourse & identity in order to avoid- in their eyes- future pogroms & genocide. Because in the fevered mind of pathological Jewish nationalists, Europeans & whites, virtually all of them, possess the inner Nazi screaming to get out & finally finalize the Final Solution. This is an illustration of such a mindset:



It’s not blonde beast they should be afraid of, but brown camel-shtupper & his ebony lapdogs. But- they seem to be unable to grasp it ….

Nonfiction for the Nonplussed