Tag Archives: jews

Does the World Need A New Decree Of Peace? – Part VI to Part I

Dear Readers:

Today we finish reviewing this post by Dmitry Lyskov.  Where we left off, we saw that the new Bolshevik-led government, with its official Decree of Peace, hastened to fulfill a decade-old promise it had made … NOT to the German General Staff, as some anti-Communist ideologues still claim (without any facts to back up this assertion), but to the Second International, and to the world’s “conscious proletariat” represented by that organization.  The Bolshevik delegations to the Congresses of the Second International, especially those meetings of 1907 and 1912, had voted for the peace resolutions and hence obligated themselves to carry them out to the best of their abilities.  Which abilities had improved significantly since taking over the actual government of Russia (one of the warring parties) in October of 1917.

Next Lyskov deals with still another myth perpetuated by those same Great Russian chauvinist forces, amongst whom one can count such anti-Soviet dissidents as Alexander Solzhenitsyn.  It was the bug-eyed Jew-hating fanatic Solzhenitsyn who popularized to the West, not only the “Gulag” meme (which is not exactly a myth, Stalinism was a real thing, but was greatly exaggerated in his telling of it), but also the myth of Russia’s “Stolen Victory” in World War I.

According to this myth:  Russia was perched on the threshhold of victory against Germany.  Tsar Nicholas II was prepared to fight to the bitter end.  But then the Revolution happened, and prevented Russia from marching triumphantly into Berlin at the head of the Victors Parade.  In which case, according to everybody’s What-If Machines, Russia would haveshared the spoils of war with the other Entente victors; Russia would have snagged herself some juicy pieces when the planet was subsequently carved up like a Christmas goose.

Defeated German troops return to Berlin, December 1918

What this theory has going for it, is the actual fact that Germany did lose the war, in the end.  And was forced to pay reparations to the victors.  Hence, it might actually be logical to assume that Russia could have taken her rightful share of the pirates booty.

Aside from that one point, the facts do not support this theory.  One should always remind oneself, that the Tsar abdicated before the Revolution broke out in Petrograd.  Nicky simply quit the game, because he couldn’t deal with the disarray his policies had caused.  The revolution was sparked by the collapse in transport, the lack of food coming into the cities, actual hunger.  The war was lost, not at the front, but at the rear.  No revolutionary agitators, however skilled their oratory, even were they born with a hundred of Cicero’s golden tongues, could not have produced such an effect.

More to the point, the Tsar was forced to abdicate, not by revolutionary firebrands, but by his own General Staff.  I suppose one could say that even Tsarist Russia had something like a Deep State!

Another fact:  Decree #1 of the Petrograd Soviet, which is often cited as a defeatist document, since it ordered the troops to disperse, was technically directed just to the Petrograd garrison, not to the Russian army as a whole.  As it so happened, the decree then got passed from hand to hand over the entire front line, almost at the speed of light.  The men went “yay, we can go home!” and took off for home.  The officers had simply lost control over the soldiers.  There was no command left.  There was no military discipline.  The solid flesh of the Russian army had melted, thawed, and resolved itself into a dew.

Under such conditions, could Russia have possibly continued fighting the war unto the eventual victory?  Lyskov answers his own question.

Building A New Army

At the start of 1918 the Bolshevik government started to build a new army for the nation:  the Red Army.  On the surface this would not seem like a promising project, given that the entirety of Russian manhood had just voted en masse with their feet that they didn’t want to be in the army any more.

And now we see the paradoxical situation which even General Denikin had commented on:  That the same soldiers who kept whining for years that didn’t want to fight, suddenly wanted to fight.  What, oh what, could have changed their minds, what could possibly turn these army sad-sacks and deadbeats into Spartan warriors?  (Maybe the fact that they had just finished partitioning up the landlords estates and then come to find, that they have to take up the gun again, to keep their newly acquired land?)

Having something valuable to fight for, understanding precisely what one is fighting for, doesmake a difference, oddly enough.   Motivation is an important thing, psychologically speaking.  Still, it was an amazing feat for the Bolshevik government to reunite literally millions of soldiers with their weapons and send them back out there into the fray!  Only this time, not to fight against Germans, but to fight against their former masters and bosses!

Woman! Learn how to read!

How did the Bolsheviks do this?  With threats and cajolings?  Maybe that too.  But primary via the hackneyed and old-fashioned tactic of education.  In the year 1919 alone, the Red Army newspapers reached a circulation of almost 150 million.  In Soviet Russia, 68 million books and brochures were published.  In 1918, the Red Army became the Well-Read Army:  building 3033 libraries for the troops; by 1919 this number had increased to 7500 stationary libraries, and 2400 mobile libraries.  The Army also set up around 6000  “Literacy Schools” for the troops, along with theaters and other forms of education and entertainment.  The written word was, of course, supplemented by the speeches of the professional orators who accompanied the army and engaged the soldiers in political agitation.

All of these means of education served an important function:  They transformed the “dark masses” into enlightened masses; patriots of the new Soviet Republic, who were able to discuss, in a halfway-intelligent fashion, the political needs and interests of their brand-new country.  In this way, a new nation was formed from the lowliest members of the former Russian Empire.

Posted in Russian History | Tagged  | 4 Comments

Does the World Need A New Decree Of Peace? – Part V

Dear Readers:

Russian people: These are your rightful rulers…

Continuing to review and work through this post by Dmitry Lyskov, concerning Russian history of 100 years ago.  Lyskov has done a good job in countering historical revisionism, often of the hysterical brand, e.g., “Lenin hated Russia and Russians, Lenin wanted to destroy Russia, etc.”  People who emote those kind of views frequently equate “Russia” with the ruling Romanov dynasty and lament the untimely end of little Alexei and Olga and Tatiana and Maria, and the others.  I am guessing these are the same kind of people who send their small daughters to “Princess School” at Disney World and follow the marriages and spawnings of the ruling English monarchy in the tabloids.  Such people are hopeless sycophants to anybody calling him- or herself of “royal blood”, and simply cannot understand the concept of Democracy.  Nor the idea that ordinary people can actually be political actors; elect their own government; and even have some say in the decisions made by that government.  Through a process of vanity combined with projection, these innate anti-democrats identify their own inner selves with royalty, and somehow believe that they are internally a member of the elite, except that they are not!  They are just ordinary hicks.  Such people are born to be slaves and servants, and so they shall be.  Just probably not to anybody with actual royal blood!  Instead, they will serve the needs of corporate bullies.

Baby girls dressed as Disney Princesses

There are, however, some bourgeois democrats of the Westie variety, who believe the Romanov dynasty had it coming, but that the Rusian people should have then thrown their broad-shouldered support to the “democratic” Provisional Government.  A government which would then continue the Entente’s war against the enemy of mankind, Germany.  This point of view contains a not-so hidden assumption, that the Germans were the bad guys in all of this.  I’m not saying the Germans were any great shakes, but look at the alternative, from the point of view of the oppressed colonial serf:  Who was the most brutal colonialist beast when it came to Africa?  Probably the French and Belgiums, I reckon.  Compared to them, the Germans were practically benign.

First Attempts To End The Bloodshed

Speaking of the bourgeois democrats, we saw in our previous episode, that the new government which took over in February, did actually experience a burst of anti-war conscience.  The Socialists in that government remembered their past pledges, made in 1907 and 1912, to prevent/oppose imperialist wars.   Hence, one month later, in March 1917 they issued the very popular manifesto “To the peoples’s of the world”, calling for the proletarians of the world to step up to the plate, and end the slaughter.

After the Bolsheviks assumed governmental authority in October/November, they issued the first official governmental decree; as mentioned before, this was the famous “Decree Of Peace”.   The Decree was penned mainly by Lenin himself and shows his vigorous and crystal-clear no-B.S. writing style.  The Decree was presented to the Second Congress of Soviets of Workers, Soldiers and Peasants Deputies on 26 October (old style dates); was passed by the Congress; and published in Izvestiya the following day.

Lyskov debunks the popular notion that this decree ended the war immediately.  It wasn’t quite that simple.

The first paragraph of the Decree contained a shout-out to all warring sides and their governments to sit down at the bargaining table and hammer out a “just” peace that left all sides intact, with no annexations.  All sides (not just the defeated) were to pay into a reparations fund to help rebuild the nations after the war.

In essence, this was a call to return to the status-quo, without declarations of victory or defeat.  At the same time, the Bolshevik government expressed itself willing to consider any other reasonable propositions on the table; and in the meantime, there should be a ceasefire.  No more killing!  The Bolsheviks encouraged all warring soldiers to put aside their weapons and fraternize with each other.  “Fraternization” consisted of singing, dancing, drinking beer, having sleepovers in the trenches, and telling old army jokes.

Bolshevik propaganda encouraged Russian and German soldiers to dance the Polka together on the front lines.

The Decree was a complex document.  In essence it set the tone for Soviet foreign policy, and even post-Soviet foreign policy, for decades to come.  In essence, it called for complete transparency in the conduct of foreign relations — i.e., no secret deals.  To prove their bona fides in this matter, the Bolsheviks went so far as to publish the secret treaties signed by the Tsarist regime.

There was one piquant twist in the Bolshevik attitude towards international diplomacy:  As Communist revolutionaries, they maintained the right to speak directly to the peoples of the world, over the heads of their governments and bypassing the usual diplomatic channels.  This was a “revolutionary” idea, no pun intended.  For example,  this paragraph:

“The workers and peasants government of Russia appeals, in particular, to the conscious workers of the three most advanced nations of mankind, as well as the 16 most important participating governments in the war.”  The appeal to the “conscious workers” [as opposed ot the “unconscious workers”] over the heads of their governments, called upon them to step up to the plate and “assume their responsibilities, such as the liberation of mankind from the horrors of war and its consequences”.  It was the duty of these workers to help the new Soviet government bring peace to Europe.

Stolen Victory? Russian propaganda poster of 1915 shows Russia humiliating Germany.

Such phraseology came directly from the Stuttgart and Basel resolutions, proving that all that Socialist Congress verbiage was not just for naught.  The Bolshevik assertion that the war was purely imperialist and had no value whatsoever for the toiling masses, achieved a huge resonance in Russian society.  The “dark masses” chided by General Denikin for their “lack of patriotism” were reaffirmed, by the Bolsheviks, that their instincts had been correct all along.  This war did not belong to them, nor were they to blame for any defeats!  The guilt-tripping of the war-mongers now fell on deaf ears.

Lyskov:  “The Decree of Peace was indeed a fulfillment of a commitment made by the Bolsheviks.  But not to the German General Staff.  It was a commitment made to the Second International.  And this is why it found such resonance among the Russian people.”

Next:  Lyskov addressed the meme of the “Stolen Victory”… an ever-popular propaganda device of the Russian Nationalists and Great Russian Chauvinists.

[to be continued]

Posted in Russian HistoryUncategorized | Tagged  | Leave a comment

Does the World Need A New Decree Of Peace? – Part IV

Dear Readers:

Continuing to review and work through this post by Dmitry Lyskov.

Entente propaganda portrayed the Germans as gorillas.

Where we left off in our previous episode, we were attending the Seventh Congress of the Second Socialist International in Stuttgart Germany, where we were having a roaring great time and meeting some very interesting people.  This Congress passed many important resolutions, including one that obliged all socialists everywhere to oppose the looming world war (which the Congress accurately foresaw); and — here is the most important point— that if the war should break out despite all our best efforts, then we, socialists, are obliged to take advantage of the situation to do away with the imperialist governments that started it for their own mercenary ends.  In other words, the war would put the socialist revolution directly on the agenda in each one of the participating nations.  The corollary being so obvious that it hardly needs to be stated:  That no socialist should ever ever ever ever give support to his own government in the conduct of such a grotesque and unjust war.  Socialists are supposed to be immune from patriotic rah-rah propaganda that conceals an unsavory truth about Big Capital and its colonialist aims.

I think the discerning reader already guesses what I am leading up to, namely, the shocking reveal that many, if not most, socialists turned out, in the end, to be not so immune to the war frenzy, once the Big One did actually break out.  In the end, it takes more testicular fortitude than people can even imagine, to stand up to the ravings of mass hysteria, once soldiers start shooting and dying, and the government and police assume a self-righteous attitude about “supporting our boys”, etc.

The Basel Congress

But I am getting ahead of myself.  We need to return to the year 1912, two years before the real slaughter began.  Delegates of the Second (Socialist) International met again, this time in Basel, Switzerland, to formulate their response to the Balkan War.  This was an emergency meeting.  The Balkan War was a big deal, and turned out to be the precursor to World War I.  The Congress seated 518 delegates representing almost every nation in Europe.  As the piece (I just linked) notes:  “Congresses in Stuttgart in 1907 and Copenhagen in 1910 had agreed on opposition to war, but had not been able to resolve the differences between those who wanted the International to call for a strike in the event of war, and those who believed that such a commitment was unrealistic and should not be made.”

The Russian delegation was led by Alexandra Kollontai, of the Menshevik faction (later to switch to the Bolshevik faction).  Georgiy Plekhanov was also there, representing the Russian proletariat, as a good professional revolutionary is supposed to do.  You can think of Plekhanov as the Obi-Wan Kenobi to Lenin’s Luke Skywalker (or Darth Vader, depending on your political views).  Lenin regarded Plekhanov as a mentor and was said to fear his rebuke.  Which makes it doubly sad that the old friends eventually had to part ways.  Again, on the issue of the war.  The war was the true litmus test.  Of everything.  (As it turns out, when war did break out, Plekhanov supported the Russian government and the Entente powers against Germany.  Hence, it follows from this, that he would not have endorsed mass strikes intended to disrupt the war effort.)

Lenin did not attend the Basel Congress, but still followed the proceedings very closely.  One could expect nothing less from this professional revolutionary and Congress-connoisseur.  And Lenin could see, even from a distance, that the German Social Democratic Party (SDP) was starting to go squishy on the war issue, even before the war broke out!  Despite the dissenting Leftist faction, led by Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, the majority SDP leaders were already angling to prevent resolutions mandating general strikes in the warring nations.  Now, this could be a legitimate tactical issue; it is not always a good idea to mandate certain tactics in advance.  Or it could show a certain lack of will…

In the end the Congress passed a compromise resolution which held back on the tactical issue of the General Strike, but was still radical enough to satisfy everybody, even Lenin.  Kollontai was pleased with the result, delighted with her own experiences, and wrote to a friend:  “One felt the need to frighten Europe, to threaten it with the ‘red specter,’ revolution, in case the governments should risk a war. And standing on the table which served as a platform I did threaten Europe!”

Turn Imperialist War Into Class War

We return to Lyskov’s analysis, and his reading of Lenin’s call to turn the imperialist war (when it broke out in 1914) into a “civil war”.  By “civil war”, Lenin did not have in mind the actual Russian Civil War (1918-22).  In his vocabulary, he meant “civil war” as a synonym for “class war”, aka Revolution.  Revolution is an intra-society war of the oppressed and exploited masses against those who oppress and exploit them.  It is a war intended to switch the government from one ruling class to a different ruling class.  Because the government is a civil institution, hence the phrase civil war.  All of this vocabulary is important.  Westies, especially, have lived for decades in a state of brain-washing, where the very language itself is used against them, to control their brains and make them see things in a certain way.  This especially pertains to ruling class propaganda against actual social revolutions, which are described in terms such as “seizing power” rather than “switching the government”, etc.  And the term class war is presented as something particularly bloody and undesirable; which it is, of course, except that the actual ruling class wages class war every minute of every day, just invisibly, most of the time.  Only very honest capitalists such as Mr. Warren Buffett even admit that this war is still on-going, when he was quoted as saying, “There has been class warfare for the last 20 years, and my class has won.”  Except, just expand that 20 years to, oh, say, 10,000 years or so!

Anyhow, leaving that last bit to professional anthropologists, we saw that many international socialists sort of had their fingers crossed when they voted for the anti-war resolutions in Stuttgart and Basel.  In the end, they could not find the testicular fortitude to call for the defeat of their own government and ruling class.  Lenin had no such qualms.  When war broke out, he openly called for the defeat — not of the nation of Russia, but of the Russian monarchy.  A fine distinction, of course, since, according to monarchs everywhere, l’état c’est moi, but others might beg to disagree.

Lenin was never one to waffle around with words:  His definition of the Russian defeat that he desired, was Über-clear:  “In Russia, due to its [economic] backwardness, and not having yet completed even the bourgeois revolution, the main tasks remain as before, with three main conditions for a functional democratic transformation:  A democratic Republic (with complete rights and self-determination of all nations); the confiscation of landowner plots; and an 8-hour working day.”  In other words, according to Lyskov, Lenin was not calling for the military defeat of Russia, there is nothing in there proposing German occupation and administration of the former Empire.  Lenin was calling for the fall of the Romanov monarchy and the formation of a Rusisan Democratic Republican government in its place.  Quite a distinction!

The February Revolution toppled a 300-year-old dynasty.

And this is precisely what Lenin had in mind when he called for the “defeat of one’s own government” and “turning the imperialist war into a civil war”.  All of which terrible phrases, which have frightened children for decades, conceal a much more benign meaning.  Lyskov also remarks, ironically, that nowadays the word “Revolution” sounds benign to most people, but “Civil War” sounds horrible; but a hundred years ago, it was the other way around!

When the February (1917) Revolution broke out, the Romanovs left town, and the reins of government passed into the hands mainly of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries.  And something clicked in their heads around this time, and these old socialists remembered the resolutions that they had voted for, in Stuttgart and Basel.  Hence, in March 1917 they published a manifesto addressed “To The Nations Of The World”.  The manifesto called on the proletarians of all nations to shrug off the yoke of the ruling classes, and to work together “to end this awful war, the shame of humanity”.

The Manifesto found resonance in Russian society and coincided with the thoughts and desires of the vast majority of the Russian people.

[to be continued]

Posted in Russian History | Tagged  | Leave a comment

Dear Readers:

Continuing with  this post by Dmitry Lyskov, who has been writing great pieces in VZGLIAD about the Russian Revolution(s) and ensuing Civil War.

Where we left off yesterday,we saw that ordinary Russian peasants did not always “get” the foreign policy aims or methods of the Romanov dynasty.  Nor were they able to grasp the cunning dynastic schemes nor the geo-political brilliance behind all of this Marching and Dying.  It’s one thing for a, say, Ivan Susanin to pledge his “Life For the Tsar” when Poles are invading your native village and threatening your children.  Quite another to die for the dynastic glory of the English monarchy.  So, these peasants didn’t understand why Russia had to go to war against Japan, or why it later had to align with England/France against Germany.  But they’re just dumb peasants, after all.  What about the noble and intelligent Russian working class?  Whether they knew it or not, or liked it or not (!), the Russian proletariat belonged to an international entity known as the “international proletariat”.  Whose political representatives and leaders consisted of the various socialist parties, mainly the parties of the Second International.

European socialists, being highly intelligent men and women, could clearly see what was going to happen, years before it did.  In 1907, at the Seventh Congress of the Second International, 884 representatives from 25 nations gathered in the beautiful city of Stuttgart, Germany, to write important resolutions, including ones involving women’s suffrage (in favor of), and colonialism (against).  The delegates passed a resolution which nobly attempted to prevent the bloodshed of the future imperialist war, which they all foresaw with Nostradamus-like clarity.

All the delegates, not just the Russian ones, had a very clear idea, that the slaughter to come was to be a purely imperialist war, that is to say, a war launched by very narrow segments of the ruling classes, including Big Capital, for purely mercenary ends:  Dynastic intrigues, the right to plunder colonies, scrapping like dogs over new markets for capitalist exploitation.  Nothing in any of this had even the tiniest earmark of a just or defensive war; nor any ends that could be supported by the toiling masses.  Most prescient of all, the delegates defined exactly how socialists should behave if and when the war broke out:  “If war should break out regardless [of our attempts to prevent it], then [the workers of the participating nations, along with their representatives] must actively call for the soonest possible end to it, and to strive, with all their strength, to take advantage of the ensuing economic and political crisis, to awake the masses, and to hasten the fall of capitalist rule over the masses.”

In other words, the Socialist International would do all in its power to prevent the war; but if and when the war broke out nonetheless, they would at least use it to their advantage, to hasten the socialist revolution.  An act of true prophecy:  the Oracle of Delphi could not have done a better job!

Future Soviet diplomat Maxim Litvinov was one of the delegates!

All of the Russian delegates to the Stuttgart Congress voted unanimously “DA” to the above resolution.  The Russian delegation consisted mostly of the Social-Democrats, whose leader was Georgy Plekhanov, along with his loyal apprentice, V.I. Lenin; but there were also at least a couple of  Socialist-Revolutionaries there (or former “Land and Freedom” party, representing the Russian peasantry).  A quick google could not find me a complete list of the Russian delegation, but the following individuals are mentioned in various sources:

Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich (for the Russian Social-Democrats)
Plekhanov, Georgy Valentinovich (ditto)
Martov/Tsederbaum, Juliy Osipovich (ditto)
Lunacharsky, Anatoly Vasilievich (ditto)
Litvinov, Maxim Maximovich (ditto)
Rubanovich, Ilya Adolfovich (Socialist-Revolutionary)

Of the above, a special shout-out should go to Maxim Litvinov. born with the hilarious Jewish name Meir Henoch Wallach-Finkenstein.  Of all the delegates, I believe he lived the longest thereafter, dying only in 1951!  Litvinov survived not only WWI but WWII as well, not to mention the Stalin purges, and even outlived many of the Western figures involved in both wars, with whom he had dealings, as a Soviet diplomat!

[What follows is cribbed mostly from wiki, except for the judginess and moral outrage]:

H.G. Wells was a close friend of Litvinov’s father-in-law

Finkelstein was born into a Lithuanian-Jewish banking family in Białystok (now Poland, but in those days part of the Russian Empire).  He joined the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party (SDLP) in 1898.  The party was illegal at that time, so it was common for members to adopt aliases, and also might as well Russify their names, while they were at it; hence, Meir Finkelstein became Maxim Litvinov.  Litvinov joined the Bolshevic faction of the party as early as 1903.  He experienced everything in life that a Bolshevik could, including prison time and exile.  Most of his exile involved wasting away in that hell-hole London, where he married Ivy Low, the daughter of a Jewish university professor, Walter Low, who was a close friend of the writer H.G. Wells!  During his stint in London, Litvinov at one time (that same year as the Stuttgart Congress, 1907) shared a rented house with Joseph Stalin; and also apparently worked with Stalin as the bag-man on several bank robberies.  This tender friendship and camaraderie with Stalin may explain why Litvinov was not purged in the mid-1930’s, like most of the Old Bolsheviks were.  (Although he came close, in 1939, as we shall see.)  It also proves that Stalin was not the anti-Semite that some people accuse him of, since he did indeed have several close Jewish friends.  Litvinov could even be said to have been a member of Stalin’s inner circle.  Until he fell out of favor with Tsar Djugashvili.

A Veteran Diplomat

Litvinov is best known in his role as a veteran and highly seasoned Soviet diplomat.  Living in London as he did, when the October Revolution broke out, Litvinov was a natural choice to be the Soviet of Peoples Commissars unofficial Ambassador to Great Britain.  For many years subsequently, Litvinov represented the Soviet Union in many nations, and at many international conferences.  In 1930 he was promoted to People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs.  Litvinov was known as a “moderate” in international affairs, pursuing excellent diplomacy even with noted class enemies such as the English and French governments.  In the early 1930’s the Soviet Union still preserved (this was to change during the Spanish Civil War) a division of labor between the Comintern (The Communist International, aka The Third International) and the Foreign Office.  As the leader of the latter, Litvinov knew his place in the scheme of things, and did a good job, as best he might.

Litvinov performed Marxist vaudeville shtick with fellow Jew, Harpo!

In 1933 Litvinov achieved an amazing diplomatic victory:  Official recognition by the United States of America!  Well, everyone knows that President FDR was a secret commie, as was later proved by Senator Joseph McCarthy!

According to wiki:   “[President] Franklin D. Roosevelt sent comedian Harpo Marx to the Soviet Union as a good-will ambassador, and Litvinov and Marx became friends and even performed a routine on stage together.”  One would give a fortune to see what kind of vaudevillian shtick those two clowns came up with, but, alas, as far as I know, those films or tapes have been lost to posterity!

Iago to Othello: “Thou art a cuck…”

In May 1939 an ever-more paranoid Stalin began to suspect his old bank-robbing buddy of disloyalty.  Hitler may have also had something to do with this, as he didn’t like dealing with Jews, yet he craved a temporary pact with the Soviet Union.  Hitler could envision a “Molotov-Ribbentrop” deal, but not a “Finkelstein-Ribbentrop” deal.  But Litvinov had an enemy closer to hand, and far more dangerous, than Hitler:  Vyacheslav Molotov.  We all know, and have had the misfortune, to work with these Iagos of the Office Place:  Back-stabbers, gossips, ferocious cliquists.  Suckers-up to the boss.  Otherwise known as “Kiss Up, Kick Down” (KUKD) kind of guys and gals!  OFFICE POLITICS, in other words.

Molotov (on the right): Office back-stabber and KUKD.

So, Litvinov was summarily fired, replaced with Vyacheslav Molotov.  To add to his humiliation, NKVD troops surrounded the home of the old revolutionary and cut his telephone lines.  Several of Litvinov’s aides were arrested and tortured, apparently in an attempt to get kompromat on their boss.  Molotov, an ethnically pure Russian who benefited at Finkelstein’s expense, was said to have expressed horror at the number of Jews he found working in the Foreign Office, and “thank God” they are being purged out!  Later, after Litvinov’s death, Molotov was to write, unsympathetically, that Litvinov was “not a bad diplomat — a good one” but also “quite an opportunist” who “greatly sympathized with Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev.Litvinov remained among the living [in the Great Purge] only by chance,”Molotov declared.  As opposed to Molotov himself, who knew how to stab a fellow office worker, twist in the knife, and then climb the corporate ladder on the backs of his victims!  As expertly as any Iago, using the weak point of the boss’s personality to gain some unfair advantage for self.

On the bright side, Litvinov survived this horrible ordeal.  Although kicked out of the inner circle, he got to stay alive, and even received a new (plum!) job as Ambassador to the United States.  If that Ambassador gig hadn’t worked out, he probably could have done Broadway tours with the Marx Brothers.  The old diplomat died in 1951, most likely of a heart attack, after a long and productive life.  They say that revolutions, like tigers, eat their young; and yet Litvinov was able to travel a long road from that Stuttgart Congress way back in 1907!

[to be continued]

Posted in Russian History | Tagged  | Leave a comment

Does the World Need A New Decree Of Peace? – Part II

Dear Readers:

So, after yesterday’s Intro, let us get started with  this post by Dmitry Lyskov, who has been writing great pieces in VZGLIAD about the history of events from 100 years ago.

As Lyskov mentioned, the Decree of Peace was the very first act of the new Bolshevik-dominated Soviet government, after they assumed responsibility to administer the former Russian Empire (October/November, 1917).  It was an important priority of the Bolsheviks to get Russia out of the war pronto.

Lyskov begins with the anti-war attitude of the Russian peasantry, at the start of the 20th century, which was shown in the earlier war (the Russo-Japanese war of 1905), as well as the big war, World War I.  He links this earlier piece of his, concerning the failure of the Stolypin agrarian reforms, and the rebellious attitude of the peasantry, who participated massively in the 1905Russian Revolution.  The disgruntled Russian peasants apparently did not harbor Rah-Rah “patriotic” feelings about the war against Japan.  The Romanovs may or may not have had valid geo-political concerns, but the bottom line is, they were unable to sell this war to the masses.

For example, the peasants of the village of Gariali of the Sudzhansky region (Kursk) wrote the following complaint (to the Duma) during their rebellion against the authorities:  “Our only means of survival is being able to rent land from our neighboring landowners.  But now they have stopped leasing the land, and we don’t know if that will resume.  We are sustained by earning wages, but now, because of the war, the work has stopped as well, everything is more expensive, and our taxes have increased…”

Similarly, the peasants of the village of Kazakov (Nizhniy Novgorod) wrote the following complaint:  “We subscribed to a newspaper (because there are literate ones among us), and started to read about the war, what is happening over there, and what kind of people the Japanese are.  It turns out that they walloped us.  And because of that, we will have to pay in full, we peasants and workers, in the form of various taxes…”

Residents of the village of Veshka (Tver) were even more ideologically inclined in their opinions of the Russo-Japanese war:  “This ill-fated, ruinous and destructive war must become an issue for all the people, for which it is necessary to gather representatives from the people and inform them about everything that is known about this war.  Then we can determine whether or not we should continue it, or seek peace.” 

And that was just a regional war.   When World War I rolled around, it was way bigger, the defeat was bigger, and the Russian peasantry were even less thrilled with the conflict.

The War To End Wars

General Denikin

At the beginning of WWI, Russia, like the other participants, experienced a wave of flag-waving patriotism.  The first regiments marched off to the front with orchestras playing and people running alongside shouting “Hurrah!”  But a lot of this patraiotism was just skin deep.  White General Anton Denikin was later to pen this plaint:  “Blinded by the thunder and crash of the usual patriotic phrases… we overlooked the internal, organic deficiency of the Russian people:  A lack of patriotism….  They did not want this war.   With the exception of the heated-up military youth craving to be heroes, [most of the people] believed that the government would take all measures to avert actual combat.”  Denikin, apparently believing that Russia’s alliance with such back-stabbers as England and France was an act of “self-defense”, went on to lament:  “The notion of national self-defense was not understood by the dense masses [literally: the dark people], who went off to war obediently, but without any sense of enthusiasm and without a clear notion of the necessity to make great sacrifices.”

According to Lyskov, Denikin was correct in the sense, that most peasants of this era did not regard the entire Russian Empire as their fatherland; for them, the “fatherland” was mostly just their village and region.  And they had little care for the vast geo-political concerns of the Romanovs.  As Denikin also noted, the Tambov peasant did not feel any concern that the German soldier would reach his village or do anything to him.  [And he was probably right about that:  This was WWI not WWII!]

Ordinary Russian peasants simply did not understand why they had to sit in trenches and get killed by incoming artillery strikes.

[Next:  the Role of the Socialist parties in the anti-war movement — to be continued]

Posted in Russian History | Tagged  | 4 Comments

Does the World Need A New Decree Of Peace? – Part I

Dear Readers:

Today I start a new series, based on this post by our old friend Dmitry Lyskov from VZGLIAD.  Lyskov has written a stunning series of historical posts about the events of 100 years ago.  In which he subtly refutes those who have sought to distort this history.  I just barely finished (a few days ago) reviewing his piece on the Ukrainian Revolution of 1917.  Today’s piece is about the Bolshevik Decree of Peace, which was issued after the October/November Revolution of 1917.  The Decree was the first official act issued by the new Soviet government.

Russia entered the war with only the noblest of intentions …. !

It was always fashionable among the elites of Russia’s former “allies”, especially England and France, to call this decree a “treacherous” or “treasonous” act.  As if Russia owed so much to England and France, how dare the barbarians pull out of the war and leave their dear civilized friends hanging in the wind?  Nowadays, sadly, you will also find many “Great Russian chauvinists” among the Russians themselves, and even in the pro-Russian blogosphere, who lament the Bolshevik “treachery” against their erswhile allies.

This point of view is not new, actually.  Among the anti-Soviet dissidents, Solzhenitsyn was notable, in his novel August 1914, of promoting this view.  Some call it the “Lost World” view, as it is also fashionable among monarchists who rue the downfall of the Romanov dynasty.  These people, who all possess accurate “What-If” time machines in their homes, assert that if only the treacherous Bolsheviks had not pulled Russia out of the war, if only they had not “stolen defeat from the jaws of victory“, then Russia would have defeated Germany, would have saved the monarchy, would haveavoided revolution and bloody Civil War.  These are generally the same Great Russian chauvinists who call Lenin a Jew, a German spy, and worse.  As if being pro-German (or a Jew, for that matter!) is somehow way more reprehensible than being pro-English!  (Besides, technically, despite Lenin’s admittedly Germanophile tilt, the Bolsheviks as a Party were officially neutral, not pro-German.  Still, even if….)

Anyhow, what would have been so horrible about a German victory?  My own What-If machine, which is of German make and very finely calibrated, like all German technology, tells me that a German victory in WWI would have prevented a later Hitler!  In which case, there would be no need for me to build this new time machine, go back in time, and kill Hiter, because Hitler would have just remained an obscure and harmless house painter.  See, two can play this game of Teleological Chess!

But back to Comrade Lyskov…  Who asks the pertinent question:  What was so important about the Decree of Peace that the Bolsheviks chose this as the very first decree of the new government they led?  Lyskov lists the various theories surrounding this act:  A humanitarian diplomatic initiative intended to end the international slaughter.  Fulfillment of an obligation made previously to the German General Staff.  A deliberate betrayal of the Entente allies.  The first step to a “Separate Peace” as later came to pass in Brest-Litovsk.  The reality, Lyskov says, is much more complicated than each and all of these various theories combined.

[to be continued]

Source: https://awfulavalanche.wordpress.com/page/2/

Zionist Wars for a Greater Israel

 

Most timid Americans would avoid any serious discussion on the true causes of a continuous failed foreign policy that only benefits Israel while costing our own country any chance of real national security and a prosperous society. The mere mention of the term Jew is usually enough for being banded to the back of the room and shunned as one of those haters. Unfortunately, President Trump has succumbed to this fallacious political correctness. In order to correctly understand the framework of the detrimental circumstances that propagate the decline of the American Empire, the clear-headed observer must confront why the United States remains a vassal to the Zionist myth that Israel is a valuable ally to our country.

Essentially the question boils down to a sober outlook. Does one place the interests of the foreign agents that swear allegiance to Israel above that of America, or are you content to bow to the dictates of Zionism, especially when they directly conflict with the betterment of our own people?

A genuine America First mindset rejects both attitudes and rests upon a basic non-interventionism whenever possible. In the case of Israel, there is no germane special interest that places their objectives above ours. Yet, the facts of the matter are that the practical reality in domestic politics has a virtual Jewish veto factor that makes wimps out of even the most courageous warriors. At the end of the cultural and governmental administration process; the influence of the pro-Zionist media, legal and court system, the Wall Street cabals of Banksters, socially progressive academia, culturally correct government schools, Big Corporatist Business and Christian-Zionist apostates all promote and perpetuate that Israel is a friend.

Ask yourself, exactly what did America gain by our involvement from decades of Middle East conflicts or from the trillions of dollars spent on bribes or military campaigns and deployments? The honest answer is nothing. We have been under the yoke of intimidation from the primary victimhood industry post World War II; namely the impact from false guilt to compensate for the hyperbolic holocaust claims that doom any objective discussion on the Khazar exodus to Palestine.

The final solution for these proclaimed Jews is to establish a Zionist political region within the expanses of the Middle East.

Global Research published this document pertaining to the formation of “Greater Israel” constitutes the cornerstone of powerful Zionist factions within the current Netanyahu government,  the Likud party, as well as within the Israeli military and intelligence establishment. (Article first published by Global Research on April 29, 2013). “Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East. Reading this account which includes documentation by Israel Shahak and Oded Yinon will be ignored by most proponents and apologists for the Zionist State.

In the case of one of the most repulsive supporters of this bellicose apartheid regime, Daniel Pipes casts dispersions and objections in his 1994 account, Imperial Israel: The Nile-to-Euphrates Calumny. His exceptions to the historic reality that is the basis of this eternal conflict are all based upon a condition of denial and a fraudulent defense for the rogue band of supremacists.

“Turning to the United States, reducing apprehensions about Greater Israel is good American policy. Americans agree it’s in the their interest to end the Arab-Israeli conflict; because the fantasy of Greater Israel impedes resolution of that conflict, American diplomats and politicians should seize every opportunity to calm fears among their Arab and Iranian counterparts that Israel plans to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. Here are a few steps for U.S. officials to keep in mind:”

Piper goes on to instruct how American foreign policy should shield Israel from the crucial criticisms that only benefit the Khazars who pretend to be descendants of Abraham. How many times have you heard such sophistry that attempts to shame you into supporting what Revelation 3:9 calls the synagogue of Satan and if that does not work, condemn opponents to the Talmud Temple as anti-Semitic?

Not since the hundred years of the Balfour Declaration, or the regret acknowledged by Harry Truman in caving to ‘fanatical’ Zionist lobby by recognizing Israel, has the announcement by President Trump recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital caused the conditions ripe for ‘major catastrophe‘.

Palestinian Envoy Warns: Trump Move on Jerusalem a ‘Declaration of War’ reports comments on Trump’s decision made by Manuel Hassassian in a BBC radio interview.

“He is declaring war in the Middle East, he is declaring war against 1.5 billion Muslims (and) hundreds of millions of Christians that are not going to accept the holy shrines to be totally under the hegemony of Israel,” Hassassian added.

Reaction from the UK follows.

In the meantime, Britain itself expressed concern over the change in American policy on Jerusalem, with Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson saying: “We view reports that we’ve heard with concern.”

He told reporters at NATO headquarters in Brussels on Wednesday that Britain thinks “Jerusalem obviously should be part of the final settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians — a negotiated settlement that we want to see.”

The actual Statement by President Trump on Jerusalem on the surface seems reasonable. However, the needed question that begs a rational answer asks: What existential benefit does the United States gain from such reorganization without a comprehensive peace agreement among all parties within the region?

Manifestly, we all know that it would take divine intervention to achieve this objective. Sorry, even for the most avid Trump supporters, we all will have to wait for the Second Coming.

WikiTribune spoke to Stephen Walt, a Harvard professor of political science and controversial critic of the influence of pro-Israeli lobby groups on U.S. policy. This interview includes, Trump’s Jerusalem policy driven by groups who ‘see themselves as defenders of a greater Israel’.

Q: What does Trump gain from the policy change?

I’m not sure, to be perfectly honest. I think that most people that are skeptical about this change don’t see enormous benefits.

Obviously it will make the people, like Sheldon Adelson, who were pushing him to do this, happy, and this guarantees their support. You could argue this nails down support among the evangelical community and the right wing parts of the American Jewish community. By taking this largely symbolic step he solidifies that base a little bit.

You could also argue that this shows he’s a man of his word – he made a promise in the campaign and now he’s going to fulfil it.

But in a larger sense it’s not clear what the United States or really anybody actually gains from this, or why he chose to do it at this moment.

Now who among the ranks of the State Department can provide a distinct and clear response on how this departure will bring a positive improvement within the region?

Surely, President Trump’s response does not provide that clarity.

“After more than two decades of waivers, we are no closer to a lasting peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. It would be folly to assume that repeating the exact same formula would now produce a different or better result.

 Therefore, I have determined that it is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.”

 Well, the Guardian item Hamas presents new charter accepting a Palestine based on 1967 borders presents a seeming breakthrough, but of course no olive branch goes unpunished in the Israeli border disputes.

“The new document states the Islamist movement it is not seeking war with the Jewish people – only with Zionism that drives the occupation of Palestine.

The new document also insists that Hamas is a not a revolutionary force that seeks to intervene in other countries, a commitment that is likely to be welcomed by other states such as Egypt.

The policy platform was announced by the head of the movement’s political bureau, Khaled Meshal, at a press conference in Doha. “Hamas advocates the liberation of all of Palestine but is ready to support the state on 1967 borders without recognising Israel or ceding any rights,” he said.”

And what was the response from Israel?

“Israel rejected the document before its full publication, with a spokesman for the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, saying: “Hamas is attempting to fool the world, but it will not succeed.” 

Maybe this is the actual folly that President Trump makes reference to in his White House statement. So why should America care about Israeli’s belligerent chutzpah? Must have something to do with genuflecting to AIPAC.

The Zionists are the driving force behind the covert creation of ISIS and the Mossad is the disruption operations behind making Iran the next target for the Amerika’s legions so the Israelis can further their plan for their own Shalom. This diabolical alliance will end in a radioactive cloud. But when that happens the irony will be missed by most brainwashed mass media news followers. The nukes the Zionists will use came from the U.S. labs, paid for by U.S. taxpayers and delivered by U.S. military technology.

Source: http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/zionist-wars-greater-israel/

You Are Free To Travel – If The IRS Lets You

© Gonzalo Lira Blogspot

A bill that nobody is paying any attention to is sailing through Congress: Senate Bill 1813. It passed the Senate by 74 to 22, and is expected to sail through the House as well. It’s an act “[t]o reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes.”

It’s the “and for other purposes” part of the title that has me worried – specifically Section 40304: “Revocation or denial of passport in case of certain unpaid taxes.”

This section would give the IRS the power to keep a U.S. citizen from traveling –

– and it’s another example of Executive Power run amok. It’s another example of how the United States is turning into a police-state.

The right to travel freely is sacrosanct – it’s not some privilege that the government bestows on us: It’s one of our basic freedoms as citizens. In point of fact, the countries that have limited their citizens’ ability to travel – the Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China, North Korea, Cuba – were all rightfully called “police-states”: It’s one of their defining characteristics – the fact that they were keeping their citizens hostage.

In the United States, there are several, clearly defined reasons why you would have your passport either denied or revoked – and all of them pass the smell test.

In the case of a passport being denied, according to the U.S. State Department, the reasons are:

“a federal warrant of arrest, a federal or state criminal court order, a condition of parole or probation forbidding departure from the United States (or the jurisdiction of the court), or a request for extradition [by a foreign country].

Additionally, failure to pay a court-ordered child-support in excess of $5,000 can also be grounds for the State Department to refuse to issue a passport to a U.S. citizen.

In the case of a passport being revoked, the law (22 CFR 51.72) says very clearly that:

A passport may be revoked or restricted or limited where:
(a) The national would not be entitled to issuance of a new passport under §51.70 or §51.71 [the above conditions]; or
(b) The passport has been obtained illegally, by fraud, or has been fraudulently altered, or has been fraudulently misused, or has been issued in error; or
(c) The Department of State is notified that a certificate of naturalization issued to the applicant for or bearer of the passport has been canceled by a federal court.
[54 FR 8532, Mar. 1, 1989, as amended at 64 FR 19714, Apr. 22, 1999]

Now, notice how both in the case of a denial or a revocation of a passport, the State Department is essentially carrying out the judgment of the courts.

An arrest warrant can only be issued by a court. A parolee is, again, limited under the aegis of a judicial order. An extradition request will only be complied if a foreign court is making the request, not a foreign law enforcement agency. A court-ordered child support payment is, again, a judicial decision.

In all of these cases, the State Department is acting on the orders of a court. It is the Judiciary that decides to restrict the freedom of movement and travel of a U.S. citizen – as is their exclusive prerogative.

According to the Constitution, the Legislature does not have the right to judge the guilt or innocence of a person, be they a citizen or not. According to the Constitution, the Executive does not have the right to judge the guilt or innocence of a person, be they a citizen or not.

According to the Constitution’s separation of powers, only the Judiciary has the right to determine guilt or innocence.

Thus, ultimately, only the Judiciary has the right to revoke or deny a citizen’s ability to travel – and only for serious crimes.

But with this Bill 1813, it will now be the IRS – without any judicial oversight – which will determine if a citizen can travel or not. Not even the IRS as an institution – just some random IRS bureaucrat, with no oversight or restraint, will be able to decide to strip you of your right to travel freely.

As written, Bill 1813 states that the IRS must find that $50,000 or more is owed by the citizen – but this is a unilateral determination by the IRS, and it includes penalties and interest. So the alleged amount that you owe could be substantially less – but you are now no longer allowed to travel.

Notice I say “alleged”: It is not that the IRS has to present proof of tax delinquency to anyone – they just have to say that you owe back taxes. No proof required, no judicial oversight or restraint.

In other words, the IRS’s word is enough – and you do not have the possibility of appeal. Who would you appeal to – a judge? There’s no judge in this case – because no judge supervises and monitors the IRS’s decision.

That’s why Madison invented the idea of checks-and-balances: To make sure that no one branch of the government acquired the power to deprive people of their life, liberty or property.

But here is Senate Bill 1813, doing precisely that.

Commentators on tax law are very surprised by this legislation. Over at the blog of R&G Brenner, a large and well-established New York tax preparation company, they wrote:

[I]f the bill is passed you could have your passport revoked merely because you owe say $60,000 and the IRS has filed a notice of lien. Bear in mind that the IRS files tax liens routinely when you owe taxes – it’s just the IRS way of putting creditors on notice so the IRS will eventually get paid… In that sense, this you-can’t-travel idea seems pretty extreme. [ellipsis in original]

So even knowledgeable people are surprised by how extreme this legislation is –

– because it is extreme. But more importantly, it is yet another example of how the Executive Branch is hollowing out the Judiciary, and taking control of all facets of justice.

We already have an Executive that has taken it upon itself to determine the guilt or innocence of an American citizen overseas – and execute him by drone strike. We already have an Executive – in the person of Attorney General Eric Holder – who has made the incredible distinction between “judicial process” and “due process”, claiming that the Executive can carry out due process without involving the Judiciary.

In other words, summary judgments. The Executive is becoming the judge, jury and executioner. Judgements by the Executive where there is no right to appeal. Judgments made not by a jury of your peers, but by a faceless bureaucrat.

This Senate bill 1813 will in all likelihood pass the House vote, and be signed into law by President Obama. Few people will notice it now, and when the history of this shameful period is written it will not be given much pride of place: Senate bill 1813 will simply be mentioned as one more law that was passed that turned the United States from a free Republic into a closed Police-State.

Source: https://www.sott.net/article/244157-You-Are-Free-To-Travel-If-The-IRS-Lets-You

IS ISRAEL A RACIST NATION?

IS ISRAEL A RACIST NATION?

“Our race (speaking of the Jews) is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves.”– Menachem Begin. (Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin in a speech to the Knesset [Israeli Parlament], quoted by Amnon Kapeliouk, “Begin and the Beasts,” New Statesman, June 25, 1982)


JEWISH SCRIPTURES DESCRIBING NON-JEWS AS ANIMALS

talmud

“Only the Jews are humans, the Non-Jews are not humans, but cattle” (goyim = human cattle) [1]
– Kerithuth 6b page 78, Jebhammoth 61a

“The Non-Jews have been created to serve the Jews as slaves” [2]
– Midrasch Talpioth 225

“The Non-Jews have to be avoided, even more than sick pigs”
– Orach Chaiim 57, 6a

“Sexual intercourse with Non-Jews is like sexual intercourse with animals”
– Kethuboth 3b

“The birth-rate of the Non-Jews has to be suppressed massively” [3]
Zohar II, 4b

“As you replace lost cows and donkeys, so you shall replace dead Non-Jews” [4]
– Iore Dea 337,1

“To box an Israeli on the ear, is like to box on the ear of God”
Sanhedrin 58b

“God (Jahveh) is never angry about the Jews, just about the Non-Jews”
Talmud IV / 8 / 4a

“The human (the Jew) has to pray every day three times, because Jahveh didn’t make him a goyim, not a female and not an ignorant”
– Talmud V / 2 / 43b + 44a

“Towards a Non-Jew the Jew doesn’t cause an adultery… Punishable for the Jew is just the adultery towards his next, that means the wife of a Jew. The wife of the Non-Jew is excluded”
– Talmud IV / 4 / 52b

“There is no wife for the goyim, they really aren’t their wives”
– Talmud IV / 4 / 81 + 82ab

“You (the Jews) have made me, Jahveh, the only true lord in the world, so I will make you the only ruler in the world”
“Who wants to be smart shall occupy himself with money matters, because there are no corner pillars in the Thora that are more important, because they are like a sparkling fountain”
– Talmud IV / 3 / 173b

“Jews always have to try to deceive Non-Jews” [5]
– Zohar I, 168a

“Non-Jewish property belongs to the Jew who uses it first”
– Babba Bathra 54b

“If two Jews have deceived a Non-Jew, they have to split the profit”
– Choschen Ham 183,7

“Every Jew is allowed to use lies and perjury to bring a Non-Jew to ruin”
– Babba Kama 113a

“The possessions of the goyim are like an ownerless desert, and everybody (every Jew) who seizes it, has acquired it”
– Talmud IV / 3 / 54b

“The Jew is allowed to exploit the mistake of a Non-Jew and to deceive him”
– Talmud IV / 1 / 113b

“The Jew is allowed to practice usury on the Non-Jew” [6]
– Talmud IV / 2 / 70b

“When the Messiah comes, all will be slaves of the Jews”
– Erubin 43b

“Whoever disobeys a Rabbi deserves death… Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.”
Erubin 21b

“If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there”
– Moed Kattan 17a

“Non-Jews are Not Human. Only Jews are human (“Only ye are designated men”)
– Baba Mezia 114a-114b

“Jews are Divine. If a heathen (Gentile) hits a Jew, the Gentile must be killed. Hitting a Jew is the same as hitting God”
– Sanhedrin 58b

O.K. to Cheat Non-Jews. A Jew need not pay a Gentile (“Cuthean”) the wages owed him for work
– Sanhedrin 57a

“If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite…the payment is to be in full.”
– Baba Kamma 37b

Jews May Steal from Non-Jews – Baba Mezia 24a

If a Jew finds an object lost by a Gentile (“heathen”) it does not have to be returned
– (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b)

God will not spare a Jew who “marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean…”
– Sanhedrin 76a

Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews. When a Jew murders a Gentile (“Cuthean”), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a Gentile he may keep
– Sanhedrin 57a

Gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has “exposed their money to Israel.”
– Baba Kamma 37b

Jews May Lie to Non-Jews. Jews may use lies (“subterfuges”) to circumvent a Gentile
– Baba Kamma 113a

Non-Jewish Children Sub-Human. All Gentile children are animals
Yebamoth 98a

Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth
Abodah Zarah 36b

Gentiles prefer sex with cows
– Abodah Zarah 22a-22b

A Jew may marry a three year old girl (specifically, three years “and a day” old).

SANHEDRIN, 55b: “A maiden three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; (if a niddah) she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon (a person afflicted with gonorrhea).” (emphasis in original text of Soncino Edition, Ed.)

– Sanhedrin 55b

 

Sanhedrin 54b
[source]

A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.
– Sanhedrin 54b

“When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing.”
– Kethuboth 11b

“Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal.”
– Sanhedrin 59a

“Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed.”
– Abodah Zara 26b

“To communicate anything with a Goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly.”
– Libbre David 37

“Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is of three years of age.”
– Yebhamoth 11b

“Jesus is in hell and is being punished by being boiled in semen. Christians are boiled in dung”
Gittin 57a

“If it be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of this earth.”
– Choschen Ham 388, 15

“A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely if by so doing Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people.”
– Choschen Ham 266, 1

Source: viewzone.com

The myth of the Pogrom


soviet-union-jew-62-million-bo23lshevik-communist-marxist-lenin-stalin

“The establishment of a central bank is 90% of communizing a nation.” ~ Lenin.

Holodomor AvatarThe Jewish Bolshevik regime had begun murdering their way through ethnic Europeans as early as the 1920’s. Initially these crimes were concealed behind the Jewish Bolshevik construct of the ‘Soviet Union’ but with a Jewish victory in 1945 a new paradigm was concocted with the German Nation as the scapegoat. The source of the Big Lie can be traced back to the Jewish architect of ethnic European Genocide Vladimir Lenin %22A lie told often enough becomes truth.%22Leninwho pronounced that “a lie told often enough becomes the truth”. While the Jewish Bolshevik genocide of ethnic Europeans is concealed, for the 70 years since WWII ethnic Europe has been saturated with propaganda regarding a Jewish ‘Holocaust’.

Ethnic European peoples are particularly susceptible to Jewish propaganda with their nations so insular as opposed to the international nature of the Jewish tribe. Ethnic Europeans of the German Nation are not united with ethnic Europeans of the Russian Nation consequently international information becomes limited to that which the Jewish tribe allows to filter through their network. A specific example of networking between Jewish cells occurred during WWI. Jewish Zionist Leo Motzkin presided over the Copenhagen office of the Zionistorganization and operated as liaison between Zionist organizations in all other European nations. Trust is also a significant issue. The ethnic European of a number of nations appears capable of trusting implicitly that their own racial brethren are perpetrating horrendous atrocities. Yet will self-censor the crimes and atrocities that another race has perpetrated against their own. Trust between fraternal nations is at its lowest ebb during territorial instability when pseudo-patriotism encourages ethnic Europeans to paint their racial brethren as a nation of beasts. Jewish propaganda operates at a premium during war when there is most unrest. It feeds and maintains ethnic division an example of which is ‘Holocaust’ propaganda that primarily demonises the German nation and in a wider context paralyses ethnic Europe with false guilt allowing Jewish interests priority throughout ethnic European territory.

Curiously other occasions in European history have been most ‘opportune’ for Jewish interests. In the late 19th-century Europe’s Russia was plagued by riots alleged by Jewish voices to be ‘anti-Jewish’ in nature and classified by Jewish historians as ‘genocidal pogroms’. These riots had considerable demographic implications for the rest of ethnic Europe and European America for at least 80% of Jews in the West are descendants of Jewish immigrants from Russia and its environs during the period 1880–1910. Commissioned to write propaganda alleging so called ‘pogroms’ against Jews in Russia it was Jewish leader of the World Zionist Congress and numerous other Jewish Zionist organizations across Europe, Leo Motzkin that spearheaded a campaign against ethnic White Russians. Joined by Franz Oppenheimer and Adolf Friedemann he invented a ‘German Committee for Freeing of Russian Jews’, apparently condoned by the German Government of the time, which attests to the Jewish ability to splinter relationships between fraternal nations. Also intriguing is that Jewish sources openly discouraged historical enquiry by non-Jewish historians into the subject of alleged ‘pogroms’ in Russia. For example, when Ukrainian historians exposed evidence proving that contemporary media reports of Jewish casualties in that nation were wildly exaggerated, the Jewish genealogy website ‘JewishGen,’responded by stating: “We believe that [these facts] are more than irrelevant because it redirects public attention from the major topic: 16.5 Million Europeans murdered in all 3 Holodomorsthe genocidal essence of pogroms.” Yet of the genocide by Jewish Bolsheviks of 16.5 million ethnic Europeans in Ukraine there still remains hardly a murmur.

“In 1881 the ‘Russo-Jewish Committee,’ (RJC) an arm of Britain’s Jewish elite, mass-produced a pamphlet entitled “The Persecution of the Jews in Russia,” the 1899 edition including a lengthy letter written to the London Times by Nathan Joseph, Secretary of the RJC, dated November 5th, 1890 claiming that in the present circumstances “hundreds of thousands [of Jews] could be exterminated,” and began disseminating it through the press, the churches, and numerous other channels. By 1899, it was embellished and published as a short book, and today digitized copies are freely available online. By the early 20th century, the pamphlet had even spawned a four-page journal called Darkest Russia – A Weekly Record of the Struggle for Freedom, ensuring that the average [ethnic Briton] did not go long without being reminded of the ‘horrors’ facing [Jews in Russia]. The fact that these publications were mass produced should provide an indication as to their purpose: It is clear that these publications represented one of the most ambitious propaganda campaign in Jewish history, and combined with similar efforts in the United States, they were aimed at gaining the attention of…Western nations and ensuring the primacy of the ‘Jewish…story.’ Implicit in this was not only a desire to provoke anti-Russian attitudes, but also copious amounts of sympathy for the victimized Jews —sympathy necessary to ensure that  mass Jewish chain migration to the West went on untroubled and unhindered by nativists.” A complete transposition of historical relations between White Russian and Jew, the propaganda contended that the Jews of Eastern Europe had been oppressed for centuries, their whole lives “hampered, from cradle to grave, by restrictive laws.” They claimed that White Russians had an unwritten law “that no Russian Jew shall earn a living,” even though, according to the Russo-Jewish Committee, Jews in Russia wanted nothing more than to participate in Russian society. The Jewish narrative also contended that the ‘pogroms’ were genocidal in nature and perpetrated by groups seeking the extermination of the Jews. Yet the most horrific of the charges laid against the Russian Empire was that they had committed the most fiendish atrocities on the most enormous scale. Jews had allegedly been murdered ruthlessly, infants dashed on the stones or roasted alive in their own homes. A common theme in most contemporary atrocity stories was the brutal rape of Jewish women, with most reports including mention of breasts being hacked off. The Masking the Holodomorsimilarity between such atrocities and those concocted by ‘Holocaust survivors’ cannot be denied, furthermore it was The Jewish Bolshevik “bestial torturesJewish Bolsheviks that instigated a horrific cycle of crucifixions, scalpings and other bestial tortures against ethnic Europeans in which eyes were poked out, tongues cut off, and victims buried alive. Indeed letters home from German soldiers attest to Jewish Bolshevik brutality-

NCO K. Suffner, Military Post Number 08 070 to his work mates

…The Bolshevists and Jews bestially murdered 12,000 Germans and Ukrainians. I saw pregnant women hanging by their feet in the GPU’s prison. They had slit the noses, ears, eyes, fingers, hands and arms and legs of other women. Some even had their hearts cut out. 300 orphans between the ages of 2 and 17 had been nailed to the wall and butchered. After they were done with the torture, they threw the people, most of whom were still alive, into a 3 meter deep pile in the basement, doused them with gasoline, and lit them on fire. It was terrible! We could not believe that shave suffered if Bolshevism had reached us. The complainers and know-it-alls that we still have in the Reich should see this. Then they would know what pure Bolshevism looks like. They would fall to their knees and thank the Führer for saving Germany from such things. I and many other German soldiers have seen this. We all thank the Führer that he let us see theBolshevist “paradise.” We swear to extirpate this plague root and branch.

Soldier Fred Fallnbigl to his Parents in Salzburg, 17.7.41

…a bit more from the Soviet Paradise. I’ll especially tell you about things that happened in Lemberg-Tarnopol and Tromborla. Tromborla is due south of Tarnopol. I saw the prisons in Lemberg, and saw things that struck me deeply. There were men with their ears and noses cut off, etc. They had nailed children alive by their hands and feet to the wall, butchering them. The blood was ankle deep. It didn’t make any difference if they were alive or dead. They doused the piles of bodies with gasoline and set them on fire…I always think how fortunate we are that this scourge of humanity never made it to our country. I don’t think that even years of preparation would make Germans capable of such atrocities.

Given the evidence of long-term murderous Jewish Bolshevik atrocities against ethnic Europeans and the failing construct that is the ‘Holocaust’, Jewish claims of horrific brutality by white Russia begins to sound decidedly hollow. Even more so when one discovers thatThe 1881 assassination of Tsar Alexander IIAlexander II set into motion a Jewish emancipation in Russia. He made education fully open to Jews, Jews could sit on the juries of Russian courts and efforts to change the economic profile of Jews were relaxed. However, while the Jews in Russia took advantage beginning to swamp higher education establishments they stubbornly persisted in the unproductive trades, continued in their antipathy to Russian culture, and refused to make any meaningful contribution to Russian society. In Odessa, there were reports that in school after school, Jews were “driving Christians from the school benches,” and “filling up the schools.” Jewish propaganda proposed that when the riots began, the government was “not altogether sorry to let the excitement of the people vent itself on the Jews.” However, John Doyle Klier, in his 2005 work, Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881–2, stated that “contemporary research has dispelled the myth that Russian officials were responsible for instigating, permitting, or approving the pogroms.” It was largely Klier’s work in the late 1980s which began to truly shed light on the origins of Russian-Jewish relations prior to 1914. Jews overwhelmingly “served in a variety of middleman roles.” In many cities, “the Jewish mercantile element was numerically superior to the [White Russian] Christian,” and there was a gradual move towards the reacquisition of the liquor trade. According to Klier, by 1830 Jews in Belarus were found to be “totally dominating trade”, which closely reflects the Jewish fuel monopolies ofWittgenstein and Rothschild occurring in Central Europe during the same period, and are to coincidental not to be a coordinated requisition of ethnic European wealth. A large number of wealthy Jews were also found to have funded some of the rebels in the nationalist revolt of Poles in 1863 casting fresh doubts on Jewish loyalty to Russia. Breaking out at a moment when general quiet prevailed in Europe, there was a public outcry in support of the Poles. Again this provides the necessary conditions for the transmission of Jewish propaganda as periods of inter-ethnic strife are highly conducive for demonization of a nation to the outside world. It also mirrors the Jewish financing of ‘revolution’ in Europe throughout history.Jewish Bolshevik Rape

Meanwhile with the close of WWII Jewish ‘citizens’ in Berlin daubed the door frames with lambs blood so the Jewish Bolshevik Red army wouldPassover‘ to rape and murder only ethnic Germanshttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254521/German-victim-break-silence-Red-Army-rapists-65-years.html . The Jewish case against ethnic Europe is so contrived that were it not so genocidal it would be comic. What is patently clear is that Jewish historians greatly exaggerated the death toll during SIX MILLION JEWS 1915-1938periods of rioting in Russia. People may well have died but in general; Jews were not specifically targeted. Reports of Jewish rape victims and violent atrocities against Jews are a fiction. One must reiterate with evidence of long-term murderous Jewish Bolshevik atrocities against ethnic Europeans and the failing construct that is the ‘Holocaust’, Jewish claims of horrific brutality by white Russia is as hollow as their 70 year big lie.

Follow us on twitter – https://twitter.com/HolodomorInfo

Trotsky torture squad


soviet-union-jew-62-million-bo23lshevik-communist-marxist-lenin-stalin

“The establishment of a central bank is 90% of communizing a nation.” ~ Lenin.

Holodomor Avatar“For pure murderous evil, there has never been a force to compare with Communism and Leon Trotsky…never before or since did one people construct a vast industry of death for the sole purpose of rounding up and destroying every single member of another people. The Jewish Bolshevik under orders and overseen by Trotsky, killed so many Europeans the death toll surpasses 100 million.”

 TO THE VICTIMS OF COMMUNISM, LEST WE FORGET By Jeff Jacoby The Boston Globe December 7, 1995

Leon TrotskyLev Davidovich Bronstein better known as Leon Trotsky, was a Jewish communist, mass murderer and Marxist ideologue. After Lenin’s Judeo-Bolsheviks enslaved Russia and manufactured a cover known as a Soviet Empire,Trotsky the Jewish sadistTrotsky acted as Commissar of Foreign Affairs and later Commissar of Military and Naval Affairs. He was among the first members of the Politburo. Trotsky is best known as the founder of the Red Army, as well as his criminal role in the Holodomor genocides against Europe.

The Red Army torture squad was controlled by Leon Trotsky, while the state itself was headed by Lenin. The most high-profile victims of the The Jews Who Murdered Tsar Nicholas IIearly phase of the genocide were the European Monarch Tsar Nicholas II and his entire family. Incidentally 30 The 1881 assassination of Tsar Alexander IIyears before in 1881 another Tsar was murdered by a Jew. The assassination of Tzar Alexander II by a  Jewish terrorist called Vera Figner (Leader of a terrorist group called The Peoples Will) was later linked to Lenin adding a more profound emphasis to the royal slaughter “Actually, the decision was not only expedient but necessary. The severity of this summary justice showed the world that we would continue to fight The Assassin of the Tsar and the Royal family of Russia 2mercilessly, stopping at nothing. The execution of the Tsar’s family was needed not only in order to frighten, horrify, and dishearten the enemy but also in order to shake up our own ranks, to show them that there was no turning back, that ahead lay either complete victory or complete ruin.” —Leon Trotsky, Trotsky’s Diary in Exile, 1935 Much of this was carried out under the pseudo-rationale of “class war” (sometimes called the Red Terror), despite the fact that most of the Jews in positions of control were university educated and from middle-class backgrounds.

This quote by Trotsky highlights how those of Jewish heritage felt about those of European blood. “England is nothing but the last ward of the European madhouse, and quite possibly it will prove to be the ward for particularly violent cases.” It has been estimated that 13 million Europeans were exterminated during this period and almost all of the positions of power were in the hands of Jews. Trotsky advocated a ‘PermanentKarl MarxRevolution’ that facilitated the ‘revolutionary holocaust’ revealed by Marx. Funded by Jacob Schiff and Max Warburg, Trotsky was the preferred candidate of the international Jewish bankers. However, perhaps it was most Hang the kulaks - Vladimir Leninfortuitous for theVladimir Lenin’s Jewish roots confirmed’s largely Jewish Bolshevik regime to install the gentile Stalin for Communism’s next phase. He is visibly the Jewish tribe’s scapegoat for their murderous regime and conceivably their opening for re-packaging Communism. Scepticism has arisen about the authenticity of Lenin’s last Testament with regards to statements made about his successor.

Meanwhile as head of the military wing Trotsky had Lenin’s authorisation to The Jewish Bolshevik “bestial torturesmobilise state forces against the people. This he did to devastating effect.  A horrific cycle of crucifixions, scalpings and other “bestial tortures” ensued.  Eyes were poked out, tongues cut off, and victims were buried alive. Shootings by The writer Maxim Gorky describes Lenin's reign of terrorJewish Communist Cheka (police) where common place and there where those who cut open their victim’s stomach, pulled out a length of small intestine, nailed it to a telegraph pole, and with a whip forced the victim to run circles around the pole until the whole intestine became unravelled. To emphasis Trotsky’s utter distain for the European people in 1921 messengers who represented starving peasants asked him for help he said “You are starving? This is not famine yet! When your women start eating their children then you may come and say we are starving”.

Maxim Gorky “They would open a prisoner's belly,%22For those that believe the horrors of Jewish Bolshevik cruelty are solely a part of a forgotten past they are sadly mistaken. The future looks much bleaker. One must point to a contemporary example that compares in all its horrific detail with Trotsky and his Cheka brutality. Be assured if creatures such as The Atrocities of Jewish Bolshevismthose involved in this current incident are unleashed on the world unfettered the crimes of the past will seem tame compared to what the future holds.Recently a group of Jewish men were arrested in connection with a massive human organ trafficking operation involving the removal of organs from living ethnic Serbs. Left to die the bodies of murder victims were piled into mass graves. Hence, the Holodomor Genocides would herald the beginning of Europe’s imminent torture field as the Jewish tribe litters the land with the bodies of the slaughtered White race.
Follow us on twitter – https://twitter.com/HolodomorInfo

Lenin-The Jewish Architect of European Genocide


soviet-union-jew-62-million-bo23lshevik-communist-marxist-lenin-stalin

“The establishment of a central bank is 90% of communizing a nation.” ~ Lenin.

Holodomor AvatarSince the very vocal collapse of economic Communism has coursed an unavoidable explosion of activity surrounding the Jewish Bolshevik mass slaughter in Europe a skew often centres on the the years 1932 to 1933. This was horrific and loss of life has been listed as anywhere between 7 million to 7.5 million, although, figures have been as high as 10 Million deaths. Yet the butchery had been in place for a decade alreadyVladimir Lenin (Genocide)due to Vladimir Lenin’s Jewish roots confirmedVladimir Lenin’s Jewish roots confirmed. This Jewish Communist terrorist, mass murderer, propagandist and dictator of the Soviet Empire, established after the Jews took control of Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution, is the architect of European genocide.  In fact the nature of their Jewish revolution was extermination and not betterment of Europeans. While it was the Jew Karl MarxKarl Marx, with the help of his teacher Moses Hess the philosophical father of Zionism, who invented Communism; in fact Marx was the first to advocate racial genocide. Meant for Europeans of Basque, Breton, Serbian and Scottish heritage he used the term ‘racial Karl Marx planned Holocaust for Europe's Racial Trashtrash’ and recommended a revolutionary ‘holocaust’. Living a parasitic life and not himself a worker Lenin provoked the reality of the Marxist Communist plan when he implemented the foreign artificial politic of Leninism. On the surface it presents a ‘utopian equality’ impossible as it does not exist in nature. This can be clarified by looking at the sexes. If nature wanted them to be ‘equal’ or the same why not make them androgynous. In reality man and woman are meant to be different to complement each other. The only way one achieves ‘equality’ is to eradicate difference-sexual, racial and cultural and reduce the mass by force to the lowest common denominator.

Lenin regarded Europeans as animalsIn October 1919, Lenin paid a secret visit to the laboratory of the great physiologist I. P. Pavlov, a Russian physiologist known chiefly for the concept of the conditioned reflex. In his classic experiment, he found that a hungry dog can be trained to associate the sound of a bell with food and will salivate at the sound even in the absence of food. Lenin wanted to find out if his work on the conditional reflexes of the brain might help the Bolsheviks control European behaviour. “I want the masses of Russia to follow a Communistic pattern of thinking and reacting,” Lenin explained.  Pavlov was astoundedIt seemed that Lenin wanted him to do for humans what he had already done for dogs. “Do you mean that you would like to standardise the population of Russia? Make them all behave in the same way?”he asked. “Exactly” replied Lenin.Man can be corrected. Man can be made what we want him to be.”… The ultimate aim of the Jewish Communist system is the mechanization of nature i.e. European ‘man WILL live by bread alone’ and show no idealism or spiritual content. Consequently not long after the Bolshevik Revolution Pavlov became an outspoken opponent of the Communist government. He stated publically, “If that which the Jewish Bolsheviks are doing with Russia is an experiment, for such an experiment I should regret giving even a frog.”  Even so Lenin’s regime continued to fund Pavlov’s research making it clear that Lenin and his Bolsheviks viewed Pavlov’s approach to psychology as confirmation of the animalistic nature of European peoples as well as a method of automatizing European society. At great pains to appear Russian and atheistic this aspect of Lenin’s character reveals just how deep his Jewish roots are. References to the European as ‘goyim’ or cattle are riff throughout the Talmud; the most dramatic states categorically that “Jehovah created the Goy in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The Goy is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.” Midrash Talpioth p. 225-L Therefore, rather than an atheist Lenin is clearly attempting to carry out the ‘laws’ of his Talmud and turn Europeans into unquestioning ‘beasts of burden’ to the Jewish Bolsheviks.

The Real HolocaustSold on the international market grain seizure was merely a profitable outcome of genocide. Lenin’s view on the situation was that “the peasant must do a bit of starving so as to relieve the factories and towns from complete starvation.” Already hit by a bad harvest Lenin’s ‘beasts of burden’ or slave labour, clearly how he viewed Europeans, survived on starvation rations if at all. In keeping with the execution of this Communist policy Lenin constructed the Gulag slave system that tortured and worked many millions to death. Whilst one cannot ring a bell to make the ‘animal’ behave perpetual fear just may. Long-time head of Comintern (the Communist International) Grigory Zinoviev, a Jewish Communist terrorist and Holodomor perpetrator had a strong relationship with Lenin.  His quote of 1918 establishes a deliberate policy of terror and mass slaughter where on the cards “We must carry along with us 90 million out of the 100 million the Soviet population. As for the rest, we have nothing to say to them. They must be annihilated”. Confirmation came from Lenin himself “Put more force into the terror. Shoot every tenth person; place all the suspects in concentration camps!”The writer Maxim Gorky describes Lenin's reign of terrorConsequently, it was under Lenin that the most horrific torture took place. Eyes were poked out, tongues cut off, and victims were buried alive. Jewish Communist Cheka (guards) cut open their victim’s stomach, pulled out a length of small intestine, nailed it to a telegraph pole, and with a club forced the victim to run circles around the pole until the whole intestine became unravelled. Children caught eating what was considered ‘state grain’ were shot as ‘traitors’ to the state.  Consequently deportation to gulags was familiar and often Europeans would be taken with no explanation. Possibly the most infamous gulag wasThe Nazino Gulag (Cannibal Island)Nazino also known as ‘cannibal island’. Speculation has that as news of the horrific tortures committed against Europeans on this desolate Siberian Island hit the Jewish press they endeavoured to deflect consequences away from their tribe.

In December of 1922 Lenin established a Jewish regime based on terror and murder that lasted 69 years and slaughtered well over 60million Europeans.

Lenin %22A lie told often enough becomes truth.%22On December 8, 1991 this Jewish Bolshevik regime, constructed under the guise of the Soviet Union, was dissolved. It is interesting to note however, that this coincided with a violent upsurge of the European physical and psychological violation that is political correctness (cultural Marxism).  It was Lenin who said “A lie told often enough becomes truth”. Perhaps that is why an ‘iron curtain’ lies across the Jewish tribe while another Nation hung for its crimes.

Source: holodomorinfo.com