Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Fashion Crisis Aboard Air Force One

Vogue Fashion Editor Lynn Yaeger.  If you are
 getting your fashion advice from her  you have a problem
Will anyone ever forget where they were the moment the news broke that Melania Trump “boarded Air Force One wearing a pair of towering pointy-toed snakeskin heels better suited to a shopping afternoon on Madison Avenue or a girls’ luncheon at La Grenouille.”  What does the U.N. Security Council have to say about this.  Fortunately we have Lynn Yaeger, fashion editor of Vogue magazine, to alert us to this crisis.  Ms. Yaeger should be invited to the White House to give Melania some fashion tips.  It
does not appear that Ms. Yeager made similar comments when Michelle Obama attended a feeding for the homeless in $500 tennis shoes.
My good friend Elmo remarked upon seeing this photo that it reminded him of that Elvis Presley hit "A Hunk, a Hunk of Burning Love."  Elmo has been off his meds for a while.  He never got over Hillery's loss.

Saturday, August 26, 2017

BroJoeK vs Vehmgericht on Morgenthau Plan

To: libertylover
FDR signed off on the Morgenthau Plan which resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent people and Europe almost going Communist by 1947.
23 posted on 8/24/2017, 9:38:35 AM by Vehmgericht

To: Vehmgericht
Vehmgericht: " FDR signed off on the Morgenthau Plan which resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent people and Europe almost going Communist by 1947. "
Sorry, but the Morgenthau plan was never implemented, so you'll have to blame those deaths on the real perpetrators: national & international socialists.
Most people still remember the American plan which did get carried out.
It was called the Marshall Plan and it sent, in our dollars, many billions to help feed & economic recovery for post-war Europeans. 
30 posted on 8/24/2017, 2:06:38 PM by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)

To: BroJoeK
BroJoeK, You have been reading conventional history by plagerists like Steven Ambrose. JCS 1067, directing US policy, was essentially the Morghenthau Plan. Like any complex plan it was not 100% like the original. If you demand 100% conformity, the Marshal PLan was never implemented. The Communist inspired (Harry Dexter White) plan was almost successful in driving all of Europe into the Soviet sphere. That is what made the Marshal Plan necessary. I agree that international socialist were to blame. The FDR administration was full of them
32 posted on 8/24/2017, 2:42:07 PM by Vehmgericht ( stop)

To: BroJoeK
I forget where I first read about the Morgenthau Plan. I was appropriately appalled.
33 posted on 8/24/2017, 7:34:38 PM by Lysandru

To: Vehmgericht
Vermgerricht: "You have been reading conventional history by plagerists like Steven Ambrose. 
JCS 1067, directing US policy, was essentially the Morghenthau Plan"
Here is what history says about it:

  • "While the Morgenthau Plan had some influence on Allied planning for the occupation of Germany, it was not adopted
  • U.S. occupation policies aimed at "industrial disarmament",[2] but contained a number of deliberate "loopholes", limiting any action to short-term military measures and preventing large-scale destruction of mines and industrial plants, giving wide-ranging discretion to the military governor and Morgenthau's opponents at the War Department.[3][4] From 1947 the US policies aimed at restoring a "stable and productive Germany" and were soon followed by the Marshall Plan.[3][5]
    The Morgenthau Plan was
    seized upon by the Nazi German government, and used as part of propaganda efforts in the final months of the war which aimed to convince Germans to fight on."
And on JCS 1067:

  • "Walter M. Hudson describes JSC 1067 as less harsh than Morgenthau's plan: while core elements of the Morgenthau Plan were incorporated in JCS 1067, it was deliberately diluted, and permitted the military government to be more flexible than envisaged by the Morgenthau Plan.[92] The German Federal Agency for Civic Education (BPD) asserts that the Morgenthau Plan was never implemented and was only briefly supported by Roosevelt,[93] and that JSC 1067, while treating Germany as a defeated enemy state instead of a liberated nation and aiming at the dismantling of German industries, also left loopholes that allowed a military governor to later implement more lenient policies.
    The agency states that the purpose of JCS 1779, which replaced JCS 1067, was to increase German self-government at the regional level, limit dismantling of war industries, raise living standards, and remove dependence on subsidies.[94][95]"
And regarding Nazi propaganda:

  • "German historian Bernd Greiner (de) talks of the failure of Morgenthau and the backward-looking political minority that supported him, stating that by the end of 1945 Morgenthau's staff had returned to the USA despondent, and those then in charge were not interested in "industrial diarmament".[96] 
  • However, according to Greiner, the "Morgenthau myth" (German: die Morgenthau-Legende) was perpetuated in West Germany by right-wing extremist historians echoing Nazi propaganda and railing against an "extermination plan" for Germany by Jews and the left-wing intelligensia in America, while in Communist East Germany the Morgenthau Plan was presented as a western imperialist plot to destroy Germany.[97] Wolfgang Benz, director of the Center for Research on Antisemitism at the Technical University of Berlin, states that the plan had no significance for the later occupation and Germany policy, though Nazi propaganda on the subject had a lasting effect and is still used for propaganda purposes by extreme right-wing organizations.[53][98][99]
    German historian Rainer Gömmel criticises the common claim by historians, including Benz, that the Morgenthau Plan was never implemented, arguing that
    core elements of the plan, namely the proposals for deindustrialisation, were adopted in August 1945 and became part of Allied policy.[101]
    The Norwegian economist Erik S. Reinert, states that "The Morgenthau Plan was abruptly stopped in Germany in 1947"..."
On the subject of mass starvation:

  • "During the war, Germans seized food supplies from occupied countries and forced millions of foreigners to work on German farms, in addition to food shipped from farms in eastern Germany. 
  • When this ended in 1945, the German rationing system (which stayed in place) had much lower supplies of food.[30]:342–54 
  • The U.S. Army sent in large shipments of food to feed some 7.7 million prisoners of war—far more than they had expected[30]:200—as well as the general population.[31] 
  • For several years following the surrender, German nutritional levels were low... In early October 1945 the UK government privately acknowledged in a cabinet meeting that German civilian adult death rates had risen to 4 times the pre-war levels and death rates amongst the German children had risen by 10 times the pre-war levels.[32]:280"
Finally, on Bacque's Other Losses:

  • "Maj. Ruediger Overmans of the German Office of Military History in Freiburg who wrote the final volume of the official German history of the war estimated that the total death by all causes of German prisoners in American hands could not have been greater than 56,000 approximately 1% of the over 5,000,000 German POWs in Allied hands exclusive of the Soviets."
But there are no numbers for Germans supposedly killed by the Morgenthau Plan.
Nazi propaganda tells us nine million Germans died post-war, but the historical number is about a million Germans who died while being expelled from Eastern Europe.
Total German deaths for the war, including military, were about 7 million, or 8% of the population.
For comparison: Greece lost 10%, Latvia 13%, Soviets 14%, Lithuania 15%, Poles 17%.
Indeed, you may remember, after the war there were four occupying powers -- Soviets, French, Brits & US.
Of the four, I could easily argue that Americans -- Morgenthau Plan or not -- treated Germans better than any others.
You disagree? 
35 posted on 8/25/2017, 8:15:56 AM by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)

To: Lysandru; Vehmgericht
Lysandru: "I forget where I first read about the Morgenthau Plan. 
I was appropriately appalled."
Note my post #35 above.
You should not have been appalled, for several reasons:

  1. Morgenthau's was similar to plans by other allies -- Soviets, French & Brits -- but unlike those other powers, Morganthau's plan was never carried out. 
  2. Morganthau's plan was soon replaced by JCS 1067, which did incorporate some Morgenthau ideas, but gave US commanders flexibility to relieve suffering. 
  3. All such plans were intended to prevent Germans from doing after 1945 what they had done after 1919: re-militarize, rearm and reconquer what they lost in the previous war.
  4. And the plans worked, of course, but it soon became obvious that Germans would serve much better as western allies against the Soviet Communist menace, and that became the reason for dropping economic restrictions on Germans after 1947. 
  5. In the end, the post-war removal of German industrial equipment meant they needed to build an all-new industrial base, which gave Germans a huge technological advantage from the late 1950s until, well, even today.
Of course, Nazi propaganda exaggerates and blames the Morgenthau Plan for everything evil in Germany.
But none of it is true. 
36 posted on 8/25/2017, 8:47:00 AM by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)

People naturally minimize their involvement in crimes.  After the war everyone was a member of the resistance.  No one was a collaborator during the German occupation.  Likewise, progressive historians minimize or ignore crimes committed by progressive politicians.

You claim, “Here is what history says about it: ‘While the Morgenthau Plan had some influence on Allied planning for the occupation of Germany, it was not adopted.’”   “History” is actually Wikipedia.  They have banned my book for being “unreliable.”   They are frequently “unreliable.”   You might check  for information on Steven Ambrose’s credibility.  Many German sources can be sited denying the MP was carried out.  I don’t know if this is Stockholm Syndrome or what.

Perhaps the person with the most reliable opinion on whether the MP was carried out was Henry Morgenthau: President Truman signed JCS 1067 on May 10, 1945.  Morgenthau considered this "a big day for the Treasury."  He also hoped "somebody doesn't recognize it as the Morgenthau Plan." (Blum, Years of War 1941-1945 From the Morgenthau Diaries, p. 460.)

A lie must be plausible.  Ruediger Overmans’ 1% estimate of POW fatalities is not realistic.  If these POWs were sent to health spas there fatality rate would have been higher than 1%.  Also in Ambrose’s Eisenhower and the German POWs, Professor James F. Tent claimed, “By the spring of 1947, and thereafter to the end of the military occupation, the number and variety of supplemental programs expanded to the point that some observers asked with only slight irony if there were any normal consumers – that is, those consuming 1,550 calories per day – left in the British and American zones.”  Tent appears to be saying that the food crisis was over by 1947.  Yet, the same text includes a photo of seven German infants “picked at random” from a Catholic hospital in Berlin in various stages of malnutrition dated October 1947.

It is unfortunate that the more accurate historical account is used by the extreme right to justify anti-Semitism or other nefarious causes.  This encourages people to support the false narrative.  People are still repeating the lampshade myth.

Saturday, August 19, 2017

White Supremacist Uses Flame Thrower in Attack on Infant

Photographic evidence of a white supremacist using a flame thrower to attack an infant.  The infant's image is obscured by the flag.

This information is provided by the PRS (Post Reality Society).

Friday, August 18, 2017

Ronald Radosh Condemns Trump Followers

In an Article in the Daily Beast Ronald Radosh Condemns Trump Followers

Ronald Radosh describes himself as a conservative.  Many non-conservatives do this for various reasons.  He continues to disparage Joseph McCarthy.  He’s a big fan of Dean (“I will not turn my back on Alger Hiss”) Acheson.  He attacked Diana West for her revelations about Communists in the Roosevelt administration.  Radosh seems to doubt the leftist/muslim alliance.  He wonders, “how do establishment Republicans . . . come to act under the sway of Mao and Herbert Marcuse?”  Establishment Republicans want to be loved.  If embracing Mao makes them loved, so be it.  Some examples: John McCain claimed, “There’s no moral equivalency between racists & Americans standing up to defy hate&bigotry.  The President of the United States should say so.”  Mitt Romney tweeted, “No, not the same.  One side is racist, bigoted, Nazi.  The other opposes racism and bigotry.  Morally different universes.”  Lindsey Graham stated,  “Through his statements yesterday, President Trump took a step backward by again suggesting there is moral equivalency between the white supremacist neo-Nazis and KKK members who attended the Charlottesville rally and people like [Heather] Heyer.”  Trump specifically referred to Heather Heyer during his press conference, “I hear she was a fine -- really, actually, an incredible young woman.”

Radosh condemns Richard Higgins’ “conspiracy” theory and has Gabriel Schoenfeld describe him as a “crank.”  Higgins is therefore not a good analyst.  I suppose Philip Mudd is.  Mudd announced on TV that, Government is gonna kill this guy.”  There are thousands of people in the intel community with a Mudd mindset.

The Left will be victorious.  They have captured the commanding heights of our society, but patriots will not go down without a fight.
President Trump may be doomed.  The forces against him are formidable.  They include (according to Higgins and any objective observer) “the Mainstream Media, the Academy, the Deep State created by cultural Marxism, global corporatists and bankers, the Democrats who protect “cultural Marxist programs of action.”

I ran across this example of media bias:

The Media and the Snowflakes

The recent controversy surrounding the events in Charlottesville illustrate a problem the media is having with President Trump.  Supporters of the President will remain with him under almost any circumstance.  His opponents will oppose him regardless of what he says. If he says “good morning” they will manage to find some nefarious motive in his statement.  There are a large number of people in the middle who can be swayed either way.  If they get their information exclusively from the establishment media they will tend to be critical of the President.  The establishment media is almost universally opposed to Trump.  The problem for the media is that an increasing number of people are getting their information from the internet. The internet contains a wide spectrum of information.  Much of it is nonsense.  However, it also contains 100% accurate information.  If people want to know what the President said during his press conference they can read the transcript.  Fair minded people can determine for themselves if the President’s remarks have been distorted.  

Much of the criticism of the President revolved around his condemnation of both sides in the violence in Charlottesville.  Trump was asked, “Is the alt-left as bad as white supremacy?”  He responded, “you had a group on one side that was bad, and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent.”  He continued, “you had a group on the other side that came charging in, without a permit, and they were very, very violent.”  This position is inexcusable.  The progressive narrative is that the Antifa are against hate and are therefore the good guys.  This narrative has been accepted by Trump’s Republican opponents.  John McCain claimed, “There’s no moral equivalency between racists & Americans standing up to defy hate&bigotry.  The President of the United States should say so.”  Mitt Romney tweeted, “No, not the same.  One side is racist, bigoted, Nazi.  The other opposes racism and bigotry.  Morally different universes.”  Lindsey Graham stated,  “Through his statements yesterday, President Trump took a step backward by again suggesting there is moral equivalency between the white supremacist neo-Nazis and KKK members who attended the Charlottesville rally and people like [Heather] Heyer.” 

Are the organizations attacking the alt-right respectable groups worthy of support by Republican senators?  Protesters frequently wear masks to conceal their identity.  They often use symbols of Che Guevara and Mao Zedong as fashion statements. They frequently carry flags from an ideology responsible for the deaths of perhaps 100 million people.  They routinely riot at G20 summits, causing extensive property damage.  Perhaps the two groups are not morally equivalent.  It may be that the “Antifa” are more destructive than the alt-right groups.

Donald Trump has repeatedly condemned the alt-right groups during his press conferences: “I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. Neo-Nazis and the white nationalists . . . should be condemned totally.  It looked like they had some rough, bad people -- neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them.”  The President mentioned those who attended the protest who were not extremists but attended because they opposed the removal of historic monuments.  He remarked, “you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.”  Is this sentence unclear?  He states, “other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.”  Yet a reporter immediately asks, “Sir, I just didn’t understand what you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly? I just don’t understand what you were saying.”  This question is an indication of a lack of understanding on the part of the press.  Even more incomprehensible was Lindsey Graham’s comment that the President equated the neo-Nazis with Heather Heyer, the woman who was killed during the protest.  Trump specifically said, “I hear she was a fine -- really, actually, an incredible young woman.”

The other inexcusable statement by the President was his claim that “You’re changing history. You’re changing culture.”  He said, “So this week it's Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?”  When it was pointed out that, “George Washington and Robert E. Lee are not the same,” he responded that they were both slave owners.  The reporter’s claim that Lee and Washington were not the same implied that after Lee the protests would end.  However there have been news reports that there are calls for the removal of both Washington and Jefferson monuments. 

If all the demands of the Antifa were granted and every last vestige of the Confederacy was remove, would they all return to their homes and resume their peaceful lives?  Everyone knows they would create a new list of demands.  Confederate monuments are just a tool they are using to assert their power.  Republican politicians are using them to attack the President.  They are either extremely cynical or incredibly ignorant.  Conservatives need to emphasize the moral depravity of Antifa and questions those politicians’ motives. 

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Are Far Left and Far Right Equivalent?

President Trump has committed the unpardonable sin of implying that the far left is as violent as the far right.  This can be a career ender.   New York Times Domestic Affairs Correspondent, Sheryl Gay Stolberg, may have learned this the hard way.  She commented, “The hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding ‘antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park.”   She was immediately set upon.  She had contradicted the progressive narrative.  Perhaps she can be forgiven because her comments were made early in the dispute.  The progressive narrative is that this was a demonstration by white supremacists, neo-Nazis and KKK protesting the removal of statues of slaveholders.  They were opposed by “civil rights protestors:” defenders of the American Way.  In Sheryl Gay Stolberg revised comments the protestors were “standing up to hate.”

Even Mitt Romney endorsed the progressive fairy tale, tweeting, "No, not the same. One side is racist, bigoted, Nazi. The other opposes racism and bigotry. Morally different universes."  Former Vice President Joe Biden tweeted simply: "There is only one side. #charlottesville."  This narrative has been repeated endlessly.  All demonstrators were hate advocates.  There was nobody demonstrating against the removal of monuments dedicated to their forebears or people aware of the left’s true agenda.  Perhaps they should have known that an event organized by Richard Spencer, a known white supremacist, would not be a tea party.

The President’s original statement was, "We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides.”  This allowed critics to suggest he was drawing a moral equivalency between the right and the left.  After massive criticism he appeared to have capitulated.  On Monday he condemned the attack and specifically mentioned the KKK, Neo-Nazis and white supremacists.  Unsurprisingly this did not satisfy his critics.  On Tuesday he appeared to revert to his original position with a vengeance.  He asked reporters, “When you say alt-right, define alt-right for me—what about the alt-left that came charging at the, as you say, the alt-right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?”
Trump claimed, “Not all of those people were neo-Nazis.” 

He then touched on a problem few conservative commentators have mentioned.  The entire progressive exercise is based on one goal: the acquisition of power.  He continued, “Many of those people were there to protest the taking down the statue of Robert E. Lee.  So this week its Robert E Lee I notice the Stonewall Jackson is coming down.   I wonder is it George Washington next week and is it Thomas Jefferson the week after.  You really do have to ask yourself where does it stop.”  Al Sharpton has already targeted  Thomas Jefferson.

There is not a moral equivalency between left and right.  The left has repeatedly demonstrated that they are more violent than the Right.  The left is held to an entirely different standard.  Black Lives Matter (“Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon) can be invited to the White House by President Obama.  President Trump can not even criticize them.  Mayors often tell their police forces to “stand down.”  They give protestors  “who wished to destroy space to do that as well.”  Conservative demonstrations do no usually end with burned out liquor stores.  Leftist speakers do not fear being assaulted when the visit a college campus.  The left controls the establishment media.  It can therefore suppress or emphasize information that it believes will further its cause.  Che Guevara, Mao, Joseph Stalin and Pol Potdo not receive the attention they deserve.

President Trump’s exchange with the press at Trump Tower did not reflect well on the press.  The question, “Are you against the Confederacy?” was entirely ignored.  After condemning white supremacists several times a reported asked, “I didn’t understand what you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly.”  Reporters hear what they want to hear.  If they are incapable of listening they cannot report accurately.

Monday, August 14, 2017

Government’s Gonna Kill This Guy

CNN counterterrorism analyst Philip Mudd is retired from a long career in American intelligence.  He was in the upper echelons of the intelligence community and was a member of the White House National Security Council.  He was appointed by FBI Director Robert Mueller to be the first deputy director of the FBI's National Security Branch in 2005.  He was awarded the William Langer Award for excellence in analysis and several Exceptional Performance Awards.  He resigned from government service in 2010 and is presently the President of Mudd Management, a company specializing in security consulting.

There is nothing exceptional about Mudd’s career except for the fact that he was a high performer.  He obviously was a good fit for the intelligence community.  His specialty is analysis.  It is therefore strange that he could demonstrate such a lack of judgment when discussing the policies of the President of the United States.  On August 11 during the CNN program The Lead with Jake Tapper there was a discussion about Trump’s comments about the Russian expulsion of U.S. diplomats.  Mudd responded to the question “what was your response Phil Mudd?” with “As a former government official.  Government’s gonna kill this guy.”

Tapper had to interrupt to make sure Mudd was speaking metaphorically.  Mudd responded “obviously.”  It is unfortunate that members of the entertainment community can “joke” about the President’s severed head.  We should expect a great deal more from our intelligence professionals.  This is more than an example of poor judgment.  Rudd mentions the “deep state.”   Referring to this entity as the “deep state” gives it an air of nefarious mystery.  There is nothing mysterious about the “deep state.”  It is the enormous bureaucracy that has been built up over the years.  It has a mind of its own and is remarkably resistant to the interference of elected officials.  Philip Mudd is an excellent example of a member of that bureaucracy.

Trump is a threat to this “deep state.”  He will attempt to rein it in.  However, funding for government programs has not been seriously reduced.  Congress (Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell) is still funding wasteful programs and leftist organizations.  Republican leadership claims it cannot make progress because that is how government works.  Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid never used that excuse.

While Mudd spoke approvingly of the government “killing this guy,” Richard Higgins, former NSC Director for Strategic Planning, wrote a memo describing the process the “deep state” is using to remove the President.  Higgins paid for his memo with his job. In his seven-page memo he warns of a concerted information warfare campaign designed to remove the President.  His memo states, “The Trump administration is suffering under withering information campaigns designed to first undermine, then delegitimize and ultimately remove the president.”  “For this cabal, Trump must be destroyed.”  Were something happen to the President, Mudd’s irresponsible remarks will come back to haunt him.

Saturday, August 12, 2017

A Brain is a Terrible Thing to Wash

Published by American Thinker on Aug 14, 2017

Nazi propagandist Joe Goebbels reportedly said, “A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.”  Everyone knows that the Russians interfered in the U.S. election.  When it is discussed on TV it is mentioned without qualification.  It is a known and accepted fact.  It is on a par with saying the earth is round.  However, ask for evidence.  There is none.  There is a dossier.  This dossier was so poorly created that even Vice President Joe Biden believed it was bogus.  If you can’t fool Joe Biden you can’t fool anybody.  After months of investigation by thousands of researchers eager to make a name for themselves the result is zero.  However, this does not prevent the assertion from being a “truth.”

Goebbels had undoubtedly read Sigmund Freud’s nephew, Edward Bernays, book on propaganda.  Bernays contended that, “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.  Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed , our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of."

The power of the media cannot be overestimated.  An early example of the media’s power was provided by publisher William Randolph Hearst.  Hearst sent the artist Frederic Remington to Cuba in 1897 to cover the insurrection against Spain.  Remington cabled Hearst, “Everything quiet.  There is no trouble here.  There will be no war.  Wish to return.”  Hearst responded, “Please remain.  You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.”  A short time later the U.S. was involved in the Spanish-American War.

Perhaps the most dramatic illustration of the effects of propaganda is American attitudes towards all things sexual.  Bernays wrote," We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of."  In this case we have the names of the architects of a considerable part of this transformation. Around 1985 social activists Marshall Kirk and Dr. Hunter Madsen began developing a plan to make homosexuality acceptable.  They wrote an article entitled The Gay Agenda outlining their strategy to make homosexuality appear narmal.  They have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.  In many locations they have made homosexuality fashionable.

When the elite is preparing the public for war the suffering of children is widely publicized.  Following the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq Nayirah al-Sabah testified before Congress that she witnessed Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators leaving them to die.  It was later revealed that she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States and was unlikely present in Kuwait at the time.  Her testimony was couched by PR firm and “inflamed American public opinion against the Iraqis.”

European attitudes about the flood of migrants reaching their shores have been influenced by photos of Aylan Kurdi, a Syrian toddler whose body was washed up on a beach in Turkey.  A British paper asserted, "If these extraordinarily powerful images of a dead Syrian child washed up on a beach don't change Europe's attitude to refugees, what will?"  The tragic death of this child was used to encourage the entry of thousands of migrants that were far from innocent.   

In the Syrian conflict Omran Daqneesh is the child star.  His village was allegedly bombed by pro-Assad forces.  “Activists and aid workers hoped the story would boost international support to help bring an end to the suffering and fighting in Syria.”  Instead of immediately tending to his wounds, Omran was positioned in an ambulance chair for a photo op.  “Television news anchors fought back tears as they broadcast the video.”  This was a direct appeal to peoples’ emotions.  The implied solution to bring about an end to the suffering in Syria is to overthrow the Assad regime.  This would be followed by a chaotic situation similar to the situation in Libya.

Economist Stuart Chase suggested, “Theoretically a society could be completely made over in something like 15 years, the time it takes to inculcate a new culture into a rising crop of youngsters.”  He warned, “Prepare now for a surprising universe.”  Baby boomers have witnessed four of these 15 year periods.  The transition has been extremely gradual and therefore difficult for some to recognize.  However, for those paying attention the transition has been truly surprising.

Friday, August 11, 2017

The Higgins Memo

This memo was posted on Freerepublic.  It is from Richard Higgins who was fired by Gen. McMaster 

The Complete Richard Higgins Memo
Circulating | May 2017 | Richard Higgins 
Posted on 8/10/2017, 10:17:47 PM by BRK

May 2017

BACKGROUND.  The Trump administration is suffering under withering information campaigns designed to first undermine, then de legitimize and ultimately remove the President. Possibly confusing these attacks with an elevated interplay of otherwise normal D.C. partisan infighting and adversarial media relations, the White House response to these campaigns reflects a political advocacy mindset that it is intensely reactive, severely under-inclusive and dangerously inadequate to the threat. If action is not taken to re-scope and respond to these hostile campaigns very soon, the administration risks implosion and subsequent early departure from the White House.
This is not politics as usual but rather political warfare at an unprecedented level that is openly engaged in the direct targeting of a seated president through manipulation of the news cycle. It must be recognized on its own terms so that immediate action can be taken. At its core, these campaigns run on multiple lines of effort, serve as the non-violent line of effort of a wider movement, and execute political warfare agendas that reflect cultural Marxist outcomes. The campaigns operate through narratives. Because the hard left is aligned with lslamist organizations at local (ANTI FA working with Muslim Brotherhood doing business as MSA and CAIR), national (ACLU and BLM working with CAIR and MPAC) and international levels (OIC working with OSCEand the UN), recognition must given to the fact that they seamlessly interoperate at the narrative level as well. In candidate Trump, the opposition saw a threat to the "politically correct" enforcement narratives they've meticulously laid in over the past few decades. In President Trump, they see a latent threat to continue that effort to ruinous effect and their retaliatory response reflects this fear.

INTRODUCTION. Responding to relentless personal assaults on his character, candidate Trump identified the players and the strategy:

"The establishment and their media enablers will control over this nation through means that are very well known. Anyone who challenges their control is deemed a sexist, a racist, a xenophobe, and morally deformed." - President Trump, Oct 2016

Culturally conditioned to limit responses to such attacks as yet another round in the on-going drone from diversity and multicultural malcontents, these broadsides are discounted as political correctness run amuck. However, political correctness is a weapon against reason and critical thinking. This weapon functions as the enforcement mechanism of diversity narratives that seek to implement cultural

Marxism. Candidate Trump's rhetoric in the campaign not only cut through the Marxist narrative, he did so in ways that were viscerally comprehensible to a voting bloc that then made candidate Trump the president; making that bloc self-aware in the process. President Trump is either the candidate he ran as, or he is nothing.

Recognizing in candidate Trump an existential threat to cultural Marxist memes that dominate the prevailing cultural narrative, those that benefit recognize the threat he poses and seek his destruction. For this cabal, Trump must be destroyed. Far from politics as usual, this is a political warfare effort that seeks the destruction of a sitting president. Since Trump took office, the situation has intensified to crisis level proportions. For those engaged in the effort, especially those from within the "deep state" or  permanent government apparatus, this raises clear Title 18 (legal) concerns.


The Opposition. While opposition to President Trump manifests itself through political warfare memes centered on cultural Marxist narratives, this hardly means that opposition is limited to Marxists as conventionally understood. Having become the dominant cultural meme, some benefit from it while others are captured by it; including "deep state" actors, globalists, bankers, lslamists, and establishment Republicans. Through the campaign, candidate Trump tapped into a deep vein of concern among many citizens that America is at risk and is slipping away. Globalists and lslamists recognize that for their visions to succeed, America, both as an ideal and as a national and political identity, must be destroyed. Atomization of society must also occur at the individual level; with attacks directed against all levels of group and personal identity. Hence the sexism, racism and xenophobia memes. As a Judea-Christian culture, forced inclusion of post-modern notions of tolerance is designed to induce nihilistic contradictions that reduce all thought, all faith, all loyalties to meaninglessness. Group rights based on sex or ethnicity are a direct assault on the very idea of individual human rights and natural law around which the Constitution was framed. "Transgender acceptance" memes attack at the most basic level by denying a person the right to declare the biological fact of one's sex. When a population has 2 + 2 = 5 imposed on it, there are many that benefit:

•         Mainstream Media -The principle mechanism for implementing narratives.

•         The Academy - Academia has served as a principle counter-state node for some time and remains a key conduit for creating future adherents to cultural Marxist narratives and their derivative worldview.

•         The Deep State - The successful outcome of cultural Marxism is a bureaucratic state beholden to no one, certainly not the American people. With no rule of law considerations outside those that further deep state power, the deep state truly becomes, as Hegel advocated, god bestriding the earth.

•         Global Corporatists & Bankers - Exploitation of populations, unfettered by national protections and notions of personal morality and piety.

•         Democratic Leadership - The democratic leadership has been a counter-state enabler that executes, sustains, and protects cultural Marxist programs of action and facilitates the relentless expansion of the deep state.

•         Republican Leadership - More afraid of being accused of being called a racist, sexist, homophobe or lslamophobe than of failing to enforce their oaths to "support and defend the Constitution," the Republican Establishment accepts and enforces cultural Marxist memes within its own sphere of operations. In doing so, knowingly or not, it becomes an agent of that. These "conservatives" become increasingly indistinguishable from their democratic counterparts save that they misrepresent themselves to their constituents. Lacking the discernment to recognize their situation, they will work with globalists, corporatists, and the international financial interests and will likewise service the deep state. These establishment Republicans are the hard left's designated defeat mechanism in the destruction of the old regime as well as the American ideal. 1 Because candidate Trump publicly exposed them for their duplicitous activities, they are at risk as long as Trump can turn on them and are, therefore, bitter foes. Candidate Trump's success remains an ongoing existential threat to establishment Republicans.

1 For more information on how influence operations of the former Soviet Union targeted leading conservative groups and individuals in order to bring them into line with cultural Marxist narratives. See Link here:

•         lslamists - Islamists ally with cultural Marxist because, as far back as the 1980s, they properly assessed that the hard left has a strong chance of reducing Western civilization to its benefit. Having co-opted post-modern narratives as critical points, Islamists deploy these narratives to strategically blind and then control US decision makers. This is by design and purposeful. "By their own hands!" has been the declared strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood since 1991. This strategy seeks to divide American society against itself with the forced imposition of Islamist objectives on one half of American society by the other half. Once a society has been effectively atomized, the population will have lost its faith in the old order, detest those who reduced it, and divide along the lines of narrative adherence. This is the intended outcome of hostile information cum political warfare campaigns and today we see their effects on American society.

Complicating the current situation, many close to the president have pushed him off his message when he was candidate Trump thus alienating him from his base thereby isolating him in the process.  When President Trump is not candidate Trump, he becomes dangerously exposed. While the base that elected candidate Trump identified with his vision, they are only Trump's insofar as he holds to the vision that made him president.

Political Warfare Attacks -A Primer. As used here, "political warfare" does not concern activities associated with the American political process but rather exclusively refers to political warfare as understood by the Maoist Insurgency model2. Political warfare is one of the five components of a Maoist insurgency. Maoist methodologies employ synchronized violent and non-violent actions that focus on mobilization of individuals and groups to action. This approach envisions the direct use of non-violent operational arts and tactics as elements of combat power. In Maoist insurgencies, the formation of a counter-state is essential to seizing state power. Functioning as a hostile competing state acting within an existing state, it has an alternate infrastructure. Political warfare operates as one of the activities of the "counter-state" and is primarily focused on the resourcing and mobilization of the counter state or the exhaustion and demobilization of the targeted political movement. Political warfare methods can be implemented at strategic, operational, or tactical levels of operation.

Political warfare is warfare. Strategic information campaigns designed to delegitimize through disinformation arise out of non-violent lines of effort in political warfare regimes. They principally operate through narratives. Because the left is aligned with lslamist organizations at local, national and international levels, recognition should be given to the fact that they seamlessly interoperate through coordinated synchronized interactive narratives.

Cultural Marxism - A Primer. While the attacks on President Trump arise out of political warfare considerations based on non-kinetic lines of effort (as discussed below), they operate in a battle-space prepared, informed and conditioned by cultural Marxist drivers. In practical terms, the political warfare assault on President Trump cannot be separated from the cultural Marxist narratives that drive them. From an operational preparation of the environment perspective, President Trump is operating in a battle-space that reflects the left's vision.

2 This discussion relies on Thomas A. Marks' treatment of the Maoist model as discussed in Maoist People's War in Post-Vietnam Asia (Bangkok, Thailand: White Lotus Press, 2007), 1-14. Hereafter "Thomas A. Marks, Maoist People's War."

As used in this discussion, cultural Marxism relates to programs and activities that arise out of Gramsci Marxism, Fabian Socialism and most directly from the Frankfurt School. The Frankfurt strategy deconstructs societies through attacks on culture by imposing a dialectic that forces unresolvable contradictions under the rubric of critical theory. The result is induced nihilism, a belief in everything that is actually the belief in nothing.

That post-modern (diversity/multiculturalism) narratives seeks to implement cultural Marxist objectives can be demonstrated by reference to founding Frankfurt School theorist Herbert Marcuse's repurposing of the term tolerance. In a 1965 ~ Marcuse defined tolerance as intolerance; said it can be implemented through undemocratic means to stop chauvinism (xenophobia), racism, discrimination; and should be extended to the left while denied to the right:

•  "The realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed."

•  "Surely, no government can be expected to foster its own subversion, but in a democracy such a right is vested in the people (i.e. in the majority of the people). This means that the ways should not be blocked on which a subversive majority could develop, and if they are blocked by organized repression and indoctrination, their reopening may require apparently undemocratic means. They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion, or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc." (8-9)

• "Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: ... it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion and propaganda, of deed as well as of word." (12)

It is through such post-modern constructs that interoperable narratives are established among various left-wing groups as well as between them and Islamist groups at all levels. For example, from the 2001 Conference of Foreign Ministers at Bamako, Mali, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) declared its commitment to fight racism and xenophobia and then declared lslamophobia a "contemporary form of racism":

• In this context, the World Conference urges all states ... take all necessary measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance particularly against Islam

• Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance which display an increasing trend, in their most subtle and contemporary forms, constitute a violation of human rights. 3. Contemporary forms of racism are based on discrimination and disparagement on a cultural, rather than biological basis. In this content, the increasing trend of lslamophobia, as a distinct form of xenophobia in non-Muslim societies is very alarming.

That the OIC made these claims as part of its planned inputs to the United Nation's "Third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance" further demonstrates the coordinated and interoperable nature of these narratives at international levels in international forums.

As cultural Marxist narratives intensify, they are to be further operationalized in the form of hate speech narratives. Hate speech narratives are non-random, coordinated, and fully interoperable escalations of cultural Marxist memes. Key international players include the European Union, the UN, and the OSCE, the OIC and the International Muslim Brotherhood. Hate speech memes are structured, coordinated, and implemented through these same international forums. They involve close coordination with media and social media and include the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) narratives. David Shipler's book Freedom of Speech provides a road map for how hate speech narratives are to be structured, deployed and enforced.

Battlespace. These attack narratives are pervasive, full spectrum and institutionalized at all levels. They operate in social media, television, the 24-hour news cycle in all media, and are entrenched at the upper levels of the bureaucracies and within the foreign policy establishment. They inform the entertainment industry from late night monologues, to situation comedies, to television series memes, to movie themes. The effort required to direct this capacity at President Trump is little more than a programming decision to do so. The cultural Marxist narrative is fully deployed, pervasive, full spectrum and ongoing. Regarding the president, attacks have become a relentless 24/7 effort.

While there is certainly a Marxist agenda and even lslamist motivations that must be seriously addressed in their own right, these motivations alone seem inadequate to explain the scope and magnitude of the effort directed against the president. The economic drivers behind the Marxist and Islamist ideologues are enormously influential and seek to leverage these ideological movements for their own self interests. While beyond the actual scope of this document, the benefactors of these political movements include; Urban Real Estate who depend greatly on immigrant tenants, International Banking who seeks to maintain US debtor status so as to control the application of American power, and elements of the business sector that depend upon immigrant labor or government infrastructure. The overall objective of these economic forces is the forced urbanization of the populace, thereby necessitating a larger, more powerful government. In summary, this is a form of population control by certain business cartels in league with cultural Marxists/corporatists/lslamists who will leverage Islamic terrorism threats to justify the creation of a police state.

Adversary Campaign Plan. Political Warfare has been described as "propaganda in battledress."3 The effort directed at President Trump is executed along one overt, as well as two covert, lines of effort:

•  The overt line of effort is PUBLICITY. Publicity is the straightforward projection of a case that builds a picture in the audience's mind designed to garner support. It is facts without context and information the adversary wants the audience to possess that creates an impression and sets conditions. It seeks to establish good will and receptiveness to additional inputs.

•   There are two covert lines of effort: PROPOGANDA and INFILTRATION/SUBVERSION.

o  Propaganda is the deliberate direction, even manipulation, of information to secure a definite outcome. It is an attempt to direct the thinking of the recipient, without his conscious collaboration, into predetermined channels that are established in the Publicity line of effort. It is the unwitting conditioning of the recipient by devious methods with an ulterior motive that seeks to move them incrementally over time into greater belief and acceptance of message transmitted in the Publicity line of effort.

o Infiltration and subversion operate internal to the targeted organization in order to inform, target, coordinate, and amplify the effects of the publicity and propaganda. Both operate to gather intelligence, obstruct legitimate courses of action, provide inside information, and leak sensitive information that undermines the leadership and suppresses the morale of friendly elements.

3 "Political Warfare Executive - The Meaning, Techniques and Methods of Political Warfare," His Britannic Majesty's Government, London, 1942, 5.

o Infiltration of political and social groups within a target state is done for the purpose of extending counterstate influence and control. The endgame is concealed and may involve illicit activities.

o Subversion undermines or detaches the loyalties of significant political and social groups within the target state and transfers political and/or ideological loyalties to the counter-state. As the counter-state forms, a counter-elite of influential individual and key leaders within the target state will later facilitate the legitimacy and permanency of the new regime.

Political warfare employs both publicity and propaganda. It recognizes no intrinsic virtue in the news but rather envisions it as a mechanism to exploit and build up support. From a political warfare perspective, control of the news cycle is the most potent means of attracting and building up a favorable audience. As it relates to the news cycle, publicity and propaganda can be merged to form a "pseudo-publicity" that is presented as news in furtherance of sustaining pseudo-realities maintained by cultural Marxist memes. Pseudo-publicity treatment of President Trump dominates the news cycle. The current campaign against President Trump operates in the following manner:

The Meta Narrative. Meta narratives seeks to delegitimize President Trump, his administration, and the vision of America he projected as a candidate. With cultural Marxist memes serving as the backdrop, President Trump is to be relentlessly characterized as unfit through the use of supporting narratives acting to move unwitting populations to belief in the meta narrative. Hence:

•"President Trump is illegitimate"

•"President Trump is corrupt"

•"President Trump is dishonest"

Note that the twitter accounts and mainstream media personalities pushing this narrative have seen their audience numbers rise greatly in the past 6 months. This is a direct result of the supporting and backdrop narratives channeling individuals to this meta-narrative.

Supporting Narratives. Meta-narratives are supported by an ongoing series supporting-narratives that can be swapped out as circumstances warrant. It is important to recognize that these stories do not have to be true, valid or accurate to serve their purpose. Over time, deserved or not, the cumulative effect of these supporting narratives will result in a Trump fatigue. From a political warfare perspective, President Trump's inability to meet this challenge will cast him as a weak failed leader. The current list of supporting narratives include:

•         "Russia hacked the election"       - illegitimate

•         "Obstruction of Justice"                - corrupt

•         "Hiding Collusion"                            - dishonest

•         "Putin Puppet"                                 - treasonous

Backdrop Narratives. The backdrop to the meta and supporting narratives are cultural Marxist memes designed to sustain a general sense of loathing of President Trump and the America that elected him.


•         "[meta] President Trump is illegitimate, [supporting] he was elected because of Russian hacking, [backdrop] and besides, he a racist, sexist xenophobe."

Adversaries utilize these interlocking narratives as a defensive political and information warfare screen that silences critics and smears supporters of President Trump. When people in the media question the behavior, actions and decisions of the Trump Administration's opponents, they are immediately said to be "working for the Russians" or "supporting Russian propaganda." Individual Americans who support the President are deemed "deplorable" and "racist."

End State. Attacks on President Trump are not just about destroying him, but also about destroying the vision of America that lead to his election. Those individuals and groups seeking the destruction of President Trump actually seek to suffocate the vision of America that made him president. Hence, the end state is not just a delegitimized, destabilized, immobilized and possibly destroyed presidency; but also a demoralized movement composed of a large enough bloc to elect a president that subsequently become self-aware of its own disenfranchisement.


The recent turn of events give rise to the observation that the defense of President Trump is the defense of America. In the same way President Lincoln was surrounded by political opposition both inside and outside of his wire, in both overt and covert forms, so too is President Trump. Had Lincoln failed, so too would have the Republic. The administration has been maneuvered into a constant backpedal by relentless political warfare attacks structured to force him to assume a reactive posture that assures inadequate responses. The president can either drive or be driven by events; it's time for him to drive them.