Jewish screaming about the horrors of the Holocaust and the evil indifference of the Allies in not coming to their aid soon enough has obscured the important role of the Soviet Union in winning World War II. If Hitler had not invaded the Soviet Union and brought them into the war, Hitler may have solidified his domination of Western Europe even if he had not been able to invade England or the US. The result would have been that many more Jews would have died and the status of Jewry in the world would have been greatly diminished. Israel would probably never have been created.
The Soviets suffered the most casualties of any nation in the War, about double what the Jews suffered in the Holocaust. But the Jews spit on the Soviet sacrifices although they probably saved millions of Jewish lives by defeating the Germans. It is unlikely that the US and UK alone could have invaded Western Europe on D-Day if the Soviets had not defeated a major part of the German army on the eastern front.
Even in America, we have a World War II memorial because the Jews made the war about the Holocaust. American GIs thought their victory over Hitler would have ensured their legacy, but the Jews perverted it by accusing them of delaying the invasion of Europe while Jews died in German prison camps. The Jews portray American leadership from FDR down as morally and militarily weak. America had to create World War II memorials to offset the Jewish defamation of World War II veterans. While Americans did fight valiantly and were probably a deciding factor in the defeat of Germany, the Soviets were also essential, but they get even more Jewish derision than American veterans.
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Oligarchy versus Free Markets
To function
well, capitalism requires a free market.
Markets in America are becoming progressively less free as they become
more oligopolistic. Antitrust is
basically dead. Mergers and acquisitions
are becoming more frequent and much larger, highlighted by this Wall
Street Journal story. A market
dominated by a few huge players is not free.
It’s bad for customers, who cannot bargain with so few alternatives, and
for employees, who are hugely overmatched by the power of management. It tends to stifle innovation, because in
many cases small companies cannot compete with the market giants, who will
drive new competitors out of business by cutting prices or other punitive
measures.
Outsourcing
and automation have increased the power of the already powerful market
giants. . Very little is manufactured in America,
despite ABC TV’s efforts to find things made here. Bank tellers are one of the latest entry
level jobs to go the way of the dodo bird, replaced by on-line banking and ATMs. Management of these large companies is
furiously trying to bring labor costs to zero.
They have enlisted the Republican Party to help them break unions. There are almost no unions left in the manufacturing
sector; the most powerful ones are in the public sector, particularly
teachers. For lobbyists’ money,
Republicans politicians have taken on the task of destroying the teachers’
union, which would probably be the death knell for unions across the
country. Republicans already dislike
education; how many times did Republicans say, “I am not a scientist,” during
this last election. They are uneducated
and proud of it, but they also have an
economic agenda behind their efforts to destroy schools and teachers.
The heart
of the matter is that Republicans love money and love people with money. This is why they are willing to outsource the
defense of the country to their friends who supply private armies for
money. That’s why they want to lower taxes, and end
regulations that in any way hinder their patrons from making a quick buck. That’s why we have even government healthcare
like Medicaid run by private insurance companies, of which there are only a few
giants who dominate the market.
The
American people sense these dislocations.
They recognize that American business is not the same as it was a
generation or two ago. That is one
reason they don’t have faith in the current economy. They see, either objectively or subjectively,
that the American economy is not a free market.
It is stacked in favor of the rich, who get their taxes lowered, their
political influence strengthened. At the
moment, relatively few people are starving; we are not on the verge of a French
Revolution, but we seem to be moving toward that sort of climax, rather than
away from it.
The most
recent episode of HBO’s “The Newsroom,” with federal agents swarming the
newsroom floor, was no doubt intended to be reminiscent of France’s “Le
Miserables” or perhaps even Nazi-era Germany.
As Thomas Jefferson said, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Problems with 501(c)(4) Organizations
The recent elections point out how corrupting the influence
of 501(C)(4) organizations is. The
organizations are the means of protecting the use of dark money in elections
which cannot be traced to any individual or organization. The IRS was right to investigate applications
for 501(c)(4) organizations; almost everyone involved in them is corrupt and is
corrupting the American elections process.
To qualify under 501(c)(4), an organization must be a nonprofit
organized exclusively for the promotion of social welfare. It is not supposed to be a political advocacy
organization, except to the extent that something like historical preservation
or child welfare might get involved in the political process in order to
further its social aims. It may engage
in lobbying for its cause as its primary activity; however, political
activities may not be the organizations “primary activities.” Presumably this means that political
activities cannot constitute more than 50% of its activities, probably
determined by how it spends its money.
The OpenSecrets.org
web site list the following as the main 501(c)(4) spenders in the 2014 campaign:
Crossroads GPS
|
$26,015,174
|
NRA Institute
|
$10,686,049
|
Patriot Majority USA
|
$10,652,302
|
League of Conservation Voters
|
$9,472,561
|
American Action Network
|
$8,958,129
|
Kentucky Opportunity Coalition
|
$7.573,762
|
Carolina Rising
|
$6,459,252
|
Americans for Prosperty
|
$5,540,280
|
An Ohio
State College of Law article on 501(c)(4)’s states that they must file a
Form 990 with the IRS. While the 990
includes information regarding contributors who give at least $5,000, that
information is not made public. In
discussing the IRS controversy pursued by Congressman Issa, the article says:
When
Congress passed the disclosure provisions in § 527, it required disclosure by
organizations that intervened in political campaigns. Some organizations that
engage in significant political activity have claimed that their activities are
not political but are social welfare activities. If organizations primarily
engaged in political activity are classified as social welfare organizations,
then Congressional intent regarding disclosure will be flouted. Determining the
primary purpose of the organization, therefore, requires the IRS to examine the
political activities of the organizations seeking status as a social welfare
organization and to determine whether those organizations are social welfare
organizations or political organizations.
In discussing the IRS
investigation, the article goes on to say:
It
is very difficult to determine the primary purpose of an organization. The questions
asked of these organizations were clearly designed to try to examine the
organizations’ activities. Obviously, an organization seeking status as a
social welfare organization that is familiar with the legal rules in this area
is not going to state that its primary activity is intervention in a political
campaign. If it did so, it would be a § 527 political organization. The IRS
needs to examine an organization that applies for recognition under § 501(c)(4)
to determine its true purpose. To take an extreme example, if the organization
spent $10,000 on social welfare activities but had 1,000 volunteers who engaged
in campaign intervention activities, the primary purpose of the organization
would likely be political, despite the fact that it spent more money on social
welfare activities. It is understandable how an agent thinking about
investigating an organization would ask these types of questions. It is also
understandable that in the aggregate these questions were unduly intrusive.
The law appears to be
designed to facilitate misuse and thereby contribute to the corruption of
elections. My opinion is that anyone who
uses a 501(c)(4) organization is probably undermining the American electoral
system. It is a bad law and should be
repealed.
Tuesday, November 04, 2014
Chaos in the Middle East
I am disgusted by US policy in the Middle East. It appears to be the US policy to overthrow
every government and replace it with chaos.
We have created an enormous, fertile breeding ground for terrorism. Afghanistan pre-9/11 was a relatively safe,
orderly country compared to Syria today, and thanks to the US policy of
destroying governments that might have helped contain the chaos in Syria things
are getting worse.
The most recent target of US destabilization is Turkey. Whether rightly or wrongly, Turkey perceives
the Kurds, particularly under the leadership of the PKK, as terrorists who want
to form a greater Kurdistan that would take away part of Turkey, or ideally for
the Kurds, overthrow the Turkish government.
The US is supporting the Kurds despite the protests of the Turkish
government. Because of Turkey’s fear of
the PKK, the US came up with the idea of bringing Kurds from Iraq to fight in
Kobani, because Turkey doesn’t care of the Kurds create a Kurdistan in Iraq;
that is not their problem. The US
currently seems much more favorably disposed toward creating a Kurdistan from
Iraq than it did when Biden first proposed it years ago.
But Turkey is only the most recent target of US destabilization
attempts. We have already destabilized Iraq,
Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt (especially the Sinai), Libya, and Yemen. While Tunisia looks better, having just
completed fair elections, it is a big source of recruits for ISIS. Regarding Iraq and Afghanistan, Iraq is
already going down the tubes, and Afghanistan looks set to follow after we
leave. Several recent articles have
compared the Iraq and Afghan wars to Vietnam, especially to the battle of Khe
Sanh, positing the idea that American soldiers won every battle, but the
political leadership lost the war.
It’s still not clear which way the battle for Kobani will
go, but today there are reports of the defeat of the American proxies, the Free
Syrian Army around Idlib in Syria, with the bad guys, reportedly al-Nusra,
capturing anti-tank weapons, after ISIS captured some of the supplies we
dropped for the Kurds in Kobani. The
American news reports of this on TV tonight were particularly bad. ABC’s Martha Radditz, who is usually good on
military issues, looked like she didn’t know what she was reporting on. Tom Friedman’s recent column in the NYT
raised the pertinent issue that because of the threats to news reporters in
these hot spots, we don’t have good information about what is going on. We are often depending on propaganda posted
on Twitter or Facebook, or on reports from ordinary people like refugees, who
may not be reliable sources. Hopefully
our intelligence agencies with all the billions we spend on them have some
humint, sigint and photint that the news people don’t have. And hopefully they will leak some sanitized
information to the news media that is not entirely spin supporting the
administration’s policies. But it’s hard
to verify.
I think that we are making things worse in the Middle
East. If we had let nature take its
course in getting rid of Saddam, Mubarak, Kaddafi, Assad, etc., we might have
more stability there and less terrorism.
I worry that the instability is a plus for Israel. Certainly al-Sisi’s takeover in Egypt has
been good for Israel. If the Israelis
believe this, then influential American Jews may be pushing America to pursue
policies that are good for Israel, but not necessarily good for America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)