From the Heart to the Mouth: Jesus’ Views on the Talmud

Perversity, Stupidity and Blind Guides

As Al-Aqsa descends into chaos…

By Richard Edmondson

I came across the above picture several days ago. It is of Nur Hamdan, a 13-year-old Palestinian boy who lost his eye earlier this month after being shot by Israeli police. According to news reports, Nur was standing on the balcony of his East Jerusalem home along with his mother and a cousin when he was hit by a “sponge-tipped bullet.”

Reportedly he suffered eye socket fractures and other facial injuries. According to Israeli authorities, clashes were occurring in the area, but Nur’s family says he was not involved in any of this. When his mom saw the Israeli police presence in the street below, she ordered the children to come inside from the balcony, and reportedly it was just as Nur stood up that he was hit by the projectile.

You can go here and here to access news articles on the incident. (All of this took place just a few days before the shooting of two Israeli police officers and subsequent outbreak of violence at the Temple Mount.) One of the reports says the use of sponge-tipped bullets for crowd control began three years ago, but now the Israelis have adopted a new version that is “twice as hard and heavy and their potential to cause injury is much greater.” Official police regulations stipulate the bullet should not be fired at children, and if used against adults only the legs should be targeted. Apparently, however, this regulation was disregarded in Nur’s case.

It may have been disregarded other times as well. One of the reports linked to above is from The Independent, whose article notes that, “as of January 2016, 15 people have lost an eye in similar shootings involving Israeli forces, including a six-year-old boy.”

It seems almost as if Israel’s behavior grows progressively worse the more global public opinion galvanizes against it. Perhaps there is a perverse sort of logic in this. Just a guess here, but maybe the thinking goes something along the lines of: “Well people are going to hate us anyway, so we might as well do whatever the f-ck we want.” Whether this is the new credo or not, certainly perversity and perverse thinking–quite a bit of it actually–can be found in the Talmud, one of Judaism’s “holy” books. For instance, a passage from the Moed Kattan reads, “If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.” If you think about it, there is a perverse sort of “logic” to it, I suppose.

The Talmud also has passages concerning non-Jews, such as this one from the Sanhedrin, “What a Jew steals from a Gentile he may keep,” and even those applying to non-Jewish children, such as this gem–“All gentile children are animals”–from the Talmudic tractate known as the Yebamoth.

The above quotes are taken from an article by Michael Hoffman, who is the author of Judaism’s Strange Gods and is widely regarded as one of the preeminent non-Jewish authorities on the Talmud. You might want to go and check it out. There are lots of other quotes from the Talmud as well.

So is there a connection between the perverse ideology found in the Talmud and the perverse behavior we see from Israelis? I don’t have a definitive answer to that, but my guess is probably there are Israeli rabbis who point to various passages in the Talmud in order to justify things such as settlement expansion, demolition of Palestinian homes, and–well, who knows?–maybe even shooting children in the eye. All this is not to say that there aren’t some good and decent Israeli Jews who oppose their government’s policies.  I suspect, however, these are not the ones who spend their days reading and studying the Talmud.

Jesus had a few thoughts on this subject as well, although I should qualify the title I’ve given to this post–“From the Heart to the Mouth: Jesus’ Views on the Talmud”–by mentioning that the Talmud did not exist in Jesus’ day. Ah, but the oral law did. And the oral law became the basis for a good portion of the Talmud, which began to be written down starting in about 200 A.D.

So what exactly was this oral law that existed in Jesus’ time? Well, it consisted of “interpretations” of the law of Moses, along with some outright additions that supposedly had been omitted from the five books of the Torah, presumably due to oversight, all of this as envisaged, or imagined, by rabbis and “sages” of the day–a group of people Jesus referred to (almost always derisively) as “teachers of the law.”

A clear picture of the contempt Jesus felt for their perverse edicts can be found in the fifteenth chapter of Matthew (a parallel passage can also be found in Mark 7). The chapter starts out with a group of Pharisees and teachers of the law coming to Jesus and demanding to know why he doesn’t insist on his disciples washing their hands before they eat. Here is his reply to them, starting in verse 3 and running through verse 9:

“And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ he is not to ‘honor his father’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
Their teachings are but rules taught by men.’”

Jews were required in those days to make sacrifices at the Temple as well as pay a yearly Temple tax. Apparently the teachers of the law felt it more urgent and of greater priority for members of the public to fulfill these obligations  than obligations toward their own parents. And Jesus called them out on it.

The quote Jesus supplies from Isaiah is from chapter 29, verse 13. Interestingly, the entire 29th chapter of Isaiah is a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem. Verse 14, immediately following the one quoted by Jesus, reads:

Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish; the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish.

Isaiah seems to have been envisioning a time in which the intelligent and wise, the “sages” if you will, would sink into a morass of perversity and stupidity. Again, keep in mind the Talmud began to be written down starting in about 200 A.D.

Another interesting aspect to all this is that Isaiah refers to the city of Jerusalem not by its common name–Jerusalem–but by the name “Ariel.” The Hebrew word “ariel” means “lion of God,” but because of Isaiah’s use of it in this context, it has also come to be recognized as an alternate name for Jerusalem. Thus, Ariel Sharon, the former prime minister of Israel who spent the last eight years of his life in a vegetative state, could also be known as “Lion of God Sharon” or “Jerusalem Sharon.” Either would be technically correct.

Here is what Isaiah says about the city of Ariel/Jerusalem:

Woe to you Ariel, Ariel,
the city where David settled!
Add year to year
and let your cycle of festivals go on.
Yet I will besiege Ariel;
she will mourn and lament,
she will be to me like an altar hearth.

The above are the first two verses of chapter 29. A bit of explanation regarding the term “altar hearth” is warranted. In ancient Israel, particularly in the homes of the poor, a “hearth” consisted of a depression in the ground in which a fire was kindled. An “altar” was a place where sacrifices were made–and hence where blood was shed. So Jerusalem, Isaiah in effect was saying, will become like “a depression in the ground where blood is shed.” Also take note: the Hebrew word for “ariel”, spelled אךיאל ,   is very similar to the Hebrew word for “altar”, spelled  אךאיל ,  and both are pronounced ar-ee-ale’ . In other words, Isaiah was making a play on words! And a rather ironic one at that: the “lion of God” was going to become nothing more than a “depression in the ground where blood is shed.”

But to return to the Gospel of Matthew. The verbal dressing down of the teachers of the law is followed, in verses 10 and 11, with:

Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’”

It is while Jesus is addressing the crowd that the Pharisees and teachers of the law stalk away, apparently incensed at being called hypocrites and having the words of Isaiah thrown up in their faces. This in fact is remarked upon by one of the disciples. “Did you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?” he entreats Jesus with a sense of alarm. The latter replies:

“Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”

It is at this point that the ever-curious and ever-quizzical Peter asks for an elaboration–what exactly did Jesus mean about words coming out of a person’s mouth making the person unclean? The reply is well worth recording here:

“Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean.’ For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what make a man ‘unclean’; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him ‘unclean.’”

In his article, Hoffman says that most religious Orthodox Jews ascribe greater authority to the Talmud than to the Old Testament, and he supplies a quote from a Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph, who insists that without the Talmud, Jews would be unable to grasp the meaning of the Old Testament.

“God has handed this authority to the sages and tradition is a necessity as well as scripture,” ben Joseph asserts. “The Sages also made enactments of their own…anyone who does not study the Talmud cannot understand Scripture.”

In the video below we see a couple of erudite Israeli “sages” offering up their views on Gentiles.

On a scale of 1 to 10 how would you rate the level of perversity and stupidity you see in this video? Isn’t it ironic–that we observe these two teachers of the law referring to Gentiles as animals, insisting that they exist to serve only Jews, while at the same time congratulating themselves on being the most “humane” creatures on the planet? Is it any wonder Jesus referred to them as hypocrites and blind guides?

One of the foremost Talmudic scholars of the 20th century was a US rabbi by the name of Joseph D. Soloveitchik, who served at Yeshiva University in New York and is said to have ordained some 2,000 rabbis over the course of his career. Soloveitchik reportedly had a close relationship with Chabad Lubavitch Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, and is also said to have been highly admired by Rabbi Meir Kahane. Schneerson believed that two types of souls exist: a Jewish soul and a non-Jewish soul. The latter, he held, comes from “satanic spheres,” but the Jewish soul “stems from holiness.”* As for Kahane, he was founder of the Jewish Defense League (JDL) and was convicted of domestic terrorism in the US. All three men–Soloveitchik, Schneerson, and Kahane–were avid supporters of Israel.

Among the JDL’s more notable accomplishments were acts of violence aimed against Russian targets in the US as well as bomb threats called in over the 1970 TV sitcom Bridget Loves Bernie (the show portrayed an interfaith marriage between a Catholic woman and a Jewish man and was cancelled after only one season despite having high ratings).

Hoffman, who describes the Talmud as “hate literature,” says the body of writing “has caused untold suffering throughout history and now, in occupied Palestine, it is used as a justification for the mass murder of Palestinian civilians.”

Interestingly, Isaiah evinced what could possibly be construed as a premonition of the coming of the the oral law. In his chapter 29, verse 4, he writes:

Brought low, you will speak from the ground;
your speech shall mumble out of the dust
Your voice will come ghostlike from the earth;
Out of the dust your speech will whisper.

The prophet died in about 681 B.C. Legend has it that he was sawed in half. Mannasseh, one of the more evil rulers of the ancient Israelites, was king of Judah at the time. Roughly a hundred years after his death, Jerusalem, in 586 B.C., was sacked by the Babylonians.

Christ was crucified in 30 A.D. Forty years later, in 70 A.D. Jerusalem was sacked again, this time by the Romans.

Does history repeat itself? With the plethora of blind guides leading the blind that we see today in Israel, the answer to that is probably going to be yes.

* as quoted in Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, by Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky

Senate Bill Would Criminalize BDS, Impose Prison Terms; ACLU Publishes Letter in Opposition

Sens. Kristen Gillibrand and Charles Schumer of New York are among the co-sponsors of a bill calling for criminal penalties for US citizens supporting a boycott of Israel

“We write today in opposition to S. 720, also known as the Israel Anti-Boycott Act. We understand that proponents of the bill are seeking additional co-sponsors. We urge you to refrain from co-sponsoring the legislation because it would punish individuals for no reason other than their political beliefs.”

So reads the opening paragraph of a letter published on Monday by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The Israel Anti-Boycott Act would make it a felony for Americans to support the boycott of Israel. According to the ACLU, violators would be subject to massive fines and imprisonment of up to 20 years. The bill was introduced into the Senate back in March by Sen. Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat. Since then, it has picked up a whopping 45 co-sponsors, including seven just in the past week, suggesting it has a strong chance of  passing the Senate.

A bit more from the ACLU letter:

The bill seeks to expand the Export Administration Act of 1979 and the Export Import Bank Act of 1945 which, among other things, prohibit U.S. persons from complying with a foreign government’s request to boycott a country friendly to the U.S. The bill would amend those laws to bar U.S. persons from supporting boycotts against Israel, including its settlements in the Palestinian Occupied Territories, conducted by international governmental organizations, such as the United Nations and the European Union. It would also broaden the law to include penalties for simply requesting information about such boycotts. Violations would be subject to a minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years in prison. We take no position for or against the effort to boycott Israel or any foreign country, for that matter. However, we do assert that the government cannot, consistent with the First Amendment, punish U.S. persons based solely on their expressed political beliefs.”

Co-sponsors of S.720 (you can find the full text of the bill here ) include both senators from New York, Charles Schumer and Kristen Gillibrand, as well as Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Robert Menendez,  and Lindsay Graham.

According to a report by Glenn Greenwald and Ryan Grim and published at The Intercept, the bill has been strongly pushed by AIPAC, which would probably account for why so many senators have signed onto it.

“Indeed, AIPAC, in its 2017 lobbying agenda, identified passage of this bill as one of its top lobbying priorities for the year,” they write.

The also report that a similar bill had been introduced in the House at the same time as S.720, noting that the House version “has already amassed 234 co-sponsors: 63 Democrats and 174 Republicans.”

At the risk of stating the obvious, bills like this give us pause to wonder what the future may hold and whether or not we may be evolving into a Jewish-run totalitarian state. Greenwald and Grim comment that “the criminalization of political speech and activism against Israel has become one of the gravest threats to free speech in the West.”

A bit more from the ACLU:

This bill would impose civil and criminal punishment on individuals solely because of their political beliefs about Israel and its policies. There are millions of businesses and individuals who do no business with Israel, or with companies doing business there, for a number of reasons. Some, like those who would face serious financial penalties and jail time under the bill, actively avoid purchasing goods or services from companies that do business in Israel and the Palestinian Occupied Territories because of a political viewpoint opposed to Israeli policy. Others may refrain from Israeli-related business based on political beliefs, but choose not to publicly announce their reasoning. Still others do no business with companies in Israel for purely pragmatic reasons. Under the bill, however, only a person whose lack of business ties to Israel is politically motivated would be subject to fines and imprisonment–even though there are many others who engage in the very same behavior. In short, the bill would punish businesses and individuals based solely on their point of view. Such a penalty is in direct violation of the First Amendment.

According to Wikipedia, Sen. Ben Cardin is Jewish. His grandparents were Russian Jewish immigrants and the family name originally was “Kardonsky” before it was changed to Cardin.

Can anyone explain to me why it shouldn’t be regarded as a conflict of interest for Jewish Congress members to vote on bills pertaining to Israel? Or why there isn’t a law on the books requiring them to recuse themselves whenever such measures come up for a vote?

Can we imagine the thunderous outcry that would erupt if we had elected representatives of Slavic or Russian extract introducing bills giving away huge sums of money–in the billions of dollars each year–to Russia, or mandating criminal penalties on anyone calling for a boycott of Russia?

New Evidence Emerges in USS Liberty Attack

“The reason is apparently that the Americans have findings that show our pilots were in fact aware the ship was American.”

[ Ed. note – If you’re a Zionist or an Israeli (or both), then I guess the word that might come most immediately to your mind here would be “Oooops!”

Imagine this: a long-suppressed Israeli Foreign Ministry document comes to light. It consists of a communication sent from New York to Jerusalem, apparently shortly after the attack on the USS Liberty, which took place on June 8, 1967. The communique conveys the message that an Israeli official has reached a somewhat unsettling conclusion–that US officials just may “have findings that show our pilots were in fact aware the ship was American.”

This is what we have in the article below posted by Alison Weir. The Israeli historian who discovered the document doesn’t believe it amounts to a “smoking gun,” but smoking guns are very much like beauty: both are in the eyes of the beholder. If you were sitting on a jury and this evidence was presented by a prosecutor, which way would you vote? Would you find the Israelis who ordered and carried out the attack on the Liberty guilty of deliberately murdering Americans…or not?

Apparently, judging from the evidence presented here, the Israelis at the time felt they had reason to be worried. ]

***

Israeli Documents on USS Liberty: ‘Americans have Findings Showing Our Pilots Were Aware the Ship was American’

If Americans Knew Blog

Recently discovered documents show Israeli leaders were worried that evidence would come out that Israel’s 1967 attack on the USS Liberty was intentional.

The Liberty was a Navy electronics surveillance ship operating in international waters during the Six-Day War. Israeli forces perpetrated an extended air and sea assault on the ship that killed 34 Americans, injured 175, and damaged the ship beyond repair. Afterward, Israel claimed the assault was an accident and provided $6 million in compensation for the loss of the $40 million ship. (More information here.)

According to the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, Israeli historian Adam Raz recently examined hundreds of documents related to the Liberty that had been posted by Israeli State Archives.

(Raz is author of The Battle Over the Bomb,” available only in Hebrew. He also is reported to have written “a fascinating article about Israel’s nuclear secrets in last week’s Hebrew Haaretzsupplement.”)

Ha’aretz reports that Raz is “fully aware of the fact that the ‘smoking gun’ won’t be found in the papers in the State Archives, because if Israel really had intended to hit the ship, that would have been known only to a handful of people.”

One of the documents Raz did find is an Israeli Foreign Ministry communication sent from New York to Jerusalem. Ha’aretz quotes the document:

“Menashe [apparently an Israeli official] informed us we had better be very careful… The reason is apparently that the Americans have findings that show our pilots were in fact aware the ship was American.”

And later: “Menashe believes there is a recording on the ship of the conversations between the ship and our pilots, in which the ship’s crew said the ship is American. Menashe says that, in his opinion, our only chance of getting out of the crisis is to punish someone for negligence.”

In another document, the Israeli Embassy in Washington writes to the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem under the heading “Urgent.”

Continued here

Nasrallah: The US Created ISIS

Posted on July 12, 2017

“The victory in Mosul is major. It’s as clear as the sun that the Obama administration established ISIS, and there is proof of this within the American government.”

–Hasan Nasrallah

The above quote from Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah is taken from an Israeli website here. The report concerns a speech Nasrallah gave on Tuesday in which he praised Iraqi forces for their liberation of the city of Mosul. You can read more about the speech at Al Manar and at Press TV (h/t summitflyer).

I suspect we are going to see a new war between Israel and Hezbollah break out probably in the not-too-far-distant future. Perhaps worth keeping in mind is that Megiddo, the site in Israel traditionally thought of as where the Battle of Armageddon will be fought, is no more than 35 miles from the Lebanese border.

Over the past three days Israeli media have been full of stories about underground “missile factories,” supposedly built in Lebanon by Iranians, where Hezbollah members are now manufacturing missiles to fire upon Israel. The US media, preoccupied with the “Russiagate” story, have had little to say about it so far, although a couple of commentaries have been published, one in the Washington Times and the other in US News and World Report, and I suspect CNN, the New York Times and the rest of the herd will jump on the story before too long.

The commentary in the Washington Times, written by one Clifford D. May, includes a bellicose quote from Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman:

“We are fully aware” of the factories, Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman told military correspondents in a briefing in Tel Aviv on Sunday. “We know what needs to be done . We won’t ignore the establishment of Iranian weapons factories in Lebanon.”

The gist of the reporting on the story is that at least two factories–both built deep underground–have been set up, and that both are now actively producing weapons with which to attack poor, little Israel. Whether there is any validity to the reports at all is impossible to say, but clearly the groundwork is being laid to establish a pretext for an Israeli attack upon Lebanon. This of course comes after repeated Israeli attacks upon Syria, but of course all that will be forgotten. Forgotten also will be Israel’s brutal occupation of Palestine.

Of course, one thing we should try very hard not to forget is that, just as Bashar Assad’s government has protected Christians in Syria, so too has Hezbollah protected Christians in Lebanon. Here is a picture of the St. Joseph Maronite Church–located right in the heart of Haret Hreik, the Hezbollah neighborhood of southern Beirut:

I visited Beirut in 2014 and saw the church with my own eyes–in fact passed right down the alleyway you see in the picture that runs alongside of it. You don’t have to be a Shiite Muslim to live in Hezbollah-controlled areas of Lebanon; people are free to worship as they see fit.

One thing I’ve noticed about the Zionist media’s reporting on Hezbollah is that they always try to blur the line between Hezbollah and ISIS–as if deliberately trying to instill the impression that both are “terrorist” organizations and that both follow the same ideology. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Suffice to say, Russiagate isn’t the only media deception game going on.

ISIS Wives, Filmed by Iraqi Police, Reveal Details of Their Lives

[ Ed. note – The US has been more interested in overthrowing the Assad government than in fighting the savage degenerates who kidnapped these women and turned their lives into hell–that’s something I hope people will keep in mind while watching the video above as well as while reading the article below.

And not only has the US been disingenuous in its supposed fight against ISIS, but US weapons and munitions, along with whole fleets of Toyota vehicles, have somehow mysteriously ended up in ISIS hands. Yet for some equally mysterious reason, ISIS militants don’t seem to be able to get their hands on Russian weapons–or at least I’ve yet to hear of it. At any rate, below are two articles from Sputnik, the first published today, while the second appeared back in February. One thing we can be thankful for is that Mosul is now liberated. ]

***

Daesh Wives Reveal Details of Their Lives

Sputnik

Wives of Daesh terrorists agreed to take part in a video interview conducted by Iraqi law-enforcement services. Sputnik received the exclusive footage from the Iraqi federal police.

The video depicts three women responding to police questions after their evacuation from Mosul.

The first woman said that she was forced to marry a terrorist by her uncle, who is also a member of Daesh. In this way, he hoped to get a promotion within the group, but later was killed. The woman now has a one-year-old child; the fate of her husband remains unknown.

Replying to the police’s questions, the woman said that she could not escape from her husband, because he kept her captive in the cellar for more than a year. After he found out that she tried to contact her relatives who serve in the army, he threatened to kill her.

When the second woman was asked if she was married to a Daesh militant, she only nodded affirmatively. Later she said that her husband was killed. The father of the woman was also a Daesh member, he was also killed a couple of days ago.

The third woman was holding a small child on her hands during the interview. Her husband was killed during an airstrike.

Commenting on the women’s statements, the head of the Iraqi federal police Shakir Jaudat told Sputnik that “women who agreed to answer questions in front of the camera are innocent. If they were involved in committing crimes, they would refuse to do so.”

According to Jaudat, the women’s testimony will be used for further investigations.

Daesh terrorists are notorious for their atrocities against civilians and, especially, their cruel treatment of women. Women are often used by Daesh militants as slaves and sometimes serve as snipers or work in financial departments within the terrorist group.

***

Torturing Their Own: Daesh Now Raping Sunni Women Too

Sputnik

Daesh fighters are detaining, ill-treating, torturing, and forcibly marrying Sunni Arab women and girls in areas under their control in Iraq – the first cases identified of such practices being inflicted against Sunni Arab women.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) researchers interviewed a number of women who fled the Daesh-controlled town of Hawija, to the northern city of Kirkuk. While HRW and the United Nations have previously documented extensive sexual abuses carried out by Daesh against Yazidi women, including the execution of 250 girls who refused to be sex slaves, this is the first time such abuses have been detected among the Sunni community.

One woman described being forced to marry her cousin, who then raped her; another had her home destroyed by militants after her husband deserted Daesh, and likewise forced to marry a fighter.

In April 2016, Daesh captured a large group of women who were attempting to escape Hawija and held them for months in an abandoned house, where they were raped in front of their children on a daily basis.

A woman, Aisha, recounted how her family was caught by Daesh trying to flee. They shot her son, and beat the female members of the group with rifle butts. The women were then lashed 65 times each, with more lashes added if they winced at the punishment. They were held for a fortnight, and only released after paying US$2,000.

Experts from four international organizations working with survivors of sexual assault in Iraq told HRW it is difficult to assess the prevalence of Daesh’ gender-based violence against women who have fled territory under their control. They said victims and their families remain silent to avoid stigmatization and harm to their reputations.

The women interviewed are all patients at the Kirkuk Center, where a staff of 12 provides psychological and behavioral counseling to women and children. The site has almost fallen victim to bombing attacks by the US and its allies on more than one occasion.

Continued here

P.C. Roberts on ‘the ignorant, stupid Nikki Haley’ and the destruction of the Trump Administration

[ Ed. note – A very interesting commentary by Paul Craig Roberts, who argues that Trump is powerless–he is under the complete control of the Deep State–and that the president is furthermore being treacherously undermined by his own appointees. The Trump administration is full of Russophobes like UN Ambassador Nikki Haley who, rather than  pursuing the peaceful relations with Russia that Trump seemed to promise during the campaign, have instead become parrots essentially, repeating the mainstream media mantra about “Russian interference” in the election. What are the implications of all this? Not good, says Roberts. Trump has become nothing more than a “figurehead” president, he argues, while the media and the Deep State are committed to  “raising tensions between the US and Russia to the point of nuclear war.” ]

By Paul Craig Roberts

President Trump Has Been Contradicted by His Own Government, Which Has Lined Up Against Him in Favor of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and the Russophobic Presstitute Media that serves the military/security complex and the neoconservatives.

I am afraid that The Saker and Finian Cunningham are correct. Nothing can come of Trump’s meeting with Putin, because, as Cunningham puts it,

“Trump doesn’t have freedom or real power. The real power brokers in the US will ensure that the Russophobia campaign continues, with more spurious allegations of Moscow interfering to subvert Western democracies. Trump will continue to live under a cloud of media-driven suspicions. And thus the agenda of regime change against Syria and confrontation with Russia will also continue. Trump’s personal opinions on these matters and towards Vladimir Putin are negligible—indeed dispensable by the deep powers-that-be.”

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/395782-trump-putin-meeting-media-syria/

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47392.htm

Cunningham points out that instead of lauding the meeting as the beginning of the process to defuse the high tensions between the two major nuclear powers, the US media denounced Trump for being civil to Putin in the meeting.

What is missing from the media in the entirety of the Western world and perhaps also in Russia is the awareness that the dangerous tensions are orchestrated not only by Hillary and the Democratic National Committee, the neoconservatives, the US military/security complex, and the presstitutes, but also by President Trump’s own appointees.

Trump’s own ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, and Trump’s own Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, sound exactly like Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, the neoconservatives, the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN and the rest of the totally discredited presstitute media that is committed to raising tensions between the US and Russia to the point of nuclear war.

Continued here

***

Click the link just above to read the rest of Roberts’ commentary. Meanwhile, the “Russia conspiracy soap opera” continues in the media. The lone exception to this seems to be one program on Fox News.

Satire: Trump’s Unprecedented Move Helped ‘Energize’ the G-20 Meeting

By Ariadna Theokopoulos

President Trump stepped out of the G-20 meeting  for a while (these sessions can be very tiring) and to everyone’s surprise he sent Ivanka to sit in his place, next to Merkel and the Chinese premier.

This is unprecedented, since in such circumstances the substitute is usually a high-ranking official, not the presidential offspring, playing the role of “special advisor.” Nevertheless, this was just the beginning.

Emboldened by Trump’s action, Putin stepped out next and sent in his black Labrador retriever. The Lab got a warm and friendly (albeit surprised) reception from all except for Angela Merkel, whose fear of dogs is said to date back to when he she was a STASI agent in East Germany and was bitten by a dog during field training. She has also never forgiven Putin for scaring her a few years ago by bringing Konni into a one-one meeting.

Cynologists at both the Brookings Institution as well as the Enterprise Institute claim that the Lab who participated in the G-20 meeting is not Konni (long retired at a dacha in Crimea), but rather his grandson, Smersh.

Any objective observer had to conclude that the originality and sophisticated level of the discussions were notably increased by the presence of the two substitutes. The Lab in particular made some incredibly astute, albeit brief comments in Russian, which the translator conveyed in English. Only a cat lover could have failed to admit the dog’s brilliance and superiority of intellect compared to Ivanka and other participants.

This opens up a new era in international diplomacy. President Putin has more than enough on his plate and by now he knows pretty much in advance what each leader is most likely to say in such meetings. He should spare himself and make use of Smersh as often as possible.

Similarly, Trump could reserve his time to more robust twitting by sending Ivanka or his son in his place. Jared The Kushner, of course, should go along as script supervisor. Macron of France could send in his septuagenarian wife, and leaders who have pets well versed in international affairs could send them in. Only Merkel is indispensable.

The American MSM could complement their in-depth analysis of Ivanka’s sartorial accomplishments–

http://footwearnews.com/2017/fashion/celebrity-style/ivanka-trump-g20-fashion-jumpsuit-red-dress-jared-kushner-390277/

…with a well-researched biography and credentials of Smersh, e.g.,:

Early Youth–

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=OIP.D_m3_ZX9InL4OzQYAWQRmQEZEs&pid=15.1&rs=1&c=1&qlt=95&w=100&h=107

Special Services Training–

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=OIP.ySjBec7K4CdV43McTGiEEwEjDW&pid=15.1&rs=1&c=1&qlt=95&w=163&h=121

To me this is a breath of fresh only made possible by Trump’s once again thinking outside the box.

%d bloggers like this: