Originally Posted by Nobody
Do you see how the protests in Kiev weakened Yanukovich’s negotiating position with the EU enabling EU stinginess?
Already answered. Not going to play your game again where you ignore cites you disagree with and keep asking the same question over and over.
I’ll play. He mentions it here:
where he’s “just asking questions”,
and also here:
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j100402.html
And this book:
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j032202.html
While he may be a “truther” it is quite disgusting to claim he believes “Jewish conspiracy theories” to discredit his position.
Respectfully, when you blame 911 on the Mossad, whether you’re Justin Raimondo or Amiri Baraka you’re engaging in Jewish conspiracy theories.
In fact, traditionally anti-Semitism has taken the form of conspiracy theories with references to the Rothschilds, the Elders of Zion, or of course the Mossad.
Moreover Raimondos idiotic claims of the Mossad manipulating the events surrounding 911 to fool the gullible goyim into doing the bidding of Jewish state is clearly a modern day update of traditional anti-Semitic stories.
If you want to insist what he’s doing isn’t automatically anti-Semitism, I’ll disagree, but find. However, yes, he is promoting Jewish conspiracy theories.
Bullshit. “Israel” can not be substituted with “Jewish”. Israel actually HAS a very active spy service. “The Jews” don’t have a secret spy service.
Your right. Right sector seems to me to be just a group of thugs who hijacked the Euromaiden protests to build up their own profile. Unfortunately, their presece is giving ammunition to Russian propogandists who are painting all pro-western Ukrainians as fascists. I think part of the reason Russia is continueing to stir things up is that it is afraid that once the situation settles down Right Sector’s profile will be diminished, especially when far-right leaning candidates get trounced in elections.
Only if you believe the Russian story that the unidentified masked gunmen who showed up just before Crimea’s government called the secession referendum were just “local self defense forces” despite the fact that they wore uniforms which were identical to Russian army uniforms (minus the insignia) and carried standard issue Russian army weapons, and drove vehicles which, despite having their insignia’s painted over, had Russian plates and were identical to Russian military vehicles. And, yes, there was a treaty that allowed Russia to maintain military bases in Crimea, but that doesn’t give Russian troops the right to go off their bases to unilaterally guard airports and Ukrainian military instillations, much less interfere in the affairs of the local government. And, oh yes, some of the “local forces” now occupying buildings in Eastern Ukraine look suspiciously similar.
“Various ministers/officials” is qualitatively different that unmarked masked troops. Yes, Western diplomats may have been “interfering in Ukrainian affairs” in the sense that they were seeking to influence the outcome of an internal political crisis. But the only tools they had to do so was persuasion and whatever diplomatic leverage their respective countries or entities had. That doesn’t remotely compare to an armed invasion.
Yes and by those standards “Rothschild” can’t be substituted with “Jewish” and they actually were a really powerful banking family so we shouldn’t view people who rant about the Rothschilds as engaging in Jewish conspiracy theories.
Anyway if you want to try and insist that people claiming that “the Sovereign State of the Jewish people”(AKA Israel) was behind 911 aren’t engaging in Jewish conspiracy theories then go ahead, but if so you’re ignoring the history of anti-Semitism in both history and the present day where the Mossad have taken the place of the Rothschilds as the catch-all Jewish boogeyman. Obviously that doesn’t mean every criticism of the Mossad is unfair and personally I don’t think they’re the embodiment of evil that many do, but I’m not a fan.
Unless you are saying that the Rothschilds have a publicly acknowledged spy service, then no those standards can not be applied. And I would submit, people may indeed be distrustful of the richest family in the history of the planet for reasons other than them being Jewish. Equating Mossad and the Rothschilds with the Elders of Zion is not reasonable, imho.
Ok, I’ll confess if you don’t believes that paranoid rantings about the Rothschilds can be viewed as belief in Jewish conspiracy theories then I can understand your belief that blaming “the Sovereign State of the Jewish People” for 911 doesn’t constitute belief in Jewish conspiracy theories.
He mentions what, where?
From your last cite:
Were does Raimondo become a ‘TRUTHER’ claiming the WTC was taken down by anyone other than the terrorists flying airliners into it?
Let’s get more specific. Where does Raimondo blame 911 on the Mossad?
No. This is your first post since I asked the question. Was your answer sent by some other means?
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
Were does Raimondo become a ‘TRUTHER’ claiming the WTC was taken down by anyone other than the terrorists flying airliners into it?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t even have to open up the other links…right there in what you quoted pretty much shows he’s a CT Truther. Seriously, which part of this don’t you get:
Let me break it down for you. He’s claiming that Israeli spies in the US had Atta (and in fact by saying ‘they’ probably all the other ones as well) under constant, 24/7 surveillance (presumably because they knew he was up to something, but the implication would be that they knew all about 9/11), yet told the US nothing and then allowed him/them to trot off and hijack an airplane to attack the US with. And this is just one quote…gods know what else he’s said.
Seriously, how do YOU read what you quote? I mean, you obviously quoted it because you felt it made your case that the guy isn’t a Truther, but, well, wtf? I can see how even you could parse this to make it smell right, so please translate the passage you quoted into NFBW-speak to show how it’s NOT a standard Israeli CT Truther JAQ off.
I’m reminded of people claiming David Irving wasn’t a Holocaust Denier because he didn’t deny the existence of the death camps.
Russia under its treaty with the Ukraine was allowed to station up to 25,000 troops in the Crimea. The actual 3/4,000 it had stationed there were called out by the majority population within the Crimea due to a complete breakdown in law and order in which they, the Russian speaking population, were the innocent party in order to provide protection.
Evidently part of the ‘persuasion’ being offered was, amongst many other things, the dispatch of a reported 86 Ukrainians to a police camp, outside of Warsaw, for intensive training then released back into Kiev to lead the other persuaders who murdered their way into power in an uprising against a democratically elected government.
The Ukraine has reportedly the third largest reserves of shale gas in Europe. The Western ‘persuaders’ want their hands on it fast. Like most things this has to do with money which represents power.
Russia under its treaty had agreed to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Another poster has also referred to the “complete breakdown in law and order”. I’m curious what is meant by that. What were the conditions in Crimea that warrant that description? Was there massive looting? Gangs roaming the streets shooting random people?