tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post8678062667077617330..comments2024-03-02T21:58:21.667-08:00Comments on The Real Deal with Jim Fetzer podcast: True OttUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-23961505867964843442013-02-12T06:10:00.226-08:002013-02-12T06:10:00.226-08:00True Ott aka Alma C. Ott is a racist fraud and Cou...True Ott aka Alma C. Ott is a racist fraud and CounterIntelligence Operative. He is also a plagiarist. <br />Read http://www.TrueOtt.comAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11647455810639420317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-33191398646238694252012-11-23T10:02:18.205-08:002012-11-23T10:02:18.205-08:00Well Carl, we will just have to agree to disagree....Well Carl, we will just have to agree to disagree. <br /><br />I do believe that, despite the text you have posted above that, on balance, there is valid scientific support and scientific consensus on human-caused climate change.<br /><br />I also believe we can't deny that the financial/power agenda for debunking human-caused climate change is by far the strongest with the oil and gas sector. Humanity/the planet DOES have a lot to lose by NOT taking human-caused climate change seriously. Those who have by FAR the most to gain by seeding doubt with the public are oil and gas companies.<br />Seeding of doubt on this topic is more tied to a political/monetary agenda than with any valid scientific observations. <br /><br />Climate of Doubt Strategy #1: Deny the Consensus<br />http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/climate-of-doubt-strategy-1-deny-consensus.html<br /><br />Human-caused global warming is NOT in scientific doubt. This is clear when one understands and acknowledges the very basic connection between atmospheric CO2, global temperature, and immense amounts of human burning of carbon-based fuels in recent decades. For serious scientists, the debate is essentially over and legitimate consensus has been reached.<br /><br />In closing, such debate is good, as long it is rooted in intellectual honesty and greater good thinking...the cornerstones of a meaningful existence.Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-53335227327075496502012-11-23T07:47:53.447-08:002012-11-23T07:47:53.447-08:00More background on Richard Muller's BEST proje...More background on Richard Muller's BEST project (from same link posted above): <br /><br /><br />Richard Muller's Temperature Project Aptly Termed The 'Berkeley Scam' -- ramuller@lbl.gov -- Muller's team 'are completely unbiased and open minded, though they have already determined (ahead of their neutral study) that global warming is the most serious problem in the world'<br /><br /><br />Climatologist Roger Pielke Sr. Slams Richard Muller's 'contradictory statements' -- ramuller@lbl.gov -- 'All Muller's study has accomplished so far is to confirm that NCDC, GISS and CRU honestly used the raw observed data as the starting point for their analyses. This is not a surprising result...The uncertainties and systematic biases remain unexplored so far by Richard Muller...Muller and his colleagues have not yet examined these concerns, yet chose to report on his very preliminary results at a House Hearing'<br /><br /><br />He can't get basic temperature data correct?! 'Muller's graph appears to be incorrect' -- Richard Muller Claims 1C Warming Since 1977 -- 'But HadCRUT shows about half of that' <br /><br /><br />From BEST To WORST In D.C. Minute: Berkeley Scientist's Promise of Transparency Becomes Vaporware<br /><br /><br />Muller Exposed: 'I was disheartened by the testimony of Richard Muller...he has totally destroyed any credibility he might have had with me' -- ramuller@lbl.gov -- Muller is 'a man driven by a very serious agenda, a man who doesn't check his work and who pays insufficient attention to facts in testimony'<br /><br /><br />'GOP asked Richard Muller the wrong questions. Warming is miniscule, and the little warming we have seen isn't primarily due to CO2'<br /><br /><br /><br />What Richard Muller Isn't Saying: 'Most of the warming in his graph occurred after PDO shift in 1977' -- 'The rate of warming is below low end of projections. In other words, a don't care' <br /><br /><br />Meteorologist D'Aleo: Berkeley's Muller goes to Washington and another misleading statement by NOAA CCSP author Thorne<br /><br />Prof. Richard A. Muller's testimony: 'According to IPCC report (2007), the human component became apparent only after 1957, and it amounts to 'most' of the 0.7 degree rise since then' -- 'I believe that some of the most worrisome (temperature) biases are less of a problem than I had previously thought'<br /><br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917647868593063337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-10884513931973658482012-11-23T07:46:27.998-08:002012-11-23T07:46:27.998-08:00http://www.climatedepot.com/a/10426/Climate-Depot-...http://www.climatedepot.com/a/10426/Climate-Depot-Round-Up-on-Richard-Muller-Scientists-trashing-Mullers-workMuller-stands-accused-of-being-front-man-for-geoengineering-org--Muller-Responds-to-Climate-Depot<br /><br />further links at link above<br /><br />[Climate Depot, serving the public interest, continues it's coverage of Richard Muller of Berkeley's BEST temperature project]<br /><br /><br />Scientists Trashing Muller's work: Peter Thorne of NCDC: 'The Berkeley team had been 'seriously compromised' by publicizing its work before publishing any vetted papers'<br /><br />Muller calculating his scientific claims?! 'He basically destroys the reputation & research of most of [AGW's] most notable super stars & yet he believes the science they promote is sound -- amazing!' ramuller@lbl.gov Muller's alleged 'skeptical' climate quotes manufactured?! 'On one hand he says that virtually all the science flowing from IPCC and various proponent organizations is shoddy, yet he believes that the science that underpins it which is product of those same individuals and organizations is accurate' <br /><br /><br />Richard Muller Stands Accused: 'He is the front man for a geoengineering organization...which claims theirs is the only means of controlling the earth's temperature': 'So they employ Dr. Muller to rubbish all the carbon control proposals -- which he ably does'<br /><br />Background on Muller's BEST project: 'Who is Novim and why are they messing with the Earth's Temperature update?' -- Muller's Berkley Earth Surface Group is part of the Novim Group...they are very much into Geo-Engineering: 'Novim's Exec Dir. Ditmore: 'We're running out of time' -- 'The Berkley Earth Surface Group is not without an agenda'<br /><br /><br />Muller's scientific work failing the grade?: 'Even [warmist Kevin] Trenberth isn't too sure about it': Trenberth is 'highly skeptical of the hype and claims' surrounding Muller's effort and claims the team does 'not the expertise required in certain areas, and purely statistical approaches are naive'<br /><br /><br />Scientist Ridicules the Muller Con: 'I forecast Muller will continue to play role of neutral observer, & will continue to shock us with revelations that climate change is 'worse than he expected'<br /><br />Richard Muller Demonstrates That UHI (Urban Heat Island) Contaminates The Temperature Record: 'Satellite data is measured at 14,000 feet, and would exaggerate the warming if it was due to 'global warming.' However, we see the exact opposite. The only plausible explanation is that the surface record is biased by UHI effects, because thermometers are located where humans live, build roads, remove snow, heat their homes, build buildings, etc.' <br /><br /><br />Hiding The Decline In Illinois: Berkeley's Muller says the surface temperature record is golden but 'USHCN has created a rise by subtracting from older temps and adding to newer temps'<br /><br /><br />Climatologist Pielke Sr.: 'Is There A Sampling Bias In The BEST Analysis Reported By Richard Muller?': Muller's 'sampling is still biased if a preponderance of his data sources comes from a subset of actual landscape types. The sampling will necessarily be skewed towards those sites...unresolved issues, including a likely systematic warm bias, remains in the analysis of long term surface temperature trends'<br /><br /><br />Muller claims 'that existing work by NOAA, NASSA & Had CRU is excellent. So why set up a new study to compete with them?' - 'Left unsaid in all this is the group behind BEST, Novim' ramuller@lbl.gov Revealing quote from warmist at heart Muller: 'I you believe we can get a favor from God by praying, I suggest you pray that cloud cover will kick in because if my evaluation is right when I show you what the problem is and if the global warming models are right, and I think they are very likely right, then we are going to have global warming'<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917647868593063337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-56378306196091611512012-11-23T07:34:40.648-08:002012-11-23T07:34:40.648-08:00The Muller/NYT/Guardian case provides a very good ...The Muller/NYT/Guardian case provides a very good example of the method of the fraudsters.<br /><br />Here's the truth about Muller, links at source blog ( http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/06/truth-about-richard-muller.html ) - and the case also provides an example of a fossil fuel billionaire funding research by a known global warming alarmist that was used to promote AGW hysteria dishonestly:<br /><br />"I was never a skeptic" - Richard Muller, 2011<br /><br />Richard Muller has never been a skeptic, at best he had a moment of intellectual honesty towards skeptics when he acknowledged Steve McIntyre's debunking of Mann's Hockey Stick, only to later dismiss this as irrelevant to the global warming debate, "This result should not affect any of our thinking on global warming". Hardly surprising, as Muller considers the carbon dioxide produced from burning fossil fuels to be, "the greatest pollutant in human history" and likely to have, "severe and detrimental effects on global climate". The future outlook for global warming according to Muller is that, "it’s going to get much, much worse" and thus advocates that the United States immediately pay China and India hundreds of billions of dollars to cut back their carbon emissions or, "it'll be too late". No wonder he endorsed "The Earth is the Great Ship Titanic", Steven Chu as "perfect" for U.S. Energy Secretary and Al Gore's hypocritical alarmism, <br /><br /><br />"If Al Gore reaches more people and convinces the world that global warming is real, even if he does it through exaggeration and distortion - which he does, but he’s very effective at it - then let him fly any plane he wants." - Richard Muller, 2008<br /><br /><br />"There is a consensus that global warming is real. ...it’s going to get much, much worse." - Richard Muller, 2008<br /><br /><br />"Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate." - Richard Muller, 2003<br /><br />References:<br />Medieval Global Warming (MIT Technology Review, December 17, 2003)<br />Global Warming Bombshell (MIT Technology Review, October 15, 2004)<br />Author and physicist Richard A. Muller chats with Grist about getting science back in the White House (Grist, October 7, 2008)<br />Physics the Next President Needs to Know (Wired, November 2, 2008)<br />Steven Chu named U.S. Energy Secretary (KGO-TV, December 15, 2008)<br />Physics for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines (Richard Muller, 2009)<br />‘In the Great Ship Titanic’ (The Daily Beast, April 10, 2009)<br />Richard Muller, Climate Researcher, Navigates The Volatile Line Between Science And Skepticism (The Huffington Post, November 3, 2011)<br /><br /> --- do you see how they lie, Constructor?<br /><br /><br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917647868593063337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-73278839085873237582012-11-21T14:35:21.590-08:002012-11-21T14:35:21.590-08:00This a useful word...found in a pretty good thread...This a useful word...found in a pretty good thread on global warming.<br />http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/11/20/2352255/climate-contrarians-seek-leadership-of-house-science-committee<br /><br />skep-tic-tard /`skeptiktard/ Noun: A person inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions, regardless of any and all facts. Sees a changing of the mind when presented with good solid evidence as a moral failing.<br /><br />The same thing as a contrarian...much better to be an independent thinker.Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-35160439392153217892012-11-20T12:21:03.786-08:002012-11-20T12:21:03.786-08:00Carl, you will of course have to counter this. It...Carl, you will of course have to counter this. It's recent (July 2012) and decent scientific support for human-caused global climate change.<br /><br />Climate change study forces skeptical scientists to change minds. Earth's land shown to have warmed by 1.5C over past 250 years, with humans being almost entirely responsible (2012 Guardian Article)<br />http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jul/29/climate-change-sceptics-change-mind<br /><br />Prof Richard Muller, a physicist and climate change skeptic who founded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (Best) project, said he was surprised by the findings. "We were not expecting this, but as scientists, it is our duty to let the evidence change our minds." He added that he now considers himself a "converted skeptic" and his views had undergone a "total turnaround" in a short space of time.<br /><br />"Our results show that the average temperature of the Earth's land has risen by 2.5F over the past 250 years, including an increase of 1.5 degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases," Muller wrote in an opinion piece for the New York Times.<br />http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all&<br /><br />Berkley Earth Results Summary<br />http://berkeleyearth.org/results-summary/<br /><br />Berkley Earth Land Temperature Anomaly Video<br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHZzACcYJRo<br /><br />A New Estimate of the Average Earth Surface Land Temperature Spanning 1753 to 2011 (The Berkeley Earth team commonly refers to this as the “Results” paper)<br />http://berkeleyearth.org/pdf/results-paper-july-8.pdfConstructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-38772059837425460662012-11-20T10:49:07.913-08:002012-11-20T10:49:07.913-08:00Carl, I'm willing to check out your claims hon...Carl, I'm willing to check out your claims honestly. Can you please forward me a couple of key links / sources that sum up your above assertions.Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-22512854567459344382012-11-20T07:11:25.306-08:002012-11-20T07:11:25.306-08:00#why have former 'global warming' PROPONEN...#why have former 'global warming' PROPONENTS stopped talking about it?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917647868593063337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-62949366452628754052012-11-20T07:10:02.490-08:002012-11-20T07:10:02.490-08:00What global warming? That trend finished nearly tw...What global warming? That trend finished nearly twenty years ago and could not have done so if industrial development was the single cause.<br /><br />What proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere is caused by industrial development? Clue: it's minsicule.<br /><br />What caused previous changes in temperature before industrialization? And why should we not suppose they were responsible for recent changes?<br /><br />You called them fossil fuels, I responded by querying that claim.<br /><br />If global warming were supported by overwhelming evidence, why have former 'global warming' stopped talking about it? Now, since the most recent cycle of global warming has clearly ended - just as the sun's cycle of mass activity ended, coincidentally - they talk about 'climate change' and even more recently, 'climate disruption'.<br /><br />Are you aware that over 1000 climate scientists have signed a declaration of skepticism over the CO2/climate change hysteria. This dwarfs the number of climate scientists responsible for promoting the CO2/climate change hysteria where most of the people associated with the IPCC and other official committees are computer modellers, sociologists, archaeologists, ecologists and even trash collectors and train drivers. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917647868593063337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-22415984658607430672012-11-19T17:07:22.968-08:002012-11-19T17:07:22.968-08:00Nice try Carl,
The greenhouse effect is the resul...Nice try Carl,<br /><br />The greenhouse effect is the result of a pretty simple cause and effect: more C02 in the atmosphere results in higher temperatures at the earth's surface. Another simple cause and effect is that burning a bunch of carbon-based fuels (call them fossil fuels if you believe they came from fossils[nice red hearing you introduced above]) causes a bunch of C02 to be released into the atmosphere. Since the industrial revolution we've released absurd amounts into the atmosphere. These amounts, and their coincidence with increasing global temperatures, can't just be swept under the carpet for the sake of contrarian thinking.<br /><br />Carl...the trick in life is not to be a contrarian; being a contrarian is easy, anybody can just say something is not true based on some cherry-picked 'facts'. The trick is to be an independent thinker, which means accepting the status quo when it supported by overwhelming evidence, which global warming is.Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-34568251296913153362012-11-19T03:58:33.599-08:002012-11-19T03:58:33.599-08:00That problem is overstated, Constructor, and is mo...That problem is overstated, Constructor, and is more a function of Them controlling both sides of the debate. Most of the funding for the climate change agenda comes from people who control Big Oil, sometimes through their Big Oil operations themselves, at other times through their control of banking, government, heavy industry etc. The really vocal and scientifically rigorous climate change sceptics - Tim Ball, Richard Lindzen, Christopher Monckton and so on receive nothing from BP, Shell and the like. <br /><br />On the other hand every clown who wants to examine the effect of global warming on (insert object) gets funding for his study from major corporations and foundations never more than one degree of separation removed from the people who control Big Oil, if not those Oil corps themselves.<br /> <br />And there is evidence that both 'fossil fuels' and 'global warming' are myths promoted to enrich these interests. I mean, what global warming? There hasn't been any for years. And during the last period of warming, which coincided with a cycle of extreme solar activity, both Mercury and Venus experienced warming too, quite predictably. A local novel explanation for warming on earth was unnecessary and now that both extreme solar activity and warming on Earth, Mercury and Venus have ceased the link looks even more compelling, and the CO2 explanation even less so.<br /><br />If oil and coal are fossil fuels than how and why do drained oil wells spontaneously refill? How and why do hundreds of coal seams around the world burn constantly for centuries at a time. Just how many dang dinosaurs piled themselves into that hole in the first place? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917647868593063337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-81590923180961736762012-11-16T22:30:16.970-08:002012-11-16T22:30:16.970-08:00To clarify: "Look at the greasy scientists t...To clarify: "Look at the greasy scientists that the oil and gas sector digs up to assert that human burning of fossil fuels is not significantly contributing to global warming."Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-52772117321840479122012-11-16T22:24:58.672-08:002012-11-16T22:24:58.672-08:00You can be both a psy-ops operative and a scientis...You can be both a psy-ops operative and a scientist...all rolled into one corrupt unit. Look at the greasy scientists that the oil and gas sector digs up to speak against global warming.Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-46746012157388190972012-11-16T19:54:02.803-08:002012-11-16T19:54:02.803-08:00Another interesting source, dated, but with lots o...Another interesting source, dated, but with lots of bibliography and footnote support, is Crichton's "book State of Fear". Was Crichton an psy- ops operative for someone? Or a scientist?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-61027242618359854292012-11-15T06:22:49.102-08:002012-11-15T06:22:49.102-08:00Agreed Constructor. But any "evidence" c...Agreed Constructor. But any "evidence" could well be fabricated. If the globalists had half the power that people like Alex Jones say they do, they would have completely taken over the planet a long time ago. I hope Mr. Fetzer keeps a cool head and understands this. It is dangerous to fall for all so-called "leaks", "evidence" and so forth. <br /><br />We also hear a lot of talk about the depopulation agenda of the globalists, and that it goes back almost 100 years. Really? Last time I looked the planet passed 7 billion, and the population has been increasing exponentially for a very long time.<br /><br />They lied and told us they put a man on the moon. They DO NOT even have this much power in reality.<br /><br />At Roswell what happened is obvious. They faked an alien crash and then pretended to cover it up as if it really happened.<br /><br />We could go on and on about their lies, designed to make themselves look stronger than they really are.Stooy44https://www.blogger.com/profile/09347878945674182794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-70155901615468883432012-11-14T13:13:26.559-08:002012-11-14T13:13:26.559-08:00Stooy44, I am on the fence on that topic. I agree...Stooy44, I am on the fence on that topic. I agree with your comment above that we (the non-elite) have to be very careful not to disempower ourselves by letting the elite convince us that they have a lot more power than they actually do have. But then again, we don't want to delude ourselves into thinking they have less power than they do have. It's a real Psy-Op knife-edge. Whether they can cause large storms, I wouldn't be surprised but I am not convinced either way...in large part because I haven't spent any time going through the evidence for / against.Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-54157139823221052572012-11-14T08:55:35.595-08:002012-11-14T08:55:35.595-08:00Personally I do not believe any of the weather mod...Personally I do not believe any of the weather modification theories. Maybe on a small scale they can do things, but I do not believe they can cause major storms. I think this is lies, disinfo, "leaks", all designed to make us fear the globalists. These maniacs are going off, and they know it, so they are trying everything they can now. But they will fail. Do not buy into the lies of Alex Jones and others who exaggerate the power of these people. Stooy44https://www.blogger.com/profile/09347878945674182794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-3848333992639282332012-11-14T08:45:41.943-08:002012-11-14T08:45:41.943-08:00See also:
http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/2012/1...See also: <br /><br />http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/2012/11/14/11142012-2hour-interview-deep-earth-bunker-radio-weather-modification-hurricane-sandy-frankenstorm/ <br /><br />and the earlier<br /><br />http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/geoengineeringfrankenstorm-hurricane-sandy-and-the-air-force-weather-weapon-system-part1/<br /> <br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-69147918481760744402012-11-14T05:30:50.343-08:002012-11-14T05:30:50.343-08:00Consturctor, do you believe that people who buy in...Consturctor, do you believe that people who buy into the theory that hurricanes like Katrina and storms like Sandy are man-made are themselves disinfo agents? Deluded and gullible? Or correct in their views?Stooy44https://www.blogger.com/profile/09347878945674182794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-48675392299588884152012-11-12T17:10:06.236-08:002012-11-12T17:10:06.236-08:00It's pretty clear that atlantabill is some typ...It's pretty clear that atlantabill is some type of disinfo agent:<br /><br />this is a useful article explaining how to spot these guys:<br />http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm<br /><br />If anybody (including atlantabill) has a more concise checklist, could you please post it? Thanks in advance.<br /><br />Constructorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14469345469542778969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-20029051075731393932012-11-12T05:59:45.005-08:002012-11-12T05:59:45.005-08:00freepalestine72 asked “How is the double standard ...freepalestine72 asked “How is the double standard explained by a concern with class issues when my question concerns only standards of evidence?”<br /><br />Just so. If we take atlantabill’s reply as honest and straightforward it makes sense only as a declaration that he is prepared to lie about race when he thinks it would further his class struggle, he is saying: <br /><br />“I don’t care, frankly, whether German National Socialists do not really control the U.S. and Israel, it helps my economic argument if others believe they do. I don’t care, frankly, whether Jews really were in control of the Soviet Union, it helps my economic arguments if others believe they were not.”<br /><br />But how does this help his economic argument in any way? It does not appear to bear any relation to his professed economic concerns nor does it ‘shift the focus off race’. Rather, as freepalestine72 says, it simply shifts the focus from one race to another. <br /><br />“the other comments of yours are not worth replying to, as they pretty much expose you as a witch-hunting racist”<br /><br />I am without an ideological dog in the fight. I’m neither Marxist or Hitlerite, nor Russian, German or Jew. I read this thread with fresh eyes and an open mind. The quotes from Marx, Engels and Lenin, and your own comments and style of argumentation were quite disgusting. The ‘witch hunting racist’ label better suits you and yours, atlantabill. In contrast there is not even the hint of racism in freepalestine72’s comments. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03917647868593063337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-40880058087301255572012-11-12T01:20:33.403-08:002012-11-12T01:20:33.403-08:00Sources actually cited: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trots...Sources actually cited: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky. References or influence from Goebbels: none. <br /><br />Why on earth would Henry Makow put out stuff about Jewish bankers that's easily discredited - by the swill about the Illuminati, masons and satanism, long before anyone examines the details? <br /><br />Why, oh, why? Why?freepalestine72https://www.blogger.com/profile/03303059065964322558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-39664679264198161552012-11-12T01:05:43.625-08:002012-11-12T01:05:43.625-08:00The letters, as stated quite clearly in my comment...The letters, as stated quite clearly in my comment and at the link, were between <i>Lenin’s</i> sister and Stalin. They came from declassified KGB files and were exhibited at the Moscow State Historical Museum last year. I guess the omnipotent Nazis control the Commies and the KGB, too! I’m joking of course but this buffoon may turn round and agree. <br /><br />These source of the letters and the story of their public exposure are facts easily googled but Atlanta Bill does not seem overly interested in facts or truth. <br /><br />He professes a knowledge of Lenin, claims to know absolutely that Lenin was never racist, yet Lenin’s habit of making positive reference to Jews especially in comparison with ‘Russian idiots’ is quite well-attested to in the literature on the major personalities of the Soviet Union. In addition to the quotes posted already from Lenin’s own sister and Dmitri Volkogonov in his 1994 biography LENIN:<br /><br />“Lenin's non-Russian ethnic antecedents — Mongol, Jewish, Swedish and <br />German — may partly explain his often expressed contempt for Russia and the <br />Russians ... He often used the phrase ‘Russian idiots.’” ~ Orlando Figes, A PEOPLE’S TRAGEDY (1997)<br /><br />“This helps explain Lenin’s contempt for old Russia - ‘Russian idiots’ was a favourite curse.” ~ Simon Sebag Montefiore, YOUNG STALIN (2010) <br /><br />“on 16 October 1919 Lenin wrote to S. Yelyava … [use Germans, Italians and Frenchmen for the purpose] ‘As for the Russian idiots’ …” ~ Volkogonov, AUTOPSY FOR AN EMPIRE (1999)<br /><br />Even when I further quote Lenin himself calling for the merciless suppression of a specific ethnic group Atlanta Bill ignores all these facts and accuses me of being the racist! Hey, I’m just here advocating the end of double standards and Marxist genocide propaganda that seem to me blatantly racist. All of the double standards, hatred, contempt, hostility and bellicosity directed at ethnic groups or races in this thread has come from Atlanta Bill and his Marxist gurus. I haven’t expressed any. <br />freepalestine72https://www.blogger.com/profile/03303059065964322558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759924423263977907.post-82209115308689717582012-11-10T00:46:08.797-08:002012-11-10T00:46:08.797-08:00The reliance by the Goebbelsian network on Stalini...The reliance by the Goebbelsian network on Stalinist sources is laughable. Henry Makow tells us that Trotsky's friend and fellow Left Oppositionist Christian Rakovsky admitted to his jailor while in one of Stalin's prisons (later to escape) that he was an agent of the "world Jewish banking conspiracy" - this on the testimony of Stalin's jailor. Keep that word 'banking' in mind as you read the first stanza of the Revolutionary song "Trotsky's Red Army":<br />"Banker and boss hate the red Soviet star.<br /> The bosses would build a new throne for the Czar.<br /> Then from the steppes to the dark British Sea,<br /> Trotsky's Red Army brings victory."Atlanta Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13731574644449276796noreply@blogger.com