Alex Jones Now Becomes Anti-Semtitic?

Alex Jones: “Jewish Mafia” runs Uber and health care and wants to hurt Americans 

On his radio show Tuesday, the conspiracy theorist claimed that the Emmanuel brothers run a seedy challah cabal

There’s a conspiracy afoot! So says alt-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who recently shared his belief that there’s a “Jewish Mafia” actively trying to scam and hurt Americans. “I mean it’s not that Jews are bad; it’s just they are the head of the Jewish Mafia in the United States,” Jones said during Tuesday’s edition of his educational program “The Alex Jones Show.”

“They run Uber. They run the health care. They’re going to scam you. They’re going to hurt you.”

The tinfoiled host ad libbed a scattershot monologue about the Jewish brothers Ari, Ezekiel and Rahm Emanuel on Tuesday, warning his listeners of the apparent dangers they pose.

If this sounds anti-Semitic to you, you’re not alone. Jones prefaced his impressive rant by acknowledging that he is frequently called anti-Semitic. “They’re always trying to claim that if I talk about the world government and corruption, I’m anti-Semitic,” Jones said.

As with most Jonesian rants, what followed was a string of sentences that mostly led nowhere, interrupted by outbursts about George Soros’ being a Nazi collaborator. Apart from his denial that the moon landing ever took place, Jones’ favorite conspiracy theory has involved a New World Order, supposedly run by Jews with sinister intentions. Toward the end of the segment, Jones seemed to have come to terms with his anti-Semitism. “I mean it’s, like, if being against Jews that are weirdo Nazi collaborators and gangsters makes me anti-Semitic, then fine,” Jones said. “I’m not against Jews, but at a certain point, when you people call you out, I’ve been called out in hundreds of newspapers in the last month, as being anti-Semitic, because I talk about a global, corporate combine.”  

So, obviously this article is a wee biased. Among other things, Jones did not talk about the moon landing. That's obviously a common trope to make "conspiracy theorists" look nutty.

The full text of Jones' remarks can be seen here.

And while he says not all Jews are bad, he has nothing against Jews, he is definitely playing off anti-Jewish ideas here. Certainly he is hinting that Jews secretly control the world.

Well, so what? He's a conspiracy theorist. Why am I even bringing this up?

It's just kind of amusing because for a long time, Jones was criticized by other conspiracy theorists for NOT criticizing Jews, not talking about their involvement in 9/11 or not talking about the Holocaust.

So along with his new found love of Trump, and his emerging presence in mainstream politics, Jones is playing up more of a Jewish conspiracy theory, at the same time he's downplayed all his theories about false-flags and 9/11 being an inside job.

It's very odd.

33 of the Day: Chapter 33 of Old US Air Force Textbook Discusses UFOs

Just a coincidence, I'm sure...

INTRODUCTORY SPACE SCIENCE - VOLUME II CHAPTER XXXIII UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS - USAF UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY It has been known for some time that during the late 1960's and early 1970's the U.S. Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs had some material on UFOs in its curriculum. The chapter of the textbook "Introductory Space Science" for the class Physics 370 has been posted on CUFONSM for quite a while. This file contains expanded coverage, including a newspaper article from the "Lemoore Advance, A letter of reply from the A.F. Academy transmitting copies of the two versions of Chapter 33, Chapter 33 as it was in use from 1968 - 1970, and the revised Chapter 33 placed in use for the Fall Quarter, 1970. (Posted 14 MAY 1992) -- Jim Klotz, CUFONSM SYSOP

(Chapter 33 of "Introductory Space Science"  Physics 370 1968 - 1970 

(snip)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTORY SPACE SCIENCE - VOLUME II
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS - USAF
Edited by:  Major Donald G. Carpenter
Co-Editor:  Lt. Colonel Edward R. Therkelson 

CHAPTER XXXIII
UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS 

  What is an Unidentified Flying Object (UFO)?  Well, according to United States Air Force Regulation 80-17 (dated 19 September 1966), a UFO is "Any aerial Phenomenon or object which is unknown or appears to be out of the ordinary to the observer."  This is a very broad definition which applies equally well to one individual seeing his first noctilucent cloud at twilight as it does to another individual seeing his first helicopter.  However, at present most people consider the term UFO to mean an object which behaves in a strange or erratic manner while moving through the Earth's atmosphere.  That strange phenomenon has evoked strong emotions and great curiosity among a large segment of our world's population.  The average person is interested because he loves a mystery, the professional military man is involved because of the possible threat to national security, and some scientists are interested because of the basic curiosity that led them into becoming researchers.
   The literature on UFO's is so vast, and the stories so many and varied, that we can only present a sketchy outline of the subject in this chapter.  That outline includes description classifications, operational domains (temporal and spatial), some theories as to the nature of the UFO phenomenon, human reactions, attempts to attack the problem scientifically, and some tentative conclusions.  If you wish to read further in this area, the references provide an excellent starting point.
33.1 DESCRIPTORS

   One of the greatest problems you encounter when attempting to catalog UFO sightings, is selection of a system for cataloging.  No effective system has yet been devised, although a number of different systems have been proposed.  The net result is that almost all UFO data are either treated in the form of individual cases, or in the forms of inadequate classification systems.  However, these systems do tend to have some common factors, and a collection of these factors is as follows:

   a. Size

   b. Shape (disc, ellipse, football, etc.)

   c. Luminosity

   d. Color

   e. Number of UFO's

Behavior:

    a. Location (altitude, direction, etc.)

    b. Patterns of paths (straight line, climbing, zig-zagging, etc.)

    c. Flight Characteristics (wobbling, fluttering, etc.)

    d. Periodicity of sightings

    e. Time duration

    f. Curiosity or inquisitiveness

    g. Avoidance

    h. Hostility

Associated Effects:

    a. Electro-Magnetic (compass, radio, ignition systems, etc.)

    b. Radiation (burns, induced radioactivity, etc.)

    c. Ground disturbance (dust stirred up, leaves moved, standing wave

    d. Sound (none, hissing, humming, roaring, thunderclaps, etc.)

    e. Vibration (weak, strong, slow, fast)

    f. Smell (ozone or other odor)

    g. Flame (how much, where, when, color)

    h. Smoke or cloud (amount, color, persistence)

    i. Debris (type, amount, color, persistence)

    j. Inhibition of voluntary movement by observers

    k. Sighting of "creatures" or "beings"

After Effects:

    a. Burned areas or animals

    b. Depressed or flattened areas

    c. Dead or missing animals

    d. Mentally disturbed people

    e. Missing items

There is a lot more at the link.
-------
 
Here is some more recent news regarding the Air Force and UFOs...

The military deleted a passage about unidentified flying objects from a 2008 Air Force personnel manual just days after The Huffington Post asked Pentagon officials about the purpose of the UFO section.

Before the recent revisions, the document — Air Force Instruction 10-206 — advised pilots, radar operators and other Air Force personnel on what to do when they encountered any unknown airborne objects. Now in the 2011 version, the reference to UFOs — which simply means “unidentified flying objects,” not necessarily spaceships with little green men — has been eliminated.

What Is Happening with Russia?

I'm going to post a few links and then add some summary comments at the end.

The NYTimes has a good summary piece on recent developments and history of US and Russia: "The Hawk on Russia Policy? Hillary Clinton, Not Donald Trump"

 An propaganda-ish video from the Hillary Clinton campaign that still makes some good points:


A post from TPM describing a key exchange in the last debate with Trump and Clinton on Russia. Briefly, Trump denied Russia was hacking the US, at the same time, going against US intelligence assessments.

A long blog post from Josh Marshall at TPM speculating on what Russia is doing-- basically trying to move the US election. A key point is that Russia is actually a relatively poor country, the economy is small compared to the size of the country, and they have limited money to use for foreign policy. So hacking is a way they can achieve asymmetric warfare.

Although Hillary typically gets blamed for being a hawk on Russia, and she is hawkish, the Obama White House is escalating tensions as well: "Did the White House Declare War on Russia?Vice President Biden announces a forthcoming covert strike against Russian president Putin and Moscow calls it a “declaration of war.”"

-------

Here are the key facts as I see them:

1) Democratic leaders (Obama, Biden, Clinton) are clearly confrontational about Russia, and this is a long-standing position of US foreign policy, even if it used to be the Republicans that were more hawkish

2) Trump is trying to paint himself as more of a peace candidate to Russia, basically denying they are doing anything wrong, appeasing them, complimenting Putin. Trump has undeniable economic ties to Russia as well.

3) Someone has been hacking Democratic campaign materials. US intelligence thinks it is from the Russian government although there may not be absolute proof on this. (I tried to track down the evidence on this, and it gets very complicated, involving internet technology I do not understand. The bottom line is the hacking goes to wikileaks, and the material has been dripping out and primarily damaging the Democratic campaign. This of course helps Trump. So on the simple question of "cui bono" (who benefits), it IS Trump and the Russians.

4) The US and Russia each have a few thousand nuclear weapons pointed at each other, still.

So what is going on?

First of all, we are not to have a war with Russia, due to the nuclear weapons. Any conflict will have to be through proxies or indirect. Any hostility will have to carefully managed to prevent nuclear escalation. Let's just assume that no actual leaders in the US or Russia (Obama, Clinton, Putin, Trump) want to have a nuclear war (even if there are some evil creeps in each country who do).

So, I think there are three main possibilities at play here.

Possibility A:
Russia is threatened by the US, and is indeed trying to get Trump into power, to suit their own ends, and are threatened by Clinton being elected, as she will more aggressive towards them. The US is the good guy.

Possibility B:
Russia is largely innocent, and is being framed by the US in the hacking. Trump would be a US agent in this scenario. The reason the US is doing this is to create propaganda to build up the military more, for more military spending. The US is the bad guy.

Possibility C:
Russia and the US are in on this whole thing together at a deep level. It is all a scam, meant to build up and keep the nuclear weapons arsenal humming. This is the deep ultimate truth scenario, where the true evil PTB are running things, for an eventual attempt at breaking out of the planetary quarantine on them, which is why they need so many nuclear weapons.

In terms of the election, Trump is just too erratic and impulsive to be trusted in these geopolitical matters, even if he wants peace on the surface. It's also not clear that appeasing Russia will help, as it will encourage further aggression, and create more places for conflict.

In any case, Hillary Clinton will almost certainly be elected president, and the while a lot of this foreign policy is just out of the hands of the public, the key thing is for Americans to stay ENGAGED in these matters and get involved in the issues, and to try to do what they can to make the US and world a better place.

PEACE.

Fakery Watch

Miles Mathis does a lot of research into the biographies of various famous people. His current theory is that most really famous people throughout history are fakes, and really gay Jewish actors.

This one on Steve Jobs may not be the most convincing one I've seen from him, but still it raises some really good points. Bottom line is Jobs is probably a gay Jewish actor, to be a spokesperson to sell computers to everyone.

Here he reveals Trump is likely really Jewish. Reasonably good case for that. He's not sure about him being gay.

Here he says George Washington was gay and Jewish.

FWIW.

Did a Fake Attack a la the Gulf of Tonkin Incident Just Happen Off the Coast of Yemen?

Do a web search for “USS Mason” and you will find countless “news” reports about how this poor innocent U.S. ship has been fired upon, and fired upon again, and how it has fired back “countermeasures” in self-defense. 

But you might stumble onto one article from CNN (don’t watch the totally misleading video posted just above the text) that says: 

“Officials Saturday night were uncertain about what exactly happened, if there were multiple incoming missiles or if there was a malfunction with the radar detection system on the destroyer.” 

So, was the poor wittle innocent destroyer fired at or not?

Read the rest for some history on the Gulf of Tonkin and the escalation of the Vietnam war. 

I don't think this new incident will be anything Vietnam though... Yemen is too poor, and no one in the US really cares about it. We will likely just use this as an excuse to drop more bombs.


The overall real tragedy is what Obama has allowed in Yemen, with the fucking Saudis:

Obama Is Killing Yemen: A Yemeni Journalist Speaks Out After U.S.-Backed Bombing Strikes Funeral

The US just bombed Yemen and nobody cares.

Election Season

The WaPo has really led the media charge against Trump in this election, and here is their "closing argument" against Trump

The hideous diabolical truth about Hillary (an amusing round up of various extreme claims about Hillary Clinton)

The Fury and Failure of Donald Trump: Win, lose or drop out, the Republican nominee has laid waste to the American political system. On the trail for the last gasp of the ugliest campaign in our nation's history By Matt Taibbi

Trump lies more often than Clinton. But Americans think she’s more dishonest. Here’s why.

Not so amusing:

HOW TRUMP TOOK HATE GROUPS MAINSTREAM: The full story of his connection with far-right extremists.

Meet the Horde of Neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and Other Extremist Leaders Endorsing Donald Trump: The Republican nominee for president has not disavowed any of them.

The 2016 Election Will Never End

-------------

Is Trump a cult leader?


Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.
- Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.
- No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
- No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.
- Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
- There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
- Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
- There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
- Followers feel they can never be "good enough".
- The group/leader is always right.
- The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader.
- Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.
- Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.
- Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".
- Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.
- Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement. - Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.
- A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.
- Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.
- Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.
- Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.

Alex Jones' Slide into Complete Insanity Continues

ALEX JONES (HOST): I'm never a lesser of two evils person, but with Hillary, there's not even the same universe. She is an abject, psychopathic, demon from Hell that as soon as she gets into power is going to try to destroy the planet. I'm sure of that, and people around her say she's so dark now, and so evil, and so possessed that they are having nightmares, they're freaking out. Folks let me just tell you something, and if media wants to go with this, that's fine. There are dozens of videos and photos of Obama having flies land on him, indoors, at all times of year, and he'll be next to a hundred people and no one has flies on them. Hillary, reportedly, I mean, I was told by people around her that they think she's demon-possessed, okay? I'm just going to go ahead and say it, okay?

They said that they're scared. That's why when I see her when kids are by her, I actually get scared myself, with a child -- with that big rubber face and that -- I mean this woman is dangerous, ladies and gentleman. I'm telling you, she is a demon. This is Biblical. She's going to launch a nuclear war. The Russians are scared of her.
[...]

Imagine how bad she smells, man? I'm told her and Obama, just stink, stink, stink, stink. You can't wash that evil off, man. Told there's a rotten smell around Hillary. I'm not kidding, people say, they say -- folks, I've been told this by high up folks. They say listen, Obama and Hillary both smell like sulfur. I never said this because the media will go crazy with it, but I've talked to people that are in protective details, they're scared of her. And they say listen, she's a frickin' demon and she stinks and so does Obama. I go, like what? Sulfur. They smell like Hell.

Someone Is Feeding the Trump Campaign Russian Propaganda

Interesting piece here:

We have another of those apparently Russian-sourced email thefts which ended up on Wikileaks - this time emails from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta.

In those emails there's an email from Clinton confidante Sid Blumenthal in which he appends an article by Eichenwald himself about Benghazi and other matters. When the Russia-state owned news and propaganda outlet Sputniknews got a hold of it they apparently got confused - intentionally or not - and ascribed Eichenwald's copy to Blumenthal. So far, so good. Or at least the kind of mistake you might make if you were operating outside your language and political culture - but mainly a tempest in a teapot.

Except that the same mis-ascription ended up in Donald Trump's speech last night at a rally in Wilkes-Barre, PA!

According to Eichenwald, this goof showed up only in Sputnikness, the Russian propaganda site and briefly in a Turkish publication.

So how did a Russian propaganda goof or intentional error show up in the GOP nominee's speech?

Good question. But here's the thing. This isn't the first time this has happened. It's happened a number of times with Trump and his top level surrogates. Indeed, I examined the issue back in August. We might speculate that there's some kind of mole in the Trump operation. Less conspiratorially, we might speculate that one of Trump's advisors with extensive ties to Russia is feeding Trump this stuff.

The second option at least seems plausible. But there's actually a simpler explanation and it's one not based on speculation at all but things we know to be facts. News from Russian propaganda sources are pervasive in the alt-right/neo-Nazi web. As a secondary matter we know from Adrian Chen's work that there are a decent number of faux 'pro-Trump' accounts on Twitter that are actually run from troll farms operated by Russian intelligence services.

By whichever path, Russian propaganda is ubiquitous on the alt-right/racist web - particularly on Twitter, Reddit, 4chan and similar sites. It happens that we know the Trump world is awash in the alt-right/neo-Nazi web. After all, that's where all the retweeting of #WhiteGenocide accounts and the like comes from. So anything is possible. Perhaps there's a more complex explanation. But the simplest one is that it's organic. Russian propaganda stories from outlets like RT, Sputniknews and other similar sites spread freely on the alt-right/white supremacist web. And that's where the Trump camp lives. So it's entirely plausible that that's why material that appears only on these Russian propaganda sites shows up so frequently in Trump's speeches.

The key question is whether they have a Russian operative, or one of their white supremacist connections is doing this. Either way, it's disgraceful to have Trump taken in this way and repeating disinfo to US audiences. But of course Trump is nothing but disgraceful overall, a spoiled bigoted manchild who is also a sexual predator. Thank god it looks like he will go down in historic defeat, against a woman no less.

Blink-182’s Tom DeLonge Emailed Clinton’s Adviser John Podesta About UFOs

Speaking of rock musicians and UFOs....

I posted previously about the very curious interest of Hillary Clinton and John Podesta in UFOs, and it's clear that both of them are public about being pro-UFO disclosure.

Aliens, Drugs and Rock and Roll (also Environmentalism and Expanded Consciousness)

I just found a really interesting blog post about how so many rock musicians:
1) have had UFO experiences or believe in them
2) used powerful mind-altering drugs
3) are strong environmentalists


The great Neil Young song "After the Gold Rush" is an interesting example:

Well, I dreamed I saw the knights in armor coming, saying something about a queen.

There were peasants singing and drummers drumming and the archer split the tree.

There was a fanfare blowing to the sun that was floating on the breeze.

Look at Mother Nature on the run in the nineteen seventies.

Look at Mother Nature on the run in the nineteen seventies.

I was lying in a burned out basement with the full moon in my eyes.

I was hoping for replacement when the sun burst thru the sky.

There was a band playing in my head and I felt like getting high.

I was thinking about what a friend had said I was hoping it was a lie.

Thinking about what a friend had said I was hoping it was a lie.

Well, I dreamed I saw the silver space ships flying in the yellow haze of the sun.

There were children crying and colors flying all around the chosen ones.

All in a dream, all in a dream, the loading had begun.

They were flying Mother Nature's Silver seed to a new home in the sun.

Flying Mother Nature's Silver seed to a new home.

From the blogpost:

Young has stated that he did not know what After the Gold Rush message was. We know this because when Dolly Parton, Emmylou Harris and Linda Ronstadt recorded it in 1999 for their collaboration trio, they got some unique insight into the song from the man who wrote it. Parton said, "When we were doing the Trio album, I asked Linda and Emmy what it meant, and they didn't know. So we called Neil Young, and he didn't know. We asked him, flat out, what it meant, and he said, 'Hell, I don't know. I just wrote it. It just depends on what I was taking at the time. I guess every verse has something different I'd taken.'" 

Young (as did many of the top rock and roll stars) therefore admitted he was doing drugs when he wrote the song and came up with the lyrics. The question therefore is where did the alien and environmental messages come from? 

He is not the only one. Jerry Garcia, who like Young was a big environmentalist working to save the rainforest talked about a DMT (known as the spirit drugs because people are often greeted by alien of spirit type beings) experience in which he encountered insect type humanoids. Garcia struggled with drugs his whole life, and in fact died in a drug rehab unit. It was one of his DMT experiences that he came up with the name “Grateful Dead” for the band during an DMT experience. He described his alien DMT experience as follows, 

I had some very weird experiences. My main experience was one of furious activity and tremendous struggle in a sort of futuristic, space-ship vehicle with insectoid presences. After I came out of my coma, I had this image of myself as these little hunks of protoplasm that were stuck together kind of like stamps with perforations between them that you could snap off. (laughter) They were run through with neoprene tubing, and there were these insects that looked like cockroaches which were like message-units that were kind of like my bloodstream. That was my image of my physical self and this particular feeling lasted a long time. It was really strange.[1] 

Sting from the band Police tells almost the exact experience. During an ayahausca experience in Brazil he recounts his hallucinogenic experience in the Brazilian rainforest back in the 80's. He says he had an experience of playing a frightening game of chess with a sensual beautiful insect like "humanoid" being, who played very aggressively. Sting was beaten badly and went on to form the rainforest foundation and has now saved an estimated 28 million acres of rainforest from clear cut destruction.[2]

Some whole bands even report being abducted by aliens, such as the Moody Blues.

Really fascinating stuff, overall.

The whole piece is worth a read, as well as other stuff at the site.

Trump and Pence Keep Saying that Hillary Deleted 33,000 Emails

The thing is, it's not 33,000 emails.  It's maybe 32,000, at most, and it's a non-issue overall.


But if 33 doesn't mean anything, why does the Trump team love that number?

Hitler vs Trump

• Hitler was often described as an egomaniac who “only loved himself” — a narcissist with a taste for self-dramatization and what Mr. Ullrich calls a “characteristic fondness for superlatives.” His manic speeches and penchant for taking all-or-nothing risks raised questions about his capacity for self-control, even his sanity. But Mr. Ullrich underscores Hitler’s shrewdness as a politician — with a “keen eye for the strengths and weaknesses of other people” and an ability to “instantaneously analyze and exploit situations.”

• Hitler was known, among colleagues, for a “bottomless mendacity” that would later be magnified by a slick propaganda machine that used the latest technology (radio, gramophone records, film) to spread his message. A former finance minister wrote that Hitler “was so thoroughly untruthful that he could no longer recognize the difference between lies and truth” and editors of one edition of “Mein Kampf” described it as a “swamp of lies, distortions, innuendoes, half-truths and real facts.”

• Hitler was an effective orator and actor, Mr. Ullrich reminds readers, adept at assuming various masks and feeding off the energy of his audiences. Although he concealed his anti-Semitism beneath a “mask of moderation” when trying to win the support of the socially liberal middle classes, he specialized in big, theatrical rallies staged with spectacular elements borrowed from the circus. Here, “Hitler adapted the content of his speeches to suit the tastes of his lower-middle-class, nationalist-conservative, ethnic-chauvinist and anti-Semitic listeners,” Mr. Ullrich writes. He peppered his speeches with coarse phrases and put-downs of hecklers. Even as he fomented chaos by playing to crowds’ fears and resentments, he offered himself as the visionary leader who could restore law and order.

• Hitler increasingly presented himself in messianic terms, promising “to lead Germany to a new era of national greatness,” though he was typically vague about his actual plans. He often harked back to a golden age for the country, Mr. Ullrich says, the better “to paint the present day in hues that were all the darker. Everywhere you looked now, there was only decline and decay.”

• Hitler’s repertoire of topics, Mr. Ullrich notes, was limited, and reading his speeches in retrospect, “it seems amazing that he attracted larger and larger audiences” with “repeated mantralike phrases” consisting largely of “accusations, vows of revenge and promises for the future.” But Hitler virtually wrote the modern playbook on demagoguery, arguing in “Mein Kampf” that propaganda must appeal to the emotions — not the reasoning powers — of the crowd. Its “purely intellectual level,” Hitler said, “will have to be that of the lowest mental common denominator among the public it is desired to reach.” Because the understanding of the masses “is feeble,” he went on, effective propaganda needed to be boiled down to a few slogans that should be “persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward.”

• Hitler’s rise was not inevitable, in Mr. Ullrich’s opinion. There were numerous points at which his ascent might have been derailed, he contends; even as late as January 1933, “it would have been eminently possible to prevent his nomination as Reich chancellor.” He benefited from a “constellation of crises that he was able to exploit cleverly and unscrupulously” — in addition to economic woes and unemployment, there was an “erosion of the political center” and a growing resentment of the elites. The unwillingness of Germany’s political parties to compromise had contributed to a perception of government dysfunction, Mr. Ullrich suggests, and the belief of Hitler supporters that the country needed “a man of iron” who could shake things up. “Why not give the National Socialists a chance?” a prominent banker said of the Nazis. “They seem pretty gutsy to me.”

• Hitler’s ascension was aided and abetted by the naïveté of domestic adversaries who failed to appreciate his ruthlessness and tenacity, and by foreign statesmen who believed they could control his aggression. Early on, revulsion at Hitler’s style and appearance, Mr. Ullrich writes, led some critics to underestimate the man and his popularity, while others dismissed him as a celebrity, a repellent but fascinating “evening’s entertainment.” Politicians, for their part, suffered from the delusion that the dominance of traditional conservatives in the cabinet would neutralize the threat of Nazi abuse of power and “fence Hitler in.” “As far as Hitler’s long-term wishes were concerned,” Mr. Ullrich observes, “his conservative coalition partners believed either that he was not serious or that they could exert a moderating influence on him. In any case, they were severely mistaken.”

• Hitler, it became obvious, could not be tamed — he needed only five months to consolidate absolute power after becoming chancellor. “Non-National Socialist German states” were brought into line, Mr. Ullrich writes, “with pressure from the party grass roots combining effectively with pseudo-legal measures ordered by the Reich government.” Many Germans jumped on the Nazi bandwagon not out of political conviction but in hopes of improving their career opportunities, he argues, while fear kept others from speaking out against the persecution of the Jews. The independent press was banned or suppressed and books deemed “un-German” were burned. By March 1933, Hitler had made it clear, Mr. Ullrich says, “that his government was going to do away with all norms of separation of powers and the rule of law.”

• Hitler had a dark, Darwinian view of the world. And he would not only become, in Mr. Ullrich’s words, “a mouthpiece of the cultural pessimism” growing in right-wing circles in the Weimar Republic, but also the avatar of what Thomas Mann identified as a turning away from reason and the fundamental principles of a civil society — namely, “liberty, equality, education, optimism and belief in progress.”

---------------------------------

It can reasonably be argued that the presidency of George W. Bush was an eight-year warm-up act for the final stage of a dumbed-down America: a Trump presidency. You can draw a relatively straight line from the Florida recount of 2000, which took Bush into office, right through to the shambolic Trump campaign. The election of Bush led to the invasion of Iraq, which led to the de-stabilization in the Middle East (Libya, Egypt, Syria), which led to the migrant crisis, which led to European nationalism, Brexit, and, at the tail end of all these disasters, Trump.

He has touched—embraced!—every third rail in American politics. He has offended (and I apologize if I’ve left some group out): African-Americans, Native Americans, Mexicans, Jews, Muslims, war heroes—war heroes!—families of war heroes, the disabled, women, and babies. Babies!

Through word or action, Trump has promoted gun violence, bigotry, ignorance, intolerance, lying, and just about everything else that can be wrong with a society. And yet he marches on, playing to a constituency that just doesn’t seem to care. The thing is, this ramshackle campaign, following a ramshackle business career, has exposed his flaws and failures to the world and, more importantly, to the people he will brush up against for the rest of his life. To them he is now officially a joke. I suspect he knows this. And if his thin skin on minor matters is any indication, he will be lashing out with even more vitriol.

He is a mad jumble of a man, with a slapdash of a campaign and talking points dredged from the dark corners at the bottom of the Internet.

I don’t think he will get to the White House, but just the fact that his carny act has gotten so far along the road will leave the path with a permanent orange stain.

Trump, more than even the most craven politicians or entertainers, is a bottomless reservoir of need and desire for attention. He lives off crowd approval. And at a certain point that will dim, as it always does to people like him, and the cameras will turn to some other American novelty. When that attention wanes, he will be left with his press clippings, his dyed hair, his fake tan, and those tiny, tiny fingers.  

Speaking of Hitler, the Philippines has a leader who wants to be like Hitler and kill millions. What an amazing psycho.

Stop the Global Arms Trade, Stop War

Worth a watch--


Note how all arms are made in the global north, and almost all wars are in the poor global south. Funny how that works.

One good thing, is with the recent peace-deal in Colombia, the Western hemisphere is actually free of war.