Sunday, August 14, 2016

The Bear in the Room: Russia

[NOTE: Copy/paste links to an open browser window to view. There is a temporary glitch in this blog program so links cannot be accessed by clicking on them alone. The author hopes to have this corrected ASAP.]

I am going mad. Completely, certifiably insane. I have written on this subject many times (see my post history) and I have acquired even more disturbing information of late. Yet people continue to dismiss my assertions out-of-hand, and the current election is making matters far worse. Respected, well-known radio and television hosts are laughing at an accusation leveled by Hillary Clinton, failing to make the distinction between disinformation and misinformation. This is a critical error.

There is a well-known maxim in the law that states once a witness has been caught in a lie, everything he or she says may be called into question. Not "dismiss everything the person says". In other words, do not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Which is precisely what prominent personalities are doing. "Hillary said it, so it cannot be true." "Mike Morell was CIA. 'Nuff said", implying that someone from CIA never speaks a word of truth. Rubbish.

Let us go back and review the difference between disinformation and misinformation. Disinformation is "deliberately incorrect and misleading information leaked especially by an intelligence agency as a means of counteracting and discrediting authentic information that the enemy has obtained". Misinformation is simply "inaccurate information". (Both definitions are from the Webster's II Dictionary.) In other words, disinformation is a complete fabrication while misinformation is based on actual facts but distorted so that the truth is obscured.

Hillary's claim that Donald Trump is working for Russia is still being ridiculed as being ludicrous. Indeed, the idea of Vladimir Putin sitting in his palace waiting on a signal from "The Donald" to tell him what to do and when "doesn't pass the laugh test", as Barry Scheck would say. But what if we rephrase her claim? How about "Donald Trump, with or without his knowledge, is being used by the Kremlin"? Now we have a statement that just might be true.

Let us now review recent Russian history, and tie it in to what is happening now. I do not feel the need to regurgitate things I have already written since readers can simply go through the menu on the right, so I will limit this article to that which I have not yet published or at least have not elaborated on until now.

Readers will recall when I wrote about the time the man I call my "unofficial mentor", Prime Minister Netanyahu, had driven me up the wall with his continual harping on Iran until it finally occurred to me there had to be a reason (other than the obvious and justified concern Israel has over the "Iran Deal"). I did some research and came to the conclusion that America has been at war with Iran since 1979 but that most Americans remain oblivious.

I extrapolated from there, and with the help of someone I know on social media I stumbled onto just how firmly Russia has had its tentacles in the Middle East for a century now. I continued digging, and have now uncovered some mind-blowing data which once again links a terrorist event directly to the Kremlin.

Pan Am 103.

I have posted previously about Lockerbie, the false confession by Qaddafi in exchange for sanctions being lifted against Libya, and the stunning revelation three years ago that Iran and the PFLP (People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine) had been responsible for the bombing in retaliation for our downing of a civilian Iranian plane just six months prior. But even that revelation did not go far enough.

For in addition to being supplied by Hezbollah/Iran, the "Palestinians" have also been supplied by Turkey, who gets its supplies in part from


Which brings me to some hair-raising questions, but before I list them let me post a link to just some of Moscow's interactions with various terrorist organizations (in this case, Turkish, but again, review my previous posts for even more information):

As readers can see, the FSB/GRU/SVR/KGB/Whatever-the-hell-they-are-calling-themselves-today have been rather busy. And things appear to be heating up; Erdogan and Putin just had a cozy little tete-a-tete:

If anyone thinks this meeting was only about oil I have swamp land for sale. Additionally, anyone balking at the idea of Russia sponsoring terrorism (after all, Putin hates terrorism, right?) not only needs to review what I have written in the past but also needs to grasp the fact that the Russians are happy to make a buck wherever they can make a buck. They are not troubled by such things as morality and loyalty. They invented the game of playing both sides of the field. We in America need to disavow our perception of the "new, improved Russians" and replace it with the all-too-familiar Soviets.

Astute readers noticed the play-on-words in my title, the "Bear" being substituted for the "elephant". Why will no one utter the "R" word, especially those people who I know have to be privy to Putin's tactics? This is the question that is driving me mad. We scoff at Hillary's assertion despite the plethora of evidence that Russia is indeed meddling in our election. Putin has been playing us for fools since Obama's reign of terror began. Ukraine, Crimea, Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Yemen...oh, and did we forget or just not notice the split-second news blurbs about the Russian espionage ship that has been on "liberty" in Cuba since April of 2014; the taunting fly-bys off our coast by Russian fighter pilots who have been doing the same thing off the coast of Canada? And, what about this?

Here are some questions to ponder. Did the Soviet Union supply the explosives used on Pan Am 103?  Was Russia behind Hillary's all-consuming need to rid the world of Qaddafi? While Hillary was running guns out of Benghazi through Turkey to the Syrian "rebels", was Russia also running guns through Turkey? To whom did those arms go? The "rebels", or the future Islamic State? Remember, Russia is playing both sides, has zero loyalty to anyone (including Assad), and is always in the market for cash, regardless of the source.

And, why is Putin now in an all-out attack on Hillary and Barry?

To those who are now incredulous, let me remind everyone that the Russians have never had a problem getting rid of people who have outlived their usefulness. But, what does he want with Donald Trump?

Maybe I will have some answers in my next post.

To Be Continued...

Thanksgiving: A Lesson in Gratitude

I found myself becoming irritated yesterday as I watched people I know on social media talking about the various plans they had for today. ...