Moveable Feast Cafe 2016/06/04 … Open Thread

Based on some positive comments that Donald Trump has made about Putin, and his willingness to ‘make a deal’ with Russia and some, Russians included, are insisting that he represents a somewhat better choice than Hillary Clinton, who is clearly antagonistic to Russia and Putin, I decided to watch his recent speech in San Jose California. This is my report, which I sent out to some of my email list.

I have heard a lot of ‘reports’ about Trump, and know enough about his history as a casino operator, his association with Joe McCarthy’s lawyer, and real estate wheeler dealer who would go bankrupt to avoid his debts.

And of course heard a lot of criticism about Trump from the MSM, and the Democrats.
But some people who correctly criticize Clinton’s war mongering and scandals and influence peddling corruption, say that assuming she wins the nomination, that we should vote for Trump.

So I finally decided to watch his recent speech in San Jose California.

I did not watch the whole video, just the start of it, the musical intro to his entrance and his speech.

So here is what I think:

The rally started with a prayer—by a Police Chaplain. A fitting start to an incipient state that glamorizes the Police, and the subtext of what that means. He cited Prophet Micah’s famous dictum which I mostly agree with, to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly (with God).
So far so good, but why the police chaplain?

Then the fun really began, while the crowd waits for Trumps entrance.

It starts at Minute 29 of the Youtube video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfGHhPHWVdk

when Wagner’s Song of the Valkyrie plays just before Trump’s entrance.

If there is one signature piece of music of the Nazis, that’s it.

https://www.youtube.com/verify_controversy?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3D0-8jjEX1dm8%26bpctr%3D1465023132

So the structure of the speech was to start with what many of us agree on, that the system is corrupt, the jobs have all gone. He goes on to talk about Hillary and her criminality regarding the emails and a brief reference to her abandoning US people to be killed by terrorists.

He talks about how Amazon is monopolizing retail and driving small retailers out of business (true) and that Amazon owns the Washington Post, which has become a terrible newspaper (true).

He criticized NAFTA and after impoverishing Mexican farmers and fomenting the whole drug culture of gangsters, which the US created, he tells Mexico to build a wall, as a solution to the problem the US created.

He says Obama care is bad (arguably true) and that he will create something better. What that is he does not spell out. Much of what he says in the beginning of his speech would resonate with people on the Left, including Sanders supporters, many of whom, he says will vote for him when and if Sanders loses the nomination in a rigged process.

He criticized Sanders as crazy or something to that effect but acknowledges what those on the Left have seen or documented–that the Democratic Primary process is rigged, then buyin from his Republican supporters.

But what is his conclusion and solution?

He closes the deal with his listeners, by complaining about the underfunded military, whose airplanes don’t get enough maintenance. And promises to rebuild it. (He omitted to discuss the 8 trillion dollars that got lost in the Pentagon budget, and that the Pentagon has never been willing to pass an audit).

He talked about Russia and China, but was not so specific except to imply that the US should not spend money to defend Japan when Japan is a competitor. The feeling is not one of cooperation but of confrontation. (After previously saying some good things about Putin, he recently dissed him. So where he stands on Russian relations is a cipher but most likely will continue the dangerous path to war with Russia.)

He ends with the Supreme Court, saying he wants another Antonin Scalia, who was a member of Opus Dei a secret Catholic society associated with Italian Fascism and terrorist attacks in Italy that were blamed on the Left.

Scalia, setting that dark aspect aside, was an arch conservative.

Conclusion:

Starting with a populous appeal, he ends with militarism and sympathizes with an extreme right wing Supreme Court.

So he enters the stage with essentially a Nazi anthem, and goes out with an appeal to more military spending, ‘to wipe out ISIS’, when Russian essentially already did it far more effectively. Yet Russia is an implicit threat, when ISIS is seen by both as dangerous.

Bottom line, is to ask, if he starts with a Nazi anthem, and ends with militarism and neo fascist sympathies, what is his real agenda, populist rhetoric aside?

Eric

PS while Hillary’s record of scandals and warmongering make her totally unacceptable, some people say she is better than Trump, and some say Trump is better than Hillary. Frankly, it looks bleak, if that is what choices the US political system offers.

Now, finally, the foreplay climaxes into what I came here to do: make love with you and share sex that’s true.

The love army has ten divisions. Six have taken up their positions and the seventh is now deploying. These divisions are renditions of the reality of war and its causes. Like vineyards, they are multi-polar energies emanating from the only source that can defeat the undefeatable enemy.

The love army is a projection of us in our ideal condition. It’s a matter of quality, not quantity; and so it takes but a handful to turn the tide. It’s also not an all or nothing matter, so any change by anyone in the direction of victory contributes to the cause.

The causes of war must be understood. The divisions represent the causes and cures. To reprise:

1. Thought, intelligence, emotional intelligence, wisdom, truth, clarity and acuity transform stupidity into courageous action in support of gentle love. But this cannot be achieved without the following nine basic, most basic actions:

2. Diet. We are what we eat. If we want to win, we eat an Eden Vegan diet. If we want to lose, we eat something else.

3. Animality. We are animals of the highest order: wild and free, unless we make ourselves pets by having pets.

4. Marriage. We take marriage vows to the whole, communal sexlove commons as it was in our beginning, before the slaughter of patriarchy, of which marriage of couples, or just coupling relations destroyed structures that could resist empire.

5. Money. At the very least, we do not use interest or invest in usury; not if we want to win against the beast.

6. Drugs. Per # 1, we have to have a clear mind to win, not a fogged over mind from pot to propaganda, whether political or religious.

I have already introducted these six divisions in the previous cafes. There is more information there and more information at thelovegovernment.com which provides a still larger context.

7. Abortion:

What could be more war-like than destroying life at its very beginning? If my mother chose to abort in my case, I would not even be destroyed; I would simply not be; nor would those championing pro-choice. If abortion was universal, none of us would be. Nihilism in spades.

Abortion, as such, is wrong and immoral. It is an attack on life and love of unprecedented proportions, involving millions. Of course, there are mitigating circumstances but these do not change the principle. To kill life at its source is an unforgivable crime; forgiveness gives nothing but the chance to do it again.

I could go into a discussion of the mitigation factors and the multiple qualifiers but I prefer to answer specific questions and objections as they arise. Ad hominems I’ll refer to ad feminems.

To our deranged minds, these seven divisions of moral love are indeed “terrible as an army in battle array.” We may want to walk away from the battleground into the safe zone of denial. That’s our choice but I don’t think we’ll stop the war on Russia and the world that way.

It’s not the evil elites that are the problem. It’s all of us (including the elites) who are acting in the interests of empire by the behaviors outlined here. Take it or leave it. I’m just reporting on what the love army is doing because I was commanded to do so.

You may think the love army is a fiction, stranger than the faction of war. If so, I think you’re not thinking very cleanly; no doubt due to the foundational nine violations of love. You may throw the gauntlet right back at me. Fine, but I hope there would be some substance within, other than hurt feelings.

I’ve got to run but I’ll be back. There’s probably more to say about abortion but I think it’s enough for now.

We will smile with blank faces – no lips at the end of our mouths pointing upwards

We will try and look as completely miserable as the people examining us as we go through border control…

We won’t say a word – as I am disrobed – because I forgot that my spectacles are made of metal and I might have a bomb in my sandals – which I also have to take off – as they take me to one side – and sniff my bag for any traces of drugs or explosives…and then I have to take a piss test and a blood test…and if I get annoyed with them..

and they still let me out of England -and say – Yeh your wife can go too…

its coming back that is the problem – we hope to get to a gig – about 90 minutes after the plane is scheduled to land – and its The French and the Spanish who are Kickin’ Off

No one could give a tear in The UK

That is why we are all voting

out

most of the rest of Europe are with us English too.

We can tolerate really horrible people – but we are not going to tolerate tyrant fascist control.

(this post was edited by me who wrote it – to try and change some of the really strong working class english swear words – and to try and tone it down a bit)

Tony

You see if it ever eventually dawns on The Russian People (we didn’t do it)

and it dawns on The American People (the commies might be cn’ts – but no way did they do 9/11)

and i kind of suggest it might have been us – though I have no evidence whatsoever of any British involvement in 9/11 – except one clear up vehicle..which a yank – miami i think..he says that’s RAF a very specialised Pentagon clear up vehicle – when the aeroplane didn’t quite fit

I don’t think we did it – and I do realise the problem if both America and Russia think we did it…

They are not going to Nuke Each Other…

They are going To Nuke Us – In ENGLAND

I think we are fairly innocent…

so if it wasn’t us…who was it?

Just Askin’

Tony

@”Are there changes you would like to see?”

You could use/link (more) official and semi-official documents from US/NATO/EU for your analysis so the reader can get a more in-depth look into how the US empire functions and what its motives and plans are. I think this might help persuade those who are naive and still fall for the lies of US propaganda.

Documents like those for example:
“Excerpts From Pentagon’s Plan: ‘Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival’
…
the U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. Second, in the non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. Finally, we must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role. An effective reconstitution capability is important here, since it implies that a potential rival could not hope to quickly or easily gain a predominant military position in the world.
…
access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil;”
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/08/world/excerpts-from-pentagon-s-plan-prevent-the-re-emergence-of-a-new-rival.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

“Likewise, space forces will emerge to protect military and commercial national interests and investment in the space medium due to their increasing importance.”
“The Joint Vision 2010 operationalconcepts of dominant maneuver, precision engagement, full-dimensional protection, and focused logistics are enabled by information superiority and technological innovation. The end result of these enablers and concepts is Full Spectrum Dominance. Information superiority relies heavily upon space capabilities to collect, process, and disseminate an uninterrupted flow of information while denying an adversary’s ability to fully leverage the same.”
“The globalization of the world economy will also continue, with a widening between “haves” and “have-nots.””
https://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usspac/visbook.pdf

“Victory is Possible
by Colin S. Gray and Keith Payne
…
If American nuclear power is to support U.S. foreign policy objectives, the United States must possess the ability to wage nuclear war rationally.
…
Surely no one can be comfortable with the claim that a strategy that would kill millions of Soviet citizens and would invite a strategic response that could kill tens of millions of U.S. citizens would be politically and morally acceptable. However, it is worth recalling the six guidelines for the use of force provided by the “just war” doctrine of the Catholic Church: Force can be used in a just cause; with a right intent; with a reasonable chance of success; in order that, if successful, its use offers a better future than would have been the case had it not been employed; to a degree proportional to the goals sought, or to the evil combated; and with the determination to sparre noncombatants, when there is a reasonable chance of doing so.
…
Small, preplanned strikes can only be of use if the United States enjoys strategic superiority — the ability to wage a nuclear war at any level of violence with a reasonable prospect of defeating the Soviet Union and of recovering sufficiently to insure a satisfactory postwar world order.
…
The United States should plan to defeat the Soviet Union and to do so at a cost that would not prohibit U.S. recovery. Washington should identify war aims that in the last resort would contemplate the destruction of Soviet political authority and the emergence of a postwar world order compatible with Western values.
…
Strategists cannot offer painless conflicts or guarantee that their preferred posture and doctrine promise a greatly superior deterrence posture to current American schemes. But, they can claim that an intelligent U.S. offensive strategy, wedded to homeland defenses, should reduce U.S. casualties to approximately 20 million, which should render U.S. strategic threats more credible. If the United States developed the targeting plans and procured the weapons necessary to hold the Soviet political, bureaurcratic, and military leadership at risk, that should serve as the functional equivalent in Soviet perspective of the assured-destruction effect of the late 1960s.”
http://home.earthlink.net/~platter/articles/80-summer-payne.html

“If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal — if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would have so few warheads and decoys left.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20060511183633/http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060301faessay85204/keir-a-lieber-daryl-g-press/the-rise-of-u-s-nuclear-primacy.html?mode=print

Ted Postol on US “conventional” war planning with nuclear weapons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pXPgK9Pld8&t=91m25s

“SIOP-3”
http://web.archive.org/web/20070401081613/http://www.nd.edu/~klieber/Foreign%20Affairs%20article%20documents/2005_SIOP-3.pdf

“We have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security.To do so,we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives.We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.”
-George Kennan, US State Department senior planning official, 1948
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25303

Already in 2009 the EU think tank ISS announced the current war against Russia:
“Alienated Modern States – AMS North Korea, Burma, Russia?
…
The AMS are actively alienated from the PMC and see our globalising system as a threat. The task here is to convert them if possible and, failing this, to manage thier challenges to the globalising world. This will require a capability for hard power politics.
…
Towards the AMS, a capability to support hard power politics, both for Clausewitzian influence and possible direct military confrontation.
…
Hard power politics – Clausewitzian influence over alienated state regimes. Some alien-
ated regimes will still exist in 2020 – the key uncertainty here being the Kremlin. If so, we will need to retain a capability to meet their deliberate challenges to our vision of the world. This will require hard military power, but also an increased focus on asymmetrical forms of destruction, notably in the cybersphere. This is of major concern to the East-
ern members of the EU, and if the ESDP is unable to provide this then they will turn to NATO or directly to the US.”
http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/What_ambitions_for_European_defence_in_2020.pdf

“A NEW GEOGRAPHY OF EUROPEAN POWER?”
http://www.egmontinstitute.be/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ep42.pdf

“Final Report by the High Representative/Head of the EDA on the Common Security and Defence Policy”
http://eeas.europa.eu/statements/docs/2013/131015_02_en.pdf

“The BND, the West German intelligence service under former Wehrmacht Gen. Reinhard Gehlen, formed a new relationship with Bandera. It was a natural union. During the war, Gehlen’s senior officers argued that the USSR could be broken up if only Germany wooed the various nationalities properly. Bandera had continued lines into the Ukraine, and in March 1956 he offered these in return for money and weapons.71
…
The CIA decided to expand its operations for “the support, development, and exploitation of the Ukrainian underground movement for resistance and intelligence purposes.” “In view of the extent and activity of the resistance movement in the Ukraine,” said OPC Chief Frank Wisner, “we consider this to be a top priority project.”98
…
One CIA analyst judged that, “some form of nationalist feeling continues to exist [in the Ukraine] and … there is an obligation to support it as a cold war weapon.””
http://www.archives.gov/iwg/reports/hitlers-shadow.pdf

“J.P.Morgan
The Euro area adjustment: about halfway there
…
But, over time it has become clear that there are also national legacy problems of a political nature. The constitutions and political settlements in the southern periphery, put in place in the aftermath of the fall of fascism, have a number of features which appear to be unsuited to further integration in the region. When
German politicians and policymakers talk of a decade-long process of adjustment, they likely have in mind the need for both economic and political reform.
…
Constitutions tend to show a strong socialist influence, reflecting the political strength that left wing parties gained after the defeat of fascism. Political systems around the periphery typically display several of the following features: weak executives; weak central states relative to regions; constitutional protection of labor rights; consensus building systems which foster political clientalism; and the right to protest if unwelcome changes are made to the political status quo. The shortcomings of this political legacy have been revealed by the crisis.”
https://random-thoughts-on-investments.googlegroups.com/attach/243626285e18f68b/JPM-the-euro-area-adjustment–about-halfway-there.pdf?part=7

“In the current issue of the military journal “European Security and Technology,” Johannes Varwick, Professor for International Relations and European Policy at the University of Halle-Wittenberg
…
Varwick considers that, at least for the time being, it is conceivable that Berlin and Brussels should “grit their teeth and continue to flexibly attempt to benefit from US capabilities,” because for now, the EU’s military capabilities are insufficient for an independent global hegemonic policy.[6]”
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58808

In the 90s German leaders brazenly demanded:
“expansion to the East”
“outwards it is essential to achieve something whereby we have failed twice before”
“Without Germany it is impossible to integrate the East European peoples.”
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=632_1323437313

“In March 1993, Bonn’s Minister of Defense at the time, Volker Ruehe, was the first to publicly declare that the war alliance should be expanded to include several East European nations, says Brill.”
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/56303