Why American Aggression Against Russia's Dneiper Front is Unwise

It is difficult to keep a nation or a family together. Abraham Lincoln did that for the U.S.A. when the threat to ordinary citizens of the first people's democracy seemed greater if the house was divided to let global aristocrats dismantle it entirely defeating America in economic detail. Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to keep traditional Russia together with the same degree of resistance from financially aristocratic leaders of the west.

The misinformed and bullying Obama administration policy of developing war upon Slavic Russians of Eastern Ukraine descended from Middle and Eastern Slavs is also a proxy tool for Anglo aggression against Russia. Ruling elites sometimes move inertially forward within a political bubble of social solipsism failing to comprehend the history and vital interests of others. A sycophantic broadcast media may blow the warm smoke of pomp and circumstance up a politician's ass.

Since the first world war England has been America's master to the U.S. blaster politically speaking when Thunderdome policies present to recover lost power of the British Empire. For the U.S.A. it is an irresponsible policy inimical to U.S. national security interests.

One may roll back the clock to find Brits attacking at Sevastopol or Chancellor being expelled from Russia and forget the Russian roll back of Nazis across the broad Eastern front of the second world war, yet one ought to remember that Grand Prince Oleg of Kievan Rus, after taking the title in 882, took co of the lower Dnieper. As the historian Melvin Wren commented-he cleared the water road from the Baltic to the Black Sea. The Dnieper remains a vital Russian interest in spite of Bill Clinton’s plundering of Ukraine from a drunken President Yeltsin.

In order for the Russian people to have given up their ancestral homeland in anything but a shyster's court fashion a referendum would have needed to have been held at least 7 years after the coercive pressures of regime change under external threat and pressure had been achieved and a new stability developed. As it was President Clinton took advantage of Russian disarray and of a drunk leader to accomplish what the Imperial German leadership accomplished with Vladimir Lenin during the first worlds war-relinquishment of the Ukraine under pressure and for support in taking over.

Russians will not for generations forget that Kiev is their ancestral homeland and the Dnieper River their first core commercial highway. Thought the United State's leadership may wish to battle upon Russians with proxies in the Ukraine that policy of dividing Europe will not be a satisfactory long-range policy and is likely to be abandoned by future U.S. Presidents, yet even if it were not a war and enmity for several generations of no necessity to gravity select Wall Street-Harvard financial insiders and 10 Downing Street is wrong. Consider the sentiment if Brits were forced to give up the Thames, Chinese the Yangtze River, Americans the Potomac or Mississippi. What if Massachusans were backed into a corner, stripped of their dirty salmon deficient rivers and sold into wage slavery? Would they like that?

Like global warming Americans must have a change of heart to reach a righteous policy. If global warming may be compared to sin, the United States must not fool itself in believing that it will evolve away from sin over time because of the bad long-term effects. Instead it must have a complete change of heart and stop sinning today; tearing out heat-absorbing asphalt highways, building electric transport infrastructure without producing greenhouse gases and so forth. It must will itself with the providence of God to being a new energetic creation.

Oleg’s successor was Igor-a son of the Viking founder of the Rurik dynasty that ruled over the Slavs of the region at their request in the beginning to provide security for Slavic commercial establishments. Igor’s ancestors later ruled in Moscow too. Grand Prince Vladimir of Kiev, baptized in 988, fought in the Crimean Peninsula and brought Christianity to his empire. One of his sons; Yaroslav ruled in Novgorod at the northern end of the water road the United States seeks to expropriate entirely from the Rus. When Vladimir dies in 1005 the succession was unclear and conflict between brothers ensued. Yaroslav who came to be know as Yaroslav the Wise emerged to rule the Rus and Slavs of the Dnieper empire from Novgorod to the Crimean Peninsula. Yaroslav promulgated laws known as Russkaia Pravda- Russian Justice.

Politicians of Washington D.C. find it acceptable these days to trample on the heritage of countless generations of peoples because they have the pure military power to do so. Yet in so doing they set back for generations the reputation of the United States for pursuing justice rather than power and the expropriation of lands and possessions. In failing to at least share the Dnieper with Russia U.S. leadership is establishing enmity and a wedge that will act to undermine U.S. security for generations. It does not simply need to achieve a short-term victory with superior military power and the little nation will hush up so homosexual marriage can be established and Christianity marginalized.

“This power of God is against the wicked. God's power will not be the sinner's shield to defend him, but a sword to wound him. God's power will bind the sinner in chains. His power serves to revenge the wrong done to his mercy. He will be Almighty to damn the sinner. Now, in what condition is every unbeliever? God's power is engaged against him,

and ‘it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.' Heb 10:31.”-Thomas Watson (Divinity page 78).

Russia has a history of principalities ruled by a central Grand Prince later evolving to become named a tsar. When Kievan domination evolved and gave way to rule in Novgorod in the 13th century and while Mongols were invading the Moskva River frontier had a fort-a kreml built on it that was initially sacked by Mongols, yet on the frontier Moscow emerged as a commercial center and was a better jumping off point to resist Mongol invaders. Eventually Alexander Nevsky appointed a son to rule in Moscow. In time the principality of Moscow became the power center over the principalities of Kiev, Novgorod and Lithuania. Centuries of war to keep Russian lands free of Mongol invaders, Muslims, Germans, Poles and Brits followed to the present day more or less. Into that history President Obama boldly goes forth where no U.S. President was rash enough to go before and engage the U.S.A. on the wrong side of a millennium long battle for Slavs to be free of oppressors in the Eurasian conflict zone of striving and suffering for freedom.

It is quite possible that with the example of the American left entirely supporting what is in effect a war of conquest by the post-cold war west upon implicit Russian lands for the benefit of foreign financial aristocrats that the European left will take a turn to the right realizing what a lot of hypocritical killers the American left are supporting aggressive wars through other means to conquer historically Russian national lands. Wrong value theory and existential historical logic will not well-serve the American left. Europeans and others may learn that in order to force corrupt moral and political values on others a strong central government able to override the objections of affiliated states to homosexual marriage is undesirable. Too strong of a central government destroys the individual states as laboratories of democratic expression and compels them to submit to corrupting Federal judicial decisions or Chief Executive's will to wage unjust wars of expansion. New federations of nations of the future will learn from the tragic lessons of the United States I would think, yet of course foreign nations and states may be as gullible as those of the U.S.A. and repeat the failures of the past.

The political natural balance will not be achieved until Moscow at least shares the Dnieper River with whatever predators of the west are there at any given time.

Evolving Evolution for a 'Dog Ate My Homework' Political Tool

Human history cannot be described with evolution. Human history is determined by free will and is a concatenation of social actions. Evolution is a way of describing empirical events over time regarding space-time continuum change and order yet the practical effect of describing human social activity as evolution would be to negate free will, social responsibility and political accountability-a politician's dream.

Evolution builds organic complexity, yet it also deletes innumerable species forms over time with the Occam's razor of survival selection of adaptation to the Time=Present environment. Homosexuals in species are normally deleted by evolution. Politicians and media hawking evolution to support a homosexual marriage society are working against evolutionary tradition in blind ignorance. Evolution does not select the best, the largest predators or the deserving-it describes post hoc the survivors of environmental challenges and how they adapted.

Evolution in scientific field theory describing change in biology has inspired a vast legion malaprop imitators in fields beyond science. Evolution to the unholy warblers means amoral change in an environment without moral values. Natural evolution has no moral values it is theorized, so nothing moral is of value. Yet human society works faster than evolution does. The human mind has a kind of free will that can work against the second law of thermodynamic locally in ways that nature does not. Nature does not work out-of-its own laws as might humans launch Spaceships to leave a gravity well from a planet. Only in advanced biological forms where natural process begin to be eclipsed can free will and all of its dangers appear. Only in intentional human social design can human society adapt unto its own dangerous nature or overcome the willful ignorance. Human society can design a democratic polity within a healthy environment if it respects spiritual potential and does not choose to negate responsibility with a self-destructive appeal to intellectually nihilistic evolution for a political rationale.

Evolution as a concept-word became applied to every aspect of life and experience including comedy. Yet evolution as a word also justified elite social disregard for traditional laws and morality including that of families. The left view of families is that they are a repressive hierarchical and patriarchal social unit of exploitation, hence it is useful to work toward their dissolution in order to ‘evolve’ to a more advanced society with equal personhood for all.

Human social activity is better described by history rather than evolution. Evolution generally is a far slower process than human social change. Humans surpass evolution and design their own social reality and to a large extent design their own environment. Birds did not evolve to fly in a day while the Wright brothers changed human history at Kitty Hawk. The Manhattan Project changed the technological applications of nature in a few years while there is virtually nothing new occurring in nature; gravity works, stars form producing molecules and elements, planets form, stars die etc. On a planetary level humans work faster than evolutionary processes. Mount Saint Helens might erupt and change the environment yet with means known in processes that have occurred countless times. Environmental changes and the biosphere of a local area changes-sometimes quickly with acidification of oceans after release of methane hydrates or climate fluctuations, yet the organisms for themselves change slowly-it is the ratio and balance of numbers of different organisms in the environment that changes quickly sometimes.

Human beings tend to inadvertently and sometimes quickly change the balance of species numbers and relationships in nature from extermination of the passenger pigeon or devastation of North Atlantic cod. Human actions accelerate evolutionary effects upon the environment and species yet with the power of selective, intentional will not found in nature beyond that of humanity. Human free will surpasses evolutionary processes and can lap them to a large extent in a destructive or constructive way. Humanity can destroy the global ecosystem of it will intentionally or unintentionally yet it could also restore the existing ecosphere or build new ecospheres upon other worlds devoid of life.

The use of evolution as a word to justify virtually anything at all in the field of politics is simply misguided. Humans may select their own moral directions including that of negating a belief in morality or good and evil. In evolutionary history there have been hundreds of hominid species closely related to homo sapiens with the last existing as recently as 15,000 B.C. Today just one survives-homo sapiens. If that is considered evolutionary progress it is reasonable to wonder if evolution will continue to progress toward extermination of the surviving hominid.

Human free will within the deterministic criterion selected by God for the physics of the creation allows the intentional selection of faster-than-evolution material courses to take or fabricate, build and allocate with technology invented and social values innovated with careful, reflective, spiritual insight into the nature of things. Evolution as a political validation of any sort of change or corruption is a new way for the stupid to corrupt social foundations and concentrate wealth for-themselves and for their social class. It is a dangerous and regressive abnegation of human social progress.

Consider that in evolutionary rather than human history countless species have become extinct. Mass extinction by degrees is a normal rather than a rare phenomenon in evolutionary history. Rolling waves of species deletion occurs as new species displace and replace the old. Is that a good model for an ideal or desirable human society? Is evolution for humans not more of a fascist nature than democratic and rational? Shouldn’t humans regard rationality and spirituality as more valuable than fascist, phenomenal conquest accomplished through any available means?

Quoting Watson from 'Divinity' page 70- “a word to the wicked, who march furiously against God and his people, let them know that God's decree is unchangeable. God will not alter it, nor can they break it; and while they resist God's will they fulfill it. There is a two-fold will of God, Voluntas praecepti et decreti; ‘the will of God's precept, and of his decree.' While the wicked resist the will of God's precept, they fulfil the will of his permissive decree. Judas betrays Christ, Pilate condemns him, the soldiers crucify him; while they resist the will of God's precepts, they fulfil the will of his permissive decree. Acts 4:48. God commands one thing, they do the contrary; to keep the Sabbath, and they profane it. While they disobey his command, they fulfil his permissive decree. If a man sets up two nets, one of silk, the other of iron, the silken net may be broken, not the iron; so while men break the silken net of God's command, they are taken in the iron net of his decree; while they sit backward to God's precepts, they row forward to his decrees; his decrees to permit their sin, and to punish them for their sin permitted."

Free New Testament K.J.V. download in PDF

This version is in PDF.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5mNLBmCx8N4Q01oQTcyNFdPUE0/view?usp=sharing

Homosexual 'Marriage' Corrupts the Truth of Laws

Any rational individual knows that marriage was created as a social institution to support heterosexual reproduction setting aside and recognizing and special the family relationship. Any citizen is free to participate in that establishment if they wish. Homosexual relationships on the other hand are not able to procreate; if homosexuals could procreate share their genes in progeny it would be discriminatory not to allow them to marry too. Since homosexual couplings are 'air guitars' so far as marriage goes it is not at all discriminatory to those relationships ineligible to marry.

Males that apply assert homosexual behavior as a reason for special social privileges that corrupt political accuracy of meaning in the promulgating law are a post hoc expropriation of a political establishment that was in no way created with their behavior in mind. Laws made for particular purposes should not be applied too broadly on irrelevant purposes through the middle term exchange medium of obfuscation rubric of equal rights. Let me provide an example…

A city's sanitation workers laboring in the hot, smelly inner city environment collecting government clave trash are restive about their pay and working conditions. Every day they see the lofty jet flying high overhead in the sky and have read in discarded newspapers cast into the trash that air traffic controllers make seven times the pay that they do. The sanitation workers know that striking would be ineffective at some point as the National Guard would move in and haul garbage. So the trash-persons hire a Chicago lawyer educated at Harvard to file lawsuits claiming that garbage persons ought to be called Air traffic controllers too in order to have equal pay and benefits plus retirement and fully stocked refrigerators in time-share condo rights.

It seems as if there is a legal trend toward redistributing benefits and establishments within a social environment with untruthful equivocation of eligibility of citizens for simply being human. That kind of inaccuracy in law is harmful to democracy and the effort of citizens to be free from inimical or mockish corruption of law traditionally conferring benefits upon the rich and powerful with that simple expedient redistributing power-in-reality to especially corrupt interests.

Democracy ought to have its will in legal meanings respected rather than corrupted. Homosexual marriage bans should exist simply because homosexuals cannot theoretically procreate. It may be that the desire of zero population growth advocates to halt the increase of human population makes marriage an undesirable establishment. Homosexual marriage is effectively a contradiction of marriage's purpose. There are alternative ways to support continuity of a human environment within a vibrant ecosphere that could be innovated.

One might as well find it discrimination to tax the rich differently than the poor. Some states have decided that parents have no right to provide psychological counseling to children duped into homosexual affairs or to 'return young homos to heterosexuality. When the government bans particular psychological counseling ideas that seems a great intrusion into freedom to think and right to privacy regions protected by the constitution of the United States. The federal government seems to wish to compel z.p.g. through the cut of homosexuality. One wonders if Bruce Genner is really undergoing a sex change-or was that an Internet tabloid sort of story? Wouldn't it be better to donate the medical costs to surgery for needy African children instead of some sort of superfluous medical fruitifying for p.r. or psychological purposes? Must the U.S.A. be such a decadent nation without good sense, intellect or the ability to find positive ways for the human journey to and beyond a new, sustainable ecopheric frontier, work ethic, lifestyle and value criterion able to respect human dignity and not simply provide dog biscuits to people boxes with queer content inside until population reduce so the winners can consume as much with a tenth of the population of 2100 A.D.?

There may be numerous ways that homosexuals could be provided with special social benefits for being queer with one another that legislators may want to provide. It may be reasonable that government retirement benefits for homosexual couplings might be made to exist with an economic parity with that of married heterosexuals. It is not reasonable however to corrupt the historical establishment of marriage post facto in order redistribute or increase what is regarded as equal rights. That practice that some courts have so far forced upon several state dishonors the legal institutions of the United States as well as the stare decisis of God and history.

President Obama Considers Increasing Body Count in Ukraine

President Obama is considering adding the accelerent of weapons donations to expedite development of the Ukrainian civil war. If the Obama administration were to provide lethal military weapons to the Poroshenko regime the prospects for increasing bloody conflict would be enhance and up-speech broadcasters could sound optimistic about the tempo of doom.

Russia has had a war water Black Sea port for hundreds of years and the Dnepr River is an important waterway-like the Mississippi is to the U.S.A.-reaching into central Russia. To sanction and deny Russia at least shared control of its most vital southern seaport and river is a policy that is likely to cause enmity for generations if Washington insiders are importunate enough to pursue that senseless policy. If a Dnepr River and seaport sharing agreement were reached between Ukraine and Russia without Obama weapons saturation to create a generation of injury and death in the Ukraine it is likely that Russian-western political and economic free enterprise could develop in Ukraine to a point where the wickedness of conflict would fade away.

In the 1977 I journeyed along the Nicaraguan coast listening to the revolutionary radio broadcasts and transited through the Panama Canal. I supported returning the Canal zone to Panamanians so they could have control of their own economic future. I wrote a letter to the White House in support of that point of view after walking around Panama City. President Obama today is taking an opposite, colonialist view toward the Russian Dnepr River and Black Sea Coast. Just because Democrats are swollen with high tech weapons and Federal Reserve printing press issues of money it should not make them drunk with power and will to snatch and grab everyone's possessions. Local people have a right to share in control of their important natural economic resources (though not to the point of destroying the ecospheric health). President Obama should take a more Carter-like view and recognize that Russians too are the local people and end rather than increase conflict in Ukraine with acknowledgement of Russian right to share the Dnepr River’s banks.

I Sam 16:6.‘The Lord looketh upon the heart.'

“Men judge the heart by the actions, God judges the actions by the heart; if the heart be sincere, God will see the faith and bear with the failing. Asa had his blemishes, but his heart was right with God.”- Thomas Watson

President Ronald Reagan in his famous Berlin speech did not claim to be a jelly donut; Ronald Reagan said; “President Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. The final president of the Soviet Union would trust the good natured Reagan's smile implying America and the west would not plunder Russia if it dropped its defense shield and reorganized with freedom. State absolutism under corrupt communist elites had passed its time. Years later President Clinton-the first carpetbagging Democrat Party President seeking to plunder Russia, somehow induced President of C.I.S. ( Community of Independent States) Boris Yeltsin to give up the Ukraine . Perhaps one of Yeltsin's drunken working vacations running around the White House grounds in underpants Washington D.C. brought Boris to sign off on anything. Nothing is known of C.I.A. or Clinton methods of exploiting Yeltsin's alcoholism if that occurred. Nothing is known about the White House becoming an ad hoc Mustang Ranch except for the possible blue dress smoking gun.

The process of ending the cold war and giving the former Soviet Union an opportunity to accomplish the difficult honorable transition from one political system to another with honor and a minimum of bloodshed had a substantial element of grace to it. Grace furthered should have allowed Western interaction with Russia to develop a free market restrained from the errors of over-concentrated wealth and predatory capitalism that leads to networked corporatism.

The perennial human struggle against elite rulers of any sort to oppress the masses eventually reacts to new challenges. In former time Adam Smith and David Hume considered how individuals might be liberated economically and politically from oppressive organizational power for free trade. Capitalists in that era were of less stature than today; corporations did not yet exist nor of course did corporate networks of stock owners. Instead, aristocracy was the oppressive power. Later, fascism and communism became oppressive or adversarial powers. In the aftermath of the cold war capitalist networks totalizing global economic power are emerging as an oppressive dominant economic power. Would Tony Lama innovate vibram-sole non-ice skid cowboy boots if it were taken over by the Harvard Chop Chop Mega-Power Corporation?

The blood of human commerce and free enterprise works best as it flows freely through the arteries without the blockages and clotting of concentrated wealth. Democracy provides a structure akin to a defense against the leukemia of anarchy. Freedom for economic pluralism and the maximum degree of free enterprise and individualism rather than concentrated wealth and corporatism is the point democracy needs to defend.

Capital is simply wealth. Capital exists as healthy rivers and ecosystems as well as in public works, education systems and privately held or publicly traded corporations. Allowing individuals to have maximum liberty to create free enter-prizes through invention, discovery or emulation in an economic environment not determined by corporatist control of the entire economy should be an American priority instead of goose stepping figuratively speaking in march to the drum beat of Wall Street elites concentrating wealth and power through control of every aspect of the economy.

President Clinton filched the Ukraine-the heartland of the Rus as soon as possible after the end of the cold war when Russia was weak and without strong cohesive government, economy or defense. That was a land too far that would later naturally become a recovery target for the leadership of Russia. President Obama as a stuffed suit actualizing Wall Street desires for more land and weapons sales has worked to increase civil conflict in Ukraine in order to prevent a just apportionment and settlement of Ukrainian land expropriated from Russia by the power of the west. Presently in the news is the Obama contemplation of providing the fuel of weapons to the civil war fire in Ukraine.

The grace Ronald Reagan worked with to end the cold war glossed over the meaningful issue of pride that can humiliate a fallen power. To a certain extent pride in politics can shape the course of political behavior as well as pragmatic concerns. It may be that expecting Russians to give up the Ukraine to the west and eat the loss would require a second humiliation-a second loss, and that might be exacerbated if a new cold war is engineered by the Obama administration. There is no certainty that Russia would be willing or capable of trusting the west one more time after the west reneges on promise that made for an agreeable end of the first cold war. Because the Obama policy of restoring to cold war status American relations with Russia could work counter-productively to American security interests I wanted to point out that the way a new cold war ends might be different than the first.

It is the obdurate ignorance of Washington elite insiders that should not be misunderestimated driving land expansion policy too often. Organizational and institutional loyalty inertia of the historically illiterate reinforced with sycophantic broadcast media predators enables implementation of unjust foreign war development from D.C. President Obama allowed development of the Islamic State through a policy of promoting Syrian civil war and has allowed Boko Haram to carve out a territory in Nigeria. President Good Luck Jonathan has had the bad luck to experience bad Obama policies that have supported the real growth of Middle Eastern terror organization and proliferation of weapons from Libya and Iraqi arsenals. Ukraine too is suffering from the tender ministration of Obama doctrine of war-for-others with help from the Harvard-Wall Street-Washington D.C. axis of evil economic resource reallocation.

President's Budget Another Air Guitar Performance

If President Obama had advanced a proposal to tax the earnings of the rich made overseas in December of last year his Democrat controlled Congress might have rubber stamped it. The President's tax increases on Capital gains and overseas earnings in his 4 Trillion dollar budget proposal haven't a snowball's chance of being passed in the Republican Congress as he well knows. The President  played an air guitar to a classic Humphrey-era Democrat tune for show.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/02/02/obama-budget-399-trillion-republicans/22695611/

The Parable of the Rats

The trouble with secular knowledge is that to accurately understand the human social environment and history one needs a lifetime of research. It is needful to know philosophy and history together. Few ordinary people have the time or inclination for that-yet of course democracy requires that its citizens be intelligent and thoughtful participants in human affairs or the classical challenge of corrupt elites dominating and concentrating wealth and power recurs to the detriment of the masses. 

Much of human history is about the effort of ordinary people to live free from oppression of elites. It is difficult and they too often forget how to make democracy and individual rights flourish or how to create liberty and justice for all. A little knowledge can be worse than none. Bad political interventions tend to exacerbate problems...oh well-in God we trust.
So few Americans understand why the Second World War and holocaust occurred. I may address that particular topic later, now though it is useful to comment on the pied piper that will lead the rats to reason or perhaps just compare human races to rats of different colors.

White rats of Europe were attacked by brown and yellow rats-or maybe chartreuse from about 300 A.D. until 1492 when rats of the south were driven out by white rats from Iberia. With about 1500 years of being attacked in Spain, Sicily, Byzantium and across the steppes of Russia to Europe (the Muslims and Attila the Hun reached France and the Mongols nearly to the Baltic Sea)white rats found travel across Asia to China challenging-they took to ships and discovered America on the way to China. Those warrior conquistadors ran over the comparatively inexperienced rats of the Americas.

Rat society and social theorists of rats have noted that rat races sometimes genocide down rival rat races. Yet Rat elites were always looking to pad their bank accounts with wealth. White rats with ships saw a market for black African rats as worker-slaves in America and imported millions to nth western hemisphere. With a somewhat stable growing world rat population in racial equilibrium technological development occurred and the rats decimated the environment developing industry, comfortable ratholes and rat cities. There were even a few rats in space.

Global rats interacted increasingly with commercial pursuits while rat elites substituted consolidation of wealth and power. The standard of living most rats increased and female rats saw themselves and surrender as the way to peace prosperity and empowerment for-themselves. Homosexual rats expropriated heterosexual marriage privileges unto-themselves and saw a queer approach to rattiness as the way to reduce population and to emulate female surrender as victory characteristics. Rat theorists decided that different races of rats and nations of rats were the causes for rat conflict and choose to eliminate the races and create on race of rats rather off-white in color with more queer rats under the power of dominatrices. 

Rat theorists also postulated religion as opposed to rat focus on secularism and commercial advertising. Some non-white rat religions (in origin) waged racial jihad upon the homelands of white rats and tended to receive sympathy from non-white male rats. Enough of the rat paradigm. Maybe a super-rat could lead the rats to reason with song or even rat evolution theory highlighting how much rats have in common with each other and chimpanzees-though it may be that rats learning to live together while respecting rat differences and conservation of the environment would be a better way than rats were able to comprehend.

In Europe the millennium of attack by non-whites created a built-in antipathy toward non-Europeans. In addition to traditional European rivalries there were religious Muslim invaders of a different race attacking from the south, East and West the better part of a thousand years. Jews unfortunately would become associated with the bad features of foreign invasion.

Jews of the European diaspora remained obvious non-Christians in an era when even the Church of England was a state religion too ruled by the King or Queen kept tightly disciplined because of the rivalry with the Catholic Church and its state monopoly so far as it could exert its power. Jews as different and more international people than Europeans were traders that accumulated wealth and power. Benjamin Disraeli became Prime Minister, Leon Bronstein (Trotsky) became War Commander of the Red Army; Jews were outspoken, powerful and prominent in many places and associated too often with aristocracy. Restive ordinary clods yearning to overthrow their oppressors could easily associate Jews with their oppressors.

When World War 1 happened toward the end after U.S. intervention the Aristocratic class of which the Kaiser was the leader was overthrown-the Kaiser abdicated and moved to Belgium after learning that he must or be forced out by his own people. Veterans like Hitler did not believe they would lose the war and blamed the Jews for leading a revolution to force the armistice ending the war. Jews were actually prominent leaders in the revolution to end the war. Hitler’s Munich beer hall speech was made in the same beer hall where a Jewish leader organized the revolt to force out the hundreds of years old Bavarian royalty. Hitler while recovering in a sanitarium in Bavaria from phosgene or some sort of gassing in his eyes became temporarily blind from some psychosomatic reaction after learning of the signing of the armistice. Hitler was not an intellectual or well- balanced soldier.

Hitler’s voice however was very unusual physically and vibrated at a yelling tone while speaking in a normal voice-that made his listeners rapt with attention. The leaders of the Army selected Hitler to infiltrate and take over the German Democratic Socialist Workers Party and he accomplished that. A charismatic individual with hidden support-support that was probably given as a way for former royalty to expropriate the incipient native left and create a new vehicle for the rich to act in (via corporatism), Hitler was able to play the soldier-radical civil leader role and began and effort to leader Germany back to greatness lost with an end of the war under bad terms he thought they could have won (they couldn’t have)(Patton said we should have warred until unconditional surrender was achieved). Jews were perceived as part of the problem of foreign invasion and religious invaders that had been a problem for Europeans forever. It wasn’t that simple though, and obviously the final solution cost Jews and Germans far more than was imaginable. German greatness with Jews and intellectuals from everywhere working together would have achieved far more than the remainder ever could.

Hitler paradoxically in working his final solution to the foreign invader, infiltrator and subversion challenge created a role model for modern times that was ancient in origin-even Romans would wipe out entire populations that resisted conquest sometimes. ISIS and AL Qa’eda, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood today would annihilate Israeli Jews if they could as a final solution too. People don’t learn enough from history, and neither would rats if they could read.