The Cynicism of Hillary 346

Hillary Clinton’s completely unfounded claim that Russia was behind the passing to WikiLeaks of Democratic National Committee documents was breathtakingly cynical. It was a successful ploy in that it gave her supporters, particularly those dominating mainstream media, something else to focus on other than the fact that the DNC had been busily fixing the primaries for Hillary.

It was however grossly irresponsible – an accusation that a US Secretary of State would hesitate to make in public even at the height of the Cold War. It raises further the tensions between the World’s two largest nuclear armed powers, and plays into the mood of rampant Russophobia which we are seeing whipped up daily in the press. With the Ukraine and Syria as points of major tension, to throw such an accusation wildly in defence of her own political ambitions, shows precisely why Hillary should never be US President.

This is all the more true as not only did Hillary have no evidence of Russian involvement, she almost certainly knows the allegation is completely baseless.

Which brings me to the curious murder of Seth Rich, the DNC staffer killed by an armed street robber who left Rich’s gun, watch, cash and wallet. WikiLeaks have offered an award of US $20,000 for information on his assassination. This does not indicate that it was Rich who leaked the emails. It does indicate that WikiLeaks are aware of profound shenanigans involving the Hillary campaign, and are putting effort and resources into piecing together the picture.

Liked this article? Please share using the links below. Then View Latest Posts

346 thoughts on “The Cynicism of Hillary

1 2 3
  • Brianfujisan

    Loony has already mentioned this – Bob Beckel –

    Hillary Clinton strategist Bob Beckel appeared on on Fox calling for the assassination of Julian Assange — a blatant urge for violence against the Wikileaks founder in direct contradiction of every possible natural and government law.

    “I mean, a dead man can’t leak stuff,” Beckel chillingly noted of Assange. “The guy’s a traitor, a treasonist, and … and he has broken every law in the United States. The guy ought to be — and I’m not for the death penalty — so, if I’m not for the death penalty, there’s only one way to do it, illegally shoot the son of a bitch.”

    • Njegos

      Very interesting. This call for assassination is unequivocal. Interesting contrast with Trump’s musings on Hillary and 2nd Amendment.

      • Martinned

        Yup, Trump was only implying that Mrs. Clinton should be killed. Clearly that makes him the much better candidate for President!

        • Njegos

          No. It means they are equally unfit for office.

          But the venom reserved for Assange is revealing.

    • David

      It’s interesting that a presumably important member of a political organisation (important enough to be interviewed on TV on its behalf) (a) could arise to a top position whilst holding such views and (b) could be so crass as to voice his feelings in this way. Surely all decent people would be appalled at this. But wait, read our very own Craig Murrays comments on Facebook concerning the recent death of the Duke of Westminster . He says” Good news is the Duke of Westminster is dead. Bad news is there is a new one. Danton had it right.” Saying that you are pleased that someone has died seems to be in the same neck of the woods as Bob Beckel, a couple of steps removed, perhaps. It is a short step from being pleased someone has died to wishing they were dead, to turning a blind eye to their murder. Have we already seen this progression of ideas in contemporary Political events, in various places in the world? It always used to be that one refrained from criticising a person who was no longer able to respond, that death drew a clean line, the feelings of the deceased family were respected above ones own petty gripes. There is no explanation given as to why this is to be regarded as good news. One can only conclude, in the absence of a proper explanation, that it is prejudice against the wealthy. There are rich people in the world, there are poor people. We in Britain are amongst the words richest. We’d better hope that the poorer ones can resist Craig’s prejudice, and not regard our future deaths as “good news”, and that they don’t make the transitition to Bob Beckels position any time soon. If Craig’s post is a “joke”, then let’s hope all his followers get it, and don’t take his lead. If it isn’t a joke, then, sorry Craig, it was a crass and offensive thing to say.

      • Resident Dissident

        I was always told if you cannot say something nice about someone who has just died then the polite response was to say nothing at all. I’m afraid good taste is not something that you come to this blog for. As for the accusation of cynicism against Hillary Clinton perhaps the best comment would be that cynicism is a subject on which Craig is a leading world expert.

        • David

          Glen UK , I don’t want to be rude, but you obviously cannot understand a simple argument, just as you cannot spell mourn. Crediting me with arguments I have not made, and putting words into my mouth, just because you cannot stomach criticism doesn’t change what I actually said. You offer no valid counter argument. To insult is the last refuge of the man with nothing to say worth listening to. And that seems to describe you. Your responses are simply the tactics of the bully and of the coward.

      • David

        Thank you you Glen. I did say it was different, but in the same neck of the woods, one attitude possibly leading to the other in some cases. We can say with some certainty, I think that someone wishing the death of another will also be pleased upon their actual death. The sentiments are related. I may well be mistaken, and you obviously think I am.But your choice of an unnecessary insult rather than a reasoned response reveals more about you than the insult does about me. The Duke of Westminsterhas died prematurely from a heart attack. He now cannot answer his critics. His estate cannot sue for libel or slander.It seems to me that only a bully and a coward would take this opportunity to launch such an attack, as Craig Murray has done. Most internet comment on this seems more measured and fair , even when critical in respect of payment of death duties, and the nature of Craig’s comment seems to put him in doubtful company. Craig also seems to have attracted a coterie of supporters whose responses to criticism only ever comprise insults. Cowardly in itself. Congratulations, you are one of these it would seem. For some unknown reason they seem to think it brave and clever to take this time to remember their pleasure at the death of Margaret Thatcher. It’s as though mentioning this is the equivalent to a Masonic handshake which will identify them as brethren. What kind of mentality takes pleasure in such events? Answer, a sick one, the coward, the bully and those who can find nothing original to contribute, other than the insult as that which you have just uttered.

        • glenn_uk

          You appear to think it incumbent upon one to morn the death of everyone, no matter how despised they were in life.

          That’s your call. However, you attempted to conflate a lack of hypocrisy – maintaining a position on an individual, whether they have recently departed or not – with incitement to (or condoning of) murder.

          That’s what earned you the epithet of ‘twat’, which rather understates the position you have taken.

    • Tony

      Bob Beckel, I am pretty certain, helped to destroy the Clinton administration’s health care plans through ‘astroturfing’ activities.

  • exiled off mainstreet

    For those connecting the dots, it appears quite likely that Greg Rich was liquidated because he was at least suspected of being the source of a leak, making the dangerous Russian accusation even more outrageous. Other suspicious Clinton related deaths include the death of a lawyer, a supporter of Sanders, who was set to file a suit based on the evidence leaked to wikileaks, and the death of an ex UN official in a strange suspicious weightlifting accident who was of interest because his testimony could have highlighted the corruption of the Clinton foundation (I believe the trial concerned the fact he was being accused of something; I can’t remember just what it was). Meanwhile, the latest controversy involving off-the-cuff statements Trump made regarding what might happen if the Second Amendment gun ownership concept was abrogated has become another media feeding frenzy. This may result, however, in unfortunate blowback because the harpy, in 2008, admitted that she was continuing her campaign against Obama to the convention because a “Robert Kennedy” incident might occur. This makes the whole Trump thing into a projection, because it is the harpy, not Trump, who has a record of suggesting assassination to resolve problems.

    Another development this week was the mention by a serious reporter, blackagendareport’s Danny Haiphong, of the well-known mass murder in Sirte, Libya of ethnic Africans Khaddafi had settled there as part of his belief in African unity by the triumphant Jihadis when they took over that city in 2011. The jihadis, el qaedas, or whatever politically incorrect name you want to call them, were there as a result of Clinton’s spearheading of Khaddafi’s overthrow as yankee foreign minister. Obama has hinted that his agreement to go along with this was his biggest mistake in office. This Sirte massacre ties Hillary through her spearheading of this overthrow, to a racist crime against humanity. If this is properly aired and exploited, this could be seriously dangerous to her campaign, which is largely based on racial identity politics. What she has going for her is the commercial media acting uniformly as a “ministry of truth” in this campaign. Her triumph, it seems to me would be the consolidation of a sort of soft-core fascism in the US, discussed by the late philosopher Sheldon Wolin as “soft totalitarianism.”

    • Njegos

      All interesting points. Isn’t it ironic how a woman who supposedly represents blacks and women ended up pursuing a foreign policy that has led to racial and misogynistic violence in Libya and the Sahel (see my earlier comment about the revival of Boko Haram).

        • Njegos

          Hillary overthrows Gaddafi. Victorious jihadists massacre ethnic Africans in Sirte and Boko Haram arsenal is replenished with weapons from Gaddafi’s looted arsenal.

          Get the connexion?

          • Anon1

            Like I said, they do it all by themselves.

            Better to keep the butcher in power who keeps a lid on Islam, ref. Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad etc al.

            That’s the choice you get in the Muslim world; brutal dictatorship or fanatical Islam.

          • Njegos

            Except that the specific events that I refer to were facilitated by US “liberal interventionism” that overthrew Gaddafi.

            Hence the irony.

          • Anon1

            I don’t accept that by removing a brutal dictator you are responsible for the fanatical jihadist violence that follows. You have to accept that the perpetrators are responsible for their own behaviour and that their actions are motivated by religious extremism. In many years living and working in Islamic countries I never met a Muslim who tried to absolve Islam of all crimes as much as the Western leftist does.

            I would agree, however, that Gaddafi should not have been removed. I take a pragmatic approach that brutal dictatorship is slightly better than the hell of medieval Islamic barbarism.

            But in the particular case of Libya, Gaddafi was a gonner anyway. Western air support only hastened the process and actually prevented a protracted civil war such as that we see in Syria now, which would have been far worse.

          • Njegos

            It sounds to me as though you are trying to absolve the United States for any responsibility for the current mess in the Middle East and North Africa.

            Funny how the United States constantly claims credit for liberating Europe after the Second World War but when things go badly wrong, as they have in Libya and Iraq, suddenly it’s: Hey, not our fault!

            The jihadist blowback that has accompanied the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi is a direct consequence of both interventions. How can we pretend otherwise? Just look at the situations before and after.

            And Gaddafi was a “goner” only because the West neutralized his air defenses under the pretext guise of an “imminent massacre”. The result? Jihadist cancer spreading all over North Africa and the Sahel.

            Sorry but the US, France and the UK are big culprits.

          • glenn_uk

            Anon1: I can’t say I disagree with you on the whole here.

            However, I think you’re not taking account of the radicalism which was fomented by our impositions (as western capitalists) in the first place. Left to their own devices, a far more gentle interpretation of Islam was likely to have been followed. Too many radical individuals have become this way, because they have interpreted their own miserable situation as the result of a lack of devotion in society generally.

          • bevin

            “I don’t accept that by removing a brutal dictator you are responsible for the fanatical jihadist violence that follows. ”
            You are responsible if you arm, organise and recruit the ‘fanatical jihadists’ in question.

          • lysias

            And the Syrian rebels got lots of those weapons from Libya. Apparently the transport of those weapons is what was going on in Benghazi at the time of the attack on the consulate.

        • Njegos

          Ben Monad:

          “Not racist…bigoted.”

          Try again. A bigot is someone who is intolerant of those who hold different opinions.

        • Njegos

          Oh but of course. I am regularly trying to silence people, aren’t I?

          Or are you someone who thinks that defending one’s point of view is an act of “intolerance”?

          Please enlighten us since you are clearly an expert.

        • Ben Monad

          Clearly you not only don’t get irony any more than you have the minimum of self-awareness. Go fish.

        • Njegos

          How so very clever of you Ben.

          To point out someone’s incorrect definition of “bigotry” is ‘’intolerance” and therefore (tee, hee) “bigotry”.

          A beautiful politically correct world where facts simply disappear and everything becomes an opinion.

          Ah, I shall sleep so well this evening knowing that no one but a bigot can ever contradict me.

        • Ben Monad

          As you wish. You are free to create any reality you can imagine, Njegos. Please continue to astound me with your self-serving and non-sequiter rationalizations.

        • Njegos

          Speaking of “non-sequiters” Ben (in fact, it is “non-sequitur” but I guess that is just me being “intolerant” and “bigoted” again) I couldn’t help notice your utterly irrelevant story about how HRC once helped you sort out this or that problem with some bureaucrat.

          You are obviously quite proud of the encounter because it is not the first time you have dredged it up. We get the message Ben. You had direct contact with HRC and we didn’t. Wow. No wonder you feel you can sit in judgment of us poor “bigots”!

          And now it’s Good Night from Bigotlandia.

  • Anon1

    Channel 4 News reports that Muslim women are the most unemployed section of society in the UK.

    According to C4, this is our fault for “discrimination” and “racism”.

  • fwl

    Didn’t Trump also in effect casually infer that the Russians were behind hacks or if not could be and should be into Hillary’s emails when he encouraged them to do so. I appreciate.this is slightly different but isn’t blaming the Russians par for the course. Do we know the source of the DNC leaks?

    • Alan

      Didn’t Trump recently try to walk all over some Scottish people with his plans for his golf course, and get…err…told where to go?

      • Anon1

        Trump offered jobs and investment. Naturally this didn’t go down well with a certain section of Scots who seem to believe money grows on trees (or is handed out by the hated Unglesh).

        • Alan

          What you mean is that the man applying for the job advertised as “The most powerful man in the world” got told where to go by some Scottish people who just weren’t willing to be walked all over by some (adjective omitted) Yank?

          And this is the man who is going to “make America great again”?

          And to think they just don’t “get” irony on Planet America….

        • Kempe

          ” Trump offered jobs and investment. ”

          Much of which didn’t materialise and most of the jobs that did were filled by cheaper immigrants from eastern europe. Besides which many locals thought the price demanded: trashing of a SSSI, being bullied out of their homes etc, too high.

          • John Monro

            Anon 1. Commenting on this matter from New Zealand, it was a huge black mark against Alex Salmond when he sucked up to Trump in regard to this wretched golf course. His judgement went truly awry there. And for Alex to suggest more recently that “Trump let Scotland down” is a bit of a self-exculpatory statement; Alex let Scotland down in having anything to do with Trump – it was the sort of all too common shonky back room deal that brings politics and politicians into serious disrepute.

    • bevin

      No. He made a joke to the effect that if the Russians did have hillary’s 30,000 missing emails they ought to publish them.
      He was aware, as are we all, that the Russian government has far more important things to do than to assist the Democratic Party in committing suicide.
      The enduring wonder is that anyone actually fell for as crude a piece of misdirection as a child, who had forgotten his homework, could come up with.

  • Tom

    Yes. And I’m afraid there is only one man who can stop Clinton getting to the White House.
    The more I see of the election race, the more I hope Trump wins.

    • RobG

      There will be a 45th president of the United States, probably Clinton, but it won’t last long.

      The whole rotten structure is about to collapse, which will mean even more severe economic woes for most people; but hey, most people voted for these psychos, so they have only themselves to blame.

      A ‘reset’ is badly needed. I hoped it wouldn’t be as violent as what’s coming.

      Welcome to the brave new world that you total neo-con fuckwits have created.

  • Loony

    Anyone interested in whether Muslim women are discriminated against in the workplace may be best advised to compare the labor force participation rate of Muslim women in the UK and Muslim women in Saudi Arabia.

    The answers derived from such a comparison may be enlightening.

  • mike

    Excellent post, Craig.

    “Profound shenanigans” is a delicately weighted euphemism.

    Now that Erdogan has recovered his rationality, it’s more or less certain that the Empire has lost Syria. But the game’s afoot (again) in Ukraine, and Libya is now that go-to toy-box of horror that can be clobbered into “order” when the need arises.

    • Martinned

      Indeed. That’s what you would expect a rational dictator to do: make a deal with another dictator who is just far enough away that you don’t have to worry about him invading your turf.

  • RobG

    The economic collapse of 2007/2008 was a mega moment in history (and please note that the collapse happened because of decades in which neo-cons were in control – primarily they de-regulated the banking industry), and the bankers were bailed-out with trillions of tax payer’s money.

    These people in the financial industry are, of course, all totally insane (as are most politicians), and the next crash is about to happen.

    This time round it won’t be bail-outs, it will be full-on police states. Fascism.

    Are the public really so dumb that they will put up with this shite?

    • Loony

      Were bankers bailed out with trillions of tax payers money?

      If the bail outs exceed the plausible tax take over any relevant time frame then they must have been bailed out with something in addition to taxpayer money.

      • deepgreenpuddock

        Yes, I agree- sort of-and the quantity of money supplied was enough to restore liquidity, if not addressing the underlying problems of solvency and the vast amount of poor quality debt and inflated asset valuations. In effect just enough is applied to restore ‘confidence’.In effect the state(taxpayer) takes on the burden of risk of the debt contracts failing.
        The extent of failure is not necessarily precipitous,which a lot of people assume when they talk of crises and financial cataclysm, but incremental so even if there are losses these can often be accommodated over a period of time.
        That is one of the important issues -the period of time, although that is also subject to credibility factors. Not sure how credible it is that Greece has a very long period of time before it resolves its financial problems-probably an unrealistic period of time which will have a dire effect on such organic issues as the birth rate and the death rate. It is these factors that define the viability of the population and that is why money is so critical. The further problem is that during that time it is highly likely that the country of Greece will cease to exist in all but a geographical/historical name will cease to be a unitary part of the economic world, but becomes absorbed and dissolved into other entities.
        Of course there are many complications, such as the strategic role and military significance that might militate against that, as well as the resilience of the language and the culture, but I would fear for all the ‘small’ nation states in Europe over the next few decades, as it may revert to some post modern version of the Hapsburg empire.
        It will be interesting to see how it all develops. One of the hesitations for me is that in the event of independence and the EU ‘Scremain’-we may find ourselves in a ‘Union’ that is a damned sight less accommodating than the present union.

        • Loony

          You write: “the quantity of money supplied was enough to restore liquidity” – This sounds as though you are writing about something that occurred in the past.

          Bail outs through the mechanism of QE are ongoing and are, in fact, running at record levels. Global central Banks co-ordinate their actions. The Fed has ended its QE but the slack, and more besides, has been taken up by the BoJ, the ECB. and,since last week the BoE.

          • deepgreenpuddock

            yes I realise that- but it is ‘just enough’ to get by-to maintain liquidity and market confidence. I also think that this juggling act is extremely difficult, and dangerous and there are definitely potentials to trigger major instabilities.

          • Martinned

            QE depresses interest rates and, by extension, banks’ profit margins, so I’m not sure why you think bankers are happy about QE. But then I wouldn’t expect anyone in these parts to understand anything about economics.

      • lysias

        A lot of what the banks (and insurance giant AIG in particular) were bailed out with was money manufactured out of thin air by the Federal Reserve. They can do that only as long as people retain confidence in the dollar.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Career politicians are dishonest. Surprise.
    Hillary Clinton is a greedy, lying career politician. Surprise, surprise.
    And she’s up against someone who is equally a stranger to the truth. Perhaps it’s time the election circus stopped being modelled on the Superbowl?

    • Ben Monad

      Is there any other way to address an ignorant and disinterested electorate? And don’t confuse ‘interest’ with the Trump phenom. That’s merely the essential extraction of voter apathy distilled into alcohol.

      • Ba'al Zevul

        I don’t know, Ben. Do you want the ignorant and those who can’t tell the difference between their party and the Denver Broncos to decide your nation’s government? But given that the ignorance of the electorate is actively fostered by the candidates, that might be a good nexus to look at. I’ve been thinking about this for a while, and I’m increasingly drawn to the idea that a titular head of state who is not democratically elected – such as our own – may offer significant advantages in terms of continuity and lack of infighting irrelevant to the process of government. Good ol’ King George… whose ministers, not he, were to blame for our loss of you lot. Aside from that, it seems that if you allow vast amounts of cash into the electoral process, you’ve scuppered representative democracy in any case. Both candidates have been bought from the word go, often by the same lobby, and the actual voter turnout is meaningless.

        Loony: start here:

        • Phil the ex-frog

          Anarchism would resolve both the inevitable corruption of representative democracy and voter apathy. Actually it’s the only possible democratic solution to the former I am aware of.

          • Ben Monad

            It seems Anarchism gets no more respect than any other Third or Fourth Party banging on the podium for emphasis. There just is no room in the discussion for anything except the abject failure of the political Bully system where two WWF actors ply their trade and prevent the 2nd string from entering the Ring.

        • Loony

          Ba’al – It is not my view that Trump is a paragon of virtue. I am also not too keen on truth as a relative concept. However in current circumstances he needs to be compared to Clinton as the effective choice is between either one or the other.

          The video you post demonstrates very little beyond the fact that Trump makes different arguments depending on whether he is promoting his business or his Presidential campaign. Almost everyone differentiates between their personal interests and what they perceive to be the public interest.

          For example it is entirely consistent for a person acting for and on behalf of a corporation to fulfill their fiduciary duty by seeking to lawfully minimize taxes and for the same person to argue, as a public figure, that tax levels are too low and that tax loopholes need closing.

          The most egregious lies to be found in your video are to be found in the written text that purports to highlight Trump lies or inconsistencies. For example it is entirely misleading to claim that NAFTA is beneficial by plotting GDP per capita increases from the date of its introduction. This is wrong on multiple grounds not least the ongoing corruption of official US statistics, and the lack of any evidence to attribute rising GDP per capita as a sole or primary consequence of NAFTA. Most obviously GDP per capita is not a measure of the actual income of actual people – hence growing disquiet with wealth concentration which has spawned such protest groups as Occupy and the Tea Party, and in fact Donald Trump himself.

          • Ba'al Zevul

            This is merely to pick over the ‘he/she’s a bigger liar than I am’ dispute which forms very nearly the totality of the incredibly tedious US election procedure. No point. They’re both saying whatever the audience of the moment wants to hear, and damn the contradictions. Once either of them gets into power, they won’t have to hold themselves to any of it. So it’s a colossal waste of time and PR wages.

            I’m not dissing Trump, particularly. (As if it matters, I distrust Clinton more) It’s the subversion of the original proposition that representatives actually represent the people who elected them – which implies that other trades than that of career politician should form the greater part of our assemblies – that concerns me. While I sympathise with Phil up to a clearly defined point – where human nature cuts in – my proposal would be to rigorously vet our representatives’ incomes during and after their period in office. In office, they should be restricted by means of a 100% tax on the excess, to a level which ensures that no-one stands for election for the money and perks alone. Out of office, they might be allowed double this. And any special expertise they may have gained in office should not be put at the disposal of foreign governments….regarding this as treason would take care of Blair, among many others.

        • Ben Monad

          I guess my point wasn’t clear Komo. I actually do no like voter turnout drives because anyone who isn’t jacked into issues and candidates votes with dart and board. Eenie minie mo?

        • lysias

          The Athenians had it right. They chose most officials and representatives by lot, like for juries.

    • deepgreenpuddock

      In my fevered imagination, I always imagine that when a US president is actually admitted to the white house for the first time, he is taken to a small room with a group of people all sitting with a gun.
      The president is placed at the end in a big throne at the end of the room. Everyone picks up their gun and points it at the President – while a spokesperson says-there a whole lot of people here who can kill you if we want. You are here to play your part in this great enterprise. If you don’t-we shoot. One of us will get you. Even if there is division between us it is quite likely that one if us will get you.
      This somewhat lurid dream sort of reflects the reality that the presidency is largely for show. Certainly there are powers but these are much moderated and influenced by the many powerful forces that define such an activity system. IOn other words the idea of the powerful presiedency is somewhat bogus. In the past there may have been some kind of stalemate breaking role for the President-with the casting vote, but i suspect even that is much diminished by the complexity of the issues and the high levels of analysis and advice that are now possible, and which the president would be expected to accede to. I also suspect that while my dream scenario is entirely dreamlike- there will also be some kind of actual ‘final sanction’-of assassination in the event of the president doing something or threatening to do something that might have a very disturbing effect on what is perceived as the ‘rational’ or best interests of the US.
      Unfortunately, that does not take account of all those subtle group effects and the follies and joint delusions and misapprehensions, and insanity that sometime overtakes such groups.

      • lysias

        They are undoubtedly much more subtle than in your dream scenario. If they did anything like that, the president’s obvious response would be to reveal the threat in a national broadcast and to defy the powers that be to do their worst.

  • Brianfujisan

    Sorry to be a bit O.T..

    Chunky mark in a heart felt post says

    “People are Fighting for their children’s Future, Their not even asking for a lot, just some equilibrium, some Balance ”

    25 year old Duke Of Westminster inherits £9 Billion … The Super Rich and Jeremy Corbyn

  • J

    I was wondering what happens at the point when an American child discovers that their entire freedom lovin nation is founded upon a genocide which is still continuing? Witness the escalating cynicism of power over the last fifty years even though I told myself we are making progress.

    Are we really going to repeat the last century? Can’t someone hold the geriatric cold warriors down and talk some sense into them?

    • nevermind

      well said J, its time that US citizens ask some vexing of their regional and federal Government, a good kickstart would be for California to declare UDI. That will concentrate minds a little.

    • Hieroglyph

      Everybody should be forced to read that article – or be held to account by RobG!

      Seriously, very interesting. Basically, we had the 1 and a half party state, now we’ve go the 1 party state. Trump is essentially an independent, as was Sanders. Basically, all the crazy people support Hillary, from all sides, and have coalesced under her banner. Interesting times. It’s clear to me that Trump is the least-bad option here – which is a truly disturbing stock-the-cellar or flee-to-the-hills thought.

      America is just so fucked. And Bernie, he’s put himself out of the game.

  • Paul Barbara

    A very succinct video, 25 1/2 minutes long:
    ‘ The Clintons ‘:

    So much for Bernie Sanders – he fooled me. But, despite his history, unknown to me (I got the video from ‘Brasscheck’, though the link above is youtube; here’s what they said in the email: ‘A lot of people put a lot of faith in Bernie Sanders. A lot of people were disappointed by the actions he took at the end of “the game.” What a lot of people don’t know is that Bernie was running cover for Bill and Hillary as long ago as 1994. We found this clip from back then: – Brasscheck TV ‘).

    Well, that clip was from late July 1994; many people involved with the Clintons or with knowledge of what they had done had already died in extremely suspicious circumstances, and were to continue to die – it is extremely unlikely that someone as smart as Bernie hadn’t at the very least extreme suspicions that the stories going about about the Clintons’ crimes were highly plausible.
    His sickening endorsement of the ‘Snopes Hildabeast’ recently stinks.

    But, he has done a very good service to America – he has aroused the sleeping Sheeple, and many of them have not ‘followed their leader’ in backing Clinton, and instead joined Jill Stein’s Presidential campaign (she’s the Green candidate).

    As the song goes, ‘…Life is a cabaret, old chum! Come to the cabaret!…’

  • fwl

    Those here who are flirting with Trump need to think again.

    The US has massive debt. How do you get out of it? Sterilisation? No because you have to reissue. Do that leaves you with either inflation or write off.

    The Trump has one skill. Growing roses out of fertiliser bags aka corporate bankruptcy without stigma ie going bust without smelling of shit.

    Do you get it?

    This is the US’s chance to write off a few trillion and Trump will become the sacrificial goat as afterwards the nation will say he took us astray we won’t do that again.

    If that is not the reason why he had been allowed to get this far then there is either an even more devious scheme, or the country has gone collectively mad.

      • fwl

        So my crude analysis would be

        Trump for bankruptcy
        Clinton for inflation / war.

        Hope I’m wrong.

      • Ba'al Zevul

        There is another solution. And it’s because the current financial system doesn’t admit the possibility, that it’s in such deep shit. It’s a J*wish idea. Every so-many years, let the accumulated debts become null and void. Jubilee.

        There has to be a corrective to the ability of financiers to create debt out of thin air, to hamstring the economy for an indefinite future. And the financiers (a) are fully wealthy enough to take the hit and (b) are fully responsible for their poor judgement if they can’t turn their funny money into hard cash by the end of the period.

        • Martinned

          What makes you think that government debt hamstrings anything? There’s already a shortage of safe assets, which is why the ones that do exist pay such low returns.

          • Ba'al Zevul

            (1) Because it is not actually created by governments but simply rewrites pre – existing debt (with interest)
            (2) Because it forces the sale of government assets at firesale prices
            (3) Because unprofitable but essential social expenditure has to be trimmed to the bone to finance debt accumulated for other purposes.

          • Martinned

            When has a government that borrows in its own currency – an important proviso that excepts, for example, Greece – ever had to do a fire sale, or had to trim social expenditure? There are plenty of conservative politicians who have reduced expenditure claiming that this was necessary because the budget deficit, etc., but there is no reason why we should actually accept that excuse and take it into account when discussing the optimal amount of borrowing.

            For example, the UK has been well North of 200% debt/GDP twice in the last 200 years, and not only did no disaster ensue, but the ratio came back down both times because of an economic boom.

          • Ba'al Zevul

            So that’s the recovery in the aftermath of the Napoleonic wars, which took 100 years or so, and that in the aftermath of WW1+2, which took about 40. Suggest anything to you? Also bear in mind that we are no longer an imperial power, we are in competition with formerly negligible entities like India and China, we don’t even have naval superiority in the Channel, and our manufacturing base has been encouraged to decay at the expense of selling each other designer coffee.

            I think you’re a bit of an optimist.

          • Martinned

            I just grabbed the UK as an example because I figured it would be most familiar to you. Apart from variation depending on who was involved in which war when, and the occasional bit of debt forgiveness, other countries’ graphs look pretty similar.

            Also, why would you think the UK is competing with China and India? The richer they get, the richer we get selling them stuff. Like the deficit, this idea of countries competing is largely a matter of political spin used to push through unpopular reforms. (N.B. in both cases there are exceptions. Just like Greece really does have too much debt, some countries, particularly those with big export sectors, really do need to watch their competitiveness.)


          • Ba'al Zevul

            Also, why would you think the UK is competing with China and India? The richer they get, the richer we get selling them stuff. Like the deficit, this idea of countries competing is largely a matter of political spin used to push through unpopular reforms.

            You haven’t noticed that they’re selling us most of our consumer goods, and we’re selling them….pig semen. Similarly the US. what we’re selling them is our debt. That’s how they’re getting rich. They don’t care if we don’t have the cash handy: the bigger the deficit, the better. I hope you’re not denying that there is a deficit? Of course the chickens come home to roost when the Chinese economy falters, as it is showing every sign of doing now. There reaction is to start cashing in the vouchers and get a domestic housing bubble going…

        • lysias

          Solon also enacted a forgiveness of debts at the very beginning of Athenian democracy.

    • Martinned

      The US has massive debt.

      It does? Massive compared to what?

      How do you get out of it?

      The same way everyone has always reduced the size of their debt historically, by growing the economy. At current rates of growth and inflation, the US could run a permanent budget deficit of more than 1% of GDP and still reduce its debt.

      • Ba'al Zevul

        I love that ‘simply grow the economy’ meme. What that actually means is ‘create circumstances in which more debt is created’ – regardless of what the economy is actually doing. If you stick to the debt-fuelled economy, you will continue to experience cyclic boom-and-bust: the busts wiping out any gains from the booms and effectively making life worse than before for the unprivileged minority.

        But go on. Have another housing boom, for instance.

        • Ba'al Zevul

          Should be majority, not minority. Numerically speaking, not in terms of political clout, obviously.

        • Martinned

          Does it? It could be me – after all, it was me speaking – but I don’t think that’s what it means at all. That’s certainly not what it meant after the Napoleonic wars. Are you for some reason against economic growth? I know it’s not everything, but it correlates pretty well with other things that make people happier/better off.

          • Ba'al Zevul

            Am I against economic growth?
            That’s a very general question, isn’t it? As currently defined, yes I am against economic growth. That is, I am against debt-funding of inessential enterprises parasitic on our physical production, debt which is purely speculative, and backed by no or minimal tangible equity, structural inflation poorly disguised as growth, growth unconstrained by recognition that the environment is at grave risk, and growth metrics which incorporate service industries. I am against economic growth purporting to require the free movement of cheap labour across national borders. I am fundamentally against multiple hierarchies of management suits paralysing innovation. I am for modest economic growth based on sustainable productive industries. I am also for hanging every jumped-up salesman who uses the word ‘branding’….but that’s by the by.

            PS, it’s a world recession. You can increase GDP until the bubble bursts again, but if you can’t sell the product abroad, you don’t even get the bubble…

          • fwl

            Interesting discussion. Around 10 to 13 years ago I read a WSJ editorial asking what would happen when the US could no longer sell paper to foreigners. The answer was panic not for as long as the US were not so stupid as to sell foreign paper it would simply have to let inflation rip and devalue the dollar denominated debt. Oddly despite QE we don’t have very obvious inflation.

            The problem Ba’al with debt forgiveness is that you will not find the world’s policeman asking for forgiveness.

            If debt is not a problem then great. But then I would start to think of money as akin to Auction Rate Securities (ARS notes) remember those and what happened when the carousel stopped spinning in 2007.

            If debt has to be dealt with then even with the Dump on the throne it takes some doing to see the US actually defaulting unless it is for some odd reason eg Senate / Congress deadlock, or the creditor is said to be at fault.

            In any event I may have over simplified, but I do think a dose of pessimistic cynicism is in order (in relation to temporal affairs only though as otherwise the sun shines and the sky is blue).

            Away now. Have a nice summer.

  • giyane

    I can’t help thinking Wikinappies wouldn’t be a better name. It is Clinton who’s leaking.

  • YKMN

    After all, it is up to the voting Americans to decide in November if they will be better off voting for DonaldTrump (portrayed as a monkey), HillaryClintstone (a monkey with a hand-grenade) or Mr last-minute C.I.A. stooge. I trust that the people of the USA will be reliably and correctly informed of the policies, the problems & the politics, allowing them to make an informed choice. (Like uk citizens were so well informed in the Brexit vote) (like NBC viewers are delighted with the coverage of the olympics in North America)

    It therefore seems reasonable that he American voters ought to read not-only Craig’s blog, a good place to start, but FARS e.g. ( cia to covertly kill people who have nukes )
    NEWSMAX e.g. ( US military lying to itself about a war, again)

    THE HILL e.g. ( cia chief actually mostly agrees with an outrageous Trump claim )

    DAILY SABAH e.g. ( cia seems to have signed the immigration green card for a Turk who might have revolved, recently etc )

    sadly, although I really like the USA and admire both of the listeners to NPR, I can’t yet see the electorate reading/browsing/listening widely and wisely and relating the news contextually then making a fully informed decision?

  • fred

    Well done to Scottish Labour for winning the Irvine by-election beating Nicola Sturgeon’s father and taking a seat on the council from the SNP.

    Just wondering why there’s no word of it on the BBC web site, have Nationalist threats and intimidation got them scared to report the news now?

    • Republicofscotland

      Meanwhile Kezia Dugdale who opposes Corbyn is still on holiday, after swanning off to America several weeks earlier.

      Corbyn opposes Scottish independence, Labour in Scotland are still a joke.

  • John Goss

    As well as the list of deaths linked to the Clintons I posted 3 days ago:

    Four apparent murders have been committed within the space of a month:

    To confirm that these suspicious deaths may well be linked to Hillary Clinton herself one of her supporters and strategists, former Fox News presenter, Bob Beckel, has called for the assassination of Julian Assange.

    I am glad Craig Murray has raised this important issue. The Clintons are the personification of evil. But I agree there is no alternative because Trump is a fickle opportunist who is just as likely to take the US into another conflict which could eventually lead to the annihilation of life on earth.

    • Paul Barbara

      Any Yank with a bit of common sense wouldn’t vote for either of the evil crooks, but for Jill Stein.
      Both the Repugnant and Demoprat candidates will be totally controlled puppets – if Trump isn’t already, he will soon learn that is the name of the game.
      A lot of Sanders supporters are going over to Jill Stein; Sanders himself, although running interference for the Hildabeast since 1994 (as evidenced in the video I posted a few posts back), has at least woken a lot of Sheeple up, and they are not going back to sleep any time soon.

  • michael norton

    Islamaphobic Theresa may has a BIG decision to make, when she gets back from trotting up the Swiss Alps.

    Theresa May is being urged to pull the plug on the controversial Hinkley Point C project immediately, after new allegations of spying in the US by a consultant working for the Chinese co-investor in the planned nuclear plant.

    The new government is currently in the middle of a review of the £18.5bn Hinkley scheme following a final investment decision by the developers, EDF of France and its Beijing-based partner China General Nuclear Power (CGN).

    Paul Dorfman, a senior research fellow at University College London, said the British prime minister could legitimately blame poor French reactor technology if she wanted to save face with the Chinese.

    How come there seems to be very little discussion of these matters in FRANCE,
    There are the project developers, right?

    • michael norton

      The name of China General Nuclear Power (CGN) has appeared as a defendant in US legal papers filed by the US authorities in a Tennessee district court.
      “Now the idea of China investing in Hinkley, then constructing and operating a reactor on British soil is really beginning to look like a Anglo-Sino bridge too far.”

      Greenpeace’s executive director, John Sauven, said there were very real concerns about handing over the keys to our future energy security to companies run by foreign governments.

      “There are a vast array of alternative power sources for the UK that Theresa May can choose from to keep the lights on, from solar, tidal and wind power through to interconnectors and storage. These are cutting edge technologies that will also attract investment into the UK, create jobs and don’t come with a huge health warning.”

      Exactly, adjacent to the Hinkley point site, a Severn Barrier tidal plant has been suggested ( over several decades)
      the fact that it has not been preferred over Hinkley Point C is almost certainly down to TRIDENT

      • michael norton

        One needs the other.

        To continue to have a “modern” nuclear deterent, you need nuclear scientists and nuclear technicians.
        It “might” be difficult to persuade young people to train at university in nuclear science, if their only job prospects were working on the Trident Programme.
        However, if a new fleet of nuclear power stations were to be constructed, going to university to study nuclear technologies,
        might be a viable future.

        Like I said one needs the other.

  • nevermind

    freely translated on right wing populism ” the more voters are scared the higher the likelihood to vote in Cowards. And these scare-managers then sacrifice everything to stay in power, us, our country and our European continent. And we are cowardly looking for cover.”

    by Andrezej Stasiuk, Polish writer who is this years winner of the Austrian literature price.

    I’m not going to translate his whole speech, it is his descriptive journey through Vienna and how it has changed.

  • Silvio

    Oh dear! Operation Gladio rears its ugly head again in this 27 minute Youtube video with FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds. She explains why she is looking forward to see upcoming email leaks promised by Julian Assange which he alleges will link Hillary to Mullah Fethullah Gulen.

    WikiLeaks, Hillary-Gulen Intimate Ties & How Clintons Gave Birth to Mullah Gulen’s Terrorist Network.

    In this episode of Spotlight with Sibel and Spiro we discuss the notorious USA-based Mullah Fethullah Gulen and Operation Gladio B in light of Wikileaks’ recent announcement that they plan to release a new batch of e-mails exposing the intimate ties between Hillary Clinton and Gulen’s 25+ Billion shady network. Sibel Edmonds explains how Fethullah Gulen was brought into the United States during the Clinton Administration, and how Bill Clinton’s White House, the State Department and the Justice Department’s Janet Reno provided the infamous mullah and his terrorism-heroin operations with blanket immunity and protection. We also take a look at Clinton’s hand-picked handlers, Graham Fuller and Mark Grossman, selected to manage and direct Gulen’s cells in the U.S. and abroad.


    Donald Trump is an Independent ?????????

    1) He wants to nominate Supreme Court Justices that will overturn Roe v Wade and return women to back street abortions.
    2) He wants to de-fund Planned Parenthood. An organisation that provides medical services for poor woman.
    3) He wants to repeal Obamacare. Yes we want a health care system that provides for all but Obamacare/medicare expansion for all it’s limitations has provided healthcare for many poor Americans that have never had any healthcare.
    4) He wants to ban Muslims from entering the USA.
    5) He thinks that most economic migrants from Mexico are Drug dealers, rapists or murderers and wants to round them up.
    6) He wants to rip up the Nuclear agreement with Iran and reimpose sanctions. If this happens will he give the green light to Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities?
    7) He wants to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem “the undivided capital of Israel” and is supported by the Republican Party platform that according to the Jerusalem Post.

    “the GOP convention for the first time in years has adopted a platform that includes no mention of the Palestinians, nor of a two-state solution to the historic conflict. The party effectively endorsed this week a strategy that leaves Israel to its own devices in its handling of the Palestinians– a departure from years of promises, across party lines, of American leadership toward conflict resolution.”
    They even had the audacity to say that Israel IS NOT an occupier!

    Donald Trump might have some different ideas from the Republican establishment but his boilerplate agenda is the agenda of a Republican party that is moving further to the right.

    Politico fact an organisation that fact checks, reported that during the primary debates the most honest person was Bernie Sanders.
    The person that told the second most lies was Hillary Clinton and the number one lier was Donald Trump.

    What a sad state of affairs we have over here when our two choices for President are the biggest liers and according to opinion polls the most disliked politicians but I have to agree with Noam Chomsky that no matter how bad Hiilary Clinton is as a candidate if you are in a swing state she is the lesser evil.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.