A+ A A-

  • Category: Warmer War
  • Written by White Apple
  • Hits: 5953

#StopS2828 Why did the U.S. vote Nazi... again?




Why did the U.S. vote Nazi... again?


     If things were different I would prefer to write about Moral Neuroplasticity, something far different than Sam Harris's Moral Landscape which comes across more like an islamaphobic black hole than a topographical map of some budding scientific branch that studies morality.  I have my reasons, namely the growth of technology far surpasses our moral growth and in some cases (e.g. Wall St. and London's Gold Exchange), amoral decay, the logical thing to do at this point would be for everybody to meditate, what was it that the Dalai Lama said?   But there seem to be a "Warm War" brewing in the international spheres, the kind with all sorts of intrigue and inflammations, and I being an international gadfly am somewhat attracted to large piles of... well, you get the point.  Recently (November 21st), the U.N. had a vote regarding the Russian initiated resolution regarding the Non Proliferation of Nazism, and yes, there were 3 countries that voted against it - Ukraine, Canada and the U.S., and although it was the the first time for Ukraine, the U.S. had voted against the resolution every time it had come up for vote since 2003, even alone amongst the nations if need be.  It seems rather bipolar of Congress and US Policy if you consder that in earlier in November Russell Berman of the Atlantic wrote a piece entitled "Nothing Unites Congress Like Fighting Nazis", that opens with...

"There is still one group of people who can prompt the bitterly divided parties in Congress to spring into bipartisan action: Nazis...legislation to prevent suspected Nazi war criminals who were forced out of the U.S. from receiving Social Security checks."

Sorry, I put the wrong Greasley photo up.


     Perusing the internet for western media stories regarding the U.N. vote, I found one from Counterpunch that spoke of Canada, but made no mention of the U.S. voting no as well.  I found another by the National Post that did mention all three countries, but left out the juicy details regarding Canada that were mentioned in the Counterpunch article.  Other than a very short piece by the Daily Kos I saw very little (if any), western press regarding the vote until I ran across this Voice of America piece which attempted to clarify the very short explanation given by the U.S. at the UN during the vote...

"...concerned about the overt political motives that had driven the main sponsor (Russia), of the current resolution.  That Government had employed those phrases in the current crisis in Ukraine.  That was offensive and disrespectful to those who had suffered at the hands of Nazi regimes."

     I think the best analogy for average Americans that I can come up with regarding the events that have unfolded in Ukraine is imagine if the KKK were to team up with the Tea Party and the Koch Brothers and stage a massacre at one of their protests, and with the help and accusations of the Imperial Bikini Is. they then take over Washington D.C.  Shortly thereafter 2/3 of Americans lose their right to vote because they don't own land and probably some kind of civil war.  I'm sure some may not think that fits the bill, but that's why the U.S. constitution has free speech, isn't it?  The VOA article claims...

"The United States, which annually rejects the resolution for reasons including language that could be interpreted to limit free speech and assembly, this year also expressed “alarm” over Russia’s “recent efforts to vilify others by loosely using terms such as “Nazi or “Fascist.""

     Not sure if you all know this but some of the core kernels of the U.S. freedom of speech act were derived from the Brandenburg v. Ohio  (or KKK v. Ohio if you like), case of 1969 regarding "seditious speech".  In that landmark case the "clear and present danger" test was changed to the "imminent lawless action" test.  The difference was that seditious speech was no longer defined as: having a "tendency" to cause sedition or lawlessness, but rather: seditious speech is inciting or producing imminent lawless action.  Justice Abe Fortas was going to modify the clear and present test, but was removed from his post due to an ethics scandal, after which the test was changed by Justice Brennan.  Now maybe in cases like the one the year before (United States v. O'Brien) where a young man in 1968 protested the draft by burning his draft card, this new imminent lawless action test might have been more suited to the founder's implied nature of free speech than one involving a supporter of genocide, well, that's just the way it goes.  The simple fact is that now we protect the free speech and "peaceful" assemblies of Nazis in other "sovereign" nations, aside from what their constitution may say about free speech.  Not sure about you, but if that doesn't sound like a unicorn turning around to bite it's own ass only to find out it's hind end is of a dragon, I don't know what does.  The KKK of the U.S. in 1969 hereby lawfully assist the Nazis of Ukraine in 2014 with the protection of the very same nation that was central to ending the  Holocaust of WWII... which was engineered by the Nazis.  That makes perfect sense. 

The VOA also quotes Nina Khrushcheva (an associate professor of international affairs at New York’s New School),

“They absolutely care about their image. But this particular resolution is not going to really improve the image, because the image is bad.” She added, “You [can] condemn Nazism all you want - but what kind of Nazism are you condemning? And where exactly and who is exactly glorifying Nazis today?”

     First of all, what country doesn't care about their image... besides the U.S.?  Her next statement is a matter of opinion without some real evidence to back it, thankfully we all get those.  Thank you Nina for letting us condemn Nazism, because personally I don't support Nazis (the kind of Nazi that helped Hitler massacre Jews), nor do 133 other countries in the world (not including Germany but including Israel), according to the U.N. vote.  "And where exactly and who is exactly glorifying Nazis today?"  German Foreign Policy reports:

"...for example, in the Baltic nations. Regular commemoration honor parades for the Waffen SS, sponsored by their national Waffen SS veterans are organized in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. In Latvia, one of the most recent marches was held last spring, with approx. 2,000 participants..."

"Riga's state-run Latvian "Occupation Museum" the Latvian Waffen SS militias are referred to as "freedom fighters" in the struggle against Moscow. Organizers of the Waffen SS memorial march are invited to schools to teach courses in "patriotism.""

"One of the party's (Latvia's All for Latvia), leaders had once declared that the Russian minority - nearly one quarter of the population - are "occupiers" or "illegal colonialists.""

"In Hungary...new memorials to the "Reich's Deputy" and Nazi collaborator Miklós Horthy, which have been inaugurated since 2012." & "changing the name "Freedom Square" to "Horthy Square," in April 2012" & "...in Gyömrö, near Budapest, a Horthy statue was erected in the village of Kereki" & Memorials in Hencida & Budapest & ""Hitler's Hungarian partner is being rehabilitated," wrote German press organs back in 2012".... and not to mention Croatia or Italy.

Sure, there's no Nazis in Ukraine either, definitely not in Kolomoysky's Nazi Azov Battalion by the name of Andriy Biletsky:

  • "The historical mission ... is to head and lead the White Peoples of the whole world in the last crusade for their existence. Crusade against Semite-led subhumanity."

The decorated leader  who was recently appointed to Ukrainian Parlaiment (which seems more like a WWF title fight than a political body), was mentioned by IFFConsulting's account on twitter: "With that patriot in the post of interior security : no more Russian traitors in the security department."  That's the same IFFConsulting that also supports the new Israeli Pipeline (or pipe dream if you stand for the sovereign rights of Palestine & Gaza (like Xi at the U.N.), to the Leviathan Gas field) to the EU that was recently proposed, no cognitive dissonance there.  If you have any doubts you can refer to the New York Times article (pointed out by Robert Parry of Consortium News & reiterated by newcoldwar.org), by Andrew Kramer on Aug. 9,2014 entitled 'Ukraine Strategy Bets on Restraint by Russia' that said...

"Officials in Kiev say the militias and the army coordinate their actions, but the militias, which count about 7,000 fighters, are angry and, at times, uncontrollable. One known as Azov, which took over the village of Marinka, flies a neo-Nazi symbol resembling a Swastika as its flag.

In pressing their advance, the fighters took their orders from a local army commander, rather than from Kiev. In the video of the attack, no restraint was evident. Gesturing toward a suspected pro-Russian position, one soldier screamed, “The bastards are right there!” Then he opened fire."


Here in the U.S. we had the German American Bund Society right up until the beginning of WWII...


     More recently the New York Times did a piece in Nov. 2011 entitled "Nazis Were Given ‘Safe Haven’ in U.S., Report Says" where, as you can imagine, is all kinds of gritty information on the secret U.S. deals done with Nazis after WWII, I just didn't know how long we'd been assisting Nazis.  The report makes for some fabulous light reading, but I don't want to take up too much of your time.  My point is simple, if the U.S. leaders are going to try to portray ISIS as an imminent threat, the least they could do is accept the reality that there are still Nazis, that they still hate Jews, Africans and Russians living in any country, and probably ISIS too.

   In regards to the U.S. reply to the U.N. about it's vote, it seems to infer that the main reason Russia is doing this is because of the current situation going on in Ukraine, but that is simply not the case.  Russia put forth a similar resolution to the U.N. in 2003, long before the events of Maiden 2014, proving that this resolution was not initiated due to recent Ukrainian events.  Russia has been "employing" those "phrases" for a quite some time now, and 113 other countries agreed, most of them for a while.  The US has stated other reasons in the past that made no mention of Ukraine, and in December of 2009 the U.S. was the only country in the U.N. to vote no, in fact the history of the vote is fascinating from a global perspective.  Carla Stea writes:

"On February 25, 2009, I asked the US State Department spokesman: “Robert, recently a commission was established on preventing genocide, co-chaired by William S. Cohen, Madeleine Albright with Stuart Eizenstat and Tom Pickering. And since there is a great interest in that, and it is extremely important; why did the United States vote against a resolution which was adopted recently at the General Assembly of the UN, on the inadmissibility of the glorification of Nazism, prohibiting the description of Nazi collaborators during World War II as national liberation movements? That’s Orwellian.”

Also of note is the fact that Germany and most of the EU abstained from voting claiming a variety of reasons that mostly state the resolution is too restrictive.  But German Foreign Policy also reported that in...

"early 2012, German organizations have been working - and intensively so, since 2013 - to incorporate the Svoboda Party and its affiliated forces into an anti-Russian alliance of organizations.  Svoboda honors the OUN and particularly its commander Stepan Bandera, who is very popular throughout West Ukraine. In 1941, Bandera's militias actively supported Nazi Germany in its attack on the Soviet Union. Svoboda also honors the "Ukrainian Partisan Army" (UPA), which, in the wake of the German war of extermination, had participated in mass murders of European Jews." "Had Germany and the other EU countries not refused to vote in favor of last Friday's UN resolution, they would - had they taken the document seriously - be facing serious conflicts with one another and with their close allies, e.g. their partners in Ukraine." 

     I did hear rumors that Euromaiden protesters were paid 200€/mos by German bank(s) to join the maiden protests, not to mention reports from Foreign Policy Journal that "US and EU Are Paying Ukrainian Rioters and Protesters", or how about USAToday reporting Antimaiden protesters were paid by the recently ousted Ukrainian government.  It seems that the average Ukrainian either has no real political beliefs other than "Kill the Russians!" v "Don't Kill me!" or is just extremely broke and bored... or both.  A friend of mine mentioned that Ukrainians are buying diesel from Germany... but paying cash up front, much like the Russians expecting payment for gas delivered before more is delivered to keep Ukraine warm through the winter.  

     To say there are no Nazis and that no one is supporting them is absolutely absurd.  What I feel is even more absurd is to assume that Jews would be angered by the resolution in the current context of Ukraine, but keeping in mind of course that the resolution has been around since 2003 making that line of logic seem out of context with the overall facts.  Ignoring the fact of the '03'-'14' history of the resolution while acknowledging Israel's Yes vote, one has to disagree with the statement given at the U.N. as one would commonly agree that Israel would be the water mark for such an opinion.

"That was offensive and disrespectful to those who had suffered at the hands of Nazi regimes."

     But for those that choose not to ignore history or the facts surrounding the current Ukraine situation and the Warm War it has birthed, the above statement is not only incorrect, but offensive and disrespectful to Jewish culture as it seems to champion the Holocaust defense while those who probably have more right than most to champion such a thing, in fact, disagree.  There is obviously more to this, and to ignore the facts that Russia is responsible (at least in part to the hatred expressed by the Bandera clans), due to things like Russian gulags and Stalinism which were as much a reality as the Holocaust, and to not have that acknowledged that in the resolution does make it seem disingenuous, and not just from a purely Ukrainian or Baltic point of view.  I would only suggest that instead of appearing to the rest of the world that your country defends the right to violent Nazi protests paid for by other governments (and it's own government), that the 4 or more Nations in question get together and change the resolution to include Stalinism.  It fails to make sense that in this day and age governments of most any nation in the world feel that  they have the right to point a moral finger at one another with examples like the Holocaust, GITMO, the Presido, QUARTZ, beheaddings, invasions of privacy for false flags, staged government coups and much much more, but here we are.  Reminds me of a saying I heard: If you are going to point your finger, remember there are three pointing back at you, and one up.




     In my view, the U.S., and the other nations that voted No (as well as the ones that voted to abstain), are in a state of Holocaust denial due to the denial of all acts of genocide, especially colonial/imperial acts such as what happened to the American Indian tribes, and then followed by such actions as the Navajo Relocation act designed by none other than Senator John McCain.  Wait!  I think I hear people in Crimea screaming over the sound of tanks coming from Russia... Oh, sorry, that was just the wind blowing through Senator McCain's war torn mind, who reminds me more and more of the boy who cried WOLF!

     Panopticons and children's stories of morality aside, there is more cause to think that the Warm War is heating up, gold is flying around (aside from the Crimean gold held by the Dutch), the world 1st class (as if MH17 never happened), from reserve banks like the New York Fed., back to their respective central banks.  Germany has asked for it's gold, Ukraine has missing gold (other than the gold held by the Dutch), that either went missing in March or in October depending on who you ask, and is either in Russia or the New York Fed depending on who you ask.  Gold is kind of hush hush you know?  The Dutch have asked for their gold, as well as the Swiss considering it, in fact, Ed Moy of Money News points out that...

"Finally, more countries are repatriating their gold. For them, an audit is not enough. They would like their gold back. Azerbaijan, Ecuador, Iran, Libya, Mexico, Romania and Venezuela is a short list of countries that have requests into their custodians to transfer some or all their gold back to their countries."

I watched a very interesting recording of George Soros speaking to the House Oversight Committee Hearing on Hedge Funds, and he stated:

"We are in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the 1930's... generated by the financial system itself.  First, Financial Markets don't reflect the underlying conditions accurately... it is an inherent characteristic of financial markets that they are prone to produce bubbles.  Third, controlling credit requires reactivating policy instruments which have fallen into disuse, notably, margin requirements and minimal capital requirements for banks.  Markets do have moods"

Soros also stated in the New York Review of Book that...

"There is now pressure from donors, whether in Europe or the US, to “bail in” the bondholders of Ukrainian sovereign debt, i.e., for bondholders to take losses on their investments as a precondition for further official assistance to Ukraine that would put more taxpayers’ money at risk. That would be an egregious error. The Ukrainian government strenuously opposes the proposal because it would put Ukraine into a technical default that would make it practically impossible for the private sector to refinance its debt."

Another statement in the above article also brings some commonly held suspicions about Geo-politics into light...

"Putin may then revert to the smaller victory that would still be within his reach: he could open by force a land route from Russia to Crimea and Transnistria before winter. Alternatively, he could simply sit back and await the economic and financial collapse of Ukraine. I suspect that he may be holding out the prospect of a grand bargain in which Russia would help the United States against ISIS—for instance by not supplying to Syria the S300 missiles it has promised, thus in effect preserving US air domination—and Russia would be allowed to have its way in the “near abroad,” as many of the nations adjoining Russia are called. What is worse, President Obama may accept such a deal."

     Soros warns central banks to reactivate the policy of having 1/5 of their assets at home to combat these "market bubbles", whereas Russia and other nations in the BRICS union have gotten together to form a new Global Development Bank to shelter themselves from the western bubble boys of Wall St. and London's Gold Exchange.  It seems to me and others (such as Noam Chomsky in his book Power Systems), that the IMF and BRICS are at odds, and if one noticed, that the day after BRICS Bank was formed MH17 went down and Israel ground invaded Gaza for gas, it would become even more obvious and sinister.  This doesn't look good for the Bubble Boys of Capitalism, BRICS may have a needle.

     Many believe that the more repatriation of gold that occurs around the world, the louder the whispers of war get.  I would assume that the recent letter sent to Putin from a group of Dutch intellectuals (motivated by such great intellectuals as Karel Von Wolferen, Professor Cees Hamelink), apologizing for MH17, Syria and Ukraine, would be evidence of such a suspicion.  I like to stick to cold hard facts though, e.g. S.2828 (up for vote on December 1st in Congress), which asks the President to impose 3 or more sanctions against Russia, even though as we all know that this kind of economic war deeply hurts the poor not just of Russia, consider the many other countries affected adversely by the sanctions already imposed.  Not to mention suspicious voter scripts in favor of the bill that sport a picture of Uncle Sam... pointing.  It urges voters to call Representative Marcy Kaptur (202-225-4146) to thank her for her support of Ukraine in Congress, not to mention catch phrases like "Act now to stop further Russian aggression against Ukraine!" or "We need 10 min of your time every day".  In the House of Representatives H. RES. 758, submitted by Kinzinger of Illinois, which asks to...

"call on the President to cooperate with United States allies and partners in Europe and other countries around the world to refuse to recognize the illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation." and "to impose visa bans, targeted asset freezes, sectoral sanctions, and other measures on the Russian Federation" "To provide the Government of Ukraine with appropriate intelligence and other relevant information to assist the Government of Ukraine..." "calls on NATO allies and U.S. partners in Europe and other nations around the world to suspend all military cooperation with Russia, including prohibiting the sale of lethal and non-lethal military equipment;" "calls on the President and the United States Department of State to develop a strategy for multilateral coordination to produce, or otherwise procure and distribute news and information in the Russian language to countries with significant Russian-speaking populations which maximizes the use of existing platforms for content delivery such as the Voice of America Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Incorporated, leverages indigenous public-private partnerships for content production, and seeks in-kind contributions from regional state governments;"

     Well, I urge the American citizens to politely call up their President, Senators and Representatives and tell them, in plain English, that Free Speech is not to be used as a defense for Nazism or the KKK, and to apologize to the American people for using such an idea for such a thing.  I urge the American people to call them and tell them that you neither support the current administration's attitudes and policies on the Ukrainian/Russian Warm War or these two ill conceived bills.  In closing I would like to mention that my Grandfather was a Ukrainian Jew that migrated via Cuba to the US after WWI and served and died as US Army for the 11th Armored Div. under General Patton at the Battle of the Bulge.  For me this loss is a very dear price to pay to be safe from Nazis, I hope his sacrifice can be honored by the U.S. administration.  Further, I lived in Israel on a Kibbutz during the Yom Kippur War and I in no way support antisemitism any more that I do Zionism, and I would be extremely offended to hear such accusations considering the sacrifice and risks that I have already made for that country and it's people, with out even knowing it.

Some other articles I recommend

No to War, Hot or Cold, with Russia by Dennis Kucinich

Ukraine war driven by Gas-Dollar link: Defending Dollar Imperialism by Mike Whitney

NYT shows how Propaganda Works by Robert Parry

Thank you for your time... Sincerely,

White Apple

@whiteapple on twitter