Wednesday, January 21, 2015

On Khazin, elephants, Jews and Israel

Dear friends,

Frankly, I am dismayed not only at the often rather nasty comments made here about Khazin's analyses of cui bono in the Charlie Hebdo psyop, and some have actually found it appropriate to question Khazin's ethnicity. 

I let you speak your mind - no comments were erased - now please listen to my point of view.

First, calling an analysis inept, stupid or anything else does nothing to challenge the analysis.  By now I would have thought that you all would have understood that what I am trying to achieve with this blog is for those who disagree with the views of author X to post something along the lines of: "I think that author X is wrong because...." followed by a list of facts and a logical analysis explaining the relevance of these facts to the demonstration of your criticism.

Second, why is it that so many of you apparently cannot imagine that somebody might be simply and honestly *wrong*?  Many of you have made the oh so subtle accusation that Khazin is deliberately ignoring the (Jewish/Israeli) elephant in the room.  Let me tell you that whether you are correct in your suspicions or not, this is not the right assumption to make unless you can prove it.  If you cannot, you are basically making a unsubstantiated accusation and that weakens your case.

Third, what Khazin did in his analysis is something which is taught in all basic intelligence courses: list all possible variants.  The point is to break from preconceived notions and to look at all credible options.  Do anybody really believe that Khazin thinks that maybe the Russians themselves did it?  Of course not, he is trying to use an intellectual crowbar to break the mental lock the zombified "Charlies" are currently tied up with to show that "it ain't that simple folks!"

Fourth - so why did he not list Israel?  I don't know.  Ask him.  In fact, I will do just that.  I will ask him and post his reply here.  But before making any type of accusations, you begin by trying to understand the other and, when possible, clarify his/her position.  True, you could not do that.  Fair enough.  But what you COULD have done is *asked a question* and then wait a little to get the answer before making accusations or, what I hate even more, oblique accusations by way of innuendo which, by the way folks, is exactly what the Zionists always do to discredit their opponents: they speak about "overtones" about "unclear position" about "in other words" or "it sure sounds like" and all the rest of their ugly and crude oratory trick to avoid having to substantiate their accusations.  Please friends, don't do that.  We are better then that, no?

Fifth.  To question Khazin's ethnicity is simply uncivilized and racist.  Let's assume that he is a 100% pure Jew, from a family of rabbis, that all his relatives work for the Mossad and that he was born in Israel.  SO WHAT?!  He is he.  I sure would not want to be judged by my parents - would you?  If yes, lucky you, count your blessings are realize how fortunate you are.  Besides, what is racism?  Let me give you my definition of it:
Racism is, in my opinion, not so much the belief that various human groups are different from each other, say like dog breeds can be different, but the belief that the differences between human groups are larger than within the group. Second, racism is also a belief that the biological characteristics of your group somehow pre-determine your actions/choices/values in life. Third, racism often, but not always, assumes a hierarchy amongst human groups (Germanic Aryans over Slavs or Jews, Jews over Gentiles, etc.). I believe that God created all humans with the same purpose and that we are all “brothers in Adam”, that we all equally share the image (eternal and inherent potential for perfection) of God (as opposed to our likeness to Him, which is our temporary and changing individual condition).
Khazin, regardless of his ethnicity, is first and foremost a PERSON with a God-given FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE AND CHOICE.  At the moment you believe that his DNA affects or overrules these freedoms in Khazin because he might be a Jew you are a 100% bona fida racist and, in my book, an idiot (sorry, I never met an intelligent racist in my entire life, not one).

Sixth, I personally loathe to slouch down to the kind if racial McCarthyism were you start looking for Jewish relatives like the Nazis did, but lest I be accused of "covering up" for Khazin, I did some digging on the Russian Wikipedia and judging by the names of Khazin's family members I would say that there is a pretty good chance that Khazin's family includes Jews. But for those of you releasing a triumphant AHA!!  I would want to explain this:

Seventh. Please re-read Israel Shamir's recent article "Trolling Russia" and in particular these paragraphs:

The Russians don’t comprehend the Western infatuation with Jews, for Russian Jews have been well assimilated and integrated in general society. The narrative of Holocaust is not popular in Russia for one simple reason: so many Russians from every ethnic background lost their lives in the war, that there is no reason to single out Jews as supreme victims. Millions died at the siege of Leningrad; Belarus lost a quarter of its population. More importantly, Russians feel no guilt regarding Jews: they treated them fairly and saved them from the Nazis. For them, the Holocaust is a Western narrative, as foreign as JeSuisCharlie. With drifting of Russia out of Western consensus, there is no reason to maintain it.

This does not mean the Jews are discriminated against. The Jews of Russia are doing very well, thank you, without Holocaust worship: they occupy the highest positions in the Forbes list of Russia’s rich, with a combined capital of $122 billion, while all rich ethnic Russians own only $165 billion, according to the Jewish-owned source. Jews run the most celebrated media shows in prime time on the state TV; they publish newspapers; they have full and unlimited access to Putin and his ministers; they usually have their way when they want to get a plot of land for their communal purposes. And anti-Semitic propaganda is punishable by law – like anti-Christian or anti-Muslim abuse, but even more severely. Still, it is impossible to imagine a Russian journalist getting sack like CNN anchor Jim Clancy or BBC’s Tim Willcox for upsetting a Jew or speaking against Israel.

Russia preserves its plurality, diversity and freedom of opinion.
I have already written about that in the past, in my latest podcast also I think, but let me repeat it here: the vast majority of russophobic Russian Jews and the vast majority of Zionist Russian Jews have already left Russia long ago.  As a direct result from this, most Russian Jews today are rather patriotic and even when they have ties to Israel through friends or relatives (as do many non-Jewish Russians), this does not make them sayanims or crypto-Zionists.  This is a western problem, not a Russian one.

Russians are truly multi-ethnic and multi-confessional.  In Russia Russians can be Buriat, Kalmyk, Nenets, Tuvin, German, Polish, Italian, Korean, Chinese and, of course, Jewish. And there are plenty of "ethnically Russian" russophobes.  Most of the Russian 5th column, by the way, I not Jewish because following the "Putin purges" against the rule of the Jewish oligarchs under Eltsin (known as the "Semibankirshchina" or the "rule of the seven bankers") the (mostly) Jewish 5th column has been replaced by a (mostly) Russian 5th column.  I am not sure which is worse...

What I am trying to convey here is that even if Khazin is 100% Jewish through mom and pop, he does not have the kind of knee-jerk mental blocks and hidden prejudices which, say, French Jews will often, but even here not always, have.

I am sorry to have to tell you that your comments about Khazin and elephants are not only unsubstantiated and rather inelegant, they are also sophomoric and ill-informed.  Now I can easily imagine that you will reject my criticism.  Fair enough.  What I do ask you is to is to appreciate that I took the time to at least substantiate my criticism, that I made no oblique accusations and that I was not rude to anybody.  If you think that I am wrong, please extend to me the assumption of sincerity and don't start asking me if I, perchance, have any semitic blood (I don't) which might clout my own judgment.  Maybe I am simply honestly and sincerely *wrong*.  It happens to me all the time :-)

Now, in conclusion, and for whatever it is worth, here is my own take on the elephant issue:

I cannot prove a negative.  Maybe it was the Peruvian secret services or the Mongolian ones who did Charlie Hebdo.  Could it have been the Israelis?  I suppose.  Is that likely?  Meh...?  Charlie Hebdo sure benefits the French organized Jewish organizations (which are 100% hard core Zionist and work hand in glove with the Israeli special services and political parties, especially the Likud).  But you have to realize that ALL French political parties have now been taken under Israeli control, including at least to some degree the FN under Marine Le Pen.  So even if Hollade is immensely unpopular, as was Sarko before him, there is no alternative to a Zionist controlled government in France.  In other words, if government change in a real possibility, regime change is not.  For the time being and no matter what happens, the Zionists will remain in firm control of the French regime.  Even more importantly, their control is not only not challenged by anybody except Egalité & Réconciliaton, but it is not even acknowledged by anybody.  This might be hard for those who do not know France to imagine, but the Israeli grip on France via organizations like the CRIF, the UEJF or the LDJ is far stronger than the influence Israel has in the US through AIPAC, CUI or the ADL.  So I personally see no point for Israel to get involved in such a high risk high visibility false flag.  My bet is firmly behind the "Uncle Sam done it" hypothesis combined with "and the French let him".  But that is too early to call.

So, I will try to ask Khazin and let you know what he says.

But please, don't take offense at my criticism (after all, you get to criticize me under every post of mine - it's only fair for me to "retaliate" once in a while!) and please take it as a host's request to have his guests respect the spirit of the home into which he invited them, ok?  I want this blog to be better then the typical YouTube level of commentary.

True, with all the problems our community has had to face recently, I have been very lax in my moderation here, but I remind you that on the new blog (which is being worked on along all the other ones) I have decided for very strict moderation guidelines which I will not enforce here, on the old blog, but which I suggest you get used to.  Here it is:
Any comment in violation of the following rules will be immediately removed: 
1 ) Absolutely no use of CAPITAL LETTERS (as this is considered SCREAMING).
2 ) All comment have to be impeccably courteous to me, the blog’s author, any guest author and all the other commentators. Absolutely no ad hominems or personal attacks. Comments insulting the 1% plutocracy ruling the AngloZionist Empire are allowed and encouraged.
3 ) Any comment designed to make me angry will make me angry and will be removed in anger.
4 ) All racist comments are banned, including of the Nazi racists and Jewish racist type (here I repeat the definition given above)
5 ) Any comment deliberately and grossly mis-representing what I write will be immediately removed. I shall not answer any “straw man” arguments.
6 ) Any comment demanding that “the Ukraine” be written just “Ukraine” without the definite article “the” will be sent where it belongs: to the trash bin.
That's it.

Now let's see what Khazin replies.

Cheers and thanks for hearing me out,

The Saker