Just links

This is going to be just a few links, because I’ve got to clean my house before my youngest daughter arrives this afternoon for a visit.

G. Murphy Donovan has another excellent piece at The American Thinker today – “Don’t Kid Yourself About Ukraine”

Here’s a link from GMD’s opinion piece by former US ambassador to the USSR, James F. Matlock, Jr. (1987-1991) that’s a must read:
“The U.S. has treated Russia like a loser since the end of the Cold War.”

GMD’s piece has several links and interesting photos too – here’s another must read at Global Research, written by George Eliason: “Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis. Stepan Bandera and the Legacy of World War II”

Here’s another tough talking lady broad(yikes) – Ukrainian politician Yulia Tymoshenko’s leaked phone call: “Screw it, we should take up arms and kill the goddamned katsaps” — derogatory Ukrainian slang for Russians — “along with their leader.” then further in the conversation when asked what to do about the 8 million Russians still living on Ukrainian territory, here’s her answer, “We should hit them with an atomic weapon.” From Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty  She even outdoes dragon lady, Hillary’s, “We came, we saw, he died!” comment…

Here’s a repeat of the best background reporting on Yulia Tymoshenko I’ve come across, from blogger, Anna Raccoon: “Uk-Raine Terrain”, replete with info on her early years, to include her style makeover from wealthy business tycoon to looking like a “modest village schoolteacher”…. stranger than fiction, really she hired a social psychologist to “block out the image of wealth”….

More chaos in Egypt boiling up (from the BBC):Egypt court sentences 528 Morsi supporters to death”

Now I really must clean this house…. Later!


Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics

16 responses to “Just links

  1. JK

    Oh dear.

    I was of a mind to simply link to a specific George Friedman piece except I couldn’t recall precisely when it appeared. So what to do?

    Enter his name on the Search function on a blog one of my alter-egos very infrequently lurks on. And boy oh boy!

    What I’m pointing to specifically is the post of, September 2009 titled, “The Western View of Russia.” & I would have just left it at that except entering George’s name into Search yields a lot of interesting stuff.


    • I found the article JK, will read it later, thanks. My daughter got here this afternoon and decided the front yard needed immediate attention. I don’t keep the yard looking like a page out of Better Homes & Gardens anymore. I am already tired…

      Your memory for details amazes me JK….. 2009 article, wow:-)

      • JK

        Do see above LB (first para) I could recall the gist.

        But it took some other than my memory-banks for the specifist.

  2. Minta Marie Morze

    Liberty, JK—super links! When it comes to the history and current situations in the world, the more you read and watch videos, especially from reliable (or even known biased sources), the better to judge what we need to know. The usual suspects tell you the twist or spin that is officially coming out from the Left, and the others give insight into the way they see it and also help you judge where the Left is messing with things.

    I know that a lot of people are happy they stopped watching TV and cable, but I have always enjoyed the science and military channels, C-SPAN, BOOKTV, and other history channels (and the BBCA for Dr Who) for instance, and FOX News, etc., so I keep my TV and Cable. It is essential for anything like 9/11, Benghazi, etc.—you see videos and interviews from a lot of sources and can judge a lot of information. For instance, I saw that Ukraine “blonde with the braids” as she gave her speech from the wheelchair to the crowd and noted how little enthusiasm there was for her—that told me a lot. Adding other information, like the great links above, fill in the picture more clearly, so it is essential to explore a lot of information. We all have a duty to understand more about what is going on in the world.

    Please keep the links coming!

    The Internet sure has changed things—live blogging from locales, such as some of the Venezuelan sites I read, and tweeting and such, the more you learn the better. It helps to judge what you see and hear, especially as the evidence grows over time.

    So thanks for the effort to collect links that are really useful!

  3. JK

    Doctor Who!

    Rare to so easily come to the conclusion – and on the Internet – we’re kindred journeyers Minta.

    I’m gonna *steal* from another blog author (and paraphrase too!) he has as his page motto

    “Study everything, join nothing.”

    Paraphrased, Study/Watch every channel and if one sees some character on for instance FOX, look up a Wiki bio – chances are good s/he worked earlier at CNN. No matter who -excepting for what’s probably obvious … MSNBC- one listens to, everybody’s got something to stir into the pot.

    Keeping in mind we might be hungry – but some stuff is more nutritious than other stuff.

  4. Minta Marie Morze

    Yes, I know this is a long comment. Sorry.

    JK, you are so right!

    For a few months in1972, I helped a friend by listening to all the news shows that were on in the evening (in Los Angeles), and writing down the time and channel for stories about certain companies. In essence, for a few months I listened to all the news on the eight TV stations we had in Los Angeles at that time, with three TVs on, and with an earphone on my left ear and one in front of my right ear (to hear both the right earphone TV and the audio aloud in the room from the third TV). Later in the evening I would do the purely local stations. There was a spectrum of networks to watch, (if I remember correctly) channels 2 CBS, 4 NBC, 5, 7ABC, 9, 11, 13, and PBS, ranging from Walter Cronkite to George Putnam, and believe me, that’s an extreme range.

    Boy, was I shocked!!!! I mean real, serious shock. I was angry and disturbed by the way the coverage slanted the news depending on the channel. Every aspect of the news presentation would be manipulated: whom they interviewed, what they showed, images doctored or ignored, choice of words, emphasis, what they ignored, how much of a story they showed, range of facial expression, ensemble attitude (mirth, anger, serious faces, etc.), and so forth.

    One example, with the names and crimes changed: A Republican, Mr. Smith, was being investigated for embezzlement. On one station, there was a clip of a reporter asking the prosecutor, “You’re now investigating Mr. Smith for burning down his house two years ago, too. How is that investigation going?” The prosecutor answered, “I can’t talk about the details in an ongoing investigation.” Okay, got it, Mr. Smith may have burned down his house. Wow! Then, on another station, later on the same night, same clip but not cut short, this time covering the prosecutor’s whole answer: The reporter asked the prosecutor, “You’re now investigating Mr. Smith for burning down his house two years ago, too. How is that investigation going?” The prosecutor answered, “I can’t talk about the details in an ongoing investigation. Anyway, you KNOW there was an exhaustive arson investigation at the time, and they found absolutely no evidence of arson. We’re only investigating it because you reporters keep writing that we’re ignoring it, and pushing us to look into it. Okay, okay, we’re ‘looking into it’.”

    I remember the exact moment I heard the entire answer. I remember the prosecutor was wearing a bow tie, and was irked with the reporter. I actually yelled at the TV. (It turned out Mr. Smith was innocent of arson).

    By the time I stopped helping my friend, I knew, incontrovertibly, that news—and other reporting, and writing, and film, and in general all the stuff meant to inform or advocate—could be manipulated. I learned a lot about the tricks people used, and I have learned even more over time.

    This is the reason that, when the issues are important, now I always listen to the debates, the speeches, interviews, etc., even when I have to force myself to do so. I read transcripts. I note bylines. I follow links. I watch videos. I watch BookTV. And so on and so on. Not just in politics but in science, history, military battles, expert talking heads, and so forth.

    As for the more important matter, I have watched Dr. Who from the first doctor—not the first show, I had to wait until the local PBS station carried it and I noticed it—but definitely from when it was in black-and-white, with the first doctor. I am a total Dr. Who geek. I even have a TARDIS USB hub on my desk, and a Dalek and TARDIS hanging from my keychain, and a sonic screwdriver-pen thingy, and a huge collection of Dr. Who wallpapers for my iMac desktop background changes. And VHS, and the DVDs, a lot of them in Region 2, which require a different player, because I didn’t want to have to wait for the Region 1s to come out. And posters. Etc, etc, etc. As a side-note, I really like the choice of Capaldi, and I am currently hoping that when Capaldi decides to leave—they always break my heart—I would love Cumberbatch to take it. (Sherlock is fabulous.)

    • JK

      Happy to note Minta you order your priorities in reverse to your news-readers. That “should” keep you sane.

      Back in 2011 (prior to the Libyan “No-Fly” when McCain was all in a huff over Obama’s reluctance to do as he, McCain was speechifying on the floor of the US Senate for Obama to do as he “suggested”) I took to recording sequentially six months worth of FOX’ Sean Hannity episodes.

      More recently when Howard Kurtz announced he’d be leaving CNN destination unknown – I recorded six weeks worth of his show. And when FOX announced the previously “destination challenged” Kurtz would soon be given a slot on the Fair and Balanced Channel I recorded the first three airings of that.

      Now when inevitably Capaldi chooses as he must one day do and after careful reflection of what it takes to overcome the arduous and sundry challenges to reality for any presumptuous replacement Doctor Whovian capable mortal could possibly be …?

      Sean Hannity.

      • JK


        Curiously Mr. Hannity seems to’ve lost the March 2011 archives.

        (I should I think explain why I choose Sean over Senator McCain. Admittedly John’s had more real-life episodes of the far-out variety but I worry his demonstrated memory problems would leave him forgetting the lines to the script.)

      • You survived 6 months of that torture – has there ever been a more loyal partisan on the Right? I can’t deal with more than 5 minutes of Sean Hannity at a time. There’s no news there, and he’s akin to the Left’s, oh so faithful, Chris Matthews…. minus the thrill up the leg. We sure need more Americans to move away from that partisan dead zone and begin to think for themselves again.

      • Minta Marie Morze

        LOL. I enjoy being snarky, too. And the image of Hannity as a Dr. Who—nnnnnnooooooo. JK, JK, you’re bordering on blasphemy here! Moreover, the moment Dr. Who touches Reality, the whole thing will fall apart. They have gotten around this issue with their “fixed points in history” flummery, and a lot of hand-waving; the instant they make the viewer back up and seriously think, “Why not bring back a cure for cancer?” or “Nazis, concentration camps, Dr.??” or some such thing, the story collapses. They sometimes put in a line or two that skates close to the edge, but in general, they avoid Reality, or they do what they did when they had Nixon for a character—the storyline dealt fairly with the issues. Hey! Even talking about it this way is being too serious. :o)

        As for Hannity, etc., in Reality, THINK, dudes and dudettes—we need all the support for our side (The American Ethos) we can find. I have to say that I rather like Hannity as a person. He’s not a political philosopher, but his love of the country and Constitution is clear. Chris Matthews is contemptible; Sean Hannity is a decent, honest Conservative, and doesn’t totally stick to the party line—he thinks the establishment Republicans are destroying the party. And though his beliefs aren’t nuanced, he’s a fighter against tyranny.

        It doesn’t mean you have to watch his show.

        Of course, he’s no Greta or Megyn. But, think guys! We need everyone who loves the Constitution and America in this fight. That has to be the bottom line. We have to fight the establishment, but this November, we have to vote for everything with an “R” after its name. Look at the arguments at the Supreme Court yesterday. The EPA, the NLRB, and all the other alphabet soup! God help us!!!!

        Okay, don’t get me started on John McCain and Libya. Or John McCain.

        So, back to important matters, Capaldi then Cumberbatch. (** heavy sigh of contentment **) That scene in the forest with the three doctors. Brilliant!!

        Rats! I just remembered that Greg Gutfeld is at the Reagan Library, just a few miles from here, with a dinner and a speech tonight, and I couldn’t afford to buy tickets in time. Bummer.

        Back to Dr. Who . . . . .

  5. JK

    Well … not exactly “that” torture … leastwise all of it.

    Acquaintance of mine rigged up a program where the dvds got queried for the keywords “Libya” and/or “McCain.” If the 30 second snip sounded promising I’d listen to the whole thing – minus Viagra etc commercials.

    Listening to the whole rigamarole woulda left me with the opposite of the side-effects the Viagra ads advise to go see the doctor for (with the possible exception of temporary blindness).

    Greta, Megyn and Shep Smith I can handle whole cloth – Sean? Not so much.

  6. Ok Minta, I concede the point that Hannity isn’t as bad as Matthews, but truly his talking points style is more than I can tolerate. I prefer a Megyn or a Greta truthfully – like their interviewing style.

    As far as the voting for anything with a R after it – well, I don’t believe America’s way out of the darkness is ever going to come from Washington, but I can see the sense in trying to slow down that train wreck. Turning our country around is going to have to start in small communities all across America and build from there, imho.

    • Minta Marie Morze

      I totally agree!

      Building the future is going to be a long, difficult process, from the ground up. I just think that the Supreme Court, NLRB, etc., can do damage that will take a very long time to deal with. We have to put a finger in the dike (do people even learn the story about the finger in the dike anymore??). It’s like a patient at an ER—you stop the bleeding first, and try to stabilize the patient. Then the years of therapy.

      I love Megyn and Greta. They are fearless.

      Washington is totally corrupt. But because of the way our government is designed, you needed a certain number of people, and right now that number needs to be reached. First stop the bleeding. The transcript of the SOTU hearing speaks volumes. You have to do what you can while you’re building up the Normandy landing.

  7. JK

    “That is not all; the Conservative establishment is also opposed to Romney: Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin (because she is a former VP candidate), Rush Limbaugh, and Mark Levin all make this list.

    If Romney is the most electable candidate, then say it. However, as we just heard Coulter say in the video, Romney has never seemed very electable. This bewilderment by those who would try to influence others with half-truths and innuendos is getting to the point of hilarity. They will not see convivial attitudes from working class conservatives until they get a candidate they can accept.

    The conservative activist[s] are more engaged and better informed than they were before the advent of the 24-hour news cycle and high-speed internet. The Tea Party should have taught us this, but some still have yet to feel the winds.”


    • JK

      Oops. Left something off.

      “Like Romney, Coulter suffers from the mass record of YouTube videos that can be pulled up at moments notice.”

      • Minta Marie Morze

        I’m confused at your comment. :o) Do you consider Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Mark Levin part of the Republican Establishment? I don’t.

        Moreover, 2014 is a race for the House and Senate. It’s an attempt to stop the massive bleeding. The patient will still be in the ICU, and still have the cancer growing. The point is, first we need to get the patient to the ICU. I’d like to know your opinion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s