State Department Traitors
Follow NCRenegade on Twitter
Follow NCRenegade on Twitter
This was posted here ages ago, but deserves to be read again.
It was the winter of 1939, only a few months earlier the Soviet Union and Hitler’s Third Reich had signed a partially secret accord known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact; essentially a non-aggression treaty which divided Europe down the middle between the fascists and the communists. Hitler would take the West, and Stalin would take the East. Stalin’s war machine had already steamrolled into Latvia. Lithuania, and Estonia. The soviets used unprecedented social and political purges, rigged elections, and genocide, while the rest of the world was distracted by the Nazi blitzkrieg in Poland. In the midst of this mechanized power grab was the relatively tiny nation of Finland, which had been apportioned to the communists.
Apologists for Stalinist history (propagandists) have attempted to argue that the subsequent attack on Finland was merely about “border territories” which the communists claimed were stolen by the Finns when they seceded from Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution. The assertion that the soviets were not seeking total dominance of the Finns is a common one. However, given the vicious criminal behavior of Russia in nearby pacified regions, and their posture towards Finland, it is safe to assume their intentions were similar. The Finns knew what they had to look forward to if they fell victim to the iron hand of Stalin, and the soviet propensity for subjugation was already legendary.
The Russian military was vastly superior to Finland’s in every way a common tactician would deem important. They had far greater numbers, far better logistical capability, far better technology, etc, etc. Over 1 million troops, thousands of planes, thousands of tanks, versus Finland’s 32 antiquated tanks, 114 planes which were virtually useless against more modern weapons, and 340,000 men, most of whom were reservists rallied from surrounding farmlands. Finland had little to no logistical support from the West until the conflict was almost over, though FDR would later pay lip service to the event, “condemning” soviet actions while brokering deals with them behind the scenes. Russian military leadership boasted that the Finns would run at the sound of harsh words, let alone gun fire. The invasion would be a cakewalk.
The battle that followed would later be known as the “Winter War”; an unmitigated embarrassment for the Soviets, and a perfect example of a small but courageous indigenous guerrilla army repelling a technologically advanced foe.
To Fight, Or Pretend To Fight?
Fast forward about seven decades or so, and you will discover multiple countries around the globe, including the U.S., on the verge of the same centralized and collectivized socialist occupation that the Finnish faced in 1939. The only difference is that while their invasion came from without, our invasion arose from within. The specific methods may have changed, but the underlying face of tyranny remains the same.
In America, the only existing organization of people with the slightest chance of disrupting and defeating the march towards totalitarianism is what we often refer to as the “Liberty Movement”; a large collection of activist and survival groups tied together by the inexorable principles of freedom, natural law, and constitutionalism. The size of this movement is difficult to gauge, but its social and political presence is now too large to be ignored. We are prevalent enough to present a threat, and prevalent enough to be attacked, and that is all that matters. That said, though we are beginning to understand the truly vital nature of our role in America’s path, and find solidarity in the inherent values of liberty that support our core, when it comes to solutions to the dilemma of globalization and elitism, we are sharply divided.
While most activist movements suffer from a complete lack of solutions to the problems they claim to recognize, constitutional conservatives tend to have TOO MANY conceptual solutions to the ailments of the world. Many of these solutions rely upon unrealistic assumptions and methods that avoid certain inevitable outcomes. Such strategies center mostly on the concepts of “non-aggression” or pacifism idealized and romanticized by proponents of Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, and the anti-war movements of the 1960’s and 1970’s. The post-baby boomer generations in particular have grown up with an incessant bombardment of the “higher nature” of non-violence as a cure-all for every conceivable cultural ailment.
We have been taught since childhood that fighting solves nothing, but is this really true?
I can understand the allure of the philosophy. After all, physical confrontation is mentally and emotionally terrifying to anyone who is not used to experiencing it. The average “reasonable” person goes far out of their way on every occasion to avoid it. Most of the activists that I have met personally who deride the use of force against tyrannical government have never actually been in an outright confrontation of any kind in their lives, or if they have, it ended in a failure that scarred them. They have never trained for the eventuality. Many of them have never owned a firearm. The focus of their existence has been to hide from pain, rather than overcome their fears to achieve something greater.
There is nothing necessarily wrong with becoming an “intellectual warrior”, unless that person lives under the fantasy that this alone will be enough to defeat the kind of evil we face today.
Non-aggression methods rely on very specific circumstances in order to be effective. Most of all, they rely on a system of government that is forced to at least PRETEND as if it cares what the masses think of it. Gandhi’s Indian Independence Movement, for example, only witnessed noticeable success because the British government at that time was required to present a semblance of dignity and rule of law. But what happens if a particular tyranny reaches a point where the facade of benevolence disappears? What happens when the establishment turns to the use of the purge as a tool for consolidation? What happens when the mask comes completely off?
How many logical arguments or digital stashes of ethereal Bitcoins will it take to save one’s life or one’s freedom then?
Arguments For And Against Violent Action
The position against the use of “violence” (or self defense) to obstruct corrupt systems depends on three basic debate points:
1) Violence only feeds the system and makes it stronger.
2) We need a “majority” movement in order to be successful.
3) The system is too technologically powerful – to fight it through force of arms is “futile”, and our chances are slim to none.
First, violence does indeed feed the system, if it is driven by mindless retribution rather than strategic self defense. This is why despotic governments often resort to false flag events; the engineering of terrorist actions blamed on scapegoats creates fear within the unaware portions of the population, which generates public support for further erosion of freedoms. However, there is such a thing as diminishing returns when it comes to the “reach, teach, and inspire” method.
The escalation of totalitarianism will eventually overtake the speed at which the movement can awaken the masses, if it has not done so already. There will come a time, probably sooner rather than later, when outreach will no longer be effective, and self defense will have to take precedence, even if that means subsections of the public will be shocked and disturbed by it. The sad fact is, the faster we wake people up, the faster the establishment will degrade social stability and destroy constitutional liberties. A physical fight is inevitable exactly because they MAKE it inevitable. Worrying about staying in the good graces of the general populace or getting honest representatives elected is, at a certain point, meaningless. I find it rather foolish to presume that Americans over the next decade or two or three have the time needed to somehow inoculate the system from within. In fact, I’m starting to doubt that strategy has any merit whatsoever.
Second, the idea that a movement needs a “majority” of public backing to shift the path of a society is an old wives tale. Ultimately, most people throughout history are nothing more than spectators in life, watching from the sidelines while smaller, ideologically dedicated groups battle for superiority. Global developments are decided by true believers; never by ineffectual gawkers. Some of these groups are honorable, and some of them are not so honorable. Almost all of them have been in the minority, yet they wield the power to change the destiny of the whole of the nation because most people do not participate in their own futures. They merely place their heads between their legs and wait for the storm to pass.
All revolutions begin in the minds and hearts of so-called “outsiders”. To expect any different is to deny the past, and to assume that a majority is needed to achieve change is to deny reality.
Third, I’m not sure why non-aggression champions see the argument of statistical chance as relevant. When all is said and done, the “odds” of success in any fight against oligarchy DO NOT MATTER. Either you fight, or you are enslaved. The question of victory is an afterthought.
Technological advantage, superior numbers, advanced training, all of these things pale in comparison to force of will, as the Finnish proved during the Winter War. Some battles during that conflict consisted of less than a hundred Finns versus tens-of-thousands of soviets. Yet, at the end of the war, the Russians lost 3500 tanks, 500 aircraft, and had sustained over 125,000 dead (official numbers). The Finns lost 25,000 men. For every dead Finn, the soviets lost at least five. This is the cold hard reality behind guerrilla and attrition warfare, and such tactics are not to be taken lightly.
Do we go to the Finnish and tell them that standing against a larger, more well armed foe is “futile”? Do we tell them that their knives and bolt action rifles are no match for tanks and fighter planes? And by extension, do we go to East Asia today and tell the Taliban that their 30 year old AK-47’s are no match for predator drones and cruise missiles? Obviously, victory in war is not as simple as having the biggest gun and only the uneducated believe otherwise.
The Virtues Of Violence
The word “violence” comes with numerous negative connotations. I believe this is due to the fact that in most cases violence is used by the worst of men to get what they want from the weak. Meeting violence with violence, though, is often the only way to stop such abuses from continuing.
At Alt-Market, we tend to discuss measures of non-participation (not non-aggression) because all resistance requires self-sustainability. Americans cannot fight the criminal establishment if they rely on the criminal establishment. Independence is more about providing one’s own necessities than it is about pulling a trigger. But, we have no illusions about what it will take to keep the independence that we build. This is where many conceptual solutions are severely lacking.
If the system refuses to let you walk away, what do you do? If the tyrants would rather make the public suffer than admit that your social or economic methodology is better for all, how do you remove them? When faced with a cabal of psychopaths with deluded aspirations of godhood, what amount of reason will convince them to step down from their thrones?
I’m sorry to say, but these questions are only answered with violence.
The Liberty Movement doesn’t need to agree on the “usefulness” of physical action because it is coming regardless. The only things left to discern are when and how. Make no mistake, one day each and every one of us will be faced with a choice – to fight, or to throw our hands in the air and pray they don’t shoot us anyway. I certainly can’t speak for the rest of the movement, but in my opinion only those who truly believe in liberty will stand with rifle in hand when that time comes. A freedom fighter is measured by how much of himself he is willing to sacrifice, and how much of his humanity he holds onto in the process. Fear, death, discomfort; none of this matters. There is no conundrum. There is no uncertainty. There are only the chains of self-defeat, or the determination of the gun. The sooner we all embrace this simple fact, the sooner we can move on and deal with the dark problem before us.
As I was watching the Schiff Sh_t Show yesterday, I realized that the cavalry is not coming to save the day. Really, there is no political solution to the problems that our elected officials have created and maintained.
The initial question to all of these “witnesses” should have been:
Dear Sir or Madam: Do you have any knowledge that Donald Trump committed a crime?
Then the Republicans will come back when the next witness is summoned to testify.
They would then all walk out of the hearing. Seriously, the Republicans’ questions at this hearing are pathetic. I have to wonder if they are actually supporting the impeachment and just putting on a show.
The premise is Donald Trump will be the last Republican President due to the successful strategy of radical immigration policies to dilute the white voting populace. I doubt that I need to elaborate its details since the open borders’ policy is their main weapon. Its side effect is just as insidious: any criticism of this racist policy invokes the racist label.
I must hand it to the other side. This plan is ingenious and is being implemented even more successfully in Europe. Time is not on our side.
So if the premise is true, then the best outcome will be Trump is reelected in 2020 and that is the end of Capitalism in the country in 2024. We will then become a Communist nation under the control of “Democrats” in January 2025.
The question to consider is what would happen between 2020 and 2024 if Trump is reelected? If the original premise is true, it will only postpone the inevitable and give the Communists four more years to solidify and strengthen their power.
I personally face problems head on. I know that hoping something will go away if I ignore it is a flawed philosophy. Which then raises another question: why delude ourselves that four more years will help our side win the impending civil war?
Roger Stone has been convicted on all 7 counts of lying to the federal government about the Wikileaks leaks which exposed some of the lies and deceptions of the Democrats.
In a society that is largely run by liars, crooks, bureaucratic frauds and political cheats, the establishment has targeted Roger Stone with a criminal prosecution that, in any truly just society, should have been directed at Hillary Clinton, James Comey, John Brennan, Andrew McCabe and even Barack Obama himself.
Leftists are celebrating today, along with Chris Wallace of Fox News who is laughing hysterically at the announcement of Roger Stone’s conviction. Yet what we are really watching is the tipping point of tyranny, where the deep state can target an individual, gag their speech, throw them into a rigged trial run by a deep state judge, subject them to a deep state jury composed almost entirely of anti-Trump D.C. operatives, and find them “guilty” of a non-crime crime while the truly guilty go free.
Justice is dead in America. The courts are rigged, the judges are corrupt, the “journalists” are all run by the CIA and the fake news media is complicit in a criminal coup against the President of the United States of America.
We the People cannot allow this grave injustice to continue. This long train of abuses must be answered and halted.
Prepare for chaos, because that’s what America now faces as the deep state has made it clear they will imprison or kill all who threaten the Democrats or the deep state, which is all really the same thing.
Nice Tweet Trump…. Now do something about it…. Go ahead…. We’ll be waiting and watching.
Former ambassador Yovanovitch has perjured herself in today’s testimony when she denied dictating a list of companies and people which could not be prosecuted to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuri Lutsenko:
Soon after this speech, Lutsenko struck back, suggesting the U.S. ambassador was really the corrupt one. On March 20, he spoke to Hill TV and claimed that Yovanovitch had given him a list of people not to prosecute.
Listening to her testify today is like reading Atlas Shrugged: how do you feel about “Orange Man Bad”. Facts be damned. The Constitution be damned. The power of the Executive branch be damned. While Adam Schiff’s motives have been exposed, Yovanovitch’s role in overthrowing the Ukrainian government in 2014 with the State Department, Civil Society 2.0 and George Soros has been exposed.
As we continue to see, we live in a two-tiered justice system in which the other side is winning. I am tired of losing to evil. I am tired of people believing that they have representation in the halls of government. I am tired of being a wage slave to fund our domestic enemies. I “feel” that I am not alone.
So I presented this video yesterday without comment,“There’s gonna be a civil war” pro-Trump supporters talk tough on impeachment
It took off like crazy, with a wide range of comments. Yet these two articles, Quigley’s Greatest Con and Must Read: Trump Impeachment And The Civil War Scenario with a different point of view barely scratched the surface?
The comment section is a mixed view of both sides of this argument.
Let me ask you a couple of questions. Do you not think the left knows what the likely consequences of impeaching Trump are? Is it stopping them?
I believe the Democrats and the Deep State want this choas. They want us fighting. But why?
I’m not sure what to make of Trump. Is he part of the Deep State? I don’t know. I like to believe in the good of all man. But I look past his words and into what he is actually doing.
Trump has given many fantastic speeches, yet not much has been followed thru.
People are going to say, well he is just one man, and he has no help. You have to support him, he is the only thing standing in the way.
I like many of you wanted to believe that Trump was going to restore the Republic. It’s been three years now. Doesn’t appear that it’s going to happen.
There are many and I am one of them, who believes we would be morally justified to take the necessary action needed against this Government. Ok so you don’t want us to go to war over Trump, fine. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Anyone want to dispute that we aren’t long past this point? Are we just going to wait until they go for the guns? Is that the final straw? Is that the point of no return?
Is it that the timing just isn’t right? Or the environment just isn’t right? Afraid of being persecuted? I think many of us are willing and able to act, and would be justified in doing so, are we just waiting for the environment to get ripe to where it would make a difference? What if we wait until we don’t have a fighting chance? Or are we looking for that catalyst. Something that sets everything in motion?
When was the last time any of you have read the Declaration of Independence? I believe our Founding Fathers would be ashamed of us right now.
These Deep Staters, these Globalists, these Communists, they must destroy the United States to try to install this one World dream of theirs. Look I think Trump is either real and trying to do the things he said he would do, but is being stonewalled by the Deep State, or he has fooled us all and is working for the Deep State/Globalist. I’m leaning more towards he has fooled us all and we are watching Pro Wrestling at it’s finest.
So let’s quit focusing on Trump? Let’s focus on why would we be justified in Declaring Independence from this Government.
Ahh that’s crazy talk you say. Why? Why is it? What happens if we do nothing? I refuse to live as a slave which is what these fools in charge view us as.
I’ve often asked what keeps us from coming together in this Liberty movement? I wish I knew. I fear as long as everyone is fat,happy and entertained, nothing will change. When the pain comes, I fear it will be too late to act.
Thank you for always engaging in conversation here at NCRenegade. I look forward to your thoughts.
I won’t beat around the bush. All of the hate-mongering against Donald Trump in Washington, D.C., is nothing more than public theater—and that includes Trump’s forthcoming impeachment. It is all public theater. Nothing more. In fact, the more opposition Trump receives, the more popular he becomes. And that’s the whole purpose.
Donald Trump is not an outsider. He is not anti-establishment. He is not anti-globalist. He is the globalists’ perfect con on the American people. He tells them what they want to hear but in reality changes nothing of importance to the establishment elite. But Trump makes everybody think he’s changing things. Like I said, Trump is the globalists’ perfect con.
Carrol Quigley, a former professor from Georgetown University and author of the book “Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in our Time” is quoted as saying the American political system should give the impression that there are two parties working against one another when in truth, they are pursuing the exact same policies. It should also be noted that Quigley was one of Bill Clinton’s professors.
The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies… is a foolish idea. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies. (Quigley, 1966)
The Trump v The Left theatrics—including Trump’s impeachment—is without a doubt Quigley’s greatest con.
Paul Craig Roberts
As the media are all out to get Trump, there is no way to get any valid information about the so-called impeachment. But you don’t have to pay too much attention to notice that the Democrats and the presstitutes are constantly changing the focus. The alleged whistleblower, who only had hearsay information, if that, has dropped out of the picture, being too compromised by his affliations and prior meetings with Adam Schiff during which the “whistleblowing” was planned as an attack on Trump.
The Democrats and presstitutes then shifted focus to state department types who also heard second hand from “staff” about the alleged conversation containing a quid pro quo, a claim unsupported by the transcript of the telephone call or by the President of Ukraine. So now a new alleged phone call has emerged, or been invented. The acting ambassador to Ukraine, William Taylor, a sleazy State Department type, today (Nov. 13) testified that a member of his staff heard Trump in another telephone call asking Sondland about the Ukraine investigation of the Bidens. This second-hand information is described by the presstitute media as a “bombshell.” God help us. It is nothing of the sort. But the presstitutes will repeat it until it is.
A person has to wonder how many members of staffs are permitted to listen to telephone conversations between heads of state. In my day it was zero.
What I want to know, and what we all should want to know, is why are the Democrats serving up hearsay information? Why aren’t the staffers themselves who allegedly heard the conversations on the stand testifying? The testimony should come under oath from those who allegedly heard the conversations. Are the House Democrats going to impeach the President of the United States on second-hand hearsay information?
As for the investigation of the Bidens and their payoffs for blocking Ukraine’s investigation of the corruption in Burisma, the Ukrainian company that hired the protection of Biden, Trump doesn’t need to ask for it in exchange for $1 billion. Ukrainian officials have released the records. http://www.stationgossip.com/2019/11/ukrainian-officials-release-records-of.html The presstitutes have not reported the release. Don’t expect the whores to report any true facts. They are incapable of it.
Burisma holdings paid Hunter Biden $3,166,000 for protection according to the records released by Ukraine. More importantly, the information released by Ukraine, according to the report, revealed that Burisma pressured the corrupt Obama State Department to intervene to end the Ukrainian investigation of Burisma for corruption. This is precisely what the Obama regime did. Joe Biden forced the firing of the Ukrainian prosecutor by giving the President of Ukraine 6 hours to fire the prosecutor, thus ending the investigation, or forfeiting $1 billion.
We all need to ask ourselves why it is Trump who is under investigation and not Biden and Obama. We already know the reason. The American media is corrupt beyond the meaning of the word. The Democrats are the most corrupt political party on the face of the earth. And the military/security complex intends to deep-six Donald Trump for threatening their budget and power by normalizing relations with Russia.
If Trump goes down, America goes with him.
Most of the world will say, “Good Riddance.”
As for the Republicans, they will not choose Trump over the campaign contributions and protection of the military/security complex. Where is Trump’s attorney general Barr? Where are the Justice Department reports of the investigations of the felonies committed by the FBI and Obama’s Justice (sic) Department in the Russiagate hoax? Hasn’t Trump noticed that his own Justice (sic) Department has hung him out to dry? Indictments for the Russiagate felonies would blow the Democrats’ impeachment of Trump out of the water. Where are the indictments? The felonies have been known without doubt for a long time. A number of former US Attorneys and Assistant US Attorneys have described the felonies committed by the Russiagate hoax in detail.
Trump’s Justice (sic) Department is going to sell him out, and democracy in America will be the casualty.
Neither political party wants the profitable swamp drained.