Majorityrights News > Category: Russian Politics

Audio of Part 3

Hitler and Nazism were Not White Nationalism, Part 3

Thus we have established a first principle of this discourse, a positive tautology that the World Wars are history, the people of today are not to blame and should not be subject to the collective punishment of losing their peoplehood and corresponding nations.

There is a second principle that we will invoke at this point, one which the internet has provided for in spades, but which White Nationalists have not utilized to anything like its full potential.

That is correctability, the correctability of ideas and understanding through interactive participation, whether through comments or speaking directly to people and engaging correction.

To date, what has been imposed as if correction, has largely been World War II revisionism - which tends to be dishonest excuses and apologetics for Nazi imperialism where not outright recitation of Nazi propaganda that could be falsified rather easily if they cared to do it.

Misrepresentation and omissions of important facts can remain if would-be interlocutors are not of good faith, don’t really want to pursue the truth, though Nazi apologetics usually claim the truth as their mission.

On the other hand, taking interactive correctability for granted and expecting the voices of correction to chime-in has left me susceptible to allow oversights to linger, because many would-be WN, who’ve accepted the rightist identity and its own political correctness will not say “boo” and alert me to oversights, especially when calling attention to these matters will call negative attention and shoot holes in their pro-Hitler/Nazi position.

Graudenz, Kulm, Thorn and Bromberg, a would-be occlusive salient. To the south of those cities, Poznan and Gniezno are the cradle of Polish nationhood.

There is a third and ancillary tautology to be invoked which is that for whatever grievances that either side had of the times, they were more than made up for.

We will apply this as a third tautological principle then, after ‘it’s history and nobody had anything to do with it’, and after correctability, that is, the tautology that for whatever complaints of the time, “they more than made up for it in retaliation.”

We will take a critical perspective on grievances and injustices alleged by the Nazi apologists, such as allegations made against Polish nationals and partisans, since those allegations have tended to go uncorrected within the philoNazistic PC of so called White Nationalism.

But we need to circle back to our second principle at this point, which is interactive correctability and the fact that so called WN has not been acting in good faith to call matters to attention, especially when they would reflect badly on Nazi Germany.

In previous discussions of Hitler’s complaints over where Versailles borders were drawn, I have made the claim that there were really only three cities of significance lost by Germany - Poznan, Bromberg and Thorn and one made neutral, Danzig (made neutral, not Polish, as in something the Poles could unilaterally return to Germany as misinformed Hitler apologists often claim they should have); and there were some village areas in the corridor and near the Versailles established border where Germans were caught in Polish territory, and we must add that there were Poles caught in German territory. But though Danzig was at the time occupied by Germans, it was a historically disputed city and a strategic city for all concerned, thus justifiably deemed neutral by Versailles. Cities to the south of the corridor, such as Poznan, Gniezno and Leszno, should not have been considered anything remotely but Polish.

While it is true that in previous discussions of this issue I had neglected to mention two cities of significance in the Polish corridor which were inhabited by Germans, Graudenz and Kulm , known in Polish as Grudziądz and Chelmno, it does not change the thesis.

First of all, circling to principle three (mis-spoke; it is “principle two”, correctability that is invoked here) again, that the comment section has been open and feedback of good will is expected to correct oversights such as that.

More fundamentally, these cities being under German political jurisdiction would only extend the salient that would be formed by Bromberg and Torun to obstruct and potentially occlude crucial strategic and economic sea access for Poland.

In addition, Graudenz and Klum were formed of brutal Teutonic and Prussian imperialism on cities that were originally Polish.

Finally, it is a history that only provides more examples of the enormous toll that the Nazis took against impositions of Polish patriotism in these areas; invoking principle three, that they more than made up for it.

Thus, it is no wonder that the Hitler redemptionists didn’t particularly care to take me up on my open offer to correct whatever prior oversights of mine…

No, the Hitler redemptionists, in their claim to be after the truth of history, tend to begin history at or about World War I. And of course, Germany was a sheer victim of the rest of the world, from the Schiff’s backing of the Trotskies, to the Balfour Declaration to the Treaty of Versailles.  But really, to do enthnonationalism justice, we need to go further back in history…

Dinant

The Necessary War

With correction of prior failure to discuss Graudenz and Kulm - now added to surrounding discussion…

As European(White) Nationalists, we all know that the wake of the World Wars has not birthed favorable circumstances for our people. Thus, we are decidedly less satisfied than Max Hastings that a marked separatism from Jewish power and influence was not achieved, its necessity not even understood; and along with that that a pervasive liberalism should have won-out as consequence, potentially auguring the final chapter for Europeans in entirety.

But was it “hubris” for Poland to want its nation back? I rather think not. It’s called ethno-nationalism and it is that which we should support as opposed to internationalism. Germany was still huge after Versailles. On the Polish border, it had lost Posen, Bromberg and Thorn and I need to add Graudenz and Kulm *, while Danzig became neutral. The Max Hastings account introduces yet more discussion of Versailles to make it more understandable as an effort at justice, as it always appeared when looking at the territorial divisions. However, there have been a couple of parties who want me to run strong anti-Polish propaganda.

The large problem with that is that for those of us who view White Nationalist media as our veritable news source now (finding other, anti-White media wholly intolerable), a hypotrophied unanimity with Nazism and its antecedent regime’s military campaigns is what we get: for whatever reasons, but probably because America is so German- American that a “by-golly, Hitler was absolutely right!” perspective is all too convenient (and the most popular and economically supported of any WN perspective) in the wake of Jewish and Neo-liberal destruction; and all the more motivated with guilt trips of World War II being most pressing upon them; their having least perspective on anything but a direct desire to throw guilt trips off as entire fabrication: nuances of perspective and history are cast aside, and ultimately, the unfortunate difficulty they have in seeing our family relations and the more relative and complex justice of the circumstance seeds potential inter-European conflict, if not war. Seeds sown oblivious to the fact that we do not care to lay guilt trips upon them, certainly not subsequent generations, though they go ahead and try to lay guilt trips upon us for events before our fathers lives even. Just as they want it understood that they and their forefathers were not ex-nihilo evil, but had reasons for their wars, so too those of “Allied” descent wish to claim the same.

Yes, there were corrupt forces manipulating the circumstances, but there were also justly reasoned motives. The circumstances were a great deal more complicated and justified from an Allied perspective than The Hitler contingent of WN will ever admit. That’s a problem if you want to treat WN as your media. Because Nazi Germany and Kaiser Germany were not pure and sheer victims, as the salient contingent of WN wish to claim. But so long as their childish and Jewish style of argumentation is what is being served in WN discourse, I am left no choice but to balance things off in the service of truth. There are several sites out there for those who want to take a “Hitler only good everyone else bad” perspective. You will not hear that the German regimes did have choices: Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian and other Nationalisms, even the British, of course, could have been aligned, willing and able to fight Soviet incursions (had done so already in some instances).

Until there are other, or more, WN sites which care for the truth and represent events in the context of their nuance and balance, I must continue to highlight discussions such as that from Max Hastings. In fact, there is much there that one would never hear and learn about if the now standard WN position on several sites - “Germany’s war efforts only good, their people only victims” -  were the only perspective heard; and there is a great deal of intimidation that it be the only perspective heard in WN, to the point where the opposite of PC is in effect, to where it is a veritable taboo to say anything negative about Nazi Germany and its predecessors and anything good about the Allies and their predecessors. In truth, of course, there are many things for Germans to be proud of, and some things to not be so proud of. For some reason, that is too complex a fact for some to cope with. Those of us who are sick of that childish unanimity might find Max Hastings discussion refreshing and informative.

There are thoughts on responsibility in World War I which echo very much that of WWII. Thoughts on Versailles foreign to WN discourse. And of course the great taboo in WN, to suggest that a German military could have done anything worth resisting. It was of course noble to burn the library of Leuven (they just had to do that, didn’t they?); to do whatever I am not allowed to speak about to Belgian civilians there, in Dinant and elsewhere, to French and other civilians; in Kalisz as well. No, Germany was always a perfect nation, nobody can say otherwise; if you want to blame anybody, conveniently blame Poland as Hitler and Goebbels suggested, or as Frederick the Great might have proposed of his then vanquished neighbor.

A remiss to not mention Graudenz and Kulm not only for my part but also conveniently “uncorrected” by the Hitler redemptionists in commentary here; probably as it would open a can of worms surrounding these two cities that they’d rather not to go into - though I will go into it in parts three and four of the audio, “Hitler was Not WN.” A remiss for my part to not go into these cities as yet, but not changing the fundamental thesis of The Treaty of Versailles’ reasoning. On the contrary.

The “father of Polish Nationalism” and staunch anti-Semite, Dmowski felt Piłsudski’s pragmatism was naive. They became rivals, but prior to that Dmowski had good things to say about Piłsudski: “He was always the brave boy, son of mother patriotism, dreamer of the liberation of his homeland (...) (...) p. Pilsudski, the intelligent and noble man, and above all a very good Pole” said Roman Dmowski about Piłsudski in 1903.

Polish patriot and military man extraordinaire, with initiatives ranging from the cunning Bezdany train robbery to fund the Polish revolution, to the spectacular victory over the Soviet army at Warsaw, to the audacious re-take of Poznan and surroundings from the Germans in the Greater Poland Uprising.

While it is true that in previous discussions of this issue I had neglected to mention these two cities of significance in the Polish corridor - cities that were inhabited by Germans, Graudzen and Kulm, known in Polish as Grudiaz and Chelmno - this does not change the thesis.

First of all, the comment section has been open and feedback of good will is expected to correct oversights such as that. And how convenient that Hitler redemptionists would not go into matters surrounding these cities.

Further, these cities being German would only extend the salient that would be formed by Bromberg and Torun to obstruct and potentially occlude crucial strategic and economic sea access for Poland.

In addition, Graudzen and Kulm were formed of brutal Tuetonic and Prussian imperialism upon already extant settlements that were originally Polish.

And finally, investigation into the dispute over these cities only reveals yet more examples of the enormous toll that the Nazis took in retaliation to imposition of Polish patriotism in these areas. It’s no wonder that the Hitler redemptionists were less than ardent, didn’t particularly care to take me up on my open offer to correct whatever oversights of mine…

Part 2 Audio, Hitler was NOT White or any kind of ethnonationalist - and text:

Hitler was Not White Nationalist Part 2. Audio now online.

To commence, we will indicate some of the issues, adding to these issues in the series to come where issues emerge relevant beyond mere detail to be fleshed out and given argumentative support. That is to say, we anticipate an ongoing corrective process.

As we must go into the history, the other side, the side which is subject to a right wing political correctness of its own, needs to be addressed - this quote, alternative media, that sees a niche market in the largest by far White demographics of America - German/Irish - and panders to the fact that they are going to be more susceptible to positive spins on Hitler and Nazi Germany. It is to counter this pandering, that it is necessary to take a corrective postion from an ethnonational standpoint, that does not look upon Hitler and the Nazis as innocent and only acting in accordance to what they should be rightfully entitled.

The map drawn by Versailles and the contentions raised by Hitler are central issues to redress thereupon.

Hermeneutic, that is to say, additional historical perspective is necessary to assess the situation and related contentions over the borders set by The Treaty of Versailles and maintained by The Treaty of Saint Germain in the case of the Sudetenland..

And why should the Allies trust the Nazis, why should they sympathize with their claims and why should they not be aggrieved with what happened in WWI? and in prior Prussian / Austrian expansion?

Contra Allied grievances, Hitler’s mindset of Friedrich The Great 2.0 is key.

Ostensibly justifying excuses were used for his imperial aspirations as such, chief among others, an epistemic blunder failing to assess socially corrective human nature in praxis, taking rather a sheer might makes right naturalistic fallacy, that humans are bound sheerly to struggle in nature’s way; a will to power set in motion in this case by false allegations of mass persecution of German civilians and false threat to the German nation to provide pretext for Imperialist and supremacist expansion Eastward.

His defenders frequently lob the straw man that he was being accused of wanting to take over the whole world, when in fact, he did want Europe eastward up to the Urals, which is way more than bad enough considering he was using the guise of his sheer necessity to fight communism; and when, in fact, all nations between Russia and Germany were anti-Soviet.

Of course these nations weren’t perfect either and yes, the Nazis had a number of things correct, in the quote, N/S idea; and it’s nevertheless understandable how people could get wrapped up and go for broke; but it didn’t work and there was much fundamentally wrong about it, it wasn’t just that the Allies were corrupt, that defending Nazi Germany is bad optics for the “normies”, nothing fundamentally wrong other than that the “normies are not ready to quote, “understand” - nevertheless, it’s history now, and we can learn from it.

It might also be said of some people on the Allied side, that they can learn too - for example, like many of us since those times, we’ve projected our own reasonableness onto the YKW as a group - we thought, as our Allied forebears might have thought, that the YKW would be ok if we were ok to them - they’d be fair and deserved a chance. How many of you grew up aware of the J.Q.? Well, now the YKW have had their chance and we are aware that we need to be in separate governance.

WN has a pretty good feel of that now, but not so much representation of views apart from what is for it, a politically correct Nazi sympathetic perspective and the false either or thereof YKW or Hitler 88.

With that said.  Here are some of the topics we are going to address and more:

As we already mentioned, We will be taking a look at historical events which have been distorted by Nazi propaganda.

Events such as the Bromberg “quote bloody Sunday” incident, the Polish/ Slovak border train station take-over by the Poles, the false so called “peace offers” from Hitler to Britain and Poland and why it was valid for the Allies to reject them.

The claim that Hitler only wanted peace with the neighboring Slavic countries, and only wished to get back lands taken from Germany, where a majority of Germans where then living under non-German governments. And so on.

We will also debunk the claims that Hitler and the Nazis were ok with the Slavic peoples and did not see them as subhumans with less right to life.

We will address the Nazi ideology of imperialism, immoral racism and the concept of “might is right” contra healthy nationalism, ethnopluralistic morality and what we view as the right kind of racism.

(Richard McCullochs racial compact and moral racism: http://www.racialcompact.com/ )

We will address the issue of who has had a worse influence in promoting a false, positive idea of the Nazi regime to Americans after the war - George Lincoln Rockwell or William Luther Pierce?

And a great deal more.

Interesting that if one so much as intimates the slightest defense of Poland (e.g., against chauvinism and imperialism) that you will project your mindless German chauvinism (a troll commentor had said that I am a “mindless Polish chauvinist” and that is why MR is unpopular); with a reactionary part of a large demographic under more direct pressure of PC lies, thus going with the pretense that it cares for sheer truth by reaction - it is backed by Jewry as the third default position:

1) Sheer liberalism is their preferred position for Whites (direct betrayal of Whites and White atomization).

2) Christianity as it places Whites mindlessly under the yoke of Abrahamic law (the golden rule is mindless; the gentiles are not ethnicity organized as such).

3) Failing that, they will encourage Nazism - the clear chauvinism - as they know it will repulse most normal people and lead to antagonism among Whites where not otherwise sending us headlong into disaster. ..perhaps take care of some ‘traitorous’ Jews all too intermarried with Germans, Poles, other ‘goyim.’

4) Failing that they will encourage sundry and motley no-account, right wing reactions that help to atomize would-be White organization and coordination:

a) No account scientism and objectivism for the higher I.Q.

b) Conspiracy theories; and ideologies beyond reality and verification for the less intelligent;
or to cover that part of their intelligence that isn’t (lacks judgment).

I am not lonely, but your bubble that appears as camaraderie is based on illusion and lies; along with (((marketing))) of tropes and memes in YKW interest.

Enabling some stupid dude like yourself to absurdly accuse me of “mindless Polish chauvinism”, if I defend ethnonationalism.

Nor am I a chauvinist of any kind. I’m ethnonationalist, defending ethnonationalism of all kinds, but the European kind and its coordination to begin with.

Nazism is the clear imperialist supremacism, programmatic of disaster. And scientism - viz., scientistic reaction - is the mindlessness that lets it be guided headlong to disaster. Get with the reality of praxis instead, get with the ethnonational program.

J.F. Gariepy: “One of the major historians of World War II” Thomas Goodrich: “From what I’ve read..

..from what I’ve read it was a virtual massacre of German residents living in areas under Polish control.”

J.F. Gariepy: “Alright, so that would be quite shocking.”    Thomas Goodrich: “Or maybe”...

The real question is why recycled Nazi propaganda has any sort of currency today and why it should have any credibility beyond your typical Internet lunatic fringe.

For the answer, return to the top of the page and read again (further orienting clue, it’s part and parcel of the YKW’s interest in having Whites identify with right wing reaction).

The Times of Israel, 5 Oct 2018:

In rare criticism, Russian chief rabbi blasts supply of S-300 missiles to Syria.

Berel Lazar calls Russia’s decision to give advanced air defense system to Assad regime a ‘mistake,’
says he’s talked to Putin about it.

File photo of Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) lights up a candle watched by Russia’s chief Rabbi Berl Lazar during a ceremony in Moscow’s Jewish community center.REUTERS/Viktor Korotayev

The chief rabbi of Russia said that Moscow’s decision to give Syria advanced anti-aircraft missiles is a “mistake,” offering a rare rebuke of his country’s defense policy.

Berel Lazar, of the Chabad Hasidic movement, made his remarks Thursday at a conference organized by the Limmud FSU cultural group in Sighet, Romania.

Russia is giving Syria the S-300 system following the downing last month of a Russian intelligence gathering aircraft by Syrian forces responding to an Israeli strike over Syrian airspace.

Russia has blamed Israel for the incident, which killed 15 Russian soldiers.

“I think it’s a mistake that will only augment the region’s problems,” Lazar, who meets regularly with Russian President Vladimir Putin, told the Israeli journalist Eli Mandelbaum about the missile transfer.

Screen capture from video showing the delivery of Russian S-300 air defense missiles to Syria. (YouTube)

Lazar’s group, the Federation of Jewish Communities in Russia, often speaks out against expressions of anti-Semitism in Russia and aspects of Russia’s policy concerning Israel, including its voting in 2017 in favor of a UN resolution that ignores Jerusalem’s significance to Jews.

But Lazar, who has said he opposes excessive involvement by Jewish community leaders in Russian politics, has seldom criticized Russia publicly over its bilateral relations with Israel on subjects devoid of a religious dimension.

The rabbi, a native of Italy who became a Russian citizen in 2000, went on to say that he and his organization “speak about [the S-300 issue] with the president,” referencing Putin. “We explain, I’d say, the sensitivity of this issue to our brethren in Israel, in Zion, and we hope Israel and Russia can continue to cooperate in stopping terrorism, stopping Iran, and that Israel will continue to guard its borders and neutralize any threat before it reaches its doorstep.”

Israel and its allies for years have lobbied Russia not to give Syria and other regional players the S-300 system, arguing that it would limit Israel’s ability to neutralize terrorist threats, including by the Lebanon-based group Hezbollah.

Several hundred people attended the event in Sighet, which is the birthplace of Elie Wiesel, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Holocaust survivor who died in 2016. In August, Romanian police arrested a 37-year-old man whom they suspect wrote anti-Semitic slogans on Wiesel’s childhood home.

READ MORE...

In this photo July 21, 2016, photo, then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, right, watches with then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Manafort’s chief deputy Rick Gates, left, as Ivanka Trump rehearses for the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

New York Times, “Rick Gates Sought Online Manipulation Plans From Israeli Intelligence Firm for Trump Campaign”, 8 October 2018:

WASHINGTON — A top Trump campaign official requested proposals in 2016 from an Israeli company to create fake online identities, to use social media manipulation and to gather intelligence to help defeat Republican primary race opponents and Hillary Clinton, according to interviews and copies of the proposals.

The Trump campaign’s interest in the work began as Russians were escalating their effort to aid Donald J. Trump. Though the Israeli company’s pitches were narrower than Moscow’s interference campaign and appear unconnected, the documents show that a senior Trump aide saw promise in a disruption effort to swing voters in Mr. Trump’s favor.

The campaign official, Rick Gates, sought one proposal to use bogus personas to target and sway 5,000 delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention by attacking Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Mr. Trump’s main opponent at the time. Another proposal describes opposition research and “complementary intelligence activities” about Mrs. Clinton and people close to her, according to copies of the proposals obtained by The New York Times and interviews with four people involved in creating the documents.

Documents from Psy-Group laying out its proposals for the Trump campaign.

A third proposal by the company, Psy-Group, which is staffed by former Israeli intelligence operatives, sketched out a monthslong plan to help Mr. Trump by using social media to help expose or amplify division among rival campaigns and factions. The proposals, part of what Psy-Group called “Project Rome,” used code names to identify the players — Mr. Trump was “Lion” and Mrs. Clinton was “Forest.” Mr. Cruz, who Trump campaign officials feared might lead a revolt over the Republican presidential nomination, was “Bear.”

[An Israeli company drew up digital manipulation proposals for a Trump campaign aide. Read them here.]

READ MORE...

During the Syrian Civil War, millions of Syrians fled to Europe and other places as refugees. Now it seems that Syria wants them back after a powerful speech by Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid Moualem at the recent UN General Assembly.

Speaking on Saturday (29th September), Moualem, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister, thanked the countries which have taken in the refugees, but said it was time for them to come back home, as the Syrian Civil War is now practically finished.

“The government continues to rehabilitate the areas destroyed by terrorists, to restore normalcy,” he told the meeting. “All conditions are now present for the voluntary return of Syrian refugees to the country, the country they had to leave because of terrorism and the unilateral economic measures that targeted their daily lives and their livelihoods.

True enough, thousands of Syrian refugees abroad have started their journey back home.

From this podium I would like to stress the following - the return of each and every Syrian refugee is a priority for the Syrian state. All doors are wide open for All Syrians abroad to return voluntarily and safely…

Thanks to the help of Russia, the Syrian government will spare no effort to facilitate the return of refugees and meet their basic needs. Therefore a special committee was recently established to coordinate the return of refugees to their places of origin in Syria, and to help them regain their lives once again.”

Moualem also criticised the uncooperative attitude of some of the Western countries to which the refugees fled, and accused them of trying to prevent the refugees returning to their homelands.

  “We have called upon the international community and humanitarian organisations to facilitate these returns. However, some Western countries, in line with their dishonest behaviour since the start of the war in Syria, continue to prevent the return of refugees. They are spreading irrational fears among refugees. They are politicising what should be a purely humanitarian issue, using refugees as a bargaining ship to serve their political agenda and linking the return of refugees to the political process.”

Source, TradNews

Related at Majorityrights:
Bashar Al-Assad, a proper Left Nationalist, a socially conscientious man.

Mueller Documents: Manafort Conspired With Israeli Official To Influence Obama’s Ukraine Policy

Inquisitor, 14 Sept 2018:

According to the document, Manafort and an unnamed senior Israeli official conspired to tarnish the reputation of Yulia Tymoshenko by accusing her of anti-semitism.

In 2012, while working as a lobbyist for the pro-Russian government of Ukraine, Paul Manafort conspired with a senior Israeli official to pressure Barack Obama’s administration to disavow Ukraine’s then-opposition leader, Yulia Tymoshenko, Haaretz reports.

The Manafort-Israel-Russia connection appears on the pages of the plea deal signed between Donald Trump’s former campaign manager and Robert Mueller’s office. The following is stated in the document.

“Manafort sought to undermine United States support for Tymoshenko. He orchestrated a scheme to have, as he wrote in a contemporaneous communication, ‘Obama Jews’ put pressure on the [Obama] administration to disavow Tymoshenko.”

According to the document, Manafort and an unnamed senior Israeli official conspired to tarnish the reputation of Yulia Tymoshenko by accusing her of anti-semitism.

Manafort and the Israeli official’s strategy was simple. The two men authored a written statement, slandering Tymoshenko. Manafort then spread the story to U.S. media.

“I have someone putting it in the New York Post. Bada bing bada boom,” he wrote to one of his associates.

“The Jewish community will take this out on Obama on Election Day if he does nothing,” Manafort told an associate, according to the document, implying that his goal was to pressure Barack Obama’s administration into acting against Tymoshenko, Manafort client’s biggest rival at the time.

By accusing Tymoshenko of anti-semitism, with the help of his Israeli co-conspirator, Manafort planned on spreading the story to American media. Eventually, it would reach the American Jewish community (“Obama Jews,” as Manafort put it), which would then pressure Obama to work in the favor of Manafort’s client.

According to Haaretz, Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s then-foreign minister could be the mysterious Israeli official mentioned in the document. In October, 2012, Lieberman published a statement viciously attacking political rivals of Manafort’s pro-Russian client. Ukrainian elections were held on October 28, 2012.

“Israel condemns anti-Semitism in all its forms, and expresses hope that common sense will prevail,” the statement read.

If Avigdor Lieberman is indeed the mysterious Israeli official mentioned in court documents, his and Manafort’s tactic worked, at least to an extent, considering the fact that various American media outlets published his statement, including Breitbart and the New York Times.

Avigdor Lieberman is currently the Defense Minister of Israel. Today, Lieberman denied ever meeting with, speaking to, or working with Paul Manafort.

Manafort weaponized antisemitism with ‘senior Israeli official’ in Ukraine lobbying scheme

https://t.co/W75z6Conqx

— The Jerusalem Post (@Jerusalem_Post) September 14, 2018

According to the Jerusalem Post, along with Manafort’s deep ties to Ukraine’s pro-Russia politicians, political influence campaigns directed by other states, such as Israel, through Manafort, are also attracting Robert Mueller’s attention.

The Jerusalem Post, too, noted that Avigdor Lieberman appears to be the unnamed Israeli official mentioned in court documents.

These developments may come as a surprise to the American public, but some intellectuals have warned that other foreign powers, along with Russia, have meddled in U.S. elections multiple times.

As the Inquisitr previously reported, renowned linguist Noam Chomsky recently argued — without denying Russian election interference — that Israel meddles in U.S. internal affairs “openly, brazenly and with enormous support.”

Manafort weaponized antisemitism with ‘senior Israeli official’ in Ukraine lobbying scheme

Jerusalem Post, “Muller: Manafort used ‘Obama’s Jews’ to smear Ukrainian leader”, 14 Sept 2018:

Israeli Defense Minister Liberman seems to be implicated in the affair.

Paul Manafort tried to use misleading charges of antisemitism against a senior Obama administration official to pressure the former president to go soft on his Ukrainian client, Viktor Yanukovych, in 2012, according to documents released on Friday by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office.

New “superseding” criminal information was released this morning as part of a plea agreement reached between Manafort, Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman who faced charges for lobbying law violations, and Mueller, the special prosecutor investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Manafort has already been convicted on several counts of federal bank and tax fraud brought by the special counsel.

Mueller describes a scheme by Manafort to manipulate “Obama’s Jews”– in Manafort’s own words– to pressure the administration to disavow Yanukovych’s political archrival, Yulia Tymoshenko, by highlighting her alleged ties to antisemitic groups and spreading stories that an Obama “Cabinet official” supporting her cause was antisemitic by proxy.

Manafort “coordinated with a senior Israeli government official” to publicize the story, Mueller charged, seeking to convince the administration that “the Jewish community will take this out on Obama in the [2012 presidential] election if he does nothing.” The Israeli official is not named.

According to archived articles from the time, the cabinet official referenced in the Mueller documents appears to be then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton, and the Israeli official appears to be Avigdor Liberman, then minister of foreign affairs.

He then fed claims to Obama officials that Yanukovych was working to quell the manicured crisis, hoping to ingratiate him with the administration.

Manafort’s deep ties to Ukraine’s pro-Russia figures, paired with his prominent role in Trump’s presidential campaign, has drawn Mueller’s attention as he investigates whether US persons coordinated with Moscow to influence the 2016 race.