zionaUSea retch

Zionazi Stretch

Preet Bharara @PreetBharara  42m 42 minutes ago

Enjoying a lovely lunch with @billbrowder, talking some justice, talking some Russia. We should all be glad for his courage in speaking up.zionaUSea retch

— -

translation: Talking #justUS with "private equity", hedgefunding super-max putchUSt$ has gotta be a zionauseoUS thrill, plus some extra  pocket change.

--- ---

Until now, though I had relatively little knowledge about Preet Bharara, I did not suspect Bharara to be either Zionist or Zionist apologist, and the following two excerpts would seem to at least to peripherally support reason to believe that:

 -Marc Kasowitz, President Donald Trump's personal lawyer in the Russia investigation, has boasted to friends and colleagues that he played a central role in the firing of Preet Bharara

 -Kasowitz’s law firm, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres and Friedman, has been a go-to source for ...– and one of its partners, David Friedman, currently serves as the president’s ambassador to Israel.

Now, since zionaUSea has its purveyors and its victims, it's not easy to see that Bharara is one who views militant zionism (ala Israel) to be immoral, criminal, genocidalist ideology and practice.

 -- --

'''The US Congress rushed in the Magnitsky Act, the first salvo of the Cold War Two. By this act, any Russian person could be found responsible for Mr Magnitsky’s untimely death and for misappropriation of Browder’s assets. His properties could be seized, bank accounts frozen – without any legal process or representation. This act upset the Russians, who allegedly had kept a cool $500 billion in the Western banks, so tit for tat started, and it goes to this very day.

The actual effect of the Magnitsky Act was minimal: some twenty million dollars frozen and a few dozen not-very-important people were barred from visiting the US. Its psychological effect was much greater: the Russian elite realised that they could lose their money and houses anytime – not in godless Putin’s Russia, but in the free West, where they had preferred to look for refuge (ala Trump empire). The Magnitsky Act paved the road to the Cyprus confiscation of Russian deposits, to post-Crimean sanctions and to a full-fledged Cold War.

This was painful for Russia, as the first adolescent disillusionment in its love affair with the West, and rather healthy, in my view. A spot of cold war (very cold, plenty of ice please) is good for ordinary people, while its opposite, a Russian-American (oligarchial) alliance, is good for the elites. The worst times for ordinary Russian people were 1988-2001, when Russians were in love with the US. The oligarchs stole everything there was to steal and sold it to the West for pennies. They bought villas in Florida while Russia fell apart. That was bad time for everybody: the US invaded Panama and Afghanistan unopposed, Iraq was sanctioned to death, Yugoslavia was bombed and broken to pieces.

As the Cold War came back, some normalcy was restored: the Russians stopped the US from (completely) destroying Syria, and Russian officials learned to love Sochi instead of Miami. For this reason alone, Browder can be counted as a part of the power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good. The Russian government, however, did not enjoy the cold shower.

The Russians denied any wrongdoing or even political reasons for dealing with Browder. They say Magnitsky was not a lawyer, just an auditor and a tax code expert. They say that he was arrested and tried for his tax avoidance schemes, and he died of natural causes while in jail. Nobody listened to them, until they demanded that Browder testify under oath. He refused. ... '''

---

''' The Magnitsky Hoax?

Who stole all the money?  ...

 Nekrasov believes there was indeed a huge fraud related to Russian taxes but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, the accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme used to carry out the deception.

To be sure, Browder and his international legal team have presented documents in the case that contradict much of what Nekrasov has presented in his film. But in my experience as an intelligence officer I have learned that documents are easily forged, altered, or destroyed so considerable care must be exercised in discovering the provenance and authenticity of the evidence being provided. It is not clear that that has been the case.

Given the adversarial positions staked out, either Browder or Nekrasov is essentially right, though one should not rule out a combination of greater or lesser malfeasance coming from both sides. But certainly Browder should be confronted more intensively on the nature of his business activities while in Russia and not given a free pass because he is saying things about Russia and Putin that fit neatly into a Washington establishment profile. As soon as folks named McCain, Cardin and Lieberman jump on a cause it should be time to step back a bit and reflect on what the consequences of proposed action might be.

One should ask why anyone who has a great deal to gain by having a certain narrative accepted should be completely and unquestionably trusted, the venerable Cui bono? standard. And then there is a certain evasiveness on the part of Browder. The film shows him huffing and puffing to explain himself at times and he has avoided being served with subpoenas on allegations connected to the Magnitsky fraud that are making their way through American courts. In one case he can be seen on YouTube running away from a server, somewhat unusual behavior if he has nothing to hide.

A number of Congressmen and staffers were invited to the showing of the Nekrasov documentary at the Newseum but it is not clear if any of them actually bothered to attend, demonstrating once again how America’s legislature operates inside a bubble of willful ignorance of its own making. Nor was the event reported in the local “newspaper of record” the Washington Post, which has been consistently hostile to Russia on its editorial and news pages.

A serious effort that a friend of mine described as “hell breaking loose” was also made to disrupt the question and answer session that followed the viewing of the film, with a handful of clearly coordinated hecklers interrupting and making it impossible for others to speak. The organized intruders, who may have gained entry using invitations that were sent to congressmen, suggested that someone at least consider this game being played out to have very high stakes.

The point is that neither Nekrasov nor Browder should be taken at their word. Either or both might be lying and the motivation to make mischief is very high if even a portion of the stolen $230 million is still floating around and available. And by the same measure, no Congressman or even the President should trust the established narrative, particularly if they persist in their hypocritical conceit that global human rights are best judged from Washington. They should in particular hesitate if they are considering tying policy towards Russia based on a presumption of guilt on the part of Moscow without really knowing what actually did occur. That could well be a decision that will bring with it tragic consequences. --http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-magnitsky-hoax/#p_1_20:1-77

--

The Browder affair is a heady upper-class Jewish cocktail of money, spies, politicians and international crime.

Views: 45

Comments are closed for this blog post

Comment by moki ikom on August 31, 2017 at 1:41pm

'''

... The death became a Western cause célèbre with Magnitsky, the accountant for hedge-fund executive William Bro..., hailed as a martyr in the cause of whistleblowing against a profoundly corrupt Russian government. After Magnitsky’s death from a heart attack, Browder claimed that his “lawyer” Magnitsky had been tortured and murdered to cover up official complicity in a $230 million tax-fraud scheme involving companies ostensibly under Browder’s control.

Because of Browder’s wealth and political influence, he succeeded in getting the European Parliament and the U.S. Congress to buy into his narrative and move to punish the presumed villains in the tax fraud and in Magnitsky’s death. The U.S.-enacted Magnitsky Act in 2012 was an opening salvo in what has become a new Cold War between Washington and Moscow.

The death became a Western cause célèbre with Magnitsky, the accountant for hedge-fund executive William Browder, hailed as a martyr in the cause of whistleblowing against a profoundly corrupt Russian government. After Magnitsky’s death from a heart attack, Browder claimed that his “lawyer” Magnitsky had been tortured and murdered to cover up official complicity in a $230 million tax-fraud scheme involving companies ostensibly under Browder’s control.

Because of Browder’s wealth and political influence, he succeeded in getting the European Parliament and the U.S. Congress to buy into his narrative and move to punish the presumed villains in the tax fraud and in Magnitsky’s death. The U.S.-enacted Magnitsky Act in 2012 was an opening salvo in what has become a new Cold War between Washington and Moscow.

Only One Side Heard

The Magnitsky narrative has now become so engrained in Western geopolitical mythology that the storyline apparently can no longer be questioned or challenged. The New York Times reports Browder’s narrative as flat fact, and The Washington Post took pleasure in denouncing a 2016 documentary that turned Browder’s version of events on its head. ...''' --https://www.truthdig.com/articles/remembering-hillary-clinton-teams...

- - -

- - -

It's funny in a sick way that the pro-Browder mentality prefers to indulge in the fantasy of calling Mr. Magnitsky a lawyer. May he RIP even though "he was just an (corrupted?) accountant, not a lawyer", the latter for whom the West, esp. in u.s., holds in higher esteem than a professional accountant.  Besides Congress is full of lawyers who are necessarily more sympathetic to other lawyers than to accountants. 

Comment by moki ikom on August 31, 2017 at 3:46pm

''' Browder is the poster boy for what is wrong with US attitudes towards Russia. Since being unceremoniously booted out of Russia several years ago, the previous hedge fund manager has dedicated his life to mounting blistering attacks on Putin's Russia, leading many observers to speculate that he works for the CIA.  Who else would bother with these theatrics?  Russian television made a whole show discussing the possibility. ... ''' -- http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/watch-bill-browder-heap-scorn...

'''  (Browder the) grandson of the NKVD spy / US communist leader turning into an uber-capitalist, an accountant organizing tax evasion schemes turning into a corruption-fighting attorney, investigators turning into the embodiment of Al Capone – all that is just too many metamorphoses for my liking. The only undisputed winner that emerged after all the twists and turns is Browder. He earned himself a name, a heap of money and a lot of free advertising. After the EU Parliament’s decision, the possibility of Interpol issuing an international arrest warrant on him is zero. On top of everything, he keeps harming Russia’s reputation without even trying very hard, and there’s a chance that the Russian authorities will have to start negotiating with him. And he will ends up earning even more money. Congratulations, Bill; well played.

The saddest part of this story is the uncanny ability of the Russian government to shoot itself in the foot from any position.  I mean, how hard is to hire some callow student to put together a lucid presentation of the investigators’ stand in English? How many billions has Russia lost, just because some honest investor read Browder’s unchallenged blaring and vowed never to invest a single penny in Russia? How much longer will any Russian investigation be maligned by the fact that the policemen drive a car worth more than their 10-year salary? How come millions of dollars just disappear from the budget, never to be found, while some talented doctor is pulling a night shift for a respectable $300 a month? Those are the questions I don’t know the answer to. Does anyone?”  ''' -- http://ow.ly/kJ0a30ePrIY

Comment by moki ikom on August 31, 2017 at 5:15pm

‘’’ One of Browder’s first jobs in London is with the investment operation of the publishing billionaire Robert Maxwell. As it happens, Maxwell was originally a Czech Jewish Holocaust survivor who fled and became a decorated British soldier, then helped in 1948 to set up the secret arms supply line to newly independent Israel from communist Czechoslovakia. He was also rumored to be a longtime Mossad agent. But you learn none of that from Browder’s memoir.

The silence is particularly striking because when Browder launches his own fund, he hires a former Israeli Mossad agent, Ariel, to set up his security operation, manned mainly by Israelis. Over time, Browder and Ariel become close. How did that connection come about? Was it through Maxwell? Wherever it started, the origin would add to the story. Why not tell it?

When Browder sets up his own fund, Hermitage Capital Management his first investor is Beny Steinmetz, the Israeli diamond billionaire. Browder tells how Steinmetz introduced him to the Lebanese-Brazilian Jewish banking billionaire Edmond Safra, who invests and becomes not just a partner but also a mentor and friend.

Safra is also internationally renowned as the dean of Sephardi Jewish philanthropy; the main backer of Israel’s Shas* party, the Sephardi Torah Guardians, and of New York’s Holocaust memorial museum, and a megadonor to Yeshiva University, Hebrew University, the Weizmann Institute and much more. Browder must have known all that. Considering the closeness of the two, it’s surprising that none of it gets mentioned.

It’s possible that Browder’s reticence about his Jewish  connections is simply another instance of the inarticulateness that seizes so many American Jews when they try to address their Jewishness. It’s a topic they don’t much think about. ‘’’ —

http://forward.com/news/376788/the-secret-jewish-history-of-donald-...

 *  Shas has opposed the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Comment by moki ikom on September 1, 2017 at 8:34pm

Were I a passionate zionist idealist -since I could not ever be a passionate, necessarily vested zionist practioner, profiteer- I think I could find more than a few reasonably arguable bits floating in points I tried to above relate. Not complaining so much as blandly amused.

NEW BLOG POSTS

American Zionazi

Posted by moki ikom on October 17, 2017 at 10:30pm 0 Comments

Addiction; Opioids and The News

Posted by Rodney Roe on October 17, 2017 at 6:22pm 0 Comments

A Tale of Two Cities in Texas

Posted by Doc Vega on October 17, 2017 at 2:47pm 1 Comment

Not Blood and Soil

Posted by alsoknownas on October 17, 2017 at 1:30pm 4 Comments

Found on Twitter

Posted by Robert Young on October 17, 2017 at 6:17am 2 Comments

What About Ze Jews, Mein Kampf?

Posted by cheshyre on October 16, 2017 at 8:56pm 8 Comments

© 2017   Created by lorianne.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service