Trump’s UK Visit.

Standard

After influencers have been agitating for months, urging people to go out in the streets to show their hate for the US President, we now see the result! Thank you so much for putting a strain on our law enforcement personnel while advocating for total unrest all over the country. *Insert Sarcasm * I urge any person who might read my blog and follow me to stay safe. I send out my love to the British police today, who are constantly given impossible and difficult tasks to deal with.

This is how they will be accommodated as they try to protect those who protest: Terrible treatment of the UK Police.

The U.S. Embassy is telling Americans to keep a low profile during Trump’s visit. Stay Safe!

 

Some Interesting Articles To Read.

Standard

“Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan, 57, told an interviewer from Milan’s Il Giornale last week that “the phenomenon of so-called “immigration” represents an orchestrated and long-prepared plan by international powers to radically change the Christian and national identities of the European peoples.” (READ THE ARTICLE HERE)

This is the conclusion I’ve reached as well by simply looking at the placement of certain population groups within all of Europe’s Nations. It is obvious that it is a long term de-stabilisation plan by people who hate us to no end. 

I will let other people compile potential enemy lists over who could possibly be guilty… It’s not like people aren’t compiling these kind of lists already….

…some theories are more popular than others…..and will continue to gain ground by the hour I’m sure…….

(I’m personally not a big fan of conspiracy theories. I find a great number of them troubling, for the simple reason that it might make sense, but then it doesn’t if the accused group stand to lose. All I see are people who will lose in the end when reading or hearing of popular narratives of conspiracy. What would make sense would be to think broader, or maybe I overestimate people. In fact I’m suspecting that that might be the case. If I’m guilty of over-thinking then Europe & America are standing face to face with a threat that is shooting itself in the foot.)

With the current culture war and student movements on both sides of the Atlantic, not to forget the underground “scene” of self-taught individuals on the opposite political spectrum who openly blog or hack while being in “stealth mode,” I’m sure that boats will be rocked and alignments change, whether it is for the better or for the worst.

Loyalties might swiftly change and old narratives of friendship might suddenly be forgotten.

Leaders such as Sebastian Kurz & Matteo Salvini, not to forget “freedom fighters” such as the imprisoned Tommy Robinson are the kind of types that will salvage the mothership that is Europe. If they fail we will see the uprising of what their critics accuse them of being, “the great evil” that the mainstream media think they see in U.S. President Donald J.Trump. If the U.S.A. and Europe are not salvaged politically, there will be an attempt to do so from the bottom up. That is a given. There will always be those who refuse to give up. I predict that the situation in America will become especially dire in the years to come, unless the culture issue and the demographic issue is solved. 

So where does this strange self-destructive attitude we can observe in The Western World come from? Is it possible to manufacture Ethno-masochism? Well apparently yes…

Don’t expect that these type of initiatives won’t backfire though.

They do and they will. If your people win a fight, whether culturally, demographically or out on the battlefield, then you ought to remember how you won, because your enemies surely will!

And those who are clever will study closely, h-o-w y-o-u w-o-n!

The problem with Western culture today, is that we are neither equipped to deal with victory nor defeat. Or that is the aim of political correctness. The aim is clearly to pacify people and ensure that the fight or the battle is lost before it even starts.

The goal is obviously to have a Nation caving in on itself, self-annihilating, with the one institution falling after the other like domino bricks, and an angry populace wondering what the heck is going on, eventually resulting in violence in the streets and disorder, so that enemy elements placed within the Nation can initiate their part while their partners come in from the outside.

You have to be mean (by today standards) to win. People are inherently mean and people will be mean, even those who normally aren’t, the question is rather, can you be mean in a clever fashion without your operation backfiring either on you or your children?

That is the question and that is a good one indeed, all things considered.

From Africa Digest

 

I don’t really follow “trade wars” or “tariff wars” and find this quote to be interesting:

“The Commerce Department is currently investigating whether foreign auto imports pose a risk to national security.”

You can read more here: Germany Willing To Cut Tariffs.

Here is a genuine Russia collusion. I remember reading somewhere, sometime, somehow, about Russia providing energy to Eastern European Nations and using this politically, funny enough I didn’t catch that Western European Nations were in on it too… Maybe they should get their power from Norway instead 😛 Funny how everyone is spinning the Russia narrative as far as the U.S. is concerned when Europeans are blatantly dealing massively with the official “eternal-bad-guy-Putin.” Remember; everything is always Russia’s fault. Hilarious. I also recall that I read in a French newspaper, somewhere, sometime, somehow, that the then French President had lots of interests (or maybe it was France Inc.) in Iraq due to business dealings with Saddam, so their opposition to the war was not so much humanitarian as it was money related. Funny enough this story was confirmed when I read something else concerning the Iraq war….It is always interesting to figure out what drives people’s “official concern.” Lately I’ve been wondering why American celebrities don’t starve themselves for all of those kids who’ve been separated from their parents in inner-city America, but then again, I guess you have to come from anywhere but America for Hollywood to bother…..

Whether you dislike or like the current U.S. President I strongly recommend reading this: “Trump – The Art Of The Deal” by Donald J.Trump & Tony Schwartz.

Here is a most intriguing article from The New York Times: The New York Times Praising Donald J.Trump – before he ran for office.

Here are some selected quotes from the article, published in 1984….

“Donald J. Trump is the man of the hour.” – The New York Times.

“He deserves full credit for his success,’ says another builder.”

“Mayor Koch says that, indeed, what is good for Donald Trump is often good for New York.”

“To others, the notion that Mr. Trump seems to be able to do just about anything he sets his mind to is terrifying.”

“Roy M. Cohn, Mr. Trump’s friend and attorney, adds: ‘He has an uncanny sense of knowing that something is a good deal when it looks dismal to everyone else.”

“That Mr. Trump was able to obtain the location, when every real-estate developer in the world would have done just about anything to get it, is testimony to Donald Trump’s persistence and to his skills as a negotiator.” (my highlighting).

“He is an almost unbelievable negotiator,’ says Irving Fischer of HRH Construction. ‘I don’t worship at the shrine of Donald Trump,’ he says, ‘but our company has given up trying to negotiate costs with him. We just say: ‘Tell us what you want, you’re going to get it anyway.”

“He says that his concern for nuclear holocaust is not one that popped into his mind during any recent made-of-television movie. He says that it has been troubling him since his uncle, a nuclear physicist, began talking to him about it 15 years ago.”

“When he finally speaks up, he says hat he is on the commission because the young men who went to Vietnam got a bad deal – which, about the worst thing that can happen to anyone.”

“The day before he has sent $3,000 to an unfortunate family he has red about in the newspaper, something he does frequently, according to Mrs. Foerderer.”

“That Mr. Trump builds shops and apartments for the world’s wealthiest people makes him that much more prone to attack.”

“If you go with Donald to see an art collection, he’s not that interested. He’d rather look out the windows at building.”

“His wife describes him as an all-American boy who likes country music best and prefers a steak and aked potato to anything called cuisine.”

“Mrs. Trump says they like to attend Broadway openings an that they frequent the ballet and opera. Mrs. Trump is active in support of the United Cerebral Palsy Fund and other charities, as well as the New York City Opera. She is also an active supporter of Ronald Reagan.”

“He has dificulty now figuring out who his real friends are, as billionaires will.”

The White House Chief of Staff made waves online after untangling an American flag: “Once A Marine, Always A Marine.”

I enjoyed this article written by Steve Hilton until he wrote this:

“But we have to recognize that the melting pot is cracking. Years of uncontrolled immigration – and a creeping acceptance of separatism, boosted by identity politics – risk importing the disastrous doctrine of “multiculturalism” that is prevalent in Europe.”

The U.S.A. has been a multi-racial construct, arguably since the very beginning, with absolute “separatism,” before the federal government made segregation “illegal.” I say illegal, since people now self-segregate, which roughly means that the “melting-pot” never really worked on a street level. What I recognise in Europe is imported American multiculturalism, so I’m not sure which planet Hilton is living on… I find it annoying to see such lies in digital “print.”

Radical “multiculturalism” is a relatively new phenomenon in Europe. There is a reason as to why Europe never became Muslim and there is also a reason as to why we are so very pale……One foreigner now and then doesn’t really make much of a difference, but importing hordes of people will ruin the peace and comprise the integrity of your Nation.

It is especially dangerous if you mass import young men, who are in their “peak aggression” age.

Multiculturalism never really works, regardless of where in the world people try it, it always results in “separatism” and can only be held together by a rough, police state. It always results in fragmentation. Mixing on a large-scale only happens as a result of unhinged violence, where the men of one tribe are killed off and their women raped.

Inter-Ethnic diversity is a challenge great enough.

Anyone who welcomes anything else is culturally and demographically suicidal. Nothing less.

People = culture.

People = behaviour patterns on average.

There is no such thing as “magic soil.” Period.

If you mass import people from Uganda into Norway, then you’ll get Uganda in Norway.

If you mass import Arabs into France, then you’ll get an Arab Nation in the middle of Europe.

If you mass import Chinese people into Canada, you’ll get China Inc. in Canada.

If you mass import people from Latino countries into the U.S.A, then the culture, the practises, the voting patterns and whatnot will be coloured by this.

Apparently it is very difficult to follow this kind of logic………

Any person who does not understand demographics should be banned from public service.  It is that dangerous to play around with. An increase in violence and division is a given….

 

Having A Raison D’être & An End Game – The Impression One Can Get.

Standard

When reading about the Iraq war last year I was stunned to see the willingness to sacrifice the integrity of Europe on the altar of momentary territorial access needed in order to get into Iraq.

“Plan Of Attack” by Bob Woodward.

“Decision Points” by George W. Bush.

I was further mystified by the fact that 4-star Army General (ret.) Colin Powell came across as the one lone voice of reason, since he tried to raise awareness of tribalism and ethnic diversity in the targeted area.

The reading certainly gave me the impression that humans are simply being seen as replaceable cogs in the machinery by the establishment.

Culture and ethnicity simply doesn’t matter, it is all about momentary victory, without any overarching solid narrative selling a clearly defined End Game, that will be reached by many separate actions all serving the same underlying objective.

This is a startling realisation.

When reading “The Art Of War” I was surprised about what sort of advice it contained. Prolonged warfare with no end in sight is depicted as one of the worst projects that a Nation can ever engage in. A group that engages in warfare also have to ensure that they have access to an efficient supply line, taking advantage of whatever resources the group can get their hands on as they expand into a territory. A war effort should be swift and precise, without too much meddling from sovereigns located far away. The people who are on the ground need to be able to do what is necessary to reach their goal in a completely mobilised way, to the extent that this is possible.

All of this certainly made me question the sort of warfare that people my age have grown accustomed to. All of our Nations’ war efforts seem concentrated in “alien territories,” fighting and training “aliens” that might turn on the West later, and all of our Nations’ major war efforts seemingly drag out for ever…

No proper end game that logically makes sense is ever presented to the public and when getting an insight into the world of those who run these things, it doesn’t really seem like these characters know what the deal is either (unless a battle ground is simply needed in order to train soldiers and test new equipment).

Warriors & Citizens – American Views of Our Military edited by Kori Schake & Jim Mattis.

A parallel can be drawn to hacker activists, who don’t seem too concerned with allies. They’ll attack an enemy of the West one day only to target Western political and military structures the next, potentially jeopardising the integrity and safety of a Nation State or its military operations.

When reading about community organisers you see this pattern of behaviour once again.  A lot of left-wing activism simply cancels itself out, since the only common denominator seems to be emotionalism. Due to this you’ll get contradicting agitation and advocacy that will leave someone like myself slightly confused, as there is no End Game in sight anywhere.

If you look at Islamic agitation in Europe it is very easy to understand what their End Game and overarching goal is. They engage in demographic expansionism into Europe, which gradually gives them a political advantage. Wealthy Muslim power-players buy themselves into Western Corporations which gives them cultural influence and leverage. Street-level Muslims carve out their own territories and then defend these. Mosques are erected further cementing a claim to a specific territory boosting confidence, while a romanticized fantasy of Islamic Imperialism, appealing to people’s sense of identity and innate penchant for ancestry-worship, is promoted. Of course, as always, not all. But you don’t need every member of a specific group to behave in this particular fashion for it to have its desired effect. My impression of European Islamification is that there is a long-term vision, coupled with a willingness to commit to certain behaviours, in order to eventually reach a clearly defined outcome: Nation States that become compatible in their policies and in their cultures with the Muslim faith, preferably paving the way for a new “Golden-Age.” Of course it is of importance to point out the ethnic and racial diversity within Islam, and that there are numerous conflicting denominations within the faith as well. As an example: we can now clearly observe, imported tribal disagreements and feuds, in Europe, in addition to all of our own inter-ethnic issues that we had from before….

Inter-ethnic dissonance is very prevalent in Africa; which is generally referred to as the most diverse continent on the surface of the earth.

So what can be said of the West? What is our End Game? What can be observed and what conclusions can be drawn? 

What would make sense, instinctively,  would be to have common ancestry as the glue holding Europe together. Race has become way more inclusive than what it used to be, since we now largely see Race as something observable, while ethnic groups give us what has become our European Nation States, with its specific cultures and characteristics.  Back in the day these used to be chopped up into various tribes that probably displayed a lot of similar traits to one another, hence our generalisation regarding population groups contained within the boundaries of the modern Nation State: an extended family sharing common ancestry and a similar distribution of genetic traits on average.

It would make sense if our Nation States in Europe concerned themselves with the protection of our shared and individual cultural heritage, doing everything to ensure the survival and majority status of white children (and mixed whites) in the only territory that actually belongs a 100% to whites, protecting our continent’s borders and integrity.

A strong unified Europe and more broadly speaking, a strong unified West with the more multi-racial configurations found within territories conquered by whites, would in theory make sense.

Is this an End Game for what is collectively known as The West though? No.

This would be a racist objective. It would insinuate that Ethnic-Europeans have a natural claim to a specific territory and that conquest is a legitimate way to establish a Nation, which is what a white presence in all other territories other than Europe is a result of. (To my knowledge … It certainly looks that way when observing strange geographic settlements by Whites and the presence of dark-skinned indigenous groups).

The prevalent mythos championed in the West is this:

  1. that all other groups are minorities, even if Europe looks very small when compared to other continents, and we are outnumbered globally speaking.
  2. That the magic soil theory is truth, meaning that you’ll automatically become  Swedish by simply breathing the air in Sweden.
  3. That all human beings are born equal due to a blank slate, and that genetics simply don’t exist.
  4. That talking about genetics and genuine diversity is dangerous because that will instantly turn you into Hitler and result in a new Holocaust.
  5. That it makes sense to celebrate white ethnic groups becoming minorities, after years of civil-rights battles in the U.S.A. to ensure equal opportunity regardless of skin colour, and after years of Whites trying to do good towards previously marginalised and abused non-white minority groups within their domains. Not to forget: the constant focus on the challenges faced by so-called (and genuine) minorities within traditionally White-majority constructs. None of this paints minority-status in an appealing light … yet we should do everything in our power to lay the groundwork for our own marginalisation…. which is particularly interesting when reading about the merciless brutality in other parts of the world perpetrated by non-white majorities…
  6. That previous white expansionism will just be forgotten, since Whites have decided to “play nice,” which means that we no longer have any enemies and don’t really need any borders….
  7. That only white ethnic groups can be guilty of racism and imperialistic activity.
  8. That white ethnic groups are not under any circumstance “indigenous” and that there will at no point be any need to give any white demographic the status of “protected group.”
  9. That race and/or ethnicity is only real and only counts if/when dealing with “indigenous people,” who can under no circumstance be white. These “indigenous” groups are also the only ones entitled to certain territories that have to be protected in order to ensure their survival.
  10. That charity is only needed in the 3rd world as it is probably your own fault if you are poor and hungry in the superior, egalitarian, socialist inspired constructs that make up the Western World.
  11. That you have to import workers from Africa and The Middle East, rather than employing individuals from territories closer to your own, or within your own continent.
  12. That mixing on a massive scale is always peaceful and not the result of violent demographic change or militant conquest.
  13. That re-writing history and engaging in gas-lighting on a National and/or Continental level is perfectly alright in order to salvage vanity projects initiated by international organisations, that might look good on paper and in theory; until inserting the human factor into the equation actually implementing the idea.

Ok. So this doesn’t look too promising. Then what about Christianity? This is multi-racial, multiethnic and global. It is way more inclusive and has been used as a unifying factor in Europe before…

The West has continuously acted as an enemy to Christian groups in the Middle East, facilitating genocidal persecution of genuine Christian minority tribes. Western governments not only promote the build-down of Christianity within Europe and all other territories under White influence, they actively side with Nations and regimes known for violent Christian persecution.

What about human-rights, enlightenment ideas, world peace and the “human race”?

Western governments have repeatedly sided with regimes guilty of outrageous human rights abuses, making themselves guilty of gross hypocrisy since human rights and the protection of humanity as a whole has become the main narrative and general raison d’être of Western groups.

Portraying oneself as a defender of the human race also becomes tricky as you cannot possible go out there and claim that population group A needs more protection and privileges than population group B as this would be racist and undermine universal rights. And how on earth can you even say population group A and B when race/ethnicity isn’t even real? You cannot say that religious group A is more guilty of persecution than religious group B, because why would religious group B be more righteous or in need of more protection than the other? Are you a bigot or what?

Who are you to say that Terrorists don’t have rights or don’t have a point, when you claim to be a defender of all of humanity? And how on earth do you even define a “War on Terror” or “Terrorists”? Any person or group could fall into this category when nothing is specified.

These kind of points can be spinned indefinitely putting The West in a situation where none of its actions can be seen as righteous and/or legitimate.

It opens up the door for a potential legal, moral and PR nightmare where The West and its natural inhabitants never win.

It also puts Western Nation states in a situation where an enemy cannot be clearly defined, at least not in public, due to important exotic alliances and potential diplomatic disasters. By relying on exotic alliances for abstract military operations, the West paints  itself into a corner, where they cannot kick out subversive elements within their own nations if these stem from their good “friends and allies.”

The West is forced into a position where it cannot really look after the interests of its own inhabitants, nor enforce the heritage and integrity of itself.

Not to forget that The West is put into an incredibly awkward situation when Western leaders cannot clearly formulate anything, if interested in maintaining good international relationships.

This results in cringe worthy narratives that leaves all of those who don’t just parrot our “modern shared values” confused and puzzled. What are we all about really? Does anyone know?

What about Capitalism then? A support for this must surely be a constant factor from The Americans at least? 

No. Think again. The U.S.A. is willing to tolerate oppressive communist regimes that in the long run pose a threat to the American experiment and their global influence, as long as the U.S.A. can gain from such an alliance in the short run.

So what is The End Game of The West? 

Strangely and worryingly enough there doesn’t seem to be one……(but I might be very wrong, after all, who knows what goes on behind the scenes…).

At best it can be argued that there are forces within The West championing stability trough whatever means by expanding the police state and surveillance of their own citizens. This though is worked against by leaders who don’t want to acknowledge the effects of demographic change. In addition it facilitates the very form of governance that Western Nations are outspokenly against, not to forget that the identity destruction currently happening in The Western world work against any conservation efforts intended to protect our cultural and ethnic inheritance, while simultaneously compromising stability and security; in short, all of it compromises the survival of those people who occupy the territories that we collectively refer to as The West.

 

“Trump – The Art Of The Deal” by Donald J.Trump & Tony Schwartz.

Standard

If there is one thing I never really read it is business books, in fact this is the 1st one I’ve ever completed.

The work was recommended to me by my mother who studied economics and is a life-long Trump fan. She had previously read “The Art Of The Deal” many years ago ( it was published in 1987) and bought it again after Trump’s election victory over in the U.S.A.

The work is very easy to read, but not in a dumb or condescending fashion. If you have a curious mind it will keep you occupied into the early morning hours. I finished the book in less than a day. Those who are searching for bigotry will find themselves disappointed as Trump mentions how he likes to hire women since they are so efficient and competent (to paraphrase), among other myth-busting statements. It is also highlighted that part of Trump Tower’s success is that they did not engage in “discrimination” towards potential buyers. Getting hold of an apartment in New York is described as being rather difficult, since you as a person have to be assessed before you’re allowed into “the club.”

The work is off to a strong, but overwhelmingly energetic start, following a typical work-week in Trump’s busy business life. His network is nothing short of impressive and is the first thing that stands out. He lifts up the phone and seem capable of reaching any decision maker in any multi million/billion dollar industry whenever he likes.

What he is depicted as doing comes across as very complex for sure, as he seems to be everywhere and involved with everything at any give time. It certainly sounds like a more cerebral activity than just repeating and focusing on one activity over and over, which is what artists and athletes do.

He displays great “cunning” in his autobiography which would have scored him lots of points with the Vikings or the Greeks. It is nothing short of staggering what one person can accomplish during a lifetime. Donald Trump’s legacy will ring out through the ages I’m sure, after first establishing a business empire, leaving many buildings after himself (in his name), even becoming president of the U.S.A. Movies will be made in due time, probably statues as well.

When talking about his childhood he describes a privileged background in comparison to most. He was groomed for the property business working along his father. It is also mentioned that his grandfather came from Sweden, which instantly made me wonder what Trump’s impression would be if he went over there and saw “Swedish conditions” for himself. A funny story is shared of how Trump built skyscrapers with Lego as a child.

It is of great interest that Trump the adult is depicted as brushing shoulders with the same sort of people who have now all of a sudden thrown him under the bus. My guess is that everybody wanted his money back then and to pose next to a successful, glamorous developer. Trump used to be pop (and still is with his supporters and fans), but was all of a sudden somewhat disowned by an entertainment industry and a media establishment now depicting him as retarded and evil. I’ve previously credited this to him simply being politically conservative.

Questioning the mental capacity of someone who’ve built a business empire, branding him as a “buffoon-reality-show-President,” is nothing short of hilarious. You cannot be an idiot and become successful in the line of work where Trump has made his name. His critics must see him as a threat (he criticises corruption  within the political establishment in New York in his book), he gets back at his haters (before Twitter-Trump, there was letter-writing-Trump), he was able to get back on his feet after bankruptcy, he has always (by judging from this book) called a spade a spade, he comes across as a real-life monopoly player with an unblemished background after numerous bureaucratic assessments and in addition he is the definition of a capitalist, and I guess that is the issue more than anything else. 

More worryingly for his enemies: he is described as engaging in economic “sieges,” certainly adding a militaristic flair to the Trump phenomenon. The business environment is obviously described as competitive and filled with jealousy, so you have that element as well. Maybe there are other businessmen out there who wish they had run for office themselves … there are probably many money-makers out there who wish they were Trump……

In the book he constantly talks about “the market;” it is because of his ability to read “the market” and see “the market,” that he wins. This of course clashes with people from proper old-money, or those who are more elitist in their taste and feel that the “masses” are dull, stupid, uninteresting, you name it. Donald J.Trump is all about understanding what and how to sell. That seldom goes along with arrogance or an outright refusal to “sell out.” He shares his admiration for other people who also cater to whatever “market” that is relevant for the line of work that they are in.

He describes how an artist friend of his makes lots of money by simply pouring paint over a canvass, making a mess, selling it as modern art;  which is a con-trick I’ve come across myself when I was introduced to an Asian female painter with three studios around the world who made her money by pouring paint unto canvasses, and folding and unfolding said canvasses. This was how she made her money, with eager buyers psychoanalyzing the emotional meaning behind her work…..

This “market” obsession is what a lot of “true” (or much better written: TRVE) artists and musicians turn away from in total disgust. If you choose to do proper classical crossover for example, there will be an understanding that this doesn’t hang as high as catering to the niche, elitist, market of “proper classical music.” Crossover acts sell more records, but that doesn’t really matter….

I also posses a certain snobbish flair when it comes to food and art (which I attribute to being European), but this is something that is only good in certain doses. I have myself turned down certain TV offers in the past, because I felt that appearing on such shows would hurt my brand; like it would taint me somehow. Such behaviour cannot be a constant factor though as you’ll never crossover into the mainstream in any sort of way, which I’ve thankfully done by being visible on some of the most mainstream TV-shows in my country of origin, yet even when I said yes to these things, I knew that there was a certain sense of “selling-out,” yet the opportunities seemed too fun and too good to turn down, and I was very right about that. I love doing TV.

I do know that great art a lot of times isn’t supported by “the market” but need “patronage” in order to survive. History proves this to be the case. People who really have “the attitude” though would scoff at “circus-entertainment,” or anything catering to the so-called “masses” such as a U.S. President eating burgers from McDonald’s. Capitalists such as Trump win financially because they seemingly don’t care about the snobs; offering apartments for sale in New York without discrimination, is a very good example, making a reality-show is another not to forget; bothering about the ordeals of so-called “commoners” like Annabel Hill; which paints the picture of a capitalist with a heart. And what can possibly beat strong leadership combined with compassion?

Even the story of Trump trying to kick out tenants who were paying ridiculously low rent as a result of “rent-control,” is an interesting case study, as these individuals who got a bargain and took advantage of the “system,” felt that they were being harassed when Trump’s people tried to run the building in accordance with the low rent they collected. This was seen as an act of harassment by the tenants. To quote Trump:

“If there’s one thing I’ve learned about the rich, it’s that they have a very low threshold for even the mildest discomfort.”

“It happens to be very easy to vacate a building if, like so many landlords, you don’t mind being a bad guy. When these landlords buy buildings they intend to vacate, they use corporate names that are difficult to trace. Then they hire thugs to come in with sledgehammers and smash up the boiler, rip out the stairways, and create floods by cutting holes in pipes. They import truckloads of junkies, prostitutes, and thieves and move them into vacant apartments to terrorize holdout tenants. That’s what I call harassment.” (This clearly illustrates “people used as weapons.” Which      can be compared to how migration is handled by some).

The scenario described illustrates once again how a privileged few, convinced other people not as fortunate as themselves, to gang up together to fight a common enemy whose defeat ultimately would have profited the tenants who had the biggest flats the most. Trump’s dislike of wealthy people taking advantage of rent-controlled apartments can also be a reason as to why some people strongly dislike the current President, since people aren’t too keen on separating with their perks. Many celebrities taking advantage of “rent-control” are mentioned within the book….

Trump ends up fantasizing about offering the homeless his vacant apartments in said condominium, so that snobbish New Yorkers can share their living space with the less-fortunate. He backs down from this idea after his lawyers warn that it will become almost impossible to remove rough sleepers to prepare the building for demolition if he first initiates such an endeavour.

I’m suspecting that I’ve hit the nail somewhat on its head when it comes to why show-biz people have turned their backs so violently on the current U.S.President. Messy, absent-minded, artsy types seem to have an innate disgust towards suit-wearing money-makers like the ones Trump describes in his book. I wonder if the mentality goes both ways as the world described by someone like Donald J. Trump starkly contrasts any music industry related book. There is a personality contrast (on average) I’m suspecting, which is probably why artists have a tendency of being outspokenly anti-corporate, even if benefitting from major corporations and patronage from such people. This “night and day” contrast with deadline averse, unorganised artists on one side, and a no bullshit, no time to waste, mentality on the opposite spectrum, might illustrate my point. Artists would ironically enough be able to relate to business guys struggling to get financing for unique and new ideas, but I guess there is no interest in finding common ground if you as an artist hate and fight “the system,” while business people (might) think of artists as annoying, ungrateful, weirdos, with a strange dress-sense.

There are a great number of artists out there who are openly communist and would cringe at the idea of having their music placed in an ad, for example. Rather than seeing this as a golden opportunity, there would be many who would be opposed to such a thing. Licensing music for use in commercials should be the dream of any musician; I personally do not understand the official anti-business stance of a lot of show-biz characters since you are starting a business anyway the moment that you are selling a service or a product. You can might as well think big and aim high.

The greatest comedy in entertainment is when radical artists are in the receiving end of proper corporate backing and feel clever since they feel like they are fighting the machine from within, using capitalist tools. The capitalists also feel clever since they are making a profit off approved opposition and dissent, getting rich off anti-establishment punks, who actually enrich the very institutions that they criticise… This sort of oddity can to a certain degree be witnessed by anti-gun celebrities who’ve made their names by being gun-wielding action heroes, or #MeToo male feminists in show-biz unmasked as sexual predators. A box that Donald J. Trump’s critics have tried their best to place him in. The second that “locker-room” talk from the current President could be used as a tool to remove him from the 2016 election, his critics edited out what they needed and jumped at the opportunity to use it, only to see him win in the end anyway. It is particularly telling that the ace up their sleeve now come in the form of a certain lame storm that passed many, many, years ago.

There is a Russia-link funny enough on pages. 26-27 and on page 364 … This book however was published in 1987 and I’m guessing that Trump travelling to the Soviet Union to scout for potential prospects with his first wife doesn’t count… I’m willing to bet that Trump’s critics haven’t bothered to read his book. They should. Maybe they’ll turn around.

When you read “The Art Of The Deal” you get an insight into those who run the world; in other words: those who know how to handle money, make good business deals and don’t want to waste time on bullshit. Trump even meets with a Cardinal.

Politics and the world of real estate are closely linked and certainly puts into question the myth of property-rights in the Western world. I’ve previously mentioned in my entry: “An Insight Into The State of A European Nation – Election in Norway/Valg i Norge 2017.,” how easily rights gets compromised when red-tape and bureaucracy infringes on what a person can do with his/her property. It contradicts freedom and liberty to have politicians interfere with how or what  you build on a piece of land that you’ve purchased, unless there is a concern for buildings of a historical value. If we are to have rights in the Western world, it would be good if these could be respected, if not they are merely a mirage….

Politicians are depicted as fishy weather-wanes in Trump’s book, obsessed with their own vanity, living in fear over any bad publicity since this can cost them votes. They are depicted as largely incompetent and untrustworthy.

I particularly enjoyed reading about “value engineering” and “quality control.” I’ve had a ridiculous amount of different addresses in my short life and know how sneaky landlords can be. They paint over blemishes and pretend like nothing, which is why it is crucial to hire a nosy “inspector” if you ever intended to rent, and especially buy something. More often than not you’ll find “fire traps” and/or “hazardous materials.” I would recommend people to smell the walls of their flats and/or houses, in order to detect any mould that has been painted over or any potential rot. It might make you look crazy, but at least you’ll know if someone is trying to be clever…

My favourite chapter was the one about the rebuilding of the Wollman Ice Rink in Central Park.

After reading Donald J. Trump’s book I’m sure that he is thrilled over bureaucrats and feet-dragging within the political establishment that he now finds himself in…

A future President and world-leader can be seen when Trump says: “…I felt there was a bigger issue at stake. I’ve come to believe Ed Koch is so incompetent and destructive to New York that someone has to stand up and say so, publicly.

Nowhere can this President-in-the-making be sensed clearer than in the “What’s Next” section of the work: “ But what I admire most are people who put themselves directly on the line. I’ve never been terribly interested in why people give, because their motivation is rarely what it seems to be, and it’s almost never pure altruism. To me, what matters is the doing, and giving time is far more valuable than giving money. In my life, there are two things I’ve found I’m very good at: overcoming obstacles and motivating good people to do their best work. One of the challenges ahead is how to use those skills as successfully in the service of others as I’ve done, up to now, on my own behalf.

Conclusion: Donald J. Trump comes across as a very likeable guy, sharp, not someone you could easily fool, interested in the whereabouts of real people and what actually happens in the real-world. He comes across as someone critical of a political establishment only interested in enriching itself, and at odds with New York snobbery. He comes across as a successful “man-of-the-people,” in love with everything HUGE and beautiful. Those looking for anything Hitleresque will find themselves disappointed. Read this book whether you like President Trump or not.

More relating to the Trump administration & the US Presidency:

Warriors & Citizens – American Views of Our Military edited by Kori Schake & Jim Mattis.

Link to An Interview With The White House Chief of Staff.

Amusing Articles From The Political Correctness Police …

“Decision Points” by George W. Bush.

A Crash Course In Politics. (What It Is And What It Is Not).

4 Things I really like and agree with from “The Art Of The Deal”

  1. It doesn’t matter if you own something a 100% if what you own is worthless.
  2. It doesn’t matter if you have a stellar product if no one ever hears about it.
  3. There are lots of people out there with unfulfilled potential because they were never put in a setting where they could properly bloom.
  4.  Leading a meritocratic operation will get out the best in people.

Selected Quotes from “The Art Of The Deal”

” … politicians don’t care too much about what things cost. It’s not their money.”

“You can’t  be imaginative or entrepreneurial if you’ve got too much structure.”

“… if you’re right, you’ve got to take a stand, or people will walk all over you.”

“The way I see it, critics get to say what they want to about my work, so why shouldn’t I be able to say what I want about theirs?” – after writing a letter to a critic who ” …was knocking a design he hadn’t even looked at yet.”

“That experience taught me a few things. One is to listen to your gut, no matter how good something sounds on paper. The second is that you’re generally better off sticking with what you know. And the third is that sometimes your best investments are the ones you don’t make.”

“The worst things you can possibly do in a deal is seem desperate to make it.”

“It pays to trust your instincts.”

“The state official who cross-examined Hefner said afterward that several commissioners hadn’t liked Hefner’s demeanour and style on the witness stand.” On why some get licenses from the bureaucracy and why some don’t.

“There is nothing to compare with family if they happen to be competent, because you can trust family in a way you can never trust anyone else.”

“To this day not many people or companies are willing to go through the nightmare of licensing in New Jersey, which gives Nevada a big advantage in attracting new investors.”

Trump on the business of Sport: ” Porter bluntly outlined a multipart plan for declaring total war on our league, by employing numerous anti-competitive strategies. His two-and-a-half-hour presentation was divided into sections such as “Offensive Strategies,” “Guerrilla Warfare,” and “The Art of War – China 500 B.C.”

Trump on politicians: ” It’s fortunate for those city officials that they chose to go into city government rather than business. The deal they were suggesting was far worse for the city than the one I’d originally offered. I wasn’t about to fight them at my  own expense.”

“…raise the possibility of bad press, even in an obscure publication, and most politicians will jump.”

“It irritates me that critics, who’ve neither designed nor built anything themselves, are given carte blanche to express their views in the pages of major publications, whereas the targets of their criticism are almost never offered space to respond.”

Trump on celebrity buyers of his apartments: ” Obviously, we were a natural choice for people connected with show business, in the sense that we’d created something very glamorous.”

“The truth is that we never hired anyone to do public relations, and every star who bought an apartment – Johnny Carson, Steven Spielberg, Paul Anka, Liberace – and many others – came to us.”

 

 

 

US President Trump’s Haters, Vol.II – The Lousiest Puppet Show.

Standard

I haven’t really written much about the never-ending political drama unfolding on both sides of the Atlantic lately, but I’ve certainly had my thoughts…

I’m not sure how anyone can justify  the amount of exposure rewarded to a certain “storm-of-a-non-weather nature,” I’m certainly asking myself why on earth I even know about such a thing … if we lived in the age of my great-grandparents then maybe I could have understood the desperate attempt at creating some sort of scandal, but it is all a play to the gallery, not that I’m sure who’s watching or who cares.

While a certain administration is probably celebrating the return of three liberated hostages, the pacification of an Asian nuisance with the worst hairdo in the pantheon of villains, jobs brought back thanks to a magic wand, and a myriad of other accomplishments; there are other forces desperately trying their best to “isolate” the US President or to make him miserable by breaking up his family and undermining whatever cohesion that is necessary for his administration to work.

The cherry on top of the pie is how people who openly support said President, (or other politicians like him over here in Europe), will get heckled/trolled online and/or in the media, so as to discourage other people from supporting their views, attempting to create an illusion of ideological dominance, that is nothing but false; in addition to making the target feel alienated and hated by everyone, which is also false.

It’s a witch hunt and a lame one indeed.

Meanwhile on the other side of the pond … it is said that the leaders of our continent are saddened by Trump pulling out of the Iran deal and want to do their best to keep the initiative alive. The USA is letting everyone know who is boss (if you think about the Tweets, America visibly going its own way, etc;) and that the glory days of European leverage is long gone, unless something drastic happens on this side of the Atlantic. An important thing to keep in mind if European Nations want trade deals where we aren’t sold poisonous chicken and other dubious foodstuffs. We are diseased enough as it is already….

When I reviewed “Where To Invade Next” by Michael Moore., I mentioned that one of the reasons as to why we’ve been allowed to spend a lot on Utopian projects in Europe is because our Nation States have relied on the American Empire’s Military to have Europe’s back. Maybe our leadership will wake up and realise that such priorities are reckless. We have enemies within and without and our culture needs to change in order to face new challenges. The Nations of Europe cannot expect victory without a serious boost in morale internally, and for this to happen there has to be a change in narrative, so that people know that they are not being lied to as they open up their front door and step out to face the new reality of the New-Europe; a derelict post-modern construct erected upon maggot infested delusional ideas, in desperate need of a reset back to the old, if our part of the world is to continue. It is a great enough challenge to cope with inter-ethnic diversity for any continent.

The U.S.A. and the various nations of Europe both West & East have to stand together, including Australia, Russia and Canada. This is more important than all other exotic alliances. Just take a look at what’s happening in South Africa. There have been many white people who’ve been chased out of Africa without anything. Where do we go if we end up being chased out of Europe as well?

I struggle to see why anyone in the U.S.A. would champion excessive liberalism if you contemplate how an Anglo-Saxon construct in a completely alien territory came to be in the first place. If your ancestors are successful conquerors, it doesn’t resemble anything that you would facilitate a similar victory for other groups on the land that you’ve inherited. Maybe American youths need to learn a bit more about their own history. Then they would understand the importance of a wall, secure borders and demographics. Not to forget that Americans did not “invent” slavery.

The demographic challenges facing the U.S.A. are monumental. They should have focused on bridging the gap between Afro-Americans, Euro-Americans and Native Americans before opening up the U.S.A. to even more different tribes. The issue with America the way I see it, is that they didn’t properly sort out their racial tensions before they decided to further complicate the definition of their identity and the possibility for cohesion. It has left the U.S.A. in an incredible sensitive and complex situation, where one can only hope that ideology (which would have to be on the conservative spectrum) will be the glue that keeps the construct together.

It is important to stress that the U.S.A. and Europe are two very different animals….

When it comes to Europe it baffles me that people have chosen to forget how our geographical location made us naturally vulnerable, and forced our ancestors to fight off  expansionism, especially Muslim expansionism  … Islam was pushed out from wherever it had gained ground in the borderlands of Europe, and it took years…… Why do we have all of these fine fortresses and castles of ours? Can someone please remind me? And if our Nation States vowed “Never Again” after WW2, then why lay the groundwork for one hell of a mess?

If one was to compile a potential enemy list of groups who could possibly want Europe destroyed we would probably run out of paper. That is an important thing to keep in mind. The notion that you can only be a nice European if you support the destruction of the continent while championing strong Nations and values in other parts of the world, doesn’t resemble anything, except death.

If you want to live in Africa or the Middle East then I suggest that you move there. I’m very happy with living in the Western World, thank you very much.

Blame It On The Russians…

Standard

Right.  So today I came across an article that seemed interesting and legit at first referring to an interview with the English Secretary of Defence. It certainly echoed other articles I’ve come across with Americans complaining about their military readiness and UK generals doing the same; complaints are publicly filed for the whole world to see from several western Nations.

Female participation is criticised since it makes the forces less combat effective, the attitude of (some I hope) students at military institutions are criticised on both sides of the Atlantic, there seems to be no end to the backlash or complaints made public, which I’m guessing is the result of people rejecting the politically correct culture enforced upon them by politicians and/or a cry for help when it comes to better equipment, more funding or maybe a better way to allocate funds.

A great deal of these things I’ve chosen not to share on my blog, such as a political correctness manual, where “subconscious bias” was fought against. Simply put: if a tiger jumps out of the bushes, you should first spend some time contemplating if the tiger is dangerous and a genuine threat before attacking it, because it could potentially be politically incorrect to do so. This of course refers to social issues within the military and a desire to make military culture more like civilian society, and more appealing to women and members of the LGBTQ community… However it does seem as if though normal human instincts should be fought against and further broken down, which leaves me wondering how a culture like this will affect people in combat?

This political correctness manual was so embarrassing to read, in fact so worrying to see as a civilian, that I decided not to publish it, as I thought of it as a disrespectful act to share something of this nature with anyone. Not to forget something that could potentially work against the recruitment of patriotic individuals and depict the military in an unflattering light. Can it potentially help our armed forces to share articles and pass these around? Can the public help or will it just damage reputation and morale? I certainly think that it can have the effect of pushing more young men into the private sector. This political correctness crusade can become a major issue in the future I think.

Yet, after coming across more and more and more complaints, I decided to do so anyway,    as part of an entry. This PC Manual is official and available for anyone to read and download….. I don’t know how smart that is, but I guess that it is from a post-modern perspective….

Yet the article I read today was, how should I put it, interesting (in lack of a better word) due to the headline pictured above, chosen by the journalist, I’m guessing. Or hoping.

The reason as to why I’m reluctant to share “the-Russians-are-coming-to-get-us-narratives” on my blog should not be surprising, as once again we are moving into “the-boy-who-cried-wolf-territory,” a dangerous narrative to peddle when you are a leader….or more correctly put: this seems to be the case when observing things from a citizen’s perspective, whether correct or not.

What I’m witnessing when travelling/moving around in Europe, what I have seen and heard, what other people are talking about, is apparently Russian propaganda. How can the civilian population take the Russia threat seriously, when the current, imported, internal, threat is not properly addressed by our leadership? It can easily seem (whether genuine or not) that Russia gets picked as a scapegoat, rather than addressing the very real issues and problems that the European population have to deal with everyday. Is Putin to blame for how the so-called migration crisis is handled by the European leadership? Are the Russians to blame for the cultural tensions that we are currently facing as a result of street level diversity and anti-western measures? Sure, who really knows who is behind a bomb going off here and there, but what do you do, when bombs, as I’ve said before, are just the tip of the iceberg? The problems that we Europeans have to deal with are real and genuine and not the result of Russian interference, unless they secretly run the entire world and we are all Russian puppets, which sounds nothing short of insane.

According to Hillary Clinton, Putin was the Godfather of the Alt-Right. As if though Nationalistic sentiments cannot emerge without Russian interference. Trump’s victory was also the result of Russian interference, and so is the general disgruntled air among the European populace, tired of losing their culture and countries to foreigners and politicians with their own strange agenda. I’m guessing that fragmentation within the U.S.A. as a result of criminal gangs and self-segregation, also can be pinned on the Russians. Social cohesion/trust actually breaks down the more ethnic/racial diversity you get within your borders……I’ve linked to articles and studies about this here on my blog, studies and articles by experts from various backgrounds.

Anyway… check this out: currently I’ve borrowed a whole bunch of books about roughly the same topic; in one of these I found a paragraph describing how fearful the English were of a 5th column during WW2. The intelligence community were not interested in German infiltration. Do I have to explain how absurd it this to read about this in the current year? Infiltration is welcomed into our societies, you’ll be called a bigot if you don’t want 5th columns. So if this is the impression civilians get, then how on earth can the Russia narrative be expected to be successful? Where are these Russians destroying us from within? I don’t see them, do you? I do however see expansionist militant Islam, and how new-Europeans carve out territories for themselves (while defending these from us) and as I’ve said before, how long does it take before these expand any further?

It might be that we will be taken by surprise, that Washington’s never-ending Russia paranoia finally will be proven to be right, but as a member of the civilian population, it is very awkward, strange and absurd to buy into this narrative, especially if it is promoted by people in official denial over the issues and problems that Ethnic-Europeans now face. While the people in power officially address China and Russia as our number one enemies, I think civilians will have a hard time to relate, while trying to live normal lives in an ever-changing Europe. Simply put, people are losing their sense of safety, not because of a Russian presence (at this time of writing) but because of the new arrivals into Europe and how scandalously this has been handled. Everything is changing and many are extremely disgruntled with our western leadership as a result, but I guess we should blame that on the Russians……..

 

“Plan Of Attack” by Bob Woodward.

Standard

“The press reports of smiling Iraqis leading inspectors around, opening up buildings and saying, “See, there is nothing here,” infuriated Bush, who then would read intelligence reports showing the Iraqis were moving and concealing things.” (p.253)

Preemptive war yea or nay? Should your country play on the defensive or on the offensive? This is the question one must ask when judging and reading about the Iraq war and the removal of Saddam Hussein.

Where people stand on that issue in general will differ tremendously. I have no doubt where I’m at, but I also realise that maintaining static viewpoints might not be such a good idea regardless of how well intended they may be.

North-Korea doesn’t look particularly promising. Nazi-Germany was allowed to grow and look how that turned out.

After having read “Decision Points” by George W. Bush., my curiosity was not satisfied and I instantly plunged into another Bush-era book, this one authored by liberal journalist Bob Woodward. It is surreal that the Iraq war and Bush’s presidency are now confined to history books as it feels like yesterday when the passenger planes hit the twin towers not to forget the build up to the highly controversial Iraq war.

I realise now after having read Woodward’s work that Bush’s take on events is slightly superficial in comparison. Many events and sentiments are perfectly aligned which is good to see, but Woodward retells the build up to the Iraq war by utilising different perspectives and seeing matters through multiple lenses, which makes for a very interesting book.

It is nothing short of fascinating to read about General Frank’s war planning, with interference from Rumsfeld;  covert operations are of particular interest, the same can be said of “creating an urgency within the Iraqi population to remove Saddam” to paraphrase. The reason this struck a chord is obviously due to our own current situation over here in Europe. Are we being messed with; walking to and fro like senseless sheep? It isn’t strange that people start believing in all sorts of conspiracy theories.

“Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small.” Best quote ever from an American president, p.202.

It also caught my attention that the Americans planned to reduce Iraq’s military capabilities while demilitarizing their society. Hmm … I wonder which part of the world this makes me think of…..

Even though Rumsfeld has been heavily criticised left-right-and-centre I found his approach of gradually increasing troops in the Middle East in order to stay off the press-radar quite cool. Yet his intelligence on WMD and how he communicated this to senators does not reflect well on his character:

“In the “Night Note for September 4,”Christine M. Ciccone, a young lawyer who covered the Senate for Calio, reported on Rumsfeld’s one-and-a-half-hour briefing.

“You have already heard that it was a disaster and Lott views it as having destroyed all of the goodwill and groundwork that the president accomplished during his meeting this morning. I found myself struggling to keep from laughing out loud at times, especially when Sec. Rumsfeld became a caricature of himself with the ‘we know what we know, we know there are things we do not know, and we know there are things we know we don’t know we don’t know.” (p.171)

Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War” can be felt throughout “Plan Of Attack,” funny enough. I recognise so many of the lessons mentioned in the old classic I couldn’t help but smirk in certain places and I now feel compelled to re-read the work which I read for the first time earlier this year: A Book About Warfare.

During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 the soldier selected to lead the campaign, Gen. Tommy Franks, called Pentagon number-three man Doug Feith “the stupidest f*cking guy on the face of the planet.” Taken from John Taylor.

While civilians get an impression of complete inadequacy when it comes to western leadership, don’t despair as it is not all bad. Thankfully. Warriors & Citizens – American Views of Our Military edited by Kori Schake & Jim Mattis.

Colin Powell is the star of the show as he tried to warn Bush of everything that could go wrong. He felt that nobody else had properly briefed the president on the potential risks:

“Powell’s notes filled three or four pages. War could destabilise friendly regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, he said. It could divert energy from almost everything else, not just the war on terrorism, and dramatically affect the supply and price of oil.

What of the image of an American general running an Arab country, a General  MacArthur in Baghdad? Powell asked. How long would it be? No one could know. How would success be defined? War would take down Saddam and “You will become the government until you get a new government.”

Powell thought he was scoring. Iraq had a history that is quite complex, he said. The Iraqis have never had a democracy. “So you need to understand that this is not going to be a walk in the woods.”

“It’s nice to say we can do it unilaterally, except you can’t,” he said. The geography was formidable. General Franks had said it was imperative that he have access to bases and facilities from allies in the region and beyond. Powell was unusually blunt.

He did not feel the downsides had been brought out in sufficient detail. Saddam was crazy and in a last desperate stand he might unleash weapons of mass destruction. Worse, the U.S., in perhaps the largest manhunt in history, had not found Osama bin Laden. Saddam has more at his disposal, an entire state. They did not need another possible fruitless, ongoing manhunt. On top of all this, Powell said, such a war would tie down most of the American army.” (pp.150-151)

I guess the complexity in terms of American leadership can best be described by referring to a dinner party starting on page 409; Adelman, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Libby were celebrating the successful invasion of Iraq. In awe over America’s military superiority the gentlemen mocked “the reluctant warrior” Powell as overthrowing Saddam had been a walk in the park. Toasting to the steadfast leadership of George W. Bush the scenario became awkward when Adelman said: “Let me ask, before this turns into a love fest. I was just stunned that we have not found weapons of mass destruction.” There were several hundred thousand troops and others combing the country. “We’ll find them,” Wolfowitz said. “It’s only been four days really,” Cheney said. “We’ll find them.”

“CENTCOM reported to the president that two Republican Guard divisions were now combat-ineffective.” (p.406) I just pasted this in as “combat-ineffective” sounds just as hilarious as “enhanced interrogation.” 

Throughout the book there seems to be an absolute obsession from certain members of the Bush administration to find a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. To their credit it has been said that Hussein was on the USA’s radar before 9/11 as he was being “problematic.” Yet they did not succeed in finding any links besides a strain of intelligence deemed dubious suggesting that one of the hijackers had met in Prague with an individual assumed to be part of the Iraqi special forces/intelligence.

“As Powell was preparing his presentation, Cheney called.

Colin, the vice president said, look carefully at the terrorism case that Scooter prepared. Give it a good look.

Sure, Dick, Powell said. He generally used the vice president’s first name when they were alone. Cheney was not ordering him or trying to direct him. It was just a request to take a serious look.

Powell looked at it. Four Mohammed Atta meetings in Prague. That was worse than ridiculous. He pitched it.

Powell thought that Cheney had the fever. The vice president and Wolfowitz kept looking for the connection between Saddam and 9/11.

He saw in Cheney a sad transformation. (p.292)

The more Powell dug, the more he realised that the human sources were few and far between on Iraq’s WMD. It was not a pretty picture. Still, like Bush and the other war cabinet members, he was much influenced by Saddam’s past behaviour.

Some CIA analyst and David G.Newton, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 1984 to 1988, had warned of falling victim to the “rational man syndrome,” projecting what Americans deemed rational behaviour on Saddam, who in the past had seemed to specialise in the irrational.”(p.298)

According to the information as described by Woodward there were always holes in the intelligence that the Bush administration were presented with. Several of the intelligence briefings did not leave the audience convinced with the exception of Cheney; who according to other’s had an unhealthy fixation on Saddam.

Yet Bush was horrified by Saddam’s style of governance and was not the least interested in sitting on the fence if a nuke went off in the USA, courtesy of Saddam. He felt strongly that it was in the national interest to take him out, bringing peace and democracy to the Iraqi people as Saddam was seen as an unstable element in the region, Bush was clearly troubled and worried about sending American soldiers into war and utterly shocked by the fact that no WMD were found.

“He raised his hand in a salute to his commanders, and then abruptly stood and turned before the others could jump up. Tears welled up in his eyes, and in the eyes of some of the others.” (p.379)

“Bush was still worrying about the women and children.

Rumsfeld and Myers said it probably didn’t matter what they hit in the first strike because the Iraqi propaganda machine was going to say that the United States killed a number of women and children anyway. And if necessary the Iraqis would execute women and children and say the United States did it.” (p.387)

In the Epilogue it is described how an investigation into faulty intelligence work was launched when it became clear that there were no WMD:

“The CIA was reviewing and examining everything in order to improve its performance, and had discovered that one of their sources had “fabricated” information, Tenet said. He noted that the CIA’s human spies had provided the information that had led to the capture of some top al Qaeda leaders, including Khalid Sheik Muhammad, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and had played a key role in uncovering the secret nuclear proliferation network of Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of the Pakistani nuclear program who had helped Libya, Iran and North Korea with their nuclear programs.” (p.439)

It must have been especially difficult to be Colin Powell as CIA Director Tenet, “the one who had assured Bush that the case on WMD was a “slam dunk.” Later went out in public stating that:

” … the aluminium tubes they had previously been so confident were for use as centrifuges for enriching uranium were possibly for regular artillery shells. Powell remembered that he had challenged them on this before his U.N presentation a year ago … Now Tenet was saying, “We have additional data to collect and more sources to question,” and his agency “may have overestimated” the progress Saddam was making on development of nuclear weapons. Powell felt let down.

Tenet was also backing away from previous assertions of certainty on the alleged mobile biological labs.

” And I must tell you that we are finding discrepancies in some claims made by human sources about mobile biological weapons production before the war.” Powell let out another holy shit!” (p.440)

When Woodward interviewed Bush for his book he obviously asked about the missing WMD. Keep in mind that the USA went to war in order to disarm a nuclear Saddam:

“I said I was asking these questions because I wanted to show in the book what he thought the status of the WMD search was. “Why do you need to deal with this in the book?” he asked. “What’s this got to do about it?” (p.423)

There is also a funny section mentioning the never-ending beef we Norwegians got with the Swedes 😛

“Rove saw that the president was “wired up” about Blix. The president knew Rove’s attitude toward the Swedes. As the highest-ranking Norwegian-American in the White House – and perhaps the only one – Rove was convinced of the historical duplicity of the Swedes, who had invaded Norway in 1814 and ruled the country until 1905. There was a long-standing grudge and it was a running joke between the president and Rove.” (p.250)

” … Cheney was convinced that Blix, from traditionally pacifist Sweden, would not be tough enough.” (p.224)

Some more quotes from “Plan Of Attack”:

“But General Franks had something important to add. “Mr. President,” he said, “we’ve been looking for Scud missiles and other weapons of mass destruction for ten years and haven’t found any yet, so I can’t tell you that I know that there are any specific weapons anywhere. I haven’t seen Scud one.”

But it could, and should, have been a warning that if the intelligence was not good enough to make bombing decisions, it probably was not good enough to make the broad assertion, in public or in formal intelligence documents, that there was “no doubt” Saddam had WMD.

Franks believed that Saddam did, in fact, have WMD, specifically weaponised chemicals. Intelligence officials from other countries had told him they believed Saddam had some weaponised biologicals.” (p.173)

“Success helps change public opinion,” Bush said. “Should we commit troops, we’ll feed the people of Iraq.” He said it as if that humanitarian gesture might have an impact on public opinion in Poland.” (p.275)

“We believe that Islam like Christianity can grow in a free and democratic manner.” – George W. Bush (p.276)

“Snow’s favoured option for an interim replacement currency was the American dollar. Instead of Saddam on their currency, Iraqis would soon get former American presidents Washington, Jackson, Lincoln and Grant as well as early American heroes Hamilton and Franklin.” (p.340)

On page 432 it is described how Rove felt that the odds were in their favour in regards to Bush’s second term. Since Kerry had been a supporter of the war in Iraq and was part of the Washington establishment, Rove felt that he could easily be portrayed as an hypocritical opportunist.

What I found of interest were Kerry’s reasons for criticising the handling of Iraq including that Bush “was too eager to go to war when Saddam was isolated and weak.”

Is it not a fantastic idea to crush an enemy when they are in fact “isolated and weak?”

The only critique I have of Woodward’s work is that I found his sentence structure and style – unfamiliar. But this says more about my habits rather than a lack of talent or anything as such on his part. It was an enjoyable book for sure and one that I would highly recommend.

If you’re interested in war literature you should also check out this one: The War Has No Female Face.

General Tommy Franks.

An unflattering article about Rumsfeld’s management style.

Deus Vult.

An interesting article about Georgia.

An interesting article about Hiroshima.