Vladislav Krasnov writes:

"Dear Kevin,
"This is to invite you and your readers/listeners to a debate on Jewish-Gentile relations that my article 'Ron Unz's Strategy for the Alt-Media to Defeat the Mainstream Media Is Brilliant' generated on the pages of Russia-Insider. 

"So far there are over 150 comments, and it is good as far as hits are concerned. However, I've noticed a negative dynamics because emotional negativism toward Jews seems to predominate. I can understand that the anger toward Jews in general is, at least, partially understandable and perhaps justifiable. However, I am convinced that all Jews are not alike. Moreover, the number of Jews who challenge Zionism, especially its current pro-Netanyahu trend, is growing. Some Jews are even more forthright about secretive Jewish shenanigans than the alleged 'anti-Semitic' authors of The Protocols of the Wizards of Zion were.

"Therefore I feel that it is incumbent upon us-- the 'Whites', Gentiles, Christian, Muslim, and secular non-Jews--to respond in kind and welcome such dissident Jews as Norman Finkelstein, Gilad Atzmon, Israel Shamir (whom I know more), Ron Unz, Brother Nathanael Kapner and several more into the community of truth-seekers.

"And you are the person who is best qualified and positioned to do so. You're converted Muslim familiar with Christianity. And you are a secular scholar. You work well with Veterans today and a regular author of Ron Unz's site. What is personally very important to me, you know who Bakhtin, Dostoevsky and Solzhenitsyn are. You know that Russians were able to overcome Marxist-Leninist ideological and political monopoly ('monologue') via a dialogue and actually polyphony of many dissident authors as soon as glasnost was established. In the US we should be able to stave off the monologic tendency of Big Media by letting Christian, Muslim, Jewish and other genuine dissidents to speak up. And that's what you are doing at TruthJihad Radio."

Dr. Vladslav Krasnov (also known as Wladislaw “George” Krasnow) of RAGA.org was a dissident in the former Soviet Union, where deviating from the official Communist Party line was a serious thoughtcrime. He defected to Sweden and then the United States in the 1960s, earned a doctorate in Russian Literature at the University of Washington, and has written three books and worked for many leading think tanks and government agencies.

​All statements in this report are an opinion of the author. Act at your own risk. Russia & America Goodwill Association (RAGA) is not responsible for the content of the article. Any views or opinions presented in this report are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RAGA. Any liability in respect to this communication remain with the author.

RAGA News
www.RAGA.org​

​We are lucky being able to discuss just about anything, including such taboo topics as the Holocaust, Hitler, or Jewish influence in The Unz Review. Thanks to our host Ron Unz whom one grateful reader called “an incredibly brave human being”[1] for exploring taboo topics himself, selecting a team of independent authors and encouraging readers’ comments. I agree with this reader. That’s why I had invited Ron as a featured author for RAGA.org.
​
As to Steve Sniegoski, I have known him for years as a fellow contributor to FGF.com, a conservative site dedicated to Championing Western Civilization and the great legacies of Sam Francis and Joe Sobran.[2] At the turn of millennia, I joined a group of scholars and Washington policy wonks, some from the Reagan administration, who regularly met in the Washington DC area diners to discuss all the misadventures of US foreign policy. Jon Utley,[3] Ron Unz’s successor as the publisher of The American Conservative magazine[4] in Washington, was one of the organizers. Steve Sniegoski was among our leading presenters. Soon he published The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel

The article at hand[5] is very perceptive as it takes into account the change of demographics and of cultural and political climate in the country.  Steve wrote it not to make fun of the would-be presidential candidate’s name or sexual orientation. His thrust is rather to suggest that the eventual outcome of the election will be decided by the demographic change and influence of Big Media.

“Should Buttigieg run for president, the mainstream media would likely expand its worship of him and double down on the faults, real or imagined, of Trump. It would seem that Buttigieg is the ideal Democratic candidate, lacking the baggage afflicting Sanders and Biden. This, of course, does not guarantee that Buttigieg will be the Democrats nominee for president or vice-president but about the only thing that could derail Buttigieg’s campaign would be the discovery that he is really a straight man.”

This conclusion, made with tongue in cheek, should be enough to dissuade those readers whose thinking stops as soon as the subject’s unusual name starts. As Anon[253] • Disclaimer says: “Well l think the author is head over heels for Buttleg or whatever his name is”. Alas, he failed to see that Steve’s conclusion was made tong in-cheek.

[1] See http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-holocaust-denial/ Comment 408. Otterboy, August 28, 2018

[2] http://www.fgfbooks.com/AboutUS.html

[3] Jon Utley http://www.fgfbooks.com/Utley/Utley-bio.html. See also my article about him
Jon Basil Utley at 80 “He is One of Us” (Memoirs of Two Trips to Russia)  Tribute by W. George Krasnow at Jon’s birthday party in Washington on March 12, 2014

[4] https://www.theamericanconservative.com/about-us/

[5] The Green New Deal, Israel, and Mayor Pete. STEPHEN J. SNIEGOSKI • MAY 11, 2019
https://www.unz.com/article/the-green-new-deal-israel-and-mayor-pete/#comments

​After perusing the flow of comments, I have two impressions. First, there are too many negative remarks about Jews in general, without indicating their specific political orientation. Second, the overall defeatist mood is evident in the alleged Jewish takeover of the formerly “WASPish” US establishment. Did we forget that Trump won the election in spite of the fact that out of 1000 largest media outlets only 50 were on his side? One does not have to admire Trump, but the lesson is: Even a small number of alternative sites can defeat the Big Media! True that even a small number of Jewish moguls on Trump’s side were able to subordinate his foreign policy to the Neocons. But the fact is: a presidential candidate can beat the Mega Media if his message is properly calibrated.
​
Can it be done in the forthcoming 2020 election? I think ‘yes’, if priorities are properly selected and duly stressed.

​ 

1. With the avalanche of information via Internet, the Cyber agreement among the super-powers is urgently needed.[1] James Cardin cogently argues in The Nation magazine, a cyber “wild west” is not in the US national interest.
2. An agreement on the limitation of nuclear arms is just as urgent, for a break-down of Internet and ensuing chaos may lead to a global nuclear holocaust even if nobody wanted to trigger it. Failing to reach such agreement, super-powers effectively abdicate their responsibility for Life on Earth.
3. Domestically, the peace dividend from the above agreements would allow the US to reduce the overblown defense budget and spend more on education and healthcare to make the country more competitive economically, more fair and socially cohesive, and worthy of emulation abroad.
4. There is a need to open new investigation of 9/11 because the official version of terrorist destruction of World Trade Center has been challenged not just by alleged political “conspiracy theorists” but also by a large group of structural engineers who deem the official explanation technically impossible. You think 9/11 was an inside job?[2]

[1] Read, e.g.  Time to Pursue an International Cyber Treaty? By James Carden, APRIL 30, 2019
The Mueller report findings show a cyber “wild west” is not in the US national interest.
https://www.thenation.com/article/international-cyber-treaty-russia-china-dnc/

[2] You think 9/11 was an inside job? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg
See text and sign petition  https://shop.ae911truth.org/DVD-Cased-9-11-Explosive-Evidence-Experts-Speak-Out-DVD-ESO-CASED1-PP.htm

Cui bono? It looks like it was a coup d’état to put the nation on war footing for ongoing US misadventures in the Middle EAST. It cost us 2744 lives lost in New York; 1 million lost in Afghanistan and Iraq and counting; 6, ooo US troops killed in a war on terror; $4.5 trillion lost to US tax payers. Moreover, our civil liberties have been impaired by:  The Patriot Act; Military Commissions Act; Department of Homeland Security; TSA (just take your next flight!) and National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA 2012). The engineers remind us that today American citizen can be subject to search and seizure without a warrant; detained or imprisoned indefinitely without charge, without evidence, without lawyer, without a trial, and even tortured or assassinated merely for being accused. The engineers conclude: Ignoring the World Trade Center evidence is no longer an option.[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg
See also Experts speak out. Richard Gage (a leader) Americal Institute of Architects. 1500 engineers and 10 000 other people questioned. https://911planeshoax.com/

Be it as it may, but I believe the first question any presidential candidate must be asked is this: Do you take seriously the 9/11 official story?

There is no need to elaborate before there is a candidate who would agree on the validity of the issues. But there is one person I have in mind. He is no other than Ron Unz, our open-minded and tireless host. I did not raise the issue with him when we met in April. But he would certainly qualify: excellent education, broad knowledge of history, highly intelligent, open-minded, a successful entrepreneur and skillful communicator. The declared candidates might envy Ron’s electability: ---in 1994 he was second in the race for California governor;-- in 1998 sponsored California Proposition 227, to modify the state's bilingual education by English immersion classes.
​
As California is the first state where the majority is non-white, Ron has the advantage as a conservative patriot who is nonetheless liberal enough to unite the nation across racial, ethnic, and religious lines. He might emerge as a national leader for whom indeed “there are no Jews, nor Hellenes”.

Regretfully, many comments in TUR tend to lump all Jews together, regardless of their political leanings. Even though the majority of American Jews traditionally vote Democrat, they are just as torn in several, even opposite, directions as the Gentiles are. There are ardent religious Jews, as those belonging to Neturei Karta, Orthodox Jews United Against Zionism, who oppose Israel’s violent political ideology.[1]

There are secular Jewish American groups, such as Jewish Voice for Peace[2] that bravely defend Palestinian rights and lead the BDS movement. As a non-Jewish member of JVP, I feel I am better informed about Israel and its American Jewish critics. The JVP just announced a May 19, 2019 meeting at which “forty Jews of diverse backgrounds tell a wide range of stories about the roads they have traveled from a Zionist world view to activism in solidarity with Palestinians and Israelis striving to build an inclusive society founded on justice, equality, and peaceful coexistence.”

[1] Neturei Karta opposes the so-called "State of Israel" because the entire concept of a sovereign Jewish state is contrary to Jewish Law. https://www.nkusa.org/AboutUs/index.cfm
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Voice_for_Peace

And there are other American Jews who believe that Zionism goes against the grain of Judaism as a universal religion that eschews territorial attachment.[1] One of them is Allan Brownfeld[2] of the American Council for Judaism.[3] I’ve been reading Allan’s articles on global issues since the 1980s and translated some to Russian.[4] He is one of the most astute American political thinkers.

Then there is Israel Shamir,[5] an early Soviet dissident who immigrated to Israel in 1968. After serving as paratrooper in the IDF and fighting in the 1973 war, Israel became disillusioned in Zionist reality. Now he has emerged as most persistent critic of Israel’s right-wing Zionism. A friend of Palestinians, he was baptized as an Orthodox Christian. At my invitation, in 2001 he was the distinguished speaker at the club of disenchanted Washington conservatives where both Sniegoski and I were active participants. Not an American, Shamir is nonetheless most imaginative and prolific author of TUR.

[1] See my 2012 article The World for Israel, or Jews for the World? By W. George Krasnow, January 09, 2012. http://original.antiwar.com/krasnow/2012/01/08/the-world-for-israel/.
[2] http://www.fgfbooks.com/AllanBrownfeld/aBrownfeld-bio.html
[3] http://www.acjna.org/acjna/default.aspx
[4] http://perevodika.ru/articles/1196711.html?sphrase_id=4433208
[5] http://www.israelshamir.net/Biography.htm

I have not yet exhausted my list of Jewish friends of mine and--I dare say--of Russia. But let me mention one more who just alerted us that the USA and Israel are preparing a war on Iran. “A collection of colonists plop themselves down in the middle of the Muslim world with plans to expand—into a world, mind you, not too keen about it all—and we’ve got their back? I mean, Bibzy (Netanyahu) wants to fight the Iranians down to the last American.”[1] So says Mr. Milton Kapner,[2] a New York Jew who, after converting to Orthodox Christianity became Brother Nathanael, an ardent and tireless preacher against “pernicious” influence of the “establishment Jews” on US political and cultural life.

As the founder and president of RAGA.org, I make it a policy to include in our RAGA newsletter all good writers who favor a peaceful co-existence with Russia and non-aggressive US foreign policy world-wide. I welcome them regardless of their political leanings—Left, Right, Liberal or Conservative—as long as they present facts and cogent arguments. One might say I practice political polyphony having transferred this term from Solzhenitsyn’s artistic strategy.[3] I pay no attention whether the authors are Jewish or not.

As personally I tend to be Conservative, I may favor such authors as Pat Buchanan or Paul Craig Roberts. But I am always happy to provide links to Sharon Tennison,[4] Ray McGovern, Stephen Cohen, Ed Lozansky,[5]  Gilbert Doctorow,[6] Naomi Klein, Medea of CODEPINK,[7]   Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept, and my personal friends Dan Lieberman of Alternative Insight[8] and Martin Sieff. As far as exposing US meddling in Russian reforms under Boris Yeltsyn to help create the oligarchic system, none is better than Professor Janine Wedel,[9] the author of “Collision and Collusion: The Strange Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe”.[10] And don’t forget Gilad Atzmon,[11] a jazzman and the author of Being in Time-- A Post Political Manifesto.[12] Don’t his artistic jazz improvisations spell the same doom for the militant Zionism as jazz in the USSR[13] did for totalitarian Communism?

The same “big tent” polyphonic approach I apply in selecting authors to translate into Russian and post either on RAGA or the Russian site PEREVODIKA: Noam Chomsky, Chas Freeman,[14] Marjorie Cohn, and Allan Brownfeld appear next to Pat Buchanan, Chris Hedges, Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com, and Charles Bausman whose pioneering Russia-Insider article It's Time to Drop the Jew Taboo I immediately translated and had it posted both on RAGA.org[15] and PEREVODIKA.[16]

One translation of which I am particularly proud was that of “Six Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of His Time.”[17] I was asked to do so by Dr. John Andrew Morrow, Canadian-American scholar who researched the Arabic sources. John was so impressed with the medieval Al-Andalus in Spain and Portugal where Muslims, Christians, and Jews co-existed for over seven centuries that he learned Arabic and converted to Islam. As Amazon.com describes his book, “accepted as law for nearly 1400 years, these documents were common knowledge to educated Muslims and Christians until the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, after which they virtually disappeared from collective consciousness.” Knowing of the importance of religious tolerance in Russia today, I translated his book to Russian, and had it posted in Russian internet.[18] I also wrote a commentary for an established Russian magazine.[19] Later Mr. Adgezal Mamedov of Azerbaijan[20] had it translated and published in Azeri language. After all, we should not forget that Islamophobia in the USA often goes hand in hand with Russophobia.

I was fortunate with people who offered me their sites for free posting and interviews. Dr. Kevin Barrett interviewed me for his Truth Jihad Radio.[21] Yes, he is a Muslim convert. But for me he is, first of all, an American patriot, a scholar who insists that the First Amendment is our foremost treasure. He knows how to protect best this treasure for himself and his fellow citizens. Kevin is a rare American familiar with the work of Russian literary scholar Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975)[22] who introduced the notion of polyphony as a necessity of having competing ideological views for any country to remain free. For such unorthodox views Bakhtin was quickly hauled to the GULAG because the USSR recognized only one and only Marxist-Leninist ideology.

But the banner of polyphony and heterodoxy was soon picked up by Solzhenitsyn, Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989),[23] Andrei Amalrik (1938-1980),[24] Anatoly Ivanov, Vladimir Osipov,[25] and dozens other Soviet dissidents. The USSR refused to coexist with polyphony of different persuasions, and soon Amalrik, Solzhenitsyn, and dozen others were expelled from the country. Amalrik, who was my fellow student in History Department of the University of Moscow, was the author of the prophetic book Will the Soviet Union Survive until 1984?[26] He did not see his dream come true as he died in a traffic accident while visiting Spain in 1980.

Dr. Barrett thinks that now Russia and the USA reversed their roles. Since the time of glasnost and the fall of USSR, Russia has been moving toward a greater heterodoxy—dialog and polyphony in public discourse—whereas the Mainstream Media in the USA tries to turn it   into a monologic society in which “political correctness” rules the roost. Kevin knows what he is talking about because for he lost his academic position for sticking to the 9/11 contrarian view and encouraging others to speak up their mind. That this is not an easy task is evident in his latest articles “Sorry, Ilhan, Jews HAVE Hypnotized the World”[27] and "The Holocaust" Is a Myth That Conceals Our Shame.”[28]

Dr. Barrett is not alone to challenge the official wisdom. Ray McGovern, a former high CIA official in the Reagan administration, has been also harboring dissident thoughts. In January 2003, Ray co-created Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)—and the name “for Sanity” is just right-- to expose how intelligence was being falsified to “justify” war on Iraq. In 2011 Ray was seized and badly beaten in front of Hillary Clinton when she spoke at George Washington University about the need for freedom of expression – in Iran. It was during her speech Ray stood up with his back turned toward then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.[29] It was then I wrote for Veterans Today, a site of former military and intelligence officers turned dissidents, “A brave Man stands abuse. Vets for Peace Demands Apology from Hilliary Clinton.” [30]

Recently, March 13, 2019, Ray and his team of VIPS published their authoritative opinion that “The final Mueller report should be graded “incomplete” due to the speciousness of the story that DNC emails published by WikiLeaks came from Russian hacking”. According to the VIPS, former National Intelligence Director James Clapper’s testimony cannot be trusted because “The materials brought out by Edward Snowden in June 2013 showed Clapper to have lied under oath to the committee on March 12, 2013; he was, nevertheless, allowed to stay on as Director of National Intelligence for three and half more years. Clapper fancies himself an expert on Russia, telling Meet the Press on May 28, 2017 that…Russians are “typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever.”[31]

As I myself had to escape from the USSR,[32] just to keep my sanity intact, it is natural to me to identify with US dissidents, including Edward Snowden, whose forced defection to Russia made me write a warning to the USA, To Defect or to Integrate? The USA vs Edward Snowden.[33]

It is hardly accidental that I find my fellow dissenters at Veterans Today. Lately I was interviewed by Jonas E Alexis, a Black American scholar and the author of “Zionism Vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology Is Undermining Western Culture.”[34] He now teaches math in South Korea. Titling the interview Alexander Solzhenitsyn - Truth Can and Will Destroy the New World Order and Satanism,[35] Jonas focused our dialogue on the importance of freedom of expression.

Alexis: I remember that one of the battle cries of Soviet dissidents was the demand for glasnost, meaning giving “voice” (glas) to any subject on which Soviet leaders put a taboo.
Krasnov: Exactly so. That’s why while writing my book, Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth, I tried to give a voice, an opportunity to speak to every brave and cogent Soviet intellectual or expat dissident who, not being satisfied with Gorbachev’s schemes to save Communism, called for a Russian future BEYOND Communism, a future which could not be gained unless Russia recovered its thousand years deep national roots, including its Christianity.

Then I went on to set up Jonas’s next question:
Krasnov: We know that William J. Burns,[36] former US Ambassador in Moscow and now president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, met with Solzhenitsyn in 2008, before the writer passed away. Here is what was reported: “According to Burns, Solzhenitsyn positively contrasted the eight-year reign of Putin with those of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, which he said had ‘added to the damage done to the Russian state by 70 years of communist rule’. Under Putin, the nation was rediscovering what it was to be Russian, Solzhenitsyn thought.”
​Alexis: Do you agree with Solzhenitsyn’s assessment of Putin?

Krasnov:  Yes, I do. Moreover, I think Solzhenitsyn would have been pleased with Putin’s performance SINCE 2008, even though Burns was right to point out that “the writer’s praise for Putin wasn’t unqualified.” Solzhenitsyn was a man who could not be subservient to anyone.
Curious of how Jonas, a born American, perceive Solzhenitsyn, I asked:
Krasnov: What do you like most about Solzhenitsyn?

Alexis: What I specifically like about Solzhenitsyn is that he was committed to the truth, regardless of where it took him. In fact, he wrote arguably the most controversial book in the twentieth century, 200 Years Together, which has yet to be translated in English. Solzhenitsyn said that the first step of a courageous man is to not take part in a lie. Shouldn’t that be an encouragement for us today?

I heartily agreed with my inquisitive, knowledgeable and honorable VT debater Jonas E Alexis.
Responding to a RAGA newsletter some years ago, Brother Nathanael asked me if I was willing to translate Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together.[37] I declined but learned that Brother Nathanael was determined to walk in Solzhenitsyn’s footsteps as a truth teller, a feature that he shares with Ron Unz, with all their differences.

Ron Unz is also an unabashed admirer of Solzhenitsyn. “Throughout most of my life,” admits Ron in one of his incisive articles, “Nobel Laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn was generally regarded as the greatest Russian literary figure of our modern era, and after reading all of his works, including The First Circle, Cancer Ward, and The Gulag Archipelago, I certainly concurred with this assertion.” However, as soon as Solzhenitsyn “hinted (in Two Hundred Year Together) at the very prominent role of Jews in both financing and leading the Bolshevik Revolution, and afterward staffing the NKVD and administering the Gulag labor camps,” not only was his book ignored in the USA, but “His literary star seems also to greatly waned…  I only very rarely see his name mentioned these days in any of my regular newspapers.” [38]  

I was reading the above lines when I was getting ready to go Solzhenitsyn’s Centennial conference at Northern Vermont University last September. It then emailed Ron to ask if he would want to come to our conference and share his American perception of the Russian writer. Being busy as always Ron politely declined. But then I knew that The Unz Review was the best venue for my report about the conference. As soon as it was ready, I sent it to him and it was carried in TUR as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Relevance Today. International “Reading Solzhenitsyn” Conference in Lyndon, Vermont, September 7-8, 2018.[39]

Here is the conclusion: “Solzhenitsyn, more than anybody else unites Russia and the USA in their urgent task and duty to secure a peaceful, free, fair, and harmonious global commonwealth in which every nation is a proud member”.

What is now at stake is not just the precipitous deterioration of US-Russia relations, but the survival of the Planet as we know it. Is it not childish to compete for whom is the Best, the Strongest or the Handsomest on the Planet while threatening a nuclear war? Is it not better to join forces in harmonious and mutually enriching co-operation to cope with the ever-mounting issues, such as climate warming, depletion of resources, pollution of air, earth and seas, poverty and malnutrition in many parts of the world, uncertainties of space exploration, all of that exacerbated by fake news? Clearly, a new paradigm for world relations is urgently needed, in which usual egotism of national politics must yield to the ethical imperative of global co-operation for the security and well-being of the Planet, with all its peoples, animals and plants.

As a member[40] of the Global Harmony Association,[41] founded by Leo Semasko,[42] a former Marxist and now peace-activist, I just got an email letter from Rene Wadlow,[43] President, Association of World Citizens,[44] saying: “We must restore optimism and continue to sharpen our inborn instincts for life, for the positive, for self-preservation, for survival and human fulfillment at ever higher levels of consciousness. We must conquer the duality, the dark, the bad, the negative, and the suicidal. These all contain dangerous self-feeding processes of destruction. We must turn instead to the mysterious self-generating powers of hope, creative thinking, love, life affirmation and faith.”

Clearly, the greatest need now is not for politicians as usual, but for wise men and women of different nationalities, religions convictions and ideologies whose Number One priority is the survival and welfare of the Planet. That’s why in a follow up to the Solzhenitsyn Centennial piece, I wrote Mahatma Gandhi and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the Two Giants Who Blessed the 20th Century. Will Vladimir Putin, Other World Leaders Listen?[45] In addition to the two giants, I also named Nelson Mandela of South Africa and our own Martin Luther King Jr. I am sure there are other actual and potential leaders, men and women, who are among us but whom we have not yet called to full life in truth and justice.

Author: Vladislav Krasnov (aka W George Krasnow),
President of Russia & America Goodwill Association (RAGA.org).
Email to President92@gmail.com or president@raga.org
May 2019
​
[1] Brother Nathanael Come On Back To The War  http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=1364  Brother Nathanael May 14, 2019 @ 10:11 pm

[2] Milton Kapner https://wikiality.fandom.com/wiki/Real_Jew_News

[3] Vladislav Krasnov, Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A Study in the Polyphonic Novel. U of Georgia Press, 1980. https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Dostoevsky-Study-Polyphonic-Novel/dp/0820304727

[4] Sharon Tennison and her organization https://ccisf.org/

[5] https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/edward-lozansky/

[6] http://www.raga.org/apps/search?q=Gilbert+Doctorow

[7] Medea Benjamin, https://www.codepink.org/medea_benjamin

[8] Dan Lieberman http://www.alternativeinsight.com/

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janine_R._Wedel

[10] Janine Wedel https://www.amazon.com/Collision-Collusion-Strange-Western-Eastern/dp/0312238282  See also my companion article, Did Shock Therapy Help Russia? About Anders Aslund’s Capitalist Revolution
http://www.russialist.org/archives/2008-88-39.php #39 - JRL 2008-89 - JRL Home
Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 From: W. George Krasnow"

[11] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilad_Atzmon

[12] Gilad Atzmon’s book https://www.gilad.co.uk/being-in-time

[13] Generally accepted at first, jazz was soon proclaimed as a symbol of the hated West. With the onset of the Cold War, it was vilified. “Today he plays jazz, tomorrow he’ll betray his country” was a propaganda slogan in those days.https://www.rbth.com/history/329154-why-american-jazz-was-banned

[14] Charles W. "Chas" Freeman Jr. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_W._Freeman_Jr.

[15] Пора Отказаться от Табу на Еврейскую Тем. Иначе не поймёшь ни российскую геополитику, ни историю. Автор: Чарльз Баусман 1/22/2018

[16] Пора отказаться от табу на еврейскую тему. Иначе ничего не поймёшь в противостоянии США и России. http://perevodika.ru/articles/1197472.html

[17] Six Covenants https://www.amazon.com/Covenants-Prophet-Muhammad-Christians-Time/dp/1621380025

[18] John Andrew Morrow - 2018 - ‎Religion. Islām and the People of the Book Volumes 1-3: Critical Studies on ...
ШЕСТЬ ОБЕТОВ ПРОРОКА МУХАММЕДА ХРИСТИАНАМ МУХАММЕД СЫН ... ВЛАДИСЛАВ КРАСНОВ Содержание Глава 1: Обет пророка Мухаммеда ...
https://books.google.ru/books?isbn=1527509672

[19] 2016 №7, 8 (150-151) У нас в журнале «Представительная власть» уже вышла Ваша совместная статья о критике ДАИШ и Обетах пророка Мухаммеда. См. анонс по ссылку. Имам (д-р Морроу) осуждает ДАИШ http://www.pvlast.ru/archive/index.s132.php  Краснов В.Г., Ильяс Абд аль-Алим Ислам.

[20] Adgezal Mamedov https://gorchakovfund.ru/en/news/view/adgezal-mamedov-friendship-between-russia-and-azerbaijan-is-a-social-mandate-of-our-nations/

[21] JIHAD (n.) Effort, struggle, or striving to (1) be a better person, or (2) defend the community.
"The best jihad is a word of truth flung in the face of a tyrant." http://www.truthjihad.com/

[22] Mikhail Bakhtin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakhtin

[23] https://en.wikipedia.org/t iki/Andrei_Sakharov

[24] Andrei Amalrik  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Amalrik.

[25] About Ivanov and Osipov, the two of my friends and fellow students at the University of Moscow, read The Faces of Contemporary Russian Nationalism (Princeton Legacy Library). By John Dunlop. Paperback – 2014
https://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Russian-Nationalism-Princeton-Library/dp/0691610789

[26] Will the Soviet Union Survive until 1984? Hardcover – 1970/by Andreĭ Amalʹrik (Author)
https://www.amazon.com/Will-Soviet-Union-Survive-until/dp/B0006CPGLA

[27] “Sorry, Ilhan, Jews HAVE Hypnotized the World”, KEVIN BARRETT • MARCH 15, 2019 http://www.unz.com/kbarrett/sorry-ilhan-jews-have-hypnotized-the-world/

[28] "The Holocaust" Is a Myth That Conceals Our Shame.”[28] KEVIN BARRETT • APRIL 15, 2019
 http://www.unz.com/kbarrett/the-holocaust-is-a-myth-that-conceals-our-shame/

[29] http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/18/ex_cia_analyst_ray_mcgovern_beaten

[30] “A Brave Man stands abuse. Vets for Peace Demands Apology from Hilliary Clinton”. By Dr. George Krasnow - February 18, 2011. https://www.veteranstodayarchives.com/2011/02/18/vets-fo r-peace-demands-apology-from-hillary-clinton/

[31] https://consortiumnews.com/2019/03/13/vips-muellers-forensics-free-findings/

[32] See my book, Soviet Defectors: The KGB Wanted List. (Hoover Institution Press Publication) by Vladislav Krasnov  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Soviet-Defectors-Wanted-Institution-Publication/dp/0817982329

[33] To Defect or to Integrate? The USA vs Edward Snowden. 4/29/2014
http://www.raga.org/news/to-defect-or-to-integrate-the-usa-vs-edward-snowden

[34] Zionism Vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology Is Undermining Western Culture Hardcover – April 3, 2018
https://www.amazon.com/Zionism-Vs-West-Talmudic-Undermining/dp/1546224599

[35] http://www.raga.org/news/vt-veterans-today-alexander-solzhenitsyn-truth-can-and-will-destroy-the-new-world-order-and-satanism  11/8/2018

[36] William J Burns  https://carnegieendowment.org/experts/1014

[37] Two Hundred Years Together (Complete Edition in 2 Volumes) / Dvesti Let Vmeste - v 2-h Tomah (in Rus)
By Alexander Solzhenitsyn.  It became finally available in English under the title The Crucifixion of Russia: A new English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together by Columbus Falco. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36499209-the-crucifixion-of-russia

[38] “The oddities of Jewish religion” https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/?highlight=Ron+Unz+Oddities+Oddities

[39] Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Relevance Today https://www.unz.com/article/aleksandr-solzhenitsyns-relevance-today/ It was also carried by Global harmony Association http://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=864
 
[40] Vladislav Krasnov https://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=752

[41] Global Harmony Association https://www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=home

[42] Leo Semashko personal page https://www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=253

[43] https://www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=272

[44] Association of World Citizens http://www.worldcitizensunited.org/

[45] Mahatma Gandhi and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the Two Giants Who Blessed the 20th Century.http://www.unz.com/article/mahatma-gandhi-and-aleksandr-solzhenitsyn-the-two-giants-who-blessed-the-20th-century/  It was also carried by https://www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=884 and on a site in India:  Gandhi and Solzhenitsyn: Two Giants who blessed the 20th century – I.  By Vladislav Krasnov

http://vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=4950 Gandhi and Solzhenitsyn: Two Giants who blessed the 20th century – II. http://vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=4951
 
All statements in this report are an opinion of the author. Act at your own risk. Russia & America Goodwill Association (RAGA) is not responsible for the content of the article. Any views or opinions presented in this report are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RAGA. Any liability in respect to this communication remain with the author.

RAGA News
www.RAGA.org​

Although I always had a great interest in history, I naively believed what I read in my textbooks [1], and therefore regarded American history as just too bland and boring to study.

By contrast, one land I found especially fascinating was China, the world’s most populous country and its oldest continuous civilization, with a tangled modern history of revolutionary upheaval, then suddenly reopened to the West during the Nixon Administration and under Deng’s economic reforms starting to reverse decades of Maoist economic failure.
​
In 1978 I took a UCLA graduate seminar on the rural Chinese political economy, and probably read thirty or forty books during that semester. E.O. Wilson’s ​seminal Sociobiology: The New Synthesis [2] had just been published a couple of years earlier, reviving that field after decades of harsh ideological suppression, and with his ideas in the back of my mind, I couldn’t help noticing the obvious implications of the material I was reading. The Chinese had always seemed a very smart people, and the structure of China’s traditional rural peasant economy produced Social Darwinist selective pressure so thick that you could cut it with a knife, thus providing a very elegant explanation of how the Chinese got that way. A couple of years later in college, I wrote up my theory while studying under Wilson, and then decades afterward dug it out again, finally publishing my analysis as How Social Darwinism Made Modern China [3].

1 http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-deadly-world-of-post-war-politics/
2 https://www.amazon.com/Sociobiology-New-Synthesis-Twenty-Fifth-Anniversary/dp/0674002350/?tag=unco037-20
3 http://www.unz.com/runz/how-social-darwinism-made-modern-china-248/

With the Chinese people clearly having such tremendous inherent talent and their potential already demonstrated on a much smaller scale in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore, I believed there was an excellent chance that Deng’s reforms would unleash enormous economic growth, and sure enough, that was exactly what happened [4]. In the late 1970s, China was poorer than Haiti, but I always told my friends that it might come to dominate the world economically within a couple of generations, and although most of them were initially quite skeptical of such an outrageous claim, every few years they became a little less so. The Economist had long been my favorite magazine [5], and in 1986 they published an especially long letter of mine [6] emphasizing the tremendous rising potential of China and urging them to expand their coverage with a new Asia Section; the following year, they did exactly that.

These days I feel tremendous humiliation for having spent most of my life being so totally wrong about so many things for so long, and I cling to China as a very welcome exception. I can’t think of a single development during the last forty years that I wouldn’t have generally expected back in the late 1970s, with the only surprise having been the total lack of surprises. About the only “revision” I’ve had to make in my historical framework is that I’d always casually accepted the ubiquitous claim that Mao’s disastrous Great Leap Forward of 1959-61 had caused 35 million or more deaths, but I’ve recently encountered some serious doubts [7], suggesting that such a total could be considerably exaggerated, and today I might admit the possibility that only 15 million or fewer had died.

4 http://www.unz.com/runz/chinas-rise-americas-fall/
​5 http://www.unz.com/runz/the-long-decline-of-the-london-economist/
6 http://www.unz.com/runz/far-east-2/
7 http://www.unz.com/article/mao-reconsidered-part-two-whose-famine/

But although I always had a great interest in China, European history was even more fascinating to me, with the political interplay of so many conflicting states and the huge ideological and military upheavals of the twentieth century.

In my unjustified arrogance, I also sometimes relished a sense of seeing obvious things that magazine or newspaper journalists got so completely wrong, mistakes which often slipped into historical narratives as well. For example, discussions of the titanic 20th century military struggles between Germany and Russia quite often made casual references to the traditional hostility between those two great peoples, who for centuries had stood as bitter rivals, representing the eternal struggle of Slav against Teuton for dominion over Eastern Europe.

Although the bloodstained history of the two world wars made that notion seem obvious, it was factually mistaken. Prior to 1914, those two great peoples had not fought against each other for the previous 150 years, and even the Seven Years’ War of the mid-18th century had involved a Russian alliance with Germanic Austria against Germanic Prussia, hardly amounting to a conflict along civilizational lines. Russians and Germans had been staunch allies during the endless Napoleonic wars, closely cooperated during the Metterich and Bismarck Eras that followed, while even as late as 1904, Germany had supported Russia in its unsuccessful war against Japan. Later, Weimar Germany and Soviet Russia had a period of close military cooperation during the 1920s, the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939 marked the beginning of the Second World War, and during the long Cold War, the USSR had no more loyal a satellite than East Germany. Perhaps two dozen years of hostility over the last three centuries, with good relations or even outright alliance during most of the remainder, hardly suggested that Russians and Germans were hereditary enemies.

Moreover, throughout much of that period, Russia’s ruling elite had had a considerable Germanic tinge. Russia’s legendary Catherine the Great had been a German princess by birth, and over the centuries so many Russian rulers had taken German wives that the later Czars of the Romanov dynasty were usually more German than Russian. Russia itself had a substantial but heavily assimilated German population, which was very well represented in elite political circles, with German names being quite common among government ministers and sometimes found among important military commanders. Even a top leader of the Decembrist revolt of the early 19th century had had German ancestry but was a zealous Russian-nationalist in his ideology.

Under the governance of this mixed Russian and German ruling class, the Russian Empire had steadily risen to become one of the world’s foremost powers. Indeed, given its vast size, manpower, and resources, combined with one of the world’s fastest economic growth rates and a natural increase in total population that was not far behind, a 1914 observer might have easily pegged it to soon dominate the European continent and perhaps even much of the world, just as Tocqueville had famously prophesized in the early decades of the 19th century. A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain’s belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia.

Obviously, this entire landscape was totally transformed by the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, which swept the old order from power, massacring much of its leadership and forcing the remainder to flee, thereby ushering in the modern world era of ideological and revolutionary regimes. I grew up during the final decades of the long Cold War, when the Soviet Union stood as America’s great international adversary, so the history of that revolution and its aftermath always fascinated me. During college and graduate school I probably read at least one hundred books in that general topic, devouring the brilliant works of Solzhenistyn and Sholokhov, the thick historical volumes of mainstream academic scholars such as Adam Ulam and Richard Pipes, as well as the writings of leading Soviet dissidents such as Roy Medvedev, Andrei Sakharov, and Andrei Amalrik. I was fascinated by the tragic story of how Stalin outmaneuvered Trotsky and his other rivals, leading to the massive purges of the 1930s as Stalin’s growing paranoia produced such gigantic loss of life.

I was not so totally naive that I did not recognize some of the powerful taboos surrounding discussion of the Bolsheviks, particularly regarding their ethnic composition. Although most of the books hardly emphasized the point, anyone with a careful eye for the occasional sentence or paragraph would surely know that Jews were enormously over-represented among the top revolutionaries, with three of Lenin’s five potential successors— Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev—all coming from that background, along with many, many others within the top Communist leadership. Obviously, this was wildly disproportionate in a country having a Jewish population of perhaps 4%, and surely helped explain the large spike in worldwide hostility towards Jews soon afterward, which sometimes took the most deranged and irrational forms, such as the popularity of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and Henry Ford’s notorious publication of The International Jew. But with Russian Jews so much more likely to be educated and urbanized, and suffering from fierce anti-Semitic oppression under the Czars, everything seemed to make reasonable sense.

Then perhaps fourteen or fifteen years ago, I encountered a rip in my personal space-time continuum, among the first of many to come.
In this particular instance, an especially rightwing friend of evolutionary theorist Gregory Cochran had been spending long days browsing the pages of Stormfront, a leading Internet forum for the Far Right, and having come across a remarkable factual claim, asked me for my opinion. Allegedly Jacob Schiff, America’s leading Jewish banker, had been the crucial financial supporter of the Bolshevik Revolution, providing the Communist revolutionaries with $20 million in funding.
My first reaction was that such a notion was utterly ridiculous since a fact so enormously explosive could not have been ignored by the many dozens of books I had read on the origins of that revolution. But the source seemed extremely precise. The Knickerbocker columnist in the February 3, 1949 edition of The New York Journal-American, then one of the leading local newspapers, wrote that “Today it is estimated by Jacob’s grandson, John Schiff, that the old man sank about 20,000,000 dollars for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia.”

Once I checked around a little, I discovered that numerous mainstream accounts described the enormous hostility of Schiff towards the Czarist regime for its ill-treatment of Jews, and these days even so establishmentarian a source as Wikipedia’s entry on Jacob Schiff notes that he played a major role financing the Russian Revolution of 1905, as was revealed in the later memoirs of one of his key operatives. And if you run a search on “jacob schiff bolshevik revolution” numerous other references come up, representing a wide variety of different positions and degrees of credibility. One very interesting statement appears in the memoirs of Henry Wickham Steed [8], editor of The Times of London and one of the foremost international journalists of his era. He very matter-of-factly mentions that Schiff, Warburg and the other top Jewish international bankers were among the leading backers of the Jewish Bolsheviks, through whom they hoped to gain an opportunity for the Jewish exploitation of Russia, and he describes their lobbying efforts on behalf of their Bolshevik allies at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference following the end of the First World War.

8 https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.79764

Even the very recent and highly skeptical 2016 analysis in Kenneth D. Ackerman’s 2016 book Trotsky in New York, 1917 notes that U.S. Military Intelligence reports of the period directly made that astonishing claim, pointing to Trotsky as the conduit for the heavy financial backing of Schiff and numerous other Jewish financiers. In 1925 this information was published in the British Guardian and was widely discussed and accepted throughout the 1920s and 1930s by numerous major media publications, long before Schiff’s own grandson provided a direct confirmation of those facts in 1949. Ackerman rather cavalierly dismisses all of this considerable contemporaneous evidence as “anti-Semitic” and a “conspiracy story,” arguing that since Schiff was a notorious conservative who had never shown any sympathy for socialism in his own American milieu, he surely would not have funded the Bolsheviks.

Now admittedly, a few details might easily have gotten somewhat garbled over time. For example, although Trotsky quickly became second only to Lenin in the Bolshevik hierarchy, in early 1917 the two were still bitterly hostile over various ideological disputes, so he certainly was not then considered a member of that party. And since everyone today acknowledges that Schiff had heavily financed the failed 1905 Revolution in Russia, it seems perfectly possible that the $20 million figure mentioned by his grandson refers to the total invested over the years supporting all the different Russian revolutionary movements and leaders, which together finally culminated in the establishment of Bolshevik Russia. But with so many seemingly credible and independent sources all making such similar claims, the basic facts appear almost indisputable.

Consider the implications of this remarkable conclusion. I would assume that most of Schiff’s funding of revolutionary activities was spent on items such as activist stipends and bribes, and adjusted for the average family incomes of that era, $20 million would be as much as $2 billion in present-day money. Surely without such enormous financial support, the likelihood of any Bolshevik victory would have been far lower, perhaps almost impossible.

When people casually used to joke about the total insanity of “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories” no better example was ever tossed around than the self-evidently absurd notion that the international Jewish bankers had created the worldwide Communist movement. And yet by any reasonable standard, this statement appears to be more or less true, and apparently was widely known at least in rough form for decades after the Russian Revolution, but had never been mentioned in any of the numerous more recent histories that shaped my own knowledge of those events. Indeed, none of these very comprehensive sources ever even mentioned Schiff’s name, although it was universally acknowledged that he had funded the 1905 Revolution, which was often discussed in enormous detail in many of those very weighty books. What other astonishing facts might they similarly be concealing?

When someone encounters remarkable new revelations in an area of history in which his knowledge was rudimentary, being little more than introductory textbooks or History 101 courses, the result is a shock and an embarrassment. But when the same situation occurs in an area in which he had read tens of thousands of pages in the leading authoritative texts, which seemingly explored every minor detail, surely his sense of reality begins to crumble.

In 1999, Harvard University published the English edition of The Black Book of Communism, whose six co-authors devoted 850 pages to documenting the horrors inflicted upon the world by that defunct system, which had produced a total death toll they reckoned at 100 million. I have never read that book and I have often heard that the alleged body-count has been widely disputed. But for me the most remarkable detail is that when I examine the 35 page index, I see a vast profusion of entries for totally obscure individuals whose names are surely unknown to all but the most erudite specialist. But there is no entry for Jacob Schiff, the world-famous Jewish banker who apparently financed the creation of the whole system in the first place. Nor one for Olaf Aschberg, the powerful Jewish banker in Sweden, who played such an important role [9] in providing the Bolsheviks a financial life-line during the early years of their threatened regime, and even founded the first Soviet international bank [10].

9 http://www.unz.com/isteve/swedens-volunteer-auxiliary-thought-police/
10 ​https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olof_Aschberg

When one discovers a tear in the fabric of reality, there is a natural tendency to nervously peer within, wondering what mysterious objects might dwell there. The Ackerman book denounced the notion of Schiff having funded the Bolsheviks as “a favorite trope of Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda” and just prior to those words he issued a similar denunciation of Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent, a publication which would have meant almost nothing to me. Although Ackerman’s particular book had not yet been published when I began exploring the Schiff story a dozen years ago, many other writers had similarly conjoined those two topics, so I decided to explore the matter.

Ford himself was a very interesting individual, and his world-historical role certainly received very scanty coverage in my basic history textbooks. Although the exact reasons for his decision to raise his minimum wage to $5 per day in 1914 [11] — double the existing average pay for industrial workers in America—can be disputed, it certainly seems to have played a huge role in the creation of our middle class. He also adopted a highly paternalistic policy of providing good company housing and other amenities to his workers, a total departure from the “Robber Baron” capitalism so widely practiced at that time, thereby establishing himself as a world-wide hero to industrial workers and their advocates. Indeed, Lenin himself had regarded Ford as a towering figure in the world’s revolutionary firmament, glossing over his conservative views and commitment to capitalism and instead focusing on his remarkable achievements in worker productivity and economic well-being. It is a forgotten detail of history that even after Ford’s considerable hostility to the Russian Revolution became widely known, the Bolsheviks still described their own industrial development policy as “Fordism.” Indeed, it was not unusual to see portraits of Lenin and Ford hanging side-by-side in Soviet factories, representing the two greatest secular saints of the Bolshevik pantheon.
​
11 http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2014/01/03/history/post-perspective/ford-doubles-minimum-wage.html
12 https://www.amazon.com/dp/0375407359

As for The Dearborn Independent, Ford had apparently launched his newspaper on a national basis not long after the end of the war, intending to focus on controversial topics, especially those related to Jewish misbehavior, whose discussion he believed was being ignored or suppressed by nearly all mainstream media outlets. I had been aware that he had long been one of the wealthiest and most highly-regarded individuals in America, but I was still astonished to discover that his weekly newspaper, previously almost unknown to me, had reached a total national circulation of 900,000 by 1925, ranking it as the second largest in the country and by far the biggest with a national distribution. I found no easy means of examining the contents of a typical issue, but apparently the anti-Jewish articles of the first couple of years had been collected and published as short books, together constituting the four volumes of The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem, a notoriously anti-Semitic work occasionally mentioned in my history textbooks. Eventually my curiosity got the best of me, so clicked a few buttons on Amazon.com, bought the set, and wondered what I would discover.

Based on all my pre-suppositions, I expected to read some foaming-at-the-mouth screed, and doubted I would be able to get past the first dozen pages before losing interest and consigning the volumes to gather dust on my shelves. But what I actually encountered was something entirely different.

Over the last couple of decades, the enormous growth in the power and influence of Jewish and pro-Israel groups in America has occasionally led writers to cautiously raise certain facts regarding the untoward influence of those organizations and activists, while always carefully emphasizing that the vast majority of ordinary Jews do not benefit from these policies and actually might be harmed by them, even leaving aside the possible risk of eventually provoking an anti-Jewish backlash. To my considerable surprise, I found that the vast majority of the material in Ford’s 300,000 word series seemed to follow this same pattern and tone.

The individual 80 chapter-columns of Ford’s volumes generally discuss particular issues and events, some of which were well-known to me, but with the vast majority totally obscured by the passage of almost a hundred years. But as far as I could tell, almost all the discussions seemed quite plausible and factually-oriented, even sometimes overly cautious in their presentation, and with one possible exception I can’t recall anything that seemed fanciful or unreasonable. As an example, there was no claim that Schiff or his fellow Jewish bankers had funded the Bolshevik Revolution since those particular facts had not yet come out, only that he had seemed to be strongly supportive of the overthrow of Czarism, and had worked toward that end for many years, motivated by what he regarded as the hostility of the Russian Empire towards its Jewish subjects. This sort of discussion is not all that different from what one might find in a modern Schiff biography or in his Wikipedia entry, though many of the important details presented in the Ford books have disappeared from the historical record.

Although I somehow managed to plow through all four volumes of The International Jew, the unrelenting drum-beat of Jewish intrigue and misbehavior became somewhat soporific after a while, especially since so many of the examples provided may have loomed quite large in 1920 or 1921 but are almost totally forgotten today. Most of the content was a collection of rather monotonous complaints regarding Jewish malfeasance, scandals, or clannishness, the sort of mundane matters which might have normally appeared in the pages of an ordinary newspaper or magazine, let alone one of the muckraking type.

However, I cannot fault the publication for such a narrow focus. A consistent theme was that because of the intimidating fear of Jewish activists and influence, virtually all of America’s regular media outlets avoided discussion of any of these important matters, and since this new publication was intended to remedy that void, it necessarily required coverage overwhelmingly skewed toward that particular subject. The articles were also aimed at gradually expanding the window of public debate and eventually shame other periodicals into discussing Jewish misbehavior. When leading magazines such as The Atlantic Monthly and Century Magazine began running such articles, this result was cited as a major success.

Another important goal was to make ordinary Jews more aware of the very problematical behavior of many of their community leaders. Occasionally, the publication received a letter of praise from a self-proclaimed “proud American Jew” commending the series and sometimes including a check to purchase subscriptions for other members of his community, and this achievement might become the subject of an extended discussion.

And although the details of these individual stories differed considerably from those of today, the pattern of behavior being criticized seemed remarkably similar. Change a few facts, adjust the society for a century of change, and many of the stories might be exactly the same ones that well-meaning people concerned about the future of our country are quietly discussing today. Most remarkably, there were even a couple of columns about the troubled relationship between the earliest Zionist settlers in Palestine and the surrounding native Palestinians, and deep complaints that under Jewish pressure the media often totally misreported or hid some of the outrages suffered by the latter group.

I certainly cannot vouch for the overall accuracy of the contents of these volumes, but at the very least they would constitute an extremely valuable source of “raw material” for further historical investigation. So many of the events and incidents they recount seem to have been entirely omitted from the major media publications of that day, and surely were never included in later historical narratives, given that even such widely known stories as Schiff’s major financial backing for the Bolsheviks were completely tossed down George Orwell’s “memory hole.”
​
With the volumes long out of copyright, I have added the set to my collection of HTML Books, and those so interested may read the text and decide for themselves.

The International Jew
The World’s Foremost Problem
http://www.unz.com/book/henry_ford__the-international-jew

As mentioned, the overwhelming majority of The International Jew seems a rather bland recitation of complaints about Jewish misbehavior. But there is one major exception, which has a very different impact upon our modern mind, namely that the writer took very seriously The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Probably no “conspiracy theory” in modern times has been subjected to such immense vilification and ridicule as the Protocols, but a voyage of discovery often acquires a momentum of its own, and I became curious about the nature of that infamous document.

Apparently, the Protocols first came to light during the last decade of the 19th century, and the British Museum stored a copy in 1906, but it attracted relatively little attention at the time. However, all this changed after the Bolshevik Revolution and toppling of many other long-standing governments at the end of the First World War led many people to seek a common cause behind so many enormous political upheavals. From my distance of many decades, the text of the Protocols struck me as rather bland and even dull, describing in rather long-winded fashion a plan of secret subversion aimed at weakening the bonds of the social fabric, setting groups against each other, gaining control over political leaders by bribery and blackmail, and eventually restoring society along rigidly hierarchical lines with an entirely new group in control. Admittedly, there were many shrewd insights into politics or psychology, notably the enormous power of the media and the benefits of advancing political front-men who were deeply compromised or incompetent and hence easily controllable. But nothing else really jumped out at me.

Perhaps one reason I found the text of the Protocols so uninspiring is that over the century since its publication, these notions of diabolical plots by hidden groups have become such a common theme in our entertainment media, with countless thousands of spy novels and science fiction stories presenting something similar, though these usually involve far more exciting means, such as a super-weapon or a powerful drug. If some Bond villain proclaimed his intent to conquer the world merely through simple political subversion, I suspect that such a film would immediately die at the box office.

But back one hundred years ago, these were apparently exciting and novel notions, and I actually found the discussion of the Protocols in many of the chapters of The International Jew far more interesting and informative than reading the text itself. The author of the Ford books seems to appropriately treat it as any other historical document, dissecting its content, speculating on its provenance, and wondering whether or not it was what it purported to be, namely an approximate record of the statements of a group of conspirators pursuing mastery over the world, with those conspirators widely believed to be an elite fraternity of international Jews.

Other contemporaries seem to have taken the Protocols very seriously as well. The august Times of London fully endorsed it, before later retracting that position under heavy pressure, and I’ve read that more copies were published and sold in the Europe of that era than any other book save the Bible. The Bolshevik government of Russia paid the volume its own sort of deep respect, with mere possession of the Protocolswarranting immediate execution.

Although The International Jew concludes that the Protocols was probably genuine, I doubt that likelihood based upon the style and presentation. Browsing around on the Internet a dozen years ago, I discovered quite a variety of different opinions even within the precincts of the Far Right, where such matters were freely discussed. I remember some forum writer somewhere characterizing the Protocols as “based upon a true story,” suggesting that someone who was generally familiar with the secretive machinations of elite international Jews against the existing governments of Czarist Russia and other countries had drafted the document to outline his view of their strategic plans, and such an interpretation seems perfectly plausible.

Another reader somewhere claimed that the Protocols were pure fiction but very significant nonetheless. He argued that the very keen insights into the methods by which a small conspiratorial group can quietly corrupt and overthrow powerful existing regimes arguably ranked it alongside Plato’s The Republic and Machiavelli’s The Prince as one of the three great classics of Western political philosophy, and earned it a place on the required reading list of every Political Science 101 course. Indeed, the author of Ford’s books emphasizes that there are very few mentions of Jews anywhere in the Protocols, and all the implied connections to Jewish conspirators could be completely struck from the text without affecting their content whatsoever.
​
In any event, this short work is now available as one of my HTML Books, making it quite convenient for reading and text-searching.

The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion
http://www.unz.com/book/anonymous__the-protocols-of-the-learned-elders-of-zion

​Some ideas have consequences and others do not. Although my introductory history textbooks had often mentioned Henry Ford’s anti-Semitic activities, his publication of The International Jew, and the concurrent popularity of the Protocols, they never emphasized any lasting political legacy, or at least I don’t recall any. However, once I actually read the contents and also discovered the enormous contemporary popularity of those writings and the huge national circulation of The Dearborn Independent, I quickly came to a very different conclusion.

For decades pro-immigration liberals, many of them Jewish, have suggested that anti-Semitism was a major factor behind the 1924 Immigration Act that drastically reduced European immigration for the next forty years, while anti-immigration activists have always heatedly denied this. The documentary evidence from that era certainly favors the position of the latter, but I really do wonder what important private discussions may not have been set down in print and entered into the Congressional Record. The overwhelming popular support for immigration restriction had been successfully blocked for decades by powerful business interests, which greatly benefited from the reduced wages of the resulting labor-competition, but now matters had suddenly changed, and surely the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia must have had been a powerful influence.

Russia, overwhelmingly populated by Russians, had been governed for centuries by a Russian ruling elite. Then, heavily Jewish revolutionaries, drawn from a group amounting to just 4% of the population had taken advantage of military defeat and unsettled political conditions to seize control of the country, butchering those previous elites or forcing them to desperately flee abroad as penniless refugees.

Trotsky and a large fraction of the leading Jewish revolutionaries had been living as exiles in New York City, and now many of their Jewish cousins still resident in America began loudly proclaiming that a similar revolution would soon follow here as well. Huge waves of recent immigration, mostly from Russia, had increased the Jewish fraction of the national population to 3%, not far below the figure for Russia itself on the eve of its revolution. If the Russian elites who ruled Russia had been suddenly overthrown by Jewish revolutionaries, is it not obvious that the Anglo-Saxon elites who ruled Anglo-Saxon America feared suffering the same fate?

The “Red Scare” of the 1919 was one response, with numerous immigrant radicals such as Emma Goldman rounded up and summarily deported, while the Sacco-Vanzetti murder trial in 1921 Boston captured the attention of the nation, suggesting that other immigrant groups were violent radicals as well, and might ally themselves with the Jews in a revolutionary movement, just like the Letts and other disgruntled Russian minorities had done during the Bolshevik Revolution. But drastically reducing the inflow of these dangerous foreigners was absolutely essential since otherwise their numbers might easily grow by hundreds of thousands each year, increasing their already huge presence in our largest cities of the East Coast.

Sharply reducing immigration would certainly cause a rise in worker wages and hurt business profits. But considerations of profits are secondary if you fear that you and your family might eventually end up facing a Bolshevik firing squad or fleeing to Buenos Aires with just the clothes on your backs and a few hurriedly-packed suitcases.

A noteworthy bit of evidence in support of this analysis was the subsequent failure of Congress to enact similar restrictive legislation curtailing immigration from Mexico or the rest of Latin America. The local business interests of Texas and the Southwest argued that continuation of unrestricted Mexican immigration was important for their economic success, with Mexicans being good people, politically docile workers, and no threat to stability of the country. This was a clear contrast with the Jews and some other European immigrant groups.

The much less familiar early 1920s battle over restricting Jewish enrollment in the Ivy League may have been another consequence. In his magisterial 2005 volume The Chosen, Jerome Karabel documents how the very rapid growth in Jewish numbers at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and other Ivy League colleges had by the early 1920s become an enormous concern to the Anglo-Saxon elites which had established those institutions and always dominated their student bodies.

As a result, a quiet war over admissions broke out, involving both political and media influence, with the reigning WASPs seeking to reduce and restrict Jewish numbers and the Jews struggling to maintain or expand them. Although there seems no paper-trail of any direct references to the enormously popular national newspaper and books published by Henry Ford or any similar material, it is difficult to believe that the academic combatants were not at least somewhat aware of the theories of a Jewish assault on Gentile society then being so widely promoted. It is easy to imagine that a respectable Boston Brahmin such as Harvard President A. Lawrence Lowell regarded his own moderate “anti-Semitism” as a very reasonable middle-ground between the lurid claims promoted by Ford and others and the demands for unlimited Jewish enrollment made by his opponents. Indeed, Karabel himself points to the social impact of Ford’s publications as a significant background factor to this academic conflict.

At this point in time, the Anglo-Saxon elites still held the upper hand in the media. The very heavily Jewish film industry was only in its infancy and the same was true for radio, while the vast majority of major print outlets were still in Gentile hands, so the descendants of America’s original settlers won this round of the admissions war. But when the battle was rejoined a couple of decades later, the strategic political and media landscape had completely shifted, with Jews having achieved near-parity in print influence and overwhelming dominance in the more powerful electronic media formats such as film, radio, and nascent television, and this time they were victorious, easily breaking the hold of their longtime ethnic rivals, and eventually achieving almost complete dominance over those elite institutions [1].

1 http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

And ironically enough, the most lasting cultural legacy of the widespread anti-Jewish agitation of the 1920s may be the least recognized. As mentioned above, modern readers might find the text of the Protocols rather boring and bland, almost like they had been cribbed from the extremely long-winded monologue of one of the diabolical villains of a James Bond story. But it wouldn’t surprise me if there were actually an arrow of causality in the opposite direction. Ian Fleming created this genre in the early 1950s with his string of international best-sellers, and it is interesting to speculate about the source of his ideas.

Fleming had spent his youth during the 1920s and 1930s when the Protocols were among the most widely read books in much of Europe and leading British newspapers of the highest credibility were recounting the successful plots of Schiff and other international Jewish bankers to overthrow the government of Britain’s Czarist ally and replace it with Jewish Bolshevik rule. Moreover, his later service in an arm of British Intelligence would surely have made him privy to details of that history that went far beyond those public headlines. I think it is more than pure coincidence that two of his most memorable Bond villains, Goldfinger and Blofeld, had distinctly Jewish-sounding names, and that so many of the plots involve schemes of world-conquest by Spectre, a secretive and mysterious international organization hostile to all existing governments. The Protocols themselves may be half-forgotten today, but their cultural influence probably survives in the Bond films, whose $7 billion of aggregate box-office gross ranks them as the most successful movie series in history when adjusted for inflation.
 
The extent to which established historical facts can appear or disappear from the world should certainly force all of us to become very cautious in believing anything we read in our standard textbooks, let alone what we absorb from our more transient electronic media.

In the early years of the Bolshevik Revolution, almost no one questioned the overwhelming role of Jews in that event, nor their similar preponderance in the ultimately unsuccessful Bolshevik takeovers in Hungary and parts of Germany. For example, former British Minister Winston Churchill in 1920 [2] denounced the “terrorist Jews” who had seized control of Russia and other parts of Europe, noting that “the majority of the leading figures are Jews” and stating that “In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing,” while lamenting the horrors these Jews had inflicted upon the suffering Germans and Hungarians.

2 http://www.fpp.co.uk/bookchapters/WSC/WSCwrote1920.html

Similarly, journalist Robert Wilton, former Russia correspondent of the Times of London, provided a very detailed summary of the enormous Jewish role in his 1918 book Russia’s Agony and 1920 book The Last Days of the Romanovs, although one of the most explicit chapters of the latter was apparently excluded from the English language edition [3]. Not long afterward, the facts regarding the enormous financial support provided to the Bolsheviks by international Jewish bankers such as Schiff and Aschberg were widely reported in the mainstream media.

3 http://mailstar.net/wilton.html

Jews and Communism were just as strongly tied together in America, and for years the largest circulation Communist newspaper in our country was published in Yiddish [4]. When they were finally released, the Venona Decrypts demonstrated that even as late as the 1930s and 1940s, a remarkable fraction of America’s Communist spies came from that ethnic background.

A personal anecdote tends to confirm these dry historical records. During the early 2000s I once had lunch with an elderly and very eminent computer scientist, with whom I’d become a little friendly. While talking about this and that, he happened to mention that both his parents had been zealous Communists, and given his obvious Irish name, I expressed my surprise, saying that I’d thought almost all the Communists of that era were Jewish. He said that was indeed the case, but although his mother had such an ethnic background, his father did not, which made him a very rare exception in their political circles. As a consequence, the Party had always sought to place him in as prominent a public role as possible just to prove that not all Communists were Jews, and although he obeyed Party discipline, he was always irritated at being used as such a “token.”

4 https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1zxsj1m.6?seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents

However, once Communism sharply fell out of favor in 1950s America, nearly all of the leading “Red Baiters” such as Sen. Joseph McCarthy went to enormous lengths to obscure the ethnic dimension of the movement they were combatting. Indeed, many years later Richard Nixon casually spoke in private [5] of the difficulty he and other anti-Communist investigators had faced in trying to focus on Gentile targets since nearly all of the suspected Soviet spies were Jewish, and when this tape became public, his alleged anti-Semitism provoked a media firestorm even though his remarks were obviously implying the exact opposite.

5 https://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/07/us/in-1971-tapes-nixon-is-heard-blaming-jews-for-communist-plots.html

This last point is an important one, since once the historical record has been sufficiently whitewashed or rewritten, any lingering strands of the original reality that survive are often perceived as bizarre delusions or denounced as “conspiracy theories.” Indeed, even today the ever-amusing pages of Wikipedia provides an entire 3,500 word article attacking the notion of “Jewish Bolshevism [6]” as an “antisemitic canard.”

6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Bolshevism

I remember in the 1970s the enormous gusts of American praise for Solzhenitysn’s three volume Gulag Archipelago suddenly encountered a temporary headwind when someone noticed that his 2,000 pages had included a single photograph depicting many of the leading Gulag administrators, along with a caption revealing their unmistakably Jewish names. This detail was treated as serious evidence of the great author’s possible anti-Semitism since the actual reality of the enormously large role of Jews in the NKVD and the Gulag system had long since disappeared from all the standard history books.

As another example, the Rev. Pat Robertson, a leading Christian televangelist, published The New World Order in 1991, his fiery attack on the “godless globalists” whom he considered his greatest enemy, and it quickly became a massive national best-seller. He happened to include a couple of brief, somewhat garbled mentions of the $20 million which Wall Street banker Jacob Schiff had provided to the Communists, carefully avoiding any suggestion of a Jewish angle and providing no reference for that claim. His book quickly provoked a vast outpouring of denunciation and ridicule across the elite media, with the Schiff story seen as conclusion proof of his delusional anti-Semitism [7]. I cannot really fault these critics since in pre-Internet days they could only consult the indexes of a few standard histories of the Bolshevik Revolution, and finding no mention of Schiff or his money, naturally assumed that Robertson or his source had simply invented the bizarre story. I myself had had exactly the same reaction at the time.

7 https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1994/10/16/calling-all-crackpots/68f3742a-3b1e-46b5-aedf-b8c0f21a5cf4/

Only after Soviet Communism had died in 1991 and no longer was perceived as a hostile force were academic scholars in America once again able to publish mainstream books that gradually restored the true picture of that past era. In many respects, a widely praised work such as The Jewish Century by Yuri Slezkine, published in 2004 by Princeton University Press, provides a narrative quite consistent with long-forgotten works by Robert Wilton but marks a very sharp departure from the largely obfuscatory histories of the intervening eighty-odd years.
Until about a dozen years ago, I had always vaguely assumed that Henry Ford’s The International Jew was a work of political lunacy and the Protocols was a notorious hoax. Yet today, I would probably consider the former as a potentially useful source of possible historical events otherwise excluded from most standard accounts, while at least understanding the argument of why the latter might deserve a place alongside Plato and Machiavelli as a classic of Western political thought.

Related Reading:
·   The International Jew by Henry Ford
http://www.unz.com/book/henry_ford__the-international-jew/

·   The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion by Anonymous
http://www.unz.com/book/anonymous__the-protocols-of-the-learned-elders-of-zion/

·   American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion
http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/

·   Hating Russia is a Full-Time Job by Philip Giraldi
http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

·   The Elders of Zion and the Masters Discourse by Israel Shamir
​http://www.unz.com/ishamir/the-elders-of-zion-and-the-masters-discourse/

​All statements in this report are an opinion of the author. Act at your own risk. Russia & America Goodwill Association (RAGA) is not responsible for the content of the article. Any views or opinions presented in this report are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RAGA. Any liability in respect to this communication remain with the author.

RAGA News
www.RAGA.org​

In the footsteps of the great Russian writer Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn who did more for the liberation of Russia--and the United States--from the false image of the October (Bolshevik, Communist) Revolution created by the lies of 73 years of global Soviet propaganda, I have done as much as I could to expose it as a vane and violent attempt to impose an utopia on Russia and the world.

In my 1991 book Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth, I argued that the most promising exit from the impasse of the USSR was for Russia to return to its ancient spiritual roots, including Christianity and much of the pre-1917 cultural, economic and political inheritance. Instead of pursuing unworkable Soviet utopia, Russia should have returned to its traditional national identity and let other Soviet republics do the same.

I am happy to say that, to a large extent, this happened.[i] And it is still happening, even though there are many huge obstacles that New Russia has encountered on the path to its own identity. The greatest obstacle is the refusal of the USA to recognize Russia's quest for national self-identity, her sovereignty. This refusal has led to a New Cold War that is even more dangerous than the Old Cold War. The expansion of NATO to Russia’s border is one such worrisome and uncalled-for development. The US numerous unprovoked aggressions in the Middle East and elsewhere is another.

Domestically, the recent transfer of US mega media to a very few hands has effectively curtailed the freedom of expression. However, Donald Trump’s presidential victory signaled that the mega media, overwhelmingly geared against Trump, are not all-powerful. The Internet technology assured the freedom of heterodoxy the mega media has unsuccessfully tried to suppress.

The Unz Review is a flagship of heterodox opinion that seeks to help create an educated alternative to the failed foreign and domestic policies of the US. I have been reading its publications for a number of years and am convinced that it upholds best the standards of responsible free speech so fundamental for the US and the West.

I am especially delighted that the blog-magazine’s founder and primary writer Ron Unz has challenged its writers and readers to a dialogue on most controversial topics, including the role of Jews in the October (Bolshevik) Revolution in Russia. On RAGA’s behalf I already welcomed the recent call by Charles Bausman of the Russia Insider to “drop the Jew taboo” by translating his article into Russian and posting it on our site. Now am delighted to welcome Ron Unz’s American Pravda series of articles on similar issues.

[i] Post-Communist Russia Is Not the Soviet Union. By Daniel J. Mahoney. August 07, 2018
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/08/07/post-communist_russia_is_not_the_soviet_union_137730.html

Ron is not the first Jew to point out that the Bolshevik leadership was heavily Jewish and thus challenge Soviet propaganda’s image of the October Revolution as a popular uprising. In the free election to Constituent Assembly to decide on the form of government in January 1918, the Bolsheviks garnered less than 25% of the vote. Then, Bolshevik troops forcibly dissolved the Assembly to dispersed workers’ demonstrations by gun fire to let Lenin and Trotsky stay in power.

It is doubtful that the majority of Russian Jews supported the violent revolution. In any case, many more Jews voted for the Zionists and Social Revolutionary party rather than the Bolsheviks. Not for nothing, Fanny Kaplan,[i] a Jewish Socialist Revolutionary, made a failed attempt to assassinate Lenin, and Leonid Kannegisser, [ii]a Jewish Tsar army cadet, assassinated Moisei Uritsky,[iii] the notorious brutal Jewish boss of the Petrograd Cheka.

Still, many more Jews of the Russian Empire did not want to do anything with the revolution as they believed their ongoing gradual emancipation assured their equality in Russia. Some of them sided with the White Army and, after the defeat by the Reds, joined the ranks of patriotic Russian emigrees forced to flee the USSR. In my book, Russia Beyond Communism (op.cit), in Chapter 4, I discussed Joseph Bickermann’s Russian collection of articles by a number of prominent Russian Jews opposed to Communism. In 1928 Joseph Bickermann published another anti-Soviet collection, this time in English:  “Ten Years of the Bolshevic Domination”[iv]
Thus, Ron Unz joins the ranks of those Jews who are so independent in their thinking that they defy any stereotypes. After all, the phenomenon of prophets as wise men standing alone against threatening crowds and against all shibboleths of the time is as Jewish as Jeremiah. I am especially delighted that Ron is an admirer of Solzhenitsyn as a writer and Russian prophet who helped Americans get rid of their pro-Soviet illusions. As the author of Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A Study in the Polyphonic Novel, I share Ron’s indignation over US media later vicious insinuations that Solzhenitsyn was an “anti-Semite”.

Most recently I have dealt with the issue of Jews vs. non-Jews in the Russian revolution in a longer article Emperor Michael II in the Solzhenitsyn House.[v] The article was dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the brutal murder of Mikhail (Michael), the last legal ruler of Russia, on June 13, 1918, in my native city of Perm. In fact, some historians in Russia, as well as the late Donald Crawford of UK, call Mikhail “The last Tsar”. In this instance I agree with them rather that my hero Solzhenitsyn who unfortunately, being unfamiliar with post-Soviet research, appraised Mikhail as a weakling and political non-entity of no consequence.

There are also serious US domestic considerations for taking Ron Unz and his alternative blog-magazine seriously. With great regret I must say that I have not seen the American people so deeply torn apart along political, racial, and economic and gender lines since I came to the States in 1966. Some people even talk about the threat of Civil War II Coming?[vi] It is painful to see as US left-liberal cum Neo-Con establishment is trying to divert attention of American people from pressing domestic problems to the imagined threat from Russia.

The RAGA was founded on the idea that world peace is best advanced by US-Russia dialogue whereas domestic tranquility is best assured by a polyphony of various ideological, political, economic or religious beliefs as long as their protagonists—be they Russian or American, Jewish or non-Jewish, Israeli or Palestinian, Christian or Muslim—hold their opinion honestly and engage their opponents as friends in a common search for truth, harmony and peace.

END

[i] Fanya Yefimovna Kaplan (Russian: Фа́нни Ефи́мовна Капла́н; real name Feiga Haimovna Roytblat, Фейга Хаимовна Ройтблат; February 10, 1890 – September 3, 1918) was a member of the Socialist Revolutionary Party who allegedly tried to assassinate Vladimir Leninanny Kaplan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanny_Kaplan

[ii]Leonid Akimovic Kannegisser (Russian: Леони́д Иоаки́мович Каннегисер, March 1896 – October 1918) was a Russian poet and military cadet, known for assassinating Moisei Uritsky, chief of the Cheka in Petrograd, on 17 August 1918. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_Kannegisser

[iii] Moisei Solomonovich Uritsky (Russian: Моисей Соломонович Урицкий; January 14, 1873–August 30, 1918) was a Bolshevik revolutionary leader in Russia. After the October Revolution, he was Chief of Cheka of Petrograd City. Uritsky was assassinated by Leonid Kannegisser, a military cadet, who then fled into the British embassy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moisei_Uritsky

[iv] Joseph Bickerman et al. on Bolshevik domination https://www.abebooks.co.uk/book-search/title/ten-years-of-bolshevic-domination/author/bickermann-joseph-ed-patriotic-union-of-russian-jews-abroad/

His biography is only in Russian Иосиф Менассиевич Бикерман (нем. Josef Bickermann; 15 января 1867, село Окны, Ананьевский уезд, Херсонская губерния — 1942, Париж) — российский историк, писатель и публицист. Отец американского историка-антиковеда Ильи Иосифовича Бикермана и химика Якова Осиповича Бикермана. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Бикерман,_Иосиф_Менассиевич

[v] http://www.raga.org/news/emperor-michael-ii-in-the-solzhenitsyn-house-author-vladislav-krasnov

[vi] Kevin Barrett  http://www.unz.com/article/civil-war-ii-coming/

​
All statements in this report are an opinion of the author. Act at your own risk. Russia & America Goodwill Association (RAGA) is not responsible for the content of the article. Any views or opinions presented in this report are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RAGA. Any liability in respect to this communication remain with the author.

RAGA News
www.RAGA.org​