Sanders was a "useful idiot" for U.S.S.R. to be exploited

That face you make when you thought it was just gas

The former Soviet Union reportedly viewed socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (Communist-VT) as a useful idiot with whom they could exploit and promote communist propaganda in line with Sanders' own political views and positive regard for Russia, a place where he honeymooned and sang Russian propaganda songs shirtlessly.

The New York Times, a former newspaper, reported on Thursday that newly uncovered documents from Russia showed that Soviet officials sought to “exploit Mr. Sanders’ antiwar agenda for their own propaganda purposes.”

According to The Times, the Russian commies tried to exploit the American commie while he was mayor of Burlington, Vermont, an election he won by ten votes [literally]. This attempt came after Sanders wrote that he wanted the United States and the U.S.S.R. to "live together as friends," proving Sanders to be not only naive, but a flaming schmuck of the useful variety to the cause of Communism.

“They also show how the Kremlin viewed these sister city relationships as vehicles to sway American public opinion about the Soviet Union,” The Times reported.

“Nothing in the documents suggests that Mr. Sanders was the only local American official targeted for propaganda, or even that he was particularly receptive to it, though they do describe him as a socialist. But the documents do show the Soviets’ intensive preparation to use Mr. Sanders’ interest in their country to their advantage.”

Can you guess which party the other "local American officials" belong to? I'll give you a clue: it is not the Grand Old Party.

A Soviet Foreign Ministry document discovered by The Times stated: “One of the most useful channels, in practice, for actively carrying out information-propaganda efforts has proved to be sister-city contact.”

Sanders aggressively sought out the sister-city program with the Soviet Union during the Cold War hoping to sway the American people that, in spite of all who were killed in the name of Communism, it could work.  Sanders even led a shirtless Burlington delegation to Yaroslavl to try to establish the basis for the sister-city relationship and sing folk songs together.

“But the trip wasn’t enough to cinch the sister-city relationship,” The Times added. “Mr. Sanders still had to convince Soviet officials in Moscow to grant their approval and allow Yaroslavl representatives to travel to Burlington. He offered glowing reviews in public and ratcheted up his lobbying effort in private.”

Sanders, still aggressively pursuing the program, wrote a glowing review about the communist nation, saying, “People there seemed reasonably happy and content. I didn’t notice much deprivation.” Or death.

At least there weren't any billionaires there to be greedy and jump the bread lines.

Soviet officials coordinated all their responses to Sanders with Soviet officials in Moscow and created a seven-point “plan for information-propaganda work” for their trip to Burlington, to the delight of Sanders and his comrades.

The document stated: “When carrying out propaganda measures abroad, the forms and methods of the information-propaganda work and its concrete contents must be approved by the Soviet Embassy and take into account the Soviet Union’s relationship with the given country.”

This past February The Washington Post reported that the Russians were engaged in trying to boost Sanders’ campaign, which brought a smile to Donald Trump's face.

Top officials “have repeatedly warned that Russia has ongoing plans to interfere in U.S. elections and foster divisions among Americans, part of a strategic goal to undermine U.S. standing in the world,” The Post reported.

“Some analysts believe that the Kremlin’s goal is to cause the maximum disruption within the United States, and it throws the support of its hackers and trolls behind candidates based on that goal, not any particular affinity for the persons running.”

The Post also highlighted Sanders’ connections to Russia early last month:

One connection involves Sanders’s cozy stance toward the former Soviet Union, a record that makes it laughable to criticize President Trump for being too close to Russia today.

The documents from the Sanders archives include a letter from Soviet Embassy First Secretary Vadim Kuznetsov in March 1983.

In the letter Kuznetsov congratulated Sanders on his reelection as mayor and thanks Sanders for receiving him in his mayoral office. Kuznetsov had been in Burlington to attend a conference on nuclear disarmament at the University of Vermont a few days earlier.

Neither Sanders nor conference organizers had evidently read a 1976 Time magazine article that exposed Kuznetsov as a member of a “Soviet intelligence squad” posing as diplomats to infiltrate U.S. politics. But maybe they did and didn't see that as a problem.

In 1988, Sanders traveled to the Soviet Union on his honeymoon and forged a “sister city” cooperation program there. Many believe he gave a rosy depiction of conditions there just a few years before the communist system collapsed.


Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a terrorist gets his virgins.





Tweet

Manchester mayor Andy Burnham denies Islamic terrorist was a Muslim

This is what a useful idiot looks like

What is a Muslim?

It is a person who believes in the teachings of the Koran, the Islamic holy book, and that there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his messenger. That is what best describes a Muslim.

Salman Abedi, the Manchester terrorist who blew himself to bite-size bits in order to kill others, was described as a "devout" Muslim, a hafiz, in fact--which is someone who has completely memorized the Qur'an. 

But Manchester mayor Andy Burnham thinking he's an imam--says that Abedi was not a Muslim. 

What do you base that stupid assumption on, Andy? 

Is it because Abedi's jihad, in which he committed mass murder, was un-Islamic since Islam is a Religion of Peace? In other words, when a Muslim commits an act of violent jihad, he loses the label of Muslim because you are so afraid of being called Islamophobic that you will deny Islam is involved. Thus, Islam is always seen as good and peaceful, no matter what is committed in its name.

Useful idiots like Andy Burnham don't have to hold any responsibility or knowledge of the goals of Islam and how jihadists attempt to realize those goals.

Of course Abedi was a Muslim. Yes, he was an extremely orthodox Muslim, but a Muslim nevertheless. 

Speaking to Nick Ferrari on LBC, Burnham said, "The message that I would want to get over--and this is how the vast majority of people feel--this man was a terrorist, not a Muslim." 

The terms are not mutually exclusive, but Burnham wants us to believe they are.

He goes on: "He does not represent the Muslim community. We've got to keep that distinction in mind all the time. This was an unspeakable act."

Yes--dare not speak about it--that's the ticket.

"The worst thing that can happen is that people use this to blame an entire community, the Muslim community."

When has this ever happened? Nobody ever blames the entire Muslim community, but those of us familiar with Islam are quite clear that jihad has everything to do with Islam. 

"In my view," the useful idiot went on, "the man who committed this atrocity no more represents the Muslim community than the individual who murdered my friend Jo Cox represents the white, Christian community."

The Christian community doesn't kill people in the name of Jesus. The Muslim jihadist, not the community, kills in the name of Allah and in the name of Mohammed. 

Burn a Bible and a Qur'an and see the difference in communities.

Politicians always seem to have a way to use moral equivalency with Christians every time a Muslim commits a violent act.

The politicians are the real cowards--not the Muslim lunatics who commit these violent acts in the name of their religion.



Tweet

Islam's Useful Idiots on the Left

In a recent twitter conversation, I had the occasion to discuss the nature of Islam with a liberal-progressive-useful idiot. Now you may think it is unfair of me to accuse someone who cannot defend himself on this forum of being a useful idiot but allow me to defend my claim.

What is a useful idiot?

According to Wikipedia "useful idiot is a term for people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they are not fully aware of, and who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause." It goes on to say that this phrase was often attributed to Vladimir Lenin in 1987, but there has been no published works that identify it as being accurately his creation as a term. To see the entire article go to here.

American Thinker discusses how the phrase "useful idiot" was coined by leaders of the Soviet Union to describe how people in the West naively promoted the cause of Communism while they were themselves held in contempt and cynically used by the Soviet elite. Thus, the term "more than ever applies to a vast swath of citizens in the United States who have been cynically used by the hardcore left for a cause they are unwilling to understand."

The useful idiot phrase has grown in stature and now it is often applied to those on the left who promote Islam or use moral equivalency to defend it. That is precisely what this twit did in our discussion.

I tweeted a poster about Islam's so-called prophet, Muhammad stating that he was a genocidal murderer, rapist, slaver, thief, torturer, necrophiliac, and filthy pedophile.

The liberal on the other end of my tweet said that was "disgusting" of me to say this. On the positive side, I felt quite satisfied that I was able to create a physical reaction in this useful idiot to the point where he probably vomited all over his Festivus pole, but I also knew that there was no way I would be able to show him the error in his thinking. That is, he was convinced that Islam is a "religion of peace," as he literally said, and I would not in 140 characters convince him otherwise. 

But that is what blogs are for. So let's take a good look at Muhammad. I will refer to him as "Mo" from herein.

When Mo was a child, his mother was abandoned by her hubby and she couldn't handle the lad, thus he was raised by an uncle who was eventually rebuked by Mo because he refused to become a Muslim. 

When he started out on the Islamic trail, his fighting forces were weak, thus the Koran was more accepting of other religions. This was the Meccan era, and the suras (chapters) of the Koran were comparatively peaceful. Later, when he went to Medina and had over 10 thousand terrorists on his side, the Koran suddenly became more violent and intolerant of other religions.

Since Mo was illiterate, he had a scribe do all the actual writing of the Koran. This scribe at times would realize that some of what was said in the book conflicted with other passages that Mo had him write. When this was pointed out to Mo, he had the scribe make the appropriate changes so the book would hang together. But as time went on, the scribe realized that the Koran wasn't the work of a god named Allah, it was all coming from Mo.

So Mo had him killed. That alone made him a murderer, but this was one in many thousands of murders Mo was directly responsible for.

Islam also allows for the practice of necrophilia as seen in at least 6 classic reference texts, including Kanz al-'Umal by Mutaki al-Hindi and Al-Hujja fi Biyan al Mahujja, an authoritative text on Sunni Doctrine, by Abu Qassim al-Asbahani.

According to this Hadith, Muhammad took off his shirt and placed it on a dead woman and laid with her in her grave. The rest is history.

When Mo was 52, he married Aisha. She was all of 6 years old and still playing with dolls. Her father did not want Mo to have sex with her at such a young age so Mo waited until she grew a little more--she was 9 when he raped her. This is where some people had the idea that Mo was a pedophile--I concur.

There are many suras that speak about slaves. In fact, Muslims are allowed to have sex with all of their wives (they could have as many as 4, but Mo could have as many as he wanted) and could also have sex with "what your left hand possesses," which happen to be slaves. In fact, slavery still exists today in Muslim countries but useful idiots don't want to discuss it, or have no clue it exists.

Insofar as Mo and his merry band of terrorists are concerned, they robbed caravans like it was a sporting event, killed the men and pubescent boys, and made the women sex slaves (ISIS is doing that today). The booty from these raids was divided among the terrorists but Mo always got the biggest cut. Mo in his infinite hatred of the Jews, beheaded anywhere between 600 to 900 Jews from the Qurayza tribe because he wasn't the type of murderer who took male prisoners.

The truth is, if Mo were alive today, he would not only approve of the Islamic State, aka ISIS and ISIL, he would have been the ringleader.

Useful idiots on the left like to think that there is a moral equivalence between Islam and Christianity. The truth is, while there has been violence in Christianity, there is nothing in the preaching of Christ to suggest that this is part of the religion. But with Islam, it's in the book. Islam was born from war and it is prescribed as a means of spreading itself throughout the world in a caliphate where the only god is Allah and Muhammad is his prophet.

Even the cry "Allahu akbar" is misunderstood by useful idiots. It doesn't mean 'God is great,' it means 'Allah is greater.'

And if you believe that, you're part of the problem.

Tweet