Tuesday 29th of April 2025

ending the ukraine war is not about dealmaking......

All of Kellogg’s underlying assumptions lacked any basis in reality. Yet Trump seemingly took them on trust.

Political warfare in Washington is endemic. But the body count at the Pentagon has started to rise precipitously. Three of Secretary of Defence Hegseth’s top advisors were placed on leave, and then fired. The war continues, with the Secretary now in the firing line.

 

The Kellogg Framework Is a Disaster for Trump
ALASTAIR CROOKE

 

Why this matters is that the Hegseth attrition comes amid fierce internal debates in the Trump administration about Iran policy. Hawks want an definitive elimination of all Iran’s nuclear and weapons capabilities, whilst many ‘restrainers’ warn against military escalation; Hegseth reportedly was amongst those warning against an intervention in Iran.

The recent Pentagon dismissals have all been identified as restrainers. One of the latter, Dan Caldwell, formerly Hegseth’s Top Adviser and an army veteran, wrote a post slamming the ‘Iran Hawks’ – and subsequently was fired. He was later interviewed by Tucker Carlson. Notably, Caldwell describes in scathing terms America’s wars in Iraq and Syria (“criminal”). This adverse sentiment concerning America’s earlier wars is a rising theme, it seems, amongst U.S. Vets today.

The three Pentagon staffers essentially were fired, not as ‘leakers’, but for talking Hegseth out of supporting war on Iran, it would appear; the Israeli-Firsters, have not given up on that war.

The inflamed fault lines between hawks and traditionalist ‘Republicans’ bleed across into the Ukraine issue, even if the faction membership may alter a tad. Israeli-Firsters and U.S. hawks more generally, are behind both the war on Russia and the maximalist demands on Iran.

Conservative commentator Fred Bauer observes that when it comes to Trump’s own war impulses, they are conflicted:

“Influenced by the Vietnam War of his youth … Trump seems deeply averse to long-term military conflicts, yet, at the same time, Trump admires a politics of strength and swagger. That means taking out Iranian generals, launching airstrikes on the Houthis, and boosting the defence budget to $1 trillion”.

Hegseth’s potential exit – should the campaign for his removal succeed – could cause the struggle to grow fiercer. Its first casualty is already apparent – Trump’s hope to bring a quick end to the Ukraine conflict is over.

This week, the Trump team (including both warring factions, Rubio, Witkoff and General Kellogg) met in Paris with various European and Ukrainian representatives. At the meeting, a Russian-Ukrainian unilateral ceasefire proposal was mooted by the U.S. delegation.

After the meeting, at the airport, Rubio plainly said that the ceasefire plan was ‘a take-it-or-leave-it’ U.S. initiative. The various sides – Russia, Kiev and the European members of the ‘coalition of the willing’ – had only days to accept it, or else the U.S. was ‘out’, and would wash its hands of the conflict.

The framework presented, as reported, is almost (maybe 95%) unadulteratedly that previously proposed by General Kellogg: i.e. it is his plan, first aired in April 2024. It appears that the ‘Kellogg formula’ was adopted then as the Trump platform (Trump was at the time in mid-campaign, and unlikely to have been following the complicated minutiae of the Ukraine war too closely).

General Kellogg is also the likely source for Trump’s optimism that the ending to the Ukraine war could come with a click of Trump’s fingers – through the limited application of asymmetric pressures and threats on both belligerents by Trump – and with the timing decided in Washington.

In short, the plan represented a Beltway consensus that the U.S. could implement a negotiated end-state with terms aligned to U.S. and Ukrainian interests.

Kellogg’s implicit assumptions were that Russia is highly vulnerable to a sanctions threat (its economy perceived as being fragile); that it had suffered unsustainably high casualties; and that the war was at a stalemate.

Thus, Kellogg persuaded Trump that Russia would readily agree to the ceasefire terms proposed – albeit terms that were constructed around patently flawed underlying assumptions about Russia and its presumed weaknesses.

Kellogg’s influence and false premises were all too evident when Trump, in January, having stated that Russia had lost one million men (in the war) then went on to say that “Putin is destroying Russia by not making a deal, adding (seemingly as an aside), that Putin may have already made up his mind ‘not to make a deal’”. He further claimed that Russia’s economy is in ‘ruins’, and most notably said that he would consider sanctioning or tariffing Russia. In a subsequent Truth Social post, Trump writes,

“I’m going to do Russia – whose Economy is failing – and President Putin, a very big FAVOR”.

All of Kellogg’s underlying assumptions lacked any basis in reality. Yet Trump seemingly took them on trust. And despite Steve Witkoff’s subsequent three lengthy personal meetings with President Putin, in which Putin repeatedly stated that he would not accept any ceasefire until a political framework had been first agreed, the Kellogg contingent continued to blandly assume that Russia would be forced to accept Kellogg’s détente because of the claimed serious ‘setbacks’ Russia had suffered in Ukraine.

Given this history, unsurprisingly, the ceasefire framework terms outlined by Rubio this week in Paris reflected those more suited to a party at the point of capitulation, rather than that of a state anticipating achieving its objectives – by military means.

In essence, the Kellogg Plan looked to bring a U.S. ‘win’ on terms aligned to a desire to keep open the option for continuing attritional war on Russia.

So, what is the Kellogg Plan? At base, it seeks to establish a ‘frozen conflict’ – frozen along the ‘Line of Conflict’; with no definitive ban on NATO membership for Ukraine, (but rather, envisaging a NATO membership that is deferred well into the future); it places no limits on the size of a future Ukrainian army and no restrictions on the type or quantity of armaments held by the Ukrainian forces. (It foresees, contrarily, that after the ceasefire, the U.S. might re-arm, train and militarily support a future force) – i.e. back to the post-Maidan era of 2014.

In addition, no territory would be ceded by Ukraine to Russia, save for Crimea which alone would be recognised by the U.S. as Russian (the unique sop to Witkoff?), and Russia would only ‘exercise control’ over the four Oblasts that it currently claims, yet only up to the Line of Conflict; territory beyond this line would remain under Ukrainian control (see here for the ‘Kellogg map’). The Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant would be neutral territory to be held, and managed, by the U.S. There is no mention made of the cities of Zaporozhye and Kherson that have been constitutionally incorporated into Russia, but lie beyond the contact line.

Nothing about a political solution apparently was outlined in the plan, and the plan leaves Ukraine free to pursue its claim to all Ukraine’s former territories – save for only Crimea.

Ukrainian territory west of the Dnieper River however, would be divided into three zones of responsibility: British, French and German zones (i.e. which NATO forces would manage). Finally, no American security guarantees were offered.

Rubio subsequently passed details of the plan to Russian FM Lavrov, who calmly stated that any ceasefire plan should resolve the underlying causes to the conflict in Ukraine as its first task.

Witkoff flies to Moscow this week to present this ‘pig’s ear’ of a plan to Putin – seeking his consent. The Europeans and Ukrainians are set to meet next Wednesday in London to give their riposte to Trump.

What’s next? Most obviously, the Kellogg Plan will not ‘fly’. Russia will not accept it, and likely Zelensky will not either, (though the Europeans will work to persuade him – hoping to ‘wrong-foot Moscow’ by presenting Russia as the essential ‘spoiler’). Reportedly, Zelensky already has rejected the Crimea provision.

For the Europeans, the lack of security guarantees or backstop by the U.S. may prove to be a killer for their aspiration to deploy a tripwire troop deployment to Ukraine, in the context of a ceasefire.

Is Trump really going to wash his hands of Ukraine? Doubtful, given that the U.S. neo-conservative institutional leadership will tell Trump that to do so, would weaken America’s ‘peace through strength’ narrative. Trump may adopt supporting Ukraine ‘on a low flame’ posture, whilst declaring the ‘war was never his’ – as he seeks a ‘win’ on the business front with Russia.

The bottom line is that Kellogg has not well-served his patron. The U.S. needs effective working relations with Russia. The Kellogg contingent has contributed to Trump’s egregious misreading of Russia. Putin is a serious actor, who says what he means, and means what he says.

Colonel Macgregor sums it up thus:

“Trump tends to view the world through the lens of dealmaking. [Ending the Ukraine war] is not about dealmaking. This is about the life and death of nations and peoples. There’s no interest in some sort of short-fused deal that is going to elevate Trump or his administration to greatness. There will be no win for Donald Trump personally in any of this. That was never going to be the case”.

https://www.unz.com/acrooke/the-kellogg-framework-is-a-disaster-for-trump/

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

 

 

SEE ALSO: https://rumble.com/v4fyk09-tucker-carlson-is-extremely-dangerous-to-our-democracy-aussie-cossack-teleg.html (IRAN)

 

SEE ALSO: https://rumble.com/v4fyk09-tucker-carlson-is-extremely-dangerous-to-our-democracy-aussie-cossack-teleg.html (RUSSIA)

 

INTERVIEWS WITH JAMIE MCINTYRE....

James J. McIntye, known professionally as Jamie McIntyre, is an American journalist best known for his stint as CNN's military affairs and senior Pentagon correspondent from 1992 to 2008.[1] His career spans more than four decades, beginning in 1975 with a part-time job as a Sunday morning disc jockey at WDVH, a 5,000-watt country music "daytimer" radio station in Gainesville, Florida, to his current position as senior writer for defense and national security at the Washington Examiner.

Aside from his journalistic work, McIntyre is known for humor. In 2006 he was named "Third Funniest Reporter on the Planet" in a charity competition at the Laugh Factory in New York City. Later that year McIntyre also placed third in the "Funniest Celebrity in Washington" contest at the DC Improv. In 2010 he was the judges' choice as "DC Funniest Reporter", at the Commedia del Media charity event at the National Press Club.

In 2006, McIntyre was among a group of people named Time magazine's "Person of the Year".[2]

 

 

 

ethnogenesis.....

 

Slava Khazaria    BY 

 

When Soviet Russia and Finland agreed to properly define their border in 1920, so the story goes, an old man whose remote cabin sat squarely on the proposed line of demarcation was asked which country he’d rather be a part of. After some deliberation, the man opted for Finland, but it was his reasoning that struck a chord of irony: “At my age, I don’t think I can survive another Russian winter.”

There is a kernel of truth to even the most cynical of apocryphal anecdotes in which life imitates art. The post-modern incarnation of a comical borderland in our current times is Ukraine, whose dilemmatic stumbling in recent history has tempted some of its people with utopian European winters of comfort, while others opt for the Little Russian ones that they’re naturally suited for. Chasing Western carrots and greener pastures is the sort of Pyrrhic end-goal typified by most migrants, who in reality are escaping themselves. In this case, the wanderlust of Ukrainian exceptionalism and entitlement is the Faustian bargain that has only migrated war to their doorstep.

Ukraine’s self-appointed destiny as a fully sovereign entity with no obligation to its complex past, its precarious present, or to a large subset of its population is an idea rooted in separateness from Russia and the chauvinistic ploy to monopolize the Kievan Rus legacy. Ask a Ukrainian about the origins of the Russian state and you’ll often get a lecture in semantics about how Muscovy stole the Rus name, or how Russia is more a successor state to the Golden Horde. Recent developments suggest that the custodians of Ukraine’s heritage want to embellish the contribution of the non-Slavic elements — the Southern nomads — to the formation of Ukrainian identity, bestowing certifiably non-Russian lineages to their pedigree.

In my previous piece on the ethnogenesis of the early Slavs, it was shown that while the Slavs remained homogeneous in their marshy homeland until at least the 10th century, the Pontic-Caspian region was a multi-ethnic (albeit monoracial) abode of roving Indo-European nations. The arrival of the Huns would buck this trend, while other horse-faring Altaic nations would follow in their hoofsteps, hastening the cycle of imperial rise, fall, and replacement or reconstitution. But among the somewhat transient presence of the Avars, Bolgars, Magyars and Pechenegs, one nation stands out for the size and longevity of their empire: the Khazars.

Having conquered such a vast expanse of territory and bringing many Indo-European peoples under their dominion, the contours of identity became distorted like never before. This multi-racial empire would hold together for several centuries, merging all inhabitants to a common name — that of the ruling Turkic Khazars. The 10th century traveling scholar Estakhri (a Persian) described the contrast in rather stark terms: “They are of two kinds, one called the Black Khazars, who are swarthy verging to deep black, as if they were a kind of Indians, and a white kind, who are strikingly handsome.”[1] Other sources from the Muslim world typically focused on just one type of Khazar, usually the more numerous type, whose “complexions are white, their eyes blue, their hair flowing and predominantly reddish.”[2] Thus, even after hundreds of years and nearing the expiration of the Khazar state, the population was diverse but not yet miscegenated.

One of the ways in which the Khazar epoch left its mark, quite literally, on modern Ukraine’s cultural heritage is through a symbol that now has global recognition. The enigmatic coat-of-arms of Ukraine, which represents either a trident or a gyrfalcon, was taken from the seals of early Kievan-Rus rulers but has a deeper origin that is unmistakably tied to the tamga designs of Turkic provenance.[3] This alone would make a modest contribution to the Khazar epoch as a whole, but alas there was another seemingly spurious event of significant consequence: the conversion of the Khazar court to Judaism.

Without delving into the controversial works of Arthur Koestler, Shlomo Sand and Eran Elhaik, suffice it to say that the medieval sources of the time — be they in Sephardic Iberia, the Abbasid Caliphate or the Regnum Teutonicorum — are sufficiently numerous and credible to believe that part of the Khazar population, the upper echelon, indeed adopted Judaism. This is not such an arcane hypothesis considering that much of the region at this time still held pagan beliefs, which had little respectability for post-nomadic peoples on the fringes of civilization now aspiring for political clout.

Turks traditionally practiced shamanistic or animistic beliefs like Tengrism, which survives to this day in Siberia. One of the oldest sources on the Khazars, the 8th century Cosmography, leaves little doubt as to the identity of the true Khazars in their early days on the Pontic Steppe, being described as “the very worst… sooty, foul, with acutely pointed [?] teeth.”[4] This last description likely refers to the filing of teeth that was done to honor the wolf that animist Turks so widely revered and tied to their own bestial creation story. As late as the 10th century, some of the more primitive Turks of the region were engaged in the worship of phallic idols, according to the travelogue of Arab diplomat Ibn Fadlan. Such bizarre cults are not totally surprising given the emphasis that animist cults placed on fertility semiotics, and this may partially explain the phenomenon of Hungary being Europe’s capital of pornography, the outsized role of Ashenazis in pioneering the industry, as well as the vulgar theories of perverted psychiatrist and self-described “fanatical Jew” Sigmund Freud.[5]

Based on quantitative judgment alone it is patently obvious that the large numbers of Jews in Eastern Europe could not all have descended from the Semitic-derived Diaspora that migrated through Italy and Germany over centuries to eventually head eastward. Moreover, the phenotypes of the Ashkenazis, who are a heterogeneous group, contain expressions which are visibly neither Semitic nor particularly European. Consider the archetype of a Mikhail Tal, the Klitschko brothers, Glenn Greenwald or Konstantin Kisin — which I can only describe as a frog-like physiognomy.

Understandably, organized Jewry has wanted no part of Khazar history to overlap with their own — if not for cultural reasons then for political reasons. But in spite of the heavy-handed reflex, some remarkable evidence remains jarringly coincidental, even in the often-mentioned domain of linguistic evidence. Yiddish may be an overwhelmingly Germanic language, but in the Khazar Khaganate it so happens that the name for a silver coin was sheleg, which indeed has ancient Semitic roots and which returned in the form of shekel to be Israel’s new currency in 1980. Another discrepancy surrounds the etymology of yarmulke, the Yiddish name for the Jewish skullcap, to which most dictionaries ascribe a Turkic etymology.

A fascinating German source from the 13th century, long after the disintegration of Khazaria, illustrates what fervently Christian Germans at that time thought of the now seemingly mixed population of the Pontic Steppe. Der Göttweiger Trojanerkriegreferences war-like, red-haired Jews who “looked hideous” and “taxed travelers very heavily” when traveling through the land of “Plotzen” (the empire of the Cumans, who succeeded the Khazars and whose Slavic exonym was Polovtsians).[6]

It’s not exactly clear what part of the Khazar epoch’s affairs and legacy mentioned above could appeal to modern Ukrainian chauvinists. However, one possibility is the identification of Khazaria as one of the first cosmopolitan, multi-racial and multi-creedal states — something that the current Kyiv regime appears to want a lot more of.

The two entities to succeed Khazaria, the Pecheneg Khanate and Cumanian Khanate, were likewise Turkic and pagan but transitioning to post-nomadic life on the Pontic Steppe, which still meant perennial warfare with their neighbors. Kievan Rus at this early time was led by a highly decorated leader, Sviatoslav I, who would be ambushed by the Pechenegs and have his skull fashioned into a drinking goblet by his nemesis Khan Kurya, in accordance with the custom of the Steppe people.[7] Both the Pechenegs and the Cumans would convert to Christianity in the next few generations and enjoy some respite from chronic warfare. However, the general theme of relations between countries of the period was one of opportunistic arrangements based on evolving circumstances and the capricious motives of rulers. Thus, the degree of ethnolingual affinity between nations was totally arbitrary to political alignment, as alien loyalties were arranged as readily as fratricidal bloodshed.

As to the Cumans (also called Kipchaks or Polovtsians) who dominated the Steppe until the time of the Mongols, there is as much uncertainty over their name as their racial identity. For while the different exonyms that referred to this people are calques of the same meaning — pale yellow, it is not known whether this referred to the color of their hair, the coat of their horses or the soil of their region. What is known is that they spoke Turkic, which at the very least was the lingua franca of a multi-ethnic confederation. An invaluable dictionary written in the 13th century, the Codex Cumanicus, has preserved many words from the Cuman language — and among them are words like shabat and shabat kun for Saturday, meaning that some Khazar Jewish linguistic culture had diffused into the Cumans.[8]

Beginning in the 11th century, the unpopular Kievan-Rus prince Sviatopolk II started a trend of marrying the daughter of a Cuman Khan — a trend followed by Volodymyr Monomakh, Rurik Rostislavich, Mstislav the Magnificent and Yaroslav Vsevolodovich. What is interesting about the conjugal habits of European royalty of old is that they seem to have engaged either in extreme inbreeding or extreme outbreeding. If there is a redeeming quality to the royals of the past, it is that they at least fought and sometimes died in the wars that they waged.

Accounts of the physical appearance of the Cumans vary, but it’s likely that a large portion were descendant of the pallid Scythians who previously dominated the Steppe, especially since some sources mention Cuman cultural practices like chivalry and female participation in warfare, which hearken back to descriptions of Black Sea Indo-Europeans like the Amazons.[9] Perhaps the most well-known figure to be of Cuman ancestry was Vlad the Impaler, better known as Dracula. His near-contemporary portrait indicates mixed Eurasian ancestry. Many Cumans who fled the Mongol invasions settled Hungary in the 13th century, with one group being granted self-governance in a county that survived to the 19th century. Genetic analyses from Cuman gravesites in Hungary indicate a high degree of Eurasian admixture.[10]

Ukrainian nationalist folklore group Brothers Kapranov assert that the Cuman legacy was more impactful than is given credit for, to the extent that the country’s national colors derive from the Cumans. This would mean that Ukraine’s flag is related to Kazakhstan’s flag and not Sweden’s as is often assumed. The brothers also promote the idea that Ukraine’s second largest city, Kharkiv, gets its name from the Cuman khan Sharukan.

The Cumans initially fought the Mongols with valiant dedication, but since the bulk of the Golden Horde’s vassals were Turkic peoples, flipping sides was not such an unnatural eventuality. At any rate, most of the Ukrainian lands during this period were nestled inside the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. By the end of the 15th century, the band of serfs, adventurers and mercenaries known as Cossacks began to form in the borderlands of this state, but also in the southern parts of Russia.

The Cossack name is almost certainly cognate with the Khazar of old and the Kazakh of the present, but since names can diversify over time, along with their meanings, linguists choose their own adventure. All of the forms of this name ultimately go back to the Turkic verb qas, which means to terrorize or oppress.[11] At some point, Cossacks graduated from a social class into an ethnic one, in spite of being quite heterogeneous. One need only look at the profile of belligerently pro-Russian advocate Simeon Boikov, a social-media cowboy better known as Aussie Cossack.

 

Since the Cossack legacy is part of Russia’s history too, Ukraine isn’t quite able to merchandise this tradition with the same verve, while both sides have issues with native pretendians accused of false affiliation for performative gratification. In any case, there is still no bigger actor than the politician in camouflage green, Volodymyr Zelensky.

Commentors on my last piece rightly pointed out that Zelensky’s identity should not be considered Slavic, not even by modern and inclusive standards. Besides being of the Hebraic faith, Zelensky’s stocky physique, black hair and brachycephaly indicate greater than average Turkic admixture, be it of Khazar, Pecheneg or Cuman provenance.

Whether by chance or design, Zelensky’s inner circle and high-level cabinet appointments also seem to disproportionately draw from the Eurasian population rather than the Slavic. These include Foreign Affairs Minister Andrii Sybiha, Technology Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, Defence Minister Rustem Umerov (a Crimean Tatar) and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces Oleksandr Syrsky (the Sirs or Shars is an older name for the Cumans).[12] The Head of the President’s Office, Andriy Yermak, also has a peculiar surname that is almost certainly related to the yarmaq — the currency of ancient Khazaria. Yermak happens to be Jewish, along with Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, President Zelensky and his godfather Ihor Kolomoysky.

The copious manifestations of corruption throughout various government organs continue to be reported in the local European media, where fantastic trade in assets is turning over in short amounts of time. In addition to this, there has been bustling trade on the weapons black market, as has been rightly publicized by Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson. This is a template that tessellates to the very top of the power hierarchy in Ukraine, such that you could see it from the Carpathian Mountains. A recent mega-project announced through official channels and without much sense of appropriateness was the commencement of construction on a ski resort in Western Ukraine with 25 hotels and a price-tag of $1.45 billion.

Transparency of the brazen kind is back in vogue, ever since the Oval Office meetingthat stopped the world and put to rest any doubts that Zelensky wasn’t a melodramatic narcissist larping well above his pay-grade. For comparison, back in 1995 Boris Yeltsin was found drunk in his underwear at 5am trying to find a pizza place near the White House, and yet that was still less of a PR disaster than the debacle of Zelensky back-chatting the President and Vice-President in front of the international press corps. Even the Ukrainian ambassador was left face-palming, but overall it was good to see these leaders finally break the fourth wall. If only America’s fifth column was to fall next.

Trump, it’s fair to say, is a transactional president, but while he barters with territory and resources, Zelensky barters with the lives of his countrymen. But he has also shown a willingness to stake Ukraine’s riches and future generations rather than aim for peace. This is not to absolve America’s nefarious role and motives in this conflict, or Trump’s material brand of pacifism. A millennium and half ago, Emperor Marcian allegedly deployed a very obtuse style of diplomacy with Attila the Hun, telling him: “I have gold for my friends, and iron for my foes.”[13] Thus, the haughty demands of indignant strongmen for rare earth minerals is not so different in our modern times after all.

The Ukraine War has clearly become a personal vanity project for President Zelensky, much like his incumbency that dares not be interrupted by elections. If his feckless Western supporters were not so enraptured by his laughable media sanctification or Putin’s demonization, they might have noticed that they’ve been Zelenskiing uphill for three years now, to a peace summit that will never come. Zelensky is the sort of unsavory character, a Merchant of Vinnytsia, who wants his pound of flesh in perpetuity — and also be recognized as a hero for it.

The purpose of giving Mr Zelensky a pedigree assessment as well as a character one is legitimate insofar that leaders with lower ethnic affinity to the populations that they rule over is a conflict of interest, for reasons not limited to lower empathy. There are also simply tendencies of low-trust and low-conscientiousness specific to certain ethnic groups.[14] A Russian-speaking Jew with a Polish surname and Turkic admixture certainly seems like an odd choice for Ukrainian nationalists. What makes Zelensky an ideal case study to contrast Ukrainian and Russian identity is that he presents a familial history of fluidity on the matter. In the Second World War, Zelensky’s grandfather fought on the side of the Red Army against Ukrainian nationalism, in a conflict that was about more than just ideology. While we don’t know much about Zelensky’s true sentiments prior to entering politics (he did not pen a single article or engage in activism of any kind), what we do know is that before being elected he publicly supported the Russian language. He completely changed course shortly after becoming president, mandating Ukrainian in all official spheres including education — at whose behest we can only speculate.

My final piece in this series will make a deeper foray into the onomastics and HBD of the contemporary Ukrainian population, including prominent members of its large diaspora.

https://www.unz.com/article/slava-khazaria/

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.