A CRITICISM OF THE ESSAY BY NICK COHEN ON ‘RUSSIAN TREACHERY’
© by Stephen Pidgeon
A criticism of the essay “Russian treachery is extreme and it is everywhere” written by Nick Cohen and published online on The Guardian, Saturday 7 January 2017.
We begin our discussion with the first lie told by this ignominious species of propaganda masquerading as a journalist, when he titles his pile of lies “Russian treachery is extreme and it is everywhere.” Nowhere in this “article” can you find a single shred of evidence of Russian “treachery” – not even a sliding reference, innuendo, or glancing metaphor. Instead, we get a title that is nothing more than condensed, regurgitated feces oozing between the gapped teeth of Nick Cohen. If you’re going to allege Russian treachery, at least give us an example of Russian treachery, even if it is a lie.
This lie then continues with that age-old, logical fallacy that such treachery is “everywhere”. Is that so? Is it going on in Namibia? Are there occurrences in East Timor? Where is the evidence of Russia treachery in Christchurch, New Zealand? Do we find it in the back waters of Uruguay? How is Iceland dealing with the treachery? Mali? New Guinea? Belize? Fiji?
Notwithstanding these obvious questions, we once again have absolutely nothing in the “article” to warrant the conclusion of the title of this piece. It looks like a serious stench accompanies that which is oozing.
Following the exploitive falsehood from this fake news editorial, we get the genuine title of the essay:
Vladimir Putin’s worldwide influence is pernicious. Dare Theresa May confront it?
That is a genuine question, although maybe not the most pressing issue facing Theresa May. Theresa May is facing a populace who wants out of the oligarchic, unelected tyranny that is the EU, and an EU that is currently arming itself with a stated goal of forcing the UK to remain in the EU. That is the most pressing issue facing Theresa May – not Russian influence worldwide.
The brilliant Cohen, again relying on his specious logical fallacies, makes the following irrational claim
Nationalism always breaks its promises because nationalists hate enemies in their countries more than they hate the enemies of their countries.
Although he doesn’t say it here, he is using the Hitler model for his comparison. You remember, the Nazis hated the Jews within (of whom they are alleged to have killed 6 million), more than they hated, say, the Russians (of whom they killed some 16 million)? How does one measure the validity of this statement? Is there a quantitative study measuring the hatred of the Jews over the hatred of the Russians in the average German? How do you factor for those who hold a nationalist bent, over those who were internationalists, or maybe simply continentalists? Were there measurements taken in 1938? Were such measurements taken again in 1939? 1940? Etc.? No. No. There were no such measurements taken by anybody. All you have is a body count, and a dishonest appeal to the emotions of those who still reel from the holocaust but making a subliminal comparison with Hitler. The implication in Cohen’s phrase here is that all nationalists hate the enemy within, more than they hate the enemy without.
Let’s take a comparative look, shall we? Does it require a nationalist to be more fearful of the fellow in the front yard with a rusty knife holding a head of someone he just beheaded, than to be fearful of a fellow in a nation 5,000 miles from here holding the same rusty knife and someone’s head? No, it doesn’t. Internationalists, continentalists, even anarchists are logically more fearful of the enemy who is near than they are of the enemy who if far away. Nationalism is not required. So why would Cohen make this remark? Again, he is subliminally comparing Putin to Hitler, and for that matter, Trump to Hitler. Let’s take a look at his empirical evidence for his claim.
First, Cohen claims that [m]illions of American conservatives proved it when they voted for Donald Trump, even though he was an open admirer of a hostile foreign power.
Dear Mr. Cohen: You consider Russia to be a hostile foreign power because your team under Cameron had troops in the field fighting for ISIS. That makes you and your team particularly bad boys, because the barbarity of ISIS is the worst that has been seen since . . . well, since Muhammed himself graced us with his beheadings. The actions of ISIS, with which the UK was complicit, are war crimes and crimes against humanity on a scale consistent with the genocide practiced by Hitler. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
As an American, I haven’t seen the evidence of Russia doing anything hostile to America. I recall the gift they gave to America following 9/11:
Russia’s gift “tear drop” memorial was dumped in Bayonne, NJ (NYC is barely visible) and buried by the New York media. The base names all of those who died in this event.
Cohen goes on to claim that local hatred, not national security is what moved Americans to vote for Trump. Cohen completely ignores the hard facts on the ground that Obama has gutted the US military, has completely demoralized the US Military by advancing LGBTQ rights, and deploying transgendered people awaiting sexual reassignment surgery with men who were preparing to die for their country. Obama spent hundreds of billions on the failed F-35 program, and abandoned the successful F-22 Raptor (our only competitive fighter jet). Obama deployed American troops all over the world to engage in social welfare functions instead of warfare, and abandoned the veterans when they returned home to the extent that 22 veterans commit suicide every day in America. Americans know more about their national security than Nick Cohen, and he simply gets this wrong.
Cohen claims that Americans hated Obama more than they feared Putin. That would be a correct statement, because Americans generally do not fear Putin at all. Putin has proven himself to be a responsible world leader, and comported himself admirably and well within the confines of international law in Syria, where Russia had an invitation from the duly-elected regime in Syria to make entry and assist. You can’t say that about the UK and the US and their deployment into the region in violation of all standards of international law. At one point, Putin had an “82 percent approval rating” in the US. Obama never had such approval – not ever.
Here is how Americans saw Obama (ching-ching) in comparison with Putin:
Now let’s have a little give and take with Mr. Cohen:
He claims we hated political correctness. No, we despise attacks on our First Amendment right to speak freely being surpressed in order to dominate the conversation by force, which is tyranny and has no place in America.
He claims that we hated – not without reason – the attacks on freedom of speech. Here he shows a modicum of reason, which he believes is sufficient to give his “article” some semblance of credibility. Let me say this to you, Mr. Cohen, so you will know. The credibility of the propaganda organ with whom you are currently employed is shot; completely shot. You will go down with this ship if you don’t figure out a way to begin to tell the truth without your words drowning in your liberal fascist agenda. If you don’t, in the very near future, your career will be simply a zit on the butt of history.
He claims that Americans hated rich liberals and defence lawyers. No, we only hate the rich liberals and defense lawyers that inhabit Comet Ping Pong, and who spend their every waking hour taking or making illegal bribes, committing treason, committing espionage, engaging in war crimes, slaughtering the unborn, poisoning us with chemtrails, jamming an international tax down our throat based on the fake science called climate change, and hiding behind a wall of lies propagated by the bald-faced liars that call themselves the media. There is nothing irrational here, as the arrests and convictions will soon establish.
Cohen claims that Americans hated Black Lives Matter and immigrants speaking Spanish in the shop queue. Wrong. Americans tolerated this mercenary terrorist group blocking our freeways and demanding that we extol Black Lives above everybody else’s life or get beaten to death, tortured, knifed, forced to drink toilet water or worse, until they set up an ambush in Dallas.
Russia has delineated Black Lives Matter as a terrorist organization, which is an accurate assessment given that it was deployed as an anarchist tool of disruption by known international terrorist, George Soros. Americans do not hate Spanish speaking people in stores. Americans do not like people being in the country illegally. If Cohen wants to take the position that illegal entry is okay in America, let him put it in writing and demand the same of Israel.
Cohen claims that Americans hated the “experts” who told them that fossil fuel caused global warming and gun ownership caused crime. Experts? Ha-ha-ha! Americans know that the global warming line is pure bubulum stercus. In fact, so do the people pushing this, which is why they changed the moniker to climate change. It seems like every time Obama opened his mouth about global warming, Washington would get hit with another record breaking blizzard and record cold temperatures. Remember the global warming convention in Copenhagen? The blizzard there was so bad, they had to cancel half of the event. Ha-ha! What a joke. Does Cohen tells us in this paragraph that British courts banned Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth from being shown in British schools because it told nine lies? No, he doesn’t give us this disclaimer, because he is a liar telling a lie.
Speaking of failing to disclaim: can we get some violent crime statistics from the UK now that they have banned firearms? Funny, it hasn’t stopped beheadings and random knife attacks. No one mentions home burglaries in the UK. Come on, Nick, break out that statistic! Gun ownership in the US is protected by the Second Amendment. Get used to it because our 300 million weapons are not going away, and as much as you communists need to get rid of them so you can kill the same 60 million Americans that you killed in Russia under communism, or the 100 million you killed in China, you’re not going to get them without a fight, and it is a fight where you can expect us to shoot back. Get it?
Cohen concludes as follows: For all their patriotism, when it came to the crunch, they cared as little for national security as the “reds” their ancestors condemned in the 20th century.
As you can see with just a little analysis, this conclusion is completely unsupported. It just kind of sticks out there as an unsupported assertion consistent with a lie.
Now, Cohen – at this point a serial perpetrator of fraud by omission – goes apoplectic when Trump makes it clear that Wikileaks has more credibility than the CIA (the outfit running the war against the Second Amendment in America and ISIS in the Levant), the FBI (the group who looked at thousands of acts of espionage, breaches of national security, war crimes, crimes against humanity, federal elections violations, even human trafficking, gun running, and drug running by “presidential candidate” and serial war criminal Hillary Clinton and couldn’t find any reason to indict), the DOJ (a sycophant organization dedicated to covering the treason, bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors committed by Obama and his administration), and other intelligence agencies who represent the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States, and whose intelligence briefing provided zero evidence of Russian involvement at any level in the US election. Too bad, Nick. You, like every other mouthpiece for the fascist left, are just out of luck, and out of evidence. If you had something, you’d produce it. Instead, we get the argument ad hominem. Your writing is a complete vacuity.
As for the rape charges being leveled against Assange: Right. Nothing political there. The child molesting, blood drinking, human sacrificing, sex trafficking pigs that make up the liberal left got their underwear in a bunch when Assange started disclosing what they themselves had written. So they called the bought-off fascists in Sweden to make something up. However exclusive new documents throw doubt on the Julian Assange rape charges in Stockholm. http://observer.com/2016/02/exclusive-new-docs-throw-doubt-on-julian-assange-rape-charges- in-stockholm/
Neither woman ever claimed they were raped by Assange, and the charges, after being brought from the prompt from Americans who were desperate to keep their own words from being leaked to the world, were initially dropped. Only after the pay-off and the pressure were the charges reinstated. In a word, this line of rhetoric is used purposely to inflame and defame – again, the argument ad hominem by Cohen. By the way, no democrat, to date, has denied the content of any of the emails that have been disclosed and at this point, the failure to so deny constitutes an admission that in fact the content is accurate. Of course they could deny and then Anthony Wiener’s laptop would then become admissible, and nobody at the DNC wants that information to become public.
Cohen goes on to use a typical trick of propaganda: to hide the biggest lie in the entire “article” in an irrelevant and untrue allegation, claiming that the CIA no longer inspires fear around the world. Cohen claims that the CIA “is so feeble it cannot stop a Russian plot in plain sight to manipulate a US election.” Okay, blowhard, ante up! Which Russian plot was in plain sight? Come on, point to it! If you can, you would be doing better than the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the White House, because as much as they have tried, they still can’t produce one stitch of evidence to support this claim. Ante up, you lying pile of dried detritus! Where is the plot? Who was involved? What is the supporting evidence? Where is the link? Show me the smoking gun! Okay, show me the smoking IP address! Oh, you can’t show any of that? Well then you must be a bald-faced liar!
Now we get to Cohen’s actionable claim. This lie is so pernicious, he should get his butt sued in US courts for the claim. He makes the statement that “in 2016” the director of the FBI intervened on behalf of the Kremlin’s chosen candidate in the US presidential election. Let’s get a little clarity on this, shall we?
Muslim Sisterhood member, Huma Abedin, has been the personal aide of Hillary Clinton for a long time, including the time she held the post of Secretary of State of the United States. During this period, she married the top Zionist in the US Congress, Anthony Wiener. Shortly after his conversion to Islam and their marriage, somehow his Blackberry ended up with Huma on a trip to Europe with Hillary, and his sexting images were delivered to Breitbart, who began publishing them. Wiener was destroyed politically, and Huma went back to work with Hillary.
Unfortunately for Hillary, Huma kept all of the records Hillary was placing illegally on private servers on a laptop. This laptop was also accessed by Wiener, and when he began to be investigated by the NYPD for approaching underage girls, he willingly gave up the laptop, which held some 650,000 emails. Whoops. The only reason the FBI reopened the case was not because they were yielding to pressure from the Kremlin (who at this point was laughing at the notorious stupidity of Hillary Clinton), but because the NYPD told the FBI if they didn’t reopen the case, they were going to go public. Hillary has never denied the content of those emails.
Cohen then goes on to call RT a propaganda station, while admitting that RT complies with with Britain’s rules on broadcasting accuracy and impartiality. One wonders how Nick Cohen does with Ofcom, given the extent of his lies and omissions. Cohen then claims that the Russian regime “hates the west and uses anti-western conspiracies to explain away its thefts and crimes.” Well, Nick, I would like to entertain this statement if you would put in anything to support your claims. Which thefts and crimes are you discussing? Please limit your response to the thefts and crimes of the Russian government.
Let’s cut to the quick, shall we? What is it that really bothers Nick Cohen? Well, he claims that Putin persecutes homosexuals and denounces the liberal values. Actually, Russian law has taken a position opposed to homosexual proselytizing, not homosexualism per se. Russia will not allow for same-sex marriage, which, coincidentally, happens to be the overwhelming opinion of Russians themselves. Russia’s willingness to stand up to the perversity of Obama and his Pizzagate cohorts is a strong mark in his favor, and Cohen notes that in America, Putin’s support for the conservative side in the culture wars has not gone unnoticed or unappreciated. If you put two and two together here, you will discover that this is the reason Putin has an 82% approval rating in America. Whereas a recent Gallup poll found that Americans’ trust and confidence in the mass media “to report the news fully, accurately and fairly” has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history” now coming in at only 32%. That puts you, Mr. Cohen, some 50% behind Putin. You might want to consider that before shooting off your mouth with more lying propaganda.
So much for the introduction. Now let’s delve into the issues of geopolitics.
Cohen appears to be in a condition of irrational denial in respect of the refugee crisis that emerged last year with such severity the UK voted itself out of the EU to prevent further erosion. Cohen then runs to the opinion of Fourth Reich operatives Bush and Blair for the proposition “that the west is not in a war against Islam.” Maybe we weren’t then, when we were invading Iraq and Afghanistan, but now, after Obama overthrew the governments in Egypt, Tunisia, Sudan, Somalia, and Libya, and invaded Syria with the most barbaric group of Islamic terrorists ever deployed, we most assuredly are at war with Islam. Cohen rightfully assesses that “Putin, Trump and their supporters feel no such constraints” in declaring war on terrorists.
One wonders why Trump would see “Russia as the west’s partner against radical Islam just as it was its partner against Hitler” when Russia deployed against ISIS and al Nusra and summarily defeated them in Syria not in conjunction with Obama, but in spite of Obama.
Cohen then takes a conspicuously Islamist position claiming that Russia “has endorsed the slaughter of Sunni Muslims.” Such a statement is once again oozing from Mr. Cohen’s teeth. Russia has taken a position opposed to Islamic terrorism, and they are not shy in identifying the terrorists, and then killing them. That most of the terrorists are Sunni Muslim is mere circumstance.
In an unprecedented statement of pure below-the-belt conjecture worthy of questioning whether Cohen himself is a pedophile trying to hide, Cohen intimates that investigators should be “following the money.” Well, now, Mr. Cohen: have you recommended that we follow the hundreds of millions that flowed into the Clinton Foundation? Are you recommending that we follow the Saudi campaign donations to HRC? Oh no, you don’t mention those, do you? Could it be that you are openly partisan and that you are writing a blatant piece of propaganda which rests entirely on lies? Yes, it could.
Cohen intimates that money crossed hands to create this alliance between Trump and Putin. Does he discuss the fact that Hillary Clinton’s State Department “approved the transfer of 20 percent of America’s uranium holdings to Russia, while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation”? Well, no he doesn’t. Apparently, if money changes hands between Russian investors and the Clinton Foundation, Trump therefore took a bribe. Finally, we have discovered Cohen’s logic – manic displacement.
Here is where we find the filthy diaper journalism practiced by septic tank bobber Cohen, when he accurately reports that “no roubles [sic] had changed hands” although the way he puts it is as follows: However much Trump, Le Pen and their henchmen may have taken from Russia, the authoritarian right in the west and the authoritarian right in the Kremlin would have been natural allies, even if no roubles had changed hands.
No one has ever made this allegation before, and there is no substantive evidence of any transaction (save the $125 million to the Clinton Foundation from which neither Trump nor Le Pen received any benefit whatsoever) of any payoff at any level. Cohen even admits that no roubles [sic] had changed hands. Therefore, Cohen is alleging that Trump and Le Pen received some in-kind benefit, such as hacking. Unfortunately, the hint, the intimation, the implication, and the inference are completely without any supporting evidence whatsoever. So, the statement can only be construed as pure defamation.
Let’s move on to Cohen’s fearmongering, shall we? He claims in this “article” that following the publication in the mouthpiece of the Rothschild banking community (The Economist) by Edward Lucas warning of a new Cold War, Cohen claims that MI6 is falling over itself in an effort to recruit Russian specialists and the Foreign Office, now that Britain has finally woken up to the danger.
Let’s take a moment to examine the source of that danger. MI6 was one of those groups found actively working with ISIS in Aleppo. Apparently, MI6 sees only Russia’s actions as problematic to the relationship between the nations. Before the Brexit, UK leadership had joined hands with arch-terrorist John McCain and the neocon warmongers working with the Obama administration in ramping up for a full-scale nuclear confrontation with Russia, because Russia was not inclined to allow further proliferation of the Nazi government illegally established in Ukraine by the same group of neocon extremists.
Again Cohen goes on to make unsubstantiated claims that Russia is laundering money in British banks (begging the question as to what constitutes laundering: is it something more than making deposits and withdrawals?). And, as you might expect, Cohen resorts again to his argument ad hominem, calling Russian businessmen kleptocrats (thieves). We won’t resort to discussing the history of the British East Indies company, the slave trade, or the opium wars the enriched the Crown. Cohen uses this logical fallacy to set up the proper emotion for his ultimate assertion: that Russia invaded Ukrainian territory when it captured Crimea.
First of all, Victoria Nuland’s crusade to overthrow the duly-elected government of Ukraine was a war crime, and a violation of the United Nations charter. She should be held accountable at the Hague. Here is the leaflet that circulated in the Ukraine after the installation of this government, requiring the Jews in Ukraine to register.
The leaflet begins “Dear Ukraine citizens of Jewish nationality” and states that all people of Jewish descent over 16 years old must report to the Commissioner for Nationalities in the Donetsk Regional Administration building and “register.”
We know Britain stood by and watched the last holocaust. One wonders if silence was construed as assent. Now, Cohen speaks up on behalf of an illegally installed Nazi regime in Ukraine and turns a blind eye to their demand for an immediate registration of the Jews living there.
And who do you think lives in Crimea?
In March, 2014, the people of Crimea overwhelmingly voted to leave the illegal regime in Kiev and to join Russia – a political reality that had existed for centuries until Nikita Kruschev gave Ukraine control over Crimea following WWII. Apparently, the neocons in Britain resent the fact that they are unable to kill tens of thousands of civilians in Crimea, like their Nazi friends in Kiev have been doing in Donbass.
Cohen then claims that RT has been engaging in state-sponsored propaganda in order to demoralize and breakup the west using hack attacks. Well, that comes down to another set of bald-faced lies. You claim hacking; show some evidence of it.
As for breaking up the west, what do you think Russia is trying to do? Force the UK out of the EU? Too late! Exactly what is being broken up here? Well, if we read Cohen’s inferences, he seems to be beefing about the destruction of the proposed global dictatorship. Scratch a propagandist, find a lying NWO sycophant.
Let’s see if this fake news specialist will take this even farther. Given his understanding of geopolitics (he totes the NWO party line), he states: Britain has to wonder if America is still a reliable partner. Downing Street and the Foreign Office must deal with a US president who endorses every violation of US and international law the British government has denounced.
Let’s talk international law for a moment, shall we?
Article 2 of the UN Charter:
- All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not
- All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Okay, Nick, talk to me about the paid mercenaries that used force to overthrow the government in Kiev. How did that comport with international law? While you’re at it, maybe you can explain what British forces were doing in Syria, and how that fit with these provisions. Spit out the international law for us, won’t you?
However, let’s cut to the top lie of the article, where Cohen claims that Trump “encouraged Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails.” What a joke! Clinton was hacked by all kinds of people, none of whom were Russian. The DNC emails were leaked by DNC insiders. The Podesta emails were protected by the password “password.” Guccifer had accessed Clinton’s server, among others, and don’t forget that Anthony Wiener had a bone to pick, so to speak, with Clinton after his political life was completely destroyed. Wiener, conveniently, had the entire server on his laptop. Wiener, inconveniently, is not Russian.
Furthermore, who would care who leaked what if the emails didn’t contain the information that they did – i.e., that Clinton had illegally maintained accounts on private servers, and that she routinely handled classified information on servers she knew or should have known could and would be hacked.
Cohen, while searching for his mustard-colored diaper pin is in a panic. He thinks that Britain may have to regard the United States as a potentially hostile foreign power. That is the stupidest thing ever said. Trump may be hostile alright – particularly to the fake news people and the war criminals who don’t have enough sense to shut up and go along with the restoration of the world’s economy.
Besides, you would know if the alliance was in real trouble if Trump gave back the statue of Winston Churchill. Then you would know that this thing . . . oh, wait a minute! Barack Obama already did that!
In summary, Nick Cohen is a bald-faced liar, and his “article” is a pack of lies. He is, in my view, a completely discredited individual helping to sink the ship of a discredited news outlet. Adios, guerros.
Stephen Pidgeon is an author of both fiction and non-fiction works, the founder of several companies in high technology, an inventor, a student of theology and philosophy, and a pianist, guitarist, vocalist and composer of music. He is also the founder and director of the human rights organization DecaLogos International, the world’s foremost human rights organization advocating the Ten Commandments as the source of all human rights, and he has written numerous treatises on the Midrash Halakha and what he calls the Torah Redeemed. Stephen has been a practicing lawyer since 1996, and has engaged in advocacy on behalf of clients from municipal courts to the United States Supreme Court.