Commentary by Grigory Tsidenkov.
[ColonelCassad] When you hear or read statements that no one died of hunger in the Russian Empire, it is either deliberate deceit or gross ignorance.
When you are given exact figures of those who died of hunger in the Russian Empire, it is a direct manipulation.
All the troubles here are due to the fact that statistics were cave-like, famine was not centrally studied at the state level, the word "hunger" itself was censored, and all more or less significant works were published in specialized, not mass publications.
Let's consider how things really are using the example of the largest and most famous pre-revolutionary famine of 1891-93.
How many people died from the most famous famine of the Russian Empire - no one knows exactly, and I strongly doubt that we will ever establish this. In this post, we will try to show the closest indicators that can be extracted from the available material using official imperial data.
All data presented below are taken from government and ministerial publications, such as: the yearbook "Collection of Statistical Materials", published by the Chancellery of the Committee of Ministers, the yearbook "Statistics of the Russian Empire", published by the Central Statistical Committee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, yearbooks of the Department of Trade and Manufactures, "Works of the Commission for the Study of the Handicraft Industry in Russia", as well as works on the consolidation of budgets of peasant farms in individual provinces by Anuchin, Gryaznov, Smirnov.
The data were compiled by professors F.A. Shcherbina, V.N. Grigoriev, V.I. Pokrovsky in the collection "The Influence of Harvests and Grain Prices on Some Aspects of the Russian National Economy", Volume II, St. Petersburg, 1897. Let us begin not with the mortality rate itself and the process of impoverishment of the population of the Russian Empire, but with its growth.
One often hears, including on TV from various official and not so official persons, a sarcastically asked and, in fact, frankly amateurish question: "Why, despite constant "famines", did the population of the Russian Empire steadily grow exponentially, huh?"
Indeed, the population of the Russian Empire increased from the end of the reign of Peter the Great to the coronation of Nicholas II almost 10 times: from 13 million in 1724 to 120 million in 1894.
We will answer the question in three points:
1. High mortality was compensated by high birth rate in the absence of contraception, abortions, etc. In years of harvest, which alternated with famine, child survival increased, as did marriage and birth rates.
2. Famines, accompanying and separate epidemics covered separate parts of the empire. Where it covered - fear and horror, where it did not cover - there is a normal increase with the addition of refugees. (In the history of the Russian Empire there was only one hellish year, when it covered the ENTIRE country - wild uncontrollable cholera, crop failure and alcoholism in 1848.
The rest of the world was convulsed by revolutions that year — perhaps famine is easier…
This is the only year that gave a negative indicator of the growth of the Orthodox population (there are no statistics for others): -332,276 people.
For comparison, in 1847 it was +494,990, in 1849 +450,246. In addition, 1813 also gave a negative indicator due to war and famine: -2,749 Orthodox people throughout the country).
Constant, even if not very rapid, growth leads, sooner or later, to such a population size that, in the absence of birth control, it begins to multiply in increasing progression simply because of its numbers (see Bangladesh, India, African countries).
3. This table shows us very well how the population of the conditionally "original" Russian Empire actually grew:
1724 - 13 million.
1762 - 19 million.
1796 - 36 million, of which 7 million lived in the new territories annexed under Catherine the Great.
1815 - 45 million, of which 14.5 million lived in the annexed territories.
1851 - 69 million, of which 22 million lived in the annexed territories.
1890 - 113 million, of which 44 million lived in the new territories (see photo 1).
The population of the Russian Empire grew not only due to the European Russian provinces, but also due to the conquered and annexed lands. From the 13 "Petrine" millions, we need to subtract about one and a half - the population of the conquered Baltics and Ingria, Siberia and non-integrated into the general economy foreigners (Kalmyks, Crimean Tatars, Bashkirs, etc.). That is, the conditional "Russians" will be plus or minus 11.5 million.
Looking at the table, we will see that the "Russians" themselves gave an increase of about 5.5 times over 170 years. The figure is quite comparable with the same French in the 18th century, who also died of hunger like flies until the middle of the 19th century - they confidently grew in number, but they were seriously undermined by the revolution and the Napoleonic wars, which gave an increase of only 2 times. Prussia gives approximately the same indicators as Russia. That is, the "Russian" population grew as an average for the hospital, without showing record indicators.
The most famous famine of the Russian Empire in 1891-93 ruined and killed a very large number of people - we can safely say this. But the country in that period still showed growth in general indicators simply due to its enormity. The famine affected to varying degrees 22 of the 50 provinces of European Russia, in which, at the end of 1891, 89,587,000 people lived (with an error of several tens of thousands), at the end of 1892 - 90,923,000 thousand, at the end of 1893 - 91,392,000. Growth, albeit with a decrease, is obvious.
Therefore, we will look separately at those provinces that, as we know, were affected by an unprecedented crop failure.
We take two years for comparison - the post-harvest 1888 and the most famine-ridden 1892. We look at the ratio of births to deaths, which gives the natural population growth. First, simply in quantity, then, to be sure, the same indicators per 100 residents - the population size changed). In some provinces that were completely affected by famine, data may not be provided for all districts, since not all information could be processed (for example, there was confusion and a lack of figures for rural Tatars in the Kazan province).
Grain-producing regions (the hardest hit).
1. Don region:
1888 - 55,128 people were born (6.3 per 100 inhabitants), 32,498 people died (3.7 per 100 inhabitants);
1892 - births 54,519 people (5.6 per 100 inhabitants), deaths 68,257 people (7.0 per 100 inhabitants).
2. Voronezh province:
1888 - births 131,013 people (5.6 per 100), deaths 84,665 people (3.6 per 10);
1892 - births 106,956 people (4.4 per 100), deaths 144,105 people (5.9 per 100).
3. Kharkov province in two famine-affected counties of Volchansk and Starobelsk:
1888 - births 29,648 people (5.7 per 100), deaths 20,667 people (4.0 per 100);
1892 - births 26,311 people (4.7 per 100), deaths 28,392 (5.2 per 100).
4. Tula province in the famine-affected counties of Bogoroditsky, Epifansky, Efremovsky, Kashirsky, Novosilsky:
1888 - births 38,443 people (5.5 per 100), deaths 26,311 people (3.8 per 100);
1892 - births 34,387 people (4.8 per 100), deaths 38,186 people (5.3 per 100).
5. Ryazan province, in the famine-affected Dankovsky, Mikhailovsky, Pronsky, and Ryazhsky districts:
1888 - births 27,729 people (5.1 per 100), deaths 16,429 people (3.0 per 100);
1892 - births 23,695 people (4.2 per 100), deaths 26,550 (4.7 per 100).
6. Oryol province, in the famine-affected Yeletsky district:
1888 - births 15,670 people (7.1 per 100), deaths 10,482 people (5.7 per 100);
1892 - births 13,080 people (4.8 per 100), deaths 13,592 people (5.9 per 100).
7. Kursk province, in the Kursk and Stary Oskol districts affected by famine:
1888 - births 18,494 people (4.7 per 100), deaths 11,843 people (3.5 per 100);
1892 - births 11,843 people (4.0 per 100), deaths 18,110 people (4.4 per 100).
8. Tambov province:
1888 - births 73,610 people (5.1 per 100), deaths 49,289 people (3.0 per 100);
1892 - births 66,528 people (4.4 per 100), deaths 73,443 people (4.9 per 100).
9. Penza province:
1888 - births 66,464 people (5.5 per 100), deaths 45,147 people (3.7 per 100);
1892 - births 57,937 people (4.6 per 100), deaths 64,803 people (5.2 per 100).
10. Kazan province:
1888 - births 79,325 people (4.9 per 100), deaths 50,280 people (3.1 per 100);
1892 - births 63,721 people (3.8 per 100), deaths 84,153 people (5.0 per 100).
11. Samara Governorate:
1888 - births 155,782 people (6.1 per 100), deaths 101,773 people (4.0 per 100);
1892 - births 101,773 people (4.7 per 100), deaths 175,453 people (6.6 per 100);
12. Simbirsk Governorate:
1888 - births 53,542 people (5.4 per 100), deaths 35,651 people (3.6 per 100);
1892 - births 42,161 people (4.1 per 100), deaths 55,771 people (5.5 per 100).
13. Saratov province:
1888 - births 127,669 people (5.4 per 100), deaths 86,630 people (3.6 per 100);
1892 - births 111,418 people (4.6 per 100), deaths 145,459 people (6.0 per 100);
14. Ufa province, without the majority of the Bashkir population:
1888 - births 87,063 people (4.6 per 100), deaths 57,219 people (3.1 per 100);
1892 - births 80,021 people (4.2 per 100), deaths 92,553 people (4.9 per 100).
15. Orenburg province without the majority of the Kirghiz population:
1888 - births 83,331 people (6.2 per 100), deaths 54,606 people (4.1 per 100);
1892 - births 70,653 people (5.1 per 100), deaths 86,152 people (6.2 per 100).
16. Astrakhan province without Kalmyks:
1888 - births 30,727 people (5.9 per 100), deaths 20,755 people (4.0 per 100);
1892 - births 28,798 people (5.4 per 100), deaths 41,608 people (7.7 per 100).
Total for the grain center of Russia:
1888 - births 1,073,618 people (5.5 per 100), deaths 704,245 people (3.6 per 100);
1892 - births 922,359 people (3.6 per 100), deaths 1,156,587 people (5.7 per 100).
In quantitative terms, the natural population decline in 1892 in these provinces was -234,222 people. or -2.1 per 100. If we compare with a prosperous year, then taking the mortality rates of 1888 as normal, we get an increase in mortality of 452,342 people, or 2.1 per 100.
In addition to those indicated, the following non-black earth provinces suffered:
17. Olonets province, in the famine-affected Vytegorsky, Povenetsky, and Olonetsky counties:
1888 - births 5,399 people (4.5 per 100), deaths 4,039 people (3.3 per 100);
1892 - births 4,857 people (3.8 per 100), deaths 5,000 people (3.9 per 100).
18. Novgorod province, Belozersky county affected by famine:
1888 - births 3,326 people (2.3 per 100), died 2,125 people (1.5 per 100);
1892 - births 1,271 people (0.9 per 100), died 2,408 people (1.6 per 100).
19. Nizhny Novgorod province, in the famine-affected Knyaginsky and Semyonovsky districts:
1888 - births 11,563 people (5.3 per 100), died 9,383 people (4.3 per 100);
1892 - births 10,548 people (4.6 per 100), died 10,932 people (4.8 per 100).
20. Vyatka province for the famine-affected districts of Yelabuga, Malmyzhsky, Sarapulsky, Urzhumsky:
1888 - births 62,063 people (5.7 per 100), deaths 41,217 people (3.8 per 100);
1892 - births 54,280 people (4.7 per 100), deaths 60,960 people (5.3 per 100).
21. Perm province:
1888 - births 75,791 people (5.8 per 100), deaths 55,276 people (4.2 per 100);
1892 - births 57,728 people (4.2 per 100), deaths 68,973 people (5.1 per 100).
22. Moscow province, in the Zvenigorod and Ruzsky counties affected by famine:
1888 - births 7,586 people (4.7 per 100), deaths 6,498 people. (4.0 per 100);
1892 - births 7,527 people (4.6 per 100), deaths 7,863 people (4.9 per 100).
In total, according to the figures included in the statistics, for 22 provinces the picture is as follows:
1888 - births 1,239,346 people (5.5 per 100), deaths 822,783 people (3.6 per 100);
1892 - births 1,058,570 people (4.5 per 100), deaths 1,312,723 people (5.6 per 100).
In quantitative terms, the natural population decline in 1892 in the provinces affected by famine was -254,153 people. or -1.6 per 100. If we compare with a prosperous year, then taking the mortality rates of 1888 as normal, we will get an increase in mortality by 489,940 people. or 2.0 per 100.
THESE ARE THE MOST ACCURATE NUMBERS ON MORTALITY DURING THE 1891-93 FAMILY THAT WE HAVE.
And we should operate with them with extreme caution.
In photo 2 - the amount of rented land after the total ruin of the peasants during that famine.
#1
Riots, Looting, Car thefts, Squatters, Homeless, illegal Gang activity, socialism, ridiculous state regs that hamper common sense business operations tax after tax to never fix anything. Plus Wildfires, earthquakes, and now whole towns wiped out by landslides. Coastal Cal. Town erased by massive landslide.
[ZeroHedge] In recording for this week’s NFP, Morgan Stanley made reference to an Atlanta Fed report on immigrant workforce participation.1 The immigration topic had been top of mind for some time, and some things needed to be said. The US workforce data masks a much bigger problem with no signs of stopping even if the immigration does.
A PERMANENT WELFARE STATE
This is the Atlanta Fed's take: Immigrants, generally speaking, don’t enter the workforce for the first two years they’re here. That’s not new. Over time, they usually work their way into the job market as they get used to the country. But this time, things might be different.
We might be looking at the creation of a permanent welfare state. The data being shared suggests that new immigrants won't be working much for the first two years. Instead, they'll be underemployed—that's the term being used. Now, that’s not meant as criticism. It’s just how assimilation works. The real question is whether the current wave of immigrants wants to assimilate. I have my doubts. Take a look at the participation rates in the workforce. The reddish line represents those who've been here for two years or less. Typically, they work fewer hours. That’s just the norm.
Interestingly, during 2020, their work hours actually went up because while others were staying home, they were out working. But now, their hours are dropping again. This trend line is likely to keep falling.
TWISTED AMERICAN DREAM
Historically, immigrants came to this country to escape something—be it socialism, fascism, communism, or poverty—and to build a better life. They understood that hard work was the path to something better. My own grandparents, like many others, came here with nothing and worked their way up. That was the American Dream.
But I’m not sure that’s the mindset of many immigrants coming in now. Yes, they’re likely fleeing something worse than what’s here, but there’s a growing expectation that they’ll be taken care of right away. The concept of working hard to achieve the American Dream might not be as clear to them.
This isn’t just anecdotal; it's backed by the behavior and attitudes we’re seeing. Many immigrants are entering the country with a mindset shaped by political promises of support and benefits, rather than a focus on integrating into the workforce. This shift could lead to a culture clash, as the expectation of immediate support clashes with the traditional American value of earning your keep.
NOBODY UNDER 40 IS HIRED
There’s a disturbing trend. Younger generations, even those born here, seem to be losing the drive to seek out work. I spoke with an executive at a major firm in Philadelphia. He mentioned that they’re not firing people, but they’re also not hiring. What’s striking is that no one under 40 is even applying for jobs anymore. These are white-collar jobs, mind you, not entry-level positions. The younger applicants they do see aren’t qualified, even with degrees.
This points to a broader issue: an educational system that’s not preparing young people for the workforce. The impact is most severe among those under 40, leading to a growing underclass that lacks the skills and motivation to thrive in a competitive job market.
We’re seeing the makings of a Marxist environment—an emerging proletariat class that’s content to be taken care of, rather than striving to succeed. This trend, if it continues, could have devastating consequences for our society.
POLITICIANS ARE MISSING THE MARK
And for those relying on these workforce participation charts, particularly politicians looking to bolster the labor force with new immigrants, I think they’re missing the mark. We do need workers, especially with an aging population. But offering free benefits and expecting them to integrate into the workforce later isn’t a sustainable solution.
#4
My wife's oldest wants to move his family to California. His wife went ballistic at the idea. He is pretty well very left.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/04/2024 13:27 Comments ||
Top||
#5
They may be $h1tholes but at least they're Christian $h1tholes. The way Europe is going, they may not be able to say as much. Plan B might be some place like Chile or Uruguay.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
09/04/2024 15:03 Comments ||
Top||
Bring back the BUG!
[Breitbart] Germany-based Volkswagen (VW) is considering closing plants in its home country as automakers in the European Union (EU) grapple with a flood of cheap China-made cars that are increasingly making up a share of auto sales in the continent.
“The European automotive industry is in a very demanding and serious situation,” Volkswagen Group CEO Oliver Blume said on Monday, suggesting VW may close some of its plants in Germany and drop some job protections for auto workers to cut costs.
A VW plant closure in Germany would be the first time the automaker closed a plant in its home country and the first time it closed a plant worldwide since closing its Westmoreland, Pennsylvania, plant in 1988.
The move would come as Chinese automakers, offering highly subsidized cars sometimes made with slave labor, grow their market share across Europe — triggering the EU to impose temporary tariffs on China-made Electric Vehicles (EVs).
Chinese automakers scored a record 11 percent share of the EU market in June of this year. A policy analysis published in May suggests that China-made EVs will account for a quarter of all EVs in Europe by the end of the year.
VW executives first came under fire in 2019 for business operations in Xinjiang, China — a region that is home to the largest internment of minorities in “concentration camps” since World War II. At the time, executives said their operating in the Xinjiang region was “based purely on economics.”
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
[REGNUM] It has been almost a month since the Ukrainian Armed Forces entered the Kursk region. Volodymyr Zelensky is raising the stakes in possible peace talks, but the current situation is very damaging to the interests of Turkey, a country that has always tried to be a mediator and organizer of various negotiations and deals.
However, in the last month, there has been a passivity that is unusual for Ankara. Recep Tayyip Erdogan is more busy with the Middle East. And now the events there are no less intense and fast-paced than in Kursk and Pokrovsk.
Expectations of an Iranian response to Israel for the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh are still present. Two US carrier groups in the region are on low start. Israel is negotiating, but does not stop fighting not only in Gaza, but also on the West Bank. After the exchange of blows between the IDF and Hezbollah, the risk of opening a Lebanese front is growing.
Turkey is already losing its weight in the region due to the fact that Hamas has been bled dry in Gaza. And Ankara, as a sponsor of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood (a terrorist organization banned in Russia), bears responsibility for them.
But neither Turkey nor even Iran can seriously respond to Israel. The American military presence in the region and the risk of the outflow of the Western investments that have returned with such difficulty do not allow Erdogan to implement a forceful scenario for the defense of the Palestinian cause.
More broadly, if the “Axis of Resistance” war with Israel/the West escalates, it will be very difficult for Turkey to choose sides. Islamic solidarity demands to act against Israel and the US, but the state of Turkish finances does not allow even thinking about it. Therefore, the Turkish Foreign Ministry maintains constant contact with the State Department.
The Americans never tire of repeating that they are counting on their allies in the region to end the war in Gaza, but Ankara, even with its influence on Hamas, cannot play a peacekeeping role, since Benjamin Netanyahu constantly disrupts the negotiation process.
The same thing is essentially happening in another theater of military operations, where Erdogan has been trying to act as a mediator for two years now.
Even before the Kursk events, Dmitry Peskov said that Erdogan was not a possible mediator. The Kremlin was already hinting that until Zelensky took a compromise position and the West agreed to Russia's conditions, negotiations were unrealistic.
After the Kursk adventure, Turkey's chances of mediation became even smaller.
Previously, Putin still allowed for the possibility of negotiations, but now everything is on hold. And Ankara has nothing to say now. How can Erdogan invite Putin to visit to discuss Ukraine when Kyiv has crossed yet another "red line"? It would be a conversation about nothing, and the Kremlin does not intend to talk to Dolmabahce in vain.
This is an extremely awkward situation for Erdogan. He considers himself a respected politician in the world, whose opinion is listened to in Washington/Brussels, Moscow and Beijing. And here he finds himself out of the picture.
Unable to influence the situation around Kursk, Erdogan and his associates began looking for someone to blame.
Just like two years ago, it was the West again.
On August 29, Turkish Parliament Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş recalled on the Habertürk channel that the Istanbul agreements fell through due to Washington's position. "The US is trying to consolidate the European continent due to military actions in Ukraine, wants to involve Russia in serious problems and considers regional turbulence important for the balance of power," he said, adding that in order to end the war, Russia and Ukraine need to "reveal their political intentions."
The following day, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan also lost his temper . During a visit to Slovenia, he warned against the use of nuclear weapons over Ukraine. "There is a risk that this war will escalate into a nuclear conflict," Fidan said. He said Turkey was pushing for a swift peaceful resolution to the conflict and pointed out the difficulty in predicting its consequences.
The minister also noted that Erdogan maintains contact with Putin and the Ukrainian president, offering his initiatives.
The fact that the Turkish administration has broken its nearly month-long silence is largely due to the growing risk of a head-on clash between Russia and the West.
On the eve of the speech by Turkish officials, the Russian Foreign Ministry reminded the United States of the inevitability of punishment for hostile actions that encourage Zelensky to commit acts of aggression: F-16s were sent to Ukraine, and on September 1, the Ukrainian Armed Forces sent more than a hundred drones to Russian cities and are waiting for permission to use long-range missiles.
Given these variables, the question arises not only about the reality of Turkish mediation, but also about Turkey's strategic choice. And here, as in the Middle East, it is not easy to make.
For example, on the one hand, Turkey wants to implement joint energy projects with Russia, but at the same time is forced to adapt to US sanctions. On the other hand, the Turks talk about the need for negotiations, but at the same time there is information about military supplies to Ukraine.
Until the conflict reaches globally threatening proportions, Erdogan is trying to maintain neutrality. And at the graduation ceremony of the Naval Academy, he said: “ We are not choosing between the EU and the SCO, as some claim. We do not need to choose.”
Along with the SCO, Turkey also wants to join BRICS. According to Bloomberg, Ankara has already submitted an application.
At the same time, Moscow still has reasons to worry. The new cabinet's course of establishing ties with the West, which is hostile to Russia, does not cause much optimism in the Kremlin, as Putin already spoke about at the last SPIEF.
And on August 19, the Russian side, through the mouth of Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin, at a meeting with the Turkish ambassador, called on Ankara, just in case, to refuse to participate in the “destructive policy of the countries of the collective West.”
Turkey recently took a couple more steps toward rapprochement with the West. Fidan took part in an informal meeting of EU countries for the first time in five years, where support for Ukraine was discussed, among other things. And in those same days, the Cumhuriyet newspaper reported on Turkey’s readiness to buy F-35 fighters in exchange for the storage of S-400 air defense systems.
Time will tell how events will develop further. But at least until the Ukrainian Armed Forces leave the Kursk region and Zelensky sits down at the negotiating table at the West's behest, Turkey's diplomatic capabilities are limited. Pro-Western tendencies in Ankara's policy could become an additional burden for Turkey's diplomatic efforts in the Ukrainian direction.
So even if Putin praises the “Istanbul format” and Lavrov today recalled Turkey’s attempts to renew agreements on protecting food supplies by sea, the negotiating platform will ultimately be China, the UAE, or some other power in the Global South.
Western leaders go to Beijing and beg Xi Jinping to influence Putin. And the Emirates, as media sources reported, were preparing for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine before the events in Kursk. It is noteworthy that the last major prisoner exchange of 115 for 115 took place with the mediation of Abu Dhabi.
In such a situation, Turkey's mediating role is not visible.
#5
What was really funny was her dodging questions by pretending to take a phone call. She had earbuds in her ears attached to the phone and was holding the phone to her ear. She really does think we are that stupid. If elected she won't be in charge, she will do what she is told. She refuses to talk to the press because it will further reveal how vapid she is.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/04/2024 13:24 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Why do I have this picture of her laughing hers trademark laugh while pushing the nuclear button?
#7
Someone with the resources should change her ear buds to look like fingers. Change the audio so when they go in the audio just goes 'La La La La La...'
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/04/2024 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#9
That is some great optics. And the walking at double-time. Bravo marketing, bravo.
She's supposed to be making a sale but is instead talking on the phone. There is a sales rep whose round I'm on, and he will in the middle of a conversation answer a call. He's got the tics of an old coke head so whatever, but he is always wondering why I don't buy from him.
"She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?”
Posted by: European Conservative ||
09/04/2024 17:15 Comments ||
Top||
#11
^ someone send EC a Pennsylvania mail in ballot. The state supreme court said it was OK.
[ZeroHedge] Former CIA operations officer Philip Giraldi spent over two decades in the agency, which took him around the world. We heard his fascinating and alarming story of "How I Got Fired From The CIA" during a closed-door session at the Ron Paul Institute's Liberty Platform conference held in Dulles, Virginia.
Below are ex-CIA Giraldi's words recounting how his long career led up to a difficult show-down with CIA leadership, and what happened next, as transcribed directly by ZeroHedge [emphasis ours].
After graduate school and following time in the US Army as an intelligence officer, I joined the CIA. I was an operations officer, which means a spy. I was sent to a lot of nice places to live in, starting with Rome. And then I was in Hamburg and then I was in Istanbul, and then Barcelona. After Barcelona I left the agency for a while and came back as a contractor after 9/11, and I was there for another three years.
How I got in trouble with the agency was... after I came back as a contractor I was sent to Afghanistan - this was after we had overrun it. It didn't take me long to figure out that we had replaced the Taliban ...mindless ferocity in a turban... by becoming worse than the Taliban.
And there was no evidence whatsoever coming from CIA analysts that [Osama] bin Laden [and the Afghan government] had actually been involved in 9/11,
Seriously??
and so it was a bit of a contradictory assignment, and I became suspicious after that concerning the bogus things going on and what was developing inside the government.
So a couple years later I was back at CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia and working with them on basic security issues. I had been a counterterrorism specialist and so I was working on different groups that they were considering to be 'over horizon' threats to the United States. This was a new concept, this threat. The tune that was being played in Washington was that 'we are threatened'.
Anyway, while I was doing this I was also talking to a number of my friends who were classmates [from prior schooling and training early in his career] who were analysts and they at this point were very senior analysts in the agency. And the United States meanwhile was preparing to attack Iraq because Iraq was 'a threat'.
And these friends of mine who were analysts saw all of the raw information that went into what the US government was seeing and they said, "you know this is all bullshit, this is all a lie - the intelligence that's coming in is fake. And this fake intelligence is being used to justify starting another war."
So anyway I got 'converted' and I started to be somewhat outspoken on the issue of why we should not be going into Iraq and we should leave this alone. And word of this got around [the agency].
So they called me in, they polygraphed me. They wanted to know who among all of my friends have similar views. I refused to cooperate and they said at that point, "well you failed your polygraph exam, we want to take away your security clearance."
#2
And there was no evidence whatsoever coming from CIA analysts that [Osama] bin Laden [and the Afghan government] had actually been involved in 9/11,
#3
there was no evidence whatsoever coming from CIA analysts
Some lawyerly phrasing there? It is a believable claim. Telling the boss things he does not want to hear is seldom career enhancing. An analyst should be able to figure that out.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
...mindless ferocity in a turban...
