What’s behind China hacker charges?


by Don Hank

The Obama administration is furious at China supposedly for cyber attacks (see link below).

But China has done this forever and no one ever complained. Why now?

Here is the secret no one in msm will mention, and it is obvious:

Russia (which the US has started a Cold War with over Ukraine, even though the Kiev distrubances were made in USA and EU) and China just signed a huge gas deal for around $400 billion under a gas supply contract. This is designed as a stopgap measure in case Europe decides at some point to stop buying Russian gas. The West sees it as a threat to their economy.
But it’s worse: China and Russia have long been planning to dedollarize, and a look at the shambles the Fed has created and especially at the QEs, the insane issuing dollars in the trillions with no backing, will help you understand why they see this as necessary. Recent reports do not state whether this big gas deal that was just signed will be in a currency other than the dollar, but most likely the contract will be denominated in the yuan or the ruble.

THIS is the true source of the anger in Washington, but anger is hardly the right word. Call it fear.

Well, folks, the US government could have reined in the NGOs (incl Soros’ Open Society Foundation) in Ukraine and it didn’t have to spend $5 billion (as admitted by Victoria Nuland) on destabilizing Ukraine via USAID. And it didn’t have to send the ancient lunatic McCain to meet with a known Nazi in what must have been a deliberate provocation of Russia, a country that lost millions of its people and millions of dollars worth of infrastructure to the Nazis. to the average Russian, there is nothing more hated than a Nazi, andwith good reason. And now we are schmoozing with Nazis in Kiev.

No one made the US government accept the Wolfowitz doctrine of encirclement of Russia. Russia had traditional economic and diplomatic ties to every country surrounding it and there was no rational motive for trying to harm it economically as long as it was cooperating with the US, as it was. It was deliberate provocation.

Now ask yourself. If you told your teen not to go out to the bear cave and taunt the mother bear by stealing her cubs, what would you expect? And would your teen be blameless if he failed to heed your warning?

We were at peace with the Russian bear. Now that peace is troubled. It didn’t have to be this way. If a war breaks out, it must be between the political and corporatist class in the West and We the People, not between us and a scapegoat country.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/china-reacts-furiously-us-cyber-espionage-charges

About these ads

22 responses to “What’s behind China hacker charges?

  1. john warren

    Well stated Mr Hank. You’ve summed up the current situation perfectly. It’s good to know that there are those who’ve come to recognise the direction we’re all heading.

    Now the Queen, of what was once England, has to listen to reports of her worthless elder son blathering on about Putin acting in the same way that Hitler did during the 30s.

    Where’s his head been all these years and why isn’t it now in a basket? Did no one ever educate the heir to the realm about an evil Empire that annexed a place called the Punjab in 1848?

    Not only should Elisabeth’s son have been obliged to precisely explain to the police his role in the death of his own sons’ mother, the fool now should be obliged to precisely explain how he’s managed to reach such an absurd Hitler/Putin comparison.

    It’s true, we’re all heading for extremely troubled times. The comfortable lifestyle that most people in the West have enjoyed, will be changed for the worse in less than a decade. Unless, of course, someone out there knows where we can get our hands on close to $100 trillion bail-out money.

    Thanks again Don Hank.

  2. hugo miller

    Absolutely spot on. What did they expect Putin to do in response to EU encroachment? More to the point, what on earth do they expect him to do now, in response to western sanctions? They have made it impossible for Putin to back down, even if he were so inclined, without loss of face. Completely counter-productive.
    We should have more respect for Russia, particularly in the light of the massive price the Russian people paid to save us from Nazi domination.

  3. Paul Marks

    My first thought was that this post was pathetic – however, actually it is disgusting.

    The Soviets murdered tens of millions of people in the Ukraine in the period from 1917 (over a period of decades).

    The people trying to set up “People’s Republics” in the east of Ukraine are dancing round statutes of Lenin (and other monsters) and waving Soviet banners.

    As for the people in Kiev.

    Mostly social democrat E.U. supporters – hardly my cup of tea (to put the matter mildly) but to call them “Nazis” is vile.

    Don Hank – did your family lose anyone in the Holocaust?

    Mine did.

    So please use your brain (if you have one) before you go round calling people Nazis.

    As for the comments….

    Hugo Miller – I expected better of you.

    The millions who died in Russia after the German invasion (party because Stalin had put the Soviet military on an offensive footing, for his own plans, and so they were not set up to defend against the German attack) did not “save us from Nazi domination”.

    On the contrary, when there was actually a threat to this island – the Soviets sent vast amounts of supplies to HELP the Nazi war effort.

    The Battle of Britain was won without any help from the Soviets – quite the contrary (the Soviets were helping the German side at the time).

    It was in fact Britain and the United States that saved Russia.

    Thousands of allied sailors went to the deaths in the Artic Convoys – taking supplies to SAVE RUSSIA from the Germans.

  4. Paul Marks

    As for John McCain – whom Tom Hank calls “insane” (and so on).

    The middle of the road economic opinions of Senator McCain are (like the European Union) hardly my cup of tea – again to put the matter mildly.

    However, has Tom Hank been tortured for years by the Communists?

    What has Tom Hank actually suffered for the cause of freedom?

    If you have been tortured for years by the Communists Mr Hank – if you are in terrible pain every day of your life (due to your injuries) then I humbly apologise.

    However, if this is not the case – perhaps you would like the consider shutting-your-cakehole before throwing out absurd insults in the directly of John McCain.

    And. please remember, John McCain understood Mr Putin for what he is (an unrepentant KGB thug) when the foolish Mr Bush was still besotted by Mr Putin.

  5. Paul Marks

    As for “what is behind the China hacking charges”.

    A hostile power (in this case China) has been caught engaged in operations against the United States.

    This is not the first time the Chinese have been caught – and Mr Hank’s statement that “no one has complained before” is FALSE.

    Much of this site (not just on the Ukraine – but on everything from attacks on Walmart to support for “Occupy”) reminds me of the television station “Russia Today”.

    Believing Soviet style propaganda (being what Mr Putin and his fellow KGB people would call a “shit eater”) is NOT the same thing as being a libertarian.

  6. john warren

    … and I suppose Mr Marks that you think, that having lost family in WW2 you’ve been given the right to directly insult a man simply because he’s had a different experience to that one obviously suffered by you.

    The Russians were supplied not just with food by the Americans but with weapons of war also… and so were we and so were the French. Does that also mean then, that we too owe today’s freedom solely to the generosity and support of the Americans; that we would all be slaves now had they not joined in the struggle?

    The Russian’s were inspired enough to produce the one tank that made all the difference to the outcome of WW2. They also produced a somewhat crude but nevertheless very effective fighter plane. Above all else however, they produced precisely the right sort of fighting man that was badly needed in order to push back the Nazis before carrying a vicious fight all the way back to Berlin.

    Have Russian soldiers and civilians been persuaded to do barbaric things in the past? Of course they have, we’ve all read the books, the problem is however we all have; including the genus that you’ve obviously sprung from. Are they doing barbaric things now though that’s the question? No,I say they are not. However, for some very suspicious reason, the Americans are blatantly involving themselves in Russian affairs.

    Just a few weeks ago I was reading a post by some chap busily setting out with passion the reasons why the British were saved by the Poles in WW2. Now, according to your train of thought, we also owe our freedom to the Americans. The barbaric, devious Russians apparently just in there receiving aid and grabbing all the free food.

    The RAF – whose British pilots were a talentless lot – were just about to go down for a 3rd time when lady-luck in the shape of Miss Liberty stepped in.
    Or so the fool claimed.

    The fact is, the RAF was beginning to grow stronger month on month toward the end of the war; due mostly to the likes of The de Havilland Aircraft Co and A.V Roe Ltd, who were developing and producing genuine world-class aircraft.

    Do you personally remain acquainted with any Russians Mr Marks? Somehow I think not. The more ordinary Russian citizen did, for a very long time, suffer hardship enough. Now, after seeing the end to a long and bitter cold war, they need to breath a little of the fresh air of a freedom of sorts.

    If you want Charles, The Idiot, you can have him with my blessing. I personally dislike him intensely. How can any man trust another who openly boasts about talking intimately with his broad-beans?

    So Putin was, once upon a time, in the KGB. So what! What proof of his thuggishness can you show me? He’s the boss at the moment and giving out orders but please don’t confuse giving orders with the actions of a thug. I’ve also had to give out orders in the past, some of which have profoundly upset people. That’s the way it goes. I know a Russian ex-navy pilot who was also in the KGB but he just happens to be a very civilised, cultured and friendly fellow. Too civilised in fact to start verbally abusing you for no justifiable reason.

  7. McCain’s suffering decades ago is no excuse for him being an old fool. If he was addled by his experiences, he should retire quietly to the country, not wander around the world stirring up trouble.

  8. Paul Marks

    John Warren – in case you did not notice it was DON HANK who was doing the insulting (of John McCain and others).

    As for you John Warren – your knowledge of the Ukraine and of Mr Putin appears to be rather limited.

    And stop saying “Russia” and “Russians” when you mean the Soviet Union and the Soviets.

    By the way the T34 had a American suspension system – you do mean the T34 tank do you not?

    The Soviet air force effective – certainly AFTER the Germans had run short of fuel (the Soviets could defeat the German air force – as long as the German aircraft were unable to get off the ground).

    In the early stages of World War II raw materials were not a terminal problem – as the Soviet Union gave its ally National Socialist Germany all the raw materials they needed to attack France and Britain. That changed in 1941.

    You know the Soviet Union – the forces who murdered so many millions of people in the Ukraine from 1917 onwards.

    Mr Putin does not believe in Marxism (although his propaganda service “Russia Today” comes out with the standard Marxist tropes every day) – but the people dancing around statues of Lenin waving Soviet ear banners in parts of eastern Ukraine do believe it.

    Putin could stop these antics in five minutes – after all his military and the FSB are organising it But he choses not to stop it – because it serves his purpose.

    According to Mr Putin the end of the Soviet Union was a tragedy – not because he believes in Marxism (he is not a “shit eater” he USES them) but because it meant the collapse of the power of Moscow – i.e. his own power.

    Putin has destroyed the brief liberalism that existed in the Yeltsin years.

    The independent radio and television stations are gone.

    The directly elected State Governors are gone.

    The promise of trial by jury has been forgotten.

    The brief window into liberal values has been closed.

    NOT by Marxist ideology (ironically Mr Obama may be closer to being a “true believer” than Mr Putin is or ever was, after all the nickname for sincere Marxist in the KGB was “shit eater” – someone who “ate the shit” the propaganda it was the duty of the KGB, and the rest of the organs, to spread) – but simply so a vicious gangster (and Mr Putin is a vicious gangster – nothing more, and nothing less) could increase his personal power.

    Having taken over Russia and crushed all opposition the only way for Mr Capone (I mean Mr Putin) to increase his personal power was to expand the borders of Russia.

    Which is exactly what he has done – in Georgia and now in the Ukraine.

    A nation (I remind you) where the NKVD-KGB murdered so many millions of human beings.

  9. Paul Marks

    Ian – blaming John McCain for the warfare in Syria and the Ukraine (claiming he is going round the world stirring up trouble) is stupid – bleeping stupid in fact.

    John McCain is not to blame for Syria or for the Ukraine.

    I repeat what I have always said – nothing can be done in Syria (both sides are vile – if there were liberal forces they were crushed early on in the Civil War, it is too late to help them). And the Ukraine (as I have always said) is a mess – I would not go into it (their are FSB agents everywhere) and the Putin’s armed forces have all the cards (and not just in the Crimea).

    Our NATO allies (such as the Baltic States, Poland and Romania) should be reinforced – but the Ukraine is a “bridge too far”.

    Even Mr Obama (although he will hate it) will play his part.

    He does not have any choice – unless he wants to be destroyed (of course I rather hope he chooses Option B).

    Hence the tragic/comic situation.

    Mr Putin is backing the Marxist forces – even though privately he thinks Marxism is a load of “shit”.

    And Mr Obama (a life long Frankfurt School man – taught at his mother’s knee and by Frank Marshall Davis) is backing the anti Marxist forces – because he (Mr Obama) does not want to give his domestic enemies all the evidence they need to destroy him.

  10. Paul Marks

    It really is as crude as that.

    If the Red banners ever fly over Kiev again – it will not be because Mr Putin believes in this stuff (he does not), it will be because he finds it useful.

    And Mr Obama would feel a brief moment of joy – instantly crushed by the knowledge that it was not really a Marxist victory (it was just a farce) and by the knowledge that he would now be driven into resignation and disgrace.

    If Mr Obama did not have a tragic accident – drowning in two inches of water in his bath.

    So Mr Obama must put on a good show of opposing the Reds in the Ukraine – and it must be more than a show (it must be real opposition).

    As Mr Wilde said of the touching scene in Dickens.

    “One would have to have a heart of stone – not to laugh”.

  11. john warren

    Not only do I have limited knowledge of Russia and the Russians Mr Marks, I likewise have limited knowledge of everything else. You, on the other hand, I must presume from what you write, are all-knowing.

    It’s a little surprising then, that you failed to notice that Don Hank was talking about someone else and not you. So why did you throw insults his way simply because you do not share his opinion about someone else?

    When you insult him, you do by default insult me too because I agree with his opinion of McCain… and so did the other two contributors who were interested enough to comment.

    It’s unlikely to happen with those two particular gentlemen I realise but if people can’t make their comments without finding themselves insulted the very next time they visit the site, they may well decide not to write at all which represents a huge loss.

    Now, within the past half hour or so, I took the trouble to ask a mature Russian if, in his entire life time, he ever referred to his homeland using the words ‘Soviet Union’ or referred to himself being a ‘Soviet’. His reply was, that even in the darkest days of the USSR, very few people ever thought of themselves being Soviets or living anywhere else but in Russia.

    In fact the very word he used was, ‘John, I’m Russki’.

    Now, when he used that word, I was taken a little aback because I once recall being told off by a school teacher for referring to the composer Borodin by use of that very same word.

    So Paul, you’re quite right, clearly I don’t know too much about Russia.

    What about you?

  12. Paul Marks

    John Warren – I have already said (more than once) than Don Hank was insulting John McCain.

    That you (John Warren) agree with the insults – simply shows you to be a rather misguided person.

    By the way (I ask again) what has “Don Hank” suffered for the cause of the West? Anything?

    If he has suffered wounds at the hands of the Communists then I will apologise to him – if not (as I said) perhaps he should shut his cake-hole in relation to someone who has so suffered.

    As for Mr Putin.

    Please examine what Mr Putin has done in Russia – and please come back after you have done so (not before).

    The brief window to a liberal Russia (that seemed to be opening in the Yeltsin years) snapped shut (tight shut).

    As for the Ukraine – given the many millions of human beings murdered in the Ukraine (in Soviet times) by the NKVD-KGB it is the last place on Earth that the Kremlin should be involved in.

    First this site supported the invasion of the Crimea on the grounds that it has always been really Russian (which would have come as news to the Crimean Tartars – who were the majority of the population till the NKVD and the Red Army deported them, a deportation that half did not survive).

    Now this site is not just supporting the invasion of the Crimea – now it is the mainland eastern areas of Ukraine also.

    Where next? Putney? Richmond Park?

    I am sure Mr Putin can produce a few people who say they support him there.

    There is a difference between saying “I wish we could help you – but we can not, the military situation is simply too much against us in this area” (an honest response to the situation in the Ukraine). And saying “it is the fault of the West” – i.e. being on the side of Mr Putin.

    People who take the latter position are scum.

    Not an “insult” – an accurate description.

  13. Paul Marks

    I remind people that Mr Putin is a proud ex member of the KGB (the organisation that, under various names, murdered so many millions of people in the Ukraine) and that under its new name (the FSB) it is organising the killings in the Ukraine today.

  14. hugo miller

    Thank you for your earlier criticism Paul – but I was referring to the suffering of the ‘Russian people’ (siege of Leningrad, 23 million total dead etc etc). Your criticism refers to actions of ‘the Soviets’ which is not what I meant.
    And your more recent article bizarrely describes the word ‘scum’ as an ‘accurate description’ of those who are more favourably inclined towards Putin. ‘Scum’ might or might not be a good metaphor, but an accurate description? I think not. It is an accurate description of unpleasant stuff that floats on the surface of a liquid, not of someone who holds contrary views.
    I still regard Putin’s actions, whether they are right or wrong, as a reaction to EU encroachment into what used to be the Russian sphere of influence.

  15. Paul Marks

    You misread my words Hugo.

    The scum are those (such as the author of the post) who direct disgusting insults at John McCain whilst not saying a word against the vicious KGB gangster Mr Putin.

    By the way – knowledge of Mr Putin’s record should show anyone that he has nothing but contempt for the Russian people (having destroyed the brief promise of some fundamental liberties that the Yeltsin period seemed to be opening up).

    The leading enemy of the Russian people (and the Ukrainian people) today is Mr Putin and his KGB associates.

  16. hugo miller

    I get the feeling they quite like him. He is a strong leader, and the people seem to value that. And frankly I can see why. Putin may be less than perfect, but in my view we, and the Russian people, could do a lot worse. Whatever one thinks of Putin, surely he is better as a friend than as an enemy. And as I said previously, even if you think he should withdraw from his present adventure, we have made that course of action impossible by imposing sanctions. He cannot now back-track, even if he wanted to, without loss of face.

  17. hugo miller

    Oh, and my point was that ‘scum’ can never be an accurate description of a person. As an insult it’s pretty low-level. I prefer more creative utterances, like the old Hungarian curse “May you eat bread bought with money”. The point being that you only need to buy bread if your crops fail. And if your crops have failed, you haven’t the money to buy bread.
    ‘Scum’? You can do better than that!

  18. Well YES Hugo – the correct description of someone who sides with his nation’s enemies is not “scum”.

    I have been watching Mr Putin’s activities for years – but one does not have to be a old nerd like me. One only need watch his television station (“Russia Today”) to know that the man hates the West in general and the United States in particular. He is an enemy and he has always been so (Mr Bush did not seem to notice – but then as Wellington said of his brother in law, the man who went on to lose the Battle of New Orleans, Mr Bush was “not the brightest genius”).

    The correct description of someone who sides with the enemy is (I repeat) not “scum” – the correct formal description is TRAITOR.

    If you wish I will withdraw the word “scum” in relation to Mr Hank – and substitute the word “traitor” instead.

    I repeat Mr Putin has always been an enemy – even when silly Bush was desperately trying to be his pal.

    And the people that Mr Putin is the worst enemy of is the people of Russia – having destroyed all dissenting radio and television, got rid of the election of State Governors, ended any hope of trial by jury (and on and on).

    The widow that seemed to have opened under Mr Yeltsin has been snapped shut by Mr Putin (and Russians will not see that window on liberty reopened in my life time).

    Of course Mr Obama may (privately) look with envy upon what Mr Putin has done (in an American context it would beno more Wall Street Journal, no more Fox News, no more Republican State Governors – “wonderful”), but the fact remains that it is Mr Putin who has actually done it.

    There is nothing we can do about it.

    But we must not make excuses for it either.

    As for the Ukraine – they suffered under the NKVD-KGB for many decades (losing many millions of people).

    Now they are having to fight them (under the name FSB – and those they and the Putin military finance and organise) again.

    I wish the people of Ukraine well in their fight – but they will get no help from me. I will not go myself – and I do not support sending others into a military situation like that (when the cards are all in the other man’s hand).

    I promise the people of the Ukraine nothing – other than one thing.

    I will not urinate upon them – as Mr Hank already has.

    On the people of Russia – many (most?) seem to think Mr Putin is their friend.

    Sadly they could not be more mistaken.

    Mr Putin is the worst enemy of the Russian people.

    That is one point where Prince Charles actually hit on something (without knowing it).

    In Italy by the early 1940s few people believed in Mussolini any more.

    Italians are NOT cowards (far from it) – it is an Anglo-American myth that Italians are cowards.

    If anyone believes that Italians are cowards – then go and insult one (I promise to bring you some nice flowers in hospital).

    However, they were not prepared to fight for a man (Mussolini) they did not believe in.

    Italians who surrendered to the British army had “neatly packed suitcases” – not the sign of a coward (a coward puts his hands up in a panic).

    The Germans were different – very different.

    Many Germans truly believed in Hitler – and fought to the death.

    Many Russians really believe in Mr Putin – they really do not see him as the vicious (and squalid) gangster that he actually is.

    They will fight for him – to the death.

    So best face them (if they must be faced) in a battle space where the cards are stacked our way – not his way.

    Also Mr Putin is a rational gangster – he will NOT attack an area where the odds are against him.

    Short version………

    One should only draw a line, either against Mr Putin or against the Chinese regime, that one is actually prepared to defend.

    And that means only drawing lines in places where the military balance of power is against them (not in their favour).

  19. hugo miller

    “….Many Germans truly believed in Hitler – and fought to the death….”
    I don’t think the problem was that they believed in Hitler, but that they had sworn a personal oath to him, and their sense of honour made it difficult to break that oath.
    Back to Putin – it seems to me Paul, with respect, that you are holding him to Western standards of democracy and indeed decency. My argument is that Russia could do a lot worse than Putin for a leader. If I were in charge I would be trying to keep him onside as far as possible, or at any rate I would refrain from needlessly provoking him as the EU seems to have done.
    I know next to nothing about the Ukraine, but if you asked the man in the street whether it is part of Russia or part of the EU I think you’d get a clear answer. Putin sees it slipping through his grasp and has reacted accordingly.
    At least Putin is a rational man. He wants power and he wants territory. The real threat to this country is the Muslim fanatics who just want to die and take us with them.

  20. Paul Marks

    Yes Hugo – the Nazis were very clever, they used the sense of honour against the honourable.

    And the Germans did not have the Jesuitical training of the Italians – Jesuits (and others) taught that lying was acceptable (if it was to prevent a greater evil) and that an oath sworn under duress was not a real oath.

    The Germans did not have all that sort of thing – they viewed themselves as Northern warriors.

    But they were NOT really following the warrior code.

    The words “my honour is loyalty” (the motto of the S.S.) shows that – for honour and loyalty are DIFFERENT THINGS.

    Honour is the yardstick by which one judges loyalty – if a leader orders one to commit dishonourable acts then he has broken HIS SIDE of the oath.

    The German oath was ONE SIDED (not a warrior or “feudal” pact) – it imposed obligations only one way, and was not attached to any objective moral code.

    Indeed German philosophy had long rejected the idea of universal and objective morality.

    Hence the words of the President of France (later an target of ALLIED German and Soviet disinformation campaign in the 1920s) in reply to the German Declaration of War (a pack of lies – read it) in 1914.

    France would not only be fighting for herself – but France (and the allies of France) would be fighting for the “universal principles of reason and justice” – he said that knowing (as every educated person knew in 1914) that fashionable German philosophy denied the existence of “universal principles” of reason or justice.

    This allowed some Germans (who supported the fashionable philosophy) to commit any crime (for example loot Belgium and turn the population into slaves) because they believed themselves to be “beyond” the silly “illusions” of good and evil

    As for Mr Putin – Hugo you miss my point.

    The point is that there should not be any ABSOLUTE ruler (in Russia or anywhere else). Whether he is a competent absolute ruler or not – is not the point.

    There were real freedoms emerging in Russia – and Putin destroyed them.

    Mr Putin did not even destroy the freedoms that were emerging in Russia out of Marxist principle (he is not a real Marxist – he just uses them on “Russia Today” and so on).

    Mr Putin made himself absolute ruler (destroying all freedoms) on a whim – simply because he wanted power (absolute power) and did not care about anything else.

    A vicious and squalid gangster.

  21. Paul Marks

    My rejection of the idea of an absolute ruler (above the “Western” standards of good and evil) leads me to reject Frederick the Great.

    He is praised for his religious tolerance – but, in reality, it was based upon indifference (it is easy to be tolerant of the various Churches if one does not really believe) and he did not introduce religious tolerance (contrary to the what the simple books say) because it already existed in Prussia.

    He is praised for his law code – by people who have never looked at it (it is a terrible mess), and by people who do not know that (contrary to the story about the King and miller) that Frederick did not let any legal constraint (including laws he had created himself) when it suited him.

    He is praised for his victories (in wars of aggression) – and his defeats are overlooked.

    And on and on.

    Most of my fellow English speakers even seem to think that 18th century France was serf ridden (it was not – and had not been for centuries) and that Prussia was not (it actually was serf ridden).

    My favourite English misunderstanding of Frederick (the cult of Frederick the Great led to the words “the state” being used as a positive term here – and led to German thinkers becoming fashionable) is the oft repeated observation that one did not see cripples on the streets of Berlin and other Prussian towns.

    This was true – but it was because the Prussian military medical service was the worst of any major power.

    One did not see cripples on the streets of Prussian towns because soldiers who severe wounds (severe enough to lose a limb) tended to die in the Prussian service.

    What use were crippled soldiers to Frederick the Great?

    Dead soldiers were much less bother – one just buried them.

  22. Paul Marks

    One of the few English language writers to see through Frederick and “enlightened” Prussia of the period, was Edmund Burke.

    See the (unsigned) writings in the “Annual Register” for the relevant years.

    All the “high culture” (the philosophy, the music, the architecture) was cover for a criminal.