Friday, September 20, 2019

Every. Single. Time!

It was always going to be something like this:  "Mysterious ‘Havana Syndrome’ suffered by diplomats caused by Zika fumigation, study suggests" (Mojtehedzadeh).

More fun and games from the 'Journalists' For ISIS/al Qaeda, who have not the slightest bit of shame, cashing in their Gulf State checks: tweets (Rania Khalek) (also):
How stupid do you have to be give any credibility to such an obviously fake email, produced by a Syrian opposition supporter and deliberately released on the same day as an article slandering Nir Rosen. The email lacks a date, is clearly photoshopped, and is absurdly worded. twitter.com/charles_lister"
More progressive politics wrecked by the ubiquitous wreckers, the Jews, and again based on an absolutely bizarre Kosher/treif concept, foreign to everybody else, that the most miniscule corruption by association, even in Degrees of Kevin Bacon, means you have to throw out all your dishes (this characteristic thinking is a form of OCD mental pathology, another quintessential Jewish thing): tweet (Fadya risheq):
"Shame on @womensmarch for being part of silencing Muslim women's voice and anyone speaking behalf the Palestinian .. #IMarchWithZahra #boycottAJC #boycottADL #FreePalestine"
Isn't the stunningly obvious answer, always, never, ever, ever, let Jews into your progressive group, for they will certainly take it over for their supremacist purposes and destroy it (see also, the Labour Party). Every.  Single.  Time!  How many fucking times does this have to happen before people wake up?  They are not a group of people; they are a pathology.

Speaking of which, just another everyday cold-blooded murder:  "Palestinian woman fatally shot at Israeli checkpoint" (Nassar).

"Israel loses its leading British MP" (Winstanley).  Note at the end how the Khazar traitors are trying to manipulate another beshekeled crook into the nomination!  Every.  Single.  Time!

"Luongo: Will The Yemen War Be The End Of Saudi Arabia?"  Shi'ite militias in Iraq are becoming important players.  They are why Israel has been bombing Iraq, and are making the Zionists and their American stooges very nervous.  They are very mobile, very well trained, and extremely effective, and still may be the source of the attack on Saudi oil.

Speaking of Iraq - and I can't emphasize this enough - oil is what you don't get when you are a stooge for the Khazars and wage a War For The Jews against Iraq:  "China Just Got Handed The Oil Deal Of A Lifetime" (Watkins).  The hegemon pays a huge price for having its crooked politicians blackmailed and beshekeled.

Guy named Cohen, casting shade:  "China's Giant $400 Billion Iran Investment Complicates U.S. Options" (Cohen).  But it is multi-faceted, huge, and well thought out on all the angles, while the hegemon, of course, is bound tightly by the sad and tragic fact that its politicians are blackmailed and beshekeled by the Mega Group, and have absolutely no option of acting rationally for real American national interests:  "Here is How China-US Trade War Impacts Iran" (Sheikh):

The transparent vulnerabilities of Saudi Arabia:  "Iran vs Saudi Arabia: it’s game-over" (Kadi):
"A country that has virtually one major wealth-producing base (ie oil) and just a few desalination plants that pump fresh water into its major cities, is a very soft target indeed. After all, if those handful of vital targets are hit, not only oil exports will stop, but water will stop running in households. http://thesaker.is/dissecting-the-unfathomable-american-iranian-war/. But the water desalination plants do not have to suffer a direct hit for them to stop running. They need power to run, and the power comes from fuel, and if the fuel supplies stop, so will they, and so will electricity-generating plants in a nation that cannot survive without air-conditioning.
Up until recently, people of Arabia were used to drought, brackish water and searing heat. They lived in and around oases and adopted a lifestyle that used little water. But, the new generation of Saudis and millions of expats are used to daily showers, potable water and climate control in their households. During wars, people normally go to nature to find food and water. They hunt, they fish, they collect local berries and edible wild plants, they fill jars from running rivers and streams, they grow their own vegetables in their backyards, but in Saudi Arabia, in the kingdom of sand, such alternatives do not exist at all.
Furthermore, with a population that has swelled from a few million in the 1950’s, the current population of Saudi Arabia stands at 33 million, and this includes the millions of expats who work and live there
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Saudi_Arabia. The limited supply of brackish water is not enough to get by until any damaged infrastructure is fixed, and it’s not even piped to begin with."
Remember we've seen a couple of instances when the Assholians, fighting in the filthiest way conceivable, sabotaged the Venezuelan energy system?  Venezuela was able to recover, repair, and regroup.  That option doesn't exist for the Saudis, who will be royally, so to speak, and permanently, fucked.

"The Triumph Of Candidate Trump's Foreign Policy: Backing Off 'Disastrous War' With Iran" (Durden).  Too true, and why Trump is still, despite everything, the only sane choice.  Trump seems to have developed an almost Nixonian paranoia - very healthy!  I'm serious! - that the Deep State is trying to get him to lose the next election by tricking him into another War For The Jews, and he is not having it! 

The 'Bannon Turn' in Britain:  "The new heresy that threatens the entire European continent" (Crooke):
". . . In the late 1990s, the then leader of the Labour Party started to move the Party away from its roots in the Trade Union and labour rights movement, towards a ‘Washington Consensus’, neo-liberal stance, as epitomised by Tony Blair (who was drawing on the then Clinton winning experience). Labour had begun to understand that the endorsement of Wall Street and the City of London was a perquisite for any return to office, and that in any case, the factory-based politics of the past, in this shiny, new cosmopolitan world of the urban and suburban élite, simply would not propel the movement into power.
Labour, at that moment, wished to become a typical Euro Centre-Left party, representing middle class voters who wanted to display their decency by voting for a party that espouses some, albeit quite restricted, notion of ‘social concern’.
But, as the preoccupations of the élite, metropolitan consciousness turned more and more ‘globalist’-espousing ‘disadvantaged’ groups, such as ethnic minorities, women, and gender non-conformists, rather than show empathy for the stresses of ordinary working men and women (whom they came to regard with contempt, as Ludite backwoodsmen and racists), so the party’s internal gap opened wide.
This is the opening Cummings and Johnson have espied. The new demographics they believe, require rewriting the electoral landscape. Out is the Conservative electoral coalition of the recent past, which married urban and suburban social liberals with rural small-c conservatives (a marriage which was itself a cause of an internal tension, not dissimilar to that in the Labour Party—and as witnessed by the Tory 21 ‘Remainer’ rebels who were expelled from the Party). Centrism, in short, is no longer seen as advantageous. And, in comes a working-class, socially-conservative politics targeted at non-graduates in the Midlands and the North of England—i.e. at the Sixty-percenters as a whole.
“In this viewing, an extraordinary array of Labour seats [most of whom voted Leave] from Wrexham and Wakefield to Stoke-on-Trent Central and North could tumble into the Tory column on election night, and send Mr Johnson into Downing Street with a commanding majority,” Capurro suggests. Yes, the price may involve the loss of Conservative seats in London and the South East, but in practice the former electoral prize contested by both the main parties—the urban middle class—is itself suffering stress from globalist dynamics, as it bifurcates into the truly rich élite, and a struggling, belt-tightening Middle Class.
The Establishment élite sees the threat: This might—in the long game—end with the enthronement of the politics of the ‘deplorables’, and the eclipse (or ‘obsolescence’ in President Putin’s terminology) of liberalism.
Hence the bitter counter-revolution being mounted by the Establishment in the UK Parliament and the media. And hence the deep Establishment distrust of Johnson, for although he may represent the epitome of Establishment in one sense, he has always tried to position himself as the archetypical ‘outsider’.
The Northern working-class votes are those which Johnson wants to capture most dearly. Dominic Cummings knows from the ‘Leave’ campaign, and from Trump’s successes in US states not traditionally regarded as voting ‘Red’, that a focus on the culture ‘war’—on issues such as transgender rights and ‘political correctness’—can mobilise today’s voters, more than traditional family party affiliations. Cummings precisely intends to lever the toxicity of globalism not just with the ‘deplorables,’ but with a Middle Class increasingly fearful of slipping into the abyss."
Corbyn's consistent labor-centric politics has the answer to this, so the Khazars are being used in their traditional destructive role to undermine Labour. Globo-homo - as it is often called - is so driven to preserve itself that it is willing to completely undermine trust in traditional institutions - always marketed as at least playing 'fair' - in order to block it:
"Thibault Muzergues, European director of the International Republican Institute, warns that a structural divorce between the people and their representatives is in play. This happens once state institutions are viewed as a brake to preserve a status quo that is already in dispute, and in crisis. In other words, the Establishment counter action, and its rhetorical flourishes (i.e. describing the prorogation of the UK parliament as (literally) a coup d’état) in order to facilitate the crushing of the threat of ‘deplorablism,’ precisely sets the ground for more bitter internal European strife.
“Some extol the unwavering will of the British leader [Johnson] to do what is necessary (within the limits of his constitutional rights, at least as long as the British courts will not block him) to put an end to the debate on Brexit by respecting the popular will … whilst others [in juxtaposition], praise the virtue of the [Italian] president for saving parliamentary democracy—in the face of the risk of a Salvini government … [coming to power].
“In both cases we are confronted with a conflict between direct democracy and parliamentary democracy, but this is not necessarily what is played out in the minds of actors, let alone citizens. For them, it is not so much a crisis of the institutions; but rather that of a crisis around Brexit, or in the person of Matteo Salvini.
“The problem is that the politicians in each camp (and with them their supporters) will be able to radically change their discourse on this question of legitimacy according to their own interests …
“This is a very dangerous game because it prepares the excessive politicization of institutions in a context of polarization of debates, and their use for partisan ends only—which undermines their legitimacy a little more. Without these institutions to manage or even settle our political conflicts, there is little that separates us from civil war or, as Hobbes described almost four centuries ago, from bellum omnium contra omnes, the war of all against all. The slope we are currently following is therefore necessarily dangerous.”
But in comparing Johnson to Viktor Orban —as Austrian newspaper Der Standard did, with its London correspondent writing “Johnson and his henchmen clearly think Brexit is more important than democracy and the rule of law”; with Germany’s international public broadcaster DW calling “Boris Johnson, the UK dictator,” and Yascha Mounk in France’s Le Monde newspaper writing that suspending Parliament constituted the “most flagrant attack on democracy that Britain has ever known,” there is a distinct whiff of that old Viet Nam axiom of ‘destroying a village to ‘save’ a village’ metamorphosing into one of having a constitutionally legitimate British government overturned and destroyed, in order ‘to save democracy itself’ (and to save Britain from elections which might not produce the ‘correct outcome’).
If populism blighted “the most entrenched of democracies,” said an editorial in Le Monde, it “would be terrible news for the entire continent.” Well … welcome to the new Grand Inquisition: Does the prisoner (Johnson) confess before the Holy Inquisition that Parliament was suspended for heretical motives; or will he deny it, and face being burnt at the stake?"
"Seizure of Iranian property to pay Americans another example of Canadian hypocrisy" (Engler).  Rather than the SJWs obsessing about Trudeau's weird dressing-up fetish (it's not a racist thing, he literally has a deep psychological problem - remember, his mother is bipolar - involving costumes), they should be attacking Trudeau's consistent support for racist attacks assisting the stooge hegemon and its Jewish masters in places like Iran, Saudi Arabia (selling weapons of oppression), and leading the illegal regime change operations against Venezuela.  That's his real 'brownface' problem.  He's a monster on these issues, but the (((media))), of course, won't mention it.
blog comments powered by Disqus