Sunday, December 29, 2019

Anti-Slumlordism

Tweet (Mark Ames) (but see the reply):
"In which Snopes validates Julia Davis as a "Russian media expert". Davis made a documentary, promoted on Alex Jones' show, claiming DHS sent black helicopters to her home and poisoned Brittany Murphy to silence her support for Julia's "whistleblowing". snopes.com/fact-check/rus"
Tweet (Max Blumenthal):
"While Newsweek blocked @Tareq_Haddad's reporting on the OPCW, it ran propaganda like this from regime change hack @janinedigi, who functioned as James Le Mesurier's stenographer. This piece seems constructed from top to bottom by a pro-war influence op called The Syria Campaign"
Tweet (Rudy Havenstein, Smiling Politely) (the whole thread, from August-September is good; see):
""Epstein shares a special connection with one of the most prominent figures at Harvard—University President Lawrence H. Summers." thecrimson.com/article/2003/5 We all want someone to stare at us the way Jeff Epstein and Larry Summers stared at each other."
Tweet (Daniel Bessner) (see also; recent success at bribing and blackmailing Trump has led the Khazars to start taking victory laps, rubbing the faces of the goyim in the mud for not being as smart as their masters, a Khazar supremacist habit that hasn't worked out well for them in the past):
"Summer Bret Stephens: How dare you refer to me as a bedbug, sir, this recreates the worst tropes of the Third Reich and begins a slippery slope toward genocide. Winter Bret Stephens: To really understand the Jews you must understand the science of race."
"Jewish Brilliance: Synthetic Like Zirconia" (Striker). What we're seeing is e-x-t-r-e-m-e levels of tribal nepotism twisted by supremacists into superiority.  Ironically, the position of an idiot like Stephens is yet another example.

Here's the victory lap of Weiss, a well deserved ten years of using lite Zionism to fool the goyim. Just imagine how much worse off the Palestinians would be if it weren't for the lites!  "Netanyahu Thanks Trump for Massive Primary Win" (Anglin).  Note Bibi's immediate plans.

Max Blumenthal thread on  Josef Korbel, father of Madeleine Albright and big influence on Condi Rice.  Max probably isn't the best guy to comment on dads from hell.

Tweet (Tim Hayward) (about Sébastien Braha, who seems to have been injected into the OPCW as its political handler to ensure it doesn't accidentally do something honest) (also):
"Twitter is proactively censoring news about the OPCW scandal and central involvement in it of French diplomat."
"Media’s Deafening Silence On Latest WikiLeaks Drops Is Its Own Scandal" (Johnstone).  "Post-Truth World: An OPCW Cover-up, Shielded by MSM and Bellingcat" (Henningsen).  "WikiLeaks Publishes Documents Proving OPCW Investigation Into Alleged Syria Chemical Weapons Incident in Douma Was Rigged" (Rogers).

Tweet (Dan Cohen):
"Wong earns a spot on the FT top 50 people of the decade simply by virtue of being on a CIA cutout’s payroll and taking marching orders from Marco Rubio. In case it wasn’t blatantly obvious enough that these lists are tailored to advance US geopolitical imperatives."
"US demands extradition of AWOL soldier hiding in Ukraine" (Levine). Trump needs him back to give him a medal.

"Time to Cry for Bolivia" (Sieff).  "Bolivia’s Dictator Seeks to Annihilate Opposition From Exile" (Wadi).

"Nationalism Is Transforming the Politics of the British Isles" (Cockburn):
"The political left in most countries is bad at dealing with nationalism and the pursuit of self-determination. It sees these as a diversion from identifying and attacking the real perpetrators of social and economic injustice. It views nationalists as mistakenly or malignly aiming at the wrong target – usually foreigners – and letting the domestic ones off the hook.

The desire by people to see themselves as a national community – even if many of the bonds binding them together are fictional – is one of the most powerful forces in the world. It can only be ignored at great political cost, as the Labour Party has just found out to its cost for the fifth time (two referendums and three elections). What Labour should have done was early on take over the slogan “take back control” and seek to show that they were better able to deliver this than the Conservatives or the Brexit Party. There is no compelling reason why achieving such national demands should be a monopoly of the right. But in 2016, 2017 and 2019 Labour made the same mistake of trying to wriggle around Brexit as the prime issue facing the English nation without taking a firm position, an evasion that discredited it with both Remainers and Leavers.

Curiously, the political establishment made much the same mistake as Labour in underestimating and misunderstanding the nature of English nationalism. Up to the financial crisis of 2008 globalisation had been sold as a beneficial and inevitable historic process. Nationalism was old hat and national loyalties were supposedly on the wane. To the British political class, the EU obviously enhanced the political and economic strength of its national members. As beneficiaries of the status quo, they were blind to the fact that much of the country had failed to gain from these good things and felt marginalised and forgotten.

The advocates of supra-national organisations since the mediaeval papacy have been making such arguments and have usually been perplexed why they fail to stick. They fail to understand the strength of nationalism or religion in providing a sense of communal solidarity, even if it is based on dreams and illusions, that provides a vehicle for deeply felt needs and grievances. Arguments based on simple profit and loss usually lose out against such rivals."
Mass, unregulated immigration is a brilliant move, as it immediately decreases the price of labor while creating tensions that can be spun into people willingly voting against their own interests based on believing phony promises to make the influx stop. Nobody in the true left would support it, or the foul (((identity politics))) behind it.

"Trump's Russian Gas Sanction Strategy Blows Up Two Ways" (Mish).

"Trump Exposes Pelosi And Son's Ties To Ukraine-Linked Energy Group" (Durden).  "Biden Attempts To Defend Hypocritical Subpoena Refusal (That Trump Is Being Impeached For)" (Durden).

"The Criminalisation of Protest in America" (Romanoff):
"Congress recently passed a new law that effectively criminalises all public protests, and categorises civil society movements like Occupy Wall Street as “domestic terrorism”. The Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act give the military and espionage agencies unlimited powers. The law is deliberately vague, so that almost anything could be included within the criminal definition, and so broad that almost every American today could be labeled a suspected terrorist. The intent is to intimidate all citizens and stifle any public criticism of US government acts or policies. Any of the following actions may get a US citizen labeled as a suspected terrorist today:
(1) Speaking out against government policies,
(2) Protesting against anything,
(3) Questioning the government’s many wars,
(4) Asking questions about Wall Street Banks and the FED,
(5) Taking pictures or video, especially of police.
According to US Department of Defense training manuals, any public protest is considered “low-level terrorism” today, and all anti-war protesters are now classified as terrorists.
The US government is using the Patriot Act and various other bits of new legislation not only to outlaw most of the basic civil freedoms in the country, but these laws are so vague as to permit virtually any domestic atrocity against civilians.
Anyone today who speaks out against any US government policies can be arbitrarily classified as either a terrorist or an “unlawful enemy combatant” and imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial. Few people seem aware that the US media are compelled by law to report to the FBI/CIA all communication (letters to the Editor, etc.) that is critical of the US government.
Another fact not widely known is that thousands of Americans are imprisoned each year for a single Tweet, a single Facebook post or a single Text message. A simple post on social media or pressing “like” on Facebook, can be deemed “terroristic threatening” in the US, and result in a sentence of three to five years in prison.
Many government agencies, including the military, now actively monitor all US social media like Facebook and Twitter to identify those who criticise the US government, then seek them out and interrogate them. This has a particularly chilling effect on American so-called “free speech” when citizens know that espionage agencies are now monitoring every online post and comment. It is not widely known, but US authorities constantly monitor the social media, bulletin boards and other Internet sites for potential political dissent, and often exercise their authority to order people to disperse from “unlawful online assembly”, which definition is as arbitrary as the authorities wish to make it.
Moreover, leaked documents revealed that any students who could be identified as having been involved in protests, or posted public but ‘sensitive’ information, or involved in various political activisms, would forever be prohibited from employment with any part of the US government. One university student who had taken part in the Occupy Wall Street protests later said, “The system in place sublimely manipulates our social reality in ways obvious only when we realize that there is nothing between us and the police but fear”. She added that if the protestors had held out and actually tried to make changes in the system, her participation would exist in a permanent record and she would never be able to get a job. And in any case, she held out no hope that the citizens could ever really change anything.
The DHS hired defense contractor General Dynamics for a $12 million program to monitor the Internet for “reports that reflect adversely on DHS, especially those that have a negative spin on DHS activities”. These agencies are not monitoring so-called “terrorist” activity, but normal social activity and political commentary. In its defense, DHS claimed the released documents were “outdated” – though they were new – and that social media were monitored for “situational awareness of man-made threats” and not to police disparaging opinions about the federal government. According to their spokesman, the manual’s instruction that analysts should identify media reports that reflect adversely on DHS activities was not at all meant to silence criticism, but simply “to identify areas where DHS wasn’t doing a good job, and to help it improve”. I can scarcely imagine a greater lie than that one. [5] [6]"
The anti-Slumlordism is getting out of hand:  "'Mass Stabbing' At Jewish Hannukah Celebration In New York, At Least 5 Injured" (Durden).  "officials don’t know why".
blog comments powered by Disqus