Sunday, July 21, 2019

Lady Black

"The Honey Trap on E 71st" (Margolis) (my emphasis in red):
"Soon after I walked into the entrance of Epstein’s mansion on E 71st Street, said to be the city’s largest private home, a butler asked me, ‘would you like an intimate massage, sir, by a pretty young girl?’ This offer seemed so out of place and weird to me that I swiftly declined.
More important than indelicacy, as an old observer of intelligence affairs, to me this offer reeked of ye old honey trap, a tactic to ensnare and blackmail people that was old when Babylon was young. A discreet room with massage table, lubricants and, no doubt, cameras stood ready off the main lobby.
I had arrived with Canada’s leading lady journalist who was then close to Epstein’s sometime girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell and, it was said, procuress – something Maxwell denies. Bizarrely, Maxwell believed that I could get KGB Moscow Center to release satellite photos that showed the murder on his yacht of her father, the press baron Robert Maxwell, who was a well-known double agent for Israel and KGB, and a major criminal.
Also present was the self-promoting lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, who had saved the accused murderer Claus von Bulow, as well as a titan of the New York real estate industry (not Trump) and assorted bigwigs of the city’s elite Jewish society. All sang the praises of Israel."
"Canada’s leading lady journalist" would have to refer - and no doubt a snide reference to how she perceives herself - to the utterly appalling Barbara Amiel, a blood-pouring-from-the-fangs Zionist and an absolute curse in the history of Canadian 'journalism'.  This makes it very likely that Trump's recent pardoning of her husband Conrad Black derives from the same bribery/blackmail source of Sheldon.  I am starting to wonder if Trump does anything that isn't on Sheldon's orders.  If Amiel was 'close' to Maxwell does that mean she is also Mossad?  Would not surprise me in the least!


"Michael Hudson: U.S. Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses".  This is about what you might expect to see when smart people - but smart people who need to stay respectable - do their analysis thing without recourse to the JQ.  The general gist is that the Americans are hard-assedly, and probably immorally, acting in their own self-interest.

But they are clearly not acting in their own self-interest.  They are consistently increasing the relative strength of their enemies/competitors, and providing every possible excuse for countries to remove themselves from the power currently located in the US Dollar.  It is impossible to imagine a stupider course of action than the one the Americans are following.

And it is not a Trump thing, though The Clarification in the way Trump frames issues makes it impossible to avoid seeing what is really going on.  None of the mainstream Democrat candidates who can be expected to be allowed to win has the tiniest quibble about the big stupid things Trump is doing.  It is actually quite remarkable.

Putin (referenced by Hudson) (try to imagine any American politician giving a speech like this!):
"Technically, global economic growth, and I hope we will mostly talk about that since this is an economic forum, has been positive in the recent period. In 2011–2017, the global economy grew by an annual average of 2.8 percent. In recent years, the relevant figure was a bit over three percent. However, we believe, and countries’ leaders and all of us must frankly admit that regrettably, despite this growth, the existing model of economic relations is still in crisis and this crisis is of a comprehensive nature. Problems in this respect have been piling up throughout the past few decades. They are more serious and larger than it seemed before.

The architecture of the global economy has changed dramatically since the Cold War as new markets were becoming part of the globalisation process. The dominant model of development based on the Western “liberal” tradition, let us call it Euro-Atlantic for the sake of argument, began to claim not just a global, but also a universal role.

International trade was the main driver behind the current globalisation model. From 1991 to 2007, it grew more than twice as fast as global GDP. This can be accounted for by the newly opened markets of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and goods pouring into these markets. However, this period turned out to be relatively short-lived by historical standards.

The global crisis of 2008–2009 ensued. It not only exacerbated and revealed imbalances and disproportions, but also showed that global growth mechanisms were beginning to fail. Of course, the international community learned its lesson. However, truth be told, there was not enough will or, perhaps, courage, to sort things out and draw the corresponding conclusions. A simplified approach prevailed whereby the global development model was allegedly quite good and, essentially, nothing needed to be changed since it was enough to eliminate the symptoms and coordinate some rules and institutions in the global economy and finance, and then everything would turn out just fine. There were many hopes and positive expectations back then, but they quickly vanished. Quantitative easing and other measures failed to resolve the problems and only pushed them into the future. I am aware that quantitative easing was discussed at this and other forums. We at the Government and the Presidential Executive Office never stop discussing and debating these matters.

I will now cite data from the World Bank and the IMF. Before the crisis of 2008–2009, the global trade in goods and services to global GDP ratio was constantly growing, but then the trend reversed. It is a fact, there is no such growth anymore. The global trade to global GDP ratio of 2008 has never been recovered. In fact, global trade ceased to be the unconditional driver behind the global economy. The new engine represented by state-of-the-art technology is still being fine-tuned and not operating at full capacity. Moreover, the global economy has entered a period of trade wars and mounting direct or covert protectionism.

What are the sources of the crisis in international economic relations? What undermines trust between the world economic players? I think the main reason is that the model of globalisation offered in the late 20th century is increasingly at odds with the rapidly emerging new economic reality.

In the past three decades, the share of advanced countries in the global GDP in purchasing power parity decreased from 58 to 40 percent. In the G7 it dropped from 46 to 30 percent, whereas the weight of the countries with developing markets is growing. Such rapid development of new economies that, apart from their interests, have their own development platforms and views on globalisation and regional integration processes does not correlate well with the ideas that seemed immutable relatively recently.

The previous patterns essentially put the Western countries into an exclusive position and we should be straight about this. These patterns gave them an advantage and an enormous rent, thereby predetermining their leadership. Other countries simply had to follow in their wake. Of course, much happened and is still happening to the accompaniment of talk about equality. I will speak about this as well. And when this comfortable, familiar system began to grow rickety and competition grew, ambitions and a striving to preserve one’s domination at all costs surged. Under the circumstances, the states that previously preached the principles of free trade and honest and open competition began to talk in terms of trade wars and sanctions, and resorted to undisguised economic raids with arms twisting, intimidation and the removal of rivals by so-called non-market methods.

Look, there are many examples of this. I will only mention those that concern us directly and that are common knowledge. Take, for example, the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. I saw in the hall our partners who work with it professionally, not only Russians but also our friends from Europe. This project is designed to enhance energy security in Europe and create new jobs. It fully meets the national interests of all participants, both European and Russian. If it did not meet these interests, we would have never seen our European partners in it. Who could force them into this project? They came because they were interested in it.

But this does not match the logic and interests of those who became used to exclusiveness and anything-goes behavior in the framework of the existing universalist model. They are used to letting others pay their bills; therefore, endless attempts to torpedo this project are made. It is alarming that this destructive practice has not only affected traditional energy, raw materials and commodity markets but it has also leaked into new industries that are now taking shape. Take the situation with Huawei. Attempts are being made not just to challenge it on the global market but to actually restrict it in an off-handed manner. Some circles already call this “the first technological war” to break out in the digital era.

It would appear that rapid digital transformation and technologies that are quickly changing industries, markets and professions, are designed to expand the horizons for anyone who is willing and open to change. Unfortunately, here too barriers are being built and direct bans on high-tech asset purchases are being imposed. It has come to the point where even the number of foreign students for certain specialties is limited. Frankly, I find it hard to wrap my mind around this fact. Nevertheless, this is all happening in reality. Surprising, but true.

Monopoly is invariably about concentrating revenue in the hands of a few at the expense of everyone else. In this sense, attempts to monopolise an innovation-driven technology wave and to limit access to its fruits take the problems of global inequality between countries and regions and within states to a whole new level. This, as we all know, is the main source of instability. It is not just about the level of income or financial inequality, but fundamental differences in opportunities for people.

In essence, an attempt is being made to build two worlds, the gap between which is constantly widening. In this situation, certain people have access to the most advanced systems of education and healthcare and modern technology, while others have few prospects or even chances to break out of poverty, with some people balancing on the verge of survival.

Today, more than 800 million people around the world do not have basic access to drinking water, and about 11 percent of the world's population is undernourished. A system based on ever-increasing injustice will never be stable or balanced.

Exacerbating environmental and climatic challenges that represent a direct threat to the socioeconomic well-being of all humankind are making the crisis even worse. Climate and the environment have become an objective factor in global development and a problem fraught with large-scale shocks, including another uncontrolled surge in migration, more instability and undermined security in key regions of the planet. At the same time, there is a high risk that instead of joint efforts to address environmental and climate issues, we will run into attempts to use this issue for unfair competition.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Today we are facing two extremes, two possible scenarios for further development. The first is the degeneration of the universalist globalisation model and its turning into a parody, a caricature of itself, where common international rules are replaced with the laws, administrative and judicial mechanisms of one country or a group of influential states. I state with regret that this is what the US is doing today when it extends its jurisdiction to the entire world. Incidentally, I spoke about this 12 years ago. Such a model not only contradicts the logic of normal interstate communication and the shaping realities of a complicated multipolar world but, most importantly, it does not meet the goals of the future.

The second scenario is a fragmentation of the global economic space by a policy of completely unlimited economic egoism and a forced breakdown. But this is the road to endless conflict, trade wars and maybe not just trade wars. Figuratively, this is the road to the ultimate fight of all against all.

So what is the solution? I am referring to a real solution rather than utopian or ephemeral one. Obviously, new agreements will be needed for drafting a more stable and fair development model. These agreements should not only be written clearly but should also be observed by all participants. However, I am convinced that talk about an economic world order like this will remain wishful thinking unless we return to the centre of the discussion, that is, notions like sovereignty, the unconditional right of every country to its own development road and, let me add, responsibility for universal sustainable development, not just for one’s own development.

What should be the subject of discussion in terms of regulating such agreements and such a common legal environment? Certainly not the imposition of a single and the only correct canon for all countries, but above all, the harmonisation of national economic interests, principles of teamwork, competition and cooperation between countries with their own individual development models, peculiarities and interests. The drafting of such principles should be carried out with maximum openness and in the most democratic manner.

It is on this foundation that the system of world trade should be adapted to current realities and the efficiency of the World Trade Organisation enhanced. Other international institutions should be filled with new meaning and content rather than broken. It is necessary to sincerely consider, rather than just talk about the requirements and interests of the developing nations, including those that are upgrading their industry, agriculture and social services. This is what equal conditions for development is all about.

Incidentally, we suggest considering the creation of an open, accessible data bank with the best practices and development projects. Russia is ready to publish its successful case studies in the social, demographic and economic areas on an information platform, and invites other countries and international organisations to join this initiative.

With regard to finance, the main global institutions were created as part of the Bretton Woods system 75 years ago. The Jamaican currency system that replaced it in the 1970s confirmed the preference of the US dollar but, in fact, failed to resolve the key problems, primarily, the balance of currency relations and trade exchanges. New economic centres have appeared since then, the role of regional currencies has increased, and the balance of forces and interests has changed. Clearly, in the wake of these profound changes, international financial organisations need to adapt and reconsider the role of the dollar, which, as a global reserve currency, has now become an instrument of pressure exerted by the issuing country on the rest of the world.

Incidentally, I believe the US financial authorities and political centres are making a big mistake as they are undermining their own competitive edge that appeared after the creation of the Bretton Woods system. Confidence in the dollar is simply plummeting.

The technological development agenda must unite countries and people, not divide them. For this, we need fair parameters for interaction in key areas such as high-tech services, education, technology transfer, innovative digital economy branches and the global information space. Yes, building such a harmonious system is certainly challenging, but this is the best recipe for restoring mutual trust, as we have no alternative.

We need to join our efforts, being fully cognizant of the scale of the new era’s global challenges and our responsibility for the future. To do so, we need to use the potential of the UN, which is a unique organisation in terms of representation. We should strengthen its economic institutions and use new associations like the Group of 20 more effectively. Pending the creation of a set of rules like this, we need to act in accordance with the current situation and actual problems and have a realistic understanding of what is happening in the world.

As a first step, we propose, speaking diplomatically, to conduct a kind of demilitarisation of the key areas of the global economy and trade, namely, to make the distribution of essential items such as medicines and medical equipment immune to trade and sanctions wars. (Applause.) Thank you very much for your understanding. That also includes utilities and energy, which help reduce the impact on the environment and climate. This, as you understand, concerns areas that are crucial for the life and health of millions, one might even say, billions of people, our entire planet."
The reason why Putin (and Lavrov) have been so successful at diplomacy in recent years is that Putin stays committed to a rules-based order.  That doesn't mean that Russian allies like Syria will get everything they want (e.g., Putin has limitations on what he can convince the evil devils in Israel to do), but it does mean that Russia will be straight with them, will conform to international laws and norms, and won't turn on its friends the second a shekel falls at Putin's feet.  The kicker is that Putin can reasonably say to anybody that Russia, unlike the Assholians, simply can't afford to be an asshole.  The Russians need the protections of the same rules-based order that Putin is always talking about.  Of course, the new rules, as they are constructed, will have to exclude the Assholians, who can't be trusted.

I've been thinking about the piracy of the Brits and that ship in Gibraltar.  The Brits are, of course, stooges for the Assholians, who are themselves stooges for whichever machers hold the Epstein tapes.  What do you think Lloyd's, which is a Big Deal, and its Names, an even Bigger Deal (of the 0.01% variety), think of the British state committing an act of piracy?  Piracy is a Big Deal for naval insurers.  None of this can even remotely be considered in the interests of Britain.

I wonder what the Spanish think of having Gibraltar abused in this way.

"Iran seizes UK tanker in counter-escalation" (Bhadrakumar).  I like how the British sailors in their big warship just floated around and watched with their thumbs up their asses as the Iranian commandoes rappelled down from helicopters to the deck of their target.  The next James Bond should be a girl, as the guys can no longer handle it!  It is likely the Brits let this happen, as part of the greater Zionist warmongering play, but demonstrated Iranian competence makes their potential defensive threats to the Strait of Hormuz, and the consequent destruction of the world economy, even more credible.

A laughable sudden concern with 'freedom of navigation':  "Britain says seizures of UK vessels by Iran are ‘unacceptable’".

The legal problems with the stated position of the Brits: "The UK’s Dubious Role in the New Tanker War With Iran" (Purkayastha).  And reason to believe the Iranian capture was intended:
"What remains unexplained is why the empty UK tanker switched off its transponder before the alleged incident for about 24 hours, particularly in the period when it was passing through the Strait of Hormuz—or why an empty tanker was accompanied by a British warship. Was the UK baiting Iran by manufacturing a maritime incident in the Gulf?"
"Will Donald Trump Kill His Presidency Over Iran by Larry C Johnson".  His instincts are good, but those tapes . . .  We could be approaching a situation where civilization is ended all because respectable people are touchy about discussing the JQ.

This is a pretty good elucidation of the general liberal consensus (something I used to believe myself but now realize is pernicious bullshit):  "Donald Trump Reveals That He’s an Anti-Semite With Attack on Congresswomen" (Inlakesh):
"Trump’s attacks have been primarily aimed towards Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, as she has been extremely critical of the AIPAC Lobby and the Israeli government. Ilhan Omar has not once slandered the Jewish people, attacked Jewish identity or even used the term Jew or Jewish in her critique of Israel and Zionist Lobby power in the United States. Yet Donald Trump, who makes the most outrageous of comments on a near daily basis and defends them as not being hateful and racist, accuses others of antisemitism at any chance he gets.
In fact Trump can be heard in a recent rally talking about how Ilhan Omar makes anti-Semitic statements, whilst a large crowd of white Americans chant “send her back” behind him.
As the late Edward Said portrayed in his works, the Arab is the ‘new Jew’ to the West.
It is important to note from Trump’s evident disregard for the feelings of various minority communities in the United States, that he really does not wish to be involved in any fight back against racism. So why does he seem to be, on the surface, fighting antisemitism? The answer is very simple, he is not.
In fact, he is promoting antisemitism by legitimizing the Zionist view-point that somehow the AIPAC Lobby, powerful Zionists and the Israeli government are representative of the Jewish people. If you equate Jewish people with these things, then by default you are transferring the crimes of these entities/people onto all Jews.
If someone points out that Zionists, who are Jewish, hold powerful positions and that some of these people are perhaps being biased on the side of Israel and/or are committing a criminal act, this is very clearly not anti-semitic. If you assert that there’s something wrong with Jewish people being in these positions, then you are evidently a bigot, but if you point out that a lot of these individuals hold racist, Islamophobic views – then this is simply a concern for the way this influence among Zionists, whether they be Jewish or non-Jewish, may harm Palestinians or anyone who is opposed to Israel.
If you are attaching an entire group of people [Jewish people] to a genocidal regime or powerful individuals, then you are simply throwing the entire group under the bus.
This tactic is being used by people like Trump and other supporters of Israel. They are attempting to claim that if you criticize individuals who are Jewish Zionists, Israel, or Zionist Lobby power – for their horrific actions and rhetoric, then you are hating all Jews. This shallow, over-the-top argument is in fact creating more animosity we see today towards ordinary Jewish people.
When people are constantly told that Jews are to be equated with Israel, the Zionist Lobby or other individuals who are Zionist Jews, people start to believe it. The people that are against the actions of many influential Zionists, the Israeli state and Zionist Lobby groups, do not stop standing against them when they are called anti-semites for this. Instead, people will ignore these allegations for what they are, or they will fall into the trap of believing what they are told and think that there is some sort of Jewish conspiracy, encompassing most Jews, which is being covered up by Zionists.
The reason many people fall into this trap, is because they most likely have no real connection to Jewish people and are left to make up their mind based upon what they see and hear. Many of these people then end up becoming quite anti-Semitic. This is because they see the Jewish people as being part of Israel and other groups of Zionists, a picture that fascist Israel and its supporters have been able to effectively paint.
When the crimes of Israel and pro-Israel groups are called into question and we are called anti-semites for questioning them, it is absolutely essential as anti-racists that we call this out for what it is. Because we must stop them from throwing Jews under the bus and protecting Israel and its supporters, by transferring their crimes onto the Jewish people."
I agree with the logic of this except in cases where the named group is a violent racist collective who manipulates opinion on the vile things they do by inventing some mystical hatred which completely explains any dissent by outsiders.  In that case, it is immoral not to hate the entire group.  That's not to say that individuals should be punished just for the crime of being in the group (this whole scam is backed up by the constant Holocaust whining and the supposed threat of a Holocaust II), but the trickery has to be named and shamed, and individuals in the group have to be forced to decide whether they accept the collective trickery or not.  This is the thinking they themselves have created to protect their atrocities, and they have nobody to blame for it but themselves. Right now they've managed to create a permanent pass for all of them, which allows the snakes to operate at will.  We're seeing it right now with Epstein-Iran

Friday, July 19, 2019

Use the other door / Yglesii

"The Wheels Are Coming Off" (Sick):
"The UAE has conspicuously separated itself from Washington and Saudi Arabia. The UAE announced that it does not have sufficient evidence to determine what party was responsible for the tanker bombings. More significantly, the UAE has now announced that it is withdrawing its forces from the civil war in Yemen (though not from its anti-terrorist operations against al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula).

The “Saudi-led alliance” in Yemen today consists of the Saudi air force and a rag tag collection of local militias and mercenaries who are there for the money. This is the moment when MbS should declare victory and accept a UN-brokered peace settlement.

Yemen was supposed to yield to overwhelming power. Qatar was supposed to collapse under siege. Iran was supposed to fold when faced with maximum economic pressure. Even the presentation of the economic portion of the Deal of the Century in Bahrain failed to attract the level of investors that had been expected.

There are major shifts in the balance of power underway in the Persian Gulf. They are not what the Trump administration anticipated."
"Russia Offers Turkey Advanced Su-35 Jets Day After US F-35 Program Expulsion" (Durden).  A good example of how the US is painting itself into a corner with all its Sanctions For The Jews.  The snit over S-400s has now led to losing the chance to sell F-35s.  Also:  "If no CAATSA for Turkey, none for India too" (Bhadrakumar).

"Iran denies Trump claim that US destroyed Iranian drone" (Vahdat/Rising).

Tweet (Nicholas Miller):
"Yesterday, news reports errantly suggested Iran would negotiate on missiles, and Dubowitz seized on this as evidence that maximum pressure is working. Now that Iran has clarified it will not negotiate, Dubowitz says this is also evidence maximum pressure is working."
Sadly, it looks like the latest Epstein blackmail gambit is working on Trump:  "On The Brink Of World War 3: Here Are 5 Major Developments Within The Last 48 Hours..." (Snyder).

"A Conundrum Of Evil" (West). The Family and the Mossad.

"Piracy or War?" (Black). Reminds me of when Carney stole - literally stole, like a bank robber - the money belonging to Venezuela that was in the Bank of England.

"Media Lies About Iran Deal, Headlines Repeat Unfound State Department Claims" (DeCamp).  'Media lies about' should start every story.  "US calls emergency nuclear watchdog meeting over Iran, after spurning it for 3 years".

I truly believe these people are actually devil worshippers (and they really seem to despise true Christians):  "Pandering to Christian Zionism: Trump Outreach on Display in Washington" (Giraldi):
"Pompeo was more interested in stirring up his audience than he was in historical fact. He said “In Iraq, Syria, and other countries in the region, the last remnants of ancient Christian communities are at near-extinction because of persecution from ISIS and other malign actors. And just one example: before 2003, there were an estimated 1.5 million Christians living in Iraq. Today, sadly, almost a quarter of a million.”

Pompeo, whose grasp of current events appears to be a bit shaky, did not mention two of the principal reasons that Christianity has been declining in the region. First and foremost is the Iraq War, started by the United States for no good reason, which unleashed forces that led to the destruction of religious minorities. Second, he did not note the constant punishment delivered by Israel on the Palestinians, which has led to the departure of many Christians in that community. Nor did he say anything about the reverse of the coin, Syria, where Christians are well integrated and protected by the al-Assad government which Pompeo and Bolton are seeking to destroy to benefit Israel."
I don't know what Parler is but I like it already:  "This Twitter Alternative Was Supposed To Be Nicer, But Bigots Love It Already" (Saul).

"Rebels without a cause" (Robinson).  Tweet (Mark Ames):
"Italian Nazi missile story keeps getting weirder & wider: Now Spain. At least they're accurately reporting that the Nazis fought for Ukraine, against pro-Russian separatists "
What were airforce-less Nazis going to do with an air-to-air missile?  Also "Salvini Believes That Ukrainian Neo-Nazi Death Squad Planned to Assassinate Him!" (Batty).

"Information laundering", tweets by Kevin Gosztola.

Tweets assembled by Niqnaq on the  'Integrity Initiative'.  This is getting weird - once they were outed as a PR operation, the whole effort lost all sense (I'm reminded of The Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margaret, where the joke is that the David Cross character keeps getting caught in his lies and rather than concede and shut up, just keeps plowing ahead with more and more ridiculous lies).  At the very least, you would have thought they would rebrand themselves, but I suppose as long as the British government is stupid or corrupt enough to keep paying them, they will take the money and keep churning out the crap.

This sounds like the real Correa:  "‘Rubbish!’: Correa blasts CNN for claim that Assange made embassy into ‘command post for meddling’".

"I’m Going Long on Popcorn" (Lemieux).  The comments are heartening.  It's wonderful to see the consistent view of Dersh.

"Camouflaged Israeli Ex-PM Pictured Entering Epstein's Mansion The Same Day As Hotties Show Up" (Durden). Some of the blackmail has domestic Israeli applications.

The Khazars have a l-o-n-g history of epsteining, with this kind of sexual blackmail being something close to a group characteristic:  "Hidden in Plain Sight: The Shocking Origins of the Jeffrey Epstein Case" (Webb).

"US military chiefs ordered to reveal if Pentagon used diseased insects as biological weapon" (Forrest).  Did Lyme disease start because the Pentagon biological warfare scientists didn't know (or care) that deer could swim?

"Labour Friends of Israel denies funding from Israeli spy" (Winstanley).  The attacks on Corbyn are coming directly out of Israel (and the (((BBC))) overplayed its hand).  You can see why (((they))) are so sensitive about 'dual loyalty' claims (it is because (((they))) have absolutely no loyalty to the countries in which they are forced to live, and only have loyalty to Israel, a fact which would have huge political implications should the farm animals ever be able to figure it out).

"Cartoonist slams Guardian for spiking illustration over ‘anti-Semitism’ concerns".  The newest War For The Jews is on cartoons.

"NYT vs. DAILY MAIL On Ilhan Omar's Hilarious (And Apparently Fraudulent) Marital History" (Sailer).  "Does this photo prove Trump tormentor's second marriage was a sham? Far-left Ilhan Omar is pictured with her first husband AND her second husband - as Trump accuses him of being her BROTHER and he posts from a beach" (Ibbetson).  "David Steinberg: Tying up Loose Threads in the Curious Case".  The Khazars seem to really fear her - presumably they are feeding Trump his lines - as she knows not to back down in terror of them:  "Ilhan Omar Introduces Pro-Bds Resolution, Announces Visit to Israel" (Nahmias)

Tweet (Mark Ames) (Yglesii!):
"Great thread, missed this the first time around. h/t "
Tweet (ping):
"What a time to be alive."

Wednesday, July 17, 2019

'The Limited' hangout

Tweets - "S-400s, a story" - by Ragıp Soylu on the psychology of the Turks and the S-400s.  The US lost Turkey through a series of diplomatic blunders, centered on the hegemon's tin ear at detecting the concerns of the Turks.

"Hassan Diab calls for release of report on extradition that sent him to French prison" (Cochrane).

"Hypocrisy Taints UK’s Media Freedom Conference" and "Newspeak at the Media Freedom Conference" (Knightly).  'Freedom of the press' under the rule of Banderites.  "UK government holds “media freedom” conference while imprisoning Assange" (Grenfell).

"Does the Oct. 21 federal election date trample on Orthodox Jewish rights? It’s now in a judge’s hands" (Potter). 

"Teaching Holocaust" (Giraldi).  Sorry, but in the game of life in America, the 'being right' card, and even the 'black' card, are always going to lose to the only Khard that counts.

"Gay, Black, HIV-Positive, And Lied About It: A Hero for Our Times" (Sailer):  "From the New York Times (and no, I’m not making this up, even though this article reads like a parody product of my analysis of where the conventional wisdom has been headed)".

Tweets by Mark Ames on the arming of the Italian neo-Nazis, and the 'journalism' that was committed, and then disappeared.

"Sic Transit Gloria Mueller" (McGovern).  Mueller's attempted frame-up of 'Russians' is facing problems in the courts.

"Former Ecuadorian President Correa Claims Assange Meddled in US Elections From London Embassy".  Didn't see that coming.  Assange would have a lot more friends if it wasn't Trump who benefited from his truths about Killary.

Bachelet is a real tool.  "Xinjiang Update" (Roberts). "Liberals Use ‘Human Rights’ to Push Coup in Venezuela" (Engler).  "Venezuela: The Bachelet Lie" (Koenig).  These South American 'socialists' who the Americans have systematically replaced aren't as great as we'd like to think they are.  Still better than the alternative, though.

It remains impossible to imagine how these 'nice people' keep finding themselves in such trouble:  "How the Goliath of the Jerusalem settler movement persuaded the world it’s really David" (Cook).

"Liberals Use ‘Human Rights’ to Push Coup in Venezuela" (Engler):
"Even those inclined to believe some of the more extreme criticisms leveled against the Venezuelan government should support the protesters, not our government. The likely result of Canada succeeding in its current path is a civil war in Venezuela. Moreover, it would set a bad precedent if Canada were to succeed in its brazen coup mongering. (In a further sign of the brashness of their campaign, the Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers gave Patricia Atkinson, Head of the Venezuela Task Force at Global Affairs Canada, its Foreign Service Officers award last month. The write up explained, “Patricia, and the superb team she assembled and led, supported the Minister’s engagement and played key roles in the substance and organization of 11 meetings of the 13 country Lima group which coordinates action on Venezuela. She assisted in developing three rounds of sanctions against the regime.”)

Whatever one thinks of Maduro, Canada’s interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs and unilateral sanctions contravene the “rules-based international order” Trudeau, Freeland and Bachelet claim Ottawa upholds. But, Parliament and the media largely play along so it’s only through grassroots activism that we can hope to pry open the discussion and rein in our government."
"Alex Acosta let the cat out of the bag: the Justice Department knew all about the Jeffrey Epstein Florida plea deal" (Willmann).  'Hollywood' likes to make war movies about the extraction of 'left behind' soldiers.  I'd like to see 'Saving Mossad Asset Epstein', depicting the brave efforts of various 'justice' officials to protect Jeffrey and his johns, and further screw over the victims.

'The Limited' hangout:  "Victoria's Secret Boss Wexner Swears He Didn't Know About Epstein Penchant For Pedophilia" (Durden).  He 'searched his soul', which must not have taken long.
"Yet, Epstein portrayed himself as a way for young models to perform sexual favors in exchange for a backdoor into Victoria's Secret. According to a former Manhattan-based modeling agent cited by the New York Post, "Some of those girls got in.
"It was still significant cash for a young model doing the catalog," an agent told the Post. "They weren’t making hundreds of thousands but they could make about $5,000 a week modeling for the campaigns or the catalog. Not all the girls sent to him got jobs, but a lot of them did."
In short, Wexner had an extremely close business relationship with Epstein - who allegedly engaged in sexual favors with girls, some of whom later worked for Wexner, yet the 81-year-old knew nothing of Epstein's proclivities."
Tweets by Martin Varsavsky:
"Just landed in Madrid flying from San Francisco and traveling around the USA where I lived for 20 years and I frequently work. The San Francisco vs Madrid change makes me wonder."

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

Fake news technique III

"To Attack Julian Assange, CNN Twists Embassy Surveillance Records That Were First Covered By Spanish Newspaper" (Gosztola).

We're seeing the use of every trick in the book, a fact that I feel has to do with a general mounting sense of panic, both among elites generally, and Khazars specifically.  If you read these stories carefully they are all rather sloppy - nobody said 'journalists' were any good at anything, including their usual lying - and only work as the basis of third parties picking up the stories and emphasizing the lies, all on the assumption that nobody will carefully examine the source (see, for example, on the latest Isikoff creation, immediate repeating by the Clintonistas: "Seth Rich Smear By Sean Hannity Was First A Russian Disinfo Campaign").  The intent is for the original confabulators - who protect themselves with all the usual qualifying language - to create a piece, and most importantly, a headline, which can then be used by others to create a general Original Story for their PR purposes.

So, goyim:
  1. Clinton didn't have Rich murdered (it was just one of those Washington muggings where no money is taken), and Rich, who was just the computer IT guy who thus had access to all Clinton's documents, couldn't possibly have has access to all Clinton's documents, and leaked the material to Assange (see Murray - see also from 3:00 on in this interview, particularly from 4:45), and the very idea of the Rich activities and subsequent murder was created by Russian social media, where it became so popular that it literally cost Clinton the election;
  2. the weapons found in the hands of an Italian neo-Nazi group were supplied by Ukrainian separatists, or maybe the people fighting the Ukrainian separatists, oh, who can keep such things straight? and does it really matter?; 
  3. Assange directed and completely determined the American election from his embassy bunker/'command center', where he (may have) received - gasp! - packages (one delivered by a masked man!), which (could possibly have) contained - yikes! - hacked materials related to the 2016 US election, and (could have) used his big computers to contact - the horror! - Russians with his 'beefed up' - OMG! - internet connection, and met with Russians about whom nothing is known and who can't be contacted (how suspicious is that!), during the few times he wasn't smearing embassy walls with feces;
  4. Epstein, who had no hedge fund or other investment facility, was somehow blackmailing a bunch of grifters, who were grifting just because they (as yet) had no money (like Randy Andy, they were all peddling their alleged 'influence' and 'contacts', but had no other large piles of money to invest), into investing into his hedge fund, which entirely explains how he appeared to be a billionaire, and Maxwell was just a friend/enabler/procurer/handler, and you shouldn't notice she was Robert Maxwell's ("The shrouded body of Robert Maxwell was lowered today into a rocky grave on the Mount of Olives, where Jews since biblical times have found permanent rest. . . . . Newspapers here reported over the weekend that when Mr. Maxwell was elected as a Labor Party member of the British Parliament in 1964, he objected to a mention of his Jewishness by The Jewish Chronicle of Britain. He belonged to the Church of England, he reportedly said then.") daughter, which is just a mere cohencidence (also a cohencidence - the American money taps turned on towards Israel in the billions and billions of dollars just when Epstein's operation was up and running).

Fake news technique II

Here's another example of 'technique':  "Real Hedge-Fund Managers Have Some Thoughts on What Epstein Was Actually Doing" (Celarier) (I need hardly point out that NYMag is Khazar-owned).  There's a kernel of truth - Roberts Giuffre did depose that Epstein told her he was gathering material for blackmail - but completely added - not at all in the affidavit - was that the blackmail was for the purpose of forcing the johns to invest with him!  Sleazy 'journalism' in the finest Khazar style!  See also (((Marshall))), who is a little careful:  "Maybe It Is Extortion".

For a bracing dose of truth, here's the words from the actual affidavit:
"In addition to constantly finding underage girls to satisfy their personal desires,Epstein and Maxwell also got girls for Epstein’s friends and acquaintances. Epstein specifically told me that the reason for him doing this was so that they would “owe him,” they would “be in his pocket,” and he would “have something on them.” I understood him to mean that when someone was in his pocket, they owed him favors. I also understood that Epstein thought he could get leniency if he was ever caught doing anything illegal, or more so that he could escape trouble altogether."
"Epstein also trafficked me for sexual purposes to many other powerful men, including politicians and powerful business executives. Epstein required me to describe the sexual events that I had with these men presumably so that he could potentially blackmail them."
No reference of what the blackmail was about, so (((they))) just make it up. This is starting to remind me of 'wars for oil', the infamous bogus explanation created to distract us from the fact that the (((parasites))) effectively ruined the US by bribing and blackmailing American politicians into fighting the series of Wars For The Jews. Anything to change the subject away from Khazar leeching techniques, in this case to distract us into thinking that the blackmail was intended to obtain investments in Epstein's mythological hedge fund (which all experts believe does not exist).

By the way, the whole affidavit is great - note how Super-Gay Maxwell is. It is no wonder the Mossad picked her to run the operation.

Fake news techniques

"“National Conservatism” Gatekeeper David Brog—Israeli Citizen, Link To Sex Offender Jeffrey Epstein?" (Brimelow).  There's a bizarre campaign at the moment for 'nationalist' Zionists to take over American conservatism and rid it of its incipient wokenness.

"Ehud Barak: I Visited Epstein’s Island But Never Met Any Girls" (Tarnolpolsky) (my emphasis in red; another version of the Dersh story!):
"“The man who introduced me to Epstein about 17 years ago was Shimon Peres,” Barak said, uncertain if the event took place in New York or Washington, but recalling it was at an event where “there were many famous and important people, including, if I recall, both Clintons and hundreds of others.”

Since then, Barak says, he has met Epstein “more than 10 times and much less than a hundred times, but I can’t tell you exactly how many. I don’t keep count. Over the years, I’ve seen him on occasion.”

“I never attended a party with him,” Barak told The Daily Beast. “I never met Epstein in the company of women or young girls.”

Barak recalls having visited Epstein at two of his Manhattan residences and said he did visit Epstein’s private Caribbean island “once, for several hours—and years after the publications about sex parties or orgies there.” But, Barak says, “I've never been there at a party.”

“To the contrary,” Barak says, “at his home, I met many very respected people, scientists, Nobel Prize winners, and I met him also in Boston, at MIT or the Harvard labs he supports.”

At these events, Barak says, he “unequivocally” never met any women or girls.

Asked if any compromising pictures of him could yet surface, he responded “there is no chance whatsoever.”
“I never attended a party with him ... I never met Epstein in the company of women or young girls.”

Most Israelis first heard of Epstein in January 2016, when the British tabloid The Daily Mail published paparazzi-style pictures taken over an icy weekend stakeout headlined, “The busy life of Jeffrey Epstein: Group of gorgeous Manhattan 'it' girls in and out of the billionaire sex offender's mansion before Clinton pal flies off in private jet with comely brunette.”

Buried in the article was a picture of  Barak captioned “an unidentified man… with his own security detail at Jeffrey Epstein's New York Mansion.”

Israelis who saw the item laughed at the former prime minister, almost invisible in a large puffy coat and an oversized Russian-style fur hat.

“It is me in the picture,” he acknowledges. “It was so cold the Middle Easterner had to put on a hat. I was there, for lunch or chat, nothing else. So what?”"
"Last year, an Israeli investigative journalist revealed that in 2004 Barak received about $2.4 million earmarked “research” from the Wexner Foundation, an American philanthropy with which Epstein was long associated, that focuses on developing leadership skills among young Israeli and American Jewish citizens deemed to have potential. (Billionaire Les Wexner is Epstein’s only known client.)
Barak says he does not know if Epstein had any connection to the grant or payment he received, and in several past interviews has refused to explain what he was compensated for.

“I did what I committed to do,” he told The Daily Beast, adding that he does recall the details of the contract, but believes he “is not supposed to discuss it.”

“I perform research and geopolitical consulting for a lot of interested parties,” says the former prime minister and decorated former chief of staff of Israel’s army, who is now 77 years old. “It is up to them if they want to discuss it.”

The Wexner Foundation has declined numerous media requests to provide any explanation for the 2004 payment.

Last week, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz revealed that Epstein was a principal investor in Carbyne, a video streaming and geolocation software start-up founded by Barak in 2015. The extent of Epstein’s financial involvement has not been made public, and Barak has since said he is exploring avenues to disassociate himself from Epstein completely."
It's funny how often the usual standard (((mainstream media))) fake news is based on a 'mistake' which just happens to turn the story around 180 degrees to one that suits the Official Story:  "Fact checking" (Robinson).

"Exclusive: Security reports reveal how Assange turned an embassy into a command post for election meddling" (my emphasis in red):
"New documents obtained exclusively by CNN reveal that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange received in-person deliveries, potentially of hacked materials related to the 2016 US election, during a series of suspicious meetings at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
The documents build on the possibility, raised by special counsel Robert Mueller in his report on Russian meddling, that couriers brought hacked files to Assange at the embassy."
Standard fake news technique of the greatest 'journalists' is to combine some stuff we know with some wild guesses and surmises to produce some variant on the Official Story.  So, basically, the story is that Assange had some meetings and received some deliveries at the embassy.  The rest of this just describes Assange's actions in continuing to participate in Wikileaks, and the wild guesses.  Combined with the bizarre Isikoff piece (with no new content, just a repeat of the Clintonista Official Story, essentially appearing out of the blue, and written by one of the guys most responsible for Russiagate in the first place, but immediately picked up by the Clintonistas, and containing the idea held still held by the Clintonistas that Trump won largely because of Russian 'fake news' promoted on social media that Clinton killed Rich!), we're seeing a post-Russiagate attempt to resuscitate the Clintonista narrative, particularly the key assertion that Assange received his election-shifting material from 'Russian hackers' and not, as Assange has come as close to saying as is possible without outing sources, from Seth Rich (see also "A Spy Coup in America?" by Robert Parry).

Tweet (the emperor has no coups):
"Nothing to see here, just an email leaked to Al-Akhbar showing YPG-linked Syrian Democratic Council give the "right to explore & develop oil that is located in areas we govern" to accused Mossad spy Moti Kahana, longtime Israeli conduit for "humanitarian aid" to "moderate rebels""

Monday, July 15, 2019

Everyone was mystified

"American Pravda: The Power of Organized Crime" (Unz).  The surprisingly hidden history of (((who))) was involved in American organized crime, and an anecdote on the beating up of James Garner (I still love The Rockford Files).  Sailer often refers to what he considers to be the ongoing damage done by Bazelon and his family.

"Jeffrey Epstein’s Fortune May Be More Illusion Than Fact" (lotsa brackets):
"In 1988, when Mr. Epstein was still working for Mr. Hoffenberg, he formed the investment firm that would be the nexus for his connections to powerful people: J. Epstein & Company. One of those people, Mr. Wexner, would become the apparent foundation of Mr. Epstein’s riches.

Mr. Epstein met — and evidently charmed — Robert Meister, the vice chairman of the insurance giant Aon, on a flight from New York to Palm Beach, Fla., according to an account by the novelist James Patterson in his nonfiction book “Filthy Rich.”

Mr. Meister, who could not be reached for comment, introduced Mr. Epstein to Mr. Wexner. There appears to have been a near instant rapport.

Robert Morosky, who had been the vice chairman of The Limited, was surprised Mr. Wexner took to Mr. Epstein so readily. “Everyone was mystified as to what his appeal was,” Mr. Morosky said. “I checked around and found out he was a private high school math teacher, and that was all I could find out. There was just nothing there.”"
There is literally no evidence, and a considerable degree of doubt (even scoffing), that Epstein has ever made one cent from what is supposed to be his hedge fund business, or any kind of investment business (it is possible he did some trading at Bear Stearns). The 'evidence' of his financial genius all comes from statements from other Khazars.

"Why Did Jeffrey Epstein Fly Back To The US?" (Meijer).  When it was decided to prosecute Epstein, I imagine dozens of calls were immediately made from (((employees))) of the Southern District of New York, following their inevitable real loyalties, to the head office in Tel Aviv, and to Epstein himself.  Dershowitz was, in part, behind the law suit that ended up with the order to unseal the court documents (Dersh implausibly said he was involved as the documents would 'exonerate' him!).  Epstein knew what he would face when he returned from Paris, but came anyway.  This return is part of the conspiracy.

Epstein probably didn't stop his blackmail business after he was prosecuted (why would he?), and seems to have continued until just recently.  That odd temple on Orgy Island was built around 2011.  There must be a whole new group of blackmailed johns in politics and business that we don't even know about!

Sunday, July 14, 2019

(((Secret decoder ring)))

Epstein may be the Rosetta Stone (found here): "The World v. Alan Dershowitz" (Van Zuylen-Wood) (my emphasis in red):
"Dershowitz, despite the megawatt career, has never been a glamorous figure. At the height of his fame, he looked most comfortable not at the side of his celebrity clients but in his cramped Harvard office, wearing oversize aviator eyeglasses and itchy-looking sweaters. His social profile began to improve in 1996 upon meeting the financier Jeffrey Epstein through Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a Martha’s Vineyard friend. She told him Epstein was a brilliant autodidact who loved meeting interesting people. Epstein visited Dershowitz in Cambridge, sent him a thank-you bottle of wine, and a week later called to invite him to the 59th birthday party of Victoria’s Secret founder Leslie Wexner. “I said, ‘Who’s going to be there?’” Dershowitz tells me. “[He said], ‘Shimon Peres is going to be there. Senator [John] Glenn, the astronaut. Alfred Taubman, the head of Sothebys.’” Dershowitz was in.
Dershowitz had represented the fabulously wealthy before, but had never been friends with anyone on Epstein’s level. There was a ranch in New Mexico, a mansion in Palm Beach, a private island in the Caribbean—plus Epstein’s primary residence, a 50,000-square-foot townhouse said to be the largest in Manhattan. Dershowitz was bowled over. “I met Prince Andrew through him. I mean, I’m a kid from Borough Park, an Orthodox, poor community, hanging around with a prince, and [scientists] who were going to win the Nobel Prize. That’s pretty thrilling.”
Epstein, who also became close with Harvard grandees such as Larry Summers, made a $30 million donation to the university. Dershowitz, in turn, began flying on Epstein’s jet and hanging out in Palm Beach. Dersh, like everyone else, didn’t necessarily understand how Epstein had become a billionaire. J. Epstein & Co. had only one known client: Wexner. But Epstein’s intellect was obvious, and he had a knack for gaining the trust of the cognoscenti. “I’m on my 20th book,” Dershowitz told Vanity Fair in 2003. “The only person outside my immediate family that I send drafts to is Jeffrey.”
Then, two years later, the Epstein fairy tale ended abruptly."

The ((())) and the )))(((

The (((players))):
  1. (((Epstein)))
  2. (((Maxwell))), daughter of a known Mossad operator, (((Robert Maxwell)))
  3. mentor (((Wexner))) (possibly Epstein's sole 'client' for years) ("It's a weird relationship")
  4. Florida non-prosecutor (((Krischer))) (recent winner of the ADLs 'Jurisprudence Award'!)
  5. old lawyer/pal (((Dershowitz)))
  6. hirer of an Epstein without a degree to teach at the Dalton School, (((Donald Barr))), a converso (!) (and Epstein, of course, immediately went after the female students: something known to science as the ‘Epstein-Barr’ Problem)
  7. hirer of Epstein, Bear Stearns chairman, (((Alan 'Ace' Greenberg)))
  8. mentor of Epstein post-Bear Sterns - which he seems to have left under a considerable, but mysterious, cloud - (((Steven Hoffenberg))), who operated "one of the largest Ponzi schemes in history"
  9. the socialite who introduced him around high-society in NYC, even post-conviction (((Peggy Siegal)))
  10. even (((scientists))) and (((Stephen Pinker)))
  11. "I Tried to Warn You About Sleazy Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein in 2003" (Ward) - Vanity Fair was owned by (((S.I. Newhouse))).
Except for Dersh, who may have been there more as a handler, the invitees to Orgy Island were )))(((.

Epstein embodies Khazar criminality in America, and the weird pulling together for their supremacist goals.

Question:  “How could Epstein’s one-man show not fall apart while he was in jail during one of the most volatile years in history?”  Answer:  there was no 'show', just a Mossad legend.

Note the early shade cast on Epstein's operations! This was one hell of a legend, but just look at all the (((help))) he had (and has!).

When you've lost Moon, sheesh! (I'm seriously going to have to reconsider Moon's judgment): "A Plausible Theory Of What Jeffrey Epstein Was Actually Doing".  Completely wrong class of guys for this scam - even Bill and Tony only became super-rich enough to be useful 'investors' after Epstein, when their blackmailability made them bribeable (and just ponder how useful Tony has made himself to (((them))) in recent years!!!).

Trump immediately became more compliant on Iran after the Epstein arrest.

Friday, July 12, 2019

The Epstein Plan

So after the 1967 and 1973 wars the Khazars were on top of the world, and starting to see themselves as inevitable winners of all the land they intended to steal (Greater Israel, from the Nile to the Euphrates), thus starting the overwhelming idea of messianic Khazarianism which we see dominating today amongst all Khazars (particularly obvious in the increasingly deranged plans to steal the Temple Mount).  The 1973 war was a clear example that Israel was the American block against Soviet domination of the Middle East, and this was the horse they intended to ride to obtain continued American support.

The problem the murderers and land thieves faced was twofold:
  1. the Soviet Union wasn't going to be around forever - this was known to planners in the 70s - and what would happen to Israel once the 'threat' of Soviet dominance ended (of course, we know they replaced it with the 'threat' of Islamist 'terror', easily manipulable with false flags)?; and
  2. stealing all the land they intended to steal would result in humanitarian atrocities impossible to comprehend, and would require leeched money from Americans at historically unprecedented levels that made no sense, and how could they expect American politicians to continue to support these levels of atrocities and parasitic thieving?
At the same time (heading towards the 80s), Wall Street was starting its progression towards the turbo-thieving we see today, and 'Hollywood' had started the idea that it was possible to make money based on algorithms.  Of course, we know that the big bucks were made the old fashioned way, by insider trading and market manipulation, but it was useful to provide the illusion that the traders 'earned' their money as they were so intelligent.

Combining all these factors, Khazar planners in the late 70s started to concoct the perfect plan. They would create an imaginary 'genius' trader, based in the new and poorly understood world of hedge funds (guys who make oodles of money, but nobody quite understands how), a self-made billionaire who would thus catapult himself into the highest reaches of society, hobnobbing with the most important world figures in politics and society.  They would combine this with another traditional Khazar specialty and area of expertise, white slavery (the most vile form, involving under-aged victims, abhorrent to everybody), and thus manipulate the powerful men into committing crimes with which they could easily be blackmailed.

Sometime in the late 70s, somebody (Wexner?) identified Epstein as the perfect front man for the conspiracy.  No 'genius', but trained in math and smart enough to be able to talk the quant talk.  He was pure alpha male, with at least a feigned interest in very young girls, and extremely affable, 'one of the boys', just the guy to make high-level male politicians comfortable.  He was given a Mossad handler/procurer, Maxwell, and sent out to prepare himself for the job.  They ran him through Bear Sterns (with a Khazar supervisor) for a few years to start to build the 'legend', then sent him out with his own firm to build his 'billions'.  While Wexner was apparently his only client, and he had much less money than he was said to have had, through the 80s they carefully assembled a collection of assets to make it seem that his abilities had made him a self-made billionaire.  They then used his social talents to work his way up the ladder to the point where he was pals with major political figures.  A lot of the technique involved philanthropy, with the parties the rich give to celebrate themselves being the perfect venues to make the connections he needed.

This was an enormously expensive plan, involving operating expenses, private jets, expensive houses, and an actual fucking Orgy Island (of course, a lot of this stuff can be leased, and real estate is a good investment anyway, and some of his claimed assets are probably imaginary).  Epstein needed to be able to throw enough money around to create the illusion that he actually was as rich as he said he was.  If he was just a pimp of under-aged hookers, the Randy Andys and and Randy Tonys and Randy Bills of the world would have stayed well away from him.  He needed to create the illusion that he was a very talented and very rich and very friendly guy who happened to host parties for his good friends on a secluded and private (but well filmed) island, and, oh look, a bunch of young girls were there too!  Who knows what might happen?!

Israel spent tens of millions of dollars setting up this conspiracy, but they got literally hundreds of billions of dollars (or more) in return.  It was just at the time that Epstein was in full operation that the massive American gifts to Israel started.  There are only two principles to contemporary political science (a proper political science textbook should contain these two principles, and only these two):
  1. "Fucking Jews... Jews are responsible for all wars in the world." (by the greatest of all political scientists, Mel Gibson); and
  2. "If you want to be powerful in the world of the Jews, you want Jews to have blackmail on you, because then they know they can trust you." (Anglin).
You need to be blackmailable in order to be bribeable (and get all the other political advantages, such as political donations and full support of the (((media))) and (((stinktanks))).  The sheer improbability/ridiculousness of the parasite-host relationship is papered over by nonsense assertions like 'Judeo-Christian' (a recent Khazar invention), and 'shared values'.  What really happened is that Epstein created a mass of blackmail material concerning activities of the worst kind (the kind that puts you in jail, with your life in constant danger, for decades), nailing the very people who make the decisions on financial gifts to Israel.  While the conspiracy was complex, the psychology behind it is remarkably simple.

Thursday, July 11, 2019

Emboldened Sultan

"Sultan shines in the court of the Dragon King" (Escobar) (the big deal is Erdoğan effectively trading Turkish irredentism for being admitted into the China camp, which must have been a difficult choice for him to make):
"In conjunction with his success at the court of the Dragon King, Erdogan now feels emboldened enough to offer his services as mediator between Tehran and the Trump administration – picking up on a suggestion he made to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the G20.

Erdogan would not have made that offer if it had not been discussed previously with Russia and China – which, crucially, are member signatories of the Iran nuclear deal, or Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA).

It’s easy to see how Russia and China should consider Turkey the perfect mediator: a neighbor of Iran, the proverbial bridge between East and West, and a NATO member. Turkey is certainly much more representative than the EU-3 (France, UK, Germany).

Trump seems to want – or at least gives the impression of imposing – a JCPOA 2.0, without an Obama signature. The Russia-China partnership could easily call his bluff, after clearing it with Tehran, by offering a new negotiating table including Turkey. Even if the ineffective – in every sense – EU-3 remained, there would be real counterbalance in the form of Russia, China and Turkey.

Out of all these important moves in the geopolitical chessboard, one motivation stands out among top players: Eurasian integration cannot significantly progress without challenging the Trumpian sanction obsession."
Erdoğan could negotiate a sanction-less deal with Iran, essentially exactly the same as the old deal with some meaningless changes to sell it as new, sidestepping the embarrassing and useless Eurotrash, and then offer it to Trump to sign on to.  Trump has just demonstrated at the G20 and NK that he can play gracious - not really gracious, but gracious by his standards, and in his own mind - if it makes him look Presidential (prepping for the election), so he could be allowed to sweep in and claim the 'new' deal as his yuge MAGA improvement over the awful Barry deal.  The really yuge problem, that Iran has no good reason to trust the Assholians - nobody has the slightest reason to trust them - could be finessed by having China and Russia and Turkey secretly backstop the agreement by offering private side-deal assurances of a solid predetermined program of sanction-busting should the Assholian politicians take the shekels and renege, again.  Everybody - except the Khazars (and even they avoid having to face Hezbollah's rockets) - wins.  The problem may come down to the new Epstein blackmail caper that is being pointed at Trump (the Clintonistas are gunning for this, while attempting to protect 'our fave', quite the maneuver!).


I'm going to write more on the big picture of Epstein (and it is very, very big), but here's a - (((cough))) - good story:  "NYPD let convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein skip judge-ordered check-ins" (tweets).  It's like (((they))) are laughing at )))Americans(((!  As we are seeing with the (((Weinstein))) case, Vance is almost comically corrupt.

Wednesday, July 10, 2019

Mega Group

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, funny despite Watson:  "Ann Coulter Thinks Epstein Had A "State Sponsor" & Was Running A "Blackmailing" Operation" (Watson).  The comments are all woke, but we're still in a situation where 'naming the Jew' is impossible, even for Coulter.

"Snyder: Epstein Case Has The Potential To Be The Biggest Scandal In American History" and "Major Red Flags Are Causing Many To Doubt Whether Justice Will Be Done In The Jeffrey Epstein Sex Scandal" (Snyder).

As is obvious, the point of this is to increase the pressure on Trump to agree to the demands of Bibi/Sheldon regarding Iran/Syria, and I very much doubt that anybody important will end up in trouble (maybe some lesser degenerate will have to take the fall, just for appearances sake, and Epstein will probably get a few years, maybe on the 'child porn' that was his blackmail stash).  The machers really have nobody better than Trump to replace him, so it will be interesting to see if Trump, still wanting to be reelected, calls their bluff, and continues to refuse (((them))) WWIII.

"Mobster? “The Wexner War”" (Fitrakis).  "The Wexner War" (Fitrakis), from 2013 (I'm detecting some kind of pattern here):
"Wexner’s philanthropic side is more public. In 1998, the Wall Street Journal reported that Wexner was part of the “‘Mega Group,’ a loosely organized club of 20 of the nation’s wealthiest and most influential Jewish businessmen.” The Mega Group meets purportedly to discuss “philanthropy,” but others have speculated that their charitable interests are often a cover for lobbying activities on behalf of Israel. The Wall Street Journal identified Max Fisher, a Detroit financier and billionaire, as a member of the Mega Group. Fisher was used as a private Middle East diplomat by President Gerald Ford during the 1970s and is considered Wexner’s mentor.

So, when the Wexner Analysis report was leaked, it caused a stir but no questioning of Wexner’s little-explored relationships with Epstein and Fisher. Frank Lutz, the Republican Party pollster and spin doctor, prepared the Wexner Analysis. Lutz’s report essentially outlines a political PR campaign “as the post-war dust settles over the Iraqi desert.”

The Wexner Analysis points out that “. . . many sympathize with the plight of the Palestinian people, [but] there is no love lost for Yassir Arafat.” The report complains that, “the emergence of Mahmoud Abbas as the new Palestinian Prime Minister comes exactly at the wrong time.”

Why? “His ascent to power seems legitimate. He is a fresh face, and a clean-shaven one at that. He speaks well and dresses in Western garb,” the report states. Lutz’s assessment is that “the Palestinians throw us this curve ball.”

Still, the Wexner Analysis emphasizes that “now is the time to link American success in dealing with terrorism and dictators from a position of strength to Israel’s ongoing efforts to eradicate terrorism on and within its borders.”

Lutz, realizing the value of an Arab bogeymen, stresses that “‘Saddam Hussein’ are the two words that tie Israel to America and are most likely to deliver support in Congress. The day we allow Saddam to take his eventual place in the trash heap of history is the day we lose our strongest weapon in the linguistic defense of Israel.

In the “Essential Conclusion” section of the report, Lutz offers 10 recommendations. The first is: “Iraq colors all. Saddam is your best defense, even if he is dead. For a year – a SOLID YEAR – you should be invoking the name of Saddam Hussein and how Israel was always behind American efforts to rid the world of this ruthless dictator and liberate their people.”

Now, as the occupation of Iraq begins to look like the dreaded quagmire, and American troops are dying at the rate of almost one a day, more scrutiny should come to the role of those who pushed for the attack on Iraq, since Saddam Hussein neither had links to Al Qaeda nor posed a threat to the United States.

The Project for the New American Century, the major ideological force behind the illegal attack on Iraq, are generally more concerned with Hussein’s threat to Israel than to the United States. Recent reports that Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, advised President Bush to include the bogus reference to uranium from Niger in the State of the Union address demonstrates a much bigger problem.

Lobbying groups like the Mega Group and government insiders like Wolfowitz and Richard Pearle are engaged in a systematic campaign to identify Israeli national security interests with U.S. military and security interests. The Wexner Analysis merely documents this extensive, often covert campaign, that deserves public debate and democratic discourse, not secret PR campaigns. "
"A Secret Meeting to Plot War?" (Giraldi):
"On June 5, 16 heads of Jewish organizations joined 25 Democratic senators in a private meeting, which, according to the Times of Israel, is an annual event. All of the Jewish organizations but one were openly declared advocates for Israel and are supportive of its policies. Key groups present included the Council of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. A number of the groups have lobbied Congress and the White House in support of the use of force against Iran, a position that is basically identical to the demands being made by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The senatorial delegation was headed by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), currently Senate minority leader who has described himself as the “shomer” or guardian of Israel in the Senate. The 25 senators in attendance constitute one-quarter of the entire deliberative body and more than half of all Democrats serving in it. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who has emphatically linked her campaign to become the Democratic presidential nominee in 2020 to Jewish and Israeli interests, chaired the gathering.
After the meeting, Jewish Insider provided a complete list of the participants and also a diagram of how they were positioned in the Capitol Hill conference room. The senators were placed on one side of a rectangle with the Jewish leaders in front of them filling the seats on the other three sides. Who exactly provided the agenda that Klobuchar was presumably following is not known, but one suspects that it may have been a joint effort by Schumer and several of the more prominent Jewish organization participants.
The meeting was by design not a public event, and, to a certain extent, it was a secret. Its time, place, and participants were not announced, and it was only reported at all in the Israeli and Jewish media. According to after-the-fact coverage of the event by Alison Weir of the “If Americans Knew” website, even staffers in the congressional offices were not aware that the meeting was taking place. No statement was issued afterwards, but it is believed that the principal topic under discussion was how to contain and reverse pro- Palestinian sentiment among progressive Democratic voters, who, to the horror of the participants, actually have been embracing the possibility that Palestinians are human beings with plausibly the same rights as Israelis. A particular focus would have been the nonviolent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which has become a growing force on college campuses and in progressive circles.
. . . While other ethnic groups in the United States are protective of their respective cultures and languages, there is no sense that any of them actually seek to advocate policies damaging to the United States to benefit the foreign nations that they identify with. The Jewish advocacy for Israel is something quite different, costing the American taxpayer billions of dollars every year and involving Washington in a sequence of wars of choice driven by Israel itself aided by its powerful domestic lobby. Israel also comes with a price tag in terms of the constitutional rights enjoyed by Americans. Before too long, legislation currently working its way through Congress will criminalize any criticism of Israel. No other national or ethnic group in the United States seeks to dismantle the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in quite that fashion.
Israel is no friend and never has been. Recent media reports detail how Jewish-American oligarch Paul Singer has been working with the Israeli government to transfer thousands of high-paying American IT jobs to Israel. Is he guilty of dual loyalty? No, he is only really loyal to Israel, as are many of the Jewish leaders who met with Pompeo and the senators. It is a disgrace."
'Our faves' news: "Jeffrey Epstein's Wikipedia Page Stealth-Edited To Remove Ties To Democrats" and - Crooks and Liars trying to change the subject, but still interesting - "Jonathan Swan Incredulous At Dershowitz Massage Story: 'What's Going ON?'" (Kuns) and "Bill Clinton Tries to Distance Himself From His Close Friend, Jewish Crime Lord Epstein" (Anglin), but "Bill Clinton Lying About Epstein Relationship: Report" (Durden).

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Little Israel

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha:  tweet (Jesse Eisinger) (note the reply by Koen on Browder) (Haim!):
"I had not realized until today how nothing about Jeffrey Epstein’s business or career makes any sense. For instance, there were only 13 billionaires in the US in 1982. "
Tragically, we all live in 'little Israel':  "Israeli who headed Colombia child prostitution ring arrested in Portugal".

Comment by Tired of Not Winning to an Atzmon piece.  I've been thinking of the NXIVM scandal as just another example of the general depravity of Khazars, but we really should be considering the political and blackmail implications of it. The Epstein operation is an example of a much wider problem.

Russian 'troubles'!: tweet (The War Nerd):
"Here we have the Russians creating "divisions" within Northern Ireland. Apparently it was a haven of unity before they got their dirty mitts into the mix... "
Lite Zionism is becoming trendy in certain Democrat circles: "US Presidential Candidate Elizabeth Warren Has Got a Problem. He’s Called Max Berger" (Aussie Dave).

A lot of people noticed this classic headline:  "Harris, Warren tie for third place in new 2020 Dem poll, but Biden still leads".

This kind of thing is why the Jews ensured they controlled all the (((media))):  tweet (Ben Norton):
"Almost all of these reports on Iran are misleading and irresponsible. If you don't stress in the title that it was the US that sabotaged the nuclear deal, destroying the entire purpose of it, then you're just making anti-Iran propaganda that helps to justify illegal US aggression"
MbZ, much smarter than MbS:  "Yemen: UAE to reduce troop presence after consulting with Riyadh".  Of course, MbZ just wants to steal half of Yemen, while MbS needs the whole thing.

"Without Reform, Trump’s Embrace of MBS Will Haunt the United States" (Askari).

((('Donor'))) problems plague 'socialism':  "DSA/Jacobin/Haymarket-sponsored ‘Socialism’ conference features US gov-funded regime-change activists" (Norton/Blumenthal).  With a huge list of examples of the problem, and really no attempt to hide it!

"Head of Israel lobby group exposed by undercover film resigns" (Winstanley).  Note he had to resign because he couldn't raise the shekels to fund his trickery, not because he was found out!

"Interesting Developments in the Russiagate Saga by Larry C Johnson" and its comments.  Setting up Russiagate by the American IC and its foreign friends was very tricky, operationally, and the operators struggled to stay in their lanes, particularly regarding both legal and traditional 'best practices' restraints on various institutions.

"Iran’s shock therapy breaks JCPOA stalemate" (Bhadrakumar). "The JCPOA Crisis Isn’t About Nukes at All. Embedding US Strategic Influence Worldwide" (Korybko).  "To Think Outside the Box, It Helps First to Understand What’s IN the Box" (Crooke).  "Russia, America, and Iran" (Shamir) (it is striking how the things that nobody can say, for example that Russiagate is run by Zionists for Zionist supremacist reasons, are actually discussed openly by the Israelis!; my emphasis in red; btw, this looks like a conclusive refutation of the Korybko thesis that Putin is just a cynical manipulator):
". . . the Jewish state proposed that Putin should give up his ties with Iran; in return, they promised to assist in general warming of Russo-American relations. Putin had a bigger counter-proposal: Let the US lift its Iran sanctions and withdraw its armed forces from Syria, and Russia will try to usher Iranian armed forces out of Syria, too. The ensuing negotiations around Iran-Syria deal would lead to recognition of the US and Israel interests in Syria, and further on it could lead to negotiations in other spheres.
This was a clear win-win proposal. Iran would emerge free of sanctions; Israel and the US would have their interests recognised in Syria; the much-needed dialogue between Russia and the US will get a jump-start. But Israel does not like win-win proposals. The Jewish state wants clear victories, preferably with their enemy defeated, humiliated, hanged. Israel rejected the proposal, for it wanted Iran to suffer under sanctions.
The Russian proposal had been first sounded in September last year, and it was discussed behind the closed doors in the Israeli Knesset (Parliament). Prime Minister Netanyahu said: “The Russians asked us to open the gates for them in Washington”. Netanyahu rejected the Russian proposals because he thought the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions on Iran could be used as leverage on the Iranians over Syria — not the other way around, wrote a knowledgeable Israeli journalist Barak Ravid of Channel 13. “Netanyahu refused to show any flexibility on the issue of U.S. sanctions,” – he quoted an Israeli official.
Russians agreed to the weird idea of Russian and American security advisers meeting in Jerusalem, hoping it would lead to a breakthrough. My readers remember that I was very worried about this trilateral meeting of a Russian representative with the notorious warmongers John Bolton and Netanyahu. Israeli media played the summit up as the pivotal point for the region. Russia would part with Iran and pivot to Israel and the US, they predicted. This will be a new Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, of Russia coming to terms with the aggressor. Good-bye, Iran, welcome, Israel.
However the gift of prophecy had been taken away from the people of Israel and given to fools, said the ever-knowing Talmud (Baba Batra 12b). The Russian representative at the summit, Nikolai Patrushev, while being friendly to Israel, didn’t pivot away from Iran. He denied Tehran is the key threat to regional security. “In trilateral Jerusalem summit, Russia sides with Iran, against Israel and US. Senior Russian official stands by Tehran’s claim that US drone was shot down in Iranian airspace, defends rights of foreign troops to remain in Syria despite Israeli opposition” – concluded an Israeli newspaper.
Russia is friendly to Israel, as many Israelis are connected to Russia by their own, or their parents’ birth. An even stronger reason is that Jews are the top dog in the US, and the Jewish state can open many doors in Washington. Jews and the Jewish state would be as important as, say, the Kurds, if they did not have a hold on the US.
Russia certainly wants to live in peace with the US, but not at the price Mr Netanyahu suggested. Mr Patrushev condemned the US sanctions against Iran. He said that Iran shot down the giant American drone RQ-4A Global Hawk worth more than a hundred million dollars over Iranian territory, not in the international airspace as the Pentagon claimed. He stated that American “evidence” that Iran had sabotaged tankers in the Persian Gulf was inconclusive. Russia demanded that the United States stop its economic war against Iran, recognize the legitimate authorities of Syria, led by President Bashar Assad, and withdraw its troops from Syria. Russia expressed its support for the legitimate government in Venezuela. Thus, Russia showed itself at this difficult moment as a reliable ally and partner, and at the same time assured the staggering Israeli leadership of its friendship.
The problem is that the drive for war with Iran is not gone. A few days ago, the Brits seized an Iranian super-tanker in the Straits of Gibraltar. The tanker was on its way to deliver oil to Syria. Before that, the United States had almost launched a missile attack on Iran. At the last moment, when the planes were already in the air, Trump stopped the operation. It is particularly disturbing that he himself unambiguously hinted that the operation was launched without his knowledge. That is, the chain of commands in the US is now torn, and it is not clear who can start a war. This has to be taken into account both in Moscow and in Tehran.
The situation is daunting. President Trump may want to climb down from that tall tree he had driven himself into when he led his country out of a multilateral nuclear deal with Iran. But he is hampered by his “deep state”, by Pompeo and Bolton; about the latter, Trump himself said that he wants to fight with the whole world. Presidents can’t always remove the ministers from whom they want to get rid of – even the absolute monarchs of the past did not always succeed.
Let us hope that, given Trump’s unwillingness to go to war and the weak position of Premier Netanyahu himself, there will be progress in this matter. But meanwhile Trump introduced new sanctions against Iran; the Iranian leader called the American leadership “insane”; the Americans are again threatening to “completely destroy” Iran.
Russia wants to help Iran, not out of sheer love to the Islamic Republic, but as a part of its struggle for multi-polar world, where independent states carry on the way they like. Iran, North Korea, Venezuela – their fight for survival is a part and parcel of Russia’s struggle. If these states will be taken over, Russia can become the next victim, Putin feels."
""Pretty Please" - Trump Asked Iran To Allow Him To Bomb It" (Moon).  Overall very encouraging, and makes Trump look like a superior President, even as he hasn't got his ducks in order due to Zionist pressure (see Epstein).

Yinon news:  "The Only Strategic Rationale for America’s Involvement in Syria Finally Revealed" (Samo).

From 2016:  "Putin is a bigger threat to Europe’s existence than Isis" (Soros).

Tweet (Aaron Maté):
"I look forward to reading. Hopefully the defenseless Europeans have figured out a proper defense by now to such nefarious Russian efforts as Operation 97 Cents. "
This is rather important:  "How Christine Lagarde, Clinton and Nuland Funded a Massive Ukrainian Ponzi Scheme" (Helmer) (and the comment by AM Hants).  For the (not so) curious Khazar-Banderist alliance (it is just a parallel to the Nazi-Zionist alliance of the 30s), see also:  "Is Israel trying to hide arms exports to neo-Nazi militias in Ukraine?" (Taussig).  It is amazing how much you can understand if you have a Secret Decoder Ring.

Tweet (Yasha Levine) (pikers:  Canada has a Banderist Minister of Foreign Affairs!):
"Yikes! A Ukrainian fascist recycling coordinator in Jersey. Only in America, folks!"
"NYT: "The Dominance of the White Male [NOT Jewish Male!!] Critic"" (Sailer).  The Khazars took full control of the apparatus of literary and art criticism in the 50s, promoting utterly incompetent painters - Rothko got to sell what look like samples from a paint store for many, many shekels, with 'abstract expressionism' for the most part being one of the biggest scams in the history of art - and novelists, all of whom happened to be Khazars!  Sadly, this criticism grift has had a terrible effect on output (it explains why the novel you are reading which you are told is really, really good, isn't).  I truly believe they are right to treat us like farm animals!

"Leak of British Diplomatic Messages is Cynical Plot to Install Farage as Ambassador" (Greenhalgh).

"Citizenship question causing an uproar in U.S. has been part of Canada's census since 1901" (Harris).

"The Arabian Cradle of Zion" (Guyénot).  Tweet (Dara de Brún):
"This guys family is from Poland."
Tweet (Glyphosate=Cancer) ("her life was in danger unless "she voted right""):
"Common Lee, you know it’s more sophisticated and insidious than just donations. Let’s be real. Zionist influencers threatened the lives of world leaders and the President of the USA to get the Partition of Palestine ‘47 boarders. Their tactics haven’t abated since... "
"Brainwashing for All: Holocaust Education to be Mandatory in American Schools" (Frei).  Do you notice the general intensification, in multiple areas - even more Hollow Cost 'education', the attacks on Corbyn (I'm surprised the Khazars haven't developed an app!), the anti-BDS legislation and similar outrageous over-extension of Zionist control, Iran Talk, Russiagate, book 'burning', bizarre new enforced definitions of 'anti-Semitism', the shuttering of social media outlets, etc, etc, etc - which seems to be a manifestation of panic, as if (((they))) fear that suddenly everything is going to explode?  We're getting closer to the abyss, seemingly incapable of doing anything about it.  Imagine how many, many, many problems will be simultaneously solved when the Khazars are finally 'forced into the sea'.