Monday, September 23, 2019

Do you detect a pattern?

"Dutch court hears war crimes accusations against Israel’s Benny Gantz" (Nieuwhof).  It's so Very Israeli when part of the evidence is the boasting in the defendant's Israeli election campaign video!

"From Frontline Village of Krutaya Balka, Where Residents Under Constant Ukrainian Machine Gun Fire, Sniping, Bombing" (Bartlett).  "Town hall with Chrystia Freeland cut short by protesters".  I still find it hilarious that Freeland, wanting Trudeau's job, and just like with the SNC-Lavalin scandal, just can't bring herself to give a real endorsement of Trudeau.

Sometimes the lying is at an even more outrageous level than usual: tweet (Mark Ames):
"We’re supposed to believe that Houthis snitched on their best & only ally, Iran, because they don’t want to harm Saudi, the country that’s been slaughtering their children by the tens of thousands—so say “people familiar with the matter”."
Tweet (Tim Shorrock):
"Ed selling Signal. Who runs the Signal Foundation, where your "donations" go? That information is "coming soon." -> @Yashalevine
demystifies Signal here: Snowden is not the whole story."
This is completely consistent with Snowden being a CIA operation to take the NSA down as peg in the Washington pecking order.  Now he's directing suckers looking for privacy to give all their secrets to the CIA by using CIA-tapped communication apps.

"American Pravda: Understanding World War II" (Unz):
"To put things in plain language, during the years leading up to the Second World War, both Churchill and numerous other fellow British MPs were regularly receiving sizable financial stipends—cash bribes—from Jewish and Czech sources in exchange for promoting a policy of extreme hostility toward the German government and actually advocating war. The sums involved were quite considerable, with the Czech government alone probably making payments that amounted to tens of millions in present-day dollars to British elected officials, publishers, and journalists working to overturn the official peace policy of their existing government. A particularly notable instance occurred in early 1938 when Churchill suddenly lost all his accumulated wealth in a foolish gamble on the American stock-market, and was soon forced to put his beloved country estate up for sale to avoid personal bankruptcy, only to quickly be bailed out by a foreign Jewish millionaire intent upon promoting a war against Germany. Indeed, the early stages of Churchill’s involvement in this sordid behavior are recounted in an Irving chapter aptly entitled “The Hired Help.”
Ironically enough, German Intelligence learned of this massive bribery of British parliamentarians, and passed the information along to Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who was horrified to discover the corrupt motives of his fierce political opponents, but apparently remained too much of a gentlemen to have them arrested and prosecuted. I’m no expert in the British laws of that era, but for elected officials to do the bidding of foreigners on matters of war and peace in exchange for huge secret payments seems almost a textbook example of treason to me, and I think that Churchill’s timely execution would surely have saved tens of millions of lives.
My impression is that individuals of low personal character are those most likely to sell out the interests of their own country in exchange for large sums of foreign money, and as such usually constitute the natural targets of nefarious plotters and foreign spies. Churchill certainly seems to fall into this category, with rumors of massive personal corruption swirling around him from early in his political career. Later, he supplemented his income by engaging in widespread art-forgery, a fact that Roosevelt later discovered and probably used as a point of personal leverage against him. Also quite serious was Churchill’s constant state of drunkenness, with his inebriation being so widespread as to constitute clinical alcoholism. Indeed, Irving notes that in his private conversations FDR routinely referred to Churchill as “a drunken bum.”

During the late 1930s, Churchill and his clique of similarly bought-and-paid-for political allies had endlessly attacked and denounced Chamberlain’s government for its peace policy, and he regularly made the wildest sort of unsubstantiated accusations, claiming the Germans were undertaking a huge military build-up aimed against Britain. These roiling charges were often widely echoed by a media heavily influenced by Jewish interests and did much to poison the state of German-British relations. Eventually, these accumulated pressures forced Chamberlain into the extremely unwise act of providing an unconditional guarantee of military backing to Poland’s irresponsible dictatorship. As a result, the Poles then rather arrogantly refused any border negotiations with Germany, thereby lighting the fuse which eventually led to the German invasion six months later and the subsequent British declaration of war. The British media had widely promoted Churchill as the leading pro-war political figure, and once Chamberlain was forced to create a wartime government of national unity, his leading critic was brought into it and given the naval affairs portfolio.
Following his lightening six-week defeat of Poland, Hitler unsuccessfully sought to make peace with the Allies, and the war went into abeyance. Then in early 1940, Churchill persuaded his government to try strategically outflanking the Germans by preparing a large sea-borne invasion of neutral Norway; but Hitler discovered the plan and preempted the attack, with Churchill’s severe operational mistakes leading to a surprising defeat for the vastly superior British forces. During World War I, Churchill’s Gallipoli disaster had forced his resignation from the British Cabinet, but this time the friendly media helped ensure that all the blame for the somewhat similar debacle at Narvik was foisted upon Chamberlain, so it was the latter who was forced to resign, with Churchill then replacing him as prime minister. British naval officers were appalled that the primary architect of their humiliation had become its leading political beneficiary, but reality is what the media reports, and the British public never discovered this great irony.
This incident was merely the first of the long series of Churchill’s major military failures and outright betrayals that are persuasively recounted by Irving, nearly all of which were subsequently airbrushed out of our hagiographic histories of the conflict. We should recognize that wartime leaders who spend much of their time in a state of drunken stupor are far less likely to make optimal decisions, especially if they are as extremely prone to military micro-management as was the case with Churchill.
In the spring of 1940, the Germans launched their sudden armored thrust into France via Belgium, and as the attack began to succeed, Churchill ordered the commanding British general to immediately flee with his forces to the coast and to do so without informing his French or Belgium counterparts of the huge gap he was thereby opening in the Allied front-lines, thus ensuring the encirclement and destruction of their armies. Following France’s resulting defeat and occupation, the British prime minister then ordered a sudden, surprise attack on the disarmed French fleet, completely destroying it and killing some 2,000 of his erstwhile allies; the immediate cause was his mistranslation of a single French word, but this “Pearl Harbor-type” incident continued to rankle French leaders for decades.
Hitler had always wanted friendly relations with Britain and certainly had sought to avoid the war that had been forced upon him. With France now defeated and British forces driven from the Continent, he therefore offered very magnanimous peace terms and a new German alliance to Britain. The British government had been pressured into entering the war for no logical reason and against its own national interests, so Chamberlain and half the Cabinet naturally supported commencing peace negotiations, and the German proposal probably would have received overwhelming approval both from the British public and political elites if they had ever been informed of its terms.
But despite some occasional wavering, Churchill remained absolutely adamant that the war must continue, and Irving plausibly argues that his motive was an intensely personal one. Across his long career, Churchill had had a remarkable record of repeated failure, and for him to have finally achieved his lifelong ambition of becoming prime minister only to lose a major war just weeks after reaching Number 10 Downing Street would have ensured that his permanent place in history was an extremely humiliating one. On the other hand, if he managed to continue the war, perhaps the situation might somehow later improve, especially if the Americans could be persuaded to eventually enter the conflict on the British side.
Since ending the war with Germany was in his nation’s interest but not his own, Churchill undertook ruthless means to prevent peace sentiments from growing so strong that they overwhelmed his opposition. Along with most other major countries, Britain and Germany had signed international conventions prohibiting the aerial bombardment of civilian urban targets, and although the British leader had very much hoped the Germans would attack his cities, Hitler scrupulously followed these provisions. In desperation, Churchill therefore ordered a series of large-scale bombing raids against the German capital of Berlin, doing considerable damage, and after numerous severe warnings, Hitler finally began to retaliate with similar attacks against British cities. The population saw the heavy destruction inflicted by these German bombing raids and was never informed of the British attacks that had preceded and provoked them, so public sentiment greatly hardened against making peace with the seemingly diabolical German adversary.
In his memoirs published a half-century later, Prof. Revilo P. Oliver, who had held a senior wartime role in American Military Intelligence, described this sequence of events in very bitter terms:
Great Britain, in violation of all the ethics of civilized warfare that had theretofore been respected by our race, and in treacherous violation of solemnly assumed diplomatic covenants about “open cities”, had secretly carried out intensive bombing of such open cities in Germany for the express purpose of killing enough unarmed and defenceless men and women to force the German government reluctantly to retaliate and bomb British cities and thus kill enough helpless British men, women, and children to generate among Englishmen enthusiasm for the insane war to which their government had committed them.
It is impossible to imagine a governmental act more vile and more depraved than contriving death and suffering for its own people — for the very citizens whom it was exhorting to “loyalty” — and I suspect that an act of such infamous and savage treason would have nauseated even Genghis Khan or Hulagu or Tamerlane, Oriental barbarians universally reprobated for their insane blood-lust. History, so far as I recall, does not record that they ever butchered their own women and children to facilitate lying propaganda….In 1944 members of British Military Intelligence took it for granted that after the war Marshal Sir Arthur Harris would be hanged or shot for high treason against the British people…
Churchill’s ruthless violation of the laws of war regarding urban aerial bombardment directly led to the destruction of many of Europe’s finest and most ancient cities. But perhaps influenced by his chronic drunkenness, he later sought to carry out even more horrifying war crimes and was only prevented from doing so by the dogged opposition of all his military and political subordinates.
Along with the laws prohibiting the bombing of cities, all nations had similarly agreed to ban the first use of poison gas, while stockpiling quantities for necessary retaliation. Since Germany was the world-leader in chemistry, the Nazis had produced the most lethal forms of new nerve gases, such as Tabun and Sarin, whose use might have easily resulted in major military victories on both the Eastern and Western fronts, but Hitler had scrupulously obeyed the international protocols that his nation had signed. However, late in the war during 1944 the relentless Allied bombardment of German cities led to the devastating retaliatory attacks of the V-1 flying bombs against London, and an outraged Churchill became adamant that German cities should be attacked with poison gas in counter-retaliation. If Churchill had gotten his way, many millions of British might soon have perished from German nerve gas counter-strikes. Around the same time, Churchill was also blocked in his proposal to bombard Germany with hundreds of thousands of deadly anthrax bombs, an operation that might have rendered much of Central and Western Europe uninhabitable for generations.
I found Irving’s revelations on all these matters absolutely astonishing, and was deeply grateful that Deborah Lipstadt and her army of diligent researchers had carefully investigated and seemingly confirmed the accuracy of virtually every single item."
"Roosevelt’s economic problems had led him to seek a foreign war, but it was probably the overwhelming Jewish hostility to Nazi Germany that pointed him in that particular direction. The confidential report of the Polish ambassador to the U.S. as quoted by John Wear provides a striking description of the political situation in America at the beginning of 1939:
There is a feeling now prevalent in the United States marked by growing hatred of Fascism, and above all of Chancellor Hitler and everything connected with National Socialism. Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews who control almost 100% [of the] radio, film, daily and periodical press. Although this propaganda is extremely coarse and presents Germany as black as possible–above all religious persecution and concentration camps are exploited–this propaganda is nevertheless extremely effective since the public here is completely ignorant and knows nothing of the situation in Europe.
At the present moment most Americans regard Chancellor Hitler and National Socialism as the greatest evil and greatest peril threatening the world. The situation here provides an excellent platform for public speakers of all kinds, for emigrants from Germany and Czechoslovakia who with a great many words and with most various calumnies incite the public. They praise American liberty which they contrast with the totalitarian states.
It is interesting to note that in this extremely well-planned campaign which is conducted above all against National Socialism, Soviet Russia is almost completely eliminated. Soviet Russia, if mentioned at all, is mentioned in a friendly manner and things are presented in such a way that it would seem that the Soviet Union were cooperating with the bloc of democratic states. Thanks to the clever propaganda the sympathies of the American public are completely on the side of Red Spain.
Given the heavy Jewish involvement in financing Churchill and his allies and also steering the American government and public in the direction of war against Germany, organized Jewish groups probably bore the central responsibility for provoking the world war, and this was surely recognized by most knowledgeable individuals at the time. Indeed, the Forrestal Diaries recorded the very telling statement by our ambassador in London: “Chamberlain, he says, stated that America and the Jews had forced England into the war.”

The ongoing struggle between Hitler and international Jewry had been receiving considerable public attention for years. During his political rise, Hitler had hardly concealed his intent to dislodge Germany’s tiny Jewish population from the stranglehold they had gained over German media and finance, and instead run the country in the best interests of the 99% German majority, a proposal that provoked the bitter hostility of Jews everywhere. Indeed, immediately after he came into office, a major London newspaper had carried a memorable 1933 headline announcing that the Jews of the world had declared war on Germany, and were organizing an international boycott to starve the Germans into submission.
In recent years, somewhat similar Jewish-organized efforts at international sanctions aimed at bringing recalcitrant nations to their knees have become a regular part of global politics. But these days the Jewish dominance of the U.S. political system has become so overwhelming that instead of private boycotts, such actions are directly enforced by the American government. To some extent, this had already been the case with Iraq during the 1990s, but became far more common after the turn of the new century.
Although our official government investigation concluded that the total financial cost of the 9/11 terrorist attacks had been an absolutely trivial sum, the Neocon-dominated Bush Administration nonetheless used this as an excuse to establish an important new Treasury Department position, the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. That office soon began utilizing America’s control of the global banking system and dollar-denominated international trade to enforce financial sanctions and wage economic warfare, with these measures typically being directed against individuals, organizations, and nations considered unfriendly towards Israel, notably Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria.
Perhaps coincidentally, although Jews comprise merely 2% of the American population, all four individuals holding that very powerful post over the last 15 years since its inception—Stuart A. Levey, David S. Cohen, Adam Szubin, Sigal Mandelker—have been Jewish, with the most recent of these being an Israeli citizen. Levey, the first Under Secretary, began his work under President Bush, then continued without a break for years under President Obama, underscoring the entirely bipartisan nature of these activities.
Most foreign policy experts have certainly been aware that Jewish groups and activists played the central role in driving our country into its disastrous 2003 Iraq War, and that many of these same groups and individuals have spent the last dozen years or so working to foment a similar American attack on Iran, though as yet unsuccessfully. This seems quite reminiscent of the late 1930s political situation in Britain and America."
"Another striking historical parallel has the fierce demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who provoked the great hostility of Jewish elements when he ousted the handful of Jewish Oligarchs who had seized control of Russian society under the drunken misrule of President Boris Yeltsin and totally impoverished the bulk of the population. This conflict intensified after Jewish investor William F. Browder arranged Congressional passage of the Magnitsky Act to punish Russian leaders for the legal actions they had taken against his huge financial empire in their country. Putin’s harshest Neocon critics have often condemned him as “a new Hitler” while some neutral observers have agreed that no foreign leader since the German Chancellor of the 1930s has been so fiercely vilified in the American media. Seen from a different angle, there may indeed be a close correspondence between Putin and Hitler, but not in the way usually suggested.
Knowledgeable individuals have certainly been aware of the crucial Jewish role in orchestrating our military or financial attacks against Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Russia, but it has been exceptionally rare for any prominent public figures or reputable journalists to mention these facts lest they be denounced and vilified by zealous Jewish activists and the media they dominate. For example, a couple of years ago a single suggestive Tweet by famed CIA anti-proliferation operative Valerie Plame provoked such an enormous wave of vituperation that she was forced to resign her position at a prominent non-profit. A close parallel involving a far more famous figure had occurred three generations earlier:
These facts, now firmly established by decades of scholarship, provide some necessary context to Lindbergh’s famously controversial speech at an America First rally in September 1941. At that event, he charged that three groups in particular were “pressing this country toward war[:] the British, the Jewish, and the Roosevelt Administration,” and thereby unleashed an enormous firestorm of media attacks and denunciations, including widespread accusations of anti-Semitism and Nazi sympathies. Given the realities of the political situation, Lindbergh’s statement constituted a perfect illustration of Michael Kinsley’s famous quip that “a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth – some obvious truth he isn’t supposed to say.” But as a consequence, Lindbergh’s once-heroic reputation suffered enormous and permanent damage, with the campaign of vilification echoing for the remaining three decades of his life, and even well beyond. Although he was not entirely purged from public life, his standing was certainly never even remotely the same."
The exact (((same people))), doing the exact same thing, over and over - history can't be that simple, can it? We've got the same control of the (((media))) now, full control of the (((Entertainment-Military-Industrial Complex))) and the message produced by it, full control of the sole permitted narrative of WWIII (Hitler bad, lots and lots of Holocaust), the deplatforming of dissenting voices on the internet (on the guise that they are 'haters'), following on the 'deplatforming' of the old and once revered historians through a systematic program of ignoring and vilifying (keeping the goy historians in line with the threat of similar shaming), and the recent revelation that the Jews are actively scouring their archives to remove documentary evidence of the Nakba, so they can scoff at future statements by historians ("where is the documentary basis for your defamation, you 'anti-Semite'"?).  Do you detect a pattern?


Sunday, September 22, 2019

The mountain of kumbaya

This is from an inmate at a British conservative stinktank - in other words, a professional liar of the lowest type - but in the spirit of it taking one to know one he nails the problem of the current Thunberg climate change PR campaign, the mechanics of subverting an issue some 0.1% interests want to see go away:  tweets (Robert Colvile).  Basically, you lard the essential issue with heaps and heaps of irrelevant SJW dreck, so much so that each additional layer of irrelevancy peels off another swatch of potential supporters, and you ignore the actual policy platforms that might make a difference, buried under a mountain of kumbaya.  It's deviously clever, as many aspects of the dreck are actually solid progressive issues (in particular, some careful de-agribusinessing of agriculture will be essential), but the combination is intentionally toxic in just the right way to ensure that nothing gets done.  'Climate justice' is the key.

Desperate times call for desperate measures, and the PR industry proves itself up to the task.  Even Assholians are having trouble denying that there is a problem, when their feet are in the water and their hair is on fire (we may be lucky that the otherwise self-preoccupied self-centered and utterly selfish residents of Assholia live in a space that is going to suffer the worst).  You can only get so far claiming that 99 point something percent of the scientists who are experts on the issue are out to lunch, with anybody with an IQ over 70 having trouble with this whopper.  Eventually, the 99% are going to insist on political action, so a very carefully constructed platform was built, guaranteed to fail.

Saturday, September 21, 2019

Unusually thin skull

"Malta orders public inquiry into Daphne Caruana Galizia's murder":
"Muscat, a frequent target of Caruana Galizia's writings . . . "
Quibbly 'review' of Blumenthal's book, a book which is quite good as a mass compendium of 'war on terror' and Wars For The Jews outrages/contradictions/inconsistencies, but does suffer from the perhaps unavoidable problem of implicitly accepting some of the main underlying assumptions of the hegemon and its Zionist masters.  It is recommended reading as I know of no other similar documenting of the atrocities, both domestic and foreign, all useful knowledge that the (((media))) either ignores or buries in the fine print.  Just experiencing the sheer quantity of outrages is a useful wake-up call.  Added:  Blumenthal response.

"Darker Story behind Heritage News from Israel" (Barford).

Not newsworthy, goyim!:  "'Total Massacre' as U.S. Drone Strike Kills 30 Farmers in Afghanistan" (Higgins). Just your basic everyday total massacre as opposed to the one dead American soldier who served as the excuse to scupper Trump's attempts at peace talks.

"A Small Reminder Of The Lower-Than-Zero Value Of Partisan 'Analysts'" (Moon).

"The company Irwin Cotler keeps: Paul Kagame, Alan Dershowitz and (maybe) the Montreal mob and Jeffrey Epstein" (Engler).  "Faux Humanitarian Irwin Cotler, the White Helmets, and the Whitewashing of an Appalling Agenda" (Beeley).  "Syrian White Helmets to be nominated for Nobel Peace Prize" (Zilio).  Cotler is such an instructive example of the gaping abyss between official and (((media))) accolades, and the stunningly ugly truth about a real monster.

"New Study Documents Depleted Uranium Impacts on Children in Iraq" (Swanson).

Big picture incompetence is why it will be a tragedy if Bibi is pushed out of power:  "Israeli PM Netanyahu’s Himalayan Miscalculation on Iran: Bringing China into the Mideast" (Cole). It is not just him - all the 'American' Khazars have been a disaster for the Zionist murder and land theft project, and the Rothschilds and other globo-homo Khazars are clearly distancing themselves from the incompetence.

"“Breaking: Houthis to halt missile strikes after Saudi Arabia offers peace deal” says Al Masdar News - TTG".  MbS loses a tremendous amount of face if he is seen as asking for peace, so this will have to be negotiated very carefully, but I can't see how the Saudis can afford any additional attack (and since the Dubai skyscrapers are also now on the table, the UAE also has to give in, even to the extent of giving back the territory MbZ is trying to steal).

"U.S. Orders Duke and U.N.C. to Recast Tone in Mideast Studies" (Green).  'Hello, Newman' news!  'Tone' in the Zionazi police state, led by the Mega Group blackmail.

Marshall has been beside himself with joy over the latest alleged 'scandal', but it seems every one of these backfires:  "BRAKING NEWS--TRUMP PRESSURED UKRAINE TO FIRE PROSECUTOR by Larry C Johnson" and "Did Trump-Biden-Ukraine Drama Just Implode? WaPo Reports No "Quid Pro Quo" Offered During Phone Call".  Americans should take from this that the Bidens are quite crooked.

"Why did Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet fly to Riyadh on the eve of the 2016 election?" (Trotter). Epstein, MbS, and Bezos (and the issue of the Bezos blackmail plot)!

Randy Andy may not be the only prince accepting 'gifts' from Epstein:  "Today's Blind Items - The Payoff" (CDaN).  "The Duchess of Cornwall's brother Mark Shand died 'because of an unusually thin skull'"

"Canada Now Has Psilocybin Dispensaries" (Tomoski).

Tweet (Gearóid Ó Colmáin):
"Connolly on bourgeois decadence!"

Friday, September 20, 2019

Every. Single. Time!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thursday, September 19, 2019

Criminal insanity

The worst thing for the Saudis isn't that the Houthis managed the attack - which raises a lot of issues, with the bonus of Schadenfreude - but that the Houthis managed the attack from a base in a Shi'ite area of Saudi Arabia itself!

Added: "How the Houthis overturned the chessboard" (Escobar):
"The situation has now reached a point where there’s plenty of chatter across the Persian Gulf about a spectacular scenario: the Houthis investing in a mad dash across the Arabian desert to capture Mecca and Medina in conjunction with a mass Shiite uprising in the Eastern oil belt. That’s not far-fetched anymore. Stranger things have happened in the Middle East. After all, the Saudis can’t even win a bar brawl – that’s why they rely on mercenaries."
"My conversations with sources in Tehran over the past two years have ascertained that the Houthis’ new drones and missiles are essentially copies of Iranian designs assembled in Yemen itself with crucial help from Hezbollah engineers."
"Exhibition of Houthi military-industrial achievements" (The Saker, from July, so it is not like MbS had no warning).

Tweet (Scott Ritter):
"The Houthi spent less than $100,000 to cripple 50% of Saudi oil production, easily repaired. If the US/Saudi Team opts to attack Iran, Iran will take out 100% of Saudi oil production, never to be full repaired. That would be the death of the al-Saud family, which means no war."
I hope Bibi manages to pull off another deal with another devil, as he has been a spectacular success, despite some superficial nonsense, in wrecking the Zionist project.  I believe the deep reason for his current problems is his failure at the long-term project of killing people and stealing their land, which is after all the quintessence of the Khazars.  You have to wonder if Bibi's failure with Putin - another classic Bibi Hail Mary, so to speak, to prove how essential he is to the killing and land theft - was the factor which decided the election:  "Russia prevents Israeli airstrikes in Syria" (Okbi) (see also).

Trudeau in blackface (which the Canadian media was calling 'brownface', for some reason):  "Photos surface of Justin Trudeau wearing black makeup at two previous events" (Carrigg).  He had just finished announcing a campaign promise that would amount to a form of guaranteed annual income for low-income parents:  "Roundup: Sweetening the newborn benefits".  The deal is that the more pressure is on the Liberals, the more they will be inclined to move left, so we need to see a lot more of this kind of thing.  Canada has oodles of money to spend on Canadians; the Liberals just have to be forced to get around their 'donors' disinclination to do so.

We're reached the 'blame the third-world pilots' level of the Boeing PR campaign (which was the first approach as well):  "Langewiesche: "What Really Brought Down the Boeing 737 Max?"" (Sailer).  Unstated is the reason the US uniquely has all these kick-ass pilots who can fight through incompetent Boeing engineering and ergonomics - the skills learned in dropping bombs on wedding parties and other brown people in fighting the infinite number of Wars For The Jews (the slogan should be, as always:  'Khazars, are there no limits to what they do for us?').  Of course, also unstated is that the FAA - 'captured' by Boeing, as they say in the study of administrative law - is as equally guilty for the problem as Boeing, and is now given the task to provide the PR basis to allow Boeing to 'fix' the problem partly created by the FAA, without noticing the problem.  It remains a mystery of why any non-American airlines would have anything to do with this shambles.

"Why on Earth Would the US Go to War with Iran over an Attack on Saudi Oil Refineries?" (Lindorff).  Lots of questions like this that we're not supposed to even think about.  Like, why would the US spend trillions of dollars of wealth and basically wreck itself as a country all so 2% of its population can have an arguably slightly better chance of killing people and stealing their land?  These questions are why we need to realize that American politics is run through the blackmail of American politicians by Jewish gangsters.

Ha ha ha ha ha, 'editing error':  "Mish Blasts NYT Kavanaugh Smear: "Editorial Mistake My Ass"".  There must be some kind of JYT hot key which automatically produces 'pushed his penis into her hand' which was accidentally hit, and nobody actually read the article in editing it!  The funniest/saddest thing is that this kind of serial lying completely defangs any political reality that might have existed behind the piece.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm proud to announce the winner of the prestigious Khazar of the Year Award:  "MIT scientist RESIGNS after he appeared to defend Jeffrey Epstein and claimed sex assault victim Virginia Giuffre was likely 'entirely willing' in alleged rape case" (Saunders) and "Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely Willing’" (Montgomery) and "Remove Richard Stallman" (Selam G.).  #Metoo, that most anti-Semitic of programs, doesn't seem to have registered at all.  In fact, the whole concept of 'consent' seems utterly baffling to the Khazars.  No matter how sophisticated they might seem, they have demonstrated time and time again (see also, Dersh) that they are an extremely primitive people.

Khazars, are there no limits to what they do for us?:  "B.C. going after family behind OxyContin producer Purdue Pharma" (Vikander). Hard to pierce that corporate veil unless there was a scheme to avoid creditors (which there clearly was).

"Israel Spies and Spies and Spies" (Giraldi).  So blackmailed you can't even acknowledge it when they are caught red handed!

"US Attorney General Barr invokes “state secrets” to cover up Saudi involvement in 9/11" (Grey).  Oh, come on, this is part of the weird dance of the seven veils going back to Bob Graham!  Much as I hate the Saudis, they were patsies used to cover American government involvement and to provide some pressure on the Saudi government should it be needed.  The CIA/State Department were handing out visas like candy to fake identity 'Saudis' through the US consulate in Jeddah:  "Visas for Al Qaeda: CIA Handouts That Rocked The World – An Insider’s View." (Springmann/Faulkner).

One thing about these beshekeled 'journalists' in the (((media))), constantly shilling for Wars For The Jews, is that they have absolutely no self-awareness, and haven't learned a thing:  tweet (Max Blumenthal) (Werleman's shtick is that he is 'anti-Islamophobic'):
"A dunderheaded ex-Islamophobe who cheered on genocidal Salafi-jihadis rampaging through Syria wants to ruin our lives for diverging from the NATO/Qatari/AKP line. Watch how @cjwerleman nearly ruined his own with countless instances of blatant plagiarism:"
The little victory tour through Syria of some of the woke journalists is making the al Qaeda/ISIS shills really mad.

'Hunter Wallace' continues his attacks on The Daily Stormer, Anglin, and, in particular, weev, and  The Stormer did go offline but is back again (the paradox for Anglin is he can save the site if he denounces weev, but seems to need weev to run and finance the site):
  1. "Daily Stormer Goes Offline";
  2. "Daily Stormer: Andre Anglin’s Jailbait Girlfriend";
  3. "Daily Stormer: Weev’s History As An “Anti-Semite Hunter”";
  4. "Daily Stormer: The iProphet Rabbi Weevlos";
  5. "Daily Stormer: Response To Infostormer";
  6. "Daily Stormer: When Did You Realize Daily Stormer Was A Fake Website?"
  7. "Pity The Stormer": and;
  8. "Ahab: Azzmador Was Chanting “Free Dylann Roof” At Charlottesville".
Tweet (Samael):
"Is it just me or does the irish president look like danny devito playing bernie sanders"

Wednesday, September 18, 2019


"Attack on Saudi oil facilities highlights danger of 'kamikaze' drones" (Daigle):
"While it's not entirely clear who's responsible, it is known that since 2018, the Houthis have obtained advanced drones capable of attacks beyond Yemen's borders, according to a UN Security Council report released last January.

Identifying the devices as UAV-X (unmanned aerial vehicle X), the report said they could fly 1,500 kilometres and travel at speeds of up to 250 km/h.

What's more, the device can carry a warhead made up of 18 kilograms of explosives and ball bearings, making it potentially more lethal than other Houthi-owned drones, the UN report warned."
"Yemeni Killer Blow to House of Saud" (Cunningham).

It's odd that drones haven't yet been used for 'terrorism'.  The FBI/Khazars better get on that if they want to stay on top of the false-flaggery game.

Trump's backed off WWIII:  "War Averted? Trump Announces New Iran Sanctions Instead" (Durden).  Despite the sanctions, Trump - whose deep personal dislike of war is now obvious - is infinitely better for Iran than any plausible Democrat.  So why would they try to lead him to a war that will guarantee he loses the next election to that warmongering Democrat?

Of course, the Saudis are in deep shit if the Houthis can do this at will, and thus have every reason to lie about it:  "Saudi Arabia Says It Has "Material Evidence" Tying Iran To Aramco Attack".

What we've really learned is the extreme delicacy of the Saudi position.

Tuesday, September 17, 2019


"The Magnitskiy Myth Exploded" (Murray).  I have no idea why Murray, who used to be a diplomat, for Chrissakes! - thinks the American imposition of Sanctions For The Jews is generally a good thing, though it is the most outrageous breach of international law and diplomacy imaginable, combining the Mega Group blackmail of US politicians with the American insistence it can dictate everything to the rest of the world solely on its hegemon say-so, all run out of Washington with offices staffed entirely by 'dual loyalty' Israelis!  Comments are woke.  See here and here and here and here and here.

"Freedom in Sight for Mumia Abu-Jamal?" (Prison Radio):
"Six boxes of undisclosed case files labeled “Mumia Abu-Jamal” were found in a furniture closet last December by new DA Larry Krasner. Here is the exculpatory “Brady” evidence that was inside:
  • A letter from a witness demanding his money.
  • Memo after memo to and from Joe McGill tracking the open cases of another key witness.
  • Handwritten notes on original files, closely tracking the race of jurors.
Now we know that for 37 years the District Attorney’s office actively lied.  They scrubbed clean every single document production, during multiple appeals, for years.  It is cliché and almost predictable: evidence “lost” in a storage closet for 37 years by evil absent-minded hoarders.
Make no mistake- this evidence would have directly challenged the only “witnesses” at trial who identified Mumia Abu-Jamal as the shooter of officer Daniel Faulkner on Dec. 9, 1981."
The Paradox of the Panopticon is that there is total surveillance, but whenever that surveillance might be used to solve a political mystery, somehow the results of the surveillance are not available (see also Seth Rich and Assange and Russiagate and Clinton emails; the amusing British equivalent is for all the ubiquitous CCTV cameras to go down at the relevant time, as with 7/7 or the Skripal attack).  "Houthis Say It's Not Over - Saudi Oil "Still Within Range"; Iraq Denies Its Territory Used" (Durden). Tweet (William Owen):
"The US, Russia, France, UK and China all have #GEOINT, radar tracks, #ELINT and #HUMINT that are dispositive as to who actually attacked Saudi Arabia. So where are those data?"
There is a possibility that the attack on the Saudi oil might be a warning from Iraq about continued Israeli attacks on Iraq: "How Iraq Is Standing Up For Itself, After Israeli Attacks".  It does not appear to be a oil traders play, as Trump immediately released oil from American reserves, and clearly doesn't want to the price of gas to spiral out of control in the year or so before the US election.

There are also, of course, always Khazars, with an American attack on Iran, or even the threat of one, helping Bibi's election chances.  Tweet (Ryan Evans):
"Mark hasn't been this excited since he helped kill the nuclear deal"
Sirhan Sirhan was attacked: "Who stabbed Sirhan Sirhan, and by the way who killed Bobby Kennedy?".

Her second true love, after her first true love, the greatest love of all, the love of shekels:  "Rep. Dingell declares, ‘my heart has always been with the children of Palestine’ after withdrawing support from a bill that promotes their human rights" (Arria) (she changed her mind after speaking with (((members of her community.)))).   When the dust settles, and Khazaria is gone, all these corrupt fuckers need to go directly to jail.

Ha ha ha ha ha!:  "Times’ handling of Kavanaugh story draws widespread criticism" (Calderone) (my emphasis in red):
"The Times revealed a fresh allegation of sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh while a student at Yale University in a Sunday Review piece by reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, who are co-authors of the new book, rather than through a traditional news story. In addition, the authors omitted a key piece of information — the fact that the alleged victim of the incident didn’t remember it — and the Times promoted the piece with a shockingly tone-deaf tweet."
"On the ground, feeling the pulse of Protest Hong Kong" (Escobar) (you get problems when you combine an elite group of the entitled dispossessed - just like the anti-Castro Cubans - general extreme economic inequality, with no hope of improvement in sight, and the American 'color revolution' spark and organization):
"Then there are the old China elites – people who fled Mao’s victory in 1949. At first they were orphans of Chiang Kai-shek. Then they concentrated on hating the Communist Party with a vengeance. The same applies to their offspring. The ultra-wealthy gather at the China Club. The less wealthy at least can afford $5 million apartments at The Peak. Canada is a preferred destination – hence Hong-Couver as a substantial part of Vancouver. For them Hong Kong is essentially a transit stop, like a glitzy business lounge.
It’s this – large – contingent that is behind the protests.
The lower strata of the Escape from China elites are the economic refugees of 1949. Tough luck: still today they don’t own property and have no savings. A great many of the easily manipulated teenagers taking over the streets of Hong Kong dressed in black and singing “Glory to Hong Kong” and dreaming of “independence” are their sons and daughters. It’s certainly a cliché, but it does apply to their case: trapped between East and West, between an Americanized lifestyle on steroids and the pull of Chinese culture and history."
"The drama played out in Hong Kong is actually a microcosm of the Big Picture: turbo-charged, neoliberal hyper-capitalism confronted to zero political representation. This “arrangement” that only suits the 0.1% simply can’t go on like before.
In fact what I reported about Hong Kong seven years ago for Asia Times could have been written this morning. And it got worse. Over 15% of Hong Kong’s population now lives in actual poverty. According to figures from last year, the total net worth of the wealthiest 21 Hong Kong tycoons, at $234 billion, was the equivalent of Hong Kong’s fiscal reserves. Most of these tycoons are property market speculators. Compare it to real wages for low-income workers increasing a meager 12.3% over the past decade.
Beijing, later rather than sooner, may have awakened to the number one issue in Hong Kong – the property market dementia, as reported by Asia Times. Yet even if the tycoons get the message, the underlying framework of life in Hong Kong is not bound to be altered: maximum profit crushing wages and any type of unionization.
So economic inequality will continue to boom – as an unrepresentative Hong Kong government “led” by a clueless civil servant keeps treating citizens as non-citizens. At Hong Kong University I heard some serious proposals: “We need a more realistic minimum wage. “We need real taxes on capital gains and on property.” “We need a decent property market.”"
All signs point to the fact that Brennan - both a traitor and a complete fool - got 0wned by that rascal Putin (who is rubbing it in!), and that Russiagate is an extremely successful Russian intelligence operation - one of the classics! -to drive a wedge between Trump and his spies:  "The Spy Who Failed" (Ritter):
"In my view, if one assumes that the Smolenkov July 2016 report at the center of this drama was not a result of serendipity, but rather a product derived from a specific request from his CIA managers to find out how high up in the Russian decision-making chain the authorization went for what U.S. intelligence agencies were already publicly pushing as an alleged DNC cyber attack, then the answer I believe becomes clear–the Russians knew the U.S. had an intelligence deficit.  I am speculating here, but if the Russians provided an answer guaranteed to attract attention at a critical time in the U.S. presidential election process, it would inject the CIA and its reporting into the democratic processes of the United States, and thereby politicize the CIA and the entire intelligence community by default. This would suppose, however, that the agencies did not have their own motives for wanting to stop Trump.
In this scenario, the Russians would have been in control of when to expose the CIA’s activities–all they had to do was fire Smolenkov, which in the end they did, right as Smolenkov’s report was front and center in the post-election finger-pointing that was taking place regarding the allegation of Russian interference. The best acts of political sabotage are done subtlety, where the culprit remains in the shadows while the victims proceed, unaware that they have been played.
For the Russians, it didn’t matter who won the election, even if they may have favored Trump; simply getting President Obama to commit to the bait by confronting Putin at the G20 meeting in September 2016 would have been a victory, because I assess that at that point the Russians knew that they were driving the American narrative. When the President of the United States acts on intelligence that later turns out to be false, it is an embarrassment that drives a wedge between the intelligence community and the Executive Branch of government. I have no solid evidence for this. But in my speculation on what may have happened, this was the Russian objective–to drive that wedge.
In my view, the CIA, Russia and Smolenkov were happy to maintain the status quo, with Smolenkov living in comfortable retirement with his family, the CIA continuing to accuse Russia of interfering in the 2016 presidential election, and Russia denying it. As well, Russia seems to have brushed off the sanctions that resulted from this alleged “interference.” This idyllic truce started to unravel in May 2019, when Trump ordered Attorney General William Barr to “get to the bottom” of what role the CIA played in initiating the investigation into allegations of collusion between Trump’s campaign and the Russians that led to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Mueller’s investigation concluded earlier this year, with a 400-plus page report being published which did not find any evidence of active collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
Trump’s instructions to Barr are linked to a desire on the part of the president to hold to account those responsible for creating the narrative of possible collusion. Reports indicate that Barr is particularly interested in finding out how and why the CIA concluded that Putin personally ordered the Russian intelligence services to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.
Barr’s investigation will inevitably lead him to the intelligence report that was hand couriered to the White House in early August 2016, which would in turn lead to Smolenkov, and in doing so open up the can of worms of Smolenkov’s entire history of cooperation with the CIA. Not only could the entire foundation upon which the intelligence community has based its assessment of Russian interference collapse, it could also open the door for potential charges of criminal misconduct by Brennan and anyone else who helped him bypass normal vetting procedures and, in doing so, allowed a possible Russian double agent to influence the decisions of the president of the United States.
Seen in this light, the timing of the CNN and New York Times reports about the “exfiltration” of the CIA’s “sensitive source” seems to be little more than a blatant effort by Brennan and his allies in the media to shape a narrative before Barr uncovers the truth."

Sunday, September 15, 2019

Crystal ball

"A False Accusation of Antisemitism from Where You Would Least Expect It" (Blankfort).  More evidence of the complete crapification of the once great CounterPunch.  It's comically late to be quibbling about whether or not ZOG controls the American government.

Tweet (Ben Friedman):
"Samantha Power on NPR’s @1A says she wishes she’d more forcefully told Obama not to go to Congress and just bomb Syria after its 2013 chemical weapons use out of concern for America’s standing in the world, which to her apparently is harmed by congress voting on wars."
Tweet (Wyatt Reed):
"I went to @SamanthaJPower's book signing to ask about her justification for the destruction of Libya: "We could hardly expect to have a crystal ball when it came to accurately predicting outcomes” They called security when I asked if she'd gotten hold of a crystal ball for Syria"
"RCMP intel director charged in major case was top adviser to former force head: sources".  Looks like China.

Anglin has started attacking his fellow 'wingers:  "Still No Statement on Why a Fed-Linked Heroin Dealer is Running TheRightStuff.Biz Security".  Leading to huge counterattack from 'Hunter Wallace', who has maintained that Anglin's idiosyncrasies - the ridiculous, self-parodying, level of misogyny, for example - hurt the 'movement':
  1. "The Daily Stormer’s Meltdown";
  2. "Daily Stormer: The Vetting of Weev"; 
  3. "Daily Stormer: The Life and Times of Andre Anglin";
  4. "Christopher Cantwell: Andrew Anglin Tried To Recruit Me To Invade Whitefish, MT"; and
  5. "Daily Stormer: Andrew Anglin Is Just A Character".
The focus is on the very odd Weev, a Jew who seems to espouse extremely 'anti-Semitic' ideas, who appears to have been released early from jail in return for 'cooperation', which may include undermining white nationalism by creating the Stormer and then forcing Anglin over-the-top (all of Anglin's extreme and ridiculous positions seem to come directly from previously stated Weev positions, and Anglin appears to have been a kind of hippie free-lance 'journalist' with no extreme positions, at least not right-wing extreme positions, only a few years ago, not to mention that his imperviousness to American legal proceedings makes it seem that he is under some sort of protection).  There is a belief that Anglin was involved in tricking people into attending the intelligence op at Charlottesville (and then washing his hands of the whole thing), where the police obviously arranged things to allow for maximum violence, all to be blamed on the white nationalism, with Charlottesville now considered to be an unmitigated PR disaster by the old hands of the white nationalist groups.

We probably should be reconsidering the Swartz 'suicide', if that is what it was (and really, when you reflect on it, suicide does seem to be an extreme overreaction, even as badly as he was treated), in light of the Media Lab corruption by Epstein.  The introduction of the Mega Group into the equation means the undeniable introduction of extremely violent organized criminals who could easily have offed Swartz and made it look like suicide (a hanging, with no suicide note).  "In Epstein’s Wake: MIT Media Lab, Dirty Money, and Swartz [UPDATE]" (emptywheel, but not by Crazy Marcy).  Btw, I don't think Ito is a lawyer, in fact, his whole shtick is that he is a completely uncredentialed outsider who brings people together.  Swartz was a wide-ranging internet activist, and his murderers might have been motivated by any one of many things he was up to other than breaching a pay wall (!).  Maybe he stumbled into something about Epstein, and was going to blow the whistle . . .

Saturday, September 14, 2019

On a pike

Here we go!:  "Huge fires at Saudi Aramco oil facilities after alleged drone attacks (VIDEOS)".

MbS has gotten away with so many stupid, stupid things - the attack on Yemen (with this the inevitable conclusion, though I'm guessing they will blame it on Iran), continued increasing tensions with the much, much more powerful Iran (and not 'reading the room' that this is not a good long-term play and everybody else knows it), spending money the country doesn't have hand over fist, the big pivot to Zionism (the conclusion of which is Bibi's announcement of the final stealing from the Palestinians), the arresting and torturing of a lot of the other 'worthies' in the country, and the live dismemberment of Khashoggi - well, you have to figure that the King has made his decision and will forgive anything and everything, even at the expense of his own reputation and the entire country.

On the other hand, I expect to see the head of MbS on a pike within 24 hours after the death of the old and sick King.

Added - note the 'normal flare' response! 


Friday, September 13, 2019

Heading the wrong way

Tweets by Greg Gilbert:
"On 9/11, I was on a flight from Madrid, Spain to Washington, DC. I had been on a just-pre-marriage trip with a friend. We were halfway across the Atlantic when I noticed that the little plane icon on the seat TV had turned around, and was heading the wrong way. 1/"

Thursday, September 12, 2019

Jesus lives!

From 2016:  "My Lunch With ‘The Spider’ Who Nearly Wrecked the CIA" (Dickey) (with the caution that Rosenbaum is a horrible Zionist, and will give you a pure Mossad spin) (my emphasis in red).
"“Admiration for the Jewish state became an obsession with Angleton, who fell captive to the magic of Israeli intelligence,” wrote Dan Raviv and Yossi Melman in their 1990 history of the Mossad, and such was the debt of gratitude felt by the Israelis that in November 1987, after Angleton’s death, Jerusalem Mayor Teddy Kollek and then-Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin dedicated a “memorial corner” of a park not far from the King David Hotel where there's an inscription in English, Hebrew and Arabic: “IN MEMORY OF A DEAR FRIEND, JAMES (JIM) ANGLETON.”

As Kollek reminisced that day, he talked about how he first met Angleton while on a tour of CIA headquarters in 1950. Minutes later, he said, he happened to bump into Philby. Amazed, he hurried back to Angleton’s office and asked him, “What is Philby doing here?”

“Kim is a good friend of ours and is the British MI6 representative in liaison with the CIA,” Angleton replied.

Kollek was stunned. As a young Austrian socialist fighting the fascists in Vienna, Kollek had known Philby very well and knew his communist sympathies. Indeed, in 1934 Kollek was one of a handful of witnesses at Philby’s marriage to Litzi Friedman, “a Jewish Communist,” he told Angleton.

Yet Angleton seems to have taken no action.

“Not telling anyone. Not putting it in the file” was “par for the course with JJA,” according to the CIA’s official historian of Angleton’s counterintelligence career (as quoted by Anthony Cave Brown in his Philby biography). Angleton was “the sort who tucked information away in his hip pocket for future use. Not telling anyone. Not putting it in the file.”

As for those long lunches with Philby, Angleton is said to have destroyed whatever records, if any, were kept.

Of the many, many writers who have tried to make sense of all this, the most intriguing, to my mind, is Ron Rosenbaum, who wrote about the Angleton-Kollek-Philby relationship in Harper’s Magazine back in 1983, four years before JJA’s death and Kollek’s public revelation.

Rosenbaum explored all the possible permutations and combinations of spy vs. spy: Angleton knowing Philby might be a Soviet mole; Philby knowing Angleton might know... Was Angleton really Philby’s dupe, or vice versa? Or were they both so deep into the pleasures of ambiguity that they “felt less loyalty to their employers of record than to the game itself”?

Philby came under official suspicion in 1951
, when it appeared he might have tipped off two old Cambridge buddies in his spy ring, Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean, that their covers were blown. They escaped to Moscow and Philby looked like he must be “the third man,” but nothing was proven.

This was at the height of McCarthyism in the United States, and Angleton defended Philby from suspicious American colleagues, suggesting he was the victim of a witch hunt that could damage relations with Kim’s still extensive circle of friends and supporters among the British elite.

Although Philby was removed from his previous sensitive position, he stayed on the MI6 payroll for the next dozen years, moved to Beirut, and worked as a journalist there for the Observer and The Economist. Not until Philby partially confessed, then escaped to Moscow in 1963, did Angleton admit that Philby must have been a Soviet agent all along.

But, again, Angleton must have known before that, even if somehow he’d ignored the Litzi Friedman connection for all those years. The Philby case had been “exhumed” in 1962, according to MI5 spycatcher Peter Wright, because of information supplied by a KGB major, Anatoliy Golitsyn, who defected in 1961 to the Americans —to Angleton’s shop—with information about a Soviet “ring of five” spies recruited in the 1930s in Britain. That was precisely what heated up the cold case of Burgess, Maclean, Philby, and their friends.

Golitsyn was Angleton’s all time favorite Soviet defector. The KGB veteran was demanding and capricious, but had a literary and historical intellect that fascinated the poetic chief of CIA counterintelligence.

Golitisyn said he had attended a meeting in 1959 with 2,000 other operatives and heard the outlines of a KGB strategy to “affect the fundamental reasoning power of the enemy.” Double agents planted deep inside the Western services were at work vetting and approving intelligence about the Russians that was in fact planted by the Russians. The Ring of Five involving Philby, which Golitsyn had exposed, was just a small part of the picture, he said. And Golitsyn warned there would be new “defectors” who would try to discredit his revelations.

Thus “the monster plot” was revealed, and the decade-long disastrous mole hunt began within the CIA, turning agent against agent, analyst against analyst, and discrediting one new defector after another, some of whom were treated abominably.

Angleton could see in the midst of this that everything and nothing was explained by Golitsyn's stories, all was ambiguity, but Angleton had found that overarching framework, that aesthetic, that he sought. And he clung to it until he died.

Ron Rosenbaum’s most intriguing theory? The KGB, with Philby in Moscow to help after 1963, made “a conscious decision to target the mind of James Angleton.” If so, the strategy seems to have been a success. By the time I met him for that long liquid lunch, his brilliance could no longer disguise his madness."
"Within the agency and the U.S. government, it was not until the shock of the 9/11 attacks that the value of “humint” once again was accepted. But the way that was played by the Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld faction of the George W. Bush administration was almost as demented as anything Angleton had conjured. Amid oracular statements about unknown unknowns, bad judgments about bad intelligence led to the disastrous Iraq war: garbage in, carnage out.

And, watching this, the man who rose from the ranks of the KGB to rule post-Soviet Russia, President Vladimir Putin, bided his time, built up his strength, and began what’s being called “hybrid warfare” to rebuild the Russian empire and discredit the United States on fronts as varied as Ukraine and Syria.

Although there are military components, the greatest triumph of Putin’s policy has been to play Washington against itself, working with it in some places, against it in others, until it sometimes appears the Americans have lost track of what side the Russians are on, and, indeed, what side they are on. We are wandering again, it would seem, in a Russian-made wilderness of mirrors."
"New York Times: Main source for anti-Russia campaign may have been a “double agent”" (Damon) (my emphasis in red):
"In a further exposure of the concocted claims of the New York Times and the Democrats of Russian “subversion” of the US political system, the Times acknowledged Tuesday that the key source used by the intelligence agencies to claim Vladimir Putin’s direct involvement “could be a double agent.”

On October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said they were “confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions.”

According to this narrative, amplified by the Democratic Party and the New York Times itself, Putin personally intervened to try to get Donald Trump elected by directing the Russian state to steal incriminating emails from the Clinton campaign and release them to WikiLeaks for publication.

But this sweeping conspiracy theory, alleging a plot spanning continents involving Russia, a sovereign state, the Republican presidential nominee, and WikiLeaks, the world’s most famous dissident news organization, has fallen apart.

In August, a federal court dismissed a Democratic National Committee (DNC) civil suit against Trump, the Russian government and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Now, the main editorial outlet driving the Democrats’ anti-Russia campaign has admitted that serious concerns were raised within the US intelligence establishment about the primary source behind its hyperventilating denunciations of Russian “meddling.” The Times reported that the source, later identified by the Russian press as Oleg Smolenkov, gained an “influential position that came with access to the highest level of the Kremlin.”

Smolenkov “became one of the CIA’s most important—and highly protected—assets,” according to the Times. CNN reported that he was able to photograph documents on Putin’s desk and send them to Washington.

The Times wrote: “The Moscow informant was instrumental to the CIA’s most explosive conclusion about Russia’s interference campaign: that President Vladimir V. Putin ordered and orchestrated it himself. As the American government’s best insight into the thinking of and orders from Mr. Putin, the source was also key to the CIA’s assessment that he affirmatively favored Donald J. Trump’s election and personally ordered the hacking of the Democratic National Committee.”

There was just one problem. When the United States, concerned that media reports of Russian “meddling” might compromise their asset in the Kremlin, offered to exfiltrate their spy from Russia, where he risked a life sentence or execution if caught, he at first refused, leading to the conclusion that he might be a double agent, feeding false information to the Americans on behalf of elements within the Russian state.

The Times wrote that in 2016 “the source’s rejection of the CIA’s initial offer of exfiltration prompted doubts among some counterintelligence officials. They wondered whether the informant had been turned and had become a double agent, secretly betraying his American handlers. That would almost certainly mean that some of the information the informant provided about the Russian interference campaign or Mr. Putin’s intentions would have been inaccurate.”

The Times continued, “Some operatives had other reasons to suspect the source could be a double agent, according to two former officials, but they declined to explain further.”

Ultimately, after the Times, the Washington Post and other major media outlets published reports about the unnamed source, the US exfiltrated the spy, who is now living under his real name in Washington.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Smolenkov did work for the Putin government, “but he was never a high-ranking official” and was fired two years ago.

In the name of combating “Russian meddling,” politicians pressured American technology firms to undertake the most onerous program of political censorship in the history of the internet in the US. Accounts with millions of followers were deleted overnight, while Google manipulated search results to bury left-wing viewpoints.

There was a massive effort to poison public opinion against Julian Assange, the courageous publisher and exposer of war crimes. He was slandered by the Democrats and the Times as a Russian agent who colluded with Trump, setting the stage for his imprisonment.

More information will no doubt emerge about the background and possible motivations of Smolenkov. But regardless, the fact that the source behind allegations the newspaper breathlessly proclaimed as fact had serious credibility problems makes clear that the Times made no serious efforts to question, much less validate, its chosen political narrative.

This newspaper functions as a clearinghouse for unquestioned, unexamined dispatches from within the American intelligence apparatus. Its role in promoting the Bush administration’s lies about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was not an aberration, but its modus operandi."
The funniest thing was that this was just another story in the long list of Clintonista/'journalist' attempts to embarrass Trump by suggesting that he had again harmed American security interests by blowing an intelligence operation.  It raises at least the possibility that the real #Russiagate is Putin's devilish trick to undermine the US by introducing the idea that he is able to manipulate American politics in many devious ways, paralleling the way the Soviets were able to wreck the CIA by creating Angleton's destructive mole hunt through the use of a phony defector.  Putin's 4D chess is really wrecking the American checker game.