Thursday, February 27, 2020

Dangerous for Trump

"Here's Why WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Is Dangerous for Trump" (Gilbert/Walters).

CIA truck lane

The very essence of 'political':  tweet (Naomi Colvin):
"Ed Fitzgerald: what other point could there be to publish evidence of war crimes, torture and human rights abuses if not to produce a change in policy? "WikiLeaks did effect a change, this is one of the reasons policy did change" re: Iraq withdrawal #Assange"
It is interesting to compare this case to the Canadian case, where again the US is attempting to circumvent the vary obvious 'political' nature of the issue by glomming on to a supposed criminal act, in Britain, having a part in releasing the identities of people whose lives may be thereby threatened (though the real crime was committed by 'journalists' at the Guardian, including the laughably spooked-up Luke Harding, who negligently (?) let the password out, and American authorities apparently didn't care when Assange gave them a panicked head's up), and in Canada, conspiring to breach the ridiculous American sanctions on Iran (another very obvious 'political' crime, as there is nothing more obviously political than 'regime change' and Sanctions For The Jews).

Unfortunately, relying just on the one statute, and the unique absence of an exception in that statute (allowing the use of the statutory interpretation angle that the words must have been left out on purpose), and completely ignoring any other laws, British common law, the Magna Carta and international law, there will be enough wiggle room of a lane for this corrupt and obviously dim-witted judge to drive her CIA truck through.

Day 4

Gosztola thread for Day 4, including this, on Assange's normal and reasonable request to be able to confer with his lawyers in real time, a right taken as a given in every non-corrupt court in the world (the judge seems to think all hell would break loose if he isn't tied up Hannibal-Lecter-style):
"Issue isn’t can Assange hear but can he participate in his defense. He wants to be able to consult with attorneys during proceedings and judge is prioritizing the security concerns of guards and counter-terrorism courthouse personnel over due process rights."
Also (where it gets interesting):
"In so many words, prosecutor says political offense exception was useful to countries in Western empire (who upheld “liberal democracy”) long ago, but times have changed. Their power has waned. Who are dissidents we wish to protect is more murky #Assange"
"It definitely sounds like Lewis is arguing political offense exception was tool for US government to protect dissidents that were useful to its agenda. Government does not rely on it as much anymore. Of course not because it gets in the way of terrorism extraditions #Assange"
In other words, express statement from the agent for the hegemon that the 'political' exception only exists to protect 'color revolution' style dissidents who are working for the hegemon in regime change, is no longer needed for imperial projects, and therefore should be abandoned!

Courage Foundation thread on Day 4.

M. A. E. thread, mostly on statutory construction and 'political offences'.

Tweet (Dame Cathy Vogan):
"#Manning's crew were forbidden video games in the brig. In an Apache helicopter was another story...

Biggest revelation was that password crack was to download video games & music video; not state secrets. NO login was needed for the military database."
 Tweet (Flick Ruby):
"What have we learned from @WikiLeaks? Friends, this thread will go for a while. Consider and evaluate whether this material is in the public interest as events regarding #WikiLeaks and #Assange unfold. Also, feel free to unfollow if you can't hack it."
Added: Murray on the truly embarrassing judicial shitshow that was Day 3:
"Baraitser started to throw out jargon like a Dalek when it spins out of control. “Risk assessment” and “health and safety” featured a lot. She started to resemble something worse than a Dalek, a particularly stupid local government officer of a very low grade. “No jurisdiction” – “Up to Group 4”. Recovering slightly, she stated firmly that delivery to custody can only mean delivery to the dock of the court, nowhere else in the room. If the defence wanted him in the courtroom where he could hear proceedings better, they could only apply for bail and his release from custody in general. She then peered at both barristers in the hope this would have sat them down, but both were still on their feet.

In his diffident manner (which I confess is growing on me) Lewis said “the prosecution is neutral on this request, of course but, err, I really don’t think that’s right”. He looked at her like a kindly uncle whose favourite niece has just started drinking tequila from the bottle at a family party."


"Acting DNI chief Grenell ‘was taking orders’ from Trump when he sought to secure Assange’s arrest, leaked call suggests",  "Trump’s Jew Told Cassandra Fairbanks That Trump Personally Ordered Persecution of Julian Assange" (Anglin).  The extradition is abuse of the British legal system in order to fulfill some revenge fantasy of Trump, which includes steps up to and including murder (bizarre, as Trump knows Assange revelations about how crooked Hillary is were a big part of Trump's win).  If the British courts weren't so corrupt, this should immediately sink the extradition, and, if American politics weren't so corrupt, immediately end the political career of Trump's thug, the guy/gay now in charge of all American intelligence operations, Grenell.

"Live Updates From London: Assange Extradition Hearing—Wednesday" (Consortium News).

"Prosecution: Us-Uk Treaty Does Not Apply to Assange Extradition" (Gosztola). The pay-off of the ongoing brave resistance of Manning:  "Assange Extradition Hearing: Chelsea Manning’s Grand Jury Resistance a Major Hurdle for Prosecutors" (Gosztola).

This is a rather striking example of how we have to rely on the alt-media, and not traditional 'journalism', to find out what the hell is going on.

What an incredible shitshow!  I should note that Day 3 featured the bizarre notion of the thick - she appears to be borderline retarded! - judge that Assange would require bail, and thus a bail hearing, if he would be allowed to confer privately with his lawyers!  You have to wonder if this judge had ever run a trial before, or even been in a courtroom.  Also, the Americans are growing concerned that the judge and judicial system are being so harsh on Assange - showing off for CIA approval (the entire show trial seems to be set up to scare any future leakers or publishers or real journalists) - that they may lead to a mistrial!:  tweet (Matt Kennard):
"District Judge Vanessa Baraitser is being so punitive towards Assange that the US prosecution is clearly worried that the irregular and harsh conditions of the proceeding could force a mistrial.

What is going on?"
"While demanding Assange, US refuses to extradite CIA agent who killed British teen" (Rubinstein).

Wednesday, February 26, 2020

Its not allowed for a Defendant to speak

Gosztola thread for Day 3.  Note that the judge seems to be throwing out any argument about a 'political' exception to extradition, so the defence is layering the record with material for appeal courts, which are hopefully less crooked.  From what I'm reading this judge also seems a bit thick.

Tweet (Diani Barreto):
"Julian #Assange is speaking now to the Magistrate; that he cannot instruct his lawyers; that there is no privacy, he cannot participate. He cannot speak to his lawyer’s, without any confidence. Judge orders him to cease speaking; its not allowed for a Defendant to speak."
See, a judge with an IQ over 75 would be able to put this a little better!

Annexation mapping committee

"With Grenell Appointment, the Israel Lobby’s Foothold on US Intelligence Grows Even Stronger" (Webb).  Lots and lots more ((())).  It is ridiculous the extent to which the American government has been taken over.  Note the prominence of the MEGA Group.  Blackmail pays.

"Trump and Netanyahu prepare for West Bank annexation" (Nassar).  The "joint US-Israel annexation mapping committee".

"We should applaud the Syrian military’s actions in Idlib, not deplore them" (Gowans).  Really excellent.  It shouldn't be so hard to find common sense in writing about Syria.

Tweet (هادي نصرالله):
"The recently liberated Idlib and Aleppo countrysides. A thread.

There was no “moderate rebels”. There was no “rebels” in Syria.

They were always Al Qaeda and ISIS.

We were called conspiracy theorists and liars when we said Syria is fighting global terrorism. Who’s lying now?"
The most amazing thing about all this crap we're being fed is that this is literally al Qaeda we're talking about. Remember al Qaeda?  9/11?  Osama bin Laden?  The stated cause of all those disastrous Wars For The Jews?  Now the (((media))) is telling us that protecting these monsters is the single most important humanitarian mission in world history!

What Erdoğan is up against is that the Russians can't accept his idea that an al-Qaeda statelet in Syria would be a good thing, as such a terrorist base of operations is literally an existential threat to Russia:  "Ankara has Shot Itself in the Foot in Syria" (Kulikov).  Putin can't bend on this point as stopping this vary thing is the whole basis for Russian involvement in Syria.

"Credibility of European Court of Human Rights lies in ruins after judges’ links to Soros revealed" (Laughland).  Soros weaponizing 'human rights'.

Ha!:  tweet (Chip Gibbons) (you're not supposed to say that out loud!):
"Thank you to everyone who thought resurrecting paranoid Cold War rhetoric was a surefire way to "resist" Donald Trump. This moment couldn't have happened without your help."
Tweet (Michael Tae Sweeney) (as was the case with Corbyn, they are trying to use Sanders' long history of being right against him):
"So one year after they toppled the democratically elected government of Chile and installed Pinochet and one year before the Church Committee revealed widescale illegal domestic spying and CIA lawbreaking?"
 "How We Stay Blind to the Story of Power" (Cook):
"(Trump’s relation to power could be the basis for an entirely separate post. He is not an ideological threat to power, he is one if its functionaries. But he is a potential Harvey Weinstein or Prince Andrew. He can be sacrificed if needs be. The Russiagate narrative has served two purposes useful to power. It has tamed Trump’s ego-based politics to ensure he does not threaten deep power by making it more visible. And it has created a compelling political drama that channels and dissipates the “resistance” to Trump, satisfying much of the left’s own need to feel they are doing something, when in fact they are simply strengthening Trump and deep power.)"
"Six-Year-Olds Being Trained To Save Opioid OD's In Appalachia" (Langum).  You won't read that this is entirely a problem caused by anti-gentilism and Khazar shekel grasping.

Tweet (Madame Boukman - Justice 4 Haiti):
"President of #Haiti issued a decree on FEB 12 to declare energy, mining, offshore islands, and ALL other resources for development a matter of NATIONAL SECURITY, thus no parliament approval or contract bidding required, just hand everything to multinational business vultures."
Murray on Day 1, the Kafkaesque show trial of Assange, locked in a plastic box as if he might explode at any minute:  "Your Man in the Public Gallery – Assange Hearing Day One" (the prosecutor seems none too bright!):
"There was a separate media entrance and a media room with live transmission from the courtroom, and there were so many scores of media I thought I could relax and not worry as the basic facts would be widely reported. In fact, I could not have been more wrong. I followed the arguments very clearly every minute of the day, and not a single one of the most important facts and arguments today has been reported anywhere in the mainstream media. That is a bold claim, but I fear it is perfectly true. So I have much work to do to let the world know what actually happened. The mere act of being an honest witness is suddenly extremely important, when the entire media has abandoned that role.
James Lewis QC made the opening statement for the prosecution. It consisted of two parts, both equally extraordinary. The first and longest part was truly remarkable for containing no legal argument, and for being addressed not to the magistrate but to the media. It is not just that it was obvious that is where his remarks were aimed, he actually stated on two occasions during his opening statement that he was addressing the media, once repeating a sentence and saying specifically that he was repeating it again because it was important that the media got it.
I am frankly astonished that Baraitser allowed this. It is completely out of order for a counsel to address remarks not to the court but to the media, and there simply could not be any clearer evidence that this is a political show trial and that Baraitser is complicit in that. I have not the slightest doubt that the defence would have been pulled up extremely quickly had they started addressing remarks to the media. Baraitser makes zero pretence of being anything other than in thrall to the Crown, and by extension to the US Government.
The points which Lewis wished the media to know were these: it is not true that mainstream outlets like the Guardian and New York Times are also threatened by the charges against Assange, because Assange was not charged with publishing the cables but only with publishing the names of informants, and with cultivating Manning and assisting him to attempt computer hacking. Only Assange had done these things, not mainstream outlets.
Lewis then proceeded to read out a series of articles from the mainstream media attacking Assange, as evidence that the media and Assange were not in the same boat. The entire opening hour consisted of the prosecution addressing the media, attempting to drive a clear wedge between the media and Wikileaks and thus aimed at reducing media support for Assange. It was a political address, not remotely a legal submission. At the same time, the prosecution had prepared reams of copies of this section of Lewis’ address, which were handed out to the media and given them electronically so they could cut and paste.
Following an adjournment, magistrate Baraitser questioned the prosecution on the veracity of some of these claims. In particular, the claim that newspapers were not in the same position because Assange was charged not with publication, but with “aiding and abetting” Chelsea Manning in getting the material, did not seem consistent with Lewis’ reading of the 1989 Official Secrets Act, which said that merely obtaining and publishing any government secret was an offence. Surely, Baraitser suggested, that meant that newspapers just publishing the Manning leaks would be guilty of an offence?
This appeared to catch Lewis entirely off guard. The last thing he had expected was any perspicacity from Baraitser, whose job was just to do what he said. Lewis hummed and hawed, put his glasses on and off several times, adjusted his microphone repeatedly and picked up a succession of pieces of paper from his brief, each of which appeared to surprise him by its contents, as he waved them haplessly in the air and said he really should have cited the Shayler case but couldn’t find it. It was liking watching Columbo with none of the charm and without the killer question at the end of the process.
Suddenly Lewis appeared to come to a decision. Yes, he said much more firmly. The 1989 Official Secrets Act had been introduced by the Thatcher Government after the Ponting Case, specifically to remove the public interest defence and to make unauthorised possession of an official secret a crime of strict liability – meaning no matter how you got it, publishing and even possessing made you guilty. Therefore, under the principle of dual criminality, Assange was liable for extradition whether or not he had aided and abetted Manning. Lewis then went on to add that any journalist and any publication that printed the official secret would therefore also be committing an offence, no matter how they had obtained it, and no matter if it did or did not name informants.
Lewis had thus just flat out contradicted his entire opening statement to the media stating that they need not worry as the Assange charges could never be applied to them. And he did so straight after the adjournment, immediately after his team had handed out copies of the argument he had now just completely contradicted. I cannot think it has often happened in court that a senior lawyer has proven himself so absolutely and so immediately to be an unmitigated and ill-motivated liar. This was undoubtedly the most breathtaking moment in today’s court hearing.
Yet remarkably I cannot find any mention anywhere in the mainstream media that this happened at all. What I can find, everywhere, is the mainstream media reporting, via cut and paste, Lewis’s first part of his statement on why the prosecution of Assange is not a threat to press freedom; but nobody seems to have reported that he totally abandoned his own argument five minutes later. Were the journalists too stupid to understand the exchanges?
The explanation is very simple. The clarification coming from a question Baraitser asked Lewis, there is no printed or electronic record of Lewis’ reply. His original statement was provided in cut and paste format to the media. His contradiction of it would require a journalist to listen to what was said in court, understand it and write it down. There is no significant percentage of mainstream media journalists who command that elementary ability nowadays. “Journalism” consists of cut and paste of approved sources only. Lewis could have stabbed Assange to death in the courtroom, and it would not be reported unless contained in a government press release.
I was left uncertain of Baraitser’s purpose in this. Plainly she discomfited Lewis very badly on this point, and appeared rather to enjoy doing so. On the other hand the point she made is not necessarily helpful to the defence. What she was saying was essentially that Julian could be extradited under dual criminality, from the UK point of view, just for publishing, whether or not he conspired with Chelsea Manning, and that all the journalists who published could be charged too. But surely this is a point so extreme that it would be bound to be invalid under the Human Rights Act? Was she pushing Lewis to articulate a position so extreme as to be untenable – giving him enough rope to hang himself – or was she slavering at the prospect of not just extraditing Assange, but of mass prosecutions of journalists?
The reaction of one group was very interesting. The four US government lawyers seated immediately behind Lewis had the grace to look very uncomfortable indeed as Lewis baldly declared that any journalist and any newspaper or broadcast media publishing or even possessing any government secret was committing a serious offence. Their entire strategy had been to pretend not to be saying that."
The ancient Wet’suwet’en legal/political system (which seems weird to us, based as it is on 'feasts'):
  • "Give the Wet’suwet’en space to conduct their law-making, away from barricades" (Sanderson); 
  • "#Wetsuweten Hereditary Chiefs and House system explainer"; and
  • tweets by Margareta Dovgal.
"Let's tell the truth about Blatchford's toxic legacy." (Mastracci). 'Journalists' should know that we're not fooled by their bullshit. Blatchford was simply a monster, and we're well rid of her.

Tuesday, February 25, 2020

Day 2

Gosztola thread on Day 2 of the Assange persecution.  It seems defence counsel are doing their jobs, but with a judge so utterly compromised by conflicts of interest, and obviously biased, it is probably hopeless.

"As Assange’s trial begins, his lawyers highlight risk of extradition with CIA spying operation’s ‘extreme measures’" (Gosztola). The apparent quid pro quo that Rohrabacher tried to arrange - a pardon for Assange spilling the beans on Seth Rich - would seem to create the 'political' exception which should preclude extradition, if the judge cared at all about the law.

"WikiLeaks Editor-in-Chief Hrafnsson Briefly Banned From Assange Hearings With No Explanation" (Elmaazi/Korso).

It is curious that British prison officials seem to be going well out of their way to mistreat Assange, as if they, and the judge, are looking to Langley for a thumb's up.  Perhaps they'll all get CIA awards - the Guardians of Vault 7.

Sheer torture

Funny time to remind Erdoğan that it was the CIA behind the last coup attempt against him, the ultimate goal of which was to have Erdoğan killed, and the memory of which constitutes the strongest lever that Moscow has in reminding him of who his real friends are:  "Escobar: Putin Keen To Cool Turkish Hawk Down":
"The crucial NATO story is actually way more muddled. Diplomatic sources in Brussels say the new NATO offensive is to try to interfere deeply in both Iraq and Jordan as a means to keep the situation in Syria unresolved.

To complicate matters, a new report by the RAND Corporation, entitled Turkey’s Nationalist Course, ruffled countless feathers in both Ankara and Istanbul, spinning the possibility of a new military coup in Turkey after the failed 2016 adventure.

This could be either wishful thinking or a “recommendation” to Trump from the Deep State. Both scenarios are plausible. It’s easy to imagine Erdogan’s serial sleepless nights trying to figure out who his friends really are."
"Russia Isn’t Dividing Us — Our Leaders Are" (Taibbi). The thing about Russiagate is that it is a series of statements which purport to be factual but which are more accurately seen as part of a religious belief system.  The key is that none of the components of Russiagate is falsifiable, which is to say that there is no possible evidence that could be presented to the Clintonistas which would cause them to admit that they are wrong.  In fact, if you raise an obvious objection - like, say, under Trump NATO operations in Europe have increased to a dangerous level that Putin could not possibly want - the instant response is for the Clintonistas to claim that you are obviously an agent of Putin!  This can go on forever, as no changes in facts, or proffered hard evidence, can possibly change the minds of a religious believer.

"Why Exactly Does Putin Love Bernie?" (Ioffe).  Khazar domination of the (((media))) has resulted in the hilarious situation where (((people))) who shouldn't be allowed to write for the local dog-owners association are suddenly given mass public platforms on which to embarrass themselves (see also, Bari Weiss).

Excellent reminder that hydrocarbons are finished as an economic way forward, and it is only dead-ender grievance politicians that are keeping it alive:  "The real betrayal of Albertans? Lifer politicians who won’t tell them the truth." (Gilmore).  You know how stupid it is when the hydrocarbon companies themselves are more woke that the politicians who purport to work for them:  "Teck to pull proposal for Frontier oilsands mine in Alberta" (Leavitt/Scoffield).  This is just common sense - why pick now of all times, when emotions are stirred up all over the country, to force through approval of a massively dirty mine that can't possibly be operational until the oil price almost doubles, a very unlikely situation which may not ever occur, and at best may take decades to happen?

Trudeau jumped the gun, thinking he'd solved the BC pipeline problem and letting the police start arresting people, a mistake that has actually slowed the process of sorting things out:  "Coastal GasLink sent back to the table with Indigenous leaders" (Fletcher) and  "Planned meeting between feds, Wet’suwet’en now delayed due to Trudeau’s comments: chief" (Boynton) and "OPP arrest 10 demonstrators at Tyendinaga blockade site, charges pending" (Tunney).

The interesting Asshole component to this is that American buyers get Alberta oil at discount prices because land-locked Alberta has no other place to sell oil, and this pipeline, albeit all in BC, represents the beginnings of a Canadian policy decision to start to sell hydrocarbons to China:  "U.S. foundations funding Canadian anti-pipeline protests: fair or foul?" (Hunt).

Tweet (Dylan Penner):
"Given police in Ottawa have admitted to using controversial facial recognition and Stingray cell monitoring tech, can #cdnmedia ask what kind of surveillance this van is doing and why? It's been following the Ottawa #WetsuwetenSolidarity demo all day."
"How Hindu Supremacists are Tearing India Apart"(Subramanian).  Supremacism is such a powerful drug that its adherents will literally destroy their own county in order to continue the delusion.  While other countries continue to advance, India is going backwards, fast, in almost every way.

Micromanaging the PA (presumably under the orders of President Jared) - installing the properly bribed traitors to the Palestinians - required three days of Bloody Gina, in person, and three days of her is sheer torture!:  "US-Palestinian intelligence talks focus on Abbas’ successor" (Abu Amer).

Using Hollywood to trick Americans into anti-MAGA Wars For The Jews is not new:  "Foreign Propaganda Interference Done Right: Brits in 1940s U.S." (Sailer).

"Manhattan DA Who Declined To Prosecute Weinstein Years Ago Celebrates Demise Of "Vicious Sexual Predator"" (Nathan).  It's shocking, given Vance's obvious corruption, that a conviction was obtained.  Don't people realize how it is the essence of anti-Semitism to stop powerful Khazars from humiliating gentile women?  The shiksa revenge on the Khazar humilators continues! I can't wait to see how much more of their credibility WSWS throws away to kvetch about this 'travesty of justice'.

Monday, February 24, 2020

Day 1

Gosztola thread on day 1 of the persecution of Assange.


"They gave $25 million to Jewish nonprofits. Was some of that money laundered from Ukraine?" (Boigon).  At this point, with massive piles and piles of evidence, I see no reason to describe Chabad as anything other than a group of gangsters, an organized crime gang which includes President Jared.

"Who Is Funding The Anti-Bernie Sanders Super PAC?" (Hasan).  Lotsa ((())).

"Iran Now has Second Most Deaths from Coronavirus – Weird Coincidence!" (Anglin).  "US State Department Blaming Russians for Coronavirus “Disinfo” (Are They Talking About Me???)" (Anglin):
"With regards to the Coronavirus – I don’t actually know that this is a US bioweapon, nor do I state for a fact that it is a US bioweapon.
What I have said is this:
  • DARPA was doing research on a “novel Coronavirus” to be used as a bioweapon
  • The claim that the virus escaped from a Chinese lab – promoted by CIA shill Tom Cotton – was a hoax spread by State Department fake news outlets (why would they feel a need to preempt the bioweapon angle unless they were worried about someone proving it was not a natural virus? And how would they know it was not a natural virus?)
  • The disease appears to primarily affect Chinese people (though we do know now whites can contract it)
  • There is no valid explanation of where this came from (Chinese people have been eating bats for thousands of years)
  • The US government and Mike Pompeo in particular are obsessed with attacking China
  • The US State Department and the CIA were 100% responsible for the attempted color revolution in Hong Kong
  • As soon as the color revolution in Hong Kong fizzled out, all of a sudden this virus popped up
  • The virus has done extreme damage to the Chinese economy at the exact time that the US State Department was calling for attacks on the Chinese economy
All of that leads me to believe that the simplest and most obvious explanation for the virus is that it is a bioweapon released by the US government.
I will not state that I know this for a fact, because I do not know this for a fact. But given how hard it is to get facts while living in an information control grid, we have to rely on informed speculation as we attempt to understand what is going on."

"Greta Thunberg: A Princess of Our Disorder" (Sailer).

"Bolivia court disqualifies Morales from running for Senate".  Because he doesn't live in the country! A country he had to flee due to threats of violence from the coup plotters!

Sunday, February 23, 2020

(((John Hannah)))

"Iraq Needs Regime Change Again" (Hannah).

(((John Hannah))), one of the worst of the neocons who conspired for the worst foreign policy decision in American history, wants a do-over!

  • from 2016, pre-Trump, and pre-Trump blackmailing, hoping that President Killary would scupper the Iran deal:  "Hillary Clinton, Neocon?"
  • "John Hannah is IMO a shill for Israel" (Lang) 
  • "John Hannah" (Militarist Monitor)
  • "Are the Neocons Finally with Trump?" (Mills)
  • withering attack on Hannah from Corn (!):  "GOPers Probing Iran Deal Turn to Cheney Aide Who Was Involved With Bogus Iraq Intel"
  • in case you wonder about the ((())) (I like how it is common now to send subtle ((())) warnings, as it is the most important thing you can know about someone, as well as the worst):  "Hannah and his wife Laura joined Temple Sinai, Washington DC, in the fall of 2006."

A vote for Bernie is a vote for democracy

Tweet (Rania Khalek);
"Greatest democracy in the world. This is why we invaded Iraq, to bring them this..."
Tweet (Matt Stoller):
"First Putin installed @TomPerez as DNC Chair. Then he hired ACRONYM to build an app for the Iowa caucuses ominously named Shadow. Then he got Bloomberg to spend $400 million on ads. Then he made sure Democrats had no agenda..."
Tweet (Ryan Grim):
"James Carville says the big winner in Nevada is Putin"
It has reached the point where people who might not vote Bernie have seen enough of the derangement of the Clintonistas, and enough of the open crookedness and bias of the DNC, and are starting to assert themselves, and reclaim the franchise which Clinton wants to steal, by voting for Sanders.  This has become a trend, with voting making a particular statement - besides wanting their vote back, it is also a statement against the War For The Jews known as WWIII (ironically, perhaps, as the Khazar Bernie may not be able to help himself) - which will need to be made through all the remaining states.

Saturday, February 22, 2020


"Karl Marx and Jewish Power" (Guyénot):
"Marx redefines Jewish religion as the cult of money: “Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist.” He does the same for Jewish nationality, in one short sentence: “The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.” It follows naturally, according to Marx, that if you abolish money you will solve the Jewish question:

“Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Judaism, would be the self-emancipation of our time. An organization of society which would abolish the preconditions for huckstering, and therefore the possibility of huckstering, would make the Jew impossible. His religious consciousness would be dissipated like a thin haze in the real, vital air of society.”

Jews will be emancipated when all men will be emancipated, for there is no other emancipation than emancipation from money.

Marx makes the radical claim that love of money and economic alienation came to the world from the Jews. He equates economic alienation to Jewish influence:

“the practical Jewish spirit has become the practical spirit of the Christian nations. The Jews have emancipated themselves insofar as the Christians have become Jews. … The Jew is perpetually created by civil society from its own entrails. … The god of the Jews has become secularized and has become the god of the world”

And so, “In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism.” That sounds terribly anti-Semitic, from today’s standards. Because of these essays on the Jewish Question, Marx’s biographers have been more concerned by the question, “Was Marx an anti-Semite?” (see Edmund Silberner’s 1949 book of that title) than by the issue of his Jewish background, environment, and mindset. This is best illustrated by this article by Michael Ezra, “Karl Marx’s Radical Antisemitism.”

But in the context of the time, Marx’s view of the Jews as money worshippers was rather banal. It was almost unanimously shared among socialists, as Hal Draper reminds us in “Marx and the Economic-Jew Stereotype.”[18] It was especially common among revolutionary Jews as well as among Zionists who were generally socialists. Moses Hess himself, for instance, wrote in “The Essence of Money”: “The Jews, who in the natural history of the social animal-world had the world-historic mission of developing the beast of prey out of humanity have now finally completed their mission’s work.”

What Marx did was to push the stereotype to its limit: he made the love of money not just an attribute of some Jews, but the very essence of the Jews. But by doing so, he was in effect dissolving the Jewish question into a socio-economic question: the Jew becomes the archetypal bourgeois. By this sleight of hand, Marx eliminated the Jewish question once and for all. He would never come back to it.[19]

In fact, never again would Marx target specifically Jewish financiers. Nesta Webster draws attention to that anomaly in her World Revolution: The Plot Against Civilization (1921):

“The period of 1820 onwards became, as Sombart [Werner Sombart, The Jews and Modern Capitalism, 1911)] calls it, ‘the age of the Rothschilds,’ so that by the middle of the century it was a common dictum, ‘There is only one power in Europe, and that is Rothschild.’ Now how is it conceivable that a man who set out honestly to denounce Capitalism should have avoided all reference to its principal authors? Yet even in the section of his book dealing with the origins of Industrial Capitalism, where Marx refers to the great financiers, the stock-jobbing and speculation in shares, and what he describes as ‘the modern sovereignty of finance,’ he never once indicates the Jews as the leading financiers, or the Rothschilds as the super-capitalists of the world.”[20]"
and (my emphasis in red):
"Jewish movements seem to be working history through dialectical antagonisms that ultimately advance the Big Project. The capacity of the Jewish community to present itself either as a religion or as a nationality, depending on the circumstances, is the prime example. After gaining political emancipation in the name of religious freedom in the first part of the 19th century, European Jews were in the position to reclaim their special nationhood. For a few decades, reformed rabbis would ostensibly oppose Jewish nationalism, proclaiming in the 1885 Pittsburgh Conference: “We consider ourselves no longer a nation, but a religion community.”[25] Yet the same Pittsburgh Conference saw no contradiction in adopting the theory of German rabbi Kaufman Kohler, that “Israel, the suffering Messiah of the centuries, shall at the end of days become the triumphant Messiah of the nations,”[26] which amounts to say that Israel is not an ordinary nation, but the super-nation. In the 20th century, any trace of a contradiction between Reformed Judaism and Zionism was removed.
The early collaboration between Marx and Hess and the late encounter between Marx and Graetz both prefigure another dialectical opposition between Communism (the International revolution aimed at destroying Christian nations) and Zionism (the national project aimed at building the Jewish nation). Both movements developed in the same milieu. Chaim Weizmann recounts in his autobiography (Trial and Error, 1949) that in early twentieth-century Russia, revolutionary communists and revolutionary Zionists belonged to the same milieu. Weizmann’s brother Schmuel was a communist, and that was not a source of family discord. These divisions were relative and changeable; many Zionists were Marxists, and vice versa. The borderline was all the more vague that the Communist Bund, born the same year as Zionism (1897), inscribed in its revolutionary agenda the right of the Jews to found a secular Yiddish-speaking nation. As Gilad Atzmon recently wrote, the Bund was “also an attempt to prevent Jews from joining the ‘Hellenic’ route by offering Jews a tribal path within the context of a future Soviet revolution.”

But the most important thing to note is that, from the early days, Jewish revolutionary activity provided Zionists with a diplomatic argument in favor of their alternative program for the Jews. Herzl mentions in his diary (June 4, 1900) that “intensifying Jewish Socialist activities” was a way to “stir up the desire among the European governments to exert pressure on Turkey to take in the Jews” (Palestine was then under Ottoman control). He hawked Zionism as a solution to the problem of Jewish revolutionary subversion when meeting Kaiser Wilhelm II in 1898, and again when meeting Russian ministers in St. Petersburg in 1903.[27] The next generation of Zionists continued the stratagem. Churchill, who spoke with one voice with Chaim Weizmann,[28]dramatized the opposition between the “good Jews” (Zionists) and the “bad Jews” (communists) in his 1920 article “Zionism versus Bolshevism: A struggle for the soul of the Jewish people.” He referred to Bolshevism as “this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization” and to Zionism as the solution “especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire.” (Churchill’s later alliance with Stalin proves that his Zionism was stronger than his anti-communism.)
In the aftermath of World War II, the rivalry between the Communist and the Capitalist worlds remained the indispensable context for the creation and expansion of Israel. That explains why Roosevelt’s administration, largely controlled by Jews, helped Stalin conquer half of Europe and thwarted all attempts to stop him. Curtis Dall, Roosevelt’s son-in-law, has revealed a secret diplomatic channel demonstrating that the White House went out of its way to give the USSR all the time and the armament necessary to invade Central Europe.[29] Thus the Second World War was completed with the determined aim of laying the foundations for the Cold War, that is, a highly explosive polarization of the world that would prove crucial for Project Zion. In fact, during this whole period, it is almost impossible to distinguish, among the Jewish advisors of Roosevelt and Truman on foreign policy, the pro-Communists from the pro-Zionists, as David Martin remarks in The Assassination of James Forrestal. A case in point is David Niles (Neyhus), who was guilty of spying for the Soviets while advising Roosevelt, but then played a key role in Truman’s support of the U.N. Partition Plan and the recognition of Israel.[30]
The Cold War proved instrumental when Nasser, Israel’s most formidable enemy, was pushed into the communist camp in 1955, setting off an intense Zionist campaign to present him as a danger to the stability of the Middle East, and to present Israel, by contrast, as the only reliable ally in the region. The Cold War was also the crucial context for Israel’s defeat of Egypt in 1967 and Israel’s annexation of territories stolen to Egypt, Syria and Lebanon."

Everyone on videotape

""Jeffrey And I Had Everyone On Videotape" Ghislaine Maxwell Reportedly Told Friend" (Durden). While this is without any doubt what they did, I'm a little skeptical that she would tell a friend.  On the other hand (((Oxenberg))) and (((Jizzlaine))) have good reasons to keep up the ongoing pressure on the blackmail victims, and this kind of story is just the thing to keep them compliant with Khazar demands.

"Gloria Allred Is Using A School Bus To Shame Prince Andrew Into Talking To The FBI About Jeffrey Epstein" (Kristian).  The same, from (((Allred))).  Randy Andy isn't going to talk to any investigator, but this kind of stunt keeps the blackmail in play.

"UK minister who approved Trump’s request to extradite Assange spoke at secretive US conferences with people calling for him to be “neutralized”" (Kennard/Curtis).  They all move in the same creepy circles.

"New conflict of interest evidence against UK judge in charge of Assange extradition process" (Reed).  What amazes me is that the judges don't even attempt to hide the bias - they seem to revel in it, as if they are sending signals out to their peers of how everybody can rely on how crooked they are.  If you add all the petty ways they hinder the preparation of a proper defense, it is not a good look.  On the bright side, when he's garroted, nobody will be able to claim with a straight face that he got a fair trial.

"Former Congressman Says He Did Promise Julian Assange a Pardon If He Proved Russia Didn’t Hack DNC" (Anglin). Rohrabacher was looking for a public statement on the truth about Seth Rich.

"Pro-Israel Super PAC to stop running negative ads against Bernie Sanders".  It backfired!  With enemies like (((these))), who needs friends!

"Russiagate 2.0: Russia Is Boosting Bernie Sanders Campaign" ('Hunter Wallace'). "US Government Tells Bernie Sanders He’s Being Secretly Supported by Russian Hackers" (Anglin).

Tweet (Resist the RESISTANCE-BloombergIsaRacist):
"According to some very dumb pundits, Russia is supposedly helping Sanders win the nomination , but @MikeBloomberg is the one caught with several social media bot accounts. You can’t make this shit up. Another proof the Russia narrative is created by corporate media."
"This Week’s Lunacy" (Robinson). "Russia isn’t just mapping Ireland’s internet cables – it’s planning to INVADE, foams Cold-War-revivalist DC think tank" (Buyniski).  Obvious lunacy is no longer a deterrent to the publication of anti-Russian PR.

Entertaining the bio-weapon hypothesis:  "Escobar: No Weapon Left Behind - The American Hybrid War On China".  Added: the fact this isn't a great bio-weapon is a feature not a bug.  They don't want to kill millions, just put pressure on the Chinese government and disrupt the economy.

"Pentagon 'Accidentally' Tells The Truth About Idlib" (Durden).  I'd like to know what the critics of the Resistance operations would like to see.  Is the Syrian government really supposed to leave these monsters in charge of large areas of Syria?  The complaints all break down to the fact that the Reisitance is having success in removing the Zionist-Assholian proxy armies.

"Homeland Security Algorithm Revokes U.S. Visa of War Crimes Investigator Eyal Weizman" (Mackey).  Very, very iffy (((character))), part of the Douma gas hoax/false flag.

"Huawei in the Crosshairs" (Whitney). Americans no longer have money for R & D as they sadly must spend everything on Wars For The Jews. When this starts having practical implications, the only thing left to do is to attempt to bully and bluster, and it's not working.

"Netanyahu between the Nakba Arabs and the Arabs who are a joke" (Qandil). The Palestinian people are pretty much on their own on this one, except for Iran-Hezbollah.

"Trump-Kushner “Peace” Plan ignores elephants in the room: Israel created this mess" (Shihadah).  Khazarocracy, the most cruel form of government yet devised.

"Labour’s Next Leader has Already betrayed the Left" (Cook).  They've subjected the British people to years of one of the worst possible governments in the world, all because Corbyn was a threat to their kleptomania.  Now they are making sure no moral person can possibly be Labour leader.  We have no word in English to describe how vile they are.

"US War Criminal Elliott Abrams Goes After teleSUR As Part of Regime Change Plot". "Trump Not Giving Up On "Military Options" For Maduro's Ouster, Considers Naval Blockade" (Durden).

"Trump’s New Spy Chief Used to Work for a Foreign Politician the U.S. Accused of Corruption" (Arnsdorf).

"Apocalypse Now! Insects, Pesticides and a Public Health Crisis" (Todhunter).

Friday, February 21, 2020

Buzz saws and cleavers

"What’s Really Behind Rohrbacher’s ‘Assange Pardon’ Story?" (Henningsen),  Solid summary.  The outrageous spin of the (((media))) is one of those things that is both amazing - where do they find the chutzpah to lie so much? - and completely expected.

"Defense lawyers say they will seek French asylum for Assange" (Cetinic). How do they plan to spring him from the clutches of the crooked British 'justice' system?  It would be interesting to see if Globo-Homo-Rothschild-o would actually take him in.

"Why Is Maduro Still Pushing The Petro?" (Luther) (read the whole thing):
"International transactions executed in U.S. dollars are typically cleared in a New York bank. Those banks know their customers and are obliged to hand over transactions data to the U.S. government when subpoenaed or if they suspect a crime is being committed.

If the international transaction is executed in some other currency, like euros, the information is a little more difficult for the U.S. government to access. Of course, most European banks will refuse to clear the transaction as well since the U.S. government can require they hand over the relevant transactions data, in which case they would be found to have violated sanctions by processing the transaction, or they would lose access to U.S. markets on grounds of non-compliance; and, since most international transactions are executed in U.S. dollars, a European bank that cannot transfer money to and from U.S. banks will struggle to serve its international transactions-making customers.

Nonetheless, the risk of detection is probably a little lower than it would be if the transaction were made in U.S. dollars. And, as a result, the transaction is more likely to be executed.

The international financial plumbing has a lot of pipes running to and from the U.S. And that gives the U.S. a lot of power to levy sanctions, not just on its own citizens, but also on citizens and companies of other countries interested in international trade.

You can probably see where this is going. If Venezuela were able to create a parallel financial system, one with no pipes going to and from the U.S., it could make and receive international transactions with even less risk of detection than is afforded by other national currencies, like the euro, ruble, or renminbi.

That’s where the petro comes in. As a digital currency, it enables one to send or receive funds virtually anywhere around the world. And, to the extent that those transactions are disconnected from the U.S. financial system, they are much less likely to be detected by the U.S. government.

Again: the sanctions still apply. But, by conducting transactions in petros, they are easier to get around.

Why, then, does Venezuela push the petro at home? Why not just require it for international transactions? For one, few will be willing to accept the petro if there isn’t a very big market for petros. Hence, by increasing the demand for petros at home, Venezuela makes it less risky for foreigners to accept them — if only for a short period of time."
"Christopher Caldwell: the Weirdly Parallel Childhoods of Houellebecq and Obama"(Sailer).  Both abandoned by mothers who preferred 'progressive' causes over them.

"Bloomberg surrogate was PR guru for Brazil’s extreme-right leader Bolsonaro" (Norton).

He's bought - literally bought! - the whole Democrat party:  "Bloomberg Wants to Swallow the Democrats and Spit Out the Sandernistas" (Ford):
"In addition to the nearly million dollar down payment to the party in November that sealed the deal for the debate rules change, Bloomberg has already pledged to pay the full salaries of 500 political staffers for the Democratic National Committee all the way through the November election, no matter who wins the nomination. Essentially, Bloomberg will be running the election for the corporate wing of the party, even if Sanders is the nominee.

In an interview with PBS’s Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday night, senior Bloomberg advisor Timothy O’Brien made it clear that the DNC is in no condition to refuse being devoured by Bloomberg, even if they wanted to. O’brien predicted the Republicans will spend at least $900 million on the election, while the DNC has only about $8 million on hand. Even the oligarch’s underlings are telegraphing the takeover game plan.

Bloomberg is not so much running for president as making sure that the Democrats don’t go “rogue” anti-corporate to accommodate the Sandernistas. He is ensuring that the Democratic Party will be an even more hostile environment for anti-austerity politics than in the past – not in spite of the phenomenal success of the Sanders project, but because of it.

Such a party cannot possibly accommodate both sides, and is ultimately destined to split."
"When Bloomberg News’s Reporting on China Was Challenged, Bloomberg Tried to Ruin Me for Speaking Out" (Fincher).  Though the underlying story sounds like the usual anti-China crap PR.

The NSA in Britain, and 'diplomatic immunity':  "Diplomatic Immunity and RAF Croughton: Trump Goes After the Brits" (Giraldi).

Very close to Potemkin village territory:  "Trump’s exciting event in Ahmedabad" (Bhadrakumar):
"Trump would have calculated that even if just about ten percent of what Modi promised actually show up for the road show, that would present a breathtaking spectacle on the TV screen as the images get beamed into the American homes.

The overpowering impression that the spectacle would create in the American public will be that Trump is an immensely popular leader among mankind, contrary to what one half of Americans speak of him.

To be sure, Modi government is leaving no stone unturned. The government hopes to arrange 1.2 lakh people to attend the rally at Motera Stadium. 3,000 buses will be deployed to ferry people from the districts to the stadium."
"BT Cotton: Cultivating Farmer Distress in India" (Todhunter).

"My Struggle" (Atzmon).  According to the Jews, Jews are the only group that aren't, and can't possibly be, racist.

"Separation & Black-Jewish Discontents" (Moriarty).  Despite a simply massive PR campaign, you'd be hard pressed to find a black person who believes Jewish motives in dealing with blacks are in any way altruistic.

Khazar 'negotiating':  "‘Whether they accept it or not, it’s going to happen’ — Netanyahu lays out Palestinian submission to Trump plan" (Weiss). Actually, the 'deal' isn't going to happen - they'll just use it as the pretense to steal the land, and any obligations on Israel will, of course, never be fulfilled.

"Roundup: Looking for the path forward" (Smith):
"So where to from here? It seems to me that given that the government cannot order the RCMP or other police forces to clear the blockades – particularly without escalating the situation and creating a series of Oka or Ipperwash crises across the country – nor can they order the RCMP to withdraw from Wet’suwet’en territory, it means that it’s up to Coastal GasLink to swallow the losses and go to the court to withdraw the court order that the RCMP went in to enforce that touched off this whole mess. One has to wonder whether anyone is counselling them to that very effect, but if that’s the way out of this situation, then they may have to take their lumps and do their part to walk the country back from the brink, because there don’t appear to be any clear paths out of this particular mess otherwise. It should also be a warning to other developers that they can’t keep cutting corners, particularly with regards to Indigenous peoples. CGL should have consulted the hereditary chiefs as well as the elected ones, provided proper reassurances that no, this was not a stealthy way to put a bitumen pipeline through their territory (because yes, that conspiracy theory is floating around), and done that work ahead of time. The days of cutting these corners has to stop, or we’ll keep going through this exercise time and again."
The corner cutting: "Pipeline approval record reveals conflict with Wet'suwet'en years in the making" (Proctor).  I think the shareholders of Coastal GasLink have a good case that the laziness of management - failing to consult everybody in the hope they could just muscle their way through - was a gross dereliction of their duties.

Worse than J. Edgar:  "Jimmy Comey, Sanctimonious Moron by Larry C Johnson".

Ha ha ha!:  "A Trump Sentence Commutation Attorneys Generals Liked" (Rosenberg):
"A methamphetamine production plant existed with the slaughterhouse, sanctioned by management. At the time of the raid, Barack Obama, then an Illinois senator said of Agriprocessors during a campaign stop in Davenport, Iowa, “They have kids in there wielding buzz saws and cleavers. It’s ridiculous.”"
I love it when the absolute shekel corruption is so obvious!:
"Sholom Rubashkin was convicted of eighty-six counts of federal-bank fraud. Prosecutors asked for a life sentence for Sholom Rubashkin, citing his lawlessness and lack of remorse, but more than one dozen former U.S. attorneys cried to the judge: Unfair!
“We cannot fathom how truly sound and sensible sentencing rules could call for a life sentence—or anything close to it—for Mr. Rubashkin, a 51-year-old, first-time, nonviolent offender,” said a letter signed by former attorney generals Janet Reno, William Barr, Richard Thornburgh, Edwin Meese III, Ramsey Clark and Nicholas Katzenbach.
A few years later in 2017, President Trump commuted Rubashkin’s sentence. The commutation resulted from pressure from both sides of the aisle said the White House–both Nancy Pelosi and Orrin Hatch. It also came from high-ranking law enforcement officials said NBC, who argued “the sentence was far too harsh for a first-time, non-violent offender.”"
"Colombia: Colonel Involves General in Extrajudicial Killings".  Old soldiers who have committed atrocities testifying against the superiors who gave the orders is a step on the road to recovery.

The revenge of the martyr is happening much more quickly than anybody - especially Khazars who ordered the hit and their Assholian stooges - could have possibly imagined:  "Is the “Axis of Resistance” in a Better or Worse Position? the Martyr Qassem Soleimani Achieves Even More Than the Major General Did" (Magnier).

"The Show Trial of A and B. Kafka comes to The Hague" (Hitchens).  The reaction of the OPCW to its whistle blowers is even more shameful than the original cooked-up 'investigation'.  The whole thing needs to be wound up, its directors and senior managers publicly shamed - they can go work  for the Assholes, which, as we know, they are already doing now - and a new non-crooked organization set up as a replacement to try to do something better than rubber stamping Asshole PR.

Khazars gonna Khaz - he may be the best choice, but he's still Evil:  "Sanders tells New York Times he would consider a preemptive strike against Iran or North Korea" (Crosse/Grey).

"Dresden Terror Bombing, Like Hiroshima, A Maniacal Warning To Moscow" (Cunningham).  Nothing has changed - the Assholes are still 'warning Moscow'.

"Pentagon expects US public to buy lame excuse about missing weapons sent to Syria, Iraq" (Malic). 'Lost' and 'missing', right into the hands of our proxy armies!

How do you deliver aid to people when political control of the area is by genocidal maniacs who will just use it to feed themselves, or sell it for weapons to commit more genocide?:  "Idlib and the “Interahamwe aid trap”" (Cobban).

"Syria and “Transitional Justice”" (Cobban).  The weaponization by Assholes/Zionists of legalistic 'human rights' tribunals.  It's 'victor's justice' even when they lose!