Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Glimmers of hope

"Are You Listening, President Trump?"  This is the guy who threatened Europe with nuclear annihilation, so this may indicate that World Jewry is terrified that American efforts in Syria are actually directed against Israeli allies ISIS and al Qaeda.

"Putin to Israel: “The Game is Over”".  "Israeli airstrike and Syrian response seen as Russia-Israel communication".  "Putin Sends Message to Israel: ‘Your Freedom to Act in Syria Is Over’".

"Did The U.S. Really Bomb A Mosque In Syria? Many Factors At Play In Latest Reports".  On the striking curiosity that the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights and the White Helmets, both committed pro-terrorist propaganda organizations, confirmed the attack.  You have to wonder if this slaughter was a rogue neocon operation within the American military.

"Syrian Kurds say Russia to build base in Afrin".

Trump's appropriate answer to the neocon warmongering attack on him yesterday:  "Exclusive: Tillerson plans to skip NATO meeting, visit Russia in April - sources" and "Rex Tillerson To Skip NATO Meeting, Will Visit Russia Instead".  Also (planned at the Trump meeting?):  "Merkel Offers 'Olive Branch' To Russia As "Solution To Many International Conflicts"".

Might be too early to give up on him yet:  "Why Is Trump Abandoning the Foreign Policy that Brought Him Victory?".

"Trump's Crazy British Spy Scenario Actually Happened Before in 1983".  Leaving aside the mechanics, I would fall over dead with amazement if you could prove to be that Barry was not doing all he could to listen in on Trump.  All Presidents do it, but Trump has breached the gentleman's agreement not to talk about it.

"Comey: "The Russians Concluded Trump Was Hopeless Last August"".  "Revelations of No Links Between "The Russians" and The Trump Campaign Is Not News".  "The Missing Logic of Russia-gate" (Parry):
"Yet, further undercutting the new certainty that Putin lined Trump’s pockets with rubles as a way to ensure his allegiance to the Kremlin is the story of Trump’s failed luxury hotel project intended to be built in Moscow several years ago.

A source familiar with those negotiations told me that Trump had hoped to get a half interest in the $2 billion project but that Russian-Israeli investor Mikhail Fridman, a founder of Russia’s Alfa Bank, balked because Trump was unwilling to commit a significant investment beyond the branding value of the Trump name.

Again, if the Democratic narrative is to be believed – that Putin controls all the businesses in Russia and wanted to pay off Trump – it’s hard to understand why the hotel deal fell through. Or, for that matter, why RT was nickel-and-diming Flynn.

The other problem with the Democratic narrative is that it always assumes that Putin could foretell that Trump would rise in 2016 to win the U.S. presidential election and thus there was value in corrupting Trump and his entourage with money and other favors.

The fact that almost no political pundit in the United States shared that prediction even last year would seem to demonstrate the kookiness of the Democratic assumptions and the flaws in the U.S. Intelligence Community’s “assessments” about alleged Russian “hacking” and distribution of Democratic emails.

Those “assessments” also assume that Putin’s motives were to hurt Hillary Clinton’s campaign, boost Trump and – as FBI Director Comey added on Monday – turn Americans against their democracy.

But there is a counter-argument to that thinking: Assuming that Putin read the polls like everyone else, would he risk infuriating the likely next President of the United States – Hillary Clinton – by embarrassing her with an email leak that would amount to a pinprick? Clinton herself blamed her surprise defeat on FBI Director Comey’s decision to briefly reopen the investigation into whether she endangered national security by using a private email server as Secretary of State.

Unless one assumes that Putin’s Ouija board also predicted Comey’s actions or perhaps that Comey is another Russian mole, wouldn’t it be a huge risk for Putin to anger Clinton without ensuring her defeat? There’s the old saying that “if you strike a king, you must kill him,” which would seem to apply equally to a queen. But logical thinking no longer applies to what’s going on in Official Washington."

"The Rothschilds Own John McCain".

"McCain and Montenegro: The Anatomy of a Conspiracy Theory".  "Putin ally allegedly involved in Montenegro coup plot".

"Poroshenko: "We've lost influence over Donbass due to the blockade"".  It's trouble in paradise when you start complaining out loud about your Nazi problem!

"Of Nazi collaboration and Russian disinformation: Cohn".  I always come back to the same obvious question:  yearly stipend to lie, or are these tools paid on a piecework, article-by-article basis?
blog comments powered by Disqus