Sunday, December 23, 2018


"Trump reaffirms the U.S. war on Kurdistan" (Cartier):
"On November 6, the U.S. Embassy in Ankara announced that massive bounties were to be placed on three leaders of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The rewards for information on Murat Karayilan (up to $5 million), Cemil Bayik (up to $4 million), and Duran Kalkan (up to $3 million) were made after a visit to Turkey by U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Palmer.

The rewards were largely viewed as a means of the U.S. attempting to appease Turkey and its President Erdogan due to a souring of the relationship between the largest armies in NATO over recent years.
Given that Turkey had long claimed that the U.S. was aiding the PKK in Syria (due to the fact that the PYD is a sister party of the PKK that follows the same ideology of democratic confederalism), the bounties were essentially an olive branch to prove to Turkey that the U.S. had never actually abandoned its ally.

It’s important to understand that as U.S. weapons were being given to Kurdish forces in Syria, those same weapons were being used to murder their comrades within the borders of Iraq and Turkey.

One key example was the August assassination of Zekî Åžengali, a high-ranking Yezidi member of the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK) and PKK in Shengal, Iraq by Turkish forces – a murder which was committed due to intelligence given to Ankara by the U.S.

In the aftermath of the decision to impose the bounties, the KCK issued a statement in which it said “This unwarranted decision by the U.S. is a continuation of the international plot against Leader Apo. Our people and forces of democracy must rise up at once against the attack that is part of the plot.”

In other words, the KCK took the long view of history, understanding that the imperialist leopard had never changed its spots in the almost 20 years since the CIA and Clinton admini8stration played a key role in the capture of PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan."
"Corbyn's Brexit Predicament" (Studebaker).   Corbyn is always surprisingly woke, but is still in a battle to the death with the Bliarites and Khazars. His strategizing has been (mostly) very good, so I wouldn't count him out just yet, despite various trickery of Remainers/Zionists/assholes.

"A Short History of How the U.S. Went to War in Syria" (Van Buren).  Neither 'Washington' nor the (((media))) have any memory for history whatsoever, but many Americans of the MAGA persuasion remember all too well, especially as the 'history' is still ruining their lives each day.

" Christmas Surprise? Another US, NATO & Ukraine Planned Provocation Against Russia in Black Sea?"  Unfortunately, this might be part of a package, a sop to Sheldon to keep the shekels flowing despite the small outbreak of MAGA in Syria and Afghanistan.

"Trump Is Irresponsibly Worrying About American Border Rather Than Syria" (Sailer).  There remains a remarkable lack of awareness in the (((media))) generally about how this anti-gentilism, and the idea that it is a right to expect Americans to look after the Khazar Empire before their own interests, wealth, and lives, would appear to the MAGA Americans.

This is a joy throughout:  "Scarce News on Admiral Stearney’s Death" (Martin):
"If you are a regular reader of The Jerusalem Post you would have learned on December 1 that the top officer for all U.S. Navy operations in the Middle East, Vice Admiral Scott Stearney, had been found dead in his home in Bahrain. The Reuters wire story that The Jerusalem Post was simply passing on was an official statement from U.S. Chief of Naval Operations, John Richardson. The statement gave no cause of death or any other information except to assure us that foul play was not suspected.
If you get your news from The Washington Post, on the other hand, you wouldn’t even know that much, right up to the time that I am penning this report. Try searching “Scott Stearney Washington Post” and see what you get. Nothing comes up related to his death, no matter what search engine you use. Can one think of a greater reason to be suspicious of Admiral Stearney’s death than that? Surely The Post must know that the death of this very important man, who had some 20,000 subordinates, is newsworthy. If it were clearly of natural causes or the result of an accident, could there be any doubt that they would have at least reported it? At the same time the death is so mysterious that the Navy feels obligated to volunteer that there couldn’t have been any foul play involved.
So what was the cause of the Admiral’s death? On the next day, December 2, The Washington Times prepared us by telling us that it was “likely a suicide” according to reports, CBS and lots of other news organs then nailed it down with the old familiar “apparent suicide” mantra. (That’s the other “David Martin” who contributed to the CBS report.)
So what was it about the death that has satisfied the Navy and the Bahrain police that there was no foul play and that suicide is the most apparent cause? Was there a suicide note? Had Stearney indicated any signs of depression? By what manner did Stearney take his own life? Did he shoot himself through the mouth into the head like they tell us Vince Foster did or twice in the head as they say Gary Webb did? Did he shoot himself in the chest, as they say Admiral Jeremy Michael Boorda did? Did he slice his wrists and bleed to death in his bathtub, like they tell us Danny Casalaro did? Did he hang himself as they say Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the “DC Madam,” did? Did he leap to his death as they say James Forrestal and Gus Weiss and Frank Olson did?
Three weeks have now passed and not one of these basic questions has been answered. Even worse, no one in our supposedly fierce and aggressive press is even asking them, from all indications. Number one in the Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression seems to be the order of the day. They’re all just dummying up."
blog comments powered by Disqus