Friday, May 31, 2019

Regional threats

"A Deal Trump and Khamenei Could Make" (Ross).  On of the best things about the latest surge in Iran Talk - now on the back burner, again, as it has started to interfere with Trump's reelectability - is that even the most brain-dead normie can't help but see how MIGA it is, how it has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with American national interests, and in fact really just centers on Khazar fears of Hezbollah, who have the utter audacity to sit on, and have the capability to defend, land the Khazars want to steal.  (((Ross))) - in the third last paragraph ('regional threats', goyim) - makes it completely clear what (((they))) are up to (it also makes it completely clear that the Israelis are aware that the Iron Dome isn't going to help them, and that, intolerably, the Lebanese can defend themselves from Khazar land-stealing aggression) .  If the United States was even slightly functional as a country, and no so all Jewed up, it would nuke Tel Aviv to the ground tomorrow.

You can see how Bolton suckered Trump into agreeing to trying to get 'regime change' on the cheap - no boots on the ground, no wars, just oppressive sanctions and aggressive secondary sanctions, and some silly PR moves - in both Venezuela and Iran, and Trump suddenly realized that the price of gas was the only thing that could scupper his reelection (especially given the fact the Democrats have obviously decided to sit this election cycle out as their ((('donors'))) like what he is doing for Israel).  I'm not optimistic about Bolton leaving - Sheldon paid good shekels for his appointment - but there is a chance that Trump could refuse to stop seeing him when he walks down the hall for a visit.

"Israeli ‘intelligence’ is fostering US bellicosity toward Iran — but ‘quietly’" (Weiss).

Tweet (Aaron Maté):
"Beto captures the prevailing Democratic leadership position on Venezuela: support the Trump admin’s existing coup attempt, oppose hypothetical (and all but impossible) US military intervention. An illustration of how top Democrats often “resist” Trump: not in actual reality."
Tweet (Ajamu Baraka):
"Babies dying in Yemen from U.S./Saudi war, battleships off coast of Iran, 40 thousand dead from U.S. sanctions in Venezuela & folks working 16 hour days just to make ends meet in U.S. but focus is on Mueller & an impeachment that would not be successful even if it happen. Sad."
So typical of Assholia, to the point where nobody even notices the hypocrisy:  "Pentagon tells same old story: Russia ‘PROBABLY’ violating nuke treaty… that US never ratified" (my emphasis in red) (note that this is still better than your typical JYT story, as at least it isn't an anonymous official, and also note that this 'capability' shit, based more or less on the fact there were physicists in Iraq who might have done something, is more or less what the JYT and Assholian government settled on when it turned out Saddam had no WMDs):
"The Pentagon has rolled out new allegations against Russia, suggesting that Moscow might be conducting nuclear tests banned by a treaty which the US never even ratified.

Lt. Gen. Robert P. Ashley Jr, the head of the Pentagon’s intelligence arm, disclosed during a speech at the right-wing Hudson Institute on Wednesday that the United States believes Russia has “probably” restarted low-yield nuclear tests, in violation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

The fear, according to Ashley, is that Russia may be developing tactical nuclear weapons for use on conventional battlefields.

Pressed about the claim in a question-and-answer session afterward, Ashley backed away from his provocative word choice and said only that Russia “has the capability” to conduct a test with a low nuclear yield.

His comments were later clarified by Tim Morrison, a senior director at the National Security Council, who insisted that Moscow has “taken actions” to improve its nuclear arsenal that “run contrary to the scope of its obligations under the treaty.”

The Pentagon’s latest allegations are complimented by an inconvenient reality that neither Ashley nor Morrison were eager to discuss. The United States never ratified the CTBT, and is not bound by international law to follow its provisions. In layman’s terms, this means that Washington is making vague assertions that Russia is violating a treaty of which the US itself is not a ratified signatory."

"Chutzpah, Corporate Media Style" (Levine).  Inconsolable sobbing about Russiagate just after Barry committed the most offensive interference imaginable against Russia (and note that the interference continues against the new Ukrainian government).

"May Plot? Did U.S. Concerns Over Huawei Hasten Theresa May’s Departure?" (Coles).  Not enough evidence, but it is curious considering all the incompetence of May that the caucus decided to pick this particular time to pull the plug.

"Swedish Sex Pistol Aimed at Assange" (Kavanagh):
 ". . . by asserting the extraterritorial jurisdiction of American law to demand the extradition of another country’s (Australia) citizen from a third country (Great Britain) for activities that took place entirely outside the US, the present indictment is, as Joel Simon of the Committee to Protect Journalists, points out: “a direct threat to journalists everywhere in the world….Under this rubric, anyone anywhere in the world who publishes information that the U.S. government deems to be classified could be prosecuted for espionage.”
Indeed, under this legal rubric, China can demand that Italy extradite Dean Baquet (Executive Editor of the NYT) for publishing true, leaked information about Chinese military crimes, in contravention of Chinese espionage law! Hard to imagine, I know, because we all—and especially the US political leadership—assume that American imperialism makes that impossible. A correct assumption, for the moment. But we all also know the tricks “assume” can play on us."
and (the CIA-'feminists'; seem to have no concept of how much damage they are doing to their own, hard-fought, cause):
"This use of a sexual allegation against Assange to divert attention from, and effectively support, the American extradition demand is pernicious and phony. It’s an obvious attempt to give virtue-signaling identity-politics liberals a reason not to protest Assange’s extradition or imprisonment. It’s already the dominant ruse for such purposes in England, and it’s going to become more prominent everywhere now that the indictment can no longer be portrayed as a relatively minor matter."
"Most people do not understand that Julian Assange is not, and has never been, charged with a crime, and that the Swedish process has always been, and still is, a “preliminary investigation” that seeks to determine if there’s enough evidence to bring a criminal charge.
There is one extant allegation against Assange: that, after a night of sexual activity together, he initiated condom-less wake up sex with his partner (SW). It is agreed that the sex was consensual. It is agreed that the condom was at least asked about but definitely not insisted upon. The sole disagreement is over how fully awake his partner was at the moment of initiation—“half-asleep” according to a text she sent and what she told witnesses, “dozed off” according to a police summary (“protocol”) of her interview. Here’s how the Nordic New Network explains it: “According to the interview protocol Ms. Wilén somnade, which can be translated as “dozed off” or “went to sleep.” Prior to the interview, however, she had confided to friends that she was only ‘half asleep’ at the time of penetration.” The only open legal question is whether SW’s state of somnolence, at the moment Assange initiated a consensual act of intercourse, means she was “unduly exploit[ed]” while “in a helpless state,” supporting a charge of “rape.” (See the helpful video from Kim Iversen for the extremely expansive definition of “rape” in Swedish law.)
The Swedes have been “preliminarily investigating” this for nine years. They have all the physical and interview evidence they will ever have. If they could have charged Assange with a crime on the basis of that evidence, they would have. They don’t need him in Sweden to do so. They can charge him in absentia, as they have others. This means they do not have the evidence to make a charge.
And they are not going to get it. There is no new evidence that’s going to magically appear when Julian Assange arrives in Sweden. It is, therefore, unlikely that a charge will ever be made, or that a trial—in which Assange may very well be found not guilty—ever held.
It’s Assange who has been seeking the resolution of the sex allegations for nine years; it’s the Swedish prosecutors who have been avoiding it—and have been berated by the Swedish Court of Appeals and the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) for doing so. The resolution of the sex allegation is not what any of state actors here—Sweden, Britain, or the US—want.
The purpose of all this is not to resolve the rape allegation—to make it into a real charge and bring it to trial. It is to get Assange moved judicially out of Britain to Sweden under the cloud of “rape,” and for Sweden to send him on to the US—precisely with the rape allegation unresolved and hanging over his head forever. Leaving so many with: “He deserves to be in prison, anyway.”"
"The Swedish Prosecutorial Authority tells us so:
Once the British authorities enforce the UK Supreme Court’s decision to extradite Julian Assange to Sweden, Sweden is bound by the so-called “Doctrine of Speciality” which means that Sweden cannot extradite him further to a third country, for example the USA, without permission from the UK. This means that Julian Assange would be in the same position in Sweden as he would be in the UK with regard to further extradition to a third country.
Did you know about this rather significant point of law, which is publicly posted on the internet? Did the 70+ British MPs, and the entire editorial staff of the Guardian and of liberal politicians and media organizations crying for extradition to Sweden not know about this? Or did they just ignore it? Which is more damning?
Of course, we don’t need this law to demand no onward extradition from Sweden but it’s quite nice to know that it is there to support us, and quite interesting to know that nobody mentions it.
So, now we know: The British courts can, as a matter of ordinary law, make Sweden honor the defense of Assange from US extradition. And we can insist that anybody in Britain, Sweden, the US, or the outer planets who claims—as the Guardian and Jeremy Corbyn and most of the liberal media now do—to be concerned about resolving the sex allegation and to reject the threat to press freedom posed by the US indictment, must demand that."
and (it is truly sad, tragic even, that the Khazar attacks on him have so deteriorated Corbyn that he has fallen into the CIA's trap):
"Bottom line: Anyone who explicitly supports extradition from Britain to Sweden without explicitly objecting to onward extradition to the United States is, in fact, supporting that onward extradition—and, now, knowingly."
"Is Saudi Arabia Losing the War in Yemen?" (Fetouri).  Given the supposed massive military superiority of the Saudis/UAE, billions and billions and billions of dollars of superiority in spending, sole control of the skies, and Assholian and Brit help - the longer the Houthis hold out the clearer it is that they have won.  At some point, the Houthis are also going to score a direct hit on some important Saudi oil infrastructure.  We're reached the point where the attack continues solely because to stop would be the embarrassing loss of face in admitting defeat, especially given such lop-sided odds in favour of the (((cryptos))).

"Hassan Diab and His Supporters Demand Public Release of Segal Report and Renew Call for Public Inquiry and Reform of Canada’s Extradition Act" (while the Jewed-up French were, and are, appalling - literally to the point where they cannot be said to have a functioning judicial system - you can get a hint of how involved in the lying Canada was in this Khazar frame-up, and the Canadian DOJ lawyer mentioned here should be in jail):
"In June 2018, CBC News reported that a key fingerprint analysis exonerating Diab was not disclosed to the court in Canada during the extradition proceedings. The court in Canada was told that no such evidence existed, when in fact the fingerprint analysis that excluded Diab was done in early 2008, many months before France requested Diab’s extradition. CBC News also reported that in 2009 a senior lawyer at the Canadian Department of Justice (DOJ) urged the French authorities to obtain new handwriting ‘evidence’ against Diab when the extradition case was about to collapse. In another effort to shore up the case, the DOJ lawyer requested another fingerprint analysis of a police document signed by the suspect as he believed that the evidence would be very powerful in getting Hassan extradited. When the RCMP fingerprint analysis excluded Diab, the DOJ lawyer never disclosed this fact to the court in Canada or to the defense."
Literal blood on the hands of the Canadian government and its diplomats:  "Canada Supports Most Hardline, Anti-Democratic Elements of Venezuela’s Oppposition" (Engler). What's surprising isn't Canada's craven falling in line with the worst excesses of American imperialism, it is the complete lack of nuance or distancing, the 'fair trader' rep, something for which Canada has always had considerable skill.  All the way up to Trudeau, including of course, the Nazi, they are all covered in blood!

There are a number of fun things about Bibi's inability to form a government.  There's the confirmation of the degree of utter corruption involved in the normal horse-trading of Israeli politics (brilliantly satirized by Ayman Odeh).  There is the revelation of how universally despised Bibi is, even by people who are shekeled into pretending to like him, as evidenced by the world-wide glee at his failure. Most importantly, the issue that decided Bibi's inability to garner enough Judeo-Nazis for a government - Liberman's insistence of having the Haredim serve in the military - clearly reveals the deep contradictions of Zionism itself.  The entire Khazar mystical land-thieving fairy tale turns on some alleged right as promisee of the land from G_d, a premise which makes no sense even before we realize that the Khazars could not possibly be the people to whom the promise was made (those people are, incredibly, the Palestinians themselves, together with some real Jews at the bottom of the Israeli pecking order!).  Liberman represents the 'Russians', immigrants who are mostly secular (and, in the rush to obtain as many 'Jewish' bodies as possible to deal with the 'demographic problem', are likely not even mostly Jewish), who just wanted to get out of the Soviet Union and get gibs from the Israeli government without all the accompanying religious blather (blather exemplified in some truly nutty beliefs that Israel is protected by the ability of the Haredim to study Torah without the inconveniences of working or serving in the army).  Liberman's people want the advantages of the stolen land without the complicated phony rationalizations created over the last hundred years by clever Khazar liars.  What we're now seeing is the fractionalization of Israeli society created when the legitimizing mythology starts to fall apart.  The lies were simply too crazy to bear the weight they have has to sustain.

"Trump peace plan is now ‘dead and buried’" (Weiss). Trump's long history of bankruptcies is a pretty good indication that he understands the advantages of when to cut and run (see Venezuela and Iran, above), and the complicated timing of the Israeli and American elections means the political 'space' just isn't there to have President Jared's eliminationist plan for the Palestinians work, at least until after Trump's reelection, by which time all kinds of things will have changed.

The problem of living under a Khazarocracy:  "Macron's Security Service Threatens French Journalists With Prison And Fines" (Durden).

The world's second or third (after Khazaria and Assholia) most important state sponsor of terrorism claims to have a problem with 'terrorism'!:  "Saudi King Salman calls at Summit for Int’l Condemnation of Iranian “Terrorism”" (Cole).

Tweet (Existential Comics) (((('Hollywood')))):
"It's unfair to call the Marvel movies "kid's movies", they also have serious political messages, such as: - America is good - the military is good - military contractors are good - billionaires are good - heroes protect the existing power structure, villains try to change society"
blog comments powered by Disqus