#like you have the entire war w the northern alliance right in the middle of it

[felikatze]

officially managed to hit ch300 on the tcf reread/catch up today yippie

which means i am sitting at 120+ chapters read in a single month. with the 100 goal cleared it's time to see how far i can take this

[republicstandard]

Racial Profiles: Nick Griffin

In a departure from our profiling of “up-and-coming” thinkers on the Right, we had a chance to catch up with the prolific and immensely inspiring Nick Griffin, who’s been fighting the good fight for longer than many of our readers have been alive. Miraculously, he’s still not been banned from Twitter—you can follow him @NickGriffinBU. He's also on Gab. Read on and learn, young guns!

In ten words or less, describe your political persuasion.

Radical ethno-nationalist, distributist, Christian traditionalist and anti-globalist.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10817585113717094,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7788-6480"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

How and when did you become aware of the “Jewish Question”?

In theoretical terms, through reading the monthly issues of John Tyndall’s magazine Spearhead in 1975 when I subscribed to it having joined the National Front late in 1974, age 15. Then the local NF organizer lent me Frank Britton’s Behind Communism. In practical terms, when I was at Cambridge University and debated Daniel Janner, the son of the later disgraced child-molesting Labour politician Greville Janner and a fervent Zionist. Janner told lies with such arrogant confidence that when I analyzed the discussion later I realized that there was indeed a gulf and deeply ingrained difference between ‘them’ and ‘us’.

What figure has been the greatest influence on the development of your political/ideological beliefs?

No-one individual. My ideology was hammered out as part of a small group of radically-minded young members of the NF between about 1978 and 1983. We read voraciously and discussed, rehashed and took on board the ideas of a number of earlier figures.

Most influential of these (in no particular order) were the distributists G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, the former Communist-turned-Catholic Douglas Hyde, Romanian leader and martyr Corneliu Codreanu, NSDAP socialists Gregor and Otto Strasser, the early English radical patriot William Cobbett, Dr William Pierce of the National Alliance, the Canadian left-nationalist John Jewell, the prolific revisionist historian Mike Hoffman; English self-sufficiency guru John Seymour and several slightly earlier NF leadership figures, particularly the radical wing of the National Party splinter group and Richard Verrall. And the book The Resistible Rise of Jean-Marie Le Pen, whose French liberal author quite unintentionally showed me the only possible road for a last-ditch effort to achieve a political solution.

What are some other influences on you personally but perhaps not politically?

Clichéd of course, but life in general! More specifically in terms of people: My paternal grandfather, who was a veteran of the entire First World War; my parents, who met just after the war at a Communist meeting they’d gone to in order to heckle; five years at a minor English public school (contrary to rumours, there was no hint of buggery there!) when the UK education system still worked and some of the masters were WW2 veterans or otherwise inspirational teachers.

My wife, who I met when I was 18 and she was 15, so really we grew up together; Ron Creasy, a grand old chap who was the only elected councilor of Mosley’s British Union and with whom I spent a number of late evenings while still a young activist sipping whisky and discussing his long and eventful life; my university boxing coach Johnnie Newman.

Alexandr Solzhenitsyn. Being prosecuted for Thought Crimes three times. Jim Dowson, the Northern Irish pro-life campaigner and the man who really brought home to me both the crucial role of business organization and money in effecting change and the absolutely core issue of our own catastrophically low birthrate in the ‘Great Replacement’. And my friend and comrade since he arrived as a political refugee from Italy early in 1980, Roberto Fiore, now leader of Italy’s Forza Nuova.

Are there any up-and-coming thinkers or activists who have impressed you and are worthy of greater attention?

Frankly, I think that most of the Alt-Right ‘thinkers’ are shallow and inexperienced, while ‘intellectuals’ and philosophical waffling have always left me cold. The inability of so many of our people to discriminate in favour of the good, decent and sane, and instead to put on pedestals a variety of pro-Zionist shills, obvious nut-job neo-Nazi cranks (I wrote well in advance that Charlottesville was a blatant trap, but even some good people in the USA marched straight into it) and self-confessed homosexuals is particularly unimpressive.

That said, I very much like the work of Julian Langness, while I check The Saker’s pro-Russian and anti-globalist blog every day, along with the Unz Review. I’ve recently found the blog writings of the US-based Christian nationalist Steve Turley, while from the other end of our ‘North’ I pay close attention to Russian Faith and Russia Insider.

Who else is out there fighting the good fight?

On the JQ, of course, one has to tip a hat to Prof Kevin MacDonald and Dr. David Duke. Ron Unz deserves praise as the current leader of a small band of ‘righteous Jews’ whose work in spreading the truth puts most self-proclaimed ‘Nazis’ to shame. I greatly appreciated the stubborn optimism and fantastic work-rate of British Movement veteran Mike Walsh.

I thought that the musical work of Paddy Tarleton and Byron de la Vandal was particularly important, so it’s a real pity that Paddy is at present tied up with family issues and that Byron lost his bottle when he was doxxed.

It dismays me that at the height of the BNP challenge to the liberal British state we had over 800 individuals who voluntarily doxxed themselves by standing as candidates in their own (overwhelmingly working class) communities in one election alone, but that the new generation of middle class ‘activists’ and ‘thinkers’ seem to be scared of their own shadows. Anyone who stands up under their own name has my respect.

At a state level, Viktor Orban of Hungary is clearly a historic leader (despite his apparent over-eagerness for a relationship with Israel and his government’s decision to ban me from the country for organizing a conference against George Soros!)

Vladimir Putin is clearly a providential figure and towers above all the other national leaders of this century, although his reconstruction of Christian Russia is still very much incomplete, apparently due to his caution with regards to the liberal nationalist/pro-Zionist fifth column in Moscow and his failure to grasp the fiat money issue. There again, he knows his people and situation a million times better than any of us do, and is surely aware of the grave danger posed by an over-hasty revolutionary change.

I’ve got a soft spot for the Philippine’s Roddy Duterte, but the non-white leader who puts all of us to shame with his insight, political and organizational skills, and utter fearlessness is Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Finally, of all the world figures the bravest, and the one whose steadfast courage has done most to block and reverse the previously apparently unstoppable creep of globalism is President Bashir Al Assad of Syria.

In terms of non-state actors: Literally everyone in the Anglosphere who contributed to turning social media into a giant publicly-heard echo chamber for ‘conservative’ ideas has helped to reshape history – if only by causing much chaos with Brexit and the election of Trump that the globalist advance was disrupted long enough for the advocates of a multi-polar, sovereigntist world (principally Russia, China, Iran, and Syria) to organize an effective block against the vested-interest-dominated ‘West’.

The fact that the post-Charlottesville Purge has at present smashed that influence cannot alter what it achieved in that brief moment in time.

Various nationalist leaders in Europe are inspirational in their efforts and achievements against massive odds. My old friend Jean-Marie Le Pen and Marion Kotleba in Slovakia are from different generations but cut from the same larger-than-life material. László Toroczkai is a class act in Hungary. I’ve known and liked successive leaders of Germany’s NPD (the real nationalists, not the fakes and cowards promoted by the ‘counter-jihad’ Zionists), but the new one, Frank Franz is particularly worth watching.

He has understood the impossibility of advance along an electioneering road blocked by safety valve parties and is working to convert the party into a practical, grass-roots organisational and educational machine designed to prepare the German people for the now – thanks to Merkel and Soros - inevitable future in an era the likes of which we have never seen before.

Are there any particularly destructive elements within our ranks you’d caution readers to avoid?

Absolutely! Most dangerous and almost omnipresent right now are the counter-jihad Zionists. A small group of Likudnik billionaires is literally pouring money into trying to capture and manipulate nationalism and resistance to mass immigration and to drive us into a clash with the (admittedly deeply unlovely) Islamists.

Not because they’ve belatedly realized that Jews may need a European lifeboat, but because they want us all fighting mad enough to go to war against Iran (the Muslims actually doing more to fight Wahhabi Islamist terrorism than anyone in the West). And because they want chaos and hatred in the West so as to herd their lesser brethren to Israel to help swell the population and turn the millennialist crackpot Yinon Plan into reality.

In a deeply unhealthy symbiotic relationship with the Zionist manipulators are the Nazi fetishists, whose political necrophilia is a total dead end. They are of use only to the far-left who use them as excuses to recruit and solicit donations, and to Zionists looking for bogeymen to scare Jews into emigrating to Israel.

The ‘White Sharia’ concept is especially dangerous. In terms of isolating nationalists from the general population, it reinforces the old demonization of National Socialism with the anti-Islamism that is now so strong among people who have come of age since 9/11. Its ugly contempt for and fantasy aggression towards women makes it a mirror image of what its own proponents decry as (((feminism))). And it is potentially the gateway drug for conversion to actual Islam, which is a problem we’re already starting to see on the fringes of the movement. But out of the ‘genuine’ nationalists capable of leading good youngsters astray, the most dangerous to individual young patriots are undoubtedly the homosexuals and those willing to tolerate and excuse them. The predators using MGTOW to turn genuine concern about feminism into a tool to deepen the ‘sex war’ and push impressionable youngsters into giving up on girls are especially reprehensible.

The truth is that there are huge numbers of ordinary, decent girls out there who just want a good, strong young man and a traditional family. But they won’t have any interest in pencil-necked computer-game playing nerds who spout hatred of women, or shallow ‘pick up’ artist degenerates, who advise looking for sluts in nightclubs and judge all girls by the standards of their own female counterparts.

Let me use an analogy: If you’re a hunter and you want to bag a deer, you go to the forest. You might find a pig there, but you may also find your deer; if, on the other hand, you go to a pigsty, you really shouldn’t complain when you only find pigs.

Young men rightly worried about the ‘Great Replacement’ need to drop both the ‘sour grapes’ rhetoric about women encouraged by intellectual freaks and pederasts and the sordid one-night stands and generally empty boasts of the pick-up artists.

If there aren’t enough young women on the Alt-Right scene, then single nationalist males would do far better to join a church and look for them there, because for all the faults of the heretical and ignorant dispensationalism that sadly dominates so much of Western ‘Christianity’, that’s where traditionally minded young women are most easily found. You’ll not find them at university, that’s for sure!

Ranting on social media about the ‘Great Replacement’ and the 14 Words is no substitute at all for having children of your own. Not one, at some probably unreachable point in the future “once our careers are established”, but three and counting by the time you’re in your mid-twenties. Anyone who tells you there’s another way to save our race – or to have a fulfilling life at a personal level - is either a fool or a charlatan.

Of course you “can’t afford children”, so what? That’s been the reality of the human condition from before the start of history, but before the availability of contraception, everyone had children anyway. Necessity is the mother of invention.

If you’re reading this and you’re past your mid-twenties and both straight and childless, you need to sort your life out and set about putting it right – NOW, because if you don’t you’re part of the problem, and because you’ll regret your lazy, short-sighted selfishness for the rest of your increasingly sad, lonely and pointless life if you don’t.

That’s even more true for your female readers, for whom even mid-twenties is getting late; by the time you hear the ticking of your biological clock, it’s five to midnight for your chances of having children.

That’s probably going to offend or anger quite a lot of people reading this. But it will also make some of them think, and a few of them do something about it. Which will be what makes interviews like this really worthwhile in the long term.

One of the things I was prosecuted for ‘incitement to racial hatred’ for in my first trial nearly 25 years ago was a spoof advert entitled ‘Wanted: More White Children’, which went on to advise the young audience along the lines of “So stop being a boring bastard who only does political meetings, sometimes you need to put your jackboots back in the wardrobe, go out and cop off”. Seven grandchildren later the only thing in that message I’d change is ‘political meetings’ to ‘computer games and chatrooms’.

What is your impression of Donald Trump?

Typical Ulster-Scot and a genuine Alpha male. One of Nature’s natural loose cannons. He seems to be a mixture of deep robber baron cunning and instinctive power player, and extraordinarily naïve and easily-manipulated boor.

So much he does can be read in several very different ways. To give just one example, his expensive but essentially symbolic missile blitz of Syria on behalf of Israel and its Al Qaeda proxies after the poison gas hoax that had MI6 fingerprints all over it.

Was it the deeply pathetic act of a strutting, pig-ignorant fool dancing to his Masters’ tune? A cynical, short-termist maneuver to get the Zionist media off his back for a few days? Or a very clever piece of political theatre which made him look decisive, convinced the military-industrial complex that he’s really their man, and left the Syrians and Russians free to get on with the job of undoing the results of Obama’s Operation Timber Sycamore – the biggest and most evil gun-running operation in history? Other benefits could have included showing the NATO military-industrial complex that their Cruise missiles are obsolete and overpriced fireworks, and strengthening his hand in dealing with North Korea.

I really don’t know!

Perhaps one day we’ll be able to reach a firm conclusion. For now, we should just be grateful that our combined social media power got him elected. Because at the very least it plunged the USA into a political civil war bitter and chaotic enough to give the free world (Russia, China and Iran, and the nations gravitating towards them) time and political space in which to build their military, economic, financial, cultural and ideological alternatives to Washington and Wall Street.

Is it possible for the Right to get its act together, or are we doomed to perpetual in-fighting, egotism, and of course infiltration?

Those three are inevitable and, as you suggest, immensely damaging. But your question itself misses the key point: The demographic shift (in which our rapidly approaching population crash is as important as ‘their’ immigration and relatively high birthrate) is so catastrophic that there is no possible political solution. That ship sailed getting on ten years ago now; there is no way back this side of the coming civilizational collapse “on a par with the collapse of the Roman Empire”, to quote the warning of British military intelligence spokesman Rear Admiral Richard Parry in 2008.

Fantasizing about what would happen if “we get our act together” or working out perfect theoretical manifestos for “when we take power” is worse than useless. This is not a ‘black pill’, not least because I’m not gloomy about the future at all. Our people will not ‘wake up’ and vote their way out of trouble, they will be woken up by pain, and plenty of it. Then they will start to fight back. At which point the end result will be beyond doubt.

We will never again bestride the world, not least because China has reclaimed her place in the world as a great alternative civilization, but we will take our lands and our destiny back into our own hands. Think of it as the ‘steel pill’ instead: We will win, but there’s no easy way to do it. If you think there is, or if you find the idea of being ‘doxxed’ worrying, you need a reality check, because History is back on the roll, and the pages of History are not written in ink, but in tears, sweat and blood.

The soft liberal consumerist suicide society that is killing our race is going to choke on its own excrement. All sorts of beautiful parts of our collective European heritage will, unfortunately, be taken down with it, and there will be a hundred years of chaos, hardship, and war before our people breed enough young warriors to take back the Lost Lands and enough young women to populate, farm and hold them.

Your generation (I’m writing this of course for your young readers, because it’s young men in their teens and early twenties who make history) are fated/privileged to be the ones to have to draw and hold the lines in enough places so that YOUR sons and daughters – the ones who will be born to conflict and know nothing else – have secure bases from which to launch Reconquista 2.0.

What do you see for the future of Britain in particular, but Europe more generally?

See above! Western Europe, including Britain, is past the point of no return. It’s a re-run of Rome, apart from the fact that this time the barbarians don’t have the capacity to build a new civilization among the ruins. We’re back in A.D. 405.

There is still hope for a relatively painless way back from demographic disaster for the nations of Central and Eastern Europe, but even they will shrink to 20% of their present population and in due course be overwhelmed by an African tide unless they take the Orban example as the starting point rather than the actual solution.

They need much more than fences. They also need to ban abortion, make contraception a dirty word, welcome young ‘white flight’ refugees from the multi-way civil wars and ethnic cleansing that will engulf the West, and sort out their economies so they work to benefit those who work rather than the parasitic banking system, industrial capitalism or the drones who hand out or live on welfare.

What about the rest of the West?

On the same downward spiral as Western Europe. But the vast amount of space in the USA and its gun-owning tradition means that there has to be a possibility of Balkanisation and the creation of ethno-states. Whichever way it happens, the future belongs to the people (by which I mean individuals, families, communities and religious groups, not entire nations) who organize themselves to have large numbers of children and rear them to be true to their values.

What occupies your free time? Do you have any future projects in the works? What does the future hold for Nick Griffin?

I’m renovating a house right now. My main relaxation is cooking. I’m partial to real ale, folk music, long walks in beautiful places and time with our grown-up kids and grandchildren.

I’ve just finished writing a detailed 30-page account of the way in which the liberal Big Tech clampdown is not just an assault on free speech but also an effort to defund and break the economic back of the ‘right’.

The recently announced White House draft Executive Order opening an investigation into the censorship purge is welcome, but it will miss the mark if measures are taken only to secure abstract rights of free speech, without simultaneously dealing with politically motivated denial of business services. My next job is to work to get it into wide enough circulation for the warning – and the positive proposals – to reach the people who need to see it.

I’m working on a pair of books. One about what the future holds and the likely course of the 100-year war of resistance and reconquest that is our only road back, and one of practical advice for young nationalists and concrete proposals for practical things that can be done.

Too many people seem to think that we only have a choice between totally futile electioneering, taking up arms and getting crushed like gnats by the liberal surveillance state or holding endless waffle shop conferences where we preach to the converted and congratulate ourselves on being so much cleverer than the sheeple.

The truth is that there is a huge amount of really constructive work to be done in all sorts of fields and that the ‘sheeple’ often have a lot more common sense than self-proclaimed intellectuals.

The message I’m working on is still a bit ahead of the times, but history is moving so fast now that a vanguard minority is pretty much ready for it now.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10817587730962790,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-5979-7226"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Unchangeable demographic and political realities mean that we are in the first days of a totally new era. Nothing can stop our peoples in the West becoming minorities in their own homelands, facing something between perpetual discrimination, dispossession and low-level ethnic cleansing at one end of the scale and full-blown ethno-religious civil war at the other. Wherever we find ourselves along that scale, one thing is for sure: Everything will be changed, utterly changed. But we will still be the largest minority in a society of minorities, and the sooner we develop tactics and institutions designed to help future generations secure their rights and long-term survival, the less painful and destructive it will all be.

I’ve spent the last several years thinking this all through and discussing with a small group of very experienced colleagues what it all means and where we can and must go from here. The more I’ve studied the issue the more I have recognized both the way in which the old ways are totally out-of-date and unfit for purpose and the huge potential for a completely new way of doing things.

My firm belief is that Nick Griffin’s long-term influence will not be anything I’ve already done, but what comes next. First will come the theory, and then the organization to begin practical experiments and begin to build the political resistance from which will spring the Return of the White Man.

from Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine https://ift.tt/2Els7qL via IFTTT

[elizabethleslie7654]

The Iran Attack Part I

buy jewelry with free shipping

Tweet

by Tom Shackleford

Primer on Iran

Iran is a nation with a long and proud history, dating back to the Persian empire.  It is about the size of Western Europe and has a population in excess of 80 million. Iran also has the 3rd largest reserves of conventional (cheaply extracted) oil in the world and the 2nd largest natural gas reserves. Iran is clearly a force to be reckoned with. As such, it considers itself the protector of Shi’a Muslims, who often live under extreme Sunni repression throughout the region. No amount of US pressure has succeeded in halting the “protector” policy.

This self-conception has led it to become the principal backer of Hezbollah, and thus the primary impediment to Israel’s broader ethnostate aspirations. Hezbollah, the Shi’a militia operating on Israel’s northern border, demonstrated the martial competence to repel the Israeli military during a 2006 incursion into Lebanon, known to them as the “Divine Victory.” Since then, it has significantly improved its military capabilities, particularly missiles, with extensive Iranian support. Israel regards this group as an existential threat to its survival.

Iran has now made substantial progress in developing a nuclear energy sector. Its enemies fear that it will be channeled into a weapons program that could eventually be used against them. Even without an attack, it constrains their military options against Iran and its proxies.

Victory in Syria

Syria has a close alliance with Iran. Thus, when a US/Sunni/Israeli-backed jihadist insurgency seemed poised to topple President Assad, the Iranians delivered massive support to counter the terrorists. Most alarmingly for the West, it did so in tight coordination with Russia. Eventually, the insurgency was routed. As the conflict in Syria began reaching a close, embarrassing revelations about its origins emerged that had previously only been disclosed in the West through sources like WikiLeaks. Most notably, former Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani recently admitted in a TV interview that his and other Arab monarchies had been supplying it from the start. Thus, an appalling jihadist rampage covertly launched to contain Iranian influence has achieved precisely the opposite result.

Iran Moving Forward

Iran’s position is the strongest it has been in recent memory. Its economy, which had been severely inhibited for decades, is poised for substantial growth. Iran has a youthful, educated labor force and an independent supply of hydrocarbons and other natural resources. It also offers low labor costs comparable to a place like Vietnam. Iran will be a linchpin in China’s ambitious “One Belt One Road” trade network. It will also be able to conduct transactions with key partners like China and Russia free of the Dollar, using new mechanisms such as a gold-convertible crude oil futures contract denominated in Yuan and China’s CIPS international payment system, which will make the use of SWIFT against Iran irrelevant.

Unlike the Arab monarchies that are totally screwed once their conventional hydrocarbon reserves dwindle, Iran has a massive supply that was under-exploited thanks to the sanctions. It also has tremendous economic potential beyond collecting oil checks, which (except for beheadings) is pretty much all the Arabs are good at. The specter of peak oil coupled with the defeat in Syria has the Saudis and their Israeli partners quite spooked.

Syria and Hezbollah are only part of the picture. The Iranians exercise strong influence over their Shi’a coreligionists in Iraq. They comprise two-thirds of the population. The US unleashed them by wrecking their country, which had been kept stable by Saddam Hussein’s Sunni dictatorship. Next door in Saudi Arabia, the Shi’a comprise a very angry 15% of the populace. They’re concentrated in the Eastern Province along with most of the oil. The Saudis are currently engaged in a desperate struggle in neighboring Yemen against the Houthis, a primarily Shi’a movement. The Israelis aren’t thrilled about them either. One of the inscriptions on their flags reads “Death to Israel, Curse on the Jews.” This prolonged conflict is incredibly bloody. Even though the Saudis have few qualms about killing much of Yemen’s civilian population in order to prevail, they haven’t achieved much.

Desperation

The efforts of Israel and the Sunnis to counter Iranian influence have come to naught. This is fueling a profound sense of desperation. If Iran is already strong enough to counter them both right now, then what will they be confronted with years down the road, when the Iranian economy is much healthier? In contrast, the Arabs will be grappling with the massive costs of subsidizing their burgeoning populations with declining oil reserves. If they are going to smash Iran, it must happen soon. What’s already crystal clear: they won’t be able to stop the Iranians on their own.

America’s Role

In July 2015, a multinational agreement, The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, was concluded at the behest of the Obama Administration. Among other provisions, the agreement lifted a variety of sanctions on Iran in return for limiting its nuclear program in order to inhibit the development of weapons and allowing inspections for compliance. This sounds like a reasonable course of action, since the last thing we need in the Middle East is more fireworks. However, it would be a mistake to attribute that much agency to an affirmative action puppet like Obama.

Although the deal was accompanied by public displays of angst, a paper titled “Which Path to Persia?” from the Saban Center of the Brookings Institution is far more revealing. Here’s an excerpt:

“The ideal scenario in this case would be that the United States and the international community present a package of positive inducements so enticing that the Iranian citizenry would support the deal, only to have the regime reject it. In a similar vein, any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context— both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.”

Ominously, this paper was published in June of 2009. The authors include several prominent Jewish swamp creatures. One, Kenneth Pollack, was a CIA analyst and member of Clinton’s NSC. A notable advocate of the Iraq invasion, he wrote an entire book on why that horrific disaster would be a terrific idea. Another, Martin Indyck, was an AIPAC researcher who went onto become US Ambassador to Israel, and later an envoy to the Middle East for Obama. Worst of all, another Jew, Bruce Reidel, was actually employed as an adviser to Obama.

I’ve found that papers like this can provide grim insights into our next blunder. The first one I ever bothered reading was “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” by another Jewish think tank, The Project for a New American Century. It was floating around the dark reaches of the internet during the buildup to the Iraq War. It laid out a completely terrible idea for invading Iraq without any realistic consideration of the consequences. I became alarmed because my foray had been prompted by reading They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby by former Congressman Paul Findley. It detailed the power of AIPAC, the negative consequences of its control over our legislative process, and why the MSM won’t discuss it. I recommend checking it out because AIPAC and its tentacles are more powerful now then when the book was first published in 1985.

During the 2016 campaign, candidate Trump criticized the JCPOA. That’s not really a big deal from a rhetorical standpoint. It’s commonplace politics to take the opposite position of your opponents whether you mean it or not. Where things started getting heavy was an October 13th speech. The speech labeled Iran as a “rouge regime” whose “hostile actions” have “spread death, destruction, chaos around the globe.” Hmm.

Here’s where it takes a turn for the worse: it claimed that Iran’s government “forced a proud people to submit.” That is, we should free them. So, just like the Iraqis, Libyans, and Syrians, their lives ought to be enriched with liberty.

Then it gets really crazy: Shi’a Iran “harbored high-level terrorists in the wake of the 9/11 attack.” Al-Qaeda, a Sunni organization, both professed and acted upon homicidal hatred for Shi’a Muslims. Iran was pretty weak in 2001. Why would they invite ruin from a trigger-happy Bush administration by abetting Sunni terrorists, who have gone on to commit atrocities within their own country? Moreover, the speech went on to make the absurd claim that the Iranians “condoned Assad’s use of chemical weapons,” you guessed it, “against helpless children”. We’ve seen this all before, and it never ends well.

Perhaps worst of all, it references “Iran’s clandestine nuclear weapons program.” By all accounts, Iran is abiding by the limited terms of the deal and has allowed inspectors to verify their actions as such. After reading this transcript, I felt 15 years younger. It’s almost like they’d recycled something written for George W. Bush and then handed it to Trump.

Let’s think back on the JCPOA. What was the practical effect? First, it gave an excuse for a huge increase in military funding to Israel, mainly in the form of free F-35s. Netanyahu was even brazen enough to lecture Obama in the Oval Office on world television, and the pathetic puppet just had to take it. You could see the humiliation on his face. If you have any doubts about America’s lack of sovereignty, watch that video. Now, a false claim that Iran has reneged on “the spirit of deal” is a pretext for war under Trump, who is surrounded by Neocons and his helpful Jewish son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The potential for something very bad to happen is enormous. In the next article, we’ll take a look at the factors that point to war.

Tweet

MY FAVORITE ACCESSORIES

from LIZ FASHION FEED http://ift.tt/2oG4npv via IFTTT

[bgwalthermart]

The Butterfly Effect of Establishment Politics

The Butterfly Effect of Establishment Politics

Change may be good or bad, or both, or neither.

The “Butterfly Effect”. I’m sure most of you know it. Or at least heard of it. It’s a concept in Chaos Theory by Edward Lorenz that states small causes can have large effects. The famous concept is imagined with a butterfly flapping its wings in one continent, causing a typhoon in another. Of course, the theory states that it isn’t possible. It simply states that maybe, just maybe, the butterfly flapping its wings served as a catalyst for consequential events that caused the typhoon.

The lull before the storm.

George W. Bush won the close 2000 American elections against Al Gore by five electoral votes. I won’t beat around the bush: The result of the election served as one of the catalyst to the events we’re all facing currently in, before, and possibly the future of the year of 2017. 17 years later after the elections and more to come. And indeed, a lot of dreadful events happened between the year he won and the current year we are in, and possibly, in the future, too.

The butterfly was the president. The butterfly’s wings were the president’s actions. The typhoon was the consequences of the presidents actions.

https://millercenter.org/president/george-w-bush/key-events

George Bush is popularly known to be the president that started his term as the president with the highest approval rating (~90%) because of how he responded to the 9/11 attacks, and ending it with one of the lowest at 25% in October of the year of 2008 due to the 2008 Financial Crisis. Now, I won’t say that if Al Gore have had won, things would’ve been any different. They could’ve. We don’t know if Al Gore would’ve gone to the war in Iraq, or made the infamous Bush Tax Cuts, or approved the USA Patriot Act, or signed into law the Medicare Part D Law. Indeed, he could’ve. I don’t know. Nobody knows. It would entirely depend on the scenario and circumstances then. It would forever remain a mystery what the world would’ve looked like today if Al Gore have had won. We all know that Gore’s manifesto was vastly different from Bush’s. But his manifesto doesn’t matter. After all, do you really think that a presidential candidate would do everything in his/her manifesto should he/she be elected?

No. That person wouldn’t. A butterfly can’t predict the future. Anything can happen. And it will flap its wings accordingly. No matter what the costs.

And indeed so. The butterfly flapped its wings on the 20th of March, 2003 when he declared war with Iraq. The war which disrupted not only the countries in the Middle East, but also the relatively rich continent of Europe — the Southern, Western, Central, Eastern, and Northern European countries are all affected by it today with the Contemporary European Refugee Crisis. The war brought chaos, not only then, but also now. Then another catalyst brewed in. It was unexpected. Coming from a conservative, that is. Europe opened its borders for the refugees on August 2015 when Germany suspended the Dublin Agreement and, afterwards, Angela Merkel declared Europe’s borders open for the refugees to come in, calling it a ‘national duty’ to do so.

And then…came the typhoon.

Populism.

The people were tired. They felt that…that the European Union weren’t trying hard enough. Trying hard enough to work for the people. They thought that the supranational entity was not democratic enough — that it didn’t represent the people enough. And indeed so. The people wanted their voices to be heard. They wanted change. Whether the change came from the left or the right, they didn’t care. And indeed so. They wanted an end to what they thought was an incompetent and sorely, sorely mistaken European Union. “The elites in Brussels — we’re gonna bring you down!” they thought. They wanted an end to austerity economics, which the EU wanted to declare after the 2008 Financial Crisis caused by America due to the country’s deregulation of its banks and a housing bubble that exploded, which crippled most of Western Europe. And indeed so. And then…came the typhoon. The typhoon is populism.

“Bad government is the natural product of rule by those who believe that government is bad.” — Thomas Frank

Greece is an example of this. Their economy couldn’t have handled the 2008 Financial Crisis. The European Union rushed-in to bail them out; the world couldn’t handle an aftershock of the Financial Crisis, which would well as likely happen should Greece go bankrupt and default its economy. Naturally, they would fund that with the tax-payers of citizens of the countries — those inside the European Union. Now, there’s no problem with that — or at least, no problem with most of the people. That’s the whole point of the European Union, is it not? “Together we rise, divided we fall.” With the contemporary refugee crisis, a very bad economy, and pressure from the EU, the situation in Greece couldn’t get any worse, could it? Well, yes, it couldn’t. Greece was in a very, very bad situation. The Greeks thought so, too. But they didn’t want it. They didn’t want austerity. That was evident so on the day of January 25, 2015, wherein they voted the left-wing populist SYRIZA party with Alexis Tsipiras as its leader. They hoped — that that party would defy the EU and negotiate a deal for the people. They hoped…

And so it is. The problem with populism is not that it is against the establishment. It isn’t. The problem with populism is that their policies are against the masses while they are trying to be for the masses at the same time.

Then…came the much awaited referendum. On June 27, 2015, the Greeks rejected the Greek bailout referendum. That wasn’t any surprise. Only the center, center-left, and the center-right campaigned for the referendum. The people were not happy with them. They blamed them. For they were the establishment. Oh, the disgusting establishment. The populists were definitely more attractive. They’re populists after all. It’s their job to appeal to the masses’ emotions. Again, not surprisingly, the left, the far-left and the far-right campaigned heavily against the referendum. It was the unholy alliance. The populist alliance. And indeed so. The Greek bailout referendum lost with over 61% of the Greeks voting against it. They were happy…the masses won. They won against those dirty elites. Populism won. Even when their economy is in shambles — emotions, their hearts, mattered more than hard facts. They couldn’t accept that they were wrong — they wanted to dream. But…

The dream shattered. It broke. They saw…they saw the real face of populism.

The populists themselves knew that the economy was going bankrupt. They needed to do something. And so they did. They didn’t technically oppose the referendum. They went their way around it. Oh, the despair of the people when they found out that their government accepted the bailout from the European Union with an even stronger and harsher austerity economic policies than the one the Greeks voted against for. Shock, was their first reaction. They couldn’t believe it. And time went on fast after that. Then came on the snap elections. The Greeks didn’t want to accept that they made a mistake. They didn’t want to admit that choosing populism was wrong. And so, they voted the current government back in. And the populists were happy, while Greece shattered. The masses were betrayed by the populists they thought were for them. For themselves. For the people. Against the elites. For Greece. And indeed so. They were absolutely sorely, sorely mistaken!

Give one too much power, and he’ll fight for the entity he was fighting against when he didn’t have power. The populists BECAME the ‘Establishment’ the people so much dreaded.

The earth is a sphere. And it seems politics is, too. The more extreme one becomes, the more he gets closer to the one he’s been fighting against. And maybe if the people gets tired of populism, they’ll switch back to the establishment? Well, nobody knows the answer to that. We’ll see in the future to come. There are many things that we don’t know. Only history will show that to us and the future generations. We may never know what would’ve happened to history should Bush have lost. ‘Might be the same. This goes with many events. What if Hitler hadn’t won? What if the Great Depression never happened? What if Stalin’s mother decided to have let her son go? What if the EU never existed? What if the African countries never were colonized? What if? What if? What if? What if establishment politics never existed? That every country had governments that were on the extremes? No consensus. No peace. Just ideologies; ideologies that can create or destroy. What if…we’re all butterflies?

Would you flap your wings?

End.