What’s the expiration date on the neocons’ Ukraine military adventure? I don’t know. I think Russia will prevail, but not before a Dnieper River of Slavic blood drenches Ukraine’s killing fields and Western nations suffer crippling high-voltage shocks of neoliberal austerity. What would shut down the Ukraine horror show overnight is analogous to the guy who closes his shopaholic wife’s charge accounts after she nearly drives them into Chapter 7 bankruptcy. From behind the Saks Fifth Avenue sales counter laid up with designer dresses, the snooty clerk delivers a message that sends the wife into catatonic shock: “I’m sorry, but your credit card’s been declined.” The US Empire may one day hear those words. When that happens, the video screen will flash, “Game Over.” Not just in Ukraine, but everywhere else too.
America spends more on its military than all the next ten countries combined.* (* Scientific American). The US can still conjure up trillions of Houdini digital dollars out of thin air without going into free-fall hyperinflation. This allows US chickenhawks to continue playing Napoleon long after others would have packed up their toys and headed home. The neocons dragged out the Afghanistan debacle for over twenty years.
The Ukraine Project porcupine has sharp quills. The US and NATO spent billions training their Azov neo-Nazi battalions and provided them with a Mount Kilimanjaro pile of weapons. You might not like their Stepan Bandera politics, but it’s hard to deny that Azov are tough bastards. Zelensky can also push millions of forced conscription civilians into the giant rotating blades. However, it’s not just the Ukrainian military that Russia needs to contend with.
US-NATO spy satellites and high-tech surveillance toys provide logistical support to Zelensky’s forces. When a Ukraine missile strikes a Russian target, it’s likely the Pentagon provided the coordinates. Go SpaceX. Yes, Elon Musk improved Twitter. No, I don’t trust the guy who wants to insert a brain chip in my head and is the “Tony Stark” frontman for the Deep State’s Skynet program.
Some claim that the US military is comprised of functionally illiterate obese dandelions who go into cardiac arrest after ten jumping jacks. I think that’s a big stretch of the reality rubberband. However, even if that were remotely true, it’s not the average US grunt on the ground in Ukraine. It’s the special ops guys—Green Berets, Navy SEALS, and similar outfits. Those dudes throw hard left hooks.
The sun has set on the British Empire (or maybe it was absorbed into the US), but many view the British SAS as the premier elite fighting force. Assuredly they’re in the mix. A trained killer who can quote Shakespeare is a dangerous fellow.
Credible reports state that Poland sent over 10 thousand troops to Ukraine. The Polish government plans to annex a chunk of Ukraine once the sock hop ends. Poland ran the same game seizing German territory following WW I. A decision they came to regret when the Wehrmacht rolled across the state line looking to deal out some bitter payback. Poland has already started receiving “return to sender” shipments of body bags.
Russia also faces Blackwater (now Constellis) and similar corporate armies. The US dollar printing press has enough invisible ink left to cut stacks of mercenary paychecks. Many of these “foreign volunteers” learned their trade in the firepits of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Even if Russia annihilates the entire Ukraine army and its US/NATO advisors and support teams, the neocons still hold a nasty back pocket death card. The CIA’s ISIS proxy army continues to wage holy war against Russia in Syria. For a small pay bump, I think many would gladly relocate to Ukraine for the chance to take jihad to the enemy’s front porch. No doubt the Great Reset club would enjoy watching their ISIS mercenaries springboard from Ukraine to the Balkans to western Europe.
Zelensky said on record that he wants to turn Ukraine into a “big Israel.” (as reported in The Jewish Telegraphic Agency). Given his stated objective, logic dictates that the IDF and Mossad supply him with covert assistance. If a “big Israel” springs up from Ukraine, having it as a neighbor will probably benefit the Europeans as much as it did the Syrians with “little Israel.”
Adding to US tenacity to hold firm in Ukraine is the neocons’ pathological hatred of the Slavic race. Pepertrating Holodomor 2.0 while simultaneously bleeding Russia represents a big Rothschild Zionist lottery win. To the neocon, a child’s blood is like ambrosia from Mt. Olympus. The Ukraine conflict promises morgues full of dead kids. Neocon/neolib Madeleine Albright bragged on network television about her role in starving 500 thousand Iraqi children to death.
Multiple nefarious entities locked their teeth into Ukraine, and it’s going to be hard to make them say ahh. Bill Gates and his Monsanto (absorbed into Bayer) pals intend to seize Ukraine’s rich farmland to further genetically modify and control the global food supply. For the MIC, Ukraine delivered a “Treasure of the Sierra Madre” gold strike. The Federal Reserve bankers love the war debt generated from the Ukraine Project. The Ukraine conflict also provides a steady supply of indentured prostitutes to Zionist mafia sex trafficking rings.
By this point, you might think I’m saying that Russia is deader than a paraplegic tabby cat on an Indy 500 racetrack. Hardly. Russian special forces (Spetsnaz) are some of the toughest and best-trained fighters in the world. The Wagner Group’s (a Russian hybrid version of Blackwater and Rome’s Praetorian Guard) ranks contain Syrian War vets who sent hordes of ISIS fighters to paradise. Don’t forget the Chechen commandos. Those cats rock out harder than Attila the Hun at a Guns and Roses concert.
According to Deep State Google, the Russian military contains one million active personnel and two million reservists. This gives Russia a manpower edge. In war, numbers matter.
Russia also holds a supply line advantage. It can move weapons and men into Ukraine for as long as the conflict lasts. The US relies on the compliance of its European vassals for Ukraine arms shipments. If US neocons continue to dismantle Europe’s economies, they could crack the EU. When enough Europeans realize that their US “ally” turned their nations into bankrupt dystopian hell holes, Europe’s official football chant could become “Yankee go home!”
Russia understands the stakes. If NATO wins in Ukraine, the ensuing ziobankster plunder of Russia will make 1990s Wall Street looting look like a church soup kitchen. NATO victory means Russian national death.
Never underestimate Russian resolve when it comes to defending the motherland. General Paulus (promoted to field marshall by Hitler hours before surrendering to the Soviets) received a hard lesson on the subject during the siege of Stalingrad. General Zhukov’s Red Army forces demonstrated the ferocity of Russian vengeance as they power-blasted their way to the heart of Berlin.
If Zelensky and his cabinet ever face justice in a Russian military court, I think more than a few Albert Pierrepoint aspirants would vie for the chance to pull the rope. I’m not optimistic about that scenario. When the Ukraine experiment finally implodes, I imagine Zelensky & company will be whisked away to sunnier climes in Tel Aviv and Miami. Perhaps the Ukrainians will wake up before that happens, and provide the world with a “Mussolini hanging upside down” cell phone image moment.
Some blame President Putin’s initial “go in lightly” strategy for the protracted nature of this conflict. They called for a “shock and awe” invasion, i.e., blow it up and sort through the pieces later. While in hindsight that seems like the more pragmatic military decision, Putin wanted to avoid destroying Ukraine’s infrastructure and the mass killing of civilians.
Putin is a gifted statesman, but he also has some “gangster” in him. He didn’t come out of the collapse of the Soviet Union as one of Russia’s richest men by playing patty-cake. From what I understand, he made serious Michael Corleone moves. In a brilliant scene from the movie “Scarface,” Tony Montana derails his gangster career by refusing to blow up a mother and her two children with a car bomb. “No wife, no kids.” Ukraine presented Putin with an analogous choice. I can’t judge him. I leave that to history.
Russia is fighting a traditional war. For the neocons—if they win they win, and if they lose they win. As long as the MIC makes record profits, bankers collect war debt, and Israel remains the Middle East hegemon, the neocons consider it a good day. See Iraq.
Viewing the war strategy of the US Anglo-Zionist Empire with a WW2 mindset is an antiquated mind trip. The days of General Patton racing up Italy with a clear objective of victory went the way of the T-Rex. To the neocons, a ruined nation-state covered with rubble and corpses is a victory in itself.
To better understand the Ukraine conflict, it helps to study neocon ideology. The spiritual father of neoconservatism was academic Leo Strauss. He handed the false prophet staff to Irving Kristol who passed it to his son Bill. Neoconservatism is a weird amalgamation of Milton Friedman neoliberal capitalism, Roman Empire power projection, Likud Party Zionism, and the worst possible interpretation of Plato’s Republic.
I think it fair to classify the neoconservative movement as a Jewish* terrorist organization. (*I’m not including innocent Jews in that). While many prominent neocons are non-Jews (Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Lindsey Graham, Mike Pompeo, etc), I believe that at its core, neoconservatism is a Talmudic construct. Full disclosure—I’ve never read the Talmud. My knowledge of it comes from short pathological excerpts that appear online. I realize that taking a piece of text out of context can change its intended meaning, but there appears to be a “Talmudic psychology” that runs through the upper ranks of organized Jewry.
International debt slavery banking originated in ancient Babylon.* Coincidentally, so did the Talmud. I propose that these two forces intertwined and evolved together. The modern iteration of this marriage is Rothschild Zionism. The Old Testament forbids Jews to engage in usury. Under Mosaic law, it’s a capital crime. (*The Sumerians came up with debt slave banking first, but they didn’t export it, nor did they involve Jews).
Looking at it through the lens of Jungian archetype theory, neoconservatism is a branch of “The Synagogue* of Satan.” (*I don’t include ethical Jews who practice the Jewish religion in that). When John the Revelator wrote about the Synagogue of Satan, I doubt he was referring to Jews as a collective body. He was a Jew. The apostles were Jews. Barring Luke, the authors of the New Testament were Jews. For its first two centuries, the Church was primarily Jewish, and Jesus was a Jew. I surmise that John meant the interconnected entity of Pharisees (organized Jewry) and temple money changers (Jewish Central Bankers). Like Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr said, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.”
For the theological record and full disclosure, I identify as a Jewish Hebrew Israelite (or Jew) who follows the Tao. My Talmud is D.T. Suzuki’s “An Introduction to Zen Buddhism.” My bible is the Bible. I use its archetypes and symbols because of my ethnic heritage. If I were a Swede, I might use Thor to plug into Cosmic Intelligence. Some groove on Christ. Others, Buddha, Shiva, Darwin, or space aliens. From my viewpoint, the type of road that takes you there is less important than getting there. Where is “there?” There is there. It’s everywhere and nowhere. You’re probably already there. Ha ha. Isn’t Tao fun? Whoa. Apologies for the hippy-dippy rant. Back to neocons in Ukraine.
What makes the neocons such a dangerous terrorist organization is that, unlike the typical terrorist group, neoconservatives have the backing of the Pentagon, Deep State-Mossad, Zionist Lobby, Federal Reserve, oligarchy, and multinationals. This allowed them to wrack up a post-9/11 body count that would impress Stalin. To make matters worse, the neocons are within arms reach of the nuclear football.
When it comes to Ukraine War analysis I don’t claim to be a von Clausewitz. For play-by-play and battle-by-battle coverage, I recommend former weapons inspector Scott Ritter and The Duran. I also think Mike Whitney provides solid commentary.
What I offer is “big picture” Thomas Paine extrapolation based on past neocon misbehavior. The ecological disaster sabotage of Nord Stream 2 makes sense in the context of 9/11. The neocons wrecked Iraq, Libya, and Syria. They break stuff but don’t put it back together. They spend trillions and kill millions. They prolong unnecessary wars, and after tactical military defeat, move on to the next disaster. Plug Ukraine into the neocon equation and the probable conclusion is that this winds up a long drawn out cluster f*ck. Worse, it could expedite the collapse of Western civilization. Props to Oswald Spengler.
That’s not to say there are no current factors that could shut the Ukraine project down quickly. A neocon think tank might spew out a policy paper that says the circus needs to move to Taiwan ASAP. Jealous of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the neocons could swell up AFRICOM and start targeting China’s African projects. Vietnam 2.0 across Africa—sounds intense. Or they could take the party to the Balkans (it looks like they’re already starting to go after Serbia) and possibly hit the Archduke Ferdinand replay button.
If the neocons succeed in instigating simultaneous direct or proxy wars against Russia, China, and Iran in Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, then I’d say we’ve officially entered WW3. We might already be there. All we need is for Skynet to become sentient.
The economic collapse of the US could prevent that scenario. Not a pleasant prospect for those of us who reside there, but it might save the human race from extinction. When the Ponzi money press shuts down, the Ukraine War ends. They’ll also have to close the 1000 or so US military bases and bring home the troops. The neocons will need them to keep the inmates from burning down the American insane asylum. Of course, the neocons could be the ones who wind up receiving special therapeutic treatment. That would be crazy.
by Marwan Salamah for the Saker blog The Vineyard of the Saker on December 12, 2022 • Has Comments • Original Here
Expressing displeasure with a counterparty is the primary method of communication between countries regarding what they view as an encroachment on their important national interests, or what they perceive as threats to their security. Subject of course, that they had previously declared and clearly communicated what they consider to be their critical national interests and their essential security framework, which were deemed fair and realistic and not rejected convincingly by the other parties.
The next step in any misunderstanding is some saber rattling and minor diplomatic or even kinetic skirmishes of sorts. These are employed in the hope of deterring the other party and inducing it to change its course of action or policy. These are the bottom-of-the-rack preliminary tools of belligerence. They are easy to freeze or cancel, once both parties wisely elect to sit down and address the issues in dispute in a bona fide manner and are willing to compromise in favor of peace rather than war.
How Wars Start
The basic problem is that the concepts of national interests and security are pretty wide and loose and can encompass the evil and ridiculous as well as the fair and rational, making it easy to “cry wolf” and claim that a country’s national interests or security have been threatened. It boils down to a matter of definitions:
National Interests: it is not fair or rational to consider a country’s desire to exploit others as a fair national interest, even if it is presented as seeking needed resources that it lacks. Nor is it acceptable to strong-arm poorer and weaker countries to follow unsuitable policies or to collect from them unpayable debts that it originally helped load up. As for designating parts of the world as one’s own backyard, it has long become another passé national interests concept.
Most countries have different religions, cultures, customs, values, local laws, practices, and political systems. Not only does changing other countries’ cultures not qualify as fair and just national interests, but also borders on the ridiculous when some countries unilaterally appoint themselves as heaven’s guardian on earth and incorporate such metaphysical concepts into their national interests. Does changing other people into one’s image make them more humane or Godlier? Or does it make them more pliable for exploitation?
History confirms that such attempts have never been successful in perpetuating themselves, as evidenced by Alexander’s Hellenistic empire, Great Rome, Genghis Khan, the Golden Horde, the Crusades, the Islamic conquests, etc. – they were all eventually expunged or melded into the cultures that they tried to change, at a huge human and physical cost.
Undoubtedly, an exploiter’s rewards can be attractive in the short term, subject that the infringement or exploitation being successful. But in the longer term, pressure will continue to be exerted to return to the original status, or a semblance of it, and again, at a huge human and physical cost.
Defending a country’s national territory is considered a paramount national interest (is also a security objective). Consequently, territorial or border disputes are the most popular reasons for starting wars, especially for smaller nations. But if we dig only skin-deep into the history, we will quickly find that almost no country has, throughout the ages, maintained its theoretical or historical borders – it has always been a continuous ebb and flow of territory usurped or lost, more so in Europe and the ex-colonialized world. Nevertheless, many falsely justify this as a casus belli, or a rallying call, to regain what they regard as usurped national land. They do this with total disregard to the views and wishes of the current inhabitants of the territories in dispute, thus lending credence to the likelihood that it, in reality, is a camouflage to exploit another nation’s land. The sad part is that these wars regularly flare up despite the presence of the UN and the International Court, which were created, among other things, to adjudicate the validity of such territorial disputes and, unless a gross miscarriage of justice occurs, all grounds for territorial wars are unjustified.
Fair national interests mean those objectives or activities that allow a country to exploit, unfettered, its own resources within its territory, without harming others. Harming others includes such egregious actions as polluting or blocking jointly shared rivers, seas, and air, implementing beggar thy neighbor policies, insidiously interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, and forcing weaker nations to act against their own interests while threatening them with a big stick, fully aware that whatever carrots are offered will in no way compensate the damage inflicted.
Security Threats: Similarly, the concept of deterring security threats is wide and can be whimsically defined. No doubt, all governments are bound to protect their people and territory and must be prepared for defensive war, but always prioritize peace in both speech and action.
However, if a historical enmity between two nations remains alive in a time of peace, which usually happens by design, and as embers under the ashes, clashes, and wars can erupt at any time making extra preparedness vital. Avoiding this requires that historical enemies exercise extra care when dealing or communicating with each other and avoid imprudent belligerent posturing which could easily be misconstrued or misinterpreted to their mutual detriment.
If one nation has constantly, and for many years, regarded another as an enemy and continuously and unabashedly declares it as such and abuses it in its public media, then it is reasonable to expect the abused nation to be constantly alert with a great deal of trepidation of what belligerence could suddenly befall it. It is likely to be doubly sensitive to any threats that suddenly appear at its doorstep and to think or expect otherwise would be rash and foolish. Unless the abuser’s original plan is to trigger a response that it assesses is well within its capability of overcoming. In such a case, the abusing nation is on the warpath and is a danger to itself and to its neighbors, especially if the threatened nation is also powerful.
People do not normally start wars unless they think they can win and make off with the proverbial loot. Only a fool starts a war that he is unsure of winning. King Croesus of Lydia in 547 BC comes to mind, but history abounds with such fools. Alternatively, some people try to avoid wars but are cornered into one by a bully, these could have quite surprising outcomes, similar to a cornered cat that turns into a raging lion.
In other words, the causes of war can arise from factors other than fair national interests or realistic security needs, in many historical cases they have tended to be the products of pure avarice and hubris, the well-known very potent human herbicides.
How Can a War End
Once a war begins, it is unlikely to be aborted by either combatant as long as its outcome remains favorable – or at least, is not overwhelmingly unfavorable. Battles may be aborted or even lost, but the war would rage on until one or more of the following occurs:
1. Decisive Overall Defeat: One of the combatants is decisively defeated. This means complete destruction of the loser physically and structurally, enabling its full exploitation, maybe forever, or until it is able to rebuild itself or allowed to do so.
2. Undecisive Win or Defeat: In this case, a truce may be declared which means, sooner or later, a new conflagration is inevitable. In the meantime, some exploitation may be possible.
3. Double Defeat: in the event the warring foes are extremely powerful, they may be able to mutually destroy or weaken each other, making it impossible to continue. Historically, one is reminded of the recurring simultaneous mutual defeats and weakening of the Byzantines and Persian Sassanids, for only then could they achieve longer periods of peace. Today, however, the nuclear-armed opponents are not only guaranteed to mutually destroy each other, but also everybody else on earth. If this happens, then the faraway meek or poor may indeed inherit the earth, or whatever is left of it.
That however is not the end of wars. They are not entirely kinetic and never have been. Historically, economic weapons have always played an important and effective part in weakening an enemy and even bringing him down to his knees suing for peace.
Sanctions are ancient, they go back thousands of years in the form of embargoes, blockages, confiscation of wealth and assets, and the classical sieges of cities and fortresses. Hitting the enemies’ sources of income and livelihood (including the destruction of crops) was a standard procedure in any ancient war. The Pericles embargo of the city-state of Megara in 432 BC is usually the first reference presented, although it backfired. So was the Ottoman blockage of the Silk Road to Europe in 1453. But the most interesting is King Mithridates of Pontus on the Black Sea who, unable to ward off powerful Roman incursions on his lands in 88 BC, decided to hit the economic jugular of Rome and ransack its money collection system in Asia Minor as well as destroy the trading centers there. The mayhem he created resulted in a collapse, that some historians compare to the 2008 financial crash but without a Fed to bail out the banks and the bondholders. Bankruptcies galore of the wealthy and bloody riots of the plebs whose grain subsidies were halted hit Rome hard. Even a small civil war erupted among the military leaders on how to address the crisis. This continued for four years until Rome managed to sign a peace treaty with Mithridates in 84 BC. But the troubles reignited until 63 BC when Mithridates’ son betrayed him inducing him to opt for suicide rather than fall into Roman hands – was that an early color revolution?
But the cruelest of the economic wars were, as today, the sanctions, sieges, and blockades that starved the entrapped enemy, both civilian and military, until they accepted whatever abominable punishment was to be meted out. And the further we go into history, the crueler the punishment regardless of what the pre-surrender promises were.
These economic wars increased in intensity and frequency with the beginning of the age of discovery in the 15th century, and by the 20th century had become more sophisticated, hybrid, and easier to implement and control. They now include economic sanctions on countries, products, companies, and even specific people. A powerful country’s laws are unilaterally applied outside its territory enabling it to carry out (unlawful) arrests of foreign citizens anywhere in the world and unlawfully confiscate other peoples’ assets and wealth without proper due process.
The problem with economic warfare is that it has been craftily divorced from kinetic wars in that it continues even after the guns go silent in a truce or peace agreement. Such is the existing current hatred or the blind insistence on winning, no matter what. Does that make true world peace a hopeless dream? Or does it only make it more of a challenge to the sane?
A Operação Militar Especial Russa na Ucrânia tem por objetivos, segundo a Rússia, a desmilitarização e a desnazificação da Ucrânia.
O objectivo “desmilitarização” é fácil de compreender — em 2022 a Rússia não quis que a Ucrânia e a NATO dispusessem de capacidade militar para a ameaçar seriamente, tal como em 1962 os EUA não quiseram que Cuba e a URSS dispusessem capacidade militar para os ameaçar seriamente — mas como devemos compreender o objectivo “desnazificação”?
A meu ver para o comprendermos temos de começar por compreender o que é um “nazi” para os russos ou, alternativamente, que características deve possuir uma pessoa para que os russos considerem que essa pessoa é um “nazi”.
Tendo vindo a observar o que se tem passado desde o Euromaidan (Outono de 2013 – Inverno de 2014), levando em conta o que li sobre a Guerra dos Trinta e Um Anos (1918 – 1945), particularmente, sobre a Guerra Germano-Russa de 1941-45, guerra a que os russos chamam Grande Guerra Patriótica, diria que os russos consideram que uma pessoa é “nazi” quando essa pessoa:
1. Se vê a si própria como Übermensch, sobre-humano,
2. Os vê a eles, aos russos, como Untermenschlich, sub-humanos,
3. Age em conformidade com essa sua visão, isto é, trata os russos como se fossem animais irracionais ou, alternativamente, como se fossem coisas coisas.
Se assim fôr, e creio que o é, compreende-se que os russos apelidem de “nazi” as pessoas — individuais, colectivas. majestáticas — que consideram possuir este tipo de mentalidade e comportamento, mentalidade e comportamento que para eles, russos, é reminescente de mentalidade e comportamento das forças que, sob o alto comando do Führer Adolf Hitler, no seu território actuaram aquando da Grande Guerra Patriótica.
What is the psychoanalytical meaning of American Superheroes?
10.12.22 | Duarte Pacheco Pereira
Superman Reboots America
Do Americans essentially live outside of history, like their superheroes, not circumscribed by what has come before, being people without a past with an unquenchable thirst, a kind of inbuilt narrative desire to go back to the origins of things, to punch history’s reset button, reboot our lives and start again?
Larry Romanoff • The Unz Review • October 18, 2022 • 800 Words • Has Comments
In June of 2014, the National Post carried an article by Ira Wells, titled ‘America through the lens of its superheroes’, which presented some insightful observations on the American fascination not only with its superheroes but with their serial resurrections, the proliferation and domination of what Wells called “the origin story”, a repeat of the discovery of Superman or the maiden voyage of the Enterprise. He said this wasn’t just an ingenious marketing device for Hollywood studios but represented something much deeper in the cultural mind of Americans, noting that these archetypical American superheroes are people without a past, not circumscribed by what has come before. He then stated that there is “an unquenchable thirst, a kind of inbuilt narrative desire in America to go back to the origins of things, to punch history’s reset button, reboot our lives and start again.” He asked whether Americans essentially lived “outside of history”, like their superheroes, not circumscribed by what has come before, being people without a past. He then noted that America’s own “origin story” seemed to be in a constant state of regeneration, with a new beginning always on the horizon, and he ended with the notion that the American imagination seemed almost supernaturally well-suited to this re-booting of society and of historical memory, noting importantly that the launching of the new history was intimately linked to the repression of old histories.
It wasn’t clear from the article if Wells appreciated the depth of his own perception, and I found myself wishing he had developed his theme a bit further. He was of course correct in the notion that Americans have been living ‘outside of history’. That is precisely where they have been, their lack of a unifying history and culture being an insurmountable impediment to their progress as a people, their only adhesion coming from their mythical political religion. But America, and Americans, still fail and still have existential crises, in spite of their almost superhero powers. And whenever America appears again to be failing as a nation, as it has been especially since 2008, we have another flood of resurrected superheroes which represents precisely Americans “punching history’s reset button and starting again”. The economy has collapsed, democracy has failed everyone except the Jewish lobby and the top 1%, the American Dream is dead and the future looks hopeless. But then suddenly Superman is reborn, and America can re-boot and start over.
In an earlier article I wrote that whenever pressure is placed on Americans by unpleasant truths knocking on their doors, they employ the standard tools of denial, rationalisation and self-adoration, after which they just re-boot the system, clearing the data from all open files and erasing the (historical) memory. Then we re-start as if nothing untoward had ever happened. This is where America is today. The economic, authoritarian, judicial and political environments have created an existential crisis for which Americans have no powers to repel or even guide. It is increasingly apparent to them that the fundamentals on which their emotional well-being has been predicated, have been increasingly trashed by their own government, and their ability to ‘feel good to be an American’ rapidly disappearing in consequence. And of all the possible responses available to them, Americans turn desperately to juvenile Hollywood imagery and replenish their emotional emptiness by flocking to the cinema to celebrate the rebirth of Superman, vicariously celebrating their own imaginary rebirth through a cartoon character. While this imagery might be appropriate for eight-year-old children, it is a bit ridiculous when adopted by adults, but this seems to be an accurate indication of the American mentality, the result of a century of mass manipulation and programming.
Such is the power of the sympathetic imagery created by Lippman and Bernays, arousing emotional experiences even more fake than those at Starbucks – and of much more human consequence. We can recollect Neal Gabler’s observations that the Jews of Hollywood created a shadow America, with a cluster of images and ideas so powerful that they colonized the American imagination, and that, ultimately, American values came to be defined largely by the movies the Jews made. The rebirth of Superman and the rebooting of America constitute one of those values.
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons).
Às 08:53 do dia 07 de Novembro de 2022 partilhei no meu perfil no Facebook uma imagem e um texto que tinha ido buscar a Natural News, um canal do Telegram que sigo.
No dia 09 de Novembro de 2022, dois dias depois, ao entrar no Facebook por volta das 09:30, constatei que a referida partilha me tinha valido o ser condenado a 29 dias de silêncio.
Entretanto, e curiosamente, a não foi imediata, tal como acontece quando se usa uma palavra, ou expressão,“proibida”, uma daquelas que hão de figurar nas tabelas dos “inteligentes” autómatos-censores.
O facto da a publicação ter sido feita às 08:53 do dia 07 de Novembro e de a punição só ter ocorrido no dia 9 do mesmo mês leva-me a pensar que a mesma é da responsabilidade de um humano e não de um dos “inteligentes” autómato-censores.
—•—
Completaram-se hoje os 29 dias de Silêncio Rádio a que fui condenado – já posso comentar, gostar, publicar – mas, atendendo a que durante os próximos 29 dias as minhas publicações vão ser movidas para uma posição mais abaixo no Feed, a pena a que fui condenado ainda não está cabalmente cumprida.
—•—
Publico abaixo a imagem e o texto que me granjearam esta punição.
EVERYONE who gets mRNA jabbed for covid suffers some degree of heart injury, study finds
New research out of Switzerland suggests that every single person who gets “vaccinated” for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) ends up developing some kind of heart damage ranging from minor to major.
Researchers across the pond discovered that every “fully vaccinated” person develops elevated troponin levels post-injection – troponin being an indicator of heart injury. Of this, nearly three percent end up developing subclinical myocarditis.
The official story is that any kind of heart injury must have been caused by the “virus” and not by the injections. This is becoming increasingly unbelievable, even to diehard vaccine apologists, based on emerging data.
Excess deaths, as they are calling them, spiked dramatically after the onset of Operation Warp Speed, the Trump administration’s fast-tracked plan for releasing Fauci Flu shots at warp speed. Ever since then, the injury and death tolls have continued to mount.
Expert group confirms: heart-related injuries and deaths spiked in direct correlation to mass vaccination campaigns
The Heart Advisory and Recovery Team (HART), an expert group that analyzes such matters, says Australia makes an excellent “control group” for comparative purposes because there were very few actual covid “cases” up until the time the jabs were released.
Once the injections were unleashed, HART found, excess deaths soared. And there is no other explanation for this than the jabs because Australia “did not have prior covid as a reason for seeing this rise in mortality and hospital pressure from spring 2021.”
“The results from this control group indicate that the cause of this rise in deaths, particularly in young people, must be something in common with Australia, Europe, and the USA,” HART added.
In nearby New Zealand, economist John Gibson identified a temporal association between the so-called “booster” shots that were introduced for variants like “Omicron” and a similar spike in excess deaths.
Gibson estimates that there are “16 excess deaths per 100,000 booster doses” as “the age groups most likely to use boosters show large rises in excess mortality after boosters are rolled out.”
A similar correlation was identified by Prof. Seiji Kojima in Japan. There, the booster rollout from January to March 2022 resulted in a sharp uptick in excess deaths.
Then we have Israel, where a surge in cardiac arrest emergency calls was seen after 16-39-year-olds started getting injected with the first round of mRNA (messenger RNA) shots – Pfizer’s double-injection was the official Fauci Flu shot brand of choice in Israel.
Dr. Eyal Shahar found, after poring through the data, that there are between eight and 17 excess deaths per 100,000 people vaccinated.
In The Netherlands, that figure is even higher, according to Dr. Theo Schetters, who identified an excess death rate of 125 per 100,000 in the 60-plus age group.
Drs. Michael Palmer and Sucharit Bhakdi from Doctors for Covid Ethics are now on a mission to identify “irrefutable proof of causality” in all of these cases. They want to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that mRNA shots are, in fact, causing vascular and organ damage in many, many people.
They already discovered that mRNA injection contents do not stay at the injection site, but instead travel throughout the body where they end up accumulating in the brain and other vital organs.
This explains “the strong expression of spike protein in heart muscle after vaccination correlates with significant inflammation and tissue destruction,” they say, adding that “vaccine-induced vascular damage will promote blood clotting, and clotting-related diseases such as heart attack, stroke, lung embolism are very common in the adverse events databases.”
