Monday 23 January 2017

The Soros of the Birds

Birds, as women are called, derogatorily, in the UK
were seen to march to Washington to confront Trump.
By all signs, there were a lot of human-size, as opposed
to life-sized, vaginas wandering around.

If they were protesting Trump's groping,
they certainly groped themselves a lot, as above.
Madonna, who doesn't need much of an excuse,
kept her hands up where we could see them.
Though she did consider blowing shit up,
particularly a building with the acronym WH.
Those are some strong feelings.

As it turns out, 400 or so
women's groups were involved in the march. I wonder
how many of them are required to change a light
bulb. That's a lot of groups, in other words.
It turns out that Soros is behind about 50 of them.
Planes were chartered.

Is it a stretch to think that those 50 groups grabbed
some famous women (Madonna, Scarlet, Cher, etc
and Gloria Steinem who was a spy for the Agency
while mouthing feminazi platitudes to her fans.)
and did this not for any other reason than to show
how Soros can control things?

I had an excel file on this somewhere. The article by
Liberty blitzkrieg below has a link, or the zerohedge
one.

Soros has been credited with a lot of dangerous
protests, including violent ones, like Ukraine.
He and the US have been behind the colour
revolutions that usually usher in puppet regimes
for the US, cultural destruction leading to anomie.
That kind of shit makes Soros smile cuz it makes
him richer. Now it appears that he is turning his
colours on the US.

Meanwhile, in the eternal battle over women's
bodies, that will soon involve Trump, Breitbart
seems to be concerned with abortion. It's not
a man's business to boss women around on that
issue.

links
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-22/having-vagina-not-enough-one-womans-view-million-pussy-march
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/14/anti-trump-womens-march-celebrates-abortion-demand/

checkit Liberty blitzkrieg

Protest in the Era of Trump
Michael Krieger | Posted Monday Jan 23, 2017 at 12:25 pm

The best way to control the opposition is to lead it.

I am of the strong belief that any administration which comes into power in the current environment of nearly unrestrained executive authority, a lawless and sprawling intelligence agency complex, and a debt-driven, rent-seeking rewarding fraud economy should be assumed to represent a serious threat to the civil liberties and remaining freedoms of the American public. This would’ve been true under Hillary, and it’s also true under Trump.

Personally, I think Trump will be reacting to events outside of his control more than he will be controlling his own destiny given the extremely precarious point we are in during this geopolitical, cultural and economic cycle. This is a very dangerous period, and it will likely only get more dangerous as the years unfold. Not because of Trump, but because of the circumstances we have allowed ourselves to be boxed into as a people. As such, I fully understand and appreciate the role of non-violent protest and civil disobedience in the Trump era, just like I understood it and advocated for it during Obama’s transgressions.

Trump’s administration got off to a serious bang with the Women’s March over the weekend, which were unquestionably large events. While I think protest is important, and I don’t want to minimize the achievement of getting that many people out in the streets, there were many aspects of it that left a very foul taste in my mouth. Let’s start off with some of the people actively involved.

From the LA Times:

The Women’s March on Washington may have been filled with celebrities, singers and all sorts of Hollywood A-listers, but it was longtime feminist and writer Gloria Steinem who really revved up the crowd.

Upon exiting the Women’s March after her keynote speech in which she emphasized that protest means more than hitting the “send” button, a crowd formed around Steinem. Mothers rushed up to introduce their daughters to her; protesters held out their signs for her autograph.

Gloria Steinem, feminist icon and CIA-operative in the 1950’s and 60’s. Oh, you didn’t know that?

From The Chicago Tribune:

CIA agents are tight-lipped, but Steinem spoke openly about her relationship to “The Agency” in the 1950s and ‘60s after a magazine revealed her employment by a CIA front organization, the Independent Research Service.

While popularly pilloried because of her paymaster, Steinem defended the CIA relationship, saying: “In my experience The Agency was completely different from its image; it was liberal, nonviolent and honorable.”

Wait, what? The CIA was headed up by one of America’s most notorious psychopaths during that time, Allen Dulles. She must be aware of this fact. This is an interesting person for women to hold up as a role model, and to help lead the “resistance.”

One of the many nefarious things the CIA was up to during this time period was mind control program MK Ultra.

Project MKUltra – sometimes referred to as the CIA’s mind control program – is the code name given to a program of experiments on human subjects, at times illegal, designed and undertaken by the United States Central Intelligence Agency. Experiments on humans were intended to identify and develop drugs and procedures to be used in interrogations and torture, in order to weaken the individual to force confessions through mind control. Organized through the Scientific Intelligence Division of the CIA, the project coordinated with the Special Operations Division of the U.S. Army’s Chemical Corps.

The operation began in the early 1950s, was officially sanctioned in 1953, was reduced in scope in 1964, further curtailed in 1967, and officially halted in 1973. The program engaged in many illegal activities, including the use of unwitting U.S. and Canadian citizens as its test subjects, which led to controversy regarding its legitimacy. MKUltra used numerous methodologies to manipulate people’s mental states and alter brain functions, including the surreptitious administration of drugs (especially LSD) and other chemicals, hypnosis, sensory deprivation, isolation, verbal and sexual abuse, as well as other forms of psychological torture.

How liberal.

For more on the CIA at that time, see: How America’s Modern Shadow Government Can Be Traced Back to One Very Evil Man – Allen Dulles

But it gets worse. Steinem was a key factor in the election of Donald Trump by irrationally supporting Hillary Clinton and belittling Sanders supporters with some very un-feminist type commentary. In case you forget about this episode back in February, Desperate for Hillary – Feminist Icon Gloria Steinem Claims Young Women Support Sanders to Attract Boys. The only revolution this woman is going to lead is one that slams straight into a brick wall.

Naturally, Gloria wasn’t the only icon of female power to attend. The, always painfully desperate for attention and continued relevance, Madonna was also celebrated. Here’s some of what she had to say, courtesy of USA Today:

NEW YORK (AP) — Madonna is defending her fiery, expletive-laden speech at the Women’s March, saying her words were “taken wildly out of context.”

The singer said at the Washington, D.C., march Saturday that she had at times been angry after the election and had thought “an awful lot about blowing up the White House.”

Power to the imbecile.

Moving along, another red flag about the march were the amount of Democratic lawmakers present and actively protesting. Considering Trump rose to power based on the intense anger from much of the American voting public about how things were going, I find this to be incredibly ironic, and certainly not empowering. As The Hill notes in the article, Lawmakers Join Women’s Marches in DC and Nationwide:

Democratic lawmakers are are marching with women in Washington and across the nation one day after President Trump’s inauguration.

Hundreds of thousands took to the streets of D.C. on Saturday for the Women’s March on Washington, joined by a large contingent of lawmakers.

Other Democrats attended satellite protests in other cities across the country....

Actions, not fake news

I was late to the concept of the incipient
revolution that is Brexit and Trump. I honestly
figured that Brexit would fail. I have since
understood the dynamics of the situation that
Prof Mark Blyth has expressed. Soon to be found
here:


The full-on craziness of the media in its panic
at losing the neo-liberal great dawn of humanity
for the 1% was so palpable.

CNN: it's illegal to read Wikileaks

On Twitter, which is my University of the Internet,
I have often re-tweeted funny jokes on Trump, but
have refused to give time to any "news" about Trump,
especially from the MSM. I believe that words-are-just
-words and Trump's explosive words have certainly
cheapened the value of words. His incendiary words
have lit up a whole swath of people. 

But, I was waiting for Trump to start working in order 
to judge him. Is he the genius populist that he thinks he is?
I must say, many of his ideas impressed me greatly.
His ideas won't all be good, but some will be
groundbreaking:

[If they're all like the first two, Trump will be a god-send.]

He appears to be ready to:
- give former politicians a 5-year break before they 
can turn around and lobby their former colleagues.
This is only one of the revolving doors from government
to the private sector which is dripping with insider
trading and corruption. Shot 1 across the bows of
corruption.
EXCELLENT

- sign away any connection to TTP. That will be,
for many, the death knell of the democracy-killing
Shareholders' Protection Agreement, the nadir
of neo-liberalism and globalisation, signed by the 
"Leftie" Obama. The dragon has been slain.
EXCELLENT
[I just heard that the death of TTP has been
praised by Bernie Sanders, and called a
"mistake" by John McCain. I rest my case]

Others to come:

Don't want an hour as a refugee, in Davos

The theatrical works of a culture say as much about
that culture as they say about theater. In the Out-of-
Touch Burgh of Davos, the oligarch class, with or
without the perennial Clintons, go up a mountain in
search of wisdom, or fois gras. This year, the
self-appointed world elites were trying on some
human emotions like a pair of cheap, wet smelly
socks.

In their attempt to understand more about the
world publics that they usually step all over,
they tried discussing "them losers over there."
But when it came to refugees, they treated
themselves to a live, in the wool, experience
of life as refugees for 45 minutes only.

It was so out of touch. Until I can analyse it
further, it looked like a dark room, with some
water on the floor and a bunch of soldiers
yelling at them.

In the first instance, refugees, if Lesbos is
any example, are met by locals and
international volunteers with blankets,
if they manage to avoid a dunking in
the Med. Perhaps the show should have
chosen some Davos Divots and taken
them to a deep pool, and put them in a rickety
leaky boat, especially if they cannot swim.
I think several thousand real refugees died
in the Med last year.



Forget what the media tell you. This
Theater of the Elites looked more
like what will happen when the
economy totally collapses under the
weight of elitist fuck-ups. In that case,
it will be permanently dark as elites
will have found a way to cloud the
sun permanently. The shouting soldiers
would be the ones trying to save them
while killing the plebs who are
seeking a scrap of food. The soldiers
would be saving the elites and taking
them to refuge at Galt's Gulch. 




Sunday 15 January 2017

What's a legacy, Barrack?

UPDATE: I was right about this one.
I am assuming that Obama, as I noted,
was looking for an automatic legacy.
20 years from now, he'll be remembered as:
"the black POTUS who freed the Tranny."
As Republicans are all "law and order, as long
as it's not applied to them," the fact that a
traitor transexual (for added bile) was
pardoned, has lit up their conservative hineys.
Obama also got revenge for their killing of
Obamacare.
Two solid reasons.
---
I'm not American anyway.
Nevertheless, I have a few thoughts on what a
U.S. president, during the Banking Wars, should
have done, like solving the Runaway TBTF
Banks problem, which he didn't even touch.
The main reason, as you'll hear below, is that
he was funded by some of the worst banksters.
That's how he got elected.

Point 1 is, I think the fact that everybody,
worldwide, gave Obama an easy ride, because
the first black president of the world's super-
power, was a big thing. Only the crazy birthers
went at him, led by POTUS45 Donnie Trump
who tried to cut BO down. The Birthers were
prolly mysticists thinking that a guy named
Hussein was the living spirit of Sadam, whom
they had decapitated by accident in an Iraqi jail
on the way to being hung.

Everybody else cut Obama a lot of slack. And I
think that Smooth-talking Barrack knew that
he was going to get an easy ride. And he took
it real easy, even when he had congress on his
side for the first 2 years.
Maybe Eddie Murphy was right. Maybe the first
black Prez has to watch his back or else he'll get
shot.

we all know how MLK ended up. There was a photographer
friend of the pastor who was on the Agency pay,
telling the 40 agents where MLK was at all times.
All they had to do was find a stupid cracker who
was all too happy to shut up a righteous man
FOR GOOD.
No such threat to the O family.

The commentators that I follow didn't give him
an easy ride, but he did get an easier ride than
Bush. We all thought, "wow , a POTUS with
a brain will fix all of Bush43's mistakes." He
did none of that. Eight million people lost
their homes due to fraudulent robo signing
that we have all seen proof of, and yet
O's DOJ brother was a brother of the Banking
Clan, and is now back working there. So,
no jail.

Obama was a good spokesman, as far as
presidents go. A spokesman for big oil,
for frackers, for banks, and the other
troublemakers. Towards the end, it seemed
to me that he was a programmable wind-up
toy. The words that seemed to be coming
out of his mouth seemed to be Boardroom-
Speak. So, oligarchs may have not only
told him what to do, but the exact words
to say.
I look at his fracking speeches. Total Exxon-Lingo

So, either O is stupid (not) or he's a
puppet. "we're the Saudi of Gas." He
knows it's not profitable, not safe, but
there you go.

Now, I'll show a few commentators having a go
at Obama for your entertainment.
There's Jimmy Dore, whom I've recently tripped over.
He is one of the Aggressive Progressives on the
Young Turks. I noticed his own show when I
was looking for Prof Mark Blyth. Dore is funny,
articulate and he really seems to get annoyed
with the bullcrap that politicians feed us. I
respect that greatly. He has podcasts if you
google his name.
There's also Cenk Uygur who has a good
memory for Obama's flaws. He also has
 a segment by Michael Moore, who asks
Obama (through the tv screen- if you
understand) "How will you be
remembered"
A shot right to the Ego.

Here was one sort of legacy:
Obamacare was a sop to the Insurance
companies and Big Pharma, and so 20
million people got health care, but now
it's too expensive for many of them.
The above dynamic duo has put up
the premiums (especially in areas
with only one provider- i.e. Monopoly-
the Game that Hurts the Poor) by
up to 100%.
But, it had his name on it, thanks to the
Republicans, who were trying to insult him.
He said "I'll take that." Of course, it has
just been erased from the books by the
lame duck congress. Trump was going to
change it anyway. His ideas seemed really,
how shall I say this, progressive. Trump's
ideas.
Negotiating a better price on drugs
for Medicare? Dead easy and yet it will
be seen as Communism by Big Pharma.

Anyway, as Cenk says, any president wants
3 things: to be elected. to be re-elected. to
have a legacy.

I'm going out on a limb here and say that
with Obamacare gone, Obama's only
big legacy is the Nobel he won, which
just encouraged him to bomb 26000
people to death in 2016, for one example.
O knows that for 20 years, all you gotta
put together is two words to bring howls
of laughter:
Obama & Nobel
the pre-emptive Nobel
for the pre-emptive droner

Although he has jailed more whistleblowers
using the Espionage Act than
all other presidents combined, he may go
soft in this last week. I think
he might be forced to give clemency to
Chelsea Manning, for his own legacy.
As for Manning, well done for your work,
and for choosing a name for your new
sex that will likely piss off the Clintons.

I think he'll get clemency, largely because
of a package deal with Freddie Charles, namely
Snowden and Assange in a court room near you,
in the US.
I think Snowden has said he would be willing
to be rammed through court and jailed.
Assange, for his part, always wanting the
limelight, went too far.
He was wanted for extradition to Sweden for
trumped up charges that haven't even been
laid yet. But, he's been hiding in the Ecuadorian
embassy in London, fearing that Sweden, that
secret NATO member and US lacky, would
wrap him up in a plastic blanket and deliver
him in the back of C130 straight to GITMO.
So, Assange goes that extra step further by
offering to be extradited to the US.
If you follow, he hasn't been sought for
extradition to the US yet. So, he's jumping
the gun, that knob. Like in that Tarantino
movie: "you can torture me all you want..."
which gets the response "ya. torture. good idea."

to the videos: