“Oranges and Lemons,” by Alpha Unit

Humans are among the few mammal species unable to synthesize Vitamin C from glucose. All of our Vitamin C has to come from our diets. If you were somehow to end up with no Vitamin C in your diet whatsoever for a prolonged time – say, three or four months and counting, indefinitely – it is no exaggeration to say that the repercussions could be dire.

Without Vitamin C we can’t make collagen, and without collagen your body can’t repair your skin, bone, cartilage, ligaments and tendons, blood vessel walls, and teeth. You need fresh food in your diet, either from plant or animal sources, to get this done.

Wherever you find people going without fresh food for long periods, you’ll find Vitamin C deficiency, or scurvy.

Scurvy has been prevalent throughout much of human history. It likely began to occur in humans during the development of agriculture. According to biologist Thomas Jukes, once people in temperate zones adopted an agrarian lifestyle they were able to store grains for use during winter. They were also able to spread into other temperate regions previously uninhabitable due to the lack of food supply during winters.

But because stored grains are extremely low in Vitamin C, it is likely that these ancient peoples developed scurvy during the long winter months because grain dominated their diets.

During long journeys or overland campaigns, such as the Crusades, scurvy inevitably appeared.

The first written account of a disease likely to be scurvy comes from the Eber Papyrus of ancient Egypt, dated to 1550 BC. The Papyrus not only diagnosed scurvy but prescribed that its victims be given onions, which contain Vitamin C.

Throughout maritime history, people had to figure out not only how to transport themselves across seas and oceans but how to stay healthy along the way. They were clearly relatively successful at both. Millennia ago, Austronesians were the first humans to invent oceangoing vessels; they colonized a large part of the Indo-Pacific region. Early Polynesians were superb seafarers and traveled thousands of miles exploring and settling the region we know as the Polynesian Triangle (drawn by connecting the points of Hawaii, New Zealand, and Easter Island).

Somali seafarers developed extensive trade networks, and Somali merchants at one time led commerce between Asia and Africa. Chinese merchants sailed the Indian Ocean and traded throughout Southeast Asia, the Arabian Peninsula, and East Africa.

How did ancient seafaring peoples deal with scurvy?

Stefan Slater writes that Polynesian seafarers relied on freshly caught fish, crustaceans, and octopi, and would sometimes slaughter some of the animals they were transporting for breeding stock. Jin Ding, Chaojan Shi, and Adam Weintrit report that the diet on Chinese sailing ships included green tea, which contains more Vitamin C than black tea. They also say that Chinese ships began to carry gardens with them, growing soybean sprouts, which are high in Vitamin C.

So there is some evidence that ancient seafarers knew the importance of keeping fresh vegetables and meat in their diets on long voyages.

For Europeans, it wasn’t until the Age of Sail that the problem of scurvy truly came into focus. Wealth and national interest were at stake in ways they hadn’t been before.

Advances in naval technology and a rush for exploration and conquest brought Europeans the “plague of the sea.” Scurvy was the main occupational disease of what historians call the European Age of Exploration. More sailors died of scurvy than all other causes combined, including battles, storms, and other diseases.

Jason A. Mayberry makes the case that a unique confluence of conditions made scurvy and seafaring a deadly combination for Europeans. In his essay “Scurvy and Vitamin C,” he draws upon the work of Stephen Bown, author of Scurvy: How a Surgeon, a Mariner, and a Gentleman Solved the Greatest Medical Mystery of the Age of Sail.

First, countries had difficulty maintaining sufficient crews for their naval vessels, so they relied on impressment: the taking of men into the military by compulsion, with or without notice. It had been legally sanctioned in Britain since the time of Edward I.

It was basically kidnapping. Gangs of men would go into port towns looking for “recruits.” They would club a man and drag him back to the ship. The man’s family might have no idea what happened to him, and many of the men never made it back home.

Some had experience at sea, some didn’t. Some were in poor health to begin with, being homeless, convicts, or elderly. On average a third of a ship’s crew was made up of impressed men.

Even the men who volunteered for naval service were often in poor health. Many would volunteer in order to secure a place to sleep and get regular meals. Sometimes boys who were orphans or runaways would join.

A second reason that Vitamin C deficiency was hastened during this period were the working conditions on ships. Discipline was harsh and included flogging, keelhauling, and starvation. The body needs more Vitamin C when it is under stress, and sailors had heightened stress in the form of physical exertion, exposure to the elements, fear of battle, and sleep deprivation.

The third and main factor in the development of scurvy was clearly the diet onboard ships. What mattered most for food supplies was that the food be storable for long periods without spoiling. The nutritional content of the food was of little concern for those in charge. What was most important to them was to maintain a suitable labor force at the least possible cost.

A typical weekly ration for a sailor, according to Bown:

  • 1 lb. hardtack (biscuit) daily
  • 2 lbs. salted beef twice weekly
  • 1 lb. salted pork twice weekly
  • 2 oz. salted fish 3 times weekly
  • 2 oz. butter 3 times weekly
  • 4 oz. cheese 3 times weekly
  • 8 oz. dried peas 4 times weekly
  • 1 gal. beer daily

Sometimes the rations included dried fruit or barley meal. But the lack of fresh fruits and vegetables left the diet almost completely devoid of Vitamin C.

Compounding this problem was that even the food sailors had access to wasn’t always fit to eat. Spoilage was a huge problem on ships. Ships were a dark, damp, and sometimes waterlogged environment for sailors and their food, and this led to moldy, worm-eaten bread, or other dried foods. Meat would begin spoiling almost as soon as it left port, no matter how salt-laden it was.

European navies did provide surgeons and surgeon’s mates on ships, but most of a surgeon’s time was spent caring for battle wounds instead of focusing on the treatment and prevention of disease.

All of these factors made scurvy the leading cause of death during the Age of Sail.

The onset of scurvy is a slow progression, Bown and others inform us, usually appearing after 60 to 90 days of a Vitamin C-deficient diet. This is when the body’s lingering stores of Vitamin C are depleted. The initial symptoms are fatigue and muscle aches. Upon waking, a scurvy victim’s joints will ache.

During the second stage, his gums begin to swell and will bleed with slight pressure. The teeth become loose at the roots. He also feels pain throughout his joints and muscles.

During the third stage, the gums begin to rot. They also bleed profusely. The victim’s flesh becomes gangrenous and will spontaneously hemorrhage. His skin, especially on the legs and feet, develop ulcers that turn gangrenous. As connective tissue fails, long-healed broken bones begin to refracture, and long-healed wounds begin to reopen. The legs cramp so severely that the person cannot walk.

At this point the person is in excruciating pain.

In the final stage of scurvy, the person gets a high fever. His skin develops black spots and he begins having tremors. He will drift in and out of consciousness for a while, and then he dies.

An estimated two million sailors died of scurvy between the 15th and 18th centuries. The science at the time was of very little use in treating them – even though various people throughout European history had made the connection between citrus fruits and the prevention of scurvy.

On July 8, 1497, Vasco da Gama set sail from Lisbon, Portugal, in search of a passage to India. On January 11, 1498, the fleet anchored off Mozambique. After five weeks at sea, the crew began showing the symptoms of scurvy.

Fortunately, some weeks later, they arrived at Mombasa, on the coast of Kenya, where they met local traders who traded them oranges. Within six days of eating them, the crew recovered. Da Gama left Africa and began his voyage across the Indian Ocean to Kozhikode (or Calicut to Westerners).

After staying in India for four months, da Gama left for a three-month journey at sea in which scurvy killed many of his sailors. On January 7, 1499, the ships anchored at Malindi, Kenya, where the sailors, remembering their previous cure in Mombasa, asked for oranges. Still, more sailors died of the disease “which started in the mouth.” Six months later the survivors made it back to Lisbon.

Did Vasco da Gama alert any ship owners or controlling authorities of what he had discovered about treating scurvy? No one knows.

Sir Richard Hawkins had discovered a cure for scurvy in 1593 when it appeared in his crew in southern Brazil. He reported that oranges and lemons had been a remedy for his men. To whom did he report this? What did they do with the information?

The Dutch had known about the value of citrus fruits since at least the late 16th century. According to J. Burnby and A. Bierman, who wrote “The Incidence of Scurvy at Sea and Its Treatment,” the Dutch East India Company bartered for lemons in Africa and also established vegetable gardens and orchards in their colonies to provide fresh citrus to their ships. How did the Dutch manage to keep this knowledge to themselves? Was that their intention?

Burnby and Bierman also write about an Elizabethan merchant, Sir Hugh Plat, who had an interest in botany and gave bottled lemon juice to the commander of the first fleet of the English East India Company. It was only the crew of the flagship, Red Dragon, which received a daily allowance of lemon juice. It was also the only crew that remained relatively free of scurvy. What did the English East India Company do with this information?

In the early 1600s John Woodall, a surgeon for the same East India Company, described the symptoms of scurvy and recommended that ships’ surgeons inform Governors of “all places they touch in the Indies” that the juices of oranges, lemons, limes, and tamarinds be used as medicine for scurvy.

The East India Company actually supplied “lemon water,” as it was called, for its ships until 1625, when the Company chose not to provide it because “the woman supplying it wanted 12d. a gallon above the usual price.” The return voyage of 1626 was badly afflicted with scurvy because they had bought tamarinds in the East Indies which they presumed to be as effective as lemons. All sour fruits and even acids such as vinegar were erroneously thought to be cures for scurvy.

J. F. Bachstrom, a Lutheran theologian and physician, wrote in 1734 that there was only one cause of scurvy – the absence of fresh fruits and vegetables for a long period. No drugs would help, nor would mineral acids. Were any companies or government entities aware of his findings? If so, did they take them seriously?

Europe was slowly making headway against this problem nevertheless. In 1739 James Lind, a former physician’s apprentice, volunteered for the Royal Navy and was designated a surgeon’s mate. After seven years in that position, he was promoted to surgeon on HMS Salisbury. It was on this ship that he performed his famous scurvy experiment.

Lind showed an insight ahead of his time by understanding that, to develop a cure, treatments must be compared simultaneously in similar patients. He had envisioned the concept of clinical trials, as rudimentary as his idea might have been.

After eight weeks at sea, and when scurvy was beginning to take its toll on the crew, Lind decided to test his idea that the putrefaction of the body caused by the disease could be prevented with acids. He divided 12 sick patients into six pairs, and provided each pair with a different supplement to their diet: cider, vitriolic acid (diluted sulfuric acid), vinegar, sea water, two oranges and one lemon, or a purgative mixture.

Only the pair who took the oranges and lemons improved.

You would think that Lind had established a clear connection between citrus and scurvy and that the Navy would have taken immediate action. But neither happened.

Lind continued to believe that there were multiple causes of scurvy. He also advocated a method of preserving the virtues of oranges and lemons that involved boiling the juices. Unbeknownst to Lind, boiling destroyed the active ingredient in citrus juices – Vitamin C. When the boiled juice was tried on ships as a preventative measure and found lacking, people began to dismiss the whole idea that citrus fruits were effective against scurvy!

In 1753 Lind published his Treatise on the Scurvy, considered a classic of medical science. But it took the Royal Navy over 40 years to adopt Lind’s recommendations. This happened under the direction of Sir Gilbert Blane, who had been appointed Physician to the Fleet.

Blane was familiar with Lind’s work and had the power and initiative to bring about change, Mayberry states. He organized an experiment on HMS Suffolk on a 23-week trip to India. The sailors were given a mixture of rum, water, sugar, and lemon juice. A few sailors developed a slight case of scurvy. They were given additional rations of lemon juice and the scurvy was quickly cured.

With the results from the HMS Suffolk and the power of his position, Blane was able to ensure that fresh citrus juice became a staple in the British Navy. For the British, scurvy had finally been conquered.

The question remains: why did it take so long, when so many had found the cure time and time again?

Burnby and Bierman note that there was the view among ship owners and government authorities that seamen were expendable. They also suggest that seamen themselves might have been reluctant to take part in experiments that might have settled the issue. But they mention other considerations, mainly the problem of “sheer impracticability.”

How does one store many thousands of oranges and lemons on an overcrowded man-of-war laden with guns, gunpowder, and shot? Using the juice of citrus fruits was certainly a space saver but it readily became moldy, especially under poor storage conditions, which were usually the case.

Speaking of practical considerations, how long can it be practical to treat your work force as if they are expendable? There were no sailors’ advocates at the time to make it impractical for businessmen and governments to do so. Nothing stopped or even slowed Europe’s exploration and colonization, so losing sailors to scurvy was just one of the costs of doing business.

Alt Left: Stupidity about “Sex Trafficking”

This term has been grotesquely abused lately, starting with feminists, who equate all prostitution with “trafficking” and then the federal government, which passed a rather silly law 5-10 years against “sex trafficking.” Increasingly what you are seeing in the media is a complete conflation of  prostitution and “sex trafficking.”

In particular, anyone pimping minor females is said to be “trafficking” no matter whether there is any coercion at all. Trafficking was originally supposed to mean women who were being essentially enslaved, kept prisoner, held against their will, and forced to prostitute themselves for others. Basically sex slaves. There are a lot of forms of this coerced and imprisoned sort of prostitution in  the world, and it is an ugly thing to be sure!

But that silly federal law conflated that with any prostitution of minors. So “sex trafficking” is not just sex slavery but it’s also prostituting of minors. Which seems a bit silly. How are minors being “trafficked” if they are not being held against their will? It’s ridiculous. The crime should be something like Prostituting a Minor, along those lines. Perhaps that’s a serious offense, I have no idea. But it sure isn’t “trafficking.”

Increasingly I have seen articles, many coming out of Texas, about big roundups of “sex traffickers.” They were rounding up 50-60 men at once and the guys looked pretty ordinary. That’s an awful lot of “traffickers” to round up at once. When they do round these guys up, they usually only catch a few at a time as they are hard to catch and not particularly common anyway. So I did some research. It turned out that of those 60 men, only one of them actually trafficked in prostitutes, and even he was just prostituting minors. I have no idea if coercion or imprisonment was involved. The other 59 men were guilty of…get this: buying a teenage prostitute!

Look I’m not saying that buying an underage prostitute should be legal. But you should have to prove that he knew that she was underage or by her appearance, she could not possibly have been 18. The bizarre thing about these laws is that in many states, it is perfectly legal for any adult man to have sex with a 16-17 year old girl as long as he does it for free and doesn’t pay her. The minute he gives her some money for her treasures, it’s a crime!

Even knowingly buying an underage prostitute is not “trafficking” in any way, shape, or form. It’s a crime called “Buying a Minor Prostitute.” How in the Hell is buying a whore “trafficking?” It’s absurd.

To tell the truth, many prostitutes with pimps may be being trafficked. That’s because many pimps won’t let the girls in their stables free. They threaten to hunt them down, beat them up, or kill them if they run away from the pimp. Any prostitute in a situation like that with her pimp is indeed being trafficked.

Now buying a teenage prostitute is an odd crime. Minors are not allowed to legally prostitute themselves, but many do it anyway. And 50% of minor female prostitutes are Black. Blacks are only 13% of the population. So there’s massive over-representation of Black teenage girls in minor prostitution. Quite a few of those girls probably have psychopathic tendencies too, or will develop into psychopaths when they are adults because we are not supposed to diagnose psychopathy or any other  personality disorder in minors. Fully 45% of adult female prostitutes are psychopaths. Newsflash: whores aren’t very nice women. They not even very nice people.

A lot of them are simply criminals and ripoffs and all sorts of petty thievery and female prostitution go hand and hand. In my opinion, a prostitute and a thief are the same thing. This is what the female psychopath becomes: Histrionic Personality Disorder, the “Mata Hari” or “femme fatale” disorder. Basically what I would call a thieving whore. Many female strippers, porn stars and other sex workers are also female psychopaths or have high scores on the PCL.

Many male porn stars are the same. This was observed as far back as the 1970’s and 80’s. If you look at those old porn movies, look at how mean and evil so many of those male porn stars are. And look at how crass, loud, brassy, and cold the women are. That’s the typical whore personality: hard, cold, brassy, callous, cynical. It looks like a damaged woman. Their emotions look shut down and they’ve gone hard.

Alt Left: The Rind Et Al Study on Long-term Effects of Child Abuse: Its History and Ramifications

A famous study on childhood sexual abuse was done 20 years ago by Rind et al. I think I still have a copy of it on my desktop here.

It provoked wild outrage. Even the idiotic American Psychological Association denounced it, notable as one of the most anti-scientific statements this anti-scientific organization has ever issued. Even the US Congress got in on the act. The Congress passed a resolution condemning the study! Congressmen, mostly Republicans, stood up and denounced it forcefully.

The problem? The study came up with the wrong answer. In other words, the truth was wrong and society preferred to believe pleasant lies over unpleasant truths, so the paper was condemned for discovering the wrong facts.

Usually when theory and facts do not match up, we say that the theory was wrong and go back to the drawing board.

However, in this case and with all ideological arguments by ideologues and politics types, when the theory and the facts don’t match up, the facts are wrong, and the facts are not the facts! Why? Because the theory is said to be automatically a priori true. The theory must be true. It cannot be false. So the facts must be wrong and we need to change the facts, wipe out the truth, and say that reality isn’t real, instead, what is real is some fantasy world that doesn’t  exist.

A number of fake “studies” were undertaken by other behavioral “scientists” taking about the Rind findings and finding fault with this or that conclusion. None of the fake studies denouncing it were worth a hill of beans. That they made it into the journals at all shows that pathetic anti-scientific nature of the social sciences, sadly also including Psychology, which has been trying to become more of a science for a long time now.

But by the very fact that it is a social science means that Psychology will always be a fake science in some ways because its findings have to do with people, and the science of people will always be twisted by politics, ideology, bias, and mostly emotional reaction.

It’s hard to get emotional about a new finding in math or physics. Who cares! But findings in the social sciences are inherently emotional because we are always emotional about ourselves and our fellow humans, and anything people are strongly emotional about will always be tainted by bias, propaganda, politics, and ideology. In other words, lies. This is why the social sciences will always be doomed to the charge of being fake sciences and will always carry the guilty burden of physics envy.

Ritter et al conducted a meta-analysis of a huge number of studies on the effects of childhood sexual abuse on children as adults. Child abuse was mostly defined as sexual abuse below age 13, so sex with teenage girls and boys, a massive minefield, was left out.

The available evidence shows that consensual sex with teenage girls and boys and adults causes little if any damage to teenagers. This behavior is illegal not because it is harmful to the teens, as I doubt that it is. Instead it is outlawed because society’s morals say that members of society do not wish to live in a society where adults are free to have sex with teenagers of various ages.

It’s seen as unsavory, unpleasant, disgusting or revolting, and often morally wrong. But this behavior is not psychologically disordered in any way. This is a moral and legal problem, not a psychological one.

Unfortunately we are now in the midst of a truly insane mass hysteria around the sexuality of teenage girls in which 90% of the population has thrown reason out the window and gone batshit insane, out and out lies are widely believed, and science and facts are no where to be seen.

In fact, the people who quote the science and the facts about this question are attacked as pedophiles! Because I guess only pedophiles believe in science and truth when it comes to this sort of thing. If you don’t want to be called a pedophile, just spout the usual lies about this subject. As long as you keep lying and don’t ever resort to facts, you’re in the clear!

Fact: nothing published in an academic journal has ever produced evidence suggesting that teen/adult relationships are harmful or predatory. Literally not even one. Anthropological and historical studies all over the world have found that such relationships are common in many societies and no harm was reported in any society ever studied.

How do I know this? I’ve studied them. A particularly large one was done out of Germany in the 1950’s. You can find this evil science of banned truths on the Net, though I can’t tell you where to look. The pedo advocate sites have links to it, but I don’t want to send you there. I suspect the motives of those who wrote this study, but the science seems good.

Furthermore, historically speaking, I’ve learned from the Psychohistorian sites that teen/adult relations were normal in most of the world including the West up until 1900. Zero harm was reported.

Sadly, mass molestation of children was also reported in the West from Roman and Greek times until 1900. Under the crowded urban conditions that arose with the onset of capitalism and the Industrial Revolution, where families were packed together in tiny spaces, a great deal of molestation went on. I’m not happy about this at all, but it’s notable that no ill effects were observed in Greece and Rome until the pre-1900 West.

Perhaps the reason for this was that molestation of children was simply an expected fact of life. If you grow up as a female and get molested and all of your woman friends also got molested, it’s seen as a normal thing. There’s usually nothing inherently wrong with this behavior absent physical damage. Things that are normalized in any society tend to cause little if any damage.

I disagree here with some folks like psychohistorians who argue that all sexual abuse of children under any circumstances, normalized or condemned, results in inevitable terrible lifetime damage to the person. They also believe that many other things experienced in childhood cannot but cause horrible lifelong damage.

I doubt if that is true. If you grow up in a society that normalizes this or that behavior, outside of extreme perversion, aggression, and sadism, it’s probably seen as normalized and shrugged off. In other words, the damage of most of these things is relative and depends on the degree to which your society condemns or pathologizes the behavior.

However, for small children, the true victims of child molestation, it is quite different.

Granted, the victims were interviewed when in college so the abuse was a long ways away. Conceivably if they had interviewed them earlier as minors, they would manifested more damage. The findings were shocking:

Rind et al found that the long-term effects of child sexual abuse were typically neither pervasive nor intense, and men reacted much less negatively than women. Ritter et al also found that less than 10% of victims were traumatized. The most common effects were shame, blame, and confusion.

To explicate that further, the effects were shame about having been abused, blame for themselves for allowing it to happen to them, and confusion about the abuse itself.

The confusion may manifest in various ways. A female friend of mine from 10 years ago was molested. Of course she absolutely hates my guts now, but that’s not an unusual reaction for women who get involved with me in some way or another. I’m used to it.

She told me that she was molested by a pedophile in her church group when she was 8 years old. The molester was a young man and he does appear to have been a pedophilic or preferential molester. She told me, “It’s confusing because it feels good but it’s wrong.” This is part of the thinking behind the confusion that kids experience after being abused.

She also told me that she had completely gotten over it by age 50, but she seemed to have gotten over it much before then. I knew two other women (I actually got involved with these two whereas with the other one it was more email and hot phone conversations) of the same age who were sexually abused as girls, one by a probable pedophile and the other by her opportunistic teenage older brother. They both told me that they had gotten over it by age 50 but implied that they had gotten over it much before then.

The shame, blame, and confusion are apparently short-term effects in most victims, and at the very least have dissipated by college age.

The implication is that children or minors may experience those effects for some time in their youth, but these effects mostly go away by adulthood, and there is no lasting damage in almost all (90%) of cases. The study also found that where the molestation was consensual or non-coerced, there was little if any long-term damage. However, when coercion was involved, damage was much more likely and could easily last into adulthood or perhaps an entire lifeftime.

Unfortunately, pedophiles have gotten a hold of the Rind et al study and like to wave it around to try to push for legalization of child/adult sexual relations.

That’s not my intention here. I don’t care if most victims get over it. Good for them. I’m happy that they are not damaged in the long term.

Nevertheless, this behavior still needs to be outlawed because I don’t want to live in a society where adults are allowed to have sex with young children below age 13. I don’t have to have a reason. I just don’t like it. That’s all the reason I need.

Alt Left: Why US Conservatism Fails – Social Conservatism/Support for Working Class Whites and Neoliberalism Are Always Incompatible

There Is No Society

Margaret Thatcher summed it up well when she said, “There is no society.” This is what all conservatives want. They want there to be no society at all. It’s odd because this white picket fence White America they all want to go back to was a society if there ever was one. So all rightwingers want to get rid of society (as it’s bad for business) but then the paradises they all want to go back to had deep societal structures.

Why US Conservatism Fails – Social Conservatism/Support for Working Class Whites and Neoliberalism Are Always Incompatible

Just as Keynesian economics, social liberalism, and even social democracy always inevitably pave the way for and give ground to neoliberalism in the future, social conservatism and neoliberalism are never really compatible, at least not in the US. Another problem for Republicans is selling their project to working class Whites while pushing a project – neoliberalism – that is designed by its very nature to devastate all workers but the working class first and foremost.

Hence the Republicans claim to speak for the White Working Class while pushing the very economics that is causing declining life expectancy, opioid addiction and overdose epidemics, complete social degeneration, and economic wreckage in White working class America. The Republicans have always done this by getting working class Whites to vote for them on social issues. But then the Republicans never really get around to fixing any of the social issues.

Abortion legal yet? Of course not.

Got a handle on illegal immigration?

Porn illegal? You kidding?

Social degeneration arrested? You must be joking.

Divorce and single parenthood? Pull the other one.

Drug abuse, sales, and use? Please.

For abortion, porn, and illegal immigration, the Republicans don’t want to fix any of these issues. They just want to say they will and then never do it. The daughters of the rich get abortions too. I’m sure the rich love their porn, depraved degenerates that they are. And Republicans will never fix illegal immigration because their corporate and small business supporters want to keep the illegal flow coming for the cheap wages and control over labor.

Divorce, single parenthood, social degeneration, drug use, sales, and abuse, including opioid use and overdose epidemics? Curiously, the neoliberal economics that Republicans push tend to directly cause all of these forms of cultural decay and degeneration.

US Conservatism Will Always Be Incoherent

As usual, conservatives are incoherent. The problem isn’t capitalism, it “state capitalism” or “state interference in the market.” This is the Libertarian idiocy. Yet every time there’s a crisis in the market – and under neoliberalism there will be more than ever – the capitalists all go running to the state with their hands out asking for the workers to bail them out. The only thank you the workers get is a giant IOW for trillions of dollars they have to pay back that they loaned to the capitalists.

I go to rightwing blogs all the time and I see them flailing about. Many are starting to figure out that neoliberalism is utterly corrosive of all of the socially conservative values that they wish to cultivate.

Neoliberalism will always support mass immigration and illegal immigration to keep wages down.

Neoliberalism will always oppose any moral structures in society because the more we let it all hang loose, the more consumers we have.

Neoliberalism will never be race realist because capitalists care absolutely nothing whatsoever about race. It means nothing to them. The only color capitalists have ever cared about is green.

I see them flailing around, searching for something, anything – that will give them their social conservatism while keeping their free markets. Huey Longism, “agrarian socialism”, distributism, antisemitic campaigns against “banksters” that leave the rest of the neoliberal economy alone, on and on.

They want the usual starvation of the state with low taxes and no social programs, but that always results in no society at all or something that looks more like Somalia than Norman Rockwell.

They decry the pain that neoliberalism has inflicted on the White working class while refusing to recognize that neoliberalism had anything to do with it.

They never have any solid proposals about anything because their love of neoliberalism, a small or near-zero state, no regulation, etc. always runs afoul of their desires to limit immigration, slow the decline of the White working class, arrest the decay of values and behavior, and adopt some sanity on race, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity because the two things are utterly incompatible.

You either have one or the other.

You can’t have both.

Alt Left: Keynesianism, Social Liberalism, and Even Social Democracy Will Always Give Way to Neoliberalism

Keynesianism, Social Liberalism and Even Social Democracy Will Always Give Way to Neoliberalism

Keynesianism isn’t sustainable because the inevitable reactions against it will always swing neoliberal. So Keynesianism simply gives way to neoliberalism. Not to mention that they entire corporate class despises Keynesianism so they wage war against it the whole time it’s in. The corporate class wants neoliberalism and only neoliberalism all over the world. They have since the 1500’s. My brother had to read various tracts for his political science degree. One was by a businessman in Italy in the 1500’s.

He could have been Donald Trump or Ronald Reagan. He had no use for the state at all and preferred it to exist at as low a level as possible. He wanted absolutely nothing out of the state and mostly just wanted it to get the Hell out of the way and leave him alone as much as possible. He had no use for society either, as he felt it didn’t even exist. All that existed was money and the things you could buy and sell with it. So you see, capitalists haven’t changed since their birth in nascent form in Italy 500 years ago. They’ve always been the same and they’ll always be the same. It has to do with a Marxist notion called “the laws of economics.”

Alt Left: The Death of Social Democracy in Europe

If you haven’t noticed, there’s no more social democracy or democratic socialism in Europe. Probably the only thing left is Belarus, Moldova, Turkey, and Russia. Possibly Iceland because they told the banks to go pound sand. Greece elected a Leftist government, Syriza, that quickly went full-blown neoliberal, reportedly out of necessity. What has happened to social democracy is something that any Marxist could have predicted – the incompatibility of even trying to have any sort of socialist society in the midst of a capitalist economy.

The fate of social democracy is the what has always been the fate of social liberalism in the US and its counterpart in Canada and Australia. All of these variants have never been anything but reactionary on foreign policy – smashing the slightest sign of liberalism anywhere in the world if it even dared to peek its head out. Many governments in Latin America were overthrown for the crime of raising the minimum wage.

And most of these were overthrown by “liberal” Democratic governments. Bill Clinton set the stage for the overthrow of Aristide. Aristide’s crime? He dared to raise the minimum wage. He had investments in some factories there. So did Hilary. Hilary overthrew Honduras. The crime? Raising the minimum wage.

Even FDR, the most progressive President of the 20th century, was a raving reactionary freak on foreign policy. “Somoza may be a sonofabitch, but he’s our sonofabitch.”

Teddy Roosevelt was progressive at home but an imperialist brute overseas. “Walk softly and carry a big stick.”

The standard formula for all of these countries has always been some form of liberalism at home combined with hard right or ultra right policies that favored rightwing dictatorships, death squads, the genocide of the Left, and out and out fascism overseas. Liberal at home, reactionary abroad. And now Joe Biden, one of the most liberal Presidents in modern memory, is already treading down the same worn path.

And now the social democracies have undergone the same transformation that social liberalism, etc. has had from the start. One gets the feeling that liberalism or socialism at home in a capitalist country will always have to co-exist with ultra-right, pro-fascist politics overseas. In other words, a foreign policy of imperialism.

Most of Europe is whored to the ultra-rightwing NATO. The EU is for all intents and purposes the civilian state and NATO is the Defense Ministry of that state. Even Sweden, Denmark, and Norway are hard right countries when it comes to their NATO alliance. Finnish foreign policy has always been rightwing, a legacy of their hatred for Russia. Dutch, French, British, and Spanish foreign policy have been horribly rightwing forever now under social democratic and conservative governments both. Indeed in Europe, there is little difference between the two.

Spain strides around Latin America like a brute. Apparently they still think they rule the place as they once did.Most of this involves threats, arm-twisting, sanctions and whatnot every time countries try to assert more control over their resources, which are inevitably being exploited by Spanish corporations. Bolivia’s nationalization of oil and gas is instructive in this regard. The social democratic Spanish government was just as reactionary as the conservative one.

The French are cruel and colonialist towards their former colonies and do not allow any independent governments to form there, especially in Africa. The French and Canadians were deeply involved in the overthrow of Aristide in Haiti, apparently for the crime of raising the minimum wage. In addition, France is still demanding that Haiti repay it for its losses when the slaves of Haiti were freed and the slave-holding families were massacred. France is a social democracy.

The Dutch held a phony inquest in the M17 false flag shootdown where a Ukrainian fighter jet shot down an airliner in order to blame it on Russia. The EU was also deeply involved in this plot and especially the coverup. As were the British and in particular the BBC, the official organ of the British state. The British stole $4 million in gold from Venezuela by confiscating it. British foreign policy mimics US foreign policy in every reactionary thing we do. The UK is a social democracy.

Italy led the charge against Qaddafi and helped steal billions of his gold reserves. Italian corporations also quickly tried to get on Libya’s oil. Italy is a social democracy.

100% of the EU is sanctioning Venezuela for the crime of trying to create a social democracy in America’s backyard. No socialist country would ever sanction Venezuela. Same with Nicaragua. They’re all sanctioning Nicaragua too. Nicaragua’s even less socialist than Venezuela and Norway’s probably a lot more socialist than Venezuela.

So you see, these countries may have some sort of socialism at home (increasingly threadbare) but in foreign policy, it’s straight up full-blown reaction and imperialism, support for rightwing dictatorships and out and out fascists. The reason is simple. The economies of all EU countries are based on their multinational corporations.

Multinational corporations want nothing but rightwing dictatorship, preferably fascist, when they cannot elect hard Right democratic states. These corporations will not tolerate the slightest socialism or even liberalism overseas because they all operate on a predatory model towards the Third World.

Hence the foreign policy of all of the EU “socialist” countries is all about what’s good for the corporations that run their economies. Their corporations wish to go abroad and rape, ruin, exploit, destroy, and stripmine the economies of the Third World by exploiting their resources such that the corporations get almost everything and the countries themselves barely get a nickel.

This has always been the model and it always will be the model. So the EU social democracies have the same problem of the Democratic Party – while they can be leftwing at home to some extent, they all go hard rightwing and pro-fascist and rightwing dictatorship overseas due to their fealty to the corporations that run their economies.

Alt Left: Evidence That Israel Attacked Syria and Lebanon With Nuclear Weapons

RL: The fertilizer only blows up if you mix it with fuel oil.”

Sun Tzu: And this fact free and science free statement takes the gold medal for complete ignorance about Ammonium Nitrate properties.

RL: [The August 2020 Beirut explosion]… was when Israel dropped a tactical nuclear weapon on Lebanon’s wheat supply in silo in the Beirut port. And Hezbollah was blamed…You also fail to notice Robert Lindsay belief in the Israeli Nuke theory @Feb28 6:14 #212. That bit of misdirection was proven false soon after the incident.

Jackrabbit: The nuke theory is known to be false without a doubt. The characteristics of the fireball match that of an Ammonium Nitrate explosion and no radiation was reported.

Sun Tzu: There was no mysterious explosion in Beirut in August 2020. There was a predictable “waiting to happen” detonation of an Ammonium Nitrate Nitrate load unprofessionally stored for years in a port facility near a highly dense population center. There is wilful or criminal neglect of legal and well established international norms and regulations for the storage of dangerous goods UN placards 1942 / UN 2067. What exactly set it off, among the plurality of anecdotal and hearsay versions, is for forensic investigators to determine.

No Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizer Explosion

There was no fireworks factory in the area. The explosion looks nothing at all like a fertilizer explosion. Ammonium nitrate sends up a yellow cloud and this cloud was reddish brown, which makes sense as according to Lebanese intelligence, the warehouse it hit was full of bags of rocks and dirt masquerading as fertilizer. Lebanese intelligence, as noted, said there was no fertilizer.

Anyway, the crater that was blown was so wide it probably could not even have been blown with 280 tons of fertilizer instead of the 2.8 tons that was said to be in there. In other words, the amount of fertilizer said to be in that warehouse was not large enough to blow a crater that size. In addition, the characteristic mushroom cloud seen afterwards is only seen after nuclear blasts. No other weapon can produce such a cloud.

RL: The fertilizer only blows up if you mix it with fuel oil.”

Sun Tzu: And this fact free and science free statement takes the gold medal for complete ignorance about Ammonium Nitrate properties.

Everything I have ever heard says it has to be mixed with fuel oil and then a flame or spark has to be thrown onto it. Otherwise nothing happens. If you drop a bomb on it, it’s like dropping a bomb on a pile of sand. Also notice that the liars who made up this story changed the story after a couple of weeks after this fact came out. The new story said that fuel oil had been absolutely mixed in with the fertilizer mix a couple of years before.

Furthermore, neither ammonium nitrate nor any other explosive device can blow a hole that deep in solid rock.

Evidence for an Israeli Attack with a Tactical Nuclear Weapon

A mining engineer wrote a column saying that no known explosive could blow a crater that deep in solid rock. In fact, all known explosives blow upwards when they hit solid rock. The engineer said that because explosives can’t penetrate down into solid rock, holes must be bored deep into the rock. The explosive is placed deep inside the rock and detonated, as they can blow upwards into rock. The only known explosive that can blow a huge crater in solid rock is a tactical nuclear weapon. This includes bunker busters, which are actually small tactical nukes.

Syrian intelligence told another journalist team that the Beirut blast was caused by Israel bombing Beirut with a “new and experimental weapon.”

They also said that the explosion looked a lot like the one in Syria prior. I have seen photographs of that blast. The two explosion clouds look very similar. It is thought that Israel dropped a tactical nuke on Syria in that attack. I do not know what the target was.

The Russians were suspicious so they sent a team to the site. At the bomb site, the team did find low levels of radiation that could only have come there from a nuclear weapon. Based on video of the blast and the radiation found at the blast site, the Russian team concluded that Israel had bombed Syria with a tactical nuclear weapon. However, the Syrian government has never officially reported this.

No radiation was found in Beirut, sure, but also none was not found, as nobody even looked for any!

Anyway, with tactical nukes, you will only have small amounts of radiation in and around the crater after a day or two. They will linger for a week or so and then disappear. I am aware of a team from the US that arrived in Beirut by plane a day or two after the explosion. They had a lot of equipment with them, including radiation counters. The Lebanese military denied them entry to the country.

The nuclear arms control branch of the UN reported a large wave of radiation at their station in Sicily right around the time of the blast. I saw a printout from their data. The amount of radiation was consistent with either a nuclear explosion or a nuclear reactor failure.

An arms inspector for this UN agency, a Berkeley professor of Physics, reported told a team of journalists that Israel had dropped a tactical nuke on Beirut. The Italian government told a team of journalists that Israel had dropped a tactical nuke on Beirut. An addition, both Lebanese intelligence and the Lebanese military told a team of journalists that Israel had dropped a tactical nuke on Beirut.

Evidence for an Israeli Attack with No Mention of Tactical Nukes

Richard Silverstein reported that his source deep inside the Israeli government reported told him that Israel bombed Beirut and that the target was a Hezbollah missile depot. Israel was basically saying that the fertilizer report was a lie and what really happened was a missile depot was blown up.

Another team of journalists was told by Saudi and UAE intelligence that Israel attacked Beirut and blew up a Hezbollah missile depot. So these two intelligence agencies are also saying there was no fertilizer blast.

The Hezbollah missile depot story was put out by Israel in case the fake fertilizer story washed out. It did wash out, but fools keep repeating it anyway. The purpose was to blame Hezbollah for the blast and casualties by endangering the Lebanese people by carelessly storing missiles at the harbor, thereby leading to a loss of popularity for Hezbollah. This does not seem to have worked. All the usual idiots are sticking with the insipid fertilizer story.

A team of journalists was told by the Pentagon that Israel had attacked Beirut. No mention was made of a nuclear weapon. A group of generals then relayed this information to President Trump. Very soon afterwards, Trump said that the Beirut explosion was the result of a military attack.

Seven Different Countries and the UN Tell Five Different Teams of Journalists That the Blast Was Due to An Attack, with Most Saying It Was an Israeli Attack

We now have people from seven different governments telling five different journalist outfits that the blast was a result of an attack on Beirut.

UN: UN nuclear weapons control agency released a graph showing a large radiation release in the area at their station in Sicily. A US arms inspector for this agency reported that Israel dropped a tactical nuclear weapon on Beirut. (Journalist 1 – Veterans Today)

US: Generals report blast caused by attack on Beirut. Perpetrator and weapon used not named. (Journalist 1 – Veterans Today)

Italy: Government reported that Israel attacked Beirut with a tactical nuclear weapon. (Journalist 1- Veterans Today)

Lebanon: Government, military, and intelligence reported that Israel dropped a tactical nuclear weapon on Beirut harbor. Intelligence said there was no ammonium nitrate in the sacks. There were only sacks filled with rocks and dirt, a result of a six year long Mossad plot the culmination of which was the nuclear bombing of the harbor.

Israel: Source deep inside government said that Israel bombed a Hezbollah missile depot. (Journalist 2 – Richard Silverstein)
An Israeli newspaper quoted a rightwing Israel Congressman as saying that Israel attacked Beirut. I am not sure if he mentioned a missile depot. He also said, “That blast was huge. If I didn’t know any better, I’d think we attacked them with a nuclear bomb.” He was laughing and dancing a victory dance when he said that. That is a very suspicious statement. (Journalist 3)

UAE: UAE intelligence reported that Israel bombed a Hezbollah missile depot. (Journalist 4 – Asia Times)

Saudi Arabia: Saudi intelligence reported that Israel bombed a Hezbollah missile depot. (Journalist 4- Asia Times)

Syria: Syrian intelligence reported that Israel attacked Beirut with an unknown experimental weapon and that it resembled the blast from an attack on Syria a year ago. That blast was later proven by a Russian team of having been a tactical nuclear weapon. The two mushroom clouds look almost identical (Journalist 5 – Voltaire Network)

To reiterate:

Five different teams of journalists were told by seven different governments and the UN that there was at an attack on Beirut.

The same teams were told by five governments and the UN that the attack was the result of Israel bombing the harbor.

Two teams were told by three different governments that Israel either attacked Beirut with a tactical nuclear weapon or with a new and experimental weapon.

One team was told by two different governments that the attack was conducted by Israel with a tactical nuclear weapon.

The “No Bombing Attack” Theory

Wow, talk about complete nonsense! Jets were both heard and seen by hundreds and possibly thousands of Beirutis.

There is video of the Armenian Quarter where men are pointing up in the sky – presumably at jets – and soon afterwards, a terrible blast is heard and debris is flying in the street.

There is a video where you can hear with your very own ears the sound of a fighter jet – it sounded like an F-16 to my ears – roaring in for about 10 seconds, followed by the huge blast. The people making the video can be heard asking, “What’s that?”

How is that hundreds to thousands of Beirutis reporting hearing or seeing jets prior to the blast? Are they all hallucinating?

Why are men in Beirut pointing up to the sky at unknown objects, followed by a huge blast that sends objects flying. Did all of these people hallucinate?

Did I hallucinate when I heard the clear sound a fighter jet for 10 seconds on a video followed by an explosion?

Did the UN fake a graph showing a radiation spike at its Sicily station?

None of this makes sense.

Furthermore we have statements from sources in six different governments telling five separate teams of journalists that the explosion was due to an attack on the harbor, with most of them adding that the attack was done by Israel. Are five different teams of journalists making this up? Were five separate teams of journalists fed false information that Israel attacked Beirut? How likely is any of that?

There were 3-4 US spy planes over Lebanon at the time. They showed up several hours before the attack and left several hours afterwards. US spy planes do not commonly fly over Lebanon. What were they doing there?

The Backstory

A few weeks prior, Israel said that if Hezbollah attacks Israel again, Israel will attack Lebanese economic targets.

Two weeks later and a week before the attack, Israel staged a fake Hezbollah attack on the border. They said a Hezbollah team had tried to plant a bomb on the border but they were eliminated by Israel. Hezbollah said there was no team. This attack was apparently completely made up.

Three days later, Netanyahu issued a speech in which he threatened Hezbollah in some of the strongest language ever used.

Four days later, Israel drops a tactical nuclear weapon on the Beirut harbor, blowing up the grain silo that contains all of Lebanon’s wheat supply for the next month. Notice that this is an attack on the economy.

1. Israel threatens to attack the Lebanese economy if Hezbollah attacks again.

2. Israel stages a fake Hezbollah attack on the border, which can now be followed via the threat by an attack on the Lebanese economy.

3. Israeli leader threatens Hezbollah in a speech containing some of the strongest language ever used.

4. Israel bombs a grain silo in Beirut harbor that contains the next month’s grain supply = attack on Lebanese economy.

Jackrabbit: You also fail to notice Robert Lindsay belief in the Israeli Nuke theory @Feb28 6:14 #212. That bit of misdirection was proven false soon after the incident.

It is most certainly was not proven false.

In fact, seven different states and the UN told five different teams of journalists that the blast was due to a military attack on the harbor, with most saying it was an Israeli attack.

Three different states and the UN said or implied to two teams of journalists that Israel bombed Beirut with a tactical nuclear weapon.

It’s imperative upon the doubters to prove that multiple governments lied and/or that multiple teams of journalists lied or were all fed the same false information. Most of these teams have a good record for advocacy, and half of the governments put out quite reliable information.

The Mossad Plot That Started It All

A team of journalists was informed by Lebanese intelligence that this whole episode was a Mossad plot dating back several years. They discovered that nothing about this ship made any sort of sense. All of the documentation about it was fraudulent, forged, or dishonest. Nothing added up. Mossad purchased a ship in Cyprus. Then they went on a rendezvous of three different countries, supposedly buying fertilizer. The last stop was in Georgia, where the ship purchased 2,800 tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. This is the ultimate source of the “fertilizer” on the ship.

There is a problem with this: Ammonium nitrate fertilizer is not manufactured anywhere in Georgia, so the ship literally could not have bought this cargo there.

According to intelligence, there never was any fertilizer. Instead, the sacks were filled with rocks and dirt. The rocks and dirt labeled ammonium nitrate fertilizer were placed in the warehouse at the dock. They reportedly sat there for a number of years as buyers for the fertilizer supposedly fell through. Obviously there were no fertilizer buyers because there was never any fertilizer in the first place.

In addition, the ship’s owner, a Russian, went bankrupt and lost possession of the ship. This Russian ship owner may have been in on the plot. The fertilizer then had no owner.

Lebanese courts thought that the fertilizer was a hazard and issued a number of orders to remove it from the warehouse. None of these orders were followed. It is hard to explain this part of the story.

That part of the port of Beirut is owned by Lebanese Maronite Falangists, hardcore opponents of Hezbollah who formed the pro-Israel Southern Lebanese Army that enforced the Israeli conquest and annexation of Southern Lebanon. Hezbollah forced the Israelis to leave via continuous deadly or injurious attacks and the SLA had to flee for their lives. Most of them were quickly taken in by Israel but a few went to the US. One was arrested and imprisoned a few years ago when he came back to Lebanon. He was the head of a notorious prison in Southern Lebanon where resistance fighters were imprisoned and tortured.

It is certainly possible that these Falange worked with Israel on this plot. They may have been involved in the refusal to remove the “fertilizer.” We must also note that since the Falange control that part of the port, there is no way that Hezbollah could have stashed missiles there. So the “Hezbollah missile depot” story cannot possibly be true.

The figure of 2,800 tons is important. As noted, the crater of the blast was so large that it is dubious whether even 280,000 tons or 100 times that amount of ammonium nitrate could have blown a hole that big. And no amount of ammonium nitrate could have blown that deep crater in the solid rock below.  As noted, only a nuclear bomb, tactical or otherwise can blow a hole in solid rock. This is why all known bunker buster bombs are actually small tactical nuclear weapons. They have to be.

That the fertilizer was ammonium nitrate is also important. An Italian chemist noted that ammonium nitrate leaves a large yellow cloud when it blows up. The cloud in the explosion was red-brown. The chemist thought that may have been due to the Hezbollah missiles blowing up. But as we now know, there were no Hezbollah missiles. Lebanese President Auon himself said there was no missile depot at the port.

The Aims of the Attack

Also, note that the “fertilizer explosion” or “Hezbollah missile depot blast” occurred only a week before a corrupt UN investigation team was due to convict Hezbollah for killing former President Hariri. However, Hezbollah was framed for this crime as Hariri was actually killed by an Israeli drone overhead. This would be a one-two blow for Hezbollah. Hezbollah would be blamed twice in a week for serious catastrophes that befell the land. The idea was to make Hezbollah lose all its support.

In the event of the fertilizer explosion story, the intent there was to blame the Lebanese government. “The Lebanese government killed 1,000 Lebanese people!” This was then very suspiciously followed by a US-led color revolution supposedly outraged over the government ineptitude that caused the explosion in which a mere 3,000 paid demonstrators managed to overthrow the government. US government regime change specialists were spotted at these demonstrations with huge grins on their faces.

As soon as the government of Lebanon was overthrown, the (((Rothschild-controlled))) President Macron of France flew in and immediately began strongarming the Lebanese government into setting up a new government without any Hezbollah supporters. Lebanon was specifically threatened with consequences if they did not set this government up.

The US then put crushing sanctions of Lebanon that wrecked its economy. With the addition of a banking crisis that also collapsed the economy, the idea was to wreck the economy to make people so angry they would throw out the pro-Hezbollah government. It hasn’t worked yet.

In other words, the entire aim of the attack was to get Hezbollah out of the Lebanese government and marginalized in Lebanese society.

Very Suspicious Concurrent Attacks

The very next day after the attacks, US forces blew up several grain silos in Syria. Note that Israel’s attack blew up Lebanon’s entire supply of grain. So the US attack on Syria’s grain is concurrent with an Israeli attack on Lebanese grain. The US blowing up Syrian grain silos does not fit with an accidental fertilizer explosion. Why would we bomb grain silos because some fertilizer blew up?

In the next couple of days, a series of fires broke out at food warehouses in the southern Shia part of Iraq. Israel or the US is suspected. So the connection? In all three cases, food supplies for pro-Iranian populations were destroyed. The Lebanese people support Hezbollah by 65%. Their food was blown up. Syria supports Iran. Their bread was blown up too. The Shia in Southern Iraq support Iran. Their food supplies caught fire. The day after, a huge Iranian-owned mall in the UAE went up in flames. Israel or the US is suspected again.

Lebanon: Attack on Hezbollah and the people of Lebanon for supporting Hezbollah and Iran by blowing up the country’s supply of bread.

Syria: Attack on Syria, a pro-Iranian government, by blowing up the country’s supply of bread.

Iraq: Attack on the Iran-supporting Shia of Iraqi South by destroying their food supply.

UAE: Attack on Iran by setting an Iranian-owned shopping mall on fire, destroying it.

Why would an accidental fertilizer explosion just happen to destroy a country’s food supply. Why would it be followed by attacks on the food supply of two other populations which just happen to support Iran? Why would it also be followed by the destruction by fire of a shopping mall in the UAE that just happens to be owned by Iran?

All four of these attacks were obviously coordinated. Accidents are not followed by coordinated attacks destroying similar things that got destroyed in the accident. All attacks were against either Iran, or pro-Iranian armed groups, governments and populations.

Starting to get the picture?

The Coverup

A team of journalists was told by the Lebanese military and intelligence that all parties had agreed to cover up this incident and go with the fake fertilizer story. The Lebanese government wanted to cover it up so as not to spread panic in the population. Also it made the government look very weak in the face of Israeli aggression. Hezbollah wanted it covered up too because they have no effective response or deterrent now that the Israelis are using nuclear weapons against their adversaries.

They felt it would lead to disillusionment and defeatist thinking on the part of the Lebanese people with a resulting loss of support for Hezbollah: “Hezbollah is impotent to defend us against Israeli nuclear weapons, so why support them? Let’s just surrender. The war’s over.” In addition, Iran also wished to cover it up because they have no effective response to Israeli nuclear weapons either and admitting this might lead to similar disillusionment and defeatism on the part of the population. “Just surrender to the US and Israel already. We can’t win.”

As noted above, there is excellent evidence that Israeli dropped a tactical nuclear weapon on Syria about a year before the Beirut blast. The Syrian government has not admitted this for the same reasons as the Lebanese, Hezbollah, and Iran above.

Israel will of course never admit to using tactical nuclear weapons for fear it would set off an increase in anti-Israel sentiments in the world. However, considering how Israel-cucked the US and increasingly the EU is, not to mention the Arab sellouts and traitors, I think a lot of the world would probably cheer that Israel was nuking the Arabs.s

The US will also not admit to using tactical nuclear weapons. Any mention of this will be relegated to the usual conspiracy theory tinfoil hat territory. We reasonably fear an increase in anti-US sentiment after such a revelation. But considering how US-cucked the Europeans are, I’m wondering if they wouldn’t cheer that America is dropping nukes on those dirty Muslims.

Israel started using tactical nukes as early as 2008 when they used them against the Hezbollah resistance. A very suspicious blast was investigated soon afterwards by a Russian team and they indeed found abnormal levels of radiation at the site. The Russians concluded that Israel had used a tactical nuclear weapon against Hezbollah.

There is now excellent evidence that the US used a few to several tactical nuclear weapons (bunker busters) against Al Qaeda’s cave fortifications at Tora Bora. In addition, we now know that the first US use of tactical nuclear weapons was in the first Iraq War in 1991, when we dropped a tactical nuclear weapon 13 miles east of Basra. This marked the first use of a tactical nuclear weapon by a military in the modern era.

Alt Left: About Those “Iran-backed Militias”

That phrase doesn’t mean much. All it means is that this is an armed group in the Middle East who opposes US and Israeli hegemony. This includes Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Houthis, the Afghan Shia militias, and the PMF division of the Iraqi Army.

None of those groups takes orders from Iran. The group that we bombed does not take orders from Iran and they receive neither funding nor weapons from Iran. They are simply allied with the Iranian government.

In the case of the Houthis, there are Iranian advisors embedded in the group that help them plan and carry out some attacks. Iran sends weapons prototypes of missiles, rockets, and drones and then the Houthi modify them into their own native products. There are also Iranian advisors embedded in the Houthi forces.

In addition, Iranian advisors help the Houthi carry out some attacks. For instance, Iran helped plan and carry out the Houthi attack from Yemen against the Aramco oil refinery in Saudi Arabia. The US said Iran launched the attack from a base in Southern Iran, but that’s not true. We made that up because we would rather blame Iran than the Houthis for the attack.

It is important to realize that the US government, especially the State Department, CIA, and Pentagon, lie constantly when it comes to US foreign policy against nations we consider our adversaries. And all major US news organizations get a lot of their foreign policy stories directly from the CIA.

Look up Operation Mockingbird. In this plan, the CIA had most of the top journalists in the US on its payroll, so in essence, the CIA was controlling almost every major press organ in the US. The owners of these media groups knew that they were under CIA control, but they didn’t mind because the US media always agrees with whatever aims the CIA and State Department has as the CIA and the American ruling class and corporations share the same aims. When it comes to opposition to US foreign policy in regard to our adversaries, there is no major opposition media in the US. Our press is as controlled as PRAVDA was in the USSR.

That is why it is important to be dubious to say the least about any foreign policy news story you read about a nation deemed an enemy of the US. Every single story you read about that country or group is going to be propaganda in one way or another. Stop believing the US media! Stop believing the US government! Stop believing the Pentagon! They’re all lying to you.

Alt Left: More on Republican Election Theft Via Voting Machines

The Republicans have been using voting machines to steal elections since 2002. Apparently they have access to the software in the ESS machines somehow. And it looks like ESS is in on it. Diebold was in on it in the past. All the voting machine companies are run by radical rightwing Republicans. The plot started with Karl Rove and Jack Abraham’s HAVA or Help America Vote Act in 2002.

Our elections haven’t been right ever since. This is an operation being run by Karl Rove. Rove is on record as telling a woman that when it is within 3%, we can steal the election, but when it is more than that, we can’t because it looks too bad. But in this last election they tried to steal elections where they were 8-10 points down, so I guess they’re even chucked that courtesy.

The voting machine companies are in on it too, in particular ESS. They are owned by members of the Bush and Romney families, so it looks like the Bushes and Romneys are in on the election theft. McDonnell at least knows about. Trump stole the election in 2016 with machines. Same with Bush in the 2004 election. I do not think the Republicans have access to the Dominion machines anymore now that they have been sold. That’s why Georgia elections are pretty fair.

Look up a book called Red Shift. It documents the whole plot.

No one believes it. People I know have been screaming at the major media and the Democratic Party for years about this, but no one will touch it with a 10 foot pole. It’s “conspiracy theory.” Also these clowns say we can’t admit to that because “It will cause Americans to lose faith in our democracy.”

A lot of those Republican state governments were stolen in the same way. Now they are so gerrymandered that the Democrats can’t possibly win. To get back control of the Wisconsin Legislature, Democrats have to win 65% of the vote in the state – that’s how gerrymandered it is. A simple 51% won’t cut it anymore.

The “massive poll and exit poll failures” only started in 2002 with the placement of voting machines in our elections. Before that they were on the money. Aggregate polls and exit polls are never off in any fair election. When the results don’t match the aggregate polls and exit polls, it’s always due to fraud.

The Democrats are insane. They are willing to let the Republicans completely destroy the country and even our democracy so “Americans won’t lose faith in our democracy.” Idiots!

Alt Left: Israeli Ship Attacked in the Persian Gulf

First of all, Iran is not interested in directly striking US forces. Yes, they are committed to ejecting the US from the area, but that project has been outsourced to its armed allies in the region, should they wish to carry it out. Hezbollah, the PMF, and the Houthis are interested in attacking the US and they don’t take orders from Iran anyway. Instead the base attacks are being done by small underground Shia guerrilla groups and no one seems to know who they even are.

After the US bombed the Iraqi Army in Syria, falsely blaming it for mortar attacks on US bases, soon afterwards, an Israeli sea liner was attacked in the Persian Gulf. There were several small holes maybe three feet across in the hull. First reports said that the ship hit mines. It’s not from mines because the damage is above the water line and mines have to blow up underwater.

The information I am getting from Iranian sources is that the attack was done by either drones or cruise missiles. I don’t know who carried it out or from where. Yes, the possibility exists that it is a US or Israeli false flag and we or Israel attacked the ship, but there are some reasons that might not be true. First of all, The owner is one of the richest men in Israel, and he is very close to the head of Mossad, Yossi Cohen. So it may be a symbolic strike.

Why would they US or Israel do a symbolic strike against the head of Mossad? That doesn’t add up. It’s a very sneaky thing to do and it’s just the sort of symbolism-laden attack that devious intelligence agencies like to carry out. A lot of intelligence agency operations is psychological operations intended to terrorize and terrify the enemy. That is why intelligence agency attacks often occur on certain devious anniversaries of significant events. It’s like a murder mystery. They’re leaving clues. It’s also very creepy and the intent of intelligence agencies is to creep out the enemy.

Also, note that for his shipping company,  having  his ships attacked like this is nothing short of disastrous. International shipping operates in tight schedules and deadlines and the idea that your ships have a tendency to get attacked is extremely bad for this man’s business as ports may not want to accept his ships due to the hazards.

A couple of months ago, an Iranian hit team eliminated a high ranking Mossad officer in Tel Aviv and managed to escape.

This follows an earlier attack a year ago where Iran helped the Taliban shoot down a US CIA spy-plane in Afghanistan. “Ayatollah Mike” Mike DeAndrea, a high ranking CIA agent who runs the Iran file, was said to be on the plane along with five other CIA officers. The claim was discounted in all of the Western press, and he was said to be quite alive. However, my information is that Mike has not been seen since that attack, so I am thinking he was killed.

I used to think Mossad was the best spy agency, but I must say that Iran intelligence is getting pretty damn good. They figured out that Mike was on that CIA plane and gave the Taliban missiles to shoot it out. Sounds like Iranian intelligence has penetrated the CIA somehow.

They knew who that Mossad colonel was, what kind of car he drove, and where he would be at a given time and place. No one knows any of these things, and the names of Mossad officers are not made public. It sounds like Iranian intelligence has penetrated the Mossad!

And now this ship is hit, a ship owned by one of the richest men in Israel who is also close to the head of Mossad, Yossi Cohen. Looks like a symbolic strike at Mossad again. I wonder how many people know that the man who owns this ship is tight with the head of Mossad. That can’t be common information.

Alt Left: Why Do “Liberal Democrats” Support US Foreign Policy to the Hilt?

Why do Americans support US foreign policy? Part of it might be apathy. They simply can’t be bothered. Americans don’t seem to care how many bombs we drop or people we kill as long as no Americans are getting hurt or killed. It’s a pretty sociopathic way of looking at the world.

Actually, it is not so much that they don’t care as they are brainwashed. Just about every “liberal Democrat” I know supports US foreign policy to the hilt. Every bomb we drop, every person we kill. They back it all the way. As finding out the truth about US foreign policy necessitates figuring out the constant to  regular lies, tricks, provocations, and false flags, a reality-based assessment of US foreign policy quickly starts looking like very quickly like conspiracy theory.

Most “liberal Democrats” reject all so-called “conspiracy theory,” no matter how true it is, even when the MSM uncovers it.

Of course it is the MSM pushing all of these lies, scams, tricks, cons, and false flags, so they almost never blow the whistle on the conspiracy theory. Even when they do, no one seems to care. I remember the NY Times proved that the mortar attack that killed the US contractor was done by ISIS, not be the PMF. Most “liberal Democrats” I know just said so what, the PMF has probably done other bad things.

Liberal Democrats are horrific on foreign policy. Democratic Party foreign policy has always been reactionary. But all the Democrats in Congress go along with it and so does the media. It’s very hard to get Congressmen to go against US foreign policy, and the media basically never does, as they get most such news from the CIA anyway. Remember Operation Mockingbird?

There is a “bipartisan foreign policy consensus.” It was smashed with Vietnam, and the Deep State regarded this with horror and spent decades trying to get rid of the “Vietnam Syndrome.”

Now the consensus is back. Part of the problem is that in order to go against US foreign policy, you need to side with the so-called enemies of America. When Democrats go against foreign policy, Republicans immediately accuse them of supporting the enemies of America.

But it all goes deeper than that. I’ve thought about it a lot and when liberal Democrats can oppose US domestic policy, they are not saying America is bad. America’s just fine. It’s just the evil Republicans who are bad. America itself is still good. It’s just been hijacked by bad people.

But when you attack US foreign policy, you are attacking the Army! And basically you are saying that America is bad, America is evil. Because foreign policy is never seen as basically good but only bad when it gets hijacked by bad people called Republicans. Instead it’s that US foreign policy under Republicans and Democrats is always 100% good. It’s always America itself that is doing this or that BS overseas. In order to attack US foreign policy, you have to say that America itself is bad or evil.

The vast majority of liberal Democrats don’t want to say that. A lot of them just believe the “America is 100% good” line. Others probably don’t want to be seen as traitors and America-haters. Patriotardism is the religion in America, even among liberals. And exceptionalism is the foundational myth of America that never went away.

Bottom line is “liberal Democrats” are complete crap. There’s nothing liberal about them! I respect Republicans more than these phonies. Republicans come right out and say they’re reactionaries and then act like them. At least they are consistent and true to their word. Liberal Democrats claim to be progressive but govern as reactionaries.

Ever notice that BLM and other woketards never attack US foreign policy? Like not even one time? Ever notice that they don’t even talk about economics? See? All they talk about is divide the working class Identity Politics Cultural Left insanity. Which for some odd reason gets the complete support of the US corporate class for reasons that are still uncertain for me. Those “hip, woke” corporations are still totally reactionary, like all corporations, on economics and foreign policy. They’re just left on cultural BS that doesn’t effect their bottom line or basic philosophy.

Alt Left: Blockbuster Report: Who Are the Iraqi Shia Guerrilla Groups That Are Attacking US Bases in Iraq?

Biden bombed the Iraqi Army in Syria on the Syrian border yesterday. Anywhere from 1 Iraqi Army soldier was killed and two were wounded. The only known casualty is a Sunni member of that division. The force there is known as the PMF, a pro-Iran militia that was formed a few years ago to fight ISIS in Iraq. The US calls the PMF an “Iranian militia,” but that’s not what they are. They were formerly independent but now they have been incorporated into the Iraqi Army itself. Probably most members are Shia, but there are also Sunnis, Christians, Yezidis, and Sabeans, in addition to both Kurds and Arabs in the PMF.

The group that Biden attacked is not really the group that carried out the attacks on US bases. US bases have been getting rocketed and mortared recently for some months now. The attacks are being claimed by shadowy, illegal underground Shia guerrilla formations. The US claims that these guerrillas are nothing but the PMF in disguise, but that’s not exactly true.

The following information about the nature of the illegal Shia guerrilla formations attacking US bases in Iraq comes from Elijah J. Magnier, a 30-year veteran war correspondent who has deep contacts in the Iranian and Iraqi governments and also in the PMF. His reporting has generally been on the money in the past. He is quite straightforward and puts little if any spin on his material, so it tends to be quite objective.

First of all, you must understand that Iraq is a very weak state and the Presidency is even weaker. Many Iraqis have decided for themselves to act independently to wage attacks on US forces, as they are seen as occupiers. The Iraqi government has ordered the US forces to leave Iraq, but the US has thumbed its nose at Iraq and says it’s not leaving! What arrogance. Hence, patriotic-minded Iraqis have taken it upon themselves to form guerrilla formations to attack the US bases and Embassy.

The question I have been asking for a long time now is, “Who exactly are these shadowy underground Shia guerrillas? Are they really just the PMF as the US  says?”

I have now learned who these groups are, but it is complicated.

As noted, many Iraqis have taken it upon themselves to act independently to attack US bases and embassies. In this role they are acting independently of the Iraqi Army and the PMF because the Army and the PMF are not interested in attacking the US in Iraq at the moment for a variety of reasons. These guerrillas are mostly Shia and use Shia names and symbols. They do not take orders from Iran. They don’t take orders from anyone.

To give you an example of their independence from Iran, Iran is not happy that these Shia guerrillas are attacking the US Embassy because Iran is opposed to  attacking anyone’s embassies or diplomatic missions. This is one lesson they have learned from 1979. However, these guerrillas march to their own drummer. They simply do what they want.

These guerrilla groups are known to locals because they operate in certain locales, so these are local Shia Iraqis who have formed illegal armed formations. They are very hard to find and catch because when they are not moonlighting as guerrillas, they hide in the Iraqi Army, the federal police, and the PMF. The Iraqi government is not interested in uncovering these forces anyway.

So the guerrillas are members of the Iraqi Army, federal police, and PMF who go off on their own to moonlight as guerrillas and carry out attacks on US targets and then return to their units to hide. They operate independently of all three units of the security forces.

One major question is where do they get their arms and funding. All of Iraq is a weapons depot anyway, so weapons should not be hard to find. I assumed that they were getting funding and arms from Iran, but I was wrong. The funding and arming of these Shia guerrillas who are attacking our bases comes directly from the Iraqi government itself. Nevertheless, even though they take a paycheck from the Iraqi government, they act on their own. They use Iraqi  military weaponry on their own too. They take it from Iraqi security forces arms depots.

If you are wondering why the Iraqi government doesn’t step in and disarm or at least try to find these Shia guerrillas, the truth is that no one can go against these groups. They are too powerful and have too much support. Look at the situation with Moqtada al-Sadr. The Iraqi government cannot tell Sadr what to do either. He’s too powerful. He gets to do whatever he wants. As I noted above, political and military structures in Iraq are weak.

There are different tendencies in the Iraqi Shia, and it comes down to the individual level. Even within the PMF itself, there are Iraqi Shia who are obedient followers of Iran, others that are pro-Iran but act independently, and others who are anti-Iranian Iraqi nationalists associated with the Marjaya religious establishment around Ayatollah Sistani in Najaf. There are also Sunnis and members of other confessions.

Also, the PMF takes orders from the Iraqi government, not from anyone else, including Iran. None of the “Iranian-backed militias” ever took orders from Iran. They would meet with the Iranians and Iranians might give them a list of possible attacks they might carry out. Then they could choose from the list. For example, to show you how that these groups do not take orders from Iran, wanted the Houthis to advance on San’a early in the war, but the Houthis decided not to turned them down as they thought it was too risky at the time.

Iran doesn’t even give orders to Hezbollah. But they don’t need to as Iran and Hezbollah have aims and philosophies that are in great accord with each other.

Alt Left: That $15/Hour Minimum Wage

The Democrats are trying to push a bill that will raise the federal minimum wage to $15/hour. This is part of the Push for Fifteen movement sponsored by labor and the Left in general, especially the Bernie Sanders crowd.

This is part of the Democrats’ $1.9 billion COVID relief package. I generally support this, and the $1,400 is certainly much needed, especially around these parts, as in, my humble abode.

However, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Krysten Sinema of Arizona, the  two most conservative Democrats in the Senate, vow to oppose the $15/hour minimum wage. Well, good for them! See? Here I am, rooting for the most conservative Democrats in the Senate. I think that shows more than anything else how insane and extreme the modern Democratic Party is on so many issues. I never support conservative Democrats on anything!

Manchin somehow always manages to get re-elected in a state that Trump won by 39 points in 2016 and 29 points this time around. But West Virginia has a long tradition of electing conservative Democrats. Remember Robert Byrd? Sinema managed to win in purple Arizona, long a very conservative state, home of Barry Goldwater after all. She probably won by billing  herself as a conservative Democrat. Just to show you that conservatives are as woke as liberals nowadays, Sinema is openly bisexual. The Culture War is over. The Left won. Time to pull down the flag and go home, social conservatives.

Manchin and Sinema are proposing an $11/hour minimum wage. Well that lifts families of one and two persons out of poverty at least. It leaves families of three $1,000 short and families of four $4,500 short. I don’t mind this compromise. I’d prefer $12/hour, but I will settle for $11. Anything’s better than $7.25/hour.

Mitt Romney and Tom Cotton (Tom Cotton! He’s one the most rightwing people in the Senate!) are proposing a slow increase in  the minimum wage to $10/hour in 2025. I guess it raises at ~60 cents an hour. That seems awful meager.

And it’s also linked to E-Verify, and mandates all employers to use it. I believe it submits the worker’s Social Security # if he even has one and sees if they are eligible to work in the US.

You realize that illegal aliens engage in mass identity theft of other people’s social security #’s, right? You all think that’s ok? Why is that ok? How would you like it if some crook who sneaked into your country illegal was using your SS# to steal a job from an American citizen or legal immigrant.

This E-Verify is utterly reasonable. How this is unreasonable is beyond me. Insanely, the ACLU went to court to put an injunction on E-Verify at the federal level, apparently because it messes up sometimes. Oh, my God! Something doesn’t work right all the time! So let’s throw it out and never use it!  Try applying that to every object you own and see how that works.

I completely support full implementation of E-Verify at the federal level. Maybe then we can get a lot of these damned illegals to self-deport.

For some insane reason, the Democratic Party is opposed to E-Verify! Why?! Do illegal aliens automatically have a right to work in this country? No other country on Earth allows such nonsense. Go to any country on Earth and try to work if you’re not a citizen or a legal immigrant. Good luck with that. But we are America, and the whole damn world has a right to sneak in here anytime they want!

Biden also opposes E-Verify. Why, for God’s sake? What in the Hell is their reason? What good reason is there to oppose such a completely reasonable measure?

The present minimum wage is way too low. It’s $ 7.25/hour. It’s been stuck there since 2009. Obviously it needs raising. Question is by how much. It is stated that the present minimum wage is not a living wage. I haven’t the faintest idea what a living wage even means. What in the Hell does that mean?

$7.25/hour definitely puts a single worker above the poverty line. That’s all I think the minimum wage should do. Poverty level is ~$13,000/year for one person. Try living on that sometime. Good luck!

Family of two? $17,420. With the present federal minimum wage, a family of two would live in poverty. That’s not ok. You would need a minimum wage of $9/hour to lift that family out of poverty.

Family of three? $23,000. Well, you would need a minimum wage of $11.75/hour to lift them out of poverty.

Family of four? $26,500. You need a minimum wage of $13.50 to raise that family out of poverty.

What is the purpose of a minimum wage? If it is to keep one person out of poverty, the present wage is fine. If it is to keep a family of two out of poverty, we need to go up to $9/hour. If it is to keep a family of three out of poverty, we need a minimum wage of $11.75/hour to raise them out of poverty. Is it to raise a family of four out of poverty? Then we need to raise it to $13.50/hour.

We can also go by the historical minimum wage. It was at its highest level in 1968, when it was the equivalent of $12.20/hour. I say to raise it to that level. Raise the minimum wage to $12.25/hour to match it with the highest it ever was in the past.  Reasonable, right? It also lifts a family of three out of poverty, though a family of four is still $2,000 below the poverty line.

Someone needs to tell me what the ideal purpose of the minimum wage is? To raise a family of one out of poverty? A family of two? A family of three? A family of four?

Here in California, we have a minimum wage of $12/hour. That’s $24,000/year. That seems like quite an acceptable minimum wage for these parts. I would certainly be happy to make that much money.

I’m quite dubious about a $15/hour minimum wage. That just sounds way too high. Why not raise it to $50/hour then if we are going to keep jacking it up. Why stop at 15?

Alt Left: US, UAE, Saudi, and Israeli Support for ISIS in Syria and Yemen

In Yemen, the UAE and Israel have formed an alliance. The UAE has been close to ISIS for a long time. A while back, 3,000 ISIS fighters were moved from Syria to Yemen by the Saudis and UAE to help fight the Houthis. At the moment, the UAE-Israel alliance is supporting ISIS in Southern Yemen.

The southern army that the US, the UK, UAE, and Israel are supporting is mostly ISIS. They were used to defeat Al Qaeda in the south for whatever reason, and of course they have been used against the Houthis. Marib is ready to fall again because the pro-Saudi Hadi forces never wanted to fight in the first place and are now refusing to fight to save Marib.

This army has been mostly hired mercenaries, often Sudanese, for a long time. Others are tribal fighters who are just in it for the money. They don’t seem to fight very well, possibly because mercenary armies tend to be lousy armies. Many of the tribal fighters have been going AWOL recently, saying they’ve been used.

The Houthis besieging Marib and calling on the mercenary army that give up and fight with the Houthis. They are calling them”misled brothers who were led astray by propaganda.” This is very smart of the Houthis. Get the other army to surrender and go over to your side!

At the moment, the mercenaries are largely simply refusing to fight at all in Marib and the Houthis are advancing. The other day they were not just refusing to fight but they were fleeing the scene of the battle. The mercenaries who refuse to fight and are running away from battle are presently being bombed  by the Saudi Air Force. The Saudis are bombing their own mercenary army!

If the Houthis take Marib, the pro-Saudi forces are screwed badly. So Israel and the UAE are now assembling a large ISIS army to supplant the tribal forces that were formerly in the army. This ISIS army may be sent into try to save Marib.

The Israel-UAE forces are starting to get worried. Yes, you heard me right.Once again, we see Israel supporting ISIS. The UAE has been supporting ISIS forever now. The UAE and Israel recently conquered and annexed Yemeni territory on Socorro Island off the southwestern coast. The Israelis are rumored to have set up a base there. Yes, you read that right. Israel and the UAE have literally conquered Yemeni land, stated that they own it now, and have set up a base there. And you wonder why I hate these Israelis so much…

The US has been supporting all of this of course.

Israel openly states that they are supporting ISIS in Syria. They want ISIS to take over and defeat Assad. In the Bukmal corridor of US-occupied Syria, the US has been training ISIS for a long time. They just give them a new name and send them out to fight. Whenever Assadist forces or pro-Iranian elements of the Iraqi Army got close to Bukmal (ISIS Central), the US has bombed them. In two incidents, 30 Iraqi Army soldiers were killed and in another, 30 members of a pro-Assad militia were killed.

Major intelligence agencies, including the CIA, recently met with ISIS and confirmed that they will support ISIS taking up arms again in Eastern Syria.

The US has conducted bombing missions in conjunction with ISIS attacks on Syrian forces. That’s why the US is now called the Air Force of ISIS.

ISIS killed two Russian generals a while back with sniper fire. There’s no way ISIS could do that on their own. The US must have helped them.

US Special Forces regularly drive by ISIS positions and do nothing, as there is an informal true in many areas.

The US allowed ISIS to occupy an area north of Bukmal for a long time and refused to attack them for many months while they attacked Assad.

Finally after months of extreme pressure, the US started attacking ISIS.

So you can see, the Deep State relationship with ISIS is very strange. We support ISIS in Syria and Yemen, but we also attack them sometimes a while back in all three countries. This is typical Deep State stuff. Support a group and then attack them sometimes if they get too out of hand. It’s interesting that ISIS in Syria and Iraq rarely attacks US forces. I wonder why?

Alt Left: Jewish Pro-Israel Political Power in the US: Some Recent Trends

Most Presidents come into office shekeled to the hilt in one way or another. Hence most US Presidents owe the Jews bigtime for their election. The Jews bribed them. So they don’t want to offend this group and the only way to do that is to support Israel to the hilt.

Lately support has been plunging among Democrats and young people, even young Jews. The Jewish Establishment in the US (some of the worst humans on Earth) is visibly worried about this trend. There are all sorts of projects to reverse this trend. The disgusting ADL headed by Abe Foxman is in the forefront of most of these efforts. They usually involve some sort of lying, cheating, stealing, sleazy hardball amoral tactics, fakery, conspiracy, saying one thing and doing another, etc. They can usually count on the US media and the US government to mirror whatever the Hell it is that the US  Jewish establishment wants to do.

Alt Left: About That “Russian” Hack of Our Sensitive and Classified Data

You know the story where they say “Russia” hacked into all of this secret government websites? Got some news for you. It didn’t happen.

They’re lying through their teeth. The had no idea whatsoever who did it or if they did, they didn’t want to put the finger on them. It was an extremely sophisticated operation beyond the reach of many countries, granted. And it could only have been by a sophisticated country, grant it.  But look at the evidence.

“It has all the hallmarks of a Russian operation.”

They keep saying this about everything that happens that they don’t understand. I guess “hallmarks of Russia” just means some sophisticated operation. They’ve never presented any evidence that Russia was behind any of these things they’ve accused it of. They just put the finger on them whenever they figure out who did something. They failed to present any evidence whatsoever of any Russian involvement in this attack. IT people who looked at the internals of the attack said it was sophisticated, but there was no evidence to pin on Russia.

So, Russia didn’t do it. Ok? Take my word on that.  So who did it?

We have now figured out who seems to have done this massive spy operation. All roads in the investigation lead to…Israel! I don’t know the details right now but it has something to do with that Four Winds company and their software. The company is Israeli-owned. The software is written by Israelis. Whitney Webb  has all the details, as usual. Check her out. She’s a “conspiracy theorist,” but  every single thing  she writes checks out.

I was talking to a very connected former Marine on the phone one time a while back. I have no idea why he talked to me. He seemed to know just about everything about everything, specializing in intelligence and especially military matters. I brought up Israeli influence in the US, and he said, “Yeah we got totally penetrated by them in the early 80’s, I think 1983, and we’ve never been able to get rid of them since.”

We have literally handed over the locks and keys to this country to Israel. They get whatever the Hell they want.  We’ve given them backdoors to much of our state dealings. There are rumors that they spy and gather blackmail material on high up US government officials.

It’s particularly outrageous how we have handed over our spy network and security apparatus to these people. Homeland Security. You got it. I was stunned when I did research on Homeland Security. Almost all of their apparatus had been handed over to Israeli firms. Much of our internal spying apparatus in the US has been handed over to Israeli firms as has  airport security, etc.

A lot of the training our rather brutal police forces has been done by Israel, which probably accounts for the brutality. The idea is that Homeland Security and the US state are using all of these apparatuses to spy on us and do security for us. But the nuts and bolts were outsourced to Israel. You don’t think they might be listening in?

I’d trust one of those people as far as I could throw them. They’re some of the least trustworthy people out there. I assume that Israel has simply taken over a lot of our internal security and spying operations. Phone network spying? Check, Israeli. Cell phone network? Check, Israeli. It seems Israel could have access to much of our phone communication. And why are they running our security apparatus, say at airports?

There are a lot of new surveillance mechanisms and apparatuses coming online. Scary stuff. Guess who’s in back of a lot of them? Yep. Israel.

It was Israel who penetrated all of those secret US sites and classified material. I don’t know why they bothered. They could have just asked and we probably would have handed it over. Israel’s been spying on us for a very long time now. My understanding is that the government is pretty well “penetrated” by Israeli spies. Further a number of American Jews in the US government have repeatedly been caught acting as de facto agents of Israel, in other words, agents of a foreign power. That’s illegal but no one persecutes them because Jews get to do whatever they want to in these stupid country.

Alt Left: What’s With US’ Fanatical Support for Israel?

Judeophilia, shekeling, or blackmail? Which is it?

I don’t get it. From the sound of it, Americans are just Judeophiles. Polls repeatedly show support for Israel  around 50% and often a majority towards 60%. Doesn’t sound good but support for Palestinians is generally ~15% with not much upward trend.

Sure it seems like the US is simply a bunch of Jew-loving fools, fanatical Judeophiles. Well, fine, but that’s pretty stupid. Why don’t we hand the country over to Swedes or Vietnamese, or Hmong, or Cubans, or Japanese, or whoever. What are the Jews? Just another ethnic group; in other words, a tribe of humans. Tell me why they are so special?

To me they’re no more special than the Ingush, the Tigreans, the Karens, the Garifura, the Muong, the Naga, the Yakuts, the Han, the Basques, the Azeris, the Kyrgyz, the Akan, the Mapuche or name any nationality where the people are of a certain type. The Jews are just another pissant little petty tribe of humans that don’t want any special treatment positive of negative. Who cares about them. Sure, but why hand over the keys of the kingdom to this petty and fanatically ethnocentric tribe or ethnic group. What’s the point?

On the other hand, there might be the shekeling. Both political parties are shekeled to the hilt. Jewish money provides 60% of the funding for the Democrats and 30% for the Republicans. Presumably most politicians are taking money from AIPAC, the rightwing organization that encompasses most pro-Israeli organizations in the US.

Every now and then, every President and many Senators make a sojourn to the AIPAC convention to fall all over themselves with their love for the wonderful Jewish people and Israel. The fawning is almost suspect. Are they paid off with campaign contributtions? The fanatical love that US politicians even at the state level have for this shitty little country is hard to figure. There’s something weird about it. It doesn’t seem normal.

On the other hand, are they being blackmailed? The Epstein Affair was a Mossad honeypot operation using underage girls to get powerful US men in business and government on film having sex with underage girls. All of the men having sex with those underage girls were filmed by Epstein. He kept these in a safe.

The FBI reportedly confiscated many of these blackmail tapes. Suspiciously, absolutely nothing has come of it though no doubt there are tapes of many prominent men committing statutory rape or illegal intercourse with underage girls. Why won’t the FBI prosecute these men? What’s up with that? It’s been rumored for some time that Israel is in possession of a tape of Bill Clinton having sex with a 13 year old girl and they used this to blackmail him.

The Epstein operation has been proven to have been run by Mossad. Epstein was a Mossad asset. He was recruited in 1986 and he stayed an Israeli asset for the next 34 years. At some point, he started his blackmail operations. Ghislane Maxwell, his partner in crime, is absolutely a Mossad asset. Her father Robert Maxwell was an out and out Mossad spy. He was one of the richest men in the UK, ran a huge media network and was probably one of the worst men on Earth. A real scumbag. Spent his whole life lying, cheating, thieving, conspiring, sleazing out, backstabbing, and apparently blackmailing.

At some point he was apparently running the same blackmail operation for Israel that Epstein was running. These operations are called brownstones based on the fact that they used to be housed in brownstone buildings. The CIA has reportedly run brownstones with underage teenage girls, boys and possibly even prepubescent children (!!) all over the world for decades.

These are full of cameras and the CIA uses these houses to get powerful men on tape having sex with underage people, hence they are blackmailed by the CIA. Oh, and the CIA runs the US media more or less. The whole US media works closely with the CIA. Look up Operation Mockingbird. So these blackmail tapes can be suddenly leaked to the media should any of the blackmailees prove disobedient to the CIA. A lot of powerful men are being blackmailed this way.

Reportedly, somebody is in possession of a tape of Lindsay Graham having sex with an underage teenage boy and somebody is using this to blackmail him. This might explain his sudden 180 degree flips on various political matters and his wanton worship of some politicians, notably Trump this last time around.

Alt Left: More on an Older US False Flag: The MH17 Jet Shootdown

People have been pointing to Bellingcat’s (CIA, MI6) faked analysis of the MH17 in which the West tried to frame the pro-Russian rebels in Eastern Ukraine and by extension Russia herself for the shootdown of the jet which was actually a false flag done by an (((Ukrainian oligarch billionaire))), a (((complete psychopath))) who is the leader of a large Ukrainian province. He has airbases there that he runs as his own private military bases.

He hatched this plot and carried it out from an airbase in his province. He kept it so secret that the Ukrainian military and Interior Department was shocked when it happened.  Witnesses in the Kiev control room said panicked Interior Ministry officials were asking, “Why did we shoot down that jet?” They then confiscated all recordings of the incident.  However, we know about this because a Spanish air controller working in Kiev live-tweeted the whole thing. I was there while he was live tweeting this in real time. It was pretty shocking.

The passenger jet was shot down by a Ukrainian air force jet. Many people on the ground in the rebel controlled area actually witnessed the jet shoot down the plane. A fake story immediately went out that pro-Russian rebels had shot down the plane with a “Buk” missile.  The story started up within less than  24 hours, before the tiniest investigation had taken place.

Lying  psychopath John Kerry, who was in on some other false flags like the first fake sarin attack in Syria, was one of the first Western dogs to start barking this line from his pathological lying posting as head of the US State Department, typically one of the most grotesque liars in  any US maladministration. The head of the State Department  is pretty much just the voice of the Pentagon, the CIA, and the Deep State.

The story was so fake that even the CIA doesn’t believe it. Fully 1/2 of the CIA believes that the MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian jet in a false flag to blame the Russians. Even the CIA didn’t get fooled by this one.

However,  people are now talking about a very well-done aspect of Bellingcat’s elaborate fake story: the photos of the Buk launchers in rebel territory before the attack.

The M17 case is extremely complex. I know more about this case than just about anyone you will ever meet. I have extensive notes on it. If anyone wants to write a book, etc. about this case, please consult me. I have a gold mine.

It is correct that the Buk carriers were not properly explained. However, the Ukies had Buk missiles. In fact, they had eight Buk missile launchers right in that exact area before the attack.

A day or so before the attack, the Ukies drove a Buk on a Buk launcher into a town very near the shootdown. They were dressed in Russian uniforms and spoke Russian. They stopped in the town for no reason and got out and talked to a number of people, apparently to set the scene for the “Buk in the vicinity” being driven by “Russian military speaking Russian.”

However, the rebels never had a Buk missile. Ever. Our own CIA has absolutely confirmed that the rebels never had a Buk in Ukraine. Russia didn’t dare give them one.

This false flag was set up very well. They even had men manning a Buk right in the area. This was supposed to be the Buk that shot down the plane. To fit the narrative of drunken rebels mistakenly shooting down the plane, the Ukies scattered dozens of beer bottles around the Buk launcher.

As planned, the CIA took a picture of this Buk launcher with beer bottles littered around it. However the Ukies screwed up. All their fake rebels in that photo were wearing Ukrainian army uniforms! So, yes, the CIA said they had a shot of apparently drunken soldiers around a Buk launcher in the area, however the agency noted that the men were all wearing Ukie uniforms!

The usual Bellingcat liars mostly ignored this statement. The few who noted it said that those dastardly rebels were themselves dressed up in Ukrainian uniforms (Why?) so that they could get really drunk and accidentally shoot down the jet. Makes no sense, huh? The CIA doesn’t believe it either.

I told you they planned this out well. Why did the OCSE take three weeks to show up at the site? Almost as if they were not interested in investigating it, no? Why did the original Malay team of 130 investigators conclude emphatically that the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter jet in a false flag? Why was this report immediately buried, copies of the newspaper confiscated and the entire team dismissed? Any reasons? I’m sure that’s not suspicious at all! I’m sure everything’s completely aboveboard!

As you can see, the M17 shootdown was very well planned as a perfect false flag.

A New US False Flag against Russia: The “Novichok” Attack on Alexei Navalny

Perhaps you have read about the latest attempted poisoning of Russian dissident Alexei Navalny with “Novichok,” the same poison that was supposedly used against the Skirpals earlier, although that whole mess was an MI6 false flag to frame Russia. No one, much less the Skirpals, got dosed with “Novichok.”

The Skirpals probably got dosed with BZ. After all, BZ was found in one the samples they accidentally sent to the “outside lab” in Switzerland. The poisoning symptoms resembled BZ, not Novichok. Remember how the story kept changing and the Skirpals kept getting dosed with Novichok in place after place. The story changed because after one fake story fell apart, they had to invent another one.

Main reason no one was dosed with Novichok in the Skirpal incident? If a weaponized dose of Novichok was put on their doorknob (the fake story they finally settled on), they’d both be dead. Novichok is fatal. Within 10 minutes. No exceptions. Further, the poisoning symptoms observed in the Skirpals looked nothing like Novichok symptoms.

That Swiss lab wrecked everything. They also found an extremely pure trace of Novichok in the Skirpals’ blood. Problem? That was three weeks after the attack. The Novichok found had only been there a day or two. The stuff degrades, fast. If they had been dosed with Novichok three weeks before, that Novichok would have been significantly degraded.

Further, Novichok comes in weaponized doses. A weaponized chemical weapon has various other components in it to enhance delivery, etc. It’s a weapon. None of the standard additives that are found in weaponized chemical weapons were found in that sample. Instead, it was pure, straight out of the lab. Well, no one uses something like that in a chemical weapons attack. They use the weaponized version.

Here’s obviously what happened. Remember the Skirpals got dosed a mere five miles away from the diabolical Porton Down, the UK chemical and biological weapons lab where a variety of very nasty and completely illegal substances continue to be created and stockpiled against every treaty about such things the UK ever signed. The UK is as bad as the US, I’m telling you. Pure evil.

Porton Down was in on the whole scam. They supplied the BZ and  somehow dosed the Skirpals with it. As with so many of these other anti-Russia false flags, the hand of the Russian oligarch opposition was present. A helicopter came to fly people to safety as soon as the false flag unfolded. It came from the compound of a Russian billionaire oligarch  who absolutely hates Putin. So he was in on this false flag too.

After the Skirpals are hospitalized and the story gets revised every day or so, everything is confused. Now Porton Down makes up some lab-fresh Novichok. It’s well known that Porton Down had made and worked with this substance before. They put it in the Skirpals blood vials. Hence the purity and the non-weaponized nature of the Novichok. The BZ was already there since Porton Down were the people who dosed the Skirpals.

The Skirpals were forbidden to talk to just about anyone while wild contradictory tales floated about around their condition. At some point, they vanished off the face of the Earth.

The British are responsible for whatever happened to them. Skirpal himself is a Russian double agent, but he already did his time in Russia and no one in Russia cared about him anymore. He and his daughter (also dosed) are either dead, killed by MI6, or they are being imprisoned somewhere by the MI6. There are also stories that the Skirpals are in New Zealand. Wherever they are, I wouldn’t want to be either of them right now. Intelligence agencies kill people. And they never get caught.

In this latest Novichok reversion, Russian dissident got poisoned with “Novichok” by Putin because he is a dissident.

Problem? First, Navalny is CIA, but everyone knows that. So what?

Second, Navalny, the darling of the West, the “voiced of the Russian opposition” runs in Presidential elections all the time. He gets a whopping 1-2% every time. He has no support in Russia. All of his support is with Russia regime change agents in the West. Putin and many others in the government laugh about Navalny and say he’s a nobody. He’s nothing. He has no support. There’s nothing to worry about. Why kill him? What’s the point of killing an irrelevant, harmless man with no power and no support?

Navalny got very sick on his plane trip. This much of it is true. He went to the bathroom and came back very ill. The pilot quickly rerouted the plane to an airport where he was rushed to the hospital in Omsk. The story quickly unfolded that Navalny was poisoned by his coffee that he ordered at the airport. There are photos and video of him ordering the coffee and drinking it with his entourage.

Problem? A member of his entourage ordered Navalny’s coffee for him. He didn’t tell the server though, so for all the server knew,  it was for the associate. How could the server have known that the coffee was really for Navalny? Also, wait a minute? Putin has FSB agents working behind the counter at airports conveniently? How the Hell does he do that? How does the server put the Novichok in the cup of coffee? He has to put it in after he fills the cup, right? Right in front of everyone? That didn’t happen.

Next, if Navalny had Novichok in that tea he’s drinking at the airport, he would have been dead in 10 minutes. Not only that, but one or more of his friends at that table would have also been dead at the same time, killed by the fumes. Obviously that didn’t happen. So there was no Novichok in the tea at the airport snack bar.

That story blew up, so they went on the next one. In this story, Navalny has some water bottle he brought with him on the plane. It has Novichok in it. He takes a swig. He gets poisoned, etc. Except he’d be dead in 10 minutes again. Now he’s been killed twice already. And anyone around his seat on the plane would be dead too, from the fumes.

Also, crucial. The descriptive reports of Navalny’s poisoning symptoms as reported by passengers were not the symptoms of Novichok poisoning, the symptoms of which are well known. None other than the inventor of Novichok himself said the attack was fake because not only was Navalny not dead but his symptoms looked nothing like Novichok poisoning. At all.

Well that story bombed too, apparently. Time to come up with a new story! Now Navalny’s hotel room at the airport gets searched, and a soft drink bottle is found. It has Novichok in it! Obviously poisoned in his hotel room! Except again, he’d be dead in 10 minutes. Along with anyone in his entourage near that bottle. Ok,  so now he’s been poisoned and killed three times over, along with a few of his entourage. This Navalny guy’s better than Jesus! He only came back once for Chrissake!

Well, I guess that story didn’t work either. Because next thing we know, Elliot Higgins otherwise known as “Bellingcat,” the fake “citizen journalist” who is actually a fellow at the ferociously anti-Russian NATO-linked Atlantic Council and is also apparently working for the MI6 and probably the CIA too, came up with a doozy, elaborately sourced as it is. Keep in  mind that Higgins’ stuff is so well sourced because he gets all his data from the MI6 and CIA intelligence agencies. And they know a lot of stuff. Higgins is their cutout.

He released a tape of Navalny of all people phoning up an FSB agent. Apparently Navalny just called this spy up on the phone and the spy didn’t even recognized his voice. The voice of Alexei Navalny, CIA and MI6 asset in Russia, who’s probably under surveillance most of the time. This agent, who is named, then gives up the ghost. All the three previous stories were fake. Well, we knew that.

What really happened, the agent said, was that Navalny’s underwear was dosed with Novichok, the dried powder kind. Well, that was a mistake. Being dried, it didn’t kill him. Except his sweat would have activated it. And I suppose “dry” Novichok kills you as good as any other kind. So his shorts poisoned him on the plane but didn’t kill him because the Novichok was “dry.” The FSB messed up! Except if he got poisoned by the stuff at all in his shorts, he’d be dead. You don’t survive a dosing with weapons-grade Novichok. Along with people next to him on the plane.

Now he and his associates have been poisoned with Novichok and killed four times over. The guy has more lives than a cat!

More problems. Wait a second.  This FSB agent  didn’t recognize the sound of Navalny’s voice, a voice known well by half the country? Uh huh. This FSB agent picks up the phone in his apartment and reveals top secret information to some clown on the phone  he’s never met,  posing as an FSB agent? Uh huh. This FSB agent has any secret conversations at all over a damned unsecured phone line? Sure. The FSB agent takes this guy’s word that he’s an FSB agent, though he gives a name no agent has? The FSB doesn’t even check this guy out? Come on.

However, this part of it was well done. Bellingcat released the names and fake identities of some FSB agents, which is a pretty ugly thing to do. Obviously he got this from the CIA. Supposedly the agent’s voice is even well done. The FSB only comments to say that the whole mess is a well done fake.

None of this matters because the FSB never dosed Navalny with Novichok four times, or even one time, and certainly didn’t by putting it on his underwear. We are talking about something that couldn’t happen so it didn’t happen. End of story.

Anyway, Navalny gets rushed to a hospital in Omsk. Because of course, if Russia tried to murder the guy, the first thing they do is rush him to the nearest hospital, right? Oh, come on. The doctors are very good. The toxicology doc there is the best in Russia. At first they suspect poisoning. They run a toxicology screen on everything, including Novichok. Nothing, blank, zero. Clean.

They run through a bunch of other tests and conclude he’s in diabetic shock. Which can be fatal. Turns out he was diagnosed with diabetes a few years back. He’s almost dead and has to go on a ventilator. By the heroic actions of the docs, this ingrate traitor’s life gets saved. They also put him on a standard drug that people get when they’re on a ventilator.

Agents from Germany show up in Russia and race into the hospital room. A hospital plane is flown to Russia at a moment’s notice, all decked out in the latest gear. Boy, that was quick! It’s almost as if…the Germans knew something was up?

He’s rushed onto the plane to a German hospital. First, breathless pronouncements are made of a drug residue being found, apparently the poison. Except that’s just the drug the Russians gave him on the ventilator, standard procedure! More tests. More tests.

The Germans run a toxicology screen. I guess it’s the best toxicology screen on Earth because it finds Novichok where even the best minds of the Russians missed it! Do the Germans even know what Novichok is? The Russians are baffled. The Russian docs request that the Germans send Navalny’s blood samples with “Novichok” to them so they can look it over. Of course, the Germans tell the Russians to go pound sand! Very suspicious. Why not send a sample to the Russians? What’s the harm? Fishy as Hell.

Next we get a captured phone conversation between two high ranking government officials, one in Germany and one in Poland. The German is recorded telling the Pole that the whole Navalny poisoned by Novichok saga is made up, a false flag done to set Russia up as a patsy.

I suspect the German BND is the party behind this mess. Why this time? Notice these false flags always happen at the least opportune moment, the exact time when Russia doing that would  be about the stupidest thing they could do? Well, turns out that the Nordstream gas pipeline from Russia to Western Europe only needed 10 more miles of pipe to be laid.

It’s supposed to end in far northern Germany. NordStream has been controversial and the US, UK, and Atlantic Council have been falling all over themselves trying to stop it, all to no avail. Merkel has made all sorts of noises, mostly to the effect that it’s a done deal and quit trying to sabotage it.

So the fake Navalny Novichok poisoning false flag was done to set up Russia in a desperate last minute attempt by the BND (who are very deep in with NATO, especially NATO intelligence) to stop the pipeline. Which failed; the pipeline is going forward. And pile some new sanctions on Russia for more fake reasons. Which was done. Which was to be expected.

Notice that in all of these stupid false flags how the stories keep changing? That’s how you know you’re dealing with another fake story. Real stories don’t change every other day. They change all the time because they’re made up in the first place.

The Russian hospital would have reported if they had found Novichok. Why wouldn’t they? If the poisoning was such a big secret, why do a toxic scan? What for?

The inventor of Novichok insisted that the whole drama was nothing but a big fake. See his comments above. Further, when Navalny emerged from his coma weeks later, the inventor noted that his pupils should have been pinpointed because a telltale sign of Novichok poisoning is pinpoint pupils, and the pupils would still have been pinpointed 3 weeks later.

The inventor said that even if he was dosed with 1/300th of a standard dose, which is the size of a grain of salt, he would still have had pinpoint pupils. Novichok has never been used in an attack.

Alt Left: The Assassination of Politician Jorge Eliécer Gaitán in Colombia in 1948

This is the information contained in the huge update I just made in this post. I just updated the post with a lot of information about the assassination of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán in 1948 which led to the massive riots called The Bogotazo, after which a decade of mass killings called La Violencia took place. The assassination of Gaitan, even more than the banana workers strike, jump-started the movement of the armed Colombian Left in the form of the Colombian guerrillas.

In 1948 in Colombia, a very popular presidential candidate, Jorge Eliécer Gaitán of the Liberal Party, was assassinated for the same reason that given for the overthrow of Arbenz of Guatemala seven years later. The Liberal Party was one of two fascist parties of the oligarchy, along with the Conservative Party. See below for more on them.

The Liberal Party was anything but. Yet Gaitán was an interesting figure, part of a socialist movement in the party who advocated very popular candidate who promised major changes in Colombian society a battle against social, political, and economic inequality. He was also a feminist who advocated the uplift of the status of Colombian woman in society. In addition, he broached the subject of land reform, a hot button issue in Colombia.

In fact, as in so many other places in Latin America such as Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador, the endless Leftist guerrilla war against the government is more of a fight over land than anything else. To this day, the Colombian oligarchy has refused to do a land reform, in part because this is where most of their money comes from.

Even Venezuela has had only partial success at a land reform, as it has proven too difficult to break up the big estates or latifundias. Instead, since much of the land lies idle and fallow, peasants have conducted land invasions of fallowed land in the latifundias, which has resulted in a lot of conflict.

Death squads funded by the latifundia oligarchs have murdered over 150 peasant leaders since Chavez came in over the last 20 years. Parts of the Chavista Movement have been aligned with the rural rich for whatever reason, and they have been involved in repressing these peasant movements also.

He was murdered by the Colombian oligarchy or ruling class, which has stayed in power by mass murder for 75 years now. They were even massacring people earlier, as there was a mass slaughter of striking workers at banana plantations in the northwest in a place called La Magdalena in 1928.

Even this early, the US was waging a Cold War against the USSR. The US became very alarmed by the strike, as the plantations were owned by the US United Fruit Company. United Fruit and the US government described the strikers as subversives and Communists. The US threatened to invade if the strike was not put down by the Colombian government.

Under orders from United Fruit, the Colombian military attacked the workers. Many striking workers were killed. The event was memorialized by Gabriel Garcia Marquez in his famous novel 100 Years of Solitude. The event was a watershed in Colombian politics, as an actual Colombian Left was formed around this time.

Gaitan was an excellent speaker and his rallies drew large crowds of union members and poor people. He was characterized as a demagogue, like Juan Peron, who was already rising to power in Argentina. He was also a budding nationalist. He was criticized by the Conservative Party, the right wing of the Liberal Party, and even the Communist Party, which regarded him as a competitor for the interests of the workers.

In 1933, he split with the Liberal Party and formed the Unión Nacional Izquierdista Revolucionaria (National Leftist Revolutionary Union). In 1946, he proposed a Gaitanista Program. It advocated many things:

Development agencies for the advancement of the social, political, and economic advancement of peasants in the countryside. Policies to redistribute wealth in Colombia. Nationalization of public services, a progressive income tax, and the development of a national economy. A land reform and new pro-labor laws.

In terms of foreign policy, it advocated an economic union of Latin American countries so they could serve the interests of their people instead of that of the oligarchies and foreign carpetbagging corporations. His project could be best described as anti-plutocratic and anti-imperialist.

He was assassinated in 1948 by a “lone gunman,” Juan Roa Sierra, along the lines of Lee Harvey Oswald. Two ex-CIA agents have confessed that it was really the CIA that was behind the operation. The assassin took orders from two named CIA agents and the assassination plan was called Operation Pantomime.

This was probably one of the first of countless assassinations of liberal and leftwing figures the world over by the CIA undertaken as part of the Cold War. Sierra visited Gaitan in his office in  the morning and at 1 PM, he shot Gaitan dead.

An enraged mob then set upon Sierra, who was protected by an Army colonel. He was chased to a store where  he holed up. The mob smashed into the store and dragged him outside. He was beaten and stabbed so many times that his corpse was unrecognizable.

At the time of his assassination, a meeting of the Pan-American Conference led by US Secretary of State George Marshall. At this meeting, all members of the group agreed that fighting Communism was their number one concern.

The despicable Organization of American States or OAS, a fake organization of Latin American countries that is actually run by the US and serves to promote the interests of the US and its neo-colonies in Latin America.

At the same time, the Latin American Youth Congress was taking place. It been organized by Fidel Castro of Cuba and was funded by Juan Peron of Argentina. A young Gabriel Garcia Marquez was a law student at the time and was eating lunch at the time  Gaitan was killed. He rushed to the scene and arrived just in time to see Sierra lynched by the mob. He memorialized the event in his book, Living to Tell the Tale.

It is possible that Gaitan, like Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray, was a patsy for an assassination carried out by the US Deep State in the case of the former and by the FBI itself in the case of Ray. Gaitan suffered from schizophrenia, could not fire a gun properly, the gun in his hand was not capable of firing accurately, and he was standing quite a distance away from Gaitan while the murder occurred at a short distance. Further, Sierra was not seen anywhere near the assassination. The first time  he was spotted, he was in between two police officers.

The Colombian government quickly blamed the USSR and the Colombian Communist Party for the murder. They also tied in the young Fidel Castro with the plot. This version seems very unlikely.

Notice that this CIA assassination took place under “liberal Democrat” Harry Truman.

The murder of this candidate was followed by a wild  riot known as the Bogotazo. Many of the rioters were armed and the riots left much of downtown Bogota in ruins. The riots left 1,800 people dead. This was part of a larger reign of violence in the countryside which had started in 1930. By 1948, Bogota was full of peasants fleeing the violence in the countryside.

Alt Left: Updated: How the Armed Colombian Left (the FARC and the ELN) Came to Be

I just updated this post with a lot of information about the assassination of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán in 1948 which led to the massive riots called The Bogotazo, after which a decade of mass killings called La Violencia took place. The assassination of Gaitan, even more than the banana workers strike, jump-started the movement of the armed Colombian Left in the form of the Colombian guerrillas.

In 1948 in Colombia, a very popular presidential candidate, Jorge Eliécer Gaitán of the Liberal Party, was assassinated for the same reason that given for the overthrow of Arbenz of Guatemala seven years later. The Liberal Party was one of two fascist parties of the oligarchy, along with the Conservative Party. See below for more on them.

The Liberal Party was anything but. Yet Gaitán was an interesting figure, part of a socialist movement in the party who advocated very popular candidate who promised major changes in Colombian society a battle against social, political, and economic inequality. He was also a feminist who advocated the uplift of the status of Colombian woman in society. In addition, he broached the subject of land reform, a hot button issue in Colombia.

In fact, as in so many other places in Latin America such as Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador, the endless Leftist guerrilla war against the government is more of a fight over land than anything else. To this day, the Colombian oligarchy has refused to do a land reform, in part because this is where most of their money comes from.

Even Venezuela has had only partial success at a land reform, as it has proven too difficult to break up the big estates or latifundias. Instead, since much of the land lies idle and fallow, peasants have conducted land invasions of fallowed land in the latifundias, which has resulted in a lot of conflict.

Death squads funded by the latifundia oligarchs have murdered over 150 peasant leaders since Chavez came in over the last 20 years. Parts of the Chavista Movement have been aligned with the rural rich for whatever reason, and they have been involved in repressing these peasant movements also.

He was murdered by the Colombian oligarchy or ruling class, which has stayed in power by mass murder for 75 years now. They were even massacring people earlier, as there was a mass slaughter of striking workers at banana plantations in the northwest in a place called La Magdalena in 1928.

Even this early, the US was waging a Cold War against the USSR. The US became very alarmed by the strike, as the plantations were owned by the US United Fruit Company. United Fruit and the US government described the strikers as subversives and Communists. The US threatened to invade if the strike was not put down by the Colombian government.

Under orders from United Fruit, the Colombian military attacked the workers. Many striking workers were killed. The event was memorialized by Gabriel Garcia Marquez in his famous novel 100 Years of Solitude. The event was a watershed in Colombian politics, as an actual Colombian Left was formed around this time.

Gaitan was an excellent speaker and his rallies drew large crowds of union members and poor people. He was characterized as a demagogue, like Juan Peron, who was already rising to power in Argentina. He was also a budding nationalist. He was criticized by the Conservative Party, the right wing of the Liberal Party, and even the Communist Party, which regarded him as a competitor for the interests of the workers.

In 1933, he split with the Liberal Party and formed the Unión Nacional Izquierdista Revolucionaria (National Leftist Revolutionary Union). In 1946, he proposed a Gaitanista Program. It advocated many things:

Development agencies for the advancement of the social, political, and economic advancement of peasants in the countryside. Policies to redistribute wealth in Colombia. Nationalization of public services, a progressive income tax, and the development of a national economy. A land reform and new pro-labor laws.

In terms of foreign policy, it advocated an economic union of Latin American countries so they could serve the interests of their people instead of that of the oligarchies and foreign carpetbagging corporations. His project could be best described as anti-plutocratic and anti-imperialist.

He was assassinated in 1948 by a “lone gunman,” Juan Roa Sierra, along the lines of Lee Harvey Oswald. Two ex-CIA agents have confessed that it was really the CIA that was behind the operation. The assassin took orders from two named CIA agents and the assassination plan was called Operation Pantomime.

This was probably one of the first of countless assassinations of liberal and leftwing figures the world over by the CIA undertaken as part of the Cold War. Sierra visited Gaitan in his office in  the morning and at 1 PM, he shot Gaitan dead.

An enraged mob then set upon Sierra, who was protected by an Army colonel. He was chased to a store where  he holed up. The mob smashed into the store and dragged him outside. He was beaten and stabbed so many times that his corpse was unrecognizable.

At the time of his assassination, a meeting of the Pan-American Conference led by US Secretary of State George Marshall. At this meeting, all members of the group agreed that fighting Communism was their number one concern.

The despicable Organization of American States or OAS, a fake organization of Latin American countries that is actually run by the US and serves to promote the interests of the US and its neo-colonies in Latin America.

At the same time, the Latin American Youth Congress was taking place. It been organized by Fidel Castro of Cuba and was funded by Juan Peron of Argentina. A young Gabriel Garcia Marquez was a law student at the time and was eating lunch at the time  Gaitan was killed. He rushed to the scene and arrived just in time to see Sierra lynched by the mob. He memorialized the event in his book, Living to Tell the Tale.

It is possible that Gaitan, like Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray, was a patsy for an assassination carried out by the US Deep State in the case of the former and by the FBI itself in the case of Ray.

Gaitan suffered from schizophrenia, could not fire a gun properly, the gun in his hand was not capable of firing accurately, and he was standing quite a distance away from Gaitan while the murder occurred at a short distance. Further, Sierra was not seen anywhere near the assassination. The first time  he was spotted, he was in between two police officers.

The Colombian government quickly blamed the USSR and the Colombian Communist Party for the murder. They also tied in the young Fidel Castro with the plot. This version seems very unlikely.

Notice that this CIA assassination took place under “liberal Democrat” Harry Truman.

The murder of this candidate was followed by a wild  riot known as the Bogotazo. Many of the rioters were armed and the riots left much of downtown Bogota in ruins. The riots left 1,800 people dead. This was part of a larger reign of violence in the countryside which had started in 1930. By 1948, Bogota was full of peasants fleeing the violence in the countryside.

The Bogotazo led eventually to La Violencia, a truly crazy 10 year period from 1954-1964 in which Liberals and Conservatives, which ideologically are both simply fascist parties, with the Liberals masquerading as social democrats to the extent that they are even members of the Socialist International, massacred each other in huge numbers for no particular reason at all.

The Liberals and Conservatives typically trade off running the country. Although they hated each other to the point of slaughtering hundreds of thousands of each other, the odd thing is that despite their names, ideologically and in governance, there is little difference between. They are both far rightwing parties of the oligarchy.

The armed Left in the form of the ELN, which was created in 1964, theorizes that La Violencia was simply a way for the elite to slaughter the politically active working class.

After La Violencia ended in 1964, a small group of people tired of being massacred settled in some property in West-Central Colombia and declared themselves a semi-autonomous republic. They were also heavily armed. They said that and armed themselves mostly to keep from being massacred. And they did set it up as a “Communist republic” but it was only a small patch of land of no particular consequence and the group’s numbers never numbered greater than 200.

They named this place Marquetalia. Manuel “Sure Shot” Marulanda, the leader of the FARC for the next 40 years, was one of the founders of this commune. The Colombian government became very alarmed that 200 people had called themselves Communists and settled some lands that they freaked out and called for Uncle Sam to come help.

This was under the “liberal Democrat” Johnson Administration. The US also became very alarmed and we sent several generals and a troop of Green Berets down there.

At this time, the Green Berets were advising the Guatemalan government in putting down a Left insurgency that began there in 1960. They put it down via massacres of the civilian population. There’s nothing noble about the Green Berets. They’re simply the US government version of a Latin American death squad.

Anyway, a significant army detachment was mobilized and Marquetalia was attacked with US advisors by their side. There are suggestions that the US and Colombia even used chemical weapons against the commune.

The Marquetalians fought back but were defeated, suffering many casualties. The survivors retreated into the mountains of Colombia. These are really mountain jungles as the mountains are covered in a jungle-like near-rainforest and it’s impossible to find anyone or anything in there.

There they decided that all peaceful attempts at change, including setting up a semi-autonomous commune, were impossible, so they could either sit in the villages and wait for the government to come murder them or they could take up arms so they could at least fight back when the army and death squads came.

The group was called the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), and they are still active to this day, 56 years later. At one time around 2000, they controlled ~50% of Colombia and formed an actual threat to the regime.

The ELN (National Liberation Army) was formed at the same time, in 1964, in Eastern Colombia under obscure circumstances that I’m not aware of.

The original philosophy was Liberation Theology and their leader was Camilo Torres, the original “priest with a machine gun.” Liberation theology can be thought of as “Jesus with a machine gun” and in fact there are murals in Latin America showing exactly this. The idea is that Jesus supported “the preferential option for the poor” and that even armed struggle to achieve this goal was not only valid but very Christian.

One of the original theorists was an educator named Paulo Friere in Brazil who published a famous book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed – also published in the same year that the ELN and the FARC were formed in 1964 -along these lines, advocating a liberation theology component to be the focus of the curriculum in Latin America. Theologian Gustavo Gutierrez could be considered the father of Liberation Theology. He wrote a book called The Theology of Liberation around this same time.

To this day, although the ELN are Leftists, they are still officially a Christian organization and they have many supporters among the Catholic clergy in Colombia, as does the officially atheist FARC.

Alt Left: Why the World Bank and IMF Push Structural Adjustment on Countries That Request Loans from Them

The World Bank and the IMF (both of which are basically run by the US) forced the Third World countries that requested loans to gut and privatize their public sectors in order to get the loans. The stated reason was to lower the state’s expenditures so they would have more money to pay their loans back.

But it often came with a lot of other demands like opening up the country to foreign investment (rape, rob, and ruin exploitation) cutting the wages of workers, attacking labor unions and gutting labor protection law, lowering or eliminating the minimum wage, etc. It’s hard to see how any of these things enables the state to pay their loans back easier, especially as the attack on the incomes of the 80% majority  would lead to much lower tax revenue for the state.

I’d say the World Bank and the IMF have an ulterior motive, the same as the US – to promote neoliberalism, if need be by force, the world over because the neoliberal model is what’s best for the US oligarchy and the corporations.

Alt Left: How the US Staged Fascist Coups in Many Countries the World Over in the Last 70 Years

After World War, the Cold War was started and the murderous Dulles Brothers Installed the Policy known as Containment. This was implemented between 1946-48. As part of this policy, the US overthrew nationalist, social democratic, and even liberal democratically elected governments all over the world as part of the “War on Communism.” We replaced them with rightwing dictatorships. Although it is arguable, in general all rightwing  authoritarian regimes or dictatorships are probably fascist. Rightwing dictatorship = fascism.

These regimes were found most of Central America in Guatemala after 1954, in El Salvador and Honduras since forever, and in Nicaragua under the Somozas.

They were found in all of South America at one time or another. We can see them in the generals after 1964 in Brazil, the democratic facade duopoly regimes in Venezuela in Colombia (especially after 1947 and again in 1964, Ecuador, Peru until the generals’ revolt in 1968, Bolivia under Banzer after 1953, Paraguay under Strausser, Argentina and Uruguay under the generals in the late 80’s and early 90’s, and Pinochet in Chile.

They were also seen in the Caribbean in Cuba under Bautista, the Dominican Republic under Trujillo, and Haiti under the Duvaliers.

In Southeast Asia, they were found in Thieu in South Vietnam, Sihanouk in Cambodia, the monarchy in Laos, the military regimes in Thailand, Suharto in Indonesia, the Sultan in Brunei, Marcos in the Philippines, and Taiwan under Chiang Kai Chek.

In Northeast Asia, a regime of this type was found in South Korea from 1947-on.

They were found South Asia with Pakistan under Generals like Zia, in Central Asia in the Shah of Iran, and in a sense, the Arab World with Saddam (Saddam was installed by the CIA), King Hassan in Morocco, the Gulf monarchies, and Jordan. Earlier, they were found in the monarchies in Libya and Egypt that were overthrown by Arab nationalists. Also, Israel played this sort of role with a democratic facade.

We also found them in the Near East in the military regimes in Turkey (especially Turgut Ozul) and for a while in Greece under the colonels in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.

NATO formed the backbone of a “rightwing dictatorship” in the background of Western Europe (especially Italy), where Operation Gladio NATO intelligence essentially ran most of those countries as a Deep State behind the scenes. These regimes were found in Spain under Franco and in Portugal under Salazar along with its colonies.

These regimes were not so much in evidence in Africa except in South Africa and Rhodesia and most prominently, Mobutu in Zaire and Samuel Doe in Liberia.

The fascist forms of these rightwing dictatorships varied, most being nonracist fascism but a few being racist fascists (Turkey), and others being Mussolinists (Suharto in Indonesia with his “pangesila”)

Alt Left: How the Cold War Against Communism Ended up Being a War against Nationalism, Social Democracy, and even Liberalism

All of these liberal Democrats signing on to this media war on Venezuela need to recognize that the corporate media is using the Venezuelan example as part of a “war on socialism” to discredit the very word socialism and everything associated with it.

Remember when Trump said before Congress that the US will never be a socialist country? Here, socialism refers to social democracy in either in name/action, which exists in 95% of the countries in the world in the form of ruling parties, strong opposition parties and governmental structure/programs/ideology either in writing or action.

Remember how the entire Congress, including the vast majority of Democratic Congressmen, gave that fascist a standing ovation when he said that? And liberal Democrats dare to claim that they are on the left! They’re not on the left of anything, except maybe the left wing of Republican Party.

The corporate media and the US money/government elite (The Deep State, basically) despises anything that even smacks of socialism, especially social democracy which they truly hate because it is most likely to be implemented. This started during the Cold War but it was already going on in the Depression, when US fascists nearly staged a military coup against FDR, who they said was a Communist.

But during the Cold War the demonization of anything smacking of socialism, no matter how mild, really got under way with two bloodthirsty killers, the Dulles Brothers, who initiated the policy of Containment and created the CIA out of the wartime US intelligence agency, effectively turning the US into a militarized, national security state.

In other words, they initiated what boils down to the US Deep State or the foreign policy establishment of the United States. Note that the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned about is absolutely part of this Deep State too, as it and the national security state are each part of each other.

It was during this era when the US overthrew countries all the time for the tiniest movements towards social democracy and a lot of times simply for implementing social liberalism, the ideology of the US Democratic Party!

For instance, Aristide in Haiti was overthrown for the simple reason that he raised the minimum wage.

The US Democratic Party gave complete support to both of these coups, without a single dissenting member. My “liberal Democrat” father, actually a “Cold War liberal,” a truly awful group of people, gave his complete support to the fascist coup that overthrew Aristide. Why? Because Time Magazine told him it needed to be done. My father foolishly believed that Time Magazine was a liberal or at least Centrist project though it’s never been either.

So the Democratic Party supports raising the minimum wage, sure, but overseas, if you do it, the Democratic Party will call you a Communist and overthrow you in a fascist coup! Disgusting or what?

Nationalist, Social Democratic, and even Liberal Governments Overthrown by the CIA in the Last 70 years

Arbenz in Guatemala was overthrown in 1954 simply for implementing a mild social democracy. About 3% of his administration was made up of Communists, and this was the stated reason for overthrowing him. United Fruit also played a huge role because he nationalized their banana plantations.

Juan Bosch came to power in the Dominican Republic in 1965 and started to implement a mild social democracy. The US media demonized him as a Communist, and soon LBJ staged a fascist coup to overthrow him.

The Mossadegh government in Iran was elected in 1953 for electing a nationalist who nationalized British Petroleum’s oil and set about to implement a mild social democracy with nationalist overtones. He was overthrown by the US and UK and a fascist monarch called Reza Shah was installed and held power for the next 26 years.

A leftwing government was elected in Guyana around 1970, and the Western media went into hysterics. In reality, he was just a social democrat. The “liberal” UK soon overthrew him in a fascist coup.

The US waged economic war against Manley’s government in Jamaica in the late 80’s and early 90’s. He was never anything but a social democrat.

The Left took power in Brazil in 1964 after they won an election. In truth they were just social democrats. They were quickly overthrown in a fascist coup by generals in the military a year later.

A social democratic government that contained a few Communists was elected in 1960 in Iraq. The CIA overthrew that government in a bloody coup and installed Saddam Hussein with specific instructions to get rid of and crack down on the Communists.

Patrice Lumumba in the Congo came to power in 1964. I believe he was never anything more than a social democrat. Nevertheless, the Western media went insane, calling him a Communist. A year later he was overthrown with the help of US intelligence. It is a proven fact that Donald Rumsfeld, then working for the Defense Intelligence Agency, helped set up his arrest and subsequent execution by being tied to a tree and shot.

LSD and the LSD Manufacturing Underground in California, 1965-1990

Doses were pretty strong back in the day. The stuff around nowadays,  if you can even find it, is pretty weak.  It comes on blotter paper with some goofy caricature on it and it’s usually around 50 micrograms. Sure, you get a trip, but you get a much heavier trip when you start upping the dose up to 100 micrograms.

LSD back  then used to range from 250-500 micrograms. The famous Orange Sunshine LSD had 500 micrograms per pill. I took 125 micrograms one time, and that was plenty enough, thank you very much. I think I did take 250 micrograms once. That was one Hell of a trip, man.

Orange Sunshine was all manufactured by Timothy Leary’s group in Laguna Beach called The Brotherhood of Eternal Love, situated mostly in Laguna Canyon. My friends used to go down there and they said there would be these hippie guys sitting way up high in the eucalyptus trees. They were lookouts. The Brotherhood distributed millions of tabs of that variety of LSD, and they made a ton of money off of it.

Most LSD around this time was being manufactured by a man named Owlsley. I don’t think they ever caught him. I saw a documentary on TV about LSD in 1990.

The DEA agent said 90% of the LSD in the whole world comes out of the US, and almost all of that comes out of the Bay Area around San Francisco, California, where a few very secretive manufacturers make it. The DEA at the time had found it almost impossible to bust these manufacturers and there had not been a big bust in many years. Probably hard to get a good informant to work with you on a case like that in that part of California either, as anybody who knew anything about it was very secretive, a sort of a hidden hippie drug manufacturer underground.

LSD is quite difficult to manufacture and you almost need a Chemistry degree to make even one batch. I’m told that making it is pretty crazy because when you do, the stuff gets all over you, and you end up ingesting the stuff the whole time you’re making it. So you’re frying the whole time you make a batch, a process that could last a month or so. I don’t think I could handle a month-long trip. An 8-hour trip was bad enough.

Alt Left: The Basis of US Foreign Policy: Worldwide Total War on the Left

US foreign policy has been to attack the slightest manifestation of socialism anywhere on Earth but particularly in Latin America, “our backyard,” in other words, our colonial possessions. And indeed, official US policy is that all Latin American states are US colonies.

This goes back to the Monroe Doctrine, after which we stated that we will not allow any European (or other, as updated) country to interfere in Latin America. They’re our babies. We will fight to the death for them.

After 1900, with the rise of US economic power and formal US imperialism, which uses the US military and intelligence power to make sure US investors and corporations get the upper hand everywhere they wish to invest on the planet. In other words, the whole planet is a casino for the US rich and corporations.

And effectively that means that all nations under the boot of US imperialism (most countries, that is) are effectively colonies of the ruling class, the rich, and the corporations of the United States.

This effective colonialism is backed up by the might of the US military machine and increasingly, US economic power (control over international banking), which has now been weaponized to the point where the US Treasury Department is for all intents and purposes an arm of the Pentagon.

And indeed, US economic and military power work hand, with the first being utilized and at first and then the second utilized, if at all, only when the economic power seems to be fading as a coercive tool. But they definitely work together such that US economic and military power can be seen each one being a part of the other. It’s one entity. Call it the Deep State. The Deep State is simply “the foreign policy establishment of the United States. Its intelligence arm, the CIA is the head of the snake so to speak.

Alt Left: The World the Deep State Creates: Where Reality Is Fiction, Fiction is Reality, and Hundreds of Millions are Dangerously Mentally Ill

There’s Actual Reality, which we don’t see a lot of, but at least when we do, we know it’s real, or we think we do.

And then there’s the Fake Reality created by the Deep State and the West with the connivance of the media where things happened that never occurred, things that happened never did, where things that happened in one way actually happened in another, where the people who did things are not the real people who did them but patsies instead, where there are fake guilty parties for fake events for fake victims killed by fake substances they were never exposed to.

Where there are calls for trial and punishment of people who were framed for things they did not do, where victims are directed to the wrong perpetrators and urged to attack them, where public opinion is stirred and aroused by what boils down to a pile of fakery.

Or a Hollywood movie. Or a book. Or a TV show. The stuff that happens there isn’t real. The Deep State, the media and the West create a fake reality that is like a movie or a book, a fictional reality, and they overlay it on top of actually existing reality, so we think the movie or book or fictional world is the real thing.

What this boils down is that they are making it so we can’t tell the difference between fiction and reality, lies and truth, reality and unreality, existence and nonexistence, guilt and innocence, dreams and waking reality. What you end up with is a human that is a bundle of wild confusion that barely knows its ass from a hole in the ground because they’ve been brainwashed so thoroughly.

This is an easy object to mold for all sorts of other nefarious projects where you can pump new lies into these subject’s heads and get them aroused and agitated about new fictional worlds, while pointing at the real world, saying it’s not real, and saying that everyone who figures out that the real world is real is a mentally ill conspiracy theorist. This has the disturbing effect of labeling anyone who can tell reality from fiction as mentally ill, paranoid, and deranged. The only way to be sane is to say fiction is reality and reality is fiction. In other words, the only way to be “sane” in such a world is to be crazy!

And if you try to “go sane” and get away from the mass psychosis you are thrown into, you get the ultimate gaslighting, reputation and career destruction, ridicule, etc.

This is truly a world turned upside down. It’s Wonderland. A whole lot of stuff out there you think is real isn’t even there at all. And a whole lot of stuff you laugh and say isn’t out there is sitting right in front of your nose.

It’s the creation of mass mental disorder, delusion, and psychosis on the level of hundreds of millions of people at once, all with the same symptoms, and then giving militaries mass weaponry to blow things up and kill lots of people based on what are psychotic delusions. So hundreds of thousands of people die because hundreds of millions of people in the West are delusional and threw bombs at these people when they were in the midst of a full blown psychosis.

The West ends up being, in effect, not just mentally ill but dangerously mentally ill. Or criminally mentally ill. Those are the most disturbed criminals of all. In California they go to Atascadero. Whole societies are dangerously and criminally mentally ill and attack hundreds of thousands of innocent people due to crazy ideas in their heads. Most of the West ends up deserving to be locked away for life in Atascadero with John Hinkley, Arthur Brenner, and the rest of the crazy maniacs.

Alt Left: Paranoia, or How the Deep State Works

Basically, if they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers! Follow?

Say in the Beirut blast, the wrong questions would be endless questions about the nature of the fertilizer that blew up, who left it there, who was negligent, or if you want to go full conspiracy theory, questions about the Hezbollah missile dump, how it got there, how it stayed so long without detection, where Hezbollah has other dumps, who they paid off, on and on.

Then onto analyses of the blasts and whether this is typical of fertilizer or missiles blowing up, endless comparisons of fertilizer blasts and ammo dumps or missile dumps blowing up, not to mention fireworks factory explosions because remember the first blast was a warehouse full of fireworks right next to the fertilizer.

Whether the Lebanese people realize how Hezbollah destroyed Lebanon with their missile dump going off, how this ties in to Lebanese state instability, to questions about needing new governments, to questions about shutting Hezbollah out of new governments due to missile dump negligence. To make matters worse, new questions suing the port authority of the Lebanese government for storing the fireworks, missiles or fertilizers without supervision, how we need to make these people for all the harm they caused, etc.

All of these questions are about things that never even happened! They’re about events in the Alternate Universe that the Western media creates about so much of what goes on in the world.

You are literally asking the wrong questions? You’re not asking any questions about what really happened. Instead you are asking about nonsense that never even happened? If you’re asking endless questions about nonsense, there’s not much need to care about the answers people come up with to their nonsensical questions. The questions are false, so the answers will be false too.

This is how paranoia (the real kind, that everyone needs to have), conspiracy theory (which is almost normative reality at this point), and the Deep State, which gets you asking the fake questions in the first place so they don’t have to worry about the answers work?

Remember that:

If they can keep you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.

One of the basic laws of Paranoia 101.

Alt Left: People Wonder Why I Am a Socialist

All of the governments above are at least somewhat socialist because the action that they took right there is a socialist action.

Being a socialist, to me, at the very least means supporting the actions of the first seven countries and opposing that of the lasst, the shameful US. No capitalist country would ever do anything like that. If they did, they would no longer be a capitalist country. America is a much more capitalist country than a socialist one, as exemplified by the last figure in the list. People should not be surprised. The US is basically a capitalist country with a very weak socialist layer, and it is acting just like one in this and so many other ways. Why is everyone so shocked?

Of course there are many definitions of socialism, but here I refer to social democracy. The nations above other than the US are all social democracies (socialist) in one form or another. In fact, nearly the entire world is some form of social democracy (socialist). In much of the world, social democratic (socialist) parties either run the country or are large opposition parties with large support in Parliament.

The US, in ferociously rejecting even the suggestion of social democracy (socialism) and regarding it as the worst horror known to man, is actually completely out of step with the vast majority of nations on Earth.

Alt Left: More on the Iranian Assassination of Fahmi Hinavi, Mossad Officer, in Tel Aviv

Video of the Thursday, December 3 assassination of Fahmi Hinavi, the operational chief of Israel’s Mossad, who was killed by an Iranian hit team composed of several assassins southwest of Tel Aviv at 2 AM. Hinavi is thought to be the man behind the assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist a few weeks prior. The team entered Israel a week prior using false identities and spent time in Iranian safe houses that have been long established in Israel but have not yet been uncovered by the Shin Bet.

Iran may have carried out more assassinations on Israeli targets beside this one around the same time, but there’s no confirmation of that yet. There is a cryptic report that this assassination may be connected to two other assassinations of Israeli targets inside Israel. The targets are referred to as “X” and “Y.” I don’t have anything beyond that, sorry.

Above is a photograph of Hinavi al0ng with his bullet riddled vehicle. I am counting 14 bullet holes right in this photo alone.

You cannot see the actual shooting in this video. However, you can see that the scene is swarmed by non-police almost immediately. Also many men coming running on foot. All of this before the police even arrive. Sources inside Israel reported that Mossad and the IDF was on the scene almost immediately, even before the police got there.

Would you expect this sort of chaos if a man had been shot at a stoplight due to a dispute between neighbors. Why would Mossad and the IDF immediately swarm the scene of such a killing even before the police got there. Why would many men come running from all directions towards the scene of the crime, creating a chaotic scene with men running all over the intersection. Who are those?

Cops? Is this typically what happens at some drive-by shooting in a big US city at night? Hell, is this what happens in any typical homicide in the US? Of course not. Police officers don’t come running to the scene of most homicides. They show up in their squad cars for Chrissake. After a typical shooting on Saturday night in Chicago, is the scene quickly swarmed by US military troops and CIA agents? Really? Is any homicide in the US ever immediately swarmed by uniformed US soldiers and CIA agents? When has that ever happened?

The attack was confirmed by Iranian media, Arab news outlets and Sputnik and RT out of Russia.

The initial story saying that this was a hit on the Mossad officer and not a neighbor dispute came out of  Tel Aviv, so the story has an Israeli source.