Hillary’s got a war boner

Replace this ...
Replace this …
I write here quite a bit about false-flag attacks. The gas attack in Syria was one. 9/11 was one, Tonkin, Maine, Reichstag, most likely Israel is hammering itself with harmless rockets right now. Poking sticks at unchained monsters is stupid, which is why the people who want the wars have to make the events to start the wars. Read history for, like, all of recorded time if you’ve a chance.

...with this
…with this
MH17 is looking like a false flag event, and guess who is reading from the script? It is difficult to understand, and I am aghast that the US wants an open confrontation with Russia, but in Ukraine they have been begging for it. In case you don’t follow non-American news, Kiev has been beating the crap out of its own citizens, 400,000 13,500* have fled to Russia. A bomb was launched on a Russian city. The US is begging for war, it appears.

Generally, throughout my life anyway, American wars have been against harmless victims, countries that cannot fight back. This is something new.

Here’s some outside input. And here. And here. Get away from American news if you want a balanced view.
_______________
PS: I just ran across a term that describes the two psychopaths pictured above. If only there were just these two. These are public faces, but the whole of our empire from top to bottom, our political, corporate and military leaders, are of this type. They are “deranged predators.”
*My mistake, as 400,000 is the number of refugees out of Syria fleeing the western back terrorists attacking that country. I do not know the current number of Ukrainian refugees, as 13,500 was a month ago and the Kiev attack as intensified since then.

10 thoughts on “Hillary’s got a war boner

  1. UN report 3 weeks ago pegged the number of refugees that “fled to Russia this year” at 110,000.

    And ten days go:

    “Russia’s United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has confirmed data indicating that around half a million Ukrainian citizens have fled to Russia from the conflict in the southeast of Ukraine. Many of the new arrivals are pinning their hopes on assistance from Russia’s voluntary resettlement program for compatriots abroad.”

    It’s bleak. It’s not a civil war, it’s ethnic cleansing.

    Like

  2. You are too quick as usual to see a hidden hand behind things that are more likely to be just random chaotic occurrences. If anything it seems to me the shooting down of the airliner is more likely to settle things down in the region than to be a harbringer of open conflict between the US and Russia.

    I wonder though. Not having looked into it myself or being an expert, Id assume the airliner was cruising at an altitude that would be beyond the range of your standard shoulder fired surface to air missile. Id assume a radar apparatus of some sort at the very least would be needed. Something id assume would be out of the capacity of the rebels. But then the technology advances these days may allow something like that from a handheld capacity. Not that I really have a clue but made me wonder.

    Like

    1. Shooting down airliners is the ultimate terrorist act, which is why when it is done, it is always wise to trace it back to its most likely source, people who want to go to war. Who gains the most? The Russians do not want a war. The US does. If the US can successfully pin this on Russia, it justifies a full-force attack on Russia, which I never thought I would see. They can actually shoot back.

      I can think of four airline shoot-downs, just in my lifetime, that I would likely trace back the US, beginning with KAL 107, most likely set up by the US to discredit Soviets. This incident would be most like that one.

      Of course there was Vincennes, and since the US said it was an accident, it most likely was not. Its effect, to force the Iranians to stand down in the Iran/Iraq war, in favor of an almost-defeated Iraq, made shooting it down a tactical opportunity. (It’s a statement: “Look at us, we can shoot down your airliner with impunity, and say “Oops!” and our people believe us. You would be wise not to mess with us further, as we are bad asses who can and will do anything.”) Iran indeed stood down.

      Lockerbie, wrongly blamed on Libya, was most likely Iranian retaliation for the Vincennes. But there was a lot of suspicions intel activity around the flight prior, so that it could ahve been CIA or MI5 or 6 shooting it causing it to go down. However, having to blame it on Libya when Libya was not a shooting target at that time makes it hard to fathom. Perhaps they wanted to pin it on Iran but thought better of it, or perhaps it was a covert op that went haywire.

      And then there was what appeared to be a true accident, TWA 800. Of course, since the US says it was not an accidental shoot down, it most likely was.

      Like

  3. If the us really wanted to justify an attack on Russia your analysis would make sense but I don’t believe that to be the case. Mutually assured destruction is still a thing that carries a lot of weight. Make Russia look bad, bleed them, encircle them yes. Attack is too crazy for anyone. We may be led by psychopaths but they are power hungry not suicidal. We do not have the stones to openly attack Iran let alone Russia.

    Like

    1. I could not agree more except that … The stakes are high. The BRICS money gambit is an affront. The shooting down of an airliner, obviously intended to blame Russia, is a counter-gambit? Perhaps they are upping the ante?

      Obviously we cannot know, and since history is rewritten as we walk, the odds of getting a true picture are slim right now and in the future. I laugh that we cannot know the truth if an event 13 years ago, but think that everything before is well-recorded.

      Like

    1. Sorry Swede … that story is just not turning up anywhere else except on your American ………………… Thinker …………… website. I am stunned by the name. Pardon while I regroup.

      And I was surprised to learn there that Assad was out killing people himself. You need to read the post above this one about how Putin is evil too.

      Like

        1. Might get you better information if you do, but I was just taken aback for a second by the name – “Thinker,” so incongruous, like a lady in an evening gown at a rodeo. There are no thinkers in the political hackosphere.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s