Donald Trump authorises reckless airstrikes against the legitimate government of Syria.

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Friday, 07 April 2017 12:25.

Flag of the Syrian Arab Republic.

Let’s stand with the legitimate government of Syria

The position of Majorityrights.com is that we have always opposed the Alt-Right and we have always opposed the Presidency of Donald J. Trump. We have been harshly rejecting Donald Trump ever since the moment that he threw his hat into the ring during the GOP primaries, because the Trump phenomenon is a viciously Zionist phenomenon which only serves the apparent interests of the United States, Russia, and Israel.

If you are reading this article, you doubtless are already aware of the events that transpired early this morning. The United States has unilaterally conducted an airstrike against a Syrian airbase. There are even rumours right now of a second airstrike being prepared.

What we know so far:

  • The airstrikes targeted the Shayrat airbase near Homs. The United States has said this is the location from which Syrian forces allegedly launched a sarin nerve gas attack on the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhun on Tuesday morning.  
  •  
  • The Pentagon said 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched from the warships USS Ross and USS Porter in the eastern Mediterranean sea in the early hours of Friday morning. The strike had a 39% hit rate against the airfield.  
  •  
  • A Syrian official told the Associated Press that at least seven were killed and nine were wounded in the missile attack. Reuters reported that the Syrian state news agency said the strikes killed nine civilians, including four children, in areas near the targeted airbase.  
  •  
  • President Bashar Al-Assad’s office said the strike was “foolish and irresponsible” and that the United States has “revealed its short-sightedness and political and military blindness to reality”. It said the Syrian government would redouble its efforts against rebel groups after the strike, adding: “the disgraceful act of targeting a sovereign state’s airport demonstrates once again that different administrations do not change deeper policies.”  

This article does not intend to offer any information that is not already in the hands of other media organisations. Rather, I intend to start a conversation on what actions need to be explored by activists from a British perspective, in order to undermine American Zionist aggression in Syria.

International armed conflict

The events that we’ve seen transpiring this morning have been deeply disturbing. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the situation in Syria now is officially “an international armed conflict”.

“Any military operation by a state on the territory of another without the consent of the other amounts to an international armed conflict,” ICRC spokeswoman Iolanda Jaquemet has told Reuters in Geneva. “So according to available information – the US attack on Syrian military infrastructure – the situation amounts to an international armed conflict.”

“It’s unclear how US air strikes will make civilians safer”, Lord Wood of Anfield, chair of the United Nations Association UK has said.

In a blog post, Wood wrote: “Unilateral action without broad international backing through the UN, without a clear strategy for safeguarding civilians, and through military escalation risks further deepening and exacerbating an already protracted and horrific conflict, leaving civilians at greater, not lesser, risk of atrocities.”

He added that by circumventing the UN “we reduce both legitimacy and effectiveness, as a course of action that does not have the broad support of regional powers and the international community, channelled through UN systems and processes, can have little chance of success in leading to a more stable Syria.”

Whispers in the backchannels

As far as anyone is aware of what backchannel communications have been taking place, the United States warned Russia of the attack before it took place. Additionally, Russia had signalled yesterday evening that it would not be willing to support the government of Syria under all circumstances. In other words, there are some circumstances under which Russia would undermine the interests of the Syrian government. This was an unsurprising admission, given that it was also Russia who opted to send Sergei Lavrov to barter with John Kerry to induce the Syrian government to surrender their chemical weapons deterrent in the first place.

It is interesting that surrendering their chemical weapons deterrent into the hands of Russia, has not made the Syrian government’s position safer. Rather, it has increased the incentive for America to push for opportunistic aggression against Syria, under the pretext of seizing the very weapons which Syria has already ceased to be in possession of.

It is also interesting to note that the ‘good’ relationship between the Trump administration and the Putin administration – which will probably broadly continue despite all the sternly enunciated words that are issuing forth from Russian officials today – has not led to the position of the Syrian government being any safer. In fact, it is precisely because the United States and the Russian Federation have been on good terms since Trump’s inauguration, that the probability of what has now transpired, happening, had increased.

A scenario in which the United States and Russia arrive at an agreement in which both countries have their geostrategic interests met, is a scenario in which Russia would probably turn against Bashar Al-Assad. With Trump in office, the chances of such a scenario manifesting are actually increased, because Trump has not until today presented himself as an opponent of Russia on anything, to say the least. The chances of them being able to ‘do a deal’, is greater. Russia has specific interests in Syria which do not absolutely necessitate the survival of Bashar Al-Assad’s government. Hypothetically they could be guaranteed in another way. Vladimir Putin himself signalled this yesterday evening just before the American airstrikes took place, when Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said, “Unconditional support is not possible in this current world.” 

If the United States were to convincingly guarantee Russia’s specific interests on the Syrian territory – access to the warm-water port, a place in the pipeline consortium, a list of friendly future government figures – in some future arrangement mediated by Turkey, Qatar, UAE and Israel, via some backchannel communication, Russia might proceed to ‘take a deliberate dive to the mat’ diplomatically, and tacitly permit the United States to continue airstrikes against Syria.

People will need to watch for signs of that horrendous scenario continuing to develop.

British diplomacy

One of the central features of British diplomacy and British foreign policy, is ‘hypocrisy’. It is not done in a haphazard way, but rather, it is done with method and purpose. It has evolved over the centuries because Britain’s stated position on any given issue – particularly when it comes to the issue of geopoliticised alleged ‘human rights violations’ – is often the opposite of what its governing instiutions have actually resolved to do, or not do.

Kerry Brown, the director of King’s College London’s Lau China Institute, once wryly referred to this behaviour as “the brilliant complexity of British hypocrisy”.

And brilliant is precisely what it is.

Today is no different. Boilerplate ‘agreement’ messages were offered by Sir Michael Fallon, presumably to stave off the American Communications Operators who would have tried to apply pressure to the British government. Giving them a statement of agreement means that there is nothing for the Americans to snappily quote and criticise in the social media domain. In actual reality, Britain is still bound by the non-intervention vote that was arrived at in parliament in 2013, and thus is not actually in ‘agreement’ with the United States. 

ITV’s Paul Brand reports:

ITV News / Paul Brand, ‘Syria: Will Britain change tack too?’, 07 Apr 2017 (emphasis added):

Downing Street says America’s airstrikes against the Syrian regime are an “appropriate response” – but are they a response that Britain will be making itself?

Speaking to me this morning the Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon said the US had Britain’s full support. But two things were clear: Britain was not asked to participate in the strikes, and Britain does not intend to participate in future.

For the British government, the question remains settled by a vote taken in parliament in 2013, when MPs were asked whether or not the UK should target President Assad’s forces. The then Prime Minister, David Cameron, was famously forced into an embarrassing defeat, as Labour swerved in their support and blocked the strikes under the leadership of Ed Miliband.

Many MPs – Conservative and Labour – still feel angry about that decision, believing that it has allowed the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Syrians. But it is a decision which still stands. This morning the Defence Secretary said he has no plans to put the matter to parliament again.

Instead, the British government still seeks a ‘political solution’ to the conflict. And it does not appear as if the American President – the head of state who typically exerts the most influence over British foreign policy – is applying any particular pressure on Britain to change tack.

Instead, that pressure comes from the likes of the Liberal Democrats. Not typically a hawkish party, their leader Tim Farron has said “We cannot stand by, we must act.” He wants more strikes, not fewer.

But the chances of the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, a lifetime peace activist, ever supporting military action are remote to say the least. He’s said the US air strikes only risk escalating the conflict. That means for the government, the numbers probably still don’t stack up, killing off the idea of another vote in parliament.

So while America escalates its action – even if the strikes were a one off – Britain remains stuck in stalemate.

That’s basically how it is.

Standing against Islamic terror

Keeping British aircraft off the Syrian Arab Army’s back and away from its skies entirely, would give the Syrian Arab Army the space that is needed for them to keep fighting against outfits like ISIL, Tahrir Al-Sham, Ahrar Al-Sham, and all of the other Salafist-Jihadist outfits that are operating in Mesopotamia.

Those Islamist outfits are the same reactionary outfits who are constantly seeking ways to send fighters to conduct terrorist attacks across Europe and Asia.

It is better for all of us, that the Islamist reactionaries get killed in Syria at the hands of the Syrian Arab Army, than for them to be constantly free to organise terroristic actions across the world.

Bashar Al-Assad is operating one of the world’s great ideological garbage disposal services. It’s called the Syrian Arab Army. It’s very progressive. The Syrian Arab Army destroys reactionaries and traditionalists, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, and it requires no payment for that service. I can’t think of a better deal than that.

One of the best ways to stand against Islamism, is to let Bashar Al-Assad do what needs to be done, without intervening against him.

What can you do to keep Britain safely out of this air-war?

Britain is the most consequential and capable military actor in Western Europe. Britain’s non-participation in airstrikes, not only would ensure that Britain does not end up actively participating on the wrong side of a conflict that never should have happened, it would also have a dampening effect on America’s attempt to form the ‘coalition’ that Rex Tillerson has been talking about since last night. 

The question is, how can you become an active part of keeping British forces out of the air conflict? This is not exactly a difficult task, since it’s a case of simply reinforcing the status quo. The balance of forces in parliament simply needs to be maintained as it is, so that the deadlock on the issue is maintained.

This means that people need to write to their MPs, comment on social media, talk to their union leaders, and – for those who have such access, even at the local government level – engage productively in conversations with key people and keep presenting to them all of the real downsides of what intervention in the Syrian conflict could cause.

Make people aware that sentiments have not changed since 2013, and that no one wants to go to Syria to fight the Syrian Arab Army. The British public were interested in fighting against ISIL and against Tahrir Al-Sham. There is something to be strategically gained from that. There is nothing of any enduring value to Britain that can realistically be gained from fighting against the Syrian Arab Army.

It may also be a good idea to generate a list of any MPs and councillors in potentially vulnerable seats. They should be reminded that the British people have long memories, and that if any of them tries to start a parliamentary insurgency against the non-interventionist result that emerged in 2013’s vote, they should expect to be tarred on social media as being ‘a craven ally of interventionist Trump’. The threat should be formulated in such a way that it makes clear that everything will be done to try to remove those persons from their seats at the next election, if they try to bring this to a vote again. In other words, people need to make appropriate use of the space which liberal-democracy has carved out.

Conclusion

The Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy will not be participating in any airstrikes in Syria.

Let’s do what we can to help ensure that it really stays that way.

Kumiko Oumae works in the defence and security sector in the UK. Her opinions here are entirely her own.


Comments:


1

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 07 Apr 2017 15:22 | #

Update:

During the last half an hour, the Shayrat airbase has become operational again, as repairs were quickly carried out and the airstrip itself had not sustained any serious damage. Syrian planes have sortied off the strip to attack targets on the ground in Homs, defying America’s earlier airstrike.

Now the ball is back in Donald Trump’s court. Is he really going to give the order for another airstrike against the same location under less favourable conditions than were available yesterday? Or will he try something else?


2

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 07 Apr 2017 15:41 | #

Update 2:

Steven Mnuchin has announced that he is preparing a package of sanctions to enact against Syria.

Meanwhile, Rex Tillerson is explaining to the media that the US chose not to target the airstrip itself, but rather chose to target the infrastructure around the strip so as to make the whole airbase inoperable. This obviously didn’t work, since the base is defiantly operable once again.

In the media sphere, analysts in the UK, China, South Korea, the Netherlands, France, and pretty much anywhere on the planet other than the United States, have noted that a large slice of English-speaking media have been citing a Dr Shajul Islam as a source for the effects of the alleged ‘Sarin attack’ that has been used as the justification for the unilateral airstrikes that the United States conducted early this morning.

Dr Shajul Islam (GMC ref: 7271684) is known to British intelligence, in the sense that he was previously charged in the UK with assisting international terrorists in kidnapping and trafficking human beings in Syria, as well as taking up arms alongside terrorist groups. He was able to escape being convicted because all of his kidnapping victims failed to appear in court as witnesses against him. He is presently in Syria, supplying the ‘Sarin effects’ quotations which the media is citing.

In some publications he is not mentioned by name, and is simply referred to as, a “British doctor working in Northern Syria”.


3

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 07 Apr 2017 17:18 | #

Update 3:

The US has indicated that it is ready to take further actions in Syria.

Also:

AP, ‘US, Russia spar over maintaining military hotline in Syria’, 07 Apr 2017 (emphasis added):

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States and Russia sparred Friday over whether they will maintain a hotline aimed at preventing midair collisions of their warplanes in Syria, with senior U.S. military officials contradicting Moscow’s claims that it has suspended the “deconfliction” talks in protest of America’s cruise missile strikes on a Syrian air base.

[...]

In Moscow, the Russian government on Friday announced its own swift response to the American intervention against its Arab ally. It said it would cut the hotline that was established after Russia joined Syria’s civil war in 2015 to help Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government against opposition groups. The hotline’s primary intent is to ensure Russian planes conducting combat missions in Syria’s skies don’t stumble into an accident or confrontation with aircraft flown by the U.S.-led coalition fighting an Islamic State insurgency in the north of the country.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova reportedly said that Moscow would consider reactivating the memorandum with the United States on preventing air incidents in Syria.

But the senior U.S. military officials, who weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter and demanded anonymity, said U.S.-Russian discussions have continued since Thursday night’s attack on the Syrian military base. They said American officials asked the Russians on Friday if the military talks would continue. The Russians said they would.

Pressed on whether the Russians were actively participating in the safety calls, including one on Friday, one U.S. official said conversations were ongoing.

The officials’ comments, however, triggered a response from Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov. He said reports that the hotline was active were wrong, and that the U.S. military attache in Moscow was called to the ministry to be told that the communications would stop at midnight Saturday.

[...]

Looks like they have some leaks, and those leaks are trying to tell people something.

My view is that this means that really, Moscow and Washington are still maintaining the ‘deconfliction hotline’, so that further US airstrikes can be conducted with Moscow’s tacit acceptance. That is what is probably happening.

On a separate note, I also realised that I should suggest some ‘recommended reading’, for those who are completely lost regarding the basics or who have been living in a cave. So see here:

1. The Syrian Army: Doctrinal Order of Battle
2. The Assad Regime: From Counterinsurgency To Civil War
3. Required Sorties and Weapons to Degrade Syrian Air Force Excluding IADS (PDF, 30 Slides)
4. Syria SITREP 17 to 30 Mar 2017
5. Al-Qaeda Resumes Offensive Operations in Syria, 03 Mar 2017

The third item is the one which is most directly relevant to the present situation, of course. The fourth item may go far toward explaining why the US is choosing to act now, rather than say, two months ago.


4

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 03:35 | #

Perhaps the real story is the formal Zionisation of the Trump administration, with Bannon and Preibus now said to be close to the exit door, and the Kushners pre-eminent.  There are reports that a Goldman-Sachs Jew is being lined up to take Bannon’s job, who, during last week, got it wrong when he told little Jared, “Here’s the problem - you’re a Democrat”.

Netanyahu, apparently, led the applause for the Shayrat strike.  You would think that Bannon must know what the problem is by now, but the basic honesty in American government just isn’t there with the Jewish Question.

So far, Trump has been stopped (by liberal judges) from implementing a very limited Muslim travel ban, dissuaded (by Kushner) from moving against the excesses of Obama’s homosexual laws, and launched a wreckless, knee-jerk military strike against Assad even though his supposed chief advisor told him outright that it was contrary to his “America First” policy.  Further, American companies are ignoring the threats of punitive import duty if they re-locate south of the un-walled border.  Will there actually be a wall?  Or will that be all there is?  “America First” is history.  What does the AltRight say about that?  Anyone feeling “cucked” yet?


5

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 03:52 | #

Meh.  The only way our race will survive on the North American continent is through “direct action”.  Harold Covington is the only remaining major White Nationalist figure of any real relevance.  The rest are useless pussies.


6

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 04:17 | #

The position of Majority Rights should shift to establishing an ethnostate for Whites on the North American continent in the Pacific Northwest by any means necessary.  Fucking advancing Asian egi through needless concessions.  Fuck imposing needless jargonary nonsense.  Time to get serious.


7

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 04:25 | #

I agree that we should focus more on that.  I am still going to do a piece about the ethnostate, CC; but I as I am not even American, it can’t carry the same punch as an American opinion.


8

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 04:39 | #

It will be as George Lincoln Rockwell said, Nordics heroism leading the way for all Europeans.


9

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:34 | #

It won’t be heroism unless there is a hot war.  It will, instead, be consciousness and understanding.
It will be intelligence and creativity.  It will be planning and organisation.


10

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 06:04 | #

And one I nearly forgot.  Very important - it will be total commitment.


11

Posted by DanielS on Sat, 08 Apr 2017 08:04 | #

The terms to organize and understand our defense are not jargon, they are not complicated but they are very important.

If they were not important, Jewish interests would not have been so intent upon getting White advocates to identify their enemy as “the left” and to divert them into “the Alternative Right” big tent, which is just (((paleoconservatism))), revised with trendy terms, memes and a few more provisional adjunct circles to ease the entryism of Jews and sufficiently didactic right wingers (Captainchaos, take note) - largely a millennial generation internet bubble circle jerk; wherein they tell themselves that they are “rebelling” against boomer generation (((neoconservatism))), so that they can blame that instead of taking responsibility for having been hoodwinked in the garbed up (((paleoconservatism))) which had them as millennial fogies, getting behind Trump: “The Alternative Right” has aided, abetted, deepened entanglement and embrace of Whites with Jewish/Zionist interests.

While not naming the neocons explicitly, (((John K. Press)))‘s “culturalism” - published at Alternative Right - is definitively paleoconservative by contrast to neoconservatism.

With Trump’s coming out into the open in his paleocon agenda, Alt Righters are quickly encouraged to divert blame to the “neocons.”

(((Edmund Oslan))), who identifies as Alt Right and contributes to Alternative Right.org as well, cites Trump as having gone “Neocon” - Savage Hippie Episode 41 – Did Trump Go Neocon, or Is He a Crackhead?

Matt Heimbach and Sven Longshanks follow suit, blaming boomer generation neoconservatism for Trump’s actions in Syria.

MacDonald with Red Ice blames Trump for succumbing to neocon influence: Neocons to Remove Assad, Trump Buys the MSM Lie.

It goes without saying that the flagship of the AlternativeRight - viz Alt Right - would toe the Alternative Right/Paleocon line: Neocon Puppet Donald Trump Announces His Unilateral Attack On Syria.

Counter-Currents depicts their rightist contrast to Trump’s Syrian venture “neoconservatism” as well, not seeing the culpability which its rightism shares with all of the above for playing a part in support of Trump, not having extricated themselves from paleoconservatism.

All the while, the paleocon jargon that entangles would-be White advocacy with Jewish interests under the rubric of the alternative right is protected and defended against clarification and correction.


Concerns for balkanization of the US are in order but not mutually exclusive to other ethnonationalist concerns - they occur in hermeneutic process, attended to as relevant - for those in The US, perhaps a predominantly regular concern.


12

Posted by Al Ross on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 03:08 | #

Prior to a hot war , total commitment means an attempt at writing Aryan ‘Morals into Law’ and enforcing these statutes by an unsmiling police force.
Won’t work of course. Too many Leftists occupy the political default position.

Herr Hitler might have managed it though.


13

Posted by serg on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 03:47 | #

The Pipeline Theory is the prevailing explanation for the current destruction of Syria. I never bought into this, not least because they don’t need to go through Syria . They could go through Iraq instead. Call me a cynic but when the USA starts blowing up Israel’s (cough) neighbours my thoughts turn to the Yinon Plan , not pipelines.
http://irishsavant.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-proof-of-pudding.html

Lo and behold, confirmation comes via a recent release from Wikileaks of an email between Hildebeaste Clinton and some other State Dept. criminal.
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328#efmADMAFf

“(...)The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria [yeah, right] overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad. Negotiations to limit Iran’s nuclear program will not solve Israel’s security dilemma. Nor will they stop Iran from improving the crucial part of any nuclear weapons program — the capability to enrich uranium. At best, the talks between the world’s major powers and Iran that began in Istanbul this April and will continue in Baghdad in May will enable Israel to postpone by a few months a decision whether to launch an attack on Iran that could provoke a major Mideast war.

Iran’s nuclear program and Syria’s civil war may seem unconnected, but they are (sic). For Israeli leaders, the real threat from a nuclear-armed Iran is not the prospect of an insane Iranian leader launching an unprovoked Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that would lead to the annihilation of both countries. What Israeli military leaders really worry about—but cannot talk about—is losing their nuclear monopoly. An Iranian nuclear weapons capability would not only end that nuclear monopoly but could also prompt other adversaries, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to go nuclear as well.

The result would be a precarious nuclear balance in which Israel could not respond to provocations with conventional military strikes on Syria and Lebanon, as it can today. If Iran were to reach the threshold of a nuclear weapons state, Tehran would find it much easier to call on its allies in Syria and Hezbollah to strike Israel, knowing that its nuclear weapons would serve as a deterrent to Israel responding against Iran itself. Back to Syria. It is the strategic relationship between Iran and the regime of Bashar Assad in Syria that makes it possible for Iran to undermine Israel’s security — not through a direct attack, which in the thirty years of hostility between Iran and Israel has never occurred, but through its proxies in Lebanon, like Hezbollah, that are sustained, armed and trained by Iran via Syria. The end of the Assad regime would end this dangerous alliance. Israel’s leadership understands well why defeating Assad is now in its interests.

Bringing down Assad would not only be a massive boon to Israel’s security, it would also ease Israel’s understandable fear of losing its nuclear monopoly. Then, Israel and the United States might be able to develop a common view of when the Iranian program is so dangerous that military action could be warranted. Right now, it is the combination of Iran’s strategic alliance with Syria and the steady progress in Iran’s nuclear enrichment program that has led Israeli leaders to contemplate a surprise attack — if necessary over the objections of Washington. With Assad gone, and Iran no longer able to threaten Israel through its, proxies, it is possible that the United States and Israel can agree on red lines for when Iran’s program has crossed an unacceptable threshold. “(...)


14

Posted by SERG on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 03:50 | #

Harold Covington is the only remaining major White Nationalist figure of any real relevance.

COVINGTON NOT EVEN IS WHITE. PART INJUN MAYBE?


15

Posted by DanielS on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 05:03 | #

As I said, Al, they’ll make way for some sufficiently didactic right wingers.

Serg, from whence do you know about “Injuns” - from your troll station of Brazil and its mongrelizing ideal that Active Measures would impose upon the West?

Or do you know about them from the Altai region, their home of native origin, one of many areas stolen by the Russian federation in its parasitic aggrandizement?


16

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 05:15 | #

Al, by “total commitment” I was thinking more along the lines of the early settlers.  As for the component parts of ethnostate creation, it’s something we looked at only once, and then not in any great detail.  The thread is here:

https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/why_we_do_it_and_is_it_enough


17

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 05:18 | #

Daniel, wouldn’t the local native American tribes be the only other group with an unassailable right of abode in a white American ethnostate?


18

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 06:24 | #

Update 4:

This update is the one that confirms my framework for understanding all this, to be correct as usual.

In the article above, I wrote:

Kumiko Oumae / Majorityrights.com, ‘Donald Trump authorises reckless airstrikes against the legitimate government of Syria.’, 07 Apr 2017 (emphasis added):

[...] In fact, it is precisely because the United States and the Russian Federation have been on good terms since Trump’s inauguration, that the probability of what has now transpired, happening, had increased.

A scenario in which the United States and Russia arrive at an agreement in which both countries have their geostrategic interests met, is a scenario in which Russia would probably turn against Bashar Al-Assad. [...] Russia has specific interests in Syria which do not absolutely necessitate the survival of Bashar Al-Assad’s government. Hypothetically they could be guaranteed in another way. [...] If the United States were to convincingly guarantee Russia’s specific interests on the Syrian territory – access to the warm-water port, a place in the pipeline consortium, a list of friendly future government figures – in some future arrangement mediated by Turkey, Qatar, UAE and Israel, via some backchannel communication, Russia might proceed to ‘take a deliberate dive to the mat’ diplomatically, and tacitly permit the United States to continue airstrikes against Syria. [...]

Last year, I also wrote:

Kumiko Oumae / Majorityrights.com, ‘Russia uses its leverage in the Arab world to aid Israel where it can feasibly do so.’, 10 Jun 2016 (emphasis added):

[...] The Jewish lobby doesn’t place all their eggs in one basket, and Russia’s economic and military connections to the Arab world can always be used as leverage to produce outcomes that are favourable to Israel.

One memorable example of this can be found during the earlier stages of the Syrian conflict in 2013, when John Kerry demanded that the government of Syria must come to the table and agree to surrender its chemical weapons and dissolve its chemical weapons battalions, thus ceding all of the strategic gains against Israel that had been secured through the development and enhancement of those weapons.

People were sceptical as to the enforceability of this demand. After all, couldn’t Syria simply go to Russia and ask to be supplied with the S-300 and some Su-30s, and thus severely decrease the ability of the United States to threaten them?

That was not to be, as Vladimir Putin and Sergei Lavrov would ‘rise’ to Kerry’s challenge of ridding Syria of weapons within a week, by turning around and using their leverage over Syria to force them into accepting the challenge, by refusing to supply Syria with the S-300, and then brokering the handover of all Syria’s chemical weapons to the international community.

And now, yesterday, the Jewish Telegraph Agency via the Jerusalem Post comes out with this:

Jerusalem Post, ‘Should Israelis be happy about Trump’s missile strike?’, 08 Apr 2017 (emphasis added):

[...]

“American leadership is once again credible,” Maj. Gen. Amos Gilad, until last year the director of policy at the Israeli Defense Ministry, told Israel Radio. “When you use nerve gas against a civilian population, the message is clear.”

Netanyahu in his praise for Trump said the message should resonate as far as Iran and North Korea. The prime minister and his government continue to see the 2015 nuclear deal Obama negotiated with Iran, trading sanctions relief for a rollback of Iran’s nuclear program, as a license for Iran and its proxies to continue its regional interventionism.

Israel “hopes that this message of resolve in the face of the Assad regime’s horrific actions will resonate not only in Damascus but in Tehran, Pyongyang and elsewhere,” Netanyahu said.

Andrew Tabler, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who spent years in Syria, said in a media call that the chief concern for Israel and America’s Sunni Arab allies was what was “baked into” the nuclear deal: “That Iran could use rump governments in Iraq and Syria to shoot people into the region into submission” while the principal US concern [during the Obama years] was sustaining the Iran deal.

[...]

Israel as recently as last month sent jets into Syria to stop the smuggling of Syrian arms to Hezbollah.

Gilad, speaking on Israel Radio, said he was confident that Russia would continue to allow Israel to act.

“I don’t think there’s any threat on Israeli action as long as it in the defense of Israel’s interests,” he said.

[...]

Israel’s most potent threat is Hezbollah, which has positioned tens of thousands of missiles throughout Lebanon since the last Hezbollah-Israel war in 2006. Israeli brass believes Hezbollah could be positioning itself for another Israel war, if only as a pretext to draw attention away from Syria, where its alliance with Iran and the Assad regime has taken hits.

[...]

Netanyahu has gone to great lengths to cultivate Russia, in part because Israel sees Russia as the likeliest agent to broker a final status deal that would keep Iran and Hezbollah as far as possible from Syria’s southwest, where Israel’s border is. [...] The closeness of Trump and his team to Russia – in Washington, increasingly seen as a burden, as it engenders a string of scandals – is seen as a plus in Israel, where it was hoped Trump would leverage his friendship with Putin as a means of containing Assad, Hezbollah and Iran.

Hmm. And given that the entire purpose of Donald Trump’s ridiculous existence in the White House is to try to make that scenario into a reality, and given that he ran on that, I wonder if anyone from the Alt-Right is ever going to come and apologise to me for the frankly disgusting way that they’ve treated me these past 12+ months?

I was derided for being an Iran ‘fangirl’, and I was non-ironically called an ‘Asian imperialist’ because of my support for the Iran deal (Iran is, incidentally, a Central Asian country along the Silk Road Southern Route), my strong dislike for Russia, and other things.

I was correct about everything, and I am always correct, because I know what I’m talking about. Because I’m supposed to know what I’m talking about, and it would only be surprising if I didn’t know.


19

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 07:10 | #

So which licky-lucky moderate Al Qaeda leader will now emerge as the new dynastic strong man of Syria?


20

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 07:26 | #

Hashim al-Sheikh and Abu Mohammed al-Julani are the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham leaders, which is basically Al-Qaeda, and they stand to benefit from the weakening of Syrian Air Force power around Homs and etc. When Trump ordered these airstrikes on Thursday, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham operationally benefited directly from that.


21

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 10:10 | #

Update 5:

Just a quick lesson on rapid memetic warfare with images (commonly understood to be the most difficult mode!), using one of my own comments as the example. I’ve been inflicting some degree of terror on the remaining Trump-defenders at Altright dot com, and this one would be an example of where using an image along with a counter-prop message is very effective:

Notice how I haven’t explicitly stated my conclusion, and I haven’t had to use any epithets. I’ve presented it in such a way that the conclusion is arrived at through the reader’s use of blatant context clues. Sentences are short. The subject is always declared explicitly and pronouns are avoided. I’m referring to Trump, so it’s always ‘Trump’ and never ‘he’. Trump isn’t just ‘a Zionist’ but actually ‘a completely manic Zionist’. The opposition is cast as being idiotic for giving him the benefit of the doubt, but it is not stated as to whether I think it’s deliberate or accidental. I’ve gone with the line “a Tomahawk missile is not a chess piece”, as a way of ridiculing the ‘four-dimensional chess’ concept. It’s extended toward the foundation, which is to say “there is no chess”, and it’s extrapolated backward since “there never was a chess game.” Trump is a manic Zionist and “he always has been”. And the image is in the middle of the comment between the two paragraphs. Not at the beginning, and not at the end.

When you are aiming to make a statement in an environment where comments are rapid, you have to take into account that a person may be looking at your comment for only 20 seconds, so there is no room for waffling. If someone gives you an excuse to go for an image-post (and it rarely happens), you should generally take it.

The use of an image—one image only—where the colours are not too loud, makes the comment look ‘expensive’ (but not too expensive) rather than ‘cheap’. Tasteful but a bit alkaline. If that comment were a drink advertisement it would be 7up.

Above all, be yourself. This approach comes naturally for me, I’m essentially ‘7up girl’ just naturally and by default. People who don’t just have it, would need to cultivate it.


22

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 13:25 | #

Update 6:

More like a flashback for the historically challenged, but it’s worth curating the most salient open source items, since this whole thread is really a big “told you so” thread. Here’s where things were happily going before all of this happened:

1. Bloomberg Business, ‘Mideast Stocks Plummet as Iran Plans to Boost Crude Exports’, 17 Jan 2016
2. Bloomberg Business, ‘Iran Kicks Off Plan to Boost Oil Exports as Sanctions Lifted’, 17 Jan 2016
3. DefenseOne, ‘Your Opinion About the Iran Deal Means Nothing to Obama’, 19 Mar 2015
4. Bloomberg Business, ‘Asia Readies for Iran Oil Bargains on Potential Nuclear Deal’, 23 Mar 2015
5. Al-Monitor, ‘Rouhani’s Cabinet Seeks New Balance in Iranian Policies’, 12 Aug 2013
6. New York Times, ‘Iran’s Leaders Fall Into Line Behind Nuclear Accord’, 07 Apr 2015
7. Ring of Fire, ‘Even Fox News Thinks Louie Gohmert’s Plan to Bomb Iran is Ridiculous’, 30 Mar 2015
8. The World Post, ‘Zbigniew Brzezinski: Cooperation On Iran Deal Boosts U.S.-China Ties’, 09 May 2015
9. Youtube, ‘PBS - Zbigniew Brzezinski on Iran & Israel’, 25 Jan 2012
10. Youtube, ‘VOA London - Lord Lamont: Britain should renew the diplomatic relations with Iran’, 31 Jul 2013
11. Arstechnica, ‘American spy malware infecting Iranian networks is engineering marvel to behold’, 29 May 2012
12. Reason.com, ‘Israeli Hackers Installed Sophisticated Malware on U.S. Computers. Why Doesn’t Anyone Care?’, 04 Jul 2015
13. Majorityrights.com, ‘The NSA collects information on Israeli lobbyists, Jews scream bloody murder.’, 16 Jan 2016
14. Euractiv, ‘EU turns to Iran as alternative to Russian gas’, 25 Sep 2014
15. Asian Development Bank, ‘Falling Oil Prices in Asia and the Pacific: Potential Gains for Importers, Opportunities for Exporters’, 14 Jan 2015
16. Asian Development Bank, ‘Cheap Oil Can Benefit Asia - ADB Report’, 17 Dec 2014
17. International Atomic Energy Agency, ‘New IAEA Uranium Enrichment Monitor to Verify Iran’s Commitments under JCPOA’, 16 Jan 2016
18. Intelligence Online, ‘Norman Lamont, pillar of the British-Iranian business community’, 17 Feb 2016
19. Tablet Magazine, ‘Obama’s Syria Policy Striptease’, 21 Sep 2016
20. The Diplomat, ‘India and China: Lessons From a Lost Oil Field in Syria’, 23 Nov 2014
21. The Hindu, ‘Gulf stability and the oil supply scenario’, 23 May 2016

Previously, early last year, on Majorityrights I had said this about the situation:

Kumiko Oumae / Majorityrights.com, ‘Iran nuclear deal: ‘New chapter’ for Tehran as sanctions end.’, 17 Jan 2016:

Broadly speaking, the winners have been all oil importers, particularly the United States, the European Union, and certain oil-importing countries in South America and South East Asia.

The losers have been all oil exporters, but especially Saudi Arabia and Russia. Israel also emerges as a loser, having failed to accomplish most of its objectives.

The Trump phenomenon has managed to reverse Israel’s fortunes completely. Whereas last year Israel was in severe trouble, Israel has now been completely rescued from trouble by Donald Trump.

We are now in a situation where all of the work that was being done, is being undone. Zbigniew Brzezinski—a guy who I have a great deal of respect and admiration for because of his clarity of mind and his understanding of the pivot zone and the arc of instability—accurately described what the horrendous outcome of an Israeli victory would look like:

The Daily Beast, ‘Is the fallout just as bad if Israel preemptively strikes Iran?’, 18 Sep 2009:

BRZEZINSKI: The Russians have their own interests in Iran, which are far more complex than the simplistic notion that the Russians want to help us with Iran. The Russians have a complicated agenda with Iran. They also know in the back of their heads that if worse came to worse—and I am not saying they are deliberately promoting the worst—but if worse came to worse, which is an American-Iranian military collision, who would pay the highest price for that?

First, America, whose success in ending the Cold War the Russians still bitterly resent. And we would also pay a high price in Iraq, Afghanistan, and massively so with regards to the price of oil.

Second, who would suffer the most? The Chinese, who the Russians view as a long-range threat and of whom they are very envious, because the Chinese get much more of their oil from the Middle East than we do, and the skyrocketing price would hurt [East Asian economies] even more than us.

Third, who would then be totally dependent on the Russians? The West Europeans.

And fourth, who would cash in like crazy? The Kremlin.

POSNER: Is the fallout [just] as bad if Israel preemptively strikes Iran?

BRZEZINSKI: Absolutely.

Regarding his fourth point, we can now say that it would not only be Moscow that would cash in like crazy, Tel Aviv would also cash in directly, because Tel Aviv are now offering looted natural gas from Palestine to the European Union, as a substitute in the case that something should happen to Iran. A spike in energy prices caused by a general war against Iran, would be enormously lucrative to Israel now that it is an energy exporter, in addition to all the other strategic interests that they have.

On 03 April 2017, Israel was able to convince the continental Europeans that a pipeline to Israel should be used to offset Russian energy preponderance, and that it should take priority over any Iran-based plan. That is the worst possible outcome. That simply means that Europe now can either be blackmailed by Russia, or blackmailed by Israel.

Proceeding ahead with an Iran-based arrangement ought to have actually been Europe’s most sensible option, but with Donald Trump in office and the American power structure being fully captured by Mossad on a possible dynastic (Trump family) basis going forward over the next 16 to 32 years as a consequence of that, it now means that Iran is not the safest energy alternative for Europe anymore. This is a huge blow which compromises over 20 years of work on cultivating Iran, in which many sacrifices were made.

Elections have consequences. Some of them far-reaching. Electing an administration whose sole allegiance is to Israel, because that administration did some ‘pro-White’ (whatever that even means) signalling against college students and Mexicans, is probably the single most stupid thing that any group of people have ever done since that time when the Pharoah of Egypt put Joseph the Israelite in charge of his entire economy so as to spite the Caananites.

Talmiz Ahmad—another guy that I greatly respect—explains what kind of disaster the Israeli victory scenario (ie, Syria and Iran getting wrecked) would engender from an Asian perspective:

The Hindu, ‘Gulf stability and the oil supply scenario’, 23 May 2016 (emphasis added):

[...] Gulf supplies could be jeopardised by various factors, such as: political turbulence in Iraq; constraints on supplies from Iran, and the failure of the region to make the required investments in new exploration and development due to low prices. Analysts estimate that investments of $900 billion are required annually to meet the world’s long-term demand. The situation could be further aggravated by political uncertainty in the GCC countries due to their continued confrontation with Iran, the sectarian divide, and the threat from extremist elements, all of which have found expression in the fratricidal conflicts in Syria and Iraq.

This has serious implications for Asia. Today, 60 per cent of Gulf production is consumed in Asia; by 2035, the Gulf will export 90 per cent of its oil to Asia, while meeting about 90 per cent of Asia’s needs. Gulf stability is thus a matter of abiding interest to Asian consumers. In this scenario of contention and conflict, the challenge before the principal Asian consumers, led by India, China, Japan and Korea, is to work together to shape a new regional security paradigm that is inclusive and provides a dialogue and confidence-building platform that the contending Gulf countries desperately need. This is obviously an unprecedented and daunting task, but the gauntlet will have to be picked up; otherwise there will be no Asian growth, no Asian Silk Road, and no Asian Century.

I have a friend who happens to be a Hazara from Afghanistan. She actually wept on the night that Donald Trump was elected, because she understood that everything would become even more difficult for everyone from now on.

I’m sure that the Trump supporters would have ridiculed and laughed at her tears and devalued her viewpoint because she is ‘non-White and a woman’. Much like how when I spent 12 months sternly warning White Nationalists about the fact that Trump is a Mossad and FSB asset, my assessment was largely ignored because I am ‘non-White and a woman’.

After the events of this Thursday, I wonder if American White Nationalists still think that any of this is funny. Because really, it’s not.

In 2016 the global resistance against Zionism was fraught, as it has been since 1945, but there were positions that we had secured and some of them were stealth positions that were effectively anti-Zionist positions even though they were not explicitly framed as such. Globally speaking, things were manageable.

Enter Trump and the absolutely pathetic Alt-Right movement of complete geostrategic flunkies. Rather than assist the peoples who have been struggling against Zionism for generations, they instead literally joined the Zionists and fought against us all.

Rather than taking a global perspective and choosing carefully where to intervene and generating a political movement at the local level to build up a party structure to accomplish those ends, they instead went with the clownish approach of ‘let Trump be Trump’ and ‘Make America Great Again’, even though America is literally the problem.

Rather than developing a philosophy of meaning and action that would allow them to fight efficiently against the Zionist lobby either overtly or at some level of abstraction, they instead promoted Stephen K. Bannon whose media outfit Breitbart was sponsored by Israel in the first place, and whose philosophical outlook came from the Neoreactionary Mencius Moldbug, whose real name is Curtis Yarvin, a Jew and a Zionist.

Rather than talking about how Zionists have been able to inject their policy preferences into American foreign policy and thus piggyback on the most effective military power in the world, they instead wasted endless amounts of time screaming about Asian businesspeople and Mexican farm labourers.

Some people may think that I’m being very hard on them, given that all of this is a ‘big accident’. This is not an accident. All of it has been on purpose. See here, from none other than Kevin MacDonald himself at the Occidental Observer back in 2010:

Kevin MacDonald / Occidental Observer, ‘Lawrence Auster Gets Unhinged’, 23 Apr 2010 (emphasis added):

[...]

I am perfectly happy for Jews to live where they want. I just wish they would not continue to oppose the interests of people like me.  Obviously, in saying this, I am implying that I don’t believe in genetic determinism in the area of political choices. It is within the power of Jews to change their political behavior. In fact, rather than behaving like mindless robots acting out of a genetic imperative, Jews have always been flexibly responsive to historical contingencies, and this agrees with everything we know about human psychology.

It really doesn’t matter if groups with little power and influence oppose the interests of White Americans. But it matters greatly if a substantial component of the elite in terms of wealth as well as political power and media influence opposes our interests and brings to economic ruin and political oblivion anyone (Jew or non-Jew) who comes to our defense.

Nor do I have any conceptual problem with Jews living in Israel. As I wrote in my previous comments on Auster, I would be willing to make a quid pro quo with the organized Jewish community: If you support white ethno-nationalism in the US and provide intensive, effective support for ending and reversing the immigration policy of recent decades (i.e., something approaching the support you presently provide Israel), I would be willing to go to the wall to support Jewish ethno-nationalism in Israel [ie, Zionism], even at substantial cost for the US.

Kevin MacDonald is a Zionist. On Thursday you all saw the completely predictable result of that. The Alt-Right will now try to claim that they are ‘shocked’ and ‘disappointed’. They will try to claim that somehow ‘the Neocons’ came and magically hijacked everything overnight. Do not believe them. Alt-Right opinion-leaders and followers were willing to deliberately make deals with Zionism from the very start, and this has been the result. They should be—and will be—made to pay the political consequences for having done that.

The Alt-Right is fucking done. They were wrong, they were warned that they were wrong by basically everyone, and they refused to listen. They were wrong, not only about Donald Trump, but about pretty much everything. They assisted Russia. They assisted Israel. They viciously insulted and denigrated the white social democratic women of their own country who—without even understanding the strategic or even the racial details—had intuitively sensed that an executive branch surmounted by Trump, Kushner, Miller, Icahn and Cohn Enterprises Limited was the worst of all possible options and a total collection of bastards.

The Alt-Right has alienated everyone with their divisive rhetoric and their total wrongness about everything. And now they think they can shrug it off and move on. I asked in a previous post whether any of the Alt-Right opinion leaders will ever apologise. But really, even if they did apologise, I don’t think anyone would really be in the mood to accept their apologies anyway. It’s just like, whatever.


23

Posted by Anonymous on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 13:32 | #

You are idiots if you oppose the alt right, the only thing I’ve seen in my lifetime to offer hope and rallying the youth. You all seem like the typical paranoid renegade tribune crowd. Can’t use real names, hide like cowards claiming you’re in the right, those alt right are out there in the streets protesting the Syria attack outside of the White House, yeah, they’re doing it wrong.

This site gets 1/6,000,000th the amount of attention he alt right sites do for a reason. They are getting things done and getting followers and building leaders. You curmudgeons sit in your bunker and hope for collapse and SHTF scenarios right?


24

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 13:37 | #

Actually, the ANSWER Coalition, which is probably covertly funded by China (but who can know for sure?), has actually been more effective at continually and consistently opposing Zionist Trump than you bumbling fucking morons on the Alt-Right have been or ever will be.

Also, I don’t care whether we have as many page views as your definitively-proven-wrong-about-everything bullshit Alt-Right websites. You would get more page views due to a combination of Americans being politically stupid along with Russian and Israeli bots channelling traffic toward you over social media.

Go fuck yourself.


25

Posted by Alexander Baron on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 14:05 | #

What everybody seems to forget is Trump stated during the election campaign that he would create safe spaces in Syria. If he goes no further than that, something good may come of this.


26

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 15:08 | #

Oh, Trump is creating a safe space—but it’s a safe space for Al-Qaeda in the city of Homs, which he is clearing out by attacking Syrian Air Force bases. Who exactly would find that to be ‘something good’?

Bashar Al-Assad has it correct. Kyodo reports via Nikkei Asian Review:

Nikkei Asian Review / Kyodo News, ‘Assad says US missile strike failed to achieve goal’, 09 Apr 2017:

DAMASCUS (Kyodo)—Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said Sunday that the recent U.S. missile attack on a Syrian air base failed in achieving its objective, the state-run SANA news agency reported Sunday.

It said the objective was to raise “the morale of U.S.-backed terrorist gangs.”

SANA said Assad made the comment during a telephone conversion with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, “who expressed strong condemnation of the outrageous U.S. aggression” on Syrian territory.

Iran is a close ally and major backer of the Assad government.

The United States supports various groups fighting to overthrow the Assad government. But the cruise missile attack it mounted early Friday morning against a Syrian government air base was the first time Washington took military action against a Syrian military installation since the civil war there erupted nearly six years ago.

For years, the U.S.-backed warring factions have called for the U.S. military to join the fight.

Kyodo News (Cooperative News) is good, ever since 1936 (back when they were called Federated News) they have been savagely undermining American narratives in the most deadpan tone of voice possible.


27

Posted by Anonymous on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 16:46 | #

Thanks “Kumiko Oumae” (wtf kind of white name is that? Is it a lame cowardly pseudonym? Yes or no?) for proving my point, with additional paranoid conspiracies about Answer being funded by the Chinese.

The Alt Right is just getting started. You’re shitting on them, why? Because they had a tiny shred of hope in a white man leader once in their lives? Many of us knew we needed a charasmatic leader with fuck you money to step up and do something positive for whites. Unfortunately Mel Gibson doesn’t have the balls. We hoped Trump did. We are very glad he’s done this screwup this early so we can reconfigure.

None of us trusted Trump 100% and as the Alt-Right has already demonstrated, are taking the lead in opposing his Syria attack. We always said we wanted to use him and not let him use us. We had no other choice in 2016 elections, and you have offered literally no alternative solutions other than the typical paranoid nonsense about waiting for a collapse and a revolution.

You at this and other blackpilling sites aren’t going to gain any significant followers, certainly not enough to even organize a widdle protest outside of the White House. You are the keyboard commandoes you claim the Alt Right is. The AltRight is doing well, and have only just begun. Heil the Alt Right. Heil Richard Spencer.


28

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 09 Apr 2017 17:35 | #

Ah, this is too good not to break into pieces for a response. So here we go:

Some nameless person wrote:

Thanks “Kumiko Oumae” (wtf kind of white name is that?

It’s not a White name, it’s an Asian name as you can probably tell. Incidentally, I am Asian. But you know that already.

ibid:

additional paranoid conspiracies about Answer being funded by the Chinese.

Not a paranoid conspiracy theory, but rather just a point of humour. I actually hope that the ANSWER Coalition really is funded by China. Why? Because it would be funny, but also because it would ensure that it will never go away.

ibid:

The Alt Right is just getting started. You’re shitting on them, why?

Because the Alt-Right sucks. See my earlier comments in this thread.

ibid:

Because they had a tiny shred of hope in a white man leader once in their lives?

Are you claiming that my entirely factual arguments should be superseded by the alleged feely-feelings of White American men? How fragile are these people, exactly?

ibid:

Many of us knew we needed a charasmatic leader with fuck you money to step up and do something positive for whites.

So you selected a charismatic man who could mouth ‘anti-PC’ talking points, who also had so much money that he could not be lobbied by anyone, even though you knew that guy was in fact a single-issue anti-Iran candidacy whose family is married into Israel and who is surrounded by Israeli advisors?

That makes you either:

1. a very stupid White Nationalist or
2. a very intelligent Zionist.

Which is it?

ibid:

We are very glad he’s done this screwup this early so we can reconfigure.

You cannot undo that choice. Everyone knows that the Alt-Right supported Trump!

ibid:

None of us trusted Trump 100% and as the Alt-Right has already demonstrated, are taking the lead in opposing his Syria attack.

No, you are not. The lead is being taken by the radical left.

The Alt-Right are the ones who in fact enabled this Syria attack by unreservedly placing yourselves on the same side as the administration that did it.

ibid:

We always said we wanted to use him and not let him use us.

Yes, you said that. And it meant nothing.

ibid (emphasis added):

We [White Americans] had no other choice in 2016 elections, and you have offered literally no alternative solutions other than the typical paranoid nonsense about waiting for a collapse and a revolution.

I did offer a solution and it wasn’t anything like that. The solution I offered was tantamount to “let America’s geostrategic opponents win”. You people of course didn’t want that. You don’t seem to realise that the fact that you apparently ‘had no other choice’ is a symptom of the fact that you are now officially the cancer. The longer American global economic hegemony endures, the longer the global Zionist power flourishes.

Therefore, it is time for countries other than America to step up. Urgently.

ibid:

You at this and other blackpilling sites aren’t going to gain any significant followers,

I don’t want Alt-Rightists to follow us.

Also, regarding Nihilist Blackpilling, I’m pretty good at trafficking in nihilism. For example, under Trump’s shiny new social system which you ironically endorsed, you can save tons of money on health insurance by avoiding high insurance premiums since in ‘#MAGA’-land no one cares if you live or die to begin with. Either you died last night or you didn’t. Who can tell which is worse?

Quite seriously, a long time ago there was hope for America. There was a possibility that it could have turned out differently. After 2016 it is totally finished though. There is no going back from this.

ibid:

You are the keyboard commandoes you claim the Alt Right is. The AltRight is doing well, and have only just begun.

No, you. You’re an unhinged keyboard commando writing from behind a proxy in Odessa, Ukraine.

Can you explain that to me? Also, your talking points are being used by basically every pro-Trump bot account on the internet right now. I wonder why?

ibid:

Heil the Alt Right. Heil Richard Spencer.

Hahaha! Did you non-ironically just do a ‘hail’ to Richard Spencer in text form? That’s pretty weird. Seriously, it’s totally weird.


29

Posted by mancinblack on Mon, 10 Apr 2017 02:36 | #

That’s some naginata you have there, onna-bugeisha grin


30

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 10 Apr 2017 09:33 | #

Thank you! You can expect that I’ll be wrecking these guys in one-hit moves for weeks to come, they haven’t yet adapted any of their talking points to deal with me.


31

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 13 Apr 2017 03:42 | #

An aggressive extension of Pax Americana is doubtless coming from Donald Trump . This ill - advised policy is , of course, the latter day descendant of Pax Britannica and has now become the theme, mutatis mutandis, of London’s infinitely laid - back (terrorism is something we must get used to ) ruler (or Khan ), Sadiq , albeit under the new rubric of Pakis’ Britannica.


32

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 13 Apr 2017 07:47 | #

The Russians don’t care about Assad . They may not even care about the Syrian Govt., these Baathist remnants of the heavy 1950s European political promotion of Pan Arab Socialism.
Russia wants to save Russia.

Trump’s concerns are his own.



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: Silk Road News: First demonstration cargo train departs London for Yiwu, China.
Previous entry: Sexual Psy-Ops through the gaze of Helen Mirren(off): from Caligula to Prime Suspect and Worse

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem

Categories

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Black Pigeon Speaks (((unmasked))) commented in entry 'Angela Nagle: they think voluntary outbreeding is genocide. Cultural Marxism, Jewish porn! lol.' on Sat, 21 Oct 2017 21:26. (View)

The bling shall inherit commented in entry 'black hyper-assertiveness' on Sat, 21 Oct 2017 19:41. (View)

M Taylor commented in entry 'Alt Right Jews' on Sat, 21 Oct 2017 12:12. (View)

Rights without a state: Spencer's free speech, UF commented in entry 'Hannah Arendt: Far From Innocent' on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 08:08. (View)

Heidegger and Descartes commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 02:35. (View)

The Sackler's commented in entry 'Big Pharma Pushes Opioid Epidemic on West Virginia, the Poorest and Whitest part of America' on Thu, 19 Oct 2017 22:35. (View)

Taintng Iranian Renaissance with "Alt-Rght" commented in entry 'Why I Left the Alt-Right by Jason Reza Jorjani' on Thu, 19 Oct 2017 08:10. (View)

New Republic asks about role of White women in WN commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on Thu, 19 Oct 2017 01:44. (View)

Jewish family making billions from opioid crisis commented in entry 'Big Pharma Pushes Opioid Epidemic on West Virginia, the Poorest and Whitest part of America' on Wed, 18 Oct 2017 00:09. (View)

Catalan secessionist leaders jailed commented in entry 'Catalan referendum, explained: What's behind the push to break from Spain?' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 20:07. (View)

Jordan Peterson on hygienic aspect of racism commented in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:33. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 06:53. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 05:20. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 05:01. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:56. (View)

(((Trump admin))) liking objectivism for the Fed commented in entry 'Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Libertarianism and the “Alt-Right” (PFS 2017)' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 03:46. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 02:30. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Full speech of V. Orbán: Will Europe belong to Europeans?' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 15:28. (View)

Kurdish PKK at war with Iraq commented in entry 'Kurdish Female Sniper Dodges Headshot; laughs it off' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 12:16. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Worst mass shooting in US history as gunman opens fire from above killing 50+ Vegas concert goers' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 11:59. (View)

Support for those going to Court commented in entry 'Jez Turner - Honour our Heroes' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:49. (View)

Swarm at Hungarian border fence commented in entry 'Full speech of V. Orbán: Will Europe belong to Europeans?' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:26. (View)

thought captors kidding that Trump is president commented in entry 'US opens first permanent military base in Israel' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:19. (View)

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn commented in entry 'Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together: Russia & the Jews - Obstructions Continue' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 08:55. (View)

(((LaurenSouthern))) antiracist anarcholibertarian commented in entry 'Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Libertarianism and the “Alt-Right” (PFS 2017)' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 03:46. (View)

Orbán maintains a link with Hungarian diaspora commented in entry 'Full speech of V. Orbán: Will Europe belong to Europeans?' on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 00:47. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 19:14. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 18:03. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:37. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:33. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:01. (View)

Captainchaos commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 15:16. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Pragmatism as ethnonationalism's tool against radical skepticism' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 08:55. (View)

National-Satanist commented in entry 'Angela Nagle: they think voluntary outbreeding is genocide. Cultural Marxism, Jewish porn! lol.' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 08:40. (View)

National-Satanist commented in entry 'Angela Nagle: they think voluntary outbreeding is genocide. Cultural Marxism, Jewish porn! lol.' on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 08:38. (View)

affection-tone