Generational Déjà Vu – Iran Seizes British Oil Tanker in the Strait of Hormuz…


Iran reports they have seized another oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, in an apparent effort to increase hostilities in the region and make a larger conflict with the U.S. and western allies.  All of this activity has a ring of familiarity to it from the late 1980’s.

In ’87 and ’88 the U.S. took over patrolling the strait to afford safe passage for Kuwait tankers and western-flagged ships. Eventually, following the Iranian attack on a U.S. frigate (USS Samuel B Roberts), there were several U.S-Iran military fights.

It looks like Iran is attempting to provoke a similar scenario today.  Only this time former President Obama and former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry appear to be assisting the Iranian government in their political efforts.  As incredible as it might sound at first blush, if Iran kills or captures any American military members in the modern version of the conflict – Obama and Kerry will be working directly for the enemy.  FUBAR:

WASHINGTON – Tehran, Iran — Iran’s Revolutionary Guard says it has seized British oil tanker, the Stena Impero, in the Strait of Hormuz. The announcement comes one day after the U.S. said it destroyed an Iranian drone.

The military branch said the tanker over “non-compliance with international maritime laws and regulations” and has transferred the vessel to an Iranian port.

The company that owns the tanker, Stena Bulk and Northern Marine Management, said the vessel was approached by unidentified small crafts and a helicopter on Wednesday. “We are presently unable to contact the vessel which is now heading north towards Iran,” the company said in a statement. (read more)

Stand back and look at this from a domestic and geopolitical standpoint and there’s a significant amount of overlay.

The most severe elements of the deepest state, the neocons (McCain coalition) and the interests of Obama/Kerry are converging -at least ideologically and domestically- to work on removal of their natural enemy, President Trump 2020.   Meanwhile multiple international government interests (China, Russia, Iran, et al), mostly based on economics, tend to find a useful and convenient alignment.  Sprinkle the left wing media narratives (see: Ilhan Omar writ large) atop the larger assembly and this entire scenario becomes a bit more concerning.

.

In this rapid pace of modern communication; and absent any cohesion from patriotism and uniting American values; the politics of far-leftist ideology now engages in international issues and puts the U.S. military at risk of conflict as an outcome of domestic political alignment.

Italy Seizes Missile from Far Right Activists


The tensions in Europe continue to rise as the entire refugee issue has led to a major polarization within Europe. In Italy, the BBC reported that an anti-terrorism police unit in northern Italy seized an air-to-air missile and other sophisticated weapons during raids on far-right extremist groups who were combat ready. The missiles belong to Neo-Nazi propaganda groups and they originated from the Qatari armed forces. The civil unrest that our computer has been forecasting on a global scale is here to stay and is heating up as we head into 2024.

Nigel Farage’s BREXIT Party is Now #2


Nigel Farage’s new Brexit Party is now the second largest in Britain. The Conservatives still topped the YouGov poll with 24% of the vote, but they were boosted by the prospect of Boris Johnson, who is a Brexit believer, as the next Tory leader. The prospects for Europe remain up in the air as Brussels still refuses to reform and is looking to punish Switzerland as an example for Britain. But trying to exclude the London markets as a place Europeans can invest will cause a major economic decline for Europe rather than London.

False Flags – Not the Fringe Conspiracy but Reality


QUESTION: Are false flags by governments part of the end of this cycle or a modern practice? And why is it called a false flag?

DK

ANSWER: No – they are very real. Politicians have made false allegations to start wars and prosecute people politically since there have been politicians. The term “false flag” was coined because it was a ploy used by pirate ships that would fly flags of a friendly country as a disguise to prevent their victims from fleeing or preparing for battle. They would hoist the pirate flag at the last minute. The eventual maritime law by 1914 was that a ship MUST display its national flag before an attack. The Oxford English Dictionary traces the term “false flag” to 1569, albeit figurative: “a deliberate misrepresentation of someone’s affiliation or motives; something used deliberately to misrepresent in this way.” There are many modern false flag events that governments have admittedcarrying even against their own people. So false flags are not always some fringe conspiracy.

One of the earliest known false flag events took place in Rome on the night of July 19, 64 AD, when the Great Fire began near the Circus Maximus. The flames were whipped by a strong wind and rapidly engulfed the city. The fire burned uncontrollably for five days; four of the 14 Roman districts were burned to the ground and seven more were severely damaged. Nero blamed the Christians, and many blamed Nero claiming he secretly wanted to build his grand palace. In Germany, during 1933, just a week before general elections, the Nazis set the Reichstag on fire and blamed the Communists to get Hitler in power. The list is far too long to even repeat here in this blog post right down to Dick Cheney’s false flag on Iraq “Weapons of Mass Destruction” to invade Iraq.

Even in American politics, presidents have been directly involved in creating wars with false flags. In the 1840s, the James K. Polk administration wanted to expand slave-holding territory. They needed to expand the borders of the United States in the southwest at Mexico’s expense. They needed Mexico to attack to justify the war. Polk reasoned engineering a Mexican attack was critical. He sent General Zachary Taylor to deploy a force into territory claimed by both the U.S. and Mexico between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande. This disputed territory invoked the Mexicans to attack the Americans. Abraham Lincoln was a first-term congressman who used the incident to become famous himself. Lincoln introduced a series of resolutions demanding that Polk declare whether the “particular spot of soil on which the blood of our citizens was so shed” was American or not. Thereafter, he acquired the nickname  “Spotty Lincoln” which they still called him when he became president.

Even Pearl Harbor was a false flag incident for the US knew well in advance of December 7, 1941, and moved many of the big ships out of the harbor. On January 27, 1941, Joseph C. Grew, the U.S. ambassador to Japan, wired Washington that he’d learned of the surprise attack Japan was preparing for Pearl Harbor. Grew secretly cabled Washington with information gathered from Ricardo Rivera Screiber, the Peruvian Minister to Japan. “Japan military forces planned a surprise mass attack at Pearl Harbor in case of ‘trouble’ with the United States,” he noted in the information that was finally declassified 12 years later. Grew also stated, “There is a lot of talk around town to the effect that the Japanese in case of a break with the United States, are planning to go all out in a surprise mass attack on Pearl Harbour. Of course I informed our Government.” On September 24th, a dispatch from Japanese naval intelligence to Japan’s consul general in Honolulu was deciphered. Washington chose not to share this information with the officers at Pearl Harbor. They knew that only a surprise attack would allow them to enter World War II (“Papers Show Joseph Grew Saw Possible Jap Attack,” Frederick Post, August 4, 1953, p. 2.; “Peruvian Envoy Gave Tip On Surprise Raid Plans”. The New York Times. November 24, 1945. p. 12.).

Every single war we have entered from World War I to Vietnam and the invasion of Iraq has all been predicated upon false flags. President Johnson commented privately: “For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there.” Or how about the declassified Operation Northwoods memorandum March 13, 1962, where they proposed killing Americans to justify invading Cuba.

Despite the mountain of evidence, the press endorses war, often instigates it, and then pretends they knew nothing.

More Leaked U.K. Diplomatic Cables Against President Trump as British Authorities Promise to Catch Leaker…


The leaks from the diplomatic cables of former British Ambassador Kim Darroch continue; this time the cables discuss the U.K. efforts to get President Trump to change his position toward the cancellation of the Iran nuclear deal.

Apparently the British ambassador wrote the Trump administration was “set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism.” Oh, the audacity of it all.  Yes, according to the Brits President Trump was an intractable fellow when it came to the Iran Deal.

(Via Daily Mail) […] Sir Kim Darroch’s claim – made after Boris Johnson made a doomed trip to the White House to change the President’s mind – is revealed in leaked cables and briefing notes which led to Sir Kim’s resignation last week.

The new revelation comes after an extraordinary row over the freedom of the press blew up this weekend, with Mr Johnson and leadership rival Jeremy Hunt leading the condemnation of Scotland Yard over its threats to prosecute this newspaper.

[…] In other dramatic developments:

  • Spies at the Government’s ultra-secretive GCHQ were poised to joined the hunt for the leaker by targeting email and mobile phone records;
  • The Queen’s former private secretary Christopher Geidt was named by Whitehall sources as a frontrunner to replace Sir Kim in Washington;
  • Tensions ramped up further between Britain and Iran with the Royal Navy’s £1 billion destroyer HMS Duncan being sent to the Persian Gulf to protect UK vessels against attack by Iranian boats.

Sir Kim’s Iran memo was sent in May 2018, after Mr Johnson – who was then Foreign Secretary – had been dispatched to Washington to make a last ditch plea to President Trump not to abandon the nuclear deal with Iran designed to prevent the regime from building an atomic bomb. (read more)

Uncommon Knowledge: Part 2: Stephen Kotkin discusses Stalin’s consolidation of power


Published on Oct 13, 2015

Recorded on July 29, 2015 As part 2 begins Lenin is dead and Stalin is trying to consolidate power. Although various people were vying for the position, Stalin had already effectively taken over Lenin’s job. Lenin’s last will and testament says bad things about all his successors, with Trotsky coming out the best, yet does nothing to dislodge Stalin from power. Stalin continues, through hard work and cunning, to gather power but also because people believed that he stood for the principles of the revolution

EU Refuses to Negotiate Fairly with Britain – Demands of a Customs Union


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; could you explain this whole Customs Union issue in BREXIT? Some see it as a great idea, others say it is surrendering sovereignty to Brussels.

SN

ANSWER: A customs union, some claim, would help businesses that send goods back and forth to the European Union. So it would be of interest to Britain’s manufacturers, particularly the automobile industry. They also claim that it might ease complications of the much-hated Irish backstop plan, which is intended to eliminate the need for hard border checks between Northern Ireland and the south.

However, a customs union would allow goods to flow easier, in theory, but it would not allow for frictionless trade. It would keep the tariffs Britain pays on goods that cross the border equal to those that countries in the European Union pay currently but at a huge cost. The goods being traded will still need to meet the same product standards that apply throughout the EU. That is the key.

Turkey is a member of a customs union with the EU, but it is not a member of the EU bloc itself. Therefore, trucks are held up for hours as guards check for permits and make sure the products being transported are in compliance with regulations set in Brussels. They would do the same with a vengeance with Britain. A customs union would not cover trade in services, finance, trading, like legal counsel and information technology, which are by far the largest sector of the British economy – not trucks going back and forth.

The devil is in the detail of a customs union. The EU demands that to be in a customs union they must surrender their sovereignty to Brussels and will be prohibited from making their own trade deals. That means Britain could not enter trade deals with China or the United States simply because it does trade with the EU. This defeats the entire understanding of BREXIT.

 

France Refuses any Negotiation on BREXIT & Demands to Punish Britain


Paris is adamant that the EU should not renegotiate the Brexit deal. The French want to punish the British at all costs, and that means at the expense of their own employment and markets. Amélie de Montchalin, France’s minister for European affairs, said, “If the UK wants to leave the EU, and in an orderly way, the withdrawal agreement is the deal on the table, which has been negotiated for over two years. We’ve also said that the political declaration on the future relationship is open to discussion if the prime minister had a majority.”

France’s position is to end trade by blocking trucks from Britain through the ports of Calais and Dover. They are more interested in punishing Britain than anything else. They refuse any negotiation whatsoever. British trucks will not be able to board ships in Dover in a no-deal BREXIT scenario if they do not have the correct customs paperwork, following a deal between the Port of Calais and Channel shipping lines. Any excuse will prevent trucks from delivering anything to Europe.