U.S. roguery

The greatest fantasy in the Western rogue states' latest attack on Syria

On the 7th of April, I wrote about how Russia, having grown tired of the numerous false flag events that have been deployed in the Syrian war, had tired and decided to pre-empt false flags by warning beforehand of what they believed to be plans to conduct some. I wrote:

Having tired of false flag attacks by the Americans, the Russians decided to pre-emptively warn that the U.S. was planning one with the help of Islamists in Syria. This seems to have worked as we have not had any major false flag propaganda recently, as one would have expected what with the Islamists seemingly being cornered. If everybody knows that you are going to launch a false flag, then all credibility is lost when the false flag attack is carried out. The Russians and the Syrians have played this one very well.

With impeccable timing, the very next day, on the 8th of April, reports came out of an event bearing all the hallmarks of a false flag event; not even that, a hoax. The event supposedly took place on the very same day I released that article. Videos were circulated purporting to show how the Syrian government had attacked its people. Donald Trump went on his customary twitter rant, Hillbilly Haley did her thing at the U.N, and the lap-dogs in Europe of Theresa May and Le Creep Macron chimed in.

As few will have missed, the gang of rogue agents bannered under NATO launched airstrikes against Syria on Saturday the 14th. Only 3 countries did it in the end, but let not that fool you into thinking that the rest of the members are peace-lovers and warmonger-haters. The only other country which could reasonably had joined in was Turkey, and it has its own agenda which would not have been served by going along with this illegal action - although let us recall that Turkey has illegal actions of its own inside Syria.

There will be plenty more to write about this as more details become known, but I'll just mention one thing before getting to my main point: Unlike the events in Syria last year, which may indeed have been a genuine false flag (if the event ever took place, that is) this one appears to be a genuine hoax. In other words, the details which have come to light seem convincing on the matter that there was never any attack involving chemical attacks to begin with.

The term "false flag" is used quite a lot nowadays but it's worth making proper distinctions, given that it's often used wrongly.

A "false flag" proper is an event which takes place, carried out by someone other than the one who gets blamed, with the specific goal of using the blame apportioned to achieve other ends.

A "hoax" is a non-event which is prevented as an event.

Nothing takes place, but it is claimed that something took place, and blame is pinned as though an event had taken place. Before last week I would have argued that hoaxes were much more difficult to carry out effectively than false flags, but given the compliance of the media and the ignorance of the general population, I think the powers-that-be have decided that they do not need to go to the trouble of carrying out false flag events when hoaxes, cheaper and safer as they are, will do the job just as well.

It would seem as though what we had on the 8th of April was a complete hoax, which Donald Trump, the American establishment, the British establishment, the Western European establishment, the media, all of these sorry excuses for adults, fell for like a bitch in heat.

All we know for sure is that the White Helmets were involved. How many others of the aforementioned agents were involved is impossible to know at this point in time. The Russian government has pointed the finger at British intelligence in any case, although they have not yet presented any proof for this.

Back to the main point of this article, which has to deal with fantasies, and more specifically the fantasies which have enabled this tragic situation.

There are many flying around at the moment, far too many to list. One could be the idea that dropping bombs is humanitarian. Another is that the "rebels" are fighting to save Syria from a brutal dictator. Yet another is that the U.S. is an independent actor in all of this, only intervening to make sure that the sides are fighting fairly. Another is that the Western media can be relied upon to report on anything truthfully.

By far the biggest fantasy in all this let's-bomb-Syria-for-the-Syrians campaign is the absolutely ridiculous notion that the United States, that Donald Trump, that Theresa May, that Le Creep Macron, that Angela Merkel , that the media, that any of these narcissists care one bit about the well-being of the Syrian people.

They don't even care about the people in their own countries.

These people have been arming the band of militant head-Chopping Islamists who have terrorised all of Syria over the past 7 years. These people have mercilessly bombed the Syrian Arab Army in order to help the cause of the Islamists. These people have introduced sanctions on Syria to prevent it form being able to re-build after the war is over. These people have done everything in their power to prevent the war from being over. These people have occupied the riches parts of Syria to prevent Syria from having the funds to rebuild.

We are then supposed to believe that Donald Trump, Le Creep Macron, and medicore May care about Syrian lives, Arab lives, any lives. All the while they are claiming this, they are not only doing nothing to stop a genocide in Yemen on account of a naval blockade initiated by Saudi Arabia, but they are actively involved in helping Saudi Arabia enforce this blockade which is starving millions as...

We dare to question, and we dare to join the dots - Sunday 11th to Saturday 17th of February

If one was to write extensively about all the public evils going on in the Church right now one would hardly have time for anything else. For that reason I'll save those for last and attempt to be brief in my coverage of them. It's same old really - Bergoglio's sodomites and apostates are pushing apostasy and sodomy, in different guises and with a different cast of characters every week.

We start with a very curious story regarding Syria, one which confirms what anybody with half a brain already knew but which is nonetheless intriguing. We had the French defence minister admitting that they have never had any reliable evidence of chlorine use in Syria by the government. If I am not mistaken, this came not long after the U.S. defence minister also stated that they have no evidence that the government of Syria has used chemical or biological agents against anti-government Islamists. The question of whether it is any of their business what the Syrian government does in its own country's fight for survival against Jihadis - armed and trained by the West and its allies - is one which I shall not address now. We must assume that none of them have ever had any evidence of the Syrian government ever committing atrocities of the likes against its citizens, or even the non-citizens killing its people in an effort to turn it into an Islamic state.

This should have made news, but predictably did not.

Le Creep did not waste any time stating that if they do find evidence they will strike against Syria - in contravention of international law, of course, but which of these globalists cares about that?

The important thing to take home is that for some reason, the narrative from the NATO aggressors has started to shift. I cannot help but wonder why this is, given that the U.S. has dug its heels in Syria by attacking the Syrian government forces and its allies multiple times. It's almost as though Syria is the battleground for different factions of the Western establishment, the major cost being Syrian blood.

A similar theme, this time limited not to general NATO roguery but only to U.S. roguery, is "If America Wasn’t America, the United States Would Be Bombing It", which I read on the website of the Ron Paul Institute.  The piece was specifically about the multiple war crimes the U.S. has perpetrated since the end of the Second World War, with a special emphasis on crimes only over this past decade. It is difficult to disagree with the claim of the piece, and truth be told, if the U.S. had an embassy in Washington, then they would have found a way of taking out Donald Trump militarily by now. I would much rather think that the U.S. would not be bombing America, had America been a different country, but rather supplying it with weapons and propaganda aid.

The only group of people who largely get the U.S. straight are traditionalists, and even here I would argue that at least within the U.S. it is not a majority which is opposed to U.S. aggression. A lot of American traditionalists, however, are honest enough to recognise the U.S. as the threat to world peace and morals that it really is, and are ashamed of the U.S. for that reason.

If you think I am exaggerating ask yourself this: Since the end of the Cold War, what is the body count of non-U.S. aligned Islamists compared to that of the U.S.?  This is a particularly good mental exercise for those who do nothing but fret about the threat of Islamist violence. I don't have the numbers, but I would be extremely surprised if the numbers were not in the region of 100:1, with the U.S. having the larger number. It is also worth pointing out that the only country in which the U.S. and al Qaeda have been on opposite ends of the battle ground has been Afghanistan, and to a lesser extent Iraq (although that's questionable). In Libya, Syria and Yemen, the U.S. and al Qaeda have not only fought side-by-side, but the U.S. has provided air support for al-Qaeda, the very organisation over which the U.S. claims to have started the Afghan war.

For the longest time I resisted the notion that al-Qaeda was a CIA-front, but now I have grudgingly come to accept that it must be the case, given that in most conflicts they fight on the same side, and in the only conflict in which they had direct combat, the U.S. had been responsible for their creation in the first place, having supported Islamists in Afghanistan in their fight against the Soviet Union.

That war has destroyed a country and destabilised a region. Instead of showing contrition, Americans are now led into welcoming the tune of war drums against North Korea, Venezuela and Iran - and those are only the countries that make it to the news. I am sure there are many other threats made against smaller states but which are not found newsworthy or propaganda-worthy enough for the U.S. to make a big show about.

If we count the dead unborn, and the rising number of dead elderly, killed for no other reason other than for being inconvenient, then the body count of the West versus the Islamic world is in the region of 1,000:1 at least. As Michael Matt from the Remnant asks , why should any American think they have the moral high ground over Islam, or Islamists, or even communists? Well, at this rate the U.S. will be communist before long and large chunks of Europe will be Islamist, so we shall soon be able to see if the body count will increase or decrease.

On the topic of body counts, we were informed that there was a school shooting in the U.S., with 17 people being killed as a formerly-expelled student shot up at his...

Pages

Subscribe to U.S. roguery