Trump's Trouble With Trudeau

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Buchanan.org, June 12, 2018: At the G-7 summit in Canada, President Donald Trump described America as “the piggy bank that everybody is robbing.”

After he left Quebec, his director of Trade and Industrial Policy, Peter Navarro, added a few parting words for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau:

“There’s a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door. … And that’s … what weak, dishonest Justin Trudeau did. And that comes right from Air Force One.”

In Singapore, Trump tweeted more about that piggy bank.

“Why should I, as President of the United States, allow countries to continue to make Massive Trade Surpluses, as they have for decades … (while) the U.S. pays close to the entire cost of NATO-protecting many of these same countries that rip us off on Trade?”

To understand what drives Trump, and explains his exasperation and anger, these remarks are a good place to begin.

Our elites see America as an “indispensable nation,” the premier world power whose ordained duty it is to defend democracy, stand up to dictators and aggressors, and uphold a liberal world order.

They see U.S. wealth and power as splendid tools that fate has given them to shape the future of the planet.

Trump sees America as a nation being milked by allies who free ride on our defense effort, as they engage in trade practices that prosper their own peoples at America’s expense.

Where our elites live to play masters of the universe, Trump sees a world laughing behind America’s back, while allies exploit our magnanimity and idealism for their own national ends.

The numbers are impossible to refute and hard to explain.

Last year, the EU had a $151 billion trade surplus with the U.S. China ran a $376 billion trade surplus with the U.S., the largest in history. The world sold us $796 billion more in goods than we sold to the world.

A nation that spends more than it takes in from taxes, and consumes more of the world’s goods than it produces itself for export, year in and year out, is a nation on the way down.

We are emulating our British cousins of the 19th century.

Trump understands that this situation is not sustainable. His strength is that the people are still with him on putting America first.

Yet he faces some serious obstacles.

What is his strategy for turning a $796 billion trade deficit into a surplus? Is he prepared to impose the tariffs and import restrictions that would be required to turn America from the greatest trade-deficit nation in history to a trade-surplus nation, as we were up until the mid-1970s?

Americans are indeed carrying the lion’s share of the load of the defense of the West, and of fighting the terrorists and radical Islamists of the Middle East, and of protecting South Korea and Japan.

But if our NATO and Asian allies refuse to make the increases in defense he demands, is Trump really willing to cancel our treaty commitments, walk away from our war guarantees, and let these nations face Russia and China on their own? Could he cut that umbilical cord?

Ike’s Secretary of State John Foster Dulles spoke of conducting an “agonizing reappraisal” of U.S. commitments to defend NATO allies, if they did not contribute more money and troops.

Dulles died in 1959, and that reappraisal, threatened 60 years ago, never happened. Indeed, when the Cold War ended, out NATO allies cut defense spending again. Yet we are still subsidizing NATO in Europe and have taken on new allies since the Soviet Empire fell.

If Europe refuses to invest the money in defense Trump demands, or accept the tariffs America needs to reduce and erase its trade deficits, what does he do? Is he prepared to shut U.S. bases and pull U.S. troops out of the Baltic republics, Poland and Germany, and let the Europeans face Vladimir Putin and Russia themselves?

This is not an academic question. For the crunch that was inevitable when Trump was elected seems at hand.

He promised to negotiate with Putin and improve relations with Russia. He promised to force our NATO allies to undertake more of their own defense. He pledged to get out and stay out of Mideast wars, and begin to slash the trade deficits that we have run with the world.

And that’s what America voted for.

Now, after 500 days, he faces formidable opposition to these defining goals of his campaign, even within his own party.

Putin remains a pariah on Capitol Hill. Our allies are rejecting the tariffs Trump has imposed and threatening retaliation. Free trade Republicans reject tariffs that might raise the cost of the items U.S. companies makes abroad and then ships back to the United States.

The decisive battles between Trumpian nationalism and globalism remain ahead of us. Trump’s critical tests have yet to come.

And our exasperated president senses this.

Jordan Peterson's hysterical rant about people of low IQ

Jordan Peterson is the University of Toronto psychology professor rightly applauded for his opposition to Canada's recently enacted law "to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code" (Bill C16) in such ways as to compel, among other things, the use of self-selected pronouns demanded by transgender and other minorities from the mundane Zie and Zim to such loony extremes as His Majesty and It's Serene Highness.

 Less well known are Peterson's ideas about intelligence. In the short video below, Peterson reveals his thinking on this topic as he describes what he calls a "horrifying thing", namely what he says is the finding of US Army psychologists who were "motivated to find an accurate predictor [of the competence of recruits], so they used IQ."

One of the most terrifying statistics I ever came across [related to] the rationale of the US armed forces for not inducting anyone with an IQ of less than 83. Lets just take that apart, because it's a horrifying thing. After 100 years, essentially, of careful statistical anaylsis, the armed forces concluded that if you had an IQ of 83 or less there wasn't anything you could be trained to do in the military at any level of the organization that wasn't positively counterproductive. OK, so what, 83, OK, yeah, one in ten, one in ten, that's one in ten people, and what that really means, as far as I can tell, if you imagine that the military is approximately as complex as the broader society, then there is no place in our cognitively complex society for one in ten people. So what are we going to do about that? The answer is, no one knows. It's a vicious problem. At that point, the interviewer interjects: It's hard to train people to become creative, adaptive, problem solvers. To which Peterson responds: It's impossible. You can't do it. It doesn't work. Sorry, it doesn't work.

So here is expressed a basic mistake underlying the IQ-ist creed: it is to assume what has to be demonstrated. Specifically, that IQ test scores are an accurate predictor of competence in the military or, as Peterson clearly implies, every other sphere of human activity.

But cursory examination reveals that everything Peterson is saying is obvious bunk. If, for example, ten percent of the US population is totally incompetent, then one should expect a floor to the unemployment rate of no less than 10%, whereas in fact, US unemployment is currently under four percent, while the unemployment rate for African Americans with an average IQ of 85, or barely above Peterson's threshold for total uselessness, is under 6%.

As for the claim that there is no place in "our cognitively complex society for one in ten people," what exactly is he suggesting? The thinking of those prewar Hitler admirers in the Anglo-American eugenics movement come to mind. That Peterson concludes that the existence of so many incompetent people is a "vicious problem," certainly suggests a willingness to consider extreme solutions.

But in any case, what did he mean by "our cognitively complex society"? Can a society even have cognitive features? Perhaps what he meant was our cognitively demanding society. But is it really? Is it harder to stay alive in a world of 24/7 shopping, homeless shelters, and food stamps than in prehistoric times? And even for those productively employed, how many have cognitively challenging jobs — store clerks? coffee-shop employees? gas station attendants? hospital orderlies? Or the lower ranks of academia, say 90% of college professors?

And what about the Africans? With a mean IQ 84, half the Nigerian population is close to, or below Peterson's competence threshold, yet Nigeria's population is booming. So who's gonna win the evolutionary race: IQ 98 Americans with their below replacement fertility, or Nigerians doubling their population every 30 years? Then there's the Mozambiquans, with a mean IQ of 64 despite a significant Euro-African population component and, like Nigerians, a fertility two and half times the replacement rate.

And, conclusively refuting Peterson's claim that men with an IQ of less than 83 are useless to the US military for anything whatever is the fact that a large proportion of the troops, 354,000 of them, that were sent by the US to fight in Vietnam had IQ's of around 70. To learn more search the Web for Project 100, and MacNamara's Morons.

Posts From the Past: About Intelligence

2020:

Why IQ Tests Don't Measure Intelligence

2019:

The IQ-ist Creed

What Is Intelligence?

IQ-ism, a Fake Science Serving the Fascist New World Order

2018:

Jordan Peterson's hysterical rant about people of low IQ

2017:

Dumb Intelligence Tests: Or Why IQ Testers Need to Improve Their Understanding of Intelligence

IQ-ism, Or Psychologists Pedaling Bunk 

Nation-Destroying Stupidity In the Age of Universal Higher Education

2016:

The stupidity of IQ Testing

2015:

Down With IQ-ism

2013:

IQism, Racism and the Decay of the Great American University

Donald Trump Stumps the Justin Trudeau Chump

Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, a post-nationalist for global governance, wants unrestricted access to the US market for Canadian steel, aluminum, cars, and everything else, just as he believes in free access to the cheapest products from the sweatiest of sweaty Asian sweat shops to the Canadian market.

Donald Trump, an American nation-state democrat, wants to restore America's manufacturing base and restore working class prosperity by all necessary means including trade protectionism. In particular, Trump wants to restore prosperity to the rust-belt states of America upon whose defection from the Democratic Party his election depended. Hence Trump's imposition of tariffs on imported steel and aluminum from, among other places, Canada.

Faced by this departure from the liberal gospel of global integration and the abandonment of nation-state democracy and sovereignty, Trudeau appears to be at a loss. He talks of the inevitable return of logic and common sense to US policy, as if Trump were the moron and he the political genius in the equation.

But the more Trudeau and Canada's state broadcaster the CBC disses Trump, the more cheerfully will Trump be inclined to trounce Canada's fantasist trade minister, Chrystia Freeland, with next, perhaps, a duty on imported cars and car parts. And why not a tax on imported energy including Canadian oil, as long ago advocated by the American nationalist and speech writer to several US Presidents, Patrick J. Buchanan.

So Trudeau is stumped. Canada's chief trade partner doesn't give a damn about Canada's sappy globalist ideals. Trump simply aims to make America richer and stronger, a project that seems well on its way to accomplishment by a combination of four policies.

First, to cut corporate taxes, thereby promoting the patriation of profits of US-based international companies and investment in American manufacturing.

Second, to lift restrictions on US oil and gas extraction, thereby sharply raising US GDP.

Third, to use import tariffs to boost the profitability and hence growth of American industry.

Fourth, to impose control and selectivity on US immigration, thereby increasing the productivity of America's immigrant human capital.

For Trudeau and the CBC to express their disdain for Trump's intellect and common sense only ensures that whatever damage US policies cause Canada will be applied more relentlessly. Indeed, Trudeau's adherence to the Obaman policy of dismantling the sovereign democratic Western nation state, flooding the West with however many people from the Third World can reach Western shores, and undermining Western workers living standards by opening markets to the products of sweatshop labor abroad is now a sure-fire loser.

Trudeau's short and foolish reign is thus surely near its end. Who will succeed him? Who knows, but it is interesting to note that former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, aged 84, who said on his departure from Parliament that like England's William Ewart Gladstone, he would return in his eighties, has recently made a public reappearance. Dino, as George Dubya Bush named Chrétien, would be a match for Trump, and would surely be able to clinch a deal on trade.

But then the Tories may perhaps be wondering about Brian Mulroney, undoubtedly the most able Conservative politician of recent decades, a friend of Trump's, an expert on trade who presided over the negotiation of the Free Trade Agreement.

Could we be about to see North America return to the Mesozoic, an age of the gerontocrats*.

____

*Mohamad Mahathir, the newly elected Prime Minister of Malaysia is 91 years old, just a little younger than the blind Venetian Doge, Enrico Dandolo, who personally led the naval force that trashed Constantinople, the capital of the Western Roman Empire, on November 24, 1202.

Peter Thiel, 1996: Multiculturalism and Diversity Will Destroy Western Culture

Steve Bannon Puts the BBC Straight on What Trump Stands For

Why Did British Police Ignore Pakistani Gangs Abusing 1,400 Rotherham Children?

By Sir Roger Scruton:

Ethics and Public Policy Center: A story of rampant child abuse—ignored and abetted by the police—is emerging out of the British town of Rotherham. Until now, its scale and scope would have been inconceivable in a civilized country. Its origins, however, lie in something quite ordinary: what one Labour MP called “not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat.”

Imagine the following case. A fourteen-year old girl is taken into care by the social services unit of the town where she lives, because her parents are drug-addicted, and she has been neglected and is not turning up in school. She is one of many, for that is the way in Britain today. And local government entities—Councils—can be ordered by the courts to stand in for parents of neglected children. The Council places the girl in a home, where she is kept with others under supervision from the social services department. The home is regularly visited by young men who try to entice the girls into their cars, so as to give them drugs and alcohol, and then coerce them into sex.

The girl, who is lonely and uncared for, meets a man outside the home, who promises a trip to the cinema and a party with children of her age. She falls into the trap. After she has been raped by a group of five men she is told that, if she says a word to anyone, she will be taken from the home and beaten. When, after the episode is repeated, she threatens to go to the police, she is taken into the countryside, doused in petrol, and told that she is going to be set alight, unless she promises to tell no one of the ordeal.

Social workers tell girls they cannot help them

Meanwhile she must accept weekly abuse, in return for drugs and alcohol. Soon she finds herself being taken to other towns in the area, and hired out for sexual purposes to other men. She is distraught and depressed, and at the point when she can stand it no longer, she goes to the police. She can only stutter a few words, and cannot bring herself to accuse anyone in particular. Her complaint is dismissed on the grounds that any sex involved must have been consensual. The social worker in charge of her case listens to her complaint, but tells her that she cannot act unless the girl identifies her abusers. But when the girl describes them the social worker switches off with a shrug and says that she can do nothing. Her father, his drug habit notwithstanding, has tried to keep contact with his daughter and suspects what is happening. But when he goes to the police, he is arrested for obstruction and charged with wasting police time.

Over the two years of her ordeal the girl makes several attempts on her own life, and eventually ends up abandoned and homeless, without an education and with no prospect of a normal life.

Impossible, you will say, that such a thing could happen in Britain. In fact it is only one of over 1,400 cases,

Read more

A Fast Route to French Citizenship

This story is amazing, extraordinary, so astonishing, in fact, that one has to wonder whether it is exactly true. It is, after all, from the land of Charlie Hebdo, and it is being promoted by, among others, the BBC, an organization without a conspiracy theoretical thought at any level in its very expensive and multi-layered managerial mind.

Thus one ventures to ask, could the video be the record of a stunt: a stunt to glorify the immigrant hoards that have now become the majority in London, Paris and other great European cities?

Certainly the hero of the piece, Mamoudou Massama, is an extraordinary athlete, or should one say stuntman. Certainly his performance in apparently saving the life of a child hanging from a fourth floor balcony demonstrated an astounding combination of nerve, speed, strength and agility. Which raises one of many odd points about the video.

He was, we are told, granted French citizenship for his feat of humanitarian gymnastics and given a job as a fireman. But it seems to me that a man of such nerve, strength and gymnastic ability would be wasting his talents as a mere fireman, however, excellent his performance in that capacity might prove to be.

Rather, surely, he should be headed for Hollywood and training as a professional stuntman, capable surely, of even more extraordinary feats than the late, great Douglas Fairbanks, who as a co-founder of United Artists Studios was one of the dominating figures in the Hollywood of his day.

Also odd is what one might call, "the set-up" for Mamadou's heroic feat. The child hanging from the fourth-floor balcony who is rescued by our hero, is accompanied by an adult who seems to be holding the child by the hand and is placed where they might readily have hauled what was in fact a very small child, onto the balcony, something that Mamadou did one handed the moment he had scaled the outside of the building.

But whatever may be the case, Mamoudou Massama is a man of extraordinary physical fitness, strength and courage. We applaud his achievement, staged or not. When France is peopled almost exclusively by people from Mali and other places to the south of the Sahara, as now seems inevitable under its perpetual regime of cucks, the French people will be a force to be reckoned with.

Tommy Robinson Arrested Outside UK Court, Jailed For 13 Months As Judge Orders Orwellian Media Blackout

UK activist and English Defence Leage founder Tommy Robinson was arrested on Friday outside of Leeds Crown Court for reporting on a pedophile grooming trial. Within six hours of his arrest, Robinson was handed a 13 month prison term for violating a prior suspended sentence for a similar offense, while media outlets were banned from covering the incident by the court - with several removing reports which had already been published.

Read All About It

Related:

Zero Hedge: Swift Injustice: The "Terrifying" Case Of Tommy Robinson
Zero Hedge: "He's A Political Prisoner Whose Life Is In Clear And Pressing Danger": Tommy Robinson Offered Asylum By German MP

US Energy Sources and Uses

Double click to see at full size image. Source: the Visual Capitalist.

Trikipedia: Craig Murray on Wikipedia's Dark Side

CraigMurray.org.uk: UPDATE “Philip Cross” has not had one single day off from editing Wikipedia in almost five years. “He” has edited every single day from 29 August 2013 to 14 May 2018. Including five Christmas Days. That’s 1,721 consecutive days of editing.

133,612 edits to Wikpedia have been made in the name of “Philip Cross” over 14 years. That’s over 30 edits per day, seven days a week. And I do not use that figuratively: Wikipedia edits are timed, and if you plot them, the timecard for “Philip Cross’s” Wikipedia activity is astonishing is astonishing if it is one individual.

Read more

Related Articles by Craig Murray:

Emma Barnett: A Classic “Philip Cross” Wikipedia Operation

The “Philip Cross” MSM Promotion Operation Part 3

Philip Cross Madness Part IV

Political Correctness: State-Directed Intolerance

Paul Gottfried, writing at the Unz Review, argues that U. of T.'s Professor, Jordan Peterson, is wrong in his contention  that political correctness derives from post-modernist theory, beneath which banner  Communism has been imported to the West.

Rather, Gottfried argues, political correctness in the West is the manifestation of "a post-Marxist leftist ideology stressing universalism, equality, and the social guilt of white Christians, and more particularly heterosexual, male white Christians."

But neither Peterson nor Gottfried has it right. Political correctness is no more nor less than a new term for old fashioned intolerance, and specifically the intolerance promoted by the state.

In Europe’s 16th and 17th Century Christian world, political correctness (had the term then been coined) meant burning people alive for being a Catholic in a protestant jurisdiction, or for being protestant in a Catholic jurisdiction.

UK Academics Demolish Theresa May's Skripal Poisoning Lies

All politicians use words as instruments for the control of those they govern. and, in general, they do so with little regard for the truth. Credibility, however, is vital to the effectiveness of a politician's words, and thus politicians however mendacious must, if they are to retain any influence, ensure that their public utterances have a degree of plausibility.

Plausibility, however, the British Government, and in particular the Prime Minister, Theresa May, and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, have utterly failed to achieve in their statements about the alleged poisoning earlier this year of former Russian spy, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the quiet English cathedral town of Salisbury.

On the contrary, virtually everything they have said concerning the incident is self-evidently false. So blatantly so that one can take Theresa May's continued role as UK Prime Minister as proof of the flaccid feeble-mindedness of the UK Tory Party as a whole that it tolerates such appallingly incompetent and dishonest leadership.

Confirming this view is a report by three British academics, Professors Paul McKeigue, Professor David Miller and Professor Piers Robinson, who have placed the future of their university careers in jeopardy by publicly stating that the British Government's claims of Russian responsibility for the Skripal poisonings are nothing but a farrago of nonsense, and are indeed lies of the crudest and most blatant kind having no apparent purpose other than to stoke hatred of Russia, a nuclear super power, with no evident ill-intent toward the United Kingdom. 

Theresa May and the Cultivation of Crime in England's Capital City

Netanyahu Claims 'Iran Lied' About Its Nuclear Program, but Israel Has Been Lying for Decades

By Gideon Levy

Haaretz, May 3, 2018: Let’s leave aside our discomfort at the sight of the prime minister’s Office Depot performance. That’s a matter of style and taste. But it’s impossible to ignore the new records Israel keeps setting, again and again, for lack of self-awareness, or one might say double standards and hypocrisy.

Israelis really and truly believe it’s shocking to discover how Iran brazenly lied to the world, just as they really and truly believe it’s terrible when dictatorships shoot live bullets at demonstrators, when tyrannical regimes imprison political opponents without trial, when apartheid states maintain two penal systems, when residents of dictatorships are kept in their own country as if in a cage, when people are persecuted for their religion or nationality, when societies close their doors to refugees, when countries scoff at international law. The nation of morality can’t remain indifferent to such shocking developments.

After Weeks of Condemning Russia for the Salisbury Horror (but amazingly non-lethal), Nerve Agent Attack on former Russian Spy, Sergei Skripal, and His Daughter, Yulia, UK Authorities Now Claim Total Ignorance About Who Was Responsible

The alleged WMD attack in the quiet cathedral city of Salisbury, England, on the former Russian spy, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, by means of a hyper-deadly nerve agent smeared on a door knob, or sprayed by a drone, or added to the ventilation system of Skripal's car, or possible added to the Skripal's breakfast porridge, has revealed the British Government to be comprised of nothing but a bunch of fakes, frauds, feebletons, and fabulists intent on the promotion of Russophobia.

After claiming the horror chemical weapon attack, on "British soil," was the personal responsibility of Russian President Vladimir Putin, and after expelling Russian diplomats from the UK in punishment, the British state now says that they have no idea who was responsible for the attack.

Moreover, it is open to question whether the British Government ever had evidence of a nerve agent attack on "British soil." Not only has the Resident in Emergency Medicine at the Salisbury Trust Hospital where the Skripals were allegedly taken for treatment denied that anyone was treated at the hospital for nerve agent poisoning, but the Skripals, the alleged victims who were supposed to be at the point of death, are apparently now fully recovered, but held incommunicado but the British authorities, for reasons not given.

Thus, in the present absence of public information about the investigation relating to the incident, and the gagging of the alleged victims by the British authorities, it is entirely consistent with what is known to assert that the business is totally fake: either a complete non-event, or a staged, non-deadly pseudo attack in which the alleged victims, from whom the public are not allowed to hear, could have been willing participants. Indeed, the Skripal saga looks very much like a staged event designed to stoke hatred of Russia.

Time for Mrs. May to offer President Putin an apology, but don't hold your breath.

Related: 
SCF: Theresa May is dangerous crackpot and a liar

The whole Salisbury/Skripal affair was made up, plotted, stage managed and produced by British, American and German intelligence services. Everything the UK Government under Theresa May said about the Salisbury affair was pure lies, scripted and made up as talking points sent from Washington DC and Brussels. Everything May said, and Boris Johnson, and Amber Rudd and Philip Hammond with regards to Russia and the Salisbury affair was pure lies. The entire story the English put forward regarding the Salisbury affair kept changing and there were terrible inconsistencies. The whole episode from start to finish was a classic English Monty Python circus act. The Salisbury-Skripal affair was pure English Tory lies. Besides Theresa May who ran the Home Office when all these terrible things [apparently] were going on, knew all about it, did not lift a finger to stop it, did not put up a fight or even resign and lead a rebellion from the backbenches. Theresa May authorised everything she now claims is a terrible threat to UK National Security. The woman must go.

CanSpeccy: British Intelligence: An Oxymoron
CanSpeccy: WMD Attack in Salisbury, England: Nerve Agent, Russian Agent, Double Agent, Triple Agent, Spiked Blood Sample, Silent Witnesses, and Propaganda
CanSpeccy: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning?
Zero Hedge: From The Skripals To Douma, The Globalist Pravda Network Reveals Its True Face

Why the Truth About the Skripal Terror, WMD Poisoning Attack Will Never Be Revealed

Former UK Ambassador Craig Murray has a post on the Skripal Poisonings in which he quotes Clive Ponting, a former senior UK civil servant and whistle blower of the Thatcher era:

It seems to me that the reason none of the MSM are doing any investigating/reporting of the Salisbury affair, apart from official handouts, is that the government have slapped a D-Notice over the whole incident and it is not possible to report that a notice has been issued.

To those not familiar with British Officialese, a D-Notice is an order issued by the Government to the media prohibiting publication of certain information. So a D-Notice covering the Skripal poisonings or some aspects of the case would mean that the truth will never be publicly known.

And if the Government does not wish the public to know the truth of the matter, then they must clearly intend that the public believe something that is not true, and in particular, it seems almost certain that the untruth that Her Majesty's Britannic Government wants the public to believe is that the Skripals were poisoned by the Russians.

And if the Russians didn't do it, then it must surely have been the Brits themselves, unless it was one of their special friends, Israel or the United States.

What is not entirely clear from Clive Ponting's comment is whether a D-Notice in the case of the Skripal poisonings has been issued, or whether that is merely a presumption. However, Murray quotes Channel 4 journalist, Alex Thomson, in a direct assertion that a D-Notice has been issued, so it seems pretty certain that the Brits are lying, which is not really surprising since Boris Johnson, UK Foreign Secretary, has already been caught in a direct lie about the origin of the poison allegedly used on the Skripals.

Related: 

M.J. Carley: The Skripal Affair: A Lie Too Far?
Craig Murray: Where They Tell You Not to Look
The Blogmire: The UK Government’s Skripal Conspiracy Theory – or The Art of Holding a Mass of Contradictory Thoughts in Your Head
Valeri Suchov: This is the kind of reflections that contribute to prove the UK gov staged attack on the Skripals
Off Guardian: The farcical reality behind Theresa May’s “novichok” story
CanSpeccy: WMD Attack in Salisbury, England: Nerve Agent, Russian Agent, Double Agent, Triple Agent, Spiked Blood Sample, Silent Witnesses, and Propaganda
CanSpeccy: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning
CanSpeccy: NoviJoke: To Russia With Hate

Justin Trudeau and the Hypocrisy of Liberals

Calgary Herald, April 27, 2018:  The B.C. advocacy group Dogwood got federal funding to hire an organizing assistant to help the not-for-profit “stop the Kinder Morgan pipeline and tanker project.”

The feds are creating a $15-an-hour job designed to stop thousands of high-paying jobs — not to mention huge royalty revenues and property taxes — that would be created if the federally approved twinning of the already-existing 65-year-old Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline is allowed to proceed.

Meanwhile, The Mustard Seed Street Ministry — and thousands of other faith-based organizations like it — got zero Canada Summer Jobs funding from the federal government to help feed, house, clothe, train and love Alberta’s most vulnerable and poor citizens experiencing homelessness.

Many faith-based organizations were denied funding from the federal program owing to them refusing to sell their souls for a few pieces of silver. Trudeau and his government insisted that to qualify for a grant to hire university students, the applying organization had to sign an attestation stating that the organization’s core mandate respects “reproductive rights.”

As Steve Wile, CEO of The Mustard Seed, says, the Christian aid organization has never had to take a stand on abortion before because its core mandate is to minister to tens of thousands of poor and addicted people in Calgary, Red Deer and Edmonton. Nevertheless, the wording of the attestation made it impossible to sign, since it required applicants to essentially agree with the federal Liberal party platform on abortion.

Read more

Diamond and Silk Testify Before Congress on Face-Book Censorship

Opening Statements:


Response to Questions:

Diamond and Silk Slam Rep Sheila Jackson Lee: Don't Try To Mix My Words:

British Intelligence: An Oxymoron

Daily Mail April 23, 2018: "British intelligence investigating the Salisbury poisonings have identified a Russian assassin who could be behind the attack."

Could be behind the attack, eh?

LOL

"Codenamed 'Gordon', the 54-year-old former FSB spy is thought to use the cover name Mihails Savickis and two other aliases."

Codenamed "Gordon", but using a bunch of different names, eh?

LOL

"However, police fear the suspect has already traveled back to Russia and may never be brought to justice."

So the bugger's already skidaddled, eh?

LOL

Well done British Intelligence. 

Related:
Consortium News: Another Dodgy British Dossier: the Skripal Case

The British government shared what was supposedly a dossier containing sensitive intelligence to convince allies and EU member states to support its accusation of Russian culpability in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury, England on March 4.

But like the infamous 2003 “dodgy dossier” prepared at the direction of Prime Minister Tony Blair to justify British involvement in the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the intelligence dossier on the Salisbury poisoning turns out to have been based on politically-motivated speculation rather than actual intelligence

British officials used the hastily assembled “intelligence” briefing to brief the North Atlantic Council on March 15, the European Foreign Affairs Council on March 19 and the European summit meeting in Brussels on March 23.

The Need for Dramatic Claims

When Prime Minister Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson ordered the production of an intelligence dossier to be used to convince allies and EU member states to join Britain in expelling Russian diplomats, they had a problem: they were unable to declare that nerve agent from a Russian military laboratory had been verified as the poison administered to the Skripals. As the well-informed former Ambassador Craig Murray learned from a Foreign and Commonwealth Office source, the British government military laboratory at Porton Down had been put under strong pressure by Johnson to agree that they had confirmed that the poison found in Salisbury had come from a specific Russian laboratory. Instead Porton Down would only agree to the much more ambiguous formula that it was nerve agent “of a type developed in Russia.”



May and Johnson: Needed dramatic claims.

So May and Johnson needed some dramatic claims to buttress their argument to allies and EU member states that the Salisbury poisoning must have been a Russian government assassination attempt.