Off-topic June 17, 2019

Home Forums Discussion Forum Off-topic June 17, 2019

This topic contains 16 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  David 7 months, 2 weeks ago.

  • Author
  • #44283 Reply


    let’s try off-topics here in the forum section

    Paul Barbara
    June 17, 2019 at 10:57
    @ Tatyana June 16, 2019 at 20:09
    In many cases, the issues are black and white. For instance, Assad v ‘rebels’ (or rather, proxy Western mercenary headchoppers). To blow the ‘narrative’ of Assad’s forces firing on ‘peaceful demonsrators’ you only have to count how many police were murdered (as in Maidan Square, Kiev). Watch this very short video, where an ex-French Foreign Minister explains how he was told two years before the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ (a better name would be ‘Soros and NED Spring’) by high British officials that Britain was going to overthrow Assad with the use of mercenaries:

    Roland Dumas: les Britanniques préparaient la guerre en Syrie deux ans avant les manifestations en 2011

    The Yanks did the same in Libya, importing and arming Jihadis into Libya, then the West acted as their Air Force, destroying the most successful country in Africa (they had slipped the clutches of the international banksters, and were trading in gold dinars, rather than fiat US dollars.
    This is not to say Assad’s or Qaddafi’s rule was without blemish, but that the armed insurrections against them were clearly instigated, completely contradictory to international law, by outside ‘Regime Change’ forces.

    Paul Barbara
    June 17, 2019 at 11:04
    @ Tatyana June 16, 2019 at 20:09
    Imagine a scenario – the West and their rich Arab ‘friends’ send hordes of well-armed, mobile Jihadis into Russia to cause mayhem. Would Russia accept a massive UN(?) force coming into Russia, to force ‘negotiations’ between the Russian government and the Jihadis? I don’t think so.

  • #44284 Reply


    Paul Barbara, it’s a very interesting question. I think that Russia would ask for the UN to force negotiations in case we couldn’t manage the conflict ourselves. More probably we would be able to beat the invaders with our own army, I believe.

    Another interesting scenario is – what if not invaders, but a part of the natives, e.g. muslims, would grasp a piece of land in Russia trying to build a sharia state on it? Like ISIS does in Syria. Isn’t it obligatory for the UN to immideately jump into the situation?

    Ok, ISIS are terrorists, what about peaceful actions, like the Crimea? Everyone talks about Russian interests vs Ukrainian interest, but rarely I see that one cares for the Crimeans 🙂

    When I see these binary choices I recall a joke:

    A muslim man is visiting a party with his sister, and another muslim man comes up and says:
    – Brother, with all my respect, could you please allow this gorgeous beauty queen to dance with me?
    The other man answers:
    – Well, brother, this beautiful young woman is my sister, she is so very dear to my heart, I want her to be happy and have fun, so I think you can dance with her. Respect brother.
    The woman says:
    – Hey, why not asking me if I want to dance?
    Both man look at her and say:
    – Shut up, woman, how dare you open your mouth while men are talking?

  • #44285 Reply


    Another interesting question is:

    J Galt
    June 17, 2019 at 12:31
    What’s Soviet/German relations in the lead up to 1941 got to do with China’s attempts to establish overland trade and communications routes with her trading partners and allies?

    And as for Barbarossa in 1941, it was clearly a scratch operation and colossal gamble as the more intelligent of the Wehrmacht officers knew. The Wehrmacht was not equipped for a war of conquest in the east, however the Worker’s and Peasant’s Red Army was most certainly set up for a war of conquest in the west.

    Hitler lost the war before it had even started in August 1939 when Stalin outwitted him, in 1941 Hitler merely bought himself a couple of more years when he interrupted the long planned soviet invasion of Europe with barely a few weeks to spare.

    What are your thoughts on this Tatyana?

    • #44288 Reply

      Paul Barbara

      Tatyana, you have more or less ignored the first comment, re Syria. If the insurrection was caused by imported Jihadis by the West and their cronies, then it seems to me that case is black and white, and is not a case for ‘negotiations’, especially if some of the ‘negotiators’ are the perps who sent the Jihadis in in the first place.
      Re Russia not likely to look kindly on a Western ‘covert’ invasion of Jihadi mercenaries, or the West’s magnanimous offers to ‘mediate’, I suspect President Putin would tell them where to go.
      The scenario you suggested, where in situ Muslims create an armed insurrection, is again a black and white problem, and the West should keep their snouts out of it.
      Could you imagine Black people in the US beginning an armed insurgency, and taking over some Southern states? Would the US meekly acquiesce in a UN demand they accept arbitration, or would they go in, cruise, drone and guns blazing? And perhaps even roping NATO in as well, for good measure, like they did after 9/11?
      If hordes of heavily Jihadis poured over the border from Scotland (I’m not suggesting the Scots are either Jihadis or friendly towards them, but just creating an imaginary situation, like the hordes of non-Turkish Jihadis who were allowed by Turkey to cross their borders into Syria and Iraq with their columns of heavily-armed trucks) and made their way south, taking over North London high ground, from where they bombarded Central London, would you expect the UK to accept outside reconciliation, especially if Scotland (the main route of incursion) was a major party to the dispute settlement? Or would the UK accept a ‘no fly zone’ to stop them pounding the heck out of the terrorists?
      Again, pretty black and white, without shades of grey.
      The US is pushing Iran to the brink, just like they did with Japan pre-Pearl Harbour, which the US anticipated and welcomed (they had deliberately driven Japan to make a major strike against the US by ever-increasing sanctions, thus attaining FDR’s, the Military and Big Business desires to enter WWII.
      You ask about welcoming education about Russia pre-WWII; here are two books which are very enlightening about the run-up to WWI, which it is important to know as WWI led inevitably to WWII.
      ‘Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War’ and ‘Prolonging the Agony: How the Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately Extended WWI by Three-And-A-Half Years’ both by Jim MacGregor and Gerry Docherty.
      And US Banks and Corporations deliberately built Hitler up between the wars (with the intention that he would turn against Russia, and they would virtually destroy each other, then the US and Europe would join in and mop up, well on the way to world domination.

      • #44294 Reply


        Paul Barbara, thanks for your answer. Re ignoring the first comment about Syria.
        The case is there are more then 2 parties in reality in Syria and I don’t want to mix the reality and imagination.
        There’s Turkey, who want to fight Kurdis and Kurdis try to take a piece of land for themselves. There’s Israel, who try to hold Golan Heights and Syria tries to not let them do it.
        There’s Iran who was also invited to help Syria, and the USA+Israel who are against Iran.
        There’s Russia who wants first of all stop terrorists, you know they look for support among russian muslims and we find ISIS groups here and there in our country and in neighbouring ones.

        Indeed, if we abstract of reality we can easily see who is bad – those who strike first, instead of a peaceful decision.

        • #44331 Reply

          Paul Barbara

          @ Tatyana June 17, 2019 at 16:22
          You still seem to miss the point re Syria. The point is, ex-French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas clearly states he was in London about two years before anything kicked off in Syria, two years before the so-called ‘Arab Spring’, where high British officials told him Britain was planning to overthrow Assad with the use of mercenaries. That is a clear-cut War Crime, and the other players who got involved does not make the clearly black and white situation grey.
          Indeed, the US set up a secret base in Jordan, also in 2009, to train mercenaries, and France was also involved in the plots. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf regimes were asked to fund and provide the mercenaries, and Turkey to provide facilities for bases in Turkey from which the mercenaries would pour over the Syrian and Iraqi border.
          More recently, the Turkish Security Services actually admitted to have sent 2,000 truckloads of arms and ammunition into Syria.
          As for Assad’s forces ‘firing on peaceful demonstrators’, the demonstrations were set up by the West, and infiltrated with snipers, like in Maidan. Many Syrian policemen were killed.
          Black and White!

          • #45294 Reply


            There’s Russia who wants first of all stop terrorists, you know they look for support among russian muslims and we find ISIS groups here and there in our country and in neighbouring ones.

            Maybe this is Russia’s primary aim.

            I have read that one of the underlying US/UK aims in Syria is to get a gas pipeline constructed from Qatar to Europe. The theory is that Assad would not permit the construction of this pipeline across Syria which is the only viable route, hence the war. I’m not really in a position to judge the accuracy of this claim, but it it is clear from all the skulduggery and politics surrounding Nordstream 2 that natural gas is a resource of strategic, geopolitical import. Therefore this explanation seems at least plausible.

            And if this explanation were the correct one, then it provides Russia with another goal which may well supercede that of stopping terrorists – the goal of preventing the construction of this pipeline which would allow the US/UK/Saudi alliance to challenge Russia’s European gas buisness.

      • #44295 Reply


        thanks for your recommendation, I’ll look for russian version of the books, because it is still hard for me to read much text with many unknown words in English.

        • #44330 Reply

          Paul Barbara

          @ Tatyana June 17, 2019 at 16:23
          I don’t believe there is a Russian translation yet, but I’m sure the authors would be very pleased if one was made and the books printed in Russian. Perhaps you could approach a Russian book printer and suggest he contact the authors to buy the rights for a Russian translation.
          Until then, if there isn’t a Russian translation, I think it would be well worth your while trying to plough through them, ‘Hidden History’ first.

  • #44286 Reply


    J Galt
    I answered it is the first time I see that Stalin intended to invade the Europe. I wish you or other commentors could educate me on this.

  • #44289 Reply


    Thanks for the invite i’ll contribute this which i just posted af Off-G.

    As the origination of the 911 trope has been raised and to put last weeks firework display in context, i am thoroughly surprised that writers (and btl super posters) never mention the SCO.

    Let me get that ball rolling in the hope that OffG gets a proper article on it soon.

    ‘The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), or Shanghai Pact,[1] is a Eurasian political, economic, and security alliance, the creation of which was announced on 15 June 2001 in Shanghai, China by the leaders of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan’

    That was 611.

    Anyone getting it?

    Try this:
    ‘The SCO is widely regarded as the “alliance of the East”, due to its growing centrality in Asia-Pacific, and has been the primary security pillar of the region.[5][6] It is the largest regional organisation in the world in terms of geographical coverage and population, covering three-fifths of the Eurasian continent and nearly half of the human population.‘

    And what happened last week?
    Russia took over the presidency and Putin hit the ground running!

    From the horses mouth – in very clear english, so that the world can access it, as the MSM doesn’t.

    “We see a promising potential in integrating the Eurasian Economic Union with China’s Belt and Road project with a future aim of building a larger Eurasian partnership and an open and equal constructive cooperation space based on the principles and norms of international law without any political or economic bias, but with consideration of each other’s legitimate interests.”
    June 14 2019

    Oh and the firework display?
    June 13 2019.

    That speech (I recommend reading it in full, a few times) is as clear a declaration of intent and road map to the end of hundreds of years of Anglo Imperialism.

    • #44290 Reply


      It was instantly modded there!

      My 911/611 joke aside – it is only facts.

      • #44296 Reply


        Seems like it is a suprise for you 🙂
        It is a kind of mutual insurance society, we’ve got Eurasian Bank of Development, and trade in national currencies is widely discussed.
        Sorry, but Europe is only a part of the continent, even together with both Americas it doesn’t make the whole world.

      • #44299 Reply


        Off-G restored my comment. Phew got worried there

        Anyway the point of my post is that the western controlled MSM are regularly avoiding telling their consumers of just how significant the SCO is.

        I can see a scenario when the EU has extensive ties with the rest of Eurasia.

        Very scary for anglo imperialists.

  • #44315 Reply


    Hello, I hope I am not late to the party so to speak. I have recently obtained a copy of Craigs Samarkand book and was very moved. I was due to work in Tashkent 2000 but only worked Mongolia where I met my German wife, under an EU project. Will endeavour to contribute more here!

  • #44937 Reply


    My Skripal theory in full for you Tatyana.

    Since off-topic is all the rage at the moment I will publish my simple, but now completely firm belief about the Skripal poisoning.

    I have for a very long time now thought that much of what has been said in the Western media about this is a smokescreen to divert attention away from the true facts of this case.

    What no-one seems to have recognised is the absurdity of choosing a time when Sergei Skripal’s daughter Yulia was visiting to carry out his murder. That makes no sense at all. Any would be assassin is not going to attempt the murder when he has close company. It would carry too many risks. He could be alerted by his companion and his companion might also have to be dealt with. The assassination attempt may fail.

    it would make far more sense to carry out the assassination attempt when his daughter went home. Then he would be alone and a much easier target. Could the murdered not have waited?

    Another regular contributor to this blog and who is a Russian national has commented very strongly that Sergei Skripal was a traitor to Russia. Loyalty to mother Russia is something that Russians take very seriously, and betraying Russia is a very grave offense. You can see on the video of Mr Skripal’s arrest the anger in the faces of the officers who were taking him to his cell.

    What sort of effect does all of this have on young Yulia? Yulia, a proud young Russian woman who has grown up the child of a respected military man suddenly finds herself the daughter of a traitor. She is the daughter of the lowest of the low in the eyes of her fellow Russians. My guess is that she felt the full force of this shame and the disgrace that it brought upon her family.

    Yulia loved her father, but also secretly hated him for his betrayal. My belief is that Yulia visited her father early last year with the intention that it would be a final visit. She brought with her poison. Perhaps Fentanyl, and chose her moment when she and her father sat down on a bench, alone in the centre of Salisbury. She dosed her father with the poison and then administered it to herself.

    Yulia survived, as we know, but I believe that Sergei was killed. This had nothing whatsoever to do with the Russian government who would have tried to prevent her from taking this course of action had they known.

    I do not believe that Bashirov and Petrov had anything to do with this, though they may have been Yulia’s scapegoats.

    As for Mrs May, she is surely too stupid to understand that what she is told by MI5-6 is nonsense. Mr Putin behaves with dignity as usual.

Reply To: Off-topic June 17, 2019
Your information: