It’s a really bad look for folks still insisting that Ukraine is the correct side to associate defending it and criticising Russia with minimising this one. “What about the white people?” At least pretend to be consistent.

But here are some dead civilians in Ukraine to satisfy your urge to secure the future of white children or whatever: https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/geopolitics/burned-alive-how-the-2014-odessa-massacre-became-a-turning-point-for-ukraine/

It didn’t work in Venezuela with a barely 20 year old Bolivarian Revolution (it wasn’t regime change, PSUV is still in power, their policies didn’t even change much), but people out there really believed it would work with the 70 year old Islamic Revolution rooted in a more-than-a-thousand year old traditions? The proper comparable regime changes in recent years would be Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan, all of which took months to years of open war. The officials knew this from the start, but MSM should stop normalising this notion of regime change because it’s either not going to happen or going to be an extremely long and costly process.

Third paragraph: Anyways, we as New Yorkers don’t really have to fear any retaliation from Iran, so no worries, you can go back to brunch after you express your dissent on social media.

I also read it that way on a first pass because I missed the “Iranian” in “Iranian New Yorkers”. He’s probably referring to the likely surge in hate crimes against Iranians that’s bound to happen, and that he’ll (allegedly) work to prevent it.

Illegal war of aggression

He said the words. He also didn’t fumble around doing a both-sidesy condemnation of Iran. As far as I’m aware, that’s already the best comment on a US war for a elected US politician this Century.

Hopefully you will reply rather than sneak away with a smug look on your face like your kind usually does.

So it’s clear – they must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.

That remains the primary aim of the United Kingdom and our allies – including the US.

[…] As part of our commitments to the security of our allies in the Middle East we have a range of defensive capabilities in the region – which we’ve recently taken steps to strengthen.

Our forces are active and British planes are in the sky today as part of coordinated regional defensive operations to protect our people, our interests, and our allies - as Britain has done before, in line with international law.

We’ve stepped up protections for British bases and personnel to their highest level.

They should refrain from further strikes, give up their weapons programmes, and cease the appalling violence and repression against the Iranian people – who deserve the right to determine their own future, in line with our longstanding position.

Emphasis mine. Despite saying “we didnae do it and we wouldnae done it”, this is quite clearly stating that they’re militarily helping their ally, the US, with regards to their goals, which include changing Iranian internal policy and governance altogether. Or am I mistaken somehow? Please correct me.

It was a not-so-subtle reference to how King Louis XVI was referred to as Citoyen Louis Capet, with a surname being a indicator of loss of status, after being arrested and sent to the guillotine. It’s a call for the whole Windsor monarchy to be abolished by execution. That includes Charles.

There’s something poetic about a Windsor being called by his citizen name while being arrested. I hope the entire family of “royal” nonces get a proper Citizen Louis Capet treatment.

Yeah. But at least it’s a source that one can analyse and criticise. To be honest I literally just googled it and picked the first link because I’ve only read about this in telegram channels. And still, that was more effort than OP put in.

Please link a source next time, lots of ignorant replies in this thread due to the lack of one explaining the Baal thing.

Why were ‘Baal’ statues burned at Iran’s revolution anniversary rallies?

It’s a reference to Epstein.

Many Jews, also the Zionist ones, would oppose calling the Holocaust a cure, but it is in the Zionist vein to abhor the diasporic “weakness” which supposedly led them to go “as sheep to slaughter”, a term which epitomized the contempt with which the Israeli Zionists viewed diasporic Jews, including Holocaust survivors in general, in the early years of Israel. It was only in the 1960’s, following the Eichmann trial, that there started to be serious interest in Israel for hearing stories of Holocaust survivors, apparently since they began to witness its PR value for Israel. Before that time, Holocaust survivors were generally not listened to, and their stories merely represented weakness. The term “soaps”, common in Israeli colloquial, was derived from the myth of Nazis creating soap from human fat of Jews, and it meant “weaklings”.

https://mondoweiss.net/2019/05/the-strong-weak/

These scum were not the oppressed. If there was another Jewish holocaust they’d cheer it on so long as it furthered their aims, as they have done before. In their own words:

“Ashkenazim, removed, may you burn in hell, […] I am proud of the six million that were burned, I wish that another six million will be burned […]. Leftists are traitors, you are the cancer of the country.”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/likud-court-restores-member-who-said-6-million-more-ashkenazim-should-burn/

paying for criminal activities, like hitmen, organs, drugs

Paying for criminal activities does not necessarily only include spy movie shenanigans. Lots os banned pharmaceuticals are sold through crypto, including abortion pills and HRT hormones. I doubt we’re ever going to agree on sanctions, but hopefully we can still find a middle ground on people getting access to necessary pharmaceuticals in countries that ban them, even if it is a crime.

Though to be fair most of that is done on more stable and cheaper currencies like Montero.

Is there any evidence that crypto was used by the Epstein gang? I’ve only seen donations and other perfectly ordinary-looking transactions between them in the reports I’ve read. I feel like we’re trying too hard to pin absolutely everything on Epstein now.

Apparently Iran has already deployed another Shahed and the IRGC is being coy about whether the drone was attacked, as acknowledging it would require enacting their promised non-symbolic retaliation too soon.

Shooting down individual surveillance drones isn’t that difficult for a navy that size. Both Russia and Ukraine do it all the time, and this one drone was known to be observing CENTCOM movements for a couple days now. They don’t need to lie when it was clearly meant as a provocation, though I assume the drone will be framed as a kamikaze FPV drone by the Imperial Press.

Damn, Russia somehow didn’t account for that. Guess more war is in order.

Then this revelation is kind of boring, which is why I think it’s misleading. There are many more effective ways to influence US policy than blackmailing presidents, which last like 4 years each. And given Trump backed down on his promise to end the Ukraine war, and US support for Israel hasn’t changed at all since even the Obama days, I don’t see what either country would’ve got out of it.

On the other hand, here we are discussing whether Trump is receiving foreign influence or not, instead of how the bourgeoisie knows no borders and has no limits to their depravity. If it were a distraction, I think it was successful.

I’m not ignoring it, I’m afraid of it being reframed under the rug of “foreign influence” and “bad actors”. I see the Israel Lobby as a US sub-operation rather than a particularly Israeli one. I believe the US controls Israel rather than the other way around, and Zionist psyops are just another tool for maintaining the relationship no matter how domestically unpalatable it becomes. If there was no Epstein and no worldwide sex-traficking ring or related blackmail, I can still see Trump, Biden, Clinton, Obama or any other bourgeois spokesperson enacting the exact same policy because of material conditions, not being personally compromised through a Jewish relative. The MIC doesn’t need to blackmail their representatives to maintain support for the rabid dog white supremacist military colony in the Middle East. If anything, these revelations could be a prelude for smoothly replacing Trump the Person with another Trump the Politician.

That’s the thing that irks me, it has all the people that the run-of-the-mill USian “moderate” agrees is bad, and none of the actual political reasons why those actors act like they do. Are we supposed to believe the Trump admin supports Israel because of Epstein? And Putin?? Seems too Great Man-ish to me. Also very convenient for (actual) anti-Semites to write it off, but that’s a tangential point.

Honestly, this one leak seems to tie things up too neatly. Suspiciously neatly, specially if you have “problematic” preconceptions. Like, Trump is compromised by an ex-Mossad agent, who’s also the world sex-traficking kingpin, through Trump’s Jewish son-in-law, and it all ties back up to a Russia-based organisation led by a Putin advisor? It fits too perfectly into the “Trump is an anomaly” narrative. I’d be happy to be proven wrong, but I don’t trust this one.

https://www.asambleanacional.gob.ve/noticias/an-aprueba-en-primera-discusion-reforma-de-ley-organica-de-hidrocarburos

The law name, because gringo outlets are allergic to naming things. Seems to be legalising and making it easier for subcontractors to operate and develop Venezuelan oil fields. However the oil is still “property” of the state company, to be subcontracted.

I wouldn’t say it “throws open” the oil sector, but it looks just like the general trend in Latin America to slowly gut nationalised companies through ever growing subcontracting, which was already a thing anyway. Sucks, but actually not surprising at all. That’s been the trend in Venezuela for a while, and in fact this law has been in the works since 2021.

Also small nitpick but the framing on this article makes it seem like PSUV wanted to not export the oil, for some reason reason. They actually want to do it, and it was a ridiculously large portion of their economy and foreign policy, but sanctions and embargo made it more difficult both to export their oil (crude or refined) and develop new oil fields. Idk, just sounds weird when people like Trump talk about “making the oil flow” when they’re personally responsible for it not flowing.