Criminal Khazarians: Holding in Bakhmut is Beyond Retarded
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (57)
sorted by:
I hate to get overly optimistic, but it seems like "They" are coming unraveled and can't keep everyone on the same page. I collected these headlines just this morning:
Zelensky at odds with top general – Bild: Commander Zaluzhny called for a withdrawal from a key city, but the president has refused, the newspaper reported
Zelensky Says Ukraine’s Top Generals Want to Keep Fighting for Bakhmut
Pentagon chief downplays importance of besieged Donbass city: The fall of Artyomovsk –called Bakhmut by Ukraine– won’t mean Russia has changed the tide of battle, Lloyd Austin believes
They're beyond the point of telling you a lie and have to tell you all the lies.
hahahahah, yes it does read that way.
At this point the entire thing is a song and dance show.
I am still not sure where Russia stands, I like to think they are not just doing the banker war thing internally also, but there is no way to tell.
As far as Russia and Putin, I've studied them both for many years and have concluded that they are completely anti-NWO. In fact, I believe the Special Military Operation started a year ago will, in the fullness of time, come to mark the point where the tide was finally turned against them.
Now that's a helluva tall claim and I would never ask anyone to take my word for it, but I do have a suggestion: keep that thesis in mind as evidence comes before you and look for two different things.
One is concrete counter-evidence. By that I mean, when you think you've got something solid against the thesis, take the time to validate it. You'll very often find it ends up coming from unidentifiable sources. (And I'll tell you who it was: the CIA.)
The other is anomalous evidence, something that you have to fit into the picture yourself. Take this story, for example: RUSSIA REPORT: PUTIN
It was written back in 2014 and concerns an encounter in 1992. It's part of the picture I have built over time of Putin, and doesn't match any characterization given by either the mainstream or even conspiracy theorists.
Did some disinfo agent plant that to fool the handful of people like myself who might trip over it? I suppose it's possible, but if they did, They are so far ahead it doesn't matter what we do.
Personally I have always wanted to retain the acceptance he is working for good and not on the side of blatant evil.
I am aware of many ploys against him as a character and indeed have also been scanning for evidence of any obvious provable alignment with evil, none as of yet.
I do not recall reading this bit, I will give it a read.
At the end of the day, I have to state the chips are still in the air because I refuse to be misled.
So far all his rhetoric of late is evidence that he is on the side of repairing the evil, at least for his people, there is mountains of evidence to prove he has in his time in power done that already.
However, until he starts name dropping and actually doing the important steps, then I need to keep him at arms length.
What you hit on is the biggest argument against him. I take the view that brute force and main strength is seldom the wisest strategy to take, especially when your enemy is immensely powerful, deeply entrenched, and knows no boundary to their methodologies.
As I see it, Putin has been preparing for this time for more than 25 years. He's been building the economy and enhancing the Russian military-industrial complex, all on a shoestring budget. And all the while, he scrupulously avoided antagonizing his Western "partners" and "colleagues". A wise strategy, in my book.
This idea was cemented for me when I came across some information about the sinking of the Kursk back in 2000, "anomalous" evidence as I have described.
Long story short, Putin deliberately let 23 survivors perish. Evil? Call it what you will, but the Kursk was sunk in an engagement with one US and one UK sub. Had the survivors told the tale, the Russian people would have demanded a fight. Putin knew they were unprepared for such a fight, and who knows how many would die. He made a tremendously difficult decision.
You can see that the picture I have built up is quite complex, and includes data seldom discussed, but at least it's consistent.