Vaccine Mandates are War Crimes

The governments and corporations imposing vaccine mandates and compulsory vaccinations are literally committing crimes against humanity. Nazis were put on trial and hung for less egregious violations in the 20th century. The first point of the Nuremberg Code:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

The Nuremberg Code

Notice in particular the term “any element of force… or coercion”. This includes losing your job; if it is coercion to demand sexual services from someone in exchange for keeping their job, it is obviously coercion to demand that they inject foreign substances into their body to remain employed.

This means that any amount of force, including lethal, is justified in self-defence of oneself or one’s children against these literal war criminals.

The attempted excuse will be that the vaccines are not experiments, that they are a necessary response to a medical emergency. First, there is no medical emergency; fewer people died in 2020 than in 2019 despite the pandemic. Second, the vaccines are literally experimental, with none of them having completed the usual trials before being approved for use on an “emergency” basis.

“It was legal at the time” was not accepted as an excuse at Nuremberg, and it will not be accepted at Nuremberg II: Vaccine Edition.

DISCUSS ON SG


EU Lobbies For Forced Vaccinations

An attempt to impose mandatory vaccines in Europe will almost certainly lead to war, a lot of dead politicians, scientists, and doctors, and the collapse of the European Union:

Ursula von der Leyen has said it is time to discuss making Covid vaccines mandatory across the entire EU as the continent is battered by a new wave of Covid infections.

‘I think it is understandable and appropriate to lead this discussion now,’ the EU Commission President told a media conference, underlining that a third of the bloc’s population of 450 million is still unvaccinated.

‘How we can encourage and potentially think about mandatory vaccination within the European Union – this needs discussion. This needs a common approach. But it is a discussion that I think has to be led,’ she said.

She spoke after Austria announced plans to make jabs compulsory last month, and an aide to Germany’s new chancellor Olaf Scholz said yesterday that he wants his country to follow suit.

We knew there would be war in North America as well as in Europe; it is long overdue on both continents. But I always believed that the wars would be triggered by immigration, not evil medical tyranny run amok.

UPDATE: And now the US media is calling for forced vaccinations imposed by executive order:

This charade must end. The government must require vaccinations. Not of this group or that group, not company by company, in a cruise ship by cruise ship, or airline by airline or governor by governor. The buck stops at the White House.

Jim Kramer, CNBC

DISCUSS ON SG


Starving Ukraine Again

The difference is, this time they deserve it. Last time, it was the Bolsheviks starving the Russians in Ukraine. This time, it’s the Russians depriving the Neocon puppets in Kiev of a primary source of revenue:

Russia does not want to extend its gas transit contract with Ukraine after 2024 when the current deal ends, the head of the Kiev-based state-run oil and gas company Naftogaz claimed on Monday. Speaking to Reuters, Yury Vitrenko said that there is “not even a hint” of negotiations on a new contract.

“We are discussing it with the Americans and the Germans that all of us would like the transit to continue, but the Russians are reluctant to start these discussions,” he said.

Transiting gas from Russia to Europe is an integral part of Ukraine’s economy, and the country receives billions of dollars annually from Russian energy giant Gazprom for the use of its aging facilities, which were constructed by Moscow during the Soviet period. Following the completion of Nord Stream 2, a controversial gas pipeline that connects Russia to Germany without passing through any third country, many in Kiev now believe the country’s economy is under threat, as Ukrainian pipes become less critical for the European grid.

Earlier this year, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Nord Stream 2 would “disconnect Ukraine from gas supplies,” which in turn would cost Ukraine “at least $3 billion a year.”

“We will have nothing to pay the Ukrainian Army,” he told a delegation from the US Congress.

Now, why would the Russians ever decide to end the gas transit contract, when it could serve as a reasonable backup to Nord Stream 2? Probably because of insanely stupid threats of invasion and partition from globalist Neocon puppets like this one.

The world’s largest nation should be partitioned by Western powers and divided up into around a dozen separate states, Ukraine’s former foreign minister has said, insisting the move would be beneficial for all concerned.

Speaking in an interview with Ukraine’s Channel Five on Monday, ex-Foreign Minister Vladimir Ogryzko argued that the West should “go all the way” on the issue and allocate hundreds of billions of dollars for new countries to be carved out of territory currently governed from Moscow.

“Imagine that a collection of independent 10-15 non-nuclear nations is created in place of the current Russian Federation… Who will benefit from this? Everybody wins,” Ogryzko claimed.

According to him, the US and EU would be able to profit highly from this state-making venture, and would make the money back that they spent rehashing Russia’s borders.

In the future, when someone asks you if something is either evil or stupid, remember this idea put forth by Ogryzko is incontrovertible proof that something can be both evil and stupid.

DISCUSS ON SG


Why the Vaccine Nazis are Winning

Karl Denninger points out that, as usual, a reactionary and tactical approach is defeated by an offensive and logistical approach:

The pure bloods need a plan, milestones, and victory conditions. They need logistics and tactics to support them. But they need a few other things:

Stakes

Line in the sand

Boundaries

An outline of the enemy’s battle plan

These guidelines can be applied to life’s daily battles. Clown world won’t quit, perhaps this mindset will come in handy in other ways. There’s not a pure blood leader at the moment to implement and direct logistics. What follows gives individuals ideas for what to do until a leader or leaders arise.

Concrete victory conditions are essential. The concept of “return to NORMAL” can be expressed by things like:

No masks.

Laws against vaccine mandates.

No social distancing.

Laws against vaxports.

Pure blood victory conditions are diametrically opposed to Karens. There can be only one winner for each. Milestones track progress towards victory. Once a victory condition is decisively met, that particular battle is over. When all are decisively accomplished, the war is finished.

Stakes is number one on the list because everyone needs a reason to fight. Concrete stakes are better than vague doom and gloom. Stating stakes crystalize what happens if one side fails.

“If they can make my kids wear a mask, they can make them get the shot.”

If you want to win, you need a line in the sand that you stick to. No cucking. Cucking means it was never a line in the first place. The line has to be compatible with victory conditions. If you are a go along to get along type of person, be honest with yourself. For example, if you are planning to get the shot rather than lose your job, set your victory conditions and line appropriately.

Boundaries means what someone is willing to do and not do. The list of “will dos” forms a list of possible tactics. Now is the time to plan when to employ them.

Finally we come to the most important part of winning a war: Knowing your enemy’s battle plan.

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” –Sun Tzu, Art of War

Karen’s battle plan was outlined above. Based on it, pure bloods can predict what happens after General Karen directs a logistical maneuver and when pure bloods take the offensive.

The gaslighting campaign of the past two years is a successful tactic. We’ve all experienced it many times now, but look at it in the context of Karen’s battle plan.

Someone mentions reality or a scientific fact around a General Karen (like Fraudci or Pants ter) and the next thing out of their mouth is gaslighting. Pure bloods scramble to explain why what the General stated is bull. More gaslighting, fear porn, and shaming follows.

“But I don’t want to kill Grandma,” the pure blood stammers. It’s a poor tactic and plays right into Karen’s logistics. Gaslighting allows their battle plan to proceed because the pure bloods are distracted and defending instead of going on the offensive.

Now you know what to look for and what to expect. Don’t be shocked when it happens…again.

As soon as pure bloods have victory conditions and logistics and tactics to support them, they join the battle. Until then it’s a one sided battle into cattle cars.

The fundamental problem is that most people, and virtually all conservatives, are unwilling to lift a finger until they are personally affected, even in the event that they can see the trouble coming down the road. And by then, it’s too late for anything but reactionary tactical action.

Astute readers will also note how the purebloods have been losing the tactical battle due to their insistence on dialectic.

DISCUSS ON SG


A Very Dangerous Game

The Biden Fake Administration is playing with fire by inviting the representatives of Taiwan island to the Summit of Democracies in less than two weeks.

The Biden administration this week brazenly announced its intention to walk over China’s red line warning on Taiwan. The move by the US is a recklessly provocative step that dares an inevitable military response from Beijing. If that happens then all bets are off for a full-scale military confrontation between the United States, its allies, and China. It is not alarmist to say such a clash would escalate into World War III.

Australia and Britain are explicitly committed to a military alliance with the United States in the Asia-Pacific through the recently formed AUKUS pact. Russia will be obliged to defend China.

The date in question is December 9-10 when the Biden administration plays host to a so-called “Summit of Democracies”. This week the State Department announced a list of “participants” that include 110 countries. China and Russia are not invited, among other excluded nations.

Most provocatively, the separatist Chinese territory of Taiwan is invited to attend the video conference. The US is careful to refer to Taiwan as a “participant” not as a “nation”. Nevertheless, this semantical device aside, the invitation is a blatant violation of China’s sovereign claim of authority over Taiwan….

At a teleconference summit on November 16, China’s President Xi Jinping admonished US policy on Taiwan as “playing with fire”. Xi drew a red line that Washington must desist from inciting separatist ambitions of the Taiwanese government.

The announcement this week of the “Summit of Democracies” and specifically the invitation of Taiwan while excluding China is about as bold as it can get by the Biden administration in undermining China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. That it comes only days after a verbal commitment from Biden to Xi that the US adheres to One China Policy and is not seeking Taiwan’s independence makes the provocation all the more contemptuous.

I suppose we’ll find out soon enough if Xi is prone to posturing with regards to Taiwan or not. Based on his domestic record, I don’t have the impression that he is. And while I wouldn’t characterize a hot war over Taiwan as WWIII – I doubt it would last as long as the Falklands War – it strikes me as being as patently ludicrous as it is unnecessary.

But it is clear that the global imperialists will take war with China if they can’t get it with Russia or Iran. Although they might get a 3-for-1 bargain if they’re foolish enough.

The Russia-India-China (RIC) format has contributed to building a multipolar world order and rule of international law, and is a key global and regional policy factor, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reported on Friday at the online meeting of the RIC foreign ministers.

DISCUSS ON SG


The Four Clashing Civilizations

Even Francis Fukuyama now accepts that his End of History thesis was incorrect, and that Sam Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations model is much more descriptive of the real world. But this clash is not, as this article states, a coming clash, it is an ongoing one.

It is often argued, mainly by those in the West, that the current geopolitical rivalries can’t be compared to the Cold War, because there is no clash of ideologies. Communism has been vanquished and capitalist triumph is eternal.
Their view is one of the ‘end of history’, as proclaimed by the scholar Francis Fukuyama. The problem is, Fukuyama proclaimed the triumph of liberal democracy more than three decades ago. It’s fair to say the world has moved on a little bit since then.

It is hard to deny that ideological competition is now making a comeback. And it looks as though in the coming decades the clash of ideologies will only become more intense. All three contemporary great powers – the United States, China, and Russia – are competing for more than material power. Representing distinct ideological faiths, they are also in competition for human souls. There is also a fourth competing ideology – radical Islamism – but it is now disembodied and lacks a ‘carrier state’ after the defeat of its most vociferous advocates.

The US now champions a liberal-progressivist ideology, which, in its most extreme version, is known as wokeness. In wokeness, the two main ideological strands of the modern West that have their origins in the European Enlightenment – liberalism and communism – finally reunite after a bitter internecine feud. When the opponents of wokeness compare it to radical Bolshevism, it is not without reason. In its fight against structural oppression, wokeness is ultimately about destroying social hierarchies for the sake of justice – and at the expense of order.

Taken to its extremes, this new Western ideological struggle for equity and equality leads to universal homogenization, inevitably destroying the diversity of social and even physical identities. In a novel by Mikhail Sholokhov, one of the characters, a fiery Bolshevik, was dreaming about a post-revolutionary world in which the borders come crashing down and people intermarry so there are no dominant and oppressed groups any more: “everyone’s appearance will be pleasantly brown – and everyone will be the same.” This Russian Bolshevik from the 1920s could join the woke squads in Seattle or Bristol in the 2020s.

China and Russia are often lumped together as ‘fellow autocracies’. But, in fact, Beijing and Moscow stand for very different ideological models. China’s is a synthesis of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist socialism blended with traditional Chinese ways, such as Confucianism and legalism, all boosted by advanced digital technology. The West increasingly fears China not only due to the growth in Beijing’s economic and military power, but also because modern China’s hugely successful record of development seems to validate the CCP’s ideology….

Putin’s Russia has its ideals mainly in the past. That’s a major reason why the ideology of modern Russia appeals to many right-wing conservatives in Europe and North America who see Russia as the last major state that adheres to the values of what used to be European Christian civilization. Putin’s Russia has another advantage. Among the competing ideologies, it is the most appealing aesthetically. This may be because for Putin’s state, order is prioritised over justice.

This is a useful, and generally accurate summary of the current state of the civilizational clash. But what it leaves out is the religious and ethnic angles which actually delineate the lines of grand strategic conflict. Although it is now based in the US, the Western power is neither American nor liberal-progressive; it is not even Western, but actually a satanic shadow power in which the dominant ethnicity is Jewish and the ambitions are global. Russia is the Christian nationalist power, and China, under Xi and his Wangist ideology, is the virtuous pagan nationalist power.

This is why the Promethean-ruled US is already engaged in a virtual war with both nationalist powers and the other globalist power. The Prometheans are at war with China because China broke its alliance with them in 2015. They are at war with Russia because Russia, as a Christian nation, rejects their satanism and because Russia escaped their influence in 2000. And they are at war with their fellow globalists in the Dar al-Islam over the territory of Palestine in general and Jerusalem in particular, even as they use them to suppress Christian nationalism in Europe.

The reason Trump is so furiously hated is because he represented – however well or poorly – the Christian West’s attempt to break free of Promethean rule. Whether he failed or whether he is still engaged in some sort of secretive Q-like battle is irrelevant to understanding the shape of the overall situation; he is the West’s equivalent of Putin and Xi, ergo he represents the fundamental danger to the shadow power.

And the fundamental weakness of the Prometheans is that, unlike the other three powers, they do not represent a true civilization. They are not, technically, even civilized, as they have never progressed beyond tribalism. This is why they so reliably fail once they achieve enough power in a society to become responsible for it, as they do not know how to maintain a civilization, let alone build one. It is always much easier to destroy than to create.

DISCUSS ON SG


Desperate for War

Revenge war with Russia or revenge war with China? It appears the former is preferred, if CDAN is to be believed:

The heads of several cable networks/news organizations from the far left to the far right, all agreed that a war with Russia would be amazing for ratings.

War with either Russia or China – which would mean war with both – would be sheer lunacy, of course, but when has that ever stopped the lunatics before? They’re like gamblers who believe that winning their past bets mean that their next one is a sure thing.

DISCUSS ON SG


Hundreds of Troops

The script writers are getting lazy. Or, as is more likely the case, desperate. When hundreds of police on the Mexican border can’t stop poor and huddled masses of Africans and South Americans yearning to breathe free, are we really supposed to believe that hundreds of British soldiers are even going to slow down the Russian Army? They wouldn’t even qualify as a speed bump.

Hundreds of British special force troops are ready to deploy to the Ukranian border at a moment’s notice, amid rising tensions and fears of a possible Russian invasion in the region, according to reports.

The UK’s Special Air Service and Parachute Regiment are prepared to enter the region with medics, engineers, signalers, and hundred of paratroopers, The Mirror reported.

“The high readiness element of the brigade was told it may need to deploy at very short notice, a source told The Mirror.

“Between 400 and 600 troops are ready. Their equipment is packed and they are ready to fly to Ukraine and either land or parachute in. They have trained for both eventualities.”

The military move comes after the European Union accused Belarus, which borders both the Ukraine and Poland, of manufacturing a humanitarian crisis by urging migrants to illegally cross into the EU via Poland.

The age of carrier diplomacy is over. So is the short-lived era of the color revolution. If the neocons are successful in starting a war on or near the Russian border, it’s not going to be limited to the region. China and Iran will also take action, because they know that one of them will be next. And the new Axis of Nations is more powerful in every way than the Arsenal of Globohomo, with more population, more soldiers, more nukes, and more industrial capacity.

And isn’t it remarkable how Belarus is being accused of manufacturing the very humanitarian crisis that Angela Merkel caused six years ago? On the basis of this justification, the British should be sending troops to the US southern border and threatening Joe Biden for offering $450,000 in incentives for migrants to illegally cross into the USA.

But it proves once more that Martin van Creveld was right: immigration is war.

DISCUSS ON SG


Redefinitions

“Democracy” now means “Globo-satanry“, just as “America” now means “an identity with which anyone can identify”:

Tucker kept asking him why Americans should go fight and die for democracy in the Ukraine, and he just kept saying that it’s our duty to defend democracy. He also said that Joe Biden isn’t doing global democracy hard enough, and that the failure to establish democracy in Afghanistan is proof that we need to go to war with Russia.

He further said that he is not actually talking about going to war with Russia, he just wants to send troops to the Ukraine to stop a war with Russia.

It’s all just such bullshit. As any long-time reader of this site is aware, the democratically-elected president of the Ukraine was overthrown in a coup organized by the US State Department and the EU in 2014. These people were literally paying Ukrainian thugs and neo-Nazis 50 euros a day to riot and attack the cops. Then there was a conspiracy involving the shooting of ZOG-backed rioters by a secret assassin who was never arrested. The people organizing the protests said that the government had ordered the assassinations, and the rioters rushed the government buildings and overthrew the elected government. Then a new entirely Jewish government was established by the West.

Everyone knows this happened. Everyone knows that the current government of the Ukraine was not put in power by elections. But they just lie about it.

This word-witchery is how the globo-satanists can declare, with a straight face, that the US military must defend the borders of a) Taiwan, b) Ukraine, and c) Poland while simultaneously being prevented from defending the borders of the United States.


The Barbarossa Question

I tend to agree with the historical revisionists concerning the planned Soviet invasion of Germany, but I disagree that the burden of proof is on them any more than it is on the traditionalists. The fact that one is the first to reach a conclusion does not indicate that the conclusion is the most accurate one.

In the years 1939-1941, Stalin ruled the Soviet Union with the idea that war would be inevitable. Stalin had been preparing for that inevitability both before and during those years: This is evidenced from many developments, from the economy, to propaganda, to Red Army deployments at the border. With his poker game conception, the only question that remained is who would become Stalin’s main adversary? After the fall of France – which happened so swiftly that it baffled and enraged Stalin – it became more and more obvious that the main adversary would be Hitler. Rather than picking up the scraps of two foes who had battled each-other to exhaustion, he would now have to face Hitler alone on the European continent

There were good reasons for Stalin to fear encirclement, but even the Soviet defensive strategy contained fundamentally offensive operations which included defeating and conquering the enemy on his own territory. The neglect of defensive lines, the offensive posture of Soviet divisions, Stalin lambasting the Maginot defense strategy of the French, the brutal imposition of the Stalinist system on the conquered territories in the years 1939-1940 all point to Stalin not being afraid of the Germans. Instead it points that he was confident enough to fend them off and counter-strike in case of an attack.

There have been many Soviet war plans, many of which can be regarded to be contingency plans in case of an attack. Germans had these too even before Operation Barbarossa was decided upon. The May war plan was the plan that contained proposals for the Soviets to strike first. To date, the revisionists, especially Ewan Mawdsley, have mostly compared the May war plan with other Soviet war plans, while I attempted to compare the May war plan with the mobilization plan of 1941 and saw many similarities. MP-41 predates German deployments to the Soviet border. The completion of MP-41 would have enabled the Soviets to carry out the May war plan. The biggest issue as I have already highlighted was the date at which the Soviets would launch their preemptive strike.

Stalin’s rhetoric and behavior in the months February-May cannot possibly be construed as him waging a campaign of appeasement against the Germans. Soviet deployments, along with aggressive propaganda campaigns that intended to fuel hatred against Germans, interrogation reports of captured soviet soldiers saying that they were expected to attack soon and the stepping-up of military production all point to Stalin intending to strike against Hitler. Stalin may have become concerned in June when Germans completed their deployments, probably a lot faster than he expected. But at that point, it was too late to shift all his armies from an offensive to a defensive posture. Alternatively, Stalin may have remained confident for his armies abilities to hold off the Germans at the border in order to launch a counter-attack. Zhukov’s and Timoshenko’s directives on 25 June to counter-strike and capture Poland and East-Prussia certainly points in that direction.

So did Stalin intend to invade Germany? Yes I think that he did. But it needs to be stated that both traditionalists as well as revisionists operate on circumstantial evidence alone, granted the burden of proof is on the revisionists. I hope to have convinced the reader that the evidence points into the direction of Stalin preparing to invade Germany.

Frankly, I think the author gives too much credence to the “see no logic” traditional crowd. Anyone who pays any serious attention to history knows that the Soviets were determined to avoid the situation they faced in 1917; the Bolsheviks were – and remain – experts in the strategy of “let’s you and him fight”.

The obvious reason that Stalin wasn’t ready, and therefore the reason Hitler was able to strike first, was because Germany defeated France at least one year sooner than anyone had any reason to believe possible. And the scale of the Soviet preparations, which were considerably larger than those of Operation Barbarossa, was both why it took Stalin longer and why he didn’t expect the Germans to consider themselves ready to attack him when they did.

DISCUSS ON SG