Tuesday, October 18, 2016

The Gog-Magog Alliance Strengthens, 'Third World War' Over Syria, Lies And Deception Abundant In The U.S. Elections

On Putin-Erdogan Meeting in Syria—What is Happening

While a number of decisions worth leaving critical imprints on regional situation were taken, as was being expected, in a highly significant meeting between Russia’s Putin and Turkey’s Erdogan held last week in Istanbul, it is equally, or perhaps more, important to analyse the attraction Turkey has re-discovered in re-allying itself with Russia. More than anything else, it is the sense of Russia’s diplomatic and military success in Syria. This sense of Russia’s success has been compounded by the US’ continued support of Kurdish militias. For Erdogan, therefore, Russia is a more reliable partner than the US has been, capable of preventing the creation of Kurdistan. And since an independent Kurdistan is not in the interest of both Turkey and Syria, a ready-made framework of co-operation does exist between them. Therefore, contrary to the Western media’s projections, Erdogan is not hardening his stance towards Damascus. In fact, contrary is happening and some recent indications clearly reinforce Erdogan’s softened up stance.

For instance, some of Russia’s recently announced decisions of considerable strategic significance have not invoked any opposition from Turkey. An outstanding of these is the decision to create a permanent naval base in Syria, which, by all indication underscores the fact that Russia would be expanding not only its military footprint but its military potential in the Middle East. The announcement, quite interestingly, came at a time when Putin was travelling to Turkey. That this decision did not create any tension in his meeting with Erdogan and that certain agreements were still signed and understanding over other issues was reached signifies the trajectory Russia-Turkey bi-lateral relations are taking.

All this unambiguously shows that Russia and Turkey, which were once on opposing sides of the conflict, have started to bridge the gaps between themselves as a means to manage, if not end all together, the conflict in Syria. While it appears difficult to see this bridging up of the gaps as a fundamental strategic realignment of Turkey (read: Turkey is still a NATO member) there is no denying the fact that their mutual relationship stands on more firm ground than it was a year ago and is likely to continue to grow stronger as the sense of “mutual dependence” dawns more clearly on both sides and as Turkey realizes that its alliance with the US has done it more harm than good.

The US and Russia could drive the world into a global war if the conflict in Syria is not resolved, Turkey has warned. 

Tensions have become increasingly heightened between Washington and Moscow in recent weeks. Last week, the US and UK warned Russia and its ally the Syrian government that new economic sanctions could be imposed if the bombing of Syria's besieged Aleppo continues.

On Sunday, Russia condemned Washington for making “unprecedented” threats of cyber attacks following accusations by the Obama administration that Moscow had hacked computers belonging to American political organisations.

Turkish deputy prime minister Numan Kurtulmus said: "If this proxy war continues, after this, let me be clear, America and Russia will come to a point of war," the Daily Mail reports. 
He suggested the Syrian conflict could be the beginning of World War Three, saying it had put the world "on the brink of the beginning of a large regional or global war". 

In this explosive new video from Project Veritas Action, a Democratic dirty tricks operative unwittingly provides a dark money trail to the DNC and Clinton campaign.

The video documents violence at Trump rallies that is traced to the Clinton campaign and the DNC through a process called "bird-dogging."

An undercover video produced by James O’Keeffe’s Project Veritas shows Hillary Clinton campaign operatives admitting to starting the violence that occurred back in March during a Trump rally in Chicago which lead to the event being completely shut down over security concerns.
Project Veritas was able to infiltrate the private political consulting company Democracy Partners and its contractor the Foval Group which have ties to the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton Campaign.
According to Foval Group founder Scott Foval, “The campaign (Hillary Clinton campaign) pays the DNC, DNC pays Democracy partners, Democracy Partners pays the Foval group, Foval Group goes and executes the s**t on the ground.”
What Scott Foval means by “s**t on the ground” is the agitation that starts disruptions and places bad press on whichever Trump or Pence event they decided to hit.
An operative by the name of Aaron Minter, who goes by the alias Aaron Black, told project Project Veritas that the disruption in Chicago during Trump’s rally in March was an operation of Democracy Partners.

“So the Chicago Protest when they shut all that, that was us. It was more him (Bob Creamer, founder of Democracy Partners) than me,” said Aaron Minter, “but none of this was suppose to come back to us, because we want it coming from people, we don’t want it to come from the party.”

According to Project Veritas, Minter’s job is to direct the “spontaneous” protests at Trump and Pence rallies.

Democrats have used trained provocateurs to instigate violence at Republican events nationwide throughout the 2016 election cycle, including at several Donald Trump rallies, using a tactic called “bird-dogging,” according to a new video investigation released Monday by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas.
The goal of “bird-dogging”: to create a sense of “anarchy” around Donald Trump that would undermine his political support. Often, the tactic uses the most vulnerable people — including the elderly and disabled — to maximize shock value.
Creamer affirms on one video that Clinton is aware of “all” of his work, and that Democracy Partners has a daily telephone call with the Clinton campaign to coordinate efforts.

It has taken several months and a number of email dumps from Wikileaks to finally figure out what this presidential election is all about. There are only two ways to vote, for Donald Trump or for Hillary Clinton. But neither of those are what one would be voting for.
A vote for Donald Trump is a vote to resist the massive corruption of government, a vote against globalism, against "global warming" or "climate change" theology; it is a vote against media collusion and interference in politics. A vote for Donald Trump is not a vote for the person at all, that is why despite the media onslaught of negative stories about him as a person carries no weight with those who support him, because they don't support him at all, they support what he represents, which is a chance to hold Hillary Clinton responsible for her crimes and therefore all of the crooked politicians of 2012 who coerced votes out of their Republican base only to turn on them the next day.
Likewise, a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for a transformed America, a quasi-police state where the government intervenes in business and forces some out of business while subsidizing other businesses that could not possibly sustain themselves without massive graft and media brainwashing. All of those businesses would be held hostage to a criminal organization originating from the White House. It would be a vote to end forever the concept of individual rights. Hillary Clinton would do no less than continue the work of the Obama Administration to destroy individual rights and nearly half of the nation is in favor of just that. It would be a continued replacement of the voters who value the principles of the founding of this nation with those who have no like expectation. It is a vote for the sudden disappearance of websites like this one.
The outcome is bigger than that. The next president will likely be a true war-time president. As Vladimir Zhirinovsky claimed a vote for Hillary Clinton would be a vote for war. War with Russia may be inevitable and irrespective of the election as it seems likely that war will begin before the next president can take office. But, there is the question of who would be more likely to effectively fight that war. More than that, would our military leaders be willing to follow the orders of a criminal like Hillary Clinton running a crime organization out of Washington? Would they put their lives in jeopardy knowing the cold-blooded actions she demonstrated in Benghazi? Or, would they likely recognize that their lives meant nothing to the Commander in Chief?

1 comment:

Bt374 said...

Well, now that the election drama is winding down and Hillary is assured to win, the world can focus on more important issues. This whole election has been a twisted episode of candid camera on a private television station only the corrupt elite can watch. I hate it for America, but let's face it. Hillary just might be the right choice for the "new" Amerika. It's a real shame. So many want what is right, but the House always wins. God is sovereign in this of course. I look forward to the fight ahead. A time to be bold in faith, not a side of the aisle.
Our enemy is not Obama, nor Isis, nor Russia...it's the jealous and ticked off angel Lucifer. Seems like we are fighting impeached presidents on one side and an impeached angel on the other. Either way, a desperate and defeated foe. Go Jesus!