Sign into an existing account

or "What The Move In Bakhmut Is Actually About, And Other Hot-takes"

This is a long read, so I've broken it up into sections for those only
interested in a particular topic. However most of the sections are tightly
coupled, so bear with me and read on if you want the big picture.
If you find spelling-issues or anything of the like, let me know.

WAGNER

They're bringing in chechens, while shipping out wagner.
I thought this might be a loyalty issue but it's not,
otherwise wagner would have been removed from its leading
role long ago, instead of being starved for ammunition.

What this says to me is that some of the rumors that russia
is having logistics issues are true, but not for the reasons
you might think. Why would they deprive their best fighters so far?

This isn't simply a holding pattern.

It's them stockpiling.

Which means bakhmut was a distraction this entire time.
It was a distraction to buy-time.

The russian's were always expecting escalation, and preparing
for it every second of every minute of every hour of every day.

But why buy-time with a distraction?

Remember all those troops they conscripted? People with no military experience?
The distraction was to buy-time to train them.

This explains the relative hard tone they've taken towards the u.s. in the
diplomatic sphere: they expected the effort to fail and the u.s. to be set on its
path to oblivion so they went directly to using threats instead.

If this is the case then we can follow up with a little further discussion,
namely the drone strike against putin.

THE ATTACK ON PUTIN

The operative question to ask is who benefits the most from an attack like this?
The second question to ask is why use hardware that cheap?
Unless the biggest risk was the identity of who sent it (and who made it) would
undo the desired effect. Which means--its not who we think it was.

And who benefits? The u.s. government first, simply because now it escalates, right
when the war was petering out (ukraine running out of options, zelensky fleeing, the
spring offensive going no-where). The regime in the u.s. gets to continue looting
through their laundry man zelensky, who in turn sends it back in part to those
in the u.s. that are part of it, as well as to israel, which in turn sends it on
to britian and london banks.

THE BANKS

Wait what? Thats right, british banks. And here
we go into a long aside, so bear with me. See whats happened is the brits established the
eurodollar, basically a counterfeiting scheme. And what they do is for every dollar of u.s.
currency, they put it into foreign reserves, and then use it as a backing asset to issue
eurodollars in the dollars place. Effectively they can use the eurodollar as weapon to
leverage the u.s. into any conflict, because the brits always have their native currency
to fall back onto. The eurodollar is a gun held to the head of the u.s.
The federal reserve attempted to decouple from this financial sabotage by raising interest
rates, which while in british foreign reserves effectively causes them to lose money
(amongst other things). And as a result the brits are using assets in the u.s.
government to prolong the ukrainian war, have money sent to zelensky, who pays back
a percentage to those assets, sends the rest on to israel and affiliates of israel, who
in turn forward it to the brits, who--stuff it into their foreign reserves I imagine,
which weakens the eurodollar by inflation, relative to the u.s. dollar.
What happens then? Bad money flees the eurodollar for the dollar and u.s. assets.
Which makes everything more expensive on our side. They're hoping to use a "little bit of inflation" in britain to cause a lot of inflation in the u.s., as retaliation for
the u.s. hoping to use a little bit of interest rate rises to cause a lot of interest
rate rises (bad debt/defaults) in britain and the U.K. (and not specifically the E.U.).

FOREIGN DEFAULTS

Why are we trying to cause foreign defaults? To destroy all the dollar-denominated debts
backed by foreign reserves. Why? So they don't come flooding "on shore" to the u.s.
when the u.s. financial system experiences another shock. Someone at some time realized
this was unsustainable (probably took a look at the derivatives market) and decided
this had to happen. Which means war was going to be the answer from the beginning, rather
than a mere unplanned reaction to the bad debt. Which explains why we're starting to
onshore some of our manufacturing again, and why all sides seem intent on sending
their older equipment to destruction first--biding their time and holding the newer
stuff in reserve. This is probably the clearest indicator I've seen yet.

We've seen this playbook before, three factions causing a region to be unsustainable
for business development and profit, so one faction, the weakest one is eliminated.
This is what happened when britain financed the 'young turks' to kill the armenians,
in order to persue a rail line for oil. This is britains playbook.

CHINA

If its britains playbook, british banks likely have a heavy hand in the ccp. China in
some fashion must answer to them. It has been interesting to observe how much of the
subversion in the u.s. has found its footing in universities originally founded by
the british, with endowments and large social networks extending out into the financial
system, who run much of wallstreet and k-street, all in part or in whole owned by
blackrock or vanguard, with heavy buy-in from the chinese.
All run by zionists, who incidentally call a nation home, that was absolutely setup first
and foremost on the prerogative of none other than britain itself.

So did the u.s. use a low-cost drone to attempt to attack putin? No.
Putin has already concluded this too. The u.s. would want to make it obvious
while blatantly denying it. I know this because thats what our regime does with unpopular but unofficial policies domestically. Thats the u.s. regime playbook. Thats how the intelligence
agencies think. We would have used something expensive, but made by a secondary nation,
not necessarily the u.s.

MONEY LAUNDERING

Putin knows the u.s. wouldn't escalate if we didn't have to either, simply because the
u.s. or elements of it, are busy looting, sending the money to zelensky so they can launder it back to him. You might be forgiven for thinking biden sending money to transgender pakistanis to learn english actually indicates him and his immediate cronies are out of the loop on this, and simply being goaded like useful puppets into the war, which would indicate this is
mostly looting by congress and the senate, but actually thats something less relevant at the moment: the fact its pakistan indicates they're using the money for intelligence, which probably means this is a minor signal to muslim nations that we want to cozy up to them further, and this doubles as a covert threat to india, that if they don't play along we
can perform a color revolution on them too--which in turn tells me the u.s. state department and cia is either extremely arrogant and incompetent (because they don't realize india is
going to do everything in its power to avoid taking sides and thus avoid a war with china, its neighbor), or the heads of those agencies (or their immediate advisors) are compromised
by british intelligence, because nothing would be more ruinous to u.s. relations with a major partner, india, than say, kashmir being annexed by pakistan, or india suffering a color change
operation. Nothing would be more destabilizing, or push india more readily into chinas arms,
then us pulling something like that.

COLOR CHANGE

The other element is the transgender element, which is both a minor and major thing to look at. It's a minor element, because it acts as an appeal during 'election' season--appearances
are at least still superficially important (otherwise they wouldn't have fought so hard to deny that we no longer have actual elections in the u.s.)
This indicates two things: The transgender issue is itself a broader confirmation that the
u.s. intelligence apparatchiks really do use social issues to manufacture violent movements
as pawns in domestic and foreign politics. And second the u.s. population and its perception
of the legitimacy of the u.s. government writ large, absolutely does threaten the stability
of the u.s. both domestically and abroad. They are scared of us and see us as a threat on
all fronts, economically, socially, religiously, politically, and militarily.
Otherwise they wouldn't have needed violent street gangs (antifa, blm, et al) to enforce their politics over the last seven years. They couldn't do it directly, see? Precisely because they wanted legitimacy. This indicates finding ever-new and more effective means of denying
the regimes legitimacy and alienating the public, is the most efficient and powerful means
we have to destabilize and take down the regime.

NATURAL GAS

Meanwhile the intensification of the war requires
russia to sell more oil and natural gas. What did
the u.s. do to soviet russia decades ago? Established
ties with saudi arabia to undermine the price of oil.
Which in turn starved russia for cash.
What are we doing with natural gas? Sending it to europe
to undercut the price of russian natural gas.
And also attempting to 'go green'--to undercut foreign
oil and natural gas now that theres too much competition
we can't control.
Thats what the green push is about, at least on the surface
level, to speak nothing of bankrupting us in service to
foreign nations that effectively own and give commands to
elements of the regime in the u.s.

IRAN

Ancillary to this discussion, but I wouldn't be surprised
if elements of Iran provided the drone-in-question, as retaliation
for russia refusing to back up iran when the u.s. and israel
attacked. Russia had to choose to back up an ally or refuse to
enter into a multifront war. It chose the latter. Probably as
john bolton intended.
With the overtures of the u.s. to the middle east, domestic
elements of the regime pulling away from israel (and thus britain)
in favor of the islamic sphere, is it any wonder Ilhan Omar was selected for congress?
Of course not, this is the u.s. playing the middle during a decoupling.
And in light of that it makes perfect sense that the u.s. is monetarily
attacking the euro, the eurodollar, and by extension britian, while
giving the cold shoulder to israel. It would also explain our sudden
foray into Iran, aiding israel. The policy seems bifurcated and insane,
but it isn't if you consider that the u.s., if it is in the middle
of decoupling from british financial elements and israeli global geopolitics,
would have every reason to appear as non-threatening as possible.
The cabinets are stacked with british-affiliated zionists, the u.s.
has ostensibly given into the brits desire to get us into another war,
(while both russia and the u.s. have tiptoed around escalation, mostly
bluffing and grandstanding whenever it was possible to do).

A STRETCH BUT I'M PROBABLY NOT WRONG

The regime has brought jihadists into the u.s. among the southern invasion, who have no care at all for the law and can thus be used to terrorize both the christian-supporters of zionists in the u.s. but also to terrorize the zionists themselves. This comports with the regime's
earlier use of antifa and blm as irregular pseudo-militant elements, and confirms
my earlier beliefs the u.s. would pursue an intensification of this strategy by using
muslim terrorists--who would in turn utilize the existing gang networks, both gangs-proper (bloods, crips, new generation) and the 'street patrols' of antifa and blm, while also
being driven by disgust towards antifa/blm, thus also co-opting any minor risk for
the rise of third-positionist counter-revolutionary movements against the regime, and eliminating the useful idiots that helped them co-opt the u.s. to begin with.


WE RETURN TO WHERE WE STARTED
All of this feeds back into the predominate view that there is a strategy in place, long in the tooth, to bring the u.s. to its knees in favor of china, with russia firmly pushed into the former's sphere of influence long-term. Global disputes are not sufficient by themselves.
Issues of international import are certainly cause enough to initiate the abandoning of the u.s. dollar, but the dollar itself will still live on domestically, making up a significant, if much more minor, chunk of global trade. Even after something like a bankruptcy or default.

Unless..

Unless the u.s. falls internally into conflict. It's the zimbabwe model. And we've seen
talk of that very nation, in reference to our social ills, but not what the explicit goal
for it was. The take down of the u.s. dollar globally must coincide with the takedown
of the u.s. domestically. A government whose very legitimacy is imperiled by none other
than open civil war and genocide going on in its streets (and im not talking about the low level killings being committed by transexuals or radicalized blacks)--is a government whose
currency every remaining nation will outright question. The myth of the petrodollar and the u.s. military will be all-but dead, outright on life support, never to be resurrected, if
these things come to pass.

Some elements in the alt-sphere talking about this are simply reading the tea leaves.
Others are intelligence putting it out there to front run any conflict into one they
can control (a false civil war) in order to preserve internal order long-term and
thus save the dollar domestically (and whatever position we can retain in global trade).

But this much is certain: This is the long-term plan by the regime, and by our enemies.
It is going to happen and I've explained why, in detail. It is already carved like holy
writ, into stone.

THE RESTRICT ACT

Basically the non-co opted (non-regime) elements of the u.s. government have almost lost
the information war outright, as well the social-issues war. We realized too late
we were under attack, not for years, but decades and were co-opted into it, right up
to this final phase. In order to pull off the final phase, they'll need complete
information control where possible. They won't need to reach 100%, as long as they can get
within a couple percentages of reaching the entire public without being front-run by open-source intelligence and journalists.
Likewise, the elements of the u.s. against this plot, having very nearly lost the infowar both
in the mainstream, and in the alt-sphere, hope that by passing something like the restrict act, it will do more damage to the regime than it will to them.
Therefore both sides have an incentive to pass this bill, thinking it will be their ultimate weapon.

The truth is, the restrict act is none other than the cyber equivalent of the patriot act.
And for the cyber equivalent of the patriot act, we must have the cyber equivalent of another
9/11. Having seen this, having seen the run up to the "cyberattacks" narrative, with all
the supporting rational so far, we must conclude this is foregone. It is coming, for all
the reasons mentioned in the last 15,000+ characters I've written.

The total doom mongering about "long term blackouts" is just that, softening us to the "cyber pandemic", which might last three days, or two weeks. Neither the regime, nor non-regime elements, will tolerate a systemic risk of losing control of the u.s. unless they know they
can reestablish control.

This likewise is necessary to establish centralized digital currency (and credit cards and bitcoin were a precursor to that), a two-fer: control the money, control the information.
Likewise, this in turn is necessary to impoverish the middle class, radicalizing them in
favor of other modes of government (the transition from socialism to communism or totalitarianism). This also pulls double duty by restricting their ability to retain guns (which require ammo, not just to shoot, but also to train). Lastly, once free speech
is de-facto dead in the u.s. (thanks to social credit), the roll-up of gun rights, and the
rest of the bill of rights, goes with it in a matter of ten, maybe fifteen years at the most.


And now you know the whole plan and why everything you see happening, is happening.