Wednesday, 23 March 2011

Telling The Truth

I’ve seen this video on the sites of Veritas6464, Mr Friend and Kev Boyle. It really is too good to miss.

I also came across this effort from George Galloway.

While I am not endorsing either man their words make for compelling argument against the current atrocity underway in Libya.


  1. Hey Chuckyman,...Muchas grazias, what a buzz to be linked here, woohoo! How's George?! Go Georgie, go you good thing! I laughed my arse off as he shut down that stooge, brilliant theatre.

    Excellent Post,


    Painful Paulie

    P.S. Not a real fan of George lately because of his dubious association with that jewess that pretends to be an Arab, over at 'Viva Palestina', ah well.

  2. Howdy Veritas. A little walk on the wild side never hurts (grin).

    Old George is a bit of a shill I’m afraid to say. He is shit hot on so much but ask him about 911 and he clams up quicker than a jewish princess on wedding night.

    Louie has his issues also. He‘s alive for a start when so many that surpassed him aren’t.

    Thanks for dropping by V.

  3. Hey Chuckyman: The first video is well worth the time spent watching it.

    Good on veritas for posting it, good on you for spreading it around.

    It is evil, pure evil that foments a civil war and it is stupidity that partakes in one

  4. Hi Penny and well said. The lies surrounding this latest war are falling apart already.

    Here’s an interesting article from Rick Rozoff. It certainly added some depth for me and spread a little light on the machinations of the French.

    Sarkozy has done so much for a Hungarian born jewish son of ‘untitled Hungarian nobility’. His real name is Nicolas Paul Stéphane Sarközy de Nagy-Bocsa. A fine pawn for the elite bloodlines.

  5. Hey chuckyman, good response over at my place

    The synchronicity of suspicious minds.

    Loved it!

    You mentioned Ukraine being a NATO member, and I am wondering what do you think, just an opinion of course, Ukraines roll will be in this.
    The new fellow is definitely more pro Russian then the orange revolution fellow.

    Speaking of Crimea, and I know there are posts on my blog about this topic, the Russian navy being there etc.,
    Did they renew their lease?
    There was talk when Orange revolution leaders were in charge they weren't going to allow the renewal. Did that change under the new Victor.
    As opposed to orange revolution Victor?
    Hope that makes sense?

  6. You asked a great question Penny and it was on a line of thought I was musing on already – it seemed an apt description (grin)

    I was mistaken in my comment on one point as Ukraine is still in the queue to join NATO and not a full member.

    The Orange Revolution was potentially a master stoke of planning for the US and the globalists. A pliant puppet regime was installed and the Russian Black Sea Fleet was very close to being completely evicted. Strategically Russia’s entire southern flank would have been exposed to land and naval intimidation.

    When Saakashvili decided to smash South Ossetia he completely blew the whole plan. By killing ethnic Russians he crossed a line that the Russians are very, very serious about. Putin took charge, the Russian Army kicked the crap out of his forces as well as their US and Israhelli advisors.

    Ukraine had also supplied Georgia and tried to impose limits on the Russian navy’s operations. The Russian Bear had woken from its slumber and openly threatened to annex the Crimea where many ethnic Russians live. The Crimea was Russian before it was granted to the Ukrainians by Khrushchev.

    The result was that the Russians got their lease renewed. Viktor Yushchenko is gone and replaced rightfully by Viktor Yanukovych. He was the pro-Russian winner of the 2004 election that the Orange Revolution originally stole. The Russians also played hard-ball over the natural gas the Ukrainians routinely were taking for free from the pipelines to Europe.

    Saakashvili single handed managed to bugger up the whole thing. The Ukrainians have kept a low profile since then. After the rude awakening of their larger neighbour and the election of Yushchenko the plans for NATO membership have been ‘parked’. I have no doubt that the groups Soros funded back then are still active but their room to manoeuvre seems more limited.

    That’s what makes the move against Syria more dangerous. Ships exiting the Black Sea can only do so with the prior permission of Turkey. I had a look at the Tartus port on Google Earth. It’s 160 km from Damascus and only 50km from Tripoli in the Lebanon.

    The Russian S400 SAM air cap has a range of 400km. The P700/SS-N-19 supersonic, steel bodied, nuclear capable, cruise missile has a range of 550+ Km. Sitting in port they can hit anywhere in Israhell worth hitting including Dimona - its only 430 km away.

    Is Yo’mama wanting to play a game of bear baiting?

  7. That was a hair raising time and I remember it well. After Georgia was razed, the U.S. was said to be bringing in aid for them. However they used battle carriers to do so. I can's say it is gospel but some reports indicate at the time that Putin told the Russian military to sink every Nato ship in the area if they start world war III. Some of the ships at the time were described as able to carry 125 nuclear tipped tomahawk missiles.

    Putin was quoted to be so enraged at the time he was quoted as saying he wanted to go all the way into the capital and hand Sashkavili by the balls.

    Georgia more or less is northern Israel as they vacation there and own large swathes of prime seashore land.

  8. It certainly was a ‘no shit’ situation DM. The cards were totally stacked in Russia’s favour. It was an excellent way for Putin to appear tough, totally block the strategic threat from the West as well as raise moral in the Russian forces. Win, win win.

    I didn’t explain my point on the exit from the Black Sea very well in my last comment. Turkey has been re-examining its relations with Russia and is distancing itself from NATO. Just as the Russians consider the Black Sea as their back pond, NATO (ie the US) considers the whole Mediterranean Sea as theirs.

    Russian naval vessels in the Med would have a short but exciting time in any conflict. Their function is to push such a combat theatre further away from the Rodina – the Russian homeland. Any such NATO victory would be a pyrrhic one. Tel Aviv does not have a monopoly on Samson options.

    All cheery thoughts and I’m sure the war gamers have played it out many times. My concern is that the War Hawks in the Pentagon are too used to weak opponents that capitulate in the face of armed coercion. The Russian losses in WWII are burned into their very souls. They will not back down so close to home.

  9. I am going to think on what you have written there and get back to you..

    I recall the whole crimea annexation talk.

    I may have to go back and re-read some postings I had made way back.

  10. That’s the way to do it Penny. Chat soon.

  11. Chuckyman! good day sir.

    I am in amongst the muck of old posts. Crimea is actually already an autonomous state.
    "After several years of negotiations, Crimea became an "Autonomous Republic" within the nation of Ukraine. Crimea has its own constitution, government and legislature and certain other rights that keep it from being just another region (oblast) of Ukraine."

    Given that fact, it would not have been difficult to get them to separate. (Which is not likely to happen at this time, but, is a good card to play when needed)

    Regarding NATO membership, Orange Victor had made it an election issue, and he lost.So the NaTO membership had not come to pass.

    We can assume if any type of conflict arises Ukraine will side with Russia. Lest they risk being broken up.

    On to Syria, I figured I had to have some old posts on this

    from this post

    "According to military sources Moscow's planned retaliation for America's missile interceptors in Poland and US-Israeli military aid to Georgia may come in the form of installing Iskandar surface missiles in Syria and its Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad. "

    I am going to have to get a map up and look at Kaliningrad. Where is this located, strategically speaking? How does it relate to this whole mess geographically speaking?

    What are your thoughts on the Iskander surface missiles? Do you think it is possible that they were installed in Syria?

    Have you checked out the post I put up on this new potential leader for Syria. He is grovelling in the Israel media, and he is claiming a military coup is in the offing.

    If this is the case, how would Russia respond, i light of the two ports? Any weapons they may have installed in Syria??

    Russia would surely be aware that this may be in the cards. ( I mean if I could find this via msm, they surely have greater means then I) They would then lose their access to the Mediterranean.

    Give it a read and share some thoughts.

    Comment to Dublin Mick, it sure was a hair raising time!

    Whew, there are sure alot of what if and maybe's eh?

  12. Welcome back Penny. That’s good researching work (grin).

    I agree that the Ukrainians won’t want to seem like door mats but will line up with Russia. They are very much in their ‘sphere of influence’.

    Kaliningrad is a small area between Poland and Lithuania on the Baltic coast. It was previously a part of East Prussia before the Soviets ethnically cleansed it of Germans at the end of WW2. It makes an excellent forward fire base for the Russians.

    The Russians have designed many technically clever and devastating missile systems. Unlike the US they don’t get many chances to show them off. The last time was during the Georgian slap down and despite lengthy training by the US they turned tail and ran for their lives.

    The Iskander was the missile system used very successfully during that conflict. It is a ballistic missile system but with an ability to perform evasive manoeuvres and deploy decoys. In effect it can deliver the same punch as conventional air strikes without needing all the planes and their support services – all tucked on the back of a truck.

    I looked it up and they have a nasty sting in their tails. They can now be used as a forward launch platform for the P-500 Bazalt supersonic cruise missiles and in hence doubles their effective range. Those nasty buggers can fly in a coordinated flight pattern. One flies at 7000m to hunt for their target and coordinates the others while the rest fly low-level.

    As they are only deployed by the Russians to their land forces it depends on what security arrangements Syria has agreed around the ports. I would not be surprised to see them there. With a very long supply chain the more firepower on hand the better.

    I’m going to pop over to your place now for a look-see.

  13. Thanks for that response. If I happen in my travels to come across anything that mentions the what if's of weaponry around the port cities I will let you know.

    I guess time will tell what unfolds in Syria?

  14. Very true Penny. I think that the Syrian regime will stamp out any insurrection that occurs. Due to their strategic importance to the Russians they will be certainly help to ‘stiffen their backbones’ if it is necessary.

    I am not naive in regards to the Russian ability for brutal measures when necessary. The difference in my mind between them and the US is the lack of wanton corruption and excessive violence when other methods would suffice.

    If they get publically involved watch for the media storm of hypocritical moralising to get thrown their way. That will really ratchet up tensions.