A New Year, some shocking news: Two Items of note.
Iranian leader killed in Baghdad
Big news today, the U.S. killing of top Iranian special forces leader in Baghdad, and his Iraqi associates. Wait, what? Wow, bolt out of the blue, right?
Maybe, maybe not. 
I'm providing no links; this is all over the Internet.
Many expect full-scale war, while others don't think the Iranian regime leadership has the ability to do that, esp now that Kassem
 Suleimani, the Iranian al-Quds leader, is dead. Suleimani was a major 
player in the Iranian regime, you see, and in its military actions 
outside of Iran, a man who was responsible for a whole host of nasty 
things in various countries, as in even ballistic missile deployment. 
Another man killed was one Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, Suleimani's top Iraqi 
associate. Al-Muhandis was founder and leader of Kata’ib 
Hizballah, an Iraqi Shia paramilitary group, and was directly involved 
in the attack on the U.S. embassy. Of course, De Gaulle once said (I 
think it was him) that cemeteries are full of "indispensable men". Maybe
 so. 
Yet another (indispensable?) associate, one Hadi al-Ameri, whom Obama had once invited to the White House, was arrested yesterday (I guess it was) by US forces in Iraq.
 Al-Ameri had led (or was one of the leaders of) the recent attack on 
the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. Al-Ameri was also head of the Badr 
Organization, a Shia political party and Iranian-officer d militia. 
Sure
 looks like a liquidation of high-level anti-U.S. people, doesn't it? No
 need to have a full-scale war like George W. Bush was talked into when 
you can just "headshot" a few leaders and end all the trouble. 
Everyone
 in the loathsome Islamic Republic regime leadership must be aware of 
what this signifies. Certainly, at the very least, they know none of them are safe,
 and Donald Trump isn't Jimmy Carter or Barrack Obama. They're breathing
 fire an brimstone, the regime leaders are, as one would expect, but 
they know they could be taken out at any time. What good does it profit 
them to have militias and suicide brigades -- even vast if poorly 
trained conscription armies -- when they themselves can be killed 
instantly, anywhere?
Of course, the de-masculinized Western leaders 
will be in shock. Nothing new about that. (Did everyone see this? Pope Francis tells teens they’re not a ‘disciple of Jesus’ if they try to convert non-believers."
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/does-pope-francis-repudiate-the-great-commission ) Ben Rhodes, a close Obama associate and involved in 
Obama's Iranian -- uh -- love fest, is outraged. Rhodes is famous 
(infamous) for commenting on how easily it is to manipulate MSM 
reporters. (He was right about that!) And Democrat Senator Chris Murphy 
has written, "Soleimani [sic] was an enemy of the United States. That’s not a question.
 The question is this – as reports suggest, did America just 
assassinate, without any congressional authorization, the second most 
powerful person in Iran, knowingly setting off a potential massive 
regional war?”
1. If Suleimani
 was the second most powerful guy, the new second most powerful guy, not
 to mention the first, must be underground, in hiding. 
2. As for massive regional war, well, they've been having that off and on for millennial The Iraqis and Iranians killed over a half-million of their young men (wasn't it?) during their 1980-1988 war. (That was an interesting war in that it showed how stupid the high-level military leaders in both countries were, and how little they valued the human lives of their miserable subjects.)
2. As for massive regional war, well, they've been having that off and on for millennial The Iraqis and Iranians killed over a half-million of their young men (wasn't it?) during their 1980-1988 war. (That was an interesting war in that it showed how stupid the high-level military leaders in both countries were, and how little they valued the human lives of their miserable subjects.)
3. Congress? Who would trust them for anything?
Also,
 the Washington Post called Suleimani "most revered". That's actually 
vomit inducing. It was Suleimani who led the IED program to kill U.S. 
and Coalition military people. He's responsible for the death and 
maiming of thousands of such, and Allah only knows how many of his own 
people he's brutally murdered. No doubt he never heard of Matthew 26:52.
Logically,
 this was also a serious retaliation against Shia forces in Iraq who 
staged the attempted U.S. embassy takeover. Now, it is said that when 
one of these staged protests occur, as happened in November 1979 in 
Tehran when "students" seized the U.S. embassy there during the feckless
 Jimmy Carter presidency, and then recently in Baghdad, the way to deal 
with it is not hand wringing and surrender, but "headshots" of the guys 
running the show. Drop them, and the curtain falls. (It's not necessary,
 in other words, to solve the problem the way Napoleon solved the 
problem of Parisian Revolutionary mobs: he turned the cannons on them.) 
But if such precision is not possible, give headshots to the first 
"protesters" over the wall. That ends such "events" promptly; indeed, 
with celerity. (As in Kent State, "back in the day.") This killing of 
Suleimani & Co. (and also arrest of others) is the equivalent of 
that, on a different, much higher, level.  
So, what is all this really about? We have only speculation at the moment, but FWIW, the initial word is that Kassem Suleimani and friends were in Baghdad to run a coup d'état against the current Iraqi regime. This
 might be true, it might not. Whether there's any validity to that 
report, certainly it is obvious, though, that this "culling of the 
bulls" while there's been 
an ongoing, nation-wide protest in Iran against the hated and loathed 
regime, is an extremely significant event. It has got the 
attention of every leader in the violent Mid-East, that's for sure. News
 has spread through Iran itself, and Iranians online are cheering the 
event (while Iranian leaders fiercely vow vengeance, of course). Are we 
witnessing the beginning of the fall of the Islamic Republic? Was this 
Trump's plan when in strengthened sanctions against Iran, thus causing 
the domestic shortages that sparked the newest uprising? 
We'll learn more as things develop, obviously. Otherwise,
 we've just got speculation. But a major player in the Iranian regime's 
military is now dead. Major Iraqi associates of Iran are dead or 
arrested. That has to weaken the regime significantly. How far would 
Lenin have gotten without Trotsky? This is especially true in the 
Mid-East where you have a few leaders and a lot of ignorant, low-level 
cannon fodder following them. 
One
 final possibility: this is an attempt by the U.S. government "Deep 
State" to take out Trump because one of his main campaign promises was 
to keep us out of such foreign war imbroglios. Many pro-Trump people 
want us totally out of the Mid-East (and the UN, too). This is quite 
possible, but we'll have to see. 
Impeachment Development
The
 other big news, however, is an item you need not speculate about at 
all. I haven't written much of anything on Trump's impeachment because 
I've been waiting for "the other shoe to drop;" i.e., this isn't about 
impeachment, but rather accessing the Mueller Team's opposition research
 on Trump. Huh? Yeah, the whole odd-ball impeachment thing is a joke-show, but actually it is cover for something else. 
While
 it was up and running, the Mueller Team (Mueller not having too much to
 do about any of it except serve as a quasi-respected figurehead, and 
who lost all respect after his embarrassing Congressional testimony) was
 using grand jury testimony to dig up all sorts of non-Russia hoax 
personal dirt of Donald Trump and his family as "oppo research" to run 
against him in 2020. Yes, tons and tons of info was garnered by 
Democrat lawyers and activists against Trump over the two-year period 
the Mueller investigation went on. That info is of course extremely 
valuable to the Democrats. Now that Trump has been impeached, the 
Democrats have filed for the courts to release it, "because we need this
 information now that Trump is impeached." 
Actually,
 right after the impeachment vote, a week or so ago, the House Dems went
 to the courts (DC Court of Appeals) with this, and now, today, they'll 
make oral arguments before the court why this info needs released to 
them. THIS IS WHY THEY DIDN'T SENT THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT 
IMMEDIATELY TO THE SENATE. Clearly, all this was "in the works" for some
 time before now. 
If 
the court rules in their favor, the Dept of Justice will appeal it to 
the full DC appeals court, and if that full court approves the 
Democrats' request, it'll go to the Supreme Court. But none of that 
really matters. The Democrats have the info now, and have had it 
through the impeachment sham. If they don't get official permission to 
mine it, they'll leak it to their allies in the press. 
It's what they do.
For the full story of all this, check out: 
And that's about all there is to say to that. 
I will note that this whole Russia Collusion hoax was similar: it wasn't about Trump being in cahoots with Putin. Everyone involved knew that wasn't true.
 As Doug Wead, presidential historian, said the other day, every 
intelligence service in the world knew that Russia story was untrue 
within 24 hours of it becoming public. https://theunionjournal.com/every-foreign-intelligence-service-knew-within-24-hours-trump-russia-collusion-was-bogus-story-video/
 And as 22-year FBI veteran Frank Watt wrote here: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/12/two_possibilities_in_trump_wiretapping_and_neither_is_good.html
there's
 no way on Earth that such a series of investigations and wiretaps and 
so on that led up to "Crossfire Hurricane" (the investigation of the 
president) and "CH" itself, could have happened without multi-level 
knowledge and approval in the FBI and DOJ, and in the Obama White House.
 (Read Watt's article; it is excellent.) 
Now,
 if a 22-year FBI veteran can write so plainly about what happened, you 
know full well that Attorney General William Barr knows it too, as does 
John Durham, U.S. attorney for Connecticut, whom Barr charged with 
investigating it. If serious indictments of many high-level people don't
 happen in a few months, wow, NO ONE is going to believe anything out of the U.S. government again (as in why we kill certain terrorists, as happened in Baghdad). 
But
 my point is that just as Trump's impeachment is about getting "oppo 
research" on Trump as opposed to the officially stated reasons for it, 
so the Russia Collusion hoax was to cover up the Obama Administration's 
long term, multi-year plundering of the NSA archives and data for 
political opposition research. That was what the then NSA 
Director, Admiral Mike Rogers discovered during 2016 and why he went and
 reported it to Donald Trump when Trump was president elect. 
If
 you don't know this story about Admiral Rogers -- who relinquished the 
NSA command in May 2018 and retired a month later, wow, you really don't
 know what's been going on. He's the real hero in all this mess, the 
true "whistle blower", and the word is -- "scuttlebutt" to use an old 
Navy term -- that Rogers has been working with John Durham.
So,
 two big news items today. "Never a dull moment, really." One we can 
only speculate about, and the other we should all know about in cold, 
clear detail. 
Happy New Year,
An Préachán

 
No comments:
Post a Comment