Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "TalkTV" channel.

  1. 12
  2. 9
  3. Netanyahu would fight Iran with the last drop of blood - of U.S. soldiers. Israel under Netanyahu and the Saudis who play Trump like a fiddle HATE the deal BECAUSE IT WORKS. - It makes SURE that Iran cannot make weapons grade material w/o it being noticed (and since they - and that is certified - destroyed equipment that is also necessary for steps towards enrichment - they would need 1 year minium to get there. Which is plenty of time to act against it if - IF - they do not honor the deal and try to make material for nukes. Iran fully kept their side of the deal, the Trump admin btw cannot deny that, the UN and the Europeans certify to it. Now for the REAL reasons Hezbollah in Lebanon (they just did well in an election) does not allow Israel to grab Lebanon (Israel tried several times !! most notable in the 1980s and 2006) As long as Israel tries to drive out the Palestinians with apartheid policies (even worse - in South Africa they did not try to make people LEAVE the country) ISRAEL - not the U.S., not Europe ! - will have problems with Hamas. Israel helped to found Hamas as competition to secular PLO (under smart Arafat) btw. Syria and even more Iran support Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Iran supports Hamas (Palestinians). Neither Syria, nor Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas have sponsored terror attacks in OUR countries (Europe, U.S. Canada,...) Israel is highly aggressive with Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinians - well deal with the backlash. Hezbollah and Hamas are Shia Muslim, they have no caliphate or jihadist agenda - not like the SAUDI supported terrorists (ISIS, Al Qaedea, ....) We leave them alone, they leave us alone. That does not work with ISIS - they come over and bring terror - and again they are inspired by the Saudi style Islam (an extreme form of Sunni Islam = Wahhabism). An intact Syria and Iran (and Russia and China leaning in) = no grabbing of Lebanon (WATER). That is one of the reasons Israel provides medical treatment for the jihadists fighting in Syria (even to ISIS fighters). And help with money, training, equipment,... In case you have ever wondered why Israel never had an ISIS attack. Israel has 200 war heads with nukes (material stolen from the U.S.) they know that Iran is no threat to them, that Iran will never attack them first - they are not suicidal or irrational. But corner Iran - and watch what happens. Oh, and China has economic interests in Iran.
    8
  4. 7
  5. 7
  6. 7
  7. 7
  8. 6
  9. the British government for sure had the intention do dispose of the animals. If we believe the now official claim that the animals had stayed in the house for weeks - they let them die intentionally. After they had died it was easy to burn them and destroy potential evidence. They also could have taken the pets away and brought them to a secret place (right in the beginning of the investigation) - but of course then MORE PEOPLE would know of them so it maybe was easier to let them die of thirst in the sealed off house. My theory is that they went INTO the house of the Skripal's (I mean an investigation would require that !) and OF COURSE stumbled upon the animals (cage of guinea pigs, food bowl and cat toilet, cat toys) - as long as the cat can move, it will come running as soon as someone enters the house. They then decided that the animals could be inconvenient evidence - they had not YET made up their mind WHAT the narrative for the plebs would be . At the time before they sealed off the house there were a lot of theories - the poison was thrown at the Skripals in the park, it was in the flowers they put to the grave, in the pub or restaurant, in the food, the door handle of the car, the ventilation of the car, ... I think the most recent and official theory is that it was on the door knob of the house (inside ? outside ?). When they encountered the pets (as I am sure they did) they did not yet know what theory would be presented to the public. Anyway: pets alive and well COULD become an obstacle in any future (yet undecided narrative). The British gov. could hardly refuse to take blood and tissue samples from healthy pets - could they ? And it would not align well with any potential theory that the extremely dangerous chemical was IN the house if the animals were doing fine (it does not align anyway if the pets had a chance to starve to death - BUT the living pets would bring the message home to even the most dumbed down person. And the Brits love their cats like everybody else - so the story would get even more unwanted interest by the citizens and raise their suspicions). And when the pets are already dead (sorry we were too dumb to find them in time) it is easy to dispose of them quickly (very quickly before there is any public discussion) and w/o leaving traces (they were burnt). Note how they mainstream media let them off the hook with the very obvious question: Did they never enter the house during the investigations ? Then what kind of investigation was that ? And IF they entered the house even once - how did they manage to OVERLOOK the pets ????? The British government did not mention the pets until the Russian government speaker mentioned them (after they learned about them) - approx. a month later. (The cousin Victoria in Russia knew about the pets. Then they could hardly ignore the issue . Not in the times of RT and the internet. (gone are the times when it was much easier to bury a story with a complicit mainstream media).
    5
  10. 5
  11. 5
  12. 5
  13. 4
  14. 4
  15. +Ed Hoosen - they have cultivated the "circle the waggons" mentality in Israel for 70 years now. Fierce European foreign fighters gave the British troops troops a lot of trouble in the Protectorate Palestine. From 1900 on until and during WW2. The Zionists were not picky - the plans for their own land included discussion about Panama, The Seychelles. They just needed to convince one of the colonial powers to help them take over someone else's land - and lend them their military support in case the natives had objections. These people were no victims. After the Nazi prosecution the idea of Zionism - which had been a minority movement among Jews - had more support, especially in the U.S. - Truman (the moron and war monger) gave them their colony (for political gain, to get the Jewish vote and money for his election, and against the serious advice of the Pentagon and especially Secretary of State Gen. Marshall). So then the experienced Zionist fighters who were already in Palestine officially took charge, traumatized Nazi victims came into the new founded colony and were glad to let them take care of their security (or perceived security). Other Jewish people (often with ideals about a new society) who were enraged on behalf of the victims or with family that had suffered joined them. And they all agreed - this time THEY would be the majority in the new country. With SHARING, RESPECT, INTERACTION and MODERN AGRICULTURE and WATER MANAGEMENT the additional European settlers COULD have make it work for ALL - for the native population and the newcomers. Softening the natural ressentment against the immigrants/new settlers by "bribing them" with the advantage they could have from the new people. Well, that was not the plan of the new settlers. They new colonists were middle class Europeans - Ashkanazi Jews who have no genetic ties to the "Holy Land" anyway and who look like Europeans - because they ARE Europeans (or U.S. citizens of European descent). And they had on average every prejudice of that time of the (usually well educated) middle class - minus the anti-Jewish sentiment. And those who had been fighting as Europeans for their CLAIM on that far away country to which they had NO TIES (the right as THEY saw it) - they for sure had no qualms about the fate of the brown people who were the natives - who looked different than them, and on average were less educated. Plus the brown people did not have the Big Bully U.S. on their side. The new Jewish colonists cleared out many of the natives right away (who naturally also resisted, it was clear what was coming and no one had asked THEM). The kicked out Black Jews (Gold Meir was all for it), with some disdain let the Arab Jews stay (these are the real descendents of Moses, Abraham, King David - if those men ever lived). Read the "jokes" about the stupid Arab Jews in Kishons books. They are the underclass. Prosecution does not necessarily make persons or group more empathic. And I think they have developed a sort of group think. Maybe there is a cumulative effect of centuries of disdain and prosectution that shows up NOW in the Israeli citizens closing the ranks and not giving a damn about anyone else. Truth is: all citizens of wealthy country are (for the most part) very disinterested if their government harms poor brown people. These victims are usually in other countries. The Israelis have them closer - on the other hand their rightwing government makes sure that there is a divide. Interaction is hindered as well as possible. Israelis can live in their bubble - sure with high security, but comfortable - and never be the wiser about the plight of the Palestians. Most do not really want to know anyway. And with the current climate most would not dare to speak up even if they felt a little uneasy. I saw a video where Israeli citizens on the street were asked: What would they want their government to do. It was as if you would interview folks in Belgium, Argentine, or the U.S. The parliament is useless, the politicians are not doing their job, the economy is not doing too well, pensions cut ... The only person that mentioned: I wish we would get peace was a young man, an Arab. He did not address it as directly as I do - it was a very "indirect" statement. I noticed that - as if it was almost a taboo to mention that something like a "peace process" should be an important agenda. I think a determined U.S. government must force Israel to the negotiation table kicking and screaming. For a 2 state solution (and a good fence between them). And before that can ever happen Big Donations in politics in the U.S. must be eliminated. The powerful Israeli lobby heavily finances BOTH parties. Even if a candidate does not get money directly - a) they are also supposed to raise money for the party in general and b) the party establishment gets Israeli Lobby money for sure - and the task assigned to them by the Big Donors of Aipac is to make the party underlings fall in line. If regular politicians do not obey they will be opposed and eliminated. This is not only a matter of not getting money for a political campaign - they will crush any politician daring to speak up. Even Senator Sanders - who does not need the organizational support of the Democratic Party OR their fundraising capacity or any Aipac money is careful what he says about Israel. He made a few statements - more than most politicians in the U.S. dare to say, but not even close to what would be deserved. And since he is Jewish he has some protection from being slandered as anti-Jewish. Obama ALSO acted cautiously around the Israeli lobby (he did not like Netanyahu), he offended them of course with the Iran deal. Well we could watch the shenanigans of Netanyahu and the Republicans in 2015 when it was signed. The Democratic Party more or less had to stand by their president, their Jewish financiers had to forgive them the infidelity. But they were happy to support the extensions of the sanctions against Iran in August 2017 (after the UN and the Trump admin had confirmed the full compliance or Iran with the nuclear deal). But Iran allegedly "destabilizes" the Middle East - aka they annoy the heck out of Israel, increase their influence in Iraq, and help to prevent regime change in Syria. They support Hamas - and Hezbollah which prevents Israel from taking over Lebanon. So Iran is called the worst supporters of terrorism ever. I think they have nothing on the U.S. or the Saudis.
    4
  16. So.... police gave a neutral assessment. May exaggerated it in parliament. The police does NOT know what kind of visa the men got from the British embassy in Russia (or that is what they said when asked). The government after 1 month of speculation in spring 2018 came up with the claim that a fluid or gel was spread on the door (knob) - which caused the poisoning. Portdon Down confirmed it was a substance from the Novichok class, military grade. - The weird thing is that makes is very, very dangerous to handle. and the Skripals should have dropped dead on first contact. And if it was so diluted - then it is strange that the effects would set in at the same time (maybe not the same exposure, skin contact, body weight). After the Italian restaurant they walked through a little park. There they are the last time on CCTV, they walk normally, the bench where the doctor found them and gave them first aid is a few walking minutes away. So they were hit by the allegedly deferred symptoms at the same time. The men that are now suspects came to Salesbury after 11.48 a.m. and the Skripals left that house at 9:15 on March 2018 and never returned to it (both proven by CCTV - if it has not been manipulated). The men had stayed in a cheaper hotel in Eastend in London. The police raided it in May - never bothered to tell the owners or other guests - which learned it like everybody else from the media in Sep. 2018 (NOW the government and police ask the populatin for help, if they have noticed anything unusual). The men came on Saturday and at Sunday noon again to Salisbury nearby their house. (seeking out the worst time if they wanted to plant poison). People coming from church, doing gardening etc. Sergei and daughter Yulia switched off their phones for 4 hours and they did so at exactely the same time (and on again together). So they wanted to evade surveillance. George thinks they MET with these men (but when ??) - they bought flowers, went to the cementary, were in the pub and then eating in the Italian restaurant. Sergei got louder there, other clients noticed that he was excited / disturbed / annoyed - but he spoke Russian. The men were not there. These places were turned upside down in spring and everyone questioned, they would have remembered. So maybe they had agreed to meet with someone in the park ?? and it went wrong. And the poison in the perfume bottle was NOT used for the Skripals or to impregnate the doorknob (it that is even true) - there must have been another batch. The partner of the recent victim that picked up the perfume in a charity bin says it was sealed in cellophane, he had to open it with a knive. His partner died when she handled the perfume bottle.
    4
  17. 4
  18. Remember when big finance put insane amounts of bets on shady repackaged US subprime mortgages ?(speculating as they do all the time). So first a real estate bubble in the US was allowed to build up. The U.S. banks gave out a lof of subprime loans (a major but regional and manageable U.S. crisis). - And then regulators and governments in all major countries let their "deregulated" financial "industry" go crazy with speculating on those loans (Credit Default Swaps). Then it got really, really toxic. The project "financialization" and "deregulation" was of course started under Thatcher and Reagan.(The financial "industry" "making money" by speculation and mergers instead of boring, respectable banking and productive manufacturing). In the 1970s there were major economic troubles everywhere because of the two oil crises. Oil prices doubled within 1 - 1,5 years in both cases - and back in the day energy saving technologies were not as advanced, so it had a substantial impact on inflation AND unemployment. All governments - not only that of the UK struggled. The damage of the "winter of discontent" was NOTHING compared to the damage of the Great Financial Crisis. It is just that "uppity" working class people - or coal miners fighting for dear life - trigger much more critique, outrage and contempt than the white collar criminals when they bring the world financial system to it's knees and loot the whole world in the aftermath. (See WHO profited in the aftermath of the crisis after finance was saved by colluding politicians and WHO paid the bill for the speculative party and the recovery of Big Finance and the upper 20 % of society). Of course the financial elites and the investor / landlord class had support in the GFC that the working class did not get in the 1970s. First there were the bailouts and AFTER the bailouts the banking and financial sector was propped up with QE for the Banks - to the tune of TRILLION of Dollars, Euros, Pounds (UK, US, EU central banks).
    4
  19. 4
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24. + Nimble - you mean the Fascists took a piggy ride on a very successful movement - Socialism. Because they needed the votes of the little people, which had a very hard time because the haves and the "conservatives" had started a World War, ruined the economy, caused the Great Depression and then on top of it implemented crippling austerity (in Europe). Do you know the defintion of fascism by Mussolini ? The state operating in very close cooperation with and in the interest of private for-profit corporations - not a very Labour friendly stance to put it mildly. And sure enough the fascists considered the "left" incl. the unions to be their enemies. They suppressed the unions as soon as they got into power. Which is why rich industrialists were eager to help them rise to power, that support was - at least in Germany - covert. For once the anti Jewish rhetoric was ugly and the upper class did not want to be openly associated with that, and equally important: it would have spoiled the "We are for the little people" marketing. I recommend to read about the New Deal policies of FDR and compare them with the Labour U.K. manifesto - there were fascists, and even Nazis active in the U.S. - but because LEFT policies were boldly implemented the U.S. they remained a fringe movement and the U.S. was spared the fascist route. Rich U.S. Republicans (industrialist leaders) planned a coup in 1934 - didn't go anywhere (thanks to Gen. Smedley Butler) so they continued to fawn over the international fascists, wished for the European situation (in the 1930s a lot of European countries drifted to the dictatorial far right, not only Germany). They continued to support White Supremacists in the U.S. and funded openly and covertly the Nazis and their "Eugenics research".
    3
  25. 3
  26. 3
  27. 3
  28. 3
  29. 3
  30. +Vierotchka Just ask the French how they manage to show off The Tuilleries and Versailles without Royals. The Windsors have a fortune - they - and the tourists who are visiting the BUILDINGS - not the Royal family, no tea with the queen ! and who are enjoying the historical flair - would not vanish. So no harm done if the funding for that extremely rich family is drastically cut. The tourists go no farther than the gates, they see the guard (that I would fund by government if the Royals would shy away from the expenses), they see the castles and buildings. The Guard is also about security, they are not only a nice tradition and major touristic attraction, so if the Royals are kept as figur heads and representatives the Guard could be financed by the state. Those fine buildings were financed by the hard labour of former citizens. They belong to all of the country. Not the Royals - never mind what the current property rights say about it (the queen also enjoys tax exemptions). Other countries have Guards and old buildings and castles and museums (all open to the public even if they used to belong to the monarchs) and plenty of tourism - without financing an already excessively rich family. The fashion designers will continue to provide clothes (Kate has a huge budget - tax funded - so I guess she pays for her garments and at least does not accept presents). The tabloid press also can continue to make money with them - by covering them. If they travel abroad they can have tax funding - as representatives of the country. Many countries have a head of active government and a second office that is usually more a figurehead (and a constitutional check on the power of government). But the queen fails in that respect too, she is the Commander of the army, but did not prevent the UK participation in the war against Iraq in 2003 for instance. 1 million people out of 65 million on the streets protesting the upcoming war - does she not watch the news ??
    3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. + Blake Seven: The empire (and the theft, servitude, slavery, war) of course never benefited the mass of British people either, you are right in that respect. They were exploitative abroad AND at home. - The middle class in the UK was broader then in other countries (merchant class) - and that aspiring middle class could profit from slavery as long as it was legal and the colonial system (to some degree - the mass profit went to the top). but even if one could afford only 1 or 2 slaves one could leverage their workforce). As for the British role and profits in slavery (also for small slave holders) look at the channel of BadMouseProductions youtube(dot)com/channel/UCFEmOPY04flXH-QpMMAGeJA The British workers btw had higher wages than their counterparts on the continent (which in turn became an incentive for the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION - replacing human labour with machines). I doubt they had a better standard of living than their peers on the continent - that extra disposable income went into the pockets of the landlord class. That could be a chance for (lower) middle class people to make some money and advance on the ladder if they managed to have some flats which they could let. Rents were extremely high in the cities where the jobs where. And the British authorities (parliament) had made sure in the centuries before that people could not survive in the country, undermining the commons ("fencing off") so that the poor masses had to stream into the cities or work in the mines or had to sign up in the military be cannon fodder for the system that suppressed them.. The workers were pitted against each other (plus of course the influx of the poor Irish).
    2
  46. + Blake Seven - admitting that people now (or in the past) were even worse off than you (or your ancestors) - does NOT TAKE AWAY from us NOW being screwed (it is more the degree TO WHICH people are being screwed). - it sounds like you are into the "divide and conquer" trap of the ruling class.. The SAME MINDSET that allows the SHAMEFUL treatment of those INVITED Windrush immigrants, and DESTROYING RECORDS ** - also allows the selling out of the British fishing industry in EU or other trade negotiations. (** The destruction of the records is CRIMINAL, and who are the cowardly civil servants who do not dare to blow the whistle) That is the mindset that also allows for the defunding of the NHS (it had the leanest budget of all systems of the wealthy European nations AND THEN it was being defunded over 10 - 15 years - see World Bank per capita healthcare expenditure of nations). The traitors (New Labour, Blairites) that could not be bothered to oppose the government on immigration - also cannot be bothered to stand up for the native British population. The divide and conflict of interest is not between the immigrants and the natives. (or between the people whose ancestors mildly profited from the empire or who were completely exploited by the empire). If the economy would work for The People the immigrants likely could be integrated well and would be very much needed (if social housing, education, infrastructure and NHS is properly funded, too. They could easily find the money to bail out the banks, for QE for the banks, and they have yet to find an expensive war or regime change they do not like. Of course there has been to much immigration into the UK given the current state of the economy. - Because the EU ALSO does not work for the Polish people (or Romania, Bulgaria, ...) - why were so many of them coming to the U.K.?? - because they do not have enough jobs at home in this neoliberal economic system. The neoliberal system that is promoted by ALL Western governments (incl. the UK). They can promote it on stereoids in the EU - it gives them leverage over more than 500 million people (TTIP, CETA for instance). The UK !!!!, France and Hillary Clinton heavily lobbied the hesistant Obama administration in 2010/2011 to regime change Libya - that opened the refugee routes. (they are having slave markets now in Libya, literally, the country is a failed state NOW). Plus of course Syria - again the UK and French governments are ALSO heavily involved destroying a once functioning and relatively prosperous country (that is true for Libya, Syria, and before that Iraq). And before THAT disaster, the UK was all for the Iraq disaster. - The British CITIZENS - much to their credit - took it to the streets in 2003. A demonstration with 1 million in a country with 65 million is no small thing. But Tony Blair felt safe !!! to IGNORE THAT. He was right, he is now making money like a bandit (!!!) and he is not going to prison and no one within his bubble is suffering the consequences of war. It is not that the regular British or European citizes are to blame for the psychopaths on top - but it is about time to put in the extra effort to stop them. For ethical reasons, for the sake of peace, for the sake of the economic well-being of EVERYONE amont the regular people. the psychopaths on top will not stop at destroying foreign countries or oppress immigrants (and create the REASONS for immigration) - and they will screw US as well as the "brown" (or Muslim) people. It is obviously time for more massive civil disobedience (like they did with the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.). Just "demonstrating" does not cut it. btw: I think Jeremy Corbyn would be a huge advancement for the country (NEW economic ideas, see QE For the People, or Stephanie Kelton on MMT). he would keep the country out of the EXPENSIVE war mongering and regime changes. AND he has INTEGRITY (and the willingness to stand up for unpopular positions). That is rare and valuable.
    2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2