Hurricane_Faggot posted:
it's going to suck and all of lf is going to be like "killlll mmmeeeeeee..." as usual.

woah, look at this dude being all fucking meta and shit

Hurricane_Faggot posted:

woah, look at this dude having like, independent thoughts and shit

1488 posted:
UFOs will land on the White House lawn on 12.21.2012

close but it's actually going to be on the day of the next celestial alignment, which is in early June

As of Oct ’11, China held $1.134 trillion in US Treasury bills, bonds and notes, equalling 8% of all US foreign debt. If China were to attempt to dump these on the international bond market, it would probably only be able to obtain the equivalent of 30%-40% of this, because their value would plummet while the sale was being made. However, if our friends the ‘international bankers’ were to collude with China on this, they could probably realise 80%-90%, by a combination of organised simultaneous sales through proxies, and political pressure on the USA not to ‘welsh on its debts’.

Now I want to draw your attention to the oft-repeated pattern in ‘international finance’ whereby the centre of operations moves rapidly and somewhat catastrophically from country to country at critical moments, causing the empire built by the previous host to collapse and to a greater or lesser extent be taken over by the new one. If we trace the history of ‘international finance’ in the modern era, we find that it started in Spain and Portugal, with the financing of the conquest of the Americas, which was richly rewarded with quantities of gold and silver so great as to overwhelm all other existing sources of these metals available to Europe. After the ‘international financiers’ were expelled from Spain and Portugal in 1492, the new centre was Holland, where it remained for almost 200 years, while Holland developed a substantial empire, but in 1688 the centre moved to England, where it remained for 260 years, until 1948. Then, obviously, it moved to the USA.

These moves are always somewhat inconceivable until they take place, and their timing is absolutely critical. Too soon, and the old hegemon may remain dangerously powerful, and angry. Too late, and the geopolitical leverage afforded by the old empire may have evaporated before it has been used to lay the foundations of the new one. My prediction is that at the most tactically advantageous moment, the centre will move again, from the US to China. The US, if it accepts defeat gracefully, will be permitted a sort of semi-retirement among the second-rate powers, much as Britain was after 1948. If it fights back, it will be destroyed, as Germany was when it resisted ‘international finance’ from 1917 onwards. Germany, a potential new centre which the ‘international financiers’ professed to love until 1917, suddenly discovered that it was, to put it at its mildest, eminently expendable. This is proxy, or financial, imperialism. The ostensible ‘hegemon’ is just the front end of it.

So when would the kairos, the ‘critical moment’, be for this shift from USAia to China? Perhaps we can make some inferences. Imagine two circles on a map of the world, one centred on New York and the other on Beijing. From time to time, one circle shrinks and the other expands. On the intersection between these two circles, and therefore significant as an indicator of these changes in the size of the circles, is Iran. Iran is the third largest oil supplier to China after ‘Saudi’ Arabia and Angola, both of which could be cut off by US diktat. I should say that at the point when it becomes otherwise certain that USAia will ‘strike’ Iran, China will face what could be called an ‘existential threat’. If the switchover does not occur at that point, and USAia goes on to ‘strike’ Iran, China faces an oil crisis. Therefore, China will certainly want to know which side the ‘international financiers’ are on. It may seem almost inconceivable that ‘the Iranian threat to Israel’ will disappear at that point, but I believe it is true. Iran after all has no intention whatever of launching a pre-emptive attack on Israel; it never has had any such intention. ‘The Iranian threat to Israel’ is not in reality ‘existential’ at all; it is more a matter of regional dominance. In the event of a switch by ‘international finance’ from New York to Beijing as its preferred proxy-imperial centre, it seems to me that while the unperceptive world rubs its eyes in disbelief, the entire direction of international rhetoric can also be reversed: all of a sudden, both Israel and Iran are partners in regional resistance against US imperialism. Remember what I said about the illusory plan to ally Israel with the USSR in 1948. The illusory plan served its purpose and then vanished down the memory hole as if it had never been. This sort of thing is not too hard when you control most of the global mass media. As Orwell said in his book about the reversals of 1948, “He who controls the past controls the future.”

http://niqnaq.wordpress.com/2011/12/31/what-i-personally-think-will-happen/

Tsargon posted:
hobbit will be good, batman will be bad, me3 will be Bioware Quality but people will still secretly like it

deadken posted:
mark ames and glenn greenwald are gonna get oiled up and wrassle but before long their blows will melt into passionate kisses and a new counterpolitical consensus will be formed. in 2012

such an epic battle in teh twitterverse... eagerly awaiting the next parry by glenn greenwald of the libertarian cato institute