The United States kills Quds Commander Qasem Soleimani

[Franny]

Some high octane speculation from Dr Farrell...

JANUARY 6, 2020

EARTHQUAKE NEAR IRANIAN NUCLEAR PLANT: HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Well... here we go folks! It's 2020, and Daniel and I want to wish everyone a very Happy New Year and every good thing in the year to come.

And speaking of the New Year, I want to start of this year's blogs by a look back to the very tail end of last year, and to rehearse an old high octane speculation, because I think we're looking at that old pattern of high octane speculation in action once again. We've seen, for example, the fires in California over the past two years, with clear evidence that something more is involved than just (1) plain old arson, (2) just plain old drought, and (3) just plain old neglect to trim back brush and undergrowth. Indeed, we've seen strange pictures from those fires, from what appears to be beams of collimated energy, to evidence of fires having been started near the electrical junction boxes of power lines going into homes. I've blogged about these things before and offered some pretty wild high octane speculation in explanation of their potential technological and scientific aspects of what may be going on. Other researchers in the alternative research field such as Elana Freeland have also offered scientific and technological explanations.

As for the events themselves, former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Catherine Austin Fitts and I have also speculated that the fires were a kind of small scale "beta test" of how to practice "disaster capitalism" by initiating the disasters themselves via exotic technologies, and of course, the good old fashioned methods of blackmailing people into committing acts of arson and so on. And now... Australia burns, and more and more people are questioning the public narratives. I wish I could share some of the questions - and information - I've been getting, but suffice it to say there is a growing concern among some in the alternative research field that something is very fishy about what's going on in Australia.

Then, looking further back, there are three other signal events of a few years ago that form part of my "old high octane speculation" pattern: 1) the Fukushima tsunami-earthquake-reactor disaster, 2) the Indonesian tsunami, and 3) the strange earthquakes in the Soviet Union that preceded the German reunification. In each of these cases, what appeared to have been natural disasters all occurred within a political context that suggests that they may not have been so natural after all. Prior to the Fukushima disaster, for example, there was a new Japanese government which was gently but firmly requesting that the USA close its base in Okinawa, and which was openly talking about state visits of then-Japanese-Emperor Akahito to visit China. This was followed by a stern threat from Obama's Secretary of Defense Robert Gates that Japan would face dire consequences if it went forward on its independent course. A few days later, the tsunami struck Fukushima, and the rest is history. And in the case of the Indonesian tsunami, as recounted many times by Catherine Fitts, about a week prior to the tsunami, she noticed a massive sell-off of Indonesian sovereign securities for no apparent reason, but the reason came about a week later when the tsunami struck. In the case of the Soviet Union, Georgia was struck by strong earthquakes during the period of the events surrounding German reunification, a fact that was conveniently coincidental, because the then Soviet Foreign Minister, Eduard Schervenadze was from ... you guessed it ... Georgia.

To this pattern we might add a fourth: the earthquakes that just conveniently devastated North Korean nuclear facilities during the height of renewed tensions between that country and the Trump administration over its nuclear policy. Then came a press conference with an American general who stated "all options are on the table." When asked by a reporter if that included "kinetic weapons" or Rod of God technologies, the general's answer was a simple yes.

It's not much of a "pattern," I'll grant you, but it at least raises to the level of "hunch": natural disasters in the context of political tensions might not be natural disasters at all, but examples of the use of exotic technologies.

With that in mind, consider the recent droning-assassination of a top Iranian general that currently has much of the lamestream corporate controlled media in a tizzy. And within the same time frame, we have this:

5.1 earthquake hits near Bushehr nuclear plant in Iran

Now as the article states, the Iranian nuclear facility at Bushehr is indeed near a natural fault line and experiences almost daily tremors. Normally, that would be enough to make me dismiss the story as "mere earthquake."

But given the previous "pattern of hunches," the political commentary and tensions previous to Fukushima and again in North Korea, I cannot dispel the queasy feeling that we might be looking at the same thing here. And it is perhaps significant that prior to this earthquake, we also had one of those curious "tweets from Trump" that the USA had weapons that were not "nukes" and equally destructive.

And when you do the math on earthquakes, they certainly fall into that category...

See you on the flip side...

[Jayke]

Beginning of World War 3? Or the desperate death throes of a declining empire?

===========

• https://journal-neo.org/2020/01/06/s...out-of-office/

Soleimani’s Killing may Drive the US Out of the Region & Trump Out of Office

While General Qasim Soleimani’s death in a US air strike may apparently seem not big enough a development to start an all-out war, or even World War 3, there is no gainsaying that this deliberate attempt to escalate tensions in the region will have severe consequences. For one thing, Soleimani was no ordinary Iranian soldier, for another, his death is a US response to the increasing Iranian military strength in the region—a situation that the US and Israel have long been trying to reverse. Iranian influence in the region, specifically in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon is a major bone of contention between the US/Israel/Saudia and Iran and a primary reason for the Trump administration’s exit from the Iran-nuclear deal—a step that practically mothered the present crisis.

The US president’s assertion that the decision to take Soleimani out was taken to ‘prevent a war’ is no more than a sham. Historically speaking, Iran has been averse to starting all-out wars. More than ever, this historical fact holds true today because of one simple fact: Iran’s resistance against the US-Israeli-Saudi nexus in Syria and Iraq has been phenomenally successful. In fact, if this resistance had not been successful, the US and its allies would not have been too worried about Iranian presence in the Levant; hence, the simple question: why would Iran want to start a new war when it has already won a major part of the old war, and is most likely to stay the course?

Of course, Iran would ideally want to drive the US out of the region for obvious reasons. While it may seem that a new war, which trump said Soleimani was just about to start, might, hypothetically speaking, enable the Iranians to accomplish their objective, even this objective does not most certainly warrant an all-out war. On the other hand, all it requires is a tenacious continuation of the same strategy and tactics that the Iranians have been following ever since Syria’s eruption into a US/Saudia/Israel sponsored ‘civil-war’ and its resort not to an all-out war but the ideologically motivated resistance groups.

By killing Soleimani and Muhandis, the US has only killed those two figures that had been the two major faces of resistance against the grand US strategic project whereby the terror networks were to grow for the Levant and penetrate the west and central Asian regions and then go all the way into Russia and China—a project that was and still is crucial for sustaining US hegemony in the region.

The air strike that killed Soleimani, therefore, has nothing to do with a ‘new war.’ On the contrary, it is a continuation of the same war the US has almost lost in the region. Notwithstanding the many loses the US has suffered, there is little doubt that the absolute crucial importance of this war for US global hegemony would any time make the US act in as reckless a manner as it did when it did the fateful air strike.

The US would idealise an all-out Iranian response, a pretext that the US-Israel-Saudia would use to extend their war towards west and central Asia. However, as said earlier, Iran is averse to starting all-out wars. While a befitting Iranian response would come, it will most likely be in the form of an even more entrenched resistance to the US occupation of the Levant.

Ever since the recent Baghdad-embassy incidents, the US has been sending its troops to the region, turning it into a new war-zone—a situation that Trump thought would work to his advantage in his re-election bid at a time when he feels cornered due to impeachment. The same holds true for the indicted Netanyahu in Israel.

But a calculated Iranian response would defeat these objectives. At the same time, it would lead to more Americans being killed. In other words, with more and more body-bags coming home even when there is no all-out war, Trump’s political fortunes would most likely suffer. The war that Trump wanted to prevent would spread. The only difference would be that between an all-out war i.e., what the US wants, and an entrenched resistance i.e., what Iran will do.

As the deputy commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, General Ali Fadavi, said, “The Americans should be waiting for that severe revenge; that vengeance is not to be taken by Iran only.… The great resistance front covering a vast geographical area stands ready to take revenge, and that is sure to happen.”

Iranian response would, therefore, most likely focus on hurting the US well beyond Iraq, where the US strike killed Soleimani. And, the objective of this calculated horizontal escalation would be to make life extremely difficult for the US in the Levant and force it to drive itself out of the region.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

=============

The Iranians aren’t stupid, they know it’s really Israel who ordered the strike on Soleimani. No World War 3, but could stimulate an all out war in the Middle East that ends in the mutual destruction of Israel and Iran (isn’t that what Albert Pike wrote about in his plan for 3 World Wars?), which would make me look further afield as to where the kill order really came from.

Curious how the assassination came just days after Ursula Von Der Leyen (president of the EU commission) declared “We must use force” to restore Europe’s colonial hegemony over the Middle East and wider world. Thierry Meyssan posted this on 31st December...

=========

• https://www.voltairenet.org/article208739.html

For the European Union, the time has come to use force
by Thierry Meyssan

The new European Commission has clearly stated its project in the era of US withdrawal: to restore Western Europe’s dominance over the rest of the world from the 16th to the 19th century. To achieve this, it is adopting a trumped-up ideology that uses the vocabulary of its philosophers in the wrong way. This posture would be laughable if it could not lead to war.

The European Union aims to restore to its members the status they had acquired by force in their respective empires. As the world has changed, it is no longer possible to base colonial reality on the educational abyss that separated the savages from civilization. A new ideology must therefore be formulated which dresses European domination with noble ideals.

This already exists in embryonic form and was used by the United States to justify its own leadership. It needs to be made more coherent and clearer.

Its basic slogan states that "universalism" should no longer be understood as the equality of all before the law, regardless of origin, wealth and religion, but as the equal treatment that everyone can enjoy in whatever country they travel to. From this point of view, the real enemy is no longer the disorder and insecurity that it engenders, but the States that are supposed to protect us and abusively create differences between us according to our nationalities; excellent doctrine for a supranational State! (the US federal state, then the European federal state).

- At the sociological level, this ideology indiscriminately supports any form of migration (because it allows the disappearance of borders between men) and any gender confusion (because it allows the disappearance of inequalities based on physical differences).
- At the economic level, it militates for the free circulation of capital (which cannot be hindered by States) and the globalisation of trade (because it binds people through trade).
- On the military level, it supports the interference of the "international community" in "non-globalized states" (because they are resistant to the New Order) and the use of non-state armed forces (because some states must disappear).
- At the political level, it supports any global cause such as the fight against human responsibility for global warming. Ultimately, it rejects International Law (i.e., agreed upon by nations) in order to replace it with Global Law (i.e., binding on all) [1].

If the issue of migration has become taboo for the European elites after the failure of Chancellor Merkel in 2015, all other points are commonly accepted.
- Gender confusion, part of the gender parity and which continues today with the development of a transgender model. No one dares to observe any longer that parity in the Parliamentary Assemblies and Boards of Directors has not benefited the working classes at all, but only the elites. It is not clear why the shift from the integration of transsexuals to an apology for gender uncertainty will advance anything.
- The free movement of capital is one of the "Four Freedoms" established since the Single European Act (1986). It allows large companies to avoid national taxes, which is why everyone deplores it, but no one wants to abolish it. The globalisation of trade has destroyed millions of jobs in Europe and has begun to erode the middle classes [2].
- Military interference in non-globalized states is at the heart of the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski doctrine adopted by the United States in 2001. It is astounding that Western elites still seem to ignore it. For example, the release of a wide-ranging survey on the 18-year "failure" of the United States to pacify Afghanistan has generated a great deal of comment. But absolutely no one has dared to say that far from being a failure, it was the mission assigned in 2001 to the Pentagon by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; 18 years that the "Endless War" has been going on in more and more theatres of operation [3].
The use of non-state military forces has peaked with jihadist organizations. One of them -Daesh- even went so far as to take over a non-recognized state. It continues today with the official support of the European Union to a terrorist organization, the PKK, provided that it operates in Syria and not in Turkey [4].
- The fight against the human cause of global warming is first and foremost a policy aimed at regenerating the automotive industry at the end of the cycle: switching from petrol engines to electric motors. The fact that Milutin’s theory Milanković (position of the Earth in relation to the Sun) is sufficient to explain the current changes does not prevent the claim that it has been "scientifically proven" that they are due to human industry [5].

The worst is to come with the invention of a Global Law.

Ignoring the different legal traditions in the world, the European Union subsidizes the International Criminal Court. After having long been a tool of European colonialism in Africa, the Court intends to assert the superiority of Europeans over all other human beings.

After having unsuccessfully attempted to try Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi for crimes against humanity, the Court hopes to try Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for resisting the Muslim Brotherhood and Israel for its crimes in the Palestinian Territories. Since Europeans have no particular concern for the Rohingas, the Syrians or the Palestinians, how can we fail to observe that the Union is taking the opposite tack from the United States and trying to assert itself as the defender of the Muslims, even if it means selling off its tradition of secularity? [6]

The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, announced the forthcoming creation of a comprehensive sanctions regime against human rights violations, as called for by the European Parliament last April (B8-0181/2019). Inspired by the US model of the Global Magnitski Act [7], the European Union will, like a teacher, teach Good and Evil and award good and bad points to everyone.

The meaning of the words changes. From the sixteenth to the eighteenth century, universalism enjoined to fight against colonialism. In the 19th and 20th centuries, it dictated "the duty of the white man" and authorized the mandates of "developed" countries to help the "underdeveloped". In the 21st century, it became the justification for neo-colonialism.

President Ursula van des Leyen summed up her programme for the restoration of European domination with these words: The time has come, "We must use Force".

Thierry Meyssan

=========

[Eric J (Viking)]

Dozens of people have been killed in a crush in the south-eastern Iranian city of Kerman, where hundreds of thousands of mourners have gathered for the burial of the military commander Qassem Suleimani, according to state media.

Local TV reports said 35 people had been killed and another 48 injured. A video purportedly from the scene showed a number of mourners lying prostrate on the floor with others rubbing their chests or administering CPR. Some of those on the ground had their faces covered with jackets or scarves.

Mourners had filled the streets of Suleimani’s home town on Tuesday morning in numbers that appeared to match the huge turnouts in Baghdad, Tehran, Qom, Mashhad and Ahvaz in recent days to say farewell to the commander of the Revolutionary Guards external operations force, who was killed by a US drone strike in Iraq on Friday.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...eral-home-town

Viking

[Pam]

Well, if that doesn't add insult to injury I don't know what does. Looks like the US has has really done it this time. I have been watching Trump's actions from the vantage point of his Narcissistic personality. It has allowed him to withstand criticism at almost a superhuman level, but I think we are now witnessing the dark side of his Narcissistic, grandiose personality. This drone killing personifies what everyone hates about the US government in real time. Absolutely oblivious to the cultural ramification of martyring Soleimani. What was done was so disrespectful of both Iraq and Iran and probably the bulk of the middle east, except the Israeli government of course..

Where Americans are divided in all sorts of trivial ways, with little to no moral convictions to guide them that does not seem to be the case in Iran,whether we agree with that conviction or not.

[Praxis]

Posted by Sammy (here)
I don't think Trump is able to withdraw from anything. I think Trump was knowingly fully compromised soon after his inauguration. That Trump would have escaped the political blackmail system is a long shot IMO. In addition, and in my opinion, he is allowed a "win" here or there and probably wins in November. Trump accelerates the massive breakdown in continuity of folks in the US. Trump polarizes even further a massively polarized world. He's not the only entity playing this role.

The goal is a one world totalitarian government. The goal is to separate type one human beings (the managerial elite) from the rest including genetically. While type one humans are able to develop all aspects of their being which importantly includes their physical body vehicles, type two human beings (the rest of us) are subjugated to every possible diminishment of capablity in matching a type one human.

So here is where you narrative falls apart.

WHo had the dirt on Trump? Probably Epstein. And it turns out Sulemani himself probably had dirt on Trump Azerbaijan property. What happened to both of these dudes? Dead by federal government.

A totalitarian government keeps people seeking asylum in concentration camps at the border and separates families in the procsss.

A totalitarian government continues to occupy Iraq Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay just to name a few.

You can only black mail dirty people.

This is why the CIA uses the honeypot.

You know why you couldnt label me as a pedophile rapist who hung out with pedophile rapists? Cause I dont run in those circles.

You know who did run in Epstein circle? Trump.

This is what I am talking about living in different realities. Literally the dude Sammy is defending has a quote about Epstein liking girls young but somehow he is good dude fighting for the little guy.

He literally floated holding a NATO summit at what he calls" The southern White house."

I have that tweet if you dont believe the southern white house part.

Say it with me again

He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.

[Chester]

Praxis, because you either do not read my posts or because your bias so massively clouds your ability to understand my posts, your replies to my posts are senseless but worse, present a reinterpretation of my post that has no resemblance to the post I made at all whatsoever. Re-read my post then re-read yours, if possible, without what appears to be a strong bias against me or against what you interpret my posts to say even though they don't.

[Ernie Nemeth]

The religious hegemony in Iran is directly due to foreign meddling from decades ago. It has nothing to do with Trump. Wipe out one of the two major parties and you would have the same sort of situation in the USA.

That general was a terrorist. That regime is our enemy. They would kill every one of us with no mercy.

And Iran has a huge military. The only reason they are not invading other countries is because of the economic sanctions they have lived under for the past 40 years. Like Cuba and others on their list, the west has kept the lid shut tight on Iran and its ability to prosper from economic trade with other countries.

Their conviction is anachronistic and brutal.

[Praxis]

Posted by Sammy (here)
Praxis, because you either do not read my posts or because your bias so massively clouds your ability to understand my posts, your replies to my posts are senseless but worse, present a reinterpretation of my post that has no resemblance to the post I made at all whatsoever. Re-read my post then re-read yours, if possible, without what appears to be a strong bias against me or against what you interpret my posts to say even though they don't.

No I read it again just now and I stand by my words.

Further, You brought WOO WOO to a concrete discussion. I find your TYPE 1 and TYPE 2 human conversation as being apologetic to the Status quo. You might well have points here. They are irrelevant to practical geo political considerations. Like I said: What you believe about aliens doesn't affect me and my family but allowing the DHS to hold and prevent Iranian Americans from traveling freely does directly affect me.

I find your initial paragraph very problematic because it is reinforcing memes which I have already dissected in my earlier post. He can withdraw. You should rephrase it maybe by saying "He would experience a political problem as most of his base is actually very much pro empire if he withdrew from occupations."

Which could be true.

But when you say " I don't think Trump is able to withdraw from anything." It helps people think he has no power when, say it with me:

He, as commander in chief, has COMPLETE and UNILATERAL authority to move the military ANYWHERE as per the NDAA.

Sammy, if I am engaging you it is because I still care about you and your opinions. I am sorry for being direct but I grow tired of decades long occupations based on 9-11 which we all know wasnt what we were told. NEVER FORGET THIS. Notice I dont engage Q anon people. . .

[Chester]

Praxis, you, as all, are entitled to your opinion. What I do not believe you, or anyone, is entitled to is a blatant mischaracterization of my posts which you have done twice on this thread. You remind me of a member at another site who followed the same MO. I am left with having one option only... that which is the utilization of a feature I am thankful is offered on this forum.

[Pam]

Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
The religious hegemony in Iran is directly due to foreign meddling from decades ago. It has nothing to do with Trump. Wipe out one of the two major parties and you would have the same sort of situation in the USA.

That general was a terrorist. That regime is our enemy. They would kill every one of us with no mercy.

And Iran has a huge military. The only reason they are not invading other countries is because of the economic sanctions they have lived under for the past 40 years. Like Cuba and others on their list, the west has kept the lid shut tight on Iran and its ability to prosper from economic trade with other countries.

Their conviction is anachronistic and brutal.

I never accused Trump of creating religious hegemony. Look at the bigger picture. Let's look at the brilliant analogy created by Tangri on another thread:[QUOTE]

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) was killed by Russian drones at Mexican airport.

Would you find that behavior acceptable from all governments? If they don't like what someone does or thinks, wait till they are traveling , create a shoddy excuse and drone strike them. And if the country where you did it doesn't like it, threaten and bully them as well. This kind of behavior is grandiose and insane.

[Chester]

If I jump in and dissect Tangri's analogy, which would reveal it to be a poor one, there will be some readers who cheer my post and draw false conclusions (as Praxis has done elsewhere in this QUDS thread) as to my personal views related to Trump, his actions and what may underlie my political ideology as it stands today... and their will be readers who hate it because by pointing out the details of Tangri's anology while lining them up with the details of the Suleimani assassination, false implications can be drawn that I am somehow a supporter of Trump and/or US interventionist policies.

I had taken a few risks in the other thread in hopes that readers might see the bigger picture forces at play and pull their heads out of Trumps backside enough to understand how their reactions are simply feeding the monster.

One observation - the polarization I pointed to in the other thread has rendered common sense discussions of issues, issue by issue, a waste of time, especially with regards to US politics. The dynamic we are now experiencing is pure "side a" vs "side b" and all are required to agree with all policy positions of either side a or side b or you are attacked as being in alignment with the other side and/or their symbol (like the Orange Man has become, like Greta has become, etc,).

It is my opinion (and I would like to cite the almost three decades of the work of David Icke as just one of many proponents of this same "bigger picture view") that the public has played right into the hands of the managerial elite who control both sides via hidden layers behind the scenes and above "the Trumps" and their counterparts.

[silvanelf]

What's going on there??

First of all, I would expect Assad visiting Putin and not the other way around. You can see that Shoigu (Russian Defense Minister) is there as well. By the way, today Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas -- therefore this visit is pretty unusual.

source:https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-dunya-51024884

Putin makes rare visit to Syria, meets Assad

Russian President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Syria, on January 7, 2020. AFP/Syrian presidency

Russian President Vladimir Putin visited Syria on Tuesday and met with officials including President Bashar Assad, Syrian state media and a Kremlin spokesman reported.

--- snip ---

https://www.france24.com/en/20200107...ia-meets-assad

[ExomatrixTV]

The Media’s Not-So-Secret Iran Agenda:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=64VN9v0Hljc

The media continue to lose their minds over Trump’s killing of Soleimani, the US takes protective steps to prevent further Iranian aggression, and John Bolton signals he could testify in the impeachment trial.

[uzn]

Sometimes a picture says more than words

[ExomatrixTV]

ABC, MEDIA COVERAGE ON IRAN: Why is a TERRORIST like Qassem Soleimani being treated like a hero?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=pYAX1U-9bac

Trump: Soleimani was a monster

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=CNVDU3L7EeM

I share above NOT because I agree with all they say ... but to balance the pro-Iran Liberal MSM counter-propaganda ... I want to study all (BS) sides!

[Ron Mauer Sr]

The answer depends on which side you are on. Unfortunately, one man's "terrorist" is another man's "patriot".

[atman]

Posted by uzn (here)
Sometimes a picture says more than words

And sometimes a little research provides more truth than a picture.

That picture of Trump with Epstein is a composite image. In other words, a F-A-K-E.

Trump is seen kissing the head of his daughter Ivanka at the grand opening of the Harley Davidson Cafe in New York City, in 1993.

Epstein (from a picture taken in 2005) was added digitally to infer the kind of perverse propaganda that you seem to be intent on peddling.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world...-fake-usa-news

[mountain_jim]

Posted by uzn (here)
Sometimes a picture says more than words

Sometime a picture says you did not do your research before posting fake crap.

(Don't expect MSM tactics here at Avalon.)

in one search - determined faked - plus that's his daughter.

later edit - atman post above (just) beat me calling this out.

https://apnews.com/afs:Content:6155870094

CLAIM: Photo shows Donald Trump kissing the head of a young Ivanka Trump next to a Harley Davidson motorcycle and billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, who was arrested Saturday on child sex trafficking charges.
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The 1993 photograph of Trump and Ivanka next to a motorcycle has been manipulated to include Epstein, a 66-year-old hedge fund manager who was charged Monday with sexually abusing dozens of girls at his New York and Florida homes. He pleaded not guilty Monday to the sex trafficking charges. Epstein was registered as a sex offender after entering into a 2008 plea deal to avoid prosecution on federal charges of molesting teenage girls.

THE FACTS: The photo was taken Oct. 19, 1993, at the grand opening of the Harley-Davidson Cafe in New York City, when Trump was best known for his real estate dealings. Celebrity photographer Ron Galella is credited with taking the picture, which can be found in the Getty Images archives.
The image was manipulated to add Epstein, standing in a blue pullover and jeans. It has been circulating widely on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Some social media posts include the caption “it is NOT normal” with the altered image.

[muxfolder]

So WW3 is about to come. I was waiting for civil war 2 in US. It seemed more likely than war with Iran. Well, guess now we all have to participate then.

[Kamikaze]

delete it all.