North Korean Missile Launch Ends in Failure

Someone is going to pay dearly for letting Glorious Leader down. It just isn’t done.

The failures that keep happening might lead one to speculate that there is a saboteur on the Korean team that’s working to develop the country’s weaponry. The saboteur could be an agent of South Korea but also an agent of the Chinese.

North Korea has attempted to launch a missile on its east coast which is believed to have failed, South Korean and US military officials say.

The US said it had detected a ballistic missile, which blew up immediately.

It comes a day after North Korea warned the US that it was “ready to hit back with nuclear attacks” amid mounting tension in the region.

The state has already conducted five nuclear tests and a series of missile launches.

Meanwhile, US Vice-President Mike Pence is flying to the South Korean capital, Seoul, where he is expected to discuss the best way to deal with North Korea’s missile and nuclear programme.

‘Blew up immediately’
“North Korea attempted to test an unidentified type of missile from [its eastern port of] Sinpo,” the South Korean defence ministry said, adding that the suspected launch on Sunday had “failed”.

The ministry said that it was investigating for further details.

The US Pacific Command later confirmed the failed test, adding that it had detected and tracked what it believed to be a North Korean ballistic missile.

“The missile blew up almost immediately,” said US Navy Commander Dave Benham, quoted by Reuters news agency.

On Saturday, North Korea marked the 105th anniversary of the birth of its founding president, Kim Il-sung, with a huge military parade in Pyongyang amid speculation that current leader Kim Jong-un could order a new nuclear test.

The event, which appeared to include new intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles, was a deliberate show of strength.

Tension continues to rise in the Korean Peninsula with a US aircraft carrier group steaming towards the region.

Mike Pence’s long-planned 10-day trip marks his first official visit to the region, where he is expected to reaffirm the US commitment to stand by its regional allies.

It comes as Washington steps up the pressure on the isolated North, with President Donald Trump saying that the US is ready to act alone to deal with the nuclear threat.

At the parade on Saturday, North Korean military official Choe Ryong-hae, who is believed to be the country’s second most powerful official, said that his country was “prepared to respond to an all-out war with an all-out war”.

The Korea Herald reports that another missile test failed earlier this month.

On April 5, Pyongyang fired off what was thought to be a KN-15 medium-range ballistic missile from the Sinpo area. It flew some 60 kilometers before falling into the East Sea.

Seoul officials said the missile launched Sunday could be the same type as the one fired earlier this month.

To check the security situation, National Security Office chief Kim Kwan-jin was set to convene a standing committee session of the National Security Council at 9:30 a.m., the presidential office here said.

If what happened to the leaders of Iraq and Libya ever cross Kim’s mind, this failure represents a crushing blow to his hopes to remain in power.

The Chinese term “paper tiger” comes to mind.

NORK ANTI-US PROPAGANDA FROM 1951, SHOWING THE U.S. AS A PAPER TIGER.

Nork Shows Off New Generation of Submarine Fired Missiles

FIRST GENERATON FUKKUKSONG-1 MISSILE TEST FIRING.

North Korea showed off its Fukkukson-2 yesterday. Information is sketchy right now, but it’s a propaganda coup for the North given the rise in tensions in the region.

CNBC

North Korea displayed its submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) for the first time on Saturday ahead of a massive military parade in the capital, Pyongyang.

North Korea warned the United States on Saturday to end its “military hysteria” or face retaliation as a U.S. aircraft carrier group steamed towards the region and the reclusive state marked the 105th birth anniversary of its founding father.

State TV showed images of the Pukkuksong-2 SLBMs on trucks waiting to be paraded in front of leader Kim Jong Un.

FUKKUKSONG-2 MISSILE.

CNBC’s earlier report published on Wednesday offered an assessment of the dangers to the U.S. of Kim’s submarine fleet.

The chilling thought of North Korea’s fully submersible submarines firing a nuclear ballistic missile isn’t as far-fetched as some might think. Pyongyang has made major advances in weapons in recent years and shown a willingness to use its submarines for offensive military actions.

Indeed, last month was the seventh anniversary of the sinking of South Korea’s Cheonan navy ship by a North Korean submarine torpedo attack. That aggression killed 46 sailors and wasn’t the first time the reclusive North had made incursions into South Korean waters.

The submarine threat adds to growing fears in the region as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s nuclear weapons ambitions show no signs of slowing. It also comes as a U.S. carrier strike force led by the USS Carl Vinson sailed toward the Korean Peninsula.

“Growing fears” is the key word in this story. North Korean Communism is a family dictatorship that seeks to maintain itself in power in a world hostile to that leadership. It’s only speculation, but it doesn’t seem likely that “regime change” will be as easy in the North as it was in Libya or Iraq.

A Lot of Russians Hold Mass Murderer Joseph Stalin in High Esteem

Communist propaganda must be pretty effective to keep Joseph Stalin in the hearts of so many Russians after so many decades have passed since his death.

RT.com

People who like Joseph Stalin the most of all the actors in the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution now account for 24 percent of Russians, or three times more than the share of 8 percent registered in 1990.

According to the poll conducted by the independent Levada research agency in March this year, 24 percent of Russians described Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin as a revolutionary with whom they sympathize.

At the same time the proportion of people who named their favorite character as Vladimir Lenin fell from 67 percent in 1990 to 26 percent this year. Other figures mentioned in this year’s poll were Tsar Nicolas II of Russia and the first head of the Bolshevik security service, Felix Dzerzhinsky – 16 percent each named them as their favorite participants in the 1917 turmoil.

Forty-two percent of those who took part in the 2017 poll said that in their opinion the fall of Russian monarchy that came as a result of the February 1917 bourgeois revolution was “a very substantial loss.” Twenty-seven years ago, only 11 percent of Russians held similar positions.

Some 49 percent of respondents in this year’s poll said the October Revolution played a positive role in history. Thirty percent described this role as negative, while 21 percent found the question too difficult to answer.

At the same time, 36 percent of respondents said that the Bolshevik Revolution gave Russia a major impetus for social and economic development. Fifty percent maintain that the country’s development after 1917 went on in accordance with the features and traditions of the Russian people, just as it had before.

Twenty-eight percent of respondents believe events similar to the 1917 Socialist Revolution could be repeated in modern-day Russia, and 59 percent described such scenario as improbable.

Last March, Levada conducted a separate poll dedicated solely to Stalin. Back then, 54 percent of respondents described their attitude to Stalin as positive, 17 percent said their attitude was negative, 32 percent said they were indifferent about the late Soviet dictator and 14 percent could not give a definitive answer.

The majority of respondents acknowledged that Stalin’s radical policies had caused millions of casualties among innocent Soviet citizens and mass violations of human rights. Two thirds of respondents agreed that Stalin was a tyrant and about half said that Stalinist purges were crimes.

However, 26 percent of respondents said that the repressions were caused by political expedience and should be justified from a historical perspective.

Read more about Saint Stalin at UNZ.

Globalist Jew David Rockefeller Dead at 101

The Rockefellers deny being Jews, but check out this article by Henry Makow that names the Rockefellers, Sonia Sotomayor, and Hugh Hefner as Jews.

Excerpt from Infowars

David Rockefeller, a globalist central banker who advocated a “New World Order” and mass population control while wielding vast influence over world leaders, died Monday at the age of 101.

A family spokesman, Fraser P. Seitel, confirmed his passing.
Rockefeller was well-known for openly bragging about the transnational elite’s plans to centralize control over the world’s populations, wealth and resources.

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it,” he wrote in his book Memoirs.

Rockefeller also revealed the extent of corporate media collusion with this gameplan.

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years … It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years,” he said at the 1991 Bilderberg meeting. “But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.”

“The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.”

I haven’t watched all of the following video, but it’s looking good as it plays out in the background.

South Africa’s President Vows To Redistribute White-Owned Land And Businesses

Nothing can save the white man in South Africa. He’s outnumbered to badly. Getting out is his only chance, I fear.

Zerohedge

In a stark flashback to the events that led to Zimbabwe’s terminal collapse into banana republic status, as well as unleashing hyperinflation and economic devastation, on Thursday South African President Jacob Zuma pledged to break up white ownership of business and land to reduce inequality, in a State of the Nation address which as the WSJ reports was disrupted by a fistfight, walkouts and a release of pepper spray in the parliamentary chamber. It appears South Africa is not fond of implementing “Rule 19.”

Scenes of verbal and physical clashes inside the parliament, some 27 years to the day after Nelson Mandela was released from prison, as well as Zuma’s contentious speech, highlight the precarious future course facing Africa’s most developed economy.

As the WSJ reports, on Thursday, lawmakers from the far-left Economic Freedom Fighters “shouted over an initial attempt by Mr. Zuma to start his speech, after complaining about what they said was a threatening increase of security inside and outside Parliament. Previously the president had for the first time deployed several hundred troops to help lock down Cape Town’s parliamentary precinct in anticipation of potential clashes between ANC and opposition supporters.”

Things then quickly got out of control:

“You’re a constitutional delinquent,” EFF lawmaker Mbuyiseni Ndlozi said of Mr. Zuma, referring to a court finding last year that the president had violated the constitution when he refused to pay back public money that an official report found was used for unnecessary upgrades to his private home. Mr. Zuma has since paid back some of the funds. When EFF lawmakers, dressed in their customary red workers’ overalls and maids’ uniforms, refused to quiet down or leave the chamber, they began fighting with parliamentary orderlies. Some lawmakers used their red hard hats to hit the orderlies, while other legislators were dragged out of the chamber.

Soon after, South Africa’s other main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, walked out in protest over the increase in security. ANC lawmakers shouted after Mmusi Maimane, the DA’s first black leader, as he led his party’s MPs out of the chamber, calling him a racist and sellout. Around the same time, several DA members in the visitors’ gallery reported that tear gas had been released into the gallery, which quickly emptied.

According to the chairwoman of South Africa’s upper house, Thandi Modise, an initial investigation showed that the substance released was pepper spray and called the incident a “breach of security” that shouldn’t have happened. She didn’t say who was behind the incident.

Meanwhile, Zuma didn’t acknowledge the disruptions when he returned to the podium to continue his speech. Instead, he focused on the one issue which may soon plague South Africa for years to come: the stark economic divide between black and white South Africans, one of the issues that the EFF has seized on in recent years.

To appease the rising populist anger, and taking a page out of developed economies around the globe, Zuma then said that “today we are starting a new chapter of radical socioeconomic transformation., The president added that 22 years after the end of apartheid “white households earn at least five times more than black households.”

President Zuma’s focus on redistribution comes as his African National Congress party prepares to elect a new leader to succeed him in December and as he finds himself under growing pressure over corruption allegations. He also said that he planned to send back to Parliament a bill that will make it easier for authorities to redistribute land taken away from blacks during colonization, although white landowners will still receive market prices for any seized land.

Where have we seen this kind of land “redistribution” not too long ago? Oh yes, Zimbabwe.

It took Zimbabwe 15 years to admit its mistakes, and invite white farmers back. It now appears that South Africa will have to learn from the mistakes of its northern naighbor in due course.

South Africa will soon be a total bloodbath. Get out, white man.

r/K Selection Theory: The Rabbits vs. The Wolves

white wolf

As you read this little excerpt from a much longer piece, you might think about who the r people are and who the K people are. I have faith that it will be clear to you.

Excerpt from ROK

A while back, I came across a thought-provoking article about r/K selection theory. The basic idea is that r-selected species are adapted for environments with unlimited resources, while K-selected species are adapted for competition. The typical examples of these are rabbits and wolves. As the article explains:

Rabbits (r-Strategy)

They’re herbivores with near unlimited resources (never a shortage for grass).. The virtually unlimited resources are a primary reason why rabbits are not territorial. This is also part of the reason why they opt for breeding often; unlimited resources means they’re not going to starve.

They have no defense against predators other than running. They do not have any loyalty towards their group. It makes no sense for a rabbit to rush to the aid of another rabbit being attacked. Then you’d just have two dead rabbits. Because they can be killed so easy, it makes sense to reach maturity as quickly as possible so they can begin birthing children.

Hierarchies are pointless in rabbit society. Rabbits lives are rather simple; eat grass and run away from danger. There’s no need to invest heavily in their offspring. As such, there’s no need to prove who’s the superior (alpha) and the best candidate for passing on their genes.

Wolves (K-Strategy)

They’re carnivores that must hunt to survive. Hunting requires more intelligence and training than grazing on grass. Due to the increased difficulty of hunting compared to grazing, more time is invested in training the offspring to survive.

Because prey is limited, wolves must viciously protect their territory from intruders. While it might seem heartless, if another pack is allowed into their territory the supply of prey will be exhausted and both packs will starve to death.

Wolves are monogamous/pair-bond. Because raising the offspring is so important for the continuation of the species, the wolves will pair for life in order to raise their young. As such, they will choose the best mate they can find to further improve their chances of birthing strong, healthy cubs. This process of choosing leads to hierarchies with an alpha male leading the pack. Wolves also wait longer before reproducing and generally have less offspring. If they reproduced early and often, there would be too many wolves for the ecosystem resulting in the consumption all the prey and starvation.

Wolves are more complex. This is true for carnivores in general. Because carnivores typically live in groups, they must have more sophisticated ways to communicate. The same is true for their domesticated brethren. Look at a dog and you can easily identify if he is scared, happy, angry, or bored by his body language and barks. Can you tell the same moods on a rabbit?

This isn’t a completely binary distinction. For example, some herbivores (such as bovines) will flock in packs and defend themselves. Lions are more K-selected than domestic cats.

ROK took the quotes from The Gentlemen’s Club 2016. Both pieces elaborate on r/K selection theory. Both are worth a read. There’s a lot more on this topic easily accessible on the Internet. Critics call it “scientific racism,” but it’s really not racism at all since the r/K selection theory describes the real world.

I found this infographic to help you understand the significance of the r/K selection theory.

This video offers a quiz to help you decide if you’re an r or a K.

Latino Loving Obama Just Slammed the Door on Cubans

On the one hand, keeping browns out of the U.S. is a good thing. On the other, Obama didn’t slam the door shut on Cubans because they’re nonwhite. He surely did it, no matter the official explanation, because they vote Republican.

CNN

Washington (CNN)President Barack Obama is ending the longstanding “wet foot, dry foot” policy that allows Cubans who arrive in the United States without a visa to become permanent residents, the administration announced Thursday.

The move, which wasn’t previously outlined and is likely one of the final foreign policy decisions of Obama’s term, terminates a decades-long policy that many argued amounted to preferential treatment for a single group of migrants.

“By taking this step, we are treating Cuban migrants the same way we treat migrants from other countries,” Obama wrote in a statement Thursday.

“The United States, a land of immigrants, has been enriched by the contributions of Cuban-Americans for more than a century,” he continued. “Since I took office, we have put the Cuban-American community at the center of our policies. With this change we will continue to welcome Cubans as we welcome immigrants from other nations, consistent with our laws.”

The policy, in place for more than two decades, has applied solely for Cubans. Other immigrants who attempt to enter the United States without a visa face arrest and deportation.

The US said Cuba had agreed as part of the announcement to accept migrants who were turned away from the United States back into the country.

Havana has long argued the policy encourages Cubans to make the dangerous crossing from Cuba to Florida. Immigrants from other nations have argued the policy amounts to preferential treatment for one group.

The decision was likely Obama’s last move in his historic dealings with Cuba. In 2014, he reopened ties to the island nation after a half-century of frozen diplomatic ties.

The wet foot dry foot policy was adopted because Cubans are the only people fleeing Communism. Mexicans aren’t running from persecution such as existed in Cuba since the Castro takeover. Neither are Haitians.

If only a policy encouraged white South Africans, Zimbabweans, and so forth to come to the United States.