Whether Anthony Bourdain committed suicide or was suicided appears to be a hot topic. He was a lightning rod who pissed off many in the power structure. For example, while in Cambodia, he called Henry Kissinger a war criminal. In Russia, he railed on Putin as a tyrant. The list goes on and on, leaving him with few friends among the powers to be.
There is one theory that is strangely suppressed: It’s the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Bourdain was half-Jewish, yet supported Palestinians and spoke against Israeli occupation methods. Not a favorable combination, and I can’t imagine the Likudniks were too pleased with that.
Harvey Weinstein is also discussed among the Bourdain theories, for obvious reasons, but in kind of a second-tier way.
Tied into my personal theory, and one that I understand is controversial, is that Bourdain was off the Zio-globalist rails and working from his own script.
All of these theories are heavily suppressed, and the Syndicate looks fully engaged against them.
There is another story that is scarcely reported and involves a statement he made during a very recent interview in reference to a working in a kitchen as a young chef: “I was molested openly, every day.” Bourdain said. “There was brutal hazing there,” he added to the Wall Street Journal in a separate interview from March. “To be honest, it was sexual abuse.”
So here we have certain other elements — male homosexuals in positions over him — facing Bourdain’s wrath.
As you may recall, leading porn actress August Ames last January declared on social media that she would only work with heterosexual male performers. A week later and after a barrage of online harassment from irate homosexuals, she was found hanging in a tree. This, too, was quickly declared suicide. [See “The ‘Suicide’ of Porn Actress August Ames: Something’s Rotten in Ventura”]
Instead, the bot brigades have turned up to heavily push the suicide script. There is also a suspicious amount of character assassination going on, including Pizzagate-related smears. Take this with a grain of salt. “Somebody” is trying to control and steer the narrative. For example, on r/Conspiracy, the following message received huge up-votes and remained pinned on the front page for a couple days. On its face, this is a weak argument. It also plays into the mental-health psyop being run. How could this OP get so much support? Organically? I doubt it.
Yes, the suicide narrative looks highly scripted, with the same phony themes repeated over and over;
There is the storyline that paparazzi photographed girlfriend Asia with some young stud looking very friendly. This, in turn, made Anthony suicidal. Keep in mind that Bourdain had a young daughter and took his fatherhood seriously. At 61, he didn’t just fall off the cabbage truck about young attractive women and his role in the equation either. Since Asia is one of the #meToo women, this seems highly contrived.
We saw this obvious forced narrative in the Kate Spade so-called suicide.
“These are the men who define the saying that the candle that burns brightest burns half as long.”
“It’s incredible how suicidal, depressed people can put up fake smile as their mask in the public, can’t they?”
Pizzaearth writes: “Yet, the 25% increase in suicide of the average person is nothing to be suspicious about. Why aren’t internationally famous individuals allowed to commit suicide without you all yelling murder?”
“We could take some bitter sweet comfort to believe this was some crazy high-level hit. It’d be more rational. But more than likely Tony took his own life and that’s the shit thing.”
“A friend of mine walked into traffic the other day. No real explanation just did it. [Note: There’s a lot of the infamous friend-of-a-friend narratives circulating about suicide.]”
There is a backstory that Bourdain last October was declared persona non grata in Azerbaijan after filming one of the episodes of his culinary show on the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh. The source of this one is a prominent Israeli-Russian blogger. There is an incredible amount of misdirection in the case. The goons have been fully deployed.
Naturally, Hillary Clinton is targeted as the culprit because of more snarky Bourdain remarks. I doubt if HRC would do an intervention to save Bourdain; but this, too, seems contrived to misdirect attention. Declaring that every suspicious death (the staged Seth Rich death, for example) is tied to the Clinton cabal is lazy and actually hurts the conspiracy theory community. It also provides cover for the real culprits.
Identity politics doesn’t understand this, but Bourdain hated Trump, too. How refreshing. So a Trump culprit theory is out there as well, of course. Like Clinton, Trump is not going to provide protection; but that theory, too, is misdirection.
A Word on Fallacy of Origins
The New Nationalist (TNN) had a brouhaha going Sunday with certain parties who elected to take it public. So we need to address it, but on an intellectual level. The shit storm erupted when I stated that I thought Bourdain was a lover of Europe. That’s what I personally witnessed when I watched his show. Is he a Europhile? I thought so, but I suppose we could have a friendly debate about that. Instead, comes one sentence, without context, out of an entire un-linked article.
Shill alert! Shill alert! A jew who wants to see White people disappear completely (Bourdain) is NOT a Europhile. If this “new nationalist” is not a shill he really needs to stop watching (((TV))) and pull his head out of his ass. https://t.co/mDSeDs5YNs
— Renegade Bot (@renegadebot) June 10, 2018
Renegade uses a specific method for processing sources (origins), and they apply their standard to others. A source for whom some may give cautious credibility, they would loudly decry both the source and ALSO the person utilizing the sourcing.
Renegade quietly broke off a friendly relationship with me last February when I gave Red Ice a B-minus grade on the strength of a series of very good videos. Renegade took exception to that, as they seem to have Red Ice in a permanent dog house after a stupid interview they once did, and Red Ice’s role in the Trumptard movement. And Renegade condemns George Webb as a limited hangout Zio (probably true); therefore, nothing of interest or value ever flows from him as a source/origin. They took exception that I quoted — which in their world means promoted — Webb’s comments on brownstone operations.
Now, in the case of Bourdain, I would state that the man was not one dimensional, and there are incredible layers of other issues surrounding him, such as being pro-Palestinian, calling out Weinstein and calling out homosexual abusers as discussed above. An article last year on Bourdain from Zero Hedge: “Slams ‘Privileged’ Liberals For Their ‘Utter Contempt’ Of Working-Class America.”
To just entirely dismiss or ignore Bourdain’s death (because he made anti-white statements) and not look at the intricacies involved in this labyrinth case is called “fallacy of origins” or “fallacy of virtues.” I consider this intellectually weak methodology.
In very extreme cases, those who avoid more aggressive fallacy of origins (namely me) are called “shills.” That combination of using a fallacy of origin on a first source and then double dosing a second source who quotes or considers the first source is especially questionable behavior. Unfortunately, Renegade, which otherwise has a lot to offer, has fallen into this habit. I don’t care who they personally reject as sources/origins — and there are Judas Goats to be exposed — but it takes a lot of chutzpah to apply that extreme double-dosed fallacy of origins standard to me.
But just to prove that I do not follow the same source or fallacy of origins trap, you will see TNN continue to carry several of Renegade’s excellent videos and interviews in our featured video section. We also recommend you view them. Ironically for me there are two documentaries that moved me to tears, Kyle Hunt’s (Renegade) Hellstorm and Bourdain’s trip to Gaza and Palestine. I can’t locate the later anywhere now-scrubbed like the martyred Bourdain.
The following is a good definition of fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue. I follow this principle, and no one will intimidate me not to.
Genetic fallacy (aka fallacy of origins / fallacy of virtue) is a fallacy of irrelevance that is based solely on someone’s or something’s history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context. In other words, a fact is ignored in favor of attacking its source.
The fallacy, therefore, fails to assess the claim on its merit. The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question. Genetic (origin) accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are not conclusive in determining its merits.