Jul 312026
 


Leonardo da Vinci Head of a Woman 1470s


IRGC Strikes Jordan Again After 2-Hour US Bombardment (ZH)
Roasting Fauci Is Fun, But There’s No Do-over For The Biden Years (Kruiser)
Fauci Takes the Fifth and the Heat Over his Diary Disclosures (Turley)
GOP Senators See Path For Fauci Prosecution (JTN)
How Trump Responded to Fauci’s ‘Testimony’ (Margolis)
Russia Cannot Survive Without Victory In Ukraine – Medvedev (RT)
America Is Over if Dems Take Control in November – Larry Klayman (USAW)
Whatever Happened To Boys’ Clubs and Men’s Colleges? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Race-Based Hiring Changed Higher Education (Victor Davis Hanson)
John Cleese: “Some Cultures Are Better Than Others” (MN)
Musk’s America PAC Reportedly Plans $120 Million Midterm Blitz (ZH)
The New ‘They Who Must Not Be Named’ (A.J. Rice)
Türkiye Is Headed For A Perfect Storm (Mishel Bychkova)
More than 50,000 Migrants Swarm Spain’s Enclave of Ceuta (CTH)

 


 

 


 


“Our region is no place for the infanticidal army that cruelly slaughters innocent families in the middle of the night while they sleep.”

IRGC Strikes Jordan Again After 2-Hour US Bombardment (ZH)

In the wake of the overnight fresh round of US airstrikes on Iran, which resulted in destruction and casualties especially along coastal areas, Iran’s military has retaliated once again especially on Jordan. US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that it completed a “heavy” wave of strikes on the Islamic Republic, in response to “attempted missile attacks” on American bases in the region earlier this week. This US wave lasted two hours, the Pentagon said, striking “military command centers, missile and drone facilities, coastal surveillance and defense sites, and maritime capabilities”.


It accused Iran of a “surprise attack” the prior night, Tuesday, but said that “all Iranian missiles were successfully intercepted.” As a result of the US bombing, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRTC) said three of its troops were killed in a missile attack, according to semi-official Tasnim. The three IRGC members died while “defending Iran’s borders and people” in what it described as a “brutal attack by the criminal terrorist regime of the United States.”

Iranian officials are also saying that US bombardment of Qeshm island has killed a family. In Qeshm island, the Director General of Crisis Management of the Hormozgan Governorate said search and rescue efforts are underway amid mounting casualties there. “So far, two children have been pulled out from under the rubble and transferred to medical centers, and efforts are ongoing to rescue three other members of this family,” Mehrdad Hassanzadeh said.

In response Iran says it has again targeted a US airbase in Jordan, and claims to have taken out three F-35 stealth fighters, though there’s been no indication of this from the Pentagon side. According to details via Al Jazeera:In a statement directed to Jordan, the IRGC says in response to a US attack on Qeshm island that killed two parents and their child, aerospace fighters targeted a ramp and maintenance shed at the al-Azraq airbase, which hosts US F-35 fighter jets, with several ballistic missiles, state news agency Fars reports.

The IRGC said that it had completely destroyed three F-35 aircraft and caused “heavy damage” to three others. The IRGC stated that “A number of enemy officers and technical and maintenance personnel were also killed in this attack. Our region is no place for the infanticidal army that cruelly slaughters innocent families in the middle of the night while they sleep.” They added that the war will continue until “the last American occupier is expelled from the Islamic lands” and that Muslims in Jordan and the region want this too. Aftermath of US attack on a residential area of Iran’s Qeshm Island:

Read more …

“… we have evidence of Anthony Fauci proving that Anthony Fauci is a liar.”

“Anthony Fauci most definitely had an Anthony Fauci fetish.”

Roasting Fauci Is Fun, But There’s No Do-over For The Biden Years (Kruiser)

As I wrote in Tuesday’s Morning Briefing, conservative Americans are once again finding out that we were right about everything they called us crazy for during the Wuhan Chinese Bat Flu pandemic. Never in recorded history have “conspiracy theorists” been on a roll like the one we’re experiencing right now. I’m beginning to think that the planet might change its shape if we decide to go the Flat-Earther route. We’re that good these days.


Our current “You shoulda listened to us,” moment is courtesy of Satan’s Garden Gnome, alleged Doctor Anthony Fauci. We’ve been finding out how wrong he was for years but, thanks to his personal diary entries that we’re seeing for the first time, we have evidence of Anthony Fauci proving that Anthony Fauci is a liar. We also now have evidence that Fauci was far more concerned with his own perverse pandemic-fueled celebrity than with anyone’s health. His diary entries about his growing fame (infamy for those of us on this side of the aisle) read as if he were working himself into a sexual frenzy after every television appearance. Anthony Fauci most definitely had an Anthony Fauci fetish.

Being proven right is always a good feeling, and watching Fauci being berated by Republican senators while pleading the Fifth (which Matt covered here) was entertaining for a minute or two, but it’s not sufficient payback for what we endured during the interminable slog of the pandemic. The cold, harsh reality is that it never will be. Yes, the public exposure of the unhinged nature of Fauci’s ego is newsworthy. And, as I mentioned in the previous paragraph, there is some entertainment value in watching him squirm a little. However, unless you get extraordinary satisfaction from pointing at the television and saying, “I told you so,” there’s not a lot of satisfying “there” there.

I am not an attorney, so I will not be indulging in any legal speculation about what might happen to Fauci. From a layman’s perspective, it seems that a presidential pardon that’s backdated to the Mesozoic Era probably covers a lot. If there is some workaround that can be used to nail this vile human being, I hope it’s found soon. I don’t want to just see Fauci in an orange jumpsuit, I want to bring back town squares and pillories and put him on display for his crimes.

That sentiment may not be brimming with Christian charity, but I think we all know that I’m rather imperfect in that regard. There’s also the fact that I only attack people with words, and I’m honest about it. I’ve never fear-mongered with lies that got elderly people sent to assisted living death beds. Once a person has a body count, he or she is deserving of some ill will. (I believe that’s Confucius.)

My reaction to these Fauci revelations is the same as last year when the lefties started admitting that Joe Biden had pudding for brains during his presidency. The validation wasn’t much of a balm for the steaming piles of misery those four years heaped upon us. OK, it wasn’t any kind of balm at all, especially given the fact that Joe Biden has never been held accountable for any of his awfulness in the half century-plus that he poisoned American politics.

The Biden years were a catastrophic abomination that did damage to this great country that we will probably still be uncovering for years to come. President Trump is doing a brilliant job of cleaning up Sir Sniffsalot’s messes, but it all can be undone if another Dem gets into the White House soon.

There is no satisfaction to be derived from any of this. Anthony Fauci will almost certainly live out his days having his lying rear end kissed by the same low-IQ lefties who made him famous. Their alternative universe-dwelling powers of denial can’t be shaken. This was shared by my Twitchy colleague Doug P. in a post on Wednesday:

Nobody can fix that kind of stupid.

Look for the Dem water-carriers in the mainstream media to give Fauci some storytelling camera time in the coming weeks. The hag coven on The View probably already has the vapors just thinking about it. They can fawn over Dr. Mengele-Light and then he can scribble in his Trapper Keeper that he’s still the most popular boy in the lunchroom.

Read more …

Can he take the fifth? Or can’t he? It’s not so clear. Here’s the law professor’s take.

“The impact of a pardon on invocations is a bit murky but, as I stated yesterday, the odds favor Fauci in a court finding that he can still invoke the privilege.”

Fauci Takes the Fifth and the Heat Over his Diary Disclosures (Turley)

Below is my column on Fox.com on yesterday’s “testimony” from Dr. Anthony Fauci. Americans deserve answers to the questions raised by his diary and other remarks. The most likely course to gain such answers would be through an immunity grant. The impact of a pardon on invocations is a bit murky but, as I stated yesterday, the odds favor Fauci in a court finding that he can still invoke the privilege. In any challenge, a court would likely find that there remains a risk of self-incrimination. What is clear is that many in Washington would prefer Fauci to remain silent on the questions raised by his diary.


Here is the column:

“Stick with the science and never veer from that, even when the science turns out to be an inconvenient truth for somebody.” Dr. Anthony Fauci delivered those words to Georgetown students in 2017 as the touchstone of medical ethics. Today, before the Senate Homeland Security Committee, that line was replaced by Fauci in repeating “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.”

The optics could not have been worse, but what you saw depended largely on how you viewed the hearing. For critics, Fauci sounded like Crazy Joe Gallo without the sunglasses. For supporters, Fauci is still a hero who refused to fall into a trap laid out before him. Democratic senators such as Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) actually praised Fauci for refusing to answer questions before Congress.

There is no question that it is Fauci’s right to refuse to invoke his privilege against self-incrimination and many advised him to do so. It could be taken for strategic reasons separate from any criminal culpability. After all, he was given a last-minute pardon by President Joe Biden, and any false statements he made before the Committee could be used to bring criminal charges against him. However, Fauci is unlike many who have invoked the privilege. Unlike many past witnesses who have invoked the privilege, Fauci has testified for days in countless prior hearings. He also has appeared in countless interviews on these issues. He had reason to fear this hearing after his diary revealed startling contradictions with what he was stating publicly.

The question many will ask is why Fauci could not just “stick with the science” and resolve these contradictions. The fact is that he would have had difficulty in dealing with his own “inconvenient truths.”Fauci’s opening statement expressed obvious anger over the release of his “unredacted diary.” The new evidence shows that Fauci connected the Wuhan lab to the emerging crisis before most people had ever heard of the lab. It also shows him repeatedly referencing the lab’s gain-of-function work and discounted the “wet market” as the true origin of the virus as opposed to an “amplifier.”

Some of the most embarrassing areas for Fauci concerned his entries acknowledging that he pushed to close schools, despite public denials that he ever recommended such closures. His entries take credit for convincing figures such as then-New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, the staff of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and others to close the schools. In an Oct. 16, 2022, ABC interview, Fauci repeated that denial: “They always come back and say, ‘Fauci was responsible for shutting schools down.’ I had nothing to do [with it]!”

The media has also taken the Fifth on these subjects, declining to publish many of these contradictions. They have the same reason as Fauci: there are no spins that would reconcile their own prior coverage and gushing reviews of Fauci. The diary entries also show disturbing references to private meetings with media figures.

Fauci’s diary refers to CNN anchor Jake Tapper 41 times. In some entries, Fauci suggested that the host was concerned about crafting an interview to better serve Fauci: “Jake wanted to make sure the interview did not cause me any problems.” Fauci also related how he met socially with Tapper in July 2020: “Had dinner over Jake Tapper and Jen Tapper’s home in DC. Terrific couple. Friendship building.” (Notably, on October 14, 2020, CNN published a report repeating the condemnation of the dangers of “small household gatherings.”).

The diary revealed an obsession with his publicity and access to celebrities. The diary is replete with his gushing accounts of himself, such as “It is not hyoperbole [sic] to say that today I am the most famous and talked about person in the country and one of the most recognizable peson [sic] in the world.”

The fact is that diaries tend to be self-obsessed, and no one would want their unvarnished private thoughts made public. Rather, my gripe with these passages is something I have previously written in criticism of Fauci. During this period, dissenting scientists were barred from social media, removed from positions, and vilified for expressing views, despite now being vindicated on subjects ranging from the lab origin of the virus, the efficacy of masks, the six-foot rule, natural immunities, and school closures.

As these courageous scientists were being abused (by academic and media figures who still hold their positions), Fauci said not a word in their defense despite privately acknowledging that they could be right. Yet, Fauci remained silent as his allies in the media savaged those who voiced the view that the virus was man-made and escaped from the lab. In 2021, New York Times science and health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli was still calling on reporters not to mention the “racist” lab theory. (Federal agencies found the lab theory to be the most credible despite Fauci claiming publicly that a natural origin was the most likely explanation).

Fauci stayed silent while relishing his celebrity status. Indeed, his diary shows no concerns for these scientists as he breathlessly recounted his bobbleheads and cover shoots. Once again, Fauci has every right to invoke his constitutional rights, but the public has every right to demand answers to these questions related to the deaths of 1,238,563 Americans. That may result in a grant of immunity to compel him to answer these questions. If it is any solace for Fauci, he will clearly be able to maintain that he is “the most famous and talked about person in the country.”

Read more …

“In no courtroom in America can you have your witness plead the Fifth Amendment and then your attorney gets to testify..”

GOP Senators See Path For Fauci Prosecution (JTN)

Lois Lerner gave opening statement, then clammed up in 2013 hearing on IRS discrimination against conservative applications for tax-exempt status, and it didn’t work, Sen. Lankford notes at Fauci’s inquisition. The San Francisco 49ers trounced the Denver Broncos 55-10 in Super Bowl XXIV, the biggest blowout in the game’s history. The Seattle Seahawks snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Super Bowl XLIX through the most notorious goal-line decision in history, delaying the Emerald City’s second Vince Lombardi Trophy for 11 years.


Wednesday’s Senate Homeland Security Committee inquisition of former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, about his suspected role in the origin of COVID-19 and allegations that he tried to cover his tracks, similarly displayed elements of both tedious romp and last-minute shocker. The alternate celebrity and villain of the COVID-19 policy response repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right to refuse answering even mundane questions, such as the color of the hearing room’s carpet, following publication of over 1,100 pages of diary-like notes that have raised even more questions about the veracity of his COVID-era public statements.

Committee Republicans repeatedly argued Fauci could not opt out of answering questions due to President Biden’s sweeping preemptive pardon, the validity of which has been questioned because it was signed by autopen amid Biden’s cognitive decline. Legal analysts explained Wednesday how Fauci could still be prosecuted.Oklahoma GOP Sen. James Lankford, who pointedly disagreed with colleagues on the Fifth Amendment issue, waited until the hearing’s end to recall that Congress went through a near-identical exercise in President Obama’s second term.

It held former IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt for giving an opening statement at a House hearing in 2013 on her alleged discrimination against conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, then invoking her rights under the Fifth Amendment to decline giving testimony or answering questions that may expose one to criminal prosecution. Fauci did the same Wednesday. Lankford asked committee Chairman Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., whether the Lerner vote determined the Fauci outcome. Paul, who has called for Fauci’s prosecution for years, said lawmakers have a week to study the issue before voting on a contempt resolution.

The question that courts may have to answer is whether Biden’s pardon preempts Fauci’s right against self-incrimination, since he can’t be prosecuted “as long as he answers truthfully” and the statute of limitations forecloses some claims anyway, Paul said. George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf floated two other ways Fauci could testify without risk to himself: a two-thirds committee vote or a simple House majority to immunize him, or doing media interviews in which he’s not under oath, since “it is not a crime to lie to the public.”

Fauci is Roosevelt’s ‘Man in the Arena’ Republicans and Democrats largely repeated their dynamics from COVID-related hearings since the GOP took back the House in 2022 and full Congress in 2024. The committee majority repeatedly confronted a visibly weary Fauci with the costs of his decisions going back to 2011, when NIAID funded an American lab mutating avian flu to easily transmit through the air among mammals and published the research over the initial objections of government biosecurity experts.

Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, credited his decision to enter politics to the tasing and arrest of an Ohio woman in 2020 for not wearing a COVID mask at a middle-school football game, a policy he blamed on Fauci’s masking recommendations. “Who the f— do you think you were?” Moreno bellowed, already speculating Fauci knew he was “in deep sh–” because he hired criminal defense lawyer David Schertler, who represented ex-Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., now serving 11 years for convictions including bribery. Paul ejected Schertler from the hearing for repeatedly trying to speak on behalf of his client.

“In no courtroom in America can you have your witness plead the Fifth Amendment and then your attorney gets to testify,” Paul responded when Connecticut Democrat Sen. Richard Blumenthal said he had “gagged” Schertler. Democrats deflected from the evidence of Fauci’s alleged duplicity in his diary, given to Paul and Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who called Fauci’s notes “government records created on a government computer by a federal employee.”

They repeatedly blamed President Trump, Kennedy and other MAGA bogeymen for gutting public health, increasing vaccine hesitancy, failing to control cyclospora and enabling a spike in measles cases, though Fauci’s diary complicated the latter by predicting children’s measles deaths caused by COVID lockdowns would vastly outnumber their COVID deaths.”This hearing is designed to entrap you,” Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., told Fauci, like other Democrats praising his five decades of public service. She called Kennedy the most unqualified HHS secretary ever, who “pursues conspiracy theories, degrades people with disabilities, and continues to promote disproved science.”

Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J., went so far as to dub Fauci the “Man in the Arena” from President Teddy Roosevelt’s “Citizenship in a Republic” speech, which elevates the man who “strives valiantly” and “comes short again and again” over “cold and timid souls” who don’t try. Sen. Ashley Moody, R-Fla., mocked Kim specifically and other Democrats for fawning over Fauci.

Read more …

“..he suggested Biden likely never signed Fauci’s pardon himself, which raises real doubts about whether it meets legal requirements.”

How Trump Responded to Fauci’s ‘Testimony’ (Margolis)

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the architect of America’s COVID response, who lectured the rest of us about “the science” for years, appeared before Congress on Wednesday and invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself over 100 times. He refused to answer questions about what day of the week it was. He wouldn’t even say what color his tie was. Naturally, President Donald Trump was asked about it, and his response did not disappoint. When a reporter asked whether the Department of Justice should reopen the autopen investigation as it relates to Fauci, Trump zeroed in on the one question that matters.


“Well, the only thing you can really think about is the auto pen,” Trump said. “Because the most powerful thing the president has, they say, is the power of pardon. So, he was pardoned by Biden, and I respect that. I know how powerful it is. It’s a very powerful, they say. It’s literally the most powerful thing a president has.”

Then came the twist of the knife. Trump said the only pardon he was certain Joe Biden personally signed was the one for Hunter Biden, and he suggested Biden likely never signed Fauci’s pardon himself, which raises real doubts about whether it meets legal requirements. Whoever operated the autopen, Trump argued, would need proof, letters, and full knowledge of what was being authorized, and he suggested that person had no idea what the pardon covered.

When a reporter asked Trump whether Fauci should face repercussions, the president reminded everyone that he knows Fauci better than just about anyone.

“Well, I watched the whole thing today, but more importantly, I was a part of the whole Fauci — I inherited Fauci. He was here from the 1980s, so I had him for a period of time, and I disagreed with him on a lot. I would have had to close down the whole country if I listened to him,” Trump said. “I went the federalist way, which is basically to let the governors decide. And generally speaking, the Republican governors did very well; the Democrat governors did not do very well. But Fauci wanted to have nobody wearing masks, if you remember, and then everybody had to wear five masks, as many masks as you could get.”

Trump kept going, and it got better. “Operation Warp Speed was talked about as being one of the great success stories anywhere in the world, actually, and we did a good job. But many more people died under Biden than died in the Trump administration from COVID. COVID was a disaster, but Fauci did not help.”

But here’s the problem for Fauci, and it’s a big one. The Fifth Amendment protects you from incriminating yourself in testimony. Fauci was pardoned. A pardoned man has no self-incrimination to fear on anything the pardon covers, which means he has no Fifth Amendment right to hide behind.”As you very well know, as the Supreme Court has been clear for a century and more, Brown v. Walker, 1896. When he has been pardoned, he may not stand upon his privilege,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told Fauci during the hearing.

So the walls are closing in on Fauci from every direction. The Senate is expected to vote on contempt charges next week, the legitimacy of his autopen pardon is in serious doubt, and the president of the United States just calmly explained on camera why none of it ought to protect him. Fauci spent years telling Americans to trust him. This week, he wouldn’t even trust himself to answer a question about his tie. Trump’s response was epic, and Fauci’s reckoning may just be getting started.

Read more …

“The West has been using Kiev as a “battering ram” against Moscow, the former president has said .. “

Russia Cannot Survive Without Victory In Ukraine – Medvedev (RT)

Russia can only preserve itself by achieving victory in the Ukraine conflict because the West is seeking to destroy the country through Kiev, former President Dmitry Medvedev has said.Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, made the remarks on Wednesday while addressing young politicians and representatives of parliamentary parties at the ‘Territory of Meanings’ youth forum. He said Russia was facing an unprecedented challenge, citing Western sanctions and political pressure.


“Our common task is to preserve our country,” Medvedev said. “The only way to preserve our country is victory in the special military operation,” he added.Medvedev stated that Russia has long endured Western efforts to undermine its sovereignty, asserting that its adversaries harbor disdain for “our country – large, strong, proud and self-sufficient, one that cannot be commanded.” He claimed that Western nations are now employing Ukraine as a “battering ram” to bring about Russia’s downfall.

While political parties may disagree on economic and social issues ahead of the upcoming State Duma election, Medvedev said they must remain united on issues affecting the country’s survival, expressing confidence that Russia will ultimately prevail. Moscow has repeatedly said that it considers NATO expansion towards its borders to be a major national security threat, and cited Kiev’s ambitions to join the US-led bloc among the key reasons that led to the Ukraine conflict. Russian officials have long accused Western governments of waging a proxy war against Russia through military and financial support for Kiev.

On Monday, President Vladimir Putin told State Duma lawmakers that no one would ever succeed in breaking the Russian people, saying “This has not happened and will not happen in the future.” He added that the country’s political system and state institutions are prepared to repel any hostile actions. Putin also said that Russia’s opponents have failed on the battlefield and are now resorting to terrorist attacks. He argued that the Western sanctions have failed to damage Russia as intended and have instead inflicted the greatest harm on the European and other states that introduced them.

Read more …

Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and later FreedomWatchUSA.org.

America Is Over if Dems Take Control in November – Larry Klayman (USAW)

Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com. Renowned Attorney Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and later FreedomWatchUSA.org, is worried that massive Democrat voter fraud might do America in. Klayman warns, “There will be an inquisition by using a seized power of government by socialists, communists, jihadists and leftists. It will be a bloodletting in the courts and also a bloodletting in the streets. This is why we act now and not wait for November. . .. It could be the end of America if the Democrats take control. It almost was with Biden, and you can see what’s going to happen next. When people call them crazy, that is too charitable. They are not crazy. They know what they are doing. They are evil. They are the disciples of the devil. The Democrat Party is infested, and it is the devil incarnate.”


The Dems are fighting to hold on to their voter fraud. Just this week, the Governor of New Jersey “Mikie Sherrill refuses to provide DOJ with info about the 6,600 non-citizens erroneously registered to vote . . .” New Jersey also picks jury pools from the voter rolls, and every year “75,000 noncitizens are called for jury duty in New Jersey.” This is news from just one state in the past week. Multiply that by 50. Maybe this is why Department of Homeland Security Secretary “Markwayne Mullin Says State Officials Who Refuse to Cooperate to Secure Elections Could Face ‘Prison Time.’”

We have never heard these kinds of threats to secure elections in the past. Dr. Jerome Corsi says President Trump will not allow the voter fraud for the midterm elections and will use the President’s Article II powers to secure the elections from foreign and domestic intervention. Klayman says, “Dr. Corsi is exactly right . . . The President has those powers. The President has those emergency powers where he can step in. . .. If they have the guts to do it, they can. It’s a whole lot better than declaring martial law after an election. Let’s be proactive. Let’s do it before an election and clean the rat’s nest out now. . .. The Democrats are corrupt to the core.”

Klayman contends as the Trump Administration voter fraud crackdown heats up, so will the violence. Klayman predicts, “They are already violent. Look at Bernie Sanders, who is a supporter of Hamas. Look at Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and the Mayor of New York Mamdani, who cavorts with terrorists. Their mindset is of a terrorist. So, yes, they will resort to violence. . .. For you and my supporters, it is time for you to arm up, use it defensively and not offensively to protect you and your family. I would recommend that because we are going into a civil war. We are going to be in one very shortly.”

Read more …

“What was it all about? What was achieved other than the destruction of tradition?”

Whatever Happened To Boys’ Clubs and Men’s Colleges? (Paul Craig Roberts)

The last American population that is American grew up in the 1940s, graduated from high school in the mid to late 1950s and from college in the early 1960s. After that support systems for boys and young men were dismantled. There are no male spaces anymore. I attended 4 superlative universities–Georgia Tech, University of Virginia, UC Berkeley, and Oxford University. Only UC Berkeley, a large state university, was gender integrated. Georgia Tech says that it was gender integrated in 1952. In my years there I never saw a female student. Rumors were that there were a few taking masters degrees in engineering. The football cheerleaders were all male acrobats.


At UVa where I received a Ph.D. in economics, I never saw a female. Rumors, as at Ga Tech, were that there were a few women enrolled in masters degrees not available at the women’s colleges. The women attended excellent women’s colleges such as Sweet Briar. USA was gender integrated in 1970. At Oxford University there were ancient men’s colleges. Mine, Merton College, dated from 1264. There were four women’s colleges. Each collage had its own tradition.

For nonsensical reasons, men’s colleges at Oxford were gender integrated between 1974 and 1986, and lost their traditions. Women’s colleges followed during 1979 and 2008, and lost their traditions. What was it all about? What was achieved other than the destruction of tradition? Women were already at Oxford. Why did they have to be in men’s colleges? Men were already at Oxford. Why did they need to be in women’s colleges? The Boys’ Club of America was gender integrated in 1990, thus destroying the purpose of the Boys’ Club. Why? What was achieved?

Little League fell to gender integration 16 years earlier in 1974. Perhaps this was the death toll for the American male. Teams had to accept girls whose performance was inferior to that of the boys in order to comply with imposed gender regulations. As boys were expected to perform well, parents cheered the girls who managed to get to first base or catch a left field fly. The boy who got a double or threw a double play was cheered but not with the applause given to the most minor of female accomplishments. This subordination of male performance to female performance set the stage for the dispossession of the American male of his confidence.

Today corporate boardrooms are confronted with female members demanding advertisements against men, such as the Gillettes and Budweiser Light anti-male advertisements and Starbuck’s statement that it is not employing any white males until it has more women and people of color. Today American heterosexual men have been moved aside. What the dumbshit feminists have achieved is unprotected women. We have the evidence in England, Sweden, Norway, Europe, and America. Recently the state of Minnesota refused to prosecute an immigrant-invader child rapist “in the interest of justice.” In other words, it was just for the black guy to rape the white girl.

In Sweden and Norway white women are subject to public rapes. White men do not intervene out of fear that they will be arrested for the hate crime of abusing a black person.Throughout the Western world racial privileges have been institutionalized in law and practice. Is is racist for whites to protect themselves. With the confidence of white men destroyed, the field is open for immigrant-invaders. This is feminism’s achievement.

Read more …

1950s?

Race-Based Hiring Changed Higher Education (Victor Davis Hanson)

Jack Fowler: I mentioned a couple of episodes ago our friend Bill Jacobson with Legal Insurrection. He has some efforts aimed at ferreting out that stuff. Yeah, it’s not only, let’s just say, racism in schools, which could be in hiring. This could be in scholarships. Here’s a scholarship: blacks only need apply. Or teachers, you’re going to get this bonus, but only if you’re a minority. So he has a legal arm there that goes after that. There are efforts to …


Victor Davis Hanson: You know, I had a student tell me, “You don’t know what it’s like to be Latino.” And I said, “I do,” because I came of age when this started. In those days, 4.0 was the top, and I had a 3.99. I had two Bs. I did pretty well for a country boy on the SAT, so I applied to UC Santa Cruz. It was a new campus. It was harder to get in than Stanford. I was on the waiting list at Stanford and UC, so I might not have gone away to college. They let me into both, I think, much later at Stanford, but I got into Santa Cruz from the waiting list.

So I went there, and there were two students from my high school who were C students, and they were there already. They had been there all summer long. They were Latino. I never said anything, but they could not believe that I had you know… There were three students who had the top grades. It’s a long story, but there was a valedictorian. I wasn’t that, but we were all one-tenth of a point apart. I was, I think, the third highest. But the point I’m making is that when I went to graduate school, this was in 1975, Mark Edwards was a great guy. He called us in, and there were four white males. He said, “I want to tell you right now, we’re hearing of lawsuits.”

This was kind of like the [Allan] Bakke era. “None of you are going to get a job. I’ve been to the American Philological Association, and everybody’s told me they’re going to hire women and minorities no matter what. We have to at Stanford.” We said, “Well, you have three or four women here, and you have an African American.” I said, “How about all you guys? Why don’t you all resign and then give up your places? You’re all in your sixties.” When you’re that age, 21 years old, you don’t believe it. So you think, “Well, I’ll be fine.” I told my advisor. He said, “Well, if you’re good, you’ll make it. I did.”

I said, “Yeah, but you were in a different generation.” So I finished all my exams in two and a half years. That’s all I did. I studied twenty hours a day and slept about five hours. I wrote my thesis in my third year. I went to the American School of Classical Studies for a whole year. I did all of that. When I applied to seventeen jobs at age twenty-five, I got one interview at the Naval Academy. They said, “That was a great interview.” They interviewed me on everything. “Can you tell us who Jomini was?” and things outside classics. Then they said, “But you’re not going to get the job. We have to hire a woman.”

I said, “Well, you guys are kind of old. Why don’t you resign and hire her?” Because they have a civilian system at the Naval Academy, not like West Point. So I came back, and I’d farmed for five years. I was unemployable. When I went to Fresno, Cal State Fresno, they said, “We’re not going to hire you. We’ll have you part-time.” I said, “I published a book.” They said, “Well, let me see. You have a Ph.D. from Stanford and you’ve published a book, but we’re going to hire a woman and a minority.” These were all white guys telling me this.

Finally, I gave a lecture, and a person from the McClatchy Foundation heard me speak. She said, “That was a great talk. Why aren’t you teaching?” I said, “I only have one class.” So she gave a gift for me to teach for one year. I did pretty well, and I doubled the enrollment. But my point is that there’s a whole generation of people born in the 1950s who came of age during this whole racial preference system, and that’s all they’ve known. So, when people say discrimination, there has been discrimination, but when I saw it institutionally, I’m not talking about what people thought. Institutionally, it was all one way, and people are tired of it.

So when I got a job and I got tenure, I had a guy from the philosophy department come to me and say, “They’re not going to hire me. I’m a white male. I’ve been a part-time teacher for eleven years, and I make one-third of what a professor does. I drive all over to community colleges. Can you help me?” So I went to the chairman, and I did that for about five people. I got all five hired. But it was very strange how amoral it was. It was just blatant. You know what I mean? Blatant racism. It would have been much better if, when people thought there was inequality, and there was, they had started at K through 12.

You could have gone down to the kindergarten level and said, “These are the types of schools in minority districts in the forties, fifties, and sixties that educated people well, and we’re going to restore them. We’re going to make them academies. Anybody can go, but they’ll be located in poorer areas to make sure that when you come out of there…”

Read more …

Cultures should not emigrate to invade other cultures..

John Cleese: “Some Cultures Are Better Than Others” (MN)

Legendary Monty Python star John Cleese has drawn a clear line in the sand, declaring himself a “culturalist” who believes some cultures are superior to others. Cleese has also openly backed Restore Britain leader Rupert Lowe amid the accelerating collapse of British norms under mass migration and parallel societies. The legendary comedian responded this week to ritual insults hurled at him for supporting Lowe by rejecting the tired “racist” smear from the usual uneducated quarters.


“I am not a racist. I am a culturalist,” he stated in a post that now has over ten million views, adding “I believe that some cultures are better than others. I prefer cultures that do not advocate stoning, pederasty, wife beating, female genital mutilation, and beheading opponents. Call me old-fashioned…” Cleese had earlier made plain his preference for Lowe over the rest of the political class, stating he trusts the Great Yarmouth MP “more than any of the other leaders.” The Metro reported the comments as Cleese pushed back against the predictable pile-on.

Lowe, for his part, simply called Cleese a patriot. The exchange has crystallised a growing recognition that Britain’s cultural foundations are under sustained assault from imported practices fundamentally at odds with the country’s historic values of individual liberty, equal protection under the law, and basic human decency. Cleese has for some time now been documenting the same pattern with characteristic clarity. In April he tore into the BBC over claims that the British education system was designed for “whiteness,” pointing out the obvious: it was built for British children in Britain, most of whom happened to be white at the time.

To treat that historical fact as a “racist conspiracy,” he said, is insane. The broadcaster, he charged, operates with a hidden agenda opposed to the beliefs of the majority of British people. He has also zeroed in on the political reality driving the double standard. With churches across Britain suffering more than ten recorded crimes every single day – theft, arson, vandalism, violence – Cleese observed that Labour politicians have become so dependent on Muslim votes that they no longer even pretend to be even-handed. “We need a new election,” the Python star demanded.

Cleese has noted that the focus on religion in Britain falls almost exclusively on Islam, while more peaceful and spiritual traditions are sidelined. He has asked why schoolchildren are not being introduced to Buddhism – a far more civilised belief system – rather than being steered toward Islam.

He has highlighted the one-way demand for respect: Islam insists its traditions be honoured while showing no reciprocal intention of respecting British ones, the polar opposite of genuine multiculturalism. And he has pointed out that other religions do not threaten to take over the country, whereas multiple Muslim clerics and scholars openly do. These are not abstract observations. They map directly onto the lived experience of communities watching churches burn, girls trafficked, and native citizens pushed down waiting lists.

That is precisely the ground Rupert Lowe and Restore Britain have chosen to fight on. The party, which surged past the Conservatives in membership within weeks of its launch, does not traffic in polite fictions. It has vowed to deport millions of illegal and burdensome migrants – “if that means millions go, so be it” – to outlaw incompatible cultural and religious practices, and to give the British people a binding referendum on the death penalty for pedophiles and rapists when guilt is undeniable. “Prison or deportation is too kind,” Lowe has said.

Lowe’s own record shows why the establishment treats him as a threat. As an MP he has submitted more than a thousand Freedom of Information requests that forced light onto grooming gang data, the true costs of mass migration, and foreign offender absconding rates. When the results proved too damaging, the WhatDoTheyKnow platform restricted his access. Lowe’s response was characteristically dry: the restriction was “not in the spirit of transparency.”

He has also refused to soft-pedal the immigration crisis itself. Lowe has called openly for a hostile environment toward illegal entrants, many of them criminals, stating he wants them all deported and does not care how it happens. Far-left politicians and media figures predictably denounced the stance as “cruel” and “repulsive.” Lowe’s reply was equally direct: he could not care less about defending the “humanity” of third-world conmen who break into the country and leave British families living in fear.

The practical consequences of the current open-door approach continue to surface. Lowe recently told Joe Rogan that arriving migrants are placed at the top of NHS waiting lists for dental treatment that British citizens cannot access. Rogan’s reaction was pure disbelief.The incentive structure is obvious: free housing, welfare, and priority healthcare create a magnet that draws people across multiple safe countries. Nowhere has the cultural incompatibility been more horrific than in the industrial-scale rape gang scandals.

Lowe’s Restore Britain-backed inquiry documented a nationwide pattern of abuse involving up to 250,000 young British girls, overwhelmingly by men from Pakistani Muslim and other Muslim backgrounds, with police and politicians suppressing the truth for decades under the banner of community cohesion. Elon Musk responded by endorsing Nuremberg-style trials for those who enabled the cover-up. “The politicians who turned a blind eye to the Rape of Britain must go to prison,” he wrote.

Cleese’s latest stand simply names what millions of Britons already see. Preferring a culture that does not stone people, mutilate girls, or treat women as disposable is not racism. It is the minimum requirement of civilisation. [..] Cleese, Lowe, and a growing public are no longer playing along. Some cultures produce free speech, scientific inquiry, and equal rights. Others produce the opposite. Pretending otherwise has already cost Britain dearly.

Read more …

Cue the attacks.

Musk’s America PAC Reportedly Plans $120 Million Midterm Blitz (ZH)

The New York Times reports that Elon Musk’s America PAC plans to spend as much as $120 million to help Republicans in November’s midterm elections, signaling that the world’s richest man is preparing to reenter the political game with fewer than 100 days until voters head to the polls. America PAC’s spending surge will likely spark a coordinated opposition campaign from Democratic groups and left-wing NGOs, ranging from protests and activist pressure to sustained negative press coverage of Musk, as well as attempts to damage his brands, including Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI.


The Democrats’ playbook could resemble their coordinated pressure campaign against Musk when he was involved with DOGE and the dismantling of most of USAID. This sparked street demonstrations by left-wing and far-left activist networks supported by left-wing NGOs, along with an aggressive left-leaning media campaign that sought to make him the public face of the administration’s agenda. The NYT report is based on “two people briefed on the plans,” and like many stories run by left-leaning corporate media. Musk usually denies the reports on X, but if this report is correct, it says Musk authorized America PAC to build a field operation across at least eight states, targeting Senate races in Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, and Ohio, while considering contests in North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas.

America PAC is also gearing up to support House candidates in California, Wisconsin, and Washington, according to those people. Musk’s nearly $300 million bet on the 2024 campaign proved politically successful. Still, it came at a steep cost to his brands, which became targets of information warfare operations with coordinated pressure from left-wing journalists and NGO-backed activist groups. Remember when MSM outlets ramped up stories portraying Musk as a Nazi while he was at DOGE, dismantling the left’s USAID slush fund?

This is how the information operations game is played, and the ones being played were the American people. Remember, the far-left even launched a firebomb campaign against Tesla service centers, as the left fringe rules through intimidation, violence, and terrorism. Judging by Musk’s X posts and the broader Republican Party’s increasingly new messaging, the GOP appears to be converging on a single marketing platform ahead of the midterms: Democrats serve as the political vehicle for a socialist and Marxist takeover. It’s that simple.

That narrative is not being manufactured from nothing. The Democratic Socialists of America’s own rhetoric about dismantling the American “empire” from within gives Republican strategists a political gift in the market while establishment Democrats fret over their party fracturing in a far-left revolutionary takeover. The emerging theme for America PAC and Republican candidates will likely focus on anti-communism, framing the election as a choice between capitalism vs. socialism, national sovereignty vs. border abolition, and law and order vs. violent crime and revolution.

DSA has effectively handed Republicans the advertising material to connect illegal alien invasion, violent crime, attacks on law enforcement, street unrest, and all other failed globalist policies under a single ideological threat narrative. That is precisely the political branding that establishment Democrats fear and are melting down over.

Read more …

“.. the author who created the most successful publishing franchise of our lifetime had somehow become too radioactive for many people even to write about”

The New ‘They Who Must Not Be Named’ (A.J. Rice)

Every week on my podcast Dangerous Laughter, I sit down with people whose ideas deserve a hearing, whether the cultural gatekeepers approve or not. Sometimes it’s a politician. Sometimes it’s a journalist. Sometimes it’s a historian. This week, it was Solomon Schmidt, a gifted historian whose new biography, A Pen to Change the World: The Life of J.K. Rowling, should have been one of the easiest books in the world to promote. Instead, it became a case study in modern publishing.Schmidt told me that organizations serving independent bookstores declined to carry advertising for the book.


Harry Potter fan communities that once celebrated every new Rowling project have shown little interest in discussing a biography of the woman who created Hogwarts. Media outlets that ordinarily jump at the chance to cover major literary releases have largely looked the other way. Think about how absurd that is.=J.K. Rowling isn’t an obscure novelist looking for her first break. She’s the bestselling author of the bestselling book series in modern publishing history. Her stories have sold hundreds of millions of copies, been translated around the globe, inspired blockbuster films, and introduced an entire generation to the joy of reading.


If that resume isn’t enough to justify a serious biography, what exactly is? The answer has nothing to do with literature. It has everything to do with politics. Somewhere along the way, Rowling stopped being judged primarily as one of the world’s most successful authors and became a political litmus test. For some people, her views on sex and gender now outweigh everything else she has ever written, accomplished, donated, or inspired. You don’t have to agree with Rowling to recognize what’s happening here. You only have to ask a simple question. When did we stop being curious?

One of the things that struck me during my conversation with Solomon was how straightforward his motivation really was. He wasn’t looking to pick a fight. He looked around and realized something that should have been obvious. How could the woman behind Harry Potter, arguably the defining literary phenomenon of the last thirty years, not already have a definitive modern biography? Charles Dickens has biographies. William Shakespeare has biographies. J.R.R. Tolkien has biographies. C.S. Lewis has biographies. But the author who created the most successful publishing franchise of our lifetime had somehow become too radioactive for many people even to write about. That should bother anyone who claims to love books.

As Solomon explained, understanding Rowling’s life helps readers understand Harry Potter itself. Her struggles with poverty, depression, rejection, and single motherhood weren’t footnotes. They shaped the stories. They gave us Harry’s loneliness, the Dementors that captured depression so vividly, and the recurring lesson that courage usually comes at a personal cost. Biography isn’t an endorsement. It’s an exploration. Somewhere, we’ve forgotten the difference. The funny thing is, Harry Potter warned us about this long before social media existed.

Throughout the series, the Ministry of Magic spends as much time managing information as it does protecting people. The Daily Prophet becomes less interested in reporting facts than preserving approved narratives. Dolores Umbridge doesn’t need to burn books. She simply decides which voices deserve to be heard and which ones deserve to disappear. Sound familiar? Millions of readers recognized those lessons while turning the pages of Rowling’s novels. Some seem to have forgotten them the moment they closed the cover.

That brings me to my own new book, The Curse of the Bearded Lady. On the surface, it has little in common with a biography of J.K. Rowling. One is political satire. The other is literary history. But both books ask the same question. What happens when powerful cultural institutions stop encouraging debate and start discouraging curiosity? Unfortunately, that’s the road we’re traveling. I don’t expect everyone to agree with Rowling. I don’t expect everyone to buy Solomon’s biography. I certainly don’t expect everyone to agree with me. That’s never been the point.

The point is that readers should be free to encounter ideas, arguments, and people without first receiving permission from self-appointed cultural referees. Publishing used to trust readers enough to let them make those decisions for themselves. Now too many gatekeepers seem determined to make those choices in advance.History has never been written exclusively about saints, and thank goodness for that. The people who change the world are usually complicated. They succeed brilliantly. They fail publicly. They contradict themselves. They evolve. That’s what makes them worth studying.

J.K. Rowling is one of those figures, whether her critics like it or not. The greatest irony of all is that Rowling spent years teaching millions of young readers to question authority, resist propaganda, and think for themselves. Harry, Hermione, and Luna never accepted an official narrative simply because someone powerful told them to. Maybe that’s the real reason her books still endure. Because they encourage independent thought.That may be the most dangerous kind of magic left. Because somewhere along the way, “He Who Must Not Be Named” stopped being a fictional villain. For too many people, it became the woman who imagined him.

Read more …

“Ankara now finds itself simultaneously managing several long running disputes while its domestic bandwidth is consumed by an economic downturn and a reshaped opposition.”

Türkiye Is Headed For A Perfect Storm (Mishel Bychkova)

Turkish politics rarely stands still, but even by local standards, the past week has moved fast. Ozgur Ozel, the leader of the Republican People’s Party, told his parliamentary group that a new party will be formed within days.


On the surface, this looked like a routine reshuffling of parliamentary seats – the kind of maneuver that happens periodically in Ankara without lasting consequence. Underneath, it is nothing of the sort. The announcement was framed as a defensive move, yet its implications reach far beyond the corridors of the CHP. Against the backdrop of Türkiye’s stalling economy, the tense regional environment, and the unresolved Kurdish question, the birth of this new formation looks like the opening move in a broader contest over who controls the timing of the country’s next election. Taken together, the pieces suggest that Ankara is entering a period in which political survival, not policy, will dictate the pace of events.

A party born out of necessity
Ozel did not describe his move as a rupture. He insisted that the CHP’s role as the parliament’s main opposition voice would not be abandoned, only carried forward under a new banner. The language was careful, almost defensive, and for good reason. Splitting a party while claiming continuity is a delicate balancing act, one that requires convincing both loyal voters and international observers that nothing essential has been lost in the transition. In practice, the plan is to bring roughly 85 deputies with him, instantly turning the new party into the second largest bloc in parliament and pushing the CHP itself down to 4th or 5th place. A party that has anchored Turkish opposition politics for a century is being hollowed out from within, not by an external rival but its own recent leader.

The logic behind the move becomes clear once the legal pressure on the CHP is taken into account. Courts have been steadily encroaching on the party’s internal affairs, including the reinstatement of Kemal Kilicdaroglu as the formal leader of the CHP. For Ozel, remaining inside a party whose leadership could be legally reassigned at any moment is a losing bet. Commentator Murat Yetkin described the new project as a reserve platform, built precisely so Ozel can wait out the legal storm without being dragged into seven months of an internal power struggle before elections arrive. This is an insurance policy, drafted by a politician who understands that Turkish courts have repeatedly proven capable of reshaping party leadership through rulings where ballots fail.

CHP falls back into Kilicdaroglu’s hands, Ozel keeps a functioning vehicle of his own, complete with parliamentary representation and a base of loyal deputies. If it does not work, he has lost remarkably little, since the new party can, in theory, be folded back into a friendly CHP once the legal dust settles. It is a move built for optionality rather than conviction, and that pragmatism is precisely what makes it significant. Ozel is betting that having control over a smaller, loyal formation beats having a contested claim over a larger, legally vulnerable one.

The reaction in the press captures the split perfectly, and it is worth dwelling on because it previews how the story will be fought over in the months ahead. Cumhuriyet ran the story as a march toward power, presenting Ozel’s decision as painful but historic – a step taken for the good of the wider democratic camp. The framing was almost heroic, portraying a leader forced by circumstance into a bold act of political self-preservation on behalf of an entire opposition movement.

Sabah took the opposite line, framing the new party as inheriting a corruption problem, naming several founding figures already tied to bribery investigations and describing Ozel’s supporters as having plundered the old CHP headquarters on their way out. The tone there was mocking and accusatory, designed to strip the move of any moral standing before it could gain traction with undecided voters. Two newspapers, two entirely different versions of Türkiye, and neither side is likely to soften its framing in the weeks to come.

An economy running out of room
None of this is happening in a vacuum. Türkiye’s banking sector is heading into a difficult second quarter, with net profits expected to fall by more than 20 percent as inflation expectations stay elevated and tight monetary policy pushes up the cost of financing. For a country that has leaned heavily on its banks to sustain consumer spending and keep growth numbers presentable, that is a signal that the buffer policymakers have relied on for the past several years is thinning when they can least afford it.

More troubling is the currency exposure building up in the real economy. Foreign currency liabilities among Turkish companies hit $392.4 billion in May, the highest level recorded since 2013, while the net foreign currency deficit reached $204.4 billion. Numbers on this scale are not abstract statistics for policymakers to just shrug off. They represent a private sector increasingly vulnerable to any depreciation of the lira, and a government with steadily shrinking room to maneuver on interest rates without triggering the kind of corporate distress these figures already hint at. Companies holding that much foreign currency debt need a stable or strengthening lira simply to service their obligations, which locks the central bank into a defensive posture regardless of what domestic conditions actually call for.

This is the trap facing Turkish economic policy right now. Tightening further to defend the currency risks strangling growth and deepening the sense of stagnation that voters already feel in their daily expenses. Loosening policy to stimulate the economy risks reigniting inflation and putting even more pressure on companies already struggling under record foreign currency exposure. There is no comfortable middle path left – only a series of trade offs that grow less forgiving with each passing quarter. And because Turkish monetary policy rarely operates independently of political considerations, every one of these trade offs eventually becomes a political decision as well, made with an eye on elections rather than purely on economic fundamentals.

Türkiye’s foreign policy is not offering any relief either. Tensions with Israel remain unresolved, friction with Greece over Aegean and maritime issues continues to simmer, and the Cyprus question sits as stubbornly unsettled as it has for decades. Each of these fronts demands attention and resources from Ankara at a moment when the government would prefer to focus inward. None of them are new disputes, which in some ways makes the current moment more dangerous rather than less. Familiar tensions have a way of being taken for granted as innocuous right up until the moment they’re not. Meanwhile, Ankara now finds itself simultaneously managing several long running disputes while its domestic bandwidth is consumed by an economic downturn and a reshaped opposition.

Read more …

Europe has no Trump to close the borders.

More than 50,000 Migrants Swarm Spain’s Enclave of Ceuta (CTH)

Western media are downplaying the numbers, continually saying a “few thousand.” However, local officials and eyewitnesses are describing the migrant invasion as something substantially more; over 50,000 more. As night fell, the horde of migrants continue to overwhelm the region of Cueta, a region of Spain in North Africa. The invasion force shows no signs of slowing down and the region is entirely overwhelmed. There are 80,000 Spanish residents trying to retain their safety against the arrival of 50,000 invading north-Africans.

(REUTERS) – […] A Guardia Civil spokesperson said earlier migrants were “massively entering from the sea” around the Tarajal breakwater, a border seawall that migrants can swim around and enter Ceuta. The spokesperson could not estimate the number of migrants but said police were overwhelmed. Many local shops were shuttered. Enrique Serrano, who runs a women’s clothing store in central Ceuta, told Reuters business owners were organising self-defence because they believed police resources would be insufficient.

“I’m not opening this afternoon because the situation is extremely tense … The first thing I have to do is protect my business and my family,” he said, adding that when the fence was breached after midnight, hundreds of migrants rushed through in a matter of minutes. Ceuta and Melilla — another Spanish autonomous city located in North Africa — have the European Union’s only land borders with Africa. Both cities periodically experience surges in attempted crossings by migrants seeking to reach Europe.

[…] Spain’s Socialist government stands out in Europe for its pro-migrant stance, and it has recently launched a programme to provide legal status for some 500,000 undocumented migrants, triggering an influx of applications double that number. Right-wing parties criticised the drive, arguing it would attract more migrants to Spain, and were quick to blame Sanchez for allowing the situation in Ceuta to reach crisis proportions

Conservative opposition People’s Party leader Alberto Nuñez Feijoo said in a post on X: “The situation in Ceuta is desperate. The government cannot look the other way… because we are facing a national security crisis.”

Earlier on Thursday, Ceuta Mayor Juan Jesus Vivas had urged the national government to declare an emergency over the mass arrivals. (read more) President Trump tried to warn the Spanish people that socialist President Pedro Sánchez Pérez-Castejón would open the borders and destroy their country. Trump was right! “Fernando Rodríguez Contreras, an official in the government, said the working estimate for the number of people who had crossed was in the tens of thousands, though that figure could not be confirmed.” ~NYT

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2082944530127654963?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2082944530127654963%7Ctwgr%5Eef566a2223b1eaa02ae61159ab036a43ab2cd716%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconservativetreehouse.com%2Fblog%2F2026%2F07%2F30%2Fmore-than-50000-migrants-from-morocco-and-sub-saharan-africa-swarm-spains-enclave-of-ceuta%2F
Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Oct 172024
 


Ivan Kramskoy Christ in the desert 1920

 

I’m Voting For Him And Here’s Why (Jason)
Musk Stumps For Trump In Pennsylvania, Donates Nearly $75 Million To PAC (ZH)
Joy Reid: Black Male Trump Voters Part Of A ‘Global Fascist Phenomenon’ (ZH)
US Election Betting Skyrocketing (RT)
Harris Pledges Break From Biden’s Course In Fox Interview (RT)
US Democrats Worried About Pennsylvania – Politico (RT)
Ukraine Wants To Join NATO While Biden Is US President – Envoy (RT)
Zelensky Presents ‘Victory Plan’ To Ukrainian Parliament (BBC)
British Military Believes Kiev ‘On The Verge Of Losing’ – Daily Express (RT)
How The West Doomed Ukraine (Diesen)
Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Anti-Ballot Harvesting Directive (JTN)
Trump Urges Georgians To Vote Early Amid Record Breaking Turnout (JTN)
Liz Cheney Under Fire for Improper Contacts with Jan. 6 Witness (Turley)
The Zionist Lobby Wins, But The US Loses (SCF)
Dmitry Rogozin For President (Helmer)
How Do We Get Off the Road to Armageddon? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Could The SCO Summit Save The BRICS+ New Order? (Pacini)
BMW Says EU Ban On Gasoline Cars From 2035 Is “No Longer Realistic” (ZH)

 

 

Leads in all swing states.

 

 

Trump poll and Trump Media.

 

 

Ackman
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846214495779119179

Elon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846441735641264246

RFK
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846213396452053410

Voter ID

Gutfeld Musk
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846444714117288154

Engineer

Trump Faulkner he’s good in this

BB

 

 

 

 

X thread.

I’m Voting For Him And Here’s Why (Jason)

I can’t stand Donald Trump. He is braggy, he insults people for no reason, and he is just a brutal personality. But my mind is made up. I’m voting for him and here’s why:

* He puts Americans and their well-being first. Kamala will not.

* He will bring @elonmusk into his cabinet to be the efficiency czar and get rid of waste. This alone may be the best single reason to vote for him.

* He will bring @RobertKennedyJr into his cabinet to Make American Healthy Again. He will finally get to the bottom of why our food companies are destroying the health of our children.

* I’m sick of the way the media lies continuously about @realDonaldTrump, starting with the incessant racism claims. They are just nonsense. The latest thing I learned? He sent his plane to fly Nelson Mandela home after he was in jail with the U.S. wouldn’t do it. Racist? No.

* I’m sick of the U.S. being embroiled in foreign wars. Trump will keep us out of them again. He’s just crazy enough that foreign nations will stand down. They have no fear of Kamala. They will fear him.

* Trump sees this country as fundamentally good. Kamala sees it as inherently evil.

* Trump will end the nonsense of the open border which makes our country less secure, less financially stable, and brings in millions of people illegally who compete for Americans’ jobs.

* This government has to print billions to care for the illegals. That makes all of our dollars less valuable and makes prices zoom upward.

* He will stockpile Bitcoin.

* He will keep men out of women’s bathrooms and women’s sports.

* He is a heavyweight personality and negotiator. Kamala is a phony personality and a lightweight negotiator.

* The people who want Kamala Harris to win are the most annoying people in the country. They have pushed for pronouns, masks, endless vaccines, cancel culture, riots, blatant racism towards whites, gender confusion, undermining the U.S. constitution.

* He will upset the current political system. He was nearly the victim of assassination 3x. And he keeps going. He’s not the best in interviews, but he at least puts himself out there. Over and over and over. Kamala hasn’t done a single press conference.

* Harris and the media trying to prop her up hid Biden’s cognitive decline. They accuse @realDonaldTrump of being a threat to democracy. Yet she was installed as the nominee with no votes. She wants to pack the Supreme Court. She wants to eliminate the filibuster. She sued @RobertKennedyJr to keep him off the ballot. And the threat to democracy is Trump? Nonsense.

* Those who support Harris look at Trump supports as vile, stupid, ignorant, and fascists. They disown family members or disinvite them from Thanksgiving dinner of they support Trump. This is disgraceful.

* Every time she talks, I try to give her a chance. But she is the most phony and condescending politician I have ever seen. Ever. I can’t do it. I won’t do it.

* She and those who support her are resistant to Voter ID and believe requiring an ID is racist. Her Department of Justice is suing the state of Virginia for trying to purge the voter rolls of illegals. Why would we not want 1 vote per 1 U.S. citizen? Is it more racist to believe people from the inner city are perfectly capable of securing a government issued ID? Or to believe they are incapable?

That’s it. I’m done. Thanks for hearing me out.

Read more …

“America PAC was created to support six key values: secure borders, sensible spending, safe cities, a fair justice system, self-protection, and free speech..”

Musk Stumps For Trump In Pennsylvania, Donates Nearly $75 Million To PAC (ZH)

Businessman Elon Musk is touring Pennsylvania until Monday to stump for former President Donald Trump, where he’ll give talks to votors across the state. “Tomorrow night through Monday, I will be giving a series of talks throughout Pennsylvania,” Musk wrote early Wednesday on X. “If you’d like to attend one of my talks, there’s no attendance fee. You just need to have signed our petition supporting free speech & right to bear arms & have voted in this election.” “To clarify, you need have voted in Pennsylvania,” he added. Of note, the deadline to register to vote in Pennsylvania, a critical battleground state, is Oct. 21.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1846417963609440502

Meanwhile, Musk has donated nearly $75 million to his America PAC, and was the sole donor of $74,950,020 according to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). The PAC set a goal to get 1 million voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and North Carolina to sign the petition in support of the First and Second Amendments by Oct. 21. “Sign our petition in defense of YOUR Constitutional rights to Free Speech & Bear Arms!” the PAC wrote on X earlier this month. “For each registered swing state voter you refer that signs the petition, you get $47!” As the Epoch Times notes further, Musk is the world’s wealthiest person, with a net worth of $246.8 billion, according to the Forbes real-time billionaires list. He announced the launch of the America PAC back in May, stating at the time that it was created to “support candidates who believe in the core values of America.”

According to its mission statement, America PAC was created to support six key values: secure borders, sensible spending, safe cities, a fair justice system, self-protection, and free speech. The super PAC has since become the seventh-largest outside spender during the 2024 election cycle, spending a total of $106,031,817, according to a tally by OpenSecrets. The pro-Trump super PAC, Make America Great Again Inc, has spent $253,970,695 this election cycle, and the pro-Harris super PAC, Fast Forward USA, has spent $263,417,307 according to the non-profit. Earlier filings from September show that America PAC received millions of dollars in donations from Palantir Technologies co-founder Joe Lonsdale’s Lonsdale Enterprises, venture capitalist Doug Leone, and Sequoia Capital partners Shaun Maguire, among others.

Read more …

You left out “racist”. And why not throw in “misogynist”.

Joy Reid: Black Male Trump Voters Part Of A ‘Global Fascist Phenomenon’ (ZH)

While it’s true that not many Americans watch MSNBC’s Joy Reid and take her seriously (her show ‘The ReidOut’ is #14 on the list of most popular news commentary shows in the US according to viewership), she does remain a symbol of the woke left and her views often give us a glimpse into the collective hive mind of progressives. Similar to women on shows like ‘The View’, Reid is a standard bearer for perpetually angry, post-menopausal cat ladies that do sadly tend to vote in large numbers. These are the same women coming out in droves to support Kamala Harris based purely on her gender and skin color. They are the same women that supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 simply because they wanted a woman president and they didn’t care who it was. And generally speaking it is these kinds of women that use shaming tactics as a means to control the people around them. Their only source of power in life is to henpeck others into submission.

The problem for Harris is that childless cat ladies are not a large enough demographic to ensure a presidential win; she needs men to vote for her as well. As many critics have pointed out, this is rather ironic given the fact that Democrats and leftist activists have spent the better part of the last decade calling masculinity a “toxic” and oppressive social disease that needs to be eliminated. They have worked hard to demonize all men as potential rapists, misogynists, mass shooters and fascists. Now, not surprisingly, progressive women want men to lift them out of the hole they’ve dug for themselves. But they don’t want to admit they were wrong about men or apologize for their behavior and accusations, no. That would be asking far too much. Instead, they have turned to the same old shaming tactics they always use to get what they want.

This week Joy Reid suggested that Kamala Harris’ plunge in the polls is due in large part to a ‘global fascist phenomenon’ led by white males. She also argues that pockets of ‘black and brown men’ are a part of this supposed fascist takeover. The campaign to drag black voters back to the Democrat plantation continues. Reid’s comments come not long after Barack Obama (also a henpecker) tried to shame black men into voting for Harris by accusing them of bias against her because she’s a woman. As 2016 taught Americans, it’s foolish to blindly trust the polls and the election isn’t over until it’s over – That said, numerous indicators suggest that Harris does not inspire trust or optimism among most Americans.

Minority voters including black men have been loudly explaining why they don’t like Harris, and her being a woman is rarely on their list of complaints. Here’s what most American voters care about according to the surveys: The failing economy and stagflation, mass immigration and open borders and foreign policy leading to WWIII. That’s it. It doesn’t matter if they are white, black, brown, man or woman, these are the issues that concern people the most. Electing the first black woman president is irrelevant compared to these problems. Black male voters in particular are walking away from the political left, not because they are turning “fascist”, but because they’re finally waking up to the game being played with their futures.

Read more …

“Trading platform Kalshi [..] is offering investors the opportunity to stake up to $100 million on the result of the November vote..”

US Election Betting Skyrocketing (RT)

Election betting using so-called ‘prediction markets’ is skyrocketing in the US after a ban on the practice was recently lifted, according to media reports. Platforms are currently forecasting a narrow win for Republican candidate Donald Trump against Democratic rival Kamala Harris. Trading platform Kalshi, which last week won its legal fight against a US regulator in a Washington court, is offering investors the opportunity to stake up to $100 million on the result of the November vote. The court’s decision came after the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) failed to demonstrate harm to elections, despite arguing that such bets are similar to gaming and could undermine democratic integrity. The CFTC’s appeal against the ruling is ongoing. In the first days since the ban was lifted, more than $12 million has been taken in, according to Kalshi founder Tarek Mansour.

He added that the platform is working to attract more traders and several institutional investors. The bets are structured as binary options, priced up to $1 per contract. As of Monday, contracts favoring the former US president traded at 54 cents, while those for current Vice President Harris were at 47 cents. The prices also reflected a widening gap between Trump and Harris that has fluctuated between 51 and 49 cents for either candidate since the market opened a week ago. Although betting prices may indicate belief among traders that Trump will win the election, experts are cautious, saying that only the participation of institutional players could bring a clearer assessment.

“You may want more institutional money because while these investors might have their own particular political views, they’ll have studied the outcome and their wagers represent especially informed opinion,” Grant Ferguson, a political scientist and a follower of prediction markets at Texas Christian University told the Financial Times on Tuesday. Offshore prediction platforms such as Polymarket have also seen a surge in bets with over $1.9 billion staked on the presidential race. Experts expect volumes to soar tenfold as election day approaches.

Read more …

She said “There is not a thing that comes to mind” when asked how she would differ from Biden. She was chastised for it. So they reinvented her. Easy as pie.

Harris Pledges Break From Biden’s Course In Fox Interview (RT)

US Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris has distanced herself from the political course set by President Joe Biden, in an interview with Fox News on Wednesday. In previous media appearances, Harris had avoided drawing contrasts between herself and the outgoing president. “You’re not Joe Biden, you’re not Donald Trump, but nothing comes to mind that you would do differently?” Fox host Bret Baier asked the Democratic candidate. “Let me be very clear, my presidency will not be a continuation of Joe Biden’s presidency,” Harris replied, pledging to draw on her “professional experiences” and bring in “fresh new ideas.” “For example, as someone who has not spent the majority of my career in Washington DC, I invite ideas: whether it be from the Republicans who are supporting me, who were just on stage with me minutes ago, and the business sector and others, who can contribute to the decisions that I make,” the vice president continued.

Referring to the Harris campaign’s slogan, “Time to turn the page,” Baier pressed the Democrat nominee about what she would turn the page to, having already been vice president for three and a half years. Harris pivoted her answer to her Republican rival. “Well, first of all, turning the page from the last decade in which we have been burdened with the kind of rhetoric coming from Donald Trump,” she replied, accusing the former president of dividing the American people. Harris had been widely criticized in the media over her recent interview on the Late Show, for evading a question on what “major changes” her presidency would bring, compared to Biden’s. “Sure, well I’m obviously not Joe Biden,” she told host Stephen Colbert last week, adding that neither is she Donald Trump, to cheers from the studio audience.

“And so when we think about the significance of what this next generation of leadership looks like, were I to be elected president, it is about – frankly, I love the American people, and I believe in our country,” she said, going on to praise the American work ethic, ambition and character. In an interview on ABC last week, Harris was also asked how she would have done things differently to Biden. “There is not a thing that comes to mind in terms of – and I’ve been a part of most of the decisions that have had impact,” the presidential nominee said. Trump seized on the remark, writing on his Truth Social platform the following day: “Kamala stated clearly, yesterday, that she would not do anything different than Joe Biden, so there is nothing to debate.” Harris took over as the Democratic party’s contender for the election after Biden stepped down earlier in the year, after a disastrous televised debate against Trump raised concerns over his mental state.

Kamala Fox

Read more …

“..she “empowers a culture” that has left local elected officials feeling “unengaged and disrespected.”

US Democrats Worried About Pennsylvania – Politico (RT)

Some of the top Democrats in Pennsylvania are reportedly unhappy with the way Vice President Kamala Harris has run her campaign in the biggest battleground state in the upcoming US presidential election. Pennsylvania accounts for 19 Electoral College votes and Democrats are hoping their traditional strongholds of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh will come through for Harris on November 5 against Republican Donald Trump. Both parties are on track to spend over $500 million in TV advertising there, more than in any other state. “Democrats fret that any mistake here, big or small, could tip the election away from them,” Politico reported on Wednesday, citing insider sources.

“Pennsylvania is such a mess, and it’s incredibly frustrating,” said one elected Democrat, who asked to remain anonymous. “I feel like we’re going to win here, but we’re going to win it in spite of the Harris state campaign.” Harris’ campaign manager for Pennsylvania, Nikki Lu, has drawn criticism from the Philadelphia set. One strategist claimed that she “empowers a culture” that has left local elected officials feeling “unengaged and disrespected.” Lu is from Pittsburgh, on the other side of the state. Philadelphia City Councilmember Kendra Brooks told Politico that “there’s been a lot of struggles” within the campaign, due to “folks coming into Philadelphia that are making assumptions about what needs to happen in Philadelphia and not necessarily having the relationships to move Philadelphia politics.”

Lu has also been accused of not doing enough to attract black and Latino voters, seen as key Democrat voting blocs. While complaints about voter outreach are common among Pennsylvania Democrats, “this level of frustration and finger-pointing is not,” Politico noted. The campaign’s initial Latino coalition manager, Mariel Joy Kornblith Martin, quit after just two weeks on the job and sent a memo to state party leaders in August complaining she was not given the data or the infrastructure she needed. A Harris campaign official said Martin’s claim was “untrue.” According to former Philadelphia city council member Maria Quinones-Sanchez, the campaign has become “so scientific around door-knocking and connecting, that they forget that culturally, Latinos like just noise.”

“We need young African American men to come home. We need African American women… to come out in record numbers, and disaffected African Americans,” said Ryan Boyer, an important Philadelphia labor leader. He accused Lu of being “slow” to reach out to surrogates that could help with the black community, such as Mayor Cherelle Parker. Lu herself did not comment to Politico. Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez sent a statement that the Democrats were “running the largest and most sophisticated operation in Pennsylvania history,” with 50 staff reaching out to black voters and another 30 to Latinos. In recent weeks, however, the campaign brought in President Barack Obama’s former field director for Pennsylvania, Paulette Aniskoff, as well as several other operatives with ties to Philadelphia.

Read more …

“..a major part of Joe Biden’s legacy as president..” What, the end of NATO?

Ukraine Wants To Join NATO While Biden Is US President – Envoy (RT)

Admitting Ukraine into NATO before the end of the year could be a major part of Joe Biden’s legacy as president, Kiev’s envoy to the bloc, Natalia Galibarenko, has said. Vladimir Zelensky has pitched immediate membership in the US-led bloc as part of his ‘victory plan’, which he presented on Wednesday. Galibarenko explained the reasoning behind this in an interview with Reuters in Brussels, recorded the day before. “Our idea is that giving Ukraine [an] invitation at this moment is a political signal,” she told the agency. “We sincerely believe that it can be part of the legacy of current American administration.” Russia has demanded Ukraine’s military neutrality, and the specifically the renunciation of its NATO aspirations, as one of the preconditions for the current conflict to end.

According to Galibarenko, fast-tracking Kiev into the bloc would be “like a final, final verdict,” making Moscow unable to press the issue further. Even an invitation by itself, without any practical actions towards membership, would “send a powerful public message,” she argued. While NATO has declared that Ukraine is on an “irreversible” path to join eventually, it has qualified this by saying it will happen “when allies agree and conditions are met.” The US-led bloc has also told Kiev that it cannot join while at war and declined to give a timeline for accession. Two NATO members, Slovakia and Hungary, have already said they would vote against admitting Ukraine. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has argued that this would mean an open war with Russia, which he is opposed to.

The US has been one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine, approving almost $180 million in military and financial aid to Kiev since 2022. According to Reuters, Galibarenko’s push suggests there is “major uncertainty” in Kiev about what might happen after the American presidential election on November 5. Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ candidate for the White House, has “signaled” continued support for Ukraine but has not spelled out any policies. Former president and Republican candidate Donald Trump has promised to end the conflict within a day, presumably by discontinuing the US aid that is sustaining Ukraine.

Speculation about Biden fast-tracking Ukraine’s NATO bid first appeared earlier this month in Financial Times, but has not been substantiated. Then Vice President Biden was entrusted with Washington’s Ukraine policy during President Barack Obama’s second term, and played a key role in the 2014 coup in Kiev. His presidency’s sole foreign policy achievement so far has been to end the US war in Afghanistan after nearly 20 years. The pullout from Kabul in August 2021 ended in a virtual stampede for the exits, however, as the US-backed Afghan government imploded before the advancing Taliban.

Read more …

“..the Kremlin rubbished his “ephemeral peace plan,” saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”..”

Zelensky Presents ‘Victory Plan’ To Ukrainian Parliament (BBC)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has presented MPs with a long-awaited “victory plan” that aims to strengthen his country’s position enough to end the war with Russia. Zelensky told parliament in Kyiv that the plan could finish the war – which began with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 – no later than next year. Key elements include a formal invitation to join Nato, the lifting by allies of restrictions on long-range strikes on Russia, a refusal to trade Ukraine’s territories and sovereignty, and the continuation of the incursion into the Kursk region of Russia. The Kremlin dismissed the plan with a spokesman saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”.

Addressing MPs, Zelensky also criticised China, Iran and North Korea for their backing of Russia, and described them as a “coalition of criminals”. He said he would present the victory plan at an EU summit on Thursday. “We are at war with Russia on the battlefield, in international relations, in the economy, in the information sphere, and in people’s hearts,” Zelensky told parliament.

The plan outlined by Zelensky consists of five key points:
• Inviting Ukraine to join Nato
• The strengthening of Ukrainian defence against Russian forces, including getting permission from allies to use their long-range weapons on Russian territory, and the continuation of Ukraine’s military operations on Russian territory to avoid creation of the “buffer zones” in Ukraine
• Containment of Russia via a non-nuclear strategic deterrent package deployed on Ukrainian soil
• Joint protection by the US and the EU of Ukraine’s critical natural resources and joint use of their economic potential
• For the post-war period only: replacing some US troops stationed across Europe with Ukrainian troops

Three “addendums” remain secret and will only be shared with Ukraine’s partners, Zelensky said. The plan was presented to US President Joe Biden, as well as presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, back in September. Key allies such as Britain, France, Italy and Germany have also reportedly been shown the plan. However Zelensky’s conditions for peace are increasingly at odds with the situation which surrounds him. In front of MPs he acknowledged the growing fatigue in his country. His own tiredness was etched across his face as he said that “victory has become for some an uncomfortable word and it’s not easy to achieve.” nNational morale has gradually been crumbling under the weight of a mounting death toll, a controversial mobilisation law and never-ending Russian assaults on Ukrainian territory.

It’s increasingly thought any peace deal would have to involve Ukraine conceding territory in exchange for security guarantees. However, there was no hint of a compromise to bring the end of the war closer. Instead, Zelensky doubled down on wanting to force Russia to negotiate and to not cede Ukraine’s territory, through the strengthening of his own military. He also claimed his extensive plan could be implemented with the agreement of his allies, and not Russia. In public, Zelensky evidently still sees this war as existential, and warned of Russian President Vladimir Putin continuing to strengthen his position.

He also seemed to frame his vision as an investment opportunity for Western allies in terms of natural resources and economic potential. The Ukrainian president wants his exhausted troops to keep fighting. But with his army so reliant on Western aid, his “victory plan” will need the approval of the next US president. Immediately after Zelensky finished speaking, the Kremlin rubbished his “ephemeral peace plan,” saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”. The only way the war would end was Ukraine to “realise the futility of the policy it is pursuing,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

Read more …

“..by significantly increasing military aid, Western nations would enable Ukrainian forces to make Russia “helpless, running somewhere screaming in terror.”

British Military Believes Kiev ‘On The Verge Of Losing’ – Daily Express (RT)

Behind closed doors, the British military has grim expectations for the Ukraine conflict and believes that Kiev is about to lose, the tabloid Daily Express claimed on Tuesday. Over the past month, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has been touting his ‘victory plan’ to foreign leaders. Later this week he is set to unveil it to Ukrainian MPs and the general public, as well as the European Council. What Zelensky will present to his nation on Wednesday will not include specific numbers of requested weapons shipments by donor nations, according to his aide Mikhail Podoliak. As one of the key suppliers of arms to Ukraine, Britain has publicly supported Kiev’s uncompromising position in the conflict with Russia. But private assessments by its generals say the situation is bad for Ukraine, a military source cited by Daily Express said.

”I was speaking to a very senior British Army officer today,” the source was quoted as saying. “He told me that Ukraine is on the verge of losing the war against Russia. It’s very serious.” Zelensky has briefed the leaders of key Western nations on his ‘victory plan’, starting with US President Joe Biden in late September and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer last week. The head of the British government said it was “very important we’re able to show our continued commitment to support Ukraine.” Kiev has been asking for permission to use British-donated Storm Shadow missiles for long-range strikes into Russia. The lifting of restrictions on the use of Western weapons is understood to be integral to Zelensky’s proposal.

The Ukrainian leader had hoped to promote his plan at a gathering of donors in Germany last week, but the event was postponed after Biden canceled his participation to deal with the aftermath of deadly Hurricane Milton. Russia has made significant gains on the battlefield in the past several months, particularly since August, when Ukraine sent some of its best-equipped and experienced troops into Kursk Region. Podoliak claimed in an interview earlier this week that by significantly increasing military aid, Western nations would enable Ukrainian forces to make Russia “helpless, running somewhere screaming in terror.” Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that Moscow will treat Ukrainian long-range strikes with arms provided by Western nations as coming directly from the donors, and will respond accordingly.

Read more …

A history of..

How The West Doomed Ukraine (Diesen)

In February 2022, Russia started its military operation against Ukraine to impose a settlement after a group of NATO countries had undermined the Minsk II peace agreement for seven years. On the first day after the start of hostilities, Vladimir Zelensky confirmed that Moscow had contacted him to discuss negotiations based on restoring Ukrainian neutrality. On the third day, Russia and Ukraine agreed to start peace negotiations based on a Russian military withdrawal in return for this. Zelensky responded favorably to this condition, and he even called for a “collective security agreement” to include Russia to mitigate the security competition that had sparked the war. The talks that followed are referred to as the Istanbul negotiations, in which Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement before the US and UK sabotaged it, according to numerous claims by people close to the process.

For Washington, there were great incentives to use the large proxy army it had built in Ukraine to weaken Russia as a strategic rival, rather than accepting a neutral Kiev. On the first day after the start of the military operation, when Zelensky responded favorably to starting negotiations without preconditions, US State Department spokesperson Ned Price rejected this stance – saying Russia would first have to withdraw all its forces. “Now we see Moscow suggesting that diplomacy take place at the barrel of a gun or as Moscow’s rockets, mortars, artillery target the Ukrainian people. This is not real diplomacy… If President Putin is serious about diplomacy, he knows what he can do. He should immediately stop the bombing campaign against civilians, order the withdrawal of his forces from Ukraine, and indicate very clearly, unambiguously to the world, that Moscow is prepared to de-escalate.”

This was a demand for capitulation as the Russian military presence in Ukraine was Moscow’s bargaining chip to achieve the objective of restoring Kiev’s neutrality. Less than a month later, Price was asked if Washington would support peace talks, to which he replied negatively as the conflict was part of a larger struggle: “This is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine… The key point is that there are principles that are at stake here that have universal applicability everywhere, whether in Europe, whether in the Indo-Pacific, anywhere in between.” In late March 2022, Zelensky revealed in an interview with The Economist that “there are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”

Israeli and Turkish mediators have since confirmed that Ukraine and Russia were both eager to make a compromise to end the war before the US and UK intervened to prevent peace from breaking out. Zelensky had contacted former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to help with the talks. Bennett noted that Putin was willing to make “huge concessions” if Ukraine would restore its neutrality to end NATO expansion. Zelensky accepted this condition and “both sides very much wanted a ceasefire.” However, Bennett argued that the US and UK intervened and blocked the peace agreement as they favored a long war. With a powerful Ukrainian military at its disposal, the West rejected the Istanbul peace agreement and there was a “decision by the West to keep striking Putin” instead of pursuing peace.The Turkish negotiators reached the same conclusion: Russia and Ukraine agreed to resolve the conflict by restoring Ukraine’s neutrality, but NATO decided to fight Russia with Ukrainians as a proxy.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu argued that some NATO states wanted to extend the war to bleed Russia: “After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long… But following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, I had the impression that there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue – let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine.” Numan Kurtulmus, the deputy chairman of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s political party, confirmed that Zelensky was ready to sign the peace agreement before the US intervened: “This war is not between Russia and Ukraine, it is a war between Russia and the West. By supporting Ukraine, the United States and some countries in Europe are beginning a process of prolonging this war. What we want is an end to this war. Someone is trying not to end the war. The US sees the prolongation of the war as its interest.”

Read more …

“Anyone returning a ballot for a family member or disabled voter is required to enter county boards of elections offices and fill out an attestation form stating that they are following the law..”

Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Anti-Ballot Harvesting Directive (JTN)

The Ohio Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the secretary of state’s directive preventing ballot harvesting, ruling that its challengers filed their suit too late. In August, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) issued a directive stating that ballot drop boxes outside county boards of elections can only be used by voters dropping off their own ballots, Dayton Daily News reported. Anyone returning a ballot for a family member or disabled voter is required to enter county boards of elections offices and fill out an attestation form stating that they are following the law. The Ohio Democratic Party sued over the directive, requesting that it be rescinded. However, the lawsuit was not filed until Sept. 27, nearly a month after the directive was issued. The court ruled that the lawsuit was filed too late, as military and overseas ballots were sent out on Sept. 21 and early voting began on Oct. 8, according to the Statehouse News Bureau.

“I’m grateful the court has allowed us to proceed with our efforts to protect the integrity of Ohio’s elections,” LaRose said in a statement on Tuesday. “Political activists tried once again to dismantle the safeguards we’ve put in place, specifically in this case against ballot harvesting, and they’ve been rejected. This is the same policy that’s been used successfully in other states, and it’s designed to protect both individuals and election officials from accusations of illegal voting. The court’s decision should reinforce the confidence Ohio voters have in the security, honesty, and accountability of our elections.” In July, an Ohio federal judge partially struck down a state law restricting who can return absentee ballots for disabled voters, ruling that it violated the Voting Rights Act. LaRose issued his directive about a month later.

Read more …

“Go to the polls and vote. Then for the next 21 days get everyone you know to get out and vote. We don’t want to take a chance.”

Trump Urges Georgians To Vote Early Amid Record Breaking Turnout (JTN)

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday night urged Georgia residents to turn their ballots in early, after the state counted a record-breaking 300,000 votes cast during the first day of early voting and a state court blocked a hand-counting ballot rule. Georgia Secretary of State Chief Operating Officer Gabriel Sterling confirmed the number in a social media post, saying the number was “123% higher than the old record for the 1st day of voting.” Tuesday was the first day of in-person early voting in the Southern state, and the first day voters could return absentee ballots. Other states have already begun their early voting, including Arizona, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Virginia. North Carolina will begin its early in-person voting on Thursday.

Trump has been campaigning in critical swing states, including Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, ahead of the November election. The former president’s urging on Tuesday occurred during a campaign stop in Atlanta. “Early mail-in voting in your state is now underway, and early in-person is underway. But I’ll tell you what, I’m hearing very good things,” Trump said during the rally. “So if you have a ballot, return it immediately. If not, go tomorrow or as soon as you can. Go to the polls and vote. Then for the next 21 days get everyone you know to get out and vote. We don’t want to take a chance.”

The comment comes as a Georgia judge late Tuesday paused a new rule from the Georgia State Election Board that would have forced officials to hand-count the number of ballots cast at each polling place, determining that it would cause “administrative chaos” because of a lack of preparation and training, according to CNN. Vice President Kamala Harris, who is the Democratic nominee for president, is campaigning in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin this week. Trump is also expected to campaign in Detroit, Michigan, on Friday night.

Read more …

“..a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter..”

Liz Cheney Under Fire for Improper Contacts with Jan. 6 Witness (Turley)

Former J6 Committee Co-Chair and Rep. Liz Cheney has long been criticized for her role in creating a one-sided and at times erroneous record of what occurred on January 6th. That includes editing out Trump’s call for supporters to protest “peacefully,” burying evidence on Trump’s offer to supply National Guard support for that day, and highlighting a false account of Trump in his presidential limo that was directly contradicted by witnesses. She now stands accused of unethically contacting a key represented witness to get her to change her testimony. In my view, ethical proceedings are unlikely after the disclosure of ex parte communications with former Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson. However, the evidence seemingly contradicts public accounts of how Hutchinson decided to fire her counsel and change her testimony.

Hutchinson was represented by Stefan Passantino, who some clearly viewed as a stumbling block to getting Hutchinson to turn against Trump. Hutchinson would claim under oath that Passantino pressured her to stay “loyal” to Donald Trump and coached her responses to support Trump despite her conflicting accounts. However, newly disclosed evidence allegedly contradicts that account, including Hutchinson telling former Trump aide (and now The View co-host) Alyssa Farah Griffin that “[Passantino’s] not against me complying.” Griffin reportedly responded “I actually agree with Stefan’s approach and think it’s accomplished everyone’s goals. I am happy to tip liz off.” Hutchinson would later dump Passantino and testify to allegations that have been challenged as untrue. That includes the limo allegation that was repeatedly raised by Cheney and others. Hutchinson recounted the story that Trump allegedly grabbed the wheel of the vehicle after the Secret Service allegedly refused to take him to the Capitol.

Cheney and the Committee were aware that the account was directly and clearly refuted by the driver of the vehicle. However, they buried his account and highlighted that claim in its final report as being credible. The new allegation concerns the communications leading up to that changed testimony. Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., chairman of the House Administration oversight subcommittee has released the new evidence while alleging that Cheney used an encrypted phone app to evade defense counsel in speaking with Hutchinson. Under Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, “a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the prior consent of the lawyer representing such other person or is authorized by law or a court order to do so.” Cheney is a D.C. licensed lawyer.

At the outset, in my view, Cheney was acting as a member of Congress in this matter. That has always been a rather grey area for lawyers who are also members of Congress. The bar has taken a broad view of the need for lawyers to adhere to these ethical standards. However, it is not clear politically or ethically if the Bar officials would be inclined to pursue Cheney, who has been lionized in Washington for her role in the investigation. Yet, the record does indicate that Cheney was not just aware of the represented status but the policy of the House to respect the rules governing represented parties. In one message Griffin tells Hutchinson, “Her one concern was so long ad [sic] you have counsel, she can’t really ethically talk to you without him.”

That did not appear to prove a barrier. Before Passantino withdrew as counsel, Cheney communicated secretly with Hutchinson. A later message was send to Cheney reading on June 6, “Hi, this is Cassidy Hutchinson. I’m sorry for reaching out this way, but I was hoping to have a private conversation with you (soon), if you are willing.” Cheney responded, “I would be happy to. Let me know what time works for you.”

Read more …

“Tel Aviv is exhausting its defense and intelligence resources without achieving any meaningful objective..”

The Zionist Lobby Wins, But The US Loses (SCF)

The U.S. has apparently made the decision to intervene directly in the large-scale conflict currently taking place in the Middle East. According to recent reports, American military units, including auxiliary groups and special forces, are being sent to Israel to more effectively support Tel Aviv’s forces in their land-to-air operations. The main reason for the U.S. intervention is to support the IDF in air defense operations, and there is an official statement that there is no intention to use U.S. troops on direct combat lines. However, these claims have no practical credibility, since what we are seeing in the Middle East is a progressive escalation. Previously, direct American assistance was limited to the naval front. Now, specialized troops are already operating air defense systems on “Israeli” soil. Soon, it is quite possible that there will be direct American combat involvement both in Gaza and on the border with Lebanon, since Washington clearly does not have the ability to impose limits on Israel.

The arrival of American troops in Israel at this time is highly significant because the Zionist occupation is going through one of the most difficult moments in its recent history. Israel failed to achieve any of its strategic objectives with the genocidal operation in the Gaza Strip, having killed thousands of civilians, but failed to defeat Hamas and free the prisoners of war. Now, after suffering a humiliation during the recent Iranian attack on Zionist military and strategic bases, Israel is carrying out a disastrous invasion of Lebanon, where it suffers from Hezbollah’s high qualification in guerrilla and attrition warfare – in addition to Israeli cities being increasingly easy targets for the Shiite militia’s missiles and drones. It is fair to say that Israel is facing more difficulties now than at any other time in its military history. Tel Aviv is exhausting its defense and intelligence resources without achieving any meaningful objective, falling into a trap from which it will certainly not escape without profound changes in its state structure – if not its actual ceasing of existence as a state.

It would be naive to think that Pentagon strategists are unaware of this type of situation. Despite American propaganda encouraging Israel, senior American defense officials certainly know that entering Israel is strategic suicide for the United States, which is why the Pentagon’s recent decision seems even more irrational. However, it is important to understand that not all decisions made by a state are based on strategic sense and rationality, and that several factors influence it, such as historical and ideological ties and, above all, the stimulus of various lobbies. Contrary to what many experts say, the reality of U.S.-Israeli ties cannot be understood by taking Washington as the main agent of relations. Israel seems to have much more influence on American politics than Washington has in Tel Aviv. It is no coincidence that, despite Democrats and Republicans disagreeing on many issues, they continue to agree on Israel, with support for Zionism being absolute among all American politicians.

In fact, what the decision to send American military personnel to Israeli soil reveals is that it is the Zionist lobby that really controls the main strategic decisions of the United States. Joe Biden and his main allies have made it clear several times that they are not willing to directly support Israel in a major regional war in the Middle East. With elections coming up and major domestic problems in the United States, all Washington wants to do is to resolve its own issues and avoid military engagement. However, American decision-makers do not seem to have enough strength to neutralize the influence of the Zionist lobby, giving in on several important issues, even though all strategic sense advises something different to be done. In the end, it is possible to say that once again the Zionist lobby has won the American political game. It remains to be seen how long the U.S. will be able to resist the pressure from this same lobby for direct intervention.

Read more …

“That is to say,” Rogozin has written, “there have been some rather decent people in my family tree”.

Dmitry Rogozin For President (Helmer)

According to the Russian Constitution amendments adopted in 2020, Vladimir Putin can run for re-election in 2030 and win another term until 2036, when he will be 84. The contest over the presidential succession may thus be postponed for another decade. Or else it is under way already. That’s one of the stakes in the present argument in Moscow over how the Ukraine war should end between the General Staff and the Kremlin – between unconditional capitulation of the regime west of the Dnieper River to the Polish border, and the east-of-Dnieper terms Putin proposed at Istanbul in March 2022, and repeated in a speech to the Foreign Ministry this past June. The debate in Moscow over the terms of Istanbul-I and of Putin’s proposed Istanbul-II involves much more than future control of the territories east of the Dnieper and of the territories to the west.

The question is whether the military trust Putin to administer the outcome of the war which Russian voters believe has been won by the General Staff. In his June 14 speech Putin admitted to his audience of senior Foreign Ministry officials what they all knew – that he and the General Staff had disagreed over the “preservation of the Ukrainian sovereignty over these territories, provided Russia has a stable land bridge to Crimea.” Putin’s “land bridge” and other territorial concessions were dismissed by the General Staff. One candidate has already tossed a military style cap into the succession race: this is Dmitry Medvedev, the one-term president and currently deputy secretary of the Security Council; he is 59 now, 71 in 2036. In his Telegram platform, Medvedev has been a consistent advocate of the General Staff line: “In my opinion, recently, even theoretically, there has been one danger – the negotiation trap, into which our country could fall under certain circumstances.

Namely, the early unnecessary peace talks proposed by the international community and imposed on the Kiev regime with unclear prospects and consequences [Medvedev was referring to Istanbul-I]. After the neo-Nazis committed an act of terrorism in the Kursk region, everything has fallen into place. The idle chatter of unauthorized intermediaries on the topic of the beautiful world has been stopped. Now everyone understands everything, even if they don’t say it out loud. They understand that there will BE NO MORE NEGOTIATIONS UNTIL THE COMPLETE DEFEAT OF THE ENEMY! [Medvedev’s caps]” Medvedev implies criticism of Putin but remains loyal in the hope of negotiating an amicable transfer of power between the two of them. At the same time Medvedev is signalling the General Staff that the military can trust him. But they don’t.

There is another succession candidate who is trusted by both the military and the voters, but who has not announced he is running. Putin is well aware of him; he has repeatedly tried to sideline him. This is Dmitry Rogozin, a presidential campaigner against Boris Yeltsin; Duma deputy and negotiator in Chechnya; ambassador to NATO; deputy prime minister in charge of the military industrial complex; head of Roskosmos, and now, after surviving a Ukrainian assassination attempt, senator for the Zaporozhye region in the Federation Council. Rogozin is 60; in 2036 he will be 72. Rogozin is the son of a Russian Army general, grandson of a Russian Navy officer, great-grandson of a Red Army pilot, great-great-grandson of a general of the Russian Army in the war against Japan of 1904-05. Rogozin’s ancestors have been recorded in the Russian fight against the Teutonic Knights (13th century) and with Dmitry Pozharsky and Kuzma Minin in the war against the Poles (17th century). “That is to say,” Rogozin has written, “there have been some rather decent people in my family tree”.

In a recently published book, On the Western Front, Rogozin has said more explicitly: “The war against Ukrainian radical nationalism and Russophobia is not a confrontation between armies and military technologies, but our country’s response to an existential threat to our entire people, the entire Russian civilization. This is the restoration of historical justice. This is a common cause, in which the unity of the army, society and its political class must be manifested. This is the opportunity to kick out of the country (and not let back in!) the fifth column of traitors and globalisation-mongers.

The war in Ukraine is a war for Ukraine and Russia, it is a holy war for the right of the Russian people to exist and reunite on their ancestral territory. This is a war against a much stronger and more resourceful enemy, a war to force the collective West, manipulated by the Anglo-Saxons and German revanchists, to recognize Russia’s right to a safe and independent future for our children. Therefore, there should be no ‘red lines’ for us in this war…I consider it fundamentally important to constantly show universal solidarity with our army. It is impossible to maintain the illusion that the army is ‘out there doing its job’, and we continue to live as before.”

Read more …

“In my opinion it is essential that Trump be elected, because it will give America four more years. But the result is unlikely to be renewal of our country. Simply, the can will be kicked down the road.”

How Do We Get Off the Road to Armageddon? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Two days ago on October 14 I posted my column about a new US Department of Defense Directive, 5240.01, that radically alters the relationship between the US military and American citizens. In the new directive issued one month prior to the election, the US military is authorized to intervene against American citizens and to use deadly force against Americans. I asked why such a drastic reformulation of long established policy unless the Democrats were setting up a coup in place of a lost election. The dramatic change in policy requires more examination than my speculative question, but does not seem to be getting any attention. One would think that those patriots who are convinced that the military will come forward at the last resort and save our freedoms should be alarmed by Department of Defense Directive 5240.01. Those patriots who see Trump as America’s savior should be alarmed by his response.

In a Fox Business interview on October 13, Trump was asked if he anticipated any chaos following the announcement of the election results. Trump said not from his supporters, a surprising statement if the Democrats steal the election. Trump thought that Kamala’s loss could result in disturbances from the woke left-wing, but “it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military.” So here we have it: Trump has bought into Directive 5240.01. Having accepted the directive, how can Trump complain if the directive is used against him? It is only a few days before the presidential election and Trump seems again to be in the clutches of advisors composed of the ruling elites. Who are Trump’s advisors? Do they have any sense? Why is Trump aligned with Israel’s genocide of Palestine and attacks on Iran? Is Trump just another warmonger serving the military/security complex and Greater Israel?

Trump directs American hostility toward China, because of the lopsided trade deficit. But it was Wall Street that forced the offshoring of US manufacturing. The trade deficit results when the US corporations bring their offshored production home to America to sell. How can it be that Trump hasn’t a single advisor able to inform him of the real problem? We have to be grateful for Trump. He realizes that America is in dire straits, and he alone has emerged as anyone willing to do anything about it. But Trump is a real estate developer. He does not know issues and their history. His first term proved him to be a poor judge of people as he appointed to his government the very people he had declared to overthrow, and they overthrew him. Judging by his positions on DOD 5240.01, China, Israel, he has learned nothing and has no better advisors. In my opinion it is essential that Trump be elected, because it will give America four more years. But the result is unlikely to be renewal of our country. Simply, the can will be kicked down the road.

It is difficult to rouse the American people to the realities that they face. Americans are the most insouciant of all peoples. They exist surrounded by oceans and friendly countries devoid of military potential. Americans have ruled the world because World War II destroyed all rivals. Americans might be beginning an acquaintance with hardship, having lived on credit card and student loan debt, but despite the deceptions their government inflicts on them — 9/11, Muslim Terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, Covid pandemic, Russian invasion of Ukraine, Iranian nukes, Chinese threat, Trump insurrection, Putin’s resurrection of the Soviet Empire, the return of slavery by white supremacists– a large segment of the population still trusts the government that is destroying them. So, what can be done? How can an insouciant population deal with a ruling elite when the population doesn’t understand what is happening?

Read more …

“Strengthening Rimland is a necessary condition for the integrity of Eurasia. Not a possibility, but a necessity.”

Could The SCO Summit Save The BRICS+ New Order? (Pacini)

On Tuesday, Oct. 15 and Wednesday, Oct. 16 in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, is the 24th SCO Summit, the partnership established in 2001 as an outgrowth of the Shanghai Five to promote mutual defense, security and international counter-terrorism across the greater Eurasian region. Today there are 10 full members, namely China, Belarus, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Russia, with Afghanistan and Mongolia as observer members already welcomed and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain as countries in dialogue, Cambodia, Egypt, Kuwait, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates, to be joined at this 2024 Summit by guests from ASEAN, the CIS, the UN, and a representation from Turkmenistan.

A long and extensive list of states representing, geopolitically speaking, all of Eurasia and the Rimland coastal zone. Since this is a partnership centered on security issues, and therefore with an at least partially military agenda, we are talking about a meeting that can be a thorn in the side of NATO and the collective West. Strengthening Rimland is a necessary condition for the integrity of Eurasia. Not a possibility, but a necessity. This the Soviet leaders understood, and for that reason they had aimed not only at effective control of most of the areas abutting the Rimland, and thus to the South and East, but also had been far-sighted in weaving strong diplomatic relations and ideological-political cooperation with the countries to the East, so as to ensure lasting stability at the expense of attempts at destabilization coming from the West.

Rimland stability is not only a strategic issue but also an economic and political one. This meeting of SCO leaders comes just days before the start of the long-awaited BRISC+ Summit in Kazan, dubbed by many as “the event of the year,” from which the organizational line of the new global majority, or at least the programmatic lines of it, could emerge. As described earlier, there is a possibility-not officially stated, but theoretically plausible and confirmed by some rumors-that an alliance between BRICS and SCO, that is, between the two lungs of the emerging multipolar world, one economic and the other strategic, is in the works. This union would lead the new bloc to have a cohesive strength superior to that of NATO and, therefore, to represent not only an adversary, but even an enemy.

There are many reasons for the need for such an alliance: the West continues to promote wars and destruction, with aggressive diplomacy and an exasperated attempt to control the globe, without accepting that the rules-based order no longer applies; International Law is practically dead and it no longer makes sense to reason with paradigms written by the offices of bureaucrats in Washington and New York; genocide is taking place in Palestine and it is almost impossible to intervene because of the balance of war that Israel and the U.S. have created, threatening a nuclear apocalypse and blaming Iran and the Axis of Resistance. But, more than anything else, there are some brief reasons that are particularly urgent:

• the BRICS countries need an integrated defense system that harmonizes differences and specificities, especially now that the partnership is expanding and the new members lack the real military strength of the great powers. This in a multipolar world is normal, because military capacity is redistributed among multiple actors participating in the same scenario, the hegemonic polarizing force is lost, and a balance is set up made up of different magnetisms, which must keep in constant contact and balance in order to subsist;

• the economy of the BRICS countries and the politics of the partnership are in danger of being compromised, the hegemon still being very strong and entrenched, thus with the capacity to undermine the stages of realization of the multipolar transition.

This second point is very topical: think of how the situation in Gaza and Lebanon is undermining delicate diplomatic balances between Israel and Russia, and between Russia and Iran, involving the other Middle Eastern states and provoking antipathy in the Eastern countries that are bearers of peaceful solutions and seek to limit escalation. Think also of the situation in Taiwan, where the U.S. continues to foment a colorful revolution, or Turkey’s double-dealing that is teasing Islamic countries. A solution that gives whiplash to the West’s slowly waning adversaries is urgently needed.

Read more …

Never was of course. Delusional.

BMW Says EU Ban On Gasoline Cars From 2035 Is “No Longer Realistic” (ZH)

Germany’s car manufacturing giant BMW is warning that an EU ban on the sale of gasoline and diesel cars from 2035 is “no longer realistic” amid slow EV sales as the European auto industry will see a “massive shrinking” with such a ban. European carmakers are already struggling with their EV sales as subsidies in many countries are coming to an end and Chinese low-cost vehicle makers are gaining market share. Last year, the EU member states approved an emissions regulation under which the bloc will end sales of new carbon dioxide-emitting cars and vans in 2035. The rules target 55% CO2 emission reductions for new cars and 50% for new vans from 2030 to 2034 compared to 2021 levels, as well as 100% CO2 emission reductions for both new cars and vans from 2035. Under the regulation, the European Commission will assess in 2026 the progress the EU has made in achieving the target. The Commission will decide whether the targets need to be reviewed.

But BMW’s chief executive Oliver Zipse said on Tuesday at the Paris Automotive Summit that the ban “could also threaten the European automotive industry in its heart.” The current regulations will “with today’s assumptions, lead to a massive shrinking of the industry as a whole,” Zipse added, as carried by Bloomberg. Electric vehicle sales in Europe have been suffering this year. Sales in Germany, for example, are plummeting as Berlin ended subsidies at the end of 2023. Amid slowing sales of EVs, the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, ACEA, last month called for urgent action to reverse this year’s trend of declining EV sales. The European auto manufacturers united in ACEA, called on the EU institutions “to come forward with urgent relief measures before new CO2 targets for cars and vans come into effect in 2025.” Europe’s automakers “are playing our part in this transition, but unfortunately, the other necessary elements for this systemic shift are not in place,” ACEA said.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Candace

 

 

Aristotle Time

 

 

Dog toys
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846586910031950085

 

 

New shoes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846594910075470191

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.