Salvador Dali Birth of liquid desires 1932
“War does not determine who is right, only who is left.”
– Bertrand Russell.
Macgregor Jimmy Dore
Dr. Robert Malone.. “Covid is just a skirmish.. we have a much bigger problem in my opinion and it has to do with the rise of totalitarianism”.. pic.twitter.com/v5z25oLmBL
— Pelham (@Resist_05) March 22, 2022
“..a place removed from the USA to set up bio-weapons labs when our own government called an at-home “moratorium” on gain-of-function research in 2014..”
“Joe Biden” and company might have prevented Russia’s “operation” there by simply reiterating what NATO itself had declared: that Ukraine would not be invited to join the alliance. But Ukraine has been a special client of the USA since 2014, when we changed-out a pain-in-the-ass government there. Since then, we’ve used Ukraine as an international money laundry, a proxy forward base for NATO, and, apparently, a place removed from the USA to set up bio-weapons labs when our own government called an at-home “moratorium” on gain-of-function research in 2014. Part of the forward base activity in Ukraine since 2014 was the training and arming of the 600,000-troop Ukrainian army, one of the biggest armed forces in the world, which Russia now feels constrained to disarm and neutralize.
How successful Russia might be in that endeavor, with an operational force of about 200,000, is the subject of a propaganda war being waged one level removed from the action on the ground. The reality, as one might expect from such basic troop numbers, has been an onerous grind for the Russians. American javelin missiles have proven deadly to Russian tanks and armored vehicles. But, contrary to the narrative script of CNN and The New York Times, Russia is hardly “losing” the contest. Russian forces are in the process of kettling up Ukraine’s most potent units, the notorious Azov battalions, along the Donbass line in the east. There are a lot of them. They are surrounded, cut off from their central command, and now given the choice of surrendering or being slaughtered. For the moment, it is Ukraine’s choice.
For the Russians, this is, as they say, an existential matter, something they have faced before and understand the stakes of — think Napoleon and Hitler. The US has shown, at least, an exorbitant will to antagonize Russia using Ukraine. This, too, is yet more insanity. In Mr. Putin’s early years as head-of-state, Russia asked to join NATO, in Russia’s quest to be treated as a normal European nation after overcoming 75 years of Soviet insanity. Request rebuffed. Twenty years later, and many instances of antagonism in the meantime, Russia had enough. It is doing something America no longer can do: establishing boundaries. Ukraine will not be used as a platform for further antagonisms. Our response: wreck the global economy starting with the international money system, and possibly bring on a world famine by destroying supply lines for fossil fuels and things made from them, such as fertilizer.
Russia’s demands are clear. Respond to them, and then you can have your meeting.
At a moment Russian forces are believed to be on the cusp of taking the major southeast city of Mariupol, after the Ukrainians rejected the Kremlin’s terms of surrender for the city, a fresh statement from the Russian side has yet again cited “no significant progress” in ceasefire talks, while stating Moscow is not ready for a proposed meeting with Zelensky. The invasion which kicked off on Feb.24 and shocked the world will reach a full month by close of this week. Starting last week reports emerged that Turkey was working hard to get Presidents Putin and Zelensky at the negotiating table in face to face talks. Given Russia’s overwhelming manpower and military superiority, despite reports of serious losses, it’s not expected that the Russian leader would agree to any top level negotiations like this anytime soon.
“For us to speak of a meeting between the two presidents, homework has to be done. Talks have to be held and their results agreed upon,” Putin spokesperson Dimitry Peskov said Monday, according to Reuters. “There has been no significant progress so far.” Last week Peskov had said that “when there’s progress, we’ll tell you” – in reference to the continuing negotiations taking place between lower level delegations toward reaching a battlefield ceasefire, or at least longer lasting local ceasefires. As for the Ukrainians, according to comments given to CNN on Sunday, Zelensky told Fareed Zakaria he’s “ready to talk to Putin at any time.” But Zelensky is simultaneously urging Europe to ban Russian energy and ratchet up sanctions measures even more, pleas which have without doubt angered the Kremlin.
CNN detailed of the interview, “His offer came more than three weeks into a war that appears to be entering a new, more deadlocked stage on the battlefield. And while that counts as an extraordinary military success for outgunned Ukraine, it will also leave its cities and people even more vulnerable to brutal Russian bombardments.” And more via CNN: “It’s a stalemate. But we should note it’s a bloody stalemate,” ex-CIA Director David Petraeus, a retired general who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. “Also, arguably, it’s a battle of attrition.” For now each side is blaming the other for failure to significant progress through five rounds of talks: Peskov on Monday also suggested that Russia was more willing to engage in talks than Ukraine. “Those [countries] who can should use their influence over Kyiv to make it more accommodating and construction at these talks,” Peskov said, according to Reuters.
Stop hating Russians
Russia releases bizarre dog propaganda video as it calls for end to 'hate' campaign pic.twitter.com/rQWwaUOzye
— Wittgenstein (@backtolife_2022) March 21, 2022
The US opinion of itself is grossly outdated and distorted. That is dangerous.
Apparently not content with diplomatic war on one front with Russia, the Biden administration appears ready to escalate with China following on the heels of last week’s persistent accusations that Beijing was mulling cooperation with Moscow on weapons resupplies for its Ukraine operation, as well as assistance on Western sanctions evasion. Monday afternoon Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced more visa restrictions on Chinese officials related to prior charges that state authorities are overseeing the ethnic cleansing of Uighurs. It’s certainly interesting timing in terms of pulling out the the human rights card, given that throughout last week the admin’s China criticisms seemed exclusively focused on its “fence-sitting” over Ukraine.
Blinken called on China to “end its ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, repressive policies in Tibet, crackdown on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong, and human rights violations,” as cited in Bloomberg. “The United States rejects efforts by (Chinese) officials to harass, intimidate, surveil, and abduct members of ethnic and religious minority groups, including those who seek safety abroad, and U.S. citizens, who speak out on behalf of these vulnerable populations,” Blinken said. “We are committed to defending human rights around the world and will continue to use all diplomatic and economic measures to promote accountability.”
It’s unclear as yet which and how many Chinese state officials will be impacted by the new visa restriction measures, which will effectively ban them from travel into the United States, and it’s an expansion of prior Trump restrictions. Earlier, the White House issued a statement saying – like UK prime minister Boris Johnson’s words over the weekend – that Beijing must condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and stop downplaying it.
“western representative democracy” collapsed under the weight of COVID-19 and was replaced with unilateral authoritarian emergency power.”
Tucker Carlson used his monologue tonight to note something we have discussed at length here. Western government leaders continue to make statements about “representative democracy” in comparison to “autocratic non-western government”, yet they make these public statements while personifying autocracy itself. An example was Joe Biden making statements to the media during a 9-11 commemoration visit to Shanksville Pennsylvania. In his remarks, Joe Biden decried Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladmir Putin as autocrats, yet Biden had just announced forced mandatory medical procedures for all U.S. workers a mere 36 hours before. It is a fact that throughout the last two years – the leaders of Europe, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the United States have used declarations of emergency to position themselves with massive power. This is not debatable.
As a consequence, the prior definition of “western representative democracy” collapsed under the weight of COVID-19 and was replaced with unilateral authoritarian emergency power. When you look around, every single government in the west is still trying to extend those COVID powers by extending the emergency declarations that provide them. Again, none of this is up for debate; it is empirically true. Tucker asks a really good question. Is the autocratic system of government that existed in Ukraine before the Russian invasion – which is (not coincidentally) identical in many ways to the COVID-19 inspired system of government created by Western leaders – actually, the real motive for those western leaders to unite in their support and current propaganda campaign on behalf of Ukraine? I think he might be onto something. WATCH:
Is western autocracy the real objective, and is modern fascism (i.e. corporatism) the technique to get there? There is a massive synergy visible if you think about the WEF selecting leaders in this process. The problem for western leaders, who want to be dictators, has always been the voice of the people. Replace traditional democracy by merging modern corporatism with a new version of western autocracy, and we end up with a never-ending system of oppressive government just like we have been dealing with for the past two years throughout the pandemic.
“The U.S. has no one capable of sailing its ship of state, no one in a position of influence worthy of the title “diplomat.”
When those purporting to serve as America’s statesmen and stateswomen think calling other world leaders names is properly part of the diplomatic repertoire — a prominent part, I’ll add — we are left with only one conclusion: The U.S. has no one capable of sailing its ship of state, no one in a position of influence worthy of the title “diplomat.” To qualify it, I’m certain there are plenty of mid-level people trained in the foreign service now in mid-level positions at the State Department. But they do not count, by and large, because what passes for diplomacy in Washington is driven not by skill, experience or subtle intelligence but by fidelity to American ideology and a nose for what plays in Peoria. Over the weekend I found myself thinking about FDR. I thought about Roosevelt in that famous photograph with Churchill and Stalin at the Yalta Conference.
There they are in their overcoats against the cold of February 1945 (FDR in a dashing cape). Then I thought about Biden and his nonsense name-calling and his refusal to even consider an encounter with Putin at this crucial moment. I had choice between laughing or the other emotion. It’s simply not easy to find truly good diplomats in the post–1945 annals of the American Foreign Service. I am talking about people who understand that one of the primary responsibilities of a diplomat is to understand how those on the other side of the table think and see things, what the other side wants and why. Here’s why they don’t exist anymore: Simply stated, power obviates the need for serious statecraft. The powerful nation has no need of diplomacy.
A figure such as George Kennan was the exception proving the rule, and he was an exception because he saw the need to understand how the world looked to the Soviet Union. Henry Kissinger proved the rule: For all his claim to diplomatic skill, Hank K. was a wielder of American power with a calculating mind, nothing more. The rest follows naturally: Antony Blinken is not a serious diplomat. Samantha Power is not a serious diplomat. As a diplomat (and various other things), Hillary “He’s Hitler” Clinton is a walking calamity. Biden, who’s spent his career selling snake oil off the back of a buckwagon, is not a statesman of any kind, serious or otherwise. We should consider when, precisely, calling other leaders names became an accepted feature of American “statecraft” (and I insist on the quotation marks.) When, why, and what are the consequences of this undignified practice?
They want it all.
As of last month, the American Bar Association is requiring all accredited law schools to “provide education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism,” both at the start of law school and “at least once again before graduation.” That’s in addition to a mandatory legal ethics class, which must now instruct students that they have a duty as lawyers to “eliminate racism.” (The American Bar Association, which accredits almost every law school in the United States, voted 348 to 17 to adopt the new standard.) Trial verdicts that do not jibe with the new politics are seen as signs of an inextricable hate—and an illegitimate legal order. At the Santa Clara University School of Law, administrators emailed students that the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse—the 17-year-old who killed two men and wounded another during a riot, in Kenosha, Wisconsin—was “further evidence of the persistent racial injustice and systemic racism within our criminal justice system.”
At UC Irvine, the university’s chief diversity officer emailed students that the acquittal “conveys a chilling message: Neither Black lives nor those of their allies’ matter.” (He later apologized for having “appeared to call into question a lawful trial verdict.”) Professors say it is harder to lecture about cases in which accused rapists are acquitted, or a police officer is found not guilty of abusing his authority. One criminal law professor at a top law school told me he’s even stopped teaching theories of punishment because of how negatively students react to retributivism—the view that punishment is justified because criminals deserve to suffer. “I got into this job because I liked to play devil’s advocate,” said the tenured professor, who identifies as a liberal. “I can’t do that anymore. I have a family.
Other law professors—several of whom asked me not to identify their institution, their area of expertise, or even their state of residence—were similarly terrified. Nadine Strossen, the first woman to head the American Civil Liberties Union and a professor at New York Law School, told me: “I massively self-censor. I assume that every single thing that is said, every facial gesture, is going to be recorded and potentially disseminated to the entire world. I feel as if I am operating in a panopticon.” This has all come as a shock to many law professors, who had long assumed that law schools wouldn’t cave to the new orthodoxy.
“It’s rare, because the West is so totalising, but every now and then you get an idea of what it must be like to look into this funhouse from the outside.”
Bayerischer Rundfunk (Bavarian Public Radio) notices that Ukrainian refugees are overwhelmingly unvaccinated: “Only about a third of Ukrainians have been vaccinated against Corona, in part with vaccines that are unapproved in the EU. The low vaccination rate could cause problems in the refugee centres. The city of Nürnberg, for example, has set up three gymnasiums to accommodate 600 people, where many must share a small space. …Anyone who wants to can receive a vaccination a few hundred metres away … free of charge for Ukrainian refugees.“Unfortunately, we’re finding that the refugees aren’t exactly snatching the vaccines out of our hands,” says Nürnberg Mayor Marcus König.“Many new arrivals are very worried about ‘forced vaccinations’,” adds Thomas Jung, Mayor of Fürth. He says you have to approach the topic with sensitivity. …”
It’s been months of overt coercion to accept vaccination from politicians and the press here in the Federal Republic of Germany. Months of social exclusion and jeopardised careers and all the rest of it. Nobody has given the slightest thought to “sensitivity.” Why are they now at pains to accommodate the feelings of Ukrainians? Jung explains that city officials pressed a Ukrainian doctor into service, to begin delicately preaching the Gospel of Vaccination to refugees last Friday. It’s rare, because the West is so totalising, but every now and then you get an idea of what it must be like to look into this funhouse from the outside. You flee a war-zone and end up sleeping on the floor of some repurposed gym, while the locals scheme madly about how to inject you with their latest mRNA tech.
Dear Ukrainians: You’re entirely right to be terrified of forced vaccination. We are too.
Both political parties are salivating to draw our military into the Russia-Ukraine war, but neither of them seems to care about what our own leaders have done to these soldiers. It is now abundantly clear from numerous data points that the shots have caused unimaginable injury among the general population. Military doctors have come forward to show the enormity of this damage in the military, yet the military has chosen to cover it up and tamper with their own health surveillance data in order to conceal the magnitude of the injury. Meanwhile, new data presented in a Florida federal court on behalf of a Navy SEAL demonstrates that, at a minimum, more people died from the shot than from COVID.
On March 10, attorney Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel presented data in court showing 127 VAERS-reported COVID vaccine-related deaths in the military in 2021. That is more than the 93 reported COVID deaths in the military since the beginning of the pandemic. And keep in mind, COVID deaths tend to be overestimated, while VAERS-reported deaths, especially in the military, are underreported. Even CDC researchers recently conceded that “the actual rates of myocarditis per million doses of vaccine are likely higher than estimated” by VAERS reports. The military VAERS data was initially discovered by Dr. Jessica Rose, a biologist and mathematician who has likely published more information on VAERS than anyone in the world. VAERS has a box to check for those in the military to select upon submission, and she counted 127 reported deaths stemming from service members in 2021.
This safety signal from the universal reporting system is the most significant evidence to date that the DMED (Defense Medical Epidemiology Data) specifically monitoring the military, as originally presented by the whistleblowers, was correct when it showed a massive surge in injuries ranging from neurological and cardio to cancers and immune disorders. According to the military, though, the 2016-2020 baseline used by the whistleblowers was plagued by a glitch just at the time these military doctors pulled the information (not before and not after!) and the numbers for those years were always as high as those in 2021. The problem is that the VAERS data, by definition, indicate that 2021 had to have experienced a surge in injuries. It’s just a question of how much. Here is the VAERS data for vaccine-related hospitalizations in 2021 compared to previous years.
As another guy killed himself after he was told ‘he would not receive a fair trial in this town’.
Knowlton, now 41, has recruited a team of high-profile attorneys who hope the court examines the evidence without judging him by the actions of other defendants. They view his case as having major First Amendment implications. “He went to Washington to exercise his First Amendment right to petition the government for what he believed was a redress of grievances,” Alan Dershowitz, an attorney for Knowlton, told The Daily Wire in an interview. “And he’s been lumped together with people who caused damage or who intended to obstruct. He wasn’t intending to do that. He just intended to protest.” A few minutes before Knowlton entered the Capitol, police held the door for a group of protesters inside who exited through the Upper West Terrace. Soon after, another protestor held the exterior door open and waved for others to flood in.
The defendant’s lawyers say Knowlton heard a message echo through the crowd that officers were allowing people inside. Surveillance footage shot inside the Capitol after Knowlton entered corroborates that officers were shaking hands with protestors — furthering an argument held by some January 6 defense attorneys that police did not take necessary steps to protect the building. At 2:51 p.m., Knowlton and a group walked peacefully with an “officer escort” and left two minutes later, according to a memo based on discovery. Hundreds of protestors trekked through the Upper West Terrace doors, as officers turned their backs, until 2:47 p.m. The U.S. Capitol Police declined to comment. Knowlton’s attorneys cite judicial precedent as a key factor in showing his innocence. He was nonviolent and not “stopped or told by any officer” that his conduct was “unlawful or prohibited in any way,” they say.
But arguably the most significant prosecution flaw, the lawyers say, is the DOJ’s decision to prosecute him for obstructing a congressional “proceeding.” Ronald Sullivan, who directs Harvard Law School’s Criminal Justice Institute and is an attorney for Knowlton, called it “a unique” and “unprecedented use of the statute.” Section 1512, which carries a hefty sentence and could have the effect of “strongly encouraging defendants to accept plea bargains,” has never before been applied to protests “of this sort, or any sort,” Sullivan said in an interview. David Warrington, a constitutional lawyer who is a partner at Dhillon Law Group, told The Daily Wire that the statute relates to things like the destruction or alteration of evidence and witness tampering — not an electoral certification.
Warrington said its usage by the DOJ against defendants who trespassed, vandalized, or committed violence is “unprecedented” and an “expansion” of its scope. Lawyers who The Daily Wire interviewed questioned whether the certification of an election even constitutes an “official proceeding.”
By 2024, the US may be a complete disaster. You want to inherit that?
Former President Donald Trump’s “Save America” political action committee has more cash on hand than the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) combined, according to financial data from the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Kenneth Vogel, a journalist with The New York Times, noted the disparity between Trump’s PAC and the committees’ funds in a tweet on Monday. Vogel said that FEC records show Save America reported $110.4 million in cash on hand as of February 28, compared to the DNC’s $52.9 million and the RNC’s $24.5 million. Trump has suggested multiple times since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021 that he might mount another run at the White House in 2024, though he has not yet officially announced a campaign.
However, he’s held multiple “Save America” rallies and proven to be the most prodigious fundraiser within the GOP. Though he legally cannot use the PAC funds directly for a comeback race, he’s allowed to use the money toward such political expenses as television ads and investing in his own businesses. On Sunday, Bloomberg reported that although Trump’s war chest has grown, he has not yet donated any of the money from it in 2022 to the dozens of candidates he’s endorsed in upcoming elections. “Trump has endorsed GOP candidates at the federal, state and local level, focusing on those who support his baseless claims the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him or are challenging Republican incumbents who opposed him,” Bloomberg’s Bill Allison wrote. “He’s championed more than 130 candidates since leaving the White House, more than half of whom are running for federal office.”
Allison also noted that while Save America has given $350,500 to candidates since July, 2021, it has not reported making a single donation in 2022. In a separate story in February, Allison wrote in Bloomberg that Save America spent $838,000 “on event staging and related expenses in January.”
Thanks for telling us now, Bill.
Former US Attorney General Bill Barr on Monday accused President Biden of having “lied to the American people” during a presidential debate when he called the Post’s exposure of his son Hunter Biden’s emails “a Russian plant.” During an appearance on Fox News, Barr said, “I was very disturbed during the debate when candidate Biden lied to the American people about the laptop.” “He’s squarely confronted with the laptop, and he suggested that it was Russian disinformation and pointed to the letter written by some intelligence people that was baseless — which he knew was a lie,” Barr said. “And I was shocked by that.”
The comments from Barr — who recently authored a tell-all memoir, “One Damn Thing After Another,” that’s critical of former President Donald Trump — came after the New York Times last week said emails it obtained had been authenticated by sources familiar with them and with the federal probe into Hunter Biden’s taxes. The Times and other media outlets previously denigrated The Post’s exclusive reporting on the emails, saying the material hadn’t been independently verified. During the Oct. 22, 2020, debate, Trump suggested the emails showed Biden was “a corrupt politician” and called his scandal-scarred son’s computer “the laptop from hell.”
Biden responded that “there are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what this, he’s accusing me of, is a Russian plant.” “They have said that this has all the characteristics — four, five former heads of the CIA, both parties — say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage.” Last week, only five of 51 former officials — including former National Security Director Jim Clapper — told The Post they still stood by an Oct. 19, 2020, public statement that said the release of the emails had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” Five others declined to comment, while 39 signers didn’t respond and two couldn’t be contacted.
— Maajid أبو عمّار (@MaajidNawaz) March 21, 2022
10% for the Big Guy.
It is hardly vindication of The Post’s flawless reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop that 17 months late, the New York Times has admitted the laptop is real. It is an indictment of the Times and a betrayal of their readers who were kept in the dark about the true nature of Joe Biden before the 2020 election. But now that we are all on the same page, there are some serious questions the administration needs to answer, which go to America’s national security at a time of international peril. President Biden’s press secretary, Jen Psaki, refused to answer The Post’s White House reporter, Steven Nelson, when he had the rare opportunity to ask her two of those questions last week. Psaki’s excuse was that Hunter Biden “doesn’t work in the government.” But she wasn’t being asked about Hunter. She was being asked about her boss, the president.
“How is President Biden navigating conflicts of interest when it comes to sanctioning people who have done business with his family?” asked Nelson. “What would be his conflicts of interest?” Psaki coolly replied. Well, just for starters, Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, who paid $3.5 million into a bank account associated with Hunter and his business partner Devon Archer, was not sanctioned along with other oligarchs allied with President Vladimir Putin this month. Why not? Was it an oversight? A favor? It’s a serious question that deserves a serious answer. Baturina wired $3.5 million on Feb. 14, 2014, to Rosemont Seneca Thornton, a consortium formed between Rosemont Seneca — the firm co-founded by Hunter, Archer and Chris Heinz — and the Thornton Group.
Baturina’s wires were flagged in “suspicious activity reports” provided by the Treasury Department to a Senate Republican inquiry by the Finance and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committees. Hunter’s lawyer has denied Hunter profited from the transaction, telling CNN: “The claim that he was paid $3.5 million is false.” So who received the $3.5 million and did they pay tax on it? Seven weeks after Baturina’s wire transfer, Hunter and Archer flew to Lake Como, Italy, and had a meeting with her at Villa d’Este, a favorite haunt of Russian oligarchs. A year later, in April 2015, Baturina and her husband, the former corrupt mayor of Moscow and political ally of Putin, Yury Luzhkov, would appear on a guest list Hunter prepared for a dinner at Washington’s Cafe Milano where his father, then VP, would meet with his son’s overseas business partners from Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan.
After The Post published details of that dinner last year, the White House quietly admitted to a Washington Post fact-checker that Biden did attend the dinner, but only briefly. That’s a pretty important admission, because during the election campaign, Biden repeatedly denied meeting Hunter’s overseas business partners. Specifically, he denied meeting Hunter’s Ukrainian paymaster, Vadym Pozharskyi, who also was invited to the dinner. Pozharskyi was an executive of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, owned by Russia-aligned oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky, who was paying Hunter $83,333 a month. “Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together,” Pozharskyi wrote in an email to Hunter on April 17, 2015, two days after the dinner.
That email, found on Hunter’s abandoned laptop, was the basis of the bombshell story The Post published three weeks before the 2020 election. It was that email that 51 former intelligence officials declared without evidence, in a partisan letter issued five days after The Post’s story, had all the “hallmarks” of Russian disinformation. Biden used that letter from the Dirty 51 to get off the hook in an election-eve debate against President Donald Trump. He called The Post’s reporting a “bunch of garbage” and the laptop a “Russian plant.”
Support the Automatic Earth in virustime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.