Jun 202025
 


Eugène Delacroix Liberty Leading the People 1830

 

White House Says Trump To Decide On Attacking Iran ‘Within Next 2 Weeks’ (ZH)
Trump Has Reportedly Approved Iran Attack Plans, Withholds Final Order (ZH)
Tulsi, Hegseth et al Sidelined From Iran-Israel Discussions (RT)
Larry Johnson Reveals What’s Really at Stake as Trump Mulls Iran Attack (Sp.)
US Intel Has No Evidence Iran Building Nuclear Weapon – Top Democrat (RT)
No Proof Iran Is Working On A Nuclear Bomb – UN Watchdog (RT)
Israeli Nuclear Sites To Face ‘Crushing Blows’ – Iranian Source (RT)
The End of Israeli Exceptionalism (Bordachev)
A Dangerous Moment – The Targeting of Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)
Putin Aligns With Israel and Finds A New Way To Deny Reality (Paul Craig Roberts)
Is Trump’s Constituency Netanyahu or MAGA-America? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Supreme Court Delivers a Crushing Blow to Trans Agenda (Margolis)
Germany’s 5% of GDP Defense Spending Goal Will Ruin Economy (Sp.)
Spanish PM Rejects NATO Call to Raise Defense Spending to 5% of GDP (Sp.)
Putin Reveals Pitfalls Of Potential Meeting With Zelensky (RT)

 

 

June 20

Candace

export

Gaetz

 

 

 

 

We get the impression that Trump is having, let’s say, some second thoughts. On Tuesday, he said “The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.” On Thursday, it was “Amid speculation regarding negotiations with Iran, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next 2 weeks.”

Why the second thoughts? Is it because of new facts, is it the -broad- resistance against direct US involvement among his supporters and voters, or is it because he realizes it’s doubtful that US bunker busters could hit the desired underground Iran targets?

White House Says Trump To Decide On Attacking Iran ‘Within Next 2 Weeks’ (ZH)

Summary: The White House held a high stakes presser Thursday afternoon, as President Donald Trump also again convened his top national security officials in the situation room to hear intelligence officials and make key decisions on the Israel-Iran war, just prior. Of course, the biggest question that remains is: will the US directly enter the war against Iran?

White House quoting Trump: Amid speculation regarding negotiations with Iran, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next 2 weeks.
• Leavitt: Trump thinks ‘substantial chance’ of Iran negotiations
• Leavitt: Witkoff has been in touch with Iran
• Leavitt: Trump always interested in diplomatic solutions
• Leavitt: it’s the US belief that Iran has never been closer to a nuclear weapon
• Leavitt: Iran can and should make a deal or face consequences
• Leavitt: Trump remains in contact with Netanyahu
• Leavitt: Iran is in a weakened position and we have sent a deal
• Leavitt: Iran has all that it needs to achieve a nuclear weapon, it just needs a ‘decision’
Oil slides on the “two weeks” announcement, as the can gets kicked down the road:

Israel-Iran Conflict Continues, Trump Weighs Options

The most pressing issues at stake:
• Last ditch diplomacy working? Reuters reports in a breaking development that Iran held direct talks with US over de-escalation and potentially restarting nuclear negotiations.
• The Guardian reports that Trump only wants to strike Iran only if the US can destroy the Fordow enrichment facility.
• Destruction of Fordow would at least require the 30k pound bunker buster bomb, but still may not be effective in ending Iran’s enrichment capacity.
• Netanyahu says that while regime change in Tehran is not the current goal, the option is on the table.
• Tactical nuke on the table?

• Will the Iranians close the Strait of Hormuz, choking off global oil shipping?
• Reports of US bases in the region taking protective and defensive measures
• Israeli intelligence official says ‘imminent collapse’ of Iranian government is “far from the truth” – NBC reports
• Iran is warning that a “third party intervention” would spark an immediate military response
• Netanyahu has said the US has been “helping a lot” – without defining specifics

Read more …

“The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.”

Trump Has Reportedly Approved Iran Attack Plans, Withholds Final Order (ZH)

As President Trump convenes a White House situation room meeting this Tuesday early evening, and following Ayatollah Khamenei’s earlier televised speech vowing ‘we will not surrender’ – The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Trump has made the decision: “President Trump told senior aides late Tuesday that he approved of attack plans for Iran, but was holding off to see if Tehran would abandon its nuclear program, people familiar with the deliberations said. Iran’s well-defended Fordow enrichment facility is a possible U.S. target. Israel has yet to attack the facility, which is buried under a mountain and is generally considered by military experts to be out of reach of all but the most powerful bombs. Asked earlier if he had decided whether to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities, Trump said, “I may do it, I may not do it.” And he repeated his insistence of Iran’s unconditional surrender: “The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.”

Is this yet another last ditch effort to strong arm Tehran to the negotiating table, where Trump’s hope is that it will declare zero enrichment? Has the US Commander-in-Chief painted himself into a corner, and now it’s all zero sum? The Iranians remain under heavy Israeli bombing, and with leadership likely in deep bunkers, are unlikely to negotiate the end of their own ‘regime’. Trump may have finally pulled the trigger here. Where’s Congress? Meanwhile, elements of the Right and elements of the Left are uniting around this simple and very reasonable observation…

* * *
Update(1302ET): Things are quickly going from bad to worse for Iran, amid ongoing Israeli airstrikes, and given Iran’s air defenses in its western portion of the country appear completely destroyed and disabled. Iran is now in a ‘near-total national internet blackout’ – according to monitoring from a UK-based watchdog: Vital civic infrastructure in Tehran, including some sewage system and water networks, have also been hit.

* * *
President Donald Trump on Wednesday fielded reporters’ questions on the Iran crisis, but refused to answer whether the US military will directly enter the war, amid Israeli requests that the Pentagon assist in striking Iran’s nuclear facilities. “There’s a big difference between now and a week ago,” Trump told reporters outside the White House, and added curiously: “Nobody knows what I’m going to do.” He indicated that the Iranians had reached out but he feels “it’s very late to be talking.” But he also threw out the possibility: “We may meet. It’s, I don’t know, there’s a big difference between now and a week ago,” he said on the White House lawn. “I can tell you this, that Iran’s got a lot of trouble and they want to negotiate. And I say, ‘Why didn’t you negotiate with me before all this death and destruction?'” And more: “For 40 years they’ve been saying death to America, death to Israel, death to anybody else that they didn’t like,” he said. “They were bullies. They were schoolyard bullies. And now they’re not bullies anymore. But we’ll see what happens. “I wouldn’t say that we won anything yet. I would say that we sure as hell made a lot of progress.”

Read more …

“Trump is now said to be relying on a smaller, more experienced ‘Tier One’ advisory group..”

Tulsi, Hegseth et al Sidelined From Iran-Israel Discussions (RT)

US President Donald Trump has excluded Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard from high-level discussions on the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict, NBC News and the Washington Post have reported, citing senior administration officials. Gabbard’s sidelining, according to NBC, reportedly stems from her public and internal pushback against the official US and Israeli narrative that Tehran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons. Hegseth has also been edged out of operational discussions, with the Washington Post reporting that two four-star generals overseeing the deployment of additional US military assets in the Middle East have taken the lead.

Trump is now said to be relying on a smaller, more experienced ‘Tier One’ advisory group – comprising Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Joint Chiefs Vice Chair General Dan Caine – which is now reportedly shaping US policy on Iran, rather than the traditional civilian defense and intelligence leadership. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell has denied the reports, insisting that Hegseth is “speaking with the President multiple times a day each day and has been with the President in the Situation Room this week.” Gabbard also told reporters that she and the president are “on the same page.”

Israel launched a large-scale bombing campaign against Iran last week, claiming Tehran was close to producing a nuclear weapon. Trump will decide whether to join the Israeli campaign “within the next two weeks,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Thursday. However, US intelligence still assesses that Iran, while it has stockpiled enriched uranium, has not taken concrete steps toward developing nuclear weapons, according to Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. This view has remained unchanged since March, when Gabbard told Congress that the US intelligence community “does not believe Iran is building a nuclear weapon.” Trump contradicted this assessment on Tuesday, stating that Iran is “weeks away” from obtaining nuclear weapons and dismissing Gabbard’s remarks by saying, “I don’t care what she said.”

A former Democratic congresswoman and Iraq War veteran, Gabbard has long been critical of the US intelligence community, which she now oversees, and she was known for supporting NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. Her release of a video warning about the horrors of nuclear war following a visit to Hiroshima reportedly annoyed Trump’s advisers. Her absence from a key June 8 meeting at Camp David on Iran policy has fueled speculation about her diminished influence, with multiple sources telling NBC that she has not taken part in recent strategic discussions.

Read more …

“..it’s an “extremely dangerous, extremely volatile situation,” and one that clearly has “nothing to do with nuclear weapons..”

Larry Johnson Reveals What’s Really at Stake as Trump Mulls Iran Attack (Sp.)

With Tehran refusing to fold in the face of US ultimatums and threats, Donald Trump is considering joining Israel’s campaign of aggression. Sputnik asked veteran ex-CIA and State Department insider Larry Johnson to make sense of the administration’s calculations, including what could be holding Trump back. President Trump is vacillating on whether or not to move forward with the attack because he knows it would tank his ratings, including among Republicans, Johnson, a former CIA officer and State official, explained. “There are public opinion polls showing that 53% of Republicans are against any attack on Iran. Overall, 61% of Americans are against any attack on Iran. There have been several individuals who were prominent supporters of Donald Trump in the election that have come out condemning him,” he noted.

“I think the political realities are starting to catch up to Trump, which is why he’s now backing away from that,” Johnson said, pointing out that conservative voices sounding the alarm bell include Trump’s most prominent pre-election supporters, from political commentators Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens to comedian Dave Smith. On top of that are the logistical uncertainties, like whether a US bunker buster bombing of the Fordow nuclear site would even work, and whether the B-2 bombers based in Diego Garcia used for such an operation would be safe if Russia were to supply Iran with systems capable of detecting and downing the stealth bomber. Overall, it’s an “extremely dangerous, extremely volatile situation,” and one that clearly has “nothing to do with nuclear weapons,” Johnson stressed. Instead, it’s about “regime change” – an attempt “to install a government that’s going to be a lackey of the West and that will not cooperate or be friendly with Russia.”

Read more …

“..you’ve got the president basically dismissing all of the intelligence.”

US Intel Has No Evidence Iran Building Nuclear Weapon – Top Democrat (RT)

US intelligence still assesses that Iran, despite stockpiling enriched uranium, has not taken steps to develop nuclear weapons – a view which has remained unchanged since March, according to the Senate Intelligence Committee’s top Democrat. US President Donald Trump claimed on Tuesday, however, that he believes Tehran was “very close” to obtaining nuclear weapons at the time of Israel’s recent military strikes. His statement contradicts earlier remarks by his own director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who told lawmakers that Iran “is not building” one. The Iranian authorities insist that their nuclear program is purely peaceful and that they have every right to pursue it. In an interview with MSNBC on Wednesday, the vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Democratic Senator Mark Warner, said senators were briefed this week – following the Israeli strikes – that US spy agencies still find no evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.

He criticized Trump’s remarks as “foreign policy by tweet,” calling them irresponsible and perplexing, given that they contradict the intelligence briefings lawmakers have received. Warner noted that in March, Gabbard stated that Iran had “taken no steps toward building a bomb.” “And we got reconfirmed… Monday of this week, that the intelligence hasn’t changed,” he added. At the time, she said the US intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” When Trump was reminded of this by journalists on Tuesday, he replied: “I do not care what she said.”

Responding to Trump’s remark, Warner said, “you’ve got the president basically dismissing all of the intelligence.” He added that even as vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he is unclear on the current US strategy, asking: “If I don’t have the foggiest idea, what do the American people know?” Trump said he has not yet decided whether to support Israel’s military action against Iran, but echoed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim that Iran was “weeks away” from developing a nuclear weapon.

Since launching its campaign against Iran last week, Israel has targeted uranium enrichment infrastructure, bombing centrifuge facilities – including a site at Natanz, south of Tehran – and laboratories used to convert uranium gas into metal, according to Israeli officials and the IAEA. Trump has called for Iran’s “unconditional surrender,” claiming that the US now controls its airspace. He also said killing Khamenei would be “easy.” Media reports suggest he may soon join Israel’s military campaign. Tehran has vowed not to yield to pressure and warned it will retaliate if attacked.

Read more …

“..A day before Israel’s initial attack on Iran, the IAEA passed a resolution declaring that Tehran was not complying with its obligations concerning nuclear non-proliferation..”

No Proof Iran Is Working On A Nuclear Bomb – UN Watchdog (RT)

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found no evidence that Iran is making a “systematic effort” to produce a nuclear weapon, according to the agency’s chief, Rafael Grossi. Israel began bombing Iran on Friday, asserting that the country was on the brink of developing a nuclear bomb. The sides have been exchanging retaliatory strikes ever since. US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he believes Tehran was “very close” to obtaining the nuclear weapon, contradicting early statements from his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who stated that Iran “is not building” one. Iranian authorities insist that their nuclear program is purely peaceful and that they have every right to pursue it. I

n an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday, Grossi said that, currently, “there is this competition about who is wrong or right about the time that would be needed” for Iran to produce a nuclear bomb. “Certainly, it was not for tomorrow, maybe not a matter of years,” he noted. The Iranians may have enough enriched uranium, but in order to turn it into a nuclear weapon, technology and extensive testing is also required, the IAEA chief explained. Despite inspecting Iran’s nuclear sites for more than two decades, the UN watchdog “did not have… any proof of a systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon” on the part of Iran, he said. “What we are telling you is what we have been able to prove. The material is there. There have been, in the past, some activities related to the development of nuclear weapons, but we did not have, at this point, these elements,” Grossi stressed.

A day before Israel’s initial attack on Iran, the IAEA passed a resolution declaring that Tehran was not complying with its obligations concerning nuclear non-proliferation. Among other things, the agency noted that Iran had “repeatedly” been unable to prove that its nuclear material was not being diverted for further enrichment for military use. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said last weekend that Tehran will limit its cooperation with IAEA due to the agency’s reluctance to condemn Israel’s attacks on the country’s nuclear sites. The UN watchdog’s conduct “makes no sense,” he stated.

Read more …

“The Zionist regime’s claim that Iran attacked one of the hospitals in the occupied territories is completely false..”

Israeli Nuclear Sites To Face ‘Crushing Blows’ – Iranian Source (RT)

Iran intends to continue its military response against Israel and could target its nuclear infrastructure, a senior Iranian security official has told RT. In an exclusive statement to the head of RT’s Tehran bureau, the official, who chose to remain anonymous, said that Iranian armed forces will maintain missile and drone operations throughout the day, specifically targeting “the occupied territories and Israeli garrisons.” nThe official said Iran’s response follows “the Quranic advice on retaliation,” and warned that Iranian forces would respond “to any extent and wherever the regime attacks Iranian soil.” He noted, however, that based on “Iran’s moral principles,” there would be no attacks on hospitals. “The Zionist regime’s claim that Iran attacked one of the hospitals in the occupied territories is completely false,” the official stressed, referring to reports of the Soroka hospital being struck in the city of Be’er Sheva in southern Israel.

He also stated that Tehran’s response will be escalated in light of the Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. “Since the [Israeli] regime has attacked our nuclear facilities, our armed forces will subject their nuclear facilities to crushing blows,” the official said. Since launching its assault last week, Israel has hit several Iranian nuclear facilities, including sites in Natanz, Isfahan, Fordow and near Tehran. Between nine and 14 nuclear researchers have been reported killed in the attacks. Without naming the US directly, the Iranian official also warned that “if another country directly enters into war with us, it will provide much more accessible targets for the Iranian armed forces to destroy.”

US President Donald Trump has hailed Israel’s attacks on Iran as “excellent” and has urged Tehran to surrender unconditionally. He has also warned that the US could become directly involved in the conflict if any American targets are hit by Iran. Last Friday, Israeli forces began carrying out strikes on Iran, claiming Tehran is nearing the completion of a nuclear bomb. Iran dismissed the accusations and retaliated with waves of drone and missile strikes on the Jewish state. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, has since also refuted Israel’s claims, stating that the watchdog has found no evidence that Iran has been making a “systematic effort” to produce a nuclear weapon.

Read more …

“Some in West Jerusalem may dream of “reformatting” the Middle East – reshaping the region through force and fear. If successful, it could buy Israel a few decades of security and breathing room. But such outcomes are far from guaranteed.”

The End of Israeli Exceptionalism (Bordachev)

Israel has now been at war with its neighbours for nearly two years. The latest round began with the Hamas-led terrorist attack on 7 October 2023. In response, West Jerusalem launched an aggressive military campaign that has since expanded to touch nearly every country in the region. The escalation has placed the Jewish state at the centre of Middle Eastern geopolitics once again – this time, dragging in Iran, a state that had long avoided direct confrontation through strategic caution. Now, even Tehran finds itself under fire, with US backing making the stakes far higher. Iran is left facing a grim choice between the bad and the very bad. But this isn’t about Iran. It’s about Israel, a country that has for decades functioned as the West’s forward operating base in the Middle East.

Since the mid-20th century, Israel has enjoyed a privileged position – a bridgehead of Western power in a volatile region, while also deeply enmeshed in its politics and rivalries. Its success has rested on two pillars: the unshakable support of the United States, and its own internal capacity for innovation, military strength, and a unique social model. That second pillar, however, has weakened. The clearest sign is in demographics: Israel is facing rising negative migration. In 2024, some 82,700 people are expected to leave the country – a 50% increase from the year before. It is not the unskilled or disengaged who are leaving, but the young and educated. The people who are needed to sustain a modern state are choosing to go.

Of course, Israel’s troubles are not unique. Like many developed nations, it is struggling under the weight of a decaying neoliberal economic system. The pandemic made things worse, exposing the fragility of the model and encouraging a shift toward a “mobilisation” mode of governance – rule through emergency and constant readiness for conflict. In the West more broadly, war and geopolitical confrontation have become a way to delay or disguise necessary systemic reform. In this regard, Israel has become a laboratory for the West’s emerging logic: permanent war as a method of governance. In the autumn of 2023, the Israeli establishment embraced this fully. Conflict became not just a tactic, but a way of life. Its leaders no longer see peace as the goal, but war as the mechanism for national unity and political survival.

In this, Israel mirrors the broader Western embrace of conflict with Russia and China – proxy wars chosen when actual reform is off the table. At the global level, nuclear deterrence limits how far such wars can go. But in the Middle East, where Israel wages war directly, those constraints don’t apply. This allows war to serve as a pressure valve – politically useful, even as it becomes self-destructive. But even war has limits. It cannot indefinitely mask economic decay or social unrest. And while conflict tends to cement elite power – even among incompetent leadership – it also drains national strength. Israel is now consuming more and more of its own resources to sustain this permanent state of war. Its social cohesion is fraying. Its once-vaunted model of technological and civic progress is no longer functioning as it did.

Some in West Jerusalem may dream of “reformatting” the Middle East – reshaping the region through force and fear. If successful, it could buy Israel a few decades of security and breathing room. But such outcomes are far from guaranteed. Crushing a neighbour doesn’t eliminate the threat; it merely brings distant enemies closer. Most importantly, Israel’s deepest problems aren’t external – they are internal, rooted in its political and social structures. War can define a state, yes. But such states – Sparta, North Korea – tend to be “peculiar,” to put it mildly. And even for them, war cannot substitute for real diplomacy, policy, or growth. So has Israel, always at war, truly developed? Or has it simply been sustained – politically, militarily, and financially – as a subdivision of American foreign policy? If it continues down this path of permanent conflict and right-wing nationalism, it risks losing even that status. It may cease to be the West’s bridge in the Middle East – and become something else entirely: a militarised garrison state, isolated, brittle, and increasingly alone.

Read more …

“..what I am confident about is that if Tulsi Gabbard is removed, she will not be replaced, and that’s as good as a win for the bad actors trying to target and survive Trump.”

A Dangerous Moment – The Targeting of Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)

For the sake of urgency I’m going to talk in direct and bold terms about the targeting of Tulsi Gabbard. The IC system is attempting to remove her as a disruptive influence by using Iran as a wedge to get her out, but the issue they have with her has nothing to do with Iran. CTH approaches this after being very concerned about Tulsi Gabbard’s ability. Not because of intent, but rather because we doubted she understood the scope of the IC opposition aligned against the office of the Director of National Intelligence. She started out with these weaknesses, but she learned quickly – grasped the opposition– and has become a transformative force within the Intelligence Community. Director Gabbard’s recent efforts within the Intelligence Community Inspector General office is another feather in her cap of competence. Gabbard is now a threat.

If President Trump allows or supports the removal of DNI Gabbard, he is opening up the backplate of his armor, and making himself vulnerable. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Chairman Tom Cotton, the disassembled National Intelligence Council and a host of Intelligence Community embeds would like to see Gabbard removed. DC wants to see her removed because the traditional role of the DNI has been a willful tool of the Intelligence Community; Gabbard is not that. As DNI Mrs Tulsi Gabbard has chased down intelligence community leakers, released the JFK files, released Joe Biden’s domestic terrorism surveillance plan, intercepted an NIC plot to impeach President Trump (confirmed by Rubio), taken control of the Presidential Daily Briefing, and begun to confront the corruption within the IC Inspector General organization. These are actions, not words, and those actions speak boldly. Suffice to say, her effectiveness has placed a target on her back.

In the past few weeks, ever since she began intercepting the ICIG issues and using her own personnel to monitor the IC network, she has been targeted with several direct smear campaigns. It is obvious the targeting is coming from inside the intelligence apparatus, and perhaps even the orbit around/under CIA Director John Ratcliffe. She did make a strange video about nuclear weapons contrast against the horrific outcomes in Japan, but that seemed to be more of a personal video entry expressing a deep concern about nuclear weapons from her own perspectives. I said it was weird when I saw it, but I put that into the context of ‘surfboard Tulsi‘, the DNI peacenik. No biggie. However, with the Israel -v- Iran conflict encompassing the White House, there is a transparent objective to weaponize Tulsi Gabbard’s activity as a contrast against President Trump supporting military conflict in Iran.

This contrast is being stimulated by the same elements who want to see her removed for the reasons noted above. The latest narrative du jour in the files includes: “WASHINGTON DC – […] Trump has increasingly mused about nixing Gabbard’s office completely, an idea he floated when he gave her the job. In the White House there have been discussions about folding its mandate into the CIA or another agency, according to one of the people familiar with his response to the video and two others familiar with the matter — though it’s unclear what that would mean for Gabbard. The Director of National Intelligence serves as the president’s principal intelligence adviser and oversees the sprawling U.S. spy community.

First, “nixing Gabbard’s office completely” is exactly what the bad elements of the Intelligence Community would love to see. Second, “folding its mandate into the CIA” is like a dream come true for the darkest elements of the IC and Senate enablers. And Third, “serves as the president’s principal intelligence adviser” is false. That’s the job of the National Security Advisor, Marco Rubio. If there is one hope amid this looming and increasing drumbeat to remove her, it is that Marco Rubio likely can see exactly what the motives and intentions are from his former colleagues. The elements targeting DNI Gabbard all come from SSCI Chairman Marco Rubio’s old tribe. SoS/NSA Rubio might save her, as too may Vice President JD Vance. Both of them are at the perfect distance to see the assembled drumbeat against Gabbard for what it is. At least that is my hope.

I am not confident they will succeed removing her. However, what I am confident about is that if Tulsi Gabbard is removed, she will not be replaced, and that’s as good as a win for the bad actors trying to target and survive Trump. President Trump has no more juice or influence in the Senate. That time is over. Trump has exhausted all of the political capital he held in the upper chamber. Every Republican Senator will now smile, nod and do whatever the heck they want regardless of how it impacts President Trump. This is especially true for the SSCI who would control confirmation of a DNI replacement. They don’t have to pretend any longer, Trump’s juice is gone. If President Trump allows the Brutus crew in his orbit to isolate, ridicule and marginalize Tulsi Gabbard, he will be putting a significant part of his administration at risk. This is the Six Ways from Sunday crowd.

Read more …

“..Putin does not understand that the problem is Greater Israel. Iran is the last Muslim country with the capability of resisting the Israelization of the Middle East.”

Putin Aligns With Israel and Finds A New Way To Deny Reality (Paul Craig Roberts)

John Helmer reports that Putin said he supports the “unconditional security of Israel” and that the Russian-Iranian treaty “did not envisage military cooperation.” Is this Putin’s green light for a US/Israeli strike on Iran? Why does Putin support the security of Israel but not of Iran? Israel is the aggressor, not Iran. Iran is a buffer for Russia. Israel is a threat. Putin offered his ideas to Netanyahu and Trump on how to resolve the “problem.” Putin said, “In my opinion, in general, such a solution can be found.” Putin does not understand that the problem is Greater Israel. Iran is the last Muslim country with the capability of resisting the Israelization of the Middle East. Israel has had a target on Iran for many years, and the American whore media has succeeded in demonizing Iran in the hearts and minds of the American people.

Putin’s foolish statements putting distance between Russia and Iran removes the only real constraint on a US/Israeli war with Iran. Such a war could soon begin. Gilbert Doctorow and the Washington Post report that Israel’s supply of missiles for its air defense are being rapidly depleted by sustained Iranian attacks. Israel faces the possible humiliation of having to sue for peace in about a week to ten days or use its nuclear weapons. This prospect is a huge incentive for Netanyahu to get Trump into the war and for Trump to oblige him.

Read more …

“Why do you regard the risk of a nuclear war as less of a threat than a mutual security agreement with Russia?”

Is Trump’s Constituency Netanyahu or MAGA-America? (Paul Craig Roberts)

President Trump is supposed to be America’s President, different from Biden who was the immigrant-invaders’ president, the president for DEI, the president for Zelensky in his conflict with Russia, the president for misunderstood criminals and sexual perverts. So why is Trump behaving as if he is President for Netanyahu? Iran has done nothing to America. It has not attacked us, sanctioned us, frozen our bank reserves, forbidden trade with us, assassinated any of our leaders. These are things that Washington has done to Iran. Why? Because Netanyahu told us to. Having failed to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities used to produce fuel for nuclear power and for medical purposes, Netanyahu has turned the task over to Trump, “Israel’s best friend.” Why does Trump want to be best friend with a government that for 21 months bombed and staffed Palestinian civilians, green-lighted Israeli soldiers to shoot babies and children in the head, and is now relying on starvation and disease to finish off the Palestinian population, forcefully preventing food, water, and medicine from entering Gaza?

Would you want to be friends with Netanyahu? Can you respect a president who not only wants to be friends with a genocidal maniac like Netanyahu, but is ready to take America to war for Netanyahu? I cannot. It seems that Trump is going to do good for Netanyahu by harming America and forfeiting American lives in yet another war for Israel. Hey Trump, what happens to the domestic agenda if taking on Iran is a bigger job than Netanyahu told you? Are you going to end up expanding Israel’s borders instead of protecting America’s borders? What happened to your plan to use Gaza as the anchor for your development of an American Middle East colony in place of Greater Israel? You declared Gaza an American possession and the first stage in the development plan. Has Netanyahu straightened you out about Greater Israel?

What happened to peace in Ukraine in 24 hours? You never sat down with Putin, understood the Russian concerns about NATO on Russia’s borders, and understood that the obvious solution was a mutual security agreement. That is all it takes to solve the problem before another fool green lights another attack on Russian strategic forces. Why do you regard the risk of a nuclear war as less of a threat than a mutual security agreement with Russia? What’s wrong with a mutual security agreement? Is the answer that the US military/security complex won’t allow you to take away the enemy that justifies their budget and power? America’s last industry seems to be weapons. Can we survive without it?

Hey Trump, considering all your problems at home with the judiciary blocking your deportation efforts and your ability to exercise executive branch powers to control the federal government’s policies and spending, with state and local Democrat officials working against your effort to control the border, with NGOs and foundations financing anti-deportation riots, why are you diverting your limited time and energy to foreign wars? After Netanyahu gets you into a war with Iran, are you going to start one with China? When the dumbshits in Europe get into a war with Russia, are you rushing Americans to the rescue?

Trump, you were supposed to be an American President, not President of the World. Our own country is drowning in problems. Why are you getting involved in other countries’ problems? Your dumbshit predecessors–Dubya/Cheney, Obama, Biden–have already destroyed five countries for Israel. If you make it six with Iran, Netanyahu will hand you number 7–Saudi Arabia–and then numbers 8–Pakistan, a larger problem as Pakistan has nukes. Will number 8 be Turkey? Are you going to be the president who created Greater Israel for the genocidal Netanyahu? Do you think that this is something to be proud of?

That is not why you were elected. You had better pay attention to your base. When the American Establishment concludes that you have been given enough rope, the RINOs will join the Democrats in impeaching you, and your disappointed public base will not come to your rescue. You will be impeached and convicted and so will be your supporters. Privileges for DEI will reappear along with open borders as white heterosexuals become accustomed to their second class status in a country that the Democrats have created in their image–a Sodom and Gomorrah Tower of Babel. The Camp of the Saints will advance, and you, Donald Trump, will have opened the last door to the replacement of the white ethnicities.

Read more …

“Wednesday’s ruling is a crucial step toward restoring sanity to American healthcare and protecting our most vulnerable citizens from ideologically driven medical abuse.”

Supreme Court Delivers a Crushing Blow to Trans Agenda (Margolis)

In a resounding victory for parental rights and child protection, the Supreme Court delivered a 6-3 decision Wednesday that upholds Tennessee’s ban on so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors. This landmark ruling represents a triumph of common sense over radical gender ideology that has been targeting America’s children for far too long. nAs you could have guessed, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, while the conservative majority on the court correctly recognized what Tennessee and 24 other states have already figured out: Children deserve protection from irreversible medical experiments masquerading as healthcare. The ACLU and its allies tried to dress up this radical agenda in constitutional language, claiming that banning these dangerous treatments for gender dysphoria while allowing the same medications for legitimate medical conditions somehow violated “equal protection.”

What a joke. There’s nothing “equal” about subjecting confused children to experimental treatments that could sterilize them and cause lifelong health problems. And thankfully, a majority of the court disagreed with the ACLU. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that such policy decisions are best left to voters and their elected officials, not the courts. In her dissent, Sotomayor accused the court of retreating “from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most,” and “abandon[ing] transgender children and their families to political whims.” The medical establishment’s endorsement of these treatments is hardly the slam-dunk argument the left thinks it is. The same organizations pushing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones have been captured by woke ideology and are more interested in political correctness than protecting children.

Meanwhile, as we’ve previously reported here at PJ Media, European countries that have been dealing with this gender madness longer than we have are now pulling back because they’re finally acknowledging what many of us have been saying all along: the risks far outweigh any supposed benefits. Various studies have supported this conclusion. This Supreme Court decision is a massive win for the 25 states that have had the courage to stand up to the transgender lobby and put children’s welfare first. It’s a vindication of basic common sense in an age when saying that boys are boys and girls are girls can get you labeled a bigot.

Of course, the fight isn’t over. The radical left won’t give up its crusade to confuse and mutilate America’s children just because the Supreme Court dealt them a major blow. There are still battles to fight in schools, sports, and countless other institutions that this gender ideology has infected. The Court has yet to address the broader questions of parental rights and the scope of state authority to protect children from harmful medical interventions. But Wednesday’s ruling is a crucial step toward restoring sanity to American healthcare and protecting our most vulnerable citizens from ideologically driven medical abuse.

Read more …

Imagine bankrupting yourself over a fantasy threat.

Germany’s 5% of GDP Defense Spending Goal Will Ruin Economy (Sp.)

Germany would “ruin” its economy by agreeing to a blitzing raise in its defense spending, particularly the NATO-proposed target of 3.5% to 5% of GDP, Ralf Dickel, an independent German energy expert specializing in international energy trade, told Sputnik on Thursday.In early May, media reported that NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte had proposed that NATO states increase their defense spending to 3.5% of GDP and allocate another 1.5% of GDP to additional defense needs to meet US President Donald Trump’s demand for a 5% target. The minimum requirements are expected to be agreed upon at the NATO summit in The Hague from June 24-25. “First of all, again, this 3.5 percent, 5 percent is completely ridiculous. We will ruin our economy for nothing,” Dickel said on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF). The expert expressed his concern over the prevailing mindset in the West where the emphasis on military readiness is seen as a solution to global tensions.

“What worries me is that in the West, we have a lot of people who say, ‘okay, this must spend much more on defense,’ on being war-ready, actually. Not on defense, but war-ready. That is very stupid on several accounts,” Dickel said. He argued that true defense should not be measured solely by the percentage of GDP allocated to military spending but should be informed by a careful analysis of potential threats. “I mean, first of all, it’s fair to be able to defend yourself, but that is something you would not usually link to a scale of your GDP, but you would rather analyze what is a scale of potential military actions against your country, and then you should be sure to meet them. But in parallel to that, we should also make an offer to negotiate. And to negotiate eventually some new architecture, some new security architecture,” he stated. The expert concluded by stressing that sustainable security for any state could not solely be achieved through military means but must also involve dialogue and cooperation.

Read more …

Will NATO survive this?

Spanish PM Rejects NATO Call to Raise Defense Spending to 5% of GDP (Sp.)

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez told NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that Madrid would not support the proposal to increase the alliance’s defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2032, according to a letter published by El Pais newspaper on Thursday. “For Spain, committing to a 5% target would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive; it would move Spain away from optimal spending and would hinder the EU’s efforts to strengthen its security and defense ecosystem,” the letter read.

Sources at the Spanish government told the newspaper that while they do not rule out Europe reaching 5% defense spending, they believe it is too early to set that target. Earlier in June, Rutte called on NATO member states to increase their defense spending from the current 2% to 3.5% of their respective GDPs, and spend another 1.5% on infrastructure development, military industry and other security-related investments. US President Donald Trump previously demanded that NATO allies spend 5% of GDP on defense.

Read more …

”If the Ukrainian state entrusts someone to negotiate on its behalf, suit yourself, let it be Zelensky,” Putin said. “The question is, who will sign the document?”

Putin Reveals Pitfalls Of Potential Meeting With Zelensky (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he could meet with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to conduct peace talks between the two countries, but expressed doubt regarding Zelensky’s authority to sign a treaty. Zelensky has repeatedly called for a meeting with Putin, claiming that he alone can resolve key bilateral issues, including territorial disputes.nSpeaking late Wednesday with international media at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, the Russian president reiterated Moscow’s concerns about Zelensky’s legitimacy. ”If the Ukrainian state entrusts someone to negotiate on its behalf, suit yourself, let it be Zelensky,” Putin said. “The question is, who will sign the document?”

Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, and no successor has been elected due to martial law. Zelensky insists that he has the right to remain in office, even though the Ukrainian Constitution calls for the transfer of presidential powers to the speaker of the parliament. ”Propagandistically, one can say anything about the legitimacy of the current authorities, but we care about legal aspects and not propaganda when dealing with serious issues,” Putin said.

He added that since Ukrainian officials are appointed by the president, Zelensky’s questionable legitimacy calls into question the authority of those serving under him. We don’t care who conducts negotiations, even if it is the head of the regime. I am even willing to meet with him for some final phase, where we won’t be spending endless amounts of time divvying things but would just put a stop to it all. ”But the signature must come from legitimate authorities,” Putin stressed. “Otherwise, whoever comes after him will toss it to the dumpster. That’s not a way to conduct serious business.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Cancer
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1935346765256863947

Heart

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 052024
 


Pablo Picasso The Rooster 1918

 

Supreme Court Rules 9-0 That Trump Cannot Be Kicked Off Any State Ballot (PM)
House Dems Implode Over Supreme Court Decision (ZH)
‘Uncommitted’ Voters Unite Against Biden Ahead of Super Tuesday (RT)
The Five FUBARs (Jim Kunstler)
‘Ukraine is Russia’ – Medvedev (RT)
Draft-Eligible Ukraine Men Flee ‘Certain Death’ (Sp.)
The Good Germans Are Blowing Smoke (Helmer)
The Brainwashing of Germany in Preparation for War (Bittner)
German Defense Ministry Uses ‘1234’ As Password (RT)
Zelensky and the West Have A New Scam – And Taxpayers Will Foot The Bill (RT)
Losing to Russia Shatters Western Leaders’ Belief in Their Exceptionalism (Sp.)
Is Tehran Winning the Middle East? (Juan Cole)
The EU’s American Queen (Lily Lynch)
Musk’s X Could Face New EU Restrictions (RT)
Ballot Drop Boxes Installed Along Border Wall (BBee)

 

 

 

 

2024 ad

 

 

New Yorker profile of Biden: “The former Hollywood executive Jeffrey Katzenberg, a co-chair of Biden’s campaign, urged him to embrace his age with swagger, like his fellow-octogenarians Mick Jagger and Harrison Ford.”

 

 

Free falling

 

 

 

 

Tucker Macgregor
https://twitter.com/i/status/1764850563940794481

 

 

Social media arrests
https://twitter.com/i/status/1764691399331754399

 

 

 

 

San Diego

 

 

2007

 

 

There’s a separate 5-4 decision hidden in this unanimous decision. Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh affirmatively rule that Congress has the sole power to enforce the “Insurrection” provision. Barrett objects for unelaborated reasons, Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissent

 

 

“We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency,” the Court ruled.

 

 

 

 

 

 

BBC: “Donald Trump says today’s Supreme Court decision that he cannot be banned from Colorado’s presidential ballot, is “both unifying and inspirational”. Speaking to Fox News, Trump said: “A great win for America. Very, very important!” He went on to highlight another legal case that is set to fall to the Supreme Court: that of presidential immunity. “Equally important for our country will be the decision that they will soon make on immunity for a president – without which, the presidency would be relegated to nothing more than a ceremonial position, which is far from what the founders intended.

“No president would be able to properly and effectively function without complete and total immunity.” The Supreme Court will hear arguments in April on whether Trump is immune from being prosecuted on charges of trying to overturn the 2020 election. Trump had claimed that he was immune from all criminal charges for acts that he said fell within his duties as president. A US Court of Appeals panel has already rejected Trump’s argument..”

Supreme Court Rules 9-0 That Trump Cannot Be Kicked Off Any State Ballot (PM)

In a stunning reversal on Monday morning, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously decided against the Supreme Court of Colorado in their decision to remove Donald Trump from the state’s ballot. They further said that this ruling applies to any state who wishes to make this move. Trump cannot be removed from the ballot in any state. Colorado had made the determination that Trump could not stand for office and justified their tactic through invoking the “insurrection” clause of the 14th Amendment, section 3. After their ruling, other states jumped on board, saying that Trump would not be permitted to stand for office in their states, either. The Court states that “if States were free to enforce Section 3 by barring candidates from running in the first place, Congress would be forced to exercise its disability removal power before voting begins if it wished for its decision to have any effect on the current election cycle. Perhaps a State may burden congressional authority in such a way when it exercises its ‘exclusive’ sovereign power over its own state offices.”

“But,” they continued, “it is implausible to suppose that the Constitution affirmatively delegated to the States the authority to impose such a burden on congressional power with respect to candidates for federal office.” The Court further stated that the petitioners on behalf of Colorado were unable to identify any “tradition of state enforcement of section 3 against federal officeholders or candidates in the years following ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment.” The key aspect, however, is what they had to say about the implications of letting a ruling like that in Colorado stand. “Conflicting state outcomes concerning the same candidate could result not just from differing views of the merits, but from variations in state law governing the proceedings that are necessary to make Section 3 disqualification determinations. Some States might allow a Section 3 challenge to succeed based on a preponderance of the evidence, while others might require a heightened showing.”

“Certain evidence (like the congressional Report on which the lower courts relied here) might be admissible in some States but inadmissible hearsay in others. Disqualification might be possible only through criminal prosecution, as opposed to expedited civil proceedings, in particular States. “Indeed, in some States—unlike Colorado (or Maine, where the secretary of state recently issued an order excluding former President Trump from the primary ballot)—procedures for excluding an ineligible candidate from the ballot may not exist at all.” “The result could well be that a single candidate would be declared ineligible in some States, but not others, based on the same conduct (and perhaps even the same factual record).” “The ‘patchwork’ that would likely result from state enforcement would ‘sever the direct link that the Framers found so critical between the National Government and the people of the United States’ as a whole. U. S. Term Limits, 514 U. S., at 822.”

“But in a Presidential election ‘the impact of the votes cast in each State is affected by the votes cast’— or, in this case, the votes not allowed to be cast—’for the various candidates in other States.’ Anderson, 460 U. S., at 795. An evolving electoral map could dramatically change the behavior of voters, parties, and States across the country, in different ways and at different times. “The disruption would be all the more acute—and could nullify the votes of millions and change the election result—if Section 3 enforcement were attempted after the Nation has voted. Nothing in the Constitution requires that we endure such chaos—arriving at any time or different times, up to and perhaps beyond the Inauguration.” “For the reasons given, responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States,” the Court determined.

“The judgment of the Colorado13 Cite as: 601 U. S. ____ (2024) Per Curiam Supreme Court therefore cannot stand.” “All nine Members of the Court agree with that result,” they wrote. “The judgment of the Colorado Supreme Court is reversed.” The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case earlier in February, taking on the case on an emergency basis. In their hearing of the case, they appeared to lean toward the conclusion that state’s do not have the right to unilaterally remove candidates, thereby denying their citizens the right to cote for the candidate of their choice. Illinois, Maine and other states that have attempted this tactic will now find that they are powerless to carry it out.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1764683741601944022

https://twitter.com/i/status/1764686616805908867

Read more …

“President Biden… Fight your fight yourself. Don’t use prosecutors and judges to go after your opponent… our country is much bigger than that..”

House Dems Implode Over Supreme Court Decision (ZH)

Update (1400ET): Not satisfied to let the Supreme Court-enforced Democratic process play out, House Democrats are now preparing legislation to try and keep Trump off the ballot. “Congress will have to try and act,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, in a comment to creepy deep state mouthpiece Axios (which swears the border is extra-secure!). Raskin, a former member of the Jan. 6 select committee, said he is already crafting the bill, telling Axios, “I’m working on it – today.” Raskin pointed to legislation he introduced with Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) in 2022 creating a pathway for the Justice Department to sue to keep candidates off the ballot under the 14th Amendment. “We are going to revise it in light of the Supreme Court’s decision,” Raskin said. -Axios

“I don’t have a lot of hope that Speaker [Mike] Johnson will allow us to bring enforcement legislation to the floor, but we have to try and do it,” said Raskin, who said he’ll ‘beseech’ Republicans to join the bill. Very Democratic, Jamie. Update (1320ET): Former President Trump has responded to the Supreme Court’s ruling keeping him on the ballot in Colorado (and therefore, everywhere else). According to Trump, the decision was “very well crafted,” and “will go a long way toward bringing our country together.” Trump also slammed Biden for ‘weaponizing’ prosecutors against him. “President Biden… Fight your fight yourself. Don’t use prosecutors and judges to go after your opponent… our country is much bigger than that,” Trump said, speaking from Mar-a-Lago.

Read more …

“..Nikki Haley suffered an embarrassment when she became the first candidate to lose to ‘no-one’ in the Nevada GOP primary since the option was introduced in 1975..”

‘Uncommitted’ Voters Unite Against Biden Ahead of Super Tuesday (RT)

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the largest socialist organization in the US, has urged primary voters to cast their ballots for ‘uncommitted’ rather than President Joe Biden to show their opposition to his stance on the Israel-Hamas war. The announcement comes just two days before the primary elections on March 5 – known as Super Tuesday – when millions of Americans are expected to vote. In a series of X (formerly Twitter) posts on Sunday, the DSA, which has more than 92,000 members and chapters in all US states, demanded that the White House end the bloodshed in Gaza by revoking military assistance to Israel, saying Biden will be to blame if former President Donald Trump is reelected this year.

“Today, DSA endorses ‘Uncommitted’ in the remaining Democratic presidential primaries. Until this administration ends its support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza and delivers a permanent, lasting ceasefire, Joe Biden will bear the responsibility for another Trump presidency,” the organization said, adding that “defeat is certain” if Biden continues on the current course. “This week’s brutal ‘Flour Massacre’ has proven once again that Israel is a brutal, inhumane apartheid state which carries a legacy of 75 years of genocide and occupation. Over 30,000 Palestinians have already died; how many will be ENOUGH for Joe Biden to stop this war?” the DSA said in a follow-up post, referring to the tragedy on February 29 when at least 112 Palestinians were killed and more than 750 were injured while waiting for much-needed food aid in Gaza City.

The campaign calling on Democrats to vote ‘uncommitted’ was organized by local chapters of the DSA and the Colorado Palestine Coalitions last week and is gaining popularity amid protests against the Gaza war. The DSA noted that over 100,000 people voted ‘uncommitted’ in the Michigan primary last week. The movement was also endorsed by a major labor union, UFCW 3000, which represents more than 50,000 grocery workers in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. Biden is not the only one feeling the heat from voters who are choosing ‘none of the above’. Last week, Republican presidential hopeful Nikki Haley suffered an embarrassment when she became the first candidate to lose to ‘no-one’ in the Nevada GOP primary since the option was introduced in 1975.

Read more …

“..DA’s and AG’s who make election promises to “go after” individuals without such niceties as probable cause..”

The Five FUBARs (Jim Kunstler)

You saw last year how the blob elite greeted the transfer of illegal immigrants to their happy little island of Martha’s Vineyard. (They were not amused by Governor DeSantis’s prank, and off-loaded the mutts post-haste.) But that same smug demographic doesn’t care if hundreds of thousands are distributed to the big cities, which are now fiscally destabilized by them to an extreme, probably to bankruptcy. Of course, that is not the main thing to worry about with what altogether amounts to millions of border-jumpers flooding our land. The main reason to worry is what the blob that invited them here intends for them to do, which, you may suspect, is to unleash mayhem in the streets, malls, stadiums, and upon our infrastructure just in time to derail the election — perhaps even to make war on us right in our homeland.

The US government is paying for this whole operation, you understand, funneling our tax money to international cut-out orgs who set up the transfer camps in Panama, and buy the plane tickets for the mutts to cross the ocean, and coordinate with the Mexican cartels to shuttle this horde of mystery people among us to work their juju for the Democratic Party. The pissed-off-ness of the public has passed the red line on this. A third FUBAR is the lawfare campaign of the Democratic Party and its regime in power against the citizens of this land. This folder includes overt and obvious political prosecutions by DA’s and AG’s who make election promises to “go after” individuals without such niceties as probable cause. It includes the gigantic new scaffold of inter-agency censorship and propaganda. It includes the psychopathic struggle sessions mandated by “diversity and inclusion” policy. It includes election-rigging directed by the likes of Marc Elias and Norm Eisen, getting states to fiddle laws on voter ID and mail-in ballots.

It includes the political protection of rogue groups ranging from looter flash-mobs to Antifa anarchists who bust up things and people and burn buildings down. It includes state officials who peremptorily kick candidates off the ballot. It includes a nakedly biased judiciary, and especially the use of the DC federal district court to punish people extralegally, unjustly, extravagantly, and cruelly. In short, lawfare is the complete perversion of law, and we-the -people are entreated by reprobate officials such as Merrick Garland and Letitia James to accept it. A fourth item on this list is the US economy which has been overwhelmed by maladministration of an overgrown monster bureaucracy, and the gross (perhaps fatal) mismanagement of the government’s money. The people of this land are not being allowed to do business, to find a livelihood, to transact fairly. “Joe Biden’s” shadow string-pullers are messing as badly with the oil and gas producers as they have messed with Ukraine. And they are doing it in pursuit of a laughable mirage: their “green new deal.”

Read more …

”The best fate they can expect [from the West] is to become slaves to the ailing European freak show..”

‘Ukraine is Russia’ – Medvedev (RT)

Ukraine lies within the sphere of Russian strategic interests and has no future in any other capacity, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chair of the Russian Security Council, has stated. Russian people consider Ukraine to be part of the larger Russian civilization, the senior official said in a speech at a youth conference in Sochi on Monday. Moscow considers it to be the country’s “soft underbelly,” from which no threat to Russia should be allowed to be projected. ”The territories on both banks of the Dnieper River are an inalienable part of Russian strategic historic borders,” he said, using his preferred term for what is usually known as ‘sphere of influence’ in geopolitics. “All attempts to change them by force, to cut its living body, are doomed.”

He noted the title of a book by Leonid Kuchma, the second president of Ukraine following its independence from the USSR, which declared: ‘Ukraine is not Russia’. “This concept must vanish forever. Ukraine is without a doubt Russia,” Medvedev said. He blasted the current government in Kiev as the “main threat” to its own people, considering its anti-Russian policies. Ukrainians have “fallen into a stupid trap” set for it by the US and its allies, who have successfully turned the nation into a weapon against Russia, he said. ”The best fate they can expect [from the West] is to become slaves to the ailing European freak show,” Medvedev said, referring to the leaders of the EU and UK, who he described as incompetent and subservient to Washington.

”[The Ukrainians] will play the role of a deaf-mute servant who is raped every day in a European kitchen by a lord from overseas,” the former president added. Russia is not interested in territorial conquest, Medvedev said. Whatever natural riches Ukraine has, Russia also has in abundance, he claimed. ”The great treasure that we will not surrender to anyone for anything is the people,” he said. The Ukrainians have become “confused” by Western propaganda, but at their core they have the same values and way of life as the Russians, and need to be rescued, Medvedev said.

Read more …

“These individuals may be restricted from traveling abroad, have their driver’s license suspended, or their bank accounts seized if they fail to do so..”

“..two categories of citizens are currently not involved in the mobilization, namely “those who are behind bars and those who are not.”

Draft-Eligible Ukraine Men Flee ‘Certain Death’ (Sp.)

Ukraine’s lack of any clear mobilization strategy aimed at plugging the gaping holes in the ranks of its armed forces is fueling “deep divisions in Ukraine’s parliament and more broadly in Ukrainian society,” The Washington Post reported. Despite mounting losses, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been downplaying to wheedle more money from the West, there is still “no political consensus” on how to remedy the severe shortage of troops on the battlefront. There is a yawning split between Zelensky and his top military commanders on a plan to conscript the thousands of soldiers they need as Russia continues to advance after liberating the stronghold of Avdeyevka. As a result, Ukraine’s military has been “relying on a hodgepodge of recruiting efforts and sown panic among fighting-age men,” the publication stated. It referenced the package of aid to Kiev still stalled in the US Congress, adding that many of Ukraine’s men “have gone into hiding, worried that they will be drafted into an ill-equipped army and sent to certain death.”

Infighting over how many more troops Ukraine needs “factored” into Zelensky’s sacking of his top general in February, the outlet noted. The previous Ukrainian commander-in-chief, Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, was dismissed, with Colonel General Oleksandr Syrsky taking over, amid an overall reshuffle of the military command by Zelensky. Zaluzhny’s ouster came after months of intrigue between himself and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who slammed the commander for revealing that Kiev’s summer 2023 counteroffensive had ended in failure. But, apparently, new Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrsky has so far failed to bring new clarity regarding Ukraine’s mobilization efforts. Syrsky has been tasked with auditing the armed forces to scrape up more combat-eligible troops, added the publication. This comes after President Zelensky’s office recently announced that only some 300,000 have fought at the frontline of the one million people who have been mobilized.

With Ukraine’s rapidly dwindling troop strength described as a “strategic crisis,” Oleksiy Bezhevets, an adviser to the Defense Ministry on recruitment, was cited as saying that civilians of fighting age must recognize the fact that “there’s no time for you left to sit home.” Volodymyr Zelensky said in December 2023 that the General Staff of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had stressed the need to recruit an additional 450,000-500,000 men for the army. Accordingly, the government submitted a draft law on mobilization to parliament on January 30. However, the result has been a drawn-out and heated debate. The bill, which would broaden the scope of the draft, lowering the eligibility age from 27 to 25 years, caused outrage in the country and was sent back for revision.

It also obligates people liable for military service to report to military commissariats to clarify their information within 60 days, Ukrainian media reported. These individuals may be restricted from traveling abroad, have their driver’s license suspended, or their bank accounts seized if they fail to do so. Amid the debate over such draconian measures in January, panicky account holders withdrew over $700 million in a single month, the WaPo added. In February, Ukrainian Justice Minister Denys Maliuska proposed giving prisoners weapons and shovels when they are mobilized for the Ukrainian Armed Forces. He underscored that in Ukraine, two categories of citizens are currently not involved in the mobilization, namely “those who are behind bars and those who are not.” Maliuska previously said that at least 50,000 men of military age with criminal records are hiding from Ukrainian draft boards and are not registered with the military.

The Russian Defense Ministry earlier said that amid the disruption of mobilization plans and in order to conceal massive losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the Kiev regime has intensified the recruitment of mercenaries. Fighters from the United States, Canada, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East have joined the ranks of the Ukrainian military. Furthermore, NATO soldiers under the guise of mercenaries are involved in combat operations in Ukraine, Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoy, head of the Russian General Staff’s Main Operational Directorate, told Russian media.

Read more …

“What remains is for the Kremlin and General Staff to decide to teach the Germans the only lesson by the only method they understand..”

The Good Germans Are Blowing Smoke (Helmer)

The political comprehension of the Germans — to adapt Mao Zedong’s axiom that political power comes out of the barrel of a gun — only comes out of the barrel of a Russian gun. The good Germans define themselves publicly by wishing this weren’t true because they realise there’s nothing they can do to stop the rest of their countrymen from throwing themselves at Russian guns until there are no more of them, the good Germans among them. One of these wishfully good Germans is called Florian Roetzer, who founded the widely read internet publication Telepolis in 1996, and retired to write elsewhere in 2021. Roetzer has just published his analysis of the transcript of last month’s teleconference at which the chief of the German Air Force, Lieutenant General Ingo Gerhartz, discussed with three subordinates a plan of attack on Russian civil and military targets with the German Taurus KEPD 350E cruise missile; conceal this German operation behind British, French, and Ukrainian forces and German commercial companies; accelerate the missile deliveries; and present the plan for approval by German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius and Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

Gerhartz is not only waging personal war against Russia, as he explained on the telephone two weeks ago, on February 19. Last November he declared personal war in alliance with the Israel Air Force in implementing the genocide of Gaza. In Roetzer’s new analysis, published on March 2 in Overton magazine, the problem is not (in Roetzer’s mind) that Gerhartz and the Bundeswehr are losing their war on the Ukrainian battlefield, or that they are aiming to provoke Russian counterattack against German targets outside that battlefield. “The fact that Russia was able to eavesdrop on the conversations of the German officers…is a major problem for the Bundeswehr, also in relation to its partners, who may no longer trust it.” “The bigger [sic] problem, however, has been Putin’s for quite some time, after one red line after another has been crossed by the NATO countries, without Russia really reacting to it, apart from warnings…But so far, Putin has accepted any military support for Ukraine.

“But if it is now becoming more and more public knowledge that NATO countries are directly supporting Ukraine with target data and in general in attacks with Western missiles and cruise missiles through the participation of soldiers in civilian and intelligence officers, and thus become parties to war, then Putin, who propagates that Russia is defending itself in Ukraine, has the problem of showing weakness and only bluffing, if no action is taken against it.” “It is obvious” – according to Roetzer – “that Russia cannot compete against a NATO weakened by the Ukraine war and therefore avoids a direct conflict. But if the attacks on Russia continue to increase and Western weapons are openly used, Putin will lose support in Russia if there is no military response…With the publication of the wiretapped conversation of the German officers, the Russian leadership may have harmed itself – if only because the Bundeswehr must now try to close the security gap. It is possible that [state media director Margarita] Simonyan has gone too far here. The question is whether the publication was coordinated with the Kremlin.”

That Germany is at war with Russia has been understood in Moscow for a long time. That there are good Germans like Roetzer who would like it to be otherwise for moral, legal, German national, or personal reasons is also well-known. Some of these good Germans have even served as German generals. What the Navalny Novichok episode of the autumn of 2020 revealed, followed by the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines in September 2022; and now last month’s teleconference conducted by Gerhartz – what all three episodes reveal is not how the Germans are understood in Moscow, but rather how the good Germans react when confronted with the war they are powerless to deter or stop their countrymen from waging. The impotence of the German opposition to this war is also well understood in Moscow. What remains is for the Kremlin and General Staff to decide to teach the Germans the only lesson by the only method they understand. That is the lesson the Germans have been failing to learn for seventy-nine years next month — since April 30, 1945, when Adolf Hitler shot himself before he could be captured by the Red Army waiting outside his bunker in Berlin.

Read more …

“And then she added : “But Putin…”.

The Brainwashing of Germany in Preparation for War (Bittner)

Recently my friend G., with whom I still correspond occasionally, wrote to me saying that he had read my book “State of Emergency” and got the impression that I had fallen into a “filter bubble”. He comes from a wealthy family, his father was a senior teacher, his mother a doctor, and at a young age he was a professor of mathematics at a southern German university and also a guest lecturer in Japan, South Korea and the USA. He cannot understand the fact that I am of the opinion that it is not Russia but the USA and its allies that are to blame for most of the conflicts in the world, especially the war in Ukraine and the economic decline in Germany and Western Europe. G. would like to give me friendly advice to reconsider my political views and to please obtain information from the public media and “reputable” newspapers such as Frankfurter Allgemeine, Welt or Süddeutsche and not from so-called alternative media. If I see “evil” in the USA rather than in Putin, all he can say about himself is that he would rather live “under the evil of the Americans” than that of the Russians.

And if the NATO protective umbrella, under which the Europeans have set themselves up so well, were to become leaky, things would not look rosy for Western Europe compared to a country like Russia full of nuclear weapons. It is sad that so much money has to be spent on “defensive armament”, but it is good that Putin is getting older and older and that the end of his tyranny is imminent at some point in the near future for the good of humanity. Like other acquaintances and friends, G. is firmly convinced that he knows everything and is right. All we agree on is that wars are terrible and must be avoided. But at this point the dissent begins again, because G. considers “humanitarian interventions”, such as those carried out by the USA again and again, to be legitimate and even necessary to defend freedom and democracy. I can describe the views represented by G. as exemplary. German society is thoroughly rabble-roused, and it is divided between those who have retained an eye for the facts and the others, the far greater majority, who have succumbed to years of influence.

My hairdresser, with whom I discussed, is of the opinion that Germany needs the atomic bomb to protect itself from “the Russian” who will soon attack Poland and the Baltic countries. When I countered that Vladimir Putin had called for cooperation and a common economic zone from Vladivostok to Lisbon in a memorable speech to the German Bundestag in 2001, he replied: “This Putin is lying as soon as he opens his mouth.” The resulting dispute ended He asked me the completely serious question: “Why do you think you can judge the political situation better than me?” He told me that he reads the newspaper in the morning and watches the Tagesschau in the evening. He also speaks to customers every day who all have different opinions than me. Every now and then I gave lectures and discussed things publicly. Most of the time, listeners and discussants came who shared my views or at least kept an open mind. After one such event, a middle-aged woman who identified herself as a judge said to me: “Everything you said was logical and well-documented, although from an unusual perspective, but you largely convinced me.” And then she added : “But Putin…”.

Indoctrination has not stopped at the doors of universities either. There are still some contacts with colleagues there from the time when I was a visiting professor in Poland, but they have become fragile. My friend Tomasz, who unfortunately also succumbed to US-controlled propaganda against Russia and for Ukraine, wrote to me: “I cannot understand the people who prefer to look the other way after the Russian attack on Ukraine. Stop this policy that is killing thousands of innocent people. “Putin with his megalomania has destroyed a long and stable peace in Europe.” He really believes that and he continued: “For me, Putin resembles Hitler to a T.” It is not Ukraine, which wants to go its own sovereign way, that is to blame for the war, but Putin, for whom Ukraine is just an appetizer. He built gas pipelines behind the EU’s back and against Poland’s interests. This shows his true colors, leading and oppressing other countries like dogs on a leash.

At least I was able to have a somewhat civilized conversation with my German friend and with Tomasz, if only by holding back. The space for debate has become increasingly narrow, and the authorities are no longer relying on the previous psychological warfare. Rather, the pressure on those who think differently, their patronization and harassment, is increasing dramatically. Anyone who doesn’t step up and stand out must expect the destruction of their existence and worse.

Read more …

“..the Russians could have simply logged on to the unsecured WebEx call without the officers noticing..”

German Defense Ministry Uses ‘1234’ As Password (RT)

The German Defense Ministry has protected a press statement on leaked military communications behind the password “1234.” German media has mocked the ministry for the “extremely embarrassing” security detail. The statement, made by Defense Minister Boris Pistorius on Sunday, was posted in audio format on the ministry’s website on Monday. Under a link to a cloud storage service hosting the file, the ministry informed visitors that they could access the recording by entering the password “1234.” While the file is not classified and the password was likely chosen as a placeholder, its use was roundly mocked by German tabloid Bild. “After the wiretapping attack on the Bundeswehr [German military] by Russian spies, this is extremely embarrassing,” the paper wrote on Monday.

On Friday, RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan published a transcript and audio recording of a conversation between four officers of the German Air Force, including its top general, Ingo Gerhartz, saying that she had obtained the file from Russian security officials. Over a WebEx video call, the officers discussed the potential use of German-made Taurus missiles against the Crimean Bridge, wondering how they could maintain plausible deniability of involvement in such an attack. The conversation also revealed that – according to the officers – Britain has already sent its own military specialists to Ukraine to operate Storm Shadow cruise missiles given to the Ukrainian armed forces.

It is unclear how Simonyan’s contacts obtained the audio. However, the deputy chairman of the German parliament’s oversight committee, Roderich Kiesewetter, said on Sunday that the Russians could have simply logged on to the unsecured WebEx call without the officers noticing. Berlin confirmed the recording’s authenticity on Saturday. In his statement on Sunday, Pistorius did not address the apparent security lapses that led to the leak. Instead, he accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of orchestrating the incident as part of an “information war” against the West.

For months, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has been under pressure from Kiev and members of his own cabinet to approve shipments of Taurus missiles to Ukraine. However, he has thus far refused, and the Wall Street Journal noted on Saturday that the leaked conversation could make their eventual delivery less likely. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday that the leak proves that “plans to launch strikes on Russian territory are being substantively and specifically discussed within the Bundeswehr.” A day earlier, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned that “Germany is preparing for a war with Russia.”

Read more …

“..turning Ukraine into a giant factory showroom for Western weapons..”

Zelensky and the West Have A New Scam – And Taxpayers Will Foot The Bill (RT)

What do you do to boost GDP when your country is neck-deep in military conflict and your allies’ main interest is using you to wash taxpayer cash into their own military industrial complexes? Make that your whole national identity! And demand that the West help you transition. “Our country will become one of the world’s key producers of weapons and defense systems. And this is no longer just an ambition or a prospect, it is a potential that is already being realized,” Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky said in September 2023. That plea has echoed all over the Western press. You’d think that it may have thought to “realize” that “potential” before it went live with the big “Ukrainian counteroffensive” show. But hey, making lemonade from lemons, there’s definitely a business opportunity in losing on the battlefield that wouldn’t exist if Ukraine had proven to be adequately stocked up and victorious. Any ambulance-chasing weapons salesman would be attracted by that.

And on top of that, Russia’s whole stated objective from the very outset has been “de-militarization.” Right now, Ukraine is to Western weapons producers what the Cheesecake Factory is to a fat kid. Those slightly less cynical might be tempted to view all this as the path to victory for Ukraine, but a recent incident strongly suggests otherwise. In a leaked audio recording obtained by Russian intelligence and authenticated by the German government, senior Luftwaffe officers, including the Air Force’s chief, are overheard talking about how even the delivery of the German Taurus missiles to Kiev wouldn’t change the course of the conflict in Ukraine’s favor. If even the gold standard German cruise missile that doubles the strike distance of its Western rivals isn’t considered a game changer in the overall conflict with Russia at this point, then odds don’t sound too good for much else.

And who’s going to pay for Ukraine’s identity change, anyway? Western Europe and the US will pay for the transition, of course. Just as they’re also paying to keep all of Ukrainian society afloat, funding salaries and pensions. It’s not like investors are flocking to Ukraine right now. Much of the weapons-making infrastructure from the Cold War has been decimated, and in a country that ranks near the top of the global corruption index, it probably won’t come as a surprise that the industry itself is rife with “mismanagement.” While it’s clear who’s going to pay, what’s less obvious is who will actually benefit from turning Ukraine into a giant factory showroom for Western weapons. Some Western arms manufacturers have rushed into Ukraine to set up shop, such as Germany’s Rheinmetall, which started operating an armored vehicle plant in the country last year. Guess it’s just good business to be cranking out tanks right on the battlefield where they can be blown up coming off the assembly line. May as well just set fire to that Western taxpayer cash funding this charade the moment that it pops out of the ATM.

Read more …

“..from [the perspective of] the people who run the United States, the blob, the deep state… this war was absolutely essential.”

Losing to Russia Shatters Western Leaders’ Belief in Their Exceptionalism (Sp.)

There is “sincere panic” among Western leaders who are forced to “face the inevitable fact” that they are losing to Russia, Mark Sleboda, a foreign relations and security analyst told Sputnik’s Fault Lines on Monday. “It is shattering both their preconceptions of this conflict and also shattering their belief in their own exceptionalism and seniority,” he told co-hosts Melik Abdul and Jamarl Thomas. The comments came after discussing the leaked German plans to coordinate a strike on the Crimean bridge or an ammo depot in Krasnodar, which Sleboda said was “planning an act of war on the Russian Federation” noting that Russia would have “every right” to respond. “They were plotting an act of war and [the] Ukrainians in all of this, they weren’t doing the planning, they wouldn’t be doing the implementation, the programing of the missiles on the ground. They were talking about having it be done by German officials and the number [of] people with American accents and civilian clothes,” he said, adding “Their biggest concern, other than which was the more feasible target… was their plausible deniability.”

Sleboda noted that it is an open question if German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who has been publicly against sending Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine, was lying or if “he [was] unaware of what his own military was doing.” Recently, Scholz -seemingly on accident- revealed that British and American personnel are on the ground in Ukraine to help coordinate the long-range missiles provided by those countries to the Kiev regime. “That’s exposing that America and the UK have military people on the ground in the guise of volunteers or mercenaries or humanitarian workers… which means they are at war with Russia. It’s simply undeclared,” Sleboda argued. Noting that the plans violated the “rules” of the conflict by planning a strike inside of Russia’s mainland. “Russia had two options,” Sleboda explained. “They could escalate back or [which they tried] instead expose this, hoping that it will at least dampen down.”

“The West has two options in response, they can either back down or they can escalate in response,” he added. However, the West has a lot at stake in Russia because they bet Western hegemony on the conflict. “We’ve heard from every Western leader… a Russian victory in Ukraine would be a defeat of NATO. They did this to themselves, they invested this much political and geopolitical capital. They’ve said… that US global leadership… is at stake in the outcome of this conflict.” “The world might not have originally reached the same conclusion, but now they forced them to because they… said it so authoritatively.” Host Jamarl Thomas lamented how the West didn’t need to provoke Russia into the conflict, but Sleboda disagreed, saying that it was inevitable from the perspective of the “deep state.”

“They are fighting for US hegemony over the world – that’s why. From their point of view, this was also an inevitability, from [the perspective of] the people who run the United States, the blob, the deep state… this war was absolutely essential.” Sleboda noted that the US did manage to gain one advantage in the war, it made Europe more subservient to them. “They tied Europe more directly to them. Europe is now spending their money on two to four times more expensive [Liquefied Natural Gas] LNG than they were on Russian energy, which means that Europe’s economy, yes, is facing de-industrialization. But, on the plus side, a lot of those European businesses are going to the US. So they achieved very real geopolitical results out of this conflict.”

Read more …

“..their leaderships do agree that the days of marginalizing the Palestinians are over..”

Is Tehran Winning the Middle East? (Juan Cole)

Despite their fiery rhetoric, their undeniable backing of fundamentalist militias in the region, and their depiction by inside-the-Beltway war hawks as the root of all evil in the Middle East, Iran’s leaders have long acted more like a status quo power than a force for genuine change. They have shored up the rule of the autocratic al-Assad family in Syria, while helping the Iraqi government that emerged after President George W. Bush’s invasion of that country fight off the terrorist threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). In truth, not Iran but the U.S. and Israel are the countries that have most strikingly tried to use their power to reshape the region in a Napoleonic manner. The disastrous U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, and Israel’s wars on Egypt (1956, 1967), Lebanon (1982-2000, 2006), and Gaza (2008, 2012, 2014, 2024), along with its steady encouragement of large-scale squatting on the Palestinian West Bank, were clearly intended to alter the geopolitics of the region permanently through the use of military force on a massive scale.

Only recently, Ayatollah Khamenei bitterly asked, “Why don’t the leaders of Islamic countries publicly cut off their relationship with the murderous Zionist regime and stop helping this regime?” Pointing to the staggering death toll in Israel’s present campaign against Gaza, he was focusing on the Arab countries — Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan, and the United Arab Emirates — that, as part of Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner’s “Abraham Accords,” had officially recognized Israel and established relations with it. (Egypt and Jordan had, of course, recognized Israel long before that.) Given the anti-Israel sentiment in the region, had it, in fact, been rife with democracies, Iran’s position might have been widely implemented. Still, it was a distinct sign of terminal tone deafness on the part of Biden administration officials that they hoped to use the Gaza crisis to extend the Abraham Accords to Saudi Arabia, while sidelining the Palestinians and creating a joint Israeli-Arab front against Iran.

The region had already been moving in a somewhat different direction. Last March, after all, Iran and Saudi Arabia had begun forging a new relationship by restoring the diplomatic relations that had been suspended in 2016 and working to expand trade between their countries. And that relationship has only continued to improve as the nightmare in Israel and Gaza developed. In fact, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi first visited the Saudi capital, Riyadh, in November and, since the Gaza conflict began, Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian has met twice with his Saudi counterpart. Frustrated by a markedly polarizing American policy in the region, de facto Saudi ruler Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman and Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei resorted to the good offices of Beijing to sidestep Washington and strengthen their relations further.

Although Iran is far more hostile to Israel than Saudi Arabia, their leaderships do agree that the days of marginalizing the Palestinians are over. In a remarkably unambiguous statement issued in early February, the Saudis offered the following: “The Kingdom has communicated its firm position to the U.S. administration that there will be no diplomatic relations with Israel unless an independent Palestinian state is recognized on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, and that the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip stops and all the Israeli occupation forces withdraw from the Gaza Strip.” Significantly, the Saudis even refused to join a U.S.-led naval task force created to halt attacks on Red Sea shipping by the Houthis of Yemen (no friends of theirs) in support of the Palestinians. Its leaders are clearly all too aware that the carnage still being wreaked on Gaza has infuriated most Saudis.

Read more …

“..a “sweeping” European defence industry strategy, which will shift the EU’s defence industry to a war-footing..”

The EU’s American Queen (Lily Lynch)

Von der Leyen’s tenure has been marked by an acceleration of what Perry Anderson has termed “European coups” — the gradual agglomeration of power in Brussels. Even the manner in which she became Commissioner in 2019 represented a break with a procedure designed to lend the EU executive greater democratic legitimacy. In 2003, a Franco-German agreement established the foundations of what would become the Spitzenkandidaten (“lead candidate”) process, whereby the political family with the most votes in the European Parliamentary elections would secure the office of Commissioner for its pre-chosen candidate. But in 2019, Von der Leyen was not the Spitzenkandidat of her European People’s Party (EPP) — instead, she was handpicked by EU leaders Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron. The EPP’s Spitzenkandidat, Manfred Weber was thwarted by Macron, who viewed him as unqualified. Von der Leyen, on the other hand, was a long-time Merkel loyalist and, as Macron noted, spoke French exceptionally well.

The then-German Defence Minister was also amenable to closer military cooperation with France and had spoken of the need to create “an army of Europeans” — another point in her favour for Macron. In other words, Von der Leyen’s very rise constituted a quiet coup. Beyond the pretty verbiage about defending democracy, it amounted to what Anderson has described as “the quiet settling of affairs between elites in camera, above the heads of an inert populace below”. Perhaps as a result, Von der Leyen has started to rewrite her origin story, claiming that she “ran in 2019” — referencing a campaign that never happened. For the Queen of Europe, both reality and democracy are malleable. Yet Von der Leyen’s weightiest revisionism concerns the EU’s foreign policy. In 2019, she identified the creation of a “geopolitical commission” as one of her main priorities as Commissioner. The EU, she asserted, needed to become a major “geopolitical” actor “to shape a better world order”.

Chaos and crisis demanded that it “learn to speak the language of power”. Then came the twin threats of Russia and another Trump administration, both of which lent these aims a greater urgency. The result is that Von der Leyen’s EU is gradually being retooled for war. Two years ago, EU officials broke the taboo on financing lethal weapons when they decided to fund the provision of lethal military aid to Ukraine. As article 41.2 of the Treaty of the European Union explicitly prohibits “expenditure arising from operations having military or defence implications”, this move required some creativity to circumvent. Towards this end, the EU mobilised the European Peace Facility (EPF), a misnomer for a tool engineered to finance military engagements abroad. To get around the proscription on the financing of war, the EPF has been designed as a €5 billion “off-budget” instrument. Nor does the drumbeat of war stop there. On Tuesday, the Commission is set to unveil a “sweeping” European defence industry strategy, which will shift the EU’s defence industry to a war-footing, while “upending the way it finances and sells arms”.

Von der Leyen has said it will aim to “turbocharge our defence industrial capacity over the next five years”, with a focus on joint procurement. This approach draws on the Commission’s precedent-setting joint procurement of Covid vaccines, an effort now being touted as a model for success but still mired in major controversy: Von der Leyen’s private text message exchange with Pfizer Chief Executive Albert Bourla — hammering out the details of the April 2021 deal for 1.1 billion doses of the vaccine — has been shrouded in secrecy, with both journalists and the European Court of Auditors stonewalled in their attempts to gain access to the conversation. Suffice it to say such a precedent does not bode well for transparency in the massive new defence procurement process.

Read more …

“Companies that fail to abide by the EU’s rules may face fines of up to 10% of their total worldwide annual turnover, or up to 20% in the event of repeated infringements..”

Musk’s X Could Face New EU Restrictions (RT)

Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) could be forced to follow a set of strict guidelines in the EU after the European Commission (EC) announced that the platform may be classified as a ‘gatekeeper’ under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The EC explained that companies can be subject to additional regulations if they operate what is described as a “core platform service,” including search engines, app stores, and messenger services. They must have over 45 million monthly active end users, more than 10,000 yearly business users, or over €75 billion ($81 billion) in market capitalization.

According to an announcement published on the EC’s website on March 1, X, as well as travel website Booking.com and TikTok owner ByteDance, have submitted notifications that their services potentially meet the DMA thresholds. The commission now has 45 days to decide whether to designate the three companies as gatekeepers. If so, they will have six months to comply with DMA requirements. Companies that have already received the gatekeeper designation include the likes of Apple, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and Alphabet. Companies that fall under the rules are required to let third parties inter-operate with their services, to allow business users to access the data they generate on the platform, and to let them conclude contracts with their customers outside the gatekeeper’s ecosystem.

At the same time, the targeted companies must also refrain from favoring their own services over competitors or blocking users from removing pre-installed software or apps. They must also seek explicit consent from users to track their activity outside the gatekeeper’s core platform service for the purpose of targeted advertising. Companies that fail to abide by the EU’s rules may face fines of up to 10% of their total worldwide annual turnover, or up to 20% in the event of repeated infringements. Businesses may also be slapped with periodic penalty payments of up to 5% of their average daily turnover.

Read more …

“Some around town think it has something to do with Presiden Biden’s visit to the border..”

Ballot Drop Boxes Installed Along Border Wall (BBee)

Texas residents woke up Thursday morning to find general election ballot boxes had been placed along the southern border wall that divides parts of the U.S. from Mexico. “I’m not sure where these ballot drop boxes came from,” Brownsville resident Tom Walker told reporters. “Some around town think it has something to do with Presiden Biden’s visit to the border. I saw some of his folks down handing out mail-in ballots to these illegal guys who keep coming into town. Makes a person wonder what’s up.” Biden’s team denied placing the boxes strategically along the border wall right where the main surge of illegal immigrants are crossing into the country.

“This isn’t some crazy ploy to rig the election in favor of President Biden by handing out ballots to the millions of illegal aliens that have been streaming into the country over the past three years,” Biden spokesperson Alexander Sheperd told the press. “On a completely unrelated note, does anyone know how to say ‘President Biden will give you a prepaid $10 thousand Visa cash card if you vote for him’ in Spanish?” As of publishing time, Biden aids were seen rounding up as many filled-out ballots as they could in an effort they said would “restore fair and free elections and prevent that fascist Trump from taking office ever again.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Gaza 1970

 

 

Circle of life

 

 

Hedgehog

 

 

Floki

 

 

Survive

 

 

Coyote

 

 

Kiwi

 

 

Putin

 

 

 

 

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