The Automatic Earth

René Magritte Empire of light 1950

 

• Imagine a Missile Massacre On a Florida Beach On the Fourth of July (SCF)

• Biden Should Be Removed As President – US House Speaker (RT)

• Trump the Peacemaker? His Presidency Might Help End The War In Ukraine (RT)

• US and NATO Accomplices Play Terror Card Against Russia (Van den Ende)

• ‘She Eats Russians For Breakfast’ (RT)

• EU Bureaucrats ‘Want War With Russia’ – Orban (RT)

• Ursula von der Leyen: Beyond Redemption (NC)

• Why Does Türkiye Want to Join BRICS? (RT)

• The Art of Being Eternally Shocked (Turley)

• Trump Sentencing Will Put Merchan’s Bias in Crosshairs (RCP)

• Iran Threatens Israel With ‘Obliterating War’ If It Attacks Lebanon (ZH)

• Over 80 UK War Planes Deployed From Cyprus To Lebanon Since 7 Oct (Cradle)

• Chevron and Bitcoin (Crossman)

• Banksy ‘Launches’ Migrant Boat Stunt At Glastonbury Festival (MN)

 

 

 

 

Debate Eagle
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807076748946723280

 

 

Tucker

Joe Biden's dementia, as seen from 10,000 miles away. pic.twitter.com/Vc2QzqwQQM

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) June 29, 2024

 

 

Decline
https://twitter.com/i/status/1807019531656638865

 

 

Don’t

US govt warns: Do not, under any circumstances, come to Russia. pic.twitter.com/Jpl9luk8Ie

— Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil (@ivan_8848) June 29, 2024

 

 

McAfee 2020 (!)

Russia's first time traveller has returned.

Guess what he said:

In September Biden is medically diagnosed as unfit for office and quits.

They discover that the DNC has legal power to choose a replacement without a National vote!

Weird huh?

You'll never guess who they chose.

— John McAfee (@officialmcafee) July 18, 2020

https://twitter.com/i/status/1806945470566056163

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Washington is unhinged and depraved. A collection of psychopaths as are its minions in Brussels and other NATO capitals.”

• Imagine a Missile Massacre On a Florida Beach On the Fourth of July (SCF)

The scenario is not hyperbole. Imagine a sunny beach in Florida crowded with families enjoying a holiday weekend. In a split second, mayhem and murder are unleashed as crowds flee in panic from a foreign missile exploding over the beach. There is no doubt that the United States would go to war immediately against the perpetrator. Furious condemnations would ring out for days, weeks, and months among American politicians and their media. But what is also obvious from this hypothetical scenario is the egregious double standard and hypocrisy of American and Western responses. Last weekend, Russia was celebrating its annual Day of Remembrance and Sorrow. The day honors the dead of the Great Patriotic War instigated by Nazi Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. That weekend also combines Trinity Sunday, a prominent religious holiday in the Orthodox calendar.

As Russian families were enjoying the festive weekend, the Kiev regime fired five U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles at the Crimean city of Sevastopol. It was a deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure. Four missiles were shot down by Russian air defenses, but a fifth exploded over a nearby beach, where hundreds of people were enjoying sun-splashed sand and the gentle lapping of waves. In the ensuing horror, four people including two children were killed. Over 150 were injured, dozens of them seriously, from the explosions caused by cluster bomblets released by the missile. Video footage clearly shows explosions and not merely ordnance shrapnel falling from the sky. This was an act of state-sponsored terrorism against civilians. The United States and its NATO partners bear responsibility for the massacre.

Only a week before the attack, U.S. President Joe Biden and other NATO leaders had signed off on supplying the Kiev regime with long-range (300 km) ATACMS weapons and a green light to use these missiles on Russian territory. Arguably, too, the atrocity was an unpardonable act of war against Russia. As the foreign ministry in Moscow noted, the U.S.-led NATO proxy war in Ukraine has become a direct war against Russia. The situation has entered a most dangerous moment. The Kremlin has warned that retaliation is coming. There is no question that under international law, the Russian Federation has every right to respond to murderous aggression. It only remains to be seen what the form of retaliation will be. It is doubtful that Russia would take revenge on innocent American civilians. The Russian leadership and its people are far too moral and strategically intelligent to countenance such barbarity.

The scenario of bombing a beach in Florida is invoked to demonstrate the heinous reality of what occurred in Crimea last weekend. And it also demonstrates the rank moral bankruptcy of American and European leaders. Only days before the missile attack on Crimea, the American Senate introduced a bill to declare Russia a “state sponsor of terrorism”. The bill was a hysterical reaction to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s state visit to North Korea and the signing of a mutual defense pact with Chairman Kim Jong Un. The irony of the U.S. reaction in light of the subsequent attack on Crimea is not merely bitter. Washington is unhinged and depraved. A collection of psychopaths as are its minions in Brussels and other NATO capitals.

Read more …

“We have a serious problem here, because we have a president who, by all appearances, is not up to the task..”

• Biden Should Be Removed As President – US House Speaker (RT)

Joe Biden should be replaced as US president, having shown he is “not up to the task” during his debate with Donald Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson has said. The US president’s performance in his first election face-off with Trump on Thursday was widely viewed as a disaster. The 81-year-old appeared frail and confused, struggling to finish his sentences and mixing up words. According to media reports, Democrats were “panicking” after the debate, and some donors have demanded that the president be dropped from the party’s ticket for the November 5 election. “I would be panicking too if I were a Democrat today and that was my nominee. I think they know they have a serious problem,” Johnson told journalists on Thursday. The Republican politician argued that Biden should not only withdraw from the race, but also be immediately removed from office.

“It’s not just political. It’s not just the Democratic Party. It’s the entire country. We have a serious problem here, because we have a president who, by all appearances, is not up to the task,” he said. Johnson said Biden’s administration could force him to step down by invoking the 25th Amendment – which states that the vice president and cabinet members can vote to declare the president “unable to discharge the powers and the duties of his office,” making the VP the acting head of state. If the commander-in-chief refuses to comply, the final decision on the issue would be made by Congress. The amendment has never been used in US history. “There are a lot of people asking about the 25th Amendment, invoking the 25th Amendment right now because this is an alarming situation,” the House speaker stressed.

Due to Biden’s mental condition, “our adversaries see the weakness in this White House as we all do. I take no pleasure in saying that.” “I think this is a very dangerous situation… And it needs to be regarded and handled as such. And we hope that they will do their duty, as we all seek to do our duty to do best for the American people,” Johnson stated. “I would ask the Cabinet members to search their hearts.” The results of a poll by Morning Consult, published by the news website Axios on Friday, suggested that 60% of the voters believe Biden should “definitely” or “probably” be replaced as the Democratic presidential nominee following his disappointing performance in the debate.

Read more …

“.. the plan threatens Ukraine with certain defeat, regime, and, possibly, even state disintegration; it threatens Moscow with a harder time – a type of threat that has no record of success.”

• Trump the Peacemaker? His Presidency Might Help End The War In Ukraine (RT)

The likely next president of the US, Donald Trump, has signaled that he has a plan for bringing the war in Ukraine to an end. Or, at least, two of his advisers have such a plan. More importantly, they have submitted it to Trump. And most importantly, they have said that he has responded positively. As one of the plan’s authors has put it, “I’m not claiming he agreed with it or agreed with every word of it, but we were pleased to get the feedback we did.” It is true that Trump has also let it be known that he is not officially endorsing the plan. However, it is obvious that this is a trial balloon which has been launched with his approval. Otherwise, we would have either not have heard about it or it would have been disavowed.

The two Trump advisers are Keith Kellogg, a retired lieutenant general, and Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst. Both held significant positions on national security matters during Trump’s presidency. Currently, both play important roles at the Center for American Security: Kellogg serves as co-chair and Fleitz as vice chair. Both, finally, are clear about their belief in what is perhaps Trump’s single most defining foreign policy concept: America First. Fleitz recently published an article asserting that “only America First can reverse the global chaos caused by the Biden administration.” For Kellogg, the “America First approach is key to national security.” The Center for American Security, finally, is part of the America First Policy Institute, an influential think tank founded in 2022 by key Trump administration veterans to prepare policies for his comeback.

Clearly, this is a peace plan that has not come out of nowhere. On the contrary, it has not merely been submitted to Trump to receive his – unofficial – nod, it has also emerged from within Trumpism as a resurgent political force. In addition, as Reuters has pointed out, it is also the most elaborate plan yet from the Trump camp on how to get to peace in Ukraine. In effect, this is the first time that Trump’s promise to rapidly end this war, once he is back in the White House, has been fleshed out in detail. The adoption of the plan or any similar policy would obviously mark a massive change in US policy. Hence, this is something that deserves close attention.

What does the plan foresee? In essence, it is built on a simple premise: to use Washington’s leverage over Ukraine to force the country to accept a peace that will come with concessions, territorial and otherwise. In the words of Keith Kellogg, “We tell the Ukrainians, ‘You’ve got to come to the table, and if you don’t come to the table, support from the United States will dry up’.” Since Kiev is vitally dependent on American assistance, it is hard to see how it could resist such pressure. Perhaps to give an appearance of “balance” for the many Republicans still hawkish on Russia, the plan also includes a threat addressed to Moscow: “And you tell Putin,” again in Kellogg’s terms, “he’s got to come to the table and if you don’t come to the table, then we’ll give Ukrainians everything they need to kill you in the field.”

Yet it is obvious that, despite the tough rhetoric about Russia, the plan will cause great anxiety in Kiev, not Moscow, for two reasons. First, the threats addressed to Russia and Ukraine are not comparable: If the US were to withdraw its support from Ukraine, Kiev’s Zelensky regime would quickly not just lose the war but collapse. If the US were to, instead, increase its support for the Zelensky regime, then Moscow would respond by mobilizing additional resources, as it has done before. It might also, in that case, receive direct military assistance from China, which would not stand by and watch a potential Russian defeat unfold, because that would leave Beijing alone with an aggressive, emboldened West. In addition, Washington would, of course, have to weigh the risk of Russia engaging in counter-escalation. In sum, the plan threatens Ukraine with certain defeat, regime, and, possibly, even state disintegration; it threatens Moscow with a harder time – a type of threat that has no record of success.

The second reason the plan is bad news for Ukraine but not for Russia is that the peace it aims at is much closer to Moscow’s war aims than to those of Kiev. While the document that has been submitted to Trump has not been made public, American commentators believe that a paper published on the site of the Center for American Security under the title “America First, Russia, & Ukraine” is similar to what he – or his staff – got to see. Also authored by Kellogg and Fleitz, this paper, too, repeatedly stresses just how “tough” Trump used to be toward Russia. Plenty of strutting there for those who like that kind of stuff. These statements, however, are balanced by an emphasis on what used to be called diplomacy: “At the same time,” we read, “Trump was open to cooperation with Russia and dialogue with Putin. Trump expressed respect for Putin as a world leader and did not demonize him in public statements … This was a transactional approach to US-Russia relations … to find ways to coexist and lower tensions … while standing firm on American security interests.”

Read more …

“..making no differentiation between conservatives and liberals, social democrats or Republicans and Democrats. All belong to the de facto Western War Party serving U.S.-led Western imperialism.”

• US and NATO Accomplices Play Terror Card Against Russia (Van den Ende)

Recently, two U.S. senators, Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal, introduced a bill to designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. “We will push for a vote, and the best thing we can do, I think, to shape the future is to label Putin as a terrorist leader, because that’s what he is,” said Graham. Graham can be compared to a (rather stupid) criminal cowboy. There are many senators with the same criminal mentality in the U.S. government. Graham is Republican, Blumenthal is a Democrat. It doesn’t matter who rules the U.S., both political parties are on the warpath and both are under the influence of the U.S. deep state (lobbies like the arms industry, military complex, etc.). Elections are a farce, just like in Europe. The U.S. together with its partners in the European Union and NATO, have instigated and prolonged all kinds of illegal wars for many years, with the reckless supply of weapons and money.

Recent wars include Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and the bombing of Libya into the stone age, and now it is Russia’s turn. Since the start of the Special Military Operation in Ukraine in February 2022 (even before that going back to 2014), Russia has been the target of the entire West. European leaders have recently become even more radical than Uncle Sam and are using threatening war language – rabid rhetoric we have not heard since the Second World War. Now that Ukraine cannot win on the battlefield, the U.S. and the West are turning to other means, as they always do, namely terrorism. We see a pattern here over several decades. The worst manifestation perhaps were the bloody wars that culminated in terrorism in Syria and Iraq, where the U.S. and EU/NATO sponsored and still sponsor terrorism. ISIS or Daesh was created by the U.S. The deceased senator (a Republican) John McCain was one of the godfathers of ISIS, whose murderers were trained at the U.S. Camp Bucca in Iraq.

The same John McCain was in Kiev during the unfolding Maidan coup in December 2013 and told thousands of NeoNazi chanting demonstrators that Americans support their resistance to closer ties with Russia. The coup was executed in February 2014. Other senators and government officials from the U.S. and Europe were also present for the Kiev coup, such as Chris Murphy and Victoria Nuland from the U.S. From Europe, the Dutchman Hans van Baalen, the former Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstad (now EU MEP) and other EU delegates were present and supported the neo-Nazi groups wreaking violence on the Maidan square, killing police officers and sacking public buildings. I must emphasize that the Western coup backers were from all kinds of political parties in the EU and the U.S., making no differentiation between conservatives and liberals, social democrats or Republicans and Democrats. All belong to the de facto Western War Party serving U.S.-led Western imperialism.

Victoria Nuland (now retired from the CIA-riddled U.S. State Department) followed in the footsteps of John McCain and emerged as the greatest Russia hater in the U.S. It was she who threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin with “nasty surprises” only weeks before the terrorist attack in March this year on the Crocus City Hall shopping-theater complex just outside Moscow where 144 people were killed by a team of gunmen. The embassies (U.S. and EU) issued warnings for their fellow countrymen not to go to events or busy places in the near future, so they knew something was coming – because they planned it themselves.

Nuland has spoken vulgarly over the years. We all know her “fuck the EU” comment. But at her so-called farewell speech in February this year, she literally said: “The war in Ukraine is not to help Ukraine, but to thwart Russia.” Also revealing was Nuland’s explanation of the background of the war. Nothing about saving Ukraine, but all about her aversion to Russia. “We wanted a partner that was focused on the West, that wanted to be European. But that was not what Putin brought,” she said. So, in other words, Putin has to go and Russia needs a regime change that is pro-West, in other words a puppet regime.

Read more …

So we make her our top ‘diplomat’?!

• ‘She Eats Russians For Breakfast’ (RT)

Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas has been nominated by the leaders of EU member states to become the next high representative for security and foreign policy. The politician – selected to speak for Brussels internationally and balance conflicting interests in the EU – has a reputation as an uncompromising hawk on Russia. Before beginning a five-year term, Kallas will need approval from the European Parliament, whose members are expected to vote on her appointment in July, a step widely seen as a formality. The 47-year-old’s attitude towards Moscow was summed up by an unnamed EU official, explaining why Western European nations were resisting her candidacy for another top job – the secretary general of NATO. “Are we really putting someone who likes to eat Russians for breakfast in this position?” the source told Politico in March. Kallas reacted by posting a picture of her breakfast, consisting of blueberries, muesli, a dairy product, and a drink.

Kallas has embraced the idea that at some point NATO countries may have to deploy troops in Ukraine to prevent Moscow from defeating Kiev, first put forward by French President Emmanuel Macron in February. “We shouldn’t be afraid of our own power. Russia is saying this or that step is escalation, but defense is not escalation,” the Estonian politician said of the proposal. Macron’s stated goal in voicing the idea publicly was to leave Russian President Vladimir Putin guessing as to how far the US-led military bloc might go in supporting Ukraine. After multiple member states, including the US, ruled out sending their soldiers to fight for Kiev, the suggestion was downgraded to a military training mission in Western Ukraine. Kallas has backed the new plan, saying it does not amount to an escalation – because a potential attack on the instructors would not trigger a mandatory joint NATO response. “If you send your people to help Ukrainians … you know the country is at war and you go to a risk zone. So you take the risk,” she explained in May.

According to Kallas, there should be no “Plan B” for Ukraine, because contemplating it would amount to undermining the primary goal of helping Ukraine prevail in the conflict. ”Victory in Ukraine is not just about territory,” she told the BBC in early June. “If Ukraine joins NATO, even without some territory, then that’s a victory because it will be placed under the NATO umbrella.” The Estonian politician believes the optimal scenario of a defeat for Russia would result in the country’s dissolution. Russia is composed of “many different nations” that could become independent, and “it is not a bad thing if the big power is actually [made] much smaller,” she argued last year. The Estonian daily Postimees argued earlier this month that leaving domestic politics behind may be the best thing the prime minister can do for her country. The Baltic nation is enduring a recession and severe budget deficit, and Kallas’ coalition government is unable to find common ground on tackling the problems, the editorial argued.

“She has earned the reputation of a strong voice of the eastern part of the EU and a convincing supporter of Ukrainian victory,” the newspaper said. “It’s all good, but the citizens of Estonia did not elect her based on her international image”. Her looming appointment has “paralyzed the government,” as the coalition is unable to function while everyone waits for Kallas to quit, Postimees said. Kallas is a vocal proponent of cutting all business ties with Russia as part of the Western response to the Ukraine conflict. However, last year Estonian media revealed that her Husband Arvo Hallik held a 25% stake in a logistics company that provides services in Russia. She has denied any wrongdoing and rejected calls to step down over the scandal, which she claimed to be a politically motivated hatchet job. But her reputation was severely damaged, at home and internationally. “This is hypocrisy in a cube,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said at the time. He was referring to Kallas’ criticisms of Budapest, which views the EU decision to decouple from the Russian economy as self-harming, while having no impact on the hostilities.

Read more …

“Orban also accused the EU leadership of “imposing their own ideologies” on the populations of member states, instead of “looking after the interests of the people.”

• EU Bureaucrats ‘Want War With Russia’ – Orban (RT)

The EU leadership is pushing the bloc towards war with Russia, while neglecting the interests of their own people, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has claimed. In an op-ed published in the Magyar Nemzet newspaper on Saturday, Orban warned that the EU is facing a series of crises, including economic challenges and the heightened threat of terrorism. “To make matters worse, the Brussels bureaucracy that lives in a bubble has made a number of bad political decisions in recent years,” the prime minister argued. “Europe is increasingly being dragged into a war, in which it has nothing to gain and everything to lose.” “The bureaucrats in Brussels want this war. They see it as their own, and they want to defeat Russia. They keep sending the money of the European people to Ukraine. They have shot European companies in their feet with sanctions. They have driven up inflation and they have made making a living difficult for millions of European citizens.

The Brussels bureaucrats want this war, they see it as their own, and they want to defeat Russia. They keep sending the money of the European people to Ukraine, they have shot European companies in the foot with sanctions, they have driven up inflation and they have made making a living difficult for millions of European citizens. Orban also accused the EU leadership of “imposing their own ideologies” on the populations of member states, instead of “looking after the interests of the people.” The Hungarian prime minister made his comments shortly after EU leaders nominated Ursula von der Leyen to serve for a third term as the president of the European Commission. At the same time, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas was nominated to replace Josep Borrell as the bloc’s top diplomat. Known for her hawkish foreign policy, Kallas has been one of the key champions of tougher sanctions on Russia and more weapons shipments to Ukraine.

She is also an advocate of using frozen Russian assets for aid to Ukraine. Orban is an outspoken critic of the EU’s approach to the Ukraine conflict, favoring a diplomatic settlement through negotiations as opposed to more escalation. Unlike many other NATO members, Hungary has refused to send weapons to Kiev and lobbied against unconditional financial assistance. Orban previously claimed the US and the EU were “the sources” of the “war madness” sweeping the continent, and accused Brussels of dangerous brinkmanship with Russia.

Read more …

Europe has all these women compensating for a lack of testicles.

• Ursula von der Leyen: Beyond Redemption (NC)

To be accused of impropriety on one occasion may be regarded as a misfortune but to be accused on four occasions looks like carelessness. (With apologies to Oscar Wilde) If there is one individual who, more than anyone else, symbolises the ineptitude of the European Commission then it is surely the Commission’s president, Ursula von der Leyen (hereafter, VDL). Questions about VDL’s lack of probity first surfaced in 2015 when she was accused of plagiarising her doctoral dissertation. She was eventually cleared of the accusations but as the BBC reported on 9 March 2016, the president of the Hannover Medical School, Christopher Baum, conceded that “Ms von der Leyen’s thesis did contain plagiarised material”, but he added “there had been no intent to deceive”. Her first lucky escape.

VDL’s lack of probity continued while she served as Germany’s Minister of Defence between 2013 and 2019. During her tenure at the ministry, she became embroiled in a scandal regarding payments of €250 million to consultants related to arms contracts. Germany’s Federal Audit Office found that, of the €250 million declared for consultancy fees, only €5.1 million had been spent. Furthermore, one of the consultants was McKinsey & Company, where VDL’s son was an associate, thus raising a possible conflict of interest. It also emerged that messages related to the contracts had been deleted from two of VDL’s mobile phones. Although she was eventually cleared of corruption allegations, questions over her probity during that period remain to this day.

Having survived two scandals, VDL couldn’t believe her luck when in July 2019 Macron, together with Merkel, bypassed the Spitzenkadidaten process and nominated her as Jean-Claude Junker’s successor as head of the European Commission. The Spitzenkadidaten process, through which the lead candidate emerges and is then ratified by the European Parliament, is itself somewhat arcane. In VDL’s case, she was fortunate that the EU couldn’t agree on either of the two lead candidates at the time, Martin Weber and Frans Timmermans. It was thus left to the consummate fixer, Macron, and VDL’s mentor, Merkel, to come to an agreement using that great democratic and transparent tool called the ‘backroom deal’. VDL’s nomination was accepted by the European Council and on 16 July the European Parliament voted to accept her appointment. But it was a close vote. Out of a total of 747 MEPs, only 383 voted for her, 327 voted against, 22 abstained, and one vote was invalid. Under the EU rules, the president of the Commission must be elected with more than 50% of the MEP votes. Thus, she received only 9 votes more than the threshold. Compare this to her predecessor, Juncker, who in 2014 received 422 votes.

After she was appointed president of the European Commission, VDL again became embroiled in controversy, this time involving the procurement of the Covid-19 vaccine from Pfizer. The scandal, which the media dubbed Pfizergate, related to the purchase of 1.8 billion doses of the Pfizer vaccine for use across the EU. It transpired that: a) the number of doses was far greater than was required, resulting in a significant number having to be either destroyed or donated; b) the excess doses cost the EU €4 billion; c) the total value of the contract, which Politico reported as being approximately €20 billion, was inflated; and d) the most damaging charge, the contract for the vaccines was negotiated directly between VDL and Albert Bourla, the CEO of Pfizer. The negotiations were conducted using sms messages, which VDL later claimed to have deleted.

The New York Times, which initially carried out the investigation into Pfizergate, brought a lawsuit against the European Commission for failing to provide access to the sms conversations between VDL and Bourla. In Belgium, a lobbyist, Frederic Baldan, filed a criminal complaint citing corruption and the destruction of documents. The Belgian lawsuit was eventually taken over by the European Public Prosecutors Office, which opened a criminal investigation. The outcome of these legal proceedings/investigations is still pending.

Read more …

“BRICS countries are home to 45.2% of the world’s population, compared to just 9.7% in the G7..”

“Data on oil reserves show that BRICS countries now hold 45.8% of global volumes, while the G7 holds only 3.7%..”

• Why Does Türkiye Want to Join BRICS? (RT)

At the beginning of this month, news of Türkiye’s desire to join BRICS drew global media attention. The announcement was made by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan during his visit to China. “Of course, we would like to become a member of BRICS. Let’s see what we can achieve this year,” said the minister, as quoted by the South China Morning Post. This issue was also discussed at the BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in Nizhny Novgorod, attended by Türkiye’s chief diplomat, Hakan Fidan. Türkiye’s desire to join is not entirely new – during the BRICS summit of 2018, where Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan was a participant, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Ankara could join in 2022. However, subsequent events on the world stage apparently delayed that ambition, and Ankara is only now showing renewed interest.

[..] With the confrontation between the countries of the global majority and the West growing, BRICS is considered to be emerging as an alternative to the G7. This is determined by several key reasons related to economic, political, and social aspects. The G7, comprising leading economically developed countries – the US, Canada, the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan – has traditionally dominated the international arena, shaping the global economic and political agenda. However, the emergence and development of BRICS have changed this balance, offering an alternative view on global governance and cooperation. BRICS unites the largest developing economies in the world, which together account for a significant share of global GDP and population. Collectively, BRICS countries possess vast resources and potential for economic growth, making them important players on the global stage.

To provide a clearer understanding, let’s compare some indicators. With its five new members, BRICS now accounts for almost 34% of the world’s land area, while the G7 accounts for 16%. BRICS countries are home to 45.2% of the world’s population, compared to just 9.7% in the G7. The combined GDP based on purchasing power parity in BRICS countries is 36.7% of the global total as of 2024, compared to 29.6% for the G7. Data on oil reserves show that BRICS countries now hold 45.8% of global volumes, while the G7 holds only 3.7%. Thus, in many respects, BRICS surpasses the G7. The economic power of BRICS allows these countries to propose alternative models of development and economic cooperation, differing from the Western approaches represented by the G7.

Due to international contradictions and the destructive hegemony of Western countries led by Washington, questions about the need to transform the world order are actively arising. BRICS advocates for a multipolar world, where the balance of power is more evenly distributed among various regions and countries. While the G7 represents the interests of economically developed Western powers, BRICS focuses on the issues and interests of developing nations, which are often marginalized in global politics. This makes BRICS an important platform for countries seeking greater autonomy and independence from Western influence. Moreover, the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) demonstrates the BRICS countries’ desire to establish alternative financial institutions capable of competing with traditional Western institutions, particularly the IMF and the World Bank.

[..] Türkiye shows significant interest in joining BRICS, seeing it as an important step toward enhancing its international influence and economic potential. This aspiration is driven by several key factors related to economic, political, and geostrategic aspects. Possessing one of the largest economies in the region, Türkiye aims to diversify its economic ties and strengthen cooperation with rapidly developing countries. Joining BRICS would give Ankara access to a vast market and opportunities to increase trade and investment with the leading economies of the developing world. This is especially important in the context of global economic challenges and uncertainties, where diversifying partners becomes a key factor for sustainable growth.

Türkiye has repeatedly faced financial difficulties and restrictions imposed by Western financial institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank. Joining BRICS would provide Türkiye with access to the New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement, allowing it to secure funding on more favorable terms and with fewer political commitments. This is particularly relevant for Türkiye, which seeks to maintain its economic independence and minimize external pressure.

Read more …

“Suddenly, it is not a cheap fake but reality.”

• The Art of Being Eternally Shocked (Turley)

No one would think of the Beltway as being a place of the naive innocents of our society. Washington is the only ecosystem composed entirely of apex predators. Yet, this week everyone seems to be eternally shocked by what has been obvious for years. The press and pundits are coming off an embarrassing couple of weeks where the Hunter Biden laptop was authenticated in federal court as real. This occurred in the trial of the president’s son almost on the anniversary of a debunked letter of intelligence officials claiming that the laptop appeared to be Russian disinformation. Biden then repeated the claim in the last presidential debates to avoid answering questions over the massive influence peddling scheme of this family revealed by the laptop. After the story was suppressed before the 2020 election, it took years for the media to admit that, oops, the laptop is surprisingly real.

For years, the press and pundits piled on experts who suggested that Covid 19 escaped from a Chinese lab. The New York Times reporter covering the area called it “racist” and implausible. Now, even W.H.O. accepts the lab theory as possible and federal agencies now believe it is the most likely explanation. The response: surprise and spin. This week, the Supreme Court ruled that the Justice Department has unlawfully charged hundreds of people with obstruction of an official proceeding after the January 6th riot. For years, objections to the excessive treatment of these cases were dismissed as the view of the radical right. Now, even Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson voted to toss out these convictions. Surprise. Whether it was the false story about agents whipping migrants in Texas or the photo op claim in Lafayette Park, false stories were disproven only to have a collective shrug from those who spread them.

For years, the press and pundits have repeated like gospel that Trump had called neo-Nazis “fine people.” At the time, most of us noted that Trump condemned the racists and neo-Nazis and made the statement about fine people on both sides of the controversy over the removal of historic statues. Six years later, Snopes finally decided to do a fact check and, surprise, found that Trump never praised neo-Nazis as fine people. The only person not surprised was Biden who repeated the false story on Friday as true. Heading into the presidential debate, the White House and the media attacked Fox News and other outlets for “cheap fake” videos designed to make the President look confused and feeble. For months, politicians and pundits have insisted that Biden is sharp and commanding in conversations even after Special Counsel Robert Hur cited his decline as a reason for not charging him criminally for the unlawful retention and mishandling of classified material.

On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough stated “start your tape right now because I’m about to tell you the truth. And F— you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I have known him for years…If it weren’t the truth I wouldn’t say it.” Then the presidential debate happened and, after years of being protected by staff, tens of millions of people watched the president struggle to stay focused and responsive. After the debate, there was total surprise, if not shock, on CNN and MSNBC. Suddenly, it is not a cheap fake but reality.

Read more …

“Given the multitude of errors at trial and the pending election, it is a near certainty that his request for a stay will be granted.”

“..federal statutes generally require that the highest court in a state rule before the Supreme Court intervenes..”

• Trump Sentencing Will Put Merchan’s Bias in Crosshairs (RCP)

On July 11, acting New York Judge Juan Merchan will sentence former President Donald Trump. Trump was convicted in a New York State court in Manhattan on a novel theory and on facts never before used to secure a conviction in New York. Disregarding at least a dozen reasons his conviction should be reversed, because Trump was convicted of falsifying records with the intent to commit a second crime – illegally interfering in the 2016 presidential election – the falsification was upgraded to a class E felony, comprising 34 counts, one for each entry. The maximum penalty is four years in jail on each count, not to exceed a total of 20 years. New York defendants sentenced to less than a year are usually jailed in notorious Rikers Island, known for its overcrowding, drug problems, and violence. The New York City Council voted to close the facility by 2026. New York Post photos from just a few years ago show the awful conditions there.

For sentences of a year or longer, Trump could be remanded to one of 41 state prisons for men, though most likely to one of the three minimum security facilities. It seems highly unlikely that the U.S. Secret Service would permit Trump to be held in a New York prison. While space might be made available in a federal prison, or a building converted for exclusive use by Trump, it is more likely that he would serve any sentence in home confinement, wearing an ankle monitor. Alternatives to incarceration include probation for up to 10 years, unconditional discharge, or discharge, without probation, conditioned on not committing a further crime during the following three years, and a fine of up to $5,000. Merchan could order that confinement be limited to weekends or nights, and could permit exceptions for political or business activities. He also could split the sentence, for example, requiring 30 days of home confinement followed by conditional discharge.

Even if Trump is conditionally discharged or given probation but is later convicted of another crime, he could be remanded to prison. In setting the sentence, Merchan will consider a mandatory Pre-Sentence Report and the nature of the crime in addition to Trump’s background, age, and health. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg follows a policy of not recommending incarceration for those convicted of non-violent class E felonies. During the trial, Merchan observed that he sees incarceration as a “last resort.”Trump’s indictment for numerous other crimes and his frequent violations of Merchan’s gag order will make unconditional release less likely. However, Trump’s evaluation also will suffer because of recent verdicts that he is liable for civil fraud and defamation, and for presumably refusing to accept guilt during the pre-sentence interview.

If Merchan properly considers the nature of the offense, that similar offenses have not been prosecuted in New York, the “false records” were internal Trump accounts, there was no monetary loss, and the so-called effort to interfere in the 2016 election failed in New York (where Clinton overwhelmingly won), and Trump has no prior record, there should be no jail time or home confinement.However, if Merchan approaches sentencing with the same antagonism to Trump’s rights he brought to the trial, he can be expected to cite a fraud on the national electorate to justify at least a brief period of home confinement. Even then, it would be shocking if Merchan did not stay the sentence until after the election, pending Trump’s appeal. Trump likely will appeal to New York’s intermediate appeals court and will seek to have any sentence stayed pending the outcome of the appeal. Given the multitude of errors at trial and the pending election, it is a near certainty that his request for a stay will be granted.

Trump could also bring an action in federal district court asserting that Bragg and Merchan lacked jurisdiction to accuse him of interfering in a federal election, and he was not given adequate notice of the alleged crimes. It is unlikely a federal judge would get involved prior to a state appeals court. Trump could seek intervention from the U.S. Supreme Court, but federal statutes generally require that the highest court in a state rule before the Supreme Court intervenes. In the end, it seems likely that Trump’s conviction will be overturned. Whether the sentence is harsh or a slap on the wrist, the entire process has been a political prosecution intended to keep Trump off the campaign trail and give Biden the talking point that Trump is a convicted felon. That flagrant abuse of due process is not how our justice or electoral systems are supposed to work.

Read more …

“Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah has told Israel and its allies that a war with no limits will ensue if Israel attempts to invade southern Lebanon..”

• Iran Threatens Israel With ‘Obliterating War’ If It Attacks Lebanon (ZH)

Iran’s mission to the United Nations has put Israel and the world on notice, saying that if Israel launches an all-out war against Hezbollah in Lebanon the whole region will burn. A Friday statement from Iran’s ambassador warned the UN that any “full-scale military aggression” in Lebanon against Hezbollah will mean that “an obliterating war will ensue.” The Iranian statement continued by emphasizing that “all options, including the full involvement of all resistance fronts, are on the table” in a statement posted to X. By “resistance fronts” Tehran means the militias it supports in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen will also ramp up their military activities. On a few occasions, Iraqi Shia militias have launched missiles and drones against southern Israel, as have the Houthis, with limited effect.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has acknowledged this week that a “seven front war” could open up, in reference to all of Iran’s proxies across the region. For years already, Israeli jets have been regularly attacking ‘Iranian assets’ inside Damascus, also in a continued effort to weaken Assad, despite the presence of Russia’s military primarily in the northwest coastal region. Israel has meanwhile continued to pound Hezbollah positions in south Lebanon, amid continued fears of a bigger war at any moment. The US has even sent amphibious military ships closer to Israel and Lebanon in the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to evacuate Americans if a bigger conflict ensues.

The Israeli Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper wrote Saturday, “In the past few hours, warplanes attacked several Hezbollah targets, including a military site for the organisation in the Zabqin area, two operational infrastructure sites in the Khiam area, and a Hezbollah building in the al-Adissa [Odaisseh] area.” Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah has told Israel and its allies that a war with no limits will ensue if Israel attempts to invade southern Lebanon. Some Israeli officials fear that the IDF could be stretched too thin if this happens, considering it’s still in the thick of anti-Hamas Gaza operations in the south. Most analysts agree that Hezbollah is far more capable a paramilitary and guerilla force than Hamas, or any other Iran-linked group in the region for that matter. In the 2006 Lebanon war, there were reports that IRGC operatives were on the ground in Lebanon assisting Hezbollah.

Read more …

“..the Cypriot government has become part of the war and the resistance [Hezbollah] will deal with it as part of the war..”

• Over 80 UK War Planes Deployed From Cyprus To Lebanon Since 7 Oct (Cradle)

The UK has sent over 80 military transport planes to the Lebanese capital of Beirut since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza nine months ago, Declassified UK reported on 28 June. All the flights have gone from the UK’s massive Akrotiri airbase on the nearby island of Cyprus, long a staging post for UK bombing missions in West Asia. Declassified UK notes that the number of UK military flights to Beirut has risen dramatically in recent months. The group tracked 25 flights in April and May and 14 so far in June. Flights from the UK base take around 45 minutes to reach Beirut, which Israel has increasingly threatened to bomb in a possible full-scale war with the Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah. The Ministry of Defense declined to disclose the number of UK military flights to Lebanon since the start of the war on 7 October or their purpose. A defense source told Declassified UK that the flights “have been primarily for the purpose of facilitating senior military engagement” with the Lebanese army.

But it is widely assumed the planes are carrying weapons to Beirut to arm anti-Hezbollah militias. The US, UK, and Israel would presumably use these militias to attack Hezbollah from within the country in the case of an Israeli invasion from the south. Declassified UK notes that nearly every Royal Air Force flight to Lebanon has been the Voyager KC mark 2, which can carry a payload of 45 tons and 291 personnel or provide air-to-air refueling. Another flight involved a vast C-17 cargo plane. Israeli threats to invade Lebanon have accelerated in tandem with the increase in flights. Israeli military leaders have increasingly warned of a Lebanon campaign to push Hezbollah away from the border and past the Litani River. Last week, the Israeli army approved “operational plans for an offensive in Lebanon,” and the US pledged to support Israel with weapons if a full-scale war breaks out.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah warned the resistance movement will use its massive rocket and missile arsenal to hit targets across Israel in a “total war” if Tel Aviv decides to launch an invasion. Nasrallah also threatened Cyprus, noting its role as a US, UK, and Israeli staging ground. “The Cypriot government must be warned that opening Cypriot airports and bases for the Israeli enemy to target Lebanon means that the Cypriot government has become part of the war and the resistance [Hezbollah] will deal with it as part of the war,” he said. Nasrallah’s threat appeared to include the Akrotiri base, which lies in territory retained by the UK when Cyprus gained independence in 1960. The territory now hosts vast military and intelligence hubs for Britain and the US, Declassified UK notes.

Read more …

“With the Chevron doctrine overturned, any future regulatory attempts to impose such burdens will require explicit and unambiguous congressional authorization..”

• Chevron and Bitcoin (Crossman)

Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, delivered a decisive opinion that dismantles Chevron deference. The Court held that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires courts to exercise independent judgment when interpreting statutes, rejecting the notion that ambiguities in law should default to agency interpretations. “Chevron defies the command of the APA that ‘the reviewing court’—not the agency whose action it reviews—is to ‘decide all relevant questions of law’ and ‘interpret . . . statutory provisions,’” Roberts wrote. “It requires a court to ignore, not follow, ‘the reading the court would have reached’ had it exercised its independent judgment. … Chevron cannot be reconciled with the APA… .” Slip Op., at 21 (emphasis added).

The ruling emphasizes that statutory ambiguities do not automatically delegate interpretive authority to agencies. Instead, courts must use traditional tools of statutory construction to determine the best reading of a statute, ensuring that agencies do not exceed their conferred powers. The implications of this ruling extend far beyond administrative law, reaching into the heart of the Bitcoin mining industry. Much like the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA, which curbed the Environmental Protection Agency’s overreach, this ruling reinforces the need for clear congressional authorization before agencies can impose significant regulatory burdens. For the Bitcoin mining industry, this decision is a clear win. Regulatory uncertainty has long been a thorn in the side of Bitcoin miners, who rely on predictable and stable access to power and other resources. By curbing the ability of agencies to unilaterally expand their regulatory reach, the Court has created a more favorable environment for Bitcoin mining operations.

Bitcoin miners have often been at the mercy of shifting regulatory landscapes, which can dramatically impact their operations. For instance, stringent environmental regulations targeting power consumption could have severely constrained the industry. With the Chevron doctrine overturned, any future regulatory attempts to impose such burdens will require explicit and unambiguous congressional authorization, followed by detailed judicial scrutiny. This decision also invigorates the major question doctrine, which posits that significant regulatory actions with vast economic and political implications require clear congressional authorization. This doctrine can be a powerful tool for Bitcoin miners and other industries to challenge regulatory overreach, ensuring that agencies cannot impose wide-ranging policies without clear legislative backing.

CHEVRON GOES DOWN!

This is a great clip on the Chevron Doctrine. pic.twitter.com/4nkhbeA6GK

— eve (@eveforamerica) June 29, 2024

Read more …

“Admittance is only granted to the select few who pay the massively extortionate ticket price..”

• Banksy ‘Launches’ Migrant Boat Stunt At Glastonbury Festival (MN)

The ‘street’ artist Banksy carried out a stunt at the now uber trendy Glastonbury Festival Friday night by launching a mock-up small boat complete with dummy migrants into the crowd. The Guardian reports that many in the crowd thought it was part of the band Idles’ set given that their songs are all about lefty political positions such as the idea that limiting mass illegal immigration is right wing and evil. The report notes, however, that Banksy was behind the stunt stating “The raft, a reference to the small boats carrying migrants across the Channel that have been such a high-profile target of Rishi Sunak’s immigration policy, was crowdsurfed through the thousands-strong Other stage crowd, which Idles were headlining on Friday night.” Given that Sunak has done practically nothing to prevent the boats and the Conservative government has actively incentivised mass illegal immigration for years now, you’d be forgiven for thinking the stunt was some sort of endorsement.

One of the most cringe, out of touch and middle class things I’ve seen at
Glastonbury. Crowdsurfing a lifeboat representing illegal migrants.

Being open borders at a music festival which has a gigantic fence & very high security. So edgy. pic.twitter.com/pJxwTUNnww

— Chris Rose (@ArchRose90) June 29, 2024

Indeed, it’s difficult to pinpoint exactly what the point of it was. What is the crowd cheering about here? The report further notes that the boat was ‘launched’ during a song called Danny Nedelko, which contains the following lyrics: “My blood brother is an immigrant, a beautiful immigrant. My blood brother’s Freddie Mercury. A Nigerian mother of three. He’s made of bones, he’s made of blood. He’s made of flesh, he’s made of love. He’s made of you, he’s made of me. Unity. Fear leads to panic, panic leads to pain. Pain leads to anger, anger leads to hate.” The report also notes that “Migration is a major theme at this year’s Glastonbury festival, with a new area dedicated to the topic.” Mega cringe. It continues, “Entrants to ‘Terminal 1’ must answer a question from the UK government’s citizenship test for prospective migrants.”

The message being that having some form of secure border and vetting system is oppressive… or something. If people manage to pass the test they’re then treated to “music by representatives from Notting Hill carnival and Bristol’s St Paul’s carnival, alongside visual art by global artists including Love Watts, Yoshi Sodeoka and the Turner prize winner Mark Wallinger.” No thanks then. Admittance is only granted to the select few who pay the massively extortionate ticket price and can afford to spend more than the majority of people earn in an entire month once inside. It’s basically full of metropolitan shitlib ‘creatives’ and influencers with trust funds and disposable incomes. So it’s the perfect venue to engage in empty virtue signalling stunts.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

CO2

"It's just total nonsense."

Energy expert Alex Epstein debunks the bare-faced lie that we're living through the hottest period in Earth's history.

"They're trying to make our CO2 levels today, and our temperatures today, seem unprecedented… We're one tenth the CO2 that we've… pic.twitter.com/PU9szvqwCO

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) June 29, 2024

 

 

Whale

Not enough people are talking about how magnificent and terrifying this is pic.twitter.com/Z6zYVlvdyJ

— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) June 29, 2024

 

 

Cracks

When life gives you lemons, make lemonade…or art

David Zinn has been creating original artwork in and around Ann Arbor, Michigan, since 1987.

Armed with a box of sidewalk chalk, he turns cracks into works of art.pic.twitter.com/T3CdMxNgNY

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) June 29, 2024

 

 

 

 

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