Mar 252024

Pablo Picasso Don Quixote 1955


Trump Falsified Business Records Case May Be Delayed On Monday (Sp.)
Trump In Final Countdown To Post $464 Million Bond By Monday (ZH)
Fani Willis Goes Head to Head with Her Prior Self in Trump Case (Turley)
TIME To Panic: Joe Biden’s Campaign “In Trouble” Despite Obama Warning (ZH)
Ukraine Likely Had Prior Knowledge of Moscow Terrorist Threat (Sp.)
US Bails Ukraine Out, Covering Zelensky With ISIS – Zakharova (TASS)
Militaristic Revolution in the EU Paves Legal Way for Warmongering (Babich)
Western Banks Warn Against EU Plans to Give Russian Funds to Ukraine (Antiwar)
Mob Rule Versus Survival of the West (Susan D. Harris)
Macron Obsessing Over Personal Security Amid Ukrainian Conflict (RT)
Guterres, the UN, Might, Wise Guys’ ‘Wisdom’, and Right (Graça)
‘U-Turn Over Atlantic’ (Sp.)





Far right



Mike Rowe






Tucker Roseanne





Stormy Daniels. Star witness: Michael Cohen.

Trump Falsified Business Records Case May Be Delayed On Monday (Sp.)

Former US President Donald Trump is facing four separate criminal cases, two at the federal level and two brought by the States of New York and Georgia. Trump also leads US President Joe Biden in national polls and most swing states. Judge Juan Merchan will hold a pre-trial hearing in New York on Monday to determine if there should be further delays in former US President Donald Trump’s falsified business documents case, one of four criminal cases he is facing. The case was initially scheduled to begin on Monday but was delayed to at least April 25 after prosecutors released more than 100,000 pages of documents to Trump’s defense team. Prosecutor Alvin Bragg did not oppose the 30-day delay but argued that no further delays should be placed on the trial.

Of the criminal cases Trump is facing, this case was the most likely to conclude before the Presidential election in November, but a significant delay could push it past election day. Trump’s legal team is arguing that the prosecution intentionally held the documents back and included exculpatory evidence favorable to the defense. If Merchan agrees, he could throw the case out and possibly sanction Bragg for potential Brady violations, but he could also issue a delay in the case or keep the trial date, scheduled for March 25, as-is.

“The People have engaged in widespread misconduct as part of a desperate effort to improve their position at the potential trial on the false and unsupported charges in the Indictment,” Trump’s legal team argued in court filings. “[R]eports relating to statements by Cohen that are exculpatory and favorable to the defense.” Most legal experts quoted in US media predicted that a delay could happen but they doubt that the judge will throw out the case. The documents relate to federal investigations into Michael Cohen, Trump’s former fixer who is expected to be the prosecution’s star witness. The documents were not in Bragg’s office and were instead in different offices around the country. Bragg argues that the Trump team intentionally waited until January to ask for the documents to cause a delay in the trial.

“[T]he belated nature of the recent USAO productions is entirely the result of the defendant’s own inexplicable and strategic delay in identifying perceived deficiencies,” the prosecution argued. Prosecutors also claim that less than 300 of the documents are both new to the defense and related to Trump’s trial. Trump has been charged with 34 counts of falsifying business documents related to repayments he made to Cohen for hush money payments Cohen paid to adult film star Stormy Daniels who claimed she had an affair with then-candidate Trump in 2016. Trump pleaded not guilty but admits to making the payments. He also denies that the affair took place. Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison in 2018 after being convicted of campaign finance violations related to those payments and for lying to Congress about how long discussions about a potential Trump Tower in Moscow continued.

Read more …

Trump OAN

“What he’s talking about is the money reported on his campaign disclosure forms that he’s built up through years of owning and managing successful businesses,..

Trump In Final Countdown To Post $464 Million Bond By Monday (ZH)

Donald Trump has until Monday to come up with more than $450 million to stop his properties from being seized by authorities following the results of his New York civil fraud trial. According to the ruling by Judge Arthur Engoron, Trump and executives at the Trump Organization inflated his assets. Initially, NY Attorney General Letitia James sought $250 million in damages – but later increased it to $370 million plus interest. Trump has been seeking a bond of $464 million ($454 million plus $10 million to cover his sons’ fines) in order to post bond and appeal the case. Last week, Trump said he had “almost $500 million” in cash, however his attorney Chris Kise told CNN that Trump wasn’t referring to cash he has on hand. “What he’s talking about is the money reported on his campaign disclosure forms that he’s built up through years of owning and managing successful businesses,” he said, which the outlet noted is “the very cash that Letitia James and the Democrats are targeting.”

Assets including buildings, houses, cars, helicopters and even Trump’s plane are on the chopping block if Trump can’t come up with the money. The former president has asked a state appeals court to allow him to post a smaller bond, or none at all, claiming that irreparable harm would be done if he was forced to sell properties in a ‘fire sale’ that can’t be undone if he wins his appeal against the amount due. The court has not come back yet with a ruling. If Trump can’t secure the bond, New York state officials can begin the arduous process of taking his assets. According to experts cited by a very giddy CNN, the first action should be seizing Trump’s bank accounts. “The banks are the easiest part, they’ll receive the judgment from the Attorney General – the court order – then the banks will enforce,” said former federal prosecutor Peter Katz, who has handled fraud cases. “They take the funds from the account and put it in the attorney general’s accounts. The other stuff is a little more challenging.”

According to debt collection expert Alden B. Smith, New York officials are “trying to get their ducks in a row,” adding “They want to find the most liquid of the assets they can restrain immediately. A bank account is the most effective way to do it.” Seizing Trump’s buildings and businesses is far more complicated. Once state prosecutors figure out which properties they want to take from Joe Biden’s chief political rival, they will give the sheriff an execution order, a $350 fee, and then the sheriff will post notice for the property in three places. The AG’s office must then advertise it four times, after which the property will be sold at public auction 63 days after the sheriff is given the execution order. According to Newsweek, the following Trump-owned properties had “fraudulent” and “misleading” values, and could be on the list (with New York properties taking priority, and those in other states being more complicated to seize).
Trump Park Avenue, New York, N.Y.
Trump Tower, New York City.
40 Wall Street, New York City.
Trump Seven Springs, Westchester County, N.Y.
Trump International Hotel, Las Vegas.
Mar-a-Lago, Palm Beach, Florida.
Trump National Golf Club Westchester, Briarcliff Manor, N.Y.
Trump National Golf Club Charlotte, Mooresville, North Carolina.
Trump National Golf Club Colts Neck, Colts Neck, New Jersey.
Trump National Golf Club, Washington D.C., Sterling, Virginia.
Trump National Golf Club Hudson Valley, Hopewell Junction, N.Y.
Trump National Golf Club Jupiter, Jupiter, Florida.
Trump National Golf Club Los Angeles, Rancho Palos Verdes, California.
Trump National Golf Club Philadelphia, Pine Hill, New Jersey.
Trump International Golf Links Scotland, Aberdeen.
Trump International Golf Links Scotland, Turnberry.
Trump has roughly $200 million in cumulative loans on his properties.

Read more …

“I will certainly not be choosing to date people that work under me.”

Fani Willis Goes Head to Head with Her Prior Self in Trump Case (Turley)

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has finally broken her silence with CNN. Willis insisted that she has done nothing wrong while declaring that “the train is coming” for Donald Trump. On this occasion, CNN can be excused for not having an opposing view. Willis circa 2020 denounced Willis circa 2024. Willis told a CNN reporter “I don’t feel like my reputation needs to be reclaimed. I guess my greatest crime is I had a relationship with a man, that’s not something I find embarrassing in any way. And I know that I have not done anything that’s illegal.” The most obvious person to interview in rebuttal of that statement is Willis’s 2020 self. After all, she repeatedly declared that she would not have any romantic relationship with those in her office. Willis ran against her former boss Paul Howard, who was embroiled in a sexual harassment scandal involving his relationship with women in his office.

Willis offered both experience and ethical leadership, including pledging repeatedly that “I will certainly not be choosing to date people that work under me.” When confronted with this repeated campaign promise on the stand, Willis came up with a perfectly bizarre spin about Nathan Wade being literally “special” as a special prosecutor. While she hired him, supervised him, and controlled his continued employment with the office, she tried to suggest that he was not really part of the office in the same sense. Willis notably stressed that she did nothing “illegal.” She did not address whether she acted unethically. The court itself denounced her for unprofessional conduct in this controversy, including her speech at a church suggesting that racism was behind these allegations.

Moreover, it may be too early to tell if she is entirely free of criminal allegations. Many believe that both she and Wade gave knowingly false or misleading testimony. That is a problem not just for them as individuals but for the office in this case. Willis and Wade were both prosecuting people for the very same conduct of filing false statements with courts and making false statements. The two lawyers testified in tandem but only one was disqualified. While the Court casts doubt on Wade’s testimony on the relationship, it ignored that Willis effectively ratified those claims in her own testimony. Putting aside the pledge of a train coming for Trump, there is the problem that there are usually two tracks and another train may be coming for Willis as the state (and potentially the bar) looks into these allegations.


Read more …

“In 2020, Biden carried 87% of the black vote. Now, he’s polling at just 63%, a sharp decline. Meanwhile four years ago he won hispanic votes by a ratio of 2 to 1. He now trails Trump in that bloc..”

TIME To Panic: Joe Biden’s Campaign “In Trouble” Despite Obama Warning (ZH)

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to fuck things up.” -Barack Obama.

With less than eight months before the 2024 election, the Biden re-election campaign is in big trouble. Not only is Biden lagging in the polls vs. Donald Trump, the border crisis he created by shredding all of Trump’s Executive Orders on immigration has resulted in 10 million illegals flooding into the United States – which has left even Democrats livid. What’s more, Biden is quickly losing the support of young Americans, and the latino vote. Things are so bad that TIME magazine has just devoted 3,700 words to let us know that Barack Obama ‘warned’ the Biden campaign last June that defeating Trump would be harder in 2024 (because no pandemic or hoax dossier to set him up?). Six months later, Obama ‘saw few signs of improvement.’

Obama returned to the White House in December, with a ‘more urgent’ message: the re-election campaign was behind schedule in building out field operations, and that an ‘insular group of advisers’ in the West Wing was hamstringing the effort. Now, it’s really bad… “Three months later, the 2024 general election is under way, and Biden is indeed in trouble. His stubbornly low approval ratings have sunk into the high 30s, worse than those of any other recent President seeking re-election. He’s trailed or tied Trump in most head-to-head matchups for months. Voters express concerns about his policies, his leadership, his age, and his competency. The coalition that carried Biden to victory in 2020 has splintered; the Democrats’ historic advantage with Black, Latino, and Asian American voters has dwindled to lows not seen since the civil rights movement. -TIME

Meanwhile, Biden’s inner circle is “defiantly sanguine” as a “fog of dread” descends on Democrats. The rest of the TIME article is full of anecdotes of dissatisfied Democrats, particularly young voters such as 20-year-old Aidan Kohn-Murphy. It has nothing to do, as many assume, with the President’s age. With palpable frustration, Kohn-Murphy enumerates the list of perceived policy “betrayals” as though they were “tattooed on the back of my hand.” According to the report, GenZ voters “don’t understand why they should be compelled to cast their ballot for a candidate who has done so many things that are against their values,” said Kohn-Murphy.

In 2020, Biden carried 87% of the black vote. Now, he’s polling at just 63%, a sharp decline. Meanwhile four years ago he won hispanic votes by a ratio of 2 to 1. He now trails Trump in that bloc. Biden’s support of Israel amid the Gaza war has “tanked his standing with Muslim and Arab voters,” particularly in “must-win Michigan.” Overall, Biden’s advantage over Trump among nonwhite Americans has shrunk from almost 50 points in 2020 to 12, according to the latest Times/Siena poll. “It boils down to voters of color, and those voters are pissed,” said one former Biden campaign and White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “I think it’s very likely he’ll lose.”

Read more …

“..they have all these specific details, but they were unable to give anything specific to the Russians. This all makes one think that something is very wrong.”

Ukraine Likely Had Prior Knowledge of Moscow Terrorist Threat (Sp.)

A group of gunmen opened fire at a concert venue in Moscow on the evening of March 22, killing over 100 people and setting fire to the building. Eleven suspects have been detained by Russian security services in relation to the terrorist attack, including the four suspected perpetrators who were apprehended as they were trying to flee the country across the border with Ukraine. During an interview with Sputnik, political and military analyst Sergey Poletaev pointed out that the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) officially announced that the suspected terrorists had contacts in Ukraine. According to Poletaev, even if the reports about the perpetrators being Tajikistani citizens are true, the attack in Moscow could have been masterminded either by some kind of Islamist terrorist organization that has ties with Ukraine, or even by Ukraine directly. In any case, he noted, it appears that the Ukrainian leadership had prior knowledge of this act of terror, “which makes them accomplices, at the very least.”

Poletaev also argued that while the attack was likely planned by professionals, it does not necessarily mean that the perpetrators were equally skilled, with the analyst observing how high school students sometimes kill dozens of people during shooting sprees. Commenting on the attempts by both Washington and Kiev to hastily deny Ukraine’s trace in this terrorist attack, Poletaev suggested that the West is going to insist that ISIS* alone was responsible. Thus, he postulated, there will be two narratives – the Russian and the Western – and it all comes down to whose side the “global majority” is going to take. “It is in our best interests to collate a convincing body of evidence for our case. It would greatly help us with diplomacy,” Poletaev remarked. “We’re talking about the ‘third countries,’ of course, as the West will most likely dismiss any talk of Ukraine’s involvement.”

Seyed Mohammad Marandi, a political analyst and professor at Tehran University, also found it curious that, even when “no real details” about the attack were known, the United States started insisting that Ukraine was not involved. “It is also very strange that the United States was able to give such a detailed travel advisory or warning about a terror attack naming concerts and giving specifics about an attack in Moscow and large gatherings and all that [previous to the attack],” he added. “So, they have all these specific details, but they were unable to give anything specific to the Russians. This all makes one think that something is very wrong.” Referring to claims about ISIS being responsible for the attack, Marandi argued that this theory does not necessarily rule out “cooperation between Ukraine and ISIS or the potential role of the United States.”

“The very fact that the United States, from the start, said that Ukraine wasn’t involved and the very fact that they gave such a detailed warning to their citizens is raising serious questions. But ISIS and the Ukrainian regime both have very strong connections with the West,” he elaborated. “ISIS has cooperated with NATO countries, it has cooperated with Israel, and it has cooperated with other American allies in Syria for years. And Ukraine is also deeply dependent on NATO countries. Marandi also pointed out that ISIS “has always been focused on the enemies of the United States” whereas the terrorist organization’s attacks on NATO countries or the Middle Eastern powers aligned with the West have been “very rare.”

Cactus City hall

Read more …

“Attention, a question for the White House: are you sure it was ISIS, won’t you change your mind later?”

US Bails Ukraine Out, Covering Zelensky With ISIS – Zakharova (TASS)

After the Crocus City Hall attack, the US tries to bail Ukraine out by mentioning the Islamic State (IS, ISIS) terror group, outlawed in Russia, and to cover itself and the Zelensky regime it created, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in an article for “The American political engineers cornered themselves with their tales that the Crocus City Hall attack was carried out by the ISIS terror group,” the diplomat noted. “Hence Washington’s daily bailing out of its wards in Kiev, and the attempt to cover itself and the Zelensky regime they created with the scarecrow of the outlawed ISIS.” Zakharova noted that a number of factors directly and indirectly indicate the US authorities’ involvement in sponsoring the Ukrainian terrorism.

“Billions of dollar and an unprecedented amount of weapons, invested without accountability and with use of corruption schemes into the Kiev regime, the aggressive rhetoric regarding Russia, the rabid nationalism, the ban for peace talks on Ukraine, the endless calls for a force resolution of the conflict, the refusal to condemn the years-long terror attacks, carried out by the Kiev regime, and the massive informational and political support of any, even the most atrocious actions of Zelensky,” she listed. The spokeswoman also noted that previously, the US intervention in Middle Eastern affairs has led to the emergence, strengthening and institutionalization of a number of radical and terrorist groups that remain active in the region even today. “What is the logic, you may ask? Money and power. And, considering the international legal ban on direct interventions, it is also about sowing a ‘controlled chaos’ and reshaping the world order by the hands of terrorists,” she continued. “Attention, a question for the White House: are you sure it was ISIS, won’t you change your mind later?”

Read more …

“..the European Union, which was conceived as an entirely peaceful organization, becomes one of the world’s most implacable warring empires..”

“Later, these weapons will be used against “undemocratic” countries, whose leaders happen to be at odds with the EU and the US.”

An EU army is idiotic. Who will be in command? France or Germany? How about Hungary?

Militaristic Revolution in the EU Paves Legal Way for Warmongering (Babich)

During the last few days, the European Union went through a real militaristic revolution. A special “legal task force” is working on allowing the use of EU funds for war. The so-called European Peace Facility (EPF), officially stewarded by Josep Borrell, will get its money from the EU funds (and not individual states) after reporting the transfer of thousands of weapons systems to Kiev. EPF also reported having trained more than 40,000 Ukrainian military to use them. The Financial Times chose a somewhat routinely sounding lead for its story on the EU’s decision to legally stop being an “oasis of peace”: “Brussels proposes ‘legal task force’ to explore ways to use the common budget for defense. The headline, however, was more disturbing: “EU looks to bypass treaty ban on buying arms to support Ukraine.”

The reality described in the FT’s story, however, is more dramatic than the headline and the lead taken together: the European Union, which was conceived as an entirely peaceful organization, becomes one of the world’s most implacable warring empires – by law. Very soon the EU’s Union Treaty will no longer have a provision prohibiting “any expenditure arising from operations having military or defense implications.” (Article 41, point 2 of the Treaty on European Union.) Or, at best, this provision will be made devoid of legal force by some new additions to the EU’s legislation. FT reports, confirming its story by eyewitness accounts, that the European Commission is creating a “legal task force,” that would allow the EU to finance wars and military production by European money. In all likelihood, the first “beneficiary” of this financing will be NATO’s proxies in Ukraine, waging a war against Russia and Russians since 2014. At a recent conference of the EU’s 27 members in mid-March, 2024, it was decided to create within the framework of the so-called European Peace Facility (EPF) a special fund for financing Ukrainian armed forces (Ukraine Assistance Fund).

What the relation is between the word “peace” and the system of buying and transporting weapons to the zone of conflict, remains unclear. Ukraine Assistance Fund (UAF) will be financed by donations from EU member states to the tune of €5 billion a year. At least €500 million from that sum will be spent on training Ukrainian servicemen to use the EPF-provided weapons. The weapons will mostly be European-made (such was the requirement of France), but not only. Weapons from “third countries” can be bought and sold, creating opportunities for the spread of dangerous weapons around the world. Judging by the recent EU summit on Thursday, which discussed the ways of stealing “immobilized” Russia’s foreign assets and pouring its money into the UAF “for military support to Ukraine,” no law is an obstacle for the EU’s “legal task forces.” Was such an evolution of the EU unexpected? Not entirely.

The EU’s quasi-pacifist image started to crumble not now, but back in the 1990s. It transpired back then that the real European Union went a long way from the lofty ideas of the EU’s founders. Only naïve people can trust the EU’s claims, that it is a purely “soft power-based institution.” In 1995-1999 the EU’s member countries participated in military interventions against the former Yugoslav republics, later almost all EU members made their “military contributions” to the occupations of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. However, as more and more “crusades” by individual Western countries or American-British alliances ended in defeats (one can cite Afghanistan in 2001-2021 or the French intervention in West Africa after the coup in Libya in 2011), the dreams about a “collective war chest” of the EU started to take shape In 2020 the so-called European Defense Fund (EDF) and later, in March 2021, the European Peace Facility (EPF) started operating at the EU level. Their aim was clear from the start: to collect money from member countries and to buy arms for this money.

Later, these weapons will be used against “undemocratic” countries, whose leaders happen to be at odds with the EU and the US. Real European pacifists immediately smelt the rat and protested both against EDF and especially against EPF, which after the escalation of the Ukrainian conflict became one of the main sponsors of Zelensky’s military machine. Back in 2021, 40 pro-peace NGOs, headed by the German group Brot für die Welt (Bread for the World) came out with a statement denouncing the EPF as an instrument “which brings arms into wrong hands” and “allows to use the EU money to train the military cadres for dictatorial regimes.” Now, however, Brussels uses widespread anti-Russian prejudice in the EU, as well as constant reminders about the “threat from Putin” to justify the final destruction of the dream of “peaceful Europe,” which once inspired the pioneers of European integration. In comparison to 2021 critics are fewer and quieter. In this way, Russophobia was spiritually destructive for Europe, stealing its dream of “world peace.”

Read more …

“..once sanctions on Russia are eased or lifted, they could face decades of legal action.”

Western Banks Warn Against EU Plans to Give Russian Funds to Ukraine (Antiwar)

Some Western banks are lobbying against an EU plan to use profits made by Russian central bank funds that are frozen in Europe to arm Ukraine, Reuters reported on Thursday. The European Commission has proposed sending up to 3 billion euros to Ukraine per year using the revenue. About 90% would go to a fund called the “European Peace Facility” that can be used to buy weapons for Ukraine, and the remaining funds would go to the EU’s central budget for other types of aid. Russia has slammed the plan and has vowed to respond. “This is outright banditry and theft. These actions are a gross and unprecedented violation of basic international norms. We said that we would respond, and so we shall,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Wednesday. Sources told Reuters that banks fear they could be held liable by Russia in the future for being involved in the transaction. The report said once sanctions on Russia are eased or lifted, they could face decades of legal action.

The banks also worry the move would erode trust in the Western banking system. One source said it would set a bad precedent and that stealing the funds would amount to the “weaponization of foreign-held reserves and assets.” The US is looking to take an even more extreme measure by giving all of the Russian funds to Ukraine, not just the profit and interest. Last month, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen came out strongly in favor of the idea. “It is necessary and urgent for our coalition to find a way to unlock the value of these immobilized assets to support Ukraine’s continued resistance and long-term reconstruction,” Yellen said. Legislation to give the Russian money to Ukraine has been introduced in Congress and has received bipartisan support, but the bills have yet to be voted on. About $67 billion in Russian central bank funds are held in the US, while over $200 billion is held in Europe.

Read more …

“ is taking you to the point where I truly believe they will only stop when they find that you will swing from a tree.”

Mob Rule Versus Survival of the West (Susan D. Harris)

It’s been hard to watch the effects of forced diversity, multiculturalism, and mass immigration on the tiny island of Great Britain—the most densely populated nation in Europe. At least in America we still have so much land area that most people are not yet feeling the effects of large-scale population displacement stemming from all forms of immigration. In the UK, however, every day feels like an episode of “Survivor” as people who are being crammed in like sardines are increasingly made to fear that they’ll be voted off the island. Recently, protests surrounding the Israel–Hamas war have exposed the fragility of a British culture—and nation—on the verge of capsizing from the weight of immigration and cultural divides. Well-known British YouTuber Paul Joseph Watson has been covering events there, addressing the British prime minister’s remarks that his country is descending into “mob rule” and that the situation is urgent. The prime minister was referring to pro-Palestinian protesters currently flooding the streets of Britain.

Mr. Watson shared a genius chart from a user on social media platform X supposedly detailing the rise of mob rule in London. The user commented, “HOW DID WE GET HERE? After importing millions of people from countries with a culture of mob rule into London, mob rule has taken over London. Experts are crunching the numbers to figure out if systematically undermining basic law and order could have affected basic law and order.” Meanwhile, Pro-Palestinian protesters across Britain vowed more marches, ostensibly to protest Israeli attacks in Gaza. Mr. Watson has also been covering reactions to another member of parliament recently claiming there were “no-go zones” in Birmingham. To support the existence of “no-go zones,” Mr. Watson cited the Birmingham Mail newspaper, which reported that “due to soaring crime being committed by ‘urban youths,’ parts of the city center are no-go zones and the areas immediately surrounding Birmingham are no-go areas for the same reason,” according to Mr. Watson.

All of this comes after a huge blow-up about a comment made by a Conservative member of parliament on conservative-leaning GB News. Lee Anderson told the news outlet (where he also hosts his own show) that “I don’t actually believe that the Islamists have got control of our country, but what I do believe is they’ve got control of [Mayor of London Sadiq] Khan and they’ve got control of London. … He’s actually given our capital city away to his mates.”
Mayor Khan then responded with three strikes against Mr. Anderson, saying his remarks were “Islamophobic, anti-Muslim and racist” and poured “fuel on the fire of anti-Muslim hatred.” It was all downhill from there. Mr. Anderson was suspended from the Conservative Party after refusing to apologize and later defected to the Reform UK party. After that, a GB News guest said Mayor Khan was “not British. He doesn’t support Britain.” Which led to calls for GB News to be investigated by Ofcom, Britain’s communications regulator, similar to our FCC. And it won’t be the first time; Ofcom seems to be targeting GB News for investigations quite a lot lately.

Another British YouTuber who’s been weighing in on the ongoing cancel culture wars in her country is Katie Hopkins. In a video titled, “How cancel culture (evisceration) REALLY works,” Ms. Hopkins outlines what she believes is “currently being done to GB News by those that want to see it done away with.” She also claims that “Ofcom is the weapon wielded in a war of attrition against GB News.” And she should know. The controversial celebrity, journalist, and comedian has done her share of shocking the public and angering many over these last many years, but she’s also become quite the conservative hero. She’s been re-tweeted by President Donald Trump multiple times, banned from Twitter, reinstated on Twitter (now X), and thrown out of Australia for mocking quarantine lockdowns. She’s called Islam the “single biggest threat” to Europe and was named as a target in a planned terror attack by ISIS supporters. Most recently, she’s done a hilarious must-see YouTube short dedicated to all the people who “pushed the jab.” It currently has over 1 million views.

In 2020, Ms. Hopkins told conservative host Candace Owens that her situation in Britain was so much more than the cancel culture that was overtaking America. She explained that in the UK it had become “acceptable” to think that a targeted physical attack against her would be “welcomed and applauded.” She continued to explain to Ms. Owens that she lost her jobs, her home (which she said had to be sold due to litigation), and even experienced having her children reported to social services with the intent to have them taken away. She concluded by saying that, in the UK, “[T]he darkness is that when they come, it’s not something flippant that is cancel culture, it is taking you to the point where I truly believe they will only stop when they find that you will swing from a tree.” Her fundamental commitment, she added, was to not allow that to happen.

Read more …

“As soon as we arrived at the Elysee, the staff responsible for the president’s security were immediately doubled..”

Macron Obsessing Over Personal Security Amid Ukrainian Conflict (RT)

French president Emmanuel Macron’s concerns for his own personal safety are being amplified by his public statements and tough stance on the Ukraine conflict, Marianne magazine reported on Sunday. The magazine spoke to multiple sources within Macron’s security detail, the country’s Interior Ministry, and to his notorious ex-bodyguard Alexandre Benalla. During his time with Macron’s security team, Benalla became embroiled in multiple scandals, including beating up demonstrators alongside riot police during the Yellow Vest protests. Macron has always been concerned with his personal security, Benalla claimed, revealing the president had bolstered the ranks of his guard right after assuming office. “As soon as we arrived at the Elysee, the staff responsible for the president’s security were immediately doubled compared to those responsible for that of [predecessor] Francois Hollande,” the disgraced bodyguard explained.

The Yellow Vests protests, which have plagued Macron’s presidency throughout his first term and beyond, have left a dent. Macron’s spouse Brigitte has been particularly concerned that her husband would ultimately end up assassinated, Benalla claims. “She was always very worried about him. At home, there is the fear of ‘Kennedy syndrome,’ that he will end up assassinated,” the insider reportedly claimed. The situation has deteriorated further as a result of Macron’s determination to present himself as a hawk on the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. The president’s security team has been working in “red” mode since at least last summer, an unnamed source “at the heart” of Macron’s guard system told the magazine.

“Recently, he is provoking so much that he is afraid,” a source at the heart of the Macron security system confided. “Since last summer, he has taken on some big guys to accompany him. They are more visible and also more effective in intervening in the event of a crowd movement.” The French president is apparently not afraid of facing off angry citizens as is, but rather fears the alleged Russian “hybrid threat,” the report suggested. He has repeatedly voiced concerns over “state-level” threats emanating from abroad, while in private blaming the alleged threat exclusively on Moscow, and creating a special taskforce to tackle it. “Macron is totally freaked out by the Russians. One morning, he arrived at the intelligence services and requested the creation of a special task force on Russian interference overnight. Colleagues have to hold a meeting daily, it doesn’t excite them much,” a senior official with the Interior Ministry told Marianne.

Read more …

25 years ago NATO bombed Yugoslavia. Guterres was Portugal PM.

Guterres, the UN, Might, Wise Guys’ ‘Wisdom’, and Right (Graça)

António Guterres, according to what I have read somewhere, has formally and publicly protested the fact that the people of the newly incorporated regions of Russia participate in the latter’s presidential elections. The reason, he claimed, was that it had been an illegal incorporation, based on an also illegal invasion. Russia would thus have in this case the might, Guterres argued, but she would not have on her side the right. Does this sit well with a UN Secretary-General? It certainly does, the unaware reader will likely say. That’s precisely what the UN exists for: to show everyone that, beyond might, irreducible to it, there is always (and there will be) the right. The problem with this – formally impeccable – argument resides, however, elsewhere. Do you remember Kosovo? It was occupied by NATO in 1999, after this alliance bombed the then Yugoslavia, on various pretexts that later were revealed to be false, forcing it (without a UN mandate, by sheer military might) to withdraw from that territory.

Yugoslavia held out for almost three months of relentless bombardment, but eventually withdrew, albeit grudgingly and only against written assurances that Kosovo would remain Yugoslav territory, only provisionally occupied: “we didn’t give away Kosovo, we don’t give away Kosovo”, Slobodan Milosevic then declared publicly. Kosovo was part of a Yugoslav republic, Serbia, and remained so even when this and the other remaining Yugoslav republic, Montenegro, later legally ‘divorced’, thus ending the very existence of the ‘once upon a time’ Country of the South Slavs. Serbia does not recognize the right to secession of her provinces, and so she did not recognize the secession of Kosovo when this territory subsequently (in 2008, still under NATO occupation and without holding a referendum with that purpose) proclaimed its independence.

She complained about this to the International Court of Justice, but the ICJ did not grant the Serbian complaint, arguing that, while it was true that on the latter’s side was the UN’s principle of protection of the integrity of states’ borders, on the side of Kosovar independence was the also UN’s principle of the defense of peoples right to self-determination. That being the case, and although admittedly in a situation of mon coeur balance, the august Court decided by a majority to give the right to Kosovo’s independence, and the wrong to Serbia. The rejection of a region’s independence could be valid internally, but not internationally. Was the secession of Kosovo illegal from the point of view of Serbian law? Perhaps. But not, the ICJ declared, from the point of view of international law.

Now, with things admittedly at this point, the obvious question is: have Crimea, the Donbass, plus the other two provinces of Novorossiya, legally seceded from Ukraine? From Kiev’s point of view, of course not. But from the point of view of international law? When faced with the problem of the secession of countries de facto in a colonial situation, but formally only provinces of another (as was the case with the then Portuguese overseas provinces in Africa), the UN had already decided, in 1970, that the decisive criterion was the existence or not of negative discrimination against certain groups. If the Portuguese state practiced negative discrimination against African ‘indigenous’ people, this would be an irrefutable indication of colonialism, even if the Portuguese Constitution of the time did not openly proclaim it. Therefore, Angola and Mozambique would have the right to secede.

If, on the other hand, it was a question of territories where the populations enjoyed the same rights as the ‘normal’ nationals of their respective countries, such as the Corsicans vis-à-vis the other French, or the Sardinians in relation to the other Italians, there would be no right of secession. Corsica and Sardinia would therefore not have the right to secede from France and Italy, respectively. The point is that, precisely, Kosovo was not the target of any derogatory treatment by Serbia. On the contrary, there was positive discrimination, with the right to use Albanian as a regional co-official language, just as it is today in Spain with Basque, Galician and Catalan in the Basque Country, Galicia and Catalonia, respectively. And yet, the ICJ ruled against Serbia’s claim! That is, giving an additional right to the centrifugal political tendencies, when compared to the position of the UN General Assembly back in 1970…

Given this, the question inevitably arises: have the inhabitants of the Donbass, who revolted and organized secessionist referendums as early as 2014, and since then saw the Russian language banned, and were the target of indiscriminate bombardment by Kiev’s troops and paramilitary, and suffered all kinds of other atrocities, not much more right to secession than the Kosovars – to whom, for example, the use of Albanian had never been forbidden by Belgrade? On the contrary, the entire Albanian cultural legacy was always carefully protected by Yugoslavia’s emphatically multi-ethnic Constitution, and the ethnic Albanian population benefited from various forms of positive discrimination. And yet, the ICJ rejected Serbia’s complaint!

Read more …

What led to Putin. “If I had accepted Gore’s terms, I would have been a real traitor..”

‘U-Turn Over Atlantic’ (Sp.)

Sunday marks the 25th anniversary of then-Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov’s famous “U-turn” over the Atlantic, an event that grabbed global headlines at the time. On March 24, 1999, Primakov was on a flight to the United States to negotiate a $5 billion IMF loan for Russia. But after then-US Vice President Al Gore informed Primakov that NATO had launched a bombing campaign against Yugoslavia, Primakov decided to turn his plane around and return to Moscow. Witnessing the Primakov-Gore conversation was the now-deputy head of Russia’s upper chamber of parliament, Konstantin Kosachev, who served as an assistant for international affairs to the prime minister in the late 1990s. Kosachev was among the members of a Russian government delegation on board Primakov’s plane when the incident took place. The Federal Council deputy head later recalled that Gore told Primakov about the beginning of NATO’s military operation and the alliance’s decision to start bombing Yugoslavia “in these very minutes.”

According to Kosachev, Primakov reacted by telling Gore that such a development means that the Russian delegation’s visit to the US “becomes impossible.” The lawmaker added that the plane turned around after Primakov received the go-ahead from then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin. When asked by reporters why Primakov’s move was so significant for history, Kosachev stressed that “it was the first sign of Russia’s disagreement as a state with the policies that the US and its NATO allies were pursuing in a world which seemed to have changed since the end of the Cold War, but in fact which had not changed at all.” “As I see it, the decision proved to be a turning point both literally and figuratively in relations between Russia and the West, something that reflected our country’s utter disagreement with the West’s line on building a unipolar world,” Kosachev underscored.

It predetermined the entire course of subsequent events, the lawmaker went on, noting that Russia and the West “could have come out of all this by preserving partnership in those issues that unite both sides.” “The two, however, continued to move in opposite directions because the West refused to reconsider its policy line with regard to the outside world and Russia. What’s more, the West in many situations further aggravated the situation,” Kosachev pointed out. As for Primakov, needless to say he was shocked after hearing the news about a European country being bombed for the first time since the end of the Second World War. Despite Gore’s desperate attempts to persuade Primakov to backtrack on his decision and come to Washington, the Russian prime minister was undeterred. “If I had accepted Gore’s terms, I would have been a real traitor,” Primakov later said.

Read more …














China 2019-24



Bird dog



















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






Aug 012022
 August 1, 2022  Posted by at 8:14 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  12 Responses »

Salvador Dali The knight of death 1934



If you’re Chinese or Russian, and you watch videos of the top three “most powerful” people in the US, Biden, Kamala and Pelosi, what do you think? You think all three are incoherent and should not be anywhere near any decisive, let alone nuclear, lever.

If you’re anybody anywhere, and you look at the top three “most powerful” people in the world, Xi, Putin and Biden, what do you think? You think two of them have got it together (nothing to do with you liking them or not), and one can’t even read coherently from a teleprompter.

Nowhere near half of Americans understand these two things to be true, but probably some 90% of Chinese and Russians do, as well as a vast majority of people in other non-US/NATO/EU countries.

Another threesome: Sergei Lavrov (Russia), Tony Blinken (US) and Liz Truss (UK) are all foreign ministers (or Secretaries of State, give the beast a name). Who would you trust to represent your own interests best in the field of diplomacy? It’s not even a question, is it? If the US or UK had a Lavrov, he would be their man (he would most likely decline). But they don’t. The US has a nobody (they have lots of those!) in the role, and the UK has someone with zero qualifications who dreams of getting the top job.

The world outside of the G7 or G20 (give the wheel a spin) sees this happening. Is it any wonder they clamor to be part of BRICS? The “collective west” is fast finishing off itself, and yes, you’re right, that is a dangerous moment. It’s also why it very much looks like the “collective west” is trying to open a second theater of war in Europe. One that looks a lot like the one they opened in Ukraine. And the EU, to its utter shame, does nothing to prevent this from happening – on its “own” soil!.

I know, there’s Crazy Nancy on her way to Taipei as well as we speak, we’ll get to that yet. Imagine: you’re 80-odd years old, and you want your legacy to be WWIII. Not your grandchildren, but live nukes. Just imagine that.

Kosovo’s unilateral secession from Serbia was recognized by the “main Western powers” in 2008. But not China, Russia, or the UN!. Not too long after Bill Clinton’s NATO bombed the heebeejeebees out of former Yugoslavia in 1990. Just because they could. Today, the US -and NATO- try to use a tiny sliver of former Yugoslavia to ignite a major fire in Europe, a second fire besides Ukraine.

Kosovo is the size of half a postage stamp, only two US states are smaller, Rhode Island and Delaware. 1.8 million people live there, it’s like one NYC borough. But you can use the historic hatred to rekindle the flames. Right, Blinken? Well, turns out there are still some Serbs living in Kosovo, because that’s where they grew up.

The brilliant Kosovo PM now has the fantastic idea to start a fight with these Serbs, over the fact that their cars have Serb license plates and they themselves have Serb IDs, a whole 14(!) years later. Yeah, that’s worth a fight, obviously.

So America’s “top diplomat” Blinken invited Kosovo president Osmani and PM Albin Kurti to DC last week.



I’ll let some people other than me explain this to you. First, political analyst Alexandar Pavic:

In Kosovo As In Ukraine, The Same Western ‘Invisible Hand’ Foments Conflict

In addition to the conflict in Ukraine, Europe is now faced with the prospect of renewed conflict in Kosovo, Serbia’s breakaway province (officially named Kosovo and Metohija according to the Serbian constitution). Kosovo’s unilateral secession was recognized by the main Western powers in 2008. This came nine years after NATO’s attack on Serbia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, after which NATO forces occupied the province and helped install an ethnic Albanian-led government dominated by former members of the Kosovo Liberation Army terrorist organization.

The current crisis was triggered by Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian Prime Minister, Albin Kurti, who initially wanted to force the majority Serb population in the north of the region to accept Kosovan license plates and ID papers starting from August 1, and to ban entry to the province or issue temporary papers to travelers with Serbian-issued plates and documents.

Kurti attempted a similar stunt in September 2021, triggering a crisis where local Serbs in northern Kosovo organized roadblocks and Kosovo police reportedly beat up and intimidated Serb civilians, while the authorities in Belgrade put the Serbian military on high alert and ordered overflights by fighter planes over the administrative border between Serbia proper and Kosovo. The EU eventually brokered a temporary agreement, pending a final deal that was supposed to have been reached by April 2022, under EU auspices. However, nothing has come of that.

From Kosovo to Ukraine, it seems there’s a pattern regarding agreements in which Western powers have a hand. Since the start of this year’s special military operation in Ukraine, Russian officials have repeated time and again that the West had never pressed Kiev to fulfill its part of the 2015 Minsk 2 peace agreement, intended to end Kiev’s standoff with the Donbass republics. Recently, former Ukrainian president Pyotr Poroshenko openly admitted that Ukraine never intended to fulfill the agreement but was merely buying time until it could build up an army capable of overrunning Donbass.

The situation with Kosovo is not much different. The EU brokered an agreement between Pristina and Belgrade in April 2013, the so-called Brussels Agreement, by which Serbia was supposed to dismantle its “parallel” police and judicial structures in Kosovo and convince the Kosovo Serbs to accept integration into the Kosovo police and legal system, without recognizing the territory’s independence. And the Belgrade authorities did this, despite a large public outcry over the move.


However, there was a second part to the agreement, by which Pristina was obligated to form an Association of Serb Municipalities, with substantial local powers and ties to Serbia proper. The Albanian part of the Brussels Agreement has not been fulfilled to the present day. Or, as Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic noted on July 31, that 3,390 days have passed since the Brussels Agreement was signed, and still no sign of the Association.

As in the case of Ukraine, the collective West has put absolutely zero pressure on the side it supports to fulfill its part of a signed international agreement. And again, as in the case of Ukraine, this has encouraged Pristina to take an increasingly belligerent stance, which may very well lead to a more serious conflict.

There’s an additional ingredient to the Kosovo mix, thanks to the Ukraine conflict. Namely, the Serbs – both in Serbia and in Bosnia and Herzegovina – stand practically alone among European peoples in refusing to join Western sanctions against Russia, and in consistently demonstrating open support for Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine. As a result, the government in Belgrade has been under constant, increasing pressure by the main Western capitals, as well as the EU and NATO, to change its policy and join the West’s collective economic suicide.

Since Belgrade has proven to be a tough nut for the West to diplomatically crack when it comes to opposing Russia, it’s not at all far-fetched to imagine that the Kosovo Albanians just might be seen by the West as a useful tool by which to additionally turn the screws on Belgrade. In the same cynical way in which the unfortunate Ukrainians are being used to pressure and weaken Russia.


Next, from RT, about Richard Grenell. No love lost on my part about him, but he did negotiate a bunch of peace deals, and knows the territory much better than Blinken.

Trump’s Kosovo Envoy Slams US Over Crisis

Richard Grenell, who negotiated a Kosovo-Serbia deal under the Trump administration after a turn in charge of the US intelligence community, blamed the “reckless” prime minister in Pristina for the renewed tensions with Belgrade on Sunday and slammed the State Department for enabling him. “What’s happening in the Balkans isn’t Russia. Whoever says this to you is trying to manipulate you,” Grenell tweeted on Sunday evening. “This is about Albin Kurti trying once again to give it [to] Serbia. He is living in the past.”

“The people of Kosovo want peace and jobs, Albin. Stop picking fights,” Grenell added. Serbian military was placed on high alert and local Serbs put up roadblocks earlier in the day, after Kosovo police showed up at two administrative crossings with Serbia, intending to enforce Kurti’s decision to confiscate Serbian license plates and documents. This would have effectively cut off the remaining Serbs living in the north of the breakaway province.

According to Grenell, this was all about Kurti “making unilateral moves to reject Serbian IDs and license plates inside Kosovo,” which he called “unnecessary.” Describing the PM a “far left radical and experienced fascist,” Grenell further called his actions “foolish” and “reckless,” and urged Serbian leaders to “not take the bait.” “Even the Albanians know Kurti is the problem,”Grenell tweeted. He also blamed Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who met with Kurti and Kosovo president Vjosa Osmani earlier in the week.

US President Joe Biden has “ignored the Balkans,” the envoy added, pointing out that he had negotiated multiple agreements between Kosovo and Serbia under President Donald Trump, trying to overcome the conflict through economic cooperation. Grenell also accused the EU of orchestrating war crimes charges against Kosovo President Hashim Thaci to punish him for working with Trump – resulting in Kurti and Osmani taking power.

And then Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club.

Why Are Serbia And Kosovo On The Brink Of War Again?

Tensions between Belgrade and Pristina occur regularly, as a result of the fact that the Kosovo issue has not been resolved since 1999, when the province de facto gained independence after the US-led NATO campaign against the former Yugoslavia. However, this time there is a risk of more or less routine friction escalating into a dangerous conflict, because the context has changed dramatically.

The problem of Kosovo was solved at the end of the twentieth century in strict accordance with the then dominant approach, and in the seeming absence of an alternative. Disputes in most of Europe (ie. outside the former USSR) were settled according to the EU’s ideas of fairness, and where they could not be worked out amicably, pressure was exerted on those who rebelled, up to the use of military force (primarily American, as always).

[..] it was the EU that regulated the processes taking place locally, and, in general, this setup was taken for granted. Moreover, other powers which have been traditionally active and important in the Balkans – Russia and Turkey – indicated their presence (sometimes quite clearly), but did not pretend to have a decisive voice in the way things were arranged. This framework also defined the room to maneuver for the countries of the region, including those who were most loudly dissatisfied, like Serbia.

Now two main circumstances have changed. First, the EU is in such a vulnerable state that it is not ready to take full responsibility for the extremely complex political situation in its immediate periphery. It cannot promise membership, and more precisely – even if such a pledge were made, it doesn’t guarantee anything.

The EU’s management of the central Balkan problems – in Bosnia and Kosovo – has not led to the desired outcome over the past quarter of a century. Thus, it’s all the less likely that it will work out now. Because the second circumstance is that Russia and the West (the EU plus the US and NATO) are in a state of acute confrontation.

As a result, there is no reason to expect Moscow’s assistance in resolving the situation (be it Kosovo or Bosnia). Right now, the West’s favorite practice of “selective interaction” (we work together with Russia where we need it, we refuse to engage on other issues) can no longer be applied. There will be no cooperation: Russia and the West will be on opposite sides of the barricades everywhere, no matter the issue at hand. We are in a systemic cold war. And this reality can greatly influence what will happen in the Balkans.

The question is to what extent regional actors have retained their passion for showdown, revenge or expansion. There are suspicions that this zeal has been exhausted and emasculated. But if it still burns, then external forces will enter the fray this time, supporting opposing sides.

Blinken et al, which very much includes his EU counterparts, see the past struggles in the Balkans as something they can reignite at their convenience today. The initial boundaries are simple. Russia will come to the aid of Serbia. Kosovo will appeal to Albania. And then to NATO. So the idea is you got this hot cauldron, with 5-6-15 nations, and NATO can do whatever it wants in there.

But NATO has no chance in Ukraine, and it doesn’t have one in Kosovo. But it can ship billions worth of weapons in there and pay Raytheon. Problem I see with this genius plan is that Russia saw it coming from lightyears away. And that is the same issue as the difference between Lavrov and Blinken: they may have the same job title, but there’s no comparison.




We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site. Thank you for your support.



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


Mar 202022

Salvador Dali Remorse – Sphinx Embedded in the Sand 1931


Was Bombing Of Mariupol Theater Staged By Ukrainian Azov Extremists? (GZ)
US Recklessly Eyes China as Target in Economic War (Lauria)
Spies Who Lie (NY Post)
Media That Dismissed Hunter Biden Laptop Story Need To Correct The Record (Fox)
Biden’s State Department Backed Into a Corner, Forced to Turn on Hunter (WJ)
Biden Boasted He Proposed NATO’s 78-Day Airstrikes On Belgrade (ZH)
Halliburton, Schlumberger Draw Back From Russia Amid US Energy Sanctions (R.)
Defining Fascism (Tweedie)
Data Scientist Files Internal Appeal Of Bank Of Canada Vaccination Policy (OCLA)
The Digital Dictatorship Is Coming — Can We Stop It? (Mercola)



“Looking at the earth from afar you realize it is too small for conflict and just big enough for co-operation” – Yuri Gagarin



Kirsch Cole



Where did the 80% excess mortality come from?



40% ethnic Russians. Think Russia would bomb them?

Was Bombing Of Mariupol Theater Staged By Ukrainian Azov Extremists? (GZ)

Western media have reported that Russia’s military deliberately attacked the Donetsk Academic Regional Drama theater in Mariupol, Ukraine, claiming that it was filled with civilians and marked with signs reading “children” on its grounds. The supposed bombing took place just as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appealed to US Congress for a no fly zone, fueling the chorus for direct military confrontation with Russia and apparently inspiring President Joseph Biden to brand Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, as a “war criminal.” A closer look reveals that local residents in Mariupol had warned three days before the March 16 incident that the theater would be the site of a false flag attack launched by the openly neo-Nazi Azov Battalion, which controlled the building and the territory around it.

Civilians that escaped the city through humanitarian corridors have testified that they were held by Azov as human shields in area, and that Azov fighters detonated parts of the theater as they retreated. Despite claims of a massive Russian airstrike that reduced the building to ashes, all civilians appear to have escaped with their lives. Video of the attack on the theater remains unavailable at the time of publication; only photographs of the damaged structure can be viewed. The Russian Ministry of Defense has denied conducting an airstrike on the theater, asserting that the site had no military value and that no sorties were flown in the area on March 16.

While the Russian military operation in Ukraine has triggered a humanitarian crisis in Mariupol, it is clear that Russia gained nothing by targeting the theater, and virtually guaranteed itself another public relations blow by targeting a building filled with civilians – including ethnic Russians. Azov, on the other hand, stood to benefit from a dramatic and grisly attack blamed on Russia. In full retreat all around Mariupol and facing the possibility of brutal treatment at the hands of a Russian military hellbent on “de-Nazification,” its fighters’ only hope seemed to lie in triggering direct NATO intervention.

Azov – series of videos

Read more …

“Adding China as a target of its economic war could drive the populations of the U.S. and Europe against their own governments instead.”

US Recklessly Eyes China as Target in Economic War (Lauria)

The U.S. already has sanctions on China, as it had earlier on Russia. However, if the United States is seriously planning similar types of sanctions on Beijing that it has leveled on Moscow — against its major banks, against the central bank, removing it from SWIFT and cutting off key exports — the impact on the world economy — including on Europe and the United States — could be catastrophic. The U.S. national security strategy for several years has been aimed at both Russia and China. Knowing it must avoid a direct military confrontation against either, given the potential consequences, the U.S. is turning to economic warfare to ultimately attempt to bring down both governments through popular uprisings. Washington wants to replace them with Western-friendly leaders who would open up their economies to Western exploitation — just like Boris Yeltsin did in the 1990s.

The United States is acting as though the whole world is the West and that this is the China of 30 years ago. In its bull-headed effort to impose its unilateral rule on the world, while its domestic social problems mount, the U.S. has not only driven Russia and China closer together than ever, but it has now brought in India, much of Latin America, Africa and the Middle East, (all of whom have refused to sanction Russia and continues to trade with it), into a new bloc with economic power that exceeds the West. The U.S. has turned the majority of the world’s population against it. And it is now threatening to blow up the world economy. Cutting off trade and finance to Russia has already boomeranged on Western countries, driving up prices, especially at the pump. Instead of prompting a popular uprising in Russia as a result of its sanctions, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s popularity has actually risen since the invasion. Adding China as a target of its economic war could drive the populations of the U.S. and Europe against their own governments instead.

Read more …

“51 ‘intelligence’ experts refuse to apologize for discrediting true Hunter Biden story..”

Spies Who Lie (NY Post)

They are the supposed nonpartisan group of top spies looking out for the best interest of the nation. But the 51 former “intelligence” officials who cast doubt on The Post’s Hunter Biden laptop stories in a public letter really were just desperate to get Joe Biden elected president. And more than a year later, even after their Deep State sabotage has been shown again and again to be a lie, they refuse to own up to how they undermined an election. The officials, including CNN pundit and professional fabricator James Clapper – a man who was nearly charged for perjury for lying to Congress — signed a letter saying that the laptop “has the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” What proof did they have? By their own admission, none. “We do not know if the emails .. are genuine or not,” the letter said. They’re just “suspicious.”

Why? Because they hurt Biden’s campaign, that’s evidence enough. Keep in mind this was written Oct. 19, 2020, five days after The Post published its first story. Neither Joe Biden nor Hunter Biden had denied the story, they simply deflected questions. Didn’t these security experts think that if this was disinformation, the Biden campaign would have yelled to the heavens that the story was false? Meanwhile, though the letter was advertised as being signed by people who worked “for presidents of both political parties,” a majority of the officials were Democrats. Politico picked up the letter and ran the false headline “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.” That headline is still online today, even though the letter clearly says they don’t know if it’s Russian disinformation. That headline was tweeted out by legions of Democrats, including current White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki, as proof that it was all a con.

That tweet also is still up despite being proven false. Thus pure speculation by a group of biased officials became gospel among the media. This was “fake news,” and could be safely ignored. Keep in mind that Twitter already had banned The New York Post a few days before. The rationale was that this was “hacked materials,” even though it wasn’t – and Twitter had no evidence to think it was. A Facebook official, meanwhile, said it wasn’t going to allow the sharing of The Post’s story until it was “fact checked” by a third party — a check that never happened. Thus, Big Tech, former government officials, and the media conspired together to bury a story. No, not just bury — create a false narrative that flipped the script to make Joe Biden the victim of a conspiracy. In short, they peddled online disinformation to sway an election.

Read more …

But they do not.

Media That Dismissed Hunter Biden Laptop Story Need To Correct The Record (Fox)

The New York Times on Wednesday subtly confirmed the Hunter Biden laptop story that was largely written off by mainstream news outlets as disinformation when the New York Post first reported it ahead of the 2020 presidential election and media watchdogs want to see the organizations that initially dismissed it correct their reporting and analysis. “Outlets who actively tried to cover up the original New York Post laptop story absolutely need to correct the record,” journalist Drew Holden told Fox News Digital. “These weren’t simple misgivings — they smeared the accurate, significant scoops of a competitor as disinformation, and they absolutely have an obligation to correct the record,” Holden said.

The Post reported the laptop’s contents included emails, text messages, photos and financial documents between himself, his family and business associates that showed how he used his political influence in his foreign business dealings, specifically in his work as a board member of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company. However, voters who relied on the mainstream press for information ahead of the presidential election were told not to believe the report. Washington Post columnist Greg Sargent quickly declared the day after the Post first began reporting on the laptop that it was “Trump’s fake new Biden scandal,” calling the allegations “laughably weak.”

NPR public editor Kelly McBride addressed a listener’s question about the news outlet’s blackout of the Hunter Biden story at the time. After claiming the Post’s reporting had “many, many red flags,” including its potential ties to Russia, NPR determined the “assertions don’t amount to much.” “We don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions,” NPR managing editor Terence Samuel told McBride. In December 2020, Project Veritas published leaked audio recordings of conference calls featuring CNN’s top executives urging staff to avoid the Biden scandal during the election.

“Obviously, we’re not going with the New York Post story right now on Hunter Biden,” CNN political director David Chalian said during a conference call on Oct. 14, the same day the Post published its first story on Hunter Biden’s emails. MSNBC anchor Katy Tur mocked the Post’s story, saying it “dropped like a bomb,” but to “wither under scrutiny, not really dropping like a bomb,” while MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle attacked those who were covering the Hunter Biden controversy, referring to it as a “so-called story” with “unverified claims.” These are just a small sample of the corporate media’s overwhelming attempt to silence the story, which was even censored on Twitter.

All the hallmarks

Read more …

The MSM maintain their silence.

Biden’s State Department Backed Into a Corner, Forced to Turn on Hunter (WJ)

It’s very possible that Kenneth Vogel, a reporter with The New York Times, may actually be practicing journalism. Last year, Vogel filed several Freedom of Information Act requests with the State Department. Among the information he was seeking were copies of all correspondence that “mentioned” Hunter Biden, among officials at the U.S. embassy in Romania, between August 2015 and December 2019, according to Business Insider. Upon learning that the agency wouldn’t start producing these records until April 2023, Vogel filed a FOIA lawsuit in January. A hearing in the case was scheduled for March 17. Last Friday, however, the Times’ attorney David McCraw filed a court motion, which said the State Department had agreed to begin handing over the records next month.

Business Insider reported that, in a letter to the presiding judge in the case, U.S. District Court Judge J. Paul Oetken, McGraw wrote: “The State Department has started identifying records responsive to The Times’s FOIA requests. It has agreed to begin processing records for production as it continues to identify the remaining responsive records.” “The parties are still negotiating the number of pages to be processed in and the frequency of each production. The parties respectfully propose to provide a status report to the Court on March 25, 2022, informing the Court of the results of this negotiation,” McGraw added. In addition, Vogel requested all records mentioning Tony Bobulinski, who made headlines in October 2020 when emails contained on Hunter Biden’s lap top were revealed.

It turned out that Hunter had introduced Bobulinski to now-President Joe Biden in a May 2017 meeting at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Los Angeles, California. He was to serve as CEO of SinoHawk Holdings LLC, a joint venture between the Biden family and Chinese energy company, CEFC. Bobulinski famously confirmed that “The Big Guy” referred to in one of the emails on the laptop, who was to receive 10 percent of the potential profits, was none other than Joe Biden. Vogel has also asked for all correspondence mentioning former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who, according to The New York Post, is alleged to have contributed $100,000 to a trust for Hunter’s children in April 2016 ahead of a meeting with then-Vice President Joe Biden to discuss “some very good and profitable matters.”

The Post published a screenshot of a July 2016 email in which Freeh wrote to Hunter, “I would be delighted to do future work with you.” Apparently, he was very delighted. [..] An October 2019 story published in The New York Times may provide a clue. Vogel wrote about Hunter Biden’s association with a Romanian executive who was facing corruption charges. The headline and lede read: “Giuliani Is Drawing Attention to Hunter Biden’s Work in Romania. But There’s a Problem. … Hunter Biden worked to help a Romanian executive facing corruption charges. But so did the former New York mayor — and a former F.B.I. director.” For whatever the reason, the State Department tried to slow-walk Vogel’s FOIA request, so much so that he was forced to file a lawsuit. We know that Hunter Biden has conducted business with the Chinese and the Ukrainians, but we’ve heard very little about his involvement with anyone in Romania.

Why now?

Read more …

“we will never forget who bombed our embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia”. “We need no lecture on justice from the abuser of international law..”

Biden Boasted He Proposed NATO’s 78-Day Airstrikes On Belgrade (ZH)

Both Russian and Chinese media and state officials have in the last days been widely circulating a resurfaced video from 1999 wherein then senator Joe Biden bragged about being the first US official to propose bombing Belgrade and destroying the city’s infrastructure. State media in Russia wrote this week while featuring the footage: “The head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin, reposted the footage on his social media account, reminding the current US President of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia that is estimated to have killed about 2,500 people, including 89 children.” Russian officials used the clip to blast Biden over his latest description of Vladimir Putin as a “war criminal” and “thug” due to the invasion of Ukraine. It’s also getting wide circulation on Chinese social media.

“I suggested bombing of Belgrade. I suggested that American pilots go there and destroy all bridges on the Drina,” Biden had said at the time. The 78 days of air strikes lasted from 24 March 1999 to 10 June 1999. The bombs kept falling even on Serbia’s Easter – called Pascha – which is the holiest day of the Orthodox Christian year. “I was suggesting very specific action,” Biden said while seeming to praise his own ‘muscular’ proposals which helped lead to the NATO war against the Serbs. China’s mission to the EU also called out prior US action over what was Yugoslavia, condemning the outrageous May NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy – which killed and injured multiple Chinese nationals and journalists.

According to a summary of the incident in The National Review, “Despite the seemingly extensive target vetting, on May 7 the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was struck by five Joint Directed Attack Munition satellite-guided bombs, delivered by U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit bombers. Three Chinese journalists—Shao Yunhuan of Xinhua, and Xu Xinghu and his wife Zhu Ying of the Guangming Daily—were killed in the attack. Twenty other Chinese nationals were injured, five seriously.” On Thursday China’s foreign ministry said in a statement “we will never forget” – and related it to Washington’s outrage over ongoing Russian military action in Ukraine:

The Chinese diplomatic mission in the European Union said on Thursday that Chinese people could fully relate to the suffering of other countries because “we will never forget who bombed our embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia”. “We need no lecture on justice from the abuser of international law,” it said. “As a Cold War remnant and the world’s largest military alliance, Nato continues to expand its geographical scope and range of operations. What kind of role has it played in world peace and stability? Nato needs to have good reflection.”

Read more …

There’s a reason US oil(field) service companies operate in Russia, and their withdrawal may hurt Russia.

Halliburton, Schlumberger Draw Back From Russia Amid US Energy Sanctions (R.)

U.S. oilfield services companies Halliburton Co and Schlumberger said on Friday they have suspended or halted Russia operations in response to U.S. sanctions over Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. The disclosures followed widespread departures by energy, retail and consumer goods businesses and a series of European Union and U.S. bans on providing oil technology to Russia or importing its energy products. Halliburton said it immediately suspended future business and would wind down its operations in Russia after earlier ending shipments of sanctioned parts and products to the country.

Schlumberger has ceased new investment and technology deployment while continuing with existing activity in compliance with international laws and sanctions, the company said in a statement late on Friday. “We urge a cessation of the conflict and a restoration of safety and security in the region,” Schlumberger Chief Executive Olivier Le Peuch said. Oilfield services provider Baker Hughes declined to comment on its Russia operations. Energy companies BP PLC, Shell, Equinor ASA and Exxon Mobil have suspended business or announced plans to exit their Russia operations.

Read more …

“I fear he underestimates the intellect of the nation which did three-quarters of the fighting and dying to defeat fascism 77 years ago.”

Defining Fascism (Tweedie)

What is fascism? With the Russian ‘de-Nazification operation’ in the Ukraine entering its fourth week and “Black Lives Matter” replaced with “I Stand With Ukraine” as the virtue-signal de jour, now seems like a good time to define it. While I’m a big fan of the Iranian journalist Ramin Mazaheri, I have to disagree with his latest article on The Vineyard of the Saker. Mazaheri says Russia misinterprets Nazism as simply Russophobia. I fear he underestimates the intellect of the nation which did three-quarters of the fighting and dying to defeat fascism 77 years ago. Rather than trying to suck the meaning of the word ‘fascism’ out of our thumbs, let us instead compare two well-known definitions by Georgi Dimitrov and Umberto Eco, a Marxist and a Liberal.

Eco, the Italian author of the historical whodunnit The Name Of the Rose, listed 14 different features in his 1995 essay Eternal Fascism. The problem is, none of them individually are proof that we’re living in a fascist state. Eco admits at the start: “These features cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism.” But he claims: “it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.” The first item on Eco’s list, ‘the cult of tradition’, is common to most ‘small-c’ social conservatives. The syncretism that Eco speaks of here is found in his own eclectic list. Points three to five, ‘action for action’s sake’, ‘disagreement is treason’ and ‘fear of difference’ are true of the dozens of Trotskyite and anarchist sects jumping on the Ukraine bandwagon.

Points six to eight, ‘appeal to a frustrated middle class’, an ‘obsession with a plot’ and the belief that their ‘enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak’ describe the US ‘Never Trumpers’ and British liberals still desperate to rejoin the European Union (EU). Nine and 11, ‘ life is lived for struggle’ and ‘everybody is educated to become a hero’ apply to the ‘woke’ millennials obsessed with their own perceived victimhood. Dimitrov, the Bulgarian general secretary of the Communist (Third) International, characterised fascism in a speech to the 7th Comintern congress in 1935 as: “the open, terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic, and most imperialist elements of finance capital.”

“Fascism is not a power standing above class, nor government of the petty bourgeoisie or the lumpen-proletariat over finance capital,” he elaborated. “Fascism is the power of finance capital itself. It is the organization of terrorist vengeance against the working class and the revolutionary section of the peasantry and intelligentsia.”

Read more …

Data scientist files internal appeal of Bank of Canada’s mandatory vaccination policy. 766-page submission cites more than 1000 peer-reviewed articles showing evidence of harm.

Joseph Hickey is also the OCLA’s (volunteer) ED.

Data Scientist Files Internal Appeal Of Bank Of Canada Vaccination Policy (OCLA)

Dr. Joseph Hickey, a data scientist at the Bank of Canada (Canada’s central bank) was placed on unpaid leave without benefits by his employer in November 2021, for declining to receive injections of a COVID-19 vaccine. On March 16, 2022, Dr. Hickey submitted an internal appeal of the Bank’s decision. His 766-page submission describes and cites the scientific evidence that demonstrates there are many medical reasons for declining vaccination, including that:

• There was no emergency that caused large amounts of deaths in Canada in 2020-2021 that would justify vaccinating the entire population;
• There is no reliable evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine products provide any health benefit;
• Vaccine products injected via intramuscular routes are in-effect physiologically incapable of preventing infection and transmission of respiratory illnesses;
• There is autopsy, surveillance, and statistical evidence of grave dangers of COVID-19 vaccine products;
• There are more than 1000 peer-reviewed articles providing evidence of harm from COVID-19 vaccine products;
• There is a significantly increased risk of dangerous heart inflammation following injection with a COVID-19 vaccine product, especially for younger males, and this danger is heightened for those who engage in strenuous physical activity;
• Natural immunity provides robust and sufficient protection against respiratory illnesses; and
• It is a fundamental principle of medicine that individual assessment of risk is a personal and confidential choice and the decision to receive or not receive a medical intervention must be made with free and informed consent.

Read more …

Better be fast: “..we may have only a decade, at most two, to prevent this digital dictatorship from taking over.”

The Digital Dictatorship Is Coming — Can We Stop It? (Mercola)

According to Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), the goal of The Fourth Industrial Revolution is to change what it means to be human by merging man and machine. In short, while the term “transhumanism” is not being used, that’s exactly where the global cabal intends to take us, willing or not. In a November 2019 interview with CNN, history professor and bestselling author Yuval Noah Harari, a Klaus Schwab disciple, warned that “humans are now hackable animals,” meaning, the technology now exists by which a company or government can know you better than you know yourself, and that can be very dangerous if misused.

He predicted that algorithms will increasingly be used to make decisions that historically have been made by humans, either yourself or someone else, including whether or not you’ll be hired for a particular job, whether you’ll be granted a loan, what scholastic curriculum you will follow and even who you will marry. There’s also an ever-increasing risk of being manipulated by these outside forces that you’re not even fully aware of. Looking back over the last two years, it’s rather easy to confirm that mass manipulation is taking place at a staggering scale and that it’s phenomenally effective. As noted by Harari in 2019, the available capabilities already go far beyond Orwell’s “1984” authoritarian vision, and it’s only going to become more powerful from here.

He’s certain that in short order, there will be the ability to monitor your emotional state through something as simple as a wearable wristband. You may dutifully smile and clap when listening to a speech by a government official, but they’ll know you’re angry or don’t agree with what’s being said, and could therefore take action against you based on your most personal, internal emotions rather than what you outwardly express. Importantly, Harari warned that if we allow the establishment of this kind of digital dictatorship, where the system, be it a corporation or a government, knows the most intimate details about each and every person, it will be impossible to dismantle it. Its control will be total and irreversible. And, Harari believes we may have only a decade, at most two, to prevent this digital dictatorship from taking over.

Read more …
















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