Why Does Shepsel Ber Nudelman's Daughter HATE Putin Russia?

NYTimes  |  Ukraine was a Ukraine issue, not a Russia issue, and so the burden of dealing with the expanding crisis there fell in the laps of a newly appointed ambassador, Geoffrey Pyatt, and the newly appointed assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasia, the old Russia hand Victoria Nuland.

The daughter of Sherwin Nuland, the surgeon and Yale bioethicist, she fell in love with Russian culture after seeing a performance of Chekhov’s “Three Sisters” when she was 12; she studied Russian history and politics at Brown, worked at a Soviet children’s camp and after that for an embassy family in Moscow. Then, eager for adventure and contact with real-live Russians, she did her tour on the Soviet fishing vessel (for seven months, not one). That experience taught her something about the planned economy: After 25 days of drinking and card-playing, the crew did five days of hard work to meet their monthly targets. She also says she learned “how to drink 10 shots of vodka and still get back to my cabin and put a chair under the doorknob. Things could get a little hairy when the boys were drunk.”

At a Senate hearing, top US diplomat Victoria Nuland celebrated the Nord Stream 2 pipeline bombing:

"Senator Cruz, like you, I am, and I think the administration is, very gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now, as you like to say, a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea." pic.twitter.com/KS5OM4N165

— Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) January 27, 2023

She entered the Foreign Service in 1984. Over a long and eventful career, she witnessed the defense of the Russian White House during the attempted hard-line coup against Mikhail Gorbachev; served as Talbott’s chief of staff during the chaotic ’90s; worked as Dick Cheney’s deputy national security adviser in the years after Sept. 11 but “before Cheney became Cheney,” as she put it; and served as the State Department spokeswoman under Hillary Clinton. She was known inside successive administrations as a Russia hawk, but when asked if she hated the country, she drew a distinction between “Russian culture and the Russian people,” which she loves, and the Soviet strain she sees in Putin’s Russia, which she does not. “I deplore the way successive governments in Moscow — Soviet and Russian — have abused their own people, ripped them off, constrained their choices and made us the enemy to mask their own failings,” Nuland says. Hearing her speak with such conviction about governments that, in at least one case, no longer existed, you could understand how she had been over the years a very effective advocate inside several American administrations for her point of view.

In December 2013, with the protests in the center of Kiev just a few weeks old, Nuland traveled to Moscow and then to Kiev to try to defuse the crisis that had engulfed the Yanukovych government. She made little progress with the Kremlin, which was of the opinion that Yanukovych should simply clear the protesters from the streets. On her first night in Kiev, she was woken by members of her staff. The riot police brought out to contain the protests had formed a ring around them and were closing in. The demonstrators were desperately singing patriotic songs to keep up their spirits, but they were in mortal danger. Nuland got on the phone with Washington and worked to release a statement in Secretary of State John Kerry’s name, expressing “disgust” at the move on peaceful protesters. “After that,” Nuland says, “the singing grew louder”; the demonstrators on the square, she told me, were holding their phones in the air, “displaying the Kerry statement in Ukrainian and Russian.” The riot troops backed off.

The next morning, Nuland was to meet with Yanukovych. But first she wanted to visit the protest encampment, which, two weeks into its existence, had grown in both scope and moral authority. “In accordance with Slavic tradition, I wanted to bring something,” Nuland says. She took a large plastic bag filled with treats. Alongside Pyatt, she handed them out to the protesters, and thus was born one of the iconic images of the Ukraine crisis, immediately and widely circulated by the Kremlin’s media apparatuses — a powerful official, not a famous politician like Senator John McCain or Secretary of State John Kerry but a representative of the supposedly more neutral American policymaking bureaucracy, succoring revolutionaries in the center of Kiev. (Nuland points out that they also gave food to the riot police.) Two months later, as the Yanukovych government entered its terminal phase, Nuland’s “[Expletive] the E.U.” comment leaked out. For many Russians and Europeans, the line became emblematic of American arrogance.

A few weeks later, Yanukovych fled the country, and Russian troops annexed Crimea. In tandem with Fried, who had taken the newly established position of sanctions coordinator at the State Department, Nuland began drafting harsh sanctions against Putin’s inner circle, individuals involved in the invasion of Ukraine and eventually large Russian companies and banks. Fried told me that one senior State Department official thought this was pretty funny. He said to Fried, “Do the Russians realize that the two hardest-line people in the entire U.S. government are now in a position to go after them?”

The Russians may have realized this perfectly well. According to American intelligence agencies, two years after the sanctions went into effect, the Russians started feeding emails stolen from the servers of the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks and helping with their distribution.

 

What Obscene Tricks Do Blinken/Nudelman Have Up Their Sleeve?

johnhelmer  |   And what can be believed when, the day after Blinken’s remarks, Victoria Nuland, the most psychopathological Under Secretary of State in the record of the office, announced to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she and Blinken are ready “in the context of Russia’s decision to negotiate seriously and withdraw its troops from Ukraine and return territories, I would certainly support that [easing of sanctions].”

Victoria Nuland said yesterday that the US is working on setting up a "judicial mechanism" to prosecute Putin, whom she preemptively declared guilty. Thus confirming that the US is pursuing regime change. If you're throwing Putin in prison, you're changing the regime by force

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 27, 2023

What Nuland meant by the Ukraine and the territories to be “returned”, Blinken had disclosed the day before. Crimea, Zaporozhe and “the land bridge that connects Crimea and Russia”, meaning Kherson, Donetsk and Lugansk,  will remain Russian and will not be negotiated or “returned” because, said Blinken, “an assault on Crimea would be a tripwire for nuclear escalation.”   

For the time being there has been no Russian acknowledgement of either Blinken’s or Nuland’s statements.  

Listen now to the TNT Radio discussion of what is happening behind the scenes in Washington and Moscow – a breaking news story which has blindsided the mainstream media and also the alternative media.

Read the Blinken statement of Wednesday morning, January 25, and President Vladimir Putin’s response in the afternoon.

Here is the official text of Nuland’s opening statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on January 26;  and here is what Nuland replied in answer to a question from Republican Senator Rand Paul on Russian sanctions.    Rand then told Nuland the sanctions are a form of race war: “If we’re going to sanction people for their belief and, you know, their sort of nationalist version of the world, then we won’t have any, we won’t have any discussion between people or any legislative exchange. That would be about 90 percent of the people. I would venture to say that every member of the Duma probably supports Crimea. This is their perspective.”   

History Of The Jews In Ukraine

wikipedia  |  The history of the Jews in Ukraine dates back over a thousand years; Jewish communities have existed in the territory of Ukraine from the time of the Kievan Rus' (late 9th to mid-13th century).^[9][10] Some of the most important Jewish religious and cultural movements, from Hasidism to Zionism, rose either fully or to an extensive degree in the territory of modern Ukraine. According to the World Jewish Congress, the Jewish community in Ukraine constitutes the third-largest in Europe and the fifth-largest in the world.^[3]

Whilst at times it flourished, at other times the Jewish community faced periods of persecution and antisemitic discrimination. In the Ukrainian People's Republic (1917-1920), Yiddish was declared a state language, along with Ukrainian and Russian. At that time, the Jewish National Union was created and the community was granted an autonomous status.^[11] Yiddish was used on Ukrainian currency in this same period, between 1917 and 1920.^[12] Before World War II, slightly less than one-third of Ukraine's urban population consisted of Jews;^[13] they were the largest national minority in Ukraine.^{[citation needed]} Ukrainian Jews consist of a number of sub-groups with distinct characteristics, including Ashkenazi Jews, Mountain Jews, Bukharan Jews, Crimean Karaites, Krymchak Jews, and Georgian Jews.

In the westernmost area of Ukraine, Jews were mentioned for the first time in records in 1030. During the Khmelnytsky Uprising between 1648 and 1657, an army of Cossacks massacred and took into captivity large numbers of Jews, Roman Catholics, and Uniate Christians. One estimate (1996) reports that 15,000-30,000 Jews were killed or taken captive, and that 300 Jewish communities were completely destroyed.^[14] More recent estimates (2014) greatly reduce the number of Jews that died during the national uprising of Ukrainians to 3,000-6,000 people between the years 1648–1649.^[15]

During the 1821 anti-Jewish riots in Odesa following the death of the Greek Orthodox patriarch in Constantinople, 14 Jews were killed. Some sources claim this episode as the first pogrom.^[16] At the start of 20th century, anti-Jewish pogroms continued to occur, leading to large-scale emigration. When Ukraine was part of the Russian Empire, antisemitic attitudes were expressed in numerous blood libel cases between 1911 and 1913.^{[citation needed]} In 1915, the Russian imperial government expelled thousands of Jews from the Empire's border areas.^[17][18]

During the conflicts of the Russian Revolution and the ensuing Russian Civil War, an estimated 31,071 Jews were killed in pogroms between 1918 and 1920.^[19] During the establishment of the Ukrainian People's Republic (1917–21),^[20] pogroms continued to be perpetrated on Ukrainian territory. In Ukraine, the number of civilian Jews killed by Petliura's forces during the period was estimated at between 35,000 and 50,000 to 100,000 ^[21]

Pogroms erupted in January 1919 in the northwest province of Volhynia and spread to many other regions of Ukraine.^[22] Massive pogroms continued until 1921.^[23] The actions of the Soviet government by 1927 led to a growing antisemitism in the area.^[24]

Total civilian losses during World War II and the German occupation of Ukraine are estimated at seven million. More than one million Soviet Jews, of them around 225,000 in Belarus,^[25] were shot and killed by the Einsatzgruppen and by their many local Ukrainian supporters. Most of them were killed in Ukraine because most pre-WWII Soviet Jews lived in the Pale of Settlement, of which Ukraine was the biggest part. The major massacres against Jews occurred mainly in the first phase of the occupation, although they continued until the return of the Red Army. In 1959 Ukraine had 840,000 Jews, a decrease of almost 70% from 1941 totals (within Ukraine's current borders). Ukraine's Jewish population continued to decline significantly during the Cold War. In 1989, Ukraine's Jewish population was only slightly more than half of what it was thirty years earlier (in 1959). During and after the collapse of Communism in the 1990s, the majority of the Jews who remained in Ukraine in 1989 left the country and moved abroad (mostly to Israel).^[26] Antisemitic graffiti and violence against Jews are still problems in Ukraine.^[27][28]

Interesting How Russia's Head Khazarians In Charge Can Keep Respectful Tongues In Their Mouths...,

kremlin.ru  |  In the run-up to International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Vladimir Putin met at the Kremlin with Chief Rabbi of Russia Berel Lazar and President of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia Alexander Boroda.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, friends,

This meeting precedes International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust, the Heroes of the Resistance, and our country’s position on this is well known. The majority of Jews killed by the Nazis were Soviet citizens, and we share this pain.

You are aware of our current position too. We are strongly against consigning crimes of this kind to oblivion, since crimes like this have no statute of limitations. We hold this policy to make sure that nothing like this ever happens to humankind again.

I am aware of the position of the Jewish community of Russia and the position of the State of Israel regarding the role and importance of the Red Army in defeating Nazism and fascism. We highly appreciate this, but to reiterate, this matter is of particular importance for our people.

You are also aware that the investigating authorities and the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation continue to deploy serious efforts trying to identify crimes of this type committed against any citizens of the former Soviet Union, regardless of their ethnic origin. Without a doubt, this work is a major contribution to the efforts seeking to bring to light the crimes committed by the Nazis against the Jews as well.

We know that Jewish organisations around the world are supportive of the work we are doing. We are doing our best to ensure that our efforts are supported at the international level as well. Unfortunately, many countries use various pretexts to avoid participating in joint efforts in this important area. We will continue to pursue this work regardless of the ongoing political developments.

I am aware that you are holding an event tomorrow, or rather a string of events associated with this date, so please convey my best wishes to the participants of tomorrow’s programme.

Chief Rabbi of Russia Berel Lazar: Thank you very much, thank you for your words.

Indeed, the Holocaust and all the developments of World War II are tragic events for us. I know this firsthand, since my family, my father miraculously survived the Holocaust. They managed to leave on the last ship. My mother survived the Holocaust because some good people hid her during the war.

So, the suffering from the Holocaust – so many Jews suffered at that time and 6 million innocent people died – this suffering remains terrible to us to this day. Every year, when we remember these events, we always say: never again. Tomorrow also marks the anniversary of the lifting of the Siege of Leningrad. It is also a time when we remember the suffering during the siege. A situation where innocent people suffer only because someone attacks them is terrible, inexplicable and unsupportable.

So, thank you very much for everything you have done and are doing today. Moreover, Jews feel very comfortable living in Russia today, and thank God for what is actually happening in our country today.

In this regard, we keep saying that we are ready to do our best to find peaceful solutions. Because a situation where people suffer is bad for everyone; everyone suffers when they see others around them suffering. All of us understand that we are children of one God, and we want all his children to live in brotherhood, mutual understanding and friendship and truly respect each other. When people suffer, it is because someone is not letting them live a calm everyday life. The Talmud says that a person who saved the life of one human being saved the whole world, and we value every life.

To reiterate, we as a Jewish community, I believe, not only in Russia, but all over the world, are ready to do everything to find peaceful solutions, so people can really… maybe our people understand more than anyone else what suffering is, so we are ready to do everything we can to promote peace around the world, and have people live a good life.

Vladimir Putin: Good. Thank you.

 

On Khazarian Vulgarity...,

unz  |   I read with interest a recent column in The Tablet by David Mikics (Professor of English, University of Houston) on Jewish vulgarity or, as the piece otherwise explains it, “the once-vibrant Jewish trait of not caring what the goyim think.” Although touted as a three-part series, only the first part has been published thus far, and this first essay is a kind of focused review of elements within John Murray Cuddihy’s The Ordeal of Civility and Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century. In the following essay I want to expand upon, and challenge, some of the ideas raised in the piece by Mikics.

I have to agree with the basic premise of the opening remarks of Mikics’s column. He writes that “the charge that Jews are vulgar now seems almost quaint. … Jewish lack of manners was once taken seriously both by Jews and by their gentile neighbors and competitors. The vulgar, unmannerly Jew was a countercultural force, and not just a reason for shame and repression.” The overall state of contemporary culture has indeed degraded to such an extent that Jews no longer stand out as singular producers of cultural obscenities. And yet there is a deep history of Jews as the agents of vulgarity in the West, stretching back to Roman accounts. Mikics doesn’t seem concerned with this deep history, focusing only on the twentieth century as covered by the works of Cuddihy and Slezkine.

Historical Jewish Obscenity

Jews have often been regarded by host cultures as both inherently obscene and as promoters of the obscene — a corrosive force acting against group morality, and therefore group cohesion. In Unclean Lips: Obscenity, Jews, and American Culture (2014), Josh Lambert points out that in the ancient Mediterranean Jews were referred to as “an obscene people.”[1] Such comments may have been as much observations as aspersions, since we know that in later centuries obscenity became an integral part of Jewish linguistic culture. For example, Bernard Dov Weinryb writes that in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Poland, “many erotic or obscene expressions and metaphors appear in Hassidic writings. …They reflect the way the average Jew in those times used obscene language, mainly of an erotic character, in his conversation.”[2] On more recent contexts, Jonas E. Alexis has written that,

Jewish actors tend to gravitate towards shows with sexual themes. … Israeli-American Natalie Portman tells us in the movie No Strings Attached that “monogamy goes against our basic biology.” And [Jewish singer] Adam Lambert says, “When I’m on stage there’s definitely a sexual energy that goes into it.” In 2009 Lambert performed ‘For Your Entertainment’ at the American Music Awards. During the performance Lambert dragged a female dancer by her ankles and pushed “a male dancer’s head into his crotch and simulated oral sex.”[3]

As well as being represented and self-representing as having an intrinsic relationship to the obscene, the historical record is also replete with examples of Jews involving themselves heavily in the trade in obscenity. In his pseudonymously-published Letters from England (1808), the English Poet Laureate Robert Southey remarked on Jewish peddlers who wandered nineteenth-century England hawking “miserable and obscene prints.”[4]

In 1886 Édouard Drumont warned of a “pornographic war” being waged on France by Jews.[5] In 1913, a “filthy press” in Warsaw “belonging to a certain Zimmerman,” was confiscated by Polish police after it was discovered disseminating pornography throughout the Russian Empire — activities described by the newspaper Przegląd Katolicki as a “Jewish atrocity.”[6]
Estonian police raided a building in 1909 belonging to the Jewish Benjamin Mikhailovsky, one of the richest merchants in Narva. One of Mikhailovsky’s side projects, apart from the trade in precious metals, was printing, and during their search police seized “11,119 cards they considered pornographic.”[7] And in Poland in 1910, the Polish Archbishop Pelczar would write, “I consider it my duty to warn Christian society against those Jews who intoxicate our people in the tavern and destroy them with usury; against those who maintain houses of debauchery in the towns; who trade in live goods [i.e. selling women into prostitution], who poison our young people with pornographic prints and periodicals.”[8] In the U.S, it is well-established that Jews have had a prominent role in the porn industry since the late nineteenth century.

ALL Our Little Latinex Minions Getting WAAAAY Out Of Pocket!!!

LATimes |  A proposal floated by the leaders of Brazil and Argentina to launch a common currency is being met with deep skepticism by analysts, who say neither country is positioned to tackle such a complicated undertaking or instill confidence in the idea with global markets.

Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva told reporters Monday, though, that a common currency would reduce a harmful dependence on the U.S. dollar.

“I think this will happen with time, and it is necessary because there are countries that sometimes have difficulty acquiring dollars,” Lula said in Buenos Aires after meeting his Argentine counterpart, Alberto Fernández. “We must not in the 21st century continue doing the same as what was done in the 20th century.”

The currency would initially be shared between Argentina and Brazil for trade and transactions between the two countries and later be adopted by fellow members of the Mercosur trade bloc, Lula explained. Details remained fuzzy a day after Lula and Fernández announced the outlines in a joint statement published Sunday in the Argentine newspaper Perfil.

Speaking in Buenos Aires on Monday afternoon, Brazil’s Finance Minister Fernando Haddad clarified that the proposal would not entail the adoption of a sole currency to replace the Brazilian real and the Argentine peso.

Economists had immediately questioned the logic of the plan between the South American neighbors. Economic conditions are deteriorating in Argentina, where nearly four in 10 people live in poverty. The nation has one of the world’s highest inflation rates — 95% in 2022 — and its peso has been steadily depreciating for over a decade. Its multiple foreign exchange rates include an illegal one employed in backrooms by money-changers — a practice so entrenched that this so-called “blue dollar” rate is published daily in newspapers.

Brazil, Latin America’s largest nation, sits in an objectively better place economically, but it is hardly a beacon of success. Its inflation in 2022 exceeded the ceiling of the central bank’s target range for a second straight year. And the real has shed half its value against the dollar since 2014, just before the nation plunged into its deepest recession in a century. The nation’s growth prospects remain subdued, and it hasn’t recorded a primary budget surplus since 2013.

“Neither country has the initial conditions to make this succeed and attract others,” Mohamed A. El-Erian, former chief executive of Pimco, one of the world’s premier fixed-income investment managers, tweeted on Sunday. “The best this initiative can hope for is that talk creates some political cover for much-needed economic reforms.”

Fernández said neither he nor his Brazilian counterpart knows how a currency could function between their two countries or in the region. But he said they agree that depending on foreign currencies for trade is harmful. The greenback’s recent strength has complicated the repayment of dollar-denominated debt for developing nations around the world, including Argentina. Its central bank uses its precious dollar reserves to pay down its foreign debt and to intervene in the currency market to stem depreciation, and so it is loath to sell greenbacks to importers for trade.

Both countries’ economic teams will present proposals for trade and bilateral transactions, with a currency created after “much debate and meetings,” Lula said.

The proposal isn’t original, nor has it come only from the left.

Leftist Latinex Leadership Talm'bout Throwing Out The OAS In Favor Of CELAC

NC  |  The invasion of the capital has also, however briefly, united almost all of the governments of Latin America against right-wing authoritarianism. Just about every head of state in the region, with the notable exception, I believe, of El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele and Guatemala’s Alejandro Giammattei, has expressed support for Lula’s government and condemnation of the events of Sunday, Jan 8. They include the heads of state of Uruguay, Ecuador, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic. Again, this would have been unthinkable just a few days ago.

The reason why this is important is that one of the key foreign policy goals of Lula’s new government is to open a new chapter of regional cooperation and integration in Latin America — something that has been tried many times before and largely failed.

One of Lula’s first actions since taking office was to confirm the return of Brazil to CELAC (the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States), an intergovernmental mechanism for dialogue and political agreements. It was set up in Caracas in 2011 with the implicit goal of deepening Latin American integration and reducing the influence of the United States on the politics and economics of Latin America. Lula will officially ratify his decision to rejoin at CELAC’s seventh summit, to be held in Buenos Aires on Jan 24.

As readers may recall, Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel Lopéz Obrador (aka AMLO) proposed using CELAC as a vehicle to create in Latin America something similar to the European Economic Community, the six-member economic association formed in 1957 that would eventually evolve into today’s 27-member European Union. But he also emphasised “the need to respect national sovereignty and adhere to non-interventionist and pro-development policies” as well as ensure that any resulting structure is “in accordance with our history, our reality, and our identities.”

In his speech at the sixth CELAC summit, held in September 2021, AMLO reiterated his hopes that CELAC would eventually supplant the widely reviled Washington-based Organization of American States (OAS) as the main institution for intra-regional relations. He also invited Mexico’s North American trade partners, the US and Canada, to join. Both are already observer states, as too is China.

However, as I noted at the time, it’s virtually impossible to even imagine senior representatives of the US and Canadian governments sitting around a table with leaders of countries such as Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua, let alone debating regional policy with them. Lest we forget, just last summer the Biden Administration scored a major diplomatic own goal by refusing to invite the same three countries to the 9th Summit of the Americas, in Los Angeles, which resulted in a number of other heads of state refusing to attend.

Now, the Biden administration will have to contend with the diplomatic blowback from the arrival of Bolsonaro and his lackey Torres in Florida just days before Sunday’s insurrection. A number of members of the progressive caucus, including AOC, have already called for Bolsonaro not be allowed refuge on US soil.

This places the Biden administration in a bit of a bind, since the US has always served as a refuge for US-aligned heads of state and coup plotters in Latin America. Plus, lest we forget, the US Justice Department had an important hand in the now-disgraced Operation Car Wash in Brazil, which led to the downfall of Dilma Rousseff’s government, the imprisonment of Lula just as he was preparing to run for office again, and the eventual election of Bolsonaro.

Shame These Other Countries Are Sitting On Top Of OUR Resources...,

washingtontimes |  The world’s attention may be focused on the fighting in Ukraine and the posturing over Taiwan, but there’s plenty to worry about closer to home, the commander of U.S. military forces in Latin America said Thursday.

The U.S. is also willing to replace Russian military firepower now used by armies in Latin America so it can be shipped to Ukraine to help Kyiv fight off Russian invaders, Army Gen. Laura Richardson, the head of U.S. Southern Command, told a Washington think tank.

“We have a lot at stake. This region matters,” Gen. Richardson said. “It has a lot to do with national security. We need to step up our game.”

While leftist regimes Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua are considered firmly in Moscow’s camp, Gen. Richardson said Washington is working with other countries in South America that still use military hardware that originated in Russia, which she called her “No. 2 adversary in the region.”

“A total of nine [countries] have Russian equipment in them and we are working to replace that Russian equipment with United States equipment,” Gen. Richardson said in the online conversation hosted by the Atlantic Council.

Gen. Richardson considers Russia and China, both of whom have reached out to Central and South American states in recent years, to be “malign state actors” in the region. 

“This is very concerning to me — to see the tentacles of the [People’s Republic of China] in the countries of the Western Hemisphere,” she said. “We are very much in a strategic competition in the Western Hemisphere.”

China’s ever-expanding footprint in South America has long worried U.S. strategists. Beijing’s trade footprint in the region has grown from $18 billion in 2002 to $450 billion now. The trade is predicted to be about $750 billion in the near future, she said.

Beijing has at least 30 port facilities scattered throughout the region, including five located on the Pacific and Atlantic sides of the Panama Canal. It operates a satellite tracking station in Argentina that reports to the People’s Liberation Army and has no oversight from local officials in Buenos Aires.

“I worry about these dual-use, state-owned enterprises that pop up” from China, Gen. Richardson said. “I worry about the dual-use capability, being able to flip them around and use them for the military.”

At least seven Chinese-owned banks are also operating in Latin America, making heavy infrastructure investments that outpace the U.S. presence. Much of the region is struggling economically and Beijing is willing to write checks now. Even with strings attached, it is a tempting deal that many are unable to pass up.

“The people are getting impatient. They need help now,” Gen. Richardson said. “We are just not investing in the region as we could or should be.”

Even as it struggles in Ukraine, Moscow continues to cultivate relationships with countries like Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. High-level Russian delegations visited all three countries just before the invasion of Ukraine 11 months ago, Gen. Richardson said.

“They will keep up those relationships for as long as they can to keep their foothold in the region,” she said. “The more they can sow that insecurity [and] that instability, they can keep countries looking away from the United States and away from democracy.”

She said her third major concern in Latin America is the drug cartels and other transnational criminal organizations. The groups are responsible for about $310 billion worth of criminal activity in the region every year, including funds derived from narcotics trafficking and human smuggling.

“They sow insecurity and instability in the region, which allows the malign state actors such as [China] and Russia to move in and to flourish,” Gen. Richardson said.

Mexico Is Doing More Damage To America Than All Our Prior Enemies Combined

townhall  |  Left-wing Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador recently praised a visiting President Joe Biden: "Just imagine: There are 40 million Mexicans in the United States - 40 million who were born here in Mexico, (or) who are the children of people who were born in Mexico!"

Why wouldn't Obrador be delighted? Since Biden took office in January 2021, America has allowed some 5-6 million illegal entries across its southern border.

Obrador further congratulated the malleable Biden whom he sees as a kindred but complacent left-wing spirit: "You are the first president of the United States in a very long time that has not built even one meter of wall."

Translated that means Mexico is delighted the United States now cares little about the security of its border, the disappearance of which is wonderful news for Mexico.

Note that Mexico itself facilitates illegal transits across its southern border - as long as such Central American and other global migrants keep heading northward into the United States.

But when or if they pause, try to stay in Mexico, commit crimes, or expect Mexican social services, then almost immediately Mexico City sends thousands of troops to close its border with Guatemala, deports the illegal crossers, and revives talk of building a border wall of its own.

Biden has demolished America's southern border. His illegal nullification of U.S. immigration law is music to Obrador's ears.

But it is a nightmare to Americans who poll overwhelming disapproval of the subversion of their border security. They are exhausted by the influx of death-dealing drugs. And they are furious over the hundreds of billions of dollars diverted from their strapped social services to attend to the needs of foreign nationals who have broken their laws.

 

The Colonial Audacity Of General Laura Richardson Is PRICELESS....,

The U.S. wants to take Russian military equipment from Russia’s Latin American allies and "donate it to Ukraine". pic.twitter.com/ghmjfGav1X

— Kawsachun News (@KawsachunNews) January 21, 2023

A year ago plans were put in motion to draw Russia into a fight in the Ukraine accompanied by economic ’shock and awe’ on the Russian economy that would cause Putin’s government to collapse . This would help initiate a process that would lead to the break up of the Russian Federation. These plans would have taken years to be drawn up. Doubtless western officials and NATO officers were  checking out real estate prices in Moscow in preparation for for their next assignments. So the Russians saw this as nothing less than an existential fight for their very existence. You can imagine how people in Washington would feel if there was a plan to break up the United States into a couple dozen smaller countries.

Well it didn’t work out that way and the Russian economy is doing just fine. So here is the problem. The Ukraine is about to get crunched and no matter what hodgepodge of old military gear we send to them, it won’t make a difference. This being the case, the collective west has now realized that the shoe is on the other foot. They now think that it is an existential fight for organizations like NATO. This being a NATO-Russia war, NATO finds that no matter what they do they are on the verge of defeat. They keep on escalating but it is the Russians that have escalatory dominance. Even if NATO decides to openly send troops to the Ukraine, it won’t do much good as they have run their arms and ammunition stockpiles down. Germany has two days worth of ammo for example while France has only four.

Sure there are threats to use nukes but where? Russia won’t be the first and so that leaves the US. They start bombing the Russian Federation and the same day the US is just glass. And this includes the Crimea and the Donbass along with the other new Oblasts. And are they really going to drop one in the Ukraine after all their speeches about trying to protect that country? Would they really just nuke the Ukraine? Maybe they could drop one in the Mediterranean as a warning – but have the entire planet get on their case. The trouble is nukes are the one weapon that you can’t use, no matter how many you have.

We are now arriving at the moment when the West discovers that the fraud is over, the shake-down has failed, and everyone can see it.

What then?

Our entire economy needs a make-over. That’s the best-case scenario; a strategy that will restore the West as a constructive, useful entity in world affairs. That’s a viable future.

The likelier scenario is that the predation currently aimed at Russia and China will get re-directed toward the global south (they’re more vulnerable) and, more intensively, on North and Central America.

The economy won’t get fixed, extraction and despoliation will continue at roughly the current pace, and we’ll continue at-speed into the environmental and economic collapse

WATCH: 🇺🇸 SOUTHCOM Commander Laura Richardson describes how Washington is actively negotiating the sale of lithium in the Lithium Triangle through its U.S. embassies. pic.twitter.com/uQTvpSRHAH

— Kawsachun News (@KawsachunNews) January 21, 2023

There's No Energy Shortage - Your Masters Have Decided There's A Human Longage...,

Isaac Asimov was in no way a sophisticated stylist, but he was an intelligent man and wrote a short story, ‘The Winnowing,’ that captures exactly the logic that would be wheeled into play —

…”Do you fail to see that the Earth is a lifeboat? If the food store is divided equally among all, then all will die. If some are cast out of the lifeboat, the remainder will survive. The question is not whether some will die, for some must die; the question is whether some will live.”

“Are you advocating triage-the sacrifice of some for the rest-officially?”

“We can’t. The people in the lifeboat are armed. Several regions threaten openly to use nuclear weapons if more food is not forthcoming.”

Rodman said sardonically, “You mean the answer to ‘you die that I may live’ is ‘If I die, you die.’…An impasse.”

“Not quite,” said Affare. “There are places on Earth where the people cannot be saved. They have overweighted their land hopelessly with hordes of starving humanity. Suppose they are sent food, and suppose the food kills them so that the land requires no further shipments.”

Rodman felt the first twinge of realization. “Kills them how?” he asked.

“The average structural properties of the cellular membranes of a particular population can be worked out. An LP, particularly designed to take advantage of those properties, could be incorporated into the food supply, which would then be fatal,” said Affare.

“Unthinkable,” said Rodman, astounded.

“Think again. There would be no pain. The membranes would slowly close off and the affected person would fall asleep and not wake up-an infinitely better death than that of starvation which is otherwise inevitable-or nuclear annihilation. Nor would it be for everyone, for any population varies in its membranal properties. At worst, seventy per cent will die. The winnowing out will be done precisely where overpopulation and hopelessness are worst and enough will be left to preserve each nation, each ethnic group, each culture.”

“To deliberately kill billions-”

“We would not be killing. We would merely supply the opportunity for people to die. Which particular individuals would die would depend on the particular biochemistry of those individuals. It would be the finger of God.”

“And when the world discovers what has been done?”

“That will be after our time,” said Affare, “and by then, a flourishing world with limited population will thank us for our heroic action in choosing the death of some to avoid the death of all.”

And so on ….

Chrystia Freeland Thinks You Middle-Class Eaters Need To Tighten Your Belts

globalnews  |  Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland says she recognizes her privilege after being criticized for drawing parallels between her decision to cut her family’s Disney+ subscription to save money and the efforts of Canadians to make ends meet amid soaring costs of living.

World Economic Forum hemorrhoid, Chrystia Freeland, thinks the middle class makes too much money. The WEF is as evil as you think.#FreelandMustGo #WEF #WEFpuppet #WEF23 #Davos #DavosAgenda #GreatReset #ResistTheWEF #CrimesAgainstHumanity pic.twitter.com/lnXDea5H0b

— Vidmax.com (@Newsfilter2) January 20, 2023

“I want to start by recognizing that I am a very privileged person,” said Freeland when questioned by reporters in Milton, Ont., on Monday.

“Like other elected federal leaders, I am paid a very significant salary … I really recognized that it is not people like me — people who have my really good fortune — who are struggling the most in Canada today.”

Freeland faced criticism for being “out of touch” after telling Global News’ The West Block on Sunday that her family cut their Disney+ subscription to save money.

Freeland said the government is working on finding savings in the federal budget and there is “$6 billion more to go,” adding that she thinks “every mother in Canada” is using the same approach to cut costs.

“And I want to say to all of those mothers, I believe that I need to take exactly the same approach with the federal government’s finances because that’s the money of Canadians,” said Freeland in the interview.

Freeland said on Monday that people who are struggling to keep up with the high cost of living are low-income Canadians who “have to make difficult choices” about what food to buy and how to cover their rent.

On Nov. 3, the federal government released its fall fiscal update, with plans such as advance payment on worker’s benefits and elimination of student loan interest.

Freeland said the recognition that low-income Canadians are struggling in this economy shaped the federal government’s fall economic statement, contributing to the decision to “focus government resources on helping the most vulnerable,” which also drove the decision to double the GST tax credit.

The government also recognizes young people are also struggling, which is why they decided to eliminate permanently the federal interest on Canada students and Canada apprentice loans, said Freeland.

 

Canada Moving Ahead Briskly With The Final Solution

ncregister  |  Canadian food bank clients and disabled retirees facing financial insecurity are now considering doctor-assisted suicide to avoid living in poverty, several sources have reported.

“Based on the definitions in the Canadian law, nearly anyone with a chronic medical condition, such as people with disabilities, can be approved for euthanasia,” Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told CNA Dec. 12.

“Therefore people with disabilities are requesting euthanasia based on poverty, homelessness, or an inability to receive needed medical treatment, but they are approved for euthanasia based on their disability,” he added.

Meghan Nicholls, CEO of the Mississauga Food Bank in Mississauga, an Ontario city west of Toronto, said demand has increased by 60% since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Her food bank network now serves 30,000 people per year, she reported in a Nov. 30 commentary for the Canadian news magazine Maclean’s.

For the first time, according to Nicholls, beneficiaries are reporting that the cost of food has put them into financial insolvency.

“We’re at the point where clients on these programs are telling us they’re considering medically assisted death or suicide because they can’t live in grinding poverty anymore,” she said in the Maclean’s report. “A client in our Food Bank 2 Home delivery program told one of our staff that they’re considering suicide because they’re so tired of suffering through poverty. Another client asked if we knew how to apply for MAID (medical assistance in dying) for the same reasons.”

“We can’t underestimate the effect that poverty has on someone’s mental health. Our clients live with constant worry and cut corners on needed items like medication, fresh food, or warm clothes — constantly living under that stress takes its toll mentally, emotionally, and physically,” Nicholls said.

“When people start telling us they’re going to end their life because they can’t live in poverty anymore, it’s clear that we’ve failed them,” she added.

Nicholls told Canada’s The Catholic Register that leaders of other food banks in Canada have not heard clients speak of plans to take their own lives.

“I don’t know if that’s a bit of an anomaly or if it’s just because we operate this home delivery program. We do have a chance to connect with clients directly, and that kind of relationship might open us up for people to share a little bit more vulnerably than perhaps some other food banks.”

Schadenberg said assisted suicide has become very easy to access in Canada.

“We need to understand that many people with disabilities live in poverty and find themselves having difficulty receiving necessary medical treatment and yet according to the law they have no difficulty being approved for death by euthanasia,” he told CNA. “Clearly this has led to an epidemic of death, of despair, in Canada. Deaths based on cultural abandonment but sold to the population under the false guise of freedom.”

In 2021, over 10,000 Canadians died by euthanasia, also called medical aid in dying or doctor-assisted suicide. This is 10 times the number who died by euthanasia in 2016, when the procedure was first legalized.

If You Are Poor - Please Don't Make A Mistake Of Any Kind...,

welcometohellworld  |  Autumn Harris' lungs were so filled with fluid they weighed four times what a normal person's lungs should weigh during her autopsy. The thirty four year old died in an Alabama prison in 2018 after going untreated for pneumonia by medical staff for weeks according to a malpractice lawsuit filed by her father in 2020 that will finally get a hearing next year. Six years of waiting for the possibility that maybe someone will be held responsible for his daughter's death.

Harris had been arrested because she missed a misdemeanor court hearing over an alleged theft of $40 Alabama.com reported.

State investigators interviewed women Harris was being held with and one said she got so sick toward the end that she started to hallucinate and was calling one of them momma.

If you are poor please do not make a mistake of any kind. Please do not fuck up in such and such a way leading you to need $40 very badly or to miss a court date. Do not fuck up even once despite the entire world being littered with boobytraps just waiting for you to make a false step. The floor is lava but not in the way that usually means. If you are poor almost every fuck up you might make carries with it a potential death sentence in this country.

It sounds facile and obvious to say that kind of shit doesn't it? It's almost like what's the point? You know it and I know it and people walking through the obstacle course on hard mode know it better than anyone.

I guess we have to keep saying it anyway.

We're all of us walking through the obstacle course to be clear it's just at varying degrees of difficulty. Unless some of you reading this happen to be rich in which case can I have $50,000?

Lebensunwertes Leben

Marquette  |  The wholesale destruction of Jews and other ethnic minorities in Europe by Nazi Germany before and during World War II has been widely and justly condemned as a crime against humanity. Literally thousand of books and articles have been written on this particular genocide, highlighted by extensive testimony presented to the Nuremberg criminal trials after the war.

We have been conditioned since World War II to believe that such a horrible human tragedy cannot, or at least should not, happen again. Particularly in the Western World, schooled in the Judeo- Christian ethic, we believe that another Holocaust could not happen and particularly not in the United States. It cannot happen here, we saybecause we live under democratic forms of government and our U.S. Constitution guarantees us protection of our lives as a God-given right. 

Until this current century, we were no doubt justified in relying on these guarantees to our human existence. But will these guarantees survive the very dangerous new trends in the Western world's regard for the protection of life? Is a new and different kind of Holocaust in the offing, not against Jews or other minorities, but a Holocaust against the elderly, the chronically ill, the terminally ill and the disabled, right here in our own country? This proposition might appear preposterous at first glance, but the issue is important enough to merit a closer look. 

It is a surprising historical fact that in the United States, we are wittingly or unwittingly following the same steps that led Germany to the disastrous conclusion that some lives are "life not worthy of life" and can be legally extinguished to suit the needs of society and the desires of the family and the state. Germany progressed from the adoption of genetics theories in the last century to sterilization to abortion to euthanasia to the indiscriminate murder of ethnically and politically undesirable races and aliens. Except for timing, the United States is proceeding along the identical path, with only the legalization of euthanasia. or assisted suicide, remaining before the flood gates open. Indeed, we are now facing this last and fatal step on the "slippery slope". 

In January 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court began to hear, on appeal, oral arguments for Vasco v. Quill and Washington v. Glucksberg, the New York and Washington cases which struck down anti-assisted suicide laws in each state earlier in 1996. 

If the U.S. Supreme Court follows the unfortunate precedent which it established in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision in which it created with very questionable constitutional basis a new "right" to abortion, then they may now create another new "right" to assisted suicide. If this happens, we will have taken the final step toward undermining the very foundation of our American democracy in which the government has the constitutional responsibility both to protect the lives of its citizens and not destroy those lives. 

Ideas do have consequences and the legalization of assisted suicide would have momentous implications for the future of American society, families, medicine and the ultimate evaluation of the worth of a human life, as well as the very foundations of our American form ogovernment. Ultimately, the lives of our citizens may well be subordinated to the desires and interests of the government, which will decide directly or indirectly who will live and who will die. In fact, some U.S. authorities already are beginning to talk about the future demands on the resources of Medicare and Medicaid to maintain patients who might be kept alive for many years by modem medical technology, at great public expense, unless they can be dispensed with through assisted suicide. 

It is well known that in the Netherlands today, where assisted suicide is widely practiced, serious abuses are being perpetrated against people who have not given their consent. In almost one-half of the assisted suicide cases in the Netherlands, the decision is being made by third parties without consulting the patient or the family. If the state or its agents can kill targeted people at will, then democracy as we know it will have perished. The next Holocaust, if and when it comes, will thus not be of the same character as the Nazis'. But the end result will be the same, namely, the wholesale killing of undesirables whether they be unborn, partially born, old, ill, or just tired of living. 

Let us review the historical steps that both Germany and the United States have passed through since Darwin's theory of evolution originated in the middle 1850s and jolted the scientific world, including scholars, philosophers and even some misguided theologians. We will see how the seeds of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany preceded the Hitler era by several generations

Interesting How Robert Kagan's Revisionist Bloviations Run For 3 Days In The WaPo...,

WaPo  |  How quickly do times of apparent peace become times of conflict; seemingly stable world orders come crashing down; the hopes of many for improvement of the human condition are dashed and replaced by fear and despair.

For the first dozen years after World War I, the three powerful democracies — the United States, Britain and France — were in substantial control of world affairs, economically, politically and militarily. They established the terms of the peace settlement, redrew the borders of Europe, summoned new nations into being, distributed pieces of defunct empires, erected security arrangements, determined who owed what to whom, and how and when debts should be paid. They called together the conferences that determined the levels of armaments the major nations could possess.

All this was possible because they had won the war; because the United States and Britain controlled the banks and the seas; because France wielded predominant military power on the European continent. With this power, the three Western democracies sought to establish and consolidate a world system favorable to their interests and preferences. They argued over how best to do this, and they became increasingly estranged from each other in these years. But they all wanted a stable, prosperous and peaceful Europe. They all sought to preserve their global empires, or, in the United States’ case, its hemispheric hegemony. They all sought to defend the liberal, capitalist economic system that enriched and protected them and in which they believed. None doubted the rightness of their vision of international order or much questioned the justice of imposing it.

And there had been successes, certainly from their point of view. By the second half of the 1920s, the world had grown less violent and marginally less miserable. In Europe especially, economies were recovering, living standards were rising, general violence was down from the immediate postwar years, and the dangers of war and aggression seemed as low as they had been in decades. Internationally, trade had risen by more than 20 percent, despite growing protectionism, driven largely by the American economic boom. Nations spent more time discussing measures for peace than preparing for war. The League of Nations had come into its own. Germany seemed to be on a moderate, democratic course. In general, the threat of a return to autocracy and militarism seemed low. Democracy seemed to be ascendant.

Even those who openly defied the new order had to move cautiously. The Soviets promoted their revolution abroad but not so aggressively as to challenge the dominant powers, and they wound up settling for “socialism in one country.” Benito Mussolini, ruling an Italy surrounded in the Mediterranean by British and French naval power and dependent on the United States for financial support, thought it best to play the responsible European statesman. The 1920s were his “decade of good behavior.”

Adolf Hitler, too, proceeded with caution as he ascended to power in the early ’30s. Impressed by the United States as “a giant state with unimaginable productive capacities” and by Anglo-American domination of the global economy, and well aware of the role it had played in selecting Germany’s past governments, he worked at first to soften Washington’s opposition to his rise. He reached out to the U.S. ambassador, gave numerous interviews to prominent American media figures, including William Randolph Hearst, in the hope of making “the personality of Adolf Hitler more accessible to the American people.” He promised to pay Germany’s “private debts” to American bankers and went out of his way to assure the English-speaking world that his national socialist movement would gain power only in a “purely legal way” in accordance with the “present constitution.” After taking power, he told the press and his own officials to play down the campaigns of antisemitism that began immediately. He sought to keep German rearmament under wraps in what he called the “perilous interval” during which the “whole world” was “against us.” Until the economy recovered and German rearmament was further along, he feared that the national socialist revolution could be crushed at any time by the superior power of the democracies.

It was remarkable how quickly the winds were shifting, though. An American journalist identified the moment when history pivoted. “In the first five years after the World War,” he wrote, “the nations of Europe, on their backs and seeking American aid, took all pains to avoid offending us and therefore appeared to give careful and weighty consideration to our altruistic advice. The succeeding five years have changed that.”

One indicator of the shifting trends was the declining fortunes of democracy throughout Europe. It was inevitable that some of the new democracies, implanted in lands that had never known such a form of government, would not survive. The rise of dictatorship in various forms in Hungary (1920), Italy (1925), Lithuania, Poland and Portugal (1926), Yugoslavia (1929), Romania (1930), Germany and Austria (1933), Bulgaria and Latvia (1934), and Greece (1935) had many internal and external causes, including the global depression that began around 1930. But the overall decline of European democracy from the second half of the 1920s onward, and the turn away from democracy in Japan, also reflected the declining influence and appeal of the great-power democracies and their order.

Liberal democracy was not just losing ground. It faced a potent challenge from a vibrant and revolutionary anti-liberal doctrine that attracted followers and imitators throughout Europe and beyond. Americans, British and French during World War I and for decades afterward assumed that Bolshevism posed the greatest threat to liberal democracy. But Bolshevism proved less easily exported than both its proponents and its opponents believed. Ostracized by the rest of Europe, the Soviet Union turned inward to wrestle with the transformation of its society. When democracies fell in the 1920s and ’30s, they fell to the Right, not the Left.