nakedcapitalism | His bottom line is, as he says near the top of a two hour-talk:
The Russians are grinding down the Ukrainians and they
are doing it with flipped math. 200,000 guys are grinding down 600,000
guys. It’s one of the most amazing things. When this story is finally
told, people are going to be stunned. All these people now are saying,
“Oh, the Russians, they are doing so poorly, the Russians this…”. Maybe
they are. Maybe I’m getting this all wrong. But you know, I’ve studied
military history, I think I know how to read a map, I think I know how
to look at the balance of forces, I think I know how to study logistics
and stuff, and I think I’m reading this right….This war is closer to
being over than many people think.
Ritter also argues, interestingly, that it is of paramount importance
that Zelensky surrenders to Russia, or the functional equivalent by
signing a peace on Russian terms. Ritter argues that at this juncture,
that means Russians cannot win too quickly. Ukraine has to look like it
has exhausted its options.
Not that this is factoring into how Russia proceeds on the field, but
a slower tempo favors Russia politically. Whether Zelensky accedes to
Russia’s demands is ultimately a US call, unless he has found a way to
go rogue. The West is at present unprepared to accept that, given that
they believe their own/Ukraine’s propaganda that Russia is losing the
war and that Russia’s economy is collapsing under the sanctions.
Western leaders and pundits appear not to have worked out that the
rouble falling (so far much less than in the 1998 crisis) is not the
same as a domestic economic seize-up. Aside from Western goods being
hoovered up after the sanctions hit, we have yet to hear of domestic
shortages. Admittedly, new hardships could kick in starting in a few
months as important speciality items from the West like car parts become
unattainable.
But the US and Europe are about to see energy price pain kick in in
April, and that may soften them up with respect to a Ukraine settlement.
We linked to this story on Saturday, but it’s important to keep in
mind. From the Financial Times, IEA calls for driving restrictions and air travel curbs to reduce oil demand:
How the West Helped Putin With Sanctions
Ritter is amped up on the topic of sanctions. He argues that Saddam
Hussein would have been shot by his own generals after the loss of the
1991 war save for Western sanctions, which unified the country behind
him.
As for Putin, Ritter contends that Putin, who was originally
pro-Western, became convinced of the time of the need to distance Russia
from Europe, but was hampered by the roughly 20% of Russians who are
middle class, normally politically indifferent, but would turn on Putin
if he threatened their access to European goods and vacations. Per
Ritter:
The West just did Putin the greatest favor in the world.
They don’t even realize how stupid they were. The West divorced itself
from Russia. Putin said, “Thank you. Thanks you very much! You’ve now
allowed me to do what I needed to do.”
dailybeast | As soon as Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine,
Gonzalo Lira started sharing his thoughts and observations on the
conflict in a run of YouTube videos and posts on Telegram and Twitter.
“The commentary and analysis I post is without picking sides,” Lira, an
American who’s lived in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv for years and was in Kyiv at the start of the offensive, wrote in a recent post, “trying to be as balanced and factually accurate as I can be.”
He
began showing up on niche but notable podcasts and livestreams, where
hosts introduced him as an unmediated font of on-the-ground insights, as
someone willing to share truths about the complex conflict that the
mainstream media either can’t or won’t. He’s also gained a slew of new
followers—his Telegram has about 45,000 followers, up from 20,000 on
March 1, and seems to be gaining hundreds more every day. Many people
seem to view him as a valuable source, and have taken to signal-boosting
his content.
But his “fair-and-balanced” accounts often involve wild claims about the supposedly obvious “evil” of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The comedian-turned-politician is a known “cokehead,” Lira has
claimed—a man who uses his people as shields, has provided arms to
criminals who have terrorized the streets of Kyiv, and has possibly
“deliberately tried to have a nuclear accident” to pin it on Russia and
possibly drag America into his war. Meanwhile, Lira has portrayed the
Russian assault as provoked—and as “one of the most brilliant invasions
in military history.” He hasinsisted that the invaders don’t want to harm civilians or civilian infrastructure and are in facttaking pains not
to, that the Russian advance has not stalled but is in fact right on
course, and that Russian domination will likely be good for Ukraine in
the end.
He has also shared widely debunked conspiracy theories to
support or build out his narratives, many of them revolving around
Russian claims that they’ve found evidence of American bioweapons labs and research in Ukraine.
He has decried stories about Ukrainian resistance as obvious Western
propaganda. And he has accused people who contradict his assessments of
being idiots or paid shills.
Independent experts who follow the conflict closely, of course, vigorously disagree.
“His
claims are nonsense,” Alexander Motyl, an expert on Ukrainian affairs
at Rutgers University who’s been monitoring the conflict, told The Daily
Beast.
Not only do Lira's narratives fly in the face of a vast amount of
credible on-the-ground reporting, they “fit perfectly with what Putin
and his associates have been claiming for months,” as Motyl put it. In
fact, Lira has been in such striking lockstep with Russian narratives
on the conflict—sometimes even posting official government statements
as definitive truths about it—that Russian propaganda outlets have used
clips of him as a supposed source of external, on-the-ground support for
its stories.
More telling: When Alexandra Hrycak, a Ukrainian
affairs expert who works at Reed College and has been monitoring the
conflict, first reviewed Lira’s claims, she assumed he was likely a
fictional persona created by the Kremlin to spread its message. These
sorts of covert mouthpieces often claim to be fair and balanced outside
experts, she noted, “and [tend to argue] that their opponents are
irrational, emotional, and need to consider the facts.”
Lira is
not fake. Nor is there any evidence that he’s a paid Russian agent. In
fact, he’s actually attempted to publicly distance himself from
propaganda content that uses his clips.
These are the first authoritative remarks by a top Chinese official acknowledging that“the
Ukraine crisis provides a mirror for us to observe the situation in the
Asia-Pacific. We cannot but ask, how can we prevent a crisis like this
from happening in the Asia-Pacific?” They have followed immediately
after the 2-hour long phone conversation between President Xi Jinping
and President Biden.
Le
Yucheng took note that the Asia-Pacific is in “promising situation”
today — an anchor of peace and stability, an engine for growth and a
“pace-setter” for development. The region faces two choices between
building “an open and inclusive family for win-win cooperation or go for
small blocs based on the Cold War mentality and group confrontation.”
Le
Yucheng explained this binary choice as between: “peace and not
undermining regional tranquility; so-called absolute security and common
security; mutual respect and wanton interference in others’ internal
affairs; and, unity and cooperation versus division and confrontation.
Without doubt, he was sounding alert about the Us’ so-called
Indo-Pacific strategy.
Le
Yucheng underscored that the India-Pacific strategy characterised by
acts of provocation, formation of “closed and exclusive small circles or
groups”, and fragmentation and bloc-based division can only lead to a
situation “as dangerous as the NATO strategy of eastward expansion in
Europe… (which) would bring unimaginable consequences, and ultimately
push the Asia-Pacific over the edge of an abyss.”He underscored
the criticality of the regional states pursuing “independent, balanced
and prudent foreign policies” that dovetail with the process of regional
integration.
The
parallels between the situations around Ukraine and Taiwan respectively,
are being discussed explicitly in the Chinese commentaries and
articulation — while the US “squeezed Russia’s strategic space” through
NATO expansion and simultaneously incited Kiev to confront Russia, when
it comes to Taiwan too, Washington is instigating the secessionist
forces in the island upgrading arms sales to provoke Beijing.
Of
course, the US has refrained from direct intervention in Ukraine, as
Russia is not only a military power but also a nuclear power. The big
question is whether China will arrive at a conclusion that its best
opportunity “to solve its internal Taiwan question” lies in confronting
the US at the present juncture when “the US is short of confidence and
needs to bluster to embolden itself” and when the NATO’s hands are full
in Eurasia and it is unlikely that the US’ allies in the Asia-Pacific
will want to intervene in Taiwan.
thesaker | In 2009, after helping to rescue the US from the GFC, Zhou Xiaochuan,
Governor of the Peoples Bank of China, said, “The world needs an
international reserve currency that is disconnected from individual
nations and able to remain stable in the long run, removing the inherent
deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies.”
After helping rescue America from the GFC, PBOC Governor Zhou
Xiaochuan observed, “The world needs an international reserve currency
that is disconnected from individual nations and able to remain stable
in the long run, removing the inherent deficiencies caused by using
credit-based national currencies.”
Zhou proposed SDRs, Special Drawing Rights, a synthetic reserve
currency dynamically revalued against a basket of trading currencies and
commodities. Broad, deep, stable, and impossible to manipulate.
Nobelists Fred Bergsten, Robert Mundell, and Joseph Stieglitz approved:
“The creation of a global currency would restore a needed coherence to
the international monetary system, give the IMF a function that would
help it to promote stability and be a catalyst for international
harmony”. Here’s what’s happened since:
2012: Beijing began valuing the yuan against a currency/commodity basket
2014: The IMF issued the first SDR loan
2016: The World Bank issued the first SDR bond
2017: Standard Chartered Bank issued the first commercial SDR notes.
2019: All central banks began stating currency reserves in SDRs
Mar. 14, 2022: “In two weeks, China and the Eurasian Economic Union –
Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan – will reveal
an independent international monetary and financial system. It will be
based on a new international currency, calculated from an index of
national currencies of the participating countries and international
commodity prices”.
The currency resembles Keynes’ invention Special Drawing Rights.SDRs
are a synthetic currency which derives its value from a global,
publicly traded basket of currencies and commodities. Immense beyond
imaging, and stable as the Pyramids. Everyone gets a seat at the table
and a vote. It may eventually be administered by an arm of the UN.
SDRs pose a serious alternative to the US dollar, both for the EAEU,
the BRI’s 145 member states, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
(SCO), ASEAN, and the RCEP. Middle East countries, including Egypt,
Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, are keenly interested.
Less well known is that the EAEU, the BRI, the SCO, ASEAN, and the RCEP were discussing a merger before the currency news hit.
It is reasonable to expect them to join this new, cooperatively
managed, stable reserve currency regime in which they can settle their
trades in stable, neutral, predictable SDRs.
Biological labs
China is not losing any opportunity to bring this front and center. This is their last list of questions:
If the concerns are “disinformation”, why doesn’t the U.S. release
detailed materials to prove its innocence? – Question by Chinese Foreign
Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian on U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine.
What did the U.S. spend the $200 million on? – Question by Chinese
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian on U.S.-funded biolabs in
Ukraine.
What kind of research has the U.S. conducted on which pathogens? –
Question by Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian on
U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine.
What is it trying to hide when the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine deleted
all relevant documents on its website? – Question by Chinese Foreign
Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian on U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine.
Why does the U.S. insist on being the only country in the world to
oppose the establishment of a multilateral verification mechanism though
it claims to abide by the Biological Weapons Convention? – Question by
Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian on U.S.-funded biolabs
in Ukraine.
Whitehouse Version | President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. spoke today with President Xi Jinping of
the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The conversation focused on
Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. President Biden outlined the
views of the United States and our Allies and partners on this crisis.
President Biden detailed our efforts to prevent and then respond to the
invasion, including by imposing costs on Russia. He described the
implications and consequences if China provides material support to
Russia as it conducts brutal attacks against Ukrainian cities and
civilians. The President underscored his support for a diplomatic
resolution to the crisis. The two leaders also agreed on the importance
of maintaining open lines of communication, to manage the competition
between our two countries. The President reiterated that U.S. policy on
Taiwan has not changed, and emphasized that the United States continues
to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo. The two leaders
tasked their teams to follow up on today’s conversation in the critical
period ahead.
President
Xi noted the new major developments in the international landscape
since their first virtual meeting last November. The prevailing trend of
peace and development is facing serious challenges. The world is
neither tranquil nor stable. As permanent members of the UN Security
Council and the world’s two leading economies, China and the US must not
only guide their relations forward along the right track, but also
shoulder their share of international responsibilities and work for
world peace and tranquility.
President
Xi stressed that he and President Biden share the view that China and
the US need to respect each other, coexist in peace and avoid
confrontation, and that the two sides should increase communication and
dialogue at all levels and in all fields. President Biden has just
reiterated that the US does not seek to have a new Cold War with China,
to change China’s system, or to revitalize alliances against China, and
that the US does not support “Taiwan independence” or intend to seek a
conflict with China. “I take these remarks very seriously,” said
President Xi.
President
Xi pointed out that the China-US relationship, instead of getting out
of the predicament created by the previous US administration, has
encountered a growing number of challenges. What’s worth noting in
particular is that some people in the US have sent a wrong signal to
“Taiwan independence” forces. This is very dangerous. Mishandling of the
Taiwan question will have a disruptive impact on the bilateral ties.
China hopes that the US will give due attention to this issue. The
direct cause for the current situation in the China-US relationship is
that some people on the US side have not followed through on the
important common understanding reached by the two Presidents and have
not acted on President Biden’s positive statements. The US has
misperceived and miscalculated China’s strategic intention.
President
Xi underscored that there have been and will continue to be differences
between China and the US. What matters is to keep such differences
under control. A steadily growing relationship is in the interest of
both sides.
The two sides exchanged views on the situation in Ukraine.
President
Biden expounded on the US position, and expressed readiness for
communication with China to prevent the situation from exacerbating.
President
Xi pointed out that China does not want to see the situation in Ukraine
to come to this. China stands for peace and opposes war. This is
embedded in China’s history and culture. China makes a conclusion
independently based on the merits of each matter. China advocates
upholding international law and universally recognized norms governing
international relations. China adheres to the UN Charter and promotes
the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable
security. These are the major principles that underpin China’s approach
to the Ukraine crisis. China has put forward a six-point initiative on
the humanitarian situation in Ukraine, and is ready to provide further
humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and other affected countries. All
sides need to jointly support Russia and Ukraine in having dialogue and
negotiation that will produce results and lead to peace. The US and NATO
should also have dialogue with Russia to address the crux of the
Ukraine crisis and ease the security concerns of both Russia and
Ukraine.
President
Xi stressed that with the need to fight COVID-19 on the one hand and
protect the economy and people’s livelihood on the other, things are
already very difficult for countries around the world. As leaders of
major countries, we need to think about how to properly address global
hotspot issues and, more importantly, keep in mind global stability and
the work and life of billions of people. Sweeping and indiscriminate
sanctions would only make the people suffer. If further escalated, they
could trigger serious crises in global economy and trade, finance,
energy, food, and industrial and supply chains, crippling the already
languishing world economy and causing irrevocable losses. The more
complex the situation, the greater the need to remain cool-headed and
rational. Whatever the circumstances, there is always a need for
political courage to create space for peace and leave room for political
settlement. As two Chinese sayings go, “It takes two hands to clap.”
“He who tied the bell to the tiger must take it off.” It is imperative
that the parties involved demonstrate political will and find a proper
settlement in view of both immediate and long-term needs. Other parties
can and should create conditions to that end. The pressing priority is
to keep the dialogue and negotiation going, avoid civilian casualties,
prevent a humanitarian crisis, and cease hostilities as soon as
possible. An enduring solution would be for major countries to respect
each other, reject the Cold War mentality, refrain from bloc
confrontation, and build step by step a balanced, effective and
sustainable security architecture for the region and for the world.
China has been doing its best for peace and will continue to play a
constructive role.
The
two Presidents agreed that the video call is constructive. They
directed their teams to promptly follow up and take concrete actions to
put China-US relations back on the track of steady development, and make
respective efforts for the proper settlement of the Ukraine crisis.
The Russian Defence Ministry continues to study materials received from employees of Ukrainian laboratories on the implementation of military biological programs of the United States and its NATO allies on the territory of Ukraine.
Western mass media and some biologists, who most often have a second American citizenship, express doubts about the reliability of the materials published by us. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the documents have the signatures of real officials and are certified by the seals of organizations.
We believe that components of biological weapons were created on the territory of Ukraine.
Here is a document dated March 6, 2015, confirming the Pentagon’s direct participation in the financing of military biological projects in Ukraine.
According to established practice, American projects in the field of sanitation in third countries, including in Africa and Asia, are funded through national health authorities.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the agreement on joint biological activities was concluded between the US Military Department and the Ministry of Health of Ukraine. However, the real recipient of funds are the laboratories of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence located in Kiev, Odessa, Lvov and Kharkov. The total funding amounted to $32 million.
It is no coincidence that these biolabs were chosen by the US Defence Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) and the contractor company Black & Veatch as the executors of the U-P-8 project aimed at studying the pathogens of the Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, leptospirosis and hantaviruses. The corresponding request of the Pentagon to involve Ukrainian laboratories for the implementation of the project is presented on the slide. From our point of view, the interest of US military biologists is due to the fact that these pathogens have natural foci both on the territory of Ukraine and in Russia, and their use can be disguised as natural outbreaks of diseases. That is why this project has received additional funding, and the terms of its implementation have been extended.
A study of the documents in the part of the P-781 project on the study of ways of transmitting diseases to humans through bats showed that the work was carried out on the basis of a laboratory in Kharkov together with the infamous R. Lugar Center in Tbilisi. The total costs of the Pentagon for its implementation in Ukraine and Georgia amounted to $ 1.6 million, most of which was received by Ukraine as the main contractor.
The documents received by the Russian Ministry of Defence indicate that research in this area is systematic and has been conducted since at least 2009 under the direct supervision of specialists from the United States within the framework of projects P-382, P-444 and P-568. One of the curators of this activity was the head of the DTRA office at the US Embassy in Kiev, Joanna Wintrall. Maybe journalists should talk to her?
During the implementation of these projects, six families of viruses (including coronaviruses) and three types of pathogenic bacteria (pathogens of plague, brucellosis and leptospirosis) were identified. This is due to the main characteristics of these pathogens that make them favourable for the purposes of infection: resistance to drugs, rapid speed of spread from animals to humans, etc.
NYPost | 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?
ineteconomics | The roots of the neoliberal perspective sprung from a world shattered
by the collapse of empires and the chaos produced by the first World
War. Austrian economists and business advocates in the 1920s and ‘30s,
like Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, working at the time in the
Vienna Chamber of Commerce, worried about how a rump nation like Austria
could get along in the new global landscape. The specter of socialism
and communism in Hungary, part of the old Habsburg Empire, which briefly
went red in 1919, added to their anxiety. They were also afraid of
rising nation-states calling the shots on economic matters by doing
things like raising tariffs – especially nations governed by democracies
that recognized the interests of regular people. The spread of
universal male voting rights set off alarm bells that power was
shifting.
How could capitalists survive without a vast network of colonies to
rely on for resources? How could they protect themselves from continuing
interference in business and seizures of private property? How might
they resist increasing democratic demands for more broadly shared
economic resources?
These were big questions, and neoliberal answers reflected their
fears. From their viewpoint, the political world looked frightening and
uncertain – a place where the masses were constantly agitating to
disrupt the realm of private enterprise by forming labor unions,
conducting protests, and making demands to reallocate resources.
What neoliberals wanted was a sacred space free from such turmoil – a
transcendent world economy where capital and goods could flow without
restraint. They imagined a place where capitalists were secure from
democratic processes and protected by carefully constructed institutions
and laws — and by force, if necessary. Neoliberals weren’t fully
opposed to democracies as long as they could be constrained to provide a
safe haven for capitalists, but if they didn’t, many thought that
authoritarianism would do just fine, too.
These early stirrings of neoliberalism were thus a kind of theology, a
utopian longing for an abstract, invisible world of numbers that humans
could not spoil. In this promised land, talk of social justice and
economic plans to enhance the public good was heresy. “Society” was a
realm which, at best, should be kept strictly separate from the economy.
At worst, it was the enemy of the global economy — the troublesome
domain of nonmarket values and popular concerns that got in the way of
capitalist transcendence.
After World War II, the neoliberals organized formally as the Mount
Pelerin Society, in which key figures like Hayek pushed the vision of a
“competitive order” where competition among producers, employers, and
consumers would keep the global economy humming along smoothly and
protect everybody from abuse (quite an idea, that). Protections like
social insurance and regulatory frameworks were unnecessary.
Basically, the market was God, and people were here to serve it – not the other way around.
For neoliberals, the twentieth century wasn’t about the Cold War,
which didn’t much interest them. It was about fighting against things
like Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and what they considered dangerous
totalitarian schemes of economic equality. As historian Quinn Slobodian
put it in his book Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism,
they set their sights on the “development of a planet linked by money,
information, and goods where the signature achievement of the century
was not an international community, a global civil society, or the
deepening of democracy, but an ever-integrating object called the world
economy and the institutions designated to encase it.”
Neoliberals dedicated themselves to protecting unrestricted global
trade, crushing labor unions, deregulating business, and usurping
government’s role in providing for the common good with privatization
and austerity. While it’s true that most Western governments, as well as
powerful global institutions like the World Bank and International
Monetary Fund, are deeply influenced by neoliberalism today, it really
wasn’t until the 2007-8 Global Financial Crisis that most people had
even heard of the movement.
That’s because, for a long time, neoliberalism invaded our lives like a stealth virus.
gilbertdoctorow | As the USA and Europe have each day piled on new sanctions against
Russia, the awareness of a ‘total war’ situation has penetrated the
consciousness of Russia’s leadership and the tone of public discourse
about the war has hardened noticeably in recent days. Talk shows which I
follow regularly have changed course yet again from what I reported a
week ago. On the Vladimir Solovyov evening programs, the bearer of grim
expectations about war prospects, Mosfilm general director Karen
Shakhnazarov, has disappeared, his place taken by others who take the
conversation in a wholly different direction, including fierce
denunciations of unpatriotic personalities within Russia. Still other
newcomers are presenting their own half-baked speculations on how the
entire Russian economy and society has to be reorganized to respond to
the new realities of a total permanent break with the West. While the
Putin government remains resolutely pro-business and
pro-entrepreneurship, though with a heavy dose of state direction of the
economy, the new panelists in talk shows denounce free markets as just
one more manifestation of the West’s hijacking in the 1990s Russia’s
domestic political economy. Still other panelists on the Russian talk
shows are talking about purging the government and all public
institutions of Liberals, who are synonymous with Fifth Column traitors
and have no place in Russian society under conditions of a war for the
country’s survival.
As BBC and other Western journalists have remarked, Vladimir Putin
addressed the issue of the Fifth Column in a televised speech yesterday
that was otherwise dedicated to the increases in pensions and social
benefits that he just announced to counteract negative results of the
newly imposed Western sanctions. In the BBC interpretation, the scum and
traitors denounced by Putin are the oligarchs. These are the people who
live there, meaning in the West, either physically or just mentally,
while earning their money in Russia.
However, this identification with the oligarchs only shows how little
Western news organizations, Western think tanks and Western government
leaders know about Russia and about what makes it tick. No, oligarchs
were not in the sights of Vladimir Putin yesterday: it was the multitude
of little traitors to the country and its people who have in recent
weeks come out of the woodwork and taken flight in an attempt to avoid
having to publicly take sides in the conflict and so lose their fortunes
and/or their social standing.
The broad Russian public has been utterly shocked at the departure of
a good many stars in the entertainment industry, the kind of folks who
in the West are images on the covers of People magazine and of
the yellow press more generally. Veteran singer Alla Pugacheva and her
husband Galkin have been darlings of Russian television and music halls
across the country for decades. They are known to have quietly flown to
Israel, where so many of their friends from show business and from high
society have already found refuge earlier still. Then there is one of
the two leading television news presenters, Sergey Briullov, host of The
News of the Week on Saturday nights. Sergey carries a British as well
as Russian passport; his family is based in their home in England and
his children study there. About a week ago, Briullov disappeared from
Russia and eventually surfaced in Brazil, where he says he is doing a
film project about the Brazilian attitude to the Ukraine-Russia War. No
one is fooled for a moment about the fact that Briullov is just one
more traitor to his homeland, and comments on the Russian portals bear
this out daily.
No, Messrs BBC News, it is not oligarchs whose behavior if not their
very existence has embittered the middle and lower class Russians during
the current war. Those middle and lower classes constitute the 70% of
the population which backs Putin through thick and thin. It is the
smaller fish of Fifth Column populations who exist in much greater
numbers: as, for example, Russian lawyers who have homes near the
Champs Elysees and split their time between France and their law offices
in Moscow, whence the money from their servicing oligarchs comes. Then
there is the intelligentsia, the university dons, the occupants of often
important offices in government and private public institutions who
loathed Putin from his first election to the presidency in 2000 and have
never relented. Their contempt for the broad Russian public, which they
see as the great unwashed, as a herd of animals, was never well hidden,
and this contempt is now being reciprocated on Russian state television
and on the internet.
yahoo | Daniil
Medvedev, the Russian player currently sitting at No. 1 in the ATP
rankings, may not be allowed to play at Wimbledon unless he denounces
Russian president Vladimir Putin.
That was the situation outlined
during a meeting at British Parliament on Tuesday, where sports minister
Nigel Huddleston confirmed discussions were taking place to prevent
supporters of Putin from entering the world's oldest tennis tournament
amid Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.
Giving
evidence to the Digital, Culture, Media & Sport select committee,
Huddleston said: “It needs to go beyond that. We need some potential
assurance that they are not supporters of Vladimir Putin and we are
considering what requirements we may need to try and get some assurances
along those lines.”
Asked
whether individual Russian and Belarusian athletes wanting to come to
the UK would be required to “denounce” Putin’s invasion, Huddleston said
the details were still being discussed, including with other countries.
He added: “It would be better if we can decide some broad global consensus on this.”
Such
an action would affect Medvedev and any other Russian and Belarusian
tennis players, who are currently not allowed to play under their
national flags while the Ukrainian invasion continues. There are
currently four Russian players in the ATP top 30, while the WTA has three Russians and two Belarusians in its top 30.
The
world of sports has seen an overwhelming and potentially unprecedented
wave of bans against Russia's teams and athletes since the country's
military made its move across the Ukrainian border. That has included
suspensions from international competition in hockey, soccer, figure
skating and many more, as well organizations removing events and business from the country and governments freezing Putin allies' assets.
kremlin.ru | Taking part in our meeting are senior Government officials,
plenipotentiary presidential envoys in the federal districts and heads of Russian regions.
We
are meeting in a complicate period as our Armed Forces are conducting
a special military operation in Ukraine and Donbass. I would like
to remind you
that at the beginning, on the morning of February 24, I publicly
announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is
to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide
for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through
blockade, large-scale punitive
operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only
guilt was
that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their
forefathers’
laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up
their
children as they want.
During these years, the Kiev authorities
have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package
of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late
last year openly refused to implement it.
They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev
authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery
vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi
Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable
future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia.
There
was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military
biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with
the financial
support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains,
anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic
attempts
are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we
have
grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being
created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine.
Our
numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat
to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance
by Ukraine
and its US and NATO patrons.
In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have
been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed
through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this
special military operation.
The movement of Russian forces against
Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is
not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our
goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24.
As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself.
Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are
doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities.
This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities
were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply
withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not
want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what
is happening in reality, on the ground.
The operation is being carried out successfully,
in strict conformity with the approved plan.
I must note that,
encouraged by the United
States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing
for a scenario
of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive
onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time.
However, our Armed Forces have
shattered these plans.
Kiev was not just preparing for war,
for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts
to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea.
Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued
all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed
over this time.
As you know, there was a missile
strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody
act of terror
that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few
days.
They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics
and the exasperation
of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried
to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves.
But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism
is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this
missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called
civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy
in Donetsk, as if nothing happened.
This is how they have been
hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers
buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply
moral degradation, complete de-humanisation.
It was no longer
possible to tolerate
this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end
to this genocide,
Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties
of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties,
the republics
appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We
rendered this
aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act
otherwise.
I would like to emphasise this point
and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within
the people's
republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have
been a final
solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately
removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia.
On the contrary, a new frontline
would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling
and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed
conflict would
have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled
by the revanchist
hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military
infrastructure faster
and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with
the fact
that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already
at our
borders.
I will repeat – we had no alternative
for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military
operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security
of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive
actions against our country.
We remain ready to discuss matters
of fundamental importance to Russia’s future during the talks. This includes Ukraine’s
status as a neutral country, and demilitarisation and denazification. Our
country has done everything it could to organise and hold these talks realising
that it is important to use every opportunity to save people and their lives.
But
time and time again we see that
the Kiev regime, which its Western handlers have charged with the task
of creating
an aggressive “anti-Russia” stance, does not care about the future
of the people of Ukraine. They do not care that people are dying, that
hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people had to flee their
homes, and that a horrendous
humanitarian disaster is unfolding in the cities controlled
by the neo-Nazis
and armed criminals who were cut loose.
Clearly, Kiev’s Western patrons are just
pushing them to continue the bloodshed. They incessantly supply Kiev with
weapons and intelligence, as well as other types of assistance, including
military advisers and mercenaries.
They are using economic,
financial,
trade and other sanctions against Russia as weapons, but these sanctions
have
backfired in Europe and in the United States where prices of gasoline,
energy and food have shot up, and jobs in the industries associated with
the Russian
market have been cut. So, do not shift the blame on us and do not accuse
our
country of everything that goes wrong in your countries.
I want
ordinary Western people hear
me, too. You are being persistently told that your current difficulties
are the result of Russia’s hostile actions and that you have to pay
for the efforts to counter
the alleged Russian threat from your own pockets. All of that is a lie.
The truth
is that the problems faced
by millions of people in the West are the result of many years
of actions by the ruling elite of your respective countries, their
mistakes, and short-sighted
policies and ambitions. This elite is not thinking about how to improve
the lives
of their citizens in Western countries. They are obsessed with their own
self-serving
interests and super profits.
This can be seen in the data provided
by international organisations, which clearly show that social problems, even
in the leading Western countries, have exacerbated in recent years, that
inequality and the gap between the rich and the poor is widening, and racial
and ethnic conflicts are making themselves felt. The myth of the Western
welfare society, the so-called golden billion, is crumbling.
To reiterate, the whole planet is
now paying for the West’s ambitions and the West’s attempts to maintain its elusive
dominance by any means possible.
antiwar | CIA paramilitaries had been training Ukrainian forces on the
frontlines of the Donbas war against Russian-backed separatists since
2014 and were only pulled out by the Biden administration last month, Yahoo News reported on Wednesday, citing former US officials.
The CIA first sent a small number of paramilitaries to eastern
Ukraine when the war started in 2014, which was sparked by a US-backed
coup in Kyiv and the Donbas separatists declaring independence from the
post-coup government.
As part of the training, CIA paramilitaries taught Ukrainian forces
sniper techniques, how to operate US-provided Javelin anti-tank
missiles, and how to avoid being tracked on the battlefield by using
covert communications and other means. The former officials said at
first the CIA was surprised at the capability of Russia and the
separatists compared with US adversaries in the Middle East.
The US military held similar training programs for Ukrainian forces
in western Ukraine that have been publicly acknowledged. In January, Yahoo News revealed that the CIA had
also been holding a US-based training program for Ukrainian forces. A
former CIA official said the US-based program was training “an
insurgency” and taught Ukrainians how to “kill Russians.”
The secret CIA program in eastern Ukraine was much more provocative
than the other training programs since it essentially meant the US was
involved in a proxy war on Russia’s border. The former officials told Yahoo News
that During the first year of the Trump administration, National
Security Officials reviewed the program, which had begun under the Obama
administration.
The CIA paramilitaries were directed to advise and train but not
participate in combat. Trump administration officials feared the
authorities were too broad and that the mission was too ambiguous. One
former official said questions that were asked included: “How far can
you go with existing covert action authorities? If, God forbid, they’ve
shot some Russians, is that a problem? Do you need special authorities
for that?”
The former official said that the Trump administration discussed what
Russia’s redlines could be and determined the US support for Ukrainian
forces fell within historically acceptable bounds. “There was a school
of thought that the Russians spoke the good old language of proxy war,”
the official said.
Despite the concerns, the secret program continued for years until
February. The former officials said that when a Russian invasion became
“increasingly acute,” the Biden administration pulled all CIA personnel
out of Ukraine, including the paramilitaries. One former official said
the Biden administration was “terrified of even clandestine folks being
on the frontline.”
Although it’s hard to know what the military situation looks like in
Ukraine, the US claims Ukraine is putting up a much fiercer resistance
than Russia expected. The former officials who spoke with Yahoo News
suggested the resistance was in part thanks to the CIA training
program. The US continues to fuel the fighting as President Biden has
already pledged over $1 billion in new military aid for Ukraine since the invasion started.
businessinsider | A top aide to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy praised US President Joe Biden on Thursday.
"Grateful to [the US], our reliable partner," the aide, Andriy Yermak, wrote in a tweet. "The @POTUS does more for [Ukraine] than any of his predecessors."
Biden's predecessor, former President Donald Trump, was impeached in
2019 and charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The
impeachment focused on Trump's efforts to strongarm Zelenskyy into
launching political investigations into the Bidens by withholding nearly
$400 million in military aid to Ukraine and dangling a White House
meeting.
The hold on the security assistance was lifted after Politico reported on Trump's actions and House Democrats launched an investigation into the matter.
At the center of the impeachment was a July 2019 phone call between
Trump and Zelenskyy, in which Trump pressured the Ukrainian president to
open investigations into purported corruption by Biden and his son,
Hunter, ahead of the 2020 US election.
Trump also asked Zelenskyy
to investigate the nonsense conspiracy theory that Ukraine interfered in
the 2016 election, and that Ukraine is in possession of a secret
Democratic email server.
Yermak, as a senior advisor to Zelenskyy,
was privy to Trump's and his aides' efforts to force Ukraine to
investigate the Bidens.
Trump, for his part, has insisted that Russia's invasion of Ukraine would not have happened if he was still in office.
"If I were in Office, this deadly Ukraine situation would never have happened!" he said in a statement last month.
But days earlier, he praised Russian President Vladimir Putin's justification to launch the war as "genius" and "savvy."
His
comments stood in contrast to those of US officials, who warned that
Putin's recognition of two Kremlin-backed separatist regions in Ukraine
was part of an effort to create a false pretext and invade the country.
Trump
was repeatedly criticized throughout his presidency for making public
statements and policy decisions that benefited Russia and hurt Ukraine.
greenwald |One of the most successful disinformation campaigns
in modern American electoral history occurred in the weeks prior to the
2020 presidential election. On October 14, 2020 — less than three weeks
before Americans were set to vote — the nation's oldest newspaper, The New York Post, began publishing a series of reports about the business dealings of the Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden
and his son, Hunter, in countries in which Biden, as Vice President,
wielded considerable influence (including Ukraine and China) and would
again if elected president.
The backlash against this reporting
was immediate and intense, leading to suppression of the story by U.S.
corporate media outlets and censorship of the story by leading Silicon Valley monopolies.
The disinformation campaign against this reporting was led by the CIA's
all-but-official spokesperson Natasha Bertrand (then of Politico, now with CNN), whose article on October 19 appeared under this headline: “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”
These "former intel officials" did not actually say that the “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo." Indeed, they stressed in their letter the opposite: namely, that they had no evidence
to suggest the emails were falsified or that Russia had anything to do
them, but, instead, they had merely intuited this "suspicion" based on
their experience:
We want to emphasize that we
do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President
Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we
do not have evidence of Russian involvement -- just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.
But
a media that was overwhelmingly desperate to ensure Trump's defeat had
no time for facts or annoying details such as what these former
officials actually said or whether it was in fact true. They had an
election to manipulate. As a result, that these emails were "Russian
disinformation” — meaning that they were fake and that Russia
manufactured them — became an article of faith among the U.S.'s justifiably despised class of media employees.
Very
few even included the crucial caveat that the intelligence officials
themselves stressed: namely, that they had no evidence at all to
corroborate this claim. Instead, as I noted last September, “virtually every media outlet — CNN, NBC News, PBS, Huffington Post, The Intercept, and too many others to count
— began completely ignoring the substance of the reporting and instead
spread the lie over and over that these documents were the by-product of
Russian disinformation.” The Huffington Post even published a must-be-seen-to-be-believed campaign ad for Joe Biden, masquerading as “reporting,” that spread this lie that the emails were "Russian disinformation.”
johnhelmer | The summit meeting of East European leaders, hosted in Kiev by
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky on March 15 was fabricated by the
Polish government, with Polish secret service agents playing the part of
journalists, and fake photographs of the meeting, press briefing, and
train journey prepared by Zelensky’s press office.
The operation was designed by the Poles to promote their role in
support of the Ukraine, the Ukrainian refugees, and in defence of Europe
against Russia, and seek new European, American, and NATO alliance
funds and military equipment.
A according to the Ukrainian publicity, the operation was designed to
promote the appearance that Zelensky’s regime is in control of Kiev,
and to accelerate their application for admission to the European Union
(EU).
The Anglo-American media have reported
the meeting, as announced by Petr Fiala, the Czech prime minister,
with “the aim…to express the European Union’s unequivocal support for
Ukraine and its freedom and independence,”
The result of the summit meeting, according to the Financial Times in
London, was “a show of European solidarity even as Russian shelling
continued on residential neighbourhoods in the Ukrainian capital. The
trip by the prime ministers of Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovenia
is the most high-profile visit to Kyiv since Russia invaded the country
on February 24.”
“It is here, in war-torn Kyiv, that history is being made,” the
Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki announced. “It is here that
freedom fights against the world of tyranny. It is here that the future
of us all hangs in the balance.”
Morawiecki and the western press were lying – there was no meeting in
Kiev. Instead, the meeting was staged at the Polish rail junction town
of Przemysl, 95 kilometres west of Lvov (Lviv), and 20 kms inside the
Polish frontier with the Ukraine.
In a report published
by the Associated Press (AP) bureau in Warsaw, “the long journey over
land from Poland to Kyiv by Morawiecki, Poland’s deputy Prime Minister
Jaroslaw Kaczynski and Prime Ministers Petr Fiala of the Czech Republic
and Janez Jansa of Slovenia sent the message that most of Ukraine still
remains in Ukrainian hands.”
The evidence gathered from sources in Warsaw and from analysis of the
videos and photographs published on the meeting proves there was no
“long journey”; no meeting in Kiev or in Lvov, the Galician region
capital, which is the operating headquarters of the Ukrainian
government. From the evidence provided by the Poles and also by the
Zelensky’s publicity staff, it is now clear that only a small part of
western Ukraine remains in Ukrainian hands. Zelensky himself is now in
Polish hands.
undark |In 2004, an
activist named Edward Hammond fired up his fax machine and sent out
letters to 390 institutional biosafety committees across the country.
His request was simple: Show me your minutes.
Few people at the time had heard of these committees, known as IBCs,
and even today, the typical American is likely unaware that they even
exist. But they’re a ubiquitous — and, experts say, crucial — tool for
overseeing potentially risky research in the United States. Since 1976,
if a scientist wants to tweak the DNA of a lab organism, and their
institution receives funding from the National Institutes of Health,
they generally need to get express safety approval from the collection
of scientists, biosafety experts, and interested community members who
sit on the relevant IBC. Given the long reach of the $46-billion NIH budget,
virtually every research university in the U.S. is required to have
such a board, as are plenty of biotechnology companies and hospitals.
The committees “are the cornerstone of institutional oversight of
recombinant DNA research,” according to the NIH, and at many institutions, their purview includes high-security labs and research on deadly pathogens.
The agency also requires these committees to maintain detailed meeting
minutes, and to supply them upon request to members of the public. But
when Hammond started requesting those minutes, he found something else.
Not only were many universities declining to share their minutes, but
some didn’t seem to have active IBCs at all. “The committees weren’t
functioning,” Hammond told Undark. “It was just an absolute joke.”
The issue has gained fresh urgency amid the Covid-19 pandemic. Many
scientists, along with U.S. intelligence agencies, say it’s possible
that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, emerged accidentally
from a laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or WIV — a
coronavirus research hub in China that received
grant funding from the NIH through a New York-based environmental
health nonprofit. Overseas entities receiving NIH funding are required
to form institutional biosafety committees, and while grant proposals to
the NIH obtained by
The Intercept mention an IBC at the Wuhan institution, it remains
unclear what role such a committee played there, or whether one was ever
really convened.
An NIH spokesperson, Amanda Fine, did not answer questions about
whether the Wuhan institute has had a committee registered with the
agency in the past. In an email, she referred to a roster
of currently active IBCs, which does not list WIV. Other efforts by
Undark to obtain details about meetings of the Wuhan lab’s IBC were
unsuccessful. But so, too, were initial efforts to obtain meeting
minutes from several IBCs conducting what is supposed to be both routine
and publicly transparent business on U.S. soil. Undark recently
contacted a sample of eight New York City-area institutions with
requests for copies of IBC meeting minutes and permission to attend
upcoming meetings. Most did not respond to initial queries. It took
nearly two months for any of the eight institutions to furnish minutes,
and some did not provide minutes at all, suggesting that in many cases,
the IBC system may be as opaque and inconsistently structured as when
Hammond, who eventually testified before Congress on the issue in 2007,
first began investigating.
Indeed, recent interviews with biosafety experts, scientists, and
public officials suggest that IBC oversight still varies from
institution to institution, creating a biosafety system that’s uneven,
resistant to public scrutiny, and subject to minimal enforcement from
the NIH. Hammond and other critics say these problems are baked into the
system itself: As the country’s flagship funder of biomedical research,
the NIH, these critics say, shouldn’t also be charged with overseeing
its safety.
RT | The Russian Defense Ministry said on Thursday it will soon release
additional documents pertaining to the operation of Pentagon-funded
biolabs in Ukraine. Moscow believes they have been involved in
bioweapons research.
Russian military specialists in weapons of
mass destruction are analyzing documents obtained from staff members of
the Ukrainian labs, ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said in a daily
briefing. He claimed they detailed “implementation by the US in Ukraine of a secret project to study the ways humans can be infected from bats,” which was done in Kharkov.
The
official said the same Institute of Experimental and Clinical
Veterinary Medicine in the Ukrainian city worked for years to study
under which conditions wild birds carrying flu could cause an epidemic
in humans and to assess the damage that would result.
Konashenkov didn’t explain why such research should be considered military in nature, as assessed by the defense ministry.
The
spokesman further said more Ukrainian documents will soon be released
on the transfer of human samples from Ukraine to the UK and other
European nations. The materials will be accompanied by Russian military
assessments of the work they detail, he said.
The Pentagon
sponsors dozens of labs around the world under the Defense Threat
Reduction Agency (DTRA). The work they do, the US government claims, is
benign and is meant to monitor emergence of new dangerous infections.
Countries like Russia and China believe they may be more sinister in
nature.
US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland
said under oath that labs in Ukraine have been destroying research
materials to prevent Russia from seizing them. It was not clear why
Washington saw the scenario as dangerous. US officials claimed that the
pathogens in question were remnants of Soviet bioweapons programs, which
Moscow would presumably already have access to.
Some American
public figures, such as Fox News host Tucker Carlson and former
Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, were attacked for asking questions about
the Ukrainian labs, which supposedly amounts to repeating “Russian propaganda.”
Utah Senator Mitt Romney accused Gabbard of spreading “treasonous lies”
with her concerns about the safety of pathogen samples in Ukraine. The
hosts of The View television show suggested people asking such questions
should be arrested and investigated as possible Russian agents.
thesaker | The Russian Defence Ministry continues to study materials on the
implementation of military biological programs of the United States and
its NATO allies on the territory of Ukraine.
The information received from various sources confirms the leading
role of the US Defence Threat Reduction Agency in financing and
conducting military biological research on the territory of Ukraine.
Details of the UP-4 project became known, which was implemented with
the participation of laboratories in Kiev, Kharkov and Odessa and was
designed for the period up to 2020.
Its purpose was to study the possibility of the spread of
particularly dangerous infections through migrating birds, including
highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza, the mortality rate of which reaches 50
percent for humans, as well as Newcastle disease.
Due to the fact that Ukraine has a unique geographical location where
transcontinental migration routes intersect, 145 biological species
were studied within the framework of this project. At the same time, at
least two species of migratory birds were identified, whose routes pass
mainly through the territory of Russia. At the same time, information
about migration routes passing through the countries of Eastern Europe
was summarized.
Of all the methods developed in the United States to destabilize the
epidemiological situation, this is one of the most reckless and
irresponsible, since it does not allow to control the further
development of the situation. This is confirmed by the course of the
pandemic of a new coronavirus infection, the occurrence and features of
which raise many questions.
In addition, the R-781 project is interesting, where bats are considered as carriers of potential biological weapons agents.
Among the priorities identified are the study of bacterial and viral
pathogens that can be transmitted from bats to humans: pathogens of
plague, leptospirosis, brucellosis, as well as coronaviruses and
filoviruses.
It is noteworthy that the research is carried out in close proximity to
the borders of Russia – in the areas of the Black Sea coast and the
Caucasus.
The project is being implemented with the involvement of not only
Ukrainian, but also Georgian biological laboratories controlled by the
Pentagon in cooperation with the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and the
US Geological Survey.
The analyzed materials on the UP-8 project, aimed at studying the
Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever virus and hantaviruses in Ukraine,
clearly refute the US public statement that only Ukrainian scientists
work in the Pentagon biolabs in Ukraine without the intervention of
American biologists. One of the documents confirms that all serious
high-risk studies are conducted under the direct supervision of
specialists from the United States.
The payroll of Ukrainian contractors clearly demonstrates how they
are financed. It has been confirmed that the US Department of Defence
paid the money for research participation directly, without the
involvement of intermediaries. The extremely modest pay, by US
standards, is noteworthy. This indicates a low estimation of the
professionalism of Ukrainian specialists and the neglect of their
American colleagues.
In addition, the studied materials contain proposals for the
expansion of the US military-biological program in Ukraine. Thus, there
was evidence of the continuation of completed biological projects UP-2,
UP-9, UP-10, aimed at studying the pathogens of anthrax and African
swine fever.
The Pentagon is also interested in insect vectors capable of
spreading dangerous infectious diseases. The analysis of the obtained
materials confirms the transfer of more than 140 containers with
ectoparasites of bats – fleas and ticks from the biolab in Kharkov
abroad.
dilyana | The US Embassy to Tbilisi transports
frozen human blood and pathogens as diplomatic cargo for a secret US
military program. Internal documents, implicating US diplomats in the
transportation of and experimenting on pathogens under diplomatic cover
were leaked to me by Georgian insiders. According to these documents,
Pentagon scientists have been deployed to the Republic of Georgia and
have been given diplomatic immunity to research deadly diseases and
biting insects at the Lugar Center – the Pentagon biolaboratory in
Georgia’s capital Tbilisi.
The
Pentagon biolaboratory is heavily guarded. All passers-by within a
radius of 100 m are filmed although the military biolaboratory is
located within a residential area.
dilyana |While the US is planning to increase its
military presence in Eastern Europe to “protect its allies against
Russia”, internal documents show what American “protection” in practical
terms means.
The Pentagon has conducted biological
experiments with a potentially lethal outcome on 4,400 soldiers in
Ukraine and 1,000 soldiers in Georgia. According to leaked documents,
all volunteer deaths should be reported within 24 h (in Ukraine) and 48 h
(in Georgia).
Both countries are considered the most
loyal US partners in the region with a number of Pentagon programs being
implemented in their territory. One of them is the $2.5 billion
Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) Biological engagement program
which includes research on bio agents, deadly viruses and
antibiotic-resistant bacteria being studied on the local population.
Project GG-21: “All volunteer deaths will be promptly reported”
The Pentagon has launched a 5-year long
project with a possible extension of up to 3 years code-named GG-21:
“Arthropod-borne and zoonotic infections among military personnel in
Georgia”. According to the project’s description, blood samples will be
obtained from 1,000 military recruits at the time of their military
registration physical exam at the Georgian military hospital located in
Gori.
unz |But
the largest feather in Kholomoisky’s cap is no doubt President Zelensky
himself. Kholomoisky’s channel created and ran the “Servant of the
People” show that featured Zelensky as an honest and intrepid President
of Ukraine dedicated to fighting corruption and defending the Ukrainian
people. When the elections came around, Kholomoisky’s people and his
media resources went all out in campaigning for their man. My personal
favorite play was when they bribed Facebook fortune-tellers to spin
prophecies about the coming of the president-that-was-promised and
thereby secured the superstitious peasant granny vote. If any Western
politicians are reading this, put down Sun Tzu and try some of this
Kholomoisky fellow’s stratagems during the next election cycle instead.
Now,
Russia has declared that they are planning to do a thorough
“denazification” campaign, which almost certainly means a thorough purge
of the Galician faction from the positions that they have taken since
Yushenko let them into the government. As for what will happen to the
oligarchs who bankrolled this whole operation, well, that’s still
somewhat up in the air. It’s worth point out that Russia used to have
dealings with them right up until the events of Euromaidan. The
arrangement was simple: Russia paid them to behave and not ally against
Russia with the West. As we can see looking back, this was clearly a
catastrophic strategy, and what’s worse, I can only shake my head at how
uncreative and uninspired it was—a cardinal sin in my book. The worst
possible outcome for Ukraine at this point is if Russia comes to a
compromise with some element of the existing power structure in Ukraine
once they wrap up the military operation. We now know that no
negotiations with the Galician faction are possible, so we can cross
them off the list. That leaves the Eastern Mafia. Rumors of
Kholomoisky’s imminent surrender aside, I can’t help but hope that his
chutzpah has finally crossed the line and that he will be forced to
spend the rest of his days exiled in Israel along with his puppet
Zelensky. As for the rest of the oligarchs, well, both Petro Poroshenko
and Yulia Timoshenko held photo-ops in Kiev with Kalashnikovs in their
hands, so we can cross them off the list as well. Further than that and
we enter the realm of pure speculation.
Clearly,
the best outcome would be for a military man from Russia with no
history of doing politics or business in Ukraine to come in and take the
reins as a vizier or military governor of sorts for a time. This
solution may offend committed ideologists and apologists for Liberal
Democracy (read: Oligarchy), but the hard truth of the situation that
Ukraine finds itself in is one in which literally no one who was
anywhere near the reins of power in that country for the last three
decades has his hands clean. These people all looted, collaborated and
murdered with near impunity for 30 years. With Russia now performing a
political prison break from Liberal Oligarchic Occupation Government
right before our very eyes, we can only hope that Ukraine will be able
to follow suit and break free from the shackles as well.
Rejuvenation Pills
-
No one likes getting old. Everyone would like to be immorbid. Let's be
careful here. Immortal doesnt include youth or return to youth. Immorbid
means you s...
Death of the Author — at the Hands of Cthulhu
-
In 1967, French literary theorist and philosopher Roland Barthes wrote of
“The Death of the Author,” arguing that the meaning of a text is divorced
from au...
9/29 again
-
"On this sacred day of Michaelmas, former President Donald Trump invoked
the heavenly power of St. Michael the Archangel, sharing a powerful prayer
for pro...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...