Aggregatore di feed

Putin’s 3 day ceasefire, which begins in 8 days, is unrelated to the Ukrainian negotiations. The ceasefire is in memory of the 80th Anniversary of Russia’s defeat of Germany in World War II, a defeat in which the US, Britain, and France played a minor role as the casualty lists indicate. Russia bore the brunt of WW II. Had it not been for Russia, the Third Reich would still be ruling Germany.  Some think it actually is as Germany actively persecutes truth-tellers and critics of Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians. Indeed, in Germany you cannot even criticize the Covid “vaccine” without becoming a political prisoner like Reiner Fuellmich.

The whore Western media and the dumb Western “Russian experts” have failed to note that when Foreign Minister Lavrov declares Russia’s readiness for peace talks, he defines the purpose of the peace talks to be to “eliminate the root causes of the conflict.”

The root cause of the conflict is not Russia’s intervention. The root cause of the conflict is, as the New York Times article admits, Washington’s effort to initiate a conflict that would, or could, destabilize Russia.  

It was Washington, not Moscow, that overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian government that was in a peaceful and mutually beneficial relationship with Russia while Putin sat on his hands.

It was Washington that armed and trained an Ukrainian army to retake the two breakaway Donbas republics, while using the Minsk Agreement to deceive Moscow that a solution, which did not require Russian intervention, had been achieved.  Both the President of France and the Chancellor of Germany have stated publicly that the Minsk Agreement was used to deceive Putin and leave Russia unprepared for the planned American led Ukrainian invasion of Donbas.

It was Putin and Lavrov who pleaded with US Secretary of State Blinken, NATO, and the EU during December 2021-February 2022 for a mutual security agreement.  The Russians were given the cold shoulder and were forced to intervene  in order to prevent the massacre of the Russian peoples, who had unanimously voted to rejoin Russia from which they had been torn by former Soviet rulers and by the US dismembering the Soviet Union.

Putin’s Ukraine conflict has gone on longer than it took Stalin’s Red Army to drive the highly disciplined Wehrmacht out of thousands of miles of Russia and Eastern Europe and to enter the streets of Berlin. I am not alone in being unable to understand why Putin proceeded with a conflict that was ever-widening, drawing in the US, NATO, the EU and ever more Western weapon systems that “would never to supplied to Ukraine,” culminating in Western supplied long range missiles that now strike deep into Russia.

A possible explanation is that Putin highly values, as does much of his constituency, peace with the West and inclusion in the West. The Russian heart is not really in BRICS.  Therefore, Putin has been using the intervention in Ukraine in the hopes  that a Great Power Agreement, a New Yalta, can come out of it.

What Putin’s hopes overlook is the hegemonic doctrine of American Foreign Policy.  This doctrine as stated by Undersecretary of Defense Wolfowitz in 1991 has never been repudiated by any American  president, including Trump.  The doctrine declares that the principle goal of US foreign policy is hegemony over the world. As this remains Washington’s policy, peace with Russia, China, and Iran,  can only be achieved by their surrender or their defeat.

Is Putin prepared to surrender?  Is China prepared to surrender?  Is Iran prepared to surrender?  Unless they are, war, not peace, is our future.

It is only after we hear Trump’s and Congress’ repudiation of American hegemony can we have any hope of peace.  

We await this repudiation of American hegemony. See this.

The post The ‘Peace Negotiations’ Are Just Another Deception Creating a Narrative for More War appeared first on LewRockwell.

In what can only be called one of the most ridiculous federal criminal prosecutions in U.S. history, the U.S. Department of Justice and, specifically, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Middle District of Florida, ended up with a massive amount of egg on its face. The case involved the criminal prosecution of Black rights activists affiliated with the African People’s Socialist Party and the Uhuru Movement, including the 82-year-old chairman of the Party, Omali Yeshitela, and some White allies, including a 78-year-old woman named Penny Hess.

The feds accused the defendants of serving as Russian agents. Needless to say, the prosecution reflected the deep anti-Russia paranoia that has come to characterize the federal government, especially the Justice Department. This federal mindset is simply an outgrowth of the old Cold War mentality in which federal officials were convinced that the Russians were coming to get us — along with the Cubans, North Koreans, Chinese, North Vietnamese, and other Reds. The “modern” anti-Russia mindset is that the Russians are influencing millions of presumably feeble-minded public-schooled American voters who will easily fall for Russian propaganda if not protected by their federal overlords.

What was the real crime that the defendants had committed? They have long criticized the militarism and foreign interventionism of the U.S. Empire, just as Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Mohammad Ali, and other Blacks have done for decades. The criticism is bad enough from the standpoint of “patriotism,” but the fact that such criticism comes from Blacks obviously makes it significantly worse. The fact that the criticisms matched criticisms of the Russian government sealed the fate of the accused. In the minds of federal officials, it had to be — it just had to be — that the defendants were serving as unregistered agents of the Russian government. As such, they had to be punished severely and, it was hoped, be put away in a federal penitentiary for many years, which would not only silence them but also send a message to other Black activists to shut up and become loyal supporters of the U.S. Empire.

The technical charges against the defendants that ended up going to the jury were (1) failing to register with the U.S. government as Russian agents; and (2) conspiracy to fail to register as Russian agents.

In his opening statement at trial, a federal prosecutor told the jury that the defendants had opposed U.S. genocide of Blacks here in the United States as well as U.S. policy in Ukraine by siding with Russia rather than Ukraine. The prosecutor stated that “the defendants acted at the direction of the Russian government to sow division right here in the U.S.” Imagine — such horrific offenses!

The prosecutors were hoping to send the defendants away for 15 years, which, of course, would have been a life sentence for Yeshitela and Hess. The prosecutors were also aiming to hit the defendants with a massive fine in the hopes of bankrupting them.

Alas, things did not work out well for the feds in this criminal prosecution — and rightly so. They ended up having to wipe lots of egg from their faces. The jury returned with a not guilty verdict on the failure to register charge and a guilty verdict on the conspiracy charge, which is obviously a nonsensical verdict.

But let’s first note the ludicrous nature of both of these charges in what is purportedly a free country. In a free country, a person has the right to work for any foreign government he wants. Oh, yes, I know that Russia is considered to be an “official enemy” or “rival” or “opponent” or “competitor” of the U.S. Empire. But that’s just an imperialist construct. The fact is that in a genuinely free society, people have the right to work for whomever they want.

People also have the right to oppose any policy of their government, including opposing the massive death toll and the mass incarceration of Blacks in the U.S. war on drugs and also opposing the U.S. Empire’s foreign policy of invasions, occupations, wars of aggression, state-sponsored assassinations, torture, indefinite detention, renditions to foreign regimes, coups, and provoking wars between other countries.

In fact, in the United States, it is perfectly legal to work for the Russian government or any other government. So, what’s the problem? The problem is that the U.S. government has enacted a law that requires people who work for foreign governments to register their names with the feds. So, one is free to work for the Russian government, but if one does so, he has to put his name on an official list of the U.S. government.

That is ludicrous. Why should anyone have to register with the federal government for any reason, including working for a foreign government? Where in the Constitution does it give the federal government the power to enact such a law? How can such a registration requirement be reconciled with the principles of a free society? It can’t be. In a genuinely free society, people have the right not only to work for foreign governments but also the freedom not to register their names with the federal government. It’s probably worth mentioning that Russia also has the same type of registration requirement.

In any event, much to the Justice Department’s chagrin, the jury acquitted the defendants of failing to register as Russian agents. That could only mean one thing — that the jury concluded that they weren’t working as agents for the Russian government.

Yet, the jury then convicted them of conspiring to fail to register as federal agents, which makes the case even more ludicrous. The jury verdict essentially said that while the defendants had not served as agents of the Russian government, they had entered into an agreement to not register as agents of the Russian government. The verdict only goes to show the nonsensical nature of the law of conspiracy.

In any event, the feds were still hoping that the judge would sentence the defendants to serve several years in a federal prison on the conspiracy conviction. It didn’t happen. Pointing out that the case revolved largely around the defendants’ exercise of free speech, the judge gave the defendants probation and 300 hours of community service.

While the mild sentence was clearly a rebuke of the federal prosecutors, what the judge should have done instead is throw out the conviction entirely. To their credit, the defendants are appealing their conviction notwithstanding the judge’s light sentence. Hopefully, the Court of Appeals will throw more egg on the faces of the federal prosecutors and throw out this ludicrous Russia-paranoia-based criminal conviction.

Reprinted with permission from The Future of Freedom Foundation.

The post The Uhuru Prosecution Brings Egg on the Face of the Justice Department appeared first on LewRockwell.

The general public is completely unaware of the real stakes in the negotiations between Washington and Tehran. This article presents a situation in which lies have been piling up over three decades, making any progress particularly difficult. Contrary to popular belief, the nuclear issue in Iran is not whether Tehran will acquire an atomic bomb, but whether it will be able to help Palestine without resorting to weapons.

A month and a half ago, I announced that even before concluding peace in Ukraine, President Donald Trump would open negotiations with Iran [1]. As usual, commentators steeped in Joe Biden’s ideology showered me with sarcasm, while my colleagues, specialists in international affairs, noted my observations [2].

The difference between the two lay in their understanding of the negotiations in Ukraine. For the former, it was Donald Trump’s revenge against Volodymyr Zelensky, or a genuflection before Vladimir Putin. For the latter, it was, on the contrary, a desire for peace with Russia in order to devote US resources to its economic recovery.

It follows that the two sides approach the Iranian issue differently. For the former, it is a matter of continuing the chaos that began during the first term with the withdrawal from the nuclear agreement (JCPOA). Conversely, for the latter, it is a desire for peace with Iran, given that it is the only regional power that supports the resistance to Israel.

In early March 2024, President Donald Trump sent a letter to the leader of the Revolution, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The existence of this document was mentioned by the author himself during his speech to Congress on March 4, and then debated in the press. According to Sky News Arabia, which read this document, Donald Trump called for negotiations, while specifying: “If you reject the outstretched hand and choose the path of escalation and support for terrorist organizations, I warn you of a swift and determined response […] I am writing this letter with the aim of opening new horizons for our relations, away from the years of conflict, misunderstandings and unnecessary confrontations that we have witnessed in recent decades […] The time has come to leave hostility behind and open a new page of cooperation and mutual respect.” A historic opportunity presents itself to us today […] We will not stand idly by in the face of your regime’s threats against our people or our allies […] If you are willing to negotiate, so are we. But if you continue to ignore the world’s demands, history will testify that you missed a great opportunity.”

Simultaneously, the United States and the United Kingdom launched several attacks against Ansar Allah in Yemen. Unlike previous attacks, these did not target hidden military targets, but rather political targets scattered among the civilian population. They therefore killed leaders of the movement and many other collateral victims, which constitutes war crimes.

It should be recalled that Ansar Allah, pejoratively referred to by Westerners as the “Houthi family gang” or “the Houthis,” attacks Israeli ships in the Red Sea in order to force Tel Aviv to agree to allow humanitarian aid to pass through to Gaza.

Washington and London, believing that this was hampering international trade, and having failed to obtain approval from the Security Council, resumed the war. They initially targeted military objectives and quickly realized that these, buried deep within the country, could not be significantly affected.

Donald Trump’s letter only arrived in Tehran on March 12, and the Iranian response was slow in coming. It is important to understand that while Tehran was flattered by Washington’s secret handwritten approach, it could not accept several aspects of its behavior.

• First, the United States, faithful to Trump’s Art of the Deal technique, threatened Iran while trying to placate it. International relations are not governed by the same rules as business. Giving in to threats is a sign of weakness that the Iranians could not accept in these negotiations. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei commented on March 28: “The enmity of the United States and Israel has always existed. They threaten to attack us, which we believe is not very likely, but if they commit a misdeed, they will certainly receive a strong blow in return.” If the enemies think they can instigate sedition in the country, the Iranian nation itself will respond to them.” President Donald Trump further emphasized this on March 30, telling NBC News: “If they don’t reach an agreement, there will be bombing. It will be bombing like they’ve never seen before.”

According to the United Nations Charter (Article 2, paragraph 4), “members of the Organization shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.”
The negotiations were therefore compromised before they even began.

• Moreover, massacring the leaders of Ansar Allah was a gratuitous war crime: General Qassem Soleimani, by reorganizing the “Axis of Resistance,” had given Iran’s former proxies their complete freedom. Tehran currently has no influence, other than ideological, over Ansar Allah. Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani therefore raised these points at the United Nations [3].
• Finally, and most importantly, Donald Trump, by accumulating contradictory signals, did not allow the Iranians to assess his relations with Israel. Does he support the project of a binational state in Palestine (the one promoted by the United Nations)? Or of a Jewish state in Palestine (“Zionism”)? Or that of a “Greater Israel” (“Revisionist Zionism”)? No one knows for sure.

Ultimately, Iran sent a secret response to the secret letter from the United States, and negotiations were able to begin, but only indirectly. That is, the two delegations did not speak directly to each other, but only through a mediator. In this way, Tehran responded to the invitation, but expressed its disapproval of the manner in which it was convened.

Intervening directly, France and the United Kingdom convened a closed-door meeting of the Security Council. Paris and London wished to address several outstanding issues. As nothing has been leaked, it is unclear whether President Emmanuel Macron and Prime Minister Keir Starmer wanted to clarify what had caused all other attempts at negotiations to fail or, on the contrary, to obscure what could have been further obscured.

The following day, March 13, Mohammad Hassan-Nejad Pirkouhi, Director General for International Peace and Security at the Iranian Foreign Ministry, summoned the ambassadors of the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. He criticized them for an “irresponsible and provocative” meeting of the Security Council, which abused UN mechanisms. He emphasized that while Iran no longer respects its commitment not to enrich uranium above 3.67%, it is still respecting its JCPoA commitments to IAEA inspectors and fulfilling its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

It should be recalled that, generally speaking, Iran, following the United States, withdrew from the JCPoA and the secret bilateral agreements of the time, yet it still observes its JCPoA commitments [4]. In contrast, France and the United Kingdom, while claiming to respect the JCPoA, have taken no measures to address the consequences of the US withdrawal, in violation of the spirit of the text. The United Kingdom immediately responded by stating that it was prepared to reinstate UN sanctions by October 18 (the deadline for this procedure) if Iran did not curb its uranium enrichment. The UN sanctions were, in fact, suspended, not repealed.

Three rounds of indirect negotiations have already taken place. The US delegation was led by Steve Witkoff, President Donald Trump’s special envoy for the Middle East, and the Iranian delegation by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. The first and third meetings were held in Muscat and Oman, while the second was held at the Sultanate’s embassy in Rome, in the presence of the Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafel Grossi of Argentina. Sayyid Badr bin Hamad bin Hamood al-Busaidi, Omani Foreign Minister, acted as mediator at each opportunity, moving back and forth between the delegations.

Numerous statements were made by the US side, accumulating imprecisions and contradictions, both regarding previous rounds of negotiations and especially regarding Washington’s red lines. Each side therefore believes it understands what it wants. In Iran, too, the public debate is particularly obscure. However, we note that one current, drawing lessons from the Libyan and Korean affairs, maintains that if Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini were still alive, he would likely rescind his fatwa condemning weapons of mass destruction and, on the contrary, authorize the atomic bomb. Not because he would now find it moral from a Muslim perspective, but because it would protect Iran from the threats it faces. Indeed, Muammar Gaddafi’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, which was on the verge of acquiring such a bomb, voluntarily dismantled its facilities and received congratulations from Washington before being crushed by it. Meanwhile, Kim Jong-un’s Democratic People’s Republic of Korea still manages to resist the Pentagon because it possesses the bomb and boasts about it.

On April 22, in a lengthy interview with Time Magazine, President Donald Trump clarified his thinking. In it, he declared that he had withdrawn the United States from the JCPoA and ordered the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani in order to deprive Iran of its ability to fuel resistance against Israel; a precondition for regional peace. He had never explained this, and this helps us understand his intention during these negotiations. [5]

Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu’s “revisionist Zionists” (not to be confused with simply “Zionists”), continuing three decades of lies, have increased pressure to sabotage the ongoing contacts [6]. In Washington, their chief leader, Elliott Abrams, published a memo [7] outlining what he calls “the seven deadly sins” of previous US administrations toward Iran. This document helps us understand the position of the warmongers.

According to this note, the JCPoA negotiated by the Obama administration would not have succeeded in curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and, by returning some blocked funds, would have given it the means to fight Israel. However, during the 5+1 talks in Lausanne and Geneva, all the actors (except the United States represented by Secretary of State John Kerry) had reached the conclusion that there had been no military nuclear program in Iran since 1988 and the fatwa of Imam Ruhollah Khomeini. This point, always contested by Israel, was just confirmed on March 24 by the Director of US Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, during her Senate hearing and in her annual report on threats against her country [8]. It is absolutely clear to Germany, China, France, the United Kingdom and Russia (and probably to many others) that the Israeli accusation is based on nothing; that it’s pure deception.

• 1) Based on this oft-repeated lie, the “revisionist Zionists” rely on the fact that Iran, in response to the United States’ withdrawal from the JCPoA and the secret agreements it signed with John Kerry, has continued its uranium enrichment to 60%, and demand that Tehran be banned from all uranium enrichment.
This demand must be clearly understood: it would prohibit Iran from any civilian program, including, for example, radiation treatments that are practiced by Western countries in all their hospitals.

This claim amounts to a desire to return Iran to underdevelopment. It corresponds to the way in which certain European states have banned their colonies from modern activities in order to maintain their domination.

2) The “revisionist Zionists” continue by demanding that the negotiations not be limited to the nuclear program, but also include the issue of missiles. For years, France and the United Kingdom have falsely claimed that Tehran’s development of ballistic and hypersonic missiles violates UN sanctions. To do so, they deliberately confuse the research and production of ballistic missiles with the nuclear warheads they could carry if Iran possessed them.

Russia and China have repeatedly intervened to remind the Security Council “that none of the existing international instruments and mechanisms, including the Missile Technology Control Regime or the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, explicitly or implicitly prohibits Iran from developing missile and space programs.” » [9]

During the Iranian bombing of Israel on October 1, 2024, it turned out that all Iranian missiles and drones missed their targets or were shot down in flight, with the exception of all hypersonic missiles, which all hit their targets. This issue, unrelated to nuclear matters, is therefore essential for Israel.

• 3) The “revisionist Zionists” also demand that monitoring be carried out on Western terms, not Iranian terms. However, for the time being, Iran is subject, with its own consent, to the strictest IAEA verification procedures ever enacted. Tehran complies scrupulously, and it is difficult to see why new ones should be imposed on it, unless one wants to create a problem where none exists.

• 4) The “revisionist Zionists” continue by asserting that the threat of US force must not be abandoned prematurely. Yet this is the only civilized way to proceed, as set out in the United Nations Charter (Article 2, paragraph 4) cited above.

Knowing that Israel lacks the means to attack Iran alone and that Tel Aviv continues to pressure Washington to draw it into a war against Tehran, it is easy to understand what this fourth point conceals.

• 5) Then, the revisionist Zionists oppose the easing of UN sanctions and unilateral coercive measures by the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union on the grounds that this would encourage Iran to finance terrorism. We are not talking here about the assassinations Tehran orders abroad, but about its support for Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and the Resistance in Iraq, knowing that it no longer provides financial and military support to Ansar Allah. However, the conflicts in Palestine, Syria, and Iraq are all instances of popular resistance to Israeli military actions. They are legitimate under international law (which does not mean that all actions carried out in their name are legitimate).

This demand, therefore, aims exclusively to allow Israel to violate UN resolutions even longer, not to prevent their violation by Iran.

• 6 and 7) The “revisionist Zionists” conclude by demanding that Iran’s other “malign behaviors” not be ignored and that anti-terrorism sanctions not be eased to gain a nuclear advantage. However, Iran, like other states, does not engage in “malign behaviors” toward the United States. What we’re talking about here is Iranian support for the resistance to Zionism, which revisionist Zionists understandably fear will resume significant financial support.

This lengthy discussion has presented the substance of the negotiations between Washington and Tehran. It should be noted that Donald Trump’s team is riddled with figures convinced by the rhetoric of the revisionist Zionists. Many congressmen, both Democrats and Republicans, do not approach the Middle East through their own experience, but through the prism of their main donor, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Merav Ceren, who has just been appointed head of the Israel-Iran portfolio at the White House National Security Council, is a dual national, an officer in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) [10]. However, the head of the US delegation to Oman, Steve Witkoff, is a real estate developer working in several countries, not only in the United States, but also in Muslim states. He has already demonstrated his independence of mind by negotiating on the Ukrainian issue and listening to the arguments of both sides. There is no reason, and certainly not his Jewish faith, to suspect him of bias. Thus, he reacted positively when the Iranians reiterated their proposal to make the Middle East a nuclear-weapon-free zone like Latin America [11] ; a proposal… that includes Israel.

The fourth round of negotiations will be held on May 3. Both sides now realize that peace will depend on Donald Trump’s ability to break with the revisionist Zionists and make concrete progress on the fate of the Palestinians.

—

[1] “After Ukraine, Iran?”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Roger Lagassé, Voltaire Network, 20 March 2025.

[2] « La paix de Trump en Ukraine face à la “paix mondiale” de Poutine (avec la Chine), de Gaza à l’Iran », par Alfredo Jalife-Rahme , Traduction Maria Poumier, La Jornada (Mexique), Réseau Voltaire, 21 mars 2025.

[3] “Iran denounces US threats to peace”, by Amir Saeid Iravani , Voltaire Network, 31 March 2025.

[4] “Iran denies non-compliance with JCPoA and Resolution 2231”, by Amir Saeid Iravani , Voltaire Network, 9 December 2024.

[5] «Full Transcript of Donald Trump’s ‘100 Days’ Interview With Time», Eric Cortellessa and Sam Jacobs, Time Magazine, April 25, 2025.

[6] “Who’s afraid of Iran’s civilian nuclear programme?”, by Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire Network, 27 July 2010.

[7] «Avoiding the seven deadly sins of a bad iranian nuclear deal», March 24, 2025.

[8] «Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community», Office of the Director of National Intelligence | March 2025.

[9] For instance : “Russia denounces Western accusations against Iran”, by Vasily Nebenzya , Voltaire Network, 8 June 2022.

[10] «Trump’s NSC Director for Israel and Iran Previously Worked for Israeli Ministry of Defense», Ryan Grim & Saagar Enjeti, Drop Site, April 21, 2025.

[11] “Negotiations between Iran and the United States are progressing in Oman; a nuclear Tlatelolco Treaty for the Middle East?”, by Alfredo Jalife-Rahme , La Jornada (Mexico) , Voltaire Network, 22 April 2025.

The post The Stakes of Donald Trump’s Negotiations With the Islamic Republic of Iran appeared first on LewRockwell.

The details of the ceasefire negotiations between the U.S., Europe and Ukraine continue to make headlines despite being largely irrelevant for an end of the conflict in Ukraine.

In an interview with Brazilian paper O Globo (in Portuguese) Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov again repeated the Russian demands for peace in Ukraine.

It requires:

• an end of Ukraine’s ban on negotiations with Russia,
• for Ukraine to go back to the status of a neutral and non-aligned country in accordance with the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine in the 1990’s,
• an end of the policies of legally and physically destroy everything Russian: the language, media, culture, traditions, and Russian orthodoxy
• the international recognition of Russia’s ownership of Crimea, the DPR, LPR and the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions.

There must also be measures to legal fix those positions, to make them permanent and to have enforcement mechanisms.

Also required is, says Lavrov, (edited machine translation):

.. a schedule for the task of de-and desnazifiction in Ukraine, and the lifting of the sanctions, actions, lawsuits and arrest warrants, and the transfer of assets to Russia which are ‘frozen’ in the West. Also, we will look for reliable warranties for the security of the Russian Federation, and against the threats created by the hostile activity of Nato, the European Union and its individual member states on the country’s borders in the west.

There is then no change in the Russian position since its President Vladimir Putin explained it at length on June 14 2024.

Meanwhile the U.S. is very publicly negotiating with Ukraine and Europe about some ceasefire conditions along the lines the pro-Ukrainian (and neo-conservative?) General Kellogg has long promoted (also here):

Kellogg’s implicit assumptions were that Russia is highly vulnerable to a sanctions threat (its economy perceived as being fragile); that it had suffered unsustainably high casualties; and that the war was at a stalemate.

Thus, Kellogg persuaded Trump that Russia would readily agree to the ceasefire terms proposed – albeit terms that were constructed around patently flawed underlying assumptions about Russia and its presumed weaknesses.
…
All of Kellogg’s underlying assumptions lacked any basis in reality. Yet Trump seemingly took them on trust. And despite Steve Witkoff’s subsequent three lengthy personal meetings with President Putin, in which Putin repeatedly stated that he would not accept any ceasefire until a political framework had been first agreed, the Kellogg contingent continued to blandly assume that Russia would be forced to accept Kellogg’s détente because of the claimed serious ‘setbacks’ Russia had suffered in Ukraine.

Given this history, unsurprisingly, the ceasefire framework terms outlined by Rubio this week in Paris reflected those more suited to a party at the point of capitulation, rather than that of a state anticipating achieving its objectives – by military means.

In essence, the Kellogg Plan looked to bring a U.S. ‘win’ on terms aligned to a desire to keep open the option for continuing attritional war on Russia.

In his O Globo interview Lavrov again made it known that Russia can not and will not commit to a temporary freeze of the conflict without having a clear path towards the larger peace agreement.

In sight of this it is funny how Russia has managed to hand the tar-baby of blocking a ceasefire to the (former) Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski.

Despite U.S. pressure for a fast deal Russia does not expect any quick resolution of the conflict. It just announced a new unilateral ceasefire from May 8 to May 10, i.e. around the 80th anniversary of its victory in World War II on May 9.

It is another public sign that Russia is willing to adhere to a ceasefire agreement IF the conditions are right.

Trump still tries to behave like a neutral mediator in a conflict between Kiev and Moscow. He wants to impose a peace deal that projects his personal ‘greatness’.

But the U.S. has been and continues to be the main party of the war with Russia while Ukraine is the mere proxy force that does the bleeding. Trump can not impose a fast solution to end the war because he still can not accept that he is a main party in it.

Russia is winning the war. A solution can only be found when the U.S. is ready to (silently) acceptance its defeat.

Trump can still end the war and declare it a “win”. But only if he agrees to the conditions that Russia laid out.

Reprinted with permission from Moon of Alabama.

The post Russia Rejects Trump’s Freeze of the War in Ukraine appeared first on LewRockwell.

Why is it that not a single “COVID” criminal has been indicted by Trump’s Justice Department or – in the case of pardoned criminals such as Dr. Fauci – compelled to testify before Congress and thus be placed in the position of having to tell the truth about what they did or lie about it again and thus be subject to criminal charges on that account?

Why hasn’t there been a single arrest of anyone on the infamous Epstein List?

There was an arrest made recently – of a judge who appears to have been one of Trump’s political enemies. What about enemies of the public such as Fauci and Brix and Albert Bourla and the dozens of state officials who morphed into Gesundheitsfuhrers during the “emergency”?

Well, that might just explain it.

Who declared – and never ended – the “emergency,” even long after it became clear there wasn’t one? Remember: It was the “emergency” that green-lit the Warp Speeding of the mRNA drugs into production without the usual requirements that lots of testing for safety and efficacy be done prior to allowing them on the market. And – in this unique case – there was no market because the drugs were aggressively pushed on people who were told that if they did not take them, they faced the loss of their jobs and very possibly the loss of their status as free Americans. No more working out at the gym or eating out or even entering a store to shop unless you could prove you had been “vaccinated.” ‘That didn’t actually happen, but it came damn close to happening. Many people expected it was going to happen and that was enough to coerce them into getting “vaccinated.”

Does anyone remember?

More finely, has everyone forgotten who declared the “emergency” that set the predicate for everything that followed? More finely still, has everyone forgotten the fact that Trump left the “emergency” in place long enough to assure the selection of his successor, via unprecedented mail-in balloting and election months rather than Election Day? That even after the selection – when he was still legally the president and had the power to end the “emergency,” he failed to do so?

Perhaps that is why not one lower-tier “COVID” criminal has been held accountable for what was done under guise of the “emergency.” Indicting these lower-tier criminals or even calling the pardoned ones, such Fauci, before Congress to be compelled to indict themselves might raise difficult questions. Ones that Trump’s supporters might find awkward and probably for just that reason get very upset when raised. Of a piece with the way ardent “maskers” got very upset when anyone raised questions about “masking.” This reaction being symptomatic when trying to reason with people who believe.

Have we been played – again? Are we who believed Trump – if re-selected – would pursue justice by indicting “COVID” criminals and the creeps on Epstein’s list – similar to the people who believed in “masks”? The overlap is uncomfortable to consider.

But belief wanes as time passes and not one “COVID” criminal has been held accountable and not one of the creeps on Epstein’s list, either. We are told that the federal government is now more “efficient” on account of “waste” and “fraud” having been rooted out by DOGE. There was a temporary high, like the one that attends snorting a line of coke. It felt good to see USAID closed and those scenes of federal “workers” bitching about their lost jobs and perks – all of it paid for by the taxes we’re forced to pay.

But have our taxes been lowered? Does it really matter, at the end of the day, whether the money taken out of our pockets is spent more “efficiently”? Is that supposed to make us happier about being forced to pay?

Has a single thing been done to make government less omnipresent? Less tyrannical? In fact the opposite is being done – as for egregious example the aggressive pushing of what is styled the REAL ID, which is to say a federally mandated internal passport that Americans are being told they must get if they wish to travel by airplane from state to state within the United States. How long before it will be required in order to be allowed to travel by car or otherwise from state to state?

Did you hear that the attorney general has announced your home can be Hut! Hut! Hutted! by government goons without a warrant if said goons claim they say they suspect “illegals” may be within?

These are all impolitic things to bring up in certain quarters because they threaten certain beliefs.

Perhaps, in the end, it is better to think – even when doing so raises questions that challenge our comfortable beliefs.

This originally appeared on Eric Peters Autos.

The post Not One Indictment appeared first on LewRockwell.

On April 20, 2025, Easter Sunday, the Board of Trustees of the World Economic Forum (WEF) called for an extraordinary meeting behind closed doors.

The Board of Trustees includes among others BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, former US Vice President Al Gore, Jordan’s Queen Rania Al Abdullah and European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde as members. BlackRock is the WEF’s most important sponsor. Thus, BlackRock’s voice must weigh accordingly.

What they debated was a new Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article, apparently based on an anonymous whistleblower letter, this time accusing Klaus Schwab and his wife Hilde Schwab of misusing the WEF Foundation’s money and property for personal purposes.

Mentioned were personal massages, luxury air-travel at the WEF’s expense, for personal trips and the use of a CHF 30-million restored historic mansion, paid for with WEF money, to be used for WEF special events, but is mostly used for Klaus Schwab and his family’s personal purposes.

Mr. Schwab apparently also used junior staff to withdraw thousands of dollars from ATM machines for his personal use. Verbally quoting the WSJ: The Schwabs, “mixed their personal affairs with the Forum’s resources.”

The WSJ article also repeated accusations of discrimination, sexual harassment and nepotism within the organization, points already mentioned in a WSJ’s article about a year ago. See this.

The Board opened an immediate investigation into these allegations. Schwab said he would take legal action against the WSJ and decided – or was told – to resign immediately from the Board’s chairmanship. He stepped back last year as President and CEO of the WEF, but assumed the Chair for the Board of Trustees with a timeline through 2027. This timeline was cut short by the whistleblower and the WSJ article.

Screenshot from WSJ

Other WEF executives, especially the Schwab’s children, also exited following a board probe into workplace culture, a topic that has plagued the WEF for years, but came to the fore the first time a year ago.

With immediate effect the Board decided on an interim replacement for Klaus Schwab, a former longtime President and CEO of Nestlé, Peter Brabeck-Letmathe. He was CEO and chairman of the Nestlé Group from 1997 to 2008. Brabeck was deputy chair of the WEF’s Board of Trustees.

Brabeck is not less controversial than Schwab. He was and still is a staunch defender of the idea that water is not a public good. Mr. Brabeck is perhaps best known for declaring that water is not a human right, but a market commodity. When he led Nestlé, the food giant was one of the global leaders in the privatization of water. Brabeck is also an aggressive promoter of GMOs (genetically modified organisms).

GMO food may have significant negative health effects and especially, it does not allow farmers to collect seeds from one harvest to the next. This has severe implications for farmers, especially in so-called developing countries, or the Global South.

India is a case in point, where GMO seeds were sold without telling the farmers that the plants’ seeds could not reproduce, i.e., could not be used for next year’s harvest. When the farmers realized, they could not afford buying every year GMO seeds, thousands committed suicide, as they were unable to maintain and feed their families.

Nestlé under Mr. Brabeck was also at the forefront of a scandal about powdered milk that should replace breastfeeding.

Nestlé especially targeted Africa, where the product was introduced against healthy common breastfeeding habits. As we also know in the west, breastfeeding provides babies and children with a basic, strong immune system, which powdered milk for infants does not.

In addition, rising prices of Nestlé’s powdered milk made that women could no longer afford it, and since they did not start with breastfeeding, they did not produce breast milk. With the combination of unnatural powdered milk, lack of breastmilk and the natural immune system, many babies got sick and often died.

See this for more details (watch below):

Mr. Brabeck is known for his anti-human and anti-Human Rights stance on many issues growing to ever-more importance in the current geo-political and economic environment we are living.

Mr. Brabeck certainly does not make the WEF a better place. Perhaps to the contrary. For sure, a number of investigations – WEF internals and externals – and lawsuits are already ongoing or pending.

For the full WSJ article, see this.

Screenshot from WSJ

At the outset all of this might look like the globalists agenda is gradually dismantling. Maybe it is, maybe it is not.

Just imagine for a moment a different scenario. During last Easter weekend, several “coincidences” happened basically simultaneously:

• The WEF long-time Chair and founder (1971), Klaus Schwab, resigns and the WEF embarks on a major restructuring, the result of which is not known yet;
• Pope Francis gives his last benediction in his Easter message to hundreds of thousands of his followers in St. Peter’s Square in Vatican City, in Rome, and then he dies the following morning; and
• Hollywood announces the end of its Woke agenda, see this.

Who knows what else happened on that crucial Easter weekend 2025. There are no coincidences. Easter is the celebration of resurrection. The Deep State, or whatever else you may call this evil entity which is currently pretending to run the world, is full of symbolism and rituals.

Coud it be that globalism is sensing an ever-stronger pushback by the people, so they feign a collapse, when in reality, they take the lull in people’s attention to regroup, to reappear later with new much stronger strategies to take over the world?

It is like a ceasefire which is used by the weaker to re-arm and re-strategize their aggression. This is not just a hint to the Ukraine ceasefire, but a tactic followed worldwide.

We must be aware that a Cult movement with the monetary power they have behind and over hundred years of preparation, will not just go away. They will fight to the last world-citizen, if they are not defeated before. As Bill Gates once said – not verbatim, but by meaning – in one of his more lucid moments, “even if I disappear, the system is so strong and well prepared, it will continue the same without me.”

We, the People of the world, must make sure that the movement for deglobalization continues back to human rights and basic human values, as well as away from digitization, from the digital Gulag, will continue until we are free and sovereign people again.

And yes, it is possible, if we are aware and conscious.

The original source of this article is Global Research.

The post Regime Change at the World Economic Forum (WEF): For Better or for Worse? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Why would Russia take such an enormous burden off the political West’s back? It was NATO that started all this and pushed us all to the brink of a world-ending thermonuclear confrontation just so it could inflict a strategic defeat on Moscow. Well, now that the tables have turned, there are zero reasons for the Kremlin to pay for damages of the political West’s aggression.

Ever since the special military operation (SMO) started, trying to guess how far Russia would go seems to be everyone’s favorite pastime. Some people think it should secure only areas that are predominantly Russian-speaking, which includes the four oblasts (regions) already under Russian control, namely DNR, LNR, Zaporozhye and Kherson, as well as Kharkov, Nikolayev and Dnepropetrovsk. Along with Crimea, these areas constitute over 40% of former Ukraine’s territory. However, it should be understood that the rest is not as homogeneous as one would think. Namely, Russian is also widely spoken in Chernigov, Sumy, Poltava, Cherkassy, Kiev, Kirovograd and Zhitomir oblasts, as well as in most urban areas throughout the country.

However, due to the disastrous policy of korenizatsiya (Russian: коренизация, roughly translated as “nativization”) during Soviet times, the clear-cut Russian identity of the vast majority of people in the country (with the obvious exception of western regions) was gradually replaced by a loose Ukrainian one. Thus, what we got is a somewhat convoluted definition of so-called “Russian-speaking people”. In reality, these are ethnic Russians who have partially lost their identity or even identify as “Ukrainians”. Their reintegration into the wider ethnic Russian identity would be a gradual process that could take years (if not decades). However, this begs the question – where do you draw the line? What’s more, there’s also the question of strategic security.

Namely, if Russia were to retake only areas where Russian is spoken by the vast majority of inhabitants (80% or more), this would still leave oblasts such as Sumy and Chernigov in the hands of the Kiev regime. No Russian general worth his salt would ever accept such a deal, as it would allow NATO to use them to deploy missiles that could reach Moscow in minutes. In addition, leaving the rest of former Ukraine to the Neo-Nazi junta would mean they’d still be a threat to Russia’s security, regardless of their status within or outside of the EU/NATO. Thus, it’s clear that the process of demilitarization and denazification needs to be implemented in the entire former Ukraine. However, does that mean the Kremlin should retake this ancient Russian land in its entirety?

This is the most complex question of the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. On April 24, during a meeting with Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, US President Donald Trump was asked about concessions Moscow is offering during peace talks. He said that it’s “stopping taking the whole country”, calling it a “pretty big concession”. In practice, this means that the new American administration is aware that Russia has the capacity to retake all of Ukraine and that the fact that it’s not doing this means it wants a peaceful resolution. President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov effectively confirmed this by saying that peace could be accomplished if the Kiev regime forces fully withdraw from the aforementioned four oblasts that joined Russia back in 2022.

The mainstream propaganda machine is already reporting that this was the “first formal indication Putin has given since the war’s early months three years ago that Russia could step back from its maximalist demands”. However, these supposed “maximalist demands” were never enshrined in any official policy or document of the Kremlin. The four oblasts formally joined Russia on September 30, 2022, after most of their inhabitants voted to do so in a referendum. This constitutes approximately 20% of former Ukraine’s territory, which is nowhere near the aforementioned “maximalist demands”. What’s more, the Trump administration is now trying to prevent even this by throwing the “Crimea recognition” carrot.

However, this is not even a question as far as Russia is concerned, as the status of Crimea was resolved over a decade ago. Trump has acknowledged that NATO expansionism caused the conflict, so he’s now offering neutrality for Ukraine, as well as a formal recognition of Crimea as part of Russia. The Kiev regime is adamant that this is “unacceptable”, but such a deal is certainly nothing spectacular for Moscow either. Namely, what guarantees does the Kremlin have that such a deal would be honored? The political West has made countless promises in the last several decades, including the “not one inch to the east” back in 1990. However, this was a blatant lie from which all other conflicts in post-Cold War Europe stem, including Yugoslavia.

Reports in US media suggest that Washington DC will supposedly demand from Russia “to acknowledge Ukraine’s right to maintain its military and defense sector as part of any future peace deal”, with Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff reportedly “expected to present the demand to Putin in the next upcoming round of negotiations”. However, this goes against Moscow’s goals of demilitarization and denazification. Namely, the former Ukrainian military was effectively hijacked by CIA-backed Neo-Nazi organizations and then used to conduct what can only be described as a genocidal war against the people of Donbass and other Russian-speaking regions in NATO-occupied Ukraine. Thus, demilitarization and denazification are inextricably tied.

In practice, this means that the Kremlin cannot tolerate the existence of any form of Ukrainian Armed Forces that aren’t thoroughly vetted and purged of Nazi elements. Even then, these troops would need to give up on all long-range strike capabilities or major assault formations that could be used against Russia. The same goes for the rest of the state apparatus, particularly intelligence services, as these openly espouse terrorist tactics (the latest example being the murder of Russian Major General Yaroslav Moskalik). Without this, the Kremlin won’t even consider any “peace proposal” simply because there can be no peace as long as Nazis are in power. In practice, this means Russia will need to take part in the formation of a new Ukrainian government.

In turn, this suggests that Moscow won’t retake all of Ukraine, as claimed by the mainstream propaganda machine. It’s simply not in its interest to do so. Namely, the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict destroyed much of the country’s economy while its already catastrophic demographic situation has been exacerbated to a breaking point. With upwards of 15,000,000 refugees (mostly in “evil” Russia, mind you) and internally displaced, the country’s economic viability is virtually gone. Most of those who are left are the elderly, while there are also millions of disabled veterans (many of them forcibly conscripted by the Neo-Nazi junta). Not to mention the fact that well over a million Ukrainian men have died in this NATO-orchestrated conflict.

In other words, why would Russia take this enormous burden off the political West’s back? It was NATO that started all this and pushed us all to the brink of a world-ending thermonuclear confrontation just so it could inflict a strategic defeat on Moscow. Well, now that the tables have turned, there are zero reasons for the Kremlin to pay for damages of the political West’s aggression. Thus, whatever rump state remains of former Ukraine, it will need to be turned into a denazified DMZ (demilitarized zone) that will serve as a buffer between Russia and NATO. What’s more, even then, a lasting peace will be possible only if the world’s most vile racketeering cartel restructures the European security architecture in line with Moscow’s national interests.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

The post Would Russia Retake All of Ukraine? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Western Nomenklatura habitually gets “surprised” when outcomes do not match the expectations peddled by their MSM months or years before the reality checks. And of late this becomes more painfully obvious by the day, especially on the ter-rain of US war for Russia’s resources /1-3/. Had they been a bit smarter, and not cut off the Russian information sources (be-cause they disseminate “Russian propaganda” !!!), most of the lies that were spread would have been saved – and with them, the reputation of the “free, democratic” world and its “impeccable information services”. They would have seen through the set ups like Bucha, the systematic bombing by Ukrainians of civil targets in Russia, the multiple terrorist actions by Zelensky’s men, the fakes of Russians bombing civilian targets in Ukraine which in reality is the damage done by Ukrainian projectiles unsuccessfully attempting to shut down Russian precision rockets, the deliberate targeting of their own POW’s in Russian custody resulting – in just two occasions! – in killing close to 200 and wounding another 200 or so…

Had they not shut the Russian sources of information, the latest state of affairs on the front and south slash west of it would alarm all those who fight Russia with the hands of the Ukrainian soldiers. It has transpired that the desertion is taking now waterfall proportions, that the partisan movement is more and more active – not only by revealing target coordinates and the timing of human manning, especially whenever foreign soldiers, officers, “advisors”, etc. are present, and respectively the body count appraisal, but as well carrying out sabotage actions on their own (blowing up fuel reservoirs, manufacturing facilities, railway carriages, etc.) – and that the population at large is much less afraid now to exhibit frustration and anger with the Nazis destructing their land.

Obviously, the lack of such realistic feedback makes it rather difficult to navigate between the string of failures in Mariupol, Soledar, Bahmut/Artemovsk, Avdeevka, etc. and tie them all with lack of equipment/ammo. Even while being mostly not completely educated, under-equipped dummies, the Western “leaders” (“elites” as they’d like to be referred to) now started to comprehend the deep hole they managed to dug themselves into: cheering the lies they’ve been served by the UkroNazis all these have been quick to pride themselves with NATO involvement as a side in the conflict; some semi-idiots even boasted that their own individual country (France, UK,… to name but a few) was being a side. And obviously to top them all the multiple time accused in criminal conduct Gynecologist-in-Chief of the not strictly legitimate supranational European Or-ganization outdid every single one of them, trumpeting how the EuroAtlantic Alliance is united (under her leadership, mind you!) in what was expected to be a successful crusade against Russia, with no lesser target but splinter the great country into dozens of smaller pieces – for presumed (wise, democratic, human-prosperity-serving) control by the Evil Empire…

Now that the end of this Civil war II of Russia /4,5/ is near, all those who exposed themselves as thoroughly irresponsible “political leaders,” “statesmen,” “military leaders” and what have you, need to either bite the bullet or acknowledge defeat. Biting the bullet will mean a fully blown hot WWIII – with the nuclear option left to the West to pick first, if at all; a non-nu-clear confrontation NATO-Russia will finish soon after the start, with NATO going belly up. The reason for that prediction is that the irresponsible planners for this conflict, military and political alike, believe that they will have the time to prepare (estimated as 12-18 months). As mentioned above having cut themselves off “the Russian propaganda outlets” they have no clue what the real situation on the ground is – and that on top of having no clue what kind of countries Russia and Ukraine are, and what kind of people inhabit them /6-8/. Failing to listen at least to the few Western political observers or/and military analysts who dig deep before making statements (Jimmy Dore, Tucker Carlson, Andrew Napolitano, Clayton Morris, Doug-las McGregor, Scott Ritter, Scott Bennett, Larry Johnson,…) the brainwashed/recruited-through-purchasing “leaders” of the likes of Jens Stoltenberg, Ursula von der Leyen, Josep Borrell, Joe Biden, Antony Blinken, Boris Johnson, Lloyd Austin,… have clearly succeeded in incriminating themselves as instigators of war on behalf of NATO – a “war until the last Ukrainian,” as it became firmly imprinted in the minds of millions. Hence they will soon have the choice to walk back with merely a repri-mand – or go through and risk to be on the bench of accused, during Nürnberg 2.0. So do as well a few US Nomenklaturchiks, such as Sen. Lindsey Graham, House Speaker Michael Johnson, etc. who have made statements for the record, having consis-tently incriminated themselves as US officials calling for the war to continue (forever, if possible, for the benefit of America), supplying equipment and ammo, advisors, etc.

We understand that all these individuals are mere servants of the US’ MIC, the institution with a permanent need of armed conflicts – and with growing pace, to keep the business from imploding. In fact, already long ago we have identified NATO as the International Marketing arm of US MIC /9,10/. We also observed that the then Presidential candidate Donald Trump, having noticed what kind of big problem for the global peace the aggressive alliance NATO is, promised to retire it thus correcting what should have been done by the time the Warsaw Pact was dissolved (1991). And then the reason why President Trump did not do it was identified as the damage to the state revenue, employment, etc. such unprepared move would incur (the influence by the respective lobby can not be neglected either).

What the informed observers would tell is that after months of responding by precision strikes at military-related infrastruc-ture to Kiev’s terrorist acts of continuous shelling of civilian targets in villages and towns deep in Russian territory, Moscow decided to create a sanitary zone along the border. Russian troops’ advances there have created panic in nearby Harkov, even though Putin declared that taking Harkov is not in the plans for the moment. Given the success of the current operational strategy, the goals of this push south in direction Harkov seem to be (i) reaching the line of Lipcy, the village from which the continuous shelling of Belgorod and its region (whereby the number of victims – civilians only! – is in the hundreds) with HI-MARS operated (allegedly) by American crew; and (ii) drawing reserves from the other fronts. Next, whichever other front is weakened, the strike can come comfortably in. And shortly after most new equipment from the last promised batches is destroyed, the operation for freeing Nikolaev and Odessa can begin, immediately after which comes Pridniestrovie…

The semi-retarded current Western political “elite”, i.e. the International Nomenklatura, had come up with the most ridicu-lous solution of the problem – their pet project labeled “Ukraine” (they strictly avoid the qualifier “Nazi” since the next thing would be accusations in breaching the respective Articles in Nürnberg Protocols and the UNO Agreement): A conference in Switzerland (whereby invited is everyone in the world except Russia) is supposed to decide on ending the armed conflict in Ukraine! More stupid of an idea I have never heard of in my entire life! The dummies started to realize what they really are, soon after Russia’s BRICS partners refused to waste their time. And then there comes the next hurdle, for the West: Zelensky’s mandate ends today, 20.05.24. For his NATO/US curators this means weakening their position after his legitimacy expires, while for the Russians who are meticulous in following the international normatives this adds at least one more degree of freedom… Just as a hint: capitulation and temporary occupation are indispensable, for achieving everlasting conflict resolu-tion, and reconciliation – as is in just about every Civil war. And, in case you haven’t got it yet: NATO is obsolete!

Hence now that everyone and their dog saw that the front north of Harkov is collapsing, the Ukrainian soldiers give up en masse, and the Russians keep grinding methodically on the other fronts thus slowly but steadily advancing as well, the NATO top will have to decide (or ask Joe for his directive, wise as he still may be): open direct confrontation or give up on Kiev? The Ukrainian military top keeps shooting hundreds of rockets, missiles, drones, etc. towards civilian targets in the Russian Federation (including its new territories – Crimea, Donbass, etc.) in order to show activity, after receiving some new supplies: ATACMS, Storm Shadow, HIMARS… 90% of which are intercepted and destroyed in flight. But for the Stoltenbergs, Macrons, Shappses, Borells, Austins, Sumaks and the rest the question to ponder should be “Do I wish to risk to be sitting on the bench of the accused, in a Nürnberg 2.0?” Some of them should be smart enough to contemplate the scenario which I am advancing since years: and even those who now believe they are untouchable (especially those covered by America’s exceptionalist arrogance attitude) might find out that the new multipolar order (the BRICS era) has abolished the self-given prerogatives and privileges enjoyed by the previous (self-appointed) world ruler, ergo Nürnberg is Nürnberg. Should wit and fear prevail, NATO’s origin and evolution will look as described briefly in Table I

Table I: NATO’s history in brief

click on the image to enlarge

click on the image to enlarge

Source – Fig. 1: Some of Hitler’s Wehrmacht’s soldiers and officers who be-came NATO generals during the first decades of setting up the mil-litary organization in its early stage. Could one expect from NATO anything but duly car-rying out the very orig-inal idea epitomized by the title of Operation Unthinkable? “Attack and destroy Soviet Rus-sia, conquer its land, enslave its population” has been the obsession of many a psychotic dis-order-possessed brains, for centuries in a row, and with a very predict-able outcome, too.

Part Two: EU

All considerations shared above with reference to NATO’s rise and fall are pertinent here, too – and not to a small effect due to the fact that the players are of the same sort, Nomenklaturchiks all of them, and sometimes even identical individuals, just jumping the playground. So here we’ll touch on the few parameters that really differ:

• EU started as economic union. The embryo being a cartel agreement between German and French coal and steel industri-alists such that they could compete with US ones based on comparable scale, it did later on evolve into European Economic Community (EEC). As such it was quite successful, at least until it consisted of member states featuring comparable PPP and having at least some segments with economy of scale.
• Pushed by Deep State’s operatives of the likes of Soros and Schwab, the emphasis shifted from economics to political goals. Along this line, due to refusal by the common people to live in a political union, given that the economics-based one was satisfactory to all, the European Union has constituted itself as a very illegitimate entity /11/. However, this did not disturb those who pushed the agenda, and their puppets are happy to deliver politically correct blah-blah in exchange of life they are not qualified to earn outside this environment – the fact that the EU’s top positions are not subject to election does not bother their holders. They are oblivious that most of their deeds are border line to criminal, unconstitutional, illegal – and that one day there might be judgment coming down…
• A couple of decades later the degradation is total. The degenerates who “lead” us all do not even comprehend how badly EU is going down – first morally, and then monetarily, too. Soros’ puppets do not realize how many times they breached the original agreements; neither do they count the illegal at the core alterations of their own previous accords. The guideline is to implement all directives that come from WEF and OS, serving Deep State’s agenda. Most recently, EU’s fascist type statehood transpired during the “COVID plandemic.” And just when we, the ordinary people, thought we‘d get them to pay for all the trouble they have caused to the population at large, the war in Ukraine was their savior. Now we need to wait for the war’s end, and for the Nürnberg type trial the BRICS++ will organize thus all culpable would get what they deserve – having been amongst the most active actors, the EU top can not be overlooked.
• The EU collapse/split may not necessarily happen simultaneously with NATO’s one. It will probably take more time, until the Germans determine what do they want. I doubt that they will keep supporting the states where prosperity on credit will soon celebrate its 50th It may not be immediate but it should happen one day – for if the Germans do not rebel at all it would mean Germany is finished, dissolved in the liberastic sea. The key here is, of course, that the end of the war in Ukraine means the end of Nazism in Ukraine. Where Germans will stand in this final, is key – primarily for their own Ger-man collective psyche; individual one notwithstanding.

References:

1. https://www.academia.edu/20045616/USA_s_semi_hot_war_for_control_of_Russia_s_natural_resources_the_Syrian_episode
2. https://www.academia.edu/78692948/USAs_semi_hot_war_for_Russias_vast_resources_Ukraine_as_a_proxy
3. https://www.academia.edu/110999273/Nazi_Ukraine_is_rushing_towards_an_endspiel_akin_to_Nazi_Germanys_one_Nazi_Is-rael_is_not_far_behind
4. https://www.academia.edu/98585602/Russia_s_Civil_War_II_is_the_world_s_only_defense_against_the_next_assault_by_Soro-so_Gateso_Schwaboids
5. https://www.academia.edu/95903013/AD_2022_Back_to_USSR_2_0_
6. https://www.academia.edu/112640464/Explaining_Russia
7. https://www.academia.edu/6847478/Explaining_Ukraine
8. https://www.academia.edu/89483737/The_ongoing_clash_of_civilizations_does_not_fit_Huntingtons_definition
9. https://www.academia.edu/107888839/Evil_Empire
10. https://www.academia.edu/104243728/Quo_vadis_Homo
11. https://www.academia.edu/40162717/The_EU_is_an_illegitimate_entity_short_term_consequences_and_mid_to_long_term_ outlook

The post The Agony of NATO and EU Culminates as ‘Project ‘Nazi Ukraine’ Nears Its End appeared first on LewRockwell.

Step into the shadows with Mark Groubert and Eric Hunley as they uncover the secret history of David Atlee Phillips—a CIA mastermind whose fingerprints are found on some of America’s darkest chapters. In this explosive episode of America’s Untold Stories, we expose Phillips’ murky ties to the JFK assassination and his covert operations in Mexico during the height of Cold War tensions. As the CIA’s Chief of Operations for the Western Hemisphere, Phillips moved pawns on the world stage with chilling precision. What secrets was he hiding? What role did he really play in one of history’s greatest mysteries? Through rare documents, eyewitness accounts, and fearless analysis, Groubert and Hunley pull back the curtain on a world built on lies deception and power. If you think you know the story, think again.

*****************************************
Join us November 21st–23rd, 2025 in Dallas at JFK Lancer Conference (or Virtually)

Tickets now available at https://assassinationconference.com/
Virtual tickets start at $75.99
In-person tickets start at $149.99

Discount Code: Use UNTOLD10 at checkout for 10% off

The post America’s Untold Stories – CIA Secrets Exposed David Atlee Phillips and JFK appeared first on LewRockwell.

Gail Appel has wrote:

I thought this was an SNL spoof. The guy is a stereotypical caricature. But I remembered that Jimmy  Fallon has been hosting the Tonight Show for years and SNL is no longer funny.

This ridiculous human cartoon is a Michigan Dem Congressional member. A lawmaker. He was ELECTED. The joke is on us.

See here.

The post Congressman Shri Thanedar introduces articles of impeachment against President Trump appeared first on LewRockwell.

Gail Appel wrote:

Something is very wrong within our military. Poorly trained pilots, naval crews, equipment failure, low morale, lack of physical and mental fitness, fatigue, paucity of equipment and under Biden, the lowest number of recruits historically. The UniParty was cheering for a mandatory, permanent draft- male and female. Had Kamala won, it would have been codified.

Of course, it had nothing to do with DEI, “ Anti-Racist Training”, anti-white, anti-Christian, antisemitic, anti-male humiliation, pronouns , trans-first policy or the purge of the most highly skilled, experienced top notch performers- SEALS, Green Berets, fighter pilots- Expelled for “ racism”, refusing the clot shots or speaking out against the rot, corruption, inability to act when facing danger and the ineptitude of leadership.

The second link lists the number of aviation disasters, near disasters, deaths that were avoidable . Most occurred during training exercises. The number of Black Hawk copters is staggering, but the warships and Stealth jets are more horrifying. Combined with the $86 billion in top of the line equipment left in Afghanistan and everything Biden sent to Ukraine- we cannot fight two small wars simultaneously or God forbid- an invasion/attack on our homeland.

See here.

The post $56M Loss: US Fighter Jet Sinks in Red Sea While Evading Drone and Missile Attack appeared first on LewRockwell.

Tim McGraw wrote:

Finally, some good news!

Charges Dropped Against South Dakota Ranching Family by AG Secretary Collins

The post Charges Against South Dakota Ranching Family Dropped by AG Secretary Collins appeared first on LewRockwell.

Gail Appel has wrote:

I thought this was an SNL spoof. The guy is a stereotypical caricature. But I remembered that Jimmy  Fallon has been hosting the Tonight Show for years and SNL is no longer funny.

This ridiculous human cartoon is a Michigan Dem Congressional member. A lawmaker. He was ELECTED. The joke is on us.

See here.

The post Congressman Shri Thanedar introduces articles of impeachment against President Trump appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post 100 Days Of Trump 2.0 appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

The Federalist

The post Christianity Is The Target Of ‘Christian Nationalism’ Hysteria appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks David Martin wrote:

Megyn Slams White House Correspondents’ Dinner for Celebrating Media Coverage of Biden Cognitive Decline

Might I remind people that Buelahman’s video, “Joe Biden: Earth Angel Parody,”  as one can see, appeared even before Biden had picked Kamala Harris as his running mate for the 2020 race. 

The post Press Finally Coming Clean about Biden’s Brain appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith

Antiwar.com Original

The post 50 Years On: US Elites Learned Nothing From the Vietnam Defeat appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post The Bullet That Trump Dodged appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Haaretz.com

The post ‘Not About Protecting Jews’ | Over 550 American Rabbis Sign Letter Rejecting Trump’s Antisemitism Agend appeared first on LewRockwell.

Il manoscritto fornisce un grimaldello al lettore, una chiave di lettura semplificata, del mondo finanziario e non che sembra essere andato "fuori controllo" negli ultimi quattro anni in particolare. Questa è una storia di cartelli, a livello sovrastatale e sovranazionale, la cui pianificazione centrale ha raggiunto un punto in cui deve essere riformata radicalmente e questa riforma radicale non può avvenire senza una dose di dolore economico che potrebbe mettere a repentaglio la loro autorità. Da qui la risposta al Grande Default attraverso il Grande Reset. Questa è la storia di un coyote, che quando non riesce a sfamarsi all'esterno ricorre all'autofagocitazione. Lo stesso è accaduto ai membri del G7, dove i sei membri restanti hanno iniziato a fagocitare il settimo: gli Stati Uniti.

____________________________________________________________________________________

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/siamo-tutti-affetti-da-sindrome-post)

Non è possibile quantificare con esattezza quanto trauma mentale e psicologico esista oggi nel Paese e nel mondo, e non mi fiderei di nessuno studio che ci abbia provato a quantificarlo. Ma una cosa è chiara, abbiamo perso l'equilibrio nella conoscenza di qualcosa che gli scienziati credevano da tempo di poter sapere: se e in che misura un'economia stia crescendo e prosperando, o stia andando nella direzione opposta.

Sembra che tutti stiano improvvisando, ultimamente. Da quando i lockdown hanno interrotto l'informazione, è stato difficile distinguere tra un'evoluzione positiva e una negativa.

I notevoli ribassi subiti dai principali indici finanziari negli ultimi due mesi sembrano aver innescato un cambiamento nel sentimento pubblico, da indifferente a cupo. Probabilmente questo non ha nulla a che fare con l'enorme ricchezza detenuta nei conti pensionistici.

Ogni aggiornamento della pagina sembra portare altre cattive notizie.

Questo ha a sua volta influenzato la propensione alla spesa e le prospettive in generale.

Eppure c'è qualcosa di strano che sta accadendo: l'inflazione è effettivamente in calo rispetto al trend quadriennale e mostra i dati migliori sin dal 2020. Anche l'indice dei prezzi al consumo (IPC) riflette questo dato. Le prospettive occupazionali nel settore privato stanno leggermente migliorando.

Perché il sentiment dei consumatori è improvvisamente crollato? È strano perché ci sono scarse prove di un cambiamento improvviso, a meno che non siano i dazi a essere la causa, il che è inverosimile (secondo me).

Una possibile teoria: la popolazione soffre di una forma di disturbo da stress post-traumatico economico, un termine clinico per quello che un tempo veniva chiamato stanchezza da battaglia e shock da bombardamento. È ciò che accade allo spirito umano di fronte a qualcosa di inaspettato, terribile e in definitiva traumatizzante. Ci sono fasi di recupero che vanno dalla negazione, alla rabbia, alla contrattazione e alla depressione, con l'accettazione come fase finale.

Potremmo essere arrivati ​​a questo punto. Da anni ormai i media nazionali e le agenzie governative sostengono che tutto va bene. L'inflazione si sta raffreddando, la crescita dell'occupazione è forte, la ripresa è alle porte. Innumerevoli articoli sui media hanno lamentato il divario che separa i dati reali dalle percezioni dell'opinione pubblica. Siamo stati incoraggiati a credere che “chiudere l'economia” non sia stato poi così grave, solo qualcosa che si fa prima di riaccenderla.

Smettetela di lamentarvi! Siete ricchi!

È stato il picco del gaslighting economico, qualcosa di cui molti di noi si lamentano ormai da cinque anni.

Nel 2024 il Brownstone Institute ha commissionato uno studio più approfondito e ha rilevato che gli Stati Uniti erano in recessione tecnica dal 2022 e senza una vera ripresa sin dal 2020. Gli autori sono giunti a questa conclusione esaminando i dati sui prezzi del settore piuttosto che le sottostime del Bureau of Labor Statistics. Li hanno confrontati con una stima realistica della produzione e hanno mostrato tutto il loro lavoro. Nessuno ha mai contestato lo studio.

Questo è anche il quinto anniversario del più grande trauma delle nostre vite, i lockdown che hanno distrutto milioni di aziende, chiuso ospedali e chiese, limitato la circolazione e decimato la vita economica. Nessuno avrebbe mai pensato che una cosa del genere fosse possibile.

È stato un trauma pari a quello di un tempo di guerra. Ancora oggi la gente è riluttante a parlarne, proprio come il nonno non ha mai parlato delle sue esperienze durante la Seconda guerra mondiale.

Eccoci qui oggi, disperatamente vicini a ritrovare la normalità e con questo è arrivato un campanello d'allarme per quanto riguarda le finanze delle famiglie. Il reddito reale è in calo, i risparmi sono in calo, le bollette sono in aumento, i tagli sono necessari. Sono stati rinviati per anni, mentre i mass media strombazzavano le glorie della ripresa di Biden che invece non esisteva o era un ologramma alimentato dal debito.

Ora arriva l'indice sulla fiducia dei consumatori dell'Università del Michigan: dopo tre anni di grandi guadagni, stranamente coincidenti con la presidenza Biden, adesso mostra un crollo tremendo, stranamente coincidente con l'insediamento di Trump. Ciò che lo rende particolarmente strano è che l'inflazione è in realtà inferiore ora rispetto a quattro anni fa. Gli ultimi dati non mostrano nulla di tutto ciò.

Vi mostrerei un grafico, ma l'Istituto per la Ricerca Sociale dell'Università del Michigan non pubblica i suoi dati più recenti per un mese intero. Bisogna pagare per averli. Ecco perché nessun servizio pubblico di grafici può fornirvi quei dati. Ehi, devono pur guadagnare qualcosa, no? Chi può biasimarli per questo?

Beh, c'è un problema, uno che non mi sarei mai aspettato. Ho sempre pensato che i dati dell'Università del Michigan fossero più affidabili di quelli di un'agenzia federale. Sembrano provenire dalla “vera” America, uno stato di passaggio con veri scienziati indipendenti.

È bastata una rapida occhiata su Grok per scoprire che l'Istituto per la Ricerca Sociale, e questo sondaggio in particolare, è uno dei principali destinatari dei finanziamenti federali. Provengono dal National Institutes of Health, dalla National Science Foundation, dalla Social Security Administration e da altri.

Il totale ammonta a circa $100 milioni all'anno, dalle vostre tasche alle loro. Poi vendono i loro dati al settore privato – che derivano da un sondaggio su 1.000 persone – realizzando un profitto. Questa storia prima era sconosciuta e, in verità, nessuno ha mai pensato di mettere in discussione dati gloriosi e oggettivi provenienti dai migliori capoccioni che abbiamo.

In passato non mi sarebbe mai venuto in mente di esaminare le fonti di finanziamento per questo tipo di ricerca. Ma le cose stanno cambiando: ora capiamo il meccanismo. Il governo federale vi tassa, alimenta le università e le ONG, queste generano ricerca e propaganda per alimentare la macchina burocratica, e il ciclo continua. Gli esempi sono innumerevoli e hanno portato a una valanga di scienza fasulla negli ultimi cinque anni.

Non abbiamo prove dirette che gli ultimi dati sul sentiment dei consumatori siano falsi. Potrebbero essere del tutto reali, un'indicazione che solo ora le persone si stanno svegliando da uno stato onirico di negazione e confusione durato quattro anni – sintomatico di stress post-traumatico o di shock post-traumatico dovuto al trauma dei lockdown. D'altra parte viene da chiederselo, dato che ora sappiamo che questo centro di ricerca è in realtà a sussidio federale.

L'altro giorno ero al bar di un aeroporto e un uomo mi ha chiesto del mio braccialetto di sensibilizzazione. C'è scritto: “Non sarò più messo in lockdown”. Si chiedeva cosa significasse.

Sapendo che probabilmente era ancora nella fase di negazione, gli ho spiegato che cinque anni prima tutti i nostri diritti erano stati cancellati, l'economia era stata fatta crollare deliberatamente e la vita era stata stravolta da decreti, in attesa dell'uscita di un nuovo vaccino che non avrebbe funzionato ma che tutti erano stati costretti a iniettarsi comunque.

Ho cercato di non dare troppo nell'occhio o di non dilungarmi troppo, quindi ho lasciato perdere.

La sua risposta: “Sì, che schifo”.

Lunga pausa.

Ha poi proseguito: “Non abbiamo ancora fatto i conti con tutto questo, vero?”

“No”, ho risposto.

È tornato alla sua birra e non ha detto altro.

I giorni prima del lockdown sono stati davvero il nostro ultimo momento di innocenza.

[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/

Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una “mancia” in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.