COVID CHANGED THE WEST - THE MYSTERIOUS TIMELINE OF COVID
Garland Nixon Streamed live Jun 12, 2024
The main lesson of Covid, says Garland, is never trust the Government. Do your own research, do your thinking before adopting any position. Why should we trust a government, a ruling elite, that has committed enormous crimes in practically all continents and continues to do so, while lying through their teeth? Why should the American people think that a depraved ruling class that has engaged in many wars of choice, regime changes and so on, and is even now actively plotting more, causing incalculable suffering around the globe, all for self-enrichment, not the highfalutin ideals like "freedom" or "democracy" or "human rights" they always told the people, is going to suddenly become good and virtuous in their behaviour toward the American people? Why should a plutocracy, a bunch of billionaires with no real national attachment to any country, who follow nothing but the pursuit of wealth, be trusted with most of the major decisions in our lives? The Covid timeline alone should have alerted us, adds, Garland. But apparently it didn't.
This is a repost showing that in the elites' media world truth is an unpleasant guest. The NYTimes has been running interference for Israel for generations.
This report refers to a previous depraved Israeli attack on Gaza, but it reads as fresh as if it was describing events concerning the ongoing genocide.
The New York Times’ reporting on Israel’s latest assault on Gaza has been a rollercoaster. Unfortunately the high points have been few, short and quickly followed by dizzying and prolonged plunges back into a morass of lazy, credulous recitations of Israeli government talking points, and efforts to portray balance and symmetry in a dramatically unbalanced situation, all permeated by an absence of skepticism and critical analysis, and a failure to explain context. Though Israel has slaughtered over 1000 Palestinian civilians in Gaza and only three civilians have been killed in Israel, in The Times’ upside down world, every Palestinian weapon is a major threat, while Israeli weapons are either defensive or non-existent.
At its worst The Times’ reporting on this crisis has reminded some readers of Judy Miller’s and Michael Gordon’s enthusiastic shilling for the US attack on Iraq. There is so much that could be written about these failures, but I’ll focus on a few highlights – The Times’ failure to examine Hamas’ involvement in kidnappings or the manipulation of information about Israeli teens’ deaths, The Times’ failure to explain basic context about Gaza, Times’ explainers that grossly distort reality, and the papers’ hyping of Palestinian military capacity, in contrast to the invisibility of Israel’s massive arsenal.
Failure to Examine Hamas’ Involvement in Kidnappings or the Manipulation of Information about Israeli Teens’ Deaths
The stage was set early by The Times’ reporting on the development of the current crisis. When the Israeli government launched a crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank, blaming Hamas for the abduction of three Israeli teens in early June, The Times generally repeated Israeli government claims of Hamas responsibility for the kidnapping, while also occasionally introducing some uncertainty about Hamas involvement, and at least once quoting Hamas denials of those claims. But The Times never published a piece examining the suspicious lack of clear evidence that Hamas was responsible, unlike Shlomi Eldar on Al Monitor or Sheera Frenkel on Buzzfeed. And in the last weeks, as some Israeli authorities have been quoted saying that they had concluded that Hamas was not responsible for the abductions and killings, The Times has not looked back. The growing consensus that the Israeli government based the escalation against Hamas that led directly to the current fighting in Gaza on false claims seems not to interest The Times.
Even more damning, however, The Times’ Jerusalem-based reporters never examined the revelation that the Israeli government likely knew from day one that the three teens were killed by their kidnappers within hours, even as the Israeli government launched a massive manhunt and PR campaign for their freedom, and claimed they were operating on the presumption that the teens were alive. Gunshots could be heard followed by a groan in an audiotape of a call from one of the teens to the police that was circulating in Israel. Additionally, shell casings, blood and DNA found in an abandoned car suggested the teens were killed there. The Israeli government placed this information under a gag order, but the rumor of gunshots on the audiotape were reported on social media almost immediately, and later detailed by outlets like this site on June 23.
The existence of the audiotape was brought to the attention of Times Jerusalem Bureau Chief Jodi Rudoren on June 24 on skype by Mondoweiss reporter Allison Deger. Deger tweeted at Rudoren, “I’m sure @rudoren can find out about the emergency call details for herself if she wants to dig…” The seemingly out of it Rudoren responded on twitter to the series of tweets, “What recording?” Rather than seeking a scoop that might have contradicted the Israeli government narrative, The Times didn’t report on the recording until July 1, after the Israeli government lifted the gag order on the audiotape. Rudoren’s report on the call was minimal, and included no examination of the fact that the Israeli government very likely knew almost immediately that the teens were dead, though they told the public for weeks that they presumed them to be alive.
It was left to Times blogger Robert Mackey to publish a July 10 piece that did not make it into the print newspaper. Mackey questioned whether
“keeping salient facts of the investigation secret for weeks allowed a government-backed social-media campaign to channel outrage over the abductions to grow, but also set the public up for crushing disappointment once the bodies were discovered.”
That outrage, fed by the unexamined, dubious accusations against Hamas, led directly to overwhelming Israeli support for a brutal attack on Gaza. Times readers who did not read between the lines, read this Robert Mackey blog post, or seek out other sources of information were left largely in the dark about these key facts.
Failure to Explain Basic Context in Gaza
Times readers also probably lack an understanding of the broader context of the events in Gaza, again due to the paper’s poor reporting. In the run-up to Israel’s current assault on Gaza, The Times had neglected the Gaza Strip. According to my repeated searches of The New York Times’ website (which while thorough still could miss stories), Jerusalem Bureau Chief Jodi Rudoren reported from Gaza only one time during the 16 month period between December 2012 and April 2014. Rudoren defended this in a March 2014 email exchange with Mondoweiss by saying “we rely on our excellent Gaza-based stringer,” and noting some of the stories that they published. But it seems from the content of the articles that Fares Akram is not given much latitude in his reporting. During one seven-month period when Rudoren was completely absent from Gaza (8/13 – 3/14), I counted 27 New York Times stories reported from Gaza. Only five focused on the difficulties of life in Gaza, though those difficulties are severe.
My review of recent Times articles shows that the paper has generally failed to explain the basics: that most of Gaza’s residents are refugees from the area from which Israel launches attacks on Gaza, that Gaza remains under Israeli military occupation and a siege, and that Gaza is increasingly unlivable. The Times very infrequently uses the words occupation, siege and blockade to describe Gaza, and when it does they are most often in quotes from Palestinians. Over the last four weeks, The Times has noted a handful of times in a brief paragraph Israel’s control of land, sea and airspace around Gaza, and broached the words occupied and siege.
UN report was published that the UN has predicted that Gaza, one of the most densely populated places in the world, may be unlivable by 2020 due to deteriorating drinking water quality, inadequate electricity supply and infrastructure, growing population and the impacts of Gaza’s isolation from the world. Finally, while The Times has reported on some of Israel’s attacks on and killing of Gazans throughout the ceasefire of the last two years, it has failed to explain that, “even when rocket fire comes to a halt as called for by the cease-fire agreement, Israel continues its violations with total impunity,” as documented by Yousef Munayyer at the Palestine Center.
Two Times’ “Explainers” that Grossly Misrepresent Reality
For the last 24 days The Times has published an online summary of “The Toll in Gaza and Israel, Day by Day” that depicts a completely false sense of near parity between Palestinian and Israeli military attacks. As of August 1, 2014 the summary notes “3,834 targets in Gaza struck by Israel” versus “2909 rockets launched at Israel by Gaza,” a ratio of 1.32 to 1. The showcasing of these figures, implying near parity, is suggestive of a desperate effort by The New York Times to provide a counter to the only other figures in “The Toll in Gaza and Israel” that show a stunning disparity between the number of Palestinian than Israeli deaths.
A series of July 30 tweets at Jodi Rudoren by Amnesty USA’s Middle East and North Africa Advocacy Director Sunjeev Bery explained that The New York Timescomparison between targets struck and rockets launched is misleading. Both figures come from the Israeli army, which has an interest in spinning the numbers. Also, the statistic on targets struck by Israel neglects “scale of IDF munitions.”One “target” in Gaza can be hit by multiple Israeli strikes of munitions of varied sizes. Plus, Israeli bombs and shells are on average significantly heavier than the small Palestinian rockets. Bery’s tweets of concern about these Times statistics wereseconded on twitter by Human Rights Watch’s Middle East Director Sarah Leah Whitson.
Closer analysis shows that Israel has probably shot and dropped more than five times the tonnage of ordnance that Palestinians have fired at Israel. As of July 16th, Human Rights Watch, reported, Israeli officials said that Israeli attacks in Gaza had “delivered more than 500 tons (1 million lbs) of explosives in missiles, aerial bombs, and artillery fire.” The New York Times “toll in Gaza” shows that 1274 rockets had been launched from Gaza at Israel by that date. Using the 65 kg (143 lbs) weight of a grad rocket frequently fired from Gaza as an average for a rocket from Gaza, Palestinians would have fired approximately 182,182 lbs of ordnance at Israel by that date. Thus Israel had fired approximately 5.49 times as much ordnance at Gaza as Palestinians had fired at Israel as of July 16th. This disparity has likely increased since then as Israel has intensified its attacks, including very heavy shelling. Furthermore, fired Palestinian ordnance is extremely inaccurate compared to targeted Israeli ordnance and thus far less likely to hit anything, and some Palestinian rockets are shot down by Israel’s “Iron Dome.”
Though the comparison between “targets in Gaza struck by Israel” and “rockets launched at Israel by Gaza” is inappropriate and deceptive, The New York Timeshas persisted in using it, even after the issue was raised with the paper by a number of people.
In contrast, in summarizing the Israel’s Operation Cast Lead which began in 2008, The Institute for Middle East Understanding notes, “a situation of relative quiet prevailed in and around Gaza until November 4, when Israeli soldiers staged a raid into the Strip, killing six members of Hamas. The attack… ended the ceasefire and led to an escalation of hostilities culminating in Cast Lead the following month.” The New York Times’sown report from November 4, 2008 explained, “Israel carried out an airstrike on Gaza on Tuesday night after its troops clashed with Hamas gunmen along the border in the first such confrontation since a cease-fire took effect in June. Five militants were killed…”
Robert Wright reported a detailed 2012 timeline developed by Emily Hauser. It included the November 4, 2012 killing of a mentally-disabled Palestinian, the November 8 killing of a Palestinian boy, the November 12 killing of four Palestinian fighters, Palestinian rockets fired into Israeli on November 11th, and then Israel’s assassination Hamas military leader Ahmed Jabari and eight other Palestinians.
The most recent conflict can be traced back to the Israeli government’s aim of breaking up the new Fatah-Hamas endorsed Palestinian authority, the kidnapping and killing of three Israeli teens and then one Palestinian teen, and Israel’s crackdown against Hamas in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
To top off the misrepresentation that Hamas started the three conflicts, the “explainer” includes a graphic depicting “cumulative rockets fired at Israel from Gaza.” Perhaps realizing late in the game that “targets struck in Gaza by Israel” is fatally flawed, the new explainer thus depicts military attacks in the conflict as only by Palestinians. In summary, the explainer suggests that Palestinians started the conflict and implies that only Palestinians launch attacks.
The Hyping of Palestinian Military Capacity and the Invisibility of Israel’s Massive Arsenal
The same narrative emphasizing Palestinian rockets dominated The New York Times early reporting on both sides’ military capacity in this 2014 conflict, before Palestinian tunnels evolved to become a second focus. In the first weeks The Times published two stories detailing Palestinian rockets – “A Growing Arsenal of Homegrown Rockets Encounters Israel’s Iron Dome” and “From Gaza, an Array of Makeshift Rockets Packs a Counterpunch.” The only Israeli military weaponry that garnered any attention in those articles was Israel’s defensive “Iron Dome,” despite the fact that Israel was wiping out entire Palestinian families with bombs dropped from F16s, with shells from tanks, rockets fired from drones, and shells and rockets fired from gunboats. Even The Times explainer described above never names an Israeli weapon, instead noting passively “targets struck.”
Tunnels Lead Right to the Heart of Israeli Fear.” Avoiding any mention of the fact that no Israeli civilian has been injured or killed in an attack from a tunnel to date, as noted by Greg Mitchell and others, Rudoren’s article included a breathless, overblown narrative about the terror tunnel threat, saying, “In cafes and playgrounds, on social-media sites and in the privacy of pillow talk, Israelis exchange nightmare scenarios that are the stuff of action movies: armed enemies popping up under a day care center or dining room, spraying a crowd with a machine gun fire or maybe some chemical, exploding a suicide belt or snatching captives and ducking back into the dirt.”
Then, sounding practically like an Israeli spokesperson, Rudoren continued on The Takeaway and CNN to sell the threat of the tunnels to American audiences. In contrast, Anne Barnard’s US media appearance that I was able to locate lacked this type of one-sided tone.
Despite all the attention paid to rockets and tunnels, including four New York Times articles in three weeks, no Israeli civilians have ever been killed in an attack from a tunnel, and Palestinian rockets and mortars have killed a total of 40 Israelis since 2001, six during this current 2014 conflict. On the other hand, I can’t remember ever seeing a New York Times article focusing on Israel’s huge military arsenal which has killed over 8000 Palestinians since 2000. Lethal Israeli F16s, drones, tanks and gun boats that are tearing apart hundreds of Palestinian children seem non-existent and invisible to the paper.
The angle that the US provides billions of dollars in military aid to Israel and that many of Israel’s weapons are made in the US doesn’t evoke any interest from The Times either. Even the US government’s recent decision to resupply Israel with mortars and grenades at the same time that the US government was criticizing Israel’s shelling of a UN school was not deemed newsworthy enough by The Timesto break its silence on Israeli weapons.
* * *
With a few exceptions, The Times reporting on Israel’s ongoing assault in Gaza has been dreadful and deserves condemnation. The paper has deliberately obscured or lazily failed to examine key events and realities, and presented information in a way that attempts to portray a balanced conflict where both sides are suffering similarly, rather than the reality of a one-sided Israeli massacre of Palestinian civilians. The Times has omitted key facts in a way that hypes threats to Israel while obscuring Israel’s overwhelming power, and control over and brutal repression of Palestinians. All this seems aimed at shielding Israel and the US, Israel’s most dedicated and uncritical backer, from facing the troubling realities that most of the rest of the world now sees. The New York Times has taken on the role of comforting powerful Israeli and US elites, while afflicting the comparatively powerless and brutalized Palestinian people, and obfuscated Israeli war crimes. In all these respects The Times is little different from other US mainstream media outlets, but it is perhaps more important because it is seen as a leader that other US media and US elites follow.
Do I think The New York Times’ coverage is likely to improve following criticism? Unfortunately, after observing The Times’ reporting on Israel and Palestine closely for more than ten years, I don’t think more than marginal change is likely, because these biases seem deeply entrenched at many levels within the paper. What seems more likely is that continued coverage of this sort will further discredit the paper, and more people will turn to alternative sources for their information.
An analysis of last month of New York Times articles reveals that references to occupation are a stock phrase for the West Bank. The articles are almost devoid of any context of what Palestinians are experiencing in East Jerusalem, and readers are left with the sense that there is simply a conflict over holy sites.
BEFORE YOU GO – The mainstream media has reached a new low as it uncritically repeats government lies to justify the Israeli assault on Gaza. Mondoweiss has been there from the start, pushing back against this campaign to manufacture consent for genocide.
We are fighting the biased reporting and dehumanizing rhetoric by building a platform for Palestinians to tell their stories in their own words.
We need to do more. All of us. Will you join us in the fight against media bias and help us report the truth about Palestine?
Former Marine Intelligence Officer and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter was at JFK airport, prepared to fly to St. Petersburg, Russia for a major conference when customs agents, at the behest of the State Department, seized Ritter’s passport and refused to allow him to board the plane. Jimmy speaks with Ritter about what happened and why he thinks the State Department has targeted him to prevent him from making this particular trip to Russia.
Russia's strategic deterrent comprises the submarine fleet armed with ICBMs. (Photo: Russian Pacific Fleet).
Watching Washington Foment Nuclear War
“For two years Biden was absolutely adamant that no US weapons could be used to strike Russia. Now he reverses the policy — aka, he lied. So where’s the pushback? Congress, media? What could be of greater consequence than lying the country into war with a nuclear superpower?”
Michael Tracey
Are the peoples of the Western world so completely insouciant that they do not notice that their politicians are pushing them into direct conflict with Russia? It seems Hungarians are the only European people who have any sense. https://www.rt.com/news/598644-budapest-peace-march-nato/
The Kremlin could not issue any warnings more dire, and in response moronic Western politicians provoke harder. Are they unable to comprehend that they are provoking a nuclear war, or is it their intention to provoke a nuclear war?
Biden, Blinken, and NATO have made another U-turn. The long range missiles that Ukraine could not use for attacks on Russian territory can now be used that way, but, for now, only on military targets. But the distinction between military and non-military targets is a distinction without meaning or substance. All modern wars are attacks on civilians and infrastructure.
The argument that resulted in removing restrictions on long range missiles is that in order to defend itself Ukraine needs to be able to use the weapons Washington provides to attack the military infrastructure that Russia uses to attack Ukraine.
Russia will simply attack the sites from which it is being attacked, so the long range missiles will contribute nothing to Ukraine’s defense. Even worse: as the Kremlin knows the missiles have to be programmed with targeting information by US and NATO personnel, Russia regards the countries responsible for the targeting as combatants and targets. We are on the verge of the final widening of the war.
As every previous no-no became a yes-yes, the Kremlin has to assume that the no-no prohibition on sending NATO troops will soon become a yes-yes. If realism prevails in the Kremlin, this forces Putin to abandon his limited military operation and to knock out Ukraine before it fills up with NATO soldiers.
From the beginning it was obvious to me that the limited military operation was a strategic blunder that would allow the West to become involved, with the consequence being the widening of the war. That is precisely what has happened. We have reached the point where Putin is telling the West to back off or out come the nukes.
But no one in the West hears.
As every previous no-no became a yes-yes, the Kremlin has to assume that the no-no prohibition on sending NATO troops will soon become a yes-yes. If realism prevails in the Kremlin, this forces Putin to abandon his limited military operation and to knock out Ukraine before it fills up with NATO soldiers.
Washington cares no more for Ukrainians than it cares for Palestinians. The Ukraine conflict is a way for Washington to force Russia into a response that can be used to justify a US/NATO attack on Russia. What is to be served by this? It is a form of suicide for the West.
Where is a responsible Western leader to diffuse this dangerous situation? Why are there none? Keeping Russian Donbas in Ukraine, where it should never have been put, is not worth the war that is being fomented. As the long range missiles cannot improve Ukraine’s battlefield performance, their only purpose is to be used for provocations. Anyone looking at the situation who thinks more provocations are what is needed is insane.
It is mind-boggling to actually watch Western leaders foment a nuclear war.
There is no opposition from Congress. None from print and TV media. None from European governments except Hungary. Western peoples are too insouciant to understand that they are standing on the edge of annihilation.
“We Are Inches Away from Destruction” — Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban
Some who find reality too upsetting take issue with my warnings of how close we are to a final war. I have acquired a new accolade — “scaremonger.” But I am not the only aware person on earth. Dr. Postal at MIT understands the seriousness of the situation, as does Mike Whitney, Steven Starr, Gilbert Doctorow, Scott Ritter, and Viktor Orban. Even the restrained, unprovocative Putin now understands that Russia is confronted with war, not a limited military operation to liberate the Donbas Russians.
Prime Minister Orban says that every week he sees more and more signs that the EU and NATO are preparing for military action. The Western governments, Orban has concluded, “want to defeat Russia, they want to achieve military success at any cost.” The cost will be life on the planet. Why is Ukraine’s NATO membership more important than the massive loss of life and perhaps the livability of life on the planet? https://tass.com/world/1796133
It is extraordinary that the Western world will do nothing to stop Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians, but is prepared to destroy life on earth for the artificial borders of an artificial country called Ukraine, which is known historically as “the Ukraine,” that is, as a province of a larger country.
Orban tells the truth. He says “NATO is a strong defensive alliance created to protect its member states, not to intervene in another war.” Orban says he will do what he can to prevent Hungary from being drawn into the maelstrom. “This is not our war, and Hungarians should not suffer because of it.”
But Hungary along with any survivors and Mother Earth herself and all her creatures and plant life will suffer from the massive fires, radioactivity, perhaps a nuclear winter, total disruption of all global supply chains, and so forth. The countries that survive, if any, will be those well removed from the blast zones, wind patterns loaded with radioactivity, and self sufficient in food production. All economies dependent on global relationships will be destroyed.
The world as it is organized today cannot survive a major war. How will cities of millions of people be sustained when supply chains no longer exist? Without war Mexico City with its 20 millions is almost empty of water.
I can continue asking this kind of questions, to which there are no answers.
But it is pointless.
The problem is that except for Orban and Putin, every Western political leader is committed to war for no justifiable reason.
There is no reason for the pending war. Ukraine can exist as a neutral state. Washington can pull back its presence on Russia’s borders.
The American neoconservatives’ nonsensical demand for US hegemony can be abandoned. Whatever the consequences of accepting reality, they are better than nuclear war.
Why is it that no one in the Western world understands the threat to life? What is the explanation for Biden now approaching the end of his fourth year in office HAVING NEVER MET WITH PUTIN IN AN EFFORT TO RESOLVE THE MOST DANGEROUS CRISIS IN HUMAN HISTORY?
The dumbshits governing us do not comprehend that today’s thermonuclear weapons can be a thousand times more powerful as the atomic bombs the US dropped on two Japanese civilian cities. The weapons today do not merely obliterate large cities, they obliterate large regions.
Steven Starr and other experts have expressed their concerns that a nuclear war could fill the atmosphere with dust and debris that would block the sun for years until it settled. In those years there may be a limited or non-existent growing season. Therefore, all life can be the casualty.
From a presentation by Dr. Theodore Postal, Massachusetts Institute of Technology:
The Russian nuclear Early Warning System (EWS) at Amir was damaged by an attack. The decision to attack the Russian EWS was made in Washington. The drones were guided to their targets using US aerial and satellite reconnaissance (they have to take multiple evasive actions in the course of their flights to evade Russian radar systems, and this can only be supplied via real-time targeting information provided by the US). The operators of the drones were likely mercenaries trained in the US or out-of-uniform US troops. Russia knows this and so it considers this a US attack on its nuclear Early Warning System.
The attack was reckless beyond comprehension. ANY such attacks against the EWS system used to protect Russia from a nuclear attack can justify, under Russian law, a nuclear retaliatory strike.
The US/NATO/Ukraine previously conducted multiple drone attacks on the Russian airbase at Engels, which is where Russia keeps its long-range strategic nuclear bombers. It appeared that at least in one of these attacks, a strategic nuclear bomber was damaged. Engels airbase is hundreds of miles inside of Russia and the drones could not have made it to the base without real-time targeting information supplied by US aerial and satellite reconnaissance.
Russian military planners must consider these attacks as a possible prelude to a nuclear first strike against Russia by the United States.
The US and NATO are also preparing to send F-16s to Ukraine. Russia has announced that they will consider these to be nuclear-capable weapon systems and treat them accordingly, including striking whatever bases these weapons are launched from — inside or outside of Ukraine (meaning in Poland and Romania).
Biden today authorized attacks inside Russia using US long-range weapons. France and Germany then followed the US, giving their approval to the use of Western-supplied weapons to attack targets inside Russia.
The situation in Ukraine is escalating to the point of being out of control. Yet Western mass media ignores these events and the general public remains blissfully unaware that their leaders continue to escalate the war in Ukraine to the point where it can become a nuclear war that will destroy all nations and peoples.
Gilbert Doctorow explains that Russia’s “dead hand” launch system cannot be deterred by a first strike
Doctorow also reminds us that it only takes one fully loaded hypersonic non-interceptible Sarmat multiple warhead missile to level a country the size of the UK to the ground, and only several to erase the US from the map. It goes far beyond insanity for Europe and the US to cultivate their own suicide. The media keep all information from the public, which is unaware that its continued existence is in question.
Here is Scott Ritter on the likely consequences of attacks inside Russia:
Scott Ritter reminds us that the weapons used to strike inside Russia have to be programmed by the US/NATO countries that supply them. Ukraine is ancillary to the process. Russia understands this and has stated that Russia will attack the countries responsible.
Here is a summary of the Scott Ritter video provided by an expert who shares my concern that Washington is driving the world into nuclear war:
“Scott Ritter explains that any further attacks on Russian strategic sites or attacks on Russian territory using missiles or cruise missiles will result in Russia hitting back against all the NATO targets — inside and outside Ukraine — responsible for such attacks.
“Ritter says that such attacks would result in the NATO nations struck by Russian retaliatory strikes invoking Article V of the NATO Charter, claiming they had been attacked by Russia. Ritter says that if NATO member states take this action and unite in war against Russia, then Russia will launch a massive nuclear strike against all these nations. I hope he is wrong.
“Given that the US, the UK, France, and Germany have all signed off on using long-range weapons against Russia, albeit in a ‘limited’ area of Russia, I think we are close to the scenario that Ritter suggests because the ‘limited’ area of Russia subject to attack will expand. A situation will arise where Putin is forced to hit back in a way that is decisive. The West will deny that the Russian strike is in retaliation for their own thinly disguised attacks on Russia — they will call the Russian strikes “unprovoked aggression” and an act of war.
“The US and NATO have been hiding behind the lie that it is Ukraine fighting Russia — not the West fighting Russia. When US, UK, French, and German weapons arrive in Ukraine, they become “Ukrainian weapons”, and thus Ukraine, not the West, is made responsible for whatever is done with them, whatever targets they hit.
“Russia no longer will accept the lie that only Ukraine, not the West, is at war with Russia. Even Putin has publicly stated that the high-tech, long-range weapons are US and NATO weapons, programmed, operated, guided, and launched by US/NATO troops. The targets are decided on by the US, not by Ukraine. The weapons have to use real-time guidance from US aerial and satellite reconnaissance, hence, Russia will destroy the satellites, drones, and AWACs providing the targeting information. All the components of the attacks on Russia will be targeted.
“Russia is not bluffing. Russia will not back down.”
It is extraordinary that the entire political leadership of the Western world is pushing the world into nuclear war. Why does the West seek its own destruction? What is to be gained?
During the 20th century Cold War in which I was intimately involved both as a trustee of the Committee on the Present Danger and as a member of a secret Presidential Committee with authority to investigate the CIA’s opposition to President Reagan’s effort to end the Cold War and normalize relations with the Soviet Union, I can say with confidence that even hard line anti-communists sought to reduce tensions instead of provoking war.
What I have witnessed in the 21st century is the most egregious cultivation of war by the US government in human history, and no one in the print or TV media tells us the consequences.
Lili News 029
In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.
Things to keep in mind...
Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.
Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted. DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… PLEASE send what you can today! JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
NATO, time has come to hit Russia hard. Putin entourage. Reuters floats freeze with Elensky gone Topic 1339
Lili News 029
In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.
Things to keep in mind...
Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.
Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted. DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… PLEASE send what you can today! JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW