PS

Twitter does wonders at times.

Here is a condensed version of Glenn Greenwalds approach with some of the many voices of top analysts who all agree that Ukraine should not become a member of NATO because of the risk of a Russian attack. -

What's we don't find here are eastern analysts and pundits***:

https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1498491107902062592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


*** Those hardly exist -and most of those preer to be silent in public.

The gamble now is to get rid of Vladimir Putin. But that is a shot in the dark. The idea is to hope for a second Michail Gorbatchov. - He could appear. Could.

PS: Good evening, Mr. Hail,

Thanks for all your work, and all the info...

“Kyiv not Kiev”... I had not noticed anyone spelling it “Kyiv” until just recently.
I didn't know there was a campaign to change the spelling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KyivNotKiev

“Prior to 2019, there were few cases of organizations switching to the "Kyiv" spelling, because many people outside Ukraine did not see the need or thought that the issue was "imposed by nationalists on purpose". The outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War encouraged many Western media outlets to switch spelling.”

“After the campaign began, the name Kyiv instead of Kiev began to be used by Anglophone outlets like the BBC, The Guardian, Associated Press, The Wall Street Journal, The Globe and Mail, The Washington Post, Financial Times, The Economist, The Daily Telegraph, The New York Times and other foreign media. The 'Kyiv' was also adopted by some international organizations.”

“In June 2019, at the request of the United States Department of State, the Embassy of Ukraine to the United States, and Ukrainian organisations in America, the name Kyiv was officially adopted by the United States Board on Geographic Names as the only correct one, which resulted in the federal government of the United States solely using 'Kyiv'. Before that, both names were used.”

Kyiv not Kiev, Why spelling matters...
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/kyiv-not-kiev-why-spelling-matters-in-ukraines-quest-for-an-independent-identity/

Kinda reminds me of Why Pronouns Matter...
https://www.mypronouns.org/what-and-why
https://lgbt.ucsf.edu/pronounsmatter

“He who controls the language controls the masses”... Saul Alinsky

It's a small change. Rather insignificant compared to making people pretend Bruce Jenner or Rachael Levin are female. The former being a small exercise of power, the latter being an all out assault on reality and biology. There is a certain power in forcing people to say utter nonsense that is contrary to reality. It must be humiliating to anyone who has to play along.

I'm going to stick with Kiev, so I guess that makes me reactionary and unpatriotic.(?)

On Arming Ukrainian Civilians...

I had similar thoughts, Mr. Hail. Handing out high powered rifles, to city folk who have little to no training and having them try to fight urban guerrilla warfare against the Russian military is likely to result in large numbers of civilian casualties. It really does smell like a ploy to get civilians killed and shout “genocide”!

Thanks for the David Rothschild quote, too... Interesting stuff...

I hope you have a nice rest of the evening!

☮

PS

@Dieter, isn’t your surname actually pronounced like the Ukie Kyiv?

Київ in Ukie, Киев in Russkie ... its kind of like English-English vs. American-English. Try pronouncing Worcestershire ... those in Massachusetts can probably get it. The Ukies embraced Київ to put some distance between themselves and their long history under the thumb of the Russians, but many ethnic Russians under the Ukie thumb the past couple of decades probably stuck with Киев, which is no doubt the reason why thousands of them had to be killed by the Ukie national guard and army since 2014.

PS

Patrick J. Buchanan sums the Ukraine Question up in Taki's Magazine like Tulsi Gabard does and like Glenn Greenwald did:

"Nor is Putin “irrational,” as some pundits rail. He does not want a war with us, which would be worse than ruinous to us both.Putin is a Russian nationalist, patriot, traditionalist and a cold and ruthless realist looking out to preserve Russia as the great and respected power it once was and he believes it can be again. But it cannot be that if NATO expansion does not stop or if its sister state of Ukraine becomes part of a military alliance whose proudest boast is that it won the Cold War against the nation Putin has served all his life.President Joe Biden almost hourly promises, “We are not going to war in Ukraine.” Why would he then not readily rule out NATO membership for Ukraine, which would require us to do something Biden himself says we Americans, for our own survival, should never do: go to war with Russia?"

For more context, see here:https://www.takimag.com/article/__trashed-5/

Menawhile in Washington: Joe Biden declares whatever Putin might do, the US is standing firmly "at the side of the Iranian people ''.At the end of his speech, president Biden - addressed at nobody special - says "thank you - may God protect our troops" and then, while raising his fisted right hand, he makes a last remark - about whom? Putin's troops? - : president Biden says: "Go get 'em."

- It takes quite a bit of humor to digest this.

But in the end, President Biden could still just say: Ok, let's make president Putin an offer about Ukraine's neutrality.

Henry Kissinger too a few years back said somehting that hinted in this direktion. I don't know, what David Rothschild said about Henry Kissinger. Maybe we'll hear more about this subject at a funeral, which could take place any time now. But maybe we don't.

We were a the funeral of the "Fastnacht" (shrovetide) yeasterday in the evening, and we're fine, Adam. A gladly pompous affair, with hump-ta-ta music 'n' people dressedd up in nice costumes on parade and a coffin, of course, for the "Fastnacht". It was a nice winter evening too. People were calm and less drunk than in other years. Btw.: The Coroner is in hiding position during such events.

But all in all, yesterday, the whole funeral-affair felt a bit too real with regard to Ukraine.

Since Mr. Hail went in great detail about the word Kiev, I might add here, that my last name is pronounced like the word Kiev, Mod. - I remember you asked once in the context of some Neue Deutsche Welle songs you recalled - Nena's 99 Red Balloons amnogst others - a song about the possibility of an occasional nuclear war... - and how unfavorable that had been... - everything hangs together...

- One of my favorite novels is called Rothschilds, btw. It is not least about the fake philosemitism that got a hold of Germany in the fifties (written by a lefty, the great - and funny - writer and drinker Hermann Peter Piwitt. Piwitt was - for quite some time, one of the very rare birds in Germany who did criticize the genius composer/musician, essayist, sociologist and philosopher Theodor W. Adorno).

PS

- Rothschild nominates President Zelensky for new holiday in the Jewish religion -

I assume many (if not all) of you good people who may be reading this saw the statement, from a scion of a certain legendary banking family, praising Zelensky as this century's greatest Jewish hero?

The source of his heroism, which will last centuries or more and become a part of the religion of the Jewish ethnonation, is about how Jews can successfully preside over "multicultural democracies."

Quote, David Rothschild, Feb 28, 2022:

"Thousands of years from now there is going to be a Jewish holiday centered on the exploits of Zelensky, and while the details will be fuzzy and/or wrong, the moral will be little Jewish girls & boys can grow up to be the bad ass leader of multicultural democracies."

PS

On Arming Ukrainian Civilians

Mr Smith writes: "Are the U.S. taxcattle paying for the free kalashnikov rifles that are being handed out to Ukrainian MP's and 'resistance fighters'?"

There is something disturbing about the whole "we are arming civilians to kill Russian regular soliders" thing, being pumped up uncritically by CNN and like-minded media.

There are all kinds of problems with riling up and arming (!) civilians to fight regular combatants. It's illegal (under the Geneva Convention), contrary to rules and norms of war, immoral, and smells of a ploy to get civilians killed and shout "genocide"; figures around Ukr's comedian-president arrived at this War Strategy Day 2 or so.

The Kiev government's strategic plan after they felt out the Russian strategy (shy about any inflicting of casualties, holding back most firepower):

1.) Cry out in pain as they toss civilians at you, then 2.) Play the Genocide card.

US-aligned media goes along with this all the way, just as uncritically as they endorsed Corona-Panic.

If you watch the propaganda and talking-points and if you know what to look for, you've seen it seeping in since as early as Day Two or Day Three (I write on Day Seven). Seeding the ground with the Genocide narrative. An indirect approach is today's line, "Russia has destroyed a Ukraine Holocaust memorial!" (Babi Yar, a ravine, near Ukraine, which has been a subject of dispute by Holocaust revisionists as based on thin evidence at best, but so far even in the 2020s the revisionists' views remain 'underground,' dissident scholarship.)

In any case, the reckless, dangerous, and immoral riling up of civilians to try to kill enemy combatants (illegal under Geneva Convention) makes no sense in any other way than as Ukraine's war strategy. It looks like a post-modern war strategy: Deliberately try to get more of your own people killed, shout "genocide!", and win by some Deus Ex Machina brought on by the magical incantation of "Genocide!".

Also possible is that the comedian-president and his inner circle re angling for their own futures and are doing these theatrics after having felt out the Russian line by Day Two or so, that they weren't going for a shock-and-awe lightning-win, which gave time for theatrics and erection of this personality cult. A steady stream of Ukraine regime figures--many/most of them well meaning, I assume--have been paraded on the US news channels about how they'll fight Russia till the end, etc., but really they have to be thinking about their roles late this year, next year, in five years, somewhere in the West in a comfortable exile, so they go along with the theatrics.

The Zelensky people do seem thoroughly corrupt, as it was they who paid Hunter Biden millions to do drugs and (I assume) put in at least an occasional appearance while at least semi-sober.

What's funny is how no Western media I have seen has said one thing about how the use of civilians to (try to) kill enemy regular combatants is such a bad idea on so many angles, and deeply immoral when thinking about the ethics of war.

How is it that we, as a civilization, protect civilians during war? The answer must be a sharp demarcation line between combatant and non-combatant. If there is no such line, any kind of war or war-like situation slides onto a horrible spectrum between Northern Ireland and Rwanda. Not good.

Naturally, great minds have thought about this tricky problem, which led to internationally agreed upon rules of war (including the famous Geneva Convention, to which Ukraine is a party), but their own government flouts these rules an CNN cheers them on.

PS

RE: Moderator

"About Antony Karlin, specifically here: I'd read a couple of his comments under other threads and got the idea he was pretty much a dumbass when it came to American politics, race, etc. That's fine - that does not at all mean he doesn't have a great handle on Russia."

Are you familiar with the anti-US intellectual Dmitry Orlov? Anatoly Karlin shares many similarities with Dmitry Orlov, I think, except being 25 years younger.

Both Orlov and Karlin lived in the USA, saw some of its worst aspects, and came to embrace a form of anti-Americanism which often seems bombastic, emotionalized, propagandistic, and polemical---which is all to say, unfair. I understand totally the reaction you describe, seeing him as a two-bit anti-American propaganda guy. I don't think the story ends there.

For one thing, both Orlov and Karlin are not necessarily unlike Western European intellectuals of recent years who are anti-US, and somehow their writings are much less offensive or off-putting even when they say almost the same things.

Anatoly Karlin's biggest mistake in his entire career as a writer was in pushing the Corona-Panic in 2020. For that he ought to be ashamed of himself (maybe he is). He personally, with his influence and platform at the time, did real damage, and should have taken up the banner of Anti-Panic. We can wonder on the reason WHY he personally embraced and pushed the Panic (pushed it hard) in the Panic's critical early stages. It's tempting to say his reasons are easy discern given his m.o., really on hoping the US gets destabilized.

The two bigger long-run problem with Karlin's views (or the views he publicly presents), is that he is unable to emotionally detach from strains of "Soviet nationalism" which I think are unhelpful in our time, and he is rather a China-backer, which while I understand it's tempting for someone in his position, it's really a bad idea.

Karlin has also said repeatedly through the years how much he dislikes Ukrainian nationalists. He is not a neutral observer in the Ukraine-Russia conflict. (The temptation of the Russian nationalist to nurse grievances against neighboring nationalities does no one any favors.)

All these seeming negatives aside, I commend Karlin as one of the best out there in bridging the gap between American and Russian discourse on topics like this, especially read with his potential or actual biases in mind. I don't know why he removed his writings from the Unz Review last year, but he is still active elsewhere.

PS

More on the "Kiev or Kyiv Question":

There are some interesting tie-ins to the name change (spelling change) which pre-date the current Ukraine-War-Panic, tie in directly with US domestic politics, and which I think are a good demonstration of power. In other words, "Kyiv > Kiev" is not "peak stupidity" in action but something more deliberate, when we look behind the curtain.

Its first use: In the Google-Ngram AmE corpus, the very first time "Kyiv" appears on an uptrend line is 1986. (And that is AmEng only, not BritEng.)

(There are sporadic appearances of "Kyiv" before that but with low level and no trend. I have to dismiss them as often being misspellings, miscodings, OCR problems, or references to specific other things than the capital of Ukraine.)

Therefore, the new spelling existed by ca.1986, but was hardly in use at all up through ca.1996. Then the story proceeds as I have it in the previous comment.

The real turnover towards "Kyiv" dominance dates to either 2020, 2021, or 2022--and seems obviously true now in 2022, with Kiev-spelling-loyalists at risk of being investigated by the Congressional Committee on Un-American Activities.

But the ground was well-seeded in the 2010s, especially with Ukraine's strange tentacles within US politics in the late 2010s.

The Ukraine regime itself came out with a "Kyiv not Kiev" campaign which was rolling along hard, with NATO-bucks no doubt, in 2019 especially under the new comedian-president and his gaggle of hangers-on (Russia propaganda claims many of the inner-circle of President Zelensky are drug addicts). The "Kyiv not Kiev" campaign is symbolic or emblematic of other policies deliberately antagonistic to Russia/Russians, the kinds that aggravate Russia and which Foreign Minister Lavrov has pointed to as the reasons for the invasion.

The target of "Kyiv not Kiev" was English speakers, and with the Zeitgeist in the West being "White-Christian oppressors are bad, their symbols are evil, the names they use for things are shameful," etc., the campaign was really able scooped up the gains and capitalize on the gains they had already made in the 2010s.

By the time of "Kyiv not Kiev," I remind you that Ukraine was, bizarrely, well-embedded within US politics on one particular side (see: the shabby "Colonel Vindman" affair in late 2019, and the several Trump and Biden-family scandals throughout the period, "UKrainegate," "the phone call," and the general Russian Collusion narrative).

These unusual tie-ins with US domestic politics may be why German has still spells it "Kiev" (Kiew). But maybe this will change (the sticking point is that German letters often have different sounds than English, as in Kiev vs Kiew; if a particular alignment of letters is sacrosanct and a NATO-political shibboleth, as proclaimed by the comedian-president, German will have to dispatch a team of NATO-loyal linguists to solve the problem.

PS

RE: Adam Smith

"And yes. It's Kiev."

If you look an Google-Ngram's plotting of "Kiev" vs. "Kyiv" (and "city of Kiev" vs. "city of Kyiv"), there was hardly anyone writing "Kyiv" in English before about the late 1990s. Up to 98% of references to the city used "Kiev" as of the mid-1990s. Someone began promoting "Kyiv" in the mid-1990s and it only weakly caught on by 2000.

The "Kyiv" variant use-line slopes upwards earlier in the American-Eng corpus, later in the British-Eng corpus, but both in the late 1990s.

From about 2000 to 2013 there is a steady and low use-rate of Kyiv while "Kiev" still dominates, down from 98% to "only" 85%-90%. As of 2013, the city is still spelled as "Kiev" in 87% of cases in the Ngram corpus.

The biggest inflection-point is 2014, towards "Kyiv." In 2014, "Kiev" suddenly dropped to only 82% of printed references to the city (AmE corpus) and held at about that level thereafter. I interpret this to mean a committed group had decided to switch to "Kyiv" for some kind of ideological reason. By 2019 (the end of the current Ngram-AmE corpus), "Kiev" stood at 80% of references to the city, so 20% were already writing "Kyiv."

My supposition is the 20% using "Kyiv" by the late 2010s included the bulk of the US agenda-setting class, Big Media, think tanks, NGOs, maybe Congressional staffers, maybe a lot of academics.

It was only a matter of time before they swept in, pulled a spelling coup-d'etat, and blasted non-complying "Kiev"-spellers as reactionary and unpatriotic...

PS

RE: The Alarmist

"CNN used to be watched in a number of offices in DC when it was a source of actual news in other parts of the world"

The thing that's so interesting about CNN as we've known it the past five to ten years, is how obvious are its ties to the CIA, and without any need for any real investigation, for they proudly parade ex-CIA people at a steady rate.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this was true in the old days of CNN to which you refer.

People sometimes like to say there has been a major decline in cultural change since about the 1970s. This is one of the ways culture clearly had changed by the 2010s: the media and Left both had come to LOVE the CIA and the US military. The CIA was widely resented and even hated, as almost a kind of Enemy of the People, by the cool kids in the late 1960s and 1970s...

PS: I found a 1:25 hr video that must be the one, Mr. Kief. I hope I can find time to watch it tomorrow rather than write comments on iSteve. Tonight, I may be a hypocrite to say it, but I'll be watching another episode of Season 1 of The Rockford Files rather than the (I'm sure very good) Greenwald video. It helps for my sleep cycle to see 1970s cars chasing each other, nice slim 1970s ladies, and have a few chuckles.

Thank you all for the good discussion on here. Next time Steve Sailer has a post on this Ukraine-Russia war, I've got to put in a word about Infotainment. (I feel another 2-year PanicFest coming on.) Yes, war is serious, but it was forced to be serious by whom? As you allude to, Dieter, this probably could have been settled decently ... I'll have to watch Greenwald first.

PS: Quick question...

Are the U.S. taxcattle paying for the free kalashnikov rifles that are being handed out to Ukrainian MP's and “resistance fighters”?

Meet Kira Rudyk, The Ukrainian MP who hadn't picked up a gun until 2 days ago...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvWAQqfi0gg&t=637s

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/ukraine-receives-second-batch-us-weapons-russian-stand-off-2022-01-23/
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/24/biden-legal-ukraine-russia-resistance/

What could possibly go wrong?

☮

PS: Good afternoon, Dieter!

I hope this message finds you well...
(Happy March 1st. Spring is in the air!)

Thanks for your links and your insight.
It's nice reading your opinion of this situation.

"because if Greenwald is right, Putin would simply and happily .a.g.r.e.e. with the solution that is at hand (a big question is, if it .s.t.i.l.l. is at hand, I'd admit that that's a caveat)."

I've started watching this Greenwald video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3XcevMwWC8

But I have not yet heard him mention the solution you are talking about. (Might not be in this video.)
(I would assume the solution involves Ukrainian neutrality, no NATO expansion and no more U.S. arms shipments.)
(or something like that...)

As I don't have enough time today to enjoy a few more hours watching videos, could you tell me what solution Greenwald proposes?

Thanks, Dieter...
I hope you have a great day!

☮

PS
Mod. - I try again - here is Glenn Greenwald with what sounds surreally close to a solution, that might not have been chosen, because of simple laziness on Barack Obama's side and - lack of foresight in Donald Trump's case.

Here is the Greenwald link - I'm quite sure, that it now works:

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=glenn+greenwald+the+war+in+ukraine

I still wait for somebody opposing Glenn Greenwald or saying, his analysis 'd be superficial or some such - but: The horizon is empty. No contradictions so far. I'm still waiting.

Alarmist (and Adam now too!), I'd hold, that your argument is meant as a defense for Putin but might be counterfactual / self-annihilating, because if Greenwald is right, Putin would simply and happily .a.g.r.e.e. with the solution that is at hand (a big question is, if it .s.t.i.l.l. is at hand, I'd admit that that's a caveat).


In the meantime, the ever so curious and busy English ex-nurse and pensioner Dr. John Campbell of Covid enlightenment fame talked to a Ukrainian philosopher about Putin, and they brought up a fact, that German sparrows are also singing' from the rooftop: That Mr. Putin has become a bit of a nutcase - they refer not least to what Emmanuel Macron has said lately about his at times five hours long phone calls with Vladimir Putin.

See here Dr. Campbells talk with the philosopher Vladimir Wexler - who was born in Ukraine and now philosophizes in GB.

https://www.waronflu.org/dr-john-campbell-daily-covid-19-updates/

(click on the video with the title: Putin's mind - is he mad)

Angela Merkel is usually loyal up to her skull and above to Putin, so to speak, but she too let some of her Berlin pals know that the hour-long (three, four, five hours...) phone calls with - Vladimir Putin, she still has, touch the surreal every once in a while. One thing she mentioned was what Macron was saying: He'd go in long spiraling circles that drown the dialogue over time and he gets hooked up on details like the caliber of the weapons the "Nazis" in Luhansk are carrying. Matter of fact, the mother of a close friend of mine lives in Luhansk. My friend Anna (a great artist - always on the look out for customers - maybe I'll post her site at another occasion...) grew up there and she shakes her head when I tell her about Mr. Putins Nazi concerns...

What I try not to forget: Vladimir Putin's Russia (145 mill. inhabitants) has ca. the GDP of Italy (60 Mill. inhabitants), which is going through rather hard years since at least 1990 or so. Russia is not least strangling itself with its way (way) over the top military budget).

Mod., I know, I know, Klaus Schwab. But at its core this whole thing is freedom + capitalism vs. authoritarian Governments + military. For Madame.. MP/MG ...of Ukraine the whole thing boils down to that. (I'd bet 100 bucks right away on this claim).
I want to conclude: Glenn Greenwald's solution is so simple that at first sight it looks surreal. - To approach (if ever so faintly) a big war over such an at its core clearly solvable dispute is one of those mysteries of our time***** (unless somebody proves Glenn Greenwald's arguments / quotes / sources premises to be wrong).

***** in 1812 poeple were wondering all over Europe, what Napoleon did in Moscow - another quite memorable one.

PS: Good morning, Mr. Alarmist,

I agree. The coup of 2014 nullified any agreement that might have been formerly agreed to.

No obligations are owed to a government installed by foreign actors fomenting an illegal change of government.

Happy post 2200, Mr. Moderator!

☮

PS

BTW, if anyone wanted to quibble on the validity of the Budapest Memorandum, it would necessarily involve unwinding what happened in 2014, when the duly elected government of Ukraine where chased out by the Western-sponsored Maidan Coup. No obligations are owed to a government installed by foreign actors fomenting an illegal change of government.

PS

That MP let the cat out of the bag. Ukraine is about defending the expansion of the New World Order and, by extension, safeguarding (if not accelerating) the Great Reset.

In addition to Russia taking on GloboHomo, note that China, India, Iran, and Brazil have refused to sign on to the West’s very rushed but organised financial war on Russia. That is far more population watching, in some cases rooting for Russia, from the sidelines ... more population than the “virtuous” West can muster.

Surprisingly, Poland is reportedly allowing Ukie pilots to pick up fighters in Poland. If that is true, then NATO has already engaged, so it might get interesting soon. I should probably wander into my forest and get more firewood.

I must admit, Mr. Moderator, that I rarely travel without headphones and mp3 player, and I don’t pay attention to the screens because I travel in the best class available (our money is vapourising as we write, so why scrimp?). so I hear no evil and I see no evil ... I can’t comment on whether or not I speak it.

PS: Good morning everyone,

Mr. Hail, I agree. Regime Media propaganda regarding the situation in the Ukraine provides an excellent case study of the power of the agenda setting media and other organs of state power.

For years I have often found Al Jazeera and RT to be more informative, and in many cases more neutral, than most U.S. based media.

CoronaPanic narrative collapses, Ukrainian Crisis Explodes... Coincidence?

Messrs Alarmist and Kief, I'm under the impression, perhaps mistakenly so, that the the Budapest Memorandum was not only a sort of nonproliferation agreement, but that it also included assurances that the Ukraine would remain neutral. (Would not pursue NATO membership, for example.) (Perhaps I'm thinking of some other mid 90's agreement?) I find it telling that the U.S. does not consider the memorandum legally binding, yet expects Russia to honor it's obligations under the memorandum. (Not that the U.S. honors agreements or even formal treaties.)

Seems to me that all of this has escalated to this point because of the empire's insistence that the Ukraine should join NATO, instigated the euromaidan (revolution or coup),(pick one), and has been arming the Ukrainians with offensive weapons. Also, Zelensky recently suggested that the Ukraine might pursue nuclear weapons. This is, obviously, unacceptable to Russia. As unacceptable as Ukrainian NATO membership or having a U.S. Aegis missile system installed on Ukrainian territory.

Thanks for the Glen Greenwald link, Dieter.

Mr. Moderator, Kira Rudyk did indeed say the quiet part out loud. “We fight for this New World Order...”
She works with the Atlantic Council and The World Economic Forum...

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/news/press-releases/kyiv-security-forum-atlantic-council-statement-on-strengthening-us-ukraine-relations/

https://interfax.com.ua/news/general/636449-amp.html

I agree... The Neocons are drunk on a cocktail of warmongering and imperial hubris and have used NATO to push Russia into a corner. At this point a vote for Putin is a vote for America.

And yes. It's Kiev.

I hope you all have a great day!

☮

PS: Alarmist, regarding airport CNN: Lots of times the screens are used for other things, like standby seat assignments, etc. I've still seen CNN blaring at the hubs in a few spots still, but almost nobody is watching... often one thinks he can get away from the screen, but the sound from speakers above fill the whole area.

Come to think of it, you could tell me your experience since you've been traveling a whole lot too.

PS: About the big-breasted Minister of the Ukrainian Parliament, Mr. Kief, did you watch the last 5 seconds? That was all I showed it for. That's where she let out the line about fighting for "the New World Order". Where did that come from? Sure, she added "democracy", which nowadays means what, Globohomo?

If I'd seen all but that last part, this lady could be a Ukie version of an American patriot from "Red Dawn". That last part makes you wonder who is exactly leading her side.

Oh, and I'll watch the videos with Tulsi and Mr. Kagan. Thanks!

PS

Interestingly, the predominantly Russian parts of what is currently called Ukraine (including, for argument’s sake, Crimea) are the bits with oil and gas and, before the attacks on the Donbass, most of the productive industry. Either Catherine the Great was really prescient when she repopulated the place with Russians and Germans, or it truly is magic dirt in action.

@Dieter, the Budapest Memorandum has s not a treaty ... at least from the US’s official position, and the US further stated that it has no force of law. As for the Ukies “giving up” their nukes, they were aging decrepit nukes the Ukies had no way to maintain or use (the Russkies had the Permissive Action Links), and attempting to maintain the nuke force would have bankrupted the country.

@Hail, if I want truth about the US, I find the Daily Mail and RT to be far better sources. CNN used to be watched in a number of offices in DC when it was a source of actual news in other parts of the world ... I don’t know if they still have it out of habit, like airports. AFRICOM probably has it because the Int’l Edition seems to have a religious fascination with all things African.

PS: Mr. Kief, I am not sure which video you want to point me to the most. I watched the 0:48 one that came up, showing a quick clip of Mr. Greenwald talking to Tucker Carlson. As I figured before, I agreed completely. Glenn Greenwald is truly a stand-up guy, from everything I've seen and read.

I did make the point he made in that quick video: People are worried about nuclear war now. How'd it get to this? It did because NATO and the west got involved, not to mention a decade of US Feral Gov't/Deep State interference.

YES! If US diplomats would give Mr. Putin the time of day, as I'm sure he would to Americans, all that scary talk could be put to rest. Hell, even with the worst of the Commies, we dealt carefully, thoughtfully, and respectfully (shoe-banging aside ... that was the other guy too.)

OK, if you would give me a direct link or more specific search terms for the 1 hr. video, I'll find the time to watch Mr. Greenwald.

PS: Thanks for the run-down on the spectrum of media, Mr. Hail. About Antony Karlin, specifically here: I'd read a couple of his comments under other threads and got the idea he was pretty much a dumbass when it came to American politics, race, etc. That's fine - that does not at all mean he doesn't have a great handle on Russia.

Personally, I have not given a tinker's damn about what Mr. Karlin had to say about Russia either, simply because it's a foreign country, not the Communist USSR that was a 40-year (at least) threat to us, and one that is now none of my business. (That is, except for our tentatively-planned travel there, which I really regret not following through on back then.)

That sounds harsh, because after all, I don't have to read, and my assumption that The Unz Review should be about controversial views and such about America is possibly not a good one. It's Ron Unz' deal, and he can put up a French Guiana or a Zanzibar blog, and I should have no complaint. It's not my site, and I don't have to read everything (can't really, in fact, just based on time) .

I am sure a guy like Mr. Karlin is of great value right now. If I cared more about this newest infotainment then he would be indeed a good source for me to read, conveniently on the unz blog, with the help of commenters too, of course. I don't though.

I think I'll have to write at least one more post on how I don't have anything to write on this.. ;-}

PS

Is Ukraine a Country - six minutes with JB Peterson and Ukraine expert Frederick Kagan


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQGrrU6tulw


Ukraine is a country which is protected by a treaty Russia (Boris Jeltsin) signed in 1994
in exchange for Ukraine handing over their nuclear arsenal to Russia.
The USA, GB and Russia agreed in this treaty to defend the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

Glenn Greenwald and Tulsi Gabbard and quite a few high ranking US military and government people like the actual head of the FBI William Burns and Barack Obama agreed not long ago or still agree thatthe Ukraine could stay out of NATO and be neutralized and that that would be ok for the US
(Glenn Greenwald has the quotes and the background).

Tulsi Gabbard is saying that still explicitly and clear - see her for one minute here on Tucker Carlson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF5oPNjMZw4

The Urkainian MP in your video above, Mod., is iconic*****.

***** this is an aspect, anatoly Karlin goes deep into in his Russia / Ukraine reflections: The Icon. Remember: an Icon is what people look upon as being one. And the Ukrianins are being well trained in looking at Icons - sicnce long centuries. ("End of the deviation" (HM Enzensberger).


To be more specific: This MP in your video, Mod., is a neocon-icon. I mean that in a descriptive, not in a derogatory way: Confronted with the possibility of losing it all, brave & proud people do lean towards the liberty/ freedom side: That's the driver at the core of the neocon-movement. And this is a strong one, rooted in this very basic longing for independence (=liberty/freedom) pride = rooted in the will to fight for it. This is real. And can't be rooted out(it can only be suppressed - with the use of power. But it can't be rooted out, not in the West (in that sense, the Ukraine .i.s. firmly rooted in the Western tradition see this short video with the MP above (and see also the - iconic - picture of her above!).

See (and listen to) Glenn Greenwald with the full picture of this situation (minus the neocon dynamic that springs drirectly from the invasion).
This dynamic is creating a new mix, which might obfuscate the Greenwald/ Gabbard /(Obama/CIA boss William Burns) solution at hand: Keep Nato out of Ukraine.

Anatoly Karlin, who's blog could well be read by Vladimir Putin, wrote quite some time before the invasion, that it will happen.

Sidenote: The woke .a.n.d. Putin both deceive the public about the Nazi-threat - they both still re-enact the Weimarian 1920is and 30ies disguised as the good guys: The Antifa, fighting Nazism/ Hitler. One important point in Greenwald's analysis is how the Trump = Hitler thing
was used to cut off communication with Putin altogether in order to hit Trump (= Hitler....).

The result is a very weak US President in a real crisis and a - wrong (through and through = .u.t.t.e.r.l.y. wrong!) - Antifa-tinged perspective on the Russian and on the US side.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=glenn+greenwald+the+war+in+ukraine&docid=20694296848926&mid=C199C9D4EABCD0A1F854C199C9D4EABCD0A1F854&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

PS

"People have their eyes glued to CNN and the Lyin' Press web sites"

For those with interest in that specific area of geopolitics (or "foreign policy" from a Western European or US perspective), it is of interest; to a median plumber or kindergarten teacher in Dubuque,---or actually to a huge supermajority of Americans of all life-stations,---it's not of much obvious or inherent interest requiring Corona-Panic-style saturation coverage. Your point is right.

What is of interest to all (who have any interest at all in politics or power) is how the "media" or agenda-setting power operates.

In other words, the Ukraine-War-Panic is a good illustration of how power and media works, with the media-driven picture and and the military or geopolitical or diplomatic phenomena all separate things. One can, in principle, have no interest in any of the military, diplomatic, or geopolitical aspects but still have interest in the media agenda-setting aspect.

It can be worth sampling some of the Ukraine coverage from different sources to see this process in action. Ranging from:

(1) CNN --- the network is now all-but-openly "US regime media," and only little pretense remains that they are doing "US-leaning neutral news coverage." A middle-age American may probably remembers that old CNN from the 1990s (it was always "liberal" and "US-leaning" by nature, but not this). I think a lot of older age-cohorts vaguely believe the Walter Cronkite era seamlessly evolved unchanged-at-core into CNN and the rest of the MSM of today. (CNN also has clear ties to the CIA, a long story there)...

to

(2) Russia Today (obviously a propaganda network for Russia, and openly so) or actual Russian state media whose press releases can be read in machine-translation now,

to

(3) Established, independent commentators --- e.g., there is a reformed-neocon named David P. Goldman [by the 2010s he had converted to being a kind of China-backer or China-"triumphalist," which is distasteful to me--but he denies that he supports China, just predicts they will take over as global superpower]; until about 36 hours before the invasion, he was publicly predicting it wouldn't happen; he had a brief article up on perception-vs-reality of the military situation at ASIA TIMES, https://asiatimes.com/2022/02/russias-strategy-to-destroy-ukraine-army-going-to-plan/, and he has long been a widely read columnist there,

to

(4) Small-time independent military or geopolitical analysts, if you can find them, and IF this is a particular interest (n.b.!--there is always a risk that some of these people are just hacks who don't know much; but even the good ones, if too successful, risk drifting into becoming "social media personalities," potentially distorting their material, their presentation, even their own worldview, and thus lowering their value...and it's hard to tell who has crossed the line and who not...).

Anatoly Karlin's work is clearly of value here. (I must admit I still feel lingering resent for his role as being a major Corona-Panic-pusher in early 2020. Even when he knew *for sure* that he was wrong, he still pushed back a while and then simply went silent; I don't think he ever apologized or turned to the Anti-Panic side in earnest.)

The weakness in small-time analysts or independent journalists or commentators is they lack the resources of a major news organization, so we are still lacking something. For this, I add a fifth category:

to

(5) Neutral parties from outside the NATO bloc and outside the pro-Russia bloc who run news networks modeled on CNN.

Al Jazeera is here well-positioned, and I have to credit them as providing the best overall coverage I've seen of a comparable 'news network.' Watching a half hour of Al Jazeera's feed and then a half hour of CNN's feed and then back again, it's a dizzying experience which makes you really appreciate just much biased and propagandistic CNN is (now), whereas Al Jazeera presents a fair view.

What are some others?