As opposition to Washington's Ukraine blank check mounts, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has signaled that the next huge check - nearly $38 billion - will be conveniently hidden in a year-end, must-pass omnibus bill. It's a way to keep the gravy train flowing while sparing Members the inconvenience of having to face voters. Also today...White House to send more troops into Ukraine. What could go wrong? Watch today's Liberty Report... read on...
New material Musk released over the weekend confirms the very worst. The banal boys and girls previously ensconced in Twitter’s top echelons were not only having a jolly time attempting to steer the nation’s news narrative; these executives were actually meeting weekly with FBI, Homeland Security and national intelligence officials to discuss “disinformation” they wanted removed from the site, including the notorious suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story.
That’s just one step removed from a state-run Ministry of Truth and is perhaps even more insidious. That’s because it didn’t even involve unwanted and unconstitutional coercion. Instead, the executives of this private enterprise were voluntarily neglecting their day jobs (maximizing corporate profits and shareholder value) in order to spend a huge amount of corporate time and resources propagating official narratives and suppressing dissenting views.
It was as if the Washington powers-that-be had nationalized a multi-billion company, drafting it to propagandize in behalf of their own political and policy agenda and continued tenure in power.
So the question recurs as to why Jack Dorsey, Parag Agrawal, Vijaya Gadde, Yoel Roth and countless more top executives were not attending to corporate “biness”, but instead were ostentatiously moonlighting on behalf of an extra-curricular agenda that had absolutely nothing to do with making money at Twitter. read on...
Yesterday CNN reported that the Biden administration has decided on a significant escalation in Ukraine: providing Kiev with the most advanced US missile defense system, the Patriot Missile system. The missiles have a longer range and a much higher price tag. Russia has vowed to take them out if deployed in Ukraine. Will NATO troops be operating the complex systems? If so...then what? Watch today's Liberty Report... read on...
You’d better watch out—you’d better not pout—you’d better not cry—‘cos I’m telling you why: this Christmas, it’s the Surveillance State that’s making a list and checking it twice, and it won’t matter whether you’ve been bad or good.
You’ll be on this list whether you like it or not.
Mass surveillance is the Deep State’s version of a “gift” that keeps on giving…back to the Deep State.
Consider just a small sampling of the tools being used to track our movements, monitor our spending, and sniff out all the ways in which our thoughts, actions and social circles might land us on the government’s naughty list, whether or not you’ve done anything wrong.
Tracking you based on your phone and movements: Cell phones have become de facto snitches, offering up a steady stream of digital location data on users’ movements and travels. For instance, the FBI was able to use geofence data to identify more than 5,000 mobile devices (and their owners) in a 4-acre area around the Capitol on January 6. This latest surveillance tactic could land you in jail for being in the “wrong place and time.”
This provocative move is a direct and deliberate violation of a primary Russian red line. Russia has warned it will not tolerate USG and NATO offensive missiles on its border in Ukraine. It considers any such move a threat to its national security. The threat is compounded by the Biden administration's call for weakening Russia and overthrowing Vladimir Putin, the elected president.
In short, a NATO nation will target Russian aircraft, thus inviting retaliation by Russia. This is precisely what Biden and BoJo want—an excuse to invoke Article 5 of the NATO charter.
If that happens, WWIII is inevitable.
So immense is the hubris and delusional thinking in Washington and London, it is believed a war to weaken and destroy Russia is actually something that can be accomplished without a thermonuclear war. This is what Gen. Petraeus thinks, as do the neocons and their second cousins, the “humanitarian interventionists.” read on...
Among realists who don't accept the Kiew siegt an allen Fronten! narrative it is widely assumed that Russia will soon begin, perhaps in dramatic and decisive fashion, a winter offensive. This would come just as Kiev is hitting "empty" on all key manpower and materiel indicators, exacerbated by the Zelensky regime’s continued insistence on squandering them on strategically meaningless attacks on hardened Russian positions.
The assumption of a bold Russian shift to the offensive may not be valid, though, as it's clear that among Moscow's primary intentions is to avoid triggering a direct clash with NATO forces, which, they reasonably believe, could escalate uncontrollably to the strategic nuclear level. (That's why it appears Moscow has abandoned its longstanding no-first-use nuclear doctrine for launch-on-warning See: Paul Craig Roberts: A Hair Trigger on Endgame - LewRockwell)
So instead of taking decisive action, Moscow may prefer to incrementally escalate the "slow grind" chewing up Kiev's forces, while continuing to dismantle Ukraine's infrastructure, which also contributes to accelerating depopulation of Ukraine as cities and towns become uninhabitable. (As Moon of Alabama suggests: "It does not look like an imminent all out attack on the Ukrainian front lines is in the cards. The expected large winter attack may not be coming at all. Instead the new forces will rotate through the frontline and only attack locally whenever they see an opportunity." MoA - Ukraine SitRep - Catastrophic Losses, Failing Wonder Weapons, NATO Escalation (moonofalabama.org) ) read on...
The sudden and surprising arrest of FTX mega-scammer Sam Bankman-Fried in the Bahamas has perplexed some of America's top legal minds. Constitutional Law Professor Jonathan Turley is shocked that he was nabbed just before he was set to testify (and further incriminate himself) before the US House Financial Services Committee (Chaired by SBF's old friend Maxine Waters). Politics? Oh, there's also a Ukraine angle. Watch today's Liberty Report... read on...
Given Ukraine’s surprisingly effective counteroffensive against Russian forces in the autumn of 2022, there has been an increasing focus among Western officials and their media allies about Russia’s probable response to an overall Ukrainian triumph in the war. There has been far less discussion about how the United States and its European partners will respond if military fortunes change and NATO’s proxy faces definitive defeat. However, such a discussion is essential to avoid making a serious policy blunder.
Western foreign policy experts are split about the Kremlin’s probable response if its military venture in Ukraine implodes. Realists are concerned that Russian President Vladimir Putin might drastically escalate the scope of Russia’s efforts. Such concern is warranted. Indeed, escalation already is taking place, with the partial national mobilization that Putin ordered in September 2022, and the intensified missile strikes on Ukraine’s electrical grid and other infrastructure. Some worried analysts have warned that if Russia faces a definitive defeat in Ukraine, a cornered Putin might even use tactical nuclear weapons to avert a humiliating debacle. Even President Biden has noted the existence of that danger.
More hawkish types, though, insist that Putin is bluffing, and they celebrate Kyiv’s counteroffensive as merely the prelude to a glorious overall triumph. Their implicit assumption is that NATO’s military clout will deter the Kremlin from escalating the stakes. Instead, they apparently believe that the Russian bear will crawl away with its stubby tail between its legs, accepting a diplomatic settlement that returns all occupied Ukrainian territory (including Crimea) to Kyiv’s control. Hawks such as Anne Applebaum have insisted from the outset that a settlement with those characteristics is the only acceptable outcome. read on...
I have previously written of my pride as an alumnus of The University of Chicago in how the school has led the fight for free speech in higher education. It is also ranked as the number one free speech school in the country. The “Chicago statement” has become the rallying point for schools resisting the anti-free speech movement sweeping over our university and college campuses. Now both the University of Oklahoma and entire University of Texas system have joined almost 100 schools in signing on to the statement. It remains a minority of schools but the ranks are growing (though often due more to boards than votes of the faculty). Unfortunately, George Washington University (which has been ranked low on free speech rights) has not agreed to this basic statement of free speech protection.
UChicago shocked many in 2016 when it sent a letter to incoming students that promised an unfettered and uncensored education without the protection from disturbing or offensive ideas. While most schools are actively curtailing free speech, its letter warned the students that they will not be protected against ideas or given “safe spaces.”
The origins of the letter is found in a policy produced at the University of Chicago in 2014-2015. The Chicago Statement’s key provision declares that a university’s "fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by most members of the University community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed." read on...
