Insanity Rules

Two headlines today gave proof that insanity rules in western capitals.

US and allies to hit Russia with new sanctions as outrage over civilian killings grows

Yellen to Warn of ‘Enormous Economic Repercussions’ From Ukraine Invasion

"The Treasury secretary plans to highlight risks of rising food and energy prices at a congressional hearing on Wednesday."

But why -- oh why -- are there “risks of rising food and energy prices”? Did the risk just happen, like a passing cloud perhaps? No. The risk happened because of the sanctions.

Meanwhile, after White House eunuchs walked back Biden's call for regime change, another Biden Mumble walked back the walking back saying that that guy has got to go.

History is too important to be left to humans.

That the Russians have been brutal in their prosecution of wars is undeniable. Whether their brutality is any worse than that of others or than the sanitized techno-brutality of U.S. drone warfare, I leave to another day. War by nature is an exercise in tu quoque. The fact is that Russians have been and are capable of committing atrocities and, therefore, it is more than just possible that they murdered civilians in Bucha. On the other hand, the neatly placed boxes of Russian military rations next to some of the bodies is... well... just a little too neat for my skeptical mind.

As any lawyer can tell you, the fact of a dead body only begins the inquiry. It does not end it. The question remains as to how and why the body was killed. Was there a provocation? Was there a mistake? What was the intent? Was it an action ordered by superiors or was it a spontaneous rampage by enlisted men? In other words, was it a state action for which the state can be sanctioned or was it individual criminal behaviour for which the individuals in question should be punished.

During the last world war, all armies (except Russia) had “war crimes bureaus” whose task it was to investigate alleged and reported war crimes. The complaint would be relayed through a neutral conduit to either the Royal Navy or the Wehrmacht which would then launch an inquiry to look into the matter and issue a report either confirming or denying the claim. The idea was that, after the war, there would be a clearing of claims and repartations would be paid as appropriate. The parties were actually fairly decent about it. Sorry ol' chap. Our bad. See you in Geneva!

The point is that when an atrocity is alleged, the matter needs to be investigated, calmly and well. If a person wants to behave like a rational human being, he refrains from taking responsive action until the allegations are confirmed. Then, as a second step in rationality, he has to weigh the benefits and risks of the proposed retaliation. It is a fact of life that sometimes one cannot retaliate as one would like because the to do so would be too injurious to one's self or to another. In this situation, one is left biting one's lip.

But none of this matters in our ruling capitals. The matter is investigated in the press, with predictable outcomes. It reminds me of the notorious Kadaververwertungsanstalt. See? Look at the picture of those bodies in front of the factory!!! It's OBVIOUS. The Germans are using their own dead soldiers to make soap! Don't deny the facts! The Fiends! As if roasting babies on the spits of their bayonets wasn't bad enough!

Listen carefully to the way our leaders speak. They cry for sanctions and in the same breath refer to “mounting evidence” that “points to” and like phrases. Listen to NATO's Stoltenberg “And we have to gather all the detail so this can be an actual – have a war crimes trial.” In other words, they don't yet have “all the detail”... and without all the detail they can't possibly know if in fact a war crime was committed. They might have suspicions. The suspicions may be well founded. But -- where have we heard it before? -- “suspicion is not guilt.”

I am not denying that an atrocity took place. I am not defending it if it did. I simply do not have all the facts and I am not willing to rely on a press that sensationalizes everything or on a Ukrainian government that is not an “unbiased” observer and that has an obvious interest in creating atrocity propaganda. Of course, Russia denies and attempts to sow doubt. But the fact that Russia sows it does not mean that doubt is not a good thing to start off with. Judiciousness begins with skepticism.

All I am saying is that before our leaders run off half-cocked and impose yet further sanctions which will hurt ordinary working people around the world more than they hurt Putin, they ought at least be forced into cold showers in order to temper their inflamed minds.

Is that too much to ask?

Russia Derangement Syndrome

Let me see if I can get this straight:

1. The West imposes unprecedented sanctions of Russia, freezing its dollar assets in the West, locking it out of SWIFT, prohibiting and effectively cancelling business deals....

2. Russia says, "OK, but then if you want to buy our gas, you'll have to pay for it in rubles.

3. Germany shrieks "BLACKMAIL!!!!"

So Germany gets to pay for gas in dollars which Russia can't access because of the sanctions?

The West can deal with the present crisis in whatever way it wants, but it shouldn't loose its marbles in the process.

Biden goes Bonkers

Speaking in Europe on Saturday, Biden flew off the handle,

“A dictator bent on rebuilding an empire will never erase a people’s love for liberty,” Biden said. “Brutality will never grind down their will to be free. Ukraine will never be a victory for Russia, for free people refuse to live in a world of hopelessness and darkness.

"They will have a different future a brighter future, rooted in democracy and principles, hope and light, of decency and dignity, of freedom of possibility. For God's sake this man cannot remain in power."

It was like watching a machine spin faster and faster until it lost its bearing entirely. Needless to say, Biden's call for Putin to be deposed was walked backed furiously by the State Department.

Why do American presidents jerk themselves up into such frenzies? .

Americans have tendency toward grandiloquent Manicheism, in which they cast everything into shadows of the lightest light and the darkest dark. There is no middle ground, which most people understand is the grey human condition.

But oh no! Every bump in the geo-political world, every disagreement invokes and involves the Host of Heaven against the Legions of Hell!

In swelling tones, the Flawless Obambi routinely inovked "that [shinning][seminal][epochal] document" signed over 200 years ago, here in America which proclaimed for all the world to hear, that all human beings were created free and equal and endowed [omit 'by their Creator'] with certain ianunalienababble rights, AMONG WHICH are ... etc. etc. etc." A hair more and it would have been the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

This was the same document that my English History book's chapter on the Loss of the American Colonies, called a "propagandist appeal" in whose "magical words" the colonists found stirring justification for their rebellion.

Well.... I suppose that if you are going to rebel you need to stir things up and I'm sure every nation has its Sacrosanct Mumbo Jumbo. But two hundred years after the event? Couldn't we let things settle down a little bit instead of whipping ourselves into a crusading frenzy at every juncture?

The Ukrainian Crisis involves a geo-political conflict, which, in my view, is largely of our own making but which in all events needs to be settle by cooler heads and not inflamed by overheated ones.

And yet one could see Biden working himself up as he leaped from "love of liberty" to "brutality" to "grinding down" to "the will to be free" to "hopelessness and darkness" to "hope and dignity" and "freedom ..." until at last, literally on the verge of tears he called for Putin's removal. The only thing surprising is that he did not say, "For God's sake, for the Lillies of the Field, for the little Cherbim on Earth as in Heaven, for All the Saints, for all ye who Labour for Righteousness's sake, I call upon the Host of Heaven, hear me out: This man cannot remain in power."

And, although he did not fly off that far, there can be no doubt that that was his frame of mind.

Bismarck must be gagging in his grave.

Geo-politics maybe fundamentally stupid and murderous but there is no need to make it worse by adding hysteria to the mix.

FDR's spontaneous remark, demanding Germany's unconditional surrender took everyone by surprise. But the rhetoric was so uncompromising they all jumped on board and ended up prolonging the war by cutting the German resistance off at the knees and removing the chance of a negotiated peace.

Now, it has to be said that Biden has done a decent job of containing the war-mongering hysterics in Congrease and the gaggle of neo cons that infests the nation's capital. So why did he then call for a outcome that all but ensured heightening and possibly enlarging the conflict?

It is, I think, because deep in their historically uniformed hearts, Americans truly believe their exceptionalist, light versus dark bullshit. I would only remind them that it is possible to adhere to moral principles and be humbly restrained at the same time.

Snuffing out the Flame of Truth

The New York Slime went to war against truth today, blaring that "the US is fighting against an incendiary disinformation campaign about bioweapons being pushed by Russia and China."

Lies spreading like wildfire! Jan Psaki to the rescue!

Most of the article is devoted to yabbering about Russia and China are collaborating against us, and spreading lies in order to lay a cover for their own possible use of bio weapons... On the merits it reports that jen Psaki “called the accusations “preposterous,” and said the United States “does not develop or possess such weapons anywhere.”

The State Department chimed in: "The United States does not own or operate any chemical or biological laboratories in Ukraine,..."

Ah well. That settles that (at least on the Upper East and West sides)

But what was it that Under-secretary of State Virginia ("Fuck Europe") Nuland said the other day before a committee of Congrease?

“Uh, Ukraine has, uh, biological research facilities. We are now in fact quite concerned that Russian troops, Russian forces, may be seeking to, uh, gain control of [those labs], so we are working with the Ukrainiahhhns [sic] on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach” ”

And so we just now got involved with these things that we don't own or operate?

Well back in 2019, The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine publicly announced its collaborative work with Ukraine “to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats"

"The U.S. Department of Defense’s Biological Threat Reduction Program collaborates with partner countries to counter the threat of outbreaks (deliberate, accidental, or natural) of the world’s most dangerous infectious diseases.  The program accomplishes its bio-threat reduction mission through development of a bio-risk management culture; ...

"BTRP has upgraded many laboratories for the Ministry of Health and the State Food Safety and Consumer Protection Service of Ukraine, reaching Biosafety Level 2. In 2019, BTRP constructed two laboratories for the latter, one in Kyiv and one in Odesa.

BTRP supports many collaborative research projects through which Ukrainian and American scientists work together.

So yes... we don't "own" the facility; we merely fund it. We don't "operate" we merely "collaborate.

But never mind. The Slime prattles on:

“I can’t think of another active propaganda campaign by Russia that has gotten this level of boost from China,” said Bret Schafer, who tracks disinformation from China, Russia and Iran as a senior fellow for the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a Washington nonprofit group. “

And who are these folks?

"Alliance for Securing Democracy"

Democracies around the world are under assault. Concerted efforts by malign actors to undermine democratic processes and erode democratic institutions pose a foundational threat to the United States and its democratic partners in Europe, Asia, and beyond. External threats from authoritarian governments have coincided with internal challenges from domestic actors to weaken democratic norms and institutions. The time to act is now. Citizens across the ideological spectrum must unite in upholding democracy’s foundational principles and countering autocratic efforts to exploit discord and undermine our institutions.

The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), a nonpartisan initiative housed at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, develops comprehensive strategies to deter, defend against, and raise the costs on autocratic efforts to undermine and interfere in democratic institutions. ASD has staff in Washington, D.C., and Brussels, bringing together experts on disinformation, malign finance, emerging technologies, elections integrity, economic coercion, and cybersecurity, as well as Russia, China, and the Middle East, to collaborate across traditional stovepipes and develop cross-cutting frameworks.

We must not lose sight of the fundamental strength of our free and open societies. By shining a light on autocratic tactics, closing vulnerabilities in democratic systems, and imposing costs on those who seek to undermine our institutions, ASD is helping to support democratic values.

Working with policymakers, the private sector, and civil society, we advance innovative thinking to better understand and counter threats to democracies worldwide, share lessons learned, and develop strategies that go beyond the standard policy toolbox. Doing so not only strengthens the resilience of our democracies but is a reaffirmation of the democratic experiment.

Blah blah blah blah blah. The Burble of Military Industrial Imperialism.

Advisory Council ("The bipartisan, transatlantic advisory council brings decades of experience in national security, intelligence, cybersecurity, Russia, Europe, and politics to inform the work of the initiative. ")

Mike Chertoff was U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security from 2005 to 2009. ...

William Kristol is the editor at large of the influential political journal, THe Weekly Standard

Michael Morell was acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency in 2011...

Rick Ledgett has four decades of experience in intelligence, cybersecurity, and cyber operations, including 29 years with the National Security Agency...

John Podesta served as Chair of Hillary for America.

Who'da thunk it?

It would be funny if our informed elite weren't such dumbfuck slime suckers.

Foulness Afoot -

Since the season began, Chipsters have suspected that more than mere ambition was behind the  serial  hat tosses of  Democratic Party candidates.  One or two was normal; but when two became three and then four and then five, six, seven we suspected something foul was afoot.  Today, the New York Slime gave the game away in article reporting on Corporate Democrat angst at Bernie's steamrolling success.

More than a confession of angst the NYT  article actually disclosed the corporate Democrat strategy to defeat Bernie.  The aim of the DNC is to field as many candidates as possible so as to deny Bernie 50% on the first ballot. At that point, the Superdelegates enter on stage to "put things right" and force a "sensible comprise" on a corporate centrist. 

Read this from the article: 

"The matter of What To Do About Bernie ... hovered over a series of previously undisclosed Democratic dinners in New York and Washington organized by the longtime party financier Bernard Schwartz.  The gatherings have included scores from the moderate or center-left wing of the party, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California; Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader; former Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia; Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., himself a presidential candidate; and the president of the Center for American Progress, Neera Tanden."

#1  Who is Bernard Schwartz?

Per wiki  he is the "largest single contributor to the Democratic Party. He founded Priorities USA Action,   the largest Democratic Party super PAC. Founded in 2011, it supported Barack Obama's 2012 re-election campaign. It was the primary super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. It focused mainly on high-dollar donors."

#2-- Why was Pete Buttigieg there? And just before he announced his candidacy?

"Mayor Pete" is not quite a fresh face from the Hoosier State.   Mr. Aww shucks Rhodes scholar.   He was put himself in the running for DNC chair in 2016.   He has been hanging around with insiders for a while and that make him part of the centrist Democrat circle.

 #3-- Come to think of it, why are there so many candidates?

Why, they just keep popping up! Look at the people tossing their hats in the ring:  Kamala Harris (the woman Obama!), Beto O'Rourke, (the white Obama!), Pete Buttigieg (the gay Obama!) -- all fake  progressives offering empty soundbites and assurances.  And for good measure then come the regular, boring corporate centrists like Amy, Corey, and Gillibrand and every other office boy or office girl who ever hung around the DNC.

QED: Flood the field with candidates so no one gets 50% then have the Superdelegates fix everything like they did in 2016.  

Don't be fooled!  As Franklin Roosevelt said:  there are no accidents in politics.  Bernard Schwartz and his Super Pac have the money and money is to politicians what strings are to puppets.     Speaking on the Ellen Degeneres, Show Aww Shucks Pete, burbled that it was a good thing many people were jumping into the ring because that way we could have a full and open discussion of issues and approaches....  Bullshit.  Back in 2016 did the DNC  "prioritize" a full and open discussion of issues?  Hell no!  Bernie's run was a "betrayal" of a "party united" behind Hillary.  We are to believe that this same cabal of insiders suddenly wants a free for all?  

Yes they do. But not for the pretty reason Aww Shucks Pete would have you believe.  It's all just a form of divide and conquer.   Do not be fooled by  "HOPEY" "CHANGEY"  "TRUTHY"  "JUSTICE" "PATHWAY"  talk.  This is just political popcorn -- cheap calories -- to give the impression of being progressive.  Banks, telecom companies, major corporations do not shovel money at candidates in exchange for promises of "hope" "better dawns" and  sentimental drivel ? 

It's not hard to be specific.   It's not politically dangerous to back specific policies which polls show most Americans are in favor of.  If the centrist democrats and Obama 2.0's are not committing themsleves to specific progressive policies, they are either anti progressives or fake progressives.   Pick your huckster but don't come crying to me when your progressive hopes get betrayed again. 

© 2019 WCG

The New York Times Scoops Again

©WCG

Pope Condemns Pharaonic Oppressions of NeoLiberal Capitalism

Predictably, the neoliberal propaganda machine (aka “Hillary Press”) has distorted the Pope's recent remarks, bending them to their own nefarious and partisan purposes. Since the address is published in Spanish and Italian only, this will set the record straight for those with a waning interest in objectivity.

It is true, the Pope denounced walls built of fear and needless to say a U.S. audience would interpret this as referring to the border with Mexico and hence as an indirect attack on Trump. 

But what the Pope actually denounced was the “divinization of money” which was an “existential whip” which, as in Ancient Egypt, enslaves and exhausts without mercy (un látigo existencial que, como en el Egipto del Antiguo Testamento, esclaviza, roba la libertad, azota sin misericordia). You know, like usurious college loans perhaps?

So how does money rule? It rules with the lash of fear, economic violence and military oppression. (Con el látigo del miedo, de la inequidad, de la violencia económica, social, cultural y militar que engendra más y más violencia en una espiral descendente que parece no acabar jamás). It is from that primary violence, the Pope said,  that religious and narco- terrorism are derived. 

All tyranny, he says, operates by exploiting fears. Those who, despite massacres, plunder, injustice and oppression, still hold on to some rights are tempted by the false security of walls; walls which enclose some and exclude others.

The Pope certainly denounced xenophobia and indifference to the refugees fleeing the (US induced) disaster in Syria, but his premise was the tyranny of Mammon and its consequent “globalization of indifference” which did not put economy at the service of the people, which did not promote peace and justice and which did not defend Mother Earth. (As in continuous military incursions around the world, mass incarceration of petty offenders, sub-subsistence jobs, inadequate health care, penurious retirement,  ecocide,  fracking, coal tar extracting and palm oil deforestation.)

What is really choice is that at the outset, the Pope cited Quadressimo Anno the 1933 encyclical in which then Pope Pius XI denounced the economic dictatorship of international capital ("dictadura económica mundial que él llamó «imperialismo internacional del dinero». ) In fact Pius XI was also very vigorous in his denunciation of the “idols of Liberalism.” by which he meant exactly the economic policies pursued by Hillary and Obama and all American administrations since Reagan.

Of course the slop and slosh that passes for journalism in England and the U.S. would attempt to trivialize the Pope’s statements, rendering them harmless to the evil the corporate press supports (global capitalism sub nom. “free trade”) while abusing the Pope's remarks as a foil for their own enemies.

The Church has always denounced liberal economics. It has always insisted that people have a right economic security from the state as a precondition to personal growth and freedom.

"Toda la doctrina social de la Iglesia y el magisterio de mis antecesores se rebelan contra el ídolo-dinero que reina en lugar de servir, tiraniza y aterroriza a la humanidad."

If anything, his remarks were directed against Hillary and the arms-peddlers, money lenders, war-mongers and earth-destroyers she serves and supports

 ©