How much of Shell’s record US $40 billion profit was due to the Ukraine war and freezing Russia out of the market?
If you apply the “excess deaths” methodology we became familiar with during covid, comparing profit against a running average of the previous five years, we get a figure of about $25 billion “excess profit”.
This is of course a rough technique, both with deaths as with profits, as neither covid nor the Ukraine war were the sole factor affecting the outcome, and “all other things” are not equal but in some degree variable.
But it is a good indication when a major new factor comes in to play.
If we simply remove Shell’s 2020 accounts, with their US$20 billion covid loss, from the equation as exceptional, we still have a figure of US$15 billion excess profit, arising largely from the war in Ukraine.
Isn’t it good to know that all those people have not died or been maimed in vain? At least Shell are raking it in.
Shell of course are not alone. We will see something similar from all the energy companies, including those that are billing you massive amounts to heat your home. It isn’t costing any more to produce the energy, it is simply vulture predation on market disruption.
Capitalism in theory works in free markets of trade flows. But in practice financial flows are manipulated by states to the benefit of the rich in numerous ways, of which war and sanctions are just the bluntest examples.
The United States blowing up the Nordstream 2 pipeline was a pretty significant state market intervention. Yet when the result of that kind of action is to cause super profits to western energy companies at consumer expense, market intervention to remove that super profit becomes “unhelpful”.
Arms manufacturers are also coining it. To December, investors in merchants of death BAE had seen an increase in value of their investment by 63% in twelve months. Now everybody with a finger in the pie is clamouring to send more tanks and planes to the Ukraine. Money, money, money.
The story is no different at Lockheed Martin etc.
We should also not forget that the military and security services are themselves a vested financial interest. Vastly rising budgets, more career opportunities, more second career jobs in the arms industries and the think tanks that pump out the propaganda for more war, war without end.
I have said this before, but J A Hobson’s short book, Imperialism: A Study contains analysis of how all this works that stands true over a hundred years on, is expressed with clarity, and fundamentally changed how I view the world, when I read it forty years ago.
There is yet more acceleration in the massive transfer of resources to the wealthy. Every world event – Covid, the war in Ukraine – is manipulated by states to increase inequality. Oxfam, who seem the most genuine of the large relief charities (admittedly not a high bar), recently published this:
Billionaires have seen extraordinary increases in their wealth. During the pandemic and cost-of-living crisis years since 2020, $26 trillion (63 percent) of all new wealth was captured by the richest 1 percent, while $16 trillion (37 percent) went to the rest of the world put together. A billionaire gained roughly $1.7 million for every $1 of new global wealth earned by a person in the bottom 90 percent. Billionaire fortunes have increased by $2.7 billion a day. This comes on top of a decade of historic gains —the number and wealth of billionaires having doubled over the last ten years.
In this western world, I am not sure what percentage of ordinary people have to reach what stage of desperation before we see the start of genuine revolt. Should things continue on this trend, we are going to find out eventually.
————————————————-
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
The mass media will encourage us to view Shell’s vast profits at Russia’s (and our) expense as some kind of victory for us! We should all be celebrating not revolting!
Did I miss something, and the investigation results into the NordStream 2 sabotage disclosed? The US is obviously a major suspect, but so is their lawless UK poodle, or Poland, and obviously Ukraine itself.
Be patient. Any day now they will announce it and demand the US be shunned by the international community and Biden be flown directly to the Hague. When has the US ever not been held to account?
And the big revolving door ensures there is jobs for the boys in the big multinationals and political roles for the senior executives. Money flows from the corporate sector as donations to political parties and back again as contracts to the corporates. The whole system is corrupt and stinks to high heaven – welcome to western democracy the home of freedom and equality, for some.
“the home of freedom and equality, for some”
Those being the some who are more equal than others, presumably.
It’s a real test for the EU and especially Germany, Sweden and Denmark.
Revealing how western democracies are functioning in 2023. How honest, open and committed to transparency they really are. If, as some reports suggest, Sweden is hiding something(?) for fear of upsetting the US and other allies – with its NATO membership pending. Then that implies sovereignty is already being compromised, before that country even joins.
If democratic integrity is compromised to the point where inconvenient findings have to be suppressed, in a cover-up by elected representatives. Then what are the European ‘values’ we’re supposedly defending? Enough lies and cover-ups and they become routine, the default modus operandi, a template for future operations involving misattribution and lies about ‘enemies.’ It’s a dark path to go down.
“Then what are the European ‘values’ we’re supposedly defending?”
The values of shares and currencies?
It could be any of them, but it still would have been at the behest of the USA, the only clear beneficiary.
For some time that nice Professor Chomsky has warned of reactionary elements within the American political establishment wanting to “stick it” to the Europeans, by which I think he means take action to downgrade the status and influence of Western Europe on the global stage. In a stroke of good fortune that would surely raise the eyebrows of even the famous Dr Pangloss. The late war in the Ukraine has seen the polities of Western Europe rush into acts of violence and economic self-immolation that must surely be beyond the wildest dreams of the American Right.
I thought Radoslaw Sikorski ( ex Polish foreign minister and husband of Anne Applebaum) had cleared that up.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/former-ministers-nord-stream-sabotage-tweet-causes-uproar-in-poland/
Victoria Nuland cleared that up, actually.
Update: Sy Hersh published an article today stating it was indeed the US that did it, with some detail:
https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream
Grossly unfair to vultures.
Great Work Craig..
I see there’s been new evidence that this war could have been stopped in it’s early stages –
‘ Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said in an interview posted to his YouTube channel on Saturday that the US and its Western allies “blocked” his efforts of mediating between Russia and Ukraine to bring an end to the war in its early days.
Caitlin Johnstone –
More Evidence That The West Sabotaged Peace In Ukraine
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/more-evidence-that-the-west-sabotaged?
Hardly news or evidence, Brian. It’s been widely known for years that the West provoked Russia into its unprovoked invasion and then fed the fascists to keep it going. Boris has been appointed as the clown messenger boy to pass on the USA’s orders to the Jewish pianist. The USA don’t even bother to deny what they are doing, these announcements are just chaff to distract the public.
I Know Stevie..I’v Been Following the alternative sites ..But this Snippet is new.
@Stevie Boy
The pianist isn’t Jewish….
I don’t think it was, so much as that flabby blonde buffoon, the new liberal hero.
My most vivid recollection of ‘Shell’ dates back to the 1970s when I was a student in London watching a documentary on the environmental destruction visited on the Niger Delta. It was the Nigerian Ken Saro-Wiwa who significantly highlighted Shell’s complicity.
The presenter reached a point in the documentary when he directly confronted the CEO of Shell and very efficiently laid out the unassailable evidence pointing directly to Shell’s complicity. “Shell is responsible for this and that’s the truth isn’t it?” asked the interviewer.
Shell’s CEO rocked back in his executive chair and shamelessly and blamelessly said in reply, “Well, the truth is a variable concept”.
Courtenay
I knew Ken Saro-Wiwa. Shell of course had him killed.
Waiting to see what our two resident agents John and Pears have to say about profiting from death.
wait a bit. they never come early to new threads. perhaps getting instructions on how to counter the new topic.
Hi Tatyana.
Thanks for your patience!
My controllers in Boston were a bit slow downloading my script to the USA Embassy in Dublin.
To be fair the script is pretty good though I expect that you will spot the errors?
In particular the sarcastic comments about Gazprom in a transparent attempt to deflect from the ratbags in Shell, etc.
Good night.
John
Tatyana
since you mentioned it a few days ago, the “preps. to set up the West for war with Russia via Russiagate hoaxes et al.”
There is apparently a reference to this in the latest TWITTER revelations by Matt Taibbi
(via Alastair Crooke whose notion that now the US empire is collapsing I find childish though) here:
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/02/06/russia-strategic-aims-consequence-to-collapsing-us-empire/
“As Kelley Beaucar Vlahos in the American Conservative underlines, U.S. factions have been preparing Russia’s ‘burial’ for many years. Indeed, one of most damaging facts to emerge from Matt Taibbi’s ‘Twitter Files’ exposé has been: “how aggressive congressional lawmakers and federal agency officials were – in pushing a cynical narrative that brought the social media giant to heel whilst setting up the Russian bogeyman that haunts U.S. foreign policy and posturing in the Ukraine war today.”
Crookes link to Twitter here:
https://www.racket.news/p/capsule-summaries-of-all-twitter
Hello J Arther Nast.
Of course oil/gas companies in Russia and Europe should be taxed on all profits, however defined.
Does Gazprom have shareholders who receive dividends?
Perhaps it is a State owned company and all excess profits revert to the Russian people?
Aye right.
In my opinion, the gas/oil/minerals of a country are the property of the people of that country, not of the “private sector”.
Licences to extract gas/oil/minerals should be carefully granted under strict conditions and for a limited period.
So perhaps we for once agree?
All the best,
John
“Of course oil/gas companies in Russia and Europe should be taxed on all profits, however defined.”
Taxation on profits is a very blunt instrument and does not capture the huge amounts of wealth diverted to the senior managements of these companies. Amazon managed for years without making a profit.
“Does Gazprom have shareholders who receive dividends? Perhaps it is a State owned company and all excess profits revert to the Russian people?”
The answer to both those questions is “yes”, Gazprom is a company, the majority of whose shares are owned by the state. A fair proportion of the shareholders who receive dividends are the Russian people.
TBH I don’t have a clue what does it mean but about 17% share in 2020 was 2 *The issuing bank of ADRs (American depositary receipts) for PJSC Gazprom’s shares is the Bank of New York Mellon.
For what it’s worth, I did find that closing paragraph in the Graun ‘Comment is Free’* article by the RUSI’s Jonathan Eyal that our host linked to quite amusing:
‘Germany will reassert its European importance when the guns eventually fall silent and the world looks to Berlin’s deep pockets to help with Ukraine’s reconstruction. But Germany will struggle to influence the reshaping of Europe’s security map.’
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/29/amid-the-smoke-of-war-power-in-europe-is-shifting-decisively-to-the-east
In other words: Germany should have no say in the West’s dealings with Russia, but still needs to fork out most of the hundreds of billions of euros required to rebuild half of Ukraine when the time comes. Listen Jon-boy, our Teutonic cousins’ weekly or fortnightly visits to the local mega-brothel don’t pay for themselves you know. Also, my grammar mistress used to say that you should never start a sentence with the word ‘but’.
* which should, of course, now be called ‘Comments are not Allowed’.
And of course as a result of the US blowing up Nordstream 2 , German energy costs will increase substantially as it now has to buy LNG from the US and elsewhere, making it’s manufacturers unable to compete and quite like having to relocate to countries like the USA with cheaper energy prices. Germany will be economically hobbled and unable to carry the rest of Europe.
Thanks for your reply Geoffrey. For my money it was the SBS that did it, though at the US’s behest – could be wrong. Fully agree with your analysis of the prognosis for German industry over the next 5-10 years, especially as any sizable future chemical and manufacturing plants in the US will be largely automated.
Unfortunately, history provides a guide as to what tends to happen when Germany is economically hobbled, and don’t forget, it’s not as if there aren’t already plenty of Germans on the far right, even though for the past decade or so they haven’t needed to vote Nazi (or rather crypto-Nazi) in order to be able to live in a rich, successful Germany, which has hardly any Jews in it – where they’re able to buy as much cheap land in eastern Europe as they can afford, and for a few euros can have their wicked way with a nubile slav without having to leave their home town, city or sometimes even village – and which, before going on to win it, could beat hosts Brazil 7-1 in their own World Cup.*
* Speaking of outlandish football results, let’s remind ourselves of the scoreline of Man City’s final game before the Abu Dhabis started throwing billions at them, and their lawyers and accountants began thinking up ways to try to get round FFP rules: Middlesbrough 8 [EIGHT] – Manchester City 1.
Reparations? a red herring, the problem was that Weimar Germany was a democracy until 1930 so reparations couldn’t be palmed off on the working class.
Thanks for your reply Squeeth. The Weimar Republic ended in 1933 when Hitler became Chancellor. Throughout most of its existence it was paying reparations to the allies, even though it tried various elaborate and sometimes destructive schemes (most famously, hyperinflation in the early 1920’s) to try to minimise them in real terms. After the Nazis came to power, reparations along with democracy stopped. They resumed again after the war, for most of which time West Germany, and then the whole of Germany after 1990, have been democracies. The final payment was made in 2010.
https://www.history.com/news/germany-world-war-i-debt-treaty-versailles
Anyway, the point I was trying to make was that, even though millions of Germans faced great hardship in the early 1930’s, largely due to most of the aid from the US drying up when the Great Depression commenced, less than a third of them ever voted for the Nazis. Fast forward to now, and though their average wages are some of the highest in Europe, their manufacturing industry having benefited hugely from being in the euro, 10-12% of Germans are still voting for the AfD. I expect that percentage to increase substantially in the coming years – or if it doesn’t, a large proportion of their vote to go to even more extreme parties.
Regards the comment on Oxfam; aye the Third sector is a bit of a racket these days.
As recompense for David Miliband losing out in the Labour leadership contest to his (comparatively) socialist brother, he was hired as CEO of the International Rescue Committee. Starting salary in 2013 reported as £300k pa, rising to a reported £768k in 2021.
On losing the Danish GE in 2015, Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt (wife of NuLabour ghoul, Stephen Kinnock) became CEO of Save the Children, reported starting salary $300k. That was just the start.
Thorning-Schmidt’s current list of Directorships is a marvel to behold. A caricature of the NeoLiberal, global elite. A checklist for believers in the conspiracy of the global illuminati. Atlantic Council, check. Council for Foreign Relations, check. Centre for Global Development, check. Global Forum, check. Etc, etc..
Most lucrative of all will be full board membership at Facebook.
If the pitchforks and burning torches ever do appear, a résumé like that’ll get you a prime seat on the first tumbril.
Rumour has it that oor very ain neoLiberal, wannabe globalist apparatchik, Nicola Sturgeon is polishing her CV for some Stateside, Third sector gig. Better get that Brasso oot ‘cause aye things are falling apart on the domestic front.
Vivian O’Blivion
Maybe her future earnings can keep the SNP afloat? I saw it reported her poor old hubby had to bail the SNP out recently to the tune of £100,000 plus, due to the party’s liquidity issues. Presumably he’ll demand repayment w/interest on his loan?
Did SNP supporters ever find out where the missing £600,000 – raised to fight the referendum campaign that never happened – went?
Ah the missing £600k. This has been under investigation for an inordinate length of time by Polis Scotland (18 months roughly) but the Crown Office & Procurators Fiscal Service are doggedly opposed to acting on the investigative file presented to them (repeated leaks to the Sunday Times).
The Scottish Lord Advocate is appointed by the First Minister. Careers are made and destroyed on the capricious and vindictive patronage of a psychologically fragile leader. Not for nothing is she referred to as Wee Nippy. The Edinburgh, Legal / Political bubble is smaller and more claustrophobic than its London equivalent.
MI5 must be content that the Scottish Executive and the COPFS are intimately bound together in omertà, lest exposure lead to mutually assured destruction.
600,000
(107,000)
How amusing would it be if £493,000 was discovered in a bag mysteriously left outside SNP HQ?
These “charidees” rather remind me of the fund-raiser in Bel Ami.
I would like to add that under her reign
Denmark’s secret service helped the US spy on European politicians including German Chancellor Angela Merkel from 2012 to 2014,
Surprise Surprise!
Oskar Lafontaine, former German Finance Minister and leader of the German left:
“The fundamental concern of Europeans must be how to free ourselves from American tutelage. […] To believe the Americans want to protect us is not only naïve, but also harmful. American politicians do not even want to protect their own people.”
“Billionaires have seen extraordinary increases in their wealth. ”
Although my understanding of economics is somewhat primitive, I would have thought that the vast increases in the wealth of billionaires and inequality is principally due to the possibilities of centralisation and control of companies’ operations offered by computer systems and data processing, which didn’t exist before (yes, I’m that old). It’s that before the possibility of profiteering offered by war and sanctions. Before the 1980s, you couldn’t do that, though obviously war as enrichment of the MIC is older, as warned by Eisenhower.
Such things have been studied. That explanation is what billionaires want people to believe. But many things were centralized and globalized long before modern computers. For instance before WWI as famously described by Keynes.
Such technological explanations, which can and do work the other way, toward decentralization, are trivial compared to the true explanation. Conscious legal and political changes, supported and designed by the millionaires and their flunkies of the day (the 70s-80s) to wreck welfare states and social democracy, increase inequality and enrich themselves. Enacted by Thatcher, Reagan and Mitterrand. The last probably as crucial or more than the other two as it was a completely unnecessary and unforced betrayal.
Billionaires have seen great increases in their wealth because we have allowed them to rob everyone. Period.
“But many things were centralized and globalized long before modern computers.”
Yes, of course, but it could not technically be done effectively. The desire was there, but the means were not.
German victims of Nazi terror were located by a colossal punch card system, supplied by Dehomag, an IBM affiliate circa latte 1930’s. Dehomag maintained the system until late into WWII thru the figleaf of it being done by IBM Switerland.
No better example of the insidious link between politics and oil and corruption than Alan Duncan. A complete and utter khnt.
What about Abramovich? Politics, oil, corruption a money bag instead of soul.
This ex-Russian oligarch lost his British investor visa, so he then acquired Israeli citizenship and later a Portuguese passport through the Sephardic Jewish program. This descendant of the Jews exalted the commanders of Azov after the exchange of prisoners. Took pictures with them, gave each of them an iPhone.
Those are the same media personalities from the Azov regiment, for the rescue of which Britain was so worried. Those who created frankly Nazi content for the Ukrainian consumer.
Shariy covered this and called Abramovich “Otto Schindler of our time”
Tatyana. As they say: ‘beware Greeks bearing gifts’, or in this case: Israeli citizens bearing iPhones.
Oh, you certainly don’t want to handle a phone that an Israeli might have tampered with. They have ‘previous’ for that kind of thing:
“Following the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the Palestinian Authority began to cooperate more closely with Shin Bet in hunting [Hamas master bomb-maker, Yahya] Ayyash. Shin Bet learned that Ayyash had, on occasion, spent the night in the Gaza City home of Osama Hamad, a childhood friend of his. Shin Bet had previously had dealings with Kamil Hamad, Osama Hamad’s uncle.
“In October 1995, Shin Bet operatives approached Kamil Hamad. Kamil Hamad demanded money and israeli identity cards for himself and his wives. After the Shin Bet threatened to inform Hamas of his betrayal, Kamil Hamad agreed to cooperate. Shin Bet agents gave Hamad a cell phone, and told him it was bugged so they could listen in on Ayyash’s conversations. They did not tell Hamad that, in addition to eavesdropping devices, it also contained 15 grams of RDX explosive.
“Kamil Hamad gave the phone to his nephew Osama, knowing that Ayyash regularly used Osama’s phones. At 08:00 on 5 January 1996, Ayyash’s father called him. Ayyash picked it up and talked with his father. Overhead, an israeli plane picked up their conversation and relayed it to an israeli command post. When it was confirmed that it was Ayyash on the phone, Shin Bet remotely detonated it, martyring Ayyash instantly.”
https://ilkha.com/english/analysis/today-is-the-26th-anniversary-of-the-martyrdom-of-yahya-ayyash-15344
That’s only one of their many dirty tricks: Exploding phones to poison syringes – Inside Mossad’s super-spy death squads who ‘executed Iran nuke mastermind
Craig wrote:
“I am not sure what percentage of ordinary people have to reach what stage of desperation before we see the start of genuine revolt. Should things continue on this trend, we are going to find out eventually.”
I agree, but I suspect TPTB will engineer an escalation into global conflagration just in time, before that stuff starts to kick off in earnest.
I wish the elites and their servants had more enlightened self-interest but it appears they don’t.
I am slightly bemused by the reference to Hobson’s “Imperialism” as a “short ” book. The link takes you to an edition with 350 odd pages and my Google version goes to 380 plus including notes and references!
Interestingly Chapter 4 “Economic Parasites of Imperialism”, which seems to reflect the theme of this spot on article very well, is the same chapter used to accuse Jeremy Corbyn of antisemitism, because he had written an introduction to a new edition – with its reference to the economic and political power of the Rothschild family without whose financial permission no war could be carried out.
Hobson writes just before that reference. “If, contemplating the enormous expenditure on armaments, the ruinous wars, the diplomatic audacity of knavery by which modern Governments seek to extend their territorial power, we put the plain, practical question, Cui bono? the first and most obvious answer is, The investor. Fast forward to Shell et al.
Point taken. I meant it is incredibly concise given the ground it covers.
I’m not disputing that there are vested interests in government, Shell and BAE. But it’s not good practice to quote share price differences based on dates that you’ve picked and chosen. Shell’s share price is still below it’s 2018 level. BAE performs worse than S&P 500 on the past 5 years.
I mean, if someone is reading this and thinking of doing some amoral investing, it’s not as simple as “put all your money on Shell and BAE now and you’re a millionaire within a fortnight”. I know this article wasn’t investment advice, but still…
That was not the most common outcome in the past. As inequality of wealth increased in the dominant imperial power, internal discord weakened it, and it ceased to be the dominant power.
There’s a book by Ray Dalio that cites several historical examples of this process. He thinks it’s already far gone in the US empire (of which Britain is a part) and that China will replace the USA as the dominant power. Since China has never had much history of colonising/dominating distant countries, that would probably be a good thing for most of the world’s population.
The fly in the ointment is that “this time” really could be different: the US military is far more powerful, relative to the rest of the world, than the military forces of any previous empire. At its height around 1905, the British Royal Navy was just a little more powerful than the next 2 biggest navies combined. The US navy is considerably more powerful than all the navies of the world combined. The US could start a war with China simply to prevent its economic development.
IMO. The premiss that the USA is far more powerful than, for example, its two primary, imagined enemies China and Russia is flawed. Ukraine has demonstrated that when you get down to basics, the combined western powers cannot provide sufficient ammunition for a sustained conflicted. Shock and awe, yes, then it’s essentially over. Advanced weaponry is mainly PR fodder, it sounds good but doesn’t really do what they say it does. Sure the USA has more ships but can they field a large fleet ? Doubtful because of the logistics, fuel and ammo. When, recently, have we seen anything more than a few ships parading at a time? And, hypersonic and non hypersonic missiles realistically just make naval shipping easy targets, floating coffins. I would suggest that Ukraine shows that when you get down to it, warfare hasn’t evolved much from the blood and guts of hand to hand fighting of WW1.
The USA could not start an actual, direct war with China or Russia because of the repercussions and implications. It won’t happen. Even the Yankee crazies know they wouldn’t be safe in such a scenario.
Wars between industrial states and states supported by industrial states resemble the Great War because it was the most scientific war ever fought and because firepower trumps manoeuvre. The central front in Ukraine has been the Allied and the US-Ukronazi schwerpunkt since 2014 for a reason.
Stevie Boy, I am not so sure. I read back in the 2000’s about US admirel John Poindexter and the TIA (Total Information Awareness) program, which he followed up with the WWT (World Wide Threat) matrix. About the same time, US general Micheal Vaughn (or some equivalent MIC droid) managed the “BigAss Bag”.The Bag was an attempt to present a real time visualation of all the data streams available ,from the text on this blog to the CCTV footage of the world to sateillite data, all processed by a host of Cray supercomputers or some such machines. Humint, sigint, census data, everything available. I think the Bag had a huge “screen” , maybe 50 feet, possibly in 3D, with an operating platform staffed by technicians feeding in the search algorithms. If the business of empire is to wage continental warfare. a wannabe world empire wages war on an intercontinental scale, as the US has done since the dropping of the Bomb on Hiroshima. I would imagine germs and atomics would be the basic weapons backed by massive informational and cyber combat operations, low earth orbit shennanigans- full spectrum dominance accross all domains.
Channneling McKinder, the Sea Powers lay siege to the World Island (Eurasia). The strategy is to drive indeterminable wedges into the World Island.This serves two purposes, attempting a local bridgehead and delaying the inevitable economic union in Eurasia. Whoever controls the World Island conrtols the world. Ukraine is the latest local bridgehead in a chain of bloody imbroglios since the end of WWII. These adventures cost real money and are paid for by a lender. The destabalistation campaign is carried out by bribery, proxy and subversion. Eventually the lender calls in their debt for those past imbroglios and imperial boots are on the ground, in action on the World Island. War settles all debt. It is a zero sum game and winner takes all – the defeated are ground into the dust and forgotten, remembered only in a few place names and the phony items items of “national dress”. The victor controls the world, if there is anything left.
It was all said in 1935 – ‘War is a Racket’ by Smedley D Butler.
Indeed Robyn…
the Big Difference now is Nukes.. Where War could become All Life extinct ..Yet the MSM don’t care.. They don’t tell the Truth re Ukraine or the Coming War on China .
Brianfujisan
The only way that nukes will be used is if the Putin regime uses them.
Which would be militarily futile, politically foolish and morally contemptible.
John
you got any links for this crass assertion? JK. When think tanks such as the RAND corp played with scenarios in 2006 that asserted that the US could win a first strike scenario, utter psychos who are now headed by, arguably, the most dangerous woman on earth Victoria Nuland, and abetted by capricious narcissist like liz Truss and serial liar Johnson, it is far more likely that the Hawks circleling around the vice president and Biden take actions that will result in the destruction of Europe perse.
Hello Nevermind.
Putin has threatened (as have his cronies) the use of nukes if his regime is threatened.
When did the US, NATO, France or England threaten the use of nukes?
If anything, Biden has been cautious in his reaction to the invasion of Ukraine by the Putin regime.
Remember his repeated statements to the effect that US and NATO troops would not enter Ukraine in the event of an invasion?
Thanks,
John
John Kinsella
The problem of your statement is that it presupposes that what you say is the truth, that Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons. The truth is much more nuanced. If you do a Duck Duck Go search you will come upon dozens of headlines, mainly from well known media from the west. Amongst these headlines are the following:
The Mirror : “Vladimir Putin appears to threaten nuclear attack against West in chilling TV address”
NY post “West could trigger nuclear war over Ukraine, Russia diplomat says at UN”
And so on. But of course there are more numerous headlines stating openly that Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons. What is most interesting of all of these posts is the allegations by Boris Johnson. Here is a snippet from that shining beacon of Journalism, The Express:
“Vladimir Putin was warned that any attack on the UK would initiate an “enormous” NATO response and would be the “end of him”. The Russian President allegedly told Boris Johnson that he could wipe out the UK with a missile attack within 60 seconds. Putin made the remarks during a telephone conversation with Britain’s then Prime Minister in the days and weeks leading up to his disastrous invasion of Ukraine.”
So why does anyone believe a serial like like Johnson when he speaks about The Ukraine, but not when he speaks about anything else?
JK
Theresa May
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2016/jul/18/theresa-may-parliament-nuclear-strikes-video.
No one was outraged. Every one was outraged with Corbyn hesitating and declared him a national security risk.
“The only way that nukes will be used is if the Putin regime uses them.”
Because the US would never do such a thing, would they? oh, wait…
Hello Bayard.
As I said, “When did the US, NATO, France or England threaten the use of nukes?”
(The US did use them against the Japanese Empire in 1945. The justification being a quick end to the war. I doubt if Stalin would have hesitated in the same situation. And of course ‘Man in the High Castle’ Hitler would have nuked the USA until it capitulated.)
Perhaps I should have said “When did the US, NATO, France or England threaten the use of nukes against Russkiy troops in Ukraine?”.
Putin and his cronies, on the other hand, have regularly hinted at/threatened the use of nukes.
Remember the phrase “Why do we need a world if Russia is not in it?”.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/02/28/why-do-we-need-a-world-if-russia-is-not-in-it-state-tv-presenter-opens-show-with-ominous-address-a76653
Nihilism at its finest.
All the best,
John
JK
That article doesn’t contain anything other than the known Russian nuclear policy (as also indicated by Tatayana below) – that Russia will respond if the US (with its NATO subordinates) launches a nuclear attack on Russia. I am not quite why you are making a big point out of an article nearly a year old which says nothing new. It is the US which has often indicated the possibility of launching an initial nuclear attack.
“As I said, “When did the US, NATO, France or England threaten the use of nukes?”
Oh, come on, you said that in another comment which I had not yet read, not the one I was quoting. I don’t have the ability to see into the future, sadly.
@Bayard, in The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner, Daniel Ellsberg devotes Chapter 20 to USA’s nuclear first-use threats, compiling a list of 25 from all Presidents up to and including Bill Clinton. Obviously there are more.
No USAmerican President has ever ruled out the first use of nuclear weapons, as far as I know, although this flies in the face of UN Resolution 36/100.
Some uses of nuclear weapons could also be considered state torture, which the USA inflicted on Marshall Islanders through nuclear testing, as the British did in Maralinga, as the Chinese did in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, and so on.
JK
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1401310946550165.
In this video Theresa May proudly states within second that She will
use nukes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
considering the war going on with 150,000 or so dead Ukrainian soldiers and German responsibility for prolonging it, not to speak of possible nuclear war, this photograph from a few days ago I found disgusting:
https://www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=93464
The image shows at a carnival party right to left:
right: German Foreign Secretary ALB, no need to comment
centre: Mrs. Strack Zimmermann from the FDP, (Liberals) Chair of the Committee on National Security and a well connected lobbyist for German tank manufacturer Rhein-Metall which has its HQ in her constiutency in Düsseldorf (a rich city), about the obvious conflict of interest for a year now no one seems to care.
left: Mr. Klingbeil, Social Democrat, one of two party leaders, I call him MC, because he is always in such a good mood, whether he is opting for tanks, for money to Ukrainian democrats, for war planes, whatever – Klingbeil will probably jump off a bridge if it helps him climb the career ladder.
I am usually rather cold-blooded, or call it pragmatic, but for some reason this image made me furious.
The revolution isn’t going to come from Europe, America, Canada, or Australia. It’s going to come from places like Burkina Faso and Mali, which not only kicked out all French troops, “diplomats” and NGOs, but they are now talking of forming a kind of “merger” (see also the “East Oregon” movement for something similar).
Other places where the seams are bursting include Lebanon, Bangladesh and Pakistan, which are on the verge of a full Sri Lanka moment (gov’t is out of cash and is losing control of everything). Peru’s also falling to pieces at the moment as well as the people rise up against their government.
The real question is when London is gonna go full 2011 and burn to the ground.
Starmer’s response to this brutal rent seeking is to propose freezing energy prices at their current record highs. This gets presented by the media to the public as radically tackling the energy companies. It accords with the message being pushed by the FT, Economist,Times, Guardian and the rest that the ‘solution’ to everything is electing Starmer with a super majority of the most rightwing candidates ever selected by the Labour Party. Most educated people in the country have been convinced to believe this.
“Most educated people”
After what I have witnessed in Germany this past year, “education” means nothing.
Sometimes it makes things even worse.
Are you saying that to produce a Pint of Lager
cost £1 but at the Global Market going price was £5.
To my undestanding I will pay £3 ( no more) for a pint and the difference of £2 government will borrow to pay to the brewery!?
Txs God Starmer is SSaving us. Everyone is happy. I get a cheap beer and the brewer makes and meets and Sturmer get’s votes, and Market economy is not
disrupted. As I say win win situation!
My parents were born right at the beginning of the 20th century. My grandfathers were an engine driver and a solicitor’s clerk. My parents both ‘rose’ from this social background to the land of the Oxford intellectual. I was born in 1944. I never talked in great detail about their world ‘before the war’, but I’ve always thought that the world of the 30’s must have been a bloody awful place to live. ‘Better’ or ‘worse’ than now: I’m not really sure. We all do know, though, that only the most god-awful cataclysm put a stop to it.
a funny take on this (“the past was better”) might be Woody Allen´s comedy “Midnight in Paris”
Thanks for the link to the Karnivals kommittee meeting AG, they now want to be seen to try and look funny rather than the anihilists of mankind.
‘Es wuerde besser sein die panzer ohne kanonen zu senden. Aber diese rechts radikalen Hexen wollen ja beide das Steuerad halten und der Karneval spricht zu den Massen.’
‘ It would be better to send these tanks without barrels. But these right wing radical witches both want to have command of the tiller, and the carnival speaks to the public masses.’
‘The story is no different at Lockheed Martin etc.’
According to this particular Russian propaganda outfit that just isn’t the case. For whatever it’s faults Southfront were right about Syria long before the mainstream came round to their point of view. (Russia turned the tide)
second 44
https://southfront.org/us-fail-to-meet-needs-of-war/
Southfront was scrupulous in separating claims from facts in the Syrian war and has done the same in the Ukraine war (2014-present). I’m not sure if this makes it a Russian propaganda outfit. I could do without the masturbatory heavy-metal soundtracks though.
Propaganda outfit. The alleged chemical weapons bombs in the video are grenades, red=fragmentation, grey=smoke, yellow=stun.
The situation with energy is supposedly simple: prices are determined by supply and demand. As Russian oil and gas are sanctioned they are theoretically removed from the world’s supply which is running to near capacity anyway. So removing a big chunk from supply inevitably leads to higher prices. This of course affects the major energy producers less, including both Russia and the US. Not satisfied with the effects of the sanctions alone, the US bombing of the NS2 pipeline was also to ensure that Germany will not easily backtrack and lift sanctions unilaterally. It is amazing how little coverage and analysis of this has taken place in the MSM.
More important than the rise in energy crisis is the rather misleading approach of our western governments, to inflation mostly caused by the sudden rise in energy prices. Inflation that is caused by intrinsic factors, increase in money supply, is possible to control by increasing interest rates, and attempts to reduce inflationary wage rises especially in the public sector. . But in the case of inflation due to this rise in energy prices the same policy only squeezes more money out of those who are suffering most from inflation and makes no sense. But because we have no proper socialist parties anymore in the west, this very obvious fact is never discussed.
SA really! Prices are determined by everything but supply and demand.
Prices are largely determined by what the market will bear, which is a combination of the ability and the inclination to pay, although demand has a big effect on that and also on supply. In addition, both supply and demand are affected by price.
““Why do we need a world if Russia is not in it?”
This is a promise to retaliate.
Wael Sawan, the new Shell CEO, was asked the other day if going forward he would accept returns on wind and solar that are lower (even 2-3%) than those from oil and gas.
No, he said. “Let me be categorical, we cannot justify going for a lower return. Our shareholders deserve to see us going after strong returns. If we cannot achieve double-digit returns we need to question very hard whether we should continue in this business.”
As one of our resident agents (C) J Arther Nast works on building a nuke boogyman, using a lie, I feel I could step in with a modest contribution into revealing the truth. Thank you.
The phrase about world without Russia was used in a film by Soloviev, in March 2018. In October 2018 at Valday discussion club in Sochi, Putin explained the phrase
https://youtu.be/XVjaIp0byOY
I made the translation:
“- I said this phrase, it seems, to Volodya Solovyov?
– Yes, in the movie.
– You just can’t take anything out of context. Let me remind you that it was about the readiness to use weapons, weapons of mass destruction, to protect oneself, to protect one’s interests. I said that in our concept of using nuclear weapons there is no preventive strike.
I ask everyone, including those present here who will analyze, use it in one way or another in their presentation, to keep in mind that we do not have a preventive strike in our concept. Our concept is the answer to the oncoming blow.
“For those who know what it is, no need to specify. For those who are not familiar (*with terminology*), I will explain: this means that we are ready to use weapons only when we make sure that someone, a potential aggressor, strikes at Russia.
I won’t reveal a secret, we have a missile attack early warning system. This system captures on a global scale the launches of strategic missiles – from the world’s oceans, from any territory.
Criterion 1 – launch completed. Criterion 2 – the flight path determined . Criterion 3 – the territory where nuclear warheads fall defined.
“When we are sure that the territory of Russia is under attack, only after that we strike back. *Ответно-встречный*. Why *is it called so? Because theirs are flying towards us, and ours will fly towards them, that is, towards the aggressor.
“Of course this is a catastrophe, worldwide. But we cannot be the initiators of this, we do not have a preventive strike. Yes, in such a situation, we are waiting for someone to use nuclear weapons against us. We are not taking proactive steps. Yes. But the aggressor must know that retaliation is inevitable, that he will be destroyed.
“Well, we, well, we are victims of aggression. We, as martyrs, will go to heaven, and they will simply die because they will not even have time to repent.”
* The last phrase was said half-jokingly to relieve tension and laughter in the hall confirms this. The host comments ‘I feel desire to talk to archbishop Tikhon. I think I do it, later’
—
Now, the sense of Ответно-встречный term has absolutely no emotional connotation. ‘Ответ’ means ‘response’ in its most general meaning. ‘Встречный’ means ‘moving in the opposite direction’, like ‘moving in the opposite lane on the road’. So, the sense must be a provoked strike, a strike back.
—
If the military doctrine of your state has an exact English equivalent for Ответно-встречный удар?
I would also like to say that Putin does not use Twitter. So if you see a short phrase from his name, then it is most likely taken out of context. Putin has a website, the English version is available.
http://en.kremlin.ru/
Anything posted on Instagram, TikTok, Guardian, etc. is only a paraphrase, and presentation depends on the creativity of the editor.
I have always thought that there is a curiosity to the nuclear stalemate. It is not in the interests of the victim of a first strike to retaliate. It may seem anti-intuitive, but the victim is more likely to survive if the victim does NOT retaliate. Of course it depends on the success rate of the missiles, as well as other factors and it depends on the capacity of the victim to take a ‘rational’ view. The rational view to take is a purely numerical or statistical approach. More of the victim population may survive if there is less overall destruction, than would survive if the remaining functioning part of the world was not damaged. In a large nuclear detonation, the outcomes become unpredictable. The aggressor may suffer from unanticipated negative affects such as some ‘backfire’ cataclysmic weather/atmospheric or environmental event. There isn’t actually much data on very large scale nuclear events, and post apocalypse – the possibility of ‘meaningful’ survival may be so diminished as to result in the collapse of the aggressor population. Regardless of the factional hostilities we are a species of related beings. The loss of a large proportion of the population would potentially be so emotionally destructive it would destroy the viability of the human species to persist. Regardless of our technologies, we are NOT machines and we are not immune to grief.
I agree with you completely. When I first heard that very phrase taken out of context, I was literally horrified. Somewhere here on this site we discussed it already, I remember it. My thoughts were, I would like the world to continue even if I am gone.
It’s a philosophical point of view. As if sitting in the sky and looking at the whole Earth from above.
Being a human on Earth in intra-species relations, this approach does not work. The mechanisms of competition, dominance, expansion of the habitat …
I think that our biological species is now undergoing artificial evolution, trying to improve the biological system of recognizing friend / foe. The system of “sensors” we have reacts to color, sound, silhouette. Because of this, we unconsciously perceive people with a different skin color, a different language, in different clothes, as strangers. That’s why military propaganda works, it appeals to emotions, which turns on the limbic system, it’s somewhere in the reptilian brain.
Civilization has taught us to counter the signals from the sensors, but this has not yet eradicated our instincts.
—
I think I should have put quotation marks, there in my above comment on Putin’s words. Without inverted commas my translation looks like if I’m saying the speech myself 🙂
—
[ Mod: No problem, Tatyana. The quotation marks have now been inserted on your behalf. ]
Thank you for adding the ” ” 🙂
I thought, anyone interested to find out who of Western media journalists were accredited for Valday 2018 in Sochi? I’m curious to know. Woild be interesting to see how they presented Putin’s words about nukes in their media.
Don’t get me wrong but every day you give us homework Miss/ comrade, I would like you do to homework as well and check about those claims allegedly reported in some obscure Turkish paper claiming that this was a Mossad leak.
Apart from this youtube video I couldn’t find anything and some people claim there is nothing about it in Russia (most likely fake)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWHv8VrHi00
I think I’m Missis. Not sure you still use this old fashioned form, sorry. What is your common word for a human with tits (I mean, natural tits, no surgery, no hormone therapy) who is in a legal partnership to a human with errr… well, in old times we said ‘a man’ and we said ‘married’.
I’m probably not the best person to comment on Russian media. I don’t watch TV. Also, when the war started there appered some restrictions, which means they may hide the truth. So what’s the point of watching/reading it?
I read social networks, but it turns ugly. Bots, newly registered accounts, posting nasty things. Today I had to report a topic and make it removed.
The link is interesting, who knows if it’s true? I don’t trust anything originating from ‘alleged Mossad leak’.
TXS for your help.
What is Missis?
“Both “Miss” and “Ms.” apply to women who are unmarried or whose marital status is unknown.”
My son would address a teacher as a Miss.
Some! women with tits ,fake or natural we call a bitch or a Lady or women a slapper etc. but I do not get the point.
I don’t know what is Missis, I hoped you could help me. I studied English long ago and this ‘missis’ from textbooks somehow settled in my mind as a polite form to address a married woman. Miss for girls, Missis for women.
The same as in Russian tradition, девка vs баба.
Tatyana, “Missis” is always written Mrs, but pronounced “Missis”. In the UK, it is generally used with the surname, not the first name, so you would be Mrs (whatever your husband’s surname is). Quite a few women don’t use this form, so they style themselves Ms (their maiden surname), or (firstname surname) with no title. To call anyone Miss apart from unmarried old ladies and small children is quite old fashioned. However Ms (he modern female equivalent of Mr) is pronounced “Merz”, with the “er” pronounced as in “father”, but, equally, not used with the firstname only. We don’t have an equivalent of the Russian form of address, firstname patronymic.
This approach might make sense from a purely philosophical approach, but we are talking about nuclear weapons and the ability to obliterate major cities and kill hundreds of thousands with a single weapon – of which ‘they’ have thousands. I suspect a public poll would give a different result. Although, saying that, I suspect many happily sacrifice London; and if my doom was imminent, my end would be much more agreeable if I could see Washington wiped off the map first.
Just saying …
I wouldn’t sacrifice London. Never been there, but it’s important for me.
Washington … well, in the previous topic discussion I suggested a worldwide poll 🙂 if the questionnaire be put exactly as I suggest “small nuclear bomb in a remote part of our planet, and we all pretend it was a meteorite accident” …
I wouldn’t discount the desire of a huge part of the population of this planet to solve most of the problems with such a small concession. In fact, it sometimes seems to me that countries that are not friends of the US are quietly drawing lots among themselves to decide who will be the scapegoat next year. I can imagine the circle clapping with sympathy on the shoulder of the one who took out the unfortunate ticket.
UK PM
said this
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/18/theresa-may-takes-aim-at-jeremy-corbyn-over-trident-renewal
thx for the UK PM link.
But as Tom Stevenson pointed out a year ago there is no independent British deterrent:
“Britain is replacing its Vanguard submarines with four bigger Dreadnought-class boats, which are due to arrive in the early 2030s. The government has also ordered new warheads, which must closely adhere to American designs so that they remain compatible with the Trident missile and its aeroshell. British politicians like to talk of Britain’s ‘independent nuclear deterrent’ but in practice its nuclear weapons are an appurtenance to US power. There is no chance they would ever be used without approval from Washington. Nor would those of Israel or France, despite the unwillingness of their leaders to look like American lackeys.”
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v44/n04/tom-stevenson/a-tiny-sun
Not surprising considering that the British nuclear weapons´ program was only a well-meaning concession by the Americans after they had pushed MAUD out of the successors to MANHATTAN.
But a lackey needs some illusion to hold onto. T. May was well trained in doing just that.
The lack of revolt is not passivity, it is manufactured by continuous state repression.
I am with Shell on this one. Not defending their honour per se because I am sure that all large multinationals and especially energy companies have some rather nasty aspects when it comes to the darker parts of their relationships with governments.
Nevertheless in this particular instance why is Shell to blame? Did they ask for anyone to invade anywhere? Did they ask for European governments to go on a mad sanctioning campaign to drive up the price of energy?
We tend to forget that oil and gas is a long cycle business. It takes very expensive years to find the right oily places and get the right holes dug before oil actually starts coming out. So Shell are currently at today’s date making a profit – what does that actually mean in terms of their longer-term business cycle I wonder?
I am not against “green energy” – but neither do I want to freeze when it isn’t windy and it isn’t sunny. Basically we need companies like Shell.
Yes, this post appears to labour under the widespread delusion that all commerce operates on a cost-plus basis, by taking the cost of the product to them and adding a percentage to cover their overheads and turn a profit. In reality, the vast majority of commerce buys for the minimum it can and sells for the price that gives the maximum profit. What that price is depends on the elasticity of demand and the amount of competition. It has nothing to do with the cost of supply.
Having said that, there does appear to be quite a lot of evidence that companies like Shell are not exactly passive beneficiaries of the “war dividend”. That is why they are to blame.
“why is Shell to blame?”
Because their surrogates blew up Nord Stream 2.
Are you sure they (oil companies) did not approve or encouraged “sanctions”.
Most likely they did not advocate for war, but what about cutting Russia out from Europe?
Do you believe their lobbyist said to Biden and Ursula “Don’t do it, it will increase our profits at the expense of the poor people”?
In theory, I agree with what you are saying. But, the question should be “what does Shell do with these profits ?” Do they invest them, or put them in a bank for a rainy day, or do they just spread their profits between shareholders and executives so they all get personally a lot richer, and then come to governments and monopoly groups like OPEC for a bailout when times are tight. Hmmm !
And, let’s not forget it is in the oil industries interests to push for war when your ‘enemies’ sit on huge oil reserves like Libya, Syria, Ukraine, etc.
In economic theory this would be called
Rent Seeking
“Rent-seeking is the act of growing one’s existing wealth by manipulating the social or political environment without creating new wealth.[1] Rent-seeking activities have negative effects on the rest of society. They result in reduced economic efficiency through misallocation of resources, reduced wealth creation, lost government revenue, heightened income inequality,[2] risk of growing political bribery, and potential national decline.”
Rent-seeking is distinguished in theory from profit-seeking, in which entities seek to extract value by engaging in mutually beneficial transactions.[7] Profit-seeking in this sense is the creation of wealth, while rent-seeking is “profiteering” by using social institutions, such as the power of the state, to redistribute wealth among different groups without creating new wealth”
Most of the economy is parasitic, extracting wealth instead of creating!
Hello Laguerre.
You said that
” I am not quite why you are making a big point out of an article nearly a year old which says nothing new.”
The Moscow Times article that I linked to reminds us that, immediately after his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, the Russkiy President for Life ordered the Russian army to put its nuclear arsenal, the world’s largest, on “high alert”.
Now why, I wonder, did he do that at that moment?
Moscow Times: “The comments came just hours after President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian army to put its nuclear arsenal, the world’s largest, on “high alert” in response to what he called “unfriendly” steps by the West.”
All the best,
John
The Moscow Times, is not printed in Russia but in the Netherlands is anti Russia, pro Nato – probably even less reliable than The Guardian, therefore probably not a good idea to quote from. ‘Amsterdam Times’ might be a better name for it – or ‘Nato Times’?
When will you put your arsenal at “high alert”?
Just asking.
The war on ‘wrongthink’ gathers pace…
EU to launch platform to fight Russian, Chinese disinformation : https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-to-launch-platform-to-fight-russian-chinese-disinformation/
This from the BBC’s Frank Gardner: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64511670
Meanwhile, our beloved, incurious press become even more unrepresentative…
Working class representation in UK journalism hits record low, report says : https://pressgazette.co.uk/media-audience-and-business-data/journalists-class-backgrounds/
The TL;DR:
84% of Journalists and reporters are from higher socioeconomic backgrounds
16% are from lower and middle socioeconomic backgrounds
“We need to understand how these disinformation campaigns are organized … to identify the actors of the manipulation,” said Borrell.
Talk about starting out from a false premise…
Clearly the EU’s officialdom haven’t been paying much attention to Matt Taibbi’s excellent reporting on this topic. In the US, the Twitter accounts alleged to be Russian-linked and involved in ‘influence campaigns’ turned out to be nothing of the sort. They were a mixture of diplomatic accounts, but mostly ordinary citizens. Citizens selected based on meeting some v. weak qualifying criteria, such as retweeting stuff deemed to be pro-Russian narrative. Tests developed by the very ‘disinformation experts’ at these NGOs Borrell now wishes to further empower. We all saw how the silly the basis for suspicion can become, remember… cui bono? https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/12/cui-bono-david-leask-ben-nimmo-and-the-attack-on-ordinary-scottish-nationalists/
Quote:
‘Ben Nimmo works for the Atlantic Council, funded inter alia by NATO. He is also on a retainer of £2,500 per month from the Integrity Initiative, in addition to payments for individual pieces of work.’
If the EU are willing to throw money at those tasked with finding purported ‘disinformation’ and/or making Paul Mason-esque cryptic links to Russia and China, then of course they’ll find something to report back. If only to perpetuate that financial arrangement.
In the US, the major news outlets have either ignored the fact they were duped, or produced articles that fall short of full mea culpas. It’d be interesting to know whether or not major European media outlets are pressing Elon Musk to make available the UK and EU Twitter communications? If not, why not? I’d wager they’d show similar low bar criteria used here for linking social media accounts to Russia.
Twitter files
I guess in the case of Germany reporting, Twitter Files was initially reported but just as one item among many.
Certainly its not being ramped up like the publishing spree on Panama Papers or Pandorra Papers a while back.
If this is systemic or simply because Twitter is more of an endemic phenomenon in the US than here I don´t know – even though Twitter user numbers have gone up. But to make their reporting on Russia coherent it would be wise from their point of view to mute substantial counterevidence to what we are supposed to believe.
As was the case with Israel´s Bennett´s “revelation” on his peace initiative. The ratio of China-balloon vs. Bennett interview might have been 3-1. Now both have been replaced by Turkey and new German tank deliveries.
p.s. China geopolitics:
“Militarization of the First Island Chain – NATO expands cooperation with Japan on a broad front – at a time when Tokyo is engaged in the greatest arms buildup since 1945. USA gears up the entire first island chain of China for war.”, 3.2.23
https://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/news/detail/9152
Some may look at this whole fabricated ‘Russian influence’ nonsense and say, so what? I don’t care, Russia and Putin are bad therefore they deserve it. Any lie by our side about them is justified and is fine with me. <- This is literally the mindset of many Russophobes in the west, who believe every official narrative about Russia.
This whole Russia 'online influence' scare, is clearly like a gold rush for those with social science degrees in these NGOs. But it's no laughing matter, because their non peer-reviewed 'research' is informing domestic and EU policy makers, and providing dishonest arguments for more surveillance and censorship in the west. We shouldn't sacrifice freedom of speech on the altar of bogus 'research.'
Few years ago Hillary Clinton was talking to my disbelieve about
Information war. How can we have “information war” Information should be FACTS.
What was Trump ridiculed for ” alternative facts”?
TXS God we are now engaged in “Disinformation” war. Who can vomit more
disinformation.
Let’s listen to this compilation about “information war” .
RT , Al Jazira and China are winning this “INFORMATION WAR”!
Clinton ” we had a monopoly on the world news…..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fGWuillRXM.
BTW I am not sure if this is TRUE or totally FAKE.
It is not reported in our media I can’t find info on the Net apart from following Video.
Allegedly some Turkish paper got alleged leak from Mossad about numbers of casualties.
Allegedly this rapport was not mentioned in Russia so it must be a Fake.
Neither Ukraine or Russia mention their own losses so it might be convenient for
both sides to ignore.. If numbers are true it is a total disaster for Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWHv8VrHi0
If it is Fake news I deeply apologize for being a Muppet !
Youtube already removed the video, what was it about?
It’s probably been flagged as disinformation?
The west decries everything as ‘fake!’ while refusing to produce objective, verifiable war reports, instead treating citizens to endless, insulting Ukrainian propaganda. The warped reasoning is that anything other could somehow bring comfort, or in some way aid Russia – this, in a war we supposedly aren’t directly involved in?
We find ourselves in the ridiculous situation in which Russia, China and India are being more open about what’s going on on the ground in this war, than the supposed self-declared ‘champions of freedom.’
First I could not believe your “Silly” comment.
That video was the only thing I found.
I do not remember all the data but allegedly
Russian losses are about 20 000 man
Ukraine about 157 000
Tanks, airplanes and wounded I do not remember but article was published in a Turkish paper named Hurseda Haber
https://hurseda.net/gundem/246987-iddia-mossad-a-gore-ukrayna-ve-rusya-kayiplari.html
Borrell is one nasty guy, I would have hoped that he would tone it down as the war progressed, but he just gets more and more radlcalized
Ban on Russian media protects ‘freedom of expression’ – Borrell
https://swentr.site/news/571111-russian-media-ban-free-speech/
He also admitted bluntly that EU intefere and aid anti government journalists inside Russia:
“Borrell also noted that the EU is trying to support those media organizations that Russia has classified as ‘foreign agents’, a designation meaning that an entity is either funded from abroad or is under “foreign influence.”
“What I’m saying is not just rhetoric. I cannot go into detail, but believe me, we try to support them in practical terms,” he said, adding that he would not say how in order not to do them “a bad favor.”
—————————-
This is why I am no friend of the EU, they are lead by lunatics, warmongers that will end up destroyting the whole of europe.
Ursula von der Leyen and foreign policy chief Borrell seemingly view the EU as little more than a branch office of the US Department of State.
Biden appointee Victoria Nuland may well be the most powerful person in the world.
How scary a thought is that?
Some of the most important players driving and prolonging this conflict in Ukraine lack any meaningful democratic legitimacy. This matters, when you claim you’re defending democracy.
Victoria Nuland in the US, and Ursula von der Leyen in the EU weren’t elected to their positions, they’re appointees. And had they sought voter approval, they would have been rejected. Von der Leyen was an unpopular failed German defence minister, who’d presided over a series of debacles, before becoming the defacto EU Commission president after a backroom stitch-up.
If I remember it correctly Frau Von Der Leyen was Defense Minister.
US called for European countries to send ship to strike Syria. Frau Merkel looked like to accept and Frau Leyen to decline.
At that time Etsy ( global marketplace for handmade) had a forum section and we were free to discuss whatever. I remember I was doing harsh remarks on Frau Merkel, saying she is a childless woman that is why she is pro strike. Frau Leyen had three kids and decided against the strike. Got my first lesson on being politically correct, tolerant etc. 🙂
Look at this interview below with Borell, what a nutcase, he need anger management, this guy should not be in any powerful position!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UinbGbdyfQ
Jack
He comes across as quite slippery and sinister, doesn’t he. First interview I’ve seen with him btw.
The sort of guy John Bolton or Pompeo would probably choose to be the EU’s foreign policy chief.
Europeans need to take the 2024 European parliamentary elections far more seriously. There’s only Mick Wallace and Clare Daly offering any kind of opposing world viewpoint.
Sorry Jack, but nutcase would be a compliment for Borell.
I would go more with Goose description (slippery sinister and, IMO, creepy villain from the movies).
thx for reminding us of Borrell´s madness.
For those who want to read his infamous “we are a garden – they are a jungle” – speech
“EU Ambassadors Annual Conference 2022: Opening speech by High Representative Josep Borrell”, 10.10.22
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-ambassadors-annual-conference-2022-opening-speech-high-representative-josep-borrell_en
It´s worth the time.
Very revealing about the arrogance and cluelessness of European elites.
* * *
Another interesting long read on European politics is this three-part essay by Perry Anderson (yeah take the word “long” literally) from 2020 in LRB.
“The European Coup”, Dec. 2020
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v42/n24/perry-anderson/the-european-coup
Also take notice of the letters to the editor in the end.
Dutch political theorist Luuk Middelaar who is one major actor in this Anderson essay responds in a letter you should read:
“(…)Anderson enjoys the classic Hobbes-to-Rousseau puzzle that faces any new political order, and which I investigate in my book The Passage to Europe: how can a state arise from a condition of nature? A ballot box cannot establish itself, so one day someone must boldly claim to speak ‘on behalf of’ a people, a country. This is the case for the EU, a latecomer, as it was for England, in the mists of time, or for the founders of the United States. (…) Although Anderson claims otherwise, I explicitly call for ‘polemical opposition’ and for Europe to make room for it, citing the examples of Varoufakis’s dissident economic voice, as well as that of the nationalist Viktor Orbán in the migrant crisis. (…) How to explain this blunt oversight in an otherwise careful essay? Projection, I’d say. In Anderson’s well-honed biographical reductionism, certain facts are not allowed to get in the way of the story. (…) It is striking that in the second and third parts of the Anderson triptych, historical thinking disappears and GDP bean-counting comes in. There are no longer any traces of Machiavelli or Naudé, no signs of peace and war or of geopolitical pressure on or among the states and peoples of Europe, no hint either that their Union might actually change. (Its capacity to change under the pressure of events is the key thesis of my own work, but Anderson fails to mention this, preferring to stick to the received Tory view of a narrow, legalistic bureaucracy.) In his concluding essay, Anderson calls Hobbes to the rescue, but lacks the courage to go for the full Wolfgang Streeck conversion – from disappointed pro-European Marxist to anti-EU sovereigntist – and endorse Brexit. He emerges as a Red Whig and meek Brexiter. But he remains a formidable author. I hope to have the pleasure of meeting him.
Luuk van Middelaar
Brussels (…)”
Anderson back then also mentions Crimea (and much much more, Anderson-style):
“Ukraine: geopolitical emancipation of Europe from America, resolute sanctions against Russia for annexing Crimea, enlightened interim compromise at Minsk? The realities: EU sanctions followed US sanctions, uniting stupidity and hypocrisy. Stupidity – does any Western politician, no matter how ignorant, really believe that Russia will ever relinquish Crimea, an accidental province of Ukraine, whim of a paper shuffle by Khrushchev for a couple of decades, when it was a hallowed part of Russia for more than two centuries, populated overwhelmingly by Russians? What possible gain could come from making relations with the country an indefinite hostage to the fiction that its recovery could be reversed? Hypocrisy: Europe has never lifted a finger over the annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights by Israel, the South Sahara by Morocco, or the occupation of half of Cyprus by Turkey, though in all these cases seizure was against the will of most or all of the population, enforced by violent repression and ethnic cleansing, unlike Crimea where it was certainly welcomed by a majority, if one exaggerated by Moscow. Borders are inviolable only when it suits the West to say so. As for Minsk, its upshot has been zero.”
AG
And the did it again the other day, those africans are so stupid and gullible-bs
“Borrell had addressed EU diplomats earlier in the day, claiming Russia was using “information manipulation and interference” as weapons of war. Noting that Lavrov was visiting Mali and Eritrea, Borrell called them “easy countries” for Moscow to “spread lies about who is guilty for what is happening” in Ukraine.”
https://swentr.site/news/571125-lavrov-borrell-africa-racism/
Complete hothead!