The USA – What Democracy? 311


Joe Biden will very probably be re-elected. No incumbent President has ever lost a primary (though it should be remembered the current primary system is younger than me). Only one sitting President has ever not been selected by their party to stand again, and that was knocking on two hundred years ago.

Both Biden’s main primary challenger, Robert F Kennedy Jr, and his likely Republican opponent, Donald Trump, are less than enthusiastic about promoting massive war in Europe and risking nuclear obliteration. (I hope everyone in the UK enjoyed the nationwide new alert test the other day and spent a few moments contemplating whether they would die instantly or slowly in agony).

The military industrial complex simply cannot permit a non-hawkish President. The sums of money at stake are enormous.

Trump, for all his many faults, was the only President in recent memory not to have started any wars. I know he continued some, but his entire Presidency needs to be seen as a dialectic between Trump and the intelligence service/military power base, in which to his credit Trump was never captured as completely as Obama. (Clinton and the Bush family did not need to be captured, they were always true believers).

Thirteen months ago, I wrote this:

The Biden laptop was leaked on 14 October 2020, three weeks before voting day in the Presidential election. Its suppression by the mainstream media, Twitter and Facebook, at the behest of the security services, is the biggest illegitimate interference in an election in modern western history.

The evidence has piled up since. It is truly astounding that incalculable volumes of media coverage have been given to largely groundless accusations of Russian interference in US Presidential elections, when this actual, entirely proven interference in a US Presidential Election, which arguably was key to Biden’s election, has in itself been largely suppressed.

The letter released by 51 former US intelligence officials, telling what we now know to be the outright lie that the Hunter Biden laptop was “Russian disinformation”, was initiated by the Biden campaign, according to sworn testimony from former Acting CIA Director Mike Morell – who was willingly a part of it with the declared aim of wanting Biden to win.

If you are not fully up to speed with this, this Wall Street Journal podcast is excellent.

It should be recalled that, apart from all the sex and drugs, the laptop contained emails showing plainly Hunter Biden leveraging his father’s influence to obtain lucrative business deals with, inter alia, Ukraine and China.

Three weeks before a close election, the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop could undoubtedly have swayed it, if it had not been massively and falsely derided as a Russian hoax by almost the entire mainstream media, and censored to death by Twitter and Facebook.

Since Elon Musk released Twitter files, we have known for certain that the FBI orchestrated the suppression of the story on social media. This Twitter thread is five months old but remains a must read.

It is, I think, the epitome of the corruption of modern mainstream media that, if you go to the CNN website you can still find a “fact check” item from CNN which states that Donald Trump was promoting Russian disinformation by referring to the Hunter Biden laptop.

Google searches differ depending on the person making them. But try this. Google for the exposure of the Hunter Biden laptop “Russian hoax” as itself misinformation. How many stories come up for you from the “liberal” media, from the BBC, New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NBC, Guaridan etc?

I get nothing on from them on the front page of my google search except the old CNN misinformation. That says a great deal both about the legacy media – and about Google.

So we have conclusive evidence from the Hunter Biden laptop story that the security services, corporate media and corporate internet gatekeepers were in cahoots to ensure the election of Joe Biden. What we see now is the same forces working to ensure that he is re-elected.

Now read this from Robert F Kennedy’s campaign website:

In the long term, a nation’s strength does not come from its armies. America spends as much on weaponry as the next nine nations combined, yet the country has grown weaker, not stronger, over the last 30 years. Even as its military technology has reigned supreme, America has been hollowing out from the inside. We cannot be a strong or secure nation when our infrastructure, industry, society, and economy are infirm.

A high priority of a Kennedy administration will be to make America strong again. When a body is sick, it withdraws its energy from the extremities in order to nourish the vital organs. It is time to end the imperial project and attend to all that has been neglected: the crumbling cities, the antiquated railways, the failing water systems, the decaying infrastructure, the ailing economy. Annual defense-related spending is close to one trillion dollars. We maintain 800 military bases around the world. The peace dividend that was supposed to come after the Berlin Wall fell was never redeemed. Now we have another chance.

As President, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. will start the process of unwinding empire. We will bring the troops home. We will stop racking up unpayable debt to fight one war after another. The military will return to its proper role of defending our country. We will end the proxy wars, bombing campaigns, covert operations, coups, paramilitaries, and everything else that has become so normal most people don’t know it’s happening. But it is happening, a constant drain on our strength. It’s time to come home and restore this country.

In Ukraine, the most important priority is to end the suffering of the Ukrainian people, victims of a brutal Russian invasion, and also victims of American geopolitical machinations going back at least to 2014. We must first get clear: Is our mission to help the brave Ukrainians defend their sovereignty? Or is it to use Ukraine as a pawn to weaken Russia? Robert F. Kennedy will choose the first. He will find a diplomatic solution that brings peace to Ukraine and brings our resources back where they belong. We will offer to withdraw our troops and nuclear-capable missiles from Russia’s borders. Russia will withdraw its troops from Ukraine and guarantee its freedom and independence. UN peacekeepers will guarantee peace to the Russian-speaking eastern regions. We will put an end to this war. We will put an end to the suffering of the Ukranian people. That will be the start of a broader program of demilitarization of all countries.

This is astonishing stuff to be put before the American people from the scion of one of the great American political dynasties.

(I am aware of his chequered past, his support for Hillary over Bernie, and his Covid vaccine scepticism, though the latter appears to be more based on his long term commitment to tackling the profiteering and corrupt influence of big Pharma than an actual anti-vaccine stance).

I did not predict that the USA would become a gerontocracy. Biden shows signs of the mental decay that is a natural part of the human condition. He will not have to face Kennedy in any Primary debates – the NDC could be relied on to stitch up that potentially huge hurdle for him – but the risk of Biden detariorating further mentally in a way that is impossible to hide must exist for anyone of his age. So the Kennedy challenge is not without a slim hope.

A slim hope for a declared opponent of the military industrial complex is one hope too many, therefore the twin agencies of social media suppression and corporate media ridicule have already swung in to action against Kennedy.

The challenge must be choked at birth. The range of acceptable opinion to the US Establishment is now extremely narrow.

Trump remains an enigma. He is a mixture of far right prejudice and serious outbursts of commonsense. I do not doubt that he does have interests beyond the personal advancement of Donald J Trump, but only in an incidental way.

In Ukraine we are either going to see death and destruction on a scale well beyond the terrible horrors already inflicted, or there is ultimately going to be a deal involving the ceding of some territory to Russia (Crimea+, as my FCO sources tell me it is currently called in Beijing based diplomacy).

Trump says this. It is the kind of thing that makes the US military-industrial-security service complex hate him, as they are seeing super profits, massive resources and political influence stretching ahead for at least another five years. They don’t care at all how many Eastern Europeans die.

Trump is a much greater threat to Biden, and the full weight of the state is therefore being thrown into stopping him through lawfare. Some of this is very dubious, and subject to the perfectly true response that Bill Clinton was never prosecuted for remarkably identical behaviours.

Watching the agencies of the state find a way to stop Trump is going to be fascinating.

Russiagate was a hoax. There is however a real interference with what the public are allowed to know which makes the notion of “democracy” in the USA meaningless, and that is the interference of the security state of the USA itself.

Those interests got Biden into power, and will do everything and literally anything to help him stay there.

The British security state is of course complicit. A final thought.

It is fast approaching a year since Julian Assange submitted his High Court appeal against extradition, and still the High Court has not even decided if it will hear the appeal or not. We had initially hoped the actual hearing might be before last Christmas.

The Assange prosecution is not popular in the USA, where even the mainstream media have come out against charging a journalist with espionage.  In addition everybody can now see the parallel with Evan Gershkovich and potential impact of Assange’s treatment on Gershkovich.

Assange’s arrival in Washington would be a free speech cause celebre with the potential to alienate some liberal support from Biden in a close election. The US security services therefore still very much want Julian imprisoned for life – but they do not want him extradited until after Biden is safely re-elected.

The British government therefore need to keep Julian in maximum security in Belmarsh for another two years, to keep the Biden campaign and its security service backers happy.

This can only be done by introducing lengthy and unnecessary delays into the judicial process. We see that happening, or rather we see it “inexplicably” not happening, before our very eyes.

The senior British judiciary do what the security services tell them to do. Discreetly suggested, in the club.

————————————————

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:

Recurring Donations



 

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.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

311 thoughts on “The USA – What Democracy?

1 2 3
  • Harry Law

    Biden and Stoltenberg guaranteed the destruction of Ukraine when on the eve of the Russian Special military action, said that Ukraine will be a member of NATO. This after dozens of political Scientists and Ambassadors warned that this was a Russian red line and could mean war, breaching all the promises made to Russia about not expanding NATO “one inch to the east” after the unification of Germany, the West lied. Now new provocations are being sought….
    The US and Finland are working out a deal that would allow the US to establish a military presence in the Nordic country, as Helsinki is now a member of NATO.
    According to Newsweek, Finnish Foreign Ministry official Mikael Antell confirmed the two nations are negotiating a Defense Cooperation Agreement that may allow for the construction of significant military infrastructure on Finnish soil.
    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-talks-establishing-military-bases-finland
    Why not nuclear weapons a few miles from St Petersburg? Finnish leaders have not ruled out nuclear weapons on Finnish soil. What could possibly go wrong?

    • Jack

      I do not know what happend with the europeans (I am a european myself), US bomb their our pipelines causing destruction of european economy and making us pay for higher US gas then they trigger a propaganda effort in the media and spread all kinds of theories that it as not them but the Russians who blew up their own pipeline add to that that US lead a war IN europe causing something close to WW3 but the europeans do not care, not reazling that if WW3 were to happen it will happen in europe, not on US soil….. amazing, quite a difference from the late Cold war period when millions of europeans called for peace between the superpowers and most of all, protested against nuclear weapons. But the general view of a european seems to be: ‘.nuclear war? who cares!’.
      When Trump was president he tried to raise to issue but were rebuffed and silenced and today there are not one single western leader in power that warn about this danger!
      How on earth did we get here?

      • Stevie Boy

        Jack, spot on.
        One point though. IMO, a nuclear WW3 would not be limited to Europe. Although, the Yankee dogs might believe that themselves, but Russia would understand that it would be necessary to strike the beast in his lair to ensure retribution and enact revenge. There would be NO victors under a MAD war.
        And, if a WW3 was truly a world war, China would not be attacking Russia – the USA would be destroyed.

  • joel

    You are right, that NY Post expose of Biden’s corruption appeared right on the eve of the election and its ruthless suppression by legacy & social media was without doubt “the biggest illegitimate interference in an election in modern western history”. All the misinformation at the time – and subsequently – about the laptop story being Russian propaganda was spread by institutions who continually represent themselves as our bulwarks against misinformation.

    We truly are living in the most shameless of times when it comes to suppression and misinformation by ruling-class media. You don’t reference it but even more emblematic and craven than the laptop story has been their suppression and misinformation in relation to Biden blowing up the Nordstream pipelines, the biggest act of environmental terrorism in history. Even European mass media is running suppression and misinformation for him, despite it having been a direct attack on their own economies and citizens.

    As for British media we are as likely to hear them reference bishop Peter Ball or Jimmy Savile amid Saturday’s hagiographies as ever see them report the truth about Washington’s attack on Europe’s critical infrastructure.

  • Robert Dyson

    RFK Jr wants to limit the power of both the military-industrial and pharma-industrial complex. The forces against him are huge. However he a vaccine sceptic. A book to read is “Turtles all the way Down, Vaccine Science and Myth” I don’t think anyone can find anything in it that is false. I agree about Trump though I do not like him, but you have to look at how much harm a politician will do and there are none perfect.

  • Crispa

    Biden probably makes very few decisions for himself these days and has in Blinken, Sullivan, Nuland and the like a bunch of the most dangerous psychopaths around wielding enormous amounts of power. I would vote for anyone who could thrust them straight into the political black hole where they can disappear for ever and stop being a threat to the future of humanity. The main problem is that America has so many of these dangerous politicians that a different incoming president of either party could well just replace one bad lot by another.

  • Yuri K

    “A high priority of a Kennedy administration will be to make America strong again.”

    Nice to hear this version of the Trump’s MAGA slogan from a Democrat. However, it does not really matter who wins, although there is some suspense in this rat race (I hear a lot of variations on the theme, “Trump is the only Republican Biden can defeat”, “Biden is the only Democrat that Republicans can defeat”, and so on).

    It does not matter because the U.S. foreign politics is now ran by Congress, not by POTUS, as it used to be. The war can’t be stopped without making a deal but any deal with Russia will be blocked by Senate who represents the Deep State.

    • Courtenay Francis Raymond Barnett

      Yuri K,

      ” …without making a deal but any deal with Russia will be blocked by Senate who represents the Deep State.”

      So then, without a ‘peace deal’ is the plan to go all the way to full scale nuclear war?

      • Yuri K

        They do not want peace, they want victory. And they are eager to take risks by rising the bets. What they hope for (I think) is that Putin will be somehow disposed off from the inside. First, I believe, this is unlikely to happen; second, even if this happens, chances are high that (as Rand Corporation rightly stated in their report) Putin will be replaced by someone who’ll make them remember Putin’s rule with nostalgia. But why should we assume they are smart? The status quo is their hay day because of enormous profits of RTX, LMT and the rest of them, and no American soldiers lost. This reminds me of Uncle Remus tale about the possum who sneaked into the bear’s garden and kept eating the fruit:

        “Eve’y now en den Brer Possum think he year Brer B’ar comin’, but he keep on sayin’, sezee:

        “‘I’ll des git one ’simmon mo’ en den I’ll go; one ’simmon mo’ en den I’ll go.’

        • Beware the Leopard

          “They do not want peace, they want victory.”

          They wanted to turn Ukraine into a sack of flaming dogshit on Russia’s doorstep, ring the doorbell and run. (And launder billions of dollars to their buddies in the process.)

          Mission accomplished. First item on the bill: The near-complete immolation of Ukrainian virility.

          I struggle to understand how any sincere, middling-intelligent Ukrainian nationalist can fail to see this, that their loudest “supporters” are their greatest enemies.

          • Yuri K

            Any such brainy Ukrainians were accused of being Russian agents and had to either leave the country for safety reasons (Anatoliy Shariy, Vasil’ Vakarov) or vanished from public, like Mikhail Pogrebinsky.

          • Beware the Leopard

            Thank you for naming examples of suppressed dissent, Yuri. I see the mechanism more clearly now.

            “By all means, see all you like. But you will find it difficult to say much about it while our boots are stamping on your face.”

    • pretzelattack

      lol congress has abdicated its duty to debate wars for 70 years or so. the executive runs foreign policy.

      • Yuri K

        Obviously, you’ve never heard of H.R. 3364 and other similar bills and proposed acts (H.R. 3100, H.R. 7311, S. 1221, etc).

        The U.S. Constitution states that “He [the POTUS] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur” but things had changed. With the election of Donald Trump, “advice and consent” were replaced by “dictate and order”. Naturally, if the POTUS is a puppet of the Deep State, like Joe Biden is, they do not have to enforce this, but ordnung ist ordnung, as the German saying goes. If it happens again that a not-a-deep-stater like Trump is elected as POTUS, his hands will be tight by the laws that Congress has passed. “It’s our way or highway”.

  • glenn_nl

    Don’t forget who will be stepping in as President if, when and as Biden becomes increasingly more concerned with his own age related constraints. She doesn’t exactly have a great record, from a number of different angles.

  • General Cologne

    Craig’yyy
    Here is a tip for you. If you want to find something on the Internet, other than Google’s fake search results, you use Yandex search, finds anything, maybe.

  • Denis Oven

    Vaccines are a scientific phenomenon. It is a grievous mistake to approach them politically.

    Moreover, the issue is not of vaccination as a concept, but, for each individual product, whether the probable benefit to harm ratio is positive, for any potential recipient considering it.

    • Stevie Boy

      And, let’s not forget the definition of a vaccine was changed in the last three years to include gene based products !

      • Denis Oven

        Yep.

        Maybe I missed Craig commenting about that.

        Vaccines had a good reputation (let’s skip any analysis of whether this was deservedly so), and so they redefined the name to cover something entirely new.

        Perhaps extension of the term was legitimate, but what astounds me is how everyone just drew on their experiences of vaccines, as the term was previously understood, to assess the new things it now (supposedly) encompasses. They, basically, fell right for a kind of Orwellian bait and switch.

        If the term was stretched again, so it encompassed what we usually call a penis, would women suck on one, to boost their immunity?

        • Beware the Leopard

          “Perhaps extension of the term was legitimate”

          If the meaning of the term ‘legitimate’ were a party balloon of the most elastic kind, it would burst before you could contort it sufficiently.

      • Calgacus

        We should forget it, because it isn’t true. Look at a dictionary more than three years old. There was no change in the definition. What is remarkable is how people can believe this preposterous, easily refutable internet meme, with no evidence and reasoning whatsoever.

        This kind of “skepticism”, like RFK Jr’s crazy anti-vaxxism, does nothing but service to “the deep state” & Big Pharma, who jump in joy when they see it. Contrary to Craig Murray’s remarkable assertions about him, he is not only opposed to vaccination, but the leading opponent in the whole country. It’s like seriously wondering whether the Pope is Catholic.

        Very often, observers from another land make cogent observations that the natives don’t see. Sometimes they say things which might better be passed over in silence, as the natives find them – hilariously wrong. Something like Pacific Islanders confronted by anthropologists asking where babies come from. I yield to no one with admiration for Mr. Murray, but the latter is the case here.

        • useless eater

          To see Public Health policy captured and used as a mechanism to transfer massive wealth to the superich from everyone else, is to see there are no sacred cows in the minds of our rulers. We learn public health is to be just another weapon in the global class war. So much for Big Pharma and it’s claim to be a “community stakeholder”

          The vaccine industry has become a cash cow – a mere income stream not the sacred Public Health trust it should be.

          In a context such as this, i would make up my own mind. Any criticism I hear of Big Pharma will be judged by the context, ie if someone is slagging off profiteering I will listen; not because I am a loon but because the systemic corruption is unignorable – even to an information-poor schlub, such as myself

          RFK may be a loon but he is not a child sex slaver – you’re losing your sense of proportion. He is talking about peace and beating swords into ploughshares. Many are interested in this.

          Spending $100 000,000, 000 on biological weapons, as the US does, is clearly a racket – a racket Big Pharma and the MIC jointly run – without compunction or concern. I bet they have a lab-leak now and then, wouldn’t you say?

          The MIC make a genocide and call it peace. Anyone calling themselves “Calgacus” would know this – maybe you are an imposter?

          • Calgacus

            Yeah, sure vaccines can be, have been overused, misused, pushed by Big Pharma. Any good thing can be used improperly. Big Pharma is very, very evil. But nonsensical attacks on it strengthen it, not weaken it.

            I did not say RFK is a child sex slaver! Or anything like that.

            As Craig Murray says, RFK Jr has a lot of good positions. But what he says about health is so crazy that the Kennedy family issued public family statements saying we love him, but we dissociate our selves from his health and maybe some other views. The other Kennedys are right. Crazy conspiracism damages his and anybody else’s praiseworthy views and credibility. Overall, he does more damage than good.

            Big Pharma loves RFK Jr and other anti-vaxxers. They make Big Pharma much, much more, not less money. They say so publicly. A Jacobin article a while back explained how, with citations from Big Pharma. If you don’t see how, you need a dose of good old fashioned American cynicism and money-grubbing-fever. I’ll explain if anybody really doesn’t see the $.

          • useless eater

            Calgacus, I feel you should summarise your understanding of why Big Pharma loves these people. I don’t read the Jacobin, and don’t intend to start doing so.

            “Big Pharma is very, very evil”

            “Big Pharma” is a business or a collection of them. The administrators of these businesses are legally compelled to maximise profits for their shareholders. These businesses are not “..evil..” or “..very,very evil..” they are profitable or unprofitable, nothing more. I would allow, in conversation, “evil” to be applied to human adults but would not use the term myself. Note I said human adults not corporate personages.

            “..nonsensical attacks on it strengthen it..”

            Would you care to elaborate on this statement? As far as my limited view allows, I see no one else attacking Big Pharma, so RFK and his kind are the only game in town, if one feels it is “..very, very evil” or as I do, a global parasite afflicting humanity.

            History it is said, is written by winners, so I will finish with some words from the “Agricola” written by a winner; regarding your celebrated namesake, who clearly saw the coming of the likes of the MIC, Big Pharma and the rest of the ghastly appendages of American Empire. Just why Tacitus included this statement is unknown. Maybe in his day one might influence what type of empire would develop.

            “Thieves of the world, lacking lands now to devastate, they rove the sea…..Theft, slaughter, rapine they misname empire, they make a desert and call it peace.”

            Calgacus as quoted by Tacitus in the Agricola

          • Clark

            Useless eater, May 8, 20:49 –

            “I see no one else attacking Big Pharma…”

            Try Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre. Oh, and Jeremy Corbyn. Through them you will find more. Such people criticise Big Pharma and compromised government oversight properly, in ways the technical community respect rather than ridicule.

          • useless eater

            I read Goldacre’s book a decade ago and am acquainted with Jeremy Corbyn and his efforts but thanks for the tip. I believe there is much more to the story than is available currently in the public domain; whether this belief is proven to be a justified true belief or not, only time will tell.

            I have been reading your posts here for many years and have particularly been fascinated by your tales of direct action and your relationship with “Extinction Rebellion”. The issues you campaign on are ones of which I approve, though I would go much further in my suggestions for remedial action than the organisation of which you say you are a member.

            However, I have heard Extinction Rebellion described as “facists” by angry motorists – I always speak up for you and always will unless your organistion is revealed as sham and shillery. Your right to protest is part of how I see things should be but your argument concerning the “Kennedy trump” I feel is the same as angry motorists decrying “Extinction Rebellion”. You may feel you have a justified true belief (as I believe you do) but allow others the same privelege.

            I grew up in a radical mileau – radical feminists, committed environmentalists, anarchists, socialists etc were the adults around me. Koestler’s “Spartacus”, Carson’s “Silent Spring”, Greer’s “The Female Eunuch” and Nozick’s “Anarchy, State and Utopia” were the books on the shelves in my house back in the 60’s and 70’s. By the time I reached majority my beliefs on what was needed environmentally were incomprehensible to the well informed radical fringe, never mind the mainstream.

            In the early years of the Bolshevik Revolution several theorists spoke gushingly of a place where machines would operate at capacity under the expert eye of disarticulated “..‘Soviets of engineers…”. Their vision faded as Stalin came to fore.

            “..in ways the technical community respect rather than ridicule.”

            One needs to be careful when saying things like this, lest you be seen as a snob or worse. The “technical community” should support and justify social categories not determine them, if they go beyond my observation, I consider the discussion “political” not “technical” or “techno-political” with all of the attendant consequences such a change implies. I accept your basic thrust about the “Kennedy trump” and potential error but this is a political discussion not a technical one and thus its resolution is not achieved by exact measurement and peer review. Can’t we leave ridicule to the ridiculous and those who deserve it – you know like child sex slavers, bio-sphere despoilers and bio-weapon hawkers?

            Oh, yeah, I’m still an “..information poor schlub..” and will be until I die – you’re clearly not – good for you.

          • Clark

            Useless eater, I think commercial operations should lose the right to secrecy and non-disclosure agreements should be banned. The entire surveillance network points in the wrong direction; it gathers information about the individually powerless general public, and gives it to powerful, secretive organisations. This needs to be reversed.

            “I believe there is much more to the story than is available currently in the public domain”

            I agree; the cases in Bad Pharma for instance are necessarily some of the ones that have come to light, but they seem likely to be just the tip of an iceberg.

            One needs to be careful when saying things like “..in ways the technical community respect rather than ridicule” lest you be seen as a snob or worse.

            If people think that then they haven’t understood, because engaging with the technical community consists of considering evidence fairly, accepting facts, arguing clearly, making testable claims etc. It’s also about accepting that experts and professionals almost certainly know far more about their field than I do, so I have a responsibility to understand their reasoning, or any criticism I lob will likely be unfounded or even meaningless.

          • Clark

            Useless eater, sorry if I was a bit terse last night. Thanks for your support of XR. There will of course always be shills who attach themselves to any movement; I expect there are people donating to XR for entirely wrong or irrelevant reasons, and clearly there are politicians and companies exploiting the publicity XR generates. But humanity’s crisis needs to be addressed, and XR’s demands are the right ones – tell (and/or face) the truth, act with urgency, decide how together.

          • Clark

            I wrote:

            “I have a responsibility to understand [the technical community’s] reasoning, or any criticism I lob will likely be unfounded or even meaningless.”

            An example is Bayard’s misunderstanding below. I subsequently tried to explain to Bayard why such a criticism does not gain attention from the technical community, because it’s “not even wrong”. That is why the more technical commenter Kashmiri simply dismissed it. Maybe Kashmiri looked less of a snob than I did. But while I don’t want to overrate either my own competence or Bayard’s ability to understand, I don’t want to underrate them either.

          • useless eater

            Clarke I do not think you a snob based on what I have read that you have written. In fact I can go further – I think you are an educator -; you and several others in this place have educated me on complex issues of which I know nothing, on several occasions and I am grateful.

            I hear rumours concerning many controversial topics but that is all they are, rumours. I believe that XR are a group of people doing something important. If this belief is compromised by new information, I will review what I think. Until this time I will always defend your right to act, regardless of the foe, regardless of my fate and regardless of my feelings. I must – I can do no other.

            My overall point in this discussion with Calgacus and now with you concerns RFK. He is not a member of the oligarchy, who are clearly morally bankrupt. He may be a grifter, a loon or something better or worse – until we have more information, I will reserve judgement. The “Kennedy trump” as I have taken to calling him, is my only hope concerning mainstream politics. Biden’s presidency is the latest in a long line of abominations – yet I am aware that RFK may be a” left-Trump”, that the oligarchy has deployed to mop up dissent – this time, dissent from the left. We need change

            Whether RFK is this change, I don’t know. I will wait, like I am doing with XR and several other hopeful events, until they are played out and the truth of the matter lies revealed.

            Have you read Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”? Well worth a look if you haven’t. I noticed browsing current general sources, that many call the book a scientific revolution in and of itself .The Wikipedia summary is not bad.

          • useless eater

            Clark, why do you boost Kashmiri?

            “That is why the more technical commenter Kashmiri simply dismissed it. Maybe Kashmiri looked less of a snob than I did”

            Kashmiri doesnt look like a snob – just a deeply unpleasent, highly inadequate virtual persona swimming in the filth of it’s own ignorance.

            “I can assure you that if they get diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration, they will be the first ones to beg their doctor on their knees for a gene therapy treatment called Luxturna”

            Are you really on side with sort of thing?

          • Clark

            Useless Eater, thanks again.

            Over the years Kashmiri has posted some things I agree with, and probably more things that I disagree with. On this occasion one of Kashmiri’s posts served merely as a nearby example of the type of dismissiveness which is a common response to criticism from inadequate understanding. It has a familiar structure; “on this simple matter they decry expert opinion, but watch them come running to the experts when the need arises”. It’s a “told you so, but you insisted you knew better” type of argument, born from frustration with ill-informed criticism.

            I haven’t read Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”, but I have encountered references to its arguments many times in discussions over the years. The sort of sudden shifts in scientific consensus it describes are undoubtedly real; relatively minor examples have occurred in my lifetime, eg. the acceptance of pyroclastic flows from volcanic eruptions, and the acceptance of helicobacter pylori as a cause of ulcers. Hopefully I’ll get around to reading it eventually.

            I thoroughly agree that RFK is currently the best hope for conventional politics in the US.

          • useless eater

            “I thoroughly agree that RFK is currently the best hope for conventional politics in the US.”

            So why not speak up at the appropriate time? Instead you try to tag team me with the noxius “kashmiri” who openly espouses and revels in elder abuse? You will not profit trying to paint me as “anti-science” – this is not a warning, it is a fact. Even if this thing, this “kashmiri” has any merit as regards understanding “science”, is this worth the moral pollution risked when you name “kashmiri” an admired confederate?

            The irony of all this is, I only came back to this thread because I have been following your comments and have always enjoyed reading your tightly constructed, pithy statements, whether I am in agreement wiith them or not. Unlike many others, you actually say something.

            I mention Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” because whenever I have debated others and been able to deploy Kuhn’s arguments as to the nature of “science” and “anti-science”, none have been able to stand against Kuhn’s logic – I repeat none, whether they be hierophant or gobshite. I recall an encounter with a currently famous information scientist, stunned into furious silence by Kuhn’s work, when I applied it to information theory in a discussion he believed he couldn’t lose. This mountebank thought because I am of no import, the discussion was over before it began. Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that.

            I thought this book might be useful to you in your labours as you confront the forces of “anti-science” wherever you may find them. Read Kuhn and dump the likes of “kasmiri” and others of this ilk and you will be able to defend “science” to your heart’s content without any help

          • Clark

            Useless eater, I assure you that I neither support nor oppose kashmiri in general; I remarked on that one specific comment (May 9, 02:39 below) as an example of dismissal, merely because it was conveniently nearby. I haven’t even read kashmiri’s other comments on this thread. I regret that you feel tag-teamed; it was not my intention. Nor have I found your comments anti-scientific. Maybe I’m being less combative than you suspect?

            That’s an intriguing recommendation of Kuhn; I may get it from the library.

        • Bayard

          “We should forget it, because it isn’t true. Look at a dictionary more than three years old. There was no change in the definition.”

          The dictionary definition hasn’t changed, but what we understand by the word has. Three years is not long enough for this change to enter into the dictionaries. The COVID “vaccine” is not a vaccine as defined in any dictionary. If words mean what they are used to mean, then the the meaning of the word has changed from what is in the dictionary to something else. This happens all the time.

          • Calgacus

            “The COVID “vaccine” is not a vaccine as defined in any dictionary. If words mean what they are used to mean, then the the meaning of the word has changed from what is in the dictionary to something else. This happens all the time.”

            No. Covid vaccines are vaccines as defined in dictionaries now or twenty years ago. The ridiculous internet meme is that they are not. Those who say that the meaning of the word has changed are the ones who are playing word games and changing meanings, and you have been convinced of this incredible Big Lie, because you don’t believe that anybody could be that dishonest. This has nothing to do with Big Pharma, (which of course is quite evil) or whatever. Just common sense and literacy.

          • Bayard

            “Covid vaccines are vaccines as defined in dictionaries now or twenty years ago”

            No they are not. A vaccine is defined as something that induces immunity. The COVID “vaccine” doesn’t do that. It was said to do that when it was first introduced, but it was found that it didn’t. All it did was reduce the severity of the symptoms. Thus it is not a vaccine, but a palliative.
            FFS, stop trying to dress this up as some sort of anti-vaxx conspiracy theory. The COVID “vaccine” doesn’t do what a vaccine does, so it isn’t a vaccine. This has nothing to do with those who oppose the compulsory administering of vaccines.

          • kashmiri

            @Calgacus – you’re replying to people who didn’t even pass biology exam in their elementary school, and now are know-it-all about vaccines, viruses, immunity, etc.

            Better ignore.

            I can assure you that if they get diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration, they will be the first ones to beg their doctor on their knees for a gene therapy treatment called Luxturna.

            For now, they are just computer trolls with zero knowledge of medicine and microbiology, not mentioning any understanding of what immunity essentially is.

          • Clark

            Bayard, you keep referring to “the COVID vaccine”, in the singular, but there are many different ones, working on various related but differing principles. These vaccines do provide varying degrees of immunity, but it is partial and short-lived. But the incompleteness of this protection is due to a property of the virus rather than the various vaccines.

            The COVID vaccines work just like older vaccines in that they give our immune system a “sneak preview” of the virus from which it can prepare antibodies. This is how all vaccines work, so it’s fair to class these new ones as vaccines as well.

            But we don’t become fully immune to COVID even by catching COVID, and the partial immunity we do develop wanes. As you might suspect, our immune response to any vaccine resembling such a virus is also partial, and also wanes.
            – – – – – – –
            But your claim that “the COVID vaccine” (singular) isn’t a vaccine helps spread confusion, because another group of people are claiming that “the” COVID vaccine isn’t a vaccine because some of the new vaccines use a new technology called mRNA. Their complaint and yours at first sight seem to confirm each other, but the two complaints are completely different and essentially unrelated; any support they seemingly give each other is entirely illusory and a source of misunderstanding.

          • useless eater

            ” But the incompleteness of this protection is due to a property of the virus..”

            Clark, if this is true why where the public told lies concerning “this protection”? I remember clearly the politicians claiming immunity would result from vaccination, the opinion backed by “the best science”. Surely it would have been better to be honest and admit ignorance than just make stuff up and breach a sacred trust? This is no different from what conspiracy theorists on the internet do. It just makes it all look like a racket. I dread to think what all this has done to the public’s opinion of “science”.

          • useless eater

            kashmiri
            May 9, 2023 at 02:39

            Calgacus spoke stupidly and I have corrected him. What are YOUR qualification O godlike one?

            “I can assure you that if they get diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration, they will be the first ones to beg their doctor on their knees..”

            This is such an unpleasent sentiment I am suprised that the mods let this thru. My friend you have earned my utter contempt and any future contribution you make here will be examined carefully and responded to with great vigour – are we clear?

            “For now, they are just computer trolls..”

            Unfortunately, I can’t offer the same deal. You will be a “computer troll” for the rest of future time, in all possible worlds – unless you renounce your former ways, of course. I am nothing, except merciful – lucky for you. eh?

          • Clark

            “…why where the public told lies..?”

            Because the media predominantly quotes politicians, and politicians, typically, are manipulative.

            “This is no different from what conspiracy theorists on the internet do”

            Precisely. I’d even say that the former is a major cause of the latter; conspiracy theorists fail to notice that they’re following a very bad example.

          • useless eater

            To see Public Health policy captured and used as a mechanism to transfer massive wealth to the superich from everyone else, is to see there are no sacred cows in the minds of our rulers. We learn public health is to be just another weapon in the global class war. So much for Big Pharma and it’s claim to be a “community stakeholder”

            Clark do you have anything to say in regards the above paragraph?

          • Clark

            “Clark do you have anything to say in regards the above paragraph?”

            It’s called neoliberalism; governments have been captured by it. I saw this coming forty years ago; it was obvious that companies would buy up their smaller competitors, becoming more economically powerful with each acquisition. Gradually their power would exceed that of larger and larger entire nation states. And by becoming multinational they would gain the power to play governments off against each other, by moving or threatening to move their operations to whichever country offered them most advantage. Eventually, governments would become virtually powerless against them.

            We need to upgrade democracy to cope with this emergent commercial reality, and it will need a global dimension to cope with multinationalism. “On no! The dreaded One World Government”! Well yes, but if its democracy is robust it’d be far better than global control by a handful of One World Corporations, unaccountable except to their majority shareholders who are nearly always just other massive corporations.

          • Clark

            Kashmiri, May 9, 02:39 above:

            “Better ignore.”

            Kashmiri, the reason to respond to assertions from ignorance such as Bayard’s is because the argument proceeds in public. Educating Bayard would be nice, but all the other readers who might be swayed by such an argument, and might then go on to spread it further – these are far more significant than the one person you’re ostensibly replying to.

  • Coldish

    I’ve seen credible suggestions that the recent defenestration of Tucker Carlson by Fox News was prompted by Tucker’s willingness to give air time to both Kennedy and Trump.

  • Jack

    Very on point!
    US presidential candidate condemns Kremlin drone attack
    “Imagine how we would respond if Russian-backed forces launched a drone strike on the Capitol. We must stop these deranged attempts to escalate the war,” Kennedy tweeted.

    “After successfully defusing the Cuban Missile Crisis, President John Kennedy warned against ever again forcing Russia to choose between national humiliation and nuclear war. We should heed his advice,” he added.
    https://swentr.site/news/575804-rfk-kremlin-drone-attack/

    Like 3.. 2..1..until RFK is framed by DNC, media like Trump, as a russian stooge.

    • pretzelattack

      JFK provoked the Cuban missile crisis with the US missiles in Turkey. and he made sure that the fact that the US backed down and withdrew the missiles as part of the agreement negotiated was kept out of the news. JFK, like Biden was a warmonger.

      • Xavi

        So why didn’t he nuke the Russians then, and why did the warmongers assassinate him? To liken JFK to Joe Biden is pathetic. Biden is the political embodiment of the war-mad security state that murdered the Kennedys.

      • Stevie Boy

        Historically and factually your claim is fallacious.
        JFK was backed into a corner by the CIA, when they realised he wouldn’t play their games they killed him.

  • Fwl

    Kennedy V Tump would be a wonderful spectacle. It’s always interesting to see how US MSM deal with Robert F Kennedy as the fact that he is US Royalty seems to makes them gnash their teeth and pull their punches. His book on American Values is worth reading. To have lost both his Dad and Uncle to political assassination and to have an insider’s view on events has given him a highly unusual context. If he is nominated or gets close to being nominated I suspect the kid gloves will be coming off.

  • DunGroanin

    “ the biggest illegitimate interference in an election in modern western history”

    Mostly agree with the whole but I believe that to be more an example of local gerrymandering in THEIR elections. Old Joe, the grandfather, bootlegger, gangster, Nazi lover and Ambassador to the Court of St James pre WW2, did as much in manoeuvring JFK past Nixon, to then have both his second and third sons assassinated because they refused to do his bidding to ‘take Russia’. It’s quite a family RFKjr must know all about these skeletons and has kept in touch with the dastardly Deep State Democratic Party which would happily have him ‘deep sixed’ if they thought they could get away with it.
    Just as our global deep state controlled Starmers Blairite Labour Party has done to Jeremy Corbyn and a host of real old school genuine Labour local MP’s.

    No, worser illegitimate election interference has been carried out in many other parts of the world for decades. It’s just not known in the West.

    The Worst in the West is of course the recent plebiscites right here in the U.K. and especially in OUR last general election when the US Secretary of State, ‘ex’ head of the CIA Pompeo, Bolton and co – as deep state as they come – promised and delivered a GAUNTLET to stop Corbyns Labour winning.
    Aided and abetted by the mass media, Facebook, Twitter and any number of controlled party insiders and other 5 eye states. Because if he had been allowed to get into Downing Street that would as our ‘ex’ head of MI6 DeeDee (Dearlove) stated ‘All our plans would be put at risk’.

    That is surely The Worst and shamelessly self declared interference by our be so called democracy against another so called democracy!

    We know now exactly what these ‘Plans’ were don’t we? From the hard Brexit to a dodgy Epidemic and it’s even dodgier vaxx legislationand ever more controlling fascist legislation and boot filling to the great conspiracy of war to break and finally take Russia using proxy Nazis nurtured for a decade. Their perennial centuries old dream.

    • joel

      When their hypocrisy is presented to them direct like that they just stick their fingers in their ears and ignore it. They know they don’t have to do anything more because their behaviour will never be reported negatively by mass media. It just won’t be reported at all.

  • Deb O'Nair

    “I am aware of his chequered past, his support for Hillary over Bernie, and his Covid vaccine scepticism”

    Well founded scepticism it would now seem from the mountain of accumulating evidence regarding vaccine ‘injuries’ and the steeply climbing excess deaths across the Western world, which not only remain unexplained but are also deliberately ignored by the media.

      • SteveR

        Believe what you want but, you don’t have bioplausibility on your side, just a bunch of ‘figure-fiddlers’ and failed modelers.

        • Clark

          I have looked at the UK figures. Were I to look at, say, EU, US or Asian figures, are you saying I’d find the opposite result?

          Or are you, as I suspect, suggesting that all the hospital medical staff and local authority statisticians, in all the towns, districts and countries, all over the world, are all in cahoots with some evil conspiracy to increase the death rate by means of vaccinations? Remember that we’re talking about countless thousands of ordinary people in ordinary jobs here, rather than the handful of spooks and Integrity Initiative “journalists” who lie to us about international affairs and foreign policy. Public health data isn’t like dodgy trials run by pharmaceutical companies with employees gagged behind non-disclosure agreements either. The key difference is the public availability of the evidence.

          Incidentally, I used the models quite a bit, various universities published models online, and I found that their predictions worked quite well. Did you try that at all?

  • Tatyana

    as a foreign guest on your blog, I’d like to leave a remark to the author’s article – I hope this will be perceived as a comment by an abstract observer, more than a biased view of a person from Russia.
    it seems to me that Mr. Murray has just discovered the genre of Rashomon art 🙂

    • useless eater

      Tatyana, I had to look “Rashomon” up to understand your point.

      It occurs to me, of all the adults I interacted with when I was a child, the ones who knew their business, “the kindly ones”, demonstrated facility with “Rashomon” art when adjudicating the competing claims of childhood quarrels.

      Now I am an adult, I too try to exercise the same capacity when facing the world with its endless competing claims and counterclaims.

      The witnesses incriminate themselves, not just the accused.

  • useless eater

    There is a lot here and some of it I will take on trust.

    Your comments on Trump seem a fair shout but what of the hired help? Is this Team-B? The openly venal Pompeo, Mad Dog Mattis (If the US Army call you Mad Dog?), Tillerson (“The biggest threat the world faces today is resource nationalism”) and Bolton? What can be said of him?

    “In the East we will shoot anyone who looks askance at us”
    Adolf Hitler

    Bolton is an ideologue of this stripe.

    There are rumours being generated by conservative blogs that the recent years long medical emergency was the result of a backfired bio attack on China and Iran. I am not pushing this idea. I have not considered the truth of this claim nor its implacations. I merely observe that I when I read it, my first thought was of Pompeo and his psychopathic bragging at West Point and Bolton’s fear-drenched and fear inducing persona, radiating darkness worthy of any demon of high estate. We don’t actually know what’s been going on, in fact we’d be the last to know. They must be spending all this MIC money on something but what?

    Despite the above remarks your writing brought to mind a moment in 2018, when I became aware that Democratic talking heads had the glums over the Trump administration’s economic performance stats. So yes you could be closer to nub than me with my prehensile revulsion of Trump. To admit to all that you said of him as possibily true, would reveal me as a bit of a snob and a hypocrite. The alternative Clinton White House would have had the same death-cult ethos, just a different set of moral inadequates officiating at the killing rituals, if not considerably more inadequate.

    • Yuri K

      Tillerson was OK because he was not coming from the Deep State. At least, he had the guts to say that “It makes no sense for Ukraine to save its body in Donbass when its head in Kiev is eaten by corruption.” One can question the validity of this statement, however, it is certainly very unorthodox by Washingtonian standards. He did not do much harm. My guess is, his role was to represent Trump’s idea that politics works like a business. The same was likely true for another outsider, Nikki Haley.

      When Trump realized the Deep State was at war with him, he brought in the deepstaters like Bolton and Pompeo in an attempt to bribe his enemies, but again, they did not want peace. They wanted victory.

      • useless eater

        Tillerson is a business person, not a politician. It is not suprising that a representative of business would make such statement; they think in terms of how to maximise share holder value over the current financial year – then, and and only then do they give thought to wider structural issues.

        ““The biggest threat the world faces today is resource nationalism”
        Rex Tillerson Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power Steve Coll

        Tillerson’s above quoted statement suggests all this measuring of truth concerning Trump, Biden and the rest of the players in the tragic, bathetic farce we call “American Democracy” is no more than applause for the Kabuki.

        Tillerson’s diagnosis for the world’s ill is that everything belongs to Rex, Exxon and their mates and the world would be put to rights if everyone else in the world would accept this. I don’t know about you Yuri K but I find this completely unacceptable. both in the abstract and the actual

        • Yuri K

          This sounds like a variation on the older “our oil under their sands” theme. Businessmen are naturally greedy, but at least they do not care much for the America Uber Alles idea.

          • useless eater

            Resources include oil but not just that valuable commodity – everything

            To me it reads “All your stuff is ours.” – not the most clear sighted statement regarding private property coming from someone like Tillerson, whose mission statement is the intellectual and physical defence of private property – unless of course, Tillerson and those like him, think they already own everything – whether by Divine Right or military power does not matter; especially to countries who hold untapped or workable resources that are needed by their own populations.

            ““The biggest threat the world faces today is resource nationalism”
            Rex Tillerson

            To the reader, I ask you to think about this for a moment. Wither Nuclear annihilation, global bio war, bio-sphere breakdown, global malnutrition, human trafficking,institutional corruption, modern infrastructure deficit, drugs, crime, public health, inter-state relations, natural disasters? How many “..threats..” could you add before you got to “..resource nationalism..”?

            Tillerson’s statement is taken from the lexicon of”Forever War”. American business interests have written this lexicon in detail over the last century or so. Don’t take my word for it, read General Smedley-Butler’s “War is a Racket” (1935). Graham Greene’s “Getting To Know The General” published in 1984 tells very much the same story, albeit, gentler and more eloquently. As does Phil Agee’s memoir “Inside the Company”

            “In War Is a Racket, Smedley-Butler points to a variety of examples, mostly from World War I, where industrialists, whose operations were subsidized by public funding, were able to generate substantial profits, making money from mass human suffering.”

            Surely Yuri K, if empire is empire and suffering is suffering, cash is king?

        • Yuri K

          Well, it’s a bit more complicated, UE. Rex Tillerson represents globalism which is cosmopolitan by nature. As long as capital, goods, resources (including human) and information flow free across the borders, the globalists do not care what’s going on inside the borders. Their goal is to keep the capital growing and they keep it growing by directing these streams from one state or bank to another state or bank. The true enemies of globalism are nation-states that impose various barriers across the borders and restrict the free flows mentioned above. This explains Tillerson’s animosity toward “resource nationalism”. But, on the other hand, a globalist like Tillerson would not care about a country like Ukraine because there are no great opportunities to make money in Ukraine. Even Kersti Kaljulaid, then president of Estonia, a country friendly to Ukraine, warned potential investors not to bring their money to Ukraine because, most likely, their money will be stolen. Tillerson probably honestly did not get what the heck the U.S. interests in Ukraine are, if any.

          But while for Rex Tillerson this is all about money, for Bolton, Pompeo and their ilk this is all about power. Their formula is “you are either under us or against us”. A country’s mere independent attitude makes it an adversary to the U.S.; just look at Hungary who wasn’t invited to the Summit of Democracies. Or at Serbia that is under enormous pressure to join the sanctions against Russia. This does not make any sense economically because the volume of the Russia-Serbia trade is insignificant (Serbia makes just 0.36% of Russia’s imports and 0.26% of Russia’s exports); however, just as the Athens could not tolerate the neutrality of Melos some 2,400 years ago, the U.S. can not tolerate the neutrality of Serbia. And this has nothing to do with money or resources, this is all about power and control. Just like leaving Melos neutral would have made Athens look weak during Peloponnesian War, leaving Serbia neutral will make America look weak today. So this won’t happen.

          So the interests of the Deep State and globalists may coincide sometimes, but this is not always the case. The America’s “forever war” started as a war for resources under Carter’s Doctrine, but it has been transformed into a very different war by now. The U.S. does not need oil from Middle East or Venezuela any more, this is hardly a concern now. This is the war for global domination for the sake of global domination, and in this war everything goes.

          • useless eater

            The American “Forever War” began around 1898 with the sinking of the USS Maine, closely followed by the acquisition of territory in the Pacific and elsewhere, including the Philipines

            “First Philippine Republic was established on January 21, 1899 The islands had been ceded by Spain to the United States with Puerto Rico and Guam after the Spanish–American War. The United States would not recognize the First Philippine Republic, beginning the Philippine–American War. The war resulted in the deaths of 250,000 to 1 million civilians…..”

            Suggest you brush up on American history. Professor Alfred McCoy’s works covers the founding of American empire exceptionally clearly. Between the voracious compradors and the rapacious capitalists, very little resistance survived.

            A secretary of State has only one shareholder, the president who appointed them. This would explain his take on Ukraine – “No quick payoff, Mr President”

            Talk of “the Deep State”, “Globalists” or even “the Populist Option” don’t impress me much – just masks worn by international capital as it seeks it rate of return.

            “..this has nothing to do with money or resources, this is all about power and control.”

            Resources and money are power and control.

            “Personal violence is for the amateur in dominance, structural violence is the tool of the professional. The amateur who wants to dominate uses guns; the professional uses social structure.”
            John Galtung

            One final point;

            “The U.S. does not need oil from Middle East or Venezuela any more..”

            I disagree with this statement.

          • Bayard

            “Talk of “the Deep State”, “Globalists” or even “the Populist Option” don’t impress me much – just masks worn by international capital as it seeks it rate of return.”

            The problem is that, unlike in the past where that return on capital was largely made from adding value (industrial capitalism), now that return is almost entirely from rent in one form or another (financial capitalism). It can be argued that under industrial capitalism, everyone can benefit, but this cannot be true for financial capitalism as one man’s gain has to be another man’s loss.

          • useless eater

            We have had “the global rapine – adding value” debate. Potato, po-tato; you remember?

            I have no time for the dogmas of economics. You will find they all can be re-written upon necessity. Where there is a will, there is a way

            I speak only for “the wretched of the earth”; those who are abused, dispossessed or murdered, any combination of these or all – my only constituencey, my only gallery. The capable are capable and those who are not capable need help.

            “.. while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”
            Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War

            The above line was penned about 2500 years ago – we all need to do better.

          • Yuri K

            You are trying to think rationally, however, humans are not always rational. Marxists, for example, are always rational, they see profits and markets everywhere, but they screwed up big time when they declared that German workers will not shoot at Soviet workers; and sure they did. Class solidarity worked to some extent during the Antanta & U.S. interventions in Russia after the Revolution, but in the end nationalism – which is irrational – trumped everything. I strongly recommend reading about “offensive realism”, a theory originally proposed by J.J. Mearsheimer and developed further by others (for example, The evolution of offensive realism: Survival under anarchy from the Pleistocene to the present, by D.D.P. Johnston et al, Politics and the Life Sciences, 35 (1) 2016, pp. 1-26). The theory predicts that nations behave like tribes of chimpanzee who become aggressive to the next tribe just because such is their nature, to feel threatened by the next tribe if it becomes too powerful. Some wars fit into your rational resources-based thinking (the famous guano and saltpeter wars are the best examples); however, the bloodiest wars were not about resources at all. The Austro-Prussian War of 1866 and the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1 were not about resources at all; this were wars about who was the top dog in continental Europe. And note that “power” here does not equal “money”. “Power” means political weight based on military power. Germany, united after the victory, did not even grab the whole Lorraine, leaving most of the iron ore in France. Why? Because this wasn’t the war for resources. The same is true for WW1.

            As for the U.S., they took long breaks after 1898, and only after WW2 their forever war lasted forever.

          • useless eater

            ” Marxists, for example..”

            Yuri K, I don’t care what the acolytes of a dead god say; the only “Marxists..” I revere, are of the “Groucho” kind not the “Karl”

            My original premiss concerned US oligarchy and its basic relationship to genocide and profit – I think using any other label than oligarchy unsatisfactory and diversionary. If you not going to talk about this premiss, why bother replying?

            “Personal violence is for the amateur in dominance, structural violence is the tool of the professional. The amateur who wants to dominate uses guns; the professional uses social structure.”
            John Galtung

            Galtung’s prescription is the “Forever War” begun in 1898. Dominance through social structure.

            “Jim Crow” at home, “Forever War” abroad.

            An endless supply of second class, disposable people for the “Empire of Dirt”- the public face of oligarchy

          • Clark

            Yuri K, May 7, 03:04 –

            “The U.S. does not need oil from Middle East or Venezuela any more..”

            Useless eater, May 7, 04:19 –

            “I disagree with this statement.”

            Ah, liquid fuel, the nexus at which the interests of profit maximisation become identical to and inseparable from those of military power and conquest. The US may not need all the world’s oil for its own economy, but it needs to control the majority of world oil production to remain the top military power. All these machines of death run on liquid fuel, apart from the relative handful of nuclear ones – because nuclear power can’t be miniaturised, and liquid fuel will always vastly outperform electrical batteries. So whoever controls most liquid fuel can continue waging war longest, thus ensuring victory.

          • useless eater

            Clark I feel your above statement explains most of the major events of the 20th century

            Having read the requisite writings of most of the early theorists of mechanised warfare, ie Guderian, Fuller et al, amazingly the logic of your statement would fit right in with their observations.

            However it was the Soviet Marshal, Mikhail Tukachevsky who most clearly grasped and applied the new order in warfare, brought about by the internal combustion engine. The scale of his thought was staggering. By 1935 the metamorphosis of the old Russian army into the hierarchized Moloch of his dreams was complete. Stalin shot him shortly afterwards.

    • Lysias

      Hillary stated in the debates in 2016 that she would impose a no-fly zone in Syria. Which would have meant war with Russia. Trump never said or did anything like that.

  • Beware the Leopard

    “I did not predict that the USA would become a gerontocracy.”

    Kataskopocracy was your prediction, if I recall. Better word, and better prediction if you ask me. Though the panoply of exception that attended the 2020 installation in the White House of the nearly lifeless corpse of the most prolific and notorious liar in all of contemporary American national politics suggests to me that the “prediction” is a little late to the party.

    Speaking plain: The spies manipulate the shambling, talentless scumbag. Not the other way around. And they will spill oceans of blood and raise the dead or die trying before they relinquish power.

    I’d love to be wrong. But I’m not so foolish as to hope I am.

      • Bayard

        “Kakistocracy” is rule by the worst, the antonym to “aristocracy”. “Kataskopocracy” is a word coined by Craig to mean “rule by the secret services”.

        • Tatyana

          Kak is a Russian word 🙂 It’s pronominal adverb with interrogative meaning. In English it would be ‘what?’ or, ‘excuse me?’
          Kaka (noun, singular) is used in a figurative sense, means something dirty. Like “No, Vanya, no, throw it away, it’s kaka!” because Kaki (noun, plural) is how Russian mothers name *sorry* pieces of shit when talking to their babies about this.

          • Cynicus

            Of very similar meaning, less polite, is the Gaelic word “cac”. It means “shit” either literally or metaphorically.

            If this is Craig’s root word then “rule by shits”would be my interpretation.

            Pronunciation? Both C’ s are hard. The second one, though, is preceded by aspiration of the “a” giving something pronounced like “ca-hc” where the “-h” symbolises an exhalation.

          • Tatyana

            Ah, sorry, people say it’s from Latin ‘cacere – to defecate’. So, the derivatives sounding like ‘kak’ must be all over the languages all over the Roman Empire influenced countries.
            It’s a pity, I just was going to entertain you with a Russian joke based on a pun 🙂
            A man was introducing himself, pronouncing his name Puk (in Russian it sounds ‘fart’). And his fellow asked ‘Kak?’ meaning ‘xcuse me, can you please say it once more? And the answer was ”Hey! It’s not kak, just a puk!’.

            Sorry, sorry, sorry. Posted out of linguistic passion, didn’t intend to bring vulgarity here.

          • Bayard

            Tatyana, it’s a Primitive Indo-European root, common to all European and Indian languages.

  • AG

    German daily Berliner Zeitung, has non-paywall text

    re: Assange

    originally a speech held at the Brandenburger Tor

    “Why a release of Julian Assange is crucial for our future – On the occasion of Press Freedom Day, author Fabian Scheidler gave a speech for the release of Julian Assange at the Brandenburg Gate. We publish it here.”

    see this original link for the blue print hyperlinks. The German version of the text I have included below. [ Mod: The article is available in English translation here. ]

    https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/open-source/berlin-wikileaks-plattform-warum-eine-freilassung-von-julian-assange-entscheidend-fuer-unsere-zukunft-ist-rede-zum-tag-der-pressefreiheit-von-autor-fabian-scheidler-am-brandenburger-tor-li.345157

    p.s. The author Fabian Scheidler is admitteldy more of a fig-leaf for this paper. If you want a non-hawk write something that won´t cause big arguments but will satisfy the appearance of critical thinking Scheidler is their man. (At least from what I could read in recent months.)

    But of course better they are offering the text than not.
     
    [ — SNIP — ]

    Mod: AG, long articles should not be copied and pasted into BTL comments when they are freely available via the cited link – and particularly when they are written entirely in a language other than English.

    Please also offer a commentary on the cited article. From the moderation rules for commenters:
    Contribute
    Contributions which are primarily just a link to somewhere else will be deleted. You can post links, but give us the benefit of your thoughts upon them.”

    You can of course quote key sentences, paragraphs or passages – in English translation – to support your point.

  • zoot

    no one has greater authority or legitimacy to speak on the murder of his father and uncle than this guy. if he were to lift the lid in a debate watched by tens of millions it would be one of the most damaging assaults the Washington deep state has ever experienced. that I suspect was the foremost factor in why the DNC has ruled out any primary debates, more so even than protecting their absurd incumbent. it explains why no questioning or derision of their antidemocratic decision has issued from the Republicans. if the scion of the Kennedy clan were permitted to spill the beans on such a stage it could not be unheard and would ribbon trust in the bipartisan Washington regime.

    • Andrew Thomson

      Having attended along with 20,000 others, the same march in Glasgow today as Craig, and having freely protested against the colonial monarch and his fetishist followers, it was truly shocking to hear of Republic’s treatment at the hands of the Police in England.
      For what it is worth, I lodged a complaint: via https://www.met.police.uk/fo/feedback/complaints/complain-about-the-police/, naming Mr Graham Smith of Republic as the individual wrongfully arrested by the police, before even being allowed to exercise his legitimate right to protest against the wealth and power privilege of Charles Windsor. I would urge all freedom loving people “o’ independent mind” to do the same… even if with the lack of accountability, it only succeeds in clogging up their paper-clip counting system and, even if it takes pleasure in protesting to the Metropolitan Police with the salutation of “Fuck the King!”

  • nevermind

    Thank you AG for your referal of Herrn Scheidlers excellent article on Julian Assange and the importance his encarceration in Belmarsh has for all journalists, from the Berliner Zeitung.
    I managed to read it before it was pulled for reasons unknown.
    Even if it was O/T, which I do not believe it was, this is page 2

  • useless eater

    I have been having a persistent recurring dream concerning Julian Assange. In the dream I never see the protoganist’s face but I have guessed that it is Assange. His build, his hair confirm; it is all in monochrome.

    Sometimes he paces, sometimes sitting; often sleeping, in deep troubled spasms of discomfit and weariness. I have noticed , over time, he is literally wasting away,growing more insubstantial and diaphanous each I visit him – and the angle of my view moves, so that I know in time, I will see his face – his full face. Then I will no be longer able to hide from his gaze. When our eyes meet, I might spontaneously combust in the blaze of shame I am certain I will experience at that moment.

    “On June 11, 1963, a Buddhist monk doused himself with gasoline and set himself on fire in Saigon. Soon others were doing likewise across Vietnam. “Let them burn,” Madame Nhu, the Dragon Lady, cooed, “and we shall clap our hands.” (This happened five months before Jack Kennedy’s murder.)

    In my daily life the dream’s effect has manifested an odd pathology. In the random encounters of the day, the bus drivers, shop workers, admin officers, people in the park etc that I interact with, I say nothing. I listen politely, flattered by the attention and if a moment of frank speech occurs and I get a turn I say

    “Do you know friend, a guy Julian Assange is being tortured to death in Belmarsh Prison”

    I answer any follow-up questions laconically and I believe truthfully. At worst I am a mad old bag, a daft old coot but occasionly I hear a sound, maybe – its like a soft bell ringing somewhere in the distance, as I tell my simple truth.

    I am disciplined, I allow myself no other behaviour or speech apart from this one statement. I am become a “Free Assange ” machine. I have always liked listening to others speak, so everything seems to fit. I have become the member of a cult – the Free Julian Assange cult. I will be a member of this cult until he is freed or I am dead. I am not ashamed but I am not proud, I have joined this cult too late for pride and only because my dreams compel me.

    • nevermind

      well done you, useless eater, you are not alone, it has become an issue for me that does not leave my grey cells alone either. I do exactly the same, also I’m a quiet vigorous debater.

    • Tatyana

      At least Assange is alive.
      Zakhar Prilepin’s car was blown up today. The perpetrator, Alexander Permyakov, was detained, he was recruited by the Ukrainian special services and committed this terrorist act. He placed two anti-tank mines on the road along the path of Prilepin’s car and remotely detonated them. Prilepin is in intensive care, the driver died.
      In August, another citizen of Ukraine, Natalya Vovk, blew up the car in which Daria Dugina died.
      In April, war correspondent Vladlen Tatarsky held a meeting in St. Petersburg, at which Daria Trepova handed him a statuette, which exploded and Vladlen died.
      I would like Mr. Murray to express his opinion about the terrorist acts of the state of Ukraine against Russian journalists and public figures.

      • Andrew H

        It is not terrorism. You start a war you must expect it to come to Russia. Zakhar Prilepin was an active participant in the war – and therefore a legitimate target. Vladlen Tatarsky was also a participant in the war. He got what was coming to him – terrorism is when you go after innocent civilians that have no connection with the war (Beslan for example – I hope you can see the distinction, and I am sure you do).

        • glenn_nl

          And the driver, who actually died? Did he “get what was coming to him”?

          So, was he a victim of terrorism, or merely collateral damage in some righteous action against legitimate targets. I’m sure these are all very clear in your list of good people Vs evil-doers.

          • Andrew H

            He was collateral damage – for sure. (if you choose to be a driver for a war-monger, you take certain risks – there is such a thing as job choice). I am just saying it is inappropriate and offensive to use the word terrorism when talking about a targeted killing – because it is quite disrespectful to the children of Beslan and the victims of 911 to attempt to put them in the same category as Vladen Tatarsky. You and Tatyana perhaps don’t see that.

          • glenn_nl

            Just amazing how fast the lines get blurred between innocent victims, legitimate targets, and collateral damage.

            You managed it, though – from a hard distinction, to waving an obvious omission away as insignificant without any embarrassment whatsoever. A professional career surely awaits!

        • Tatyana

          So wise of you to say nothing about Daria Dugina.
          Else, it would follow that she deserved to die because she chose to be Alexander Dugin’s daughter.
          But that would sound completely inhuman on an emotional level, and on a logical level it would expose the whole stupid inconsistency of your argument, wouldn’t it, Andrew?

          • Andrew H

            I omitted Dugin’s daughter because we don’t know who killed her. The Ukrainians had no motive to target Dugin (or the daughter) since they are mostly unknown in Ukraine and even in Russia were apparently on the fringe. The only person with motive is Dugin himself. Before you say a father would never murder his daughter I think you are wrong. A father would never kill a son, but the daughter was disposable – she was already past breeding age where she could further the Dugin line. By murdering his daughter, Dugin makes himself relevant again and his daughter a martyr to the cause – its a sick and ego-centric way to gain a place in the history books. Many (or perhaps most) men would kill their child to become immortal – the reality is Dugin was and always will be irrelevant – killing his daughter was little more than a fantasy.

          • Tatyana

            it’s a lie, Andrew. We know exactly that Ukrainians targeted Dugin. Here is their kill list and Dugin’s profile there
            https://myrotvorets.center/criminal/dugin-aleksandr-gelevich/ [ English translation ]

            It’s amazing that you don’t know who and how killed Daria when an investigation with evidence and video footage was published.

            Your assumptions about Dugin’s motives to wish death to his daughter, I even don’t know what made you think so. It’s a wild accusation.

          • Andrew H

            So if he was on Ukraine’s kill list then it was an assassination attempt – my point was that assassination/ retribution/murder are not terrorism. There are different words with different meanings. To give you another example, the targeting of Skripal in Salsbury was not terrorism – because there was a target – Skripal (and the collateral damage was minimized – one could say it was reckless to involve civilians at all but not terrorism). I am unconvinced by your so called kill list – the only person with motive was Dugin and so until someone comes forward and confesses then he should be the primary suspect (most murders are committed by family – and the fact that the Russians are not even investigating Dugin just underlines the sloppy police work) (but that is not relevant to the inappropriate use of the word terrorism – which is what prompted my comments)

          • Jen

            The murderer of Daria Dugina has been identified as Natalia Vovk, a Ukrainian citizen, who fled to Estonia after the killing.

            Vovk apparently spent almost a month observing Dugina’s movements and gathering information about her daily routines, from an apartment she rented in the same Moscow building where Dugina lived.

            The bombing of Zakhar Prilepin’s car and the capture of the perpetrator will certainly strengthen the suspicion that Dugina was similarly targeted by the Ukrainian special services. Further targeted assassination attempts against other prominent Russian writers, academics and other intellectuals involving car bombs can only provide more circumstantial evidence for Dugina having been on a hit-list compiled in Kiev.

          • Tatyana

            Classic ISIS ideology.
            It’s for you, Andrew.

            “They’ve been trying to charge me with terrorism since 2016. But I want to begin by saying that the things they call ‘terrorism,’ we call liberation.”

            “All I will comment on is that we’ve been killing Russians and we will keep killing Russians anywhere on the face of this world until the complete victory of Ukraine.”
            Budanov, Ukraine’s military intelligence chief
            https://news.yahoo.com/we-will-keep-killing-russians-ukraines-military-intelligence-chief-vows-232156674.html

            “US intelligence agencies believe parts of the Ukrainian government authorized the car bomb attack near Moscow in August that killed Daria Dugina”
            https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/05/us/politics/ukraine-russia-dugina-assassination.html

          • Lapsed Agnostic

            Re: ‘she was already past breeding age’

            Darya Dugina was 29 when she was murdered, Andrew. Also her father is a political theorist. I doubt whether he could even begin to construct a working bomb, much less one to kill his own daughter. It’ll have been the Ukrainian secret services.

        • Johnny Conspiranoid

          “Zakhar Prilepin was an active participant in the war – and therefore a legitimate target.”

          Wikipedia seams to have him down as currently a writer and politician, not a combatant, so not a legitimate target. He was a legitimate target when he was an active participant. Same goes for Vladlen Tatarsky.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zakhar_Prilepin

          • Andrew H

            Please read that same wiki page. In February 2017, Prilepin gave a lengthy interview, in which he revealed that he was leading a volunteer battalion in the self-proclaimed People’s Republic of Donetsk. Returning to “civilian life” does not make you innocent. You do not need to be actively involved in combat to be a legitimate target. As for Vladen Tatarsky: not only did he fight in Ukraine – but he also said “”We’ll defeat everyone, we’ll kill everyone, we’ll rob everyone we need to. Everything will be the way we like it.”. That kind of statement made in the Kremlin, makes you a legitimate target – and also such people will remain legitimate targets even after the end of the war. You cannot reasonably expect these targeted killings to cease until justice is served – war has repercussions that won’t just end.

        • Bayard

          “It is not terrorism. You start a war you must expect it to come to Russia.”

          Your lack of attention in English classes is catching up with you again. “Terrorism” and “war” are not mutually exclusive. “Terrorism” is the use of terror to achieve a particular aim, usually political. It can be employed in war, or it can not. It usually is, since WWII. Yes, if the Russians invade Ukraine, they can hardly be surprised if the Ukranians strike back by all possible means, including the use of terrorism, which is what this attempted assassination was. The aim was to terrify other particularly pro-war Russians into not making their thoughts public.

          • Andrew H

            Bayard, you are twisting the meaning of words. Your last sentence is more or less laughable

          • Andrew H

            By your definition of “terrorism”, the US killing of Osama Bin Laden was terrorism, because now other Jihadists might be terrified into not signing up with Al-Qaeda? Perhaps the incarceration of Assange is also terrorism? (would be leakers might be terrified of the consequences).

          • Bayard

            ” Perhaps the incarceration of Assange is also terrorism?”

            Thank you, now I come to think of it, the persecution of Assange is a form of terrorism, as was the gaoling of Craig.
            Terrorism is anything that seeks to achieve its aims through the use of terror and since terror is an extreme form of fear, the use of fear is thus a form of terrorism.

      • useless eater

        Julian Assange is a living person being tortured to death by the British State.

        All these other people you talk about are dead – the victims of Beslan and 9/11 and Prilepin. You all seem to miss my point.Nothing can be done for the dead – they are beyond help, this is not true for the living, those like Julian Assange. The living can be saved

        Do any of you have thought for Assange?

        Pity the living – the dead have no need of your pity.

        I find your attitudes inappropriate and unsettling and your talk ghoulish.

  • Jane Morrison

    I love Robert Kennedy Jr..

    What a voice to appear on the world stage at this time with a very real chance of gaining presidency, articulating the complexity of the stranglehold so eloquently and opening a door to the possibility of radical change.

    Strengthening the knowing in the hearts and minds of millions of people, that humanity and planet are being shafted by maniacs in seats of institutionalised power. He has a voice which is capable of truly uniting a massive amount of people in a very short space of time.

    God bless and protect him and may the legendary spirits of his father and uncle come though him.. He most definately needs it to carry the light which he’s brilliantly shining, into the darkest of lairs.

    • useless eater

      It may be worth remembering Obama’s “Yes, we can!”. moment. I wasn’t there myself but I heard about it, Apparently, it was quite a moment.

      I would need more information to assess this playing of the Kennedy trump; it certainly is a high-value card and charged with meaning on many levels; whether this can be leveraged into “momentum” remains to be seen.

      As you so perceptively point out Ms Morrison, this person talks a good game but that is as far as I go – I need to see more before I would agree to your fulsome statements. Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t disagree if your statements were less fulsome but there would still be be a healthy process of give and take on on the minutae of your assertions before we could come to full concord.

      Ms Morrison, my heart has been broken many times but I am not bitter; I hope your love for this person is rewarded and the investment you risk yields the rewards you hope for. Best wishes.

      • Cynicus

        “….this person talks a good game….”
        ======
        Here in Scotland we have recently experienced the resignation of exactly that sort of leader. She could give Kennedy or even Tony Blair a masterclass in presentational skills. In the English-speaking world I think only Clinton could outperform her in that department.

        Many believed she was headed for a big international career, post-retirement. Yet, she left office in murky circumstances with the party run by her husband now a possible crime scene. But she is still gushingly admired by many of her supporters in much the same terms as Ms Morrison reserves for the new Kennedy kid on the block.

    • glenn_nl

      Kennedy is definitely sound on the environment, corporate corruption and its stranglehold on government, war and so on. Shame he became such a nutcase about vaccines, but then – he has little to no medical or scientific training, so it would be rather foolish to take anything he says along these lines too seriously.

      This really does undermine his fitness to be President, unfortunately. Someone unwilling to see reason in one area, has to become suspect when it comes to other serious aspects of life.

      But in fairness, you could justifiably say the same about every religious devotee going – the crazy, unbelievably ridiculous nonsense they believe and promote really should disqualify anyone suffering such delusions from public office. Being a paranoid anti-vaxxer nut is mild stuff compared to the utter BS you’ll get from any religious dupe.

      • useless eater

        Or Trump who recommended drinking bleach. Or presidential hopeful and televangelist Pat Robertson, who was asked about Scotland as a potential holiday destination by a caller on his phone-in show, simply replied;”Scotland, a dark land run by homosexuals.” Or Biden falling off bycicles, stages, up steps; then he arrives in Kiev marching like a grenadier, to the sound of air raid sirens, heralding by prearrangement, the Russian non-attack. I reckon a sexual cannibal could be elected Prez, if they haven’t already been. Some say there is method in all this madness but I don’t see it.

        All bets were definitely off after Georges W Bush – the idiot son of privelege and the drama of the hanging chads. Then Citizens United became law. The media machine manufactures the image and then consumes the manufactured image. It’s no longer about what things are but how they appear in the rarefied media lens. It’s not about what our leaders say in their media campaigns – it is what they don’t say. Covered in political grafitti, these living palimpsests stumble about feigning deafness and blindness, yet always hearing the rhythms of the donor’s drums, always reading the donor’s messages.

        If it was between Trump, Biden and Sponge Bob Square Pants, I’d vote for the sponge. Kennedy is surely a more qualified candidate than Sponge Bob so de facto he’d get my vote; speaking hypothetically of course as I am not an American voter.

        • glenn_nl

          All very true.

          It seems that as long as the candidate can restrain themselves from starting wars and threatening to bring our entire civilisation to an end, they will have distinguished themselves sufficiently as being the best for some time.

          Not a particularly high bar to clear, one would think, but only Trump seems to have managed it – despite being a congenital liar, a racist, a rabble-rousing, grifting, cheesy old con-man.

          Let’s face it, virtually every single Senator and Representative is pretty appalling in their individual ways, the sort of people you would cross a busy street to avoid in real life. The same is largely true for most politicians, worldwide.

          There are some decent ones of course, just as you’ll find some genuinely good Christians in church. They’re pretty rare, though.

          • AG

            What about the worried Chinese High Command contacting Milley during Trump´s last weeks in office? I wouldn´t put too much hope into any of these candidates. The reasons after all are of structural economic nature.

            The economic system works that way; the revenue machine has no other sources than speculation, war and real estate. No POTUS will change that.

            It is true that Trump alleged he would talk with Putin. Eventually what else do we know? Nothing.

            Trump did kill INF Treaty. He did threaten to kill NewSTART. Of course we have the Sanders “hopes” as bait for the sane to vote for Dems. And the security apparatus is known to adapt well under any President.

            If domestic right-wing crazies would gain traction after a Trump win that would only be another field of action for FBI and friends. The supressive nature would in essence remain.

            Whether labour rights and freedom of speech are curtailed and cut into pieces as reaction to an imminent Russian invasion (“The Russians Are Coming”, comedy movie from 1966, by Norman Jewison) or as a reaction to rising domestic right wing / Fascists groups (“The Parallax View”, conspiracy thriller from 1974, by Alan Pakula)
            – what´s the difference? Yeah the bomb.

            But on China as a threat/challenge they ALL seem to agree, even old style democrats who have been side-lined for now. It´s dancing on the brink of the volcano, whoever your dancing-partner is.

          • useless eater

            AG funny you mention “The Parallax View”;

            “I think someone is knockin’ off all the best people in the country.”
            Frady – Warren Beatty’s character, The Parallax View (1974)

            In a later Beatty film, “Bulworth” he plays a corrupt, machine politician morally disintegrating. – he hatches the bizarre plan to have himself assassinated as he is too cowardly to commit suicide. It is, as they say “..with hilarious results..”. I laughed.

            At the start of “Bulworth”, he’s in his office and his despair is revealed; one of the props – a framed picture is actually a photo of a younger Beatty (by seven years) reaching out to clasp hands with a still living RFK – it is, maybe, a street scene and informal in pose. It is a powerful picture and it’s use blurs the line between fiction and real life and the image is strongly suggestive of the recursive nature of our experience.

            It gave me shivers when I first seen it., it gives me the shivers now – who’s story is being told Frady ,Beatty, RFK, RFK jr, yours, mine?

          • AG

            useless eater

            rewatching “Bulworth” has long been on my list.
            Thx for reminding me.

            Even though Beatty is not that good an actor – (shows you how little business model art like motion picture industry has in common with the classic notion of “a.r.t.”) – he knew that all along himself and using the profits from his surprise success with Bonny/Clyde, made himself a complete film-maker, actor only for promotional reasons eventually.

            In that one of his best pupils was probably Tom Cruise (understanding that “star” is first a business model only second or third in fact about acting.)

            Beatty I assume has belonged to the good guys most of the time however.
            May be one reason for his longevity as a Hollywood player.

            His better half acting-wise, Annette Bening, I would believe has improved much more as an actress in comparison.

            In her young years limited by the surface of youthful beauty sometimes, with age has developed some considerable substance.

            Ohhh, and since this here is actually not about movies but serious politics – Beatty and the late John F. Kennedy Junior have allegedly both dated the same women, being actress Daryl Hannah and singer (?) Madonna.

            Besides, POTUS JFK wanted Beatty to play him in an Elia Kazan war picture which was shot in 1963.

            (the argument was: “Warren had everything Jack had: looks, intelligence, cunning and a commanding eye with the girls. Warren also suffered from lower back trouble.”)

            But: Cliff Robertson ended up playing the lead instead.

            Cliff Robertson, who, to close this circle of associative thinking, played bad guy Higgins in “Three Days of the Condor” which was subject of debate here, months ago.

            p.s. So I assume being a Democrat did help Beatty.
            But what does he say about the present Democrats I wonder???

            (And what would he say about the old Dems from the 1960s behind closed doors? After all Beatty did shoot and pay for the epic, today unwatchable, 3 hour-movie “REDS” in 1981. You don´t do that without a certain conviction. REDS being Beatty´s Biopic on journalist John Reed during the Russian Revolution trying to defend the Bolsheviks against US intervention, as depicted in Reed´s “Ten Days That Shook The World”. Which was btw used as well by Sergei Eisentein as additional title to his great silent movie “October”, in 1928, for purpose of better marketing in the West where people did know Reed´s account by name if not by content.)

          • useless eater

            I will yield to your superior knowledge of the wit and wisdom of Donald Trump. His slapstick approach has won him many converts – I was taking the same approach to his activities, as I am sure, he would to my activities. He would approve of me spreading “fake news” about him, if I stood to gain one iota (in this case a cheap laugh, at his expense), for that is his creed.

            But what is your motive Bayard in stopping me spreading “fake news” about him? You are not so diligent when the spread of “fake news” concerns things of greater importance and wickedness, are you? No, then I sadly observe a studied silence.

          • Bayard

            “But what is your motive Bayard in stopping me spreading “fake news” about him?”

            Just a regard for the truth, even when it comes to someone like Trump.

            “You are not so diligent when the spread of “fake news” concerns things of greater importance and wickedness, are you?”
            I spend far too much time on the internet as it is, I can’t rebut every lie that people want to make. Care to be more specific?

          • useless eater

            No. I have been specific enough.

            Now it is your turn to observe a studied silence, sadly or otherwise.

  • Tim

    Very good, thank you.

    You have a blind spot though. Consider, the jab is only legal under emergency legislation because it never completed even stage 3 trials. Yet it is now prohibited for any healthy person under 75. Do you not see an inconsistency here?

    I strongly recommend dr John Campbell on YouTube for a calm clear evidence based rebuttal of the monstrous coved jab scam

    Best wishes ( and I will donate to your fund)

    • glenn_nl

      This “Dr” John Campbell – why does he publish on YouTube, and not in medical journals, where his astonishing findings can be properly validated by his peers (a process known as “peer review” which is how real science and medicine works)?

      It seems rather odd that he would rather have clicks and up-likes, instead of the awards and prestige that breakthroughs in medical understanding would normally achieve.

      • Pigeon English

        dr John Campbell doesn’t deserve such ad hominem vitriol !
        To my understanding he can not publish other people’s studies and research already published in peer review papers.
        He comments on published papers and asks legitimate questions.
        He was pro vaccines and for strict lockdowns and as new data, evidence and research was emerging in 3 years questions have been asked.

        BTW he is the only one on Ytube not asking for “likes” “subscribe” “donate” or press notification bell.

        • glenn_nl

          I am prepared to admit being mistaken about Campbell. Seeing that he appears to have denied that more than a few thousand people had died from Covid (on the grounds that anyone having, say, diabetes doesn’t count}, and that Ivermectin was great stuff, I thought he was a shameless huckster along the lines of Malone. (Malone, and his band of con-artists, were loving their fame and influence on the weak minded and easily duped anti-vaxxers, you’ll recall.)

          If that’s not the case, I take it back.

          • Pigeon English

            Ivermectin is a great stuff but not for COVID. IT is medicine for humans and not “horse deworming” medicine even though it is used for that purpose.
            Him denying that more than 1000 people died to COVID is a lie IMO unless I missed that video. I would be more than grateful if you provide me a link where Dr Campbell appears to denied more than 1000 dead.

          • Pigeon English

            “Facebook ads are promoting horse drug Ivermectin as a COVID cure” by euronews
            Ivermectin is around since 1975 and used in humans

          • glenn_nl

            PE : Actually, I was saying thousands, not 1,000 – here is the story about how the good doctor denies anyone having some other condition ‘really’ died from Covid :

            https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/60145237

            Then on 20 January, Dr John Campbell, a retired nurse educator who has amassed a huge following on YouTube, released a video describing the figures as a “huge story” and suggested Covid deaths were “much lower than mainstream media seems to have been intimating”.

            There is more, this seems reasonably well referenced:

            https://medium.com/reptile-information-review/covid19-misinformation-joe-rogan-dr-john-campbell-and-the-reptile-lighting-facebook-group-b6681667bac7

            Some of his earlier advice seems quite good, but he seems to have gone off the reservation (so to speak), providing his own ‘wisdom’ which is not supported by evidence or proper medical practice.

          • Clark

            I think John Campbell has got sucked into anti-vax (for covid), partly by his interaction and growing popularity with the many conspiracy theorists among his YouTube commenters, and partly in reaction to the covid censorship on the big social media platforms and the biased “fact checking” in the corporate media.

      • Bayard

        “This “Dr” John Campbell – why does he publish on YouTube, and not in medical journals, ”

        Cancel culture

        “(a process known as “peer review” which is how real science and medicine works)?”

        Yes, it’s how it works now, but no better process for stifling innovation has ever been devised. If all science had been subject to peer review, we’d still be believing that the sun went round the Earth.

        • Pigeon English

          This “Dr.” Campbell IMO is smear tactic do discredit him on (not checked but heard a video on it) on his Wikipedia.
          Most of us here are aware of Wiki and it’s credentials..
          Good explanation provided by Coldish regarding so called Dr.

          Many alleged wrong doings and up in some king of Inquiry/ investigation/whitewash

          As a result of the wrong doing/whitewash following happens

          “lessons to be learned” parroted ad nauseam and that’s it.

          100000 people dead, 100’s of Billion spent, potentially 1000’s of people with Severe consequences of the Jab etc. It’s not a big deal. Did Boris have a drink or two or a full party is worth investigating for months but Covid and everything associated with it and learning lessons is not so important. We did Great and that’s it. No lessons to be learned ,we were together in it
          and let’s celebrate AZ( Astra Zeneca/ British Pride)
          deal or “lessons to be learned”.
          Tory’s and Labour United.
          I was happy to know that Boris had a party and Our/Your system works apart those irrelevant issues.
          Was Sue Gray headhunted by Starmer week earlier or later I Want to know?

        • Clark

          Bayard:

          “Yes, it’s how it works now, but no better process for stifling innovation has ever been devised. If all science had been subject to peer review, we’d still be believing that the sun went round the Earth.”

          What an utterly ridiculous assertion. Nearly all science is peer reviewed, so you are claiming that science came to a halt some time between 1665 and about 1950. Yet you live in an age of unparalleled scientific development! Here; learn a little about the history of peer review:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scholarly_peer_review&oldid=1155695503#History

          I suppose if you wish to dismiss major scientific findings as hoaxes you’re going to need some kind of mechanism, but what incredibly lazy thinking.

      • Coldish

        glenn_nl: John Campbell doesn’t do research, he draws attention to and discusses publicly available data and publications produced by researchers and governments, and tries to explain their significance to ordinary members of the public. He is not a medical doctor and has never claimed to be. He has a Ph.D degree (in nursing education) so is entitled to use the handle ‘Dr.’ He has written two handbooks on physiology for nurses. He is one of the most effective and reliable educators I have ever encountered. YouTube is lucky to be hosting his channel.
        To take a small example: without Campbell’s channel I would not have known about the published and peer-reviewed evidence (from archived blood and sewage samples) that the Covid-19 virus was already circulating in Italy by mid-December 2019, and possibly by early September. Of more importance to the general public was his insistent questioning of the widespread, officially sanctioned and arguably hazardous practice of injecting vaccines without aspiration.

        • Pigeon English

          Coldish

          “He is one of the most effective and reliable educators I have ever encountered.” + the rest of your post and that is why I was annoyed with G-nl post.
          I was so-called militant vaxxer (at a time when dr. John was informing me based on the evidence provided/available at the time) but now now I have doubts.

          To dr. Campbell’s credit and objectivity, he was the first one to inform me (but not suggesting to use) that Ivermectin (horse dewormer according to our beloved liberal media) was one of the most successful (human) medicines sold in about 3 Billion pills (out of patent).

  • Tim

    Very good, thank you.

    You have a blind spot though. Consider, the jab is only legal under emergency legislation because it never completed even stage 3 trials. Yet it is now prohibited for any healthy person under 75. Do you not see an inconsistency here?

    I strongly recommend dr John Campbell on YouTube for a calm clear evidence based discussion.

    Best wishes (and I will donate to your fund)

    • Pigeon English

      Poor Dr Campbell.
      Had to take 7 days ban from Ytube.
      I followed him since the begging of pandemic and had 2 Jabs and Covid after that so did not take further ones.
      3 years have passed and studies were done, data compiled and analysed, something’s leaked etc. and yet no debate or discussion.
      IMO dr Campbell is honest meticulous guy with integrity that went from pro vaccines and strict lockdown to analyzing new evidence and asking questions in balanced way.

    • Clark

      “the jab […] is now prohibited for any healthy person under 75.”

      The above is wrong*:

      https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/covid-19/covid-19-vaccination/about-covid-19-vaccination/

      “Most people can have any of the COVID-19 vaccines and will be offered 1 that gives protection from multiple types of COVID-19.”

      * I think you’re referring to just the Astrazeneca vaccine in certain countries. And retired doctor John Campbell was pretty good for quite a while but I think eventually YouTube drew him off course.

      • Clark

        OK, I found out more about this. The UK government has ceased offering any of the covid vaccine booster shots to people under 75 years old and at low risk from covid, but the first two doses will still be available to anyone who hasn’t yet had them. And the vaccines have not been prohibited; they will still be offered to those with conditions that make them more vulnerable to covid.

        This looks like government penny-pinching to me.

  • john

    mod,
    “vaccine hesitancy” is a smear weapon that RFK Jr.’s political enemies used and continue to use to attack him, implying he is at best irrational. Craig even mentions it, and a number of commentators here mention it too, as a matter of personal opinion; their comments are not censored.
    I am presenting evidence that RFK Jr. was correct to warn people about the dangers presented by the mRNA vaccine, and am drawing attention to the institutional corruption which underlies those who attack RFK Jr. on this issue.
    So I wonder why you would censor my comment?


    [ Mod: Your comment is not being “censored”; you are being directed to the discussion forum, which is the correct place for this kind of argument.

    What you see as ‘evidence’, others construe as misunderstandings and misinformation – and they believe they can explain why. And so the argument grows and grows, like a malignant tumour. The facility for that kind of polarised debate is the discussion forum. Kindly take your claims about vaccines there.

    Similarly, if you want clarification on moderation you should post your query in the Blog Support forum. ]

    • john

      Yet above, you have allowed ‘Clark’ to cite UK Government evidence in support of his/her viewpoint on so-called “vaccine scepticism”, from the discussion forum no less!
      Is it coincidence that it corresponds with the mainstream? Polarising, indeed.
      If your editorial policy is to support the mainstream viewpoint on this issue, you really should explicitly say so.


      [ Mod: If you’re referring to this comment (2023/05/06 at 17:56) by Clark, note that the link he provided was to the discussion forum – which, as previously mentioned, is the correct arena for disputing any facts about vaccines.

      As previously mentioned, any queries about moderation should be posted in the Blog Support forum. If you try to continue this conversation here in the blog comments section, you will be blocked from posting further comments. ]

  • Jack

    As usual, as soon as there are a candidate challenging the estalishment there will be a backlash against him/her:
    Obama, Trump, Jill Stein etc:

    I dont mind criticism against RFK or any other candidate but is it not interesting that candidates that actually, at least vocally, raise the most important issues are constantly ignored by the media/establishment and when they talk/write about these people, it is with a constantly negative spin.
    I mean media criticise RFK more than they do with Biden which have actually been the preisdent for he past 3 years!
    Deep down the criticism is stemming from their foreign policy objectives. If RFK was a warhawk, he would get a free pass by the media.

    “How the press can ethically report on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential run”
    https://www.wgbh.org/news/politics/2023/04/21/how-the-press-can-ethically-report-on-robert-f-kennedy-jr-s-presidential-run

    “Who Are These Supposed Lefties Who Love Robert F. Kennedy Jr.?
    The anti-vaxxer is challenging Biden for the Democratic nomination, and some far-left media personalities are as giddy about his candidacy as Tucker Carlson is.”
    https://newrepublic.com/article/172253/lefties-who-love-robert-f-kennedy-jr

    “Who is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s presidential campaign for?”
    https://www.semafor.com/article/04/21/2023/who-is-robert-f-kennedy-jrs-presidential-campaign-for

    “America’s self-righteous contrarian trap
    If you find yourself praising Marianne Williamson or Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (or, heaven forbid, Tucker Carlson) this election cycle, you aren’t a leftist. You’re a mark.”
    https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/left-praises-tucker-carlson-marianne-williamson-rfk-jr-rcna82319

    ‘Tucker Carlson fooling RFK on Ukraine’
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/20/ukraine-tucker-carlson-kennedy/

  • Jack

    It is like the word “democracy” has no value/definition in 2023. The word has been abused so much in past years, just take this:

    The western government funded “Reporters Without Borders” claim Ukraine have gotten considerable better on the freedom of expression index past year:
    https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1653697300588384256

    . Ukraine have banned, I do not know how many parties, media, since the war, but this is applauded?!

    Well if this organisation praised Ukraine for censoring voices why are “Reporters with Borders” so harsh on Russia being undemocratic then?

1 2 3