Nixonian ‘Dirty Tricks’ Look So Quaint By Today’s Standards

THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF DEATHS lately of particularly old people, including, e.g., billionaire Warren Buffett’s partner at Berkshire Hathaway, Charlie Munger, 99, and former first lady, Rosalyn Carter, 96. (Average life expectancy for ordinary people in the U.S. has decreased markedly since Covid.) The latest to join these exalted souls is Henry Kissinger, 100. 

Kissinger was born a Jew in what was then Nazi Germany and emigrated to the U.S. as a teen, becoming a U.S. citizen in 1943. His ambitions led him to government service and his work spanned the Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson administrations. Eventually, he become the Secretary of State under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. 

Kissinger was controversial. For one thing, he increased U.S. presence in Vietnam and bombing in Cambodia during the Vietnam War quagmire. He also orchestrated  ‘normalization’ of relations with Red China, which seemed like a good idea at the time. Additionally, he worked to ease tensions between the U.S. and then-U.S.S.R., which really was a sound policy. He won the Nobel Peace Prize for negotiating a ‘peace with honor’ settlement to end the Vietnam War back when the prize sort of meant something. He received many other honors, awards, and medals, too. Xi referred to Kissinger as “a most valued old friend.” (Insert alarm bells here.)

Still, the nation’s chief diplomat was not always all that diplomatic himself. Aside from expanding military involvement in Vietnam, he was responsible for the U.S. supporting brutal regimes in Argentina and Augusto Pinochet’s Chile, the Indonesian invasion of East Timor in 1975, and supporting Pakistan’s military regime during the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971, leading many to consider him a war criminal who should answer for his answers at the Hague. It’s doubtful, he had the requisite mens rea to be convicted of such crimes, however. Rather, he had a worldview, supported by many at the time, that the U.S. and its allies would be motivated by national interest rather than humanitarian concern or moral norms. 

It came to a tragic end for Richard Nixon who resigned in disgrace in 1974 after Watergate, a third-rate bungled robbery attempt of the DNC which seems quaint today, but Kissinger remained relevant in Ford’s term ending Jan. of 1977. After, Kissinger started a consulting group and became a prolific writer on foreign policy. 

Those Spacey Asians…

THE WORLD IS FALLING APARt fast. What isn’t being blown up with cluster-bombs and other munitions is being destroyed by extremely poor policy decisions. We, as a generation, will have a lot of explaining to do for our prodigy from our graves. It’s no wonder those of means are again looking up in space and to the stars for possible relief from human failings and failures.

In recent months, there has been a noticeable uptick in space travel, or attempts at it, after a veritable decades’-long hiatus. Private or civilian money, such as Elon Musk’s SpaceX and Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic, have funded innovative projects such as SpaceX’s Mars transportation infrastructure, SpaceX’s reusable launch system development, and Virgin Galactic’s Galactic 01, the first successful commercial space tourism flight which was completed in June. The aim of all these undertakings is, of course, commercial.

At the other end of the spectrum, however, is public investment in space exploration. After nearly half a century, Russia is hoping to pick up where the old U.S.S.R. left off, and make a soft Soyuz 2.1v rocket landing on the moon’s south pole (a first) to determine just how much water ice, if any, may be there. It is believed the moon is 100 times drier than the Sahara, but NASA maps from 2018 showed water ice which the agency was able to confirm in 2020, at least in areas where there is some sunlight. If water ice is there, it could be used to extract fuel and oxygen as well as be a life-sustaining source of drinking water. 

The Russian rocket and lunar lander Luna 25 took off on 8/10/23, after a two-year delay which was probably as much for political reasons as technical ones, a month after India launched its Chandrayaan-3 lunar lander and rover. 

India touched down on the moon’s south pole on 8/23/23. (Footage here.) The Indian plan was to run experiments for a couple of weeks, while the Russian undertaking was expected to be for a year. Unfortunately, during landing, the Russian craft crashed on the lunar surface on 8/19/23.

India has also launched a spacecraft, the Aditya-L, dedicated to studying the Sun. Among other things, it will scientifically study the photosphere, chromosphere, and the Sun’s corona. It should provide data about solar flares and weather in space. (My kinda research, given I’m more concerned about violent solar flare activity affecting the Earth than so-called ‘climate change.’)

China has also hailed a number of successful space missions in 2023 so far, including a fifth crew flight to the Tiangong space station in May. (The sixth is scheduled for next month.) The goal for some time has been to establish a permanent moon base, and it appears South Africa has formally joined China in that quest. The two nations signed a Memorandum of Understanding between their respective space agencies concerning what is known as the International Lunar Research Station. Beijing wants to land astronauts on the lunar surface by 2030. They like to play the long game, so they will surely succeed. 

Japan, too, launched a rocket headed for the moon with a robotic lander and X-ray astronomy telescope on 9/8/23. The X-Ray Imaging and Spectroscopy Mission, or XRISM, will measure the speed and composition of what lies between galaxies. This should help scientists solve the mystery of how celestial bodies were formed as well as the ultimate puzzle of how the universe itself was created. 

It is also hoped the Japanese mission will aid scientists in understanding black holes and hot plasma in space and time. The lander won’t surface until early next year as “pinpoint landing technology” is being developed. 

Not every Asian space undertaking has been successful of late, however. Japan had to abort an H3 rocket launch in February, and while the liftoff a month later was successful, the rocket had to be destroyed after its second stage missed proper ignition. Still, failures are teachable moments, and the Japanese are surely using what they have learned to achieve their ultimate goal of getting an astronaut on the surface of the moon. 

The former U.S.S.R., the U.S., China, and now, India, are the only nations to have successfully landed on the lunar surface. Only China and India have done so in the 21st century. 

As an American, it’s hard to not notice we seem to be falling behind in the space race, at least the public, and supposedly strictly civilian one. 

It’s NOT Anti-American to Hear the Russian President Out.

NOT MANY AMERICANS really want to struggle through the prodding overdubbed female voice translating Russian President Vladimir Putin’s equivalent of a lengthy and pontificating state-of-the-union address. The headline about him “suspending” or abrogating the New START nuclear arms treaty with the U.S. (which is technically illegal under international law) sufficed. All we need to know about Vlad is he caused the war—and inflation. Along with Trump, of course, because the two are co-conspirators—of something. The Federalist’s Eddie Scarry, however, took a stab at interpreting Putin’s speech last week, and I think he was right on target. Here are his other three big takeaways, quoting from the Russian leader’s speech. (Speech translated here.)

First, “[t]he U.S. has used Ukraine to prepare for a large war. They have publicly admitted that.” Scarry cites Biden’s proclamation that Putin “cannot remain in power.” He also called Putin a war criminal. This threat of regime change isn’t only evidence Putin thinks the U.S. is anticipating a long conflict, it’s an existential threat, and a very personal one, at that. That Biden made a ‘surprise’ visit to Kyiv last week wasn’t just a statement he (and by extension the U.S.) stands behind Ukraine, it was a provocation on its own. That Biden keeps giving away American taxpayers’ money to Zelensky to underwrite two-thirds of the war’s costs makes it clear money is no object to him (even if it to the taxpayers.) (Biden would be wise to recognize the Putin he knows is better than whoever takes over is likely to be, whether it be the saber-rattling Dmitri Medvedev or someone else.)

Second, “[t]he West is guilty of escalation.” Scarry notes NATO expansion has been the cards for a while as a “vanity project” for both parties. This is true enough, but Biden has advanced the cause unlike anyone else, save for select Neocons, which he himself is not. The late Sen. John McCain’s lapdog, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), have been particularly outspoken regarding the defeat of Russia. Putin’s failure to advance in Ukraine under the Trump administration isn’t because Trump and Putin were red co-conspirators. Trump simply wasn’t looking to expand NATO, as Biden is, and actually expected member nations to foot the measly two-percent of GDP they agreed to pay for their own defense rather than expect U.S. taxpayers to.

Third, “[t]hey [the West] want to have a strategic defeat of Russia…” Scarry observes this is not inconsistent with anything Biden or most of Congress has said, adding no one in the West would resume regular trade or cooperation with Russia if it retreated from Ukraine immediately. If true, and I believe it is, why would Russia be inclined to retreat in the first place? 

The problem is simple to explain; difficult to resolve. There is absolutely no incentive for Putin to do anything different than trying to make certain NATO isn’t lurking around with hidden bombs to take Russia out and him with it. Ukraine’s entry into NATO has always been a red line for Putin. Can’t Russia have its own equivalent of a Monroe Doctrine?  Or a modernized Brezhnev Doctrine?

Scarry concludes by saying Putin is not irrational. This is evident by Putin’s words and behavior, despite American spooks planting seeds of Putin’s physical and mental decline, or even his death. Between the West’s incessant prevarication, patronizing, and provocation, it’s a wonder the “special military operation,” that no one doubts is a full-fledged proxy war, isn’t spurring more deadly force from Putin.

Perhaps Russia is hoping for a negotiated settlement, but that seems a bit…irrational. Maybe it’s inept. It’s notable the Kremlin hasn’t done much with the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS). Maybe military equipment hasn’t been tended to over decades of relative peace there. While the U.S.S.R.’s losses in Afghanistan (nine years) were significant (as were ours), Russia has been out of the opium den since 1989 (unlike us). Putin was KGB then and had to learn from the experience, although apparently, not enough. (Summary here, albeit with a pronounced accent.)

Years of disuse may also be evident in the reported failure of a RS-28 Sarmat, or Satan II intercontinental missile test launch by Russia on Feb. 18th, although a test in 2022 was allegedly successful. Per the New START, Russia notified the U.S. of the test. (Also per convention, Russia was put on notice of Biden’s trip to Ukraine to ensure safe passage at about the same time.) Yet, while Russian weapons may be rusty from disuse, ours are conveniently being amassed in neighboring Ukraine, but inconveniently in the hands of among the most corrupt nations on earth. 

At this first anniversary of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and Biden’s fomenting of a WWIII, it isn’t clear what Putin will do. Some experts think he’ll resort to so-called asymmetric warfare. Maybe he already has and we just don’t know it yet. But the C.I.A., too, engages in suchthings and are just as guilty of propaganda, disinformation, deception, sabotage, assassination, psy-ops, cy-ops, and any of a number of other KGB tactics. It’s just what these people do.

What If Putin, Not Biden, Is the Rational Actor?

THE ILLEGITIMATE SOMETIMES-OCCUPANT of the White House, Joey Biden, is rapidly steering the U.S. to the brink of nuclear war with Russia. So far, Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has shown remarkable restraint, leaving some to wonder why.

As it stands presently, the U.S. has sent vast sums to the unappreciative and corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs, with only a pittance ever reaching those fighting the holy war against those pesky Russians. Weapons as well as money have been diverted, with no auditing or accountability by the U.S.  The latest is Kiev’s demand (no time for a polite request) for American F-16 fighter jets, M1 Abrams tanks, and commitments for almost unlimited artillery and ammunition, along with a few reluctantly donated items, like German-made Leopard 2 tanks from Europe. President Ronald Reagan once said of the USSR and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that we must “trust, but verify” as detente supplanted the Cold War. That’s good advice for today, too.

In contrast to Putin, we know why Biden has delivered the goods to Zelensky: it is his quid pro quo for Ukraine’s enrichment of the corrupt Biden crime family, or alternatively, a money-laundering operation for him. An incidental benefit inures to shareholders of certain defense companies. (To learn which ones will make the biggest killing, refer to the Pelosi stock disclosure down the road, but I digress.)

The problem is, of course, that at some point, Putin’s patience may wear thin and instead of retaliating for Western escalation by, for example, striking at Ukrainian critical infrastructure, he will actually target the West itself. Remember the conflict is really over the threat, real or perceived, of NATO sneaking around lurking in Russia’s national curtilage. A ground war against Europe and the U.S. would be a preposterous undertaking, but tactical nukes would not. (Neither would bioweapons or chemical weapons, but I again digress.)

The Biden regime is under the mistaken assumption that since Putin hasn’t acted capriciously yet, he never will. This has encouraged fanciful and foolhardy plans by the regime to back a Ukrainian offensive on Crimea. Biden’s regime has also contemplated the overthrow of Putin himself, though they clearly don’t see their hypocrisy and haven’t considered the possibility that the devil they know is better than the one they don’t. And they’ve mulled the complete destruction or defeat of Russia. Moscow would most certainly respond to such aggression and escalation by the West, which would possibly involve nukes used against NATO members. 

NATO would, of course, call Putin the devil incarnate, whose red menace wasteland threatens ‘our Democracy-with-a-capital-D,’ and all that is right and good in the world. Americans will be reminded of the so-called Evil Empire and how the U.S. defeated that enemy just in the nick of time before it could blow up the whole world. Anyone who even hints at seeing Russia’s point-of-view will undoubtedly be called a Putin puppet, a Russian ‘useful idiot,’ or just an old-fashioned Communist-Satinist-racist-fascist.

Caitlin Johnstone and Branko Marcetic opine, in “Incentivizing Russia To Hit NATO” and “Mission Creep? How the U.S. role in Ukraine has slowly escalated,” (respectively) on the “slow escalation” of D.C.’s role in Kiev’s fight with Moscow, but by historic standards, these deteriorating conditions have unfolded rather quickly.  The Russian invasion occurred less than a year ago and we are now involved in ways that were unthinkable only a few months ago. Johnstone and Marcetic are correct, in fact, that this effectively incentivizes Russia to react more forcefully each time another red line is crossed. Oddly, they agree with 45th President Donald Trump. And by the West threatening an enlarged NATO and its ‘all for one and one for all’ commitments, it’s apparent that this is reasonably construed by Russia as an existential threat. 

Author and former military intelligence officer who implemented arms control treaties with the former USSR, Scott Ritter, explains in detail for Consortium News just how all the military aid risks nuclear Armaggedon and also fails Ukraine, here. Even The New York Times concedes the regime’s aid to Kiev may be fallacious.

Putin undoubtedly regrets the invasion into Ukraine, but wasn’t able to convince Zelensky that the NATO red line wasn’t simply optional or a polite ask. But all the talk of NATO expansion is, in fact, changing alliances (or truces) that have served as the framework for relatively peaceful co-existence for some time. It shouldn’t make anyone comfortable. Johnstone and Marcetic correctly point out that this isn’t Russia v. Ukraine anymore; it’s Russia v. NATO, thanks to Biden. 

This time it’s not a Cold War were averting, but a hot war we’re instigating, thanks to Zelensky’s stooge, Joey Biden, and the greed that motivates them both. That Putin has been as restrained in his responses as he has been means either that he, not Biden, is the rational actor here, or, alternatively, he has no other option. Better hope for the former despite what it tells us about Kiev’s useful idiot who sometimes occupies the White House, enriching himself while endangering the world.

Gorbechev: Dead But Not Red.

Mikhail Gorbechev.

THE ONE AND ONLY PRESIDENT of the former Soviet Union and last General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, Mikhail Gorbachev, died in Moscow on Aug. 30th at age 91. He is now laid to rest next to his wife, Raisa, in Moscow. A farewell ceremony took place earlier on Sept. 3rd, where hundreds of dignitaries paid their last respects. Vladimir Putin laid flowers, but did not attend the funeral.

Gorbachev was revered by many Westerners and others in the 1980s who had tired of seeking out evil empire Communists lurking ‘round with their hidden bombs and dangerous propaganda. The Soviet Union was quite shut off from the rest of the world and was going no where fast thanks to a peace-by-strength policy enacted by then-President Ronald Reagan. Gorbachev made the wise decision to open up to the rest of the world, called “glasnost,” liberalize the economy and enact some sweeping reforms that became known as “perestroika.”  For the outside Western world, they learned these two first Russian words, along with “nyet.”

By the time of Gorbachev’s resignation in 1991, he and the world had witnessed the end of the Cold War, the breakup of the Soviet Union, and the fall of the Berlin Wall. It all resulted in his being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in the days when it actually meant something.  

To some Russians, however, and just however many I cannot really say, Gorbachev lost the empire and wasn’t the hero Westerners hailed him as. Indeed, while Russia had indeed opened up, and their young could buy their own blue jeans and rock and roll records, taboo in the USSR days, there was confusion as to where the Kremlin would really lead them. One thing that inevitably emerged was, of course, corruption and it still exists in spades, as it does in neighboring former soviet state of Ukraine, which declared independence way back in 1991. The man has his controversy, but for the young in Russia who could more easily adapt to a weird form of capitalism, he probably should be more revered than he actually is. 

Rest in Peace, Gorby.

U.S.S.R.? Russia? What Difference at This Point Does it Make?

NO ONE WANTS TO LEARN that their government has lied to them, though most of us are not naïve enough to think it doesn’t. Discovering that our government funded not one, but a whopping 46 bio-labs in Ukraine makes one want to gag. Remember when the government denied having any? They blamed Tulsi Gabbard of being a Russian asset or a Chinese spy spewing disinformation over “25+” U.S.-funded bio-labs in Ukraine as recently as March of this year. 

A Defense Department “Fact Sheet” (read here) from June 9th states in relevant part in its introduction that “[f]ollowing the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States, along with allies…has led cooperative efforts to reduce legacy threats from nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons left in the Soviet Union’s successor states, including Russia… The U.S. Congress created the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program through the passage of the Soviet Threat Reduction Act of 1991 [which] provided U.S. funding and expertise to: 1) consolidate and secure WMD and WMD-related material in a limited number of secure sites; 2) inventory and account for these weapons and materials; 3) provide safe handling and safe disposition of these weapons and materials as called for by arms control agreements; and 4) offer assistance in finding gainful employment for thousands of former Soviet scientists with expert knowledge of WMD, WMD-related materials, or their delivery systems.”  Okay…

But then there was this: “The United States has provided this assistance with transparency and in cooperation with our partners, which included Russia prior to 2014, toward mutually-decided objectives, and has been reported on a regular basis.” Oh? Gee, I don’t recall that… The Fact Sheet lists the countries it’s been  involved with, including Ukraine, through its Science and Technology Center. The Fact Sheet then glosses over thirty years, opining that “…amidst its war of aggression against Ukraine, Russia seeks, with support from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), to undermine that work by spreading disinformation and sowing mistrust in the people and institutions all over the world that contribute to WMD threat reduction.” (Emphasis mine.) Oh? Again?!

The Fact Sheet is quick to point out, “Ukraine has no nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons programs,” and that collaboration with the U.S. remain peaceful efforts to improve nuclear and radiological safety and security, disease surveillance, chemical safety and security, and readiness to respond to epidemics and pandemics such as COVID-19.” It boasts “Ukraine has become a leader in transparency,” while omitting any such characterization to itself. Hmmm…

While noting Ukraine has no nukes, the Fact Sheet stresses it has no bioweapons, either: “At the time of its dissolution in 1991, the Soviet Union, despite being a State Party to the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), had a large and sophisticated biological weapons program, consisting of dozens of research, development, and production facilities, with tens of thousands of employees, spread across many of its successor states. In violation of the BWC,” it adds, “ this Soviet weapons complex developed a broad range of biological pathogens for use as weapons against plants, animals, and humans, including the weaponization of anthrax, plague, and smallpox.”  Hmmm…

Of course, the U.S. never had any bioweapons after the BWC, that goes without saying, being the honest broker it is. And heroic, too, don’t forget heroic: “When the Soviet Union dissolved, it left some newly independent states, like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, with legacy biological weapons program facilities, equipment, and materials that were vulnerable to theft, misuse, and unsafe handling and storage. The U.S. Departments of Defense and State funded programs to help transition such former Soviet weapons facilities into peaceful public health facilities.” (Emphasis in original.) Oh, that makes all the difference in the world…

The Fact Sheet then emphasizes the cooperative peaceful purposes behind it all, adding, “The United States has also worked collaboratively to improve Ukraine’s biological safety, security, and disease surveillance for both human and animal health, providing support to 46 peaceful Ukrainian laboratories, health facilities, and disease diagnostic sites over the last two decades.” (Emphasis mine.)

The Fact Sheet concludes: “The United States has been clear since ratifying the CWC in 1997 that it will never under any circumstances develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons, or transfer, direct or indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone; use chemical weapons; engage in any military preparations to use chemical weapons; or assist encourage or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a state party under the CWC. The United States is committed to the destruction of all chemical weapons around the world and has provided substantial aid and support to numerous countries in the destruction of their chemical weapons, including Russia and Syria.” Propagandize much?! Lie much?!

Where is Kissinger When You Need Him? (Hint: Davos)

THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM in Davos, Switzerland is underway with first-, second-, and third-world elites, from Albania to Zimbabwe, toasting and celebrating their own brilliance and successes with the finest Beluga caviar, choicest Kobe beef, and after-dinner Remy Martin cognac. After all, getting to Davos means you’ve made it in the world of governments, NGOs, or media. Really made it. (For some reason…)

Among those present this year, in the first in-person event in two years due to the pandemic, is veteran statesman and former Secretary of State and National Security Advisor under then-Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, Dr. Henry Kissinger. German-born Kissinger is credited with pioneering a policy of détente with the then-USSR and for being the architect of the Cold War rapprochement between the U.S. and China, considered unattainable feats in the 1960s-70s. Nice!

One could have been forgiven for not knowing Kissinger, at age 98, is still among us. But not on Monday. Here, he unforgettably shook up the world by not kissing the ass of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and warning the illegitimate occupant of the White House, Joe Biden, as well as the West as a whole, about the error of attempting to inflict a crushing and humiliating defeat on Russian forces in Ukraine. It would, Kissinger said, have disastrous consequences for Europe’s stability in the long term:

“Negotiations need to begin in the next two months before it creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome…Ideally, the dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante…Pursuing the war beyond that point would not be about the freedom of Ukraine, but a new war against Russia itself.”

What he meant as “status quo ante” is ‘how things were before,’ suggesting that Ukraine accept a peace deal that restored the situation to pre-Feb. 24 in which Russia formally controlled the Crimea peninsula and informally controlled portions of the Donetsk region in east Ukraine. “I hope the Ukrainians will match the heroism they have shown with wisdom,” Kissinger added. Ukraine is meant to be a buffer zone for Russia and NATO countries, he further observed.

Kissinger’s concerns are that the conflict in Ukraine will permanently restructure the “global order.” And that Russia may be driven into “a permanent alliance with China” that could destabilize Europe. He noted that Russia has been an essential part of Europe for 400 years and has been vital in the balance of power there. 

Kissinger’s right. And he’s proof-positive that not all old men are senile, despite what Americans have had to endure for nearly 18 painful months with Joe Biden. Already, any European coalition is faltering because of drastic increases in the cost of food and energy due to the conflict and different country’s willingness to endure it. Hungary is considered an outlier, with Poland bearing the brunt of immigration. Sweden and Finland are keen to join NATO, but Turkey objects because Sweden, they maintain, harbors members of the P.KK., deemed a terrorist group. In short, there is no unity among these often very different nations. 

Among it all is a global economic crisis of enormous magnitude due, in part, to the pandemic. For Americans, it now means assistance in an amount exceeding $100 million a day for the war in Ukraine, something an indebted nation cannot afford without effectively “borrowing” from China. (Since 2014, the U.S. has provided over $6.4 billion in military aid, including Stinger anti-aircraft systems, Javelin anti-armor systems, Switchblade Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems, Howitzers, tactical vehicles, helicopters, armored personnel carriers, extensive munitions, tactical equipment, and others to Ukraine.) Begone military industrial complex!

The Biden regime has vowed “to move heaven and earth to help Ukraine win the fight against Russia’s unprovoked aggression,” but it seems to some Americans the expense to them is little more than money-laundering for the depraved Biden’s and corrupt Ukraine, and probably a backdoor invitation for China to take advantage of the U.S.’s compromised regime. 

Compare and contrast Kissinger’s wise words with those of his 91-year-old contemporary, the contemptible billionaire financier George Soros, who, also at Davos, called for Russia President Vladimir Putin’s defeat because…climate change. He viewed the conflict between Russia and Ukraine as a battle between “open” and “closed” societies, a rather remarkable and weak distinction given the history of the region. (Dig deeper into Soros at Davos here.) 

And naturally, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky flatly rejected any concessions. And why not? Why buy a Russian bear when you can milk an American teat for billions? Although reported by RT, which has a pro-Russian bias, it appears to be true that Zelensky’s office went so far as to tell the West to “go f^ck yourselves with such proposals, you dumbf^cks!” Others in Ukraine were equally opposed, just more polite in expressing their disagreement.

We Came. We Saw. Albright All Dead.

March 26, 2022

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT was the first woman to be appointed as Secretary of State in 1997 under then-President Bill Clinton. She served as ambassador to the U.N. previously. In 2012, then-President Obama awarded her the Medal of Freedom. She died, age 84, from cancer on Wednesday.

The Clintons loved her, so that should tell you something about this Prague native. Among other things, she encouraged NATO to be the world’s policemen in Kosovo after the fall of the U.S.S.R. in 1999. It established a precedent for later wars of aggression, such as Bush’s invasion of Iraq, and yes, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

She was also instrumental in enforcing harsh sanctions against Iraq’s dictator Saddam Hussein through the 1990s that starved Iraqi civilians of food and killed them from lack of medicines. When asked by the CBS TV news-magazine “60 Minutes” in 1996 whether the Iraqi sanctions after the 1991 Gulf war were worth it, she replied they were, despite resultant deaths of some 500,000 Iraqi children, a figure Albright did not bother to dispute. (Eventually it was estimated up to 1.5 million Iraqis had died as a result of the sanctions, probably rising to the scale of a genocide.) Osama bin Laden later said the cruel sanctions were one of the primary reasons for al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Albright thought then, as the imposter in the White House, Joe Biden, does today, that sanctions would force the nation to capitulate and cause the population to overthrow their leader. It didn’t work any better back then than it does today, but Biden was probably too busy then beating up Corn Pop outside the gym to notice. Time will tell if the analogy stops there, or if, like the pretext of WMDs being used to rationalize the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the pretext of chemical or bio-weapons will justify a possible U.S. invasion of Russia for regime change. (There were no WMDs and hopefully there will be no chem- or bio-weapons, but one cannot trust reporting on it as a contemporaneous matter given recent history of ‘mistakes.’)

Before we venerate a woman such as Albright, perhaps we should think about how we might feel if another country, say, Russia, just for giggles, did to us what Albright did to them. Would they call us what our own call Putin: a worse-than-Hitler soulless war-criminal killer madman? The MSM is not clear on this.

Another ‘Conspiracy’ Theorist Bites the Dust.

G. GORDON LIDDY REDEEMED HIMSELF. History has called him the “mastermind behind Watergate Burglary” that ultimately forced President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974. Paul Craig Roberts tells a story about Liddy’s take on that burglary since Liddy can no longer: Liddy died on March 30th at age 90. He had Parkinson’s Disease and was in declining health. 

Liddy was a prosecutor when Timothy Leary’s communal home in New York’s Dutchess County was raided in 1966. Leary was arrested for use and possession of hallucinogens, notably LSD. Because Leary had been a psychology professor at Harvard and had been rather public about the drug’s possible clinical uses, he was a perfect target for ambitious Liddy, who was looking to make a name for himself. Leary was not Mirandized, however, and the charges were swiftly dismissed against him. (N.B. Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court case that held arrestees had to have their rights read to them was decided on June 16, 1966, and was therefore, very new.)  Leary would be hounded by the law for years thereafter.

Liddy was also a former F.B.I. agent and ultimately disbarred lawyer who refused to testify in the Watergate matter. He was sentenced to 6-20 years, but served less than 4 1/2 after President Jimmy Carter’s commutation of sentence in 1977. Liddy was enigmatic, which probably helped his career when he was released from prison. He went on to write articles and books and host a successful syndicated conservative radio talk show from 1992 to 2012. 

In a life twist that’s usually reserved just for fiction, Liddy also went on a college campus speech circuit with his former target, Timothy Leary, for friendly debates covering past and current events. Lorenzo Hagerty has archived these debates for his podcast, Psychedelic Salon, here, and are a good listen. (He has also curated talks by Terence McKenna.) The twist to the twist is a movie was made about these odd debates called “Return Engagement” in 1983.

The break-in to the Democratic National Committee headquarters was so archaic — today, a simple hack into the network would likely find any information any burglars wanted. Detection would be more difficult; deniability more plausible. But back then, Nixon learned about the burglary earlier than he said he did and that lie made a simple dirty trick into an existential threat to democracy as we then knew it. An anonymous source calling himself Deep Throat was later discovered to Assistant F.B.I. Director W. Mark Felt, but today, we’d probably just recognize him as Deep State and blow the whole thing off (especially if it outed mortals named Trump). Felt apparently leaked to then well-regarded The Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein out of anger at Nixon for having overlooked him as F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover’s replacement after his death.

Some have argued the C.I.A. set up Watergate to get Nixon out of office. They wanted him out, it’s claimed, because he was entering into arms limitation agreements with the U.S.S.R. and normalizing relations with China — something the Deep State didn’t want. They didn’t want security because it would limit the budget and power of the military industrial complex where they made their money and influence. This notion dated back at least to President Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned Americans to beware the Military Industrial Complex in 1961. (Transcript here.)

Paul Craig Roberts thinks the C.I.A. had J.F.K. assassinated for similar reasons. If anyone thought the C.I.A. was the boogey man, they’d just be discredited by being called “conspiracy theorists,” a term probably first coined by the C.I.A. itself. Over the years, reading a fair amount about both Kennedy and Nixon, I remained agnostic to these ideas, largely because it was unthinkable the C.I.A. would do things so un-American, but I’ve rethought it. I’ve admittedly become cynical about American government, including the elusive Deep State. Nothing’s ‘unthinkable.’ The Deep State quite possibly has more control over who’s in the White House than we care to think. Liddy got us to think about this, and a lot of other things. It’s enough to redeem himself for his ‘third-rate burglary’ that seems so quaint today.

It’s the end of an era. Liddy’s era. The Washington Post’s era. That Liddy didn’t have to break into the Pearly Gates will likely be misreported by The Washington Post no matter how accurately they may have gotten the rest of the story.