About That Free Country We Are Supporting

First of all, let me make it clear that what is happening in Ukraine is horrible. Civilians are being targeted, innocent people are being killed, prisoners are being tortured and killed. It’s a horrible situation. I should also mention that the first casualty of war is truth, so we have no way of knowing how much of what we are hearing is true.

On Monday, Hot Air reported that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky put a program in place following Russia’s invasion of his country. His government is seeking to identify “traitors” who have expressed support for Russia and its war against “Nazis” in Ukraine.

The article reports:

Anyone who has been materially aiding the enemy is of course subject to prosecution, but people have been arrested just for expressing their support for Moscow on social media. That’s what happened to a man known only as “Victor” this month. Ukrainian security officers in full riot gear showed up at his apartment in Kharkiv to talk to him about some of his social media posts before hauling him off to jail. (Associated Press)

“Yes, I supported (the Russian invasion of Ukraine) a lot. I’m sorry. … I have already changed my mind,” said Viktor, his trembling voice showing clear signs of duress in the presence of the Ukrainian security officers.

“Get your things and get dressed,” an officer said before escorting him out of the apartment. The SBU did not reveal Viktor’s last name, citing their investigation.

Viktor was one of nearly 400 people in the Kharkiv region alone who have been detained under anti-collaboration laws enacted quickly by Ukraine’s parliament and signed by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy after Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion.

If four hundred people have been locked up just in the Kharkiv region under these disinformation laws, how many have been detained across the entire country? It’s almost certainly in the thousands, and all in a matter of a couple of months. To his credit, Zelensky at least got the Parliament to write up a law and signed it, which is better than doing it via an executive order the way Joe Biden did, but it’s still an alarming development.

I understand that a lot of bad things can happen during the fog of war, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine is no exception.

The article concludes:

We already know that a similar situation has existed in Russia from the beginning. Anyone who spoke out of turn about the invasion using unapproved language – including journalists – was quickly hauled from the public square and locked up. How is what Ukraine is doing any different? It’s not, at least as far as I can tell.

Of course, the United States has surrendered the high ground in terms of speaking up about this. We now have our own Ministry of Truth in the Department of Homeland Security where our own Orwellian Santa Clause will be making a list and checking it twice to see who is engaging in speech not approved by the Biden administration. How can we criticize Zelenski for doing the same thing that his biggest foreign supporter is doing?

This doesn’t sound like President Zelensky supports free speech.

Very Subtle Blackmail

On Monday, The Epoch Times reported that  Russia has announced that it plans to withdraw from the International Space Station (ISS) amid Western sanctions designed to cripple Moscow’s economy, the head of the space program confirmed.

The article reports:

Rogozin (Dmitry Rogozin, the chief of Roscosmos) noted that the agency doesn’t feel obligated to provide an exact date of its withdrawal, but confirmed it will warn partners on the space station within the stipulated one-year notice period.

“The decision has already been made, we are not obliged to speak about it publicly. I can only say one thing: in accordance with our obligations, we will warn our partners a year in advance about the end of work on the ISS,” he told the Russian state-owned TV channel.

In March, Rogozin announced in a storm of since-deleted posts on Twitter that Roscosmos would suspend all cooperation with international partners on joint projects like the ISS with NASA and the European Space Agency, citing Western economic sanctions imposed on Russia over its attack on Ukraine.

“I believe that the restoration of normal relations between partners in the International Space Station and other joint projects is possible only with the complete and unconditional lifting of illegal sanctions,” he said at the time.

The article concludes:

Last year, Russia already announced plans it wants to halt operations on the ISS, citing concerns about the station’s aging structure. Around the same time, Moscow claimed it is working on a new space station named the Russian Orbital Space Station, which is set to be operated entirely by Roscosmos.

Thank God for Elon Musk. At least we can make sure none of our astronauts are stranded on the Space Station. However, this sounds like blackmail to me.

Continuing The War On American Energy Independence

On Thursday, The Daily Caller reported that the Biden has more attacks on the fossil fuel industry in the works.

The article reports:

President Biden is calling on Congress to make companies pay fees on wells from their leases that they haven’t used in years and on acres of public lands that they are hoarding without producing,” the White House said in a fact sheet on Thursday.

“Companies that are producing from their leased acres and existing wells will not face higher fees,” the statement continued. “But companies that continue to sit on non-producing acres will have to choose whether to start producing or pay a fee for each idled well and unused acre.”

As part of the announcement Thursday, Biden will also order the Department of Energy to release a million barrels of oil a day from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for the next six months.

The White House has repeatedly blamed Big Oil for not doing enough to combat high gasoline prices in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which has disrupted global energy supplies. Biden and Democratic lawmakers suggested this month that oil companies have taken advantage of the crisis to pad their profits.

I have no way of knowing if the President actually believes the garbage he is spouting. The problem with gasoline prices sits in the White House–not in the executive boards of oil companies.

The article concludes:

Western Energy Alliance President Kathleen Sgamma, meanwhile, noted the Interior Department is currently holding up permits on 3,800 leases while it conducts additional “climate change analysis,” about 4,600 permits are still awaiting approval and that the her group is defending thousands more in court.

“Western Energy Alliance has been in court for years defending 5,900 leases of 7.3 million acres and companies can’t develop on most of them when they’re caught up in legal challenges,” Sgamma told the DCNF in a statement. “But the president now wants to penalize us for these delays?”

“The White House conveniently forgets the government’s role in delaying pipelines and permits and introducing new financial and regulatory risks to American development,” she continued.

The Biden administration has actively pursued an anti-fossil fuel agenda, nixing the Keystone XL oil pipeline, ditching oil drilling in Alaska, not appealing a court ruling that prohibited a massive offshore drilling lease in the Gulf of Mexico, attempting to ban new drilling leases on federal lands and making it harder for utilities to gain approval for natural gas projects.

The actions of the Biden administration in the area of energy policy show a total lack of concern for the well being of the American people. A continuation of these policies will eventually wipe out the middle class in America. This may in fact be the goal of the Biden administration.

Who Wins In The War On Coal?

On Wednesday, The Conservative Review posted an article about the war on coal and natural gas that is being waged by the Biden administration.

The article reports:

Oil is king when it comes to energy policy, but coal and natural gas are just as important. In the case of all three fossil fuels, Western governments have engaged in an all-out war on exploration, production, and generation, banned Russia’s exports of those products, and then gave a monopoly to China, inducing the worst possible outcome for the American consumer and our national security.

Despite the two-decade war on coal by the climate Nazis, coal is still the largest source of electricity around the globe and is the second-largest source of energy in general. In the U.S., coal was once king, composing roughly half of our electricity source just 15 years ago, but has dropped precipitously because of the natural gas boom and because of destructive eco policies. Yet it still accounts for 21% of our electricity source, so shocks to the system are going to harm American consumers.

The article includes the following chart showing the rise in the price of thermal coal:

So who is making money on the increase?

The article notes:

…Given that coal accounts for 35% of global electricity use and Europe gets 70% of its coal from Russia, the coal crisis is now worse than the oil crisis. And guess who stands to benefit? China, of course. Thanks to the disdain for our own coal by our own politicians, the evil communist regime is now the global champion of coal production and exports.

America is the Saudi Arabia of coal, but the environmentalists are not willing to let us produce coal. Instead other countries use the same amount of coal as they would if we produced it, except it’s not from us.

The article includes the following chart showing the changes in coal production:

The article concludes:

Between the war on leasing and restrictions on fracking, transportation, pipelines, and export terminals, this administration is stifling the cleanest, most efficient fuel that could lower prices of electricity and serve as a bulwark against China and Russia. Thus, LNG prices remain unnaturally high because the climate Nazis would rather we feel the pain than actually end dependence on bad actors.

Much as with COVID, where we saw a government that cried over the human death toll but downright declared war on anyone who would treat the virus early, those who complain about the energy crisis are the ones inducing it. Crushing the American consumer is not a bug of their plan, it is the primary feature, greasing the skids for the next step in the “Great Reset.”

Please follow the link above to read the entire article.

 

 

 

For Your Consideration

The purpose of this article is to share information that is not covered in the mainstream media. Please consider what you are about to read and draw your own conclusions. At this point I should mention that America’s media is controlled by six corporations–News Corp, Time Warner, Comcast, Sony, Viacom and Disney. All are funded by two major hedge funds, BlackRock and Vanguard. These two major hedge funds and the mainstream media do not necessarily have America’s best interests at heart and do not necessarily tell the whole story in their reporting.

On Thursday, WND posted an article about the current war in Ukraine. The entire war in Ukraine is an atrocity. The victims are the innocent civilians of Ukraine. They are being used as pawns in a much larger game.

The article notes:

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine about three weeks ago, our corporate media has been cheering on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the Ukrainians while demonizing Russia and Putin as another Hitler. What the media fail to cover and identify is the New World Order, or NWO, Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum and the role each played in provoking Russia in a much broader conflict between the New World Order and the nationalists.

Zelensky won the presidency in 2019 after being heavily bankrolled by a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch by the name of Igor Kolomoiskly. Since his election, Zelensky has cleverly attempted to play the middle ground in a war between two superpowers.

In 2014, Ukraine’s democratically elected president, Victor Yanukovych, was toppled by our CIA in favor of a puppet who would serve the New World Order’s purpose for using the nation as a money-laundering hub.

Ukraine was hardly a democracy prior to the invasion. Opposition journalists are routinely jailed there. There is no freedom of the press in Ukraine. It is not by coincidence (and contrary to the paid for hire fact checkers) that the sons of Democrats in leadership positions (Biden, Pelosi, Kerry) either sat on the boards of energy companies in Ukraine or were doing business in Ukraine. When a new Ukrainian prosecutor, Kostiantyn Kulyk, opened an investigation into the business dealings of Burisma where Hunter Biden (with no energy experience) sat on the board, Joe Biden, as vice president, threatened to withhold financial aid to Ukraine and triumphantly bragged about it on camera. Imagine that! The very quid pro quo Democrats used to falsely charge President Trump is precisely what Biden is guilty of in Ukraine.

The article concludes:

When a chorus of uni-party legislators (Lindsey Graham, Maria Elvira Salazar and many others) deliberately and callously call for the assassination of Putin and for a no-fly zone over Ukraine, they are not taking their talking points from a feeble Joe Biden. Instead, they are taking their marching orders from George Soros who has called for America’s involvement in Ukraine as a call to war. It should be a warning to the rest of us. They are willing to sacrifice America in Phase II of the Great Reset in their quest for global dominance. Standing in opposition to them is another alliance consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS).

This is not the first totalitarian movement seeking global domination, but unlike other evil movements in past years, today’s evil power grab carries the risk of global annihilation.

We would be wise to resist the call to war.

Obviously I left out a whole lot of information in the middle. Please follow the link above to read the entire article. If you are not up to date on the Great Reset, now is the time to do some research. America as it currently exists is a thorn in the side of those who want one-world government without freedom. Those who support the Great Reset have a timetable. President Trump interrupted that timetable. I sincerely doubt that they will let him do that again without putting up a major fight. It may be that Joe Biden is in office to bring America to a point so low that even President Trump can’t bring us back to where we need to be. Prayers for America are needed, and prayers for the innocent civilians in Ukraine caught in the crossfire are also needed. I truly wonder if there are any good guys in this fight.

The Realities Of Ukraine

On Thursday, Victor Davis Hanson posted an article at The Daily Caller about the war in Ukraine. The article lists ‘ten realities’ about what is happening in Ukraine.

Here is the list:

One — Reassuring an enemy what one will not do ensures that the enemy will do just that and more.

Two — No-fly zones don’t work in a big-power, symmetrical standoff.

Three — Europe, NATO members and Germany in particular have de facto admitted that their past decades of shutting down nuclear plants, coal mines and oil and gas fields have left Europe at the mercy of Russia.

Four — China is now pro-Russian. Beijing wants Russian natural resources at a discount.

Five — Americans are finally digesting just how destructive the humiliating flight from Afghanistan was.

Six — The Ukraine war did not cause inflation and record gas prices.

Seven — Putin did not invade during the Trump tenure, although he had been more aggressive under previous American leadership with his prior attacks on Georgia, Ukraine and Crimea.

Eight — It is not “escalation” to send arms to Ukraine.

Nine — Putin may never fully absorb Ukraine as long as it can easily be supplied across its borders by four NATO countries.

Ten — It is not “un-American” to point out that prior American appeasement under the Obama and the Biden administrations explains not why Putin wished to go into Ukraine, but why he felt he could.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article for the details.

The article concludes:

We should not rehash the past but learn from it — and thereby ensure Putin is defeated now and deterred in the future.

A strong America with strong leadership makes the world a safer place.

Have The People In Congress Ever Studied Economics?

On Sunday, BizPacReview posted an article about a recent statement by Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey. I lived in Massachusetts for a long time, and I am sorry to say that what the Congressman said is not unusual for a Massachusetts Democrat.

The article reports:

Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, a Democrat, has claimed that, despite an abundance of evidence showing that “clean” energy is currently neither as reliable nor as efficient as traditional energy, America should invest in it right now instead of the latter.

He made this bold but dubious assertion while delivering a speech this weekend at the Democrat National Committee’s winter meeting.

“Republicans and their oil-soaked cronies … want to feed the American people one of the biggest lies of all – that drilling for more oil and more gas is the path to energy independence,” he said during his speech.

“Republicans say that they have an all-of-the-above plan, but it’s really an oil-above-all plan. The GOP always has stood for the gas and oil party. And its argument of drilling equals energy independence is leakier than an old oil tanker.”

I beg to differ, but America achieved energy independence under President Trump. We were also in a position to send fuel to Europe to lessen their dependency upon Russia. Had we continued on that path, the combination of the lower cost of energy and Europe’s not feeding the Russian treasury, we would not be currently funding Russia’s attack on Ukraine.

The article concudes:

The evidence consists of data and polls showing that prices were on the rise long before Russia invaded Ukraine.

Republicans are not alone in their push for more oil/gas investment. Even Elon Musk, the billionaire entrepreneur renowned for his successful development and promotion of “clean”/”green” technology and solutions, has argued that oil and gas investments are mandatory at this juncture in time.

Everyone, it would appear, recognizes this point except for Democrats, who keep doubling down on “clean” energy, even as the American people double down on their complete disgust with what they say are controlling party’s skewed priorities.

If you actually believe that green energy will provide for our energy needs, please read this article at The Daily Caller. Until we have the technology for green energy (which is most likely to be brought about by a return to a free market economy), clean fossil fuel is possible and efficient.

I long for the return of $2 a gallon gas–I can easily ignore any mean tweets that appear.

What Security Does Europe Actually Have?

On Sunday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog wondering what protection against Russian invasion does Europe have from NATO or the European Union. It’s a very timely question.

The article notes:

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused a number of European countries–probably all of them–to reconsider their military defense postures. If Russia attacks them, will they be able to resist? And whom can they count on to come to their aid?

Responses vary. Germany is talking about abandoning its post-WWII de-militarization. France, in Gaullist tradition, wants the EU to take the lead on security. Others rely on a presumed airtight NATO guarantee of military assistance.

Sweden is an interesting case. Sweden is not a member of NATO, although it has collaborated closely with NATO’s central command. Instead, Sweden has allied itself with the U.S. and, to a lesser extent, the U.K.

This is a portion of the interview with Björn Fägersten, head of the Europe program at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, included in the article:

Does the EU’s mutual defence clause have a similar effect to Nato’s Article 5?

Björn Fägersten: In a purely legal sense they are equivalent – in some ways the EU is a bit sharper. But on the other hand, the EU’s clause has a sub-clause that makes clear that it doesn’t affect member states’ individual choices on security policy, for instance for those countries that are neutral.

A key difference between the EU and Nato is that the EU has no real apparatus. Nato has a joint military headquarters, SHAPE, but the EU doesn’t have an equivalent.

Within the EU there are also expectations that Nato will be at the centre of European planning – most EU countries are members. In the EU’s Global Strategy from 2016 it is made clear that Nato is the cornerstone of the EU’s defence.

Looking to the future, many in the EU, not least Macron, have long spoken about the need for strategic autonomy, where Europe will take a more independent line in defence from the US. Last week Germany announced a huge increase in defence spending. How will that change the equation for Sweden?

BF: If in the long term Europe starts taking greater responsibility while the US takes the main responsibility for handling China, that would change Sweden’s calculation. Sweden would like there to be an American interest in its security, but if, for example, a new president was elected in the US in 2024 who had a more doubtful approach to European security, Sweden would be forced to rapidly reevaluate its defence strategy.

The article concludes:

Call me a cynical lawyer, but does “such action as it deems necessary” really obligate the U.S., or anyone else, to a full military response to Russian aggression in Europe? Might “such action” merely encompass economic sanctions in the event of a Russian invasion of, say, Lithuania?

I suppose it is best if Russia’s leaders assume that Article 5 represents an airtight mutual security pact, but it is easy to imagine a weaselly or mentally challenged president–or, perhaps, one who is uniquely focused on American self-interest–going back on 70 years of interpretation of Article 5 and more or less abandoning our European allies. No doubt that is something that they, too, are imagining.

Which I think is probably to the good. Donald Trump was right: it is long past time for powerful European countries, including Germany, to look to their own defense, even if in cooperation with us. And, of course, the more able they are to defend themselves against Russian aggression, the more likely they are to receive military help from their NATO allies, including us, should the time come.

There is value in working together and providing mutual aid, but there is also a lot of value in standing on your own two feet.

Stranded?

International relations are not always stable, and sometimes friendships and joint efforts can be difficult when circumstances change. The U.K Daily Mail posted an article today about what could become a very serious side effect of the current war in Ukraine.

The headline of the article reports:

Head of Russia’s space program posts sinister video threatening to LEAVE BEHIND US astronaut, 55, aboard International Space Station and only fly home his cosmonauts on March 30 because of Biden’s sanctions over Ukraine invasion

Yikes.

The article reports:

Russia’s space program has apparently threatened to leave an American astronaut aboard the International Space Station as it comes crashing down to Earth in a video shared by Russian state media outlet RIA Novosti.

Mark Vande Hei, a married 55-year-old father of two from Texas, is scheduled to return to Kazakhstan from the International Space Station (ISS) with two Russian cosmonauts aboard a Russian Soyuz spacecraft on March 30 after spending nearly a year on board.

But amid United States’ sanctions against Russia for the human rights violations it is committing in its siege of Ukraine, Dmitry Rogozin, head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, has threatened to leave him in space.

The article concludes:

Then, after trading barbs with retired astronaut Scott Kelly over a separate video in which workers covered depictions of American and Japanese flags, Rogozin wrote in a now-deleted tweet: ‘Get off, you moron! Otherwise the death of the ISS will be on your conscience!’

But Kelly said the video leaving Vande Hei on the International Space Station went too far. 

‘It kind of enraged me that the country that we had been in this international partnership for 20 years would take the time to make a video to threaten to leave behind one of the crew members they are responsible for,’ he told the Wall Street Journal.

‘They agreed to be responsible for his safety, getting him to the space station and getting him home,’ Kelly explained. ‘For me, that kind of just crossed the line.’

Still, Rogozin has doubled down on his threats, claiming over the weekend that ‘illegal’ sanctions could cause the 500-ton ISS to crash down over Western countries.

He said: ‘The populations of other countries, especially those led by the “dogs of war,”  should think about the price of the sanctions against Roscosmos.’

Elon Musk has now offered to send his SpaceX rocket to rescue the US astronaut if the Russians abandon him, but NASA officials say they are confident Vande Hei will return as planned.

‘NASA continues working with Roscomos and our other international partners in Canada, Europe and Japan to maintain safe and continuous International Space Station operations.

‘On March 30, a Soyuz spacecraft will return as scheduled carrying NASA astronaut Mark Vande Hei and cosmonauts Pyotr Dubrov and Anton Shkaplerov back to Earth,’ it vowed.

‘Upon their return, Vande Hei will hold the American record for the longest single human spaceflight mission of 355 days.’

Hopefully, actions by Elon Musk will not be necessary, but this illustrates the folly of giving up the American space program and also illustrates the value of the free market and free enterprise.

Good News For America–Bad News For Russia

On March 10th, Newsmax reported that the Iran nuclear talks have stalled. The sticking point is that Russia is demanding protection from sanctions in response to its invasion of Iran.

The article reports:

Just days after reports a deal was close, diplomats are now signaling talks for a rewritten Iran nuclear deal have stalled due to Russia’s demand for sanctions protections amid the world response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Politico reported Thursday night.

“The talks seem to have stalled, primarily because of Russian demands,” International Crisis Group analyst Ali Vaez told Politico.

The article also notes:

Russia is leading talks with Iran, along with diplomats from China, France, Germany, the U.K., and the U.S., but those other parties are balking at the demand for sanctions relief, according to Politico.

An official from the West parties told Politico the accommodation cannot be made in talks that were designed to pull the U.S. and Iran back into the deal — not to give Russia more trade leverage.

“We’ve made it very clear,” U.S. State Department spokesman Ned Price told reporters Thursday, “that the new Russia-related sanctions are wholly unrelated to the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action].” 

“We also have no intention of offering Russia anything new or specific as it relates to the sanctions.”

The old Iran nuclear deal was called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action under former President Barack Obama’s administration when current President Joe Biden was vice president. Many of the Obama administration officials are now working in the Biden administration.

Just for the record, it is not a good idea to make a deal with the world’s largest source of terrorist funding. We have seen that Iran did not follow previous agreements, and there are no indications that Iran would follow any new agreement no matter how generous it is. Short of sanctions on Iran (which the Biden administration would never do), at this point there is probably no way to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and their delivery systems. If you understand the apocalyptic beliefs regarding the return of the Mahdi, that is a problem. There is a belief among some Muslims that if they create chaos, the Mahdi (their messiah) will return more quickly. Unfortunately, our State Department is obviously ignoring much of the history and beliefs of the militant Islamists who are currently ruling Iran.

Priorities?

On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article by Victor Davis Hanson that provides some perspective on the current war in Ukraine.

The article notes:

Thousands are dying from Russian missiles and bombs in the suburbs of Ukraine.

In response, the Biden administration’s climate change envoy, multimillionaire and private-jet-owning John Kerry, laments that Russian President Vladimir Putin might no longer remain his partner in reducing global warming.

“You’re going to lose people’s focus,” Kerry frets. “You’re going to lose big-country attention because they will be diverted, and I think it could have a damaging impact.”

“Impact”?

Did the global moralist Kerry mean by “impact” the over 650 Russian missiles that impacted Ukrainian buildings and tore apart children?

The article also asks the obvious question:

But how will the Biden administration square the circle of its own ideological war against oil and natural gas versus handing the advantage to our oil- and gas-producing enemies, as Russia invades Ukraine?

Or put another way, when selfish theory hits deadly reality, who loses? Answer: the American people.

President Joe Biden lifted U.S. sanctions on the Russian-German Nord Stream 2 pipeline designed to provide green Germany with loathsome, but life-saving, natural gas.

But first Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline in the United States. He has no problem with pipelines per se, just American ones.

While Biden doesn’t like the idea of Germany burning carbon fuel, or Putin reaping enormous profits from Berlin’s self-created dependency, or Germans importing liquified natural gas from America, Biden also does not like the idea of forcing German families to turn off their thermostats in mid-winter when there is Russian-fed war not far from Germany’s borders.

Here at home, Biden gets even crazier. As our enemies around the world reap huge profits from record high oil and gas prices, did Biden ask Alaska, North Dakota or Texas to ramp up production?

In other words, did he ask Americans to save fellow cash-strapped Americans from a self-created energy crisis, in the way he assured the Germans that during war reality trumps theory?

The article concludes:

Biden also has beseeched the once sanctioned, terrorist Iranian government. He wants Tehran to help us out by upping the very oil and gas production that America has tried to curtail for years. In return, Iran is demanding a new “Iran Deal” that will soon ensure the now petro-rich theocracy the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

On the eve of the Russian invasion, Biden begged Putin to pump even more oil to supplement its current Russian imports to the United States.

Did Putin see that surreal request as yet another sign of American appeasement that might greenlight his upcoming planned invasion? In Russian eyes, was it more proof of American weakness and craziness after the humiliating flight from Afghanistan?

Biden has blasted the human rights record of Saudi Arabia’s royal family. Now he is begging the monarchy to pump more of its despised carbon-spewing oil to make up for what his administration shut down at home. Is that why the Saudi royals refused to take his call?

The moral of Biden’s oil madness?

Elite ideology divorced from reality impoverishes people and can get them killed.

Because we have given up American energy independence (and the ability to supply Europe with energy), we are funding Russia’s war on Ukraine. Until our leaders are willing to acknowledge that fact, I don’t see the war in Ukraine ending or the war on American energy ending.

Pay Attention To The Pattern

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about the actions of private corporations regarding the war in Ukraine. Private corporations are denying services or products to Russia or to entitles connected to Russia. They are conducting their own private boycotts. Some of these companies are major corporation such as American Express, Apple, and Microsoft. That may seem like a good thing, but the pattern is troubling.

The article reports:

It could be tempting to cheer the move for targeting Russia’s authoritarian regime and condemning Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked attacks on the people of Ukraine. But the actions by private companies against Russians are part of a larger swing by U.S. corporations to deny services to those whose opinions they deem unacceptable — and that’s exactly the kind of social credit system Russia is building to impose on its own people.

That’s what we saw in Canada when bank accounts and other assets of protesting truckers were frozen.

The article notes:

Punishment might include anything from slower internet speeds to being barred from flying or staying in certain hotels. There have also been reports of people being denied higher education and having their pets confiscated.

If you think comparisons between Russia and China’s authoritarian credit systems and the increasing dragnet in the United States are outlandish, just think about how Mastercard and American Express blocked donations to Americans whose beliefs about the 2020 election were found unacceptable, while Visa’s political action committee used the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021 to “temporarily suspend[] all political donations.” Paypal, Venmo, and Shopify all went after people who were supposedly involved in the riot.

A friend of mine had her Paypal account terminated because she used a credit card to buy a hamburger in Washington on the weekend of January 6th. She did not go near the Capitol–she went back to her hotel room after the rally, but her Paypal account was still canceled because her credit card company reported that she had made a transaction in Washington that weekend. This is not the America I grew up in.

The article concludes:

We shouldn’t cheer U.S. firms for appointing themselves the arbiters of who deserves to participate in our economy (and by extension, our society). If they can do it to Russia, they can do it to you.

But we also shouldn’t cheer such actions because they move us one step closer to blurring the line between ourselves and the authoritarian tyrants we purport to denounce. If we defeat Russia or China by making our differences unrecognizable, we’ve already lost.

A Reasonable Perspective On Ukraine

I haven’t written a lot about Ukraine because I think there is a lot of false news floating around about Ukraine and I don’t want to be misled by something that looks real but isn’t. However, I trust the Center for Security Policy, so I am posted excerpts from their article on Ukraine. The article was posted on March 3rd.

The article reports:

The courageous leader of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, faces some harsh choices. But so does Vladimir Putin, President of Russia. Russia has taken many casualties, with more than 5,000 soldiers killed already. The Russian currency has all but collapsed and there is deep-seated anger in Russia against Putin and his war. Putin needs to wrap this war up fast, or he could be replaced by his adversaries in Russia.

Both Russia and Ukraine have asked for security guarantees –from NATO. Sorting out the NATO relationship is all important.

…A solution covers four main issues. The first is the future of the Donbass area; the second is NATO membership for Ukraine; the third is the Crimea; and the fourth involves nuclear weapons.

Perhaps the easiest solution is Donbass, which the Minsk Accords saw as becoming autonomous regions of Ukraine. Since Russia has now recognized the two breakaway areas (Donetsk and Luhansk) as independent states, it is more difficult now to find a way to a solution. Nevertheless, it is possible. One formula would be for the two breakaways to remain independent only while their status as autonomous Ukrainian areas is worked out, at which point it would be politically and economically expedient for them to become autonomous parts of Ukraine.

NATO, however, is a bigger issue for the Russians and for Ukraine. Ukraine believes, rightly or wrongly, that NATO guarantees their security (even though the support they have received from NATO has not achieved that goal at all). Russia believes NATO in Ukraine is a major threat to Russian security. How to solve this problem?

The article notes that the easiest solution to end the war would be for Ukraine to give up on the idea of joining NATO. That would solve at least part of the problem. Is that the problem or is the quest to reunite the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics the real goal? I don’t know.

The article continues:

A straightforward solution is for NATO to give Ukraine a special type of membership whereby NATO would come to Ukraine’s help if it is attacked. But to assuage Russia, NATO would not put any troops in Ukraine nor any NATO bases, and would not try to convert Ukraine’s military infrastructure into the NATO system. NATO, of course, is not directly part of the Russia-Ukraine negotiations, but some sort of formula can be agreed (no NATO bases, infrastructure etc) in Ukraine, leaving aside Ukraine asking for special status under Article 5 (collective security) in the NATO treaty.

If NATO membership for Ukraine is actually the issue, that would be a possible solution.

The article concludes:

European leaders, especially Emmanuel Macron of France, have tried to find a way forward, which is more than can be said of Joe Biden, who has tried to exploit the Ukraine mess for domestic political reasons. Instead of Macron visiting Putin, maybe he should stop off in Washington and see if he can turn around thinking in the White House.

Meanwhile, Americans need to be very careful about believing what they are hearing from the mainstream media.

 

While We Were All Watching Ukraine…

On Friday, The New York Post posted the following headline:

Biden on verge of making worst deal ever with Iran

The article reminds us of some recent history regarding Iran and nuclear weapons:

The Obama White House claimed the Iran deal guaranteed the most intrusive inspections the world had ever known, but only Israel’s Mossad found the evidence Iran was cheating — a secret nuclear weapons archive that the mullahs kept hidden before, during and after negotiating the Iran deal. That archive led inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, to at least four previously unknown sites inside Iran. At three of them, the inspectors found traces of uranium.

…Russia has been a leading opponent of the IAEA’s probe in Iran for years. Since Moscow regularly breaks its own international treaty obligations — whether in the use of chemical weapons or the war crimes we see today in Ukraine — Russian diplomats work overtime to shield rogue nations like Iran and Syria from accountability.

The new deal takes Moscow’s side — flouting the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, lifting sanctions and legitimizing Iran’s nuclear program without first demanding a full accounting of previous and current violations. Put simply, it is an agreement knowingly built on deceit that will encourage other authoritarian regimes to violate their international commitments.

Another important change since 2015: We know so much more about the ways in which key Iranian banks and companies finance terrorism. The Obama administration told Congress that nothing in the Iran deal precluded America from imposing terrorism sanctions on Iran. Congress, on a bipartisan basis, took that promise to heart and directed the Trump administration to impose sanctions on affiliates of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Today, the Central Bank of Iran, the National Iranian Oil Company and hundreds more entities are subject to US terrorism sanctions — not nuclear sanctions — due to indisputable evidence showing their involvement in financing terrorism. To lift sanctions on these banks and firms without any indication of behavioral change will be unprecedented. The deal will directly subsidize the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations — a win for another Russian client state, Syria, as well.

Hopefully this treaty will never get past the Senate, but that doesn’t mean the Biden administration won’t abide by it anyway. We currently have a lawless administration and an impossibility of impeachment due to a Democrat congress and a downright scary line of succcession–Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Grassley, Antony J. Blinken, etc.

Pray for the mid-terms and hope they won’t be too late.

The Story Behind The Story

On Monday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article with a rather different viewpoint on the origins and purpose of the current war in Ukraine. It is a long, involved article, so I suggest you follow the link to read the entire article. I will try to provide some  highlights.

The article notes:

Current CIA Director William “Bill” Burns was the former ambassador to Russia and Jordan.  Bill Burns had a 33-year career at the State Department under both Republican and Democratic presidents and speaks fluent Russian. If the people in the background of Joe Biden wanted an intelligence operative to trigger a specific result from Russia, there’s no one more strategically perfect for the job than CIA Director Bill Burns.

The article by Beinart (Peter Beinart on substack {SEE HERE}) is mainly focused on pointing out the irreconcilable nature of Joe Biden implying Ukraine could join NATO, while his own CIA Director has a history of giving serious warnings emphasizing the “brightest of all red lines” about that specific point.

[…]  “Two years ago, Burns wrote a memoir entitled, The Back Channel. It directly contradicts the argument being proffered by the administration he now serves. In his book, Burns says over and over that Russians of all ideological stripes—not just Putin—loathed and feared NATO expansion. He quotes a memo he wrote while serving as counselor for political affairs at the US embassy in Moscow in 1995. ‘Hostility to early NATO expansion,” it declares, “is almost universally felt across the domestic political spectrum here.”

On the question of extending NATO membership to Ukraine, Burns’ warnings about the breadth of Russian opposition are even more emphatic. “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin),” he wrote in a 2008 memo to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. “In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.” (read more)

The article reports the following:

The CIA Director is crystal clear that Russia would be seriously triggered about any prospect of Ukraine entering NATO.

Yet, in December of 2021, the exact same time when U.S. backchannel intelligence was being shared with China about Russian troop movements on the border with Ukraine, Joe Biden was telling Ukraine that membership in NATO was in their hands.

The war in Ukraine now can be conveniently blamed for economic woes, the high price of gasoline, the empty supermarket shelves, other supply chain problems, etc.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article.

A Solution That Is Being Ignored

On Sunday, Townhall posted an article suggesting how President Biden could end the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The article suggested following some of the example set by President Reagan.

The article reports:

President Reagan famously ramped up military spending. He increased the defense budget by over 40 percent, and that included the creation of his space program called SDI. The media mocked it and nicknamed it the Star Wars program and relentlessly attempted to brand Reagan as a dunce who was a former actor who knew nothing about foreign policy. We know in hindsight that the Soviets were enraged that the U.S. could own space and potentially shoot their weapons right out of the sky with the SDI program. In response, the Soviets ramped up their spending on similar programs. 

But, Soviet money didn’t grow on trees.

A lot of the money grew, so to speak, in the wheat fields of Russia. Wheat has long been in the top three biggest Soviet exports and President Reagan unleashed our farmers to produce grain. 

We need to end the restrictions on American energy production.

The article continues:

Another aspect of Reagan’s Cold War strategy was taking the reins off of American oil producers and ramping up our oil production. It not only gave us a great advantage to produce our own energy here, it also dramatically lowered the price of oil on the world market. Oil was and still is Russia’s top export. 

In addition to domestic production, Reagan worked behind the scenes to encourage Middle Eastern oil producers to increase the supply on the world market. The Soviets took a HUGE hit in the pocketbook when their oil suddenly became worth a fraction of what it was when Jimmy Carter was president. 

President Reagan also waged a PR war against the Soviets. 

The most famous moment was Reagan’s speech at the Brandenburg gate when he told the Soviets to tear down the wall that was separating the free people in Western Europe from those imprisoned in the oppressive communist system on the other side of the wall and razor wire. 

Reagan also sent funding and arms to freedom movements around the world that were resisting the Soviet Communist takeover of countries across Africa, Asia, and Latin America. 

And it worked. The USSR is on the ash heap of history. 

If we do not learn the lesson of President Reagan vs the Soviet Union, America will wind up on the ash heap of history. Unfortunately, the Biden administration is racing toward that heap.

Does This Make Sense To Anyone?

President Biden’s energy policies have been a disaster for America and for the world. We are no longer exporting enough fuel to Europe to counter the influence of the Russian oil and natural gas sales. We are no longer a net exporter of natural gas and oil, which impacts our economy. The closing of the Keystone XL Pipeline put a lot of people out of work and shifted the transport of oil to methods that are not as environmentally safe as a pipeline. The unscientific focus on climate change has destroyed the American economy and made the world less safe. Unfortunately, the Biden administration has chosen to double down on their energy policy rather than make the necessary course correction.

On Thursday, Breitbart posted an article illustrating the problem.

The article reports:

On Thursday’s broadcast of “CBS Evening News,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken responded to a question on whether the United States will cut off purchases of oil and gas from Russia over its invasion of Ukraine by stating that we’re trying to ensure “that we inflict maximum pain on Russia” while at the same time, “minimizing any of the pain to us.”

Host Norah O’Donnell asked, “Russia’s economy’s fueled by gas, and the U.S. is a consumer. So, would the U.S. consider cutting off oil and gas purchases from Russia?”

Blinken responded, “Well, what we’re doing, Norah, across the board, is making sure that we inflict maximum pain on Russia for what President Putin has done, while minimizing any of the pain to us.”

What Secretary of State Blinken did not say (for obvious political reasons) was that because America has stopped utilizing its own energy sources, we are financing the Russian attack on Ukraine. That is a disgrace.

Accidental Or Intentional ?

The way things are going here, the difference between a conspiracy theory and the news is about six weeks.

On Friday, The Patriot Daily Wire reported that prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine the Biden administration had sought help from China to prevent that invasion. In itself, that is not a problem, but a look at the bigger picture illustrates something that is a problem.

The article reports:

In hopes of securing assistance in deterring a Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration was reduced to providing China with military intelligence that Beijing in turn gave to Russia.

U.S. officials learned in December that China had provided American intelligence on Russian military activity to Moscow, The New York Times reported.

American officials believed that if any world leader could prove capable of convincing Russian President Vladimir Putin to rethink his invasion plans, it was Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Russia and China have strengthened their ties in recent years.

The Biden administration had sought to convince China that its international image would be damaged by a Russian invasion of Ukraine.

In a November meeting with Chinese Ambassador Qin Gang, American officials said the harsh economic sanctions Russia would incur would hurt the Chinese economy as well.

Successive attempts to influence Qin against Russia proved unsuccessful, with Qin asserting that Russia had legitimate security concerns in the region.

American officials also shared intelligence with the Chinese showing the Russian military buildup around Ukraine.

In addition to providing the information to the Kremlin, American officials believe China told Russia that the U.S. was attempting to sow discord between the two nations and pledged not to interfere in Russia’s plans in Ukraine.

We are about to find out how useless NATO and the United Nations really are. Why are we funding these organizations?

 

Avoiding A Possible Solution

When America cut her energy production, the price of oil and gas soared. When the price of oil and gas soared, the amount of money going into Russia increased dramatically. Russian gas and oil money are now being used to fund the invasion of Ukraine. So what is the best way to end that invasion? Cut off the money.

On Friday, One America News reported:

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged NATO leaders to take immediate action using the SWIFT international payments system to impact Russia’s President Putin and his regime, his office said following a call with NATO leaders on Friday.

Johnson urged leaders to take immediate action with SWIFT “to inflict maximum pain on President Putin and his regime,” his office said on Friday.

Not allowing Russia to use SWIFT would definitely stop the flow of money into Russia.

On Thursday, The Hill reported:

President Biden on Thursday defended maintaining Russia’s access to an international messaging system for banks despite pressure from Ukrainian leaders.

The U.S., United Kingdom and European Union on Thursday announced strict new penalties on the Russian economy, financial institutions and influential elites close to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But the Western allies did not bar Moscow from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), even after Ukrainian government officials urged them to do so Thursday morning.

“It is always an option, but right now that’s not the position that the rest of Europe wishes to take,” Biden told reporters after announcing new sanctions Thursday.

…The Biden administration also announced plans to impose sanctions on individuals and entities in Belarus, accusing the nation of supporting and facilitating Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Banks across the world use SWIFT to finalize transactions and transfers. Cutting Russia off from SWIFT would make it incredibly difficult for its banks to operate efficiently, but could also wreak economic havoc for European nations who depend on Russian oil and natural gas exports.

I would like to note that the European nations would not be dependent on Russian oil if the Biden administration had continued President Trump’s policy of American energy independence. There were a lot of bad decisions made by the Biden administration that led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

This Would Be Funny If It Were Not So Serious

On Tuesday, The Conservative Treehouse posted the following headline:

Russian Military Drills Conclude, Troop Withdrawal Begins, White House Proclaims the Stunning Strength and Brilliant Strategic Thinking of Joe Biden Averted Thermonuclear War

The article reports:

The previously planned Russian training exercises [Announcement Here] have been completed in Belarus – close to neighboring Ukraine. Today those troops began returning to their places of regular deployment as reported by the Russian Ministry of Defense in Moscow.

As a result, the Biden manufactured ‘wag the dog‘ scenario, a fabricated ‘Russia invading Ukraine‘ premise by the White House, U.S. Dept of State, Pentagon and intelligence apparatus, needs to come to an end quickly.

After pretending that Russia was going to invade Ukraine in an effort to manufacture a political win out of thin air, Joe Biden will declare today he saved the world.

The article concludes:

Yes, you can thank me in the comments section for saving Ukraine from the United States CIA construct and averting war. [ LOL ] But seriously, that inflated sense of CTH importance is less silly than Biden’s claims today. That’s how stupid this entire thing has been.

Yes, the White House is exactly that desperate.

The press is capable of creating the threat of war and capable of eliminating the threat of war (giving credit where they choose). That is what we have just witnessed.

 

The Consequences Of Giving Up Energy Independence

In October 2021, I posted an article about the potential for Russia to use its supply of natural gas and its pipeline to Europe as a political weapon. This was not possible under the Trump administration because under President Trump America had achieved energy independence. America was capable of exporting natural gas to Europe as needed. Unfortunately, that is no longer the case.

On Wednesday, The Daily Caller reported the following:

The flow of natural gas through a key Russian-controlled pipeline suddenly stopped Wednesday as tensions continue to increase between Russia and the West.

The Yamal-Europe pipeline’s liquified natural gas (LNG) flows, which are operated by Russian state-run firm Gazprom and have usually been pumped westward from Russia to Germany through Poland, were halted early Wednesday, European data showed, according to Reuters. The sudden stoppage reportedly represented a setback after leaders expected the pipeline to return to its normal flow pattern.

In December 2021, Gazprom slowed the pipeline’s gas flows, which represent 10% of the region’s supply, and the company reversed the flow direction from westward to eastward. The sudden reversal sent natural gas prices, which had already spiked amid a European energy crisis, even higher.

Gazprom and the Russian government said that the alteration was a “commercial” decision and that customers would continue to receive purchased gas. But geopolitical tensions between Russia and members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have increased over the last several weeks, potentially putting Europe’s energy supply at risk.

Gazprom is located in St. Petersburg, Russia. It is the largest publicly-listed natural gas company in the world and the largest company in Russia by revenue. Does anyone actually believe that Gazprom does not do the bidding of the Russian government? Does anyone actually believe that Gazprom would be in business if they did not adhere to the wishes of the Russian government?

The article concludes:

On Jan. 25, the White House announced it would help facilitate greater non-Russian natural gas flows into Europe. Such imports would come from North Africa, the Middle East, Asia and the U.S.

“We are collaborating with governments and market operators on supply of additional volumes of natural gas to Europe from diverse sources across the globe,” President Joe Biden said in a joint statement with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Jan. 28. “LNG in the short-term can enhance security of supply while we continue to enable the transition to net zero emissions.”

Gazprom didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

This Is Not Going To Help Me Sleep Nights!

On Thursday, NewsMax reported that China, Russia and Iran will hold joint naval drills on Friday.

The article reports:

The “2022 Marine Security Belt” exercise will take place in the north of the Indian Ocean and is the third joint naval drill between the three countries, Mostafa Tajoldin added.

Since coming to office last June, Iran’s hardline President Ebrahim Raisi has pursued a “look east” policy to deepen ties with China and Russia. Tehran joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in September, a central Asian security body led by Beijing and Moscow.

…Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian visited China last week and Iran’s president was meeting his Russian counterpart in Moscow on Thursday.

China, Russia and Iran started joint naval drills in 2019, and will continue them in the future, Tajoldin said.

“The purpose of this drill is to strengthen security and its foundations in the region, and to expand multilateral cooperation between the three countries to jointly support world peace, maritime security and create a maritime community with a common future,” the Iranian official told ISNA.

Both navies from Iran’s armed forces and Revolutionary Guards will take part in the drills, which include various tactical exercises such as rescuing a burning vessel, releasing a hijacked vessel, and shooting at air targets at night.

When America has a weak President, bad things happen.

This Is Not A Surprise To Anyone Who Has Been Paying Attention

One America News is reporting the following today:

U.S. President Joe Biden’s global energy security adviser said on Monday that Russian President Vladimir Putin is getting close to using natural gas as a political tool if Russia is holding back fuel exports to Europe as it suffers an energy crunch.

“I think we are getting close to that line if Russia indeed has the gas to supply and it chooses not to, and it will only do so if Europe accedes to other demands that are completely unrelated,” Amos Hochstein, Biden’s adviser, told reporters, when asked if Putin was using gas as a weapon.

Hochstein said gas prices in Europe have been driven higher not just by events in the region but also by a dry season in China that has reduced energy output from hydropower and increased global competition for natural gas.

Still, while a number of factors have led to the European gas crisis, Russia is best placed to come to the aid of Europe, he said.

“There is no doubt in my mind, and the (International Energy Agency) has itself validated, that the only supplier that can really make a big difference for European energy security at the moment for this winter is Russia,” Hochstein said.

He said Russia can increase upstream production of gas, and should do it quickly through existing pipelines.

Under the Trump administration, America was approaching the point where its natural gas exports would be a counter to the energy blackmail Russia has historically practiced. Ending America’s energy independence will be looked on in the future as one of the biggest mistakes made by the Biden administration.

I Think Most Of Us Suspected This

Just the News posted an article today about the news story that was circulating during the 2020 Presidential campaign that the Russians had put a bounty on American soldiers and were paying the Afghani soldiers to kill Americans. The media questioned the fact that President Trump had not placed sanctions on Russia for those actions and declared that the President was soft on Russia because he was Putin’s puppet. Well, the truth eventually does come out.

The article at Just the News reports:

On Thursday, the leaders of President Biden’s intelligence agencies declared they held little confidence in a New York Times’ story from last June that claimed Russia put bounties on American troops in Afghanistan.

It was the latest setback for the famous newspaper, which has seen its reporting on the now-debunked Russia collusion scandal be eviscerated by the FBI and its hit podcast series Caliphate retracted

Ashley Rindsberg, author of “The Gray Lady Winked: How the New York Times’ Misreporting, Fabrications and Distortions Radically Alter History,” said Thursday’s setback follows a decades-long pattern of journalism failures. He questioned what the Times will do next with the Afghanistan fallout.

The article notes that there is a history of this sort of creating a false narrative and being slow to change the narrative once the truth is discovered:

“That’s what’s happened time and again: the big story break, and there’s a lot of hoopla, and there’s a lot of coverage, and the narrative gets cemented. And when the story turns out to be false, or mistaken, or what have you, there’s either a very small correction that’s printed at the bottom of the article that very few people will pay attention to, or nothing at all,” he said. “So I think in this case, we’ll see what happens, and hopefully the Times will do the right thing.”

I can pretty much guarantee that if you are still depending on the mainstream media as your primary news source you are either misinformed or uninformed or both.

More Of The Same

The Washington Examiner is reporting today that the United Nations has placed China, Cuba, and Russia on the U.N. Human Rights Council. They will become sitting member on that Council as of January 1.

The article reports:

On Jan. 1, China, Cuba, and Russia will become members of the U.N. Human Rights Council. Yes, China, which has imprisoned 2 million of its Uighur citizens in gulag reeducation camps, sterilized thousands, and used the rest for de facto slave labor, is donning the U.N. human rights mantle. Cuba, a dystopia tolerated by the Western media elite for its creaking art deco façade, sees many of its best and brightest choose to brave shark-infested waters in search of better lives. Vladimir Putin’s Russia wages a very thinly veiled war on all who question the Kremlin. Whether it’s Novichok nerve agents and Alexei Navalny, open windows and journalists, or gang attacks on gays, Putin’s Russia despises human rights.

It is not simply alarming that these governments are joining the Human Rights Council, but that so few governments and organizations are bothered by it.

The article concludes:

But the challenges go beyond human rights. In the face of repeated and successively increasing Iranian breaches of nuclear arms agreements, the U.N. sits idle. In the face of escalating Chinese circumvention of North Korean sanctions, the U.N. sits idle. U.N. officials like to blame the U.N. Security Council’s permanent members for these issues. But the truth is that the U.N. itself is to blame. Its leaders, now and before, have failed to address the broken structures that sit at the heart of their organization. They should act. But they won’t. They’re happy instead to make speeches and then return to the extensive and expensive budgets afforded to all U.N. staffers. It is extraordinary, for example, that so much of the U.N.’s money continues to be spent in New York City and Geneva rather than out in the field where it might, just might, save lives and make the world a slightly better place.

The U.N. doesn’t deserve many birthday presents. Not this year, at least. And likely not next year.

Unfortunately the United Nations has chosen to ignore the Preamble to its Charter, which states:

  • to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
  • to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
  • to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
  • to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

When an organization betrays the charter that formed it, it is time for the organization to disband. The United Nations’ actions in recent years have done nothing to promote peace, freedom, or human rights. It’s time for them to go.