http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/57538.htm
Assassination Bid on Putin to Provoke Furious Escalation… for Whom?
The longer the Kiev regime survives, the worse the danger persists for Russia from uncontrolled instability on its border
Just as the Western public is growing increasingly skeptical of the U.S.-led proxy war against Russia and the insane military and financial aid being pumped to prop up the corrupt Kiev regime, we then see a daring assassination drone attack on the Kremlin.
Russia called it an act of terrorism to kill President Vladimir Putin. The Kremlin has also pointed the finger at Washington for authoring the assassination bid as well as the Kiev regime for having a hand in it.
The White House denies any American role in the air raid as does Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky. Western media are reporting claims that Russia may have carried out a false-flag terror attack on itself to justify ramping up military force in Ukraine. Those claims echo those put out earlier by the West about Russia blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines under the Baltic Sea last September. In both cases, the notion of Russian false-flag attacks seems absurd.
Would Russia really risk making itself look incompetent by staging an audacious aerial raid on the seat of political power in its capital?
Two small unmanned aerial vehicles were apparently brought down over the Kremlin in the early hours of Wednesday. The lightweight devices could hardly have posed a serious threat to kill Putin in his official residence. So, it can be dismissed as a realistic attempt at assassination. The Kremlin said Putin was not even in the building at the time.
Nevertheless, the mere fact of explosive drones breaching the iconic walls of the Kremlin and targeting the Senate Palace is certainly an outrageous provocation. One may aver that this provocative act per se was the main aim.
Moscow’s initial response was that it would retaliate accordingly at a time of its choosing. There are many voices calling for Russia to kill Zelensky. A furious reaction by Russia is understandable, but is it prudent?
It seems highly pertinent that there is growing skepticism and even disgust among the Western public about the U.S.-led proxy war in Ukraine. Polls are showing increasing numbers of Americans critical of the “blank checks” that Washington is throwing like a drunken sailor at the Kiev regime. Across Europe too people are angered by the unlimited money showering a corrupt cabal and the reckless danger of inciting an all-out war between NATO and Russia that could spiral into nuclear armageddon. This while Western workers are being drummed into poverty and social misery.
Skimming hundreds of millions of dollars by Zelensky and his cronies in Kiev is undermining Western public tolerance of this completely unnecessary conflict. The war is increasingly seen as a racket for the American military-industrial complex, a racket in which Zelensky and his ilk are indulged with their embezzlement and thievery of Western tax payers’ money.
The Ukraine conflict is blatantly being fueled indefinitely. There is brazen repudiation by Washington and its European minions of any diplomatic solution. A diplomatic solution was obviated from the very beginning when Russia’s reasonable security concerns and offer of dialogue in December 2021 about NATO and Ukraine were arrogantly brushed aside by the Joe Biden administration.
The war racket is too lucrative for the Pentagon industry and its ancillary European weapons firms.
But the Western propaganda narrative of “defending Ukraine for as long as it takes” is wearing thin for public consumption. The Kiev regime is burning down churches, ruthlessly repressing opposition political and media voices, glorifying Nazis and beating its own citizens on the streets in forced conscription for the military.
Vladimir Zelensky is seen as a wheedling character whose begging bowl for more weapons and funds is a black hole.
Without public support (or ignorance) in the West, the whole U.S.-led proxy war against Russia comes unstuck. The American presidential elections are approaching and the Ukrainian debacle could become a decisive factor for voters.
In order to salvage the shaky situation, therefore, what better than for Russia to launch an attack to kill Zelensky? Such an event would be spun to death by the pliant Western media as “evidence of Russian barbarism”, thereby giving the NATO proxy war in Ukraine a new lease of life and most importantly for the weapons racket to find a new throttle.
The American deep state, the CIA and Pentagon corporate oligarchy would be the most plausible agency to author the drone attack on the Kremlin. Just as this faction did with the blowing up of the Nord Stream pipelines. Technically and militarily, this faction has the capability. Just like the Nord Stream diversionary media stories about Ukrainian military agents being responsible for that sabotage, it is doubtful that the Kiev regime could have carried out the Kremlin attack – alone.
The timing of the Kremlin attack points to a big calculation to incite a wild reaction from Russia. It comes days before the annual May 9 Victory Day parade in Red Square commemorating the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945. The last time the Kremlin was attacked in an air raid was reportedly in 1942 during Hitler’s invasion. Throw into that incitement that President Putin was targeted.
Arguably, Russia should push to defeat the NATO-backed Kiev regime. The longer that regime survives, the worse the danger persists for Russia from uncontrolled instability on its border. But taking out the contemptible Zelensky and his cronies in a bloody assassination? Such a reaction might be just what his American puppet masters want.
....
http://endoftheamericandream.com/do-they-actually-want-world-war-3-now-the-west-has-decided-to-give-ukraine-long-range-cruise-missiles/
Do They Actually Want World War 3? Now The West Has Decided To Give Ukraine Long-Range Cruise Missiles…
We are getting dangerously close to the “hot phase” of World War III, but most people in the western world don’t even realize what is going on. They simply trust our leaders when they tell us that we will never have to be directly involved in a conflict with Russia, but meanwhile those same leaders continue to push us ever closer to such a scenario. Earlier today, we learned that the UK has now delivered long-range “Storm Shadow” cruise missiles to Ukraine…
The United Kingdom has delivered multiple “Storm Shadow” cruise missiles to Ukraine, giving the nation a new long-range strike capability in advance of a highly anticipated counteroffensive against Russian forces, multiple senior Western officials told CNN.
UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace, calling the donation Ukraine’s “best chance to defend themselves against Russia’s continued brutality,” confirmed the transaction on Thursday after CNN exclusively reported the deal.
These missiles do not have enough range to get to Moscow, but they do have the potential to hit strategic targets very deep inside Russian territory.
According to CNN, the UK government “has received assurances from the Ukrainian government that these missiles will be used only within Ukrainian sovereign territory”…
The Storm Shadow is a long-range cruise missile with stealth capabilities, jointly developed by the UK and France, which is typically launched from the air. With a firing range in excess of 250km, or 155 miles, it is just short of the 185-mile range capability of the US-made surface-to-surface Army Tactical Missile Systems, or ATACMS, that Ukraine has long asked for.
Critically, the Storm Shadow has the range to strike deep into Russian-held territory in Eastern Ukraine. A Western official told CNN that the UK has received assurances from the Ukrainian government that these missiles will be used only within Ukrainian sovereign territory and not inside Russia. UK officials have made frequent public statements identifying Crimea as Ukrainian sovereign territory, describing it as “illegally annexed.”
Of course the Ukrainians consider Crimea to be their “sovereign territory”, and the Russians also consider Crimea to be their “sovereign territory”.
And many experts are already anticipating that the Ukrainians will use these new missiles to strike Russia’s Black Sea fleet which is stationed in Crimea. Here is just one example…
Ben Hodges, a former U.S. Army Europe Commanding General, tweeted: “Well done UK!”
He added: “This will give Ukraine capability to make Crimea untenable for Russian forces,” and would force a Russian rethink of where to position its Black Sea fleet.
If the Ukrainians start raining down cruise missiles on the naval base in Sevastopol, that might be enough to provoke Russia into using tactical nuclear weapons against Ukrainian targets.
And if the Russians start using their tactical nukes, the Biden administration has already strongly hinted that we are likely to use ours against Russian military assets.
Once we get to that stage, there will be no turning back.
For now, the Ukrainians continue to insist that they are on the verge of launching a very powerful “counteroffensive” which will turn the tide of the war…
Zelenskyy said in an interview broadcast Thursday by the BBC that it would be “unacceptable” to launch the assault now because too many lives would be lost.
“With (what we have) we can go forward and be successful,” Zelenskyy said in the interview, according to the BBC. “But we’d lose a lot of people. I think that’s unacceptable.”
Has the Ukrainian government been able to scrape together enough foreign mercenaries to make a new “counteroffensive” possible?
I am skeptical, but the weeks ahead will show us whether they are bluffing or not.
Meanwhile, it appears that we could be on the verge of witnessing a major conflict erupt in the Middle East.
According to the Jerusalem Post, Islamic Jihad has fired more than 800 rockets into Israel, and the Israeli military has conducted more than 190 airstrikes in Gaza in response…
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad had fired 803 rockets into Israel between Wednesday morning and 8 p.m. on Thursday evening, and the IDF had undertaken 191 airstrikes in Gaza in the same timeframe.
The IDF killed Islamic Jihad rocket commander Ali Ghali around 1:00 a.m. early Thursday, and his deputy, Ahmed Abu Daka, around 4:30 p.m. on Thursday.
This is a huge test for the Netanyahu government.
If the IDF response to these attacks is deemed too weak, Netanyahu will lose a lot of public support.
But if the IDF response is too strong, a major regional war could potentially be sparked.
At this moment, the Israelis are promising that “the campaign will continue as long as necessary”…
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant stated that “the campaign will continue as long as necessary,” after a sitatuation assessment following the rocket strike on Rehovot that killed one man and wounded 10 people.
They further instructed the security forces to “continue to exact a heavy price from the Islamic Jihad for its aggression against the citizens of Israel,” the Prime Minister’s office announced.
Let us hope that a ceasefire can be brokered quickly.
Because if the Israelis send troops into Gaza, everything will change.
Before I end this article, there is one more thing that I wanted to mention.
As we draw closer to a war with China, some leaders in Washington are suggesting that we should actually blow up the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company after an invasion happens in order to keep it from falling into Chinese hands…
Taiwan’s defense minister in statements early this week pushed back against the idea of the US bombing the island’s semiconductor factories in the event of a Chinese invasion.
Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) recently said the US should “make it very clear to the Chinese that if you invade Taiwan, we’re going to blow up TSMC,” referring to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which produces the majority of the world’s advanced semiconductors.
When asked about Moutlon’s comments, Taiwanese Defense Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng said the military wouldn’t let that happen.
This just shows how dramatically our relationship with China has deteriorated.
At one time, it would have been unthinkable for a member of Congress to say such a thing.
But now many of our politicians are openly acknowledging that war with China is coming sooner or later.
So let me try to summarize what we are facing.
We are already involved in a proxy war with Russia which could soon turn into a shooting war, a major regional conflict in the Middle East could erupt at any moment, and our politicians are publicly talking about a coming war with China.
Yeah, I think that we are definitely in a time of “wars and rumors of wars”, but most of us in the western world are still completely and utterly clueless.
Most people that live in the western world still believe that our leaders are competent and that they have everything under control.
Unfortunately, by the time they realize the truth it will be far too late to reverse course.
....
https://www.globalresearch.ca/constitution-congress-government-debt/5818957
The Constitution, Congress and Government Debt
What would you do if you were driving a vehicle and came upon a traffic light that had both red and green lights on? Most rational folks would stop. After all, the red means “stop and stay stopped until the red light goes off,” and the green means “you may proceed with caution.”
An analogous dilemma faces President Joe Biden today as he attempts to spend money that Congress has ordered to be spent, but which the government does not have, and in place of which it cannot legally borrow.
The big-government mentality that has been running Washington, D.C., since the days of Woodrow Wilson has mismanaged the government into $31.4 trillion in debt. This number is so vast that — with interest rates rising — the annual interest payments to the owners of that debt will soon consume more than half the revenue collected in taxes.
That will barely leave enough for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security; and all other government expenditures — from defense to the courts to the post office — will need to be funded by higher taxes or debt.
What is Biden to do? Here is the backstory.
After the states won the Revolutionary War and ratified the Constitution, money in the U.S. consisted largely of gold and silver coins issued by the feds and promissory notes backed by gold and silver issued by banks. The Constitution — in order to prevent the type of government debt now confronting Biden and deter the central management of the American economy — conspicuously permits Congress and the states to coin only gold and silver as money, but not to issue paper.
As the Southern states were reentering the Union — forced as they were to ratify the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments as preconditions to Union reentry and the removal of federal troops from their streets — they soon found themselves extracting money from their residents to repay the lenders who helped the feds finance the war against them.
The congressional Republicans, who had stripped the Supreme Court of jurisdiction to hear appeals on Reconstruction, anticipated judicial resistance to this, so Congress crafted a clause in the 14th Amendment that prohibited anyone from challenging the federal debt that the states would soon collectively be assuming.
The clause reads, “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law … shall not be questioned.” Unpacking this clause, we see two underlying values.
Obviously the phrase “shall not be questioned” is not intended to curtail the freedom of speech of persons — as that is a natural right largely immune from governmental interference — but rather the official acts of the states and the judiciary. Stated differently, when the feds assessed the Southern states for their share of the interest on the federal debt, those states could not challenge that assessment in court because the debt they were paying was for a war that had been waged against them. A fair reading of the debates on the 14th Amendment in Congress and elsewhere clearly manifests this congressional concern.
The second underlying value from the clause is that the public debt of the federal government must be “authorized by law.”
Now back to Biden’s red light/green light dilemma.
Big-government types, corporations, banks, the military industrial complex — those who have enriched themselves on federal government largesse — as well as most folks in Congress, academics like Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe and Biden all read the 14th Amendment to embody a legal principal that permits endless debt without express authorization because it “shall not be questioned.”
Yet, such a reading is not only not countenanced by history; it is not even fairly derivable from the plain language of the amendment. In its plain English words, the amendment permits the federal government to incur debt — not to pay all invoices, not to keep the American economy afloat, not to permit politicians to keep campaign promises, not even for emergencies — but only when authorized, not by the president, but “by law.”
Congress — controlled as it has been by the big-government mentality for the past 100 years, still saddled with debt from World War I, congenitally incapable of living within its means, insidiously reckless enough to incur bills but not raise the money with which to pay them — nevertheless has not authorized by law any debt beyond what is currently on the books.
So, can the president incur debt that is not authorized by law? No. Can he choose which federal laws to enforce and which ones to ignore? No.
When two statutes conflict — thou shalt spend, thou shalt not borrow — can the president decide what the laws mean and how they should be applied? Of course not. He is only the president; he is not the judiciary. Since 1803, it has been the exclusive charge, duty and competence of the judicial branch to say what the laws and the Constitution mean — not Congress and not the president.
Whomever has an unpaid bill to the feds should simply sue them. This will force the courts to resolve the red light/green light dilemma. It might even embarrass Congress into fiscal sanity. But don’t hold your breath waiting for that.
No comments:
Post a Comment