Wednesday, June 8, 2022


 The Europeans practised colonialism. A European was the resident Head of State, and the European Head of State was the ultimate Head of State. So a British Queen or King was the official Head of State of India as well as about 25% of the world.

The Americans always practised neocolonialism. Starting with the Monroe Doctrine, all of Latin America belonged to the US. The US picked a tiny minority--the Criollos--to be the rulers, gave them lots of money and weapons, and they let the US take all the natural resources from their country, paying starvation wages to the peons who did all the actual work.

Then, after WWII, the US applied the same to everything outside the Warsaw Pact. Vietnam did not work out all that well, but, starting with Reagan, the US transformed the brutal dictatorships and state sponsors of terror--Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Libya--into peaceful and prosperous Democracies! Maybe the Grenadians, Panamanians, Yugoslavs, Afghans, and Libyans do not agree, but they are not allowed to participate in the discussion.

Now the world has 2 powers that challenge the US of A: Russia and the PRC, and both must be utterly destroyed.

Sadly, in the Ukraine, Russia has massive logistical advantages, allowing Russia to defeat the US-backed Ukrainians. Terrible.

And the PRC are now militarily superior to the US (at a tiny fraction the cost).

In 1941, the US wanted to destroy Japan, so they ordered a complete blockade (an act of war) and Japan responded by sinking the entire US Pacific fleet.

After which, Americans who'd been starving and would not go to work (because no one would offer them a job) were drafted into the US military and US defence plants, and in 6 months, the US had a new fleet, that engaged in a battle with Japan that sank both the Japanese fleet and the US fleet. But after 6 months, the US had a new fleet and Japan did not, and the US was able to bomb Japan and eventually nuke Japan.

Sadly, Russia and the PRC ain't Japan. The PRC, if the US and PRC fleets go into battle and sink each other, can and will build a new fleet faster than the US can. And Russia have far more nukes than the US. Russia are a 'No First Use' nation (unlike the US), but that should (unless our leaders are stark raving mad, which I fear they might be) prevent Russia from being first to use a nuke, but the Russkies figure the US might use one, and they are ready to respond.

Friday, May 27, 2022

Ukraine 27 May 2022

 Early this morning, the news was the usual, The Ukraine, with NATO weapons, are easily defeating the Russians, a story we've seen pretty much non-stop since 24 Feb 2022. The first story today was Russia forced to re-mobilise Soviet-era T-62 tanks due to losses .

But  not long after that header, the Ukraine complained that they lost Liman (or Lyman). Horror of horrors, their first loss (Mariupol doesn't count, that was completely destroyed in the Western press, so Russia didn't really win anything).

So the next header was Live Updates: Russian Attacks Intensify, Along With Accusations of Genocide

If the Russians are winning, then it must be genocide, as far as the Western media are concerned.

And then Zelensky asked for long range missiles, and Biden and Johnson promised to send him some.

We don't know for certain what 'long range' means. Zelensky almost certainly means Moscow, but Biden and Johnson might be a teeny bit smarter than that. 

But I wouldn't bet on it. 

They might figure Russia will just carpet bomb Kiev, or maybe all of the Ukraine. What, if anything, is going through their minds escapes me.

But Russia are very unlikely to blame Kiev if a missile hits Moscow. And I have no idea how they'll respond.

So far, the Western sanctions are destroying Europe (good, the US do not want any Western European rivals who could challenge the US economically), those sanctions are causing some pain in the US (but only for the rabble, and they've been told they must sacrifice to save Democracy, and they're not complaining much), and doing little or nothing to hurt Russia. So how to destroy Russia? Missiles hitting Moscow?

Somehow, I think Moscow knows ways to make the West suffer far more than Russia, no matter what they try.

Unless the West goes for total destruction of the entire planet. That's one way to make sure a non-existent Russia and a non-existent PRC cannot challenge a non-existent West.

Wednesday, May 11, 2022


 I first read 1984 in the '60s. It took me more than 50 years to understand it. Airstrip 1 keeps changing its allegiance. It is allied with Eurasia against Eastasia for years. All the media (and the media morgues) say Airstrip 1 has always been allied with Eurasia against Eastasia. Then Airstrip 1 is allied with Eastasia against Eurasia, and Winston Smith must edit all books and news media so they all report that Airstrip 1 has always been allied with Eastasia against Eurasia. And then back, and it all has to be changed again back to the way it was before.

I figured Eastasia was the PRC and Eurasia was the USSR, and had no idea Airstrip 1 (i.e., the UK) had ever been allied with either one against the other. Silly me. The PRC did not exist when Orwell was writing 1984. Now I know that Eurasia is Europe and the Ottomans, and Eastasia is Russia/USSR.

I also know that, in 1800, Airstrip 1 (i.e., the UK) was allied with Russia against Napoleonic France. Then in the Crimean War, Airstrip 1 was allied with France and the Ottomans against Russia. Then in WWI, Airstrip 1 was allied with Russia against Germany and the Ottomans. After WWI, Airstrip 1 was terrified of the USSR, tried war, lost, then, in 1933, when Hitler said he would abrogate the Treaty of Versailles, the UK figured Hitler would be a good buffer against the USSR and let him take over as Chancellor and abrogate Versailles, and tried to work with him against the USSR.

By 1938, Airstrip 1 realised that war with Germany would be essential, but Airstrip 1 was not ready. As Waugh put it, In 1938, when Germany demanded the Sudetenland, "war was inevitable, but in 1938, the war would have been for the wrong reasons, with the wrong allies, in pitiful weakness". France wanted Maginot completed before declaring war. Chamberlain wanted the radar completed before war.

Then, in 1939, Eurasia and Eastasia formed an alliance to split Poland, and Airstrip 1 and France declared war on Germany and lost, but Airstrip 1 fishermen managed to save most of the British Expeditionary Force from Dunkirk. Airstrip 1 demanded a scapegoat, and Churchill gave them Chamberlain and Appeasement. If only Airstrip 1 had gone to war in 1938, it would have been very easy to defeat Germany with no allies. Completely wrong, but eaten up by those who needed a scapegoat.

Had Britain declared war in 1938, there would have been no miracle at Dunkirk, the whole BEF would have been killed or captured. No radar shield, so the Luftwaffe bombing raids would have arrived unexpected with few defenders and few airships lost, so the Battle of Britain would have gone Germany's way. And Airstrip 1 would have had no choice but to surrender. And with no base from which to bomb Germany, the US could not have done much after Germany declared war on the US in 1941. Europe would still be under the swastika had Chamberlain not waited until 1939.

And now the US has a brand new Ministry of Truth. They have not yet renamed the Defence Department the Ministry of Peace, but they still call themselves that, even if it's not their official title.

Some though 1984 was a warning. Turned out, the US is using it for a guidebook. And figure it's the Right Way to Go!

Thursday, April 28, 2022

State of the Western News 3

 Before, I glanced at all the different news, but did not go in depth, so I'm not sure if this is new, or if I just missed it before.

Basically, the Russian news says they are liberating the pro-Russian Ukraine. The Western news says the entire Ukraine hates everything Russian, and, as the Russians invaded, all the Ukraine joined the Ukrainian military and repulsed the Russians, just about all of the first attack force has been eradicated, but the Russians have sent a few more soldiers in to be slaughtered as well.

Only, before being slaughtered, those evil Russian soldiers murdered civilians and raped all the women and girls.

So now the West are promising war crimes trials of the surviving Russian soldiers and the Russian leadership, something like Nuremberg. Russia, it seems, at least on the Western news--all of it: CNN, France 24, BBC, DW, Euronews, etc., etc.--is now in the same state as Nazi Germany in 1945. The Russians, they inform us, are lying and trying to deny their defeat and their crimes, but the world can see.

What some find amazing is how the Western media can be in such agreement on such a proposition, but they are.

Wednesday, April 27, 2022

State of the News 2

 I used to glance at CNN, France 24, BBC, Euronews, etc., etc., and all had the same news: Russia attacks Ukraine, wants to reestablish USSR, Ukraine defenders winning. The Russian version was fairly well blocked.

I note that the Iran version,, was blocked for one day. Then the Iranians opened which the US cannot block. The Taliban website was blocked for about a year, but they figured out how to get around US blocks: 

But Russia is still having trouble getting past the US blocks and massive DDoS. The Russians need to ask the Persians and Afghans for help!

The Western media now repeat Ukraine military talking points: Russians do not take prisoners: any Ukrainian who surrenders will be tortured and killed. The Russians are raping all the Ukrainian women and girls. The Russian atrocities demand justice, and the US will ensure that justice is delivered!

Seeing the Russian version is difficult but not quite impossible. A Chechen soldier who saw the A3OB killing a mother and child, so he and the other Chechens attacked and killed the A3OB Battalion murderers:

So what's TRVE?

Russia reports from the front lines. CNN also reports from the front lines in Warsaw. Or Manhattan, from which one gets an excellent view of the Ukraine. A few insist the CNN version is fake. Not the dead bodies, but the timings: CNN says they have proof the dead bodies were there when the Russian military was there, and not before. Others say those dead bodies appeared after the Russian military left.

The unipolar world is truly unipolar. A team from the OPCW went to Syria and said they saw no evidence of anyone using chemical weapons. Their report was edited by the Director to say they had irrefutable proof the Syrian government had used chemical weapons to kill many innocent civilians, and since he was the Director, his version was the official version. Some members of the team complained, and were told they had to be team players or they'd be fired.

The US version is the only version allowed. Back in the day, when I was a lad, one night Walter Cronkite said he had proof the US government had been lying about Vietnam. 

The US government learned. Only those who repeat the official US government version can be allowed as news anchors. So never again has any US news said the US government lied. And now the US dominates NATO, the EU who are not in NATO, plus most Europe countries not yet in the EU. Also Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Nothing but the US version of the news. Even the English Chinese news reiterates the US version of the news (but not the Chinese Chinese news).

So, again, what's TRVE? Could it be the Western version? Or the Russian version? Or are both lying?

Sunday, April 17, 2022

State of the News

Turn on CNN, BBC, France 24, DW, Euronews, etc., etc., and get the exact same news: Putin is trying to rebuild the USSR. He started by lopping off a piece of Georgia. If I may borrow from Walt Kelley, he was trying to annex President Carter's peanut ranch, and might have gotten part of it. And now Putin is trying to add the Ukraine. The world must stand up to Putin. If the world let Putin destroy the democracy flourishing in the Ukraine, he will not stop at the Ukraine, but will try to impose Soviet rule on the entire world.

Before 24 February, Russia had a national broadcast channel, a much smaller version of the BBC that had English/Spanish/French-speaking staff who tried to give the Russian take on the news in English, Spanish, and French. The English-speaking staff were based in the US, UK, and Russia. After 24 February, every effort was made by the West to shut down all the Russian channels, banning them and blocking them.

As a native English speaker, I watched the English version of the Russian national channel to get the Russian take on the news and compare that with the Western take, but after 24 Feb, the US and UK banned the Russian channel from operating in their country, so the English version lost most of its staff, and now produces very little new material: a single, 30 minute news summary, repeated all day long, and about five 30 minute discussion program a week, also repeated many times. Plus some old documentaries, many about the history of the Ukraine, all several years old.

Meanwhile, the Western version that everything on the Russian national channel is a lie is broadcast 24/7 on all the Western channels, along with the warning that Russia must be stopped, must be evicted from the Ukraine, must have all trade cut off to kill the Russian economy and thereby kill the Russian military and keep peace in the world. Or else face a brutal, world-wide dictatorship, a much larger, possibly worldwide version of the old USSR.

The West has won the narrative, at least in the West. Given that the Russian channel is blocked, most believe the Western channels about what is really happening. But is this perception that the West is more reliable than Russia based on reality or Western propaganda?

Which version is correct? The Russian? The Western? Neither?

All the Western channels reiterate the exact same story. Is this because there is only one TRVTH, and, since all are telling the TRVTH, all are telling the same story? Or is it because the establishment media channels are owned by a very small number of owners, all of whom agree to propagate the same lie, crafted by the US, translated into every major language, and then printed or broadcast on all the establishment news networks?

And then the social media are all dominated by Alphabet, Meta, Apple, and Twitter, so do the owners stamp out every site that carries a version that deviates from their preferred version if it has more than a few thousand followers? Is that why few have ever seen alternative versions of what is really happening?

So the Western version has definitely won the narrative, but is it correct?

And how can we find out?

Friday, April 8, 2022

Lost Key?

 People keep referring to the US$ as the World Reserve Currency. This is not the correct terminology (I got this from Adam Smith in his book, Paper Money, 1982). The Reserve Currencies are all those currencies kept in reserve by international banks. These are the US$, UK£, €, Swiss CHF, and Japanese ¥.

Before, the two major currencies were the UK£ and the French ₣, but after WWI, both were weakened, and after WWII, both quickly descended to a fraction of their old value, while the US$, guaranteed to be worth 0.88 gm of 24K gold (approx: the real value was 1/35 Troy oz, but even those who know a normal ounce have no idea what a Troy ounce is, but 1/35 Troy oz is approximately 0.88 gm).

So the US$ became the world's Key Currency, all other currencies had their value defined in US$. So, in the absence of any alternatives, the US$ became the currency of just about all International Trade, since the value of the US$ was set in 24K gold, while other currencies values varied, so a seller did not want to be paid in the buyer's currency which might be devalued, nor did a buyer want a contract to pay in the seller's currency which might be up-valued. So international transactions were (mostly) denominated in US$, making the US$ the Key Currency.


For years, the US has attacked and forced regime change in horrible dictatorships with massive armies that threatened the entire world: Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and similar. Now, the US is taking on the weak, impuissant Russia and the PRC, which should be much easier than any of their predecessors, since both are weak, primitive nations without major militaries. At least according to US intelligence (an oxymoron).

So now the US is starting with severe sanctions. Note that, when Saddam said he wanted to be paid in Euros, not US$, the US military saw that he was hanged. And when Gaddafi said he wanted to be paid in Euros, the US had him killed (the US had been trying since President Reagan, but Obama finally got him, confirming the validity of Obama's Nobel Prize as America's Best President EVER).

Russia is no Libya nor Iraq nor Panama, but is now (according to US intelligence) so weak that regime change should be a bowl of borscht.

After all, what does Russia have? One of the top 3 exporters of oil and gas (didn't help Saddam nor Gaddafi); top exporter of corn; leading exporter of metals and fertilizer; & etc., but the world can do without Russian oil or gas or corn. Prices have doubled, and will treble or quadruple (if we're lucky), but we still have to sanction Russia, so we're just going to have to live without heat in winter nor A/C in summer and not enough food.


But another thing: Saudi now accepts payment in c, and Russia accepts payments in ₹, something we haven't seen since Bretton Woods, 1944. And if other currencies become common for International Trade, those currencies will  rise in value. And then the world will not have a Key Currency!