Russia did not interfere in the 2016 US presidential election in favor of Donald Trump. It was the other way around: Russia opposed Trump’s election. From an article in RT.com (May 6, 2016): “Donald Trump: More Caligula than Augustus … America’s answer to Mussolini, and just like the Italian fascist dictator”. Democrats should be happy now. Republicans do not need to prove to anyone that they are not soft on Russia.

The news media and Big Tech have been demonizing Putin and Russia since July 2016 to give more teeth to the hoax of Trump–Putin collusion, and some people have transferred their hatred of Trump to Putin. It is long past time to move on. At least, they should show mercy to the Ukrainians, who are bearing the brunt of this Trump Derangement Syndrome by Proxy. Also notice that those who were appointed by Joe Biden to degrade the American military now talk of weakening Russia. There are other nefarious motives behind the escalation rhetoric. For example, Ilhan Omar (D-MN) introduced a legislation to collaborate with the International Criminal Court under the excuse of holding Putin responsible.

The current Kyiv regime, formed under the watch of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, is far from a democracy, which existed in Ukraine through 2014. The circumstances of the 2022 war are much more complicated than the naked aggression that Russia perpetrated against Ukraine in 2014. Let us review events in Ukraine and their intersection with the internal politics of the US.

1. Russia attacked Ukraine in 2014, seized and annexed Crimea, and invaded eastern regions of Ukraine when local militias declared People’s Republic of Donetsk and People’s Republic of Luhansk (together, “LDNR”). The Obama administration reacted by saying that Putin is “on the wrong side of history” and provided Ukraine token aid, strictly excluding weapons. The fighting has continued since that time, despite ceasefire agreements.
2. The government of Ukraine, led by former President Poroshenko, interfered in the 2016 US election with an overwhelming force, helped Hillary Clinton and the Democrat party leadership to create the Russia hoax that rattled and divided this country like nothing else since the Civil War. The DNC operatives and agents in the US government continued to undermine President Trump throughout his term and interfered in the 2020 US elections against him.
3. Despite this, President Trump provided Ukraine with weapons, especially Javelin anti-tank missiles, deterring Russia from imposing its will on Ukraine by force. President Trump also attempted to help Ukraine more, possibly even brokering peace with Russia.
4. Meanwhile, the Poroshenko regime in Ukraine tacked toward neo-Nazism and apartheid, as evidenced by the Language Law. February 2019, the people of Ukraine rejected these policies and elected Vladimir Zelensky in a landslide election victory (73% against 24%).
5. But Poroshenko-created state apparatus resisted Zelensky in Ukraine, while its agents in the US government sabotaged relations between the Zelensky government and the Trump administration. The Vindman–Ciaramella leak and hoax about the phone call between Trump and Zelensky damaged not only Trump, but also the ability of the United States to help Ukraine; no aid is possible if presidents of two countries cannot talk. This also weakened Zelensky in Ukraine and empowered his enemies from the ethno-nationalist fringe.
6. Following the installation of Joe Biden, Jake Sullivan, a veteran of Spygate and Burisma-gate, became his national security advisor. The aspirations of the small group of Ukrainian Russophobes, ethnonationalists, and a small circle of neo-nazis had come true.
7. The escalation of the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which led to the current war, started around September–October 2021, apparently coinciding with the time when Jake Sullivan appeared in the sights of Durham’s investigation. The escalation included public statements from the Biden administration about Ukraine joining NATO — a bad idea that had been rejected long ago. It was known as a guaranteed way to provoke Putin. This talk was followed by escalation on the ground, coinciding with the Biden regime publicly hinting that NATO membership was in the hands of Ukraine.

Ukraine Language Law and Azov

The description of the current regime in Kyiv as neo-Nazi is an exaggeration, based mainly on the Azov battalion/regiment. But the anomalous Ukraine Language Law of 2019 was a sign of a fully developed apartheid. Before that, Ukrainian was the state language, but the status of Russian and other minority languages was protected by Ukraine’s constitution.

The 2019 Language Law made knowing the state language mandatory for all citizens. The law also established six levels and sublevels of proficiency in the state language and mandated certificates of language proficiency for all important positions in the public sector. These certificates of proficiency are issued by the National Commission for State Language Standards and published in an online Registry.

Under this law, language proficiency certification is required for candidates in all elections. Thus, the Commission can disqualify political candidates simply by certifying their language proficiency below the required level.

Under this law, public schools’ education in languages other than the state language can be done only in segregated classes. Public events must be held in the state language. Publications in languages other than the state language are also severely restricted. This Language Law of 2019 is so shocking that one needs to read it to believe it.

Russia Hoaxers United

Although Ukraine rejected the apartheid policies of the Poroshenko regime, the regime’s agents in the US continued their business as usual. Eric Ciaramella, Sean Misco, Alexander Vindman, Alexandra Chalupa, and Jake Sullivan are some of the prominent figures of this network.

Ciaramella and Vindman were the central figures in disclosing the phone call between Trump and Zelensky in July 2019 and leaking a distorted version of it. That and the subsequent impeachment hearings undermined Trump’s ability to help and Zelensky’s positions in Ukraine.

This constellation of corrupt characters was nothing new. Some people (but not me) even think that the Russia hoax originated in Ukraine. Hunter Biden was receiving money from Burisma when Joe Biden forced the Ukrainian government to drop its investigation into Burisma and to make changes in the anti-corruption bodies. Then national anti-corruption bureau of Ukraine launched the investigation of Paul Manafort using a fabricated black ledger. Eric Ciaramella took part in that, too. The DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa and the Ukrainian embassy in the United States contributed to the Russian hoax in many ways.

There were no grounds to suspect Trump of collusion or even softness toward Russia. On May 2, 2016, Trump suggested shooting down Russian jets, performing dangerous maneuvers near US aircraft. The 2016 GOP platform approved under Trump said “We will meet the return of Russian belligerence with the same resolve that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. We will not accept any territorial change in Eastern Europe imposed by force, in Ukraine, Georgia, or elsewhere.” It is time to reconsider it, I think.

Ukrainian ultranationalist channel Unian (also using brand Glavred) aided Democrat J6 provocation by claiming “Russian trace” among Trump supporters. It published a video of a group of strange persons pretending to be Trump supporters, breaking windows and getting through them into Capitol building. It used a video shot by a real reporter with digitally removed brand and copyright.

Conclusions

Russian propaganda spreads disinformation, but Russian forces do not use chemical weapons in Ukraine and try to minimize civilian casualties. The allegation of massacres carried out by Russian forces in Ukraine that could be checked have been proven false (i.e., Bucha).

We watch out for coordinated efforts to pull us closer or even straight into a war with Russia. Equally dangerous is the use of the Russian boogeyman to escalate censorship of Republican and conservative voices, and to threaten other opposition to the Biden regime.

via Science Defies Politics

https://ift.tt/celzxKs

April 28, 2022 at 08:06AM

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/j14JtVq

April 28, 2022 at 08:04AM

By Paul Homewood

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00117h1/panorama-wild-weather-our-world-under-threat

You will no doubt recall that Panorama edition from last November! Justin Rowlatt used the hour long programme to claim that climate change was making the world’s weather much worse. He made two specific claims that were blatant lies:

 

1) He opened the programme by stating:

“The world is getting warmer and our weather is getting ever more unpredictable and dangerous. The death toll is rising around the world”

2) There was also a large segment devoted to the recent drought in Madagascar, which Rowlatt described as “the world’s first climate change-induced famine.”

Neither claim was remotely true. Deaths from weather disasters have declined sharply in recent years, a fact that is easily established. Meanwhile a scientific study shortly after the edition established that droughts like last year are common events in Madagascar.

I complained to the BBC about the Madagascar claim, while another complained about the first one. Both complaints were escalated to the Executive Complaints Unit, after we were fobbed off at the first stage. I am pleased to say that both complaints have been upheld.

Below is the BBC reply:

 

Panorama: Wild Weather, BBC One, 3 November 2021

Complaint

The ECU considered two complaints about information contained in this programme. In the first, a viewer complained that in the introduction, the presenter incorrectly suggested the death toll from extreme weather-related events was rising and expected to rise further. The second complainant raised concerns that the programme inaccurately asserted that Madagascar was on the brink of the first famine caused by climate change. The ECU considered both complaints in the light of the BBC’s editorial standards relating to accuracy.

---

Outcome

In the ECU’s view the wording of the introduction, which stated “the death toll is rising around the world and the forecast is that worse is to come”, risked giving the impression the rate of deaths from extreme weather-related events was increasing. In fact, as noted a recent report from the World Meteorological Organization, despite the number of weather-related disasters (such as floods, storms and drought) growing significantly in the past 50 years, the number of deaths caused by such disasters has fallen because of improved early warnings and disaster management.

BBC News accepted the wording in the programme was not as clear as it should have been and a public acknowledgement was put on the BBC’s Corrections and Clarifications website before the complaint reached the ECU. This was an appropriate means of response and ensured the potentially misleading impression was corrected as a matter of public record. However, an oversight meant the programme was still available on the BBC iPlayer without a link or reference to the published correction, and for that reason the complaint was upheld.

Separately the ECU considered the language used in the programme about the drought in Madagascar. It agreed the evidence showed southern Madagascar had suffered lower than average seasonal rainfall in recent years, and that climate change was one of the factors which had contributed to famine in the country. It also noted the reporter’s language mirrored that used by the UN’s World Food Programme. However the statement that Madagascar was on the brink of the world’s first climate-induced famine was presented without qualification, whereas other evidence available prior to broadcast suggested there were additional factors which made a significant contribution to the shortage of food. The complaint was therefore upheld.

Upheld

Further action

The finding has been reported to the Board of BBC News and discussed with the programme-makers concerned. Appropriate clarifications will be added to the iPlayer version of the programme.

Both responses are a bit mealy mouthed, and the ECU still seems to be in denial that both claims were fundamentally untrue.

Nevertheless, Justin Rowlatt has now had three complaints against him upheld, all in the space of a few months (The first was when he ludicrously claimed that the offshore wind industry was now “virtually subsidy free” in the UK.)

It is difficult to see how he can maintain his position as Climate Editor, when his work is so untrustworthy.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/61tablW

April 28, 2022 at 08:01AM

“To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker. It is just as criminal to rob a man of his right to speak and hear as it … Continue reading →

via Real Climate Science

https://ift.tt/aOxt20Z

April 28, 2022 at 05:44AM