Missouri and Louisiana Attorneys General Sue the Biden Administration Over Free Speech
BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE – AUGUST 8, 2022
Brownstone Institute has repeatedly reported on the unholy alliance between the administrative state and Big Tech with the censorious results of free speech suppression. We’ve published a full articles of inquiry as a template for further investigation into these unprecedented actions.
The cooperation between these people during the pandemic response became intense and pervasive. This model is being deployed in other areas too, with a symbiotic relationship between power centers that ends in suppressing dissent. This is contrary to the First Amendment.
The state attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana have filed suit against the Biden administration. Among the plaintiffs are Brownstone Senior Scholars Martin Kulldorff, Jay Bhattacharya, and Aaron Kheriaty who have experienced this censorship first hand. The case is joined by the New Civil Liberties Alliance and filed in the US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana Monroe Division.
The text of the lawsuit is embedded below. Here is an excerpt.
The aggressive censorship that Defendants have procured constitutes government action for at least five reasons: (1) absent federal intervention, common-law and statutory doctrines, as well as voluntary conduct and natural free-market forces, would have restrained the emergence of censorship and suppression of speech of disfavored speakers, content, and viewpoint on social media; and yet (2) through Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) and other actions, the federal government subsidized, fostered, encouraged, and empowered the creation of a small number of massive social-media companies with disproportionate ability to censor and suppress speech on the basis of speaker, content, and viewpoint; (3) such inducements as Section 230 and other legal benefits (such as the absence of antitrust enforcement) constitute an immensely valuable benefit to social-media platforms and incentive to do the bidding of federal officials; (4) federal officials—including, most notably, certain Defendants herein—have repeatedly and aggressively threatened to remove these legal benefits and impose other adverse consequences on social-media platforms if they do not aggressively censor and suppress disfavored speakers, content, and viewpoints on their platforms; and (5) Defendants herein, colluding and coordinating with each other, have also directly coordinated and colluded with social-media platforms to identify disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content and thus have procured the actual censorship and suppression of the freedom of speech. These factors are both individually and collectively sufficient to establish government action in the censorship and suppression of social-media speech, especially given the inherent power imbalance: not only do the government actors here have the power to penalize noncompliant companies, but they have threatened to exercise that authority.
After firing unvaccinated workers, Hershey’s says it can’t make enough candy for Halloween – blames Putin
By Ethan Huff – Collapse News – 08/07/2022
If there is even still a recognizable America later this fall, you can expect to see a whole lot less candy in your child’s Halloween bag.
According to reports, The Hershey Company is facing “capacity constraints” that will greatly reduce the output of candy in the coming months, resulting in demand exceeding supply. And get this: Hershey’s is blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin for its self-induced problems.
Earlier in the year, you may recall, Hershey’s fired all of its unvaccinated employees, which created a worker shortage. Now, company CEO Michele Buck wants to blame Putin, “supply chain issues,” and everything else other than herself for Hershey’s going down the tubes.
Buck made these and other false accusations against others for her company’s fate during a recent quarterly earnings call with investors. In a nutshell, Hershey’s will not have the capacity to maintain output in anticipation of its busiest holiday because it previously engaged in medical fascism against its un-jabbed employees.
“We had a strategy of prioritizing everyday, on-shelf availability,” Buck stated during the call, explaining that the company uses the same equipment to produce both everyday and specialty holiday items. (Related: Remember when Hershey’s was caught engaging in illegal price fixing?)
“It was a tough decision to balance that with the seasons, but we thought that was really important. And so that was a choice that we needed to make. We had [an] opportunity to deliver more Halloween [candy], but we weren’t able to supply that.”
How is it Russia’s fault that Hershey’s fired all of its unvaccinated employees?
Consumer engagement with Hershey’s, all things considered, is expected to remain high, according to Buck. The problem is that the company no longer has the capacity to deliver, thanks to the unvaccinated employees it “separated from the company.”
From now on, Buck indicated, Hershey’s “will not be able to fully meet consumer demand due to capacity restraints” – a deflective way of admitting that she and others in the executive leadership team at Hershey’s screwed up big time.
Buck expects “high single-digit growth” for Hershey’s during Halloween and Christmas, which she says she feels “really good about.” Perhaps there will even be more capacity during that time, she hinted.
Is Hershey’s planning to hire more workers to meet demand? Or perhaps a better way of wording that question is: Will Hershey’s be able to find anyone who isn’t already sick and dying from Fauci Flu shots who is willing to work for the company going into the holiday season?
Buck seems to think this might happen, all while she shifts the blame onto Putin and the “Russian invasion” for her company’s decline.
“I think generally we continue to see struggles across the supply chain,” Buck stated.
“We’re now starting to see bigger concerns relative to scarcity of ingredients needing to leverage different suppliers at higher cost and price points in order to secure production.”
A whopping 10 percent of annual sales at Hershey’s occur during the Halloween season. If the company is unable to meet demand – which seems likely – then it will face a major revenue hit, which is certainly of interest to shareholders.
“This is the same company that about 15 years ago almost shut down because it couldn’t figure out how to put in a new enterprise system (SAP),” wrote a commenter at The Epoch Times.
“I’m sure that Nestlé and Mars will figure out how to take advantage of this company’s incompetence.”
Another wrote that because Hershey’s fired its unvaccinated employees in a demonstration of medical tyranny, consumers should do the same by firing Hershey’s and not buying any more of its products.
Hampshire UK police end re-education classes as a punishment for tweets
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | August 8, 2022
The police in the UK continue to struggle with (re)defining their role in society, specifically as to whether or not it includes figuratively, but also at times literally, policing online free speech.
And that includes making sure people are investigated, and even prosecuted and fined for including such “crimes” as sharing memes on social networks.
In at least one instance, in Hampshire Constabulary, the “verdict” now seems to be a “no” – as in, that’s just not right. At least that’s the impression now as a “hate crime awareness reeducation” program has been dropped by the local Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), amid what looks like major controversy.
This constabulary was among three that incorporated the course, designed to “teach” officers how to become aware and then deal with racism, sexism, misogyny, and transphobia.
But it all went very much south in Hampshire when the scheme – that looks as flimsy and ill-thought-through as those deployed elsewhere – caught in its net a 51-year-old army veteran, who was told his choices were to either get “reeducated” – and pay a fine for this “course” – or face legal prosecution.
The vet, Darren Brady, was eventually handcuffed and arrested in his home and after learning about his suspected “crime” was tapping the “share” icon on a meme he saw online. The meme did not seem supportive at all of the “Gay Pride” imagery.
In fact, it was the opposite of the accepted narratives – like memes mostly do. In this case, it showed the “Progress Pride” flags arranged into the shape of a swastika.
The report Brady received by the police contained the accusation of “causing anxiety.”
If the army veteran meant to express that the “thought police” of the “classic” Nazi era were as bad in treating any topic they didn’t like, as those coming after a particular free speech opinion on anything these days – the Hampshire police’s reaction highly likely assured him he was right.
But Darren Brady wasn’t having any of it, though, and maintained that his choice to retweet the meme was legal, and legitimate.
“I am concerned about both the proportionality and necessity of the police’s response to this incident,” Hampshire PCC Donna Jones eventually announced. “When incidents on social media receive not one but two visits from police officers, but burglaries and non-domestic break-ins don’t always get a police response, something is wrong,” Jones said.
Pentagon doles out another $1 billion in Ukraine aid
Samizdat | August 8, 2022
The US Department of Defense has announced its largest military aid package for Kiev since the Russia-Ukraine conflict began in February, planning an additional $1 billion in weapons shipments to the former Soviet republic.
The latest batch of weaponry was approved under President Joe Biden’s so-called “drawdown authority,” the 18th such package for Ukraine, the Pentagon said on Monday. It will include more ammunition for the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) launchers that the US previously sent to Ukraine, as well as 1,000 Javelin anti-tank missiles, C-4 explosives, Claymore anti-personnel mines, and tens of thousands of artillery and anti-aircraft rounds.
The Pentagon also plans to provide 50 armored medical treatment vehicles, plus more pallets of medical supplies and equipment. Biden has now approved about $9.8 billion in military aid to Kiev since he took office in January 2021, including $9 billion since Russian tanks rolled across Ukraine’s borders. Congress approved $40 billion in overall new aid to Ukraine in May after previously providing $13.6 billion.
“To meet Ukraine’s evolving battlefield requirements, the United States will continue to work with its allies and partners to provide Ukraine with key capabilities calibrated to make a difference,” the Pentagon said. The latest aid package includes the types of weaponry “the Ukrainian people are using so effectively to defend their country.”
Ukrainian officials have touted the effectiveness of the US-made HIMARS system, calling it a “game-changer” on the battlefield. However, the Russian Defense Ministry has claimed to have destroyed six of the 16 HIMARS launchers that the US has sent to Ukraine, as well as ammunition stockpiles.
Only about 30% of the weapons sent to Ukraine by the US and its allies have actually made it to the front lines, according to a CBS News investigative report that was released on Thursday. Getting weapons to the troops involves navigating a complex network of “power lords, oligarchs [and] political players,” the outlet cited Lithuanian aid group founder Jonas Ohman as saying. However, facing pressure from the Ukrainian government and its supporters, CBS censored itself on Sunday, deciding to cancel a documentary that it had planned to broadcast on the issue and revising the text version of its report.
There is No Food Crisis – If Only We Stopped Burning it as ‘Green’ Biofuel
BY DAVID CRAIG | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | AUGUST 8, 2022
We’ve all been bombarded daily with horror stories about how food prices are being forced up and hundreds of millions of the world’s poorest risk starvation because the Russian invasion of Ukraine has prevented exports of grain and sunflower oil.
Well, let me give you some figures our politicians and the mainstream media don’t want to mention. They don’t mention these figures because these figures undermine the disastrous global-warming, climate-catastrophist, Net-Zero policies being forced on us by our rulers.
The U.S. produces abut 384 million metric tonnes of corn each year and around 50 million tonnes of wheat. Ukraine produces about 38 million tonnes of corn each year and around 33 million tonnes of wheat. Around 20 million tonnes of Ukraine’s wheat is exported each year.
Conclusion 1: The U.S. produces an awful lot more food than Ukraine.
But let’s look at how all the USA’s corn and wheat is actually used. Over a third of the USA’s corn – that’s more than 128 million tonnes of the USA’s corn production – is used to make biofuels rather than being used for human consumption.
It’s more difficult to find out how much of the U.S.’s 38 million tonnes of wheat is used for biofuels, but it may be as much as a quarter. However, we do know that in the European Union, 12 million tonnes of grain, including wheat and maize, is turned into ethanol – around 7% of the bloc’s production. It’s estimated that this is enough food to feed around 150 million people if it wasn’t being used for transport fuel.
Also just in the EU, 3.5 million tonnes of palm oil is used to make biodiesel. That’s almost the amount of sunflower oil coming out of Ukraine and Russia combined.
Conclusion 2: We’re burning food rather than using it to feed people.
You may have noticed that last year the petrol you buy changed from something called ‘E5’ to ‘E10’. E5 petrol is petrol containing 5% biofuel and E10 is, of course, petrol containing 10% biofuel.
According to calculations done by scientists at Princeton University, if the U.S. and Europe were to decrease their use of ethanol made from grain by 50% – that would mean just moving back from E10 petrol to E5 petrol – they would effectively have sufficient extra crops to replace all of Ukraine’s exports of grain.
If our rulers were to completely scrap the biofuel mandates they have imposed on us, the world would be awash with food and food prices would fall significantly. Then the only reason for hungry people would be distribution problems caused by mismanagement, corruption and conflict.
When the EU first mandated that 2.5% of all fuel sold in the EU should be made from biofuels, worldwide food prices shot up – wheat, for example, doubled in price – and the UN’s Rapporteur for Food said: “It is a crime against humanity to convert agricultural productive soil into soil which produces food stuff that will be burned into biofuel.”
He further argued that biofuels would only lead to further hunger in a world where an estimated 854 million people – one out of six in 2007 – already suffered from the scourge; 100,000 people died from hunger or its immediate consequences every day; and every five seconds, a child died from hunger
We’re now at 10% biofuels and, if I have understood correctly, following new climate change legislation passed in the U.S. last week, the biofuel content of petrol may be increased even further. This will mean diverting more potential food to fuel production at a time of world food shortages and rocketing food prices.
This is madness. But it get worse. Biofuels are less efficient than fossil fuels – you get fewer miles or kilometres per litre or gallon and they damage car engines more than fossil fuels. Moreover, the huge amounts of energy required to produce biofuels mean that they are probably more environmentally-damaging than fossil fuels.
Scrapping the biofuels mandates in the U.S. and EU isn’t something that would take years or months to implement. It could be done this week and the results – more food availability and falling food prices – would happen immediately.
So, why won’t our rulers do this? Moreover, why do they seem to be moving in the opposite direction – by pushing ever more food into fuel production?
It could just be utter incompetence. Or it could be fear of a storm of criticism by the ever more vociferous climate-catastrophist lobby. It could be that they are trapped by their own save-the-planet virtue-signalling. Or it could be the classic reaction of politicians and bureaucracies – the more evidence emerges that their policies are misguided, the more they double down on those policies as they can never admit that they got it wrong.
However, for the conspiracy theorists, there’s a fifth possibility – that our rulers are acting together to deliberately restrict food production, push up food prices and impoverish us all as a means of increasing their control over us.
You can choose which of the five possibilities – incompetence, fear of the climate catastrophists, feeling trapped by their own subservience to the climate-catastrophist cult, doubling down on misguided policies or conspiracy against us – you believe is the most credible explanation of the current food crisis.
David Craig is the author of There is No Climate Crisis, available as an e-book or paperback from Amazon.
EU Robbing Global South of Cheap Gas in Quest to Replace Lost Russian Supplies
Samizdat – 08.08.2022
The European Union is in the throes of an unprecedented energy crisis after taking steps to reduce dependence on Russian oil, natural gas, and coal to “punish” Moscow for its military operation in Ukraine. Skyrocketing energy prices and falling availability have sparked growing concerns about bloc countries’ fate come winter.
European countries are resolving the energy shortfall at home by outbidding developing nations for gas contracts, “increasing the misery of millions of people,” and threatening to plunge entire countries into chaos, Handelsblatt reports.
“While Europe fears supply shortages in winter, the energy crisis has already hit other parts of the world with full force. In Bangladesh’s capital Dhaka, power supply is not guaranteed even in hospitals. Young mothers report on how they torment themselves with their newborns during hot summer nights because even fans cannot be switched on,” Handelsblatt contributor Mathias Peer wrote.
A similar situation is seen in Pakistan, which has experienced “one power blackout after another,” and “also as a consequence of Europe’s failed energy policy,” Peer indicated.
The observer explained that the EU’s headlong rush to reduce dependence on Russian gas has triggered “massive turbulence on global energy markets,” with fleets of liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers which ordinarily carry cargoes to Asia diverted to Europe instead.
“In the bidding competition for deliveries, states like Bangladesh, whose per capita income is 95 percent below that of Germany, have what has become a hopeless mission,” losing out on contracts, resulting in the paralysis of gas-fueled power plants “and massive problems for hundreds of millions of people in the affected countries,” Peer noted.
The Handelsblatt contributor suggested that it was “all too understandable” for the EU to try to reduce its dependence on Russian energy in the wake of the Ukraine crisis, and suggested that Europe is not to blame for the energy crisis.
“But Europe’s attempt to find alternatives must not be at the expense of uninvolved third countries. It is the EU’s responsibility to ensure that by solving its supply shortages, not further aggravate the crisis in other countries. Reducing consumption must therefore take priority over diverting resources from other parts of the world, and in this regard the European gas contingency plan is far from being ambitious enough,” the observer suggested.
Peer emphasized that a more “considerate approach” is needed to stop Brussels from continuing to “play into [Vladimir] Putin’s hands.”
“His propaganda – which states that it is not Russia but the West and its sanctions that are responsible for the current crisis – is already affecting many more people in emerging countries than Europe would like,” the columnist concluded.
The crisis in Ukraine as well as US and EU moves to curb Russian energy and food exports to the West and other countries have served to exacerbate the inflation, energy price crunch, and global hunger crises which have accumulated over the past two years after the breakdown of the world economy thanks to COVID. President Vladimir Putin has characterized Brussels’ push to wean itself off Russian energy as “suicidal,” and warned that higher energy costs would collapse the bloc’s economic competitiveness.
The energy crisis has prompted European countries to begin a search for new sources of energy in Africa, including Algeria, Nigeria, and Tanzania. However, even before the escalation of the Ukraine crisis, some African leaders have resisted the new European energy “scramble for Africa,” with Algeria shutting off the taps to Spain over Madrid’s support for Morocco in the dispute over Western Sahara, and Nigerian Environment Minister Mohammad Mahmood Abubakar accusing developed nations of spending years starving Africa’s natural gas projects of funds on the grounds that they contribute to climate change.
Pelosi’s Taiwan Trip Exposes Foolishness of Interventionism
By Ron Paul | August 8, 2022
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s “surprise” trip to Taiwan last week should be “Exhibit A” as to why interventionism is dangerous, deadly, and dumb. Though she claimed her visit won some sort of victory for democracy over autocracy, the stopover achieved nothing of the sort. It was a pointless gesture that brought us closer to military conflict with zero benefits.
As Col. Doug Macgregor said of Pelosi’s trip on a recent episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight, “statesmanship involves advancing American interests at the least cost to the American people. None of that is in play here. … Posturing is not statesmanship.”
Pelosi’s trip was no outlier. Such counterproductive posturing is much celebrated by both parties in Washington. Neoconservative Senators Bob Menendez and Lindsey Graham were thrilled with Pelosi’s stop in Taipei and used it as a springboard to push for new legislation that would essentially declare war on China by declaring Taiwan a “major non-NATO ally.”
The “one China” policy that, while perhaps not perfect, has kept the peace for more than 40 years is to be scrapped and replaced with one sure to provoke a war. Who benefits?
Foolishly taking the US to the brink of war with Russia over Ukraine is evidently not enough for Washington’s bipartisan warmongering class. Risking a nuclear war on two fronts, with both Russia and China, is apparently the only way for Washington to show the rest of the world it’s serious.
The Washington Post’s neoconservative columnist Josh Rogin accurately captures the mindset in Washington DC with a recent article titled, “The skeptics are wrong: The US can confront both China and Russia.”
For Washington’s foreign policy “experts,” those of us who don’t believe a war with both Russia and China is a great idea are written off as “skeptics.” Count me as one of the skeptics!
During the Cold War there were times of heightened tension, but even in the darkest days the idea that nuclear war with China and the Soviet Union could be a solution was held only by a few madmen. Now, with the ideological struggles of the Cold War a decades-old memory, such an argument makes even less sense. Yet this is what Washington is selling.
The US fighting a proxy war with Russia through Ukraine and Nancy Pelosi provoking China nearly to the point of war over Taiwan is meant to show the world how tough we are. In reality, it demonstrates the opposite. The drunken man in a bar challenging everyone to a fight is not tough. He’s foolish. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose from his display of bravado.
That is interventionism at its core: a foolish policy that provokes nothing but anger overseas, benefits no one in the US except the special interests, and leaves the rest of us much poorer and worse off.
There may be plenty to criticize about China’s government and policies. They are far from perfect, particularly in protection of civil liberties. But have we already forgotten that our own government shut down the country for two years over a virus, and then forced a huge number of Americans to take an experimental shot that is proving to be as worthless as it is dangerous? Let’s look at the log in our own eye before we start lobbing missiles overseas.
Copyright © 2022 by RonPaul Institute
Here Are The Winners And Losers In The ‘Inflation Reduction Act’
By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | August 8, 2022
As Democrats pat themselves on the back after the Senate finally passed their massive tax, climate, and healthcare bill – the “Inflation Reduction Act” which Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called “one of the most significant pieces of legislation passed in a decade,” Bloomberg has compiled a list of winners and losers.
Not only did none of the billions in tax increases Democrats threatened high-earners with last year make it into the final version of the bill, their plans to ‘tax the 1%’ turned out to be nothing more than a big virtue signal.
Private equity fund managers
As we noted on Friday, the landmark bill only passed after AZ Sen. Kyrsten Sinema insisted on keeping the carried-interest loophole that allows investment managers (like her former bosses) to shield the majority of their income from higher taxes.
The private equity industry was able to gain an additional win shortly before the final passage of the bill when a handful of Democrats broke with their party to vote on a Republican amendment that created a carveout for private equity-owned companies in the corporate minimum tax. -Bloomberg
Manchin and Sinema were big winners – after having held their party hostage for more than a year over this legislation, “The entire contents of the bill were essentially cherry-picked by Manchin and then tweaked to fit Sinema’s preferences,” according to the report.
The two were also able to score direct benefits for their states – with Manchin securing an agreement to permit the completion of the Equitrans Midstream Corp.’s Mountain Valley Pipeline, and Sinema – who was able to secure $4 billion in drought relief for western states.
The IRS And The Green agenda
The bill will give $80 billion to the IRS over the next 10 years to expand its audit capabilities, as well as a bevy of technology upgrades.
Meanwhile, electric carmakers got an extension of a popular $7,500 per vehicle customer tax credit for EVs, but will have to comply with strict battery and critical minerals sourcing requirements demanded by Sinema and Manchin – which could render the credits useless for years.
Solar and hydrogen companies, such as Sunrun and Plug Power, Inc. will also benefit from generous tax credits, while operators of nuclear reactors such as Southern Co., Constellation Energy Corp., Public Service Enterprise Group Inc. and Energy Harbor Corp. could benefit from a $30 billion production tax credit.
Medicare, Obamacare Enrolees
The final version of the bill caps seniors’ out-of-pocket prescription drug expenses to $2,000 per year, and enables Medicare to negotiate the prices on 10 medications four years from now. Th bill also kicks the can on a massive increase in Obamacare premiums that were set to happen in January for many middle income Americans, which will now happen in three years.
LOSERS:
Republicans who thought Manchin and Sinema wouldn’t cave on their promises to raise taxes during a recession.
The GOP was confident they had beaten back Biden’s tax and climate agenda and were stunned in late July when Schumer and Manchin announced a deal. While still the favorites to gain seats in the midterm elections, passage of the bill is a major setback for the GOP’s policy aims. It does, however, give them a new issue to campaign on in the fall campaigns. -Bloomberg
Other losers include tech companies – that will bear the brunt of two major tax increases in the bill; a 15% minimum tax on financial statement profits, and a new levy on stock buybacks which have allowed companies like Alphabet’s Google and Meta’s Facebook to minimize their tax burden over the years.
SALT – the ability to deduct state and local taxes, a $10,000 cap which coastal Democrats were hoping to repeal.
Bernie Sanders – who Bloomberg notes wanted $6 trillion in spending, making the $437 billion in new spending a far cry from success. Excluded from the bill is all proposals for new social programs, including tuition-free-college, child care, housing spending and an expanded-child monthly tax credit.
Russia suspends US inspections of nuclear military sites
Samizdat | August 8, 2022
Moscow has informed Washington of a “temporary withdrawal” from the inspection regime under the START nuclear disarmament treaty, the Russian Foreign Ministry said on Monday. Citing treaty provisions for “exceptional circumstances,” Russia is saying the Western sanctions have prevented its inspectors from performing their duties, thus giving US inspectors an unfair advantage. Once the principle of parity and equality is restored, the inspections will resume, Russia said.
Moscow cited “anti-Russian unilateral restrictive measures” imposed by the US and its allies, such as visa restrictions on Russian inspectors and a ban on Russian aircraft in US and EU airspace. These restrictions effectively make Russian inspections under the treaty impossible, while the Americans “do not experience such difficulties.”
“The Russian Federation is now forced to resort to this measure as a result of Washington’s persistent desire to implicitly achieve a restart of inspection activities on conditions that do not take into account existing realities, create unilateral advantages for the United States and effectively deprive the Russian Federation of the right to carry out inspections on American soil,” the Foreign Ministry said.
Russia “raised this issue with the relevant countries, but did not receive an answer.” Until these problems are resolved, “it would be premature to resume inspection activities under the START Treaty, on which the American side insists.”
As justification for the measure, Moscow cited the relevant section of the treaty protocol that covers extraordinary circumstances. Washington has been officially informed through diplomatic channels.
“We would like to emphasize that the measures we have taken are temporary. Russia is fully committed to complying with all the provisions of the START Treaty, which in our eyes is the most important instrument for maintaining international security and stability,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said.
As soon as the “existing problematic issues” are resolved, the inspections can resume again in full, according to Moscow.
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (known as New START) went into effect in 2011, and limits the number of nuclear warheads and their delivery vehicles that the US and Russia are allowed to possess. It is the only remaining arms control agreement between the two nuclear powers, after the US withdrawal from the INF and Open Skies treaties in recent years. New START almost expired before it was extended in February 2021, and is supposed to remain in effect until 2026.
Though US President Joe Biden said he had offered Russia talks on a new treaty, which would include China as well, Moscow said last week that it had received only “declarative statements” and not concrete proposals.
Pentagon-hired contractors ‘everywhere on battlefield’ in Ukraine
Samizdat | August 8, 2022
Ukrainian forces have “had the American military at their side” from the start of the conflict with Russia, the magazine Causeur cited a “well-placed analyst” in French intelligence as saying. Pentagon-hired contractors are allegedly “everywhere on the battlefield.”
The claim was published by the right-leaning outlet last week in an analysis of the five-month-long Russia-Ukraine conflict, which, it stated, “is not the fight of David against Goliath,” contrary to what many people believe.
“In Ukraine, the Pentagon for the first time subcontracted large-scale warfare,” the magazine cited its source as saying. These “mercenaries” come in addition to the “gigantic” military aid provided to Kiev by Washington, and are not necessarily frontline fighters, according to Causeur.
As an example of ‘subcontracted’ warfare, it cited the widely-publicized supply of SpaceX satellite internet access for Ukrainian military officials. CEO Elon Musk initially framed this as an act of charitable support, but media reports later revealed that it was paid for with US taxpayer money.
The US decided not to involve its troops in Ukraine, claiming it did not want a direct confrontation with Russia. However, the French magazine said Washington is apparently ignoring the threat of escalation as it pours weapons and private manpower into Ukraine for the sake of “bleeding” Russia, which, the US government hopes, will result in a strategic defeat for Moscow.
The magazine also said that Russia appears to be slowly gaining the upper hand over Ukraine as its superior firepower is prevailing over Kiev’s eight-year preparations for a fight for Donbass. The heavy damage caused by Russian artillery and aerial forces have led to dissertations and insubordination among the Ukrainian troops, it said. If the Russian forces progress beyond the heavily urbanized Donbass with its unfavorable terrain, the balance of power could quickly shift in Moscow’s favor, the report said.
Russia sent troops into Ukraine on February 24, citing Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk agreements, designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. The protocols, brokered by Germany and France, were first signed in 2014. Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has since admitted that Kiev’s main goal was to use the ceasefire to buy time and “create powerful armed forces.”
In February 2022, the Kremlin recognized the Donbass republics as independent states and demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join any Western military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked.
Zaporozhye Region Announces Vote on Joining Russia
Samizdat | August 8, 2022
Zaporozhye Region will hold a referendum on whether to secede from Ukraine and request joining Russia, the head of its administration announced on Monday.
Evgeny Balitskiy said that he had signed an order to organize the plebiscite during a regional forum held in the city of Melitopol. Over 700 representatives from various parts of the Ukrainian region approved the idea, according to RIA Novosti.
Earlier comments by administration officials indicated the referendum may be held as soon as mid-September.
Russian forces took partial control of the region during the initial offensive against Ukraine launched in late February. The eponymous city located in the north of the region on the Dnepr River remains under Ukrainian control.
Officials in Kherson Region, another Russia-controlled part of Ukraine, voiced similar plans to put to a vote the proposal of breaking away from Kiev and seeking to join Russia.
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky on Sunday reiterated a warning that if the two regions go through with their plans, Kiev will break off all talks with Russia. Moscow in response suggested that the Ukrainian president should address the citizens of those regions.
“The thing is, this is what the residents of the region plan. It’s not like we [Russia] are holding a referendum. Here, apparently, it is necessary to understand to whom Zelensky is addressing this statement – to the citizens of Ukraine of the mentioned regions or to the citizens of Russia? If it’s to the citizens and leadership of Russia, then we are the wrong address,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented on Monday.
There have been no peace talks between Russia and Ukraine for months, as Kiev rejected such contacts and claimed it would only negotiate after defeating Russian on the battlefield with the help of Western military aid.
Before the talks broke off, the two nations appeared to have made progress in resolving their differences. During a meeting in Istanbul in late March, Kiev had pledged to become a neutral country and accept restrictions on its military. Moscow said it prepared a draft peace agreement based on those proposals, but Ukraine never responded.
An indirect Russian-Ukrainian deal was mediated last month by the UN and Turkey to allow grain exports from three Ukrainian ports to resume via the Black Sea. The scheme was formalized in two separate agreements that were signed by Russia and Ukraine with the other two parties.
Russia sent troops into Ukraine on February 24, citing Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk agreements, designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. The protocols, brokered by Germany and France, were first signed in 2014. Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has since admitted that Kiev’s main goal was to use the ceasefire to buy time and “create powerful armed forces.”
In February 2022, the Kremlin recognized the Donbass republics as independent states and demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join any Western military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked.