Putin Promises 'Immediate' Peace if Ukraine Drops NATO Bid and Cedes Occupied Territories

[beautifulthailand99]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps so, but Hitler didn't have the means to inflict nuclear winter on the planet.

This is the biggie - we are playing poker against a player that has a suitcase of money next to his chair who if we rasie the stakes too high he bring's it out and he says bust. Or we call his bluff. Oh but the US dod drop the A-bomb on 2 cities. So we know who would.

 

My brother's daughter went out with a British nuclear submariner for a while and I had a good chat with him. He said it wasn't the Russians they were wortied about it was always the Americans. They may just do it. Because ''freedom"'.

[beautifulthailand99]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm well aware of that. Britain had run it's military down during the 30s to the point it wasn't capable of defeating Germany. If not for Churchill it would probably have been easily defeated by Germany after war was declared, and it was a miracle that the army in France wasn't captured by Germany.

Sound familiar?

 

Europe and many western countries have run down their militaries to almost insignificance since the cold war ended.

NZ can't even find an air force plane that won't break down to take the PM to overseas functions.

 

We've got an election going on in the UK - no-one is talking about defence it is all about the NHS, pensions, education, the state of the countries infrastructure , the cost of living , housing ect. There is a lot of sympathy for Ukraine and a lot of displeasure at Russia but if people were given the stark choice as to guns or butter in a straight debate (which they won't be given) I know which they would choose.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, jas007 said:

ust out of curiosity, when did I say the U.S. “invaded” Cuba?  And I don’t consider the Bay of Pigs fiasco to be an “invasion.”  The real military could have done better than that.

I was responding to a post of yours that was in reply to a poster I have on ignore and somewhere invasion came up. You yourself didn't mention invasion.

 

The Bay of Pigs didn't involve US assets which was why it failed. Kennedy got that right. Saving Cuba for the US mafia would not have been a good idea.

[thaibeachlovers]

13 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

We've got an election going on in the UK - no-one is talking about defence it is all about the NHS, pensions, education, the state of the countries infrastructure , the cost of living , housing ect. There is a lot of sympathy for Ukraine and a lot of displeasure at Russia but if people were given the stark choice as to guns or butter in a straight debate (which they won't be given) I know which they would choose.

 

 

Hopefully the UK population have realised that being USA's poodle in wars based on lies is not a good idea.

Is any party saying they will stop funding the Ukranians? If not, perhaps the electorate needs to give them a wake up call.

[beautifulthailand99]

17 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Hopefully the UK population have realised that being USA's poodle in wars based on lies is not a good idea.

Is any party saying they will stop funding the Ukranians? If not, perhaps the electorate needs to give them a wake up call.

Not the major ones they are all onboard with the project and will be post election. If Trump pulls the plug though then the cost to make the Ukrainian reisistance effective will rise steeply and we will get the stragglers saying well if that's the cost can we get a rain check ?  Orban has alredy checked out and NATO let him. Meloni a  year ago let on that Ukrainian fatigue has set in and they wanted an out.

 

Just seen Ukraine is asking for haircuts on their bonds - in the example that kwonitoy highlighted the bond is backed by the Canadian goverment so I guess in that instance if this happened the Canadian taxpayers would be on the hook for the money. This is funding by stealth where the debtor is effectively determining the payments on the loan.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/a0d993ea-48fb-4839-8e51-281f0602bb62

 

Ukraine has urged international bondholders to accept deep cuts on $23bn of debt to help finance the nation’s war effort, after initial talks failed to produce a deal two months before a payment standstill runs out.

Bondholders turned down a proposal by Ukraine to reduce the value of foreign currency bonds by up to 60 per cent in negotiations this month, Ukraine’s finance ministry said.

An investor committee that represents holders of around 20 per cent of the bonds instead proposed cuts of just over 22 per cent, but the IMF said that this would fail key debt targets, according to the ministry.

“Strong armies must be underpinned by strong economies to win wars”, said the country’s finance minister Sergii Marchenko.

 

And Germany needs the gas - for European partners total war it ain't.

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-blocks-first-ever-sanctions-russian-gas/

 

The crux of the package was to ban countries from re-exporting Russian LNG from EU ports and financing planned Arctic and Baltic LNG terminals.

“Once upon a time, it was said that we should always blame … Hungary — and now it’s Germany,” said one diplomat familiar with discussions on the package, referring to Hungary’s habit of blocking earlier packages of sanctions.

Belgium — which currently chairs EU country negotiations — was forced to split talks on the package into two separate discussions amid German opposition to new sanctions against Belarus.

Edited June 17 by beautifulthailand99

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Not the major ones they are all onboard with the project and will be post election. If Trump pulls the plug though then the cost to make the Ukrainian reisistance effective will rise steeply and we will get the stragglers saying well if that's the cost can we get a rain check ?  Orban has alredy checked out and NATO let him. Meloni a  year ago let on that Ukrainian fatigue has set in and they wanted an out.

 

Just seen Ukraine is asking for haircuts on their bonds - in the example that kwonitoy highlighted the bond is backed by the Canadian goverment so I guess in that instance if this happened the Canadian taxpayers would be on the hook for the money. This is funding by stealth where the debtor is effectively determining the payments on the loan.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/a0d993ea-48fb-4839-8e51-281f0602bb62

 

Ukraine has urged international bondholders to accept deep cuts on $23bn of debt to help finance the nation’s war effort, after initial talks failed to produce a deal two months before a payment standstill runs out.

Bondholders turned down a proposal by Ukraine to reduce the value of foreign currency bonds by up to 60 per cent in negotiations this month, Ukraine’s finance ministry said.

An investor committee that represents holders of around 20 per cent of the bonds instead proposed cuts of just over 22 per cent, but the IMF said that this would fail key debt targets, according to the ministry.

“Strong armies must be underpinned by strong economies to win wars”, said the country’s finance minister Sergii Marchenko.

Oh dear oh dear oh dear, it's all going wrong for Zelensky and his backers. Never mind, the west has deep pockets to bail him out, and the taxpayers of the west will be grateful to be given the opportunity to buy more missiles for Ukraine, even if they can't get an ambulance when they need one.

[beautifulthailand99]

9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Oh dear oh dear oh dear, it's all going wrong for Zelensky and his backers. Never mind, the west has deep pockets to bail him out, and the taxpayers of the west will be grateful to be given the opportunity to buy more missiles for Ukraine, even if they can't get an ambulance when they need one.

If you keep pulling debt default threats then you force a situation where you will struggle to sell any bonds unless cast-iron goverment guarantees backstops them and it that scenario it's an open ended uncosted check from taxpayers. A year ago there was an apparently a pile on when the Russians looked to be losing.

 

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/bonds/ukrainian-debt-emerging-market-asset-investing-russia-wagner-mutiny-counteroffensive-2023-6

 

Ukrainian debt is now one of the hottest areas of emerging-market investing as Russian setbacks lift Kyiv's economic prospects.

Ukraine's sovereign dollar bonds have returned over 30% in the second quarter, beating other emerging markets, Bloomberg data show.

The gains were also concentrated this month, which saw the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive. While reports indicate slow progress, Ukraine's military has made steady advances, with the bulk of its Western-trained and equipped forces still waiting to deploy to the frontlines for a decisive surge.

Edited June 17 by beautifulthailand99

[LosLobo]

19 hours ago, jas007 said:

$51 trillion dollars won’t put boots on the ground. The U.S. has a big navy and advanced aircraft, but does not have the necessary equipment in place to materially change the course of the war at this point. Not the manpower, not the equipment. Nor does the rest of NATO.  Currently, the big bad Navy can’t even stop the Houthi in Yemen, and Ukraine doesn’t have many modern  aircraft and won’t have them anytime soon in close proximity to the battles. Aircraft have to be refueled . Aircraft have to be maintained. Tanks must be refueled. Tanks must be maintained. All of that requires a substantial military presence in close proximity to the front lines. It’s just not available and won’t be anytime soon. Place any of that stuff where it needs to be and it’s a legitimate target for Russia. And if this war is escalated, what happens next is anyone’s guess, but the outcome could be tragic. The West isn’t as powerful as you seem to think it is. Money, yes. Military might, not so much, unless nukes enter the equation. Too many people are simply delusional.  That’s the problem.  
 

As for “vastly superior advanced technology”?  That’s just propaganda. For all practical purposes, Russia has all the same technology the West has. That wasn’t the case in the 90s, perhaps, but today, it’s a different world. One could argue that Russia is better equipped for purposes of a ground war in Eastern Europe. The U.S. combat forces have not unlike what was used to fight WW II. Even today, much of the equipment is from the 1990s. Outdated.
 

As for no “exchangeable currency”?  You mean other than within BRICS?  Surely you must know that there are customers for Russia”s oil, gas, and other resources. They aren’t giving that stuff away.  All the US sanctions have done is weaken the U.S. dollar.  Weaken the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.  What do you think BRICS is all about?  Much of the world is fed up with the continued devaluation of the dollar. A devaluation caused, in part, to fund wars to drop bombs on the very people who put their faith in the stability of the dollar.  They buy US bonds, and  how are they rewarded? By the theft of their money. Loaning money to the U.S. at negative interest rates is probably not the best idea. 

Interesting unsupported opinion.

[jas007]

6 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Interesting unsupported opinion.

Unsupported?  
 

What do you want, some sort of link “supporting” every assertion in every post? As if a link to some website proves anything. I guess some people are easily fooled. “Gee, here’s a link to the New York Times. I guess the content must be true.”  Do you realize that’s not necessarily the case? These days, a link to any particular piece of  “news” is likely to be part of the mainstream narrative. In other words, a lie from the spin doctors. So why play games? Why pretend a link to a website proves anything? About the only thing I read in the mainstream media these days that I take at face value is when they post what day it is.  I sometimes have to look that up.

[dhupverg]

17 minutes ago, jas007 said:

Unsupported?  
 

What do you want, some sort of link “supporting” every assertion in every post? As if a link to some website proves anything. I guess some people are easily fooled. “Gee, here’s a link to the New York Times. I guess the content must be true.”  Do you realize that’s not necessarily the case? These days, a link to any particular piece of  “news” is likely to be part of the mainstream narrative. In other words, a lie from the spin doctors. So why play games? Why pretend a link to a website proves anything? About the only thing I read in the mainstream media these days that I take at face value is when they post what day it is.  I sometimes have to look that up.

If people haven't figured out yet that the "news" is actually propoganda, well, I have a bridge they can buy close to Lanta.  

All you need to do is look back at some news casts from the 50's-80's and  the news was actually pretty unbiased reporting.  Compare that today with the narrative supporting whatever the talking points are that are given to the talking heads in front of a  camera.

 

Heres a pretty funny example.  Just today KJP is trying to spin Biden freezing at his fundraiser as a "deep fake".  Too bad for her there were mutiple camera angles taken from different people all showing the same thing.  Obama having to escort the freezer in chief off the stage.  KJP saying that it's a deep fake is a bold faced lie and propoganda.  Back in the old days, Brinkley, Kronkite etc. would have called it like they saw it.

 

 

[LosLobo]

40 minutes ago, jas007 said:

Unsupported?  
 

What do you want, some sort of link “supporting” every assertion in every post? As if a link to some website proves anything. I guess some people are easily fooled. “Gee, here’s a link to the New York Times. I guess the content must be true.”  Do you realize that’s not necessarily the case? These days, a link to any particular piece of  “news” is likely to be part of the mainstream narrative. In other words, a lie from the spin doctors. So why play games? Why pretend a link to a website proves anything? About the only thing I read in the mainstream media these days that I take at face value is when they post what day it is.  I sometimes have to look that up.

 

If you need to look up what day of the week it is I suggest you should leave posting to others.

'If someone's opinions or statements are unsupported, they do not have any proof or evidence to show that they are true'.

 

UNSUPPORTED | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary

Seems a rule of this forum is 'Any alleged factual claims must be supported by a valid link to an approved credible source'.

I would recommend familiarizing yourself with the principles of burden of proof and Hitchens’s Razor. The latter states that ‘what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence’. These principles are fundamental in any discourse, especially when discussing complex or controversial topics.

[Seppius]

Here is what one Russian woman thinks of Putin, she sums it up nicely what he has done for Russia

 

https://www.tiktok.com/@bobbyscott100/video/7381680713709473057

 

 

Edited June 18 by Seppius
spelling

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

The gains were also concentrated this month, which saw the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive. While reports indicate slow progress, Ukraine's military has made steady advances, with the bulk of its Western-trained and equipped forces still waiting to deploy to the frontlines for a decisive surge.

Oh my, I wonder if the author of that has written a follow up, or If s/he is still employed/ employable.

 

I just looooooove the "decisive surge", LOL.

[beautifulthailand99]

5 hours ago, LosLobo said:

 

If you need to look up what day of the week it is I suggest you should leave posting to others.

'If someone's opinions or statements are unsupported, they do not have any proof or evidence to show that they are true'.

 

UNSUPPORTED | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary

Seems a rule of this forum is 'Any alleged factual claims must be supported by a valid link to an approved credible source'.

I would recommend familiarizing yourself with the principles of burden of proof and Hitchens’s Razor. The latter states that ‘what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence’. These principles are fundamental in any discourse, especially when discussing complex or controversial topics.

Bang go the world's religions but then that was the point !

[Yellowtail]

6 hours ago, jas007 said:

Unsupported?  
 

What do you want, some sort of link “supporting” every assertion in every post? As if a link to some website proves anything. I guess some people are easily fooled. “Gee, here’s a link to the New York Times. I guess the content must be true.”  Do you realize that’s not necessarily the case? These days, a link to any particular piece of  “news” is likely to be part of the mainstream narrative. In other words, a lie from the spin doctors. So why play games? Why pretend a link to a website proves anything? About the only thing I read in the mainstream media these days that I take at face value is when they post what day it is.  I sometimes have to look that up.

Only the left is allowed to make unsupported claims. 

 

Just do like they do, make a claim and then post a link to anything.

 

If they come with: "Hey, that does not support your claim!" Just respond like they do, and just say yes it does! 

[beautifulthailand99]

58 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Oh my, I wonder if the author of that has written a follow up, or If s/he is still employed/ employable.

 

I just looooooove the "decisive surge", LOL.

General Petraus comes to mind. The hopium of 2007. But that was a simple surge not a decisive one.

[beautifulthailand99]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Only the left is allowed to make unsupported claims. 

 

Just do like they do, make a claim and then post a link to anything.

 

If they come with: "Hey, that does not support your claim!" Just respond like they do, and just say yes it does! 

Can you support that with a link ?

[Cardano]

On 6/16/2024 at 6:21 PM, Bkk Brian said:

I honestly didn't think it was necessary to state the obvious. You proved me wrong.

You have to consider others that don't have the wherewithal to think the same as you. Sometimes you have to point out the obvious and even then there will be those who still disbelieve.

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Can you support that with a link ?

Sure, here is unequivocal proof:

https://shorturl.at/b5WxZ

 

[beautifulthailand99]

How to say No to NATO without saying NO. No pressure then. It is 2035 and from the ruins of a radioactive smoking Kyiv - Zelenskiy's emerges from the rubble (ruble ?)  saying YES we finally got it !

 

"First, they got to win this war. We are doing everything we can to make sure they can do that," he said. If this is everything they can do then Ukraine would've been better off making a deal with Rumpelstiltskin

 

https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-got-to-win-war-first-before-joining-nato/

Edited June 18 by beautifulthailand99

[beautifulthailand99]

50 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Sure, here is unequivocal proof:

https://shorturl.at/b5WxZ

 

So it is !

[jas007]

Again, you miss the point. I know what “supported” means. Unfortunately these days, it doesn’t mean much. You assume there really is such a thing as an “approved credible source.” That would be about none of them, from what I can tell.  They stopped reporting real news long ago. Today, we have propaganda. So you take it with a grain of salt. That’s today’s reality. Fortunately, there’s still some free speech out there. Elon Musk bought Twitter and so we have that.  There’s a lot of junk to sort through on X, as it’s now called, but at least it’s not censored. 

 

I read a lot.  But I don’t keep a link to everything I read.  I’m not writing a term paper and it wouldn’t do me any good, in any event. I read a lot and draw my own conclusions. Imagine that. Thinking for myself. And I can usually sort out what’s BS and what’s not.  

 

In another lifetime, I once had a job writing official BS. That’s all I did all day. Of course, when I took the job I thought it might require real work. Analyzing the facts to tell the true story.  Fortunately, that’s not really what they wanted. Far from it.  What they wanted was a plausible narrative.  They didn’t always want the truth, they just wanted a fairy tale that sounded good. Once I figured that out, I had the easiest job in the world.  I knew where the land mines were, so to speak, and I stayed away from them.  I wrote whatever I wanted, and everyone was happy.
 

A few people worked with me.  We used to have a joke of sorts. Begin every piece  like any good fairy tale:  “Once upon a time….”

[beautifulthailand99]

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

Again, you miss the point. I know what “supported” means. Unfortunately these days, it doesn’t mean much. You assume there really is such a thing as an “approved credible source.” That would be about none of them, from what I can tell.  They stopped reporting real news long ago. Today, we have propaganda. So you take it with a grain of salt. That’s today’s reality. Fortunately, there’s still some free speech out there. Elon Musk bought Twitter and so we have that.  There’s a lot of junk to sort through on X, as it’s now called, but at least it’s not censored. 

 

I read a lot.  But I don’t keep a link to everything I read.  I’m not writing a term paper and it wouldn’t do me any good, in any event. I read a lot and draw my own conclusions. Imagine that. Thinking for myself. And I can usually sort out what’s BS and what’s not.  

 

In another lifetime, I once had a job writing official BS. That’s all I did all day. Of course, when I took the job I thought it might require real work. Analyzing the facts to tell the true story.  Fortunately, that’s not really what they wanted. Far from it.  What they wanted was a plausible narrative.  They didn’t always want the truth, they just wanted a fairy tale that sounded good. Once I figured that out, I had the easiest job in the world.  I knew where the land mines were, so to speak, and I stayed away from them.  I wrote whatever I wanted, and everyone was happy.
 

A few people worked with me.  We used to have a joke of sorts. Begin every piece  like any good fairy tale:  “Once upon a time….”

This is brilliant the single most important interview for people to see to understand how the individuals involved in a conspiracy don't even realise they're involved because it is systemic - even though their intentions are good - and Marr is not a bad person. He's just the person who's sitting in that seat because he believes what he does - and he has his arris handed to him on a plate.

 

"If you’re interested in facts, I’ll tell you what they are and even give you sources”

"Blundering efforts to do good"

 

 

Edited June 18 by beautifulthailand99

[jas007]

I guess this Chomsky interview was recorded some time ago, when the internet was still in its infancy.

 

 Propaganda is the name of the game today, more than ever. The internet just adds another dimension. The reach is now global. Big tech tries its best to contain and filter out the truth, but that’s not always so easy. In any event, world is about to be at war, and one of the weapons used is propaganda. The lies are piled pretty deep, sprinkled with a little truth, for the sake of plausibility.  
 

Anyway, anyone interested should take a look at the Nazis use of propaganda in Germany in the 30s and during WWII. That was very effective for them.  Print media, newsreels, documentaries, films. Today, the Deep State is following that playbook, without a doubt.  

[LosLobo]

On 6/18/2024 at 3:15 PM, beautifulthailand99 said:

Bang go the world's religions but then that was the point !

It appears you've employed a 'red herring' logical fallacy to divert attention from the main issue.

 

For an individual who has resorted to touting a university degree as a means of establishing credibility in the absence of empirical evidence in the past, your post is quite comprehensible.

 

However, the absence of logical reasoning in a post from someone with such a high level of education is indeed puzzling.

 

Edited June 20 by LosLobo

[connda]

This article by world renowned economist Jeffrey Sach outlines the history of the conflict and Russia's attempt to negotiate security guarantees with the US since the breakup of the USSR.  Professor Sachs has advised world leaders and US presidents.  He provides a voice of reason.
And I agree with him:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Why Won't the US Help Negotiate a Peaceful End to the War in Ukraine?
For goodness' sake, negotiate!

 

For the fifth time since 2008, Russia has proposed to negotiate with the U.S. over security arrangements, this time in proposals made by President Vladimir Putin on June 14, 2024. Four previous times, the U.S. rejected the offer of negotiations in favor of a neocon strategy to weaken or dismember Russia through war and covert operations. The U.S. neocon tactics have failed disastrously, devastating Ukraine in the process, and endangering the whole world. After all the warmongering, it’s time for Biden to open negotiations for peace with Russia.

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/role-of-us-in-russia-ukraine-war

Edited June 20 by connda

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, connda said:

This article by world renowned economist Jeffrey Sach outlines the history of the conflict and Russia's attempt to negotiate security guarantees with the US since the breakup of the USSR.  Professor Sachs has advised world leaders and US presidents.  He provides a voice of reason.
And I agree with him:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Why Won't the US Help Negotiate a Peaceful End to the War in Ukraine?
For goodness' sake, negotiate!

 

For the fifth time since 2008, Russia has proposed to negotiate with the U.S. over security arrangements, this time in proposals made by President Vladimir Putin on June 14, 2024. Four previous times, the U.S. rejected the offer of negotiations in favor of a neocon strategy to weaken or dismember Russia through war and covert operations. The U.S. neocon tactics have failed disastrously, devastating Ukraine in the process, and endangering the whole world. After all the warmongering, it’s time for Biden to open negotiations for peace with Russia.

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/role-of-us-in-russia-ukraine-war

The left in the US needs Russia as an enemy to take the focus off of China and the Middle East. 

[Bkk Brian]

7 minutes ago, connda said:

This article by world renowned economist Jeffrey Sach outlines the history of the conflict and Russia's attempt to negotiate security guarantees with the US since the breakup of the USSR.  Professor Sachs has advised world leaders and US presidents.  He provides a voice of reason.
And I agree with him:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Why Won't the US Help Negotiate a Peaceful End to the War in Ukraine?
For goodness' sake, negotiate!

 

For the fifth time since 2008, Russia has proposed to negotiate with the U.S. over security arrangements, this time in proposals made by President Vladimir Putin on June 14, 2024. Four previous times, the U.S. rejected the offer of negotiations in favor of a neocon strategy to weaken or dismember Russia through war and covert operations. The U.S. neocon tactics have failed disastrously, devastating Ukraine in the process, and endangering the whole world. After all the warmongering, it’s time for Biden to open negotiations for peace with Russia.

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/role-of-us-in-russia-ukraine-war

Jeffrey Sachs.............lol

 

From economist to Kremlin mouthpiece: The troubling transformation of Jeffrey Sachs

Three weeks ago, Tucker Carlson invited economist Jeffrey Sachs for an interview, that could claim second prize in the category of “Whitewashing Russian President Vladimir Putin for Republican audiences.”

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4727046-from-economist-to-kremlin-mouthpiece-the-troubling-transformation-of-jeffrey-sachs/

[Yellowtail]

"The '80s called, they want their foreign policy back." 

[beautifulthailand99]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

Jeffrey Sachs.............lol

 

From economist to Kremlin mouthpiece: The troubling transformation of Jeffrey Sachs

Three weeks ago, Tucker Carlson invited economist Jeffrey Sachs for an interview, that could claim second prize in the category of “Whitewashing Russian President Vladimir Putin for Republican audiences.”

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4727046-from-economist-to-kremlin-mouthpiece-the-troubling-transformation-of-jeffrey-sachs/

In that poorly written short article by Oleg Dunda who is a member of Ukraine’s parliament he even mispells him name which is shoddy,shoddy,shoddy.When I see howlers like that then I am not minded to dig any deeper. Any academic that doesn't toe the party line will find themsleves subject to withering attacks from the estblishment. Just watch my Andrew Marr/Chomsky video posted upthread. Once they have been effectively cancelled by the MSN then some find themslves on more fringey dubious channels as Professors with large egos (most of them do have from personal experience) who are just happy to get their opinions out there. From what I see, he is simply someone speaking on conscience, courage and incorruptible integrity, a rare quality among scholars of his calibre these days, who are mostly slaves to their government, university or think tank masters funding their careers. He has FO money and a stellar previous reputation so he can afford that luxury.

 

Thankfully we still have Professor Mearsheimer as well I'm sure Oled will have a pop at him soon enough. Many moons ago I sourced a Hill video which was leapt on by Sir Brian as a conspiracy site as a gotcha moment (the you tube channel) and then I said it was the part of the Hill and he went quiet. He maybe right or they are desperate for money and take paid inserts from think tanks and their compliant stooges.

 

Serious publications embarking on takedowns of established figures would add we approached Professor Sachs on xxx about the facts presented in this article but he declined to comment. Or some such, as I said shoddy,shoddy,shoddy.

 

https://www.youtube.com/@thehill/videos

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleh_Dunda

 

In 1999, he graduated from the Dnipropetrovsk Technical School of Welding and Electronics (programmer-systems engineer). His diploma thesis (practical) was the development of software for the reliability calculation of electronic devices.[2]

In 2001, he graduated from the State Institute for Advanced Training and Retraining of Management and Specialists of the Metallurgical Complex (Dnipro) with a degree in Finance. His diploma thesis was the development of financial instruments for managing non-performing loans of a commercial bank.[2]

 

 

Edited June 20 by beautifulthailand99