Trump & the Hidden Meaning of J-6

Signatures of some of the January 6 Republicans who voted against certifying the election of 2020


OCTOBER 03, 2022

NY Times:
 They Cemented the Myth of a Stolen Election


On the day the Capitol was attacked, 139 Republicans in the House voted to dispute the Electoral College count.

By inducing both his overt and covert enemies into continuously defending the integrity of the Great Election Steal of 2020, The Donald has skillfully maneuvered Sulzberger’s Times, the Piranha Press and the corrupt and/or cowardly politicians (within both parties) into swimming into a trap net from which they cannot now extricate themselves. And what do trapped schools of fish instinctively do when caught in such a net? They start to frantically  wiggle, and continue to  wiggle and wiggle ever more aggressively. Though the situation is hopeless, they will furiously (and illogically) wiggle until the bitter end; even when — now starved of oxygen and really freaking out — they are hauled up and dumped onto the boat deck itself!

With ever-increasing numbers of normies now open to the question of voter fraud; and with solid Trump allies in position to win Governor’s races in badly defrauded Arizona, badly defrauded Michigan  and badly defrauded Pennsylvania — the wiggling has gotten worse than ever with this dramatic front, top & center page attack on the “Election Denying” Republicans who have since out-muscled the cowards and traitors to now dominate the new Republican Party — the Trump Party.

The article describes the huge shift:

“Five days after the attack on the Capitol last year, the Republican members of the House of Representatives braced for a backlash. Two-thirds of them — 139 in all — had been voting on Jan. 6, 2021, to dispute the Electoral College count that would seal Donald J. Trump’s defeat just as rioters determined to keep the president in power stormed the chamber. One lawmaker after another warned during a conference call that unless Republicans demanded accountability, voters would punish them for inflaming the mob.

More than 20 months later, the opposite has happened. The votes to reject the election results have become a badge of honor within the party, in some cases even a requirement for advancement, as doubts about the election have come to define what it means to be a Trump Republican.” (emphasis added)

As both Q and Trump himself have posted many, many times: “Nothing Can Stop What IComing — and the rotten netted fish at the Times all know it.

“Vote! They know if they lose, it’s over.”

1. Kari Lake appears to be a lock in Arizona. // 2. Doug Mastriano (though said to be “losing”) may win Pennsylvania. // 3. Trapped in the J-6 gefilte fish net — the Fake News has no choice but to keep defending the stolen election (a “sting” operation, actually) of 2020 and the criminal J-6 certification of 2021.

Now, about this Nothing Can Stop What IComing (NCSWIC) code language — which we explained soon after the Big Steal of 2020. It’s worth reviewing at this time because the GOP has — slowly but surely since January 6th™ — been transformed into a fighting party seemingly determined to expose 2020, when the timing is perfect.

An excerpt from our piece, dated November 7, 2020:

In November of 2018, Trump’s DHS established the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) to protect the integrity of US elections. CISA itself oversees another sub-agency to develop the products needed to assist DHS in working with “public safety partners involved in interoperable communications at all levels of government.”

In other words, if something like a blockchain communication embedded in a watermark was indeed added to the ballots, this particular sub-division of CISA (itself a subgroup of DHS) would have been tasked with setting up the sting operation by working with “private vendors” and “public safety partners.” And the name of this sub-group is (dramatic drum roll) — the National Council of StateWide Interoperability Coordinators — official acronym being NCSWIC (here) — initials which also perfectly match Nothing Can Stop What Is Coming.”

Coincidence? We shall know soon enough.

*** END OF EXCERPT ***

Obviously, especially in hindsight, the hidden meanings of NCSWIC and January 6th ™ are closely linked — which is interesting because this imposter “Joe Biden,” on several occasions, also uttered some code language before the 2020 election. Much to the confusion of the Fake News, Biden, on several occasions, predicted an “epiphany” (a sudden manifestation, a revelation) among Republicans who would turn the party against Trump. Of course, as “Biden” himself has since acknowledged, this “epiphany” has gone the exact opposite direction!

For those of you whose Christianity is a bit rusty, the Epiphany – the revelation of Christ to the Maji (The Three Kings) – is observed by most Christian denominations on …….. drum roll please

January 6th…. Coincidence?

The movie continues.

1. Q posts about “Nothing Can Stop What Is Coming” : 2018 – 2020, & one more from 2022 // 2. Trump, just last week, with added word: “Believe!”

Putin Declares Holy War on Globo-Satanic Elite

Vlad the Bad is really “feeling his oats” these days — and there’s not a darn thing that de-balled NATO, the EU, the CFR, the Soros NGOs, Rothschild, the CIA, the UN, the Jurisprudence nor any of the other weapons (disarmed by Putin’s partner, Donald Trump) of the New World Order can do about it. The article describes the boldness and brazenness of Russia’s “defiance” —

“President Putin asserted that Russia would annex four Ukrainian regions and decried the United States for ‘Satanism.’ In starkly confrontational terms, he positioned Russia as fighting an existential battle with Western elites he deemed “the enemy.”

The speech was an extraordinary combination of bluster and menace, mixing conspiratorial riffs against an American-led “neo-colonial system” with an appeal to the world to see Russia as the leader of an uprising against American power. He referred to “the ruling circles of the so-called West” as “the enemy” — and struck a tone of anger and defiance.”

Oh snap! Did Putin really say “Satanism?”  We checked. Yes he did! And not just metaphorically or in passing either — but “outright” Satanism.

Putin:

“Now they have moved on entirely, to a radical denial of moral norms, religion, and family. The dictatorship of the Western elites is directed against all societies, including the peoples of the Western countries themselves. This is a challenge to all.

This is a complete denial of humanity, the overthrow of faith and traditional values. Indeed, The suppression of freedom is taking on the outlines of a ‘reverse religion,’ of outright Satanism. … Do we really want to see perversions that lead to degradation and extinction be imposed on children in our schools from the earliest years, for it to be drilled into them that there are supposedly some genders besides women and men, and offered the chance to undergo sex-change operations?”
Tell it, Vladdy. Tell it!

Gored by Putin’s Holy lance, the Piranha Press — in unison — is squealing over being called out for “Satanism.” Wethinks Vlad the Bad is over the target, no?

* Editor’s Note: Interesting timing with this Satanism stuff because Trump operative Steve Bannon recently described Pennsylvania Demonrat Senate candidate John Fetterman as being “someone who hangs out with Satanic Groomers.”

The Russian crest features a knight trouncing the dragon beneath his horse’s hooves. This is derived from earlier historical renditions of Archangel Michael trouncing Satan.

Following are more choice excerpts from a great leader who, after 20 long years of patient and cunning gradualism, is finally in a position of such strength that he may now deliver the truth with neither anesthesia nor apology — and no longer having to politely refer to Globalist scum  as “our western partners” but rather, as “Satanists” and “enemies.”

Putin:

“We will defend our land with all the powers and means at our disposal.”

“In 1991, at Belovezh Forest, without asking the will of ordinary citizens, representatives of the then-party elites decided to destroy the USSR, and people suddenly found themselves cut off from their motherland. This tore apart and dismembered our nation, becoming a national catastrophe.”

“The battlefield to which fate and history have called us is the battlefield for our people, for great historical Russia, for future generations, our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.”

“Even today, the United States actually occupies Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and other countries, and at the same time cynically call them allies of equal standing.”

1. Russia has liberated FOUR pro-Russian regions of Ukraine for good, in addition to the Crimea from 2014. And de-balled NATO can’t do a darn thing about it because “Patriots Are Now In Control.” // 2. The alleged “sabotage” of Russian pipelines by “Biden” is all just part of the movie. Relax, there won’t actually be any World War III.

Putin’s rhetorical gems and corresponding actions come from a man whom the passionate purists among us once criticized for being too soft on the West — for playing footsies with Russia’s Jewish Oligarchs (who have since fled Russia for Israel, UK and Dubai) — for not recklessly invading Eastern Ukraine back in 2014 — for attending a WEF convention when he was a young security operative — for sucking up to Henry Kissinger — for lighting menorahs with rabbis, etc. Let this serve as a strategic and historical  lesson for ye of the backseat “Are We There Yet?” Chorus who get all worked up and start shrieking “psyop!” or “false opposition!” or “Jew puppet!” the moment one of our favorites utters something about “Covid,” vaccines or Ukraine that sounds too Globalese for our taste — or is discovered to have once attended an event sponsored by “fill-in-the-blank” — or just said something way too conciliatory toward the usual suspects. Keep your eye on the ball, boys & girls — not the head fakes!

When confronting a dangerous beast — equipped with the power to implant thoughts into the malleable minds of many millions of normies — it is calm, cunning, and temporary concessions — not passionate frontal assaults — that will win the war in the end. Of course, probably having had advance knowledge of the rise of Q and Trump surely must have made it much easier for Putin to wait out his “western partners.”

He played the long game with Satan’s minions until he no longer had to. Now, he is completely unchained.
“What is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.


– Vladimir Putin, 2015 Munich Speech

Media Madness: Inflation Will Save You Money!

SEPTEMBER 26, 2022

NY Times:
 Inflation May Save You Money on Your Taxes

The government adjusts its tax code every year, including the standard deduction and tax brackets. Rising costs mean big changes next year.

BY ANN CARRNS

Finally — after more than one year of steadily rising costs across the entire spectrum of goods and services — a bit of good economic news from “the paper of record.” The criminal debasement of our currency is actually going to “save” us money on our taxes next year! Some astonishingly Orwellian anti-logic, from the article:

“In addition to a big boost to Social Security payments, inflation could help save money on your federal tax bill next year. That’s because the federal government annually adjusts many elements of its complex tax code, including the standard deduction and tax brackets, to reflect inflation and avoid so-called stealth tax increases.

The adjustments also mean you can contribute more next year to retirement savings and other accounts that offer tax breaks, like health savings accounts.

Happy days are here again.

Cheese & crackers! Ms. Ann Carrns — the felonious freelancer who drooled out this demented drivel — ought to be locked up in an insane asylum for spinning the ongoing econo-meltdown into a welcome “tax savings” benefit.

1. Insane-looking Ann Carrns (with her daughter’s dolls) fancies herself as a financial writer. // 2. Cheer up, Mr. & Mrs. America. All that currency debasement will benefit you come tax time! // 3. Because Uncle Sam is your friend.

First of all, the upward adjustments of the tax brackets and standard deductions only represent “savings” in terms of numbers, not actual value, which has been lost due to inflation. You see, the IRS, in its infinite graciousness, allows for the fact the dollar isn’t what is used to be yesterday — and will not in the near future be what it is today either. Indeed, that’s why the adjustments were put in place in the first place, as Carrns herself does explain:

“If the bracket boundaries weren’t periodically adjusted for inflation, more of your income would move into a higher bracket, increasing your tax bill.”

In other words, you’ll be paying “less” only because you are, in reality, earning less in terms of purchasing power.

Secondly, the various adjustments for inflation NEVER keep pace with the understated (rigged) rate of inflation. To therefore describe these adjustments as “savings” — or even break-even — is just as fallacious as referring to a 5% nominal salary increase — when under-reported inflation is at 10% annual — as a “pay raise.” It’s not.

More “good news” from Crazy Carrns:

“The adjustments also mean you can contribute more next year to retirement savings and other accounts that offer tax breaks, like health savings accounts.”

Again, the “more” contributions in this case only means more nominal dollars — not more actual value.

The most exasperating element of this horrible piece of financial propaganda comes in the form of an “Inflation F.A.Q. (Frequently Asked Questions) box — inserted into the body of the article — followed by a reply that is so incomplete that it raises more questions than it answers:

We all know “what” inflation is!

How insulting! Even the dullest of the befuddled boobs in the dimmest corner of the overlapping tyrannical Kingdoms of Normiedom & Libtardia already knows WHAT inflation is: It is a widespread rise in prices. But the High Priests at “the paper of record” NEVER tell the worshipers about the true HOW and WHY of inflation — even though those questions are just as easy to define as the “what.”

Here it is — in a nutshell:

“Inflation is the loss of purchasing power over time caused by excessive expansion (legalized counterfeiting) of the money supply — injected into the economy at unpayable compounding interest (usury) — relative to the amount of goods and services available. The debt virus is injected partly through the banking system in the form of loans (out of nothing) to businesses and consumers; and partly through the Central Bank’s purchase (also with nothing) of government bonds to fund deficits. The ever increasing amounts of debt money chasing a more stable supply of goods debases the value of all existing currency, thus increasing prices.”

There — in just 100 words that an 10-year old, or even a “college educated” economist can digest. Now why can’t the esteemed, and, we presume, very well-shekeled, Ms. Carrns do that for her readers? Hmmm? Truth simplifies. Liars (and idiots) complicate.

Adding insult to idiocy, Ms. Carrns seems to hold a very “inflated” (no pun intended) opinion of her analytical and reporting capabilities. From her Stinked-In bio:

I’m a talented journalist covering personal finance, including health care, retirement, college saving, taxes and more. I excel at making complex topics understandable for readers. My column, “Your Money Adviser,” appears weekly in The New York Times.”

The most severely cracked up of crackpots always think so highly of themselves, and feel compelled to share that opinion with us — ever notice that?

1. The more you print and lend out at interest, the more you drive up the cost of goods and services. // 2. By manipulating interest rates and reserve requirements, The Fed can expand or contract the volume of loans to people and businesses. // 3. Expansion (recovery / boom) or Contraction (recession / bust) is also achieved through the Fed’s buying of U.S. Bonds and other securities with new counterfeit money (expansion), or the selling off of those securities which it holds (contraction).

The U.S. Government’s Vast New Privatized Censorship Regime

By Jenin Younes

One warm weekend in October of 2020, three impeccably credentialed epidemiologists—Jayanta Bhattacharya, Sunetra Gupta, and Martin Kulldorff, of Stanford, Oxford, and Harvard Universities respectively—gathered with a few journalists, writers, and economists at an estate in the Berkshires where the American Institute for Economic Research had brought together critics of lockdowns and other COVID-related government restrictions. On Sunday morning shortly before the guests departed, the scientists encapsulated their views—that lockdowns do more harm than good, and that resources should be devoted to protecting the vulnerable rather than shutting society down—in a joint communique dubbed the “Great Barrington Declaration,” after the town in which it was written.

The declaration began circulating on social media and rapidly garnered signatures, including from other highly credentialed scientists. Most mainstream news outlets and the scientists they chose to quote denounced the declaration in no uncertain terms. When contacted by reporters, Drs. Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins of the NIH publicly and vociferously repudiated the “dangerous” declaration, smearing the scientists—all generally considered to be at the top of their fields—as “fringe epidemiologists.” Over the next several months, the three scientists faced a barrage of condemnation: They were called eugenicists and anti-vaxxers; it was falsely asserted that they were “Koch-funded” and that they had written the declaration for financial gain. Attacks on the Great Barrington signatories proliferated throughout social media and in the pages of The New York Times and Guardian.

Yet emails obtained pursuant to a FOIA request later revealed that these attacks were not the products of an independent objective news-gathering process of the type that publications like the Times and the Guardian still like to advertise. Rather, they were the fruits of an aggressive attempt to shape the news by the same government officials whose policies the epidemiologists had criticized. Emails between Fauci and Collins revealed that the two officials had worked together and with media outlets as various as Wired and The Nation to orchestrate a “takedown” of the declaration.

Nor did the targeting of the scientists stop with the bureaucrats they had implicitly criticized. Bhattacharya, Gupta, and Kulldorff soon learned that their declaration was being heavily censored on social media to prevent their scientific opinions from reaching the public. Kulldorff—then the most active of the three online—soon began to experience censorship of his own social media posts. For example, Twitter censored one of Kulldorff’s tweets asserting that:

“Thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should. COVID vaccines are important for older, higher-risk people and their caretakers. Those with prior natural infection do not need it. Not children.”

Posts on Kulldorff’s Twitter and LinkedIn criticizing mask and vaccine mandates were labeled misleading or removed entirely. In March of 2021, YouTube took down a video depicting a roundtable discussion that Bhattacharya, Gupta, Kulldorff, and Dr. Scott Atlas had with Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, in which the participants critiqued mask and vaccine mandates.

Because of this censorship, Bhattacharya and Kulldorff are now plaintiffs in Missouri v. Biden, a case brought by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, as well as the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), which is representing them and two other individuals, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines. The plaintiffs allege that the Biden administration and a number of federal agencies coerced social media platforms into censoring them and others for criticizing the government’s COVID policies. In doing so, the Biden administration and relevant agencies had turned any ostensible private action by the social media companies into state action, in violation of the First Amendment. As the Supreme Court has long recognized and Justice Thomas explained in a concurring opinion just last year, “[t]he government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly.”

Federal district courts have recently dismissed similar cases on the grounds that the plaintiffs could not prove state action. According to those judges, public admissions by then-White House press secretary Jennifer Psaki that the Biden administration was ordering social media companies to censor certain posts, as well as statements from Psaki, President Biden, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, and DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas threatening them with regulatory or other legal action if they declined to do so, still did not suffice to establish that the plaintiffs were censored on social media due to government action. Put another way, the judges declined to take the government at its word. But the Missouri judge reached a different conclusion, determining there was enough evidence in the record to infer that the government was involved in social media censorship, granting the plaintiffs’ request for discovery at the preliminary injunction stage.

Collusion Between Government and “Big Tech” To Suppress Free Speech: Illegal Censorship of Stories involving Covid Jab Refusal

The Missouri documents, along with some obtained through discovery in Berenson v. Twitter and a FOIA request by America First Legal, expose the extent of the administration’s appropriation of big tech to effect a vast and unprecedented regime of viewpoint-based censorship on the information that most Americans see, hear and otherwise consume. At least 11 federal agencies, and around 80 government officials, have been explicitly directing social media companies to take down posts and remove certain accounts that violate the government’s own preferences and guidelines for coverage on topics ranging from COVID restrictions, to the 2020 election, to the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.

Correspondence publicized in Missouri further corroborates the theory that the companies dramatically increased censorship under duress from the government, strengthening the First Amendment claim. For example, shortly after President Biden asserted in July of 2021 that Facebook (Meta) was “killing people” by permitting “misinformation” about COVID vaccines to percolate, an executive from the company contacted the surgeon general to appease the White House. In a text message to Murthy, the executive acknowledged that the “FB team” was “feeling a little aggrieved” as “it’s not great to be accused of killing people,” while he sought to “de-escalate and work together collaboratively.” These are not the words of a person who is acting freely; to the contrary, they denote the mindset of someone who considers himself subordinate to, and subject to punishment by, a superior. Another text, exchanged between Jen Easterly, director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and another CISA employee who now works at Microsoft, reads: “Platforms have got to get more comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain.” This is another incontrovertible piece of evidence that social media companies are censoring content under duress from the government, and not due to their directors’ own ideas of the corporate or common good.

Further, emails expressly establish that the social media companies intensified censorship efforts and removed particular individuals from their platforms in response to the government’s demands. Just a week after President Biden accused social media companies of “killing people,” the Meta executive mentioned above wrote the surgeon general an email telling him, “I wanted to make sure you saw the steps we took just this past week to adjust policies on what we are removing with respect to misinformation, as well as steps taken further to address the ‘disinfo dozen’: we removed 17 additional Pages, Groups, and Instagram accounts tied to [them].” About a month later, the same executive informed Murthy that Meta intended to expand its COVID policies to “further reduce the spread of potentially harmful content” and that the company was “increasing the strength of our demotions for COVID and vaccine-related content.”

Alex Berenson, a former New York Times reporter and a prominent critic of government-imposed COVID restrictions, has publicized internal Twitter communications he obtained through discovery in his own lawsuit showing that high-ranking members of the Biden administration, including White House Senior COVID-19 Advisor Andrew Slavitt, had pushed Twitter to permanently suspend him from the platform. In messages from April 2021, a Twitter employee noted that a meeting with the White House had gone relatively well, though the company’s representatives had fielded “one really tough question about why Alex Berenson hasn’t been kicked off from the platform,” to which “mercifully we had answers” (emphasis added).

About two months later, days after Dr. Fauci publicly deemed Berenson a danger, and immediately following the president’s statement that social media companies were “killing people,” and despite assurances from high-ups at the company that his account was in no danger, Twitter permanently suspended Berenson’s account. If this does not qualify as government censorship of an individual based on official disapproval of his viewpoints, it would be difficult to say what might. Berenson was reinstated on Twitter in July 2022 as part of the settlement in his lawsuit.

In 1963, the Supreme Court, deciding Bantam Books v. Sullivan, held that “public officers’ thinly veiled threats to institute criminal proceedings against” booksellers who carried materials containing obscenity could constitute a First Amendment violation. The same reasoning should apply to the Biden administration campaign to pressure tech companies into enforcing its preferred viewpoints.

The question of how the Biden administration has succeeded in jawboning big tech into observing its strictures is not particularly difficult to answer. Tech companies, many of which hold monopoly positions in their markets, have long feared and resisted government regulation. Unquestionably—and as explicitly revealed by the text message exchanged between Murthy and the Twitter executive—the prospect of being held liable for COVID deaths is an alarming one. Just like the booksellers in Bantam, social media platforms undoubtedly “do not lightly disregard” such possible consequences, as Twitter’s use of the term “mercifully” indicates.

It remains to be seen whether Bhattacharya and Kulldorff will be able to show that Fauci and Collins explicitly ordered tech companies to censor them and their Great Barrington Declaration. More discovery lies ahead, from top White House officials including Dr. Fauci, that may yield evidence of even more direct involvement by the government in preventing Americans from hearing their views. But Bhattacharya, Kulldorff, and countless social media users have had their First Amendment rights violated nonetheless.

The government’s involvement in censorship of specific perspectives, and direct role in escalating such censorship, has what is known in First Amendment law as a chilling effect: Fearing the repercussions of articulating certain views, people self-censor by avoiding controversial topics. Countless Americans, including the Missouri plaintiffs, have attested that they do exactly that for fear of losing influential and sometimes lucrative social media accounts, which can contain and convey significant social and intellectual capital.

Moreover, the Supreme Court recognizes that a corollary of the First Amendment right to speak is the right to receive information because “the right to receive ideas follows ineluctably from the sender’s First Amendment right to send them.” All Americans have been deprived—by the United States government—of their First Amendment rights to hear the views of Alex Berenson, as well as Drs. Bhattacharya and Kulldorff, and myriad additional people, like the reporters who broke the Hunter Biden laptop story for the New York Post and found themselves denounced as agents of Russian disinformation, who have been censored by social media platforms at the urging of the U.S. government. That deprivation strangled public debate on multiple issues of undeniably public importance. It allowed Fauci, Collins, and various other government actors and agencies, to mislead the public into believing there was ever a scientific consensus on lockdowns, mask mandates, and vaccine mandates. It also arguably influenced the 2020 election.

The administration has achieved public acquiescence to its censorship activities by convincing many Americans that the dissemination of “misinformation” and “disinformation” on social media presents a grave threat to public safety and even national security. Over half a century ago, in his notorious concurrence in New York Times v. United States (in which the Nixon administration sought to prevent the newspaper from printing the Pentagon Papers) Justice Hugo Black rejected the view that the government may invoke such concepts to override the First Amendment: “[t]he word ‘security’ is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment,” he wrote. Justice Black cited a 1937 opinion by Justice Charles Hughes explaining that this approach was woefully misguided: “The greater the importance of safeguarding the community from incitements to the overthrow of our institutions by force and violence, the more imperative is the need to preserve inviolate the constitutional rights of free speech, free press, and free assembly … that government may be responsive to the will of the people and that changes, if desired, may be obtained by peaceful means. Therein lies the security of the Republic, the very foundation of constitutional government.”

The Founders of our country understood that line-drawing becomes virtually impossible once censorship begins and that the personal views and biases of those doing the censoring will inevitably come into play. Moreover, they recognized that sunlight is the best disinfectant: The cure for bad speech is good speech. The cure for lies, truth. Silencing people does not mean problematic ideas disappear; it only drives their adherents into echo chambers. People who are booted off Twitter, for example, often turn to Gab and Gettr, where they are less likely to encounter challenges to patently false posts claiming, for example, that COVID vaccines are toxic.

Indeed, this case could not illustrate more clearly the First Amendment’s chief purpose, and why the framers of the Constitution did not create an exception for “misinformation.” Government actors are just as prone to bias, hubris, and error as the rest of us. Drs. Fauci and Collins, enamored of newfound fame and basking in self-righteousness, took it upon themselves to suppress debate about the most important subject of the day. Had Americans learned of the Great Barrington Declaration and been given the opportunity to contemplate its ideas, and had scientists like Bhattacharya, Gupta, and Kulldorff been permitted to speak freely, the history of the pandemic era may have unfolded with far less tragedy—and with far less damage to the institutions that are supposed to protect public health.

Did “Q” Crash Queen Lizzie’s Funeral?

More clues that strange things are happening...

Queen Elizabeth’s coronation in 1953, and her funeral on Monday
NY Times: 
From Coronation to Funeral: Bookends to the Life of a Queen, and a Generation.

The made-for-TV spectacle that was the funeral of Queen Lizzie passed a few days ago without the slightest bit of interest to us. I had already “eulogized” “Her Majesty” a week earlier, so there really was no need for further comment. That is, until we learned that the mysterious super-hero who goes by “Q” had crashed the Royal party — or so it seems.

Recall that we had closed our previous piece with the following observation which a reader had alerted us to, and we then duly verified:

“The number of days between Q’s very first post on October 28, 2017 and the Queen’s death is 1776 — the year during which the American colonies declared their independence from the Britain of Queen Elizabeth’s great great great great grandfather, King George III. Coincidence?”
The “?” was added after the word “coincidence” because we truly could not answer that question conclusively. But three other strange points of data from the funeral have since settled the matter, at least as far as we’re concerned. Q crashed Lizzy’s funeral. Let’s analyze.

Cheerio y’all!

QUEEN CONSORT CAMILLA IN A MASK

Frankly, this woman — like so many other famous personages these days — hasn’t looked quite right in a while. There’s been something intangibly “off” about her look. However, it just wasn’t enough to justify screaming: “Fake!” But now, from the day of the funeral actually, an image of her has emerged in which the same tell-tale mask line on the neck — which “Biden” and “Fauci” had previously manifested — is strikingly clear. It’s posted down below.

What’s with all those weird wrinkles and bubbles around her mouth and chin?
Closeup of her neck reveals an actor’s mask.

“BIDEN” IN THE BACK

At the service held in the historic Westminster Abbey, the alleged President of the United States — affectionately referred to by the NYT as “Joe Biden” — was made to wait for his seat, and then placed waaay in the back, with the potentates of the Turd World — in the 14th row behind the president of Poland! This humiliation of “the leader of the free world”  — the head of state of a country which not only has a “special relationship” with the UK, if you believe in fairy tales, helped save Britain from “the Nazis” — was so amusing that Trump jumped all over it, posting on Truth Social:

“This is what’s happened to America in just two short years. No respect! However, a good time for our President to get to know the leaders of certain Third World countries. If I were president, they wouldn’t have sat me back there—and our Country would be much different than it is right now!”

Boys and girls. This unthinkable seating arrangement was NOT by chance. The humiliation of “Biden” at the Cathedral — just like his bizarre bicycle fall, his multi-fall episode while climbing an airplane staircase, his comical handshake with the air, his sudden wandering off while on stage, his falling asleep in conferences, his public farting, his apparent “senility,” his stuttering, his Satanic / Big Brother speech in Philadelphia etc — was clearly scripted, but by whom? Certainly NOT the Windsors!

1-How could a US President have been seated way back in the “cheap seats?” / 2- With the Third World leaders? / 3-Behind Poland?

THE MARK OF “Q”

Reminiscent of the masked hero of the TV / Movie character Show, “Zorro,” who would always carve out a “Z’ somewhere for his tyrannical enemies to see — an image — probably a doctored photo injected into the press — of Lizzie’s flag-draped coffin being carried out of the cathedral revealed the reflection of the letter “Q” on a golden ball. By itself, perhaps coincidental — but combined with all the other weirdness, we take it as a sign that Q not only crashed the funeral — but “he” may have actually engineered the fall of the Windsors. Was this what Q meant when he posted those chess analogies: “Queen protects King” and “Queen before King”?

Stay tuned…

Translating Biden’s ‘Soul of a Nation’ Speech…

By Pete McArdle

Joe Biden, with his history of brain injuries (two!), rapidly advancing dementia, lifelong tendency to plagiarize, lie, and self-aggrandize, and his mouthful of marbles and no doubt costly white porcelain, can be quite difficult to understand.

As a public service, then, allow me to translate some of Crusty Joe’s “Soul of America” speech to the best of my ability.

“We, the people.”

By that, Biden meant Democrats, teachers unions, the fake-news media, the hopelessly corrupt DoJ and FBI, and Big Tech.

“MAGA forces

Everyone else.

“MAGA forces are… a threat… to the very soul of this country!”

What old Joe means is, if Republicans recapture Congress and Trump wins re-election, that will most certainly threaten the Biden Crime Family’s various lucrative grifts involving Ukraine, China, and Russia.

“They (the Ultra-MAGA movement) look at the mob who stormed the Capitol… as patriots!”

Of the Jan. 6th and BLM protestors, I previously had a single thought. People who cause injuries, fear, and property damage should be seen as criminals and robustly prosecuted. But considering the Axis justice applied to the Jan 6th demonstrators and the get-out-of-jail-free passes given the Antifa and BLM movements, Biden’s statement may well be worth considering.

“They live, not in the light of truth, but in the darkness of lies!”

I have no idea what  Joe was trying to say here, except that he reminded me of the fire-and-brimstone priests of my youth. In more ways than one.

Considering the way Biden squints in bright light, perhaps that line’s merely an allegory on his pressing need for double cataract surgery.

“We are still an America that believes in… respect for others.”

Except you Ultra-MAGA maggots. Kiss the floor and give me twenty, you pro-life, flag-waving, Trump-loving scum!

“A willingness to engage in political violence is fatal to democracy.”

For the millionth time, Slow Joe, the United States is not a democracy. Thank God. And come November, “a willingness to engage in political violence” will be electorally fatal to more than a few Democrats.

“FBI agents just doing their job as directed.”

That statement proves conclusively that even a brain-compromised nitwit is right once a millennium. The FBI has been doing their job, exactly as directed by Obama, Biden, and God knows who else. No one ever said the Feebs don’t work hard, no, just that they’re Democrat tools in suits.

“We can’t let the integrity of our elections be undermined.”

What Biden undoubtedly meant to say — perhaps the teleprompter or Biden’s cortex suffered a momentary glitch while he spoke — was that we can’t allow integrity in our elections, hence, the Democrat drive for mail-in voting, drop-boxes, early and late voting, ballot harvesting, I.D.-free voting, etc., etc.

“Today, COVID no longer controls our life.”

This was a dog whistle to all of Biden’s white coat supremacist pals, to please, please come up with another health emergency soon so we can strangle our constituents with mandates, declare winners and losers in the marketplace, and find new and innovative ways to cheat electorally.

“Light is now visible.”

This is just a rumor, but… sources tell me V.P. Kamala Harris wrote that line.

“The future will be made in America, no matter what the white supremacists… say.”

Wait, what? Why wouldn’t white supremacists want our country to have increased industry and production? Seems no one in the White House bothered to ask any white supremacists their views on U.S. GDP.

“My word as a Biden.”

Trust me! Biden’s saying. Just because Barry and me sicced the FBI and several other federal agencies on Trump before, during, and after his presidency, doesn’t mean I’m a Fibber McGee, you plant-based pony soldier!

“The soul is what makes us, us.”

Kammy definitely wrote that.

“Speak out! Speak up! Get engaged! Vote, vote, vote!”

What Sleepy Joe’s saying to his supporters here, in order of appearance: Make people of other persuasions miserable with your constant sermonizing! Do it loudly! And obnoxiously! And make sure to vote multiple times, wink, wink!

“Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent… extremism.”

Heading into the midterm elections, that’s what Joe really wanted his listeners to know. The people who want to work, raise families, and be left alone; who defend the rights of the unborn; who want protection from the drugs, weapons, and unsustainable tide of humanity flowing across our southern border, they’re extremist.

The people who want their kids taught reading, writing, and math, not racial grievance, absurd gender theories, and a million reasons to hate America, they’re extremist.

The folks who want criminals and drug dealers arrested and incarcerated, so they and their family can walk the city streets without fear, they’re extremist.

The citizens who pay their bills (and taxes!) faithfully, and resent having to pay someone else’s college loans?

Extremists!

Now, loopy Joe Biden may have no idea what he means about anything. All we can say for sure, is that he can still read off a teleprompter what someone else wrote for him. After which he is no doubt rewarded with a cup of butterscotch pudding.

But whoever wrote the “Soul of the Nation” speech clearly thinks those who oppose the current corrupt and lawless administration are “extremists.” And this speech is clearly a prelude to the federal government bringing the hammer down hard on their political opponents.

Because that’s what you do with extremists.

10 Ways to Change a Liberal’s Mind…

Have you ever talked with a liberal and made a comment that shuts him down completely?  “Trump sure is getting a raw deal with that FBI raid, isn’t he?”  His eyes go glassy, and he starts to look for the exit.  Or he repeats something automatically, like “Trump deserves anything he gets.” 

This “orange man bad” mantra is often called “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”  It effectively shuts down all communication between disagreeing sides and prevents any kind of meaningful dialogue, even between good friends or family members.  Even intelligent people who are suffering greatly from Biden/liberal policies, through loss of jobs, high gas and oil prices, rapid inflation, high taxes, or curbs on religious freedoms, won’t be able to change their minds and consider voting for a conservative or moderate candidate once he is somehow linked to Donald Trump. 

They say, “If Trump is for it, then I am against it” even if that means they pay $5 a gallon for gas, can’t get formula for their babies, or can’t afford to heat their homes this winter. 

Why does this happen?  How do people make up their minds, and why do they stubbornly refuse to change them? 

You would think that people would evaluate important issues logically, like a math equation where 2+2=4, but this is not true with beliefs, especially when politics is involved.

Keith M. Bellizzi, professor of human development and family sciences, from the University of Connecticut, is among many who study cognitive psychology and neuroscience, and his article on the subject is a good start.  He explains that there are survival systems that are hard-wired into our brains that actually cause stubborn adherence to wrong beliefs.

“Belief perseverance” is one such system.  “Being presented with facts — whether via the news, social media or one-on-one conversations — that suggest their current beliefs are wrong causes people to feel threatened.”  They will reject the evidence, and often their original beliefs will become stronger.

“Confirmation bias” is “the natural tendency to seek out information or interpret things in a way that supports your existing beliefs.  Interacting with like-minded people and media reinforces confirmation bias.”  This is why liberals watch MSNBC and conservatives watch Fox. 

The brain itself is hardwired to reinforce existing opinions and beliefs, even if this might cause harm.  When you win an argument, your body releases a rush of pleasurable hormones like dopamine and adrenaline.  In a high-stress or threatening situation, cortisol is released, which depresses your logical mind and triggers the more basic part of your brain, which controls fight or flight.  You “see red,” voices are raised, fists get clenched, and it’s much more difficult to understand what the other side is saying. 

Other sociologists have identified other biases that effect logical vs. emotional thinking.

“Believing people from your tribe” 

Humans developed in tribal cultures, which continue to this day.  You are much less likely to believe an outsider.  Nowadays, a tribe is not just a reference to ethnicity or religion, but also belief systems in global warming or abortion, where members are easily identified by how they look or what they say. 

“The big lie” 

People, by nature, are well intentioned, and they assume that others are as well.  So when they hear a lie, they tend to believe it.  Interestingly, the bigger the lie, the more likely it is to be believed because they assume that no one would lie about something of such importance.  

All of these factors are related to survival going back to the earliest days of mankind.  If you constantly have to be re-evaluating your beliefs, such as “growling tigers are a reason to run,” then you might consider having a chat with such a tiger — and end up being his lunch. 

So how can you reach people with closed minds? 

1. Be from within their tribe.  Start by reinforcing what the two of you have in common — you may have lived in the same city, had similar jobs or similar backgrounds.  

2. Get permission to discuss — “Would you like to tell me about your views on global warming?”  This makes the idea of a discussion non-threatening. 

3. Resolve never to argue or raise your voice.  Don’t threaten or invoke fear.  If things start to become even a little heated, then withdraw — “we can always discuss this later” or “now may not be the time to discuss this.”  Getting into a heated argument is going to activate the liberal’s lizard brain and end logical reasoning.  

4. Start small.  Don’t try to convince the liberal that Donald Trump is the next George Washington.  Go for a smaller issue that doesn’t challenge one of his core beliefs.  “Should Iran have a nuclear weapon?” or “Would it be good for China to control our farmland?” 

5. Pick topics where you are well-versed.  Most of the people you will be talking with know very little factual information — they are used to hearing talking points and then parroting them back to you. 

6. Ask questions.  There is nothing threatening about asking an honest question, especially about something that is important to the liberal.  Make it clear that you are open and willing to listen to his side and willing to change your mind.  There is a brain/hormone thrill associated with converting someone to his side that will entice him to interact.  Your openness models good behavior — if you’re willing to change your mind, then he should be open-minded as well.

7. Ask “why?”  Few can survive three “whys” in a row.  The brainwashed rarely know the logic behind what they parrot.  

8. Focus on common sense and fairness.  “Does it make sense to spend $2 trillion to lower global temperature by 0.0006 degrees?”  “Does it seem fair to make a middle-class worker who never went to college pay for the student loan of a Harvard graduate with a women’s studies degree?” 

9. If you start to see the liberal’s resistance crumbling, share how you used to feel how he did, but you changed your mind when you learned new information. 

10. If you get him to change his mind on one topic, don’t gloat or insist that he admit he was wrong.  Just say, “I’m glad we had a chance to discuss this.  I learned a lot from you.  I hope we can talk again in the future.”  Then come back another time with a different topic that is more important.  

Changing minds is not a quick process.  Patience and self-control are essential.  Unless we can learn how to speak to our fellow Americans in a kind and understanding manner, we will never heal the divide in our nation. 

11 Reasons To Suspect Joe Biden Was X’d And Replaced

 I’m often asked to clarify what I mean by the quote marks around “Joe Biden” — as well as my frequent references to him as an “imposter” and Trump as the true acting president. Others, who understand exactly what I mean, continue to scoff at this theory — with some having requested removal from the free mailing list over such “craziness.” To avoid any further confusion or ambivalence, let me be perfectly candid and clear about the meaning of  “Joe Biden.”

I strongly SUSPECT
Note: I didn’t say “know” — I said “suspect” — So hold off on the nasty attack replies.

— that the arch-criminal, child rapist and traitor was, like his good friend and fellow mobster, John McCain — duly executed at Guantanamo Bay prison and then replaced by an imposter, supplemented by that “Deep Fake” CGI technology that the worried New York Times had previously warned about so often. We further infer (speculatively) from this that the country must be under some sort of emergency military “Continuity of Government” system activated by President Trump. Most of the “bad guys” (including the media) are under some degree of cooperative submission.

I have written extensively about Q and “the plan” — but for this piece, let’s keep it simple by focusing only upon certain data points which support the  “Joe Biden” hypothesis. Without further ado, I presents, in no particular order: The 11 Reasons I Believe Joe Biden is Dead.

1. 50-year criminals Biden & McCain — as thick as thieves — both executed? // 2. Read about “The Plan.”

1. APPEARANCE
This is the most compelling data of all. Both facially and physically, he does not look the same. The ears are different; the teeth are not as white; the eye colors and voice have varied; and the limbs seem like those of a younger man. Trump himself — the master troll artist — has jokingly pointed this out on several occasions.

  • “Now, I have to tell you, Biden is a different guy. He looks different than he used to, he acts different than he used to, he’s even slower than he used to be.”
  • “What the hell did Biden spend all that money on plastic surgery for if he’s going to cover it up with the mask?”

2. INAUGURATION
The imposter was inaugurated 13 minutes too early — at 11:47 on January 20, 2021. That had never happened before — suggesting that his “presidency” was cut short.

3.TRUMP HONORED AS PRESIDENT
When Trump — who never conceded the election nor attended the very strange and sparsely attended “inauguration” that day —  exited Marine One, he was respected with a red carpet rollout, a rendition of “Hail to the Chief,” and a 21-gun salute. The official presidential salute battery was at the ceremony. Departing presidents typically are not given such fanfare and honors.

4. POST-INAUGURATION FUNERAL PROCESSION
As soon as the fake inauguration — which Trump did not attend — was completed, what really looked like a presidential funeral procession left the Capitol for the “Tomb of the Unknown Soldier” at Arlington National Cemetery for a somber wreath-laying ceremony with a black carpet. This visit to a cemetery after an inauguration was as bizarre as it was historically unprecedented.

5. THE PLAYING OF “TAPS”
After “Biden” and Vice President “Kamala Harris” placed the wreath, a military bugler played “taps” — which is for military funerals.

Column 1: Actual images — a man in a mask. // Column 2: A surreal “inauguration” ceremony with no crowd and lots of things that didn’t fit. // 3. Column 3: It was Trump who received presidential honors that day, not “Biden.”
“Biden” and entourage head for the cemetery immediately after the “inauguration.” It looked just like a funeral procession.
1. Whose funeral, Mr. “Biden?” —- 2. “Taps” was played for the dead man.

6.WRONG GUNS & WRONG SONG
The funeral song was followed by a 13-gun salute.  which is for funerals of a “Minister Resident” – a diplomat who takes up temporary residence in a territory (DC is a territory, not a state). The band did not play “hail to the chief.” They played “Honors March One” which would be appropriate for a funeral for a Minister Resident — that being Joe Biden.

7. FAKE OVAL OFFICE & WHITE HOUSE SETS
The use of staged Oval Offices and other White House settings isn’t even concealed — Indeed, the MSM admits that the props are fake! (here) & (here) — What the heck is going on here?

8. TRUMP HINTS THAT BIDEN WAS “SHOT” BY FIRING SQUAD
Trump — ever the mischievous trickster — has gone out of his way to refer to Biden “getting his shot” (as in vaccine) or “being shot” (as in not mentally sound).

  •  “Biden got his shot.. he got his shot.”
  • “Now he (Joe Biden) is shot. He’s like, got half of his head left. He’s totally shot.” (video here)

9. BLUNDERS BLUNDERS BLUNDERS
The actor playing Biden has comically stumbled (literally), mumbled, bumbled and grumbled himself into a national embarrassment. Though many attribute Biden’s buffoonery to mental decline, the behavior also seems very consistent with someone tasked with “throwing the game” by wrecking the Demonrat Party from within.

10. BIDEN FOREIGN POLICY NOT SO RADICAL AFTER ALL
Believe it or not, but upon closer inspection, the damage that this “Biden” has done can be easily reversed. None of it is permanent. For example — though it was in his power to do so — he has not reinstated the Paris Climate Con in any substantive manner; nor did he bring back the ObongoCare penalties for the uninsured; nor has he fired John Durham, nor has he attacked any countries or re-started the proxy wars which Trump ended. When the “Red Wave” GOP Congressmen are sworn in next January, “Biden” will be rolled over.

11. PART OF A PATTERN
For those with an astute eye and ear, the sheer number of politicians, journalists and celebrities who look and sound “different” is astonishing — as is the number of such well-known names who have either “resigned,” been fired, been arrested, or suddenly died in recent years. Something IS going here — and that adds more context and credibility to the “Joe Biden” theory.

***************************

With so many big players having been quietly and safely removed from the battlefield, we expect at some point, the play actors will be “arrested” as part of the public show for the normies. If this scenario plays out, we’ll hopefully get to watch the tape-delayed executions “live” on the tellie.

1. Though it was claimed that Biden received a 21-gun salute, there is no video to confirm that 21 shots were fired. A military blogger
 now reports that only 13 were fired — and why at a cemetery on inauguration day? // 2.
 
“Joe Biden is shot, “he’s got half of his head left.” // 3. Playing the part — an actor with limbs younger than 80.
Globalist “Foreign Policy” Magazine noted that when it comes to foreign affairs, “Biden” really hasn’t changed anything.
Recently, Trump hinted that CNN’s recently fired Brian Stelter had actually been executed for treason — “REST IN PEACE”

The Dirty Diary of Biden’s Demented Daughter…

An older photo of Biden (the real one) with his troubled sex-obsessed daughter.


AUGUST 25, 2022


NY Times:
 
Florida Pair Pleads Guilty in Theft of Biden’s Daughter’s Diary


Aimee Harris and Robert Kurlander admitted to participating in a conspiracy in which Ashley Biden’s diary ended up in the hands of the conservative group Project Veritas near the end of the 2020 campaign.

The “theft” and emerging introduction of Ashley Biden‘s salacious diary — which includes allegations of incest — into the public and legal spheres smells like yet another one of those White Hat “washing of the fruit from the poison tree” operations. And oh what a pleasant aroma it is!

From the article:

“Two Florida residents pleaded guilty in federal court in Manhattan on Thursday to stealing a diary and other belongings of President Biden’s daughter, Ashley Biden, and selling them to the conservative group Project Veritas in the final weeks of the 2020 campaign.”

The “inadvertently” misplaced diary — like Hunter Biden’s child pornish laptop (“inadvertently” left at a repair shop) — and Alex Jones‘ cell phone contents (“inadvertently” sent to opposing counsel) — and the “raided” documents from Mar-a-Lago etc. etc. etc. is now fair game in a legal, evidentiary sense — which was the plan all along. Well played, White Hats, well played. By the way, Project Veritas has a defamation lawsuit going against the New York Times and O’Keefe is demanding a TON of money and a jury trial.

*Note: * Project Veritas never actually published the diaries after having come into possession of them. It was a much lesser known blogger which later published parts of them.

Ashley is the daughter of Pedo Monster Joe and his 2nd wife, Jill. 
2 & 3. A dirty, depraved and demented predator who cannot control himself around women (including other men’s wives), little girls and little boys.  .

The Times article represents a classic example of the practice known as “lying by omission.” What makes the diaries so potentially explosive is Ashley’s private speculation that she had been molested, and took showers with her father. But nowhere in this lengthy article are Ashley’s claims even mentioned. There is no longer any excuse for concealing this because, first of all, the diaries are now accepted as authentic, even by the Times —- and secondly, many millions of people are already aware of the claims because they have been circulating on the Internet for more than one year now. The following excerpt is the closest that the article comes to revealing that the diaries contain very bad information:

“The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan began the investigation in late October 2020, after it was alerted by Ms. Biden’s lawyers that Project Veritas had demanded an interview with her father about the contents of the diary, which included embarrassing disclosures about them.”

Spin it all you want, Sulzberger. But sooner or later, America will know that Joe Biden / “Joe Biden” is / was a child rapist. That’s what this whole operation is about, I believe.

Actual quote: “You know how horny I am standing next to a 13 year old girl.”

Another side-effect of this story is that it leads to more suspicion about the tragic crash in which Neila Biden(Biden’s first wife) and daughter Naomi (age 1) were killed. On the afternoon of December 18, 1972 — one month after he had been first elected to the U.S. Senate — Neilia was driving with her three toddlers along a rural road in Delaware. At an intersection, she inexplicably pulled out in front of an oncoming tractor-trailer truck. Police speculated that Neilia drove into the path of the truck because her head was turned and she did not see it.  All four occupants were taken to Wilmington General Hospital, where Neilia and Naomi were pronounced dead on arrival. Her two sons, Beau (3) and Hunter (2), were critically injured but survived the wreck with multiple serious injuries. Two weeks later, Papa Joe, just recently turned 30 years old, was sworn into the US Senate at the hospital where Beau and Hunter were still being treated.

Nearly 40 years later, Biden made the false claim that the truck driver (since deceased) had “drank his lunch” just before the fatal collision. The driver’s family vehemently denied that claim and the police did not substantiate it either. Lyin’ Biden soon apologized to the deceased trucker’s family. In a 2015 commencement speech at Yale University, the then-Vice President made a rather odd comment. He spoke of his first wife and then said:

“The incredible bond I have with my children is the gift I’m not sure I would have had, had I not been through what I went through [after the fatal accident]. But by focusing on my sons, I found my redemption.”

“Redemption?” Hmmmm. What did you have to “redeem” yourself of after the tragedy, Joe? Did you do something that drove your wife to madness?

The phenomenon of “Suicide by Truck” is well known within the trucking community, and something that truckers dread.  Could Neila Biden have been driven to killing herself and her three children as the only means of escaping a powerful & protected sex-mad pedo monster who was impregnating her at the rate of once-a-year and who may already have been diddling the genitals of all three of the toddlers? Is anything outside of the realm of possibility when dealing with these demons in human form?

Handling International Crises: From JFK to Biden

Since Biden appointed the chief architect of the Ukraine coup, Victoria Nuland, to be the third top official at the State Department, one cannot realistically expect a change in policy from this administration.

There are significant parallels between the international crises in Cuba in 1962 and Ukraine today. Both involved intense confrontations between the USA and the Soviet Union or Russia. Both involved third-party countries on the doorstep of a major power. The Cuban Missile Crisis threatened to lead to WW3, just as the Ukraine crisis does today.

Cuban Missile Crisis and  the current crisis in Ukraine 

In 1961, the US supported the “Bay of Pigs” invasion of Cuba. Although it failed, Washington’s hostile rhetoric and threats against Cuba continued, and the CIA conducted many failed assassination attempts against Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

Cuba, seeking to defend itself, or at least have a means of retaliating in case of another attack, sought missiles from the Soviet Union. The Soviets agreed and began secretly installing the missiles. As a sovereign nation having been attacked and under continuing threat, Cuba had the right to obtain these missiles.

US President John F. Kennedy thought otherwise. Invoking the Monroe Doctrine, he said the missiles endangered the US and must be removed. He imposed an air and sea quarantine on Cuba and threatened to destroy a Soviet ship traveling on the high seas to Cuba. The world was on edge, and there was global fear that World War 3 was about to erupt. In my homeland Canada, we went to bed seriously worried that nuclear war would break out overnight.

Fortunately for humanity, cooler heads prevailed, and there were negotiations. The Soviets agreed to withdraw the missiles in Cuba. In return, JFK agreed to withdraw US missiles in Turkey aimed at the Soviet Union. The Cubans were furious, thinking they had been betrayed and lost their means of defense. But the Soviets had the bigger picture in mind, along with a US commitment to not invade Cuba.

The situation now in Ukraine has similarities. Instead of missiles in Cuba being a threat to the US, NATO in Ukraine is seen as a threat to Russia. NATO has steadily expanded east and installed missiles in Poland and Romania. Since 2008, Russia has explicitly said that Ukrainian militarization by NATO was a red line for them. Kiev is much closer to Moscow than Havana is to Washington. If it was justifiable for JFK to give the ultimatum regarding missiles in Cuba, is it not justifiable for Russia to object to Ukraine being a part of a hostile military alliance?

How Both Putin and Biden Bungled in Ukraine

Different Responses

In 1962, the US and the Soviet Union realized that escalating tensions and hostilities must be avoided, and they turned to negotiations. They found a mutually acceptable compromise.

The situation seems more dangerous today. Instead of seeking an end to the war, the US and NATO are pouring in weapons and encouraging more bloodshed. It appears to be a proxy war with the US prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian. There are calls to escalate the conflict.

Ukraine Background 

Knowing the background to the current crisis is essential to understanding Putin’s actions. Unknown to most Americans, a crucial event took place in 2014 when a violent US-supported coup overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian government. US State Department official Victoria Nuland handed out cookies as Senator John McCain encouraged the anti-government protesters. In a secretly captured conversation with the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland selected who would run the government after the pending coup. In the final days, opposition snipers killed 100 people on both sides to inflame the situation and “midwife” the coup. Oliver Stone’s video “Ukraine on Fire” describes the background and events.

On the first day in power, the coup government issued a decree that removed Russian as a state language.

Within weeks, Crimea organized a referendum. With 85% participation, 96% voted to leave Ukraine and reunite with Russia. Why did they do this? Because most Crimeans speak Russian as their first language, and Crimea had been part of Russia since 1783. When Soviet premier Khrushchev transferred Crimea from the Russian republic to the Ukrainian republic in 1954, they were all within the Soviet Union.

In Odessa, anti-coup protesters were attacked by ultra-nationalist thugs who killed 48, including many burned alive as they sought refuge in the Trade Unions Hall. In eastern Ukraine, known as the Donbass, the majority of the population also opposed the ultra-nationalist coup government. Civil war broke out, with thousands killed.

With the participation of France, Germany, the Kiev government, and eastern Ukraine rebels, an agreement was reached and approved by the United Nations Security Council. It was called the Minsk Agreement. Russia has repeatedly encouraged the implementation of this agreement. Instead of negotiations and peace, the Kiev government and NATO have done the opposite. Since 2015, there have been more weapons, more threats, more NATO training, more encouragement of ultra-nationalism plus NATO military exercises explicitly designed to threaten and antagonize Russia. This is not speculation; it is described in a 2019 Rand report about “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia.”

Endangering the world

The Biden administration appears to want to prolong the conflict in Ukraine. President Biden declared in a “gaffe” that Putin must be replaced. Defense Secretary Austin has said the US goal is to “weaken Russia”. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton thinks Afghanistan in the 1980s is a “model” to follow in Ukraine by bogging Russia down in a protracted war. Republican and Democratic senators Graham and Blumenthal visited Kiev on July 7 and called for sending even more weapons. There is evidence that the US and UK have been advising Ukrainian president Zelensky to NOT negotiate.

The Need for Courage and Compromise

With war and bloodshed happening now, we need cooler heads to prevail as in 1962. We can have a LOSE – LOSE situation, endangering the whole world, or a compromise that guarantees Ukrainian independence while providing security assurances to Russia.

JFK had the courage and wisdom to resist the CIA and military generals who wanted to escalate the crisis. Does Joe Biden? There is a huge difference between the two presidents. JFK knew war first hand. He was injured and his brother died in WW2. He became an advocate for peace. It may have cost him his life, but millions of people were saved. In contrast, Joe Biden has been a proponent of every US war of the past three decades.  Not only that, he was a major player in the 2014 Ukraine coup and aftermath.

Since Biden appointed the chief architect of the Ukraine coup, Victoria Nuland, to be the third top official at the State Department, one cannot realistically expect a change in policy from this administration. Neo-cons are in charge.

If we are to avoid disaster, others must speak up and demand negotiations and settlement before the situation spirals out of control.