On a related point, we've all been reading about rumoured talks btw Ukraine and Russia to lay off each other's 'energy' infrastructure.
According to the always reliable, in fact inestimable Wapo, " Ukraine and Russia were set to send delegations to Doha this month to negotiate a landmark agreement halting strikes on energy and power infrastructure on both sides, diplomats and officials familiar with the discussions said, in what would have amounted to a partial cease-fire and offered a reprieve for both countries.
But the indirect talks, with the Qataris serving as mediators and meeting separately with the Ukrainian and Russian delegations, were derailed by Ukraine’s surprise incursion into Russia’s western Kursk region last week, according to the officials. The possible agreement and planned summit have not been previously reported."
Well, FWIW, I don't see Russia taking its foot off the gas -- ever -- until Ukraine concedes. Putin will never, ever, again be fooled by the West into any kind of ceasefire while Ukraine mans up and rearms. I understand that the Ukrainian power grid is hanging by a thread and there could be a humanitarian catastrophe this winter if Russia cuts the thread and plunges Ukraine into mid-winter darkness. A ceasefire could alleviate Ukrainian civilian suffering.
But, it won't happen. The way out for Ukraine is simply and only to sue for peace on Russia's terms. The outcome lies entirely in Kiev's hands...and the hands of Ukraine's Neocon and Uniparty masters.
I've said a few times here that NATO assistance in Ukraine's 'invasion' of Russia proves Putin's point. Eventual full-blown Ukraine membership in NATO would put NATO troops, materiel, and bases on the porous 1,400 mile border between Russia and Ukraine. Not to mention, nukes.
In case anybody doubts what NATO is up to now (and has been all along), read b's post yesterday on Moon of Alabama.
Australia deserves its fate, as does NZ. Both countries wouldn't give up their Anglo-Saxon supremacy notions and kept the monarch of a foreign country as their head of state.
The Aussies need to settle down. This is all being done to save and protect democracy in the world. Losing your nation’s sovereignty is a small price to pay for “saving their democracy.”
All the aforementioned former politicians/officials played their obsequious part in getting Australia to where we are today [see Wikileaks]. Meanwhile, Julian Assange arrived in Australia on 26 June, and has not spoken or been seen in public since. He has been disappeared.
Yes, all the aforementioned politicians played their obsequious...and cynical...part in following the US into abject wokification of the country. The same guys who sound the alarm on AUKUS ought to understand that they will not even have a viable country to preserve from AUKUS if they don't take a few deep breaths and rescue their country from the Karen State it is becoming. NZ, too.
As for Assange, perhaps he deserves a little rest and peace and quiet. Not saying that a muzzle wasn't part of the deal.
The plea deal contained no restrictions on him speaking. Assange walked off the plane in Canberra, with fists defiantly raised, and he hasn't said a single word publicly in 2 months.. The indefinite "rest and recover", "he may never want to speak again" narrative being advanced is just too convenient for the deep state. Assange's main complaint to the UN torture rapporteur was "I am voiceless". Speculation and excuses is not what WikiLeaks was about, so until Julian Assange speaks for himself, he not free.
It is illogical that Julian Assange would have not a single word to say, even to announce his intention to take a break, if he was not under some formal restrictions.
The most obvious formal restriction I can think of would be under Australia's national security laws [given that he is now a convicted felon in the US under the Espionage Act], such as the secret restrictions that could be placed upon him under the ASIO Act.
That's why I say until Julian Assange is able to speak freely for himself, he is not free.
On a related point, we've all been reading about rumoured talks btw Ukraine and Russia to lay off each other's 'energy' infrastructure.
According to the always reliable, in fact inestimable Wapo, " Ukraine and Russia were set to send delegations to Doha this month to negotiate a landmark agreement halting strikes on energy and power infrastructure on both sides, diplomats and officials familiar with the discussions said, in what would have amounted to a partial cease-fire and offered a reprieve for both countries.
But the indirect talks, with the Qataris serving as mediators and meeting separately with the Ukrainian and Russian delegations, were derailed by Ukraine’s surprise incursion into Russia’s western Kursk region last week, according to the officials. The possible agreement and planned summit have not been previously reported."
Well, FWIW, I don't see Russia taking its foot off the gas -- ever -- until Ukraine concedes. Putin will never, ever, again be fooled by the West into any kind of ceasefire while Ukraine mans up and rearms. I understand that the Ukrainian power grid is hanging by a thread and there could be a humanitarian catastrophe this winter if Russia cuts the thread and plunges Ukraine into mid-winter darkness. A ceasefire could alleviate Ukrainian civilian suffering.
But, it won't happen. The way out for Ukraine is simply and only to sue for peace on Russia's terms. The outcome lies entirely in Kiev's hands...and the hands of Ukraine's Neocon and Uniparty masters.
I've said a few times here that NATO assistance in Ukraine's 'invasion' of Russia proves Putin's point. Eventual full-blown Ukraine membership in NATO would put NATO troops, materiel, and bases on the porous 1,400 mile border between Russia and Ukraine. Not to mention, nukes.
In case anybody doubts what NATO is up to now (and has been all along), read b's post yesterday on Moon of Alabama.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/08/britain-claims-to-have-helped-with-the-ukrainian-invasion-of-russia.html#more
They're admitting it!
Seems obvious the US is setting up forward operating bases for confrontation is SE Asia.
Australia deserves its fate, as does NZ. Both countries wouldn't give up their Anglo-Saxon supremacy notions and kept the monarch of a foreign country as their head of state.
Serves them right, hahaha!!
Wow - thanks Mark. Amazing stuff. Glad to see many are recognizing US toxicity.
The Aussies need to settle down. This is all being done to save and protect democracy in the world. Losing your nation’s sovereignty is a small price to pay for “saving their democracy.”
We have to destroy both democracy and sovereignty in order to save them.
All the aforementioned former politicians/officials played their obsequious part in getting Australia to where we are today [see Wikileaks]. Meanwhile, Julian Assange arrived in Australia on 26 June, and has not spoken or been seen in public since. He has been disappeared.
Yes, all the aforementioned politicians played their obsequious...and cynical...part in following the US into abject wokification of the country. The same guys who sound the alarm on AUKUS ought to understand that they will not even have a viable country to preserve from AUKUS if they don't take a few deep breaths and rescue their country from the Karen State it is becoming. NZ, too.
As for Assange, perhaps he deserves a little rest and peace and quiet. Not saying that a muzzle wasn't part of the deal.
The plea deal contained no restrictions on him speaking. Assange walked off the plane in Canberra, with fists defiantly raised, and he hasn't said a single word publicly in 2 months.. The indefinite "rest and recover", "he may never want to speak again" narrative being advanced is just too convenient for the deep state. Assange's main complaint to the UN torture rapporteur was "I am voiceless". Speculation and excuses is not what WikiLeaks was about, so until Julian Assange speaks for himself, he not free.
I defer to your knowledge 'on the ground'.
I would only offer that certain restrictions on Assange didn't have to be written in the plea deal to be compelling restrictions.
That's why I'm so worried.
It is illogical that Julian Assange would have not a single word to say, even to announce his intention to take a break, if he was not under some formal restrictions.
The most obvious formal restriction I can think of would be under Australia's national security laws [given that he is now a convicted felon in the US under the Espionage Act], such as the secret restrictions that could be placed upon him under the ASIO Act.
That's why I say until Julian Assange is able to speak freely for himself, he is not free.
Too true.