Hey! Good Evening!

This evening's music features a bit of a format stretch, The Texas Tornados. Enjoy!

"The Ukraine invasion that never arrives is showing us once again that when it comes to Russia you really can just completely ignore all the so-called “experts” in the mainstream media. Just dismiss 100 percent of everything they say. Any random schmuck’s best guess is better than theirs."

-- Caitlin Johnstone

News and Opinion

What Is Going to Happen in Ukraine?

Every day brings new noise and fury in the crisis over Ukraine, mostly from Washington. But what is really likely to happen?

There are three possible scenarios:

The first is that Russia will suddenly launch an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.

The second is that the Ukrainian government in Kyiv will launch an escalation of its civil war against the self-declared People's Republics of Donetsk (DPR) and Luhansk (LPR), provoking various possible reactions from other countries.

The third is that neither of these will happen, and the crisis will pass without a major escalation of the war in the short term.

So who will do what, and how will other countries respond in each case?

Unprovoked Russian invasion

This seems to be the least likely outcome.

An actual Russian invasion would unleash unpredictable and cascading consequences that could escalate quickly, leading to mass civilian casualties, a new refugee crisis in Europe, war between Russia and NATO, or even nuclear war.

If Russia wanted to annex the DPR and LPR, it could have done so amid the crisis that followed the U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine in 2014. Russia already faced a furious Western response over its annexation of Crimea, so the international cost of annexing the DPR and LPR, which were also asking to rejoin Russia, would have been less then than it would be now.

Russia instead adopted a carefully calculated position in which it gave the Republics only covert military and political support. If Russia was really ready to risk so much more now than in 2014, that would be a dreadful reflection of just how far U.S.-Russian relations have sunk.

If Russia does launch an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine or annex the DPR and LPR, Biden has already said that the United States and NATO would not directly fight a war with Russia over Ukraine, although that promise could be severely tested by the hawks in Congress and a media hellbent on stirring up anti-Russia hysteria.

However, the United States and its allies would definitely impose heavy new sanctions on Russia, cementing the Cold War economic and political division of the world between the United States and its allies on one hand, and Russia, China and their allies on the other. Biden would achieve the full-blown Cold War that successive U.S. administrations have been cooking up for a decade, and which seems to be the unstated purpose of this manufactured crisis.

In terms of Europe, the U.S. geopolitical goal is clearly to engineer a complete breakdown in relations between Russia and the European Union (EU), to bind Europe to the United States. Forcing Germany to cancel its $11 billion Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline from Russia will certainly make Germany more energy dependent on the U.S. and its allies. The overall result would be exactly as Lord Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, described when he said that the purpose of the alliance was to keep "the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down."

Brexit (the U.K. departure from the EU) detached the U.K from the EU and cemented its "special relationship" and military alliance with the United States. In the current crisis, this joined-at-the-hip U.S.-U.K. alliance is reprising the unified role it played to diplomatically engineer and wage wars on Iraq in 1991 and 2003.

Today, China and the European Union (led by France and Germany) are the two leading trade partners of most countries in the world, a position formerly occupied by the United States. If the U.S. strategy in this crisis succeeds, it will erect a new Iron Curtain between Russia and the rest of Europe to inextricably tie the EU to the United States and prevent it from becoming a truly independent pole in a new multipolar world. If Biden pulls this off, he will have reduced America's celebrated "victory" in the Cold War to simply dismantling the Iron Curtain and rebuilding it a few hundred miles to the east 30 years later.

But Biden may be trying to close the barn door after the horse has bolted. The EU is already an independent economic power. It is politically diverse and sometimes divided, but its political divisions seem manageable when compared with the political chaos, corruption and endemic poverty in the United States. Most Europeans think their political systems are healthier and more democratic than America's, and they seem to be correct.

Like China, the EU and its members are proving to be more reliable partners for international trade and peaceful development than the self-absorbed, capricious and militaristic United States, where positive steps by one administration are regularly undone by the next, and whose military aid and arms sales destabilize countries (as in Africa right now), and strengthen dictatorships and extreme right-wing governments around the world.

But an unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine would almost certainly fulfill Biden's goal of isolating Russia from Europe, at least in the short term. If Russia was ready to pay that price, it would be because it now sees the renewed Cold War division of Europe by the United States and NATO as unavoidable and irrevocable, and has concluded that it must consolidate and strengthen its defenses. That would also imply that Russia has China's full support for doing so, heralding a darker and more dangerous future for the whole world.

Ukrainian escalation of civil war

The second scenario, an escalation of the civil war by Ukrainian forces, seems more likely.

Whether it is a full-scale invasion of the Donbas or something less, its main purpose from the U.S. point of view would be to provoke Russia into intervening more directly in Ukraine, to fulfill Biden's prediction of a "Russian invasion" and unleash the maximum pressure sanctions he has threatened.

While Western leaders have been warning of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russian, DPR and LPR officials have been warning for months that Ukrainian government forces were escalating the civil war and have 150,000 troops and new weapons poised to attack the DPR and LPR.

In that scenario, the massive U.S. and Western arms shipments arriving in Ukraine on the pretext of deterring a Russian invasion would in fact be intended for use in an already planned Ukrainian government offensive.

On one hand, if Ukrainian President Zelensky and his government are planning an offensive in the East, why are they so publicly playing down fears of a Russian invasion? Surely they would be joining the chorus from Washington, London and Brussels, setting the stage to point their fingers at Russia as soon as they launch their own escalation.

And why are the Russians not more vocal in alerting the world to the danger of escalation by Ukrainian government forces surrounding the DPR and LPR? Surely the Russians have extensive intelligence sources inside Ukraine and would know if Ukraine was indeed planning a new offensive. But the Russians seem much more concerned by the breakdown in U.S.-Russian relations than in what the Ukrainian military may be up to.

On the other hand, the U.S., U.K. and NATO propaganda strategy has been organized in plain sight, with a new "intelligence" revelation or high-level pronouncement for every day of the month. So what might they have up their sleeves? Are they really confident that they can wrong-foot the Russians and leave them carrying the can for a deception operation that could rival the Tonkin Gulf incident or the WMD lies about Iraq?

The plan could be very simple. Ukrainian government forces attack. Russia comes to the defense of the DPR and LPR. Biden and Boris Johnson scream "Invasion," and "We told you so!" Macron and Scholz mutely echo "Invasion," and "We stand together." The United States and its allies impose "maximum pressure" sanctions on Russia, and NATO's plans for a new Iron Curtain across Europe are a fait accompli.

An added wrinkle could be the kind of "false flag" narrative that U.S. and U.K. officials have hinted at several times. A Ukrainian government attack on the DPR or LPR could be passed off in the West as a "false flag" provocation by Russia, to muddy the distinction between a Ukrainian government escalation of the civil war and a "Russian invasion."

It's unclear whether such plans would work, or whether they would simply divide NATO and Europe, with different countries taking different positions. Tragically, the answer might depend more on how craftily the trap was sprung than on the rights or wrongs of the conflict.

But the critical question will be whether EU nations are ready to sacrifice their own independence and economic prosperity, which depends partly on natural gas supplies from Russia, for the uncertain benefits and debilitating costs of continued subservience to the U.S. empire. Europe would face a stark choice between a full return to its Cold War role on the front line of a possible nuclear war and the peaceful, cooperative future the EU has gradually but steadily built since 1990.

Many Europeans are disillusioned with the neoliberal economic and political order that the EU has embraced, but it was subservience to the United States that led them down that garden path in the first place. Solidifying and deepening that subservience now would consolidate the plutocracy and extreme inequality of U.S.-led neoliberalism, not lead to a way out of it.

Biden may get away with blaming the Russians for everything when he's kowtowing to war-hawks and preening for the TV cameras in Washington. But European governments have their own intelligence agencies and military advisors, who are not all under the thumb of the CIA and NATO. The German and French intelligence agencies have often warned their bosses not to follow the U.S. pied piper, notably into Iraq in 2003. We must hope they have not all lost their objectivity, analytical skills or loyalty to their own countries since then.

If this backfires on Biden, and Europe ultimately rejects his call to arms against Russia, this could be the moment when Europe bravely steps up to take its place as a strong, independent power in the emerging multipolar world.

Nothing happens

This would be the best outcome of all: an anti-climax to celebrate.

At some point, absent an invasion by Russia or an escalation by Ukraine, Biden would sooner or later have to stop crying "Wolf" every day.

All sides could climb back down from their military build-ups, panicked rhetoric, and threatened sanctions.

The Minsk Protocol could be revived, revised and reinvigorated to provide a satisfactory degree of autonomy to the people of the DPR and LPR within Ukraine, or facilitate a peaceful separation.

The United States, Russia, and China could begin more serious diplomacy to reduce the threat of nuclear war and resolve their many differences, so that the world could move forward to peace and prosperity instead of backwards to Cold War and nuclear brinkmanship.

Conclusion

However it ends, this crisis should be a wake-up call for Americans of all classes and political persuasions to reevaluate our country's position in the world. We have squandered trillions of dollars, and millions of other people's lives, with our militarism and imperialism. The U.S. military budget keeps rising with no end in sight–and now the conflict with Russia has become another justification for prioritizing weapons spending over the needs of our people.

Our corrupt leaders have tried but failed to strangle the emerging multipolar world at birth through militarism and coercion. As we can see after 20 years of war in Afghanistan, we cannot fight and bomb our way to peace or stability, and coercive economic sanctions can be almost as brutal and destructive. We must also re-evaluate the role of NATO and wind down this military alliance that has become such an aggressive and destructive force in the world.

Instead, we must start thinking about how a post-imperial America can play a cooperative and constructive role in this new multipolar world, working with all our neighbors to solve the very serious problems facing humanity in the 21st Century.

Russian FM delivers his message to NATO

MSM: How can we peer deeply into the mind of Putin to understand his motives and goals?
Putin: I want an end to NATO expansionism and for these clear red lines I've listed to be respected.
MSM: Nobody knows what he wants. It's impossible to tell. https://t.co/hPmWFSdWno

— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) February 16, 2022

A Call for Peace: Russian & U.S. Women Push for Diplomacy, Not Military Action, to Resolve Crisis

Joe Biden says risk of Russian invasion of Ukraine ‘very high’

Joe Biden has said he believes Russia is on the brink of invading Ukraine, as he joined Nato allies in warning that shelling in the disputed east of the country may be an attempt to set up the pretext for an incursion.

Claims of attacks by Russian-backed separatists at several locations in Ukraine’s Donbas region, including at a kindergarten and a school, were said to bear the hallmarks of an attempt to incite conflict.

The US president, speaking shortly after the expulsion of his country’s deputy ambassador to Moscow, said his administration had “reason to believe” that Russia was “engaged in a false-flag operation to have an excuse to go in”. He told reporters: “Every indication we have is they’re prepared to go into Ukraine, attack Ukraine … My sense is it will happen in the next several days.”

The president made his comments as Russia handed over its long-awaited response to American and Nato proposals about European security. The Kremlin said in its 10-page letter that the US had not taken its concerns seriously about Ukraine’s potential to join Nato and that Russia would need to take unspecified “measures of a military-technical nature”.

Separatists announce evacuation from Ukraine, West says Russia creates pretext for war

In Face of US Claims, Moscow Says "There Is No 'Russian Invasion' of Ukraine"

Amid global demands for urgent diplomacy to de-escalate the Ukraine crisis, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Thursday rebuffed allegations by the Biden administration—along with other Western governments and corporate media—that Russia intends to imminently invade its neighbor.

"There is no 'Russian invasion' of Ukraine, which the U.S. and its allies have been announcing officially since last fall, and it is not planned, therefore, statements about 'Russia's responsibility for escalation' can be regarded as an attempt to exert pressure and devalue Russia's proposals for security guarantees," said the ministry in its official response to a U.S. statement issued last month on Moscow's security demands, including Ukraine's exclusion from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

"We are calling on the U.S. and NATO to return to compliance with international commitments in the area of upholding peace and security," the ministry's document explains, according to the Russian news agency TASS. "We expect concrete proposals from the alliance's members about the form and substance of the legal confirmation that further eastward expansion by NATO will be abandoned."

The Russian statement, which centralizes "practical measures on de-escalation," accuses the United States of failing to provide a constructive response to Moscow's demands, adding that "this approach and the accompanying narrative by U.S. officials are reinforcing substantiated doubts that Washington is really committed to rectifying the European security situation."

"In the absence of readiness of the U.S. side to negotiate solid, legally binding guarantees of our security by the US and its allies," the document states, "Russia will have to react, including via implementation of measures of military-technical nature."

'The powers that be' care for intl law only when it suits them - Putin on sanctions

Protesters defy police presence in Ottawa after officers warn of crackdown

Truckers who have blockaded downtown Ottawa for nearly three weeks have defied a growing police presence in the Canadian capital and ignored repeated warnings that they could face steep fines and possible arrest. Officers had warned of an impending crackdown on Thursday, as busloads of police reinforcements arrived in the city and work crews took the rare step of erecting metal fences outside the senate and parliament.

Despite heavy rain, supporters flocked to Parliament Hill, while the mood of imminent confrontation receded. “I ain’t going anywhere,” said Pat King, one of protest organizers. “I haven’t overstayed my welcome. My taxes paid for me to be here.”

One of the leaders of the so-called “freedom convoy” was arrested as the interim police chief warned that action was “imminent”. Chris Barber was taken into custody on Thursday afternoon and was set to face criminal charges. Hours later, Tamara Lich, another organizer of the convoy, was arrested in downtown Ottawa. ...

Earlier in the afternoon, the city’s deputy police chief said officers had planned for a number of scenarios after people ignored two formal warnings to leave the area immediately. “We want people to peacefully leave,” said Steve Bell said, adding: “But I can tell you that if they do not peacefully leave, we have plans, strategies and tactics to be able to get them to leave.” Police had established 100 checkpoints along a wide-ranging cordon around the city’s downtown.

Inside Biden's Legal FIGHT Against Student Debtors

Poll Shows 83% of Democrats Want Biden to Nix Student Debt

Polling out Thursday reveals overwhelming support from President Joe Biden's party for canceling student loan debt.

Among Democrats, according to the survey from Navigator Research, 83% expressed support for the federal government wiping out at least a portion of such debt.

Looking at respondents overall, 63% back debt cancellation, including 59% of Independents and 41% of Republicans. The strongest support came from Black Americans at 87%, followed by Hispanic (72%), Asian Americans and Pacific Islander (68%), and white (57%) respondents.

Strong support for debt cancellation came whether or not respondents hold debt themselves. Eighty-nine percent of those currently saddled with student loan debt support cancellation compared to 75% among those who've ever had such debt at any time. Even among those who've never had student debt at all, support for cancellation stood at 55%.

Navigator conducted the survey of 1,000 registered voters February 3-7, 2022.

Trump and two eldest children must testify in New York case, judge rules

Donald Trump and two of his children have been ordered by a New York judge to appear for a deposition within the next three weeks, as part of the billowing investigation over alleged fraud in the valuation of assets belonging to his family business.

The ruling by Judge Arthur Engoron to force Trump and his two eldest children – Donald Jr and Ivanka – to comply with subpoenas amounts to a sharp escalation of the legal perils that are rapidly tightening around the former president.

The family has been striving to fend off demands for documents, information and testimony from the New York state attorney general, Letitia James. She is investigating whether the Trump Organization used “fraudulent or misleading” valuations of its assets to attract loans and reduce its tax burden.

Following a two-hour hearing on Thursday, Engoron delivered a blunt rebuttal to arguments put forward by Trump lawyers that the former president should not be subjected to questioning in the civil case because the information could be used against him in criminal proceedings that are running in parallel. The judge went so far as to say that had James not subpoenaed them, it would have been “a blatant dereliction of duty”.

Under the judge’s ruling, Trump must now testify within 21 days and hand over “documents and information” within 14 days. The development is the second severe blow for the former president in the space of a week. On Monday, it was revealed that the longtime accounting firm for the Trump Organization, Mazars USA, had broken off ties with the family business, saying that it could no longer stand by 10 years of annual financial statements that it had prepared for the group.

Thanks to new congressional maps, most Americans’ votes won’t matter

The most fundamental concept in American government is that all politicians are accountable to the people. Constituents accept laws shaped by the people they vote for, knowing that they have the power to eventually vote them out of office if they disagree.

But when it comes to the US House of Representatives, this pillar of democracy is crumbling. An overwhelming majority of seats in the US House are becoming non-competitive. That means that when voters show up at the polls in November to vote for their candidates, the contests will already be decided. Their votes won’t matter. ...

Just 27 of the 335 congressional districts that have been drawn so far as part of the redistricting process are considered competitive – meaning either party has less than a five-point advantage – according to FiveThirtyEight. Dave Wasserman, an elections expert for the non-partisan Cook Political Report, told me he expects there to be 30 to 35 competitive seats in total once states finish drawing all 435 district boundaries. That means that as many as 94% of representatives would be running in relatively safe seats – a figure that astonished me.

Why is this happening? Some of the decline in competitive seats is due to natural geographic clustering of likeminded voters. That clumping means that when states draw new lines, it’s harder to draw competitive districts. In 2012, there were 66 competitive districts, Wasserman noted. By 2020, under the same set of lines, there were 51.

But politicians are undoubtedly accelerating the decline in competition by distorting district lines to their advantage. As redistricting has unfolded this year, elected officials made aggressive efforts to change district lines to shore up incumbents, locking in their seats for several more years.

World spends $1.8tn a year on subsidies that harm environment, study finds

The world is spending at least $1.8tn (£1.3tn) every year on subsidies driving the annihilation of wildlife and a rise in global heating, according to a new study, prompting warnings that humanity is financing its own extinction.

From tax breaks for beef production in the Amazon to financial support for unsustainable groundwater pumping in the Middle East, billions of pounds of government spending and other subsidies are harming the environment, says the first cross-sector assessment for more than a decade.

This government support, equivalent to 2% of global GDP, is directly working against the goals of the Paris agreement and draft targets on reversing biodiversity loss, the research on explicit subsidies found, effectively financing water pollution, land subsidence and deforestation with state money.

The authors, who are leading subsidies experts, say a significant portion of the $1.8tn could be repurposed to support policies that are beneficial for nature and a transition to net zero, amid growing political division about the cost of decarbonising the global economy.

The report calls for governments to agree a target to eradicate environmentally harmful subsidies by the end of the decade at the biodiversity Cop15 gathering in China later this year, where it is hoped a “Paris agreement for nature” will be signed, and for companies to reveal the subsidies they receive as part of environmental disclosure reporting.

Climate Warriors Get A New Weapon

Amazon and Comcast executives are trying to block their shareholders from voting on initiatives designed to expose the companies’ investments in the fossil fuel industry during the climate crisis. But a little-noticed new directive from federal regulators may complicate their plans — and give climate activists a new weapon to hold corporations accountable. The new edict from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) suggests the agency is moving away from blessing companies’ attempts to quash shareholder initiatives pressing corporate management to be more forthcoming about business practices.

Despite opposition from powerful corporate lobby groups, regulators under President Biden’s new SEC Chairman Gary Gensler issued the directive in November. It could have a big impact as corporations move into the annual shareholder meeting season this spring, which is when shareholders can bring forward initiatives to press the companies in which they own stock to change their behavior. Although not legally binding, such legal guidances explain the views of regulators — and this latest directive represents a potential sea change. For years, the SEC has been allowing company executives’ attempts to shut down these initiatives, arguing that shareholders should not be able to dictate day-to-day business decisions. But the new SEC directive suggests the agency is changing its views in the face of the intensifying climate crisis.

“I think (the directive) will help our case that shareholders have a right to ask companies to provide analysis about decisions made that have a potential material impact on the brand,” said Andrew Behar, CEO of the nonprofit shareholder advocacy group As You Sow. “The companies claim that we are trying to meddle with human resources [and] ordinary business. We just care about them doing one thing in their operations and marketing and the exact opposite in their investing.”

Faced with governmental inaction, climate activists have increasingly looked to shareholder resolutions as a way to compel emission reductions and greater corporate transparency. While not legally binding, these measures still have power over corporate behavior because companies that resist the resolutions could lose control of their boards or support from key shareholders. Shareholder resolutions are permitted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and they are often brought by shareholders at banks, public pension funds, tech companies, and other major businesses.

Nearly half of bald eagles tested across US show signs of chronic lead exposure

America’s national bird is more beleaguered than previously believed, with nearly half of bald eagles tested across the US showing signs of chronic lead exposure, according to a study published Thursday. While the bald eagle population has rebounded from the brink of extinction since the US banned the pesticide DDT in 1972, harmful levels of toxic lead were found in the bones of 46% of bald eagles sampled in 38 states from California to Florida, researchers reported in the journal Science.

Similar rates of lead exposure were found in golden eagles, which scientists say means the raptors probably consumed carrion or prey contaminated by lead from ammunition or fishing tackle.

The blood, bones, feathers and liver tissue of 1,210 eagles sampled from 2010 to 2018 were examined to assess chronic and acute lead exposure. “This is the first time for any wildlife species that we’ve been able to evaluate lead exposure and population level consequences at a continental scale,” said study co-author Todd Katzner, a wildlife biologist at US Geological Survey in Boise, Idaho.

“It’s sort of stunning that nearly 50% of them are getting repeatedly exposed to lead.” Lead is a neurotoxin that even in low doses impairs an eagle’s balance and stamina, reducing its ability to fly, hunt and reproduce. In high doses, lead causes seizures, breathing difficulty and death.

The study estimated that lead exposure reduced the annual population growth of bald eagles by 4% and golden eagles by 1%.

‘Loading the dice’: climate crisis could increase southern California wildfires

A convergence of dangerous weather conditions, exacerbated by the climate crisis, has set the stage for southern California to see an increase in catastrophic wildfires over the coming decades, according to a new study.

Southern California, home to 23 million people, has largely been spared the kind of extreme fire escalation experienced in the northern part of the state, but models drawn up by researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, have predicted that will change.

Wildfires in southern California are often driven by dry winds, low humidity and high temperatures, and the climate crisis is creating the perfect conditions for them to burn hotter, faster and more frequently. Analyzing data from 49 climate stations scattered across the southern coast from Santa Barbara to San Diego, the UCLA study found that the region could see double the number of what scientists call “large fire days” by 2100 if greenhouse gas emissions are not curbed.

Even in a more moderate scenario, where heating is slowed, the researchers’ models showed a 60% increase in high-risk days compared with the late 20th century.

“Things are going to get worse,” Glen MacDonald, a professor of geography at UCLA and the lead author of the study, said.

Also of Interest

Here are some articles of interest, some which defied fair-use abstraction.

John Pilger: War in Europe & the Rise of Raw Propaganda

British Officials Spread Russia Coup Plot Disinformation For United States

A path out of the Ukraine crisis

US and Russian Officials at Odds Over Status of Russian Troops Near Ukraine

Media Studies - ('Russian Invasion' Scam)

The US Has Zero Moral Authority: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix

It's Settled That Israel Is Committing the Crime of Apartheid—Now What Should We Do About It?

Trudeau’s Money Heist: Emergencies Act Allows Seizure of Bank Accounts, Securities, Crypto of Those Suspected of “Links” to Convoy Members w/o Court Order

FBI Raids and Subpoenas Have Been Occurring on Wall Street. What’s Up?

Trump Donor John Malone Could Soon Be Calling Shots at CNN

Saudi Arabia DENIES Biden Push To Speed Up Oil Production Gas Prices, Inflation Loom Over Midterms

Is BlackRock CEO Larry Fink The Most POWERFUL Man In The World?

A Little Night Music

The Texas Tornados - Wasted Days and Wasted Nights

Roy Head with Doug Sahm & the Texas Tornados - Treat Her Right

Texas Tornados - A Little Bit Is Better Than Nada

Texas Tornados - Who Were You Thinkin' Of

The Texas Tornados - Tus Mentiras

The Texas Tornados - Is Anybody Goin' to San Antone

The Texas Tornados - Did I Tell You

The Texas Tornados - She's About a Mover (Live)

The Texas Tornados - Guacamole

The Texas Tornados - en vivo en Austin Tx