Hey! Good Evening!

This evening's music features one man band Dr. Isaiah Ross. Enjoy!

“No destiny attacks us from outside. But, within him, man bears his fate and there comes a moment when he knows himself vulnerable; and then, as in a vertigo, blunder upon blunder lures him.”

-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

News and Opinion

Biden Okays F-16s For Ukraine, US Weapons To Attack Crimea

The Biden administration has signed off on both F-16s for Ukraine and attacks on Crimea using US-made weapons. Both of these moves have drawn dire warnings from nuclear-armed Russia, and both would have been unthinkable a year ago.

In a Sunday interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper from the G7 summit in Hiroshima, Biden’s National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan made it clear that Washington would approve of US weapons being used in an offensive to recapture Crimea, a horrifying prospect that many experts have agreed is the most likely scenario to lead to nuclear warfare in this conflict. Sullivan told Tapper that while the US has forbidden the use of American weapons to attack Russia, the US considers Crimea to be part of Ukraine, not Russia.

Here’s CNN’s transcript of the exchange:

TAPPER: In February on this show, you would not say whether the U.S. would support Ukrainian efforts to recapture Crimea. That’s one of the concerns that has been expressed about whether or not the Ukrainians are given the ability to hit Russian targets in Crimea. Do you think that Crimea is part of Ukraine?

SULLIVAN: Of course.
TAPPER: So, what would be the objection of giving…

SULLIVAN: Crimea is Ukraine.
TAPPER: Right.
SULLIVAN: I mean, that’s a very straightforward thing.

TAPPER: Well, yes you answered it directly. I mean, Russia doesn’t think so, obviously. But do you think that Ukraine should have weapons that can reach Russian targets in Crimea
SULLIVAN: Yes. We have not placed limitations on Ukraine being able to strike on its territory within its internationally recognized borders. What we have said is that we will not enable Ukraine with U.S. systems, Western systems, to attack Russia. And we believe Crimea is Ukraine.

TAPPER: OK.

Moscow has considered Crimea a part of the Russian Federation since its annexation in 2014, meaning efforts to recapture it would — at least in theory — be treated the same as an invasion of any other part of Russia. It was only by way of an arbitrary bureaucratic fluke that Crimea wound up a part of Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union, and Crimeans overwhelmingly prefer to be a part of the Russian Federation. That we may soon be staring down the barrel of a nuclear third world war over something so pedantic is a very dark shade of absurd.

In the same interview, Tapper questioned Sullivan about the Biden administration’s policy shift toward approving F-16 fighter jets to be sent to Ukraine, demanding to know why the war planes weren’t approved sooner.

“President Biden told the G7 leaders that the United States is going to support this joint effort to train Ukrainian pilots to fly F-16 fighter jets,” said Tapper. “As you know, just a few months ago, the president said there was no basis militarily for giving Ukraine jets and that Ukraine didn’t need them at all. What changed? And would these jets not have been more effective if Ukraine had been trained and had them in time for the upcoming counteroffensive?”

It’s so obnoxious how the only time you ever see these mass media propagandists challenging the US government on its warmongering is when they’re pushing it to be more warlike and demanding answers on why it isn’t warmongering more. This creates the illusion of brave adversarial journalism, when in reality these empire cronies are just manufacturing consent for the increased aggressions the US wants to wage anyway.

These escalations have drawn stern warnings from Moscow, which have just been casually hand-waved away by Biden like he’s rejecting jello for dessert. In an article titled “Russia Says West Providing F-16s to Ukraine a ‘Colossal Risk’”, Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp writes the following:

A Russian official said Saturday that the Western plans to provide Ukraine with American-made F-16 fighter jets bring “colossal risks” after the US announced it would sign off on European countries delivering the aircraft.

“We see that Western countries are still adhering to the escalation scenario. It involves colossal risks for themselves,” said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko, according to TASS.

“In any case, this will be taken into account in all our plans, and we have all the necessary means to achieve the goals we have set,” Grushko added.

During the last day of the G7 Summit in Hiroshima, Japan, President Biden was asked about Russia calling the F-16 plan a “colossal risk.” He replied, “It is for them.”

Deciding to bring the world one step closer to nuclear war while in Hiroshima, how appropriate https://t.co/zuUOuTTpdM

— Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) May 20, 2023

As Tapper noted, both the F-16 decision and the Crimea decision marked a sharp policy shift by the Biden administration in just a few months. This proxy war just keeps escalating and escalating, with aggressions once deemed unthinkable due to their likelihood of sparking a nuclear exchange now becoming commonplace. Every time a new once-unthinkable escalation is enacted, the hawks are already pushing for the next one.

As we’ve discussed previously, this pattern of continually escalating nuclear brinkmanship in Ukraine has built-in incentives for Russia to ramp up its own aggressions against NATO itself. Every time the west ramps up its brinkmanship and crosses another once-taboo line in the sand without Moscow responding with direct military confrontation, the west takes this as a sign that it can ramp up the escalations again. This has put things on a trajectory toward more and more direct western-backed attacks on the Russian Federation unless Russia lashes out at NATO powers in some way to show them it’s not worth it. Which would be about as dangerous an occurrence as you could possibly imagine.

It is not okay for our rulers to play games with our lives like this. It is not okay for them to keep rolling the dice on nuclear escalation more and more often in the name of securing US unipolar hegemony. These people are making it abundantly clear that sanity and level-headedness are not in the driver’s seat here. Everyone on earth should be shouting a loud, unequivocal “no” to this at the top of their lungs.

Russia 'deeply concerned' after Belgorod raids

Anti-Putin militia claims to have overrun village in Russia border region of Belgorod

Fighting has broken out along the Russian border with Ukraine after self-described Russian partisan forces claimed to have overrun a border village within Russia for the first time in the war. The Freedom of Russia Legion, which describes itself as an anti-Kremlin militia seeking to liberate Russia from Vladimir Putin, said it had crossed the border and overrun the settlement of Kozinka, while sending units into the town of Grayvoron in Russia’s Belgorod region.

Footage of the raid, purportedly from a border checkpoint in Grayvoron, showed casualties including a Russian officer lying face down in a pool of blood next to Russian passports and other documents scattered on the floor. The video also showed armoured vehicles appearing to overrun the post.

Another anti-Kremlin militia, the Russian Volunteer Corps, which is led by a prominent Russian nationalist, also said it had taken part in the raid. Late on Monday it released video footage showing what it said was a fighter inspecting a captured armoured vehicle. Smoke was reportedly seen after unconfirmed reports that a drone had been used to drop explosives on an office of the FSB security service.

The Belgorod governor, Vyacheslav Gladkov, said eight people were wounded after the town came under Ukrainian artillery fire, news agencies reported. Most residents had left the area but the situation remained “tense”, he said. In nearby Zamostye village, a projectile hit a kindergarten and caused a fire. One woman was wounded in her hand, Gladkov said.

Belgorod reckless stunt damages collective west narrative

Worth a full read:

Patrick Lawrence: Rearmament & Europe’s Welfare

Maybe you recall all the post–Cold War talk of a “peace dividend” and maybe you don’t: It depends on when you took up residence on this mortal coil. The term arose as the Soviet Union disintegrated and was commonly mentioned during George H.W. Bush’s presidency, 1989–1993. A dramatic reduction in defense spending, and a corresponding increase in expenditures on education, health care, and so on, was put around as one of Bush I’s outstanding achievements. That was the peace dividend.

The thing you need to know about all the talk of a peace dividend back then is that it was all talk. And the thing you need to know now, with Cold War II in more or less full swing and the proxy war against Russia raging in Ukraine, is that there is no longer any need to know anything about the peace dividend. As we speak, it takes its place as an artifact of another time, a curiosity in the way of … what? … maybe Eisenhower’s promise of free electricity in his “Atoms for Peace” speech, delivered at the United Nations in 1953.

The New York Times published a remarkable piece on this topic last week under the headline, “The ‘Peace Dividend’ Is Over in Europe. Now Come the Hard Tradeoffs.” There are two ways to read this lengthy report, text and subtext.

On one hand, it tells us exactly what the headline promises: European leaders, in response to the Ukraine crisis, now plan to dump a lot more money into the weapons of war and a lot less into the social-democratic apparatus — welfare programs, social programs, cultural programs — in which European citizens have long taken pride.

On the other, this piece has a special message for Americans: There shall be no more daydreaming about how good the Danes or the French have it. The military-industrial complex has crossed the Atlantic. Neoliberalism has won. It is indeed the end of history.

Russia hits pricey US Patriot systems in Ukraine

WSJ Worries Debt Limit Fight Could Jeopardize Military Contractors’ Profits

The Wall Street Journal is very concerned about the effects of the debt limit fight…on military contractors. In an article (5/12/23) headlined “Debt-Ceiling Fight Weighs on Defense Industry,” the paper reported, “If the US defaults on its debt and is unable to pay all its bills this summer, the pain will fall squarely on the defense industry.”

A default could disrupt payments to military contractors, the Journal pointed out, and even a temporary suspension of the debt ceiling for several months “would raise the likelihood the Defense Department will have to make do with a temporary budget known as a continuing resolution.” This would likely “inflate the costs of military programs, delay the launch of new ones and prevent production increases.” In short, weapons producers might feel a momentary pinch after years of war profits.

But, given the unlikelihood of outright default, the more concerning scenario for the Journal has to do with budget talks. The piece noted that, as the largest item on the discretionary side of the federal budget—which excludes social programs like Social Security and Medicare, which are funded on an ongoing basis—military spending could soon find itself on the chopping block. And who’s taking the pain? Your friendly old drone supplier:

Concerns that military spending could be cut—or, at best delayed—in a debt-ceiling fight have weighed heavily on investor sentiment toward the biggest military contractors. Shares in Lockheed Martin are down this year more than 7%, with General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman off 15% and 20%, respectively.

Dear God, no! We must take action to address the “‘wall of worry’ among investors”!

All the valiant fighters for justice are concerned. We hear from a congressional representative who castigates Republicans who “play chicken with the full faith and credit of our country” and “jeopardize our national security.” Then an Air Force secretary is brought in to sound the alarm about the strategic harms of failing to fund the military.

Where are the voices opposed to increased military spending, who represent the majority of the US public rather than the minority of war profiteers? Probably off playing hackysack. The Journal evidently couldn’t reach them.

Dems KICK THEMSELVES For Debt Ceiling Debacle

Biden and McCarthy hold debt talks to no avail as default deadline looms

The US House speaker Kevin McCarthy and president Joe Biden said they had a “productive” discussion on the debt ceiling late on Monday at the White House but that no deal had been reached, as the government seeks to avoid a potentially catastrophic economic event.

If the debt limit is not raised, the US government will default on its bills: a historic first likely to have catastrophic consequences. Federal workers would be furloughed, global stock markets would be likely to crash and the US economy would probably drop into recession. The treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, has said this will happen on or around 1 June if no deal to raise the $31.4tn debt ceiling is reached.

McCarthy leads Republicans demanding harsh spending cuts in return for raising the ceiling. Democrats fear Republicans are willing to allow talks to fail whatever the cost, seeing a default as a price worth paying for beating Biden next year.

Biden has said he will consider spending cuts but has called Republican proposals “extreme” and “unacceptable”, saying he will not back subsidies for big energy companies and “wealthy tax cheats” or put healthcare and food assistance at risk.

At the start of the White House meeting on Monday evening, the president told reporters: “We both talked about the need for bipartisan agreement.” He also said he “was optimistic we’re going to make some progress” but said both sides need a bipartisan agreement to “sell it” to their constituencies. There may still be some disagreements, Biden said.

Watchdog to Biden DOJ: Don't Defend 'Unconstitutional' Debt Ceiling Against Lawsuit

A government watchdog on Monday urged the U.S. Justice Department not to defend the debt ceiling statute against a lawsuit recently filed by a union of federal employees and to support the group's effort to expedite its case as the crucial June 1 deadline nears.

"Attorney General Merrick Garland must refuse to defend the unconstitutional legal incoherence that is the debt ceiling," Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project, said in a statement. "The Justice Department should file papers supporting the National Association of Government Employees' request."

Hauser's demand came days after the National Association of Government Employees (NAGE) filed for an emergency injunction in their case, which was initially brought on May 8.

The union's new filing declares the debt limit, first established in 1917, a "violation of the separation of powers and the Presentment Clause as set forth in Articles I and II of the United States Constitution" and seeks to bar Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen from "limiting the borrowing of the United States pursuant to the debt limit statute."

The request for an emergency injunction was submitted as debt ceiling talks between the White House and congressional Republicans faltered, with the House GOP pushing for spending cuts that would devastate key social programs and undermine the government's ability to respond to an economic downturn. ...

Yellen and Biden, the defendants in the NAGE lawsuit, have both been served with a summons and must respond by June 6 at the latest—five days after Yellen says that, in the absence of congressional action, U.S. will run out of money to pay its obligations.

Hauser said Monday that Garland should intervene in the case "as soon as possible," arguing the Biden administration has "no justification" to "dither."

"Garland has no reason to defend the nonsense which is the debt ceiling, besides a vague sense of formality and tradition driven by elite political etiquette," said Hauser. "The cost of prioritizing tradition for tradition's sake would be irreparable harm to the U.S. and global economies, caused by a first-ever U.S. default as soon as June 1—or else complete capitulation to the ultra-MAGA faction of the House Republican caucus that marionettes Kevin McCarthy." ...

"Garland may be constitutionally reluctant to seek the spotlight, but this crisis threatens the stability of the nation, and indeed, the global economy," Hauser added. "He should not prioritize his own sense of formality over the language of the Constitution he swore to uphold."

Here’s Why Police Oversight Boards Always Fail

DeSantis’s $13.5m police program lures officers with violent records to Florida

Numerous police officers lured to new jobs in Florida with cash from Governor Ron DeSantis’s flagship law enforcement relocation program have histories of excessive violence or have been arrested for crimes including kidnapping and murder since signing up, a study of state documents has found.

DeSantis, who is expected to launch his campaign for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination this week, has spent more than $13.5m to date on the recruitment bonus program, which he touted in 2021 as an incentive to officers in other states frustrated by Covid-19 vaccination mandates.

“This will go a long way to ensuring we can have the best and the brightest filling our law enforcement ranks,” Florida’s Republican attorney general, Ashley Moody, said in April last year as DeSantis announced one-time $5,000 bonuses for new recruits.

However, among the almost 600 officers who moved to Florida and received the bonus – or were recruited in state – are a sizable number who either arrived with a range of complaints against them, or have since accrued criminal charges, the online media outlet Daily Dot has discovered.

US states agree breakthrough deal to prevent Colorado River from drying up

California, Arizona and Nevada have agreed on a plan to take less water from the drought-stricken Colorado River, a breakthrough that comes after months of fraught negotiations and several missed deadlines.

The agreement, announced on Monday, proposes that in the three states, water districts, Native American tribes and farm operators cut about 13% of the total water use in the lower Colorado basin, a historic reduction that will likely trigger significant water restrictions on the region’s residents and farmland.

Under the threat of more stringent water cuts by the federal government, the deal between the three lower-basin states – which claim the highest share of water resources – breaks a year-long stalemate and aims to prevent the Colorado from dwindling further, imperiling the water supplies for millions of people and vast swaths of agricultural land in the US west.

Still, concerns linger that the cuts fall short of what experts believe will be necessary to sustain the system as conditions intensify in the years to come. Submitted as an alternative to federal options issued last month, the deal still must undergo an environmental analysis by the US government.

Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, stressed that the announcement is not a final deal. “We agreed to a proposal. This is not an agreement,” Buschatzke said during a call with reporters. In all, the plan is expected to conserve 3m acre-feet of water over the next three years – with at least half of that amount achieved by the end of 2024. (An acre-foot is 326,000 gallons, or enough water to cover an acre of land, about the size of a football field, one foot deep and a single acre-foot is enough to sustain two average California households for a year.)

Cocoa planting is destroying protected forests in west Africa

The world’s hunger for chocolate is a major cause of the destruction of protected forests in west Africa, scientists have said. Satellite maps of Ivory Coast and Ghana showed swathes of formerly dense forest had become cocoa plantations since 2000, according to a study. It found cocoa production was linked to 360,000 of a total 962,000 hectares (37.4%) of the deforestation since 2000 of protected areas in Ivory Coast, and 26,000 out of a total 193,000 hectares (13.5%) of the deforestation of similar areas in Ghana.

The global trade in chocolate was estimated to be worth more than a trillion dollars last year. Cocoa, its most important ingredient, is produced from the seed of the tropical Theobroma cacao tree. It is native to South America, but most is now produced in Africa, with Ivory Coast and Ghana accounting for two-thirds of production.

An estimated 2 million farmers in west Africa, operating farms of an average of just three to four hectares each, rely on cocoa for their income – usually less than $1 a day. They supply a complex network of middlemen, including public and private companies, who connect them to the world market, making the supply chain opaque.

This obscurity has made cocoa production a haven for human rights abuses, and chocolate has long been linked to slavery. But the latest research also links the indulgent snack to the climate and biodiversity crises that risk the catastrophic breakdown of the planet’s biosphere.

Like tropical regions, west Africa is rapidly losing its forests. Ivory Coast is estimated to have lost more than 90% since 1950, while Ghana is thought to have lost at least 65%. Cocoa production had been identified as one of the main causes of deforestation in both countries, alongside mining, selective logging and other agriculture, but the extent to which it bore responsibility was not certain.

Big polluters’ share prices fall after climate lawsuits, study finds

Climate litigation poses a financial risk to fossil fuel companies because it lowers the share price of big polluters, research has found.

A study to be published on Tuesday by LSE’s Grantham Research Institute examines how the stock market reacts to news that a fresh climate lawsuit has been filed or a corporation has lost its case.

The researchers hope their work will encourage lenders, financial regulators and governments to consider the effect of climate litigation when making investment decisions in a warmer future, and ultimately drive greener corporate behaviour.

The study, which is currently being peer reviewed, analysed 108 climate crisis lawsuits around the world between 2005 and 2021 against 98 companies listed in the US and Europe. It found that the filing of a new case or a court decision against a company reduced its expected value by an average of 0.41%.

The stock market responded most strongly in the days after cases against carbon majors, which include the world’s largest energy, utility and materials firms, cutting the relative value of those companies by an average of 0.57% after a case was filed and by 1.5% after an unfavourable judgment. ... Researchers also found share prices fell more in reaction to novel cases involving a new form of legal argument or filed in a new jurisdiction.

Mexico prepares for evacuations as Popocatepetl volcano spews ash

Also of Interest

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

Stella Assange in Australia

US Geopolitics: Believing Impossible Things

Media And Politicians Throw So Much Bullshit At Us That It Is Difficult To See Through It

US imperialism’s relentless escalation in Ukraine

Seymour Hersh: The Ukraine Refugee Question

Durham Report: The Republic We Didn’t Keep

The Banking Crisis for the Biggest U.S. Banks Began in April 2022; By December 14 They Had Shed $457 Billion of Deposits

America’s big shift to green energy has a woolly mammoth problem

MSM Is Covering Bakhmut, Ukraine-Russia Battle All Wrong

A Little Night Music

Dr. Isaiah Ross - Dr. Ross' Boogie

Dr. Isaiah Ross - I Am Not Dead

Dr. Isaiah Ross - Mean Old World

Dr. Isaiah Ross - Cat Squirrel

Dr. Isaiah Ross - Chicago Breakdown

Dr Isaiah Ross - Hobo blues

Dr Isaiah Ross - Flying Eagle Blues

Dr Isaiah Ross - My Black Name Is Ringing

Dr Isaiah Ross - Country Clown

Dr Isaiah Ross - Boogie Disease No.2