René Magritte Meditation 1936
JORDAN PETERSON: SECOND GUESSING ELON MUSK IS A FOOL'S GAME
“Musk has done 5 impossible things.
It's like, why did he spend $44 billion on Twitter?
Because he knows things you don't – like the many things, books full of things.”
Source: @jordanbpeterson pic.twitter.com/aB0DEXlKQj
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) December 22, 2024
@realDonaldTrump is awesome!
pic.twitter.com/xSS8zqmETE— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 22, 2024
🚨 Donald Trump on Elon Musk today:
"He's not going to be President that I can tell you. I am safe because he can't be. He wasn't born in this country. He's a great guy." pic.twitter.com/O2H7WuGCfq
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) December 22, 2024
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870901510319833540
‘I’m sorry, Trump is not going to have a blissful administration, and he’s not going to prevent the economic decline.’
• Depression, Debt, Default & Destruction in 2025 -Martin Armstrong (USAW)
Legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong is back with a new round of predictions, and they are not going to make life easy for President Elect Trump. Armstrong says, “Our computer has been projecting that we are going into a depression in some areas and a recession in other areas. A depression most likely in Europe and a recession in the United States up until 2028. . . . At my November conference, everybody was celebrating after Trump won. I stood up and told my clients, ‘I’m sorry, Trump is not going to have a blissful administration, and he’s not going to prevent the economic decline.’ (Please remember, Armstrong predicted Donald Trump would win in a landslide many months before the November 2024 Election.)
Armstrong goes on to say, “We have a serious, serious problem on a global scale. . . . The sovereign debt crisis is really going to start percolating in 2025. It’s probably going to reach a major crisis by 2026 and 2027. Why? They have dictated all these banks and pension funds . . . 70%, generally, must be invested in government bonds. . . . They say it’s ‘safe,’ but it’s the worst debt possible. . . . So, if the government goes into a sovereign default, what happens? You wipe out the banking system and the pensions.”
Does Armstrong think the governments around the world are going to go into a sovereign default? Armstrong says, “Oh yeah. How does a government default? We are in this Ponzi Scheme. They have to keep selling new debt to pay off the old debt. . . . When you can’t sell the new debt, that’s when the default happens because you can’t pay off the old debt.”
What should the average guy do now? Does Armstrong think people should get to the bank and get cash? Armstrong says, “Yes, cash, physical paper money. We just had two hurricanes here in Florida. This idea of Bitcoin and CBDCs are very nice, but what’s the reality? The internet was down for 10 days. A credit card did not work. You wanted something, it was cash only. It was the same in Canada when they froze all the accounts of the truckers. They could not even buy food. Unless you had cash, you were dead in the water. This is why I am saying to have cash in this point in time.” Armstrong still likes physical gold, too.
Armstrong says the digital currencies that are getting a lot of attention lately are only a control mechanism. Armstrong contends digital money will stop bank runs. Armstrong still thinks the world will be at war by April or May of 2025. Armstrong says watch Turkey with its huge conventional army. Armstrong says Jordan and Lebanon may also be taken over, and like Syria, Turkey will be orchestrating this move. Armstrong says the Middle East is setting up for a major conflict starting in 2025, and there will be destruction. Armstrong also predicts Europe will be on the losing end of the next world war.
In closing, Armstrong says, “They can’t stop Trump from taking office, but they can delay him with martial law. Martial law has been enacted 60 times in the United States. . . . The neocons are scared to death of Trump and really want to trap him in war before he takes office.”
“..we should have acted more decisively and swiftly, should have prepared for this and chosen the right moment to start..”
• Inaction Over Ukraine Would Have Been A ‘Crime’ – Putin (RT)
Russia should have launched its military campaign against Kiev earlier, after realizing that neither Ukraine nor its Western backers were committed to a peaceful settlement of the Donbass crisis, President Vladimir Putin has said. In an interview with Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin on Sunday, Putin acknowledged that while it is difficult to give the ideal date for the special military operation in hindsight, Russians “should have gotten our bearings earlier and understood that our opponents are not going to implement the Minsk agreements, that they are simply leading us by the nose, misleading us.” A crime, Putin continued, can result from either action or inaction. “Our inaction would have been a crime against the interests of Russia and those of her people,” the president stressed.
The now-defunct Minsk agreements, first signed in 2014 and brokered by Germany and France, were intended to give the Donetsk and Lugansk regions a special status within the Ukrainian state. However, former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has since admitted that Kiev’s main goal was to use the ceasefire to buy time and “create powerful armed forces.” After the conflict escalated in 2022, the same sentiment was echoed by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and former French President Francois Hollande. The Western leaders were doing their best to prepare Kiev for a further fight with Russia, Putin stressed. “And if they gave them the opportunity to prepare for future military actions, it means they were counting on them.
With this in mind, we should have acted more decisively and swiftly, should have prepared for this and chosen the right moment to start [the campaign], without waiting for the moment when it was no longer possible to sit on our hands,” he added. Russia has said that it sent troops to Ukraine to protect the people of Donbass from recurring Ukrainian strikes and cited Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk agreements, while Ukraine has insisted that the attack was completely unprovoked. Moscow has also consistently opposed Kiev’s aspirations to join NATO, viewing the expansion of the US-led bloc as an existential threat. In the autumn of 2022, the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye regions voted overwhelmingly to join Russia in public referendums.
“You look at some of these cities and there is not a single building in good condition left. So, when you say “restore the country,” restore what? This is a 110-year reconstruction..”
• Trump Suggests Zelensky Consider Ceding Territories – El Pais (RT)
US President-elect Donald Trump has sent a message to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, asking him to start thinking about a ceasefire and to abandon the territories that are currently under control of Russia, El Pais reported on Sunday. Trump has repeatedly pledged to end the Ukraine conflict within a day of taking office, but has yet to elaborate on how he plans to achieve this. His vows have raised concerns in Kiev that it may be facing not only a decline in aid but also an audit of the billions of dollars it has received from the White House under President Joe Biden. “You look at some of these cities and there is not a single building in good condition left. So, when you say “restore the country,” restore what? This is a 110-year reconstruction,” the Spanish newspaper cited Trump as saying in a “message” to Zelensky from his Florida golf club this week.
Earlier this month, Trump called on both Ukraine and Russia to reach an immediate ceasefire. He posted the call on his social media platform Truth Social after meeting in Paris with Zelensky and President Emmanuel Macron.
The Wall Street Journal reported in early December, citing officials, that Trump had said Western Europe should deploy its troops to Ukraine to monitor a potential ceasefire. He reportedly added that the EU should play the main role in defending and supporting Kiev, while Washington could support the effort without sending troops.Speaking at his end-of-year press conference on Thursday, Russian president Vladimir Putin reiterated that Moscow remains open to negotiating with Kiev without any preconditions, except those that had already been agreed upon in Istanbul in 2022, which envisaged a neutral, non-aligned status for Ukraine, as well as certain restrictions on deploying foreign weaponry. He also noted that such talks would have to respect the realities on the ground that have developed since that time.
Ukrainians will need to revolt.
• Ukraine Has Had Its Fill (SCF)
The Russian armed forces are now less than two miles away from overwhelming the city of Pokrovsk. The conquest of that city will have three major consequences for Ukraine. The first is that Pokrovsk is a key logistical hub, the loss of which would threaten the Ukrainian armed forces’ ability to supply their troops in the Donbas. The second is that, beyond Pokrovsk, Russian troops may find mostly undefended fields as they continue their march west across the Donbas. The third is that Pokrovsk is home to Ukraine’s only coking coal mine. Coking coal is essential in the manufacture of steel. The loss of Pokrovsk would affect not only Ukraine’s economy, but its ability to obtain steel for its military manufacturing industry. As the tide of Russian troops rushes toward Pokrovsk, the coking mine has been forced to shut down 50 percent of its operating capacity. If the remainder is lost, Ukraine’s steel production could plummet by 60-75 percent.
The battlefield reality is changing rapidly. Russian forces captured over 1,500 square kilometers of Ukrainian territory in October and November, and that pace has quickened in December. And it is not just land, but key logistical and heavily fortified cities that are falling. Perhaps more importantly, troops and weapons are being exhausted. Deaths, injuries and desertions are horrifically high; morale is desperately low. On December 18, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky conceded that Crimea and the Donbas are lost to Ukraine. “De facto,” he said, “these territories are now controlled by the Russians. We don’t have the strength to bring them back.” Once again making the important distinction between de facto recognition and formal recognition, Zelensky said that Ukraine would rely, not on the Ukrainian military, but on “diplomatic pressure from the international community” to reacquire its lost territory.
But it is not only military change that is rapidly happening in Ukraine. Political change is following rapidly in its wake. The sociologist Volodymyr Ishchenko, research associate at the Institute of East European Studies, Freie Universität Berlin, says that there is no longer any enthusiasm, or that that enthusiasm is confined to a much smaller group of people than at the beginning of the war: “When the situation deteriorated and hopes that Ukraine could win the war diminished, support for negotiations increased, while support for, and trust in, Zelensky decreased.” The eclipsing of support for fighting by support for negotiating has been dramatic as Ukrainians suffer the prolonged devastation of the war. The most recent Gallup poll, conducted in August and October 2024, shows that the 73 percent of Ukrainians who believed at the start of the war that Ukraine should continue fighting until it wins has now shrunk to a mere 38 percent.
At the start of the war, in February 2022, only 22 percent felt that Ukraine should negotiate an end to the war as soon as possible. In 2023, that number still sat at only 27 percent. Today, that number has swelled to a majority for the first time, with 52 percent saying yes. Since the poll excluded the people in Russian-controlled regions, the numbers are likely even more telling. In any case, support for the war has dropped below 50 percent in all regions of Ukraine. Support for Zelensky, who succumbed to Western pressure by turning away from a possible early negotiated settlement and promising victory and the return of all Ukrainian land, including even Crimea, has dropped off even faster. Once lionized as a war leader and enjoying approval ratings in the stratosphere, by October 2023, those who strongly approved of Zelensky’s performance had dropped from 58 percent to 42 percent.
And things have gotten worse since then. The Economist reports that “if elections were held tomorrow, Mr Zelensky would struggle to repeat the success of the landslide win he secured in 2019.” The Economist has seen internal polling that shows that “he would fare badly in a run-off against Valery Zaluzhny,” the general who served as commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine for most of the war. And it is not only Zaluzhny, the war hero, that could challenge Zelensky. Ishchenko told me that some readings of polls show that he would probably also lose to Kyrylo Budanov, the chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. Though Ukrainian’s changing views on negotiating an end to the war and on Zelensky have received some attention in the mainstream media, their changing views on America have not.
While the Western media reported on Gallup’s findings on Ukrainian support for diplomacy, it did not report on the findings on Ukrainian views of the United States. The polling suggests an erosion in trust for the United States. While 70 percent of those who favor negotiations want to see the European Union “play a significant role” in peace negotiations with Russia, and 63 percent wanted to see the United Kingdom play a significant role, only 54 percent wanted to see a Harris-led U.S. and only 49 percent want to see a Trump-led U.S. play a significant role.
It’s not an actual country.
• Western Aid Covers Nearly 90% of Ukraine’s Spending in 2022-2024 (Sp.)
Russia has repeatedly warned that the US and its Western sponsors’ assistance to the Kiev regime will only prolong the Ukraine conflict. Western financing of Ukraine reached a whopping $238.5 billion from February 2022 to the beginning of December 2024, which approximately corresponds to 87% of the country s budget expenses, Sputnik s research based on information from the Ukrainian Finance Ministry, the University of Kiel, and open data has shown. The expenses of the Ukrainian budget in 2022-2023 amounted to $193.3 billion, while in 2024 the figure is expected to stand at $81.3 billion. It means that over the past three years, the expenses have increased to $274.6 billion, according to the analyzed data.
The volume of financial aid sent by Western countries to Ukraine amounted to $106 billion, whereas the West’s military assistance reached $132.5 billion within the aforementioned period. At the same time, the total volume of Western aid is 43% less than the $416 billion the West promised to Kiev, per the analysis. The US remains Ukraine s largest donor, having sent $95.2 billion to the Kiev regime in the past three years. Two-thirds of the sum was military aid, while one-third went towards budget financing. EU member states transferred financial and military aid to Ukraine worth $94.2 billion, with Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands being the bloc’s largest donors with $11.9 billion, $7.5 billion, and $6.3 billion, respectively.
The UK sent $13.4 billion, Canada $7.8 billion, and Japan $6.7 billion. During the December 19 Direct Line and year-end press conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed that Ukraine can fight and exist only with the support of its Western donors. The statement came after Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Washington’s financial aid to Kiev will not change the situation on the battlefield and will lead to “new victims among Ukrainians.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, for his part, recalled earlier that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken emphasizes that continued aid to Ukraine is a guarantee of creating new jobs in the United States. “As if he is not speaking about financing a war that has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives in Ukraine, but a lucrative business project,” Lavrov stressed. This followed Peskov warning that the EU’s hefty sums to Ukraine are “allocated to the detriment of EU economies which are already going through difficult times.” For example, Germany, Europe’s largest economy, is facing a second year of zero growth, in what comes as more Germans oppose Berlin’s excessive financial assistance to the Kiev regime, according to a recent opinion poll conducted by the ARD news channel.
“..Moscow could immediately declare a ceasefire and start peace talks as soon as Ukraine leaves all Russian territory, including Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions.”
• Kremlin Assesses Chances Of Trump-Putin Meeting (RT)
No preparations have yet been made for a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President-elect Donald Trump, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. On Sunday, Trump reiterated that he wanted to resolve the Ukraine conflict, signaling that he would not rule out a sit-down with the Russian leader to stop the bloodshed. “President Putin said that he wants to meet with me as soon as possible. So we have to wait for this, but we must end that war,” Trump said. Asked by TASS on Monday whether the two could meet face-to-face before Trump is sworn in at the end of January, Peskov replied that “there has been no real impetus at this point.” He previously stated that Russia has had no contact with the Trump team on settling the Ukraine conflict.
The remarks came after Putin last week suggested that “there will be plenty to discuss” with Trump. “Of course, I’m ready to talk anytime; I will be ready to meet with him if he wishes,” the Russian leader said at his annual Q&A session. Putin noted, however, that he did not know when the first contact could begin, recalling that he had not spoken with Trump since the president-elect’s first term. Trump has repeatedly vowed to put a swift end to the Ukraine conflict while urging the belligerents to conclude a ceasefire. Earlier this month, he met with French President Emmanuel Macron and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, later claiming that Kiev “would like to make a deal.” Ukraine, however, has ruled out any territorial concessions to Russia while demanding security guarantees.
According to several media reports, one potential peace plan being considered by Trump would include the freezing of the conflict along the current front line without recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over territories claimed by Ukraine while suspending Kiev’s NATO membership ambitions. While Russia has designated Ukraine’s neutrality as one of its key goals, it has repeatedly ruled out the freezing of the conflict, arguing that this would only enable the West to rearm Kiev. Putin has also suggested that Moscow could immediately declare a ceasefire and start peace talks as soon as Ukraine leaves all Russian territory, including Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions.
“2025 is gonna be so lit”..
• Trump Threatens To Take Back Panama Canal (ZH)
Donald Trump warned that his new administration could try to regain control of the Panama Canal that the United States “foolishly” ceded to its Central American ally, contending that shippers are charged “ridiculous” fees to pass through the vital transportation channel linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. “The fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially knowing the extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed to Panama by the US,” Trump wrote. “This complete ‘rip-off’ of our Country will immediately stop.” “The Panama Canal is considered a VITAL National Asset for the United States, due to its critical role to America’s Economy and National Security” Trump wrote adding that “if the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question.”
He ended by warning “the Officials of Panama, please be guided accordingly!” Panama’s conservative president José Raúl Mulino, who was elected in May on a pro-business platform, roundly rejected the notion as an affront to his country’s sovereignty. The president-elect’s comment came during his first major rally since winning the White House on Nov. 5. Addressing supporters at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest in Arizona, Trump pledged that his “dream team Cabinet” would deliver a booming economy, seal U.S. borders and quickly settle wars in the Middle East and Ukraine.
“The Panama Canal is considered a VITAL National Asset for the United States, due to its critical role to America’s Economy and National Security.
If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama… pic.twitter.com/LLUO358P9Y
— Donald J. Trump Posts From His Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) December 22, 2024
“I can proudly proclaim that the Golden Age of America is upon us,” Trump said. “There’s a spirit that we have now that we didn’t have just a short while ago.”
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Standing before you today, I can proudly proclaim that the GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA IS UPON US! pic.twitter.com/kZ6zM9fott
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) December 22, 2024
Trump also suggested that the canal was in danger of falling into the wrong hands, saying the canal isn’t China’s to manage. China is its second-biggest customer of the canal after the US. In response, Elon Musk, whom liberals now accuse of being Trump’s puppetmaster having seemingly vanquished Putin in this alleged task, responded that “2025 is gonna be so lit”, which it of course will be if Trump pulls a Russia and decides that it is indeed time to annex the Panama canal.
2025 is gonna be so lit >y#›>y#› https://t.co/1i5S00FhPm
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 22, 2024
“Controlling the world’s largest island is an “absolute necessity” for the US, the president-elect has said..”
“..it is rich in gold, silver, copper and uranium and the ocean shelf below its territorial waters is believed to have vast oil reservoirs.”
So how much will the US pay? $1 trillion, 2,3?
• Trump Resurrects Idea Of Buying Greenland (RT)
US President-elect Donald Trump has said that it is essential for Washington from a national security standpoint to take ownership of Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark. During his first term, Trump repeatedly voiced his intention to buy Greenland, calling the possible purchase “a large real estate deal.” He argued that the Danish government would be eager to part with the world’s largest island as providing funding for it hurts them “really badly.” However, the authorities in both Denmark and Greenland outright rejected the sale, to which the then-US president reacted by canceling his state visits to Copenhagen in 2019. Trump, however, returned to the idea of the US acquiring the autonomous territory in a post on his TruthSocial platform on Sunday. “For purposes of national security and freedom throughout the world, the US feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity,” he wrote.
In the same message, the US president-elect named PayPal co-founder Ken Howery as his pick for Washington’s ambassador to Denmark. He described Howery as “a world-renowned entrepreneur, investor, and public servant,” who had performed “brilliantly” during his tenure as US envoy to Sweden between 2019 and 2021. “Ken will do a wonderful job in representing the interests of the US,” Trump insisted. Despite spanning an area of 2,166,086 sq km (about six times the size of Germany), Greenland is home to fewer than 57,000 people, as 80% of the island is covered with ice. However, it is rich in gold, silver, copper and uranium and the ocean shelf below its territorial waters is believed to have vast oil reservoirs.
The island, which is part of the continent of North America, has access to the Arctic, where competition for dominance over natural resources and strategic routes between the world powers has been intensifying in recent years. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned in September that Washington’s “desire for globalization and self-legitimization, to assert itself as a world policeman… is also extending to the Arctic region.” Moscow has taken notice of how the US-led NATO bloc is “stepping up exercises related to possible crises in the Arctic,” he said. “Our country is fully prepared to defend its interests in military, political and military-technical terms,” Lavrov insisted.
“Led by the bumbling, malapropism-prone Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, the Greens act like the German branch of the Biden State Department.”
• Make Europe Great Again (David P. Goldman)
My advice to President Trump on how to deal with the mess in Ukraine is simple: you should pull the plug on the Biden Administration’s flailing European peanut gallery. Your friends and allies in Europe want to shoulder the burden of their own defense, but they don’t want to pour money down the drain and risk World War III in Ukraine. Get an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine, a war which no sane European wants to fight, and let the sovereigntist parties of the New Right mop up the globalist Left. They believe in their countries and will fight to protect them, unlike the Brussels liberals cowering behind the skirts of Mother America. Ending the war won’t happen without an agreement to keep Ukraine neutral and out of NATO. The Deep State will try to convince you that NATO can’t afford to back down on eventual Ukraine membership, and that Russia is bleeding out and ready to fold.
But the opposite is true: Europe’s willingness to defend itself depends on a revival of nationalism and the ascent of the sovereigntist parties on the Right. Freeze the fighting and deliver a political victory to European patriots whose watchword is “Make Europe Great Again.” A recent poll found most Germans probably wouldn’t fight to defend their country, and that two-fifths wouldn’t fight under any circumstances. Most striking is the breakdown by party affiliation. Only 9% of supporters of Germany’s Green Party—the most extreme backer of the Ukraine War—said they would personally take up arms to defend their country, the lowest of any group by party affiliation. Led by the bumbling, malapropism-prone Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, the Greens act like the German branch of the Biden State Department.
The highest proportion of individuals ready to fight for their country came from supporters of the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), the conservative upstart party now polling at 20% of the national vote. In a more recent poll, 68% of AfD members said they would defend their country “with a weapon in their hand” if Germany were attacked, compared to just 22% of Green Party supporters. The Washington Blob confuses the “let’s you and him fight” war party with the sovereigntists who are ready to defend their country, but want nothing to do with the Blob’s failed adventure in Ukraine. The European war party pledged neither their lives nor their sacred honor (they don’t have any), but rather their reputations, foundation grants, fellowships, and consulting gigs on the Ukraine War.
They made their careers on the twin premise of expanding NATO to the Russian border and arrogating governance to European rather than national institutions. European liberals were battered by the populist wave that began last year with Geert Wilders’s surprise election victory in the Netherlands. It continued through last September’s state elections in Germany, the local elections in the Czech Republic, the Freedom Party’s first-place finish in Austria, and the collapse of the French government. But even so, the continent’s liberals will fight to the last Ukrainian to keep their political privileges. If their proxy war collapses, European liberals know their figurative heads will roll. They have no plan except to keep the war going as long as possible.
And they are doing this by trying to gaslight Americans through a targeted campaign of misinformation. The British Ministry of Defense and the Pentagon, for example, allege that Russia has taken 600,000 casualties in the Ukraine War, and is losing 1,000 to 2,000 soldiers a day in the present fighting. The spurious 600,000 figure even found its way into a Trump social media post last week. The most comprehensive database on Russian casualties, Mediazona, counts 82,000 Russian dead, which it calculated by scraping information from death announcements and social media posts. A statistical estimate of excess deaths would bring the number to 120,000. Assuming three wounded for every soldier killed, Russian casualties are likely somewhere between 246,000 and 360,000.
A retired senior U.S. officer who tracks Ukraine war casualties observes: “Ukrainian casualties from independent sources are not as diligently tracked as are Russian casualties, but counts on graves, and anecdotal reporting, suggests it is higher than the figures released by Kyiv, London, or Washington, D.C. Estimates run between 105,000 and 160,000 KIA (killed in action). Using the same ratios for KIA to WIA, this places total Ukrainian casualties at between 105,000 KIA, and 365,000 WIA (wounded in action), or 470,000 total casualties, to 160,000 KIA and 640,000 WIA, or 800,000 total casualties.” Russia has had about 9,000 desertions in the course of the war. More than 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers face official charges of desertion, and the actual number is double that.
Forty-thousand Ukrainians have been killed or wounded defending an incursion into Russian territory near Kursk, according to NATO intelligence sources—and the country has already lost half of the territory it gained in the August 2024 raid. Europe’s sovereigntist parties know this and want to stop the war now. The AfD wants to stop weapons deliveries to Ukraine and advocates a negotiated solution. It is excoriated by the establishment press as a neo-Nazi throwback, and quarantined by legacy parties with a fraction of its voter base. The Greens, represented by Annalena Baerbock and Economics Minister Robert Habeck, are ironically Germany’s most vociferous war hawks. Though they won’t fight for their own country, they want to fight the war to the last Ukrainian.
“Germany is not merely in a mess; it also has a dysfunctional non-elite that is in total denial about how to fix that mess..”
• Germany Is Heading For Irreversible Decline (Amar)
Oops, he’s done it again: Tech mogul, richest man in the world, and also now new bestie of American President-elect Donald Trump, Elon Musk has used his massive social media clout – as owner of X and a personal account with more than 200 million followers – to post about politics. And here we don’t mean his unhelpful recent intervention in how Americans – barely – keep their rickety government contraption from stuttering to a halt for lack of cash. Nope, this is about Germany: With regard to Europe’s Sick Man on the Spree (there is another one on the Seine, of course), in his first post Musk waltzed in, guns blazing to support the right-wing AfD (Alternative for Germany) party in the run-up to the snap elections on February 23. Only the AfD, he pronounced with typical modesty, can “save Germany.” In a second post, a few days later, Musk reacted to a murderous attack on a German Christmas market in the city of Magdeburg. This time, he called Germany’s lame-duck Chancellor Olaf Scholz “an incompetent fool” who should resign forthwith.
Some Germans are aghast. How dare Musk, an American, intervene in our elections? Deeply unpopular German minister of health Karl Lauterbach, for instance, went almost comically Victorian with his performance of righteous ire for public display, calling Musk’s statements “undignified and highly problematic.” Shocking, shocking indeed! Interestingly enough, most of the same Germans still have no problem with Joe Biden, also an American, having helped Ukraine blow up their vital energy infrastructure and then mightily promoting the de-industrialization of Germany and the EU as a whole by subsidizing companies which move to produce in the US. Others think it’s totally normal that German politicians, such as Michael Roth – head of the German parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, no less – massively interfere in the politics of, say, Georgia, not only by messing with its elections but also trying to literally instigate a coup. Judge not, lest ye be judged…
So, let’s cut out the daft pearl-clutching: I am German, and I find it very objectionable when Musk fails to post about the genocide in Gaza, instead taking the side of the Israeli perpetrators. But I could not be less concerned about him stating his opinion – it’s not more than that – about what party would be best for Germany, even thought I do not agree at all. As to calling Scholz what he actually is, go ahead Elon. There, I am even on your side. Once we dispense with the huffy-puffy theatrics, what is really at stake here? And why would it even matter so much to some Germans what Musk has to say about their politics? It’s not complicated: Musk has hit a very sore spot. And the name of that very sore spot is Germany. Yes, all of it, or at least, everything that has to do with its tanking economy and, frankly, delusional politics. Here’s how:
On December 16, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz lost a confidence vote in the German parliament. That was no surprise but the plan from the beginning. Or to be precise, since November 6, when the former governing coalition of Greens, Free Democrat market liberals, and Scholz’s own Social Democrats imploded with a nasty bang. After that, the no-confidence vote – even if it came with some predictable yet pretty fake drama and backbiting – was merely a formality on the way to snap elections, scheduled for February 23. On the face of it, the above may look like a minor politics-as-usual hiccup: Sometimes coalitions don’t work out and a country needs new elections to – hopefully – start over with a new government. In postwar Germany (the Cold War Western version and the post-unification one together), this procedure – based on article 68 of the constitution – is not unprecedented; it has been used 5 times before.
But this is not that sort of case. Rather, the snap elections are only one small symptom of a much deeper, all-pervasive malaise: By regularly reading the news about Germany, you could easily come to feel that Europe’s former economic locomotive and political first-among-not-so-equals is now a very unhappy country, economically in severe, persistent decline and politically – to put it kindly – badly disoriented. And you would be right. Except things are even worse, and I write that, let me remind you, as a German. For what’s really gloomy – indeed, quite literally hopeless – about the current German doom is that no one with even a remote chance at political power in Berlin is prepared to honestly face the root causes of the country’s misery. Germany is not merely in a mess; it also has a dysfunctional non-elite that is in total denial about how to fix that mess. But before we get to that elephant in the misery room that almost all German politicians fail to acknowledge, with stereotypical thoroughness, let’s look at the wasteland their failure has made.
European version of lawfare.
• Germany: Effort To Ban AfD Party Faces Major Setback (RMX)
A motion to ban the Alternative for Germany (AfD) is unlikely to move forward, as there is less than a week left to vote on such a ban in this legislative period, and sources involved with the effort say there is no majority in place for such a move. The motion, originally put forward by CDU MP Marco Wanderwitz, who previously said he would retire after this term, will definitely not be put forward this term, co-signer Carmen Wegge (SPD) told the Rheinische Post. As Remix News previously reported, it appeared as if a ban procedure would almost certianly move forward just a month ago, with 105 MPs voicing cross-party support, including from MPs like Claudia Roth and Katrin Göring Eckardt from the Greens, and Ralf Stegner and Helge Lindh from the SPD, just to name a few. The motion will only move forward if there is a majority, but so far, the CDU and the SPD have spoken out against it.
There are grave worries that such a ban procedure could take years, and in any case, with elections expected to take place in February, it could lead to a substantial boost for the AfD. Currently, the SPD and CDU also see no success with the Constitutional Court, which has the final say in such a ban procedure. So far, Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and CDU leader Friedrich Merz do not back the ban, although both have hinted that they may support such a procedure in the future. Notably, politicians involved in the ban procedure are once again resorting to claims of protecting democracy by banning what is currently the second-largest party in the country. “Due to the early elections, it is not yet clear whether we can put our motion to a vote in this legislative period,” said Wegge. “The AfD represents the greatest threat to our democracy.”
She claims the party’s goal is to abolish democracy, despite the AfD actually putting forward motions for direct democracy in the country, which would allow the country to make decisions via nationwide referendums — undoubtedly a purer form of democracy than what currently serves as democracy in Germany. Meanwhile, as Remix News previously reported, the Greens are working on an alternative ban procedure which would be more gradual but which MPs of the party, and other parties, believe would have a better chance of succeeding. Efforts to ban the AfD are certainly not helped by the fact that it is the second most popular party in the country at the moment, routinely polling between 18 and 20 percent. A move to outright ban the party would be seen as a catastrophic blow to democracy.
He opposes sending aid to Ukraine, so he is pro Russian.
• Romanian Presidential Frontrunner Funded By Pro-Western Party – Media (RT)
An investigation launched by Romanian authorities has discovered that the social media campaign that contributed to last month’s surprise first-round win by independent candidate Calin Georgescu in the country’s presidential election was not funded by Russia but rather by the pro-Western National Liberal Party (PNL), the media outlet Snoop has reported. A critic of NATO and the EU and a staunch opponent of sending aid to Ukraine, Georgescu topped the first-round vote in Romania with 22.94%, beating other liberal leftist and democrat candidates. However, Romania’s Constitutional Court annulled the results ahead of the second-round vote, declaring the process would repeat itself at a later date. It cited declassified intelligence documents which have allegedly found irregularities in Georgescu’s performance.
They claimed his candidacy was improperly promoted online, including on TikTok, by paid influencers and extremist right-wing groups, and that his campaign may have benefited from Russian interference – an allegation that Moscow has denied as “absolutely groundless.” According to Snoop, Romania’s tax authorities analyzed financial flows and discovered that the campaign that promoted Georgescu on TikTok was in fact paid for by the PNL and run by Kensington Communication, a company which provides political marketing services, as well as online campaigns. The briefs delivered to influencers were aimed at promoting “a responsible attitude and a mature choice” among Romanians that would help the country continue its “democratic path,” wrote Snoop.
Influencers were reportedly given a script to describe the qualities of a future president without giving a name. Some of them however left comments below the videos, providing Georgescu’s name. “It is a shock to everyone that the public money that taxpayers had provided to the PNL was used to promote another candidate,” one expert involved in the investigation told the publication. Kensington Communication has issued a statement alleging that its campaign had been “hijacked” or “cloned” and said it would file a criminal complaint.
The leak came on Friday, a day before the expiration of Romanian President Klaus Iohannis’ term, and just days before the supreme court is scheduled to hear the case initiated by Georgescu. Iohannis himself had earlier refused to leave office, citing the country’s legislation. Georgescu, who was labelled “pro-Russian” by his critics, filed a lawsuit with the supreme court to challenge the annulment of the election results. The candidate’s lawyer described the situation as “a flagrant violation of the constitution” and “a coup d’état.” The first hearing is scheduled for December 23.
“If I lose 5 percent of my generated revenue by going to Europe, I will not go to Europe… I’m not bluffing..”
• Qatar Warns EU That Tough New Regulations Put Gas Supplies at Risk (Sp.)
One of the world’s largest suppliers of liquefied natural gas (LNG), Qatar, has warned the European Union that it may halt vital gas exports if the bloc enforces its new corporate due diligence directive. The legislation, which seeks to align companies with the EU’s net-zero goals, includes penalties of at least 5 percent of a company’s global annual revenue for non-compliance. Qatari Energy Minister Saad al-Kaabi told the Financial Times that such penalties would be unacceptable for QatarEnergy, a state-owned company with extensive global operations. “If I lose 5 percent of my generated revenue by going to Europe, I will not go to Europe… I’m not bluffing,” Kaabi stated, adding that the legislation imposes impractical requirements on energy producers.
Europe’s reliance on Qatari gas has grown significantly since the bloc decided to phase out Russian gas supplies. Countries like Germany, France, and Italy have signed long-term LNG contracts with QatarEnergy to secure energy supplies. Europe’s decision to cut ties with Russian gas has exacerbated its energy crisis, making alternative sources like Qatari LNG increasingly critical. Kaabi emphasized that QatarEnergy would not breach existing contracts but could explore legal challenges or halt new shipments if penalties are enforced. While hinting at possible compromises, he warned that Europe’s stringent regulations risk disrupting an already fragile energy supply chain.
Soldiers are quitting by the thousands despite a 6% pay raise. Europe has no serious armies left.
• British Armed Forces Shrinking – Telegraph (RT)
Over 15,000 British soldiers left the Armed Forces in November 2023 through October 2024, The Telegraph reported on Saturday. The resignations continue to come despite the government’s attempt to stem the recruitment crisis with a record pay raise. The newspaper noted that more than half of 15,119 people who left the country’s military forces during the specified time-frame had resigned voluntarily. However, during the same period, they reportedly recruited some 12,000 personnel, resulting in a net shrinkage of the military. In July, the Ministry of Defense announced a 6% pay raise, the largest in more than two decades, in an effort to tackle the raging recruitment crisis. The Telegraph noted that the move, however, failed to alter the current predicament, with new recruits to the forces remaining among the worst-paid public servants in the UK.
Inflation-adjusted pay for army privates has reportedly increased only 1.9% since 2011, versus the 13.39% and 10.14% increases recorded for new junior doctors and train drivers, correspondingly.In May, satisfaction with the basic rate of pay in the military hit the lowest level on record, according to an armed forces survey, as quoted by the newspaper. The poll, conducted prior to the government’s raises, showed that only 32% of respondents said they were happy with their remuneration packets. Earlier this month, Alistair Carns, the defense minister and former Royal Marine, claimed that the regular British army could be wiped out in as little as six months if forced to fight a war on the scale of the Ukraine conflict.
As of October 2024, there were 181,550 members of the country’s armed forces, including total full-time trained and untrained UK service personnel, according to the latest Ministry of Defence (MoD) figures. This marks a decrease of 2% since October 1, 2023. In November, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Defense said that the current government “inherited” a recruitment crunch, adding that targets had been missed annually for the past 14 years. “We have already given personnel the largest pay raise in decades and scrapped 100 outdated policies that block and slow down recruitment,” the ministry stressed.
Woke costs dearly.
• Has Disney Finally Learned What ‘Go Woke, Go Broke’ Means? (Sp.)
In a move that may seem out of place in the ‘woke’ US today, Disney has ordered the removal of a transgender storyline from Pixar’s “Win or Lose” animated series, according to the Hollywood Reporter. This isn’t the first instance of Disney removing ‘woke’ bits from its works recently, which may or may not suggest that the studio might realize that pandering to the ‘woke’ crowd might not be the best recipe for a good film. Last month, the “Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur” animated series episode that focused on a transgender character also got shelved from the Disney Channel, with artists who worked the series claiming it was “because of which party that won the recent election,” Polygon noted.
These developments occurred after a number of Disney’s productions that were deemed ‘woke’ by a not-inconsiderable portion of the audience flopped, with the company’s losses being estimated at around $900 million last year. Some of Disney’s more notable box office failures included Strange World and Lightyear, two animated series that both featured same-sex romance and relationships.
“The petitioners, illegal border crossers from El Salvador, India and Mexico, demanded they had rights to stay despite court orders requiring their deportation..”
• Supreme Court Unanimous Ruling May Pave Way For Mass Deportation (JTN)
A unanimous ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court may pave the way for challenges to a federal deportation plan under the incoming Trump administration to be defeated. The ruling was issued in a “sham marriage” case after an American citizen applied with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to obtain a visa for her noncitizen Palestinian husband to receive permanent legal residence status. Under the law, USCIS “shall … approve” a visa petition if it’s been determined “that the facts stated in the petition are true” and the noncitizen is the petitioner’s spouse. If the noncitizen previously sought or received an immigration benefit “by reason of a marriage determined by the Attorney General to have been entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws” – known as the sham-marriage bar – USCIS is required to deny it.
The petition was initially approved but two years later was revoked because USCIS argued there was “evidence suggesting that her husband had previously entered into a marriage for the purpose of evading immigration laws,” which the couple denied. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the revocation, affirming that USCIS’s determination that the husband had entered into a prior sham marriage that would have prevented the initial visa approval. The couple sued, a federal district court dismissed the case, arguing federal courts don’t have jurisdiction over certain discretionary agency decisions. The couple appealed and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which in a 9-0 vote affirmed both lower court rulings. “Section 1155 is a quintessential grant of discretion,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a President Joe Biden appointee, wrote in the decision.
“The Secretary ‘may’ revoke a previously approved visa petition ‘at any time’ for what the Secretary deems ‘good and sufficient cause.’ Congress did not impose specific criteria or conditions limiting this authority, nor did it prescribe how or when the Secretary must act.” The ruling was issued after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled earlier this month that the federal government has the authority to deport illegal foreign nationals over the objection of local authorities, The Center Square reported. In June, the Supreme Court also ruled in favor of federal deportation policies in three consolidated cases on appeal before the Fifth and Ninth circuits, where the courts issued conflicting rulings.
The lawsuits were brought by illegal foreign nationals deemed “inadmissible” under federal law and given Notice to Appear (NTA) documents stating they must appear before an immigration court at a future date and time. Each of the plaintiffs didn’t show up to their hearings, and federal immigration judges ordered their removal in absentia in accordance with federal law established by Congress. The illegal foreign nationals sued, demanded their removal orders be rescinded, claimed they didn’t receive proper written notification, challenged the definitions of the word “change” in the order they received, and made other technical arguments. The petitioners, illegal border crossers from El Salvador, India and Mexico, demanded they had rights to stay despite court orders requiring their deportation. In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court disagreed, ruling against them.
The ruling established precedent for potential future cases that could be brought after the Biden administration began issuing NTAs with court dates three to four years in the future, The Center Square first reported. The ruling could also have a bearing on roughly 200,000 deportation cases that were thrown out by immigration judges because the Department of Homeland Security didn’t file paperwork with the courts in time for scheduled hearings. The rulings are likely to have the most impact on those who attempt to fight a deportation plan by the incoming Trump administration to reverse a policy through which the Biden administration released millions of illegal foreign nationals into the country contrary to federal law.
How could you not? Look at the damage they did.
• US Could Quit WHO On Trump’s First Day – FT (RT)
The transition team of US President-elect Donald Trump hopes to pull the country out of the World Health Organization (WHO) the first day of the new administration, thus cutting one of the agency’s major cash flows, the Financial Times (FT) has reported, citing health experts. Members of Trump’s team told the experts that they intend to announce a withdrawal from the global health body on inauguration day, January 20, the FT wrote on Sunday. Some in the team reportedly want the US to stay in the WHO but push to reform it. However, another group, which hopes to cut ties, is reportedly winning the argument. The transition team wants Trump to withdraw from the WHO on the first day because of the “symbolism” of reversing Joe Biden’s own inauguration-day move, FT wrote, citing Ashish Jha, former White House Covid response coordinator to the US President.
On January 20, 2021, Biden restarted relations with the UN body, after his then-predecessor Trump initiated a withdrawal process in line with his criticism of the WHO’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020. ”America is going to leave a huge vacuum in global health financing and leadership. I see no one that is going to fill the breach,” Lawrence Gostin, professor of global health at Georgetown Law told FT. The plan to withdraw “on day one” would be “catastrophic”, he added. The WHO is a UN body that acts as a coordinating authority on international health issues. The agency gets its funding from dues-paying member states as well as voluntary contributions. The US has been one of the organization’s largest donors for decades, and, according to its data, is currently the second-largest contributor among its member states.
In 2020, Trump accused the WHO of being under China’s control amid the coronavirus pandemic. The president claimed that Beijing had pressured the organization to “mislead the world” about the virus and pledged to direct US funds to other global public health charities instead. Under a 1948 Congressional resolution, the US can withdraw from the WHO but must give a year’s notice and should pay outstanding fees. The Trump team, however, did not comment directly on the potential withdrawal, noted FT. In November, Trump nominated long-time vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy to become US Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). RFK Jr. was among the vocal critics of the WHO-recommended Covid-19 response measures imposed by governments around the world, namely strict lockdowns and the introduction of rapidly developed vaccines. Kennedy’s nomination has yet to be approved by the Senate.
“..living in a barrel, sleeping rough, going naked in the street, and declaiming rude jokes about the rulers and institutions of Athens, the state in which he lived.”
• Roll Out The Barrel For The New Year – That’s Diogenes’s Barrel (Helmer)
Diogenes of Sinope, the still famous philosopher of ancient Greece, had an unusually long and exceptionally miserable life between 412 and 323 BC. There’s no telling whether he inherited the profits of his father’s money manipulation business, but by the time he was captured by pirates, enslaved, and then put up for sale, he had nothing with which to pay the ransom. He was not the first crooked banker’s son to end up in poverty. He was the first, and possibly the last crooked banker’s son to make a virtue of poverty, and to demonstrate this in his lifestyle – living in a barrel, sleeping rough, going naked in the street, and declaiming rude jokes about the rulers and institutions of Athens, the state in which he lived.
There is some dispute over whether Diogenes’s barrel was in fact a large wine or oil storage jar; and whether the cause of his death was suicide by self-suffocation, gastroenteritis from raw octopus, or manslaughter by a hungry dog. There is no dispute over the fame Diogenes continues to enjoy for his subversion of the powerful, wealthy, and gullible of his society, and for the wit of his apothegms. They are all hearsay; next to nothing Diogenes wrote has survived.In the truth and in truth-telling, it’s certain that Diogenes was a believer. But excepting himself, towards truth-tellers in particular – journalists, lawyers, University of Chicago professors, and veterans of the US Marine Corps and CIA – Diogenes was more than cynical. He illustrated this point with his habit of walking about in the bright sunshine with a lighted lantern. Asked what he was doing, he quipped that he was looking for an honest man.
Let’s celebrate in Diogenic style and with his two convictions — that pursuing the truth is no laughing matter, and that pursuing the truth in hope of making money, power and celebrity is a joke: those who do so are masturbating in public as Diogenes used to do but for an altogether different, selfless reason. For the coming 2025 I wish you, dear reader, will catch a glimpse of the truth – enough to keep us in good spirits until the Moscow office reopens in mid-January; and then to slow down our arrival at the destination Diogenes recognized as inevitable for all truth-tellers – the empty barrel.
Hornets
Anatomy of a hornets nest
This is incredible
pic.twitter.com/R4lju1NVCp— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) December 22, 2024
Cats&dogs
Dogs adoring their cat friends 🥹❤️ pic.twitter.com/cByUc9rmHq
— Antidepressant Content (@depressionlesss) December 21, 2024
Sharks
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870485469726969997
Bros
https://twitter.com/i/status/1870777334392820166
Cat camera
Seeing the cats through pet cameras📸😹 pic.twitter.com/OlFmAdeQAT
— Why you should have a cat (@ShouldHaveCat) December 22, 2024
4
Male Lion trying to rest but his cub have other ideas pic.twitter.com/6T0wghSsZe
— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) December 22, 2024
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
