"UK RAISES ALERT LEVEL" said comedian John Cleese

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent Russian threats and have therefore raised their security level from “Miffed” to “Peeved.” Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to “Irritated” or even “A Bit Cross.” The English have not been “A Bit Cross” since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. The Russians have been re-categorized from “Tiresome” to “A Bloody Nuisance.” The last time the British issued a “Bloody Nuisance” warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.

The Scots have raised their threat level from “Pissed Off” to “Let’s Get the Bastards.” They don’t have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from “Run” to “Hide.” The only two higher levels in France are “Collaborate” and “Surrender.” The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France’s white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country’s military capability.

Italy has increased the alert level from “Shout Loudly and Excitedly” to “Elaborate Military Posturing.” Two more levels remain: “Ineffective Combat Operations” and “Change Sides.”

The Germans have increased their alert state from “Disdainful Arrogance” to “Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs.” They also have two higher levels: “Invade a Neighbour” and “Lose.”

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from “No worries” to “She’ll be alright, Mate.” Two more escalation levels remain: “Crikey! I think we’ll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!” and “The barbie is cancelled.” So far, no situation has ever warranted use of the final escalation level.

John Cleese – British writer, comedian, actor and tall person

Read More

"Russia has fallen. Forever"

"Russia has fallen. Forever"

Time Magazine dedicated the cover of the bloody war to the Russian Federation

#unitedphotopress

Read More

Meet The XB-70: The Largest And Fastest Bomber Ever Was Designed To Hit Russia

The XB-70 had speed and size going for it so it would surely be able to strike Russia with nuclear weapons during the Cold War. And yet, the bomber was canceled as time and new technology made the XB-70 sadly obsolete: It was way back in the early 1960s when the U.S. Air Force developed the XB-70 Valkyrie—which was the largest and fastest bomber ever built.

However, the aircraft—nearly two hundred feet long, thirty-one feet tall at the tail, and with a maximum gross weight of five hundred twenty-one thousand pounds—was eventually deemed obsolete and shut down by next-generation enemy defense missiles and fast-rising costs to keep it afloat.

But in a last-ditch effort to save the plane, “the Air Force and contractor North American Aviation developed several alternate uses for the plane, including everything from launching intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) to space capsules,” according to defense and security writer Kyle Mizokami at Popular Mechanics.

There were also thoughts of transforming the XB-70 into a commercial aircraft that could rival the Anglo-French-built Concorde SST.

“The XB-70 was designed to fly high and fast, outracing enemy air defenses on the ground to hit targets across the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, advances in Soviet air defenses made the XB-70’s flight profile obsolete, while the Pentagon discovered the new, land-based ICBM could strike targets far more quickly and cheaply,” Mizokami writes.

“The XB-70 was also considered expensive, with each production bomber projected to cost an estimated $24.5 million, or $237 million today. The final production cost was significantly higher and likely sealed the Space Age bomber’s fate,” he continues.

In addition to the sky-high costs, the XB-70 was seen as a potential partner “with the very system that made it obsolete: the ballistic missile. The Valkyrie was envisioned as carrying one large Minuteman II ICBM in an internal weapons bay, or two smaller Skybolt missiles.”

Not Practical

This would surely offer improved flexibility for decision-makers during wartime, but, in the end, it wasn’t deemed practical to spend that amount of money to launch just one or two missiles.

Other ideas for the XB-70 were to transform it into a hypersonic launch aircraft or the first stage for a space-launching system.

“The Valkyrie could fly to altitudes of up to 72,000 feet, negating the need for any rocket-based system to fly that distance. Several proposals saw a smaller rocket, space plane, or other space-launch system mated to the former bomber,” Mizokami notes.

Commercial Use?

Finally, in regards to its commercial use, “the XB-70 could fit 80 passengers in airline-style seating, with the convenience of a ‘hot liquid buffet.’ Alternately, it could transport seventy-two medical patients, plus attending nurses. It was even pitched as a cargo transport, with a hinged cabin allowing the loading of cargo pallets. Needless to say, none of these ideas passed the cost-to-utility test, as the Valkyrie would’ve been the most expensive people-mover ever pressed into service.”

Read More

Tens of thousands of Ukrainians are pouring towards neighbouring countries to flee the Russian invasion

António Cossa on the way with the refugies from Ukraine - United Photo Press

In the three days since the invasion began, more than 115,000 have crossed into Poland alone - some travelling for more than two days, others joining queues 15km (10 miles) long at border points.

Those fleeing are mostly women and children, as all Ukrainian men aged 18 to 60 are being told to stay and fight.

On 2 March, major urban centres in certain parts of Ukraine, such as Kharkiv (east), Kherson (south), Mariupol (south-east), and the capital Kyiv, witnessed the most intense clashes since the Russian military offensive began on 24 February. Settlements along the “contact line” in Donetska and Luhanska oblasts, such as Volnovakha, Shchastia and Stanytsia Luhanska, have been heavily impacted. Between 4 a.m. on 24 February and 2 March 2022, OHCHR recorded 802 civilian casualties in Ukraine, including 249 people killed. The human cost of ongoing clashes is likely much higher as access and security challenges make it difficult to verify the actual number of deaths and injuries.

In recent days, many cities have experienced relentless shelling that has caused significant damage to crucial infrastructure and further restricted access to vital services. Critical supplies, including food, medicine and basic hygiene items, are becoming increasingly scarcer in the hardest-hit areas, while dwindling cash reserves, empty ATMs and suspended money transfer services have greatly curtailed affected people’s ability to purchase basic goods even when markets are functioning and accessible.

Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) needs, especially in eastern Ukraine, continue to worsen as escalating tensions prevent urgently needed repair works from being carried out, while limited access makes it more difficult for partners to provide WASH assistance. In Mariupol, Sartana and Staryi Krym, around 470,000 people remain without access to water.

Stoppages in the water supply are also reportedly affecting the functioning of heating systems in certain locations amid freezing winter temperatures.

Moreover, the health needs generated by the ongoing conflict are particularly acute. The World Health Organization (WHO) says it has received several unconfirmed reports of attacks on hospitals and health infrastructure. There are critical shortages of oxygen and other critical drugs and medical supplies, as conflict-related injuries and COVID-19 infections place increasing strain on the already-weak healthcare system. With millions of people now on the move, the conditions on the ground are ripe for the spread of COVID-19, potentially triggering a double health emergency that could overwhelm the health system.

Refugees flee across EU borders as Russian attacks continue. António Cossa - United Photo Press

In Kyiv, thousands of people continue to pack overcrowded train stations in an attempt to flee the capital as Russian troops advance towards the city, limiting the movement of people and essential goods in and out of the city. On 2 March, debris from a powerful explosion reportedly landed close to the central railway station in Kyiv used to evacuate thousands of women and children. The level of damage and number of civilian causalities have yet to be confirmed.

The most affected areas of the country are facing a full-blown humanitarian crisis. Increasing numbers of people are trapped in cities under constant attack, as wide-scale evacuations have not been possible in certain locations.

As clashes escalate, a growing number of people are being displaced every day within Ukraine and across international borders, increasing the scope and scale of the ongoing crisis into neighbouring countries. one million people have fled Ukraine over the last week – the equivalent of more than 142,000 people on average per day – a number that will likely increase as constant violence and destruction of homes displaces more people.

The situation of third country nationals from countries in Africa and South Asia and other ethnic minority groups in Ukraine, including the Roma population, is particularly concerning, as there have been numerous reports of discrimination and even violence against these vulnerable groups. The Roma population lack civil status documents, limiting access to critical services, including education and health, and potentially humanitarian assistance as many Roman internally displaced people were not registered prior to the current escalation in conflict.

Antonio Cossa

United Photo Press Photojornalist 

Read More

Calamity, Again – An Anne Applebaum essay on Putin

Like the Russian tsars who preceded him — like Stalin, like Lenin — Putin also considers “Ukraine” a threat. Not a military threat, but an ideological threat.

My God, calamity again!

It was all so peaceful, so serene;

We had just started to break the chains

That hold our people in slavery

When stops! Once again the blood of the people

It's pouring…

The poem is called ‘Calamity Again’. The original version was written in Ukrainian in 1859, and the author, Taras Shevchenko, did not speak metaphorically when he wrote about slavery. Shevchenko was born into a family of serfs—slaves—on an estate in what is now central Ukraine, in what was then the Russian empire. Taken from his family as a child, he followed his master to St. Petersburg, where he learned painting and also began writing poetry. There, impressed by his talent, a group of other artists and writers helped him buy his freedom.

When Shevchenko wrote 'Calamity Again' he was universally recognized as Ukraine's most prominent poet. He was known as Kobzar or “The Troubadour” — a name taken from his first collection of poems, published in 1840 — and his words defined the particular set of memories and emotions that we would now describe as Ukraine’s “national identity.” His language and style are not contemporary. However, it suddenly seems important to introduce this 19th-century poet to readers outside Ukraine, because it suddenly seems important to make this same set of memories and emotions tangible to an audience that won't read Shevchenko's romantic ballads. Much has been written about Russian views of Ukraine; many speculated about Russian objectives in Ukraine. The President of Russia, on Monday, February 21, informed us in an hour-long speech that he thinks Ukraine should not exist. But what does Ukraine mean to Ukrainians?

The Ukrainians emerged from the medieval state of Kyivan Rus—the same state from which the Russians and Belarusians also emerged—to, at some point, become, like the Irish or Slovaks, a colony of other empires. In the 16th and 17th centuries, Ukrainian nobles learned to speak Polish and participated in Polish court life; later, some Ukrainians strove to be part of the Russian-speaking world, learning Russian and aspiring to positions of power first in the Russian empire, then in the Soviet Union.

However, during these same centuries, a feeling of “Ukraine” also developed, linked to the peasantry, serfs and farmers who could not or did not want to assimilate. The Ukrainian language, as well as Ukrainian art and music, were preserved in the countryside, despite the fact that Polish or Russian is spoken in the cities. Saying “I am Ukrainian” was once a statement about status and social position as well as ethnicity. “I am Ukrainian” meant that people deliberately defined themselves against the nobility, against the ruling class, against the merchant class, against the townspeople. Later it could mean that people were defining themselves as being against the Soviet Union: Ukrainian resisters fought the Red Army in 1918 and then again in the last days of the Second World War and the early years of the Cold War. Ukrainian identity was anti-elitist, before the term anti-elitist was commonly used, often furious and anarchic, occasionally violent. In fact, some of Shevchenko's poetry is very angry and very violent.

In the 19th century, Ukrainian patriotism, as it could not be expressed through state institutions as Italian or German patriotism at the same time, was expressed through voluntary, religious and charitable organizations, early examples of what we now call “civil society”. ”: study and self-help groups that published newspapers and magazines, founded schools and Sunday schools, promoted literacy among peasants. As they gained strength and supporters, Moscow came to see these popular Ukrainian organizations as a threat to the unity of imperial Russia. In 1863 and again in 1876, the empire banned Ukrainian books and persecuted Ukrainians who wrote and published them. Shevchenko himself spent years in exile.

Still, “Ukraine” survived in the villages and grew stronger among intellectuals and writers, remaining powerful enough to persuade Ukrainians to make their first state proposal at the time of the Bolshevik revolution in 1917. ensuing civil war, the Bolsheviks immediately realized that Ukraine should have its own republic within the Soviet Union, run by Ukrainian communists. Ukrainian distrust of authority, especially Soviet authority, remained. When, in 1929, Stalin began the forced collectivization of agriculture throughout the Soviet Union, a series of rebellions broke out in Ukraine. Stalin, like the Russian imperial aristocracy previously, began to fear that he might, as he put it, “lose” Ukraine: he feared that even the Ukrainian communists would not want to obey his orders. Shortly afterwards, members of the Soviet secret police organized teams of activists to go from house to house in rural Ukraine, confiscating food. About 4 million Ukrainians died due to the famine that followed. Mass arrests of Ukrainian intellectuals, writers, linguists, museum curators, poets and painters followed.

Simple lines cannot be drawn between the past and the present. There are no direct analogies; no nation is forced to repeat its past. But the experiences of our parents and grandparents, the habits and lessons they taught us, shape the way we see the world, and it is perhaps no accident that at the end of the 20th century, Stalin's greatest fear happened and Ukrainians once again organized, this time successfully, a popular civic movement that achieved independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. It is perhaps no accident that many Ukrainians have remained suspicious of the state, even their own state, in the years following. Because the state — the government, the rulers, the “power” — had always been “them” and not “us”, there was no tradition of Ukrainian civil service or military service; there was no tradition of public service. If the cancer of corruption, which afflicted all the weary, cynical and exhausted former republics formed in the wreckage of the Soviet Union, was particularly virulent in Ukraine, this is part of the explanation.

But in the long tradition of their parents and grandparents, millions of Ukrainians continued to resist both corruption and autocracy. And precisely because it opposed post-Soviet kleptocracy, “Ukraine” in the 21st century has become intertwined with aspirations for democracy, freedom, rule of law, integration in Europe. At the beginning of the 21st century, Ukrainians began to oppose the post-Soviet system, linked to Russia by financial interests, and began once again to intervene for something more just and honest.

Twice, in 2005 and 2014, Ukrainian self-organized street movements toppled kleptocratic and autocratic leaders who, backed by Russia, had tried to “steal” Ukrainian elections and overturn the rule of law. In 2005, Russia responded with a renewed effort to interfere in Ukrainian politics. In 2014, Russia responded with an invasion of Crimea and several attacks on cities in eastern Ukraine. The only successful attacks were in the far east, in Donbas, because the “separatist” movement created by Russia could be supported by the Russian army.

But Ukraine's character remained unchanged. In 2019, 70% of Ukrainians once again voted against the system. A complete stranger has become President: a Jewish actor born in eastern Ukraine, with no political experience but a long history of making fun of those in power — the kind of humor that Ukrainians value most. Volodymyr Zelensky was known for playing an oppressed professor who speaks out against corruption and is filmed by a student. In the television series, this footage goes viral, the professor accidentally wins the presidency, and then everyone — his nasty boss, his unfriendly family, wealthy strangers — is suddenly sycophantic. Zelensky, the actor, makes fun of them, tricking them. The Ukrainians wanted Zelensky, the real-life President, to do the same.

During the election campaign, Zelensky also vowed to end the war with Russia, the ongoing and debilitating conflict along the border with eastern Ukraine that has claimed more than 14,000 lives in the past decade. Many Ukrainians expected him to achieve this too. The President tried to establish links with the inhabitants of the occupied areas of Crimea and Donbas; he asked for meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin; however, he continued to seek Ukrainian integration with the West.

And then, calamity again.

It was all so peaceful, so serene;

We had just started to break the chains

That hold our people in slavery

When stops! Once again the blood of the people

It's pouring…

Ukraine is now under brutal attack, with tens of thousands of Russian troops pouring through its eastern provinces, along its northern border and along its southern coast. For, like the Russian tsars who preceded him — like Stalin, like Lenin — Putin also considers “Ukraine” a threat. It is not a military threat, but an ideological threat. Ukraine's determination to become a democracy is a real challenge to Putin's nostalgic imperial political project: the creation of an autocratic kleptocracy, in which he is all-powerful, within something akin to the former Soviet empire. Ukraine undermines this project solely for its existence as an independent state. Fighting for something better, for freedom and prosperity, Ukraine becomes a dangerous rival. For if Ukraine were to succeed in its decades-long struggle for democracy, rule of law and European integration, then Russians might ask: why not us?

I am not romantic about Zelensky, nor do I have any illusions about Ukraine, a nation of 40 million people, among them the same percentages of good and bad, brave and cowardly people, as anywhere else. But at this moment in history, something unusual happens there. Among those 40 million, a significant number — at all levels of society, across the country, in all fields of activity — aspire to create a fairer, freer and more prosperous country than they have ever inhabited in the past. Among them are people willing to dedicate their lives to the fight against corruption, to the deepening of democracy, to remain sovereign and free. Some of these people are willing to die for these ideas.

Conflict will be important to all of us in ways we cannot yet understand. In the long struggle between autocracy and democracy, between dictatorship and freedom, Ukraine is now the front line — and our front line too.

#unitedphotopress 

Anne Applebaum
“The Atlantic” Journalist, writer, author of “The Twilight of Democracy”

Read More

11 shockingly accurate predictions from Nostradamus including the war between Russia and Ukraine

In these cases, we couldn't ignore his speculative prowess.

Nostradamus' incredibly accurate predictions including the war between Russia and Ukraine

Nostradamus was a French astrologer born in the early 16th century. He worked as a doctor, but is famous for his supposed ability to predict the future. In fact, he is credited with predicting many important world events from the rise of Hitler to 9/11.

Naturally, these claims are met with much skepticism, but many of his predictions contain very specific details that have come true.

Now, many think that the famous astrologer may have predicted the war between Russia and Ukraine, as one of his many predictions leaves a vague idea that France would face danger from the east. "The blue head will harm the white head to such a degree as the good of France to both must be," he predicted, reports History.co. Could this prediction – only speculated to refer to 2022, as Nostradamus' predictions are based on astrological movements and not the calendar – be referring to the outbreak of World War III?

The world's attention is focused on the armed conflict that broke out in Ukraine after Russia's highest authority, Vladimir Putin, approved military operations in different Ukrainian cities, a fact that provoked thousands of reactions. Now, social networks comment on Russian actions and there are those who have raised a prediction of the famous Nostradamus.

Over the years, Nostradamus' prophecies have become viral topics on the internet, as on several occasions they have been fulfilled and followers of these writings consider that many events of global relevance were anticipated.

On this occasion, it was pointed out that the prophet had spoken of the current armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine. In this sense, what he said in one of his centuries was the following: “Around the big city there will be soldiers lodged in fields and suburbs”

In this regard, many netizens wonder if this will be what starts a military procedure that involves different countries of the world, in what could be a terrible escalation of war for many innocent people.

Nostradmus was apparently an author and poet, as well as a seer and physician. He recorded numerous predictions during his lifetime, many of them in his famous book "Les Prophéties", published in 1555.

"Les Propheties"

The prophecies in his book are written as poems, usually four lines long. His artistic reflections have exasperated historians, and many of them can be interpreted as applicable to a range of events.

Facts or fiction?

Les Prophéties contained nearly 1000 predictions, many of which were little more than poetic ramblings. That said, there are several predictions that are so specific they're hard to ignore! Let's look at them.

King Henry II

Nostradamus was a friend of King Henry II of England. In a letter to the king, he called him "the most invincible Henry, King of France". But his writings in Les Prophéties say otherwise.

Nostradamus wrote that the king would be overthrown in battle by a younger "lion". He specifically said, "He will pierce your eyes through a gilded cage / Two wounds made one, then die a cruel death."

King Henry II really died a cruel death. He was jousting when his younger opponent's spear hit his helmet, and the spear snapped in two. The wood pierced his eye and temple, leaving him badly injured. The king suffered for 10 days before dying from his wounds.

Great Fire of London

Nostradamus died in the 16th century, but he predicted something terrible would happen in the next century. A poem in his book references the "fire of 66".

In 1666, a small fire started in a London bakery and grew into a fire that consumed the city for three days. It killed several people and destroyed thousands of homes and businesses.

The French Revolution

Many believe that Nostradamus predicted the French Revolution in a poem that says "Songs, chants and claims will come from the enslaved / Held captive by the nobility in their prisons".

The French Revolution began in 1789 with the storming of the Bastille. The French people decided to revolt against the nobles who treated them unfairly and began by attacking the Bastille, a prison that was seen as a symbol of the monarchy's power.

Reign of King Philip II of Spain

Nostradamus wrote a poem that describes the rise and fall of King Philip II's reign. The first lines of the poem predict that King Philip will initially prosper. That was true! He also stated that he would "reduce the Arab army". This seems to refer to the Battle of Lepanto. A Spanish fleet clashed with ships sent by the Ottoman Empire and brutally defeated them.

Then he predicts a change in the king's fortunes. Philip was a Catholic ruler, and when the Catholic Mary of Scots was executed, his beneficial alliance with England was also broken.

Finally, Nostradamus says that King Philip's fortune will be destroyed by a "young onion". The young onion may have been the Protestant king of France, Henry IV. Henry and Philip disagreed over religion and fought throughout their lives.

Louis Pasteur's career

Louis Pasteur was a 19th century French chemist and microbiologist who made important scientific discoveries. He discovered that microorganisms cause fermentation and invented the pasteurization process, which is named after him. His work also contributed to the first vaccines against rabies and anthrax.

Nostradamus predicted that someone named Pasteur would discover things that had been hidden for centuries and be celebrated as a divine figure. He also predicted that Pasteur would be dishonored later.

In 1995, a scientific historian published a book confirming that Pasteur lied about using the work of a rival scientist to create his anthrax vaccine. This knocked him off his pedestal, as Nostradamus said.

Hitler's Rise

Hitler's rise is one of the scariest and most accurate prophecies made by Nostradamus. His poem read as follows: “From the depths of Western Europe, / From the poor will be born a child / He who with his tongue will seduce a great troop; ... Fierce beasts of hunger will cross the rivers.”

Hitler was born to poor parents in Western Europe and, as we know, had a tremendous talent for convincing millions of people to follow him, many of whom he turned into a ruthless army.

Charles de Gaulle's leadership

In another poem, Nostradamus includes the line "A man called de Gaulle is a triple leader...he shall be known above all monarchs". Charles de Gaulle was one of the most glorified leaders in French history.

De Gaulle commanded Free France in the war against the Nazis during World War II. When France regained its freedom, he became prime minister for two years while democracy was restored. A decade later, he became president. There's the triple leader!

The atomic bomb

Nostradamus made a prophecy that two cities would suffer a terrible scourge the likes of which the world had never seen. This certainly describes the destruction caused by the atomic bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II.

He describes a "proud nation brought down by the stone in the tree". Pride and honor are hallmarks of Japanese culture, and the stone in the tree is speculated to refer to the mushroom-shaped cloud created by the bombs.

Assassination of John F. Kennedy

The assassination of President John F. Kennedy was one of the pivotal moments of the 20th century. Many believe that Nostradamus foresaw this famous crime when he wrote "From above, evil will befall the great man." This could refer to the fact that a large man was shot by a sniper from a roof.

He goes on to suggest that an innocent man will be blamed for the crime, which many people believe to be the case. Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested for the murder, but was murdered the day after the murder. There are theories that he was just a scapegoat, and the real killer escaped. Nostradamus claims that the guilty person will remain "in the fog".

9/11 attacks

One of Nostradamus' most famous prophecies seems to predict the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The first verse of the poem says that the sky will burn at 45 degrees. Some suggest that this refers to the fact that New York is close to 45 degrees latitude.

It also talks about “the great new city” being destroyed by fire. This could again refer to New York and how the entire city was affected by the attack. The impact on the city was huge and lasting, not to mention the ash from the burning towers scattered far and wide.

The lines “blood will be shed / mercy to none” may refer to the tragic loss of life. Nearly 3000 people died in the attacks that day.

Nostradamus predicted the pandemic?

In the year 2020, it was speculated that Nostradamus also predicted the coronavirus outbreak, but there doesn't seem to be much substantiation in these claims. Nostradamus lived in a time when plagues were common, and he made 35 predictions related to plague outbreaks!

What does the future hold for us?

Their predictions for the next few years include Earth-destroying asteroids, global famine and a zombie apocalypse. Good thing not all of his prophecies come true!

Read More

THE WAR HAS A NAME - VLADIMIR PUTIN

All our abstract sobs, all pacifist slogans (for peace and for all that is good) are just verbiage if we do not understand who unleashed the war. Talking that all sides are to blame for the war is hypocrisy. This war has an instigator, BUT HE IS NOT ONE.

Remember the meeting of the Security Council? How did the ghoul methodically, one by one, call his accomplices and smear them with blood on camera, and they were shaking with fear, being anointed?

I do not blame them at all, I myself would have behaved in their place.

But the fact is that we are all smeared with blood here. You can, of course, consider that self-condemnation is a painful reaction to stress, but my memory is very good and my head works, despite emotions. I understood everything long ago and did not condemn myself on February 24th.

They constantly write to me here about Donetsk children killed by Ukrainian shells, saying that I don’t feel sorry for them. So, thinking about the notorious collective responsibility, I recall Dostoevsky, this remark by Porfiry Petrovich:

- You killed...

Who killed the children, saving whom from the evil fascists, Russian soldiers are now burning Kharkov, Chernigov and Kyiv?

YOU killed them, WE ALL killed them.

Everyone who supported Putin, albeit with reservations. Everyone who rejoiced at KRYMNASh. All those who made fun of the "ridiculous language" of a small neighboring country. All those who "did not interfere in politics." All those who repeated the terrible news from the Donbass, without giving them any assessment.

I want to learn more about this news, since I myself was involved in this.

In 2014, I worked as a designer in a good RR magazine, whose editor-in-chief, very kind and smart Vitaly L., a native of Donetsk land, turned it into a “mouthpiece of Donbass”.

The transformation happened almost instantly, and I did not notice how I was already typesetting the weekly sheets of Donetsk letters from the selfless journalist Marina A.

Well, I didn't notice. I noticed everything. I read all these terrible (and true!) stories about Donetsk children, old people (Putin is currently “protecting” them), militias, dogs, and I understood that, perhaps, there is not a drop of lies in them from beginning to end, but in general, these artless stories were the most terrible lies.

It was a deception of "objective" journalism, when only facts are allegedly presented without any conclusions, but, in fact, there is an interchange of cause and effect.

“Children are dying from Ukrainian shells, so the militiaman Ivan could not help but go to war,” and all this with direct speech, right from the scene, was obtained at the risk of life.

And it's all true. And the children are dying, which is terrible, and the militiaman Ivan did not lie, and the journalist Marina is fearless.

But the cause is confused with the effect, again they forgot to tell us who started the war, who is the aggressor country, and who is the victim. They forgot to remind you that there are no bloodless invasions of foreign territory, and in order for the Ukrainian projectile to fly in this direction, it was first necessary to arrange a wonderful spring holiday in the Crimea, then “go to the Voentorg” for weapons for the militias in the East. We were not told what any alteration of the borders is fraught with, they did not even hint, for the slow-witted, what they would do with the armed separatists on the territory of the Russian Federation itself.

It would be boring to read all this, but the touching personal story of the militiaman Ivan and his dog, who left the hut and went to fight, is interesting to us.

No, besides stories, they told something: about the dehumanization of the Donbass (Ukrainians consider them eastern subhumans), about the Ukrainian ultra-right (it is necessary to show their stripes with swastikas), but again, they forgot to remind how many fascists there are in Ukraine and what percentage they receive in the elections .

This was not a “crucified boy” of federal channels, not an obvious lie, but a more terrible kind of lie that cannot be refuted, which lies only in the subtext, in the reason and purpose of the text, and not in its words.

And, even without believing in the Russian World, it was necessary to take note and conclude that “not everything is so simple” - yes, Putin is not perfect, but the “other side” is also no better.

All this, one way or another, was a “blood libel”, which should inevitably raise the degree of hatred and cause an influx of new “Ivans” leaving their native huts to die for the Russian World.

And it was a vicious circle - as the Russian World advanced (or actively defended), there were more and more tortured children, "angels of Donbass", and the children, in turn, were raised on the flag for the further offensive of the Russian World.

No one explained why, where the Russian World did not come, Russian people did not die, but simply lived.

The kindest Vitaly fed everyone with pies from Donetsk, the selfless Marina took pictures of children and dogs and sent reports, and I, a modest performer, arranged texts and photos into a simple layout of the Actual heading.

What prevented me from leaving the magazine as soon as everything started? Fear of losing a job, promiscuity in ways of earning? 

A little bit of both, but the main thing is a complete misunderstanding that any of my actions will have consequences. The action seemed so small, I was too easily replaced to feel like a significant link in this chain.

Yes, of course, I went to all the rallies, I always expressed my position openly and it was disgusting to make up these reports, but I felt like a victim, not an accomplice.

And the work of hell was being done, the “blood libel” was getting stronger and one day, while relaxing in a village near Ryazan, I heard from the light room, where the TV was comfortably blinking news, the remarks of those sitting at evening tea: “a bomb should have been dropped on Ukraine long ago” and the calm affirmative answer of those chewing mouth

Then I probably thought for the first time that I didn’t want not only to typeset some magazines, but also to live in Russia.

So who killed these children? 

Ukrainians who considered Russians subhuman (there were such), careless Ukrainian artillerymen (for sure there were), irresponsible Ukrainian politicians (I'm sure they were)?

No, guys, after all, it was the one who invaded a foreign country, sent in troops and brought equipment, conducted constant propaganda in the Russian Federation, collecting cannon fodder, the one who commanded the actions of the separatists from the outside (as Girkin tells about it), the one who who interviewed and photographed them, who published touching reports about them, who made up these reports, received a salary and paid taxes to the budget. That is, WE.

Surely this will be read by those who did all this out of duty and conviction, and those who, on the contrary, are completely clean (“we did not choose them”).

I will tell everyone - we are still TOGETHER. Together we will roar. Together we will meet the corpses of Russian soldiers. Together we will learn about terrorist attacks in the Moscow metro. Together we will receive our share of grief and hatred, regardless of beliefs and degree of guilt.

We are all - both accomplices and victims, we are in this position, even if they did not ask us, we were put in this position, but this does not change anything.

Ivan Grigoriev

#НетВойне / #No war 

Read More

Putin’s Historic Miscalculation May Make Him a War Criminal

The West condemns Russia’s aggression as “barbaric” and “horrific,” as Biden warns that conflict could drag on for weeks or months.

In the eyes of the world and almost certainly history, Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine on Thursday was an epic miscalculation, drawing comparisons to Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein for cold-blooded aggression that could challenge the world order and change its borders. The Russian leader appeared almost delusional in a pre-dawn speech from the Kremlin announcing a “special military operation” to “protect” Donbas, the eastern region where Russian-backed separatists have waged a war for eight years. Putin, instead, immediately ordered Russian tanks into Ukraine and air strikes on the capital and more than a dozen cities in a country of forty million people. “Peace on our continent has been shattered,” the nato secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg told reporters. “We now have war in Europe on a scale and of a type we thought belonged to history.” Putin’s “reckless” attack risks “countless innocent lives,” Stoltenberg warned.

Putin is now, at minimum, a pariah condemned by leaders across the world. “Putin is the aggressor. Putin chose this war,” President Biden said in a speech to the nation announcing new sanctions on Russian financial institutions and élites. He charged that Putin “has much larger ambitions than Ukraine.” “He wants to, in fact, reëstablish the former Soviet Union,” Biden said. “His ambitions are completely contrary to the place where the rest of the world has arrived.” In one of a flurry of statements reflecting outrage globally, the European Commission chief, Ursula von der Leyen, called Russia’s act “barbaric” and dismissed its justifications as “cynical.” In a tweet, the British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, said he was appalled by Putin’s “horrific” decision to pursue “a path of bloodshed and destruction.” Putin’s military offensive put him on the diplomatic defensive. The French President, Emmanuel Macron, called the attack “a turning point” in history that will have a profound and lasting impact across the continent.

Putin may now also qualify as a war criminal, according to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. War crimes include willful killing and extensive destruction of property “not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.” The term has been inconsistently interpreted and unevenly applied to leaders or countries—including to the U.S. and its officials—who have initiated aggression for reasons considered unjustified. In Ukraine, Putin’s “war of choice” has clearly violated international law through his invasion of a sovereign country and attempt to oust its government. After an emergency United Nations Security Council meeting, on Wednesday, the Secretary-General, António Guterres, warned that the Russian invasion could be the “worst war” of the century “with consequences not only devastating for Ukraine, not only tragic for the Russian Federation” but for the entire world.

Putin has lied at every stage of the Ukraine crisis, insisting last year that he had no military ambitions in Ukraine even as he steadily amassed a force of nearly two hundred thousand troops on three fronts. During a joint press conference with the German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz, last week, Putin played down the prospect of war. “Do we want this or not? Of course not,” he said, in response to a question. “That is exactly why we put forward proposals for a process of negotiations.” As he spoke, however, his military was setting up field hospitals near the Ukrainian border stocked with fresh blood supplies. “You don’t need blood unless you plan on starting a war,” President Biden noted on Tuesday.

Putin’s invasion is based on wild accusations, including a claim that he needed to “denazify” Ukraine, a country led by President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is, in fact, Jewish. Putin vowed to end the “humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime,” when, in fact, separatists backed by Russia have for years waged a war in eastern Ukraine. Putin also claimed that the Kyiv government sought to acquire nuclear weapons when, in fact, Ukraine, once the third-largest nuclear power, denuclearized after the Soviet Union collapsed and it became an independent country again. He described the government in Kyiv as a “junta,” even though it was democratically elected in 2019. And Zelensky, in fact, won in a landslide with seventy-three per cent of the vote, defeating thirty-eight others who ran for President.

In a plaintive final appeal, Zelensky spoke directly to the Russian people, hours before the attack. “You are being told this is a plan to free the people of Ukraine,” Zelensky said, in an official video in Russian. “But the Ukrainian people are free.” He implored Russian citizens to embrace peace. “Many of you have visited Ukraine. Many of you have relatives here,” he said. “You know our character, you know our people, and you know our principles. You know what we value. . . . Hear us.”

Putin was, in fact, the one who sparked the crisis with an erroneous—even fictional—claim that Ukraine would soon gain membership in nato. Joining the Western military alliance is an aspirational goal for Ukraine, which it enshrined in a constitutional amendment in 2019. But nato’s leadership has openly said that Ukraine does not yet qualify for membership. It would have to introduce and enact multiple reforms that may be years away.

To counter Putin’s paranoia, the Biden Administration has offered detailed proposals to enhance security for Russia. They included offers on arms control as well as limits on military exercises. Putin’s response has been defiant. He demanded that Ukraine never join nato and the Western military alliance roll back its membership to its 1997 level. As Russian forces advance across the country, Putin’s goal now appears to be regime change by military force—a step that he criticized the U.S. for taking in Iraq. In a reflection of his paranoia, Putin even suggested that the invasion of Ukraine was to protect Russia from the U.S. “For our country, it is a matter of life and death, a matter of our historical future as a nation,” he said. And he brazenly reminded the world, “Russia remains one of the most powerful nuclear states.”

Russia experts and former U.S. officials increasingly question Putin’s stability, especially as he has surrounded himself with like-minded advisers and yes-men who encourage his ambitions to rewrite history. “Putin believes that in historical terms, as in Peter the Great and so on, blood will be forgotten and his legacy as the uniter of the ‘Russian lands,’ no matter the cost, will remain,” Nina Khrushcheva, an international-affairs professor at the New School in New York and the great-granddaughter of former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, told me. She said the Russian leader appears to “have lost all grip on reality, more so than I was willing to admit only yesterday.” She added, “I didn’t think he was suicidal, but he clearly is, and is taking the world and us with him.” She described Putin as a “ruthless megalomaniac with a giant imperialist agenda” akin to Stalin and Mao.

Others compared him to Hitler. “There are many parallels between Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939 and Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022,” Michael McFaul, the former U.S. Ambassador to Russia, who is now at Stanford University, tweeted on Thursday. Putin no longer appears to be a rational actor on the international stage, experts say. “I hate comparing people to Hitler, but Putin’s crazy talk is making it hard to avoid,” Stephen Sestanovich, a Russia expert at Columbia University, told me. “Did he think forcing all of his advisers to stand up on television and say, in such obvious discomfort, that they agreed with him would make the decision for war look careful and deliberate? My Russian friends suggest something different—is this guy losing it?”

Russian forces may make military progress in the short term. Biden acknowledged that the weeks or months ahead will be hard on Ukrainians, with a spillover on the world and its markets. But Putin is betting his political future on whether Russia can prevail long-term in Ukraine. “Putin’s gamble seems to be that he can be in charge of what comes next, how far and wide this spreads,” Karen J. Greenberg, the director of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School, told me. “That is a foolish lack of appreciation for the power nato and the other countries have to contain his incursion—and in that lies his miscalculation.”

Holding Ukraine, given its vast size and population, will be a challenge militarily and politically. Russia has the largest land army in Europe, but it would need to send in many more troops than it already has to occupy the entire country, which is roughly the size of Texas. The Ukrainian government has called up reservists and promised weapons to civilians to form a public resistance force. They could create an insurgency challenging Russian control of part or all of Ukraine, experts predict. “It’s impossible to hold on the long term,” Marie Dumoulin, director of the wider Europe program at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told me. “Whether we’re in for a long and bloody war, or whether there will be a contest inside of Russia against this decision, but I don’t see it as a realistic goal to control Ukraine.” Russia can not prevail, Biden said. “In the early days of this conflict, Russia propaganda outlets will keep trying to hide the truth and claim success for its military operation against a made-up threat,” he said. “But history has shown time and again how swift gains in territory eventually give way to grinding occupations, acts of massive mass civil disobedience, and strategic dead ends.” The first day of the invasion was just that—the first day.

Robin Wright

Read More

A Photo That Changed the Course of the Vietnam War vs Nguyen Ngoc Loan

Nguyen Ngoc Loan, the national police chief of South Vietnam, executed a Vietcong fighter, Nguyen Van Lem, in Saigon on Feb. 1, 1968.Credit. Eddie Adams/Associated Press

Fifty years ago today, the national police chief of South Vietnam calmly approached a prisoner in the middle of a Saigon street and fired a bullet into his head.

A few feet away stood Eddie Adams, an Associated Press photographer, eye to his viewfinder. On a little piece of black-and-white film, he captured the exact moment of the gunshot.

The police chief, Brig. Gen. Nguyen Ngoc Loan, stands with his back to the camera, right arm fully extended, left arm loosely by his side. The prisoner, Nguyen Van Lem, is a Vietcong fighter but wears no uniform, only a plaid shirt and black shorts. His hands are cuffed behind his back. Though in his 30s, he looks little older than a boy. His face is contorted from the bullet’s impact.

By morning, this last instant of his life would be immortalized on the front pages of newspapers nationwide, including The New York Times. Along with NBC film footage, the image gave Americans a stark glimpse of the brutality of the Vietnam War and helped fuel a decisive shift in public opinion.

“It hit people in the gut in a way that only a visual text can do,” said Michelle Nickerson, an associate professor of history at Loyola University Chicago who has studied the antiwar movement during the Vietnam era. “The photo translated the news of Tet in a way that you can’t quantify in terms of how many people were, at that moment, turned against the war.”

The execution happened on Feb. 1, 1968, two days after Vietcong and North Vietnamese forces launched the coordinated attacks of the Tet offensive. Suddenly, insurgents were in dozens of cities, in almost every province of South Vietnam. They were in the streets of Saigon, the capital. They were even inside the heavily guarded compound of the United States Embassy.

It was a shocking sight for Americans, who had been assured by President Lyndon B. Johnson and his top general in Vietnam, William C. Westmoreland, that the enemy was on its last legs.

Meredith H. Lair, a Vietnam War expert at George Mason University, said the offensive “caused people to question whether they’d been fed lies by the administration, and to question whether the war was going as well as they’d been led to believe, and to question whether the war could be won if the enemy was supposed to be cowed and appeared so strong and invigorated.”

If the broader Tet offensive revealed chaos where the government was trying to project control, Adams’s photo made people question whether the United States was fighting for a just cause. Together, they undermined the argument for the war on two fronts, leading many Americans to conclude not only that it could not be won, but also that, perhaps, it shouldn’t be.

The photo “fed into a developing narrative in the wake of the Tet offensive that the Vietnam War was looking more and more like an unwinnable war,” said Robert J. McMahon, a historian at the Ohio State University. “And I think more people began to question whether we were, in fact, the good guys in the war or not.”

A police chief had fired a bullet, point-blank, into the head of a handcuffed man, in likely violation of the Geneva Conventions. And the official was not a Communist, but a member of South Vietnam’s government, the ally of the United States.

“It raised a different kind of question to Americans than whether or not the war was winnable,” said Christian G. Appy, a professor of history at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. “It really introduced a set of moral questions that would increasingly shape debate about the Vietnam War: Is our presence in Vietnam legitimate or just, and are we conducting the war in a way that is moral?”

In the months after the Tet offensive, public opinion shifted more rapidly than at any other point in the war, Dr. McMahon said. Adams’s photo won a Pulitzer Prize, and Time magazine called it one of the 100 most influential ever taken.

“You can talk about ‘the execution photograph from the Vietnam War,’ and not just the generation who lived through it but multiple generations can call that image to mind,” said Susan D. Moeller, the author of “Shooting War: Photography and the American Experience of Combat,” and a professor of media and international affairs at the University of Maryland. “It was immediately understood to be an icon.”

Yet the decisions on how to display this photo and other graphic Vietnam war imagery were matters of debate in the newsroom of The Times. “I remember certain pictures,” the influential photo editor John G. Morris, who died at 100 last year, said, “which I was just determined to get on page one.” This was one, as was the 1972 picture of a naked 9-year-old, Phan Thi Kim Phuc, fleeing a napalm attack. That ran at the bottom of the page.

In South Vietnam, the execution image resonated in a different way. To Americans in 1968, it conveyed that North Vietnam and the Vietcong were far stronger than they had been led to believe. To South Vietnamese, it conveyed the opposite: Those forces “no longer had the kind of aura of omnipotence that they had had before,” said Mark Philip Bradley, a historian at the University of Chicago.

Then there was the fallout for the person for whom viewers had the least sympathy: General Loan, the executioner, who would eventually move to the United States. In 1978, the government tried unsuccessfully to rescind his green card. He died 20 years later in Virginia, where he had run a restaurant.

Adams himself, before his death in 2004, expressed discomfort with the consequences of his photo. He noted that photographs, by nature, exclude context: in this case, that the prisoner had killed the family of one of General Loan’s deputies.

“Two people died in that photograph: the recipient of the bullet and Gen. Nguyen Ngoc Loan,” he wrote in Time magazine. “The general killed the Viet Cong; I killed the general with my camera.”

“Still photographs,” Adams wrote, “are the most powerful weapon in the world.”

Maggie Astor

Read More