右翼分子吐槽扯淡专楼
"The defense of individual rights has reached such extremes as to make society as a whole defenseless against certain individuals. It is time, in the West, to defend not so much human rights as human obligations.
On the other hand, destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Society has turned out to have scarce defense against the abyss of human decadence, for example against the misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, such as motion pictures full of pornography, crime, and horror. This is all considered to be part of freedom and to be counterbalanced, in theory, by the young people’s right not to look and not to accept. Life organized legalistically has thus shown its inability to defend itself against the corrosion of evil.
......
This tilt of freedom toward evil has come about gradually, but it evidently stems from a humanistic and benevolent concept according to which man—the master of this world—does not bear any evil within himself, and all the defects of life are caused by misguided social systems, which must therefore be corrected."
- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Harvard Commencement Address ("A World Split Apart"), June 8, 1978
On the other hand, destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Society has turned out to have scarce defense against the abyss of human decadence, for example against the misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, such as motion pictures full of pornography, crime, and horror. This is all considered to be part of freedom and to be counterbalanced, in theory, by the young people’s right not to look and not to accept. Life organized legalistically has thus shown its inability to defend itself against the corrosion of evil.
......
This tilt of freedom toward evil has come about gradually, but it evidently stems from a humanistic and benevolent concept according to which man—the master of this world—does not bear any evil within himself, and all the defects of life are caused by misguided social systems, which must therefore be corrected."
- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Harvard Commencement Address ("A World Split Apart"), June 8, 1978
1473 个评论
Russo-Ukrainian War: The Wagner Uprising
...There’s something to be said here about the analytic model that prevails in our time - there’s a machine that instantly springs to life, taking in rumors and partial information in an environment of extreme uncertainty and spitting out formulaic results that match ideological presuppositions. Information is not evaluated neutrally, but forced through a cognitive filter that assigns it meaning in light of predetermined conclusions. Russia is *supposed* to collapse and undergo regime change (Fukuyama said so) - therefore, Prigozhin’s actions had to be framed in reference to this assumed endgame.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, we saw some similar measure of aggressive model-fitting from “Trust the Plan” Russia supporters, who were confident that the Wagner uprising was just an act - an elaborate ruse concocted in concert by Prigozhin and Putin to fool Russia’s enemies and advance the plan. The analytic error here is the same - information is parsed only for the purpose of buttressing and advancing a pre-concluded endgame; except it is Russian omnicompetence which is assumed instead of Russian state collapse.
......
One of humanity’s most universal and beloved pastimes is making bad historical analogies, and that process was certainly in high gear this past weekend. The most popular comparison, naturally, was to compare Prigozhin’s uprising to the fall of the Tsar in 1917.
The problem is that this analogy is a perfect inversion of the truth.
The Tsar fell in 1917 because he was at army headquarters far away from the capital. In his absence, a garrison mutiny in Petrograd (Petersburg) led to a collapse of government authority, which was then picked up by a new cabinet formed from the state Duma. Coups are not achieved through mindless bloodshed. What matters most is the basic question of bureaucratic authority, for this is what it means to rule. When you pick up a phone and give an order to shut down a rail line; when you summon a military unit to readiness; when you issue a purchasing order for food or shells or medicine - are these instructions respected?
It was trivially obvious that Prigozhin lacked either the force, the institutional support, or any real desire to usurp authority, and the idea that he was attempting a genuine coup was absurd. Imagine, for a moment, that Wagner managed to bash its way through the Russian National Guard into Moscow. Prigozhin storms the ministry of defense - he arrests Shoigu and sits in his chair. Do we really believe that the army in the field would suddenly follow his orders? It’s not a magic chair. Power only comes up for grabs in the event of total state collapse, and what we saw in Russia was the opposite - we saw the state closing ranks.
So in the end, both the neoliberal commentariat and the Russian plan trusters are left with an unsatisfactory view of events. Prigozhin is neither the harbinger of regime change nor a piece in Putin’s four dimensional chess game. He’s simply a mercurial and wildly irresponsible man who saw that his Private Military Corporation was going to be taken away from him and decided to go to extreme and criminal lengths to prevent this. He was a card player with nothing in his hand who decided to bluff his way out of a corner - until his bluff was called.
...There’s something to be said here about the analytic model that prevails in our time - there’s a machine that instantly springs to life, taking in rumors and partial information in an environment of extreme uncertainty and spitting out formulaic results that match ideological presuppositions. Information is not evaluated neutrally, but forced through a cognitive filter that assigns it meaning in light of predetermined conclusions. Russia is *supposed* to collapse and undergo regime change (Fukuyama said so) - therefore, Prigozhin’s actions had to be framed in reference to this assumed endgame.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, we saw some similar measure of aggressive model-fitting from “Trust the Plan” Russia supporters, who were confident that the Wagner uprising was just an act - an elaborate ruse concocted in concert by Prigozhin and Putin to fool Russia’s enemies and advance the plan. The analytic error here is the same - information is parsed only for the purpose of buttressing and advancing a pre-concluded endgame; except it is Russian omnicompetence which is assumed instead of Russian state collapse.
......
One of humanity’s most universal and beloved pastimes is making bad historical analogies, and that process was certainly in high gear this past weekend. The most popular comparison, naturally, was to compare Prigozhin’s uprising to the fall of the Tsar in 1917.
The problem is that this analogy is a perfect inversion of the truth.
The Tsar fell in 1917 because he was at army headquarters far away from the capital. In his absence, a garrison mutiny in Petrograd (Petersburg) led to a collapse of government authority, which was then picked up by a new cabinet formed from the state Duma. Coups are not achieved through mindless bloodshed. What matters most is the basic question of bureaucratic authority, for this is what it means to rule. When you pick up a phone and give an order to shut down a rail line; when you summon a military unit to readiness; when you issue a purchasing order for food or shells or medicine - are these instructions respected?
It was trivially obvious that Prigozhin lacked either the force, the institutional support, or any real desire to usurp authority, and the idea that he was attempting a genuine coup was absurd. Imagine, for a moment, that Wagner managed to bash its way through the Russian National Guard into Moscow. Prigozhin storms the ministry of defense - he arrests Shoigu and sits in his chair. Do we really believe that the army in the field would suddenly follow his orders? It’s not a magic chair. Power only comes up for grabs in the event of total state collapse, and what we saw in Russia was the opposite - we saw the state closing ranks.
So in the end, both the neoliberal commentariat and the Russian plan trusters are left with an unsatisfactory view of events. Prigozhin is neither the harbinger of regime change nor a piece in Putin’s four dimensional chess game. He’s simply a mercurial and wildly irresponsible man who saw that his Private Military Corporation was going to be taken away from him and decided to go to extreme and criminal lengths to prevent this. He was a card player with nothing in his hand who decided to bluff his way out of a corner - until his bluff was called.
America Is Getting Older - The US Census Bureau
JUNE 22, 2023 — The nation’s median age increased by 0.2 years to 38.9 years between 2021 and 2022, according to Vintage 2022 Population Estimates released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. Median age is the age at which half of the population is older and half of the population is younger.
“As the nation’s median age creeps closer to 40, you can really see how the aging of baby boomers, and now their children — sometimes called echo boomers — is impacting the median age. The eldest of the echo boomers have started to reach or exceed the nation’s median age of 38.9,” said Kristie Wilder, a demographer in the Census Bureau’s Population Division. "While natural change nationally has been positive, as there have been more births than deaths, birth rates have gradually declined over the past two decades. Without a rapidly growing young population, the U.S. median age will likely continue its slow but steady rise.”
A third (17) of the states in the country had a median age above 40.0 in 2022, led by Maine with the highest at 44.8, and New Hampshire at 43.3. Utah (31.9), the District of Columbia (34.8), and Texas (35.5) had the lowest median ages in the nation. Hawaii had the largest increase in median age among states, up 0.4 years to 40.7.
No states experienced a decrease in median age. Four states — Alabama (39.4), Maine (44.8), Tennessee (39.1), West Virginia (42.8), and the District of Columbia (34.8) — had no change in their median age from 2021 to 2022.
JUNE 22, 2023 — The nation’s median age increased by 0.2 years to 38.9 years between 2021 and 2022, according to Vintage 2022 Population Estimates released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. Median age is the age at which half of the population is older and half of the population is younger.
“As the nation’s median age creeps closer to 40, you can really see how the aging of baby boomers, and now their children — sometimes called echo boomers — is impacting the median age. The eldest of the echo boomers have started to reach or exceed the nation’s median age of 38.9,” said Kristie Wilder, a demographer in the Census Bureau’s Population Division. "While natural change nationally has been positive, as there have been more births than deaths, birth rates have gradually declined over the past two decades. Without a rapidly growing young population, the U.S. median age will likely continue its slow but steady rise.”
A third (17) of the states in the country had a median age above 40.0 in 2022, led by Maine with the highest at 44.8, and New Hampshire at 43.3. Utah (31.9), the District of Columbia (34.8), and Texas (35.5) had the lowest median ages in the nation. Hawaii had the largest increase in median age among states, up 0.4 years to 40.7.
No states experienced a decrease in median age. Four states — Alabama (39.4), Maine (44.8), Tennessee (39.1), West Virginia (42.8), and the District of Columbia (34.8) — had no change in their median age from 2021 to 2022.
4 in 10 California residents are considering packing up and leaving, new poll finds
With its unmatched natural splendor and cultural attractions, California is a beacon that attracts people from around the world who put down roots and call it home.
About 70% of residents said they are happy living here, a new statewide poll shows, crediting the state’s diversity, economic opportunities and an enjoyable lifestyle as reasons to stick around.
Yet large swaths of residents are also considering packing up and leaving. Many also believe that the state is headed in the wrong direction, and are anxious about the direction of the economy and their ability to pay their bills.
The findings of a new poll from a consortium of local nonprofits aiming to take stock of the state’s mood point to a contradiction playing out across the Golden State: People are pleased by the bounty the country’s largest state had to offer and mostly favor its liberal attitudes on social issues, but are also far more concerned about their livelihoods than last year.
With its unmatched natural splendor and cultural attractions, California is a beacon that attracts people from around the world who put down roots and call it home.
About 70% of residents said they are happy living here, a new statewide poll shows, crediting the state’s diversity, economic opportunities and an enjoyable lifestyle as reasons to stick around.
Yet large swaths of residents are also considering packing up and leaving. Many also believe that the state is headed in the wrong direction, and are anxious about the direction of the economy and their ability to pay their bills.
The findings of a new poll from a consortium of local nonprofits aiming to take stock of the state’s mood point to a contradiction playing out across the Golden State: People are pleased by the bounty the country’s largest state had to offer and mostly favor its liberal attitudes on social issues, but are also far more concerned about their livelihoods than last year.
The decline of higher education:
Biology professor says he was fired for teaching sex is determined by X, Y chromosomes
A biology professor at a Texas community college has claimed he was fired for “religious preaching” after he taught a lesson about how sex is determined by X and Y chromosomes.
Johnson Varkey, who has taught at St. Philip’s College in San Antonio for 20 years, claimed he was accused of “religious preaching” and let go after he discussed the human reproductive system during a lesson on Nov. 28, 2022, which led to four students walking out of the lecture hall.
The First Liberty Institute, a Texas-based nonprofit Christian conservative law firm, last week sent a letter to the school on behalf of the veteran educator demanding his reinstatement.
New York University professor fired after students say his class was too hard
The firing of a New York University (NYU) professor who was the subject of a petition from students who said his class was too hard continues to stoke controversy, as some parents and teachers say the incident points to a lowering of academic standards.
Maitland Jones Jr, a professor of organic chemistry, was fired by NYU after more than 80 students from his 350-student course signed a petition complaining about grades, teaching and help received during the Covid pandemic.
Jones, 84, received a message from the dean of science in August terminating his contract, the New York Times reported.
Biology professor says he was fired for teaching sex is determined by X, Y chromosomes
A biology professor at a Texas community college has claimed he was fired for “religious preaching” after he taught a lesson about how sex is determined by X and Y chromosomes.
Johnson Varkey, who has taught at St. Philip’s College in San Antonio for 20 years, claimed he was accused of “religious preaching” and let go after he discussed the human reproductive system during a lesson on Nov. 28, 2022, which led to four students walking out of the lecture hall.
The First Liberty Institute, a Texas-based nonprofit Christian conservative law firm, last week sent a letter to the school on behalf of the veteran educator demanding his reinstatement.
New York University professor fired after students say his class was too hard
The firing of a New York University (NYU) professor who was the subject of a petition from students who said his class was too hard continues to stoke controversy, as some parents and teachers say the incident points to a lowering of academic standards.
Maitland Jones Jr, a professor of organic chemistry, was fired by NYU after more than 80 students from his 350-student course signed a petition complaining about grades, teaching and help received during the Covid pandemic.
Jones, 84, received a message from the dean of science in August terminating his contract, the New York Times reported.
Liberals whitewashing progressive degenerates:
‘We’re Coming For Your Children’ chant at NYC Drag March elicits outrage, but activists say it’s taken out of context
Over the weekend, a short video circulated widely on social media of an unidentified person at a New York City march during Pride festivities saying, “We’re coming for your children.”
In the 21-second clip, circulated by a right-wing web streamer channel, dozens of people march in the streets and are clearly heard chanting, “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re not going shopping.” But one voice that is louder than the crowd — it’s not clear whose, or whether the speaker was a member of the LGBTQ community — is heard saying at least twice, “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”
To conservative pundits, activists and lawmakers, the video confirmed the allegations they’ve levied in recent years that the LGBTQ community is “grooming” children.
But to Brian Griffin, the original organizer of the NYC Drag March, if that’s the worst they heard, it’s only because he wasn’t there this year.
Griffin said he chanted obscene things in the past, like “Kill, kill, kill, we’re coming to kill the mayor,” and joked about pubic hair and sex toys during marches. People at the Drag March regularly sing “God is a lesbian.”
“It’s all just words,” Griffin said. “It’s all presented to fulfill their worst stereotypes of us.”
‘We’re Coming For Your Children’ chant at NYC Drag March elicits outrage, but activists say it’s taken out of context
Over the weekend, a short video circulated widely on social media of an unidentified person at a New York City march during Pride festivities saying, “We’re coming for your children.”
In the 21-second clip, circulated by a right-wing web streamer channel, dozens of people march in the streets and are clearly heard chanting, “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re not going shopping.” But one voice that is louder than the crowd — it’s not clear whose, or whether the speaker was a member of the LGBTQ community — is heard saying at least twice, “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”
To conservative pundits, activists and lawmakers, the video confirmed the allegations they’ve levied in recent years that the LGBTQ community is “grooming” children.
But to Brian Griffin, the original organizer of the NYC Drag March, if that’s the worst they heard, it’s only because he wasn’t there this year.
Griffin said he chanted obscene things in the past, like “Kill, kill, kill, we’re coming to kill the mayor,” and joked about pubic hair and sex toys during marches. People at the Drag March regularly sing “God is a lesbian.”
“It’s all just words,” Griffin said. “It’s all presented to fulfill their worst stereotypes of us.”
Another slippery slope:
Mentally ill people ‘have as much right to assisted dying as the terminally ill’
People suffering with mental health problems have just as much right to die as those who are physically sick, an assisted suicide group has said.
Silvan Luley, a team member from Dignitas, gave evidence to MPs as part of their controversial inquiry into assisted dying, which is currently illegal in the UK.
Mr Luley said that “it’s about time” that the UK legalises the practice, describing it as “the last human right” and telling the Commons health and social care committee that “it’s happening anyway”.
Dignitas, whose slogan is “To live with dignity, to die with dignity”, was founded in 1998 and provides physician-assisted suicide to people suffering with terminal or severe physical or mental illness.
Mr Luley revealed that his organisation has helped 540 people from the UK take their own lives in 20 years – a figure which accounts for more than one in seven of all the deaths it has enabled.
Mentally ill people ‘have as much right to assisted dying as the terminally ill’
People suffering with mental health problems have just as much right to die as those who are physically sick, an assisted suicide group has said.
Silvan Luley, a team member from Dignitas, gave evidence to MPs as part of their controversial inquiry into assisted dying, which is currently illegal in the UK.
Mr Luley said that “it’s about time” that the UK legalises the practice, describing it as “the last human right” and telling the Commons health and social care committee that “it’s happening anyway”.
Dignitas, whose slogan is “To live with dignity, to die with dignity”, was founded in 1998 and provides physician-assisted suicide to people suffering with terminal or severe physical or mental illness.
Mr Luley revealed that his organisation has helped 540 people from the UK take their own lives in 20 years – a figure which accounts for more than one in seven of all the deaths it has enabled.
Echelon Insights @EchelonInsights
For the first time in our polling since March of 2022, American voters are slightly more likely to say vital American interests and values are not at stake in the war in Ukraine.
When looking at partisan identity for this recent change, this month’s most recent shift appears mostly to be due to movement among Democratic voters. While Democrats still favor the statement that Ukraine’s war is our war by a 22-point margin, the opposing statement has risen to 31%.
Not coincidentally, only 36% of likely voters say Ukraine is winning the war. 42% say it is unclear.
https://twitter.com/EchelonInsights/status/1671199971457073152
For the first time in our polling since March of 2022, American voters are slightly more likely to say vital American interests and values are not at stake in the war in Ukraine.
When looking at partisan identity for this recent change, this month’s most recent shift appears mostly to be due to movement among Democratic voters. While Democrats still favor the statement that Ukraine’s war is our war by a 22-point margin, the opposing statement has risen to 31%.
Not coincidentally, only 36% of likely voters say Ukraine is winning the war. 42% say it is unclear.
https://twitter.com/EchelonInsights/status/1671199971457073152
More than four-in-ten Republicans now say the U.S. is providing too much aid to Ukraine
As the war in Ukraine intensifies, nearly half of Americans (47%) say either that the United States is providing the right amount of aid (31%) or not enough assistance (16%) to Ukraine, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. That compares with 28% who say the U.S. is giving too much support to Ukraine.
Yet the share of Americans who say the U.S. is providing too much aid to Ukraine has steadily increased since the start of the war, largely driven by a shift among Republicans.
Currently, 44% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say the U.S. is giving too much aid to Ukraine, up modestly since January (40%) and the highest level since shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year.
Just 14% of Democrats and Democratic leaners view the current level of U.S. aid as excessive, little changed in recent months.
As the war in Ukraine intensifies, nearly half of Americans (47%) say either that the United States is providing the right amount of aid (31%) or not enough assistance (16%) to Ukraine, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. That compares with 28% who say the U.S. is giving too much support to Ukraine.
Yet the share of Americans who say the U.S. is providing too much aid to Ukraine has steadily increased since the start of the war, largely driven by a shift among Republicans.
Currently, 44% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say the U.S. is giving too much aid to Ukraine, up modestly since January (40%) and the highest level since shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year.
Just 14% of Democrats and Democratic leaners view the current level of U.S. aid as excessive, little changed in recent months.
Supreme Court rejects affirmative action in ruling on universities using race in admissions decisions
The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a major ruling on affirmative action Thursday, rejecting the use of race as a factor in college admissions as a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
In a 6-3 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that, "A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination."
"Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race," the opinion reads.
"Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice," the opinion states.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the main dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and in part by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who recused herself from the Harvard case due to her previous role on Harvard's Board of Overseers.
The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a major ruling on affirmative action Thursday, rejecting the use of race as a factor in college admissions as a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
In a 6-3 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that, "A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination."
"Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race," the opinion reads.
"Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice," the opinion states.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the main dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and in part by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who recused herself from the Harvard case due to her previous role on Harvard's Board of Overseers.
Samuel Sey @SlowToWrite
Here are some more quotes from Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion:
“The solution to our Nation’s racial problems thus cannot come from policies grounded in affirmative action or some other conception of equity. Racialism simply cannot be undone by different or more racialism.”
—
“Anyone who today thinks that some form of racial discrimination will prove ‘helpful’ should thus tread cautiously, lest racial discriminators succeed (as they once did) in using such language to disguise more invidious motives.”
—
“What, then, would be the endpoint of these affirmative action policies? Not racial harmony, integration, or equality under the law. Rather, these policies appear to be leading to a world in which everyone is defined by their skin color, demanding ever-increasing entitlements and prefer- ences on that basis.”
—
“Though JUSTICE JACKSON seems to think that her race-based theory can somehow benefit everyone, it is an immutable fact that “every time the government uses racial criteria to ‘bring the races together,’ someone gets excluded, and the person excluded suffers an injury solely because of his or her race.”
—
You should read the entire opinion. It’s predictably brilliant.
https://twitter.com/SlowToWrite/status/1674453593913692160
Here are some more quotes from Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion:
“The solution to our Nation’s racial problems thus cannot come from policies grounded in affirmative action or some other conception of equity. Racialism simply cannot be undone by different or more racialism.”
—
“Anyone who today thinks that some form of racial discrimination will prove ‘helpful’ should thus tread cautiously, lest racial discriminators succeed (as they once did) in using such language to disguise more invidious motives.”
—
“What, then, would be the endpoint of these affirmative action policies? Not racial harmony, integration, or equality under the law. Rather, these policies appear to be leading to a world in which everyone is defined by their skin color, demanding ever-increasing entitlements and prefer- ences on that basis.”
—
“Though JUSTICE JACKSON seems to think that her race-based theory can somehow benefit everyone, it is an immutable fact that “every time the government uses racial criteria to ‘bring the races together,’ someone gets excluded, and the person excluded suffers an injury solely because of his or her race.”
—
You should read the entire opinion. It’s predictably brilliant.
https://twitter.com/SlowToWrite/status/1674453593913692160
Germany’s failure to attract business investment ‘alarming’, say economists
Germany’s ability to attract business investment suffered an “alarming” decline last year, when more than €135bn of foreign direct investment flowed out of the country and only €10.5bn came in, according to a leading economic institute.
The Cologne-based German Economic Institute said the gap between outbound investments by German companies and business investment into the country in 2022 was the largest on record, based on data from the OECD.
“The investment conditions in Germany had recently deteriorated again due to high energy prices and the increasing shortage of skilled workers,” said Christian Rusche, an economist at the GEI.
The report said 70 per cent of the outbound investment by German companies went to other European countries, adding that this made it “particularly alarming that investments by European neighbours have collapsed”.
Many of Germany’s problems were “home-made, including high corporate taxes, excessive bureaucracy and an ailing infrastructure”, it said.
Rusche called on the government in Berlin to take steps to improve the country’s attractiveness for business. “The federal government urgently needs to take countermeasures to ensure that Germany becomes the first address for foreign investments again in the future,” he said.
Germany’s ability to attract business investment suffered an “alarming” decline last year, when more than €135bn of foreign direct investment flowed out of the country and only €10.5bn came in, according to a leading economic institute.
The Cologne-based German Economic Institute said the gap between outbound investments by German companies and business investment into the country in 2022 was the largest on record, based on data from the OECD.
“The investment conditions in Germany had recently deteriorated again due to high energy prices and the increasing shortage of skilled workers,” said Christian Rusche, an economist at the GEI.
The report said 70 per cent of the outbound investment by German companies went to other European countries, adding that this made it “particularly alarming that investments by European neighbours have collapsed”.
Many of Germany’s problems were “home-made, including high corporate taxes, excessive bureaucracy and an ailing infrastructure”, it said.
Rusche called on the government in Berlin to take steps to improve the country’s attractiveness for business. “The federal government urgently needs to take countermeasures to ensure that Germany becomes the first address for foreign investments again in the future,” he said.
UK Colonel 'forced out of Army' after stating 'men cannot be women'
A colonel has claimed he was forced to quit the Army after he was criticised for stating that “men cannot be women”.
Dr Kelvin Wright, 54, had been a Reservist commanding officer with 14 years’ unblemished service, including two tours in Afghanistan, before his “honour was attacked” with a transphobia complaint and an investigation he described as “hellish”.
In May, he shared a post on his private Facebook account from Fair Play for Women, a campaign group that works with governing bodies to preserve women’s sport for those born female, which consisted of a quote from Helen Joyce, a feminist campaigner backed by the author JK Rowling.
The quote, shared without any additional comment, said: “If women cannot stand in a public place and say ‘men cannot be women’, then we do not have women’s rights at all.”
This prompted a junior officer to warn him that his gender-critical views could be at odds with Ministry of Defence transgender policies, before what Dr Wright calls the Army’s “LGBT champions” allegedly drew up a seven-page dossier about his “substandard behaviour” – which he was not allowed to see.
A formal Army investigation was opened in May that could have led to him being formally dismissed or censured under the Major Administrative Action process, through which he has been asked to make a statement.
Dr Wright, who led a team of 60 troops in 306 Hospital Support Regiment alongside working as an NHS intensive care consultant, has this month felt forced to retire six years earlier than planned, slashing his total Army pension in the process.
......
It is the latest diversity row to hit the Armed Forces, after the RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” and the Navy said it was considering multiple ID cards for those who are gender-fluid.
A colonel has claimed he was forced to quit the Army after he was criticised for stating that “men cannot be women”.
Dr Kelvin Wright, 54, had been a Reservist commanding officer with 14 years’ unblemished service, including two tours in Afghanistan, before his “honour was attacked” with a transphobia complaint and an investigation he described as “hellish”.
In May, he shared a post on his private Facebook account from Fair Play for Women, a campaign group that works with governing bodies to preserve women’s sport for those born female, which consisted of a quote from Helen Joyce, a feminist campaigner backed by the author JK Rowling.
The quote, shared without any additional comment, said: “If women cannot stand in a public place and say ‘men cannot be women’, then we do not have women’s rights at all.”
This prompted a junior officer to warn him that his gender-critical views could be at odds with Ministry of Defence transgender policies, before what Dr Wright calls the Army’s “LGBT champions” allegedly drew up a seven-page dossier about his “substandard behaviour” – which he was not allowed to see.
A formal Army investigation was opened in May that could have led to him being formally dismissed or censured under the Major Administrative Action process, through which he has been asked to make a statement.
Dr Wright, who led a team of 60 troops in 306 Hospital Support Regiment alongside working as an NHS intensive care consultant, has this month felt forced to retire six years earlier than planned, slashing his total Army pension in the process.
......
It is the latest diversity row to hit the Armed Forces, after the RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” and the Navy said it was considering multiple ID cards for those who are gender-fluid.
The Supreme Court rules for a designer who doesn’t want to make wedding websites for gay couples
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a defeat for gay rights, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruled Friday that a Christian graphic artist who wants to design wedding websites can refuse to work with same-sex couples.
The court ruled 6-3 for designer Lorie Smith despite a Colorado law that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation, race, gender and other characteristics. Smith had argued that the law violates her free speech rights.
Smith’s opponents warned that a win for her would allow a range of businesses to discriminate, refusing to serve Black, Jewish or Muslim customers, interracial or interfaith couples or immigrants. But Smith and her supporters had said that a ruling against her would force artists — from painters and photographers to writers and musicians — to do work that is against their beliefs.
“The First Amendment envisions the United States as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court’s six conservative justices.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissent that was joined by the court’s other liberals. “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class,” Sotomayor wrote.
The decision is a win for religious rights and one in a series of cases in recent years in which the justices have sided with religious plaintiffs. Last year, for example, the court ruled along ideological lines for a football coach who prayed on the field at his public high school after games.
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a defeat for gay rights, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruled Friday that a Christian graphic artist who wants to design wedding websites can refuse to work with same-sex couples.
The court ruled 6-3 for designer Lorie Smith despite a Colorado law that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation, race, gender and other characteristics. Smith had argued that the law violates her free speech rights.
Smith’s opponents warned that a win for her would allow a range of businesses to discriminate, refusing to serve Black, Jewish or Muslim customers, interracial or interfaith couples or immigrants. But Smith and her supporters had said that a ruling against her would force artists — from painters and photographers to writers and musicians — to do work that is against their beliefs.
“The First Amendment envisions the United States as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court’s six conservative justices.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissent that was joined by the court’s other liberals. “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class,” Sotomayor wrote.
The decision is a win for religious rights and one in a series of cases in recent years in which the justices have sided with religious plaintiffs. Last year, for example, the court ruled along ideological lines for a football coach who prayed on the field at his public high school after games.
Neil Hauer @NeilPHauer
Among the difficulties with Ukraine's offensive, one is the lack of time for training - especially when it comes to replacements for casualties. Here's a striking excerpt from my interview with a battalion commander on the front last week:
25% casualty rate in his battalion (in the 68th Brigade) over the winter, and then straight into the offensive. The amount the Ukrainian general staff has leaned on the 68th is wild.
https://twitter.com/NeilPHauer/status/1674744796395581442
Among the difficulties with Ukraine's offensive, one is the lack of time for training - especially when it comes to replacements for casualties. Here's a striking excerpt from my interview with a battalion commander on the front last week:
25% casualty rate in his battalion (in the 68th Brigade) over the winter, and then straight into the offensive. The amount the Ukrainian general staff has leaned on the 68th is wild.
https://twitter.com/NeilPHauer/status/1674744796395581442
Spreading degeneracy all over the world:
Biden Admin Spends $4.6 Million in Taxpayer Cash To Fund LGBT Activism Abroad
The Biden administration has given nearly $4.6 million to help foreign groups promote LGBT projects like drag shows and pride parades.
Advocacy groups from at least 55 foreign nations have received millions from the Biden State Department to fund a range of initiatives aimed at bolstering the LGBT community and spreading its ideology into the mainstream, according to a Washington Free Beacon review of federal spending databases. The United States has helped organize pride parades in at least seven different countries, paid for drag queen shows in Ecuador, funded a Polish advocacy group that encourages puberty blockers for children with gender confusion, and sent cash to a Mexican group that markets cross-sex hormones to gender-confused individuals.
The global funding spree is part of the Biden administration’s larger effort to promote a woke cultural agenda throughout the United States and abroad, even in countries with more traditional social values. In addition to funding LGBT activism across the world, the administration has allocated millions to fight climate change in various countries and teach gender studies in war-torn nations like Iraq. In 2023 alone, American taxpayers have helped foot the bill for Pride Month festivities in Australia, Estonia, Slovenia, and Bosnia.
The State Department told the Free Beacon these programs help create "a world that is safer and more prosperous for all." But critics accuse the Biden administration of wasting millions in taxpayer funds on far-left causes that do little to actually strengthen American diplomacy abroad.
Biden Admin Spends $4.6 Million in Taxpayer Cash To Fund LGBT Activism Abroad
The Biden administration has given nearly $4.6 million to help foreign groups promote LGBT projects like drag shows and pride parades.
Advocacy groups from at least 55 foreign nations have received millions from the Biden State Department to fund a range of initiatives aimed at bolstering the LGBT community and spreading its ideology into the mainstream, according to a Washington Free Beacon review of federal spending databases. The United States has helped organize pride parades in at least seven different countries, paid for drag queen shows in Ecuador, funded a Polish advocacy group that encourages puberty blockers for children with gender confusion, and sent cash to a Mexican group that markets cross-sex hormones to gender-confused individuals.
The global funding spree is part of the Biden administration’s larger effort to promote a woke cultural agenda throughout the United States and abroad, even in countries with more traditional social values. In addition to funding LGBT activism across the world, the administration has allocated millions to fight climate change in various countries and teach gender studies in war-torn nations like Iraq. In 2023 alone, American taxpayers have helped foot the bill for Pride Month festivities in Australia, Estonia, Slovenia, and Bosnia.
The State Department told the Free Beacon these programs help create "a world that is safer and more prosperous for all." But critics accuse the Biden administration of wasting millions in taxpayer funds on far-left causes that do little to actually strengthen American diplomacy abroad.
Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand
We're truly witnessing a radicalization on both sides in France.
This is an unreal communiqué by the main French police unions, essentially declaring France is in a civil war and that the police is in the "resistance" against the government.
This is the translation:
"Now that's enough...
Facing these savage hordes, asking for calm is no longer enough, it must be imposed!
Restoring the republican order and putting the apprehended beyond the capacity to harm should be the only political signals to give.
In the face of such exactions, the police family must stand together.
Our colleagues, like the majority of citizens, can no longer bear the tyranny of these violent minorities.
The time is not for union action, but for combat against these "pests". Surrendering, capitulating, and pleasing them by laying down arms are not the solutions in light of the gravity of the situation.
All means must be put in place to restore the rule of law as quickly as possible.
Once restored, we already know that we will relive this mess that we have been enduring for decades.
For these reasons, Alliance Police Nationale and UNSA Police will take their responsibilities and warn the government from now on that at the end, we will be in action and without concrete measures for the legal protection of the Police, an appropriate penal response, significant means provided, the police will judge the extent of the consideration given.
Today the police are in combat because we are at war. Tomorrow we will be in resistance and the government will have to become aware of it."
https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1674959206422806528
We're truly witnessing a radicalization on both sides in France.
This is an unreal communiqué by the main French police unions, essentially declaring France is in a civil war and that the police is in the "resistance" against the government.
This is the translation:
"Now that's enough...
Facing these savage hordes, asking for calm is no longer enough, it must be imposed!
Restoring the republican order and putting the apprehended beyond the capacity to harm should be the only political signals to give.
In the face of such exactions, the police family must stand together.
Our colleagues, like the majority of citizens, can no longer bear the tyranny of these violent minorities.
The time is not for union action, but for combat against these "pests". Surrendering, capitulating, and pleasing them by laying down arms are not the solutions in light of the gravity of the situation.
All means must be put in place to restore the rule of law as quickly as possible.
Once restored, we already know that we will relive this mess that we have been enduring for decades.
For these reasons, Alliance Police Nationale and UNSA Police will take their responsibilities and warn the government from now on that at the end, we will be in action and without concrete measures for the legal protection of the Police, an appropriate penal response, significant means provided, the police will judge the extent of the consideration given.
Today the police are in combat because we are at war. Tomorrow we will be in resistance and the government will have to become aware of it."
https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1674959206422806528
A New Migration Fight is Looming in Europe
...Though Hungary and Poland have demurred on migrant quotas, they are hardly alone in taking exception to European legislation. Both Germany and France have recently stood in the way of EU legislation on climate change and renewable energy. In essence, EU wants to shift toward the qualified majority system in order to paper over fundamental differences with the appearance of “collective decision-making.”
But this approach is already backfiring. The EU’s change of procedure for bringing about the new quota system marks a significant departure from the norm, portending an even more federal vision of the European future. And it shows that the European Union is ready to give up on obtaining the consent of its member states in its most important decisions.
Knowing that it would be impossible to advance this proposal by unanimous agreement among member states, EU leaders began the process among the EU’s interior ministers, where unanimity is not required. That way, the proposal can get off the ground without agreement among all states. The proposal will now go to the European Parliament and European Commission, where it could become binding over the will of objecting states.
In practice, the burden of the new proposal won’t fall on the states that supported it, but on those that did not. Despite the appearance of consensus, the proposal would remove a fundamental competency of member states.
Under the language of “solidarity,” the EU will require member states to absorb migrants or pay a fine of €22,000 in each case of refusal to do so. Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki has already stated that Poland will not comply with the fines, and there is talk of holding a national referendum to coincide with Poland’s elections.
Objections from Poland and Hungary are not designed to stop other European countries from having their own national policies. Speaking to Hungarian radio, Viktor Orbán stated, “We simply want to say that the Germans should be right in Germany, and let the Hungarians be right in Hungary. . . . We don’t want to experiment with it.”
...Though Hungary and Poland have demurred on migrant quotas, they are hardly alone in taking exception to European legislation. Both Germany and France have recently stood in the way of EU legislation on climate change and renewable energy. In essence, EU wants to shift toward the qualified majority system in order to paper over fundamental differences with the appearance of “collective decision-making.”
But this approach is already backfiring. The EU’s change of procedure for bringing about the new quota system marks a significant departure from the norm, portending an even more federal vision of the European future. And it shows that the European Union is ready to give up on obtaining the consent of its member states in its most important decisions.
Knowing that it would be impossible to advance this proposal by unanimous agreement among member states, EU leaders began the process among the EU’s interior ministers, where unanimity is not required. That way, the proposal can get off the ground without agreement among all states. The proposal will now go to the European Parliament and European Commission, where it could become binding over the will of objecting states.
In practice, the burden of the new proposal won’t fall on the states that supported it, but on those that did not. Despite the appearance of consensus, the proposal would remove a fundamental competency of member states.
Under the language of “solidarity,” the EU will require member states to absorb migrants or pay a fine of €22,000 in each case of refusal to do so. Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki has already stated that Poland will not comply with the fines, and there is talk of holding a national referendum to coincide with Poland’s elections.
Objections from Poland and Hungary are not designed to stop other European countries from having their own national policies. Speaking to Hungarian radio, Viktor Orbán stated, “We simply want to say that the Germans should be right in Germany, and let the Hungarians be right in Hungary. . . . We don’t want to experiment with it.”
New psychology research indicates physical attractiveness predicts health outcomes 10 years later
Physical attractiveness may indicate good health, according to new findings published in the American Journal of Human Biology. The study found that people who were rated as above-average in attractiveness tended to be noticeably healthier compared to those considered average-looking when assessed 10 years later.
The motivation behind this study was to investigate the relationship between physical attractiveness and health outcomes. Previous studies have suggested that attractive facial characteristics are more likely to be found in healthy individuals, and people with attractive faces are often perceived as healthier. However, the reliability of these associations between physical attractiveness and health has been questioned from both theoretical and methodological perspectives.
......
The researchers found that individuals rated as having above-average attractiveness had significantly better health compared to those considered average-looking after a 10-year follow-up. Importantly, people who were rated as attractive had lower cardiometabolic risk even after considering various predictors of health.
“Perhaps our key takeaway message from this study is that if you see a physically attractive person and know nothing more about them, 10 years later they will be healthier, on average, than those whom you wouldn’t classify as physically attractive,” Gugushvili told PsyPost.
Physical attractiveness may indicate good health, according to new findings published in the American Journal of Human Biology. The study found that people who were rated as above-average in attractiveness tended to be noticeably healthier compared to those considered average-looking when assessed 10 years later.
The motivation behind this study was to investigate the relationship between physical attractiveness and health outcomes. Previous studies have suggested that attractive facial characteristics are more likely to be found in healthy individuals, and people with attractive faces are often perceived as healthier. However, the reliability of these associations between physical attractiveness and health has been questioned from both theoretical and methodological perspectives.
......
The researchers found that individuals rated as having above-average attractiveness had significantly better health compared to those considered average-looking after a 10-year follow-up. Importantly, people who were rated as attractive had lower cardiometabolic risk even after considering various predictors of health.
“Perhaps our key takeaway message from this study is that if you see a physically attractive person and know nothing more about them, 10 years later they will be healthier, on average, than those whom you wouldn’t classify as physically attractive,” Gugushvili told PsyPost.
Pornhub pulls out of Virginia - blocking users in the state from accessing its website in protest over new state law
One of the most visited sites in the world, Pornhub, has blocked users in Virginia over the state's new age verification law.
The new law taking effect July 1 now require websites with pornographic content being viewed in Virginia to verify that users are at least 18 years old before they can view the site.
The law, proposed by Republican state Sen. William M. Stanley Jr. (Franklin), sailed through the Virginia General Assembly.
'The safety of our users is one of our biggest concerns. We believe that the best and most effective solution for protecting children and adults alike is to identify users by their device and allow access to age-restricted materials and websites based on that identification,' Pornhub wrote in a message to those logging on.
'Until a real solution is offered, we have made the difficult decision to completely disable access to our website in Virginia.'
The new law does not mean a complete ban on pornographic content - adult websites need simply set up a method to verify a user's age such as requiring people to submit digital copies of their identification online or facial scans, but Pornhub does not want to put its user through such trials.
'The governor remains committed to protecting Virginia's children from dangerous material on the internet,' a spokeswoman for Gov. Glenn Youngkin said in a statement.
One of the most visited sites in the world, Pornhub, has blocked users in Virginia over the state's new age verification law.
The new law taking effect July 1 now require websites with pornographic content being viewed in Virginia to verify that users are at least 18 years old before they can view the site.
The law, proposed by Republican state Sen. William M. Stanley Jr. (Franklin), sailed through the Virginia General Assembly.
'The safety of our users is one of our biggest concerns. We believe that the best and most effective solution for protecting children and adults alike is to identify users by their device and allow access to age-restricted materials and websites based on that identification,' Pornhub wrote in a message to those logging on.
'Until a real solution is offered, we have made the difficult decision to completely disable access to our website in Virginia.'
The new law does not mean a complete ban on pornographic content - adult websites need simply set up a method to verify a user's age such as requiring people to submit digital copies of their identification online or facial scans, but Pornhub does not want to put its user through such trials.
'The governor remains committed to protecting Virginia's children from dangerous material on the internet,' a spokeswoman for Gov. Glenn Youngkin said in a statement.
The Vatican is rotting:
Pope names Argentine bishop, author of kissing book, to top Vatican post
July 1 (Reuters) - Pope Francis has named an Argentine theologian and prolific author who decades ago wrote a book on the healing properties of kissing to be the Catholic Church's new doctrinal chief, one of the Vatican's top posts.
A Vatican statement on Saturday said Francis had chosen fellow Argentine Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez to be the head of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF).
The DDF, modern-day successor of the notorious Inquisition which persecuted heretics, is tasked with promoting and safeguarding doctrine on faith and morals. It monitors theological work to make sure it adheres to Church doctrine and issues guidance, clarifications, and corrections.
Fernandez, 60, has written about 300 books and articles and is a past rector of the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina, where he was also dean of its theology department.
In 1995, as a 33-year-old priest, he wrote a book called "Heal Me With Your Mouth - The Art of Kissing," which was published in English in 2017.
He writes in the introduction "that this book was not written based on my own experience, but based on the lives of people who kiss" and that he also wanted to focus on what poets had written about kissing.
Pope names Argentine bishop, author of kissing book, to top Vatican post
July 1 (Reuters) - Pope Francis has named an Argentine theologian and prolific author who decades ago wrote a book on the healing properties of kissing to be the Catholic Church's new doctrinal chief, one of the Vatican's top posts.
A Vatican statement on Saturday said Francis had chosen fellow Argentine Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez to be the head of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF).
The DDF, modern-day successor of the notorious Inquisition which persecuted heretics, is tasked with promoting and safeguarding doctrine on faith and morals. It monitors theological work to make sure it adheres to Church doctrine and issues guidance, clarifications, and corrections.
Fernandez, 60, has written about 300 books and articles and is a past rector of the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina, where he was also dean of its theology department.
In 1995, as a 33-year-old priest, he wrote a book called "Heal Me With Your Mouth - The Art of Kissing," which was published in English in 2017.
He writes in the introduction "that this book was not written based on my own experience, but based on the lives of people who kiss" and that he also wanted to focus on what poets had written about kissing.
Former French far-right MP accuses government of failing to control rioters
Former French far-right MP Marion Marechal blamed the government Friday for not being capable of controlling rioters as tension is high concerning the killing of a teen by police.
“If the government is not capable of ensuring the security of the French people, then it should make way for those who will face the rioters, " Marechal said in a video on Twitter.
“My immediate response is that the government must have the courage to pronounce the establishment of a state of emergency to immediately protect our fellow citizens,” she said.
“The cities are on fire. The chaos is everywhere in our country,” she said, adding: “All regions are affected, all departments, large cities, medium-sized towns, seven villages.”
France is jolted by protests after Nahel M., 17, was shot dead by police Tuesday during a traffic stop in the Parisian suburb of Nanterre.
“I imagine in a few months, a few weeks they will avoid any form of confrontation. This is what Emmanuel Macron initially sought to do,” she said.
“I am, of course, thinking of the independence of justice. I am, of course, thinking of the presumption of innocence. We are also fine with this minute of silence in the assembly,” said Marechal.
“The on-site testimonies are truly eye-opening. The law enforcement forces explain to us that they are overwhelmed, that they do not have enough ammunition,” she said.
“And so, what will happen on the day when the state no longer succeeds in providing assistance to its citizens? It will be a turning point. Citizens will decide to protect themselves because they will no longer tolerate seeing their cars burned, their businesses destroyed,” she warned.
Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin told TF1 on Thursday that 45,000 police were deployed across the country for possible protests which may take place for a fourth straight night.
Former French far-right MP Marion Marechal blamed the government Friday for not being capable of controlling rioters as tension is high concerning the killing of a teen by police.
“If the government is not capable of ensuring the security of the French people, then it should make way for those who will face the rioters, " Marechal said in a video on Twitter.
“My immediate response is that the government must have the courage to pronounce the establishment of a state of emergency to immediately protect our fellow citizens,” she said.
“The cities are on fire. The chaos is everywhere in our country,” she said, adding: “All regions are affected, all departments, large cities, medium-sized towns, seven villages.”
France is jolted by protests after Nahel M., 17, was shot dead by police Tuesday during a traffic stop in the Parisian suburb of Nanterre.
“I imagine in a few months, a few weeks they will avoid any form of confrontation. This is what Emmanuel Macron initially sought to do,” she said.
“I am, of course, thinking of the independence of justice. I am, of course, thinking of the presumption of innocence. We are also fine with this minute of silence in the assembly,” said Marechal.
“The on-site testimonies are truly eye-opening. The law enforcement forces explain to us that they are overwhelmed, that they do not have enough ammunition,” she said.
“And so, what will happen on the day when the state no longer succeeds in providing assistance to its citizens? It will be a turning point. Citizens will decide to protect themselves because they will no longer tolerate seeing their cars burned, their businesses destroyed,” she warned.
Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin told TF1 on Thursday that 45,000 police were deployed across the country for possible protests which may take place for a fourth straight night.
France on red alert: Macron faces calls to impose 'state of emergency' after marauding gangs with GUNS are seen rampaging in Marseille and police HQ is ransacked in fourth night of chaos
...Britain's Foreign Office issued an alert to tourists thinking of travelling to France, as the violence continued to deepen following the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Nahel Merzouk who was 'executed' by French police during a traffic stop on Tuesday.
The teenager's funeral is being held today against the backdrop of large parts of France being engulfed by fires, violence and devastating riots, with police reporting 994 arrests overnight.
......
Rioters were again seen rampaging through the streets of Marseille, Lille and Paris, amid claims looters broke into a gun shop and stole hunting rifles while others ransacked a police station. Cars, buses and government buildings have been set alight and fireworks have been launched at police.
There were more than 3,800 fires on public roads last night, while more than 500 buildings were set alight.
Emmanuel Macron green lit the use of armoured vehicles and riot police, as 45,000 officers were deployed in a desperate attempt to regain control. But the French president has been blasted for not acting fast enough.
Eric Ciotti, the head of the Republicans party said his country 'is on the edge of a precipice' and that 'we must wage a merciless war against violence and proclaim a state of emergency in all affected areas', the Telegraph reported, as he launched a political broadside against Macron.
Domestic intelligence seen by French newspaper Le Monde has also warned the president that riots could become increasingly 'widespread' and continue for the 'coming nights'.
French police have said that they are currently 'at war' with 'savage hordes of vermin', The Telegraph reported after violence continued throughout the evening.
Two of the country's biggest police unions have threatened a revolt unless Mr Macron restores order.
They said: 'Today the police are in combat as we are at war. Tomorrow we will be in resistance and the government should be aware of this.'
The comments come off the back of claims by the unions, Alliance Police, Nationale and UNSA Police suggested that the response so far from Mr Macron's government had been far too weak.
They wrote: 'Faced with these savage hordes, calling for calm is no longer sufficient, it must be imposed!'
...Britain's Foreign Office issued an alert to tourists thinking of travelling to France, as the violence continued to deepen following the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Nahel Merzouk who was 'executed' by French police during a traffic stop on Tuesday.
The teenager's funeral is being held today against the backdrop of large parts of France being engulfed by fires, violence and devastating riots, with police reporting 994 arrests overnight.
......
Rioters were again seen rampaging through the streets of Marseille, Lille and Paris, amid claims looters broke into a gun shop and stole hunting rifles while others ransacked a police station. Cars, buses and government buildings have been set alight and fireworks have been launched at police.
There were more than 3,800 fires on public roads last night, while more than 500 buildings were set alight.
Emmanuel Macron green lit the use of armoured vehicles and riot police, as 45,000 officers were deployed in a desperate attempt to regain control. But the French president has been blasted for not acting fast enough.
Eric Ciotti, the head of the Republicans party said his country 'is on the edge of a precipice' and that 'we must wage a merciless war against violence and proclaim a state of emergency in all affected areas', the Telegraph reported, as he launched a political broadside against Macron.
Domestic intelligence seen by French newspaper Le Monde has also warned the president that riots could become increasingly 'widespread' and continue for the 'coming nights'.
French police have said that they are currently 'at war' with 'savage hordes of vermin', The Telegraph reported after violence continued throughout the evening.
Two of the country's biggest police unions have threatened a revolt unless Mr Macron restores order.
They said: 'Today the police are in combat as we are at war. Tomorrow we will be in resistance and the government should be aware of this.'
The comments come off the back of claims by the unions, Alliance Police, Nationale and UNSA Police suggested that the response so far from Mr Macron's government had been far too weak.
They wrote: 'Faced with these savage hordes, calling for calm is no longer sufficient, it must be imposed!'
Russia Isn’t Going to Run Out of Missiles
Long-range missile strikes against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure have been a prominent and persistent aspect of the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine. Earlier this year, the CSIS report Putin’s Missile War found that Russian missile attacks in 2022 had caused major damage to Ukraine’s economy and infrastructure but had failed to achieve the kind of decisive strategic effects that Moscow had likely sought. Into 2023, Russia has persisted in expending expensive, long-range missiles in regular attacks against a variety of civilian and military objects across Ukraine. The focus of these strikes regularly shifts and their intensity has ebbed and flowed, as has the quality of employed munitions.
However, Russia’s continued strike campaign in 2023 has made one thing quite clear: it is unrealistic to expect Russia to ever “run out” of missiles. Despite sanctions and export controls, it appears likely that Russia will be able to produce or otherwise acquire the long-range strike capacity necessary to inflict significant damage upon Ukraine’s people, economy, and military. Ukraine’s air defenses have performed remarkably well under challenging circumstances. Nevertheless, the Russian military has continued trying to identify gaps and seams to exploit to gain an advantage.
There is no one-off fix for this problem. Sanctions and export controls can, at most, limit the quantity and quality of strike assets Russia can acquire. The most reliable counter is sustained Western support for Ukrainian air defense forces for the duration of the conflict. The continued, steady provision of air defenses into the foreseeable future will save lives, reduce costs of future reconstruction, and help end the war more quickly by enabling Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the face of superior Russian airpower. Moreover, providing air defenses has also forced Western countries to scale up production of these systems, which could have long-term benefits for Western defense readiness.
Long-range missile strikes against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure have been a prominent and persistent aspect of the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine. Earlier this year, the CSIS report Putin’s Missile War found that Russian missile attacks in 2022 had caused major damage to Ukraine’s economy and infrastructure but had failed to achieve the kind of decisive strategic effects that Moscow had likely sought. Into 2023, Russia has persisted in expending expensive, long-range missiles in regular attacks against a variety of civilian and military objects across Ukraine. The focus of these strikes regularly shifts and their intensity has ebbed and flowed, as has the quality of employed munitions.
However, Russia’s continued strike campaign in 2023 has made one thing quite clear: it is unrealistic to expect Russia to ever “run out” of missiles. Despite sanctions and export controls, it appears likely that Russia will be able to produce or otherwise acquire the long-range strike capacity necessary to inflict significant damage upon Ukraine’s people, economy, and military. Ukraine’s air defenses have performed remarkably well under challenging circumstances. Nevertheless, the Russian military has continued trying to identify gaps and seams to exploit to gain an advantage.
There is no one-off fix for this problem. Sanctions and export controls can, at most, limit the quantity and quality of strike assets Russia can acquire. The most reliable counter is sustained Western support for Ukrainian air defense forces for the duration of the conflict. The continued, steady provision of air defenses into the foreseeable future will save lives, reduce costs of future reconstruction, and help end the war more quickly by enabling Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the face of superior Russian airpower. Moreover, providing air defenses has also forced Western countries to scale up production of these systems, which could have long-term benefits for Western defense readiness.
Why Platonic Friendships Are So Hard to Keep
But part of the perception that there might be something untoward going to between heterosexual, opposite-sex friends is grounded in psychological reality. Aleksandra Szymkow, who is an associate professor and the head of the Center for Research on Biological Basis of Social Behavior at SWPS University in Warsaw, told me that it’s a consistent finding in the academic literature that many opposite-sex friends feel some sexual attraction to each other.
For single people, there is a robust friends-to-lovers pipeline. According to a paper published in 2021 in Social Psychological and Personality Science, “In a meta-analysis of seven samples of university students and crowdsourced adults, two thirds reported friends-first initiation, and friends-first initiation was the preferred method of initiation among university students.”
Studies have also shown that heterosexual men and women look for different qualities in their opposite-sex friends, which suggest that they are perhaps treating those friends as potential backup mates as a byproduct of evolutionary mating strategies “being activated in a novel social context,” Szymkow said. It’s called “mating activation hypothesis” in the academic literature.
One hilarious experiment published in the journal Evolutionary Psychology 2011 involved giving men and women limited budgets of “friend dollars” to spend on qualities or characteristics they valued. As the study explains, “Because participants must allocate constrained, fixed budgets to multiple desired characteristics simultaneously, the budget allocation method forces participants to make trade-offs for those characteristics of greatest priority.”
The results? After “personality,” men prioritized physical attractiveness in their opposite-sex friends, while women prioritized economic resources and physical prowess.
Szymkow was the lead author of a study that looked at the opposite-sex friendships of 146 heterosexual people in committed relationships. The results echoed earlier findings that men place higher value on the attractiveness of their female friends and women place higher value on perceived financial resources of their male friends. But interestingly (or maybe not surprisingly), “current partner’s attractiveness, provided support, and relationship satisfaction moderate” attraction to opposite-sex friends for women, but not for men.
But part of the perception that there might be something untoward going to between heterosexual, opposite-sex friends is grounded in psychological reality. Aleksandra Szymkow, who is an associate professor and the head of the Center for Research on Biological Basis of Social Behavior at SWPS University in Warsaw, told me that it’s a consistent finding in the academic literature that many opposite-sex friends feel some sexual attraction to each other.
For single people, there is a robust friends-to-lovers pipeline. According to a paper published in 2021 in Social Psychological and Personality Science, “In a meta-analysis of seven samples of university students and crowdsourced adults, two thirds reported friends-first initiation, and friends-first initiation was the preferred method of initiation among university students.”
Studies have also shown that heterosexual men and women look for different qualities in their opposite-sex friends, which suggest that they are perhaps treating those friends as potential backup mates as a byproduct of evolutionary mating strategies “being activated in a novel social context,” Szymkow said. It’s called “mating activation hypothesis” in the academic literature.
One hilarious experiment published in the journal Evolutionary Psychology 2011 involved giving men and women limited budgets of “friend dollars” to spend on qualities or characteristics they valued. As the study explains, “Because participants must allocate constrained, fixed budgets to multiple desired characteristics simultaneously, the budget allocation method forces participants to make trade-offs for those characteristics of greatest priority.”
The results? After “personality,” men prioritized physical attractiveness in their opposite-sex friends, while women prioritized economic resources and physical prowess.
Szymkow was the lead author of a study that looked at the opposite-sex friendships of 146 heterosexual people in committed relationships. The results echoed earlier findings that men place higher value on the attractiveness of their female friends and women place higher value on perceived financial resources of their male friends. But interestingly (or maybe not surprisingly), “current partner’s attractiveness, provided support, and relationship satisfaction moderate” attraction to opposite-sex friends for women, but not for men.
US recommends Americans reconsider traveling to China due to arbitrary law enforcement, exit bans
BEIJING (AP) — The U.S. recommended Americans reconsider traveling to China because of arbitrary law enforcement and exit bans and the risk of wrongful detentions.
No specific cases were cited, but the advisory came after a 78-year-old U.S. citizen was sentenced to life in prison on spying charges in May.
It also followed the passage last week of a sweeping Foreign Relations Law that threatens countermeasures against those seen as harming China’s interests.
China also recently passed a broadly written counterespionage law that has sent a chill through the foreign business community, with offices being raided, as well as a law to sanction foreign critics.
“The People’s Republic of China (PRC) government arbitrarily enforces local laws, including issuing exit bans on U.S. citizens and citizens of other countries, without fair and transparent process under the law,” the U.S. advisory said.
“U.S. citizens traveling or residing in the PRC may be detained without access to U.S. consular services or information about their alleged crime,” it warned.
BEIJING (AP) — The U.S. recommended Americans reconsider traveling to China because of arbitrary law enforcement and exit bans and the risk of wrongful detentions.
No specific cases were cited, but the advisory came after a 78-year-old U.S. citizen was sentenced to life in prison on spying charges in May.
It also followed the passage last week of a sweeping Foreign Relations Law that threatens countermeasures against those seen as harming China’s interests.
China also recently passed a broadly written counterespionage law that has sent a chill through the foreign business community, with offices being raided, as well as a law to sanction foreign critics.
“The People’s Republic of China (PRC) government arbitrarily enforces local laws, including issuing exit bans on U.S. citizens and citizens of other countries, without fair and transparent process under the law,” the U.S. advisory said.
“U.S. citizens traveling or residing in the PRC may be detained without access to U.S. consular services or information about their alleged crime,” it warned.
Don’t piss off China! EU prepares to tone down its battle with Beijing
...EU governments still are trying to work out how far to go in severing sensitive business ties with Beijing in order to avoid repeating the bloc’s disastrous dependency on Russia — after their reliance on Moscow for energy supplies was critically exposed by Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
But despite Beijing’s economic bullying and equivocation over the Ukraine war, some of Europe’s biggest powers now want to turn down the heat on China.
An Eastern European official observed that in the days leading up to Thursday’s summit, some Western European governments tried to water down even further an "already boring” draft statement — just to make sure they “wouldn’t piss off China.”
For Europe’s politicians, the question of how to handle Beijing is an awkward one. They are under pressure from Washington to protect their economies from exposure to the whims of the Chinese Communist Party — and to take seriously the security risks of Xi Jinping’s continuing alliance with Putin. At the same time, EU businesses rely on China for exports worth €230 billion a year.
Germany is wary of upsetting its vast business interests in China, while France has been skeptical of following the U.S. approach, which has been to ratchet up pressure on Beijing and limit Western exposure to Chinese influence over critical supply chains.
But there are signs that relations between Western powers and Beijing have been thawing in recent weeks.
......
Some Western EU countries want to appear independent of the U.S., said Marcin Przychodniak, a China specialist at the Polish Institute of International Affairs. “They — supported by Charles Michel — are tired of decoupling from Russia and wishfully think [a softer stance] may buy them time in case of China.” EU leaders “may also not want to corner China on Russia especially after recent events with Wagner group — but that is a false expectation.”
The EU’s softer approach mirrors a broader shift on China policy which is also happening on the other side of the Atlantic. After ratcheting up rhetoric towards China over its policy in the South China Sea and on Taiwan, the United States has also dialed down the temperature in recent weeks. For its part, China, too, has shown readiness to re-engage with Western officials.
...EU governments still are trying to work out how far to go in severing sensitive business ties with Beijing in order to avoid repeating the bloc’s disastrous dependency on Russia — after their reliance on Moscow for energy supplies was critically exposed by Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
But despite Beijing’s economic bullying and equivocation over the Ukraine war, some of Europe’s biggest powers now want to turn down the heat on China.
An Eastern European official observed that in the days leading up to Thursday’s summit, some Western European governments tried to water down even further an "already boring” draft statement — just to make sure they “wouldn’t piss off China.”
For Europe’s politicians, the question of how to handle Beijing is an awkward one. They are under pressure from Washington to protect their economies from exposure to the whims of the Chinese Communist Party — and to take seriously the security risks of Xi Jinping’s continuing alliance with Putin. At the same time, EU businesses rely on China for exports worth €230 billion a year.
Germany is wary of upsetting its vast business interests in China, while France has been skeptical of following the U.S. approach, which has been to ratchet up pressure on Beijing and limit Western exposure to Chinese influence over critical supply chains.
But there are signs that relations between Western powers and Beijing have been thawing in recent weeks.
......
Some Western EU countries want to appear independent of the U.S., said Marcin Przychodniak, a China specialist at the Polish Institute of International Affairs. “They — supported by Charles Michel — are tired of decoupling from Russia and wishfully think [a softer stance] may buy them time in case of China.” EU leaders “may also not want to corner China on Russia especially after recent events with Wagner group — but that is a false expectation.”
The EU’s softer approach mirrors a broader shift on China policy which is also happening on the other side of the Atlantic. After ratcheting up rhetoric towards China over its policy in the South China Sea and on Taiwan, the United States has also dialed down the temperature in recent weeks. For its part, China, too, has shown readiness to re-engage with Western officials.
Psaki attempts to scare Muslim parents from opposing transgender ideology in schools: GOP 'trying to recruit'
...The former White House press secretary claimed on her Sunday show, "Inside with Jen Psaki," that the Republican Party was dividing Muslims from transgender people, and listed why she believed the GOP was a danger to the Muslim community. The comments were first noted by Kevin Tober at Media Research Center.
"The GOP successfully managed to split off Southern Whites from the Democratic Party. Now, decades later, the right wing is reviving that same playbook, this time with Muslim Americans and trans people," said Psaki. "The GOP is trying to recruit Muslim Americans… against another tiny marginalized group of Americans, transgender people."
The director of the Islam and Religious Freedom Action Team for the Religious Freedom Institute, Ismail Royer, told Fox News Digital that Psaki's remarks were insulting to Muslims.
......
A similar narrative was peddled on MSNBC's "All in with Chris Hayes" hosted by Mehdi Hasan on June 21, and was attacked by one of the most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. as "ludicrous."
"[MSNBC guest] Wajahat Ali warns his fellow Muslims against falling for GOP tactics to draw them into attacks against the LGBTQ community," MSNBC tweeted, describing the segment.
......
However, an executive at the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the "largest Muslim civil rights organization" in America disputed the claims that Muslims were functioning as part of the GOP's playbook.
"It doesn't matter who supports a cause. What matters is whether the cause is just in itself," said Edward Ahmed Mitchell, the national deputy director at CAIR about the segment.
"Bismillah (in the name of Allah). The vast majority of concerned Muslim parents and students have been independently standing up for their religious rights in the public school system on their own without prompting from the right and without fear of backlash from the left," Mitchell continued.
He proceeded to blast MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan for failing to properly illustrate the concerns expressed by Muslim families.
"Instead of addressing the substance of the concerns that these families have raised about what's happening [in] public schools, the likes of [MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan]… paint these parents as dupes being used by the political right," he continued.
Mitchell went on to refer to how a Montgomery County Council member, Kristin Mink, was forced to apologize after claiming Muslim children were on the side of "White supremacists" for speaking out their faith opposition to attending lessons with sexual and transgender curriculum as early as elementary school.
...The former White House press secretary claimed on her Sunday show, "Inside with Jen Psaki," that the Republican Party was dividing Muslims from transgender people, and listed why she believed the GOP was a danger to the Muslim community. The comments were first noted by Kevin Tober at Media Research Center.
"The GOP successfully managed to split off Southern Whites from the Democratic Party. Now, decades later, the right wing is reviving that same playbook, this time with Muslim Americans and trans people," said Psaki. "The GOP is trying to recruit Muslim Americans… against another tiny marginalized group of Americans, transgender people."
The director of the Islam and Religious Freedom Action Team for the Religious Freedom Institute, Ismail Royer, told Fox News Digital that Psaki's remarks were insulting to Muslims.
......
A similar narrative was peddled on MSNBC's "All in with Chris Hayes" hosted by Mehdi Hasan on June 21, and was attacked by one of the most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. as "ludicrous."
"[MSNBC guest] Wajahat Ali warns his fellow Muslims against falling for GOP tactics to draw them into attacks against the LGBTQ community," MSNBC tweeted, describing the segment.
......
However, an executive at the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the "largest Muslim civil rights organization" in America disputed the claims that Muslims were functioning as part of the GOP's playbook.
"It doesn't matter who supports a cause. What matters is whether the cause is just in itself," said Edward Ahmed Mitchell, the national deputy director at CAIR about the segment.
"Bismillah (in the name of Allah). The vast majority of concerned Muslim parents and students have been independently standing up for their religious rights in the public school system on their own without prompting from the right and without fear of backlash from the left," Mitchell continued.
He proceeded to blast MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan for failing to properly illustrate the concerns expressed by Muslim families.
"Instead of addressing the substance of the concerns that these families have raised about what's happening [in] public schools, the likes of [MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan]… paint these parents as dupes being used by the political right," he continued.
Mitchell went on to refer to how a Montgomery County Council member, Kristin Mink, was forced to apologize after claiming Muslim children were on the side of "White supremacists" for speaking out their faith opposition to attending lessons with sexual and transgender curriculum as early as elementary school.
Ukraine finds stepping up mobilisation is not so easy
Ruslan kubay was surprised to receive a draft notice in late January. Registered as seriously disabled since childhood—Mr Kubay is missing both hands—he falls under a list of automatic exemptions from service. Even more surprising, however, was the reaction of officials at the local registration office in Drohobych, near Lviv. Far from admitting their error, they doubled down and declared him fit for service. Only a social-media post and a subsequent national scandal reversed the decision.
Mr Kubay’s case was an extreme, but far from isolated, incident. Ukraine has visibly stepped up mobilisation activities in the first two months of this year. There have been reports of draft notices issued (and sometimes violently enforced) at military funerals in Lviv, checkpoints in Kharkiv, shopping centres in Kyiv and on street corners in Odessa. Popular ski resorts lie deserted despite the first proper snows of the winter: footage of military officials snooping around on the slopes was enough to keep the crowds away. In every town and city across the country social-media channels share information about where recruitment officers may be lurking.
......
Not all who get draft notices are actually inducted; sometimes the notices are simply a way to get every potential recruit on the books. Even for those who get one, there are ways of getting around it. There are legal exemptions for illness and disability—either of the draftee or of a dependant. Single parents and fathers with three or more children are off the hook as well. Students can defer service. Certain professions also receive what is known locally as bron, or protection from call-up.
The government has extended this to key workers in the energy, transport and agriculture sectors. Many it staff have six-month exemptions. Alex, an it professional who handles his company’s relations with the government, says the state understands how vital his sector has become to the war effort. “It’s one of the only areas of the economy still generating hard currency. Many of us are also working pro bono on military projects in ai, surveillance, counter-espionage and other classified technologies.”
In a country like Ukraine there are inevitably less-than-legal ways to escape the call-up, too. “It’s a dialectic of nature,” says Colonel Kevlyuk, who worked in the army’s general staff until 2021. “Wherever there is demand, you’ll always find someone to supply it.” Some arrange fictitious marriages with mothers of three or more children. Others get corrupt military doctors to issue a medical exemption. For a few thousand dollars one can pay to be smuggled across the border. But the appetite for risk is falling after a series of well-publicised draft-dodging prosecutions.
Ruslan kubay was surprised to receive a draft notice in late January. Registered as seriously disabled since childhood—Mr Kubay is missing both hands—he falls under a list of automatic exemptions from service. Even more surprising, however, was the reaction of officials at the local registration office in Drohobych, near Lviv. Far from admitting their error, they doubled down and declared him fit for service. Only a social-media post and a subsequent national scandal reversed the decision.
Mr Kubay’s case was an extreme, but far from isolated, incident. Ukraine has visibly stepped up mobilisation activities in the first two months of this year. There have been reports of draft notices issued (and sometimes violently enforced) at military funerals in Lviv, checkpoints in Kharkiv, shopping centres in Kyiv and on street corners in Odessa. Popular ski resorts lie deserted despite the first proper snows of the winter: footage of military officials snooping around on the slopes was enough to keep the crowds away. In every town and city across the country social-media channels share information about where recruitment officers may be lurking.
......
Not all who get draft notices are actually inducted; sometimes the notices are simply a way to get every potential recruit on the books. Even for those who get one, there are ways of getting around it. There are legal exemptions for illness and disability—either of the draftee or of a dependant. Single parents and fathers with three or more children are off the hook as well. Students can defer service. Certain professions also receive what is known locally as bron, or protection from call-up.
The government has extended this to key workers in the energy, transport and agriculture sectors. Many it staff have six-month exemptions. Alex, an it professional who handles his company’s relations with the government, says the state understands how vital his sector has become to the war effort. “It’s one of the only areas of the economy still generating hard currency. Many of us are also working pro bono on military projects in ai, surveillance, counter-espionage and other classified technologies.”
In a country like Ukraine there are inevitably less-than-legal ways to escape the call-up, too. “It’s a dialectic of nature,” says Colonel Kevlyuk, who worked in the army’s general staff until 2021. “Wherever there is demand, you’ll always find someone to supply it.” Some arrange fictitious marriages with mothers of three or more children. Others get corrupt military doctors to issue a medical exemption. For a few thousand dollars one can pay to be smuggled across the border. But the appetite for risk is falling after a series of well-publicised draft-dodging prosecutions.
The Prigozhin Affair Is Much Less than Meets the Eye
...Is Putin about to be replaced now that members of the elite have discovered that they can challenge the boss? There is no evidence to support any of this. Not a single member of the elite — the security services, the military, the so-called oligarchs — endorsed Prigozhin’s actions, let alone moved to support him in a visible, tangible manner. The one general — Sergey Surovikin — who is rumored to have ties to Prigozhin and possibly somehow involved in the mutiny has not been seen since recording a video pleading with Prigozhin to surrender on June 24. According to some reports, Surovikin has been detained by Russian security services for his alleged role in the mutiny.
......
Did the rebellion reveal that there is a lot of rot inside the regime? Maybe. But did anyone not know there was at least some level of corrosive corruption inside the Putin regime? Isn’t the whole system built on patronage and kickbacks that in a normal country would be considered “rot” but in Russia are integral to the functioning of the state?
Is Putin going to have a hard time explaining to the Russian people what happened and why he did what he did? That’s highly unlikely. Putin has not even tried to sound the least bit plausible — his address to the nation last week was nothing short of preposterous as he pinned the responsibility for the rebellion on Ukraine. And it appears to be working. A public opinion survey conducted by the only independent Russian pollster, Levada.ru, shortly after the failed rebellion revealed a sharp drop in Russians’ attitudes toward Prigozhin — from 58 percent to 34 percent, numbers that are expected to decline further. Putin’s approval rating remained unchanged at 82 percent. The country is buying Putin’s Ukraine narrative almost a year and a half into a war that was supposed to be over in just a few days. Why change now?
Is the Russian state in danger of fracturing? There’s scant evidence to back up that proposition. Russian provincial governors serve at Putin’s pleasure. He has been hiring, firing and sending them to prison for corruption or other misdeeds, real or otherwise. They are scared of Putin. He has turned them into pawns that he can easily move around the political chessboard depending on his own calculations, ones usually perceptible only to him and a few confidants in his inner circle. The one exception to this rule has been the longtime ruler of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, who is known for two standout qualities: unsurpassed brutality and loyalty to Putin. With his local regime enabled by generous subsidies from the federal budget, Kadyrov is no separatist, and he offered to put his personal militia at Putin’s disposal to crush the rebellion.
...Is Putin about to be replaced now that members of the elite have discovered that they can challenge the boss? There is no evidence to support any of this. Not a single member of the elite — the security services, the military, the so-called oligarchs — endorsed Prigozhin’s actions, let alone moved to support him in a visible, tangible manner. The one general — Sergey Surovikin — who is rumored to have ties to Prigozhin and possibly somehow involved in the mutiny has not been seen since recording a video pleading with Prigozhin to surrender on June 24. According to some reports, Surovikin has been detained by Russian security services for his alleged role in the mutiny.
......
Did the rebellion reveal that there is a lot of rot inside the regime? Maybe. But did anyone not know there was at least some level of corrosive corruption inside the Putin regime? Isn’t the whole system built on patronage and kickbacks that in a normal country would be considered “rot” but in Russia are integral to the functioning of the state?
Is Putin going to have a hard time explaining to the Russian people what happened and why he did what he did? That’s highly unlikely. Putin has not even tried to sound the least bit plausible — his address to the nation last week was nothing short of preposterous as he pinned the responsibility for the rebellion on Ukraine. And it appears to be working. A public opinion survey conducted by the only independent Russian pollster, Levada.ru, shortly after the failed rebellion revealed a sharp drop in Russians’ attitudes toward Prigozhin — from 58 percent to 34 percent, numbers that are expected to decline further. Putin’s approval rating remained unchanged at 82 percent. The country is buying Putin’s Ukraine narrative almost a year and a half into a war that was supposed to be over in just a few days. Why change now?
Is the Russian state in danger of fracturing? There’s scant evidence to back up that proposition. Russian provincial governors serve at Putin’s pleasure. He has been hiring, firing and sending them to prison for corruption or other misdeeds, real or otherwise. They are scared of Putin. He has turned them into pawns that he can easily move around the political chessboard depending on his own calculations, ones usually perceptible only to him and a few confidants in his inner circle. The one exception to this rule has been the longtime ruler of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, who is known for two standout qualities: unsurpassed brutality and loyalty to Putin. With his local regime enabled by generous subsidies from the federal budget, Kadyrov is no separatist, and he offered to put his personal militia at Putin’s disposal to crush the rebellion.
左逼环境控制狂动不动灭绝外来物种，安乐死流浪猫狗
UK to investigate banks blacklisting accounts over political views
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has said the government will take action over banks blacklisting customers who hold controversial views after leading Brexiter Nigel Farage claimed his UK bank account had been shut down without explanation.
Hunt has asked City minister Andrew Griffith to investigate the practice of lenders closing down the accounts of individuals or companies whose views they disagree with.
“Banks and payment providers occupy a privileged place in society and it would be a concern if financial services were being denied to those exercising the right to lawful free speech,” Griffith told the Financial Times.
The Treasury opened a consultation into the matter earlier this year after rightwing commentator and journalist Toby Young complained that the Free Speech Union group he founded had its PayPal account frozen last September. PayPal did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The government was set to respond to the consultation before the end of July, according to government officials. It is expected to recommend a more rigid notice period if lenders want to close an account and more information about why action has been taken.
Farage, former United Kingdom Independence party (Ukip) leader, has claimed he is being driven out of the UK by a pro-Remain banking establishment that has blocked his financial access.
Farage said on Thursday that his accounts with an unnamed “prestigious” institution were about to be closed down without explanation after 20 years as a customer.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has said the government will take action over banks blacklisting customers who hold controversial views after leading Brexiter Nigel Farage claimed his UK bank account had been shut down without explanation.
Hunt has asked City minister Andrew Griffith to investigate the practice of lenders closing down the accounts of individuals or companies whose views they disagree with.
“Banks and payment providers occupy a privileged place in society and it would be a concern if financial services were being denied to those exercising the right to lawful free speech,” Griffith told the Financial Times.
The Treasury opened a consultation into the matter earlier this year after rightwing commentator and journalist Toby Young complained that the Free Speech Union group he founded had its PayPal account frozen last September. PayPal did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The government was set to respond to the consultation before the end of July, according to government officials. It is expected to recommend a more rigid notice period if lenders want to close an account and more information about why action has been taken.
Farage, former United Kingdom Independence party (Ukip) leader, has claimed he is being driven out of the UK by a pro-Remain banking establishment that has blocked his financial access.
Farage said on Thursday that his accounts with an unnamed “prestigious” institution were about to be closed down without explanation after 20 years as a customer.
Russia Planning Explosive 'Provocation' at Nuclear Power Plant: Ukraine
Russia may be planting explosives at Ukraine's occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant (ZNPP) in anticipation of a "provocation" taking place "in the nearest future," according to the Ukrainian military.
The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine warned in a Facebook post on Tuesday that Russia was planning the provocation "in the nearest future," claiming that "objects resembling explosive devices" were recently spotted being placed on the roof of the facility. Ukraine is in the midst of a counteroffensive that has seen the country regain control of some of its previously-occupied territory nearly 18 months into the Russia-Ukraine war.
Ukraine also claimed that the provocation was being planned to "create a picture" that Ukraine had attacked the plant instead, asserting that Russian state media had launched a "misinformation" campaign to convince the public that Ukraine would attack the facility.
......
Last Friday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that no explosive devices had been found at the plant despite Ukraine's repeated claims to the contrary.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said in a statement that experts from the agency found no devices while conducting on-site inspections, with the caveat that "they still need additional access to carry out further such checks at the site."
"I have instructed our experts at the site to look into this matter and request the access they need for doing their job," said Grossi. "Until now they have not observed any mines or other explosives. Further access will still be needed."
Russia may be planting explosives at Ukraine's occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant (ZNPP) in anticipation of a "provocation" taking place "in the nearest future," according to the Ukrainian military.
The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine warned in a Facebook post on Tuesday that Russia was planning the provocation "in the nearest future," claiming that "objects resembling explosive devices" were recently spotted being placed on the roof of the facility. Ukraine is in the midst of a counteroffensive that has seen the country regain control of some of its previously-occupied territory nearly 18 months into the Russia-Ukraine war.
Ukraine also claimed that the provocation was being planned to "create a picture" that Ukraine had attacked the plant instead, asserting that Russian state media had launched a "misinformation" campaign to convince the public that Ukraine would attack the facility.
......
Last Friday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that no explosive devices had been found at the plant despite Ukraine's repeated claims to the contrary.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said in a statement that experts from the agency found no devices while conducting on-site inspections, with the caveat that "they still need additional access to carry out further such checks at the site."
"I have instructed our experts at the site to look into this matter and request the access they need for doing their job," said Grossi. "Until now they have not observed any mines or other explosives. Further access will still be needed."
Samuel Ramani @SamRamani2
Zelensky advisor Mykhailo Podolyak is critical of IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi's efforts to downplay the risk of a detonation of Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant
Ukraine and the IAEA's narrative war is reaching new heights
The IAEA might find itself falling afoul of both Ukraine and Russia
Russian media has leaned on the IAEA's efforts to challenge Ukraine's warnings but is also warning of a Ukrainian attack. Russia's militarization of the plant clashes with the IAEA too
https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1676366026357743617
Zelensky advisor Mykhailo Podolyak is critical of IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi's efforts to downplay the risk of a detonation of Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant
Ukraine and the IAEA's narrative war is reaching new heights
The IAEA might find itself falling afoul of both Ukraine and Russia
Russian media has leaned on the IAEA's efforts to challenge Ukraine's warnings but is also warning of a Ukrainian attack. Russia's militarization of the plant clashes with the IAEA too
https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1676366026357743617
Video: IAEA saw no evidence Moscow planning attack on Zaporizhia nuclear plant, but ‘anything can happen’
Jun 29, 2023
The Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Rafael Grossi spoke to FRANCE 24 from Vienna and stated that his teams had not observed any Russian military deployment inside the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant, despite Ukrainian authorities claiming that Moscow was preparing to attack the plant.
==========
Transcript from 4:41 to 5:57
Q: The top level in Ukraine is saying - Vladimir Zelensky, a few days ago said - that according to his intelligence, Russia has made all the preparation for an attack on the plant - not an accident, but an attack. His chief of military intelligence said that preparations are being done Russian troops have moved Vehicles charged with explosives into the plant, they've mined the cooling Pond. You have a team on the ground, is this what they're witnessing?
A: Well, I would never you know enter into an argument with the president of Ukraine, whom I know very very well and with whom I've been in contact regularly and meeting with him personally. What I can say is that I was there, I did not see this kind of development. Our teams are there and they are reporting every day what's happening. I'm not privy to this intelligence report that you are referring to.
Q: Right, so you don't think that there will be a Russian attack on the plant, it's not what you're seeing.
A: What I'm saying is that we don't see what you just said. In terms of the future, I wouldn't be so adventurous into getting to what is going to happen or not happen there. I think anything can happen, this is what worries me.
Jun 29, 2023
The Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Rafael Grossi spoke to FRANCE 24 from Vienna and stated that his teams had not observed any Russian military deployment inside the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant, despite Ukrainian authorities claiming that Moscow was preparing to attack the plant.
==========
Transcript from 4:41 to 5:57
Q: The top level in Ukraine is saying - Vladimir Zelensky, a few days ago said - that according to his intelligence, Russia has made all the preparation for an attack on the plant - not an accident, but an attack. His chief of military intelligence said that preparations are being done Russian troops have moved Vehicles charged with explosives into the plant, they've mined the cooling Pond. You have a team on the ground, is this what they're witnessing?
A: Well, I would never you know enter into an argument with the president of Ukraine, whom I know very very well and with whom I've been in contact regularly and meeting with him personally. What I can say is that I was there, I did not see this kind of development. Our teams are there and they are reporting every day what's happening. I'm not privy to this intelligence report that you are referring to.
Q: Right, so you don't think that there will be a Russian attack on the plant, it's not what you're seeing.
A: What I'm saying is that we don't see what you just said. In terms of the future, I wouldn't be so adventurous into getting to what is going to happen or not happen there. I think anything can happen, this is what worries me.
IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) experts present at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) have in recent days and weeks inspected parts of the facility – including some sections of the perimeter of the large cooling pond – and have also conducted regular walkdowns across the site, so far without observing any visible indications of mines or explosives, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.
The IAEA experts have requested additional access that is necessary to confirm the absence of mines or explosives at the site, Director General Grossi said. In particular, access to the rooftops of reactor units 3 and 4 is essential, as well as access to parts of the turbine halls and some parts of the cooling system at the plant, he added.
......
Statement from American Nuclear Society on Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
...Our experts have carefully considered ‘worst case scenarios,’ including bombardment and deliberate sabotage of the reactors and spent fuel storage canisters. They cannot foresee a situation that would result in radiation-related health consequences to the public.
ZNPP’s six reactors have been shut down for over ten months and are no longer making enough heat to cause a prompt radiological release. ZNPP is designed to withstand natural and man-made hazards. Thick, steel-reinforced concrete containment buildings protect the reactor cores and are designed to keep any radioactive materials isolated from the environment.
In the unlikely event that containment structures were breached, any potential release of radiological material would be restricted to the immediate area surrounding the reactors. In this regard, any comparison between ZNPP and “Chernobyl” or “Fukushima” is both inaccurate and misleading.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) experts present at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) have in recent days and weeks inspected parts of the facility – including some sections of the perimeter of the large cooling pond – and have also conducted regular walkdowns across the site, so far without observing any visible indications of mines or explosives, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.
The IAEA experts have requested additional access that is necessary to confirm the absence of mines or explosives at the site, Director General Grossi said. In particular, access to the rooftops of reactor units 3 and 4 is essential, as well as access to parts of the turbine halls and some parts of the cooling system at the plant, he added.
......
Statement from American Nuclear Society on Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
...Our experts have carefully considered ‘worst case scenarios,’ including bombardment and deliberate sabotage of the reactors and spent fuel storage canisters. They cannot foresee a situation that would result in radiation-related health consequences to the public.
ZNPP’s six reactors have been shut down for over ten months and are no longer making enough heat to cause a prompt radiological release. ZNPP is designed to withstand natural and man-made hazards. Thick, steel-reinforced concrete containment buildings protect the reactor cores and are designed to keep any radioactive materials isolated from the environment.
In the unlikely event that containment structures were breached, any potential release of radiological material would be restricted to the immediate area surrounding the reactors. In this regard, any comparison between ZNPP and “Chernobyl” or “Fukushima” is both inaccurate and misleading.
Shashank Joshi @shashj
I think it’s notable that Western governments, who have not shied away from issuing public warnings during this war, have not endorsed or echoed Ukrainian claims that Russia has “drafted and approved” plans to blow up the plant. I am sceptical.
https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1676701129256710146
Geoff Brumfiel @gbrumfiel
NEW: Here's the latest @planet 50cm imagery of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant taken this morning (05 July).
I don't see any immediate evidence for unusual objects on the reactor roofs, but others can squint as well and see if they spot anything...
Here's a reference image from @Maxar taken on 19 August 2022.
https://twitter.com/gbrumfiel/status/1676678351912566785
I think it’s notable that Western governments, who have not shied away from issuing public warnings during this war, have not endorsed or echoed Ukrainian claims that Russia has “drafted and approved” plans to blow up the plant. I am sceptical.
https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1676701129256710146
Geoff Brumfiel @gbrumfiel
NEW: Here's the latest @planet 50cm imagery of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant taken this morning (05 July).
I don't see any immediate evidence for unusual objects on the reactor roofs, but others can squint as well and see if they spot anything...
Here's a reference image from @Maxar taken on 19 August 2022.
https://twitter.com/gbrumfiel/status/1676678351912566785
A second firm hired by Trump campaign found no evidence of election fraud
Former president Trump’s campaign quietly commissioned a second firm to study election fraud claims in the weeks after the 2020 election, and the founder of the firm was recently questioned by the Justice Department about his work disproving the claims.
Ken Block, founder of the firm Simpatico Software Systems, studied more than a dozen voter fraud theories and allegations for Trump’s campaign in late 2020 and found they were “all false,” he said in an interview with The Washington Post.
“No substantive voter fraud was uncovered in my investigations looking for it, nor was I able to confirm any of the outside claims of voter fraud that I was asked to look at,” he said. “Every fraud claim I was asked to investigate was false.”
Block said he recently received a subpoena from special counsel Jack Smith’s office and met with federal prosecutors in Washington, but he declined to discuss his interactions with them. Block said he contemporaneously sent his findings disputing fraud claims in writing to the Trump campaign in late 2020.
Former president Trump’s campaign quietly commissioned a second firm to study election fraud claims in the weeks after the 2020 election, and the founder of the firm was recently questioned by the Justice Department about his work disproving the claims.
Ken Block, founder of the firm Simpatico Software Systems, studied more than a dozen voter fraud theories and allegations for Trump’s campaign in late 2020 and found they were “all false,” he said in an interview with The Washington Post.
“No substantive voter fraud was uncovered in my investigations looking for it, nor was I able to confirm any of the outside claims of voter fraud that I was asked to look at,” he said. “Every fraud claim I was asked to investigate was false.”
Block said he recently received a subpoena from special counsel Jack Smith’s office and met with federal prosecutors in Washington, but he declined to discuss his interactions with them. Block said he contemporaneously sent his findings disputing fraud claims in writing to the Trump campaign in late 2020.
Stuart Parker, social antibody and career Moop @stuartlosaltos
In my 36 years as a climate activist, no conservative who has disagreed with me on climate has ever tried to destroy my career, my home, my relationship, my friendships, my social media accounts, my radio shows, my podcasts or my recreational activities.
People working in the fossil fuel industry who feel my efforts are destroying their employment prospects, people who think climate change is a hoax, a fraud I am helping to perpetrate, people who falsely believe I receive money from shadowy European interests: none of these people have felt entitled to go after my ability to earn a living or have a romantic partner.
In my 3 years of opposing genderwang, dozens, likely hundreds of progressives, many of whom I considered comrades or friends, have felt it totally appropriate to engage in unapologetic concerted public efforts to destroy these things, to even come after my fortnightly tabletop Runequest games and try to stop those.
In a social partition of contemporary North America, I would rather be in a conservative society, even if it were significantly more on fire, because I wouldn't feel unsafe disagreeing with my neighbours.
https://twitter.com/stuartlosaltos/status/1676701288812388355
In my 36 years as a climate activist, no conservative who has disagreed with me on climate has ever tried to destroy my career, my home, my relationship, my friendships, my social media accounts, my radio shows, my podcasts or my recreational activities.
People working in the fossil fuel industry who feel my efforts are destroying their employment prospects, people who think climate change is a hoax, a fraud I am helping to perpetrate, people who falsely believe I receive money from shadowy European interests: none of these people have felt entitled to go after my ability to earn a living or have a romantic partner.
In my 3 years of opposing genderwang, dozens, likely hundreds of progressives, many of whom I considered comrades or friends, have felt it totally appropriate to engage in unapologetic concerted public efforts to destroy these things, to even come after my fortnightly tabletop Runequest games and try to stop those.
In a social partition of contemporary North America, I would rather be in a conservative society, even if it were significantly more on fire, because I wouldn't feel unsafe disagreeing with my neighbours.
https://twitter.com/stuartlosaltos/status/1676701288812388355
Most Americans approve of Supreme Court decision restricting use of race in college admissions: POLL
...A little more than half of Americans -- 52% -- approve of the U.S. Supreme Court decision on restricting the use of race as a factor in college admissions, while 32% disapprove and 16% saying they don't know.
A majority of Republicans (75%) and independents (58%) approve of the ruling, while a distinct minority of Democrats approve (26%).
And there are deep divisions between racial groups. Most white people (60%) and Asian people (58%) approve of the Supreme Court's decision to limit the use of race in college admissions, while only 25% of Black people support the decision. Hispanic people are split, with 40% approving and 40% disapproving.
...A little more than half of Americans -- 52% -- approve of the U.S. Supreme Court decision on restricting the use of race as a factor in college admissions, while 32% disapprove and 16% saying they don't know.
A majority of Republicans (75%) and independents (58%) approve of the ruling, while a distinct minority of Democrats approve (26%).
And there are deep divisions between racial groups. Most white people (60%) and Asian people (58%) approve of the Supreme Court's decision to limit the use of race in college admissions, while only 25% of Black people support the decision. Hispanic people are split, with 40% approving and 40% disapproving.
Ryan James Girdusky @RyanGirdusky
(YouGov) do you think the following should be allowed to be considered for college admission (yes/no):
Race: 23/69
Class: 31/58
Ideology: 14/66
Gender: 21/73
Standardized test scores: 77/13
Grade point average: 85/8
Political beliefs: 9/83
Legacy: 18/73
https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1676963727860723715
Ryan James Girdusky @RyanGirdusky
(YouGov) do you think Race should be a factor in college admission (yes/no)
Overall: 25/64
Whites: 22/70
Blacks: 36/47
Hispanics: 28/55
Biden Voters: 48/38
Trump Voters: 7/89
Dems: 45/44
Indies: 21/64
GOP: 8/87
Do you approve/disapprove of SCOTUS decision on affirmative action? (Approve/disapprove)
Overall: 59/27
White: 65/23
Black: 43/36
Hispanic: 45/30
Biden voters: 32/56
Trump voters: 89/3
Dems: 36/50
Indies: 57/24
GOP: 84/5
https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1676962317349818375
(YouGov) do you think the following should be allowed to be considered for college admission (yes/no):
Race: 23/69
Class: 31/58
Ideology: 14/66
Gender: 21/73
Standardized test scores: 77/13
Grade point average: 85/8
Political beliefs: 9/83
Legacy: 18/73
https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1676963727860723715
Ryan James Girdusky @RyanGirdusky
(YouGov) do you think Race should be a factor in college admission (yes/no)
Overall: 25/64
Whites: 22/70
Blacks: 36/47
Hispanics: 28/55
Biden Voters: 48/38
Trump Voters: 7/89
Dems: 45/44
Indies: 21/64
GOP: 8/87
Do you approve/disapprove of SCOTUS decision on affirmative action? (Approve/disapprove)
Overall: 59/27
White: 65/23
Black: 43/36
Hispanic: 45/30
Biden voters: 32/56
Trump voters: 89/3
Dems: 36/50
Indies: 57/24
GOP: 84/5
https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1676962317349818375
Cannabis Is Linked to Mental Illness
...Several studies have shown that chronic cannabis use is linked to a higher incidence of schizophrenia among men in their early 20s, the age when the disease is usually diagnosed. The first paper on the topic, a Swedish study published in 1997, found that heavy cannabis use was associated with a sixfold increase in schizophrenia risk. In the decades since, social scientists have unearthed a strong link between heavy cannabis use and other severe psychological illnesses, including clinical depression and bipolar disorder.
Now a new longitudinal study has examined the medical records of all citizens of Denmark over the age of 16, some 6.5 million people in all, for patterns of diagnosis, hospitalization and treatment for substance use between 1995 and 2021. In the paper, published in the journal JAMA Psychiatry in May, Dr. Oskar Hougaard Jefsen of Aarhus University and colleagues showed that people who had previously been diagnosed with cannabis use disorder were almost twice as likely to be diagnosed later with clinical depression. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cannabis use disorder is characterized by craving marijuana, using it more often than intended, spending a lot of time using it, and having it interfere with friends, family and work.
Even more dramatically, the paper also found that people with cannabis use disorder were up to four times as likely to be diagnosed later with bipolar disorder with psychotic symptoms. As is true of many psychological disorders, the increased risk was higher in men than in women, and the more a person consumed, the greater the risk. The study did not distinguish between different forms and concentrations of cannabis.
Though the association was strong, the authors note that they can’t say for certain whether chronic and heavy cannabis use induces psychosis, or whether people prone to mental illness are more likely to be heavy users...
......
Like cigarettes decades ago, cannabis is now widely considered a harmless habit: easy and legal to buy in most places, socially acceptable, and pleasurable in the moment. Over the long term, it may be safer than drinking alcohol. But is it really safe for you and your teenage kids? Only time—and more research—will tell.
...Several studies have shown that chronic cannabis use is linked to a higher incidence of schizophrenia among men in their early 20s, the age when the disease is usually diagnosed. The first paper on the topic, a Swedish study published in 1997, found that heavy cannabis use was associated with a sixfold increase in schizophrenia risk. In the decades since, social scientists have unearthed a strong link between heavy cannabis use and other severe psychological illnesses, including clinical depression and bipolar disorder.
Now a new longitudinal study has examined the medical records of all citizens of Denmark over the age of 16, some 6.5 million people in all, for patterns of diagnosis, hospitalization and treatment for substance use between 1995 and 2021. In the paper, published in the journal JAMA Psychiatry in May, Dr. Oskar Hougaard Jefsen of Aarhus University and colleagues showed that people who had previously been diagnosed with cannabis use disorder were almost twice as likely to be diagnosed later with clinical depression. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cannabis use disorder is characterized by craving marijuana, using it more often than intended, spending a lot of time using it, and having it interfere with friends, family and work.
Even more dramatically, the paper also found that people with cannabis use disorder were up to four times as likely to be diagnosed later with bipolar disorder with psychotic symptoms. As is true of many psychological disorders, the increased risk was higher in men than in women, and the more a person consumed, the greater the risk. The study did not distinguish between different forms and concentrations of cannabis.
Though the association was strong, the authors note that they can’t say for certain whether chronic and heavy cannabis use induces psychosis, or whether people prone to mental illness are more likely to be heavy users...
......
Like cigarettes decades ago, cannabis is now widely considered a harmless habit: easy and legal to buy in most places, socially acceptable, and pleasurable in the moment. Over the long term, it may be safer than drinking alcohol. But is it really safe for you and your teenage kids? Only time—and more research—will tell.
Judge limits Biden administration contact with social media firms
A federal judge in Louisiana ruled Tuesday that the Biden administration likely violated the First Amendment by censoring unfavorable views on social media over the course of the coronavirus pandemic, calling the efforts “Orwellian.”
U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty also issued a sweeping preliminary injunction barring numerous federal officials and agencies — including Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and all employees of the Justice Department and FBI — from having any contact with social media firms for the purpose of discouraging or removing First Amendment-protected speech.
The ruling and order from Doughty, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, are the latest developments in a long-running lawsuit spearheaded by Republican-led states alleging that the administration pressured social media companies to remove posts containing purported misinformation about the coronavirus, election security and other issues.
“During the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized by widespread doubt and uncertainty, the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth,’” Doughty wrote in his 155-page opinion, which was released as most federal courts were closed for the Independence Day holiday.
Doughty’s ruling appears to take effect immediately, but it isn’t a final decision on the suit and can be appealed by the Biden administration to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
A federal judge in Louisiana ruled Tuesday that the Biden administration likely violated the First Amendment by censoring unfavorable views on social media over the course of the coronavirus pandemic, calling the efforts “Orwellian.”
U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty also issued a sweeping preliminary injunction barring numerous federal officials and agencies — including Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and all employees of the Justice Department and FBI — from having any contact with social media firms for the purpose of discouraging or removing First Amendment-protected speech.
The ruling and order from Doughty, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, are the latest developments in a long-running lawsuit spearheaded by Republican-led states alleging that the administration pressured social media companies to remove posts containing purported misinformation about the coronavirus, election security and other issues.
“During the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized by widespread doubt and uncertainty, the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth,’” Doughty wrote in his 155-page opinion, which was released as most federal courts were closed for the Independence Day holiday.
Doughty’s ruling appears to take effect immediately, but it isn’t a final decision on the suit and can be appealed by the Biden administration to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Former U.S. officials have held secret Ukraine talks with prominent Russians - NBC
A group of former senior U.S. national security officials has held secret talks with prominent Russians believed to be close to the Kremlin — and, in at least one case, with the country’s top diplomat — with the aim of laying the groundwork for negotiations to end the war in Ukraine, half a dozen people briefed on the discussions said.
In a high-level example of the back-channel diplomacy taking place behind the scenes, Russian Foreign Affairs Minister Sergey Lavrov met with members of the group for several hours in April in New York, four former officials and two current officials said.
On the agenda were some of the thorniest issues in the war in Ukraine, like the fate of Russian-held territory that Ukraine may never be able to liberate and the search for an elusive diplomatic off-ramp that could be tolerable to both sides.
Meeting with Lavrov were Richard Haass, a former diplomat and the outgoing president of the Council on Foreign Relations, current and former officials said. The group was joined by Europe expert Charles Kupchan and Russia expert Thomas Graham, both former White House and State Department officials who are Council on Foreign Relations fellows.
......
Among the goals, they said, is to keep channels of communication with Russia open when possible and to feel out where there might be room for future negotiation, compromise and diplomacy over ending the war.
The discussions have taken place with the knowledge of the Biden administration but not at its direction, and the former officials involved in the Lavrov meeting briefed the White House National Security Council afterward, two of the sources said.
A group of former senior U.S. national security officials has held secret talks with prominent Russians believed to be close to the Kremlin — and, in at least one case, with the country’s top diplomat — with the aim of laying the groundwork for negotiations to end the war in Ukraine, half a dozen people briefed on the discussions said.
In a high-level example of the back-channel diplomacy taking place behind the scenes, Russian Foreign Affairs Minister Sergey Lavrov met with members of the group for several hours in April in New York, four former officials and two current officials said.
On the agenda were some of the thorniest issues in the war in Ukraine, like the fate of Russian-held territory that Ukraine may never be able to liberate and the search for an elusive diplomatic off-ramp that could be tolerable to both sides.
Meeting with Lavrov were Richard Haass, a former diplomat and the outgoing president of the Council on Foreign Relations, current and former officials said. The group was joined by Europe expert Charles Kupchan and Russia expert Thomas Graham, both former White House and State Department officials who are Council on Foreign Relations fellows.
......
Among the goals, they said, is to keep channels of communication with Russia open when possible and to feel out where there might be room for future negotiation, compromise and diplomacy over ending the war.
The discussions have taken place with the knowledge of the Biden administration but not at its direction, and the former officials involved in the Lavrov meeting briefed the White House National Security Council afterward, two of the sources said.
This is simply evil:
Biden Weighs Giving Ukraine Weapons Banned by Many U.S. Allies
For more than six months, President Biden and his aides have been wrestling with one of the most vexing questions in the war in Ukraine: whether to risk letting Ukrainian forces run out of the artillery rounds they desperately need to fight Russia, or agree to ship them cluster munitions — widely banned weapons known to cause grievous injury to civilians, especially children.
On Thursday, Mr. Biden appeared on the verge of providing the cluster munitions to Ukraine, a step that would sharply separate him from many of his closest allies, who have signed an international treaty banning the use, stockpiling or transfer of such weapons.
Several of Mr. Biden’s top aides, including Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken, recommended he make the move at a meeting of top national security officials last week, despite what they have described as their own deep reservations, people familiar with the discussions said. They requested anonymity to discuss sensitive deliberations.
The State Department had been the last holdout, both because of humanitarian concerns and worries that the United States would be drastically out of step with its allies.
Now, Mr. Biden’s aides think they have little choice.
Ukraine, which has deployed cluster munitions of its own in the war, is burning through the available supply of conventional artillery shells, and it will take time to ramp up production.
Biden Weighs Giving Ukraine Weapons Banned by Many U.S. Allies
For more than six months, President Biden and his aides have been wrestling with one of the most vexing questions in the war in Ukraine: whether to risk letting Ukrainian forces run out of the artillery rounds they desperately need to fight Russia, or agree to ship them cluster munitions — widely banned weapons known to cause grievous injury to civilians, especially children.
On Thursday, Mr. Biden appeared on the verge of providing the cluster munitions to Ukraine, a step that would sharply separate him from many of his closest allies, who have signed an international treaty banning the use, stockpiling or transfer of such weapons.
Several of Mr. Biden’s top aides, including Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken, recommended he make the move at a meeting of top national security officials last week, despite what they have described as their own deep reservations, people familiar with the discussions said. They requested anonymity to discuss sensitive deliberations.
The State Department had been the last holdout, both because of humanitarian concerns and worries that the United States would be drastically out of step with its allies.
Now, Mr. Biden’s aides think they have little choice.
Ukraine, which has deployed cluster munitions of its own in the war, is burning through the available supply of conventional artillery shells, and it will take time to ramp up production.
NATO leaders set to offer Ukraine major support package but membership is off the table for now
BRUSSELS (AP) — NATO leaders will agree next week to help modernize Ukraine’s armed forces, create a new high-level forum for consultations and reaffirm that it will join their alliance one day, the organization’s top civilian official said Friday. But the war-torn country will not start membership talks soon.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that when U.S. President Joe Biden and his counterparts meet for a two-day summit in Lithuania’s capital, Vilnius, they also will agree to boost defense spending as alliance members pour weapons, ammunition and other support like uniforms and medical equipment into Ukraine.
They had hoped to welcome Sweden as the next member of the world’s biggest security organization, but Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has raised strong objections and it’s unclear if they can be overcome in time. Even if so, Sweden’s accession would become official only in coming months.
BRUSSELS (AP) — NATO leaders will agree next week to help modernize Ukraine’s armed forces, create a new high-level forum for consultations and reaffirm that it will join their alliance one day, the organization’s top civilian official said Friday. But the war-torn country will not start membership talks soon.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that when U.S. President Joe Biden and his counterparts meet for a two-day summit in Lithuania’s capital, Vilnius, they also will agree to boost defense spending as alliance members pour weapons, ammunition and other support like uniforms and medical equipment into Ukraine.
They had hoped to welcome Sweden as the next member of the world’s biggest security organization, but Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has raised strong objections and it’s unclear if they can be overcome in time. Even if so, Sweden’s accession would become official only in coming months.
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, February 28, 2022
Q Thanks, Jen. There are reports of illegal cluster bombs and vacuum bombs being used by the Russians. If that’s true, what is the next step of this administration? And is there a red line for how much violence will be tolerated against civilians in this manner that’s illegal and potentially a war crime?
MS. PSAKI: It is — it would be. I don’t have any confirmation of that. We have seen the reports. If that were true, it would potentially be a war crime.
Obviously, there are a range of international fora that would assess that. So, certainly, we would look to that to be a part of that conversation.
Q Thanks, Jen. There are reports of illegal cluster bombs and vacuum bombs being used by the Russians. If that’s true, what is the next step of this administration? And is there a red line for how much violence will be tolerated against civilians in this manner that’s illegal and potentially a war crime?
MS. PSAKI: It is — it would be. I don’t have any confirmation of that. We have seen the reports. If that were true, it would potentially be a war crime.
Obviously, there are a range of international fora that would assess that. So, certainly, we would look to that to be a part of that conversation.
Max Abrahms @MaxAbrahms
What fascinates me about the Ukraine war aren’t just the stakes but the elite manipulation of the masses to pursue a policy that is not only bad for them but riddled with weekly lies and hypocrisies.
https://twitter.com/MaxAbrahms/status/1677523350623600642
Scott McConnell @ScottMcConnell9
Two plausible outcomes to the war. Nato/Ukraine forces will prevail, up to the point a desperate Russia uses nukes. Or, an exhausted Ukraine will lose, and and come to regret following America's hawks. Ukrainians will hate America, rightly, for a long time.
https://twitter.com/ScottMcConnell9/status/1677411681322844162
What fascinates me about the Ukraine war aren’t just the stakes but the elite manipulation of the masses to pursue a policy that is not only bad for them but riddled with weekly lies and hypocrisies.
Jack Poso @JackPosobiec
Last year Jen Psaki said Russia using cluster bombs was a war crime
Today the Biden Admin is sending cluster bombs to Ukraine
https://twitter.com/MaxAbrahms/status/1677523350623600642
Scott McConnell @ScottMcConnell9
Two plausible outcomes to the war. Nato/Ukraine forces will prevail, up to the point a desperate Russia uses nukes. Or, an exhausted Ukraine will lose, and and come to regret following America's hawks. Ukrainians will hate America, rightly, for a long time.
Scott Horton @scotthortonshow
Inescapable fact: Small Ukrainian children will pick up unexploded bomblets or "bombies" and will be torn to shreds by them. Other civilians attempting to farm, build or otherwise disturb the dirt will also be killed. This will continue to happen for years and years and years.
https://twitter.com/ScottMcConnell9/status/1677411681322844162
Michigan House passes bill that could make using wrong pronouns a felony, fineable up to $10,000
A recently passed bill in Michigan could make it a felony to intimidate someone by intentionally using the wrong gender pronouns, according to some legal experts.
Michigan's state House of Representatives has passed bill HB 4474, a piece of legislation that criminalizes causing someone to feel threatened by words.
Under the new bill, offenders are "guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or by a fine of not more than $10,000."
"'Intimidate' means a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened," the bill reads.
The bill specifically addresses "sexual orientation" and "gender identity or expression" as protected classes.
According to the bill, "'Gender identity or expression' means having or being perceived as having a gender-related self-identity or expression whether or not associated with an individual's assigned sex at birth."
A recently passed bill in Michigan could make it a felony to intimidate someone by intentionally using the wrong gender pronouns, according to some legal experts.
Michigan's state House of Representatives has passed bill HB 4474, a piece of legislation that criminalizes causing someone to feel threatened by words.
Under the new bill, offenders are "guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or by a fine of not more than $10,000."
"'Intimidate' means a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened," the bill reads.
The bill specifically addresses "sexual orientation" and "gender identity or expression" as protected classes.
According to the bill, "'Gender identity or expression' means having or being perceived as having a gender-related self-identity or expression whether or not associated with an individual's assigned sex at birth."
What affirmative action advocates ignore
...If you were an Asian applicant to Harvard, you needed to have better scores than non-Asian applicants to be admitted, and even then your odds of admission were lower than if you were of any other race. Asian applicants were, the plaintiffs said, systematically ranked lower on “positive personality traits”, such as likability, courage and kindness, by admissions officers who had never met the applicants. The proportion of Asians in the American population has gone up dramatically; the number of Asians at Harvard flatlined year after year.
......
In fairness to Harvard, I should mention that it commissioned a Nobel Prize-winning economist to write a report showing that Harvard did not engage in racial discrimination. According to David Card’s analysis, once you controlled for the low personality scores of Asian American applicants, the disparity in admission rates vanishes. There is no discrimination once you take into account personality scores, but personality scores are the main vehicle for discrimination. And what explains the systematically lower personality scores? Card coyly suggests that perhaps Asian applicants write inferior admission essays, a requirement that was after all first introduced by Harvard a century ago to weed out Jewish applicants who lacked the requisite “character” to attend the university.
All of this is quite embarrassing to American progressives. They are unwilling to defend the simple fact that Asian Americans, many of them relative newcomers to the republic of the United States, behaved in ways that did not map well on to the uneasy American racial settlement: they did too well for a minority group, relative to their demographic weight. And for this, they have been kept to manageable proportions through unwritten numerus clausus, or limits to the number of students allowed to study.
Because these realisations are simultaneously trite but also unspeakable in polite company, the word “Asian” was barely uttered in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision, except by opponents of affirmative action. The dissenting opinion by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson used the word “Asian” precisely three times, as if it was a common vulgarity instead of an ethnic group systematically discriminated against by the country’s finest universities, including her own alma mater.
...If you were an Asian applicant to Harvard, you needed to have better scores than non-Asian applicants to be admitted, and even then your odds of admission were lower than if you were of any other race. Asian applicants were, the plaintiffs said, systematically ranked lower on “positive personality traits”, such as likability, courage and kindness, by admissions officers who had never met the applicants. The proportion of Asians in the American population has gone up dramatically; the number of Asians at Harvard flatlined year after year.
......
In fairness to Harvard, I should mention that it commissioned a Nobel Prize-winning economist to write a report showing that Harvard did not engage in racial discrimination. According to David Card’s analysis, once you controlled for the low personality scores of Asian American applicants, the disparity in admission rates vanishes. There is no discrimination once you take into account personality scores, but personality scores are the main vehicle for discrimination. And what explains the systematically lower personality scores? Card coyly suggests that perhaps Asian applicants write inferior admission essays, a requirement that was after all first introduced by Harvard a century ago to weed out Jewish applicants who lacked the requisite “character” to attend the university.
All of this is quite embarrassing to American progressives. They are unwilling to defend the simple fact that Asian Americans, many of them relative newcomers to the republic of the United States, behaved in ways that did not map well on to the uneasy American racial settlement: they did too well for a minority group, relative to their demographic weight. And for this, they have been kept to manageable proportions through unwritten numerus clausus, or limits to the number of students allowed to study.
Because these realisations are simultaneously trite but also unspeakable in polite company, the word “Asian” was barely uttered in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision, except by opponents of affirmative action. The dissenting opinion by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson used the word “Asian” precisely three times, as if it was a common vulgarity instead of an ethnic group systematically discriminated against by the country’s finest universities, including her own alma mater.
Populism Updates @PopulismUpdates
A reminder that, contrary to repeated predictions that Europe's nationalist wave would "fizzle out," the situation is actually *more* intense now than it was in 2016. Much more. One serious question is whether it carries over into 2024, with EU elections looming
In 2016 you had hotspot countries like the Netherlands or Austria where the far-right polled with shocking numbers. You still have hotspots- Austria saw the FPO hit 32% in a poll today, for example- but the difference is that *almost every EU country* has a situation now
In 2016 there were no major far-right parties in Portugal, Spain, Romania. They were polling in the 10s in Italy (with Salvini at the helm) and not in government. They were for the most part polling lower across the board in countries where they were already active
Politico has an overview of potential implications for this nearly continent-wide shift:
Europe swings right — and reshapes the EU
https://twitter.com/PopulismUpdates/status/1677768038240915461
A reminder that, contrary to repeated predictions that Europe's nationalist wave would "fizzle out," the situation is actually *more* intense now than it was in 2016. Much more. One serious question is whether it carries over into 2024, with EU elections looming
In 2016 you had hotspot countries like the Netherlands or Austria where the far-right polled with shocking numbers. You still have hotspots- Austria saw the FPO hit 32% in a poll today, for example- but the difference is that *almost every EU country* has a situation now
In 2016 there were no major far-right parties in Portugal, Spain, Romania. They were polling in the 10s in Italy (with Salvini at the helm) and not in government. They were for the most part polling lower across the board in countries where they were already active
Politico has an overview of potential implications for this nearly continent-wide shift:
Europe swings right — and reshapes the EU
https://twitter.com/PopulismUpdates/status/1677768038240915461
Italy’s Giorgia Meloni opens door to more workers from outside the EU
Italy’s rightwing coalition plans to sharply increase the number of foreign workers from outside the EU while continuing to crack down on irregular migrants crossing the Mediterranean.
Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government this week said it would issue 425,000 work permits to non-EU nationals between this year and 2025, which Rome said was part of its plan to promote legal immigration to fill gaps in the labour market.
The announcement followed repeated complaints from employers in various industries — including construction and tourism — about their acute difficulties in finding workers, as Italy’s economy rebounds from the pandemic shock.
The Bank of Italy has also warned that a serious shortage of skilled workers, including in construction and IT, was threatening Italy’s ability to carry out its ambitious €200bn EU-funded post-pandemic recovery plan.
Under its new increased quota system, Rome plans to gradually increase the number of new worker permits granted yearly, reaching 165,000 in 2025, while also expanding the categories of jobs for which foreign workers from outside the EU will be eligible.
Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, Italy granted fewer than 31,000 work permits a year to migrant workers from outside the EU.
Italy’s rightwing coalition plans to sharply increase the number of foreign workers from outside the EU while continuing to crack down on irregular migrants crossing the Mediterranean.
Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government this week said it would issue 425,000 work permits to non-EU nationals between this year and 2025, which Rome said was part of its plan to promote legal immigration to fill gaps in the labour market.
The announcement followed repeated complaints from employers in various industries — including construction and tourism — about their acute difficulties in finding workers, as Italy’s economy rebounds from the pandemic shock.
The Bank of Italy has also warned that a serious shortage of skilled workers, including in construction and IT, was threatening Italy’s ability to carry out its ambitious €200bn EU-funded post-pandemic recovery plan.
Under its new increased quota system, Rome plans to gradually increase the number of new worker permits granted yearly, reaching 165,000 in 2025, while also expanding the categories of jobs for which foreign workers from outside the EU will be eligible.
Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, Italy granted fewer than 31,000 work permits a year to migrant workers from outside the EU.
Biden admin again increases number of migrants allowed into US via controversial app
The Biden administration is once again increasing the number of migrants it potentially allows into the U.S. each day under the controversial CBP One app as its policies face a number of brewing legal challenges.
Customs and Border Protection says it is allowing 1,450 migrants a day into the U.S. each day via CBP One – a mobile application that was expanded earlier this year to allow migrants to upload data and make appointments at ports of entry to be processed into the U.S.
Initially, the agency was allowing 1,000 people in each day ahead of the end of Title 42 in May. In June, it increased the number to 1,250. The latest change means the number of migrants entering the U.S. each day via the process has increased by nearly 50%.
"CBP is expanding the number of available appointments at ports of entry for the second time in less than two months, through scheduling enhancements and operational efficiencies," said acting CBP Commissioner Troy Miller said in a statement. "By utilizing innovative technologies like CBP One™, we are improving the delivery of our homeland security mission and providing for safe and efficient processes at ports of entry."
The Biden administration is once again increasing the number of migrants it potentially allows into the U.S. each day under the controversial CBP One app as its policies face a number of brewing legal challenges.
Customs and Border Protection says it is allowing 1,450 migrants a day into the U.S. each day via CBP One – a mobile application that was expanded earlier this year to allow migrants to upload data and make appointments at ports of entry to be processed into the U.S.
Initially, the agency was allowing 1,000 people in each day ahead of the end of Title 42 in May. In June, it increased the number to 1,250. The latest change means the number of migrants entering the U.S. each day via the process has increased by nearly 50%.
"CBP is expanding the number of available appointments at ports of entry for the second time in less than two months, through scheduling enhancements and operational efficiencies," said acting CBP Commissioner Troy Miller said in a statement. "By utilizing innovative technologies like CBP One™, we are improving the delivery of our homeland security mission and providing for safe and efficient processes at ports of entry."
The two charts President Biden wants voters to see
White House officials are pointing to a pair of eye-catching stats to make the case that President Biden’s economic policies have been a world-beating success — even if many voters are still frustrated about inflation.
First, they note that the U.S. has enjoyed the fastest growth among any member of the G7, the club of major developed economies, since the start of the COVID crisis.
Second, the U.S. has experienced the G7’s lowest inflation rate over the past 12 months, when compared on an apples-to-apples basis. That holds true, even if you subtract food and energy prices from the picture, which spiked in Europe thanks to the war in Ukraine.
Combined, the trends show the U.S. is enjoying “the strongest recovery of any major economy in the world,” Biden senior advisers Anita Dunn and Mike Donilon wrote in an open memo last week. “This progress wasn’t inevitable or an accident — it has been a direct result of Bidenomics.”
White House officials are pointing to a pair of eye-catching stats to make the case that President Biden’s economic policies have been a world-beating success — even if many voters are still frustrated about inflation.
First, they note that the U.S. has enjoyed the fastest growth among any member of the G7, the club of major developed economies, since the start of the COVID crisis.
Second, the U.S. has experienced the G7’s lowest inflation rate over the past 12 months, when compared on an apples-to-apples basis. That holds true, even if you subtract food and energy prices from the picture, which spiked in Europe thanks to the war in Ukraine.
Combined, the trends show the U.S. is enjoying “the strongest recovery of any major economy in the world,” Biden senior advisers Anita Dunn and Mike Donilon wrote in an open memo last week. “This progress wasn’t inevitable or an accident — it has been a direct result of Bidenomics.”
The political leanings of the Supreme Court justices
Justice Samuel Alito narrowly overtook Justice Clarence Thomas as the Supreme Court's most conservative member this term, according to preliminary data that measures judicial ideology.
How to read the chart: An analysis by political scientists Andrew Martin and Kevin Quinn, known as the Martin-Quinn Score, places judges on an ideological spectrum. A lower score indicates a more liberal justice, whereas a higher score indicates a more conservative justice.
In her first full term on the court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the most moderate member of the court's liberal wing (-1.704), with Justice Sonia Sotomayor being the most liberal (-4.09), per preliminary measurements of a score that judges on a liberal-conservative spectrum.
Most liberal: Sonia Sotomayor (-4.09)
Elena Kagan (-2.067)
Ketanji Brown Jackson (-1.704)
John Roberts (0.42)
Brett Kavanaugh (0.446)
Amy Coney Barrett (0.821)
Neil Gorsuch (1.077)
Clarence Thomas (2.358)
Most conservative: Samuel Alito (2.568)
Justice Samuel Alito narrowly overtook Justice Clarence Thomas as the Supreme Court's most conservative member this term, according to preliminary data that measures judicial ideology.
How to read the chart: An analysis by political scientists Andrew Martin and Kevin Quinn, known as the Martin-Quinn Score, places judges on an ideological spectrum. A lower score indicates a more liberal justice, whereas a higher score indicates a more conservative justice.
In her first full term on the court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the most moderate member of the court's liberal wing (-1.704), with Justice Sonia Sotomayor being the most liberal (-4.09), per preliminary measurements of a score that judges on a liberal-conservative spectrum.
Most liberal: Sonia Sotomayor (-4.09)
Elena Kagan (-2.067)
Ketanji Brown Jackson (-1.704)
John Roberts (0.42)
Brett Kavanaugh (0.446)
Amy Coney Barrett (0.821)
Neil Gorsuch (1.077)
Clarence Thomas (2.358)
Most conservative: Samuel Alito (2.568)
Historically Low Faith in U.S. Institutions Continues
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans’ faith in major societal institutions hasn’t improved over the past year following a slump in public confidence in 2022.
Last year, Gallup recorded significant declines in public confidence in 11 of the 16 institutions it tracks annually, with the presidency and Supreme Court suffering the most. The share of Americans expressing a great deal or fair amount of confidence in these fell 15 and 11 percentage points, respectively.
Neither score recovered appreciably in the latest poll, with confidence in the court now at 27% and the presidency at 26%...
......
Overall, the new poll finds small business enjoying the most public trust, with 65% of Americans having a great deal or fair amount of confidence in it. A majority, 60%, also have high confidence in the military, while less than half (43%) feel this way about the next highest-rated institution, the police.
The medical system and the church or organized religion round out the top five annually rated institutions, albeit with meager 34% and 32% confidence ratings, respectively. Another six -- the U.S. Supreme Court, banks, public schools, the presidency, large technology companies and organized labor -- earn between 25% and 27% confidence.
The five worst-rated institutions -- newspapers, the criminal justice system, television news, big business and Congress -- stir confidence in less than 20% of Americans, with Congress, at 8%, the only one in single digits.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans’ faith in major societal institutions hasn’t improved over the past year following a slump in public confidence in 2022.
Last year, Gallup recorded significant declines in public confidence in 11 of the 16 institutions it tracks annually, with the presidency and Supreme Court suffering the most. The share of Americans expressing a great deal or fair amount of confidence in these fell 15 and 11 percentage points, respectively.
Neither score recovered appreciably in the latest poll, with confidence in the court now at 27% and the presidency at 26%...
......
Overall, the new poll finds small business enjoying the most public trust, with 65% of Americans having a great deal or fair amount of confidence in it. A majority, 60%, also have high confidence in the military, while less than half (43%) feel this way about the next highest-rated institution, the police.
The medical system and the church or organized religion round out the top five annually rated institutions, albeit with meager 34% and 32% confidence ratings, respectively. Another six -- the U.S. Supreme Court, banks, public schools, the presidency, large technology companies and organized labor -- earn between 25% and 27% confidence.
The five worst-rated institutions -- newspapers, the criminal justice system, television news, big business and Congress -- stir confidence in less than 20% of Americans, with Congress, at 8%, the only one in single digits.
The evidence mounts: Hispanic voters are drifting toward the GOP
...Nearly all — 86 percent — Hispanics say economic conditions are only fair or poor and about three-quarters say the same thing about their personal financial situation. By 2 to 1 they say President Biden’s policies are hurting, not helping, them and their families. In a just-released 6,000 respondent poll from the Survey Center on American Life (SCAL) on evolving party coalitions, almost two-thirds believe Biden has accomplished not that much or little or nothing during his time in office.
And in a recent Washington Post-ABC poll, Hispanics preferred the way Trump handled the economy when he was in office to Biden’s performance so far by 55 to 36 percent.
Beneath this discontent is an emerging gulf between the cultural outlook of many Hispanics and the increasingly left-wing values of the Democratic Party. In the SCAL survey, half of Hispanics think Democrats are “too extreme” and slightly more than half think Democrats don’t share their values. A healthy minority, 42 percent, believe the Democratic Party “looks down on people like me.” This is not to say Republicans come out any better on these measures — they don’t — but simply to illustrate how many Hispanics struggle to identify with Democrats.
Take the issue of racism in our society. Is racism “built into our society, including into its policies and institutions” or does racism “come from individuals who hold racist views, not from our society and institutions?” In the SCAL survey, by 60 to 39 percent, Hispanics chose the latter view rather than the received wisdom in Democratic circles that racism is baked into society and institutions.
In contrast, White, college-graduate liberals chose the “structural racism” position by an overwhelming 81 to 19 percent.
Or consider the question of transgender athletes participating in team sports. Should “transgender athletes … be able to play on sports teams that match their current gender identity” or should “transgender athletes … only be allowed to play on sports teams that match their birth gender?” By 66 to 30 percent, Hispanics in the SCAL survey choose the second option. For Hispanic men, the margin is 74 to 22 percent. White, college-graduate liberals, on the other hand, believe eligibility should be dictated by current gender identity by 68 to 31 percent.
The same pattern can be observed on issues ranging from the funding of police departments to the “greatness of America” to the continued use of fossil fuels.
...Nearly all — 86 percent — Hispanics say economic conditions are only fair or poor and about three-quarters say the same thing about their personal financial situation. By 2 to 1 they say President Biden’s policies are hurting, not helping, them and their families. In a just-released 6,000 respondent poll from the Survey Center on American Life (SCAL) on evolving party coalitions, almost two-thirds believe Biden has accomplished not that much or little or nothing during his time in office.
And in a recent Washington Post-ABC poll, Hispanics preferred the way Trump handled the economy when he was in office to Biden’s performance so far by 55 to 36 percent.
Beneath this discontent is an emerging gulf between the cultural outlook of many Hispanics and the increasingly left-wing values of the Democratic Party. In the SCAL survey, half of Hispanics think Democrats are “too extreme” and slightly more than half think Democrats don’t share their values. A healthy minority, 42 percent, believe the Democratic Party “looks down on people like me.” This is not to say Republicans come out any better on these measures — they don’t — but simply to illustrate how many Hispanics struggle to identify with Democrats.
Take the issue of racism in our society. Is racism “built into our society, including into its policies and institutions” or does racism “come from individuals who hold racist views, not from our society and institutions?” In the SCAL survey, by 60 to 39 percent, Hispanics chose the latter view rather than the received wisdom in Democratic circles that racism is baked into society and institutions.
In contrast, White, college-graduate liberals chose the “structural racism” position by an overwhelming 81 to 19 percent.
Or consider the question of transgender athletes participating in team sports. Should “transgender athletes … be able to play on sports teams that match their current gender identity” or should “transgender athletes … only be allowed to play on sports teams that match their birth gender?” By 66 to 30 percent, Hispanics in the SCAL survey choose the second option. For Hispanic men, the margin is 74 to 22 percent. White, college-graduate liberals, on the other hand, believe eligibility should be dictated by current gender identity by 68 to 31 percent.
The same pattern can be observed on issues ranging from the funding of police departments to the “greatness of America” to the continued use of fossil fuels.
The Media’s Scandalous Infatuation with the Intelligence Community
...Under John Brennan’s leadership, the CIA spied on the United States Senate.
Brennan’s flunkies created a fake online profile to access the network used by the Senate Intelligence Committee, whose Democratic members were at the time investigating the CIA’s torture program. Once inside, CIA agents read emails written by Senate investigators. The spies then made criminal referrals based on bogus information. During this entire ordeal, Brennan lied repeatedly, both publicly and behind closed doors, about the spying.
Brennan currently serves as a national-security and intelligence analyst for NBC News and MSNBC.
Elsewhere, a 2018 report by the Justice Department inspector general found that disgraced former FBI official Andrew McCabe had leaked sensitive information about the Hillary Clinton email investigation to members of the press. According to that report, McCabe lied to his boss, then–FBI director James Comey; lied to members of the FBI’s Inspection Division, sometimes while under oath; and lied to agents for the Office of the Inspector General.
McCabe currently serves as a senior law-enforcement analyst for CNN.
As the director of national intelligence, James Clapper testified under oath before a congressional committee that the National Security Agency had not, in fact, collected data on millions of Americans. It had. He lied.
Clapper currently serves as a national-security analyst for CNN.
Despite their egregious lies, these men have gone on to have successful careers in news media, serving as supposedly trustworthy and reliable “experts.” Never mind that they had no qualms about lying for personal, professional, and/or ideological reasons. Never mind their exceptional abuses of power.
......
The press’s deference to current and former members of the intelligence community, whom it treats as objective and honest brokers, is an ongoing scandal. This relationship is a danger to an open and free society. If any part of government deserves particular scrutiny and distrust, it’s the intelligence wing: agencies such as the CIA and the NSA, which rely on subterfuge and sleight of hand, and the officials who lead them. Left unchallenged by the so-called Fourth Estate, these powerful agencies will do what every powerful government agency does when left unchecked: amass more power, at the expense of the common man.
...Under John Brennan’s leadership, the CIA spied on the United States Senate.
Brennan’s flunkies created a fake online profile to access the network used by the Senate Intelligence Committee, whose Democratic members were at the time investigating the CIA’s torture program. Once inside, CIA agents read emails written by Senate investigators. The spies then made criminal referrals based on bogus information. During this entire ordeal, Brennan lied repeatedly, both publicly and behind closed doors, about the spying.
Brennan currently serves as a national-security and intelligence analyst for NBC News and MSNBC.
Elsewhere, a 2018 report by the Justice Department inspector general found that disgraced former FBI official Andrew McCabe had leaked sensitive information about the Hillary Clinton email investigation to members of the press. According to that report, McCabe lied to his boss, then–FBI director James Comey; lied to members of the FBI’s Inspection Division, sometimes while under oath; and lied to agents for the Office of the Inspector General.
McCabe currently serves as a senior law-enforcement analyst for CNN.
As the director of national intelligence, James Clapper testified under oath before a congressional committee that the National Security Agency had not, in fact, collected data on millions of Americans. It had. He lied.
Clapper currently serves as a national-security analyst for CNN.
Despite their egregious lies, these men have gone on to have successful careers in news media, serving as supposedly trustworthy and reliable “experts.” Never mind that they had no qualms about lying for personal, professional, and/or ideological reasons. Never mind their exceptional abuses of power.
......
The press’s deference to current and former members of the intelligence community, whom it treats as objective and honest brokers, is an ongoing scandal. This relationship is a danger to an open and free society. If any part of government deserves particular scrutiny and distrust, it’s the intelligence wing: agencies such as the CIA and the NSA, which rely on subterfuge and sleight of hand, and the officials who lead them. Left unchallenged by the so-called Fourth Estate, these powerful agencies will do what every powerful government agency does when left unchecked: amass more power, at the expense of the common man.
一次说个够：
-------------------------------------
首先：
先前几天才提过「内战当又重燃」，结果第五共和就来了个大的。
其实不意外，可以设想《猫和老鼠》的经典场景：身边堆满火药桶，但就是有忍不住玩儿火的。但现实毕竟胜于虚构，就这样儿了，还是有天天不断增加火药桶的，且不限于法国国内。
-------------------------------------
其次：
No amount of analysis or intervention can change the nature of men. Shit happens, and will happen again. Believing that you can make a difference is pointless and taking action to change the conduct of the crowd is futile, though one might well argue 'it is still meaningful'.
My position is: be thy own master and accept the limits around thee, take caution before playing God thyself.
-------------------------------------
第三：
历史的缪斯Clio早已明示愿意接受真实的学生，人可以什么都骗，包括自己在内。
然而不幸的是，「人体」这个倒霉的东西并不具备撒谎的功能，也没有真正能消化谎言的器官。
-------------------------------------
第四：
世间的「悲剧」往往是因为缺乏比较：
一位幸运地可以为自己发声的教授，却不知道他的大前辈，诺贝尔奖得主，DNA双螺旋的发现者，James Watson被整个学术圈给「取消」了，心灰意冷到把奖章给卖掉。虽然说他也幸运地创了个历史上的第一次（出卖诺贝尔奖章），可见换了角度，悲剧甚至能变个丰碑出来。虽然我100%确定，Watson不会为此高兴一秒钟。
-------------------------------------
第五：
What?
Surprising?
Anything UN-true?
-------------------------------------
第六：
Go ahead, so many lame GUN-ads, none better than this one.
Those self-contradictory lot inevitably will commit self-destruction.
As long as the above proposition holds, nothing to worry.
Accelerationism is never a china patent.
-------------------------------------
第七：
War has its own rules which no rationality will ever be able to bend.
Again, no amount of analysis will end a war, which is part of human nature which, no amount of referendum(s) can hope to shape.
Fighing will end fighting. And none other.
The choice is now or later, which, unfortunately, is not unilaterally decided.
-------------------------------------
第八：
Only one fact is certain from such a weak claim: overwhelming majority support fighting-on in Ukraine.
This means, in fact if the author wants the aid-to-ukraine to stop by concensus-of-american-people, it is hopeless.
Again, you do not hope to change human nature, along with its necessary consequences.
-------------------------------------
第九：
Won't matter.
No court can change human hearts that are seeking to dettach, or we won't see the fireworks in France these days.
The university-phenomena of US is not a problem of law, nor a power-game show like some self-serving morons might prefer to portrait it.
-------------------------------------
第十：
Well, Krauts should shut down more nuclear plants and stop using coal and oil.
Preferably, really do it right this time.
If still not working, try it again.
-------------------------------------
第十一：
Matthew Lohmeier: "Hold my beer, mate."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2021/05/17/space-force-commander-marxism-military/
-------------------------------------
第十二：
人类社会一大进步：逼吃苍蝇又不是罪。
-------------------------------------
第十三：
Really, those are lovable numbers. Far more beautiful than many would be able to dream of.
And hell, you can even complain on that as if it is bad, what a nice world you are living in now.
There are worlds on earth for man-shaped cattle which never and will never make it in the numbers.
-------------------------------------
第十四：
Power-game addicts would likely say this: it is a probing of obedience, a routine for the brave new world.
Sounds, to me, more like: "You've received a gift of life, something valuable, show me your fealty, Mr. Wick."
Or: "Shit happens under the table."
-------------------------------------
第十五：
No, no, we're really witnessing a simple proposition: demography is destiny.
And it was uttered a decade and a half ago.
Now in France, and EU, and later in the US, it's just the beginning, hardly a tip of an iceberg.
-------------------------------------
第十六：
Hopelessly, the motivation for such 'research' do not come from a certain type of human psyche.
But, again, who am I to expect that?
Racist?
-------------------------------------
第十七：
Shit happens, and so is good.
-------------------------------------
第十八：
Rotting hardly makes news these days.
The communists vaticanizing themselves probably could make a front page, for the progressive lot.
-------------------------------------
第十九：
Russia, inevitably, is securing the long-term support for war in ukraine.
Not in their own country though.
-------------------------------------
第二十：
Of course GOP 'trying to recruit'.
Albeit not a very bright move for a statesman.
Still, the US elites really not dwell in reality of their own country.
-------------------------------------
Guess that's enough for one shot.
-------------------------------------
首先：
先前几天才提过「内战当又重燃」，结果第五共和就来了个大的。
其实不意外，可以设想《猫和老鼠》的经典场景：身边堆满火药桶，但就是有忍不住玩儿火的。但现实毕竟胜于虚构，就这样儿了，还是有天天不断增加火药桶的，且不限于法国国内。
-------------------------------------
其次：
Russo-Ukrainian War: The Wagner Uprising
No amount of analysis or intervention can change the nature of men. Shit happens, and will happen again. Believing that you can make a difference is pointless and taking action to change the conduct of the crowd is futile, though one might well argue 'it is still meaningful'.
My position is: be thy own master and accept the limits around thee, take caution before playing God thyself.
-------------------------------------
第三：
4 in 10 California residents are considering packing up and leaving, new poll finds
历史的缪斯Clio早已明示愿意接受真实的学生，人可以什么都骗，包括自己在内。
然而不幸的是，「人体」这个倒霉的东西并不具备撒谎的功能，也没有真正能消化谎言的器官。
-------------------------------------
第四：
The decline of higher education:
Biology professor says he was fired for teaching sex is determined by X, Y chromosomes
世间的「悲剧」往往是因为缺乏比较：
一位幸运地可以为自己发声的教授，却不知道他的大前辈，诺贝尔奖得主，DNA双螺旋的发现者，James Watson被整个学术圈给「取消」了，心灰意冷到把奖章给卖掉。
-------------------------------------
第五：
Liberals whitewashing progressive degenerates:
‘We’re Coming For Your Children’ chant at NYC Drag March elicits outrage, but activists say it’s taken out of context
What?
Surprising?
Anything UN-true?
-------------------------------------
第六：
Another slippery slope:
Mentally ill people ‘have as much right to assisted dying as the terminally ill’
Go ahead, so many lame GUN-ads, none better than this one.
Those self-contradictory lot inevitably will commit self-destruction.
As long as the above proposition holds, nothing to worry.
Accelerationism is never a china patent.
-------------------------------------
第七：
Echelon Insights @EchelonInsights
For the first time in our polling since March of 2022, American voters are slightly more likely to say vital American interests and values are not at stake in the war in Ukraine.
War has its own rules which no rationality will ever be able to bend.
Again, no amount of analysis will end a war, which is part of human nature which, no amount of referendum(s) can hope to shape.
Fighing will end fighting. And none other.
The choice is now or later, which, unfortunately, is not unilaterally decided.
-------------------------------------
第八：
More than four-in-ten Republicans now say the U.S. is providing too much aid to Ukraine
Only one fact is certain from such a weak claim: overwhelming majority support fighting-on in Ukraine.
This means, in fact if the author wants the aid-to-ukraine to stop by concensus-of-american-people, it is hopeless.
Again, you do not hope to change human nature, along with its necessary consequences.
-------------------------------------
第九：
Supreme Court rejects affirmative action in ruling on universities using race in admissions decisions
The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a major ruling on affirmative action Thursday, rejecting the use of race as a factor in college admissions as a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
Won't matter.
No court can change human hearts that are seeking to dettach, or we won't see the fireworks in France these days.
The university-phenomena of US is not a problem of law, nor a power-game show like some self-serving morons might prefer to portrait it.
-------------------------------------
第十：
Germany’s failure to attract business investment ‘alarming’, say economists
Germany’s ability to attract business investment suffered an “alarming” decline last year, when more than €135bn of foreign direct investment flowed out of the country and only €10.5bn came in, according to a leading economic institute.
Well, Krauts should shut down more nuclear plants and stop using coal and oil.
Preferably, really do it right this time.
If still not working, try it again.
-------------------------------------
第十一：
UK Colonel 'forced out of Army' after stating 'men cannot be women'
A colonel has claimed he was forced to quit the Army after he was criticised for stating that “men cannot be women”.
Matthew Lohmeier: "Hold my beer, mate."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2021/05/17/space-force-commander-marxism-military/
-------------------------------------
第十二：
The Supreme Court rules for a designer who doesn’t want to make wedding websites for gay couples
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a defeat for gay rights, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruled Friday that a Christian graphic artist who wants to design wedding websites can refuse to work with same-sex couples.
人类社会一大进步：逼吃苍蝇又不是罪。
-------------------------------------
第十三：
Neil Hauer @NeilPHauer
Among the difficulties with Ukraine's offensive, one is the lack of time for training - especially when it comes to replacements for casualties. Here's a striking excerpt from my interview with a battalion commander on the front last week:
Really, those are lovable numbers. Far more beautiful than many would be able to dream of.
And hell, you can even complain on that as if it is bad, what a nice world you are living in now.
There are worlds on earth for man-shaped cattle which never and will never make it in the numbers.
-------------------------------------
第十四：
Spreading degeneracy all over the world:
Biden Admin Spends $4.6 Million in Taxpayer Cash To Fund LGBT Activism Abroad
Power-game addicts would likely say this: it is a probing of obedience, a routine for the brave new world.
Sounds, to me, more like: "You've received a gift of life, something valuable, show me your fealty, Mr. Wick."
Or: "Shit happens under the table."
-------------------------------------
第十五：
Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand
We're truly witnessing a radicalization on both sides in France.
No, no, we're really witnessing a simple proposition: demography is destiny.
And it was uttered a decade and a half ago.
Now in France, and EU, and later in the US, it's just the beginning, hardly a tip of an iceberg.
-------------------------------------
第十六：
New psychology research indicates physical attractiveness predicts health outcomes 10 years later
Hopelessly, the motivation for such 'research' do not come from a certain type of human psyche.
But, again, who am I to expect that?
Racist?
-------------------------------------
第十七：
Pornhub pulls out of Virginia - blocking users in the state from accessing its website in protest over new state law
Shit happens, and so is good.
-------------------------------------
第十八：
The Vatican is rotting:
Pope names Argentine bishop, author of kissing book, to top Vatican post
Rotting hardly makes news these days.
The communists vaticanizing themselves probably could make a front page, for the progressive lot.
-------------------------------------
第十九：
Russia Isn’t Going to Run Out of Missiles
Russia, inevitably, is securing the long-term support for war in ukraine.
Not in their own country though.
-------------------------------------
第二十：
Psaki attempts to scare Muslim parents from opposing transgender ideology in schools: GOP 'trying to recruit'
Of course GOP 'trying to recruit'.
Albeit not a very bright move for a statesman.
Still, the US elites really not dwell in reality of their own country.
-------------------------------------
Guess that's enough for one shot.
Zelensky slams NATO for omitting a timeline for Ukraine to join
VILNIUS, Lithuania — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday jolted a summit of NATO leaders by blasting their joint statement on his country’s prospective membership, decrying its lack of a concrete timeline as “unprecedented and absurd.”
......
“Now, on the way to Vilnius, we received signals that certain wording is being discussed without Ukraine,” Zelensky wrote on Twitter. “And I would like to emphasize that this wording is about the invitation to become NATO member, not about Ukraine’s membership. It’s unprecedented and absurd when time frame is not set neither for the invitation nor for Ukraine’s membership.”
He claimed that NATO leaders were not serious about inviting Ukraine to join the alliance and complained that their approach indicated they instead wanted to keep its membership as a bargaining chip for eventual negotiations with Russia.
......
For his part, Biden has been more hesitant than leaders of many other NATO member countries about Ukraine’s bid, saying that in addition to resolving the ongoing war with Russia, Kyiv would need to implement internal reforms to become eligible. NATO encourages its members to embrace democracy and a market economy.
Ukrainian officials have said they realize Kyiv will not immediately be invited to join the alliance at this summit but that they hoped for a clear pathway or timeline to be established in writing that would give them confidence that the country would soon be invited.
Members of the U.S. delegation were furious with Zelensky’s tweet, according to an official familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive diplomatic considerations.
VILNIUS, Lithuania — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday jolted a summit of NATO leaders by blasting their joint statement on his country’s prospective membership, decrying its lack of a concrete timeline as “unprecedented and absurd.”
......
“Now, on the way to Vilnius, we received signals that certain wording is being discussed without Ukraine,” Zelensky wrote on Twitter. “And I would like to emphasize that this wording is about the invitation to become NATO member, not about Ukraine’s membership. It’s unprecedented and absurd when time frame is not set neither for the invitation nor for Ukraine’s membership.”
He claimed that NATO leaders were not serious about inviting Ukraine to join the alliance and complained that their approach indicated they instead wanted to keep its membership as a bargaining chip for eventual negotiations with Russia.
......
For his part, Biden has been more hesitant than leaders of many other NATO member countries about Ukraine’s bid, saying that in addition to resolving the ongoing war with Russia, Kyiv would need to implement internal reforms to become eligible. NATO encourages its members to embrace democracy and a market economy.
Ukrainian officials have said they realize Kyiv will not immediately be invited to join the alliance at this summit but that they hoped for a clear pathway or timeline to be established in writing that would give them confidence that the country would soon be invited.
Members of the U.S. delegation were furious with Zelensky’s tweet, according to an official familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive diplomatic considerations.
‘We’re not Amazon’: UK defence secretary suggests Ukraine could say thank you more
The British defence secretary, Ben Wallace, has suggested Ukraine needs to put more emphasis on thanking the west for its assistance after Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s complaints on Tuesday that his country had not been issued a firm timetable or set of conditions for joining Nato.
“Whether we like it or not, people want to see a bit of gratitude,” Wallace said at a briefing in the margins of the Nato summit in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius, when asked about the Ukrainian president’s comments that it was “absurd” for Kyiv to be told it would be welcome in the alliance but not given a date or exact conditions.
“Sometimes you are asking countries to give up their own stocks [of weapons],” Wallace said. “Sometimes you have to persuade lawmakers on the [Capitol] Hill in America.”
The US national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, told a public forum at the summit he believed “the American people do deserve a degree of gratitude from the United States government for their willingness to step up and from the rest of the world as well”.
He said: “The United States of America has stepped up to provide an enormous amount of capacity to help ensure that Ukraine’s brave soldiers have the ammunition, air defence, the infantry, fighting vehicles, the mine clearing equipment and so much else to be able to effectively defend against Russia’s onslaught and to take territory back as well.”
......
Wallace revealed at the briefing that he had travelled to Ukraine last year to be presented with a shopping list of weapons. “You know, we’re not Amazon,” he said. “I told them that last year, when I drove 11 hours to be given a list.”
The British defence secretary, Ben Wallace, has suggested Ukraine needs to put more emphasis on thanking the west for its assistance after Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s complaints on Tuesday that his country had not been issued a firm timetable or set of conditions for joining Nato.
“Whether we like it or not, people want to see a bit of gratitude,” Wallace said at a briefing in the margins of the Nato summit in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius, when asked about the Ukrainian president’s comments that it was “absurd” for Kyiv to be told it would be welcome in the alliance but not given a date or exact conditions.
“Sometimes you are asking countries to give up their own stocks [of weapons],” Wallace said. “Sometimes you have to persuade lawmakers on the [Capitol] Hill in America.”
The US national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, told a public forum at the summit he believed “the American people do deserve a degree of gratitude from the United States government for their willingness to step up and from the rest of the world as well”.
He said: “The United States of America has stepped up to provide an enormous amount of capacity to help ensure that Ukraine’s brave soldiers have the ammunition, air defence, the infantry, fighting vehicles, the mine clearing equipment and so much else to be able to effectively defend against Russia’s onslaught and to take territory back as well.”
......
Wallace revealed at the briefing that he had travelled to Ukraine last year to be presented with a shopping list of weapons. “You know, we’re not Amazon,” he said. “I told them that last year, when I drove 11 hours to be given a list.”
French riots: 71% of French back reduction in immigration, 78% want financial sanctions on rioters’ parents
Following a week of rioting and looting across several French cities, the majority of French citizens want stricter migration controls and sanctions against the families of those who participated in the vandalism, a poll conducted by Odoxa-Backbone Consulting for Le Figaro newspaper revealed.
Although the French government has claimed that the rioting had nothing to do with immigration, a point widely mocked. 71 percent of those polled say they want a reduction in migratory flows in response to the riots. A majority also supported two proposals put forward by the right-wing Les Républicains party and the National Rally: the abolition of the “excuse of minors” (78 percent) and an introduction of “financial sanctions” against the parents of delinquents (77 percent).
A whopping 75 percent of respondents said for those rioters convicted of crimes should have their French citizenship stripped if they are dual nationals.
Some 59 percent of respondents are calling for a tougher immigration bill this autumn. They see recent events as “the consequence of the failings of our migration policy.” This contrasts with Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin’s statement that “there were a lot of Kévins and Mattéos” among those arrested, who were “90 percent French.” This led to Darmanin claiming that “the issue today is young delinquents, not foreigners.”
Following a week of rioting and looting across several French cities, the majority of French citizens want stricter migration controls and sanctions against the families of those who participated in the vandalism, a poll conducted by Odoxa-Backbone Consulting for Le Figaro newspaper revealed.
Although the French government has claimed that the rioting had nothing to do with immigration, a point widely mocked. 71 percent of those polled say they want a reduction in migratory flows in response to the riots. A majority also supported two proposals put forward by the right-wing Les Républicains party and the National Rally: the abolition of the “excuse of minors” (78 percent) and an introduction of “financial sanctions” against the parents of delinquents (77 percent).
A whopping 75 percent of respondents said for those rioters convicted of crimes should have their French citizenship stripped if they are dual nationals.
Some 59 percent of respondents are calling for a tougher immigration bill this autumn. They see recent events as “the consequence of the failings of our migration policy.” This contrasts with Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin’s statement that “there were a lot of Kévins and Mattéos” among those arrested, who were “90 percent French.” This led to Darmanin claiming that “the issue today is young delinquents, not foreigners.”
France set to allow police to spy through phones
French police should be able to spy on suspects by remotely activating the camera, microphone and GPS of their phones and other devices, lawmakers agreed late on Wednesday, July 5. Part of a wider justice reform bill, the spying provision has been attacked by both the left and rights defenders as an authoritarian snoopers' charter, though Justice Minister Éric Dupond-Moretti insists it would affect only "dozens of cases a year."
Covering laptops, cars and other connected objects as well as phones, the measure would allow the geolocation of suspects in crimes punishable by at least five years' jail. Devices could also be remotely activated to record sound and images of people suspected of terror offenses, as well as delinquency and organized crime.
The provisions "raise serious concerns over infringements of fundamental liberties," digital rights group La Quadrature du Net wrote in a May statement. It cited the "right to security, right to a private life and to private correspondence" and "the right to come and go freely", calling the proposal part of a "slide into heavy-handed security".
During a debate on Wednesday, MPs in President Emmanuel Macron's camp inserted an amendment limiting the use of remote spying to "when justified by the nature and seriousness of the crime" and "for a strictly proportional duration." Any use of the provision must be approved by a judge, while the total duration of the surveillance cannot exceed six months. And sensitive professions including doctors, journalists, lawyers, judges and MPs would not be legitimate targets.
"We're far away from the totalitarianism of 1984," George Orwell's novel about a society under total surveillance, Dupond-Moretti said. "People's lives will be saved" by the law, he added.
French police should be able to spy on suspects by remotely activating the camera, microphone and GPS of their phones and other devices, lawmakers agreed late on Wednesday, July 5. Part of a wider justice reform bill, the spying provision has been attacked by both the left and rights defenders as an authoritarian snoopers' charter, though Justice Minister Éric Dupond-Moretti insists it would affect only "dozens of cases a year."
Covering laptops, cars and other connected objects as well as phones, the measure would allow the geolocation of suspects in crimes punishable by at least five years' jail. Devices could also be remotely activated to record sound and images of people suspected of terror offenses, as well as delinquency and organized crime.
The provisions "raise serious concerns over infringements of fundamental liberties," digital rights group La Quadrature du Net wrote in a May statement. It cited the "right to security, right to a private life and to private correspondence" and "the right to come and go freely", calling the proposal part of a "slide into heavy-handed security".
During a debate on Wednesday, MPs in President Emmanuel Macron's camp inserted an amendment limiting the use of remote spying to "when justified by the nature and seriousness of the crime" and "for a strictly proportional duration." Any use of the provision must be approved by a judge, while the total duration of the surveillance cannot exceed six months. And sensitive professions including doctors, journalists, lawyers, judges and MPs would not be legitimate targets.
"We're far away from the totalitarianism of 1984," George Orwell's novel about a society under total surveillance, Dupond-Moretti said. "People's lives will be saved" by the law, he added.
Riddle this: How many casualties are there, truly, on both sides of Ukraine war?
Searching for clarity on Ukrainian and Russian casualty figures will most certainly shoot the seeker down a rabbit hole like Alice in Wonderland.
Rep. Tom Massie (R-Ky.) has indicated he has had enough of the madness and has issued an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that forces the secretary of defense to submit a report to Congress on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, “that includes information on casualties, wounded, and materials or equipment losses for both sides of the conflict.”
......
A Google News search of Russian-Ukrainian casualties today will result in the top eight article headlines all speculating on why Russian fatalities and injuries are so high. While there is an acknowledgment that “military casualties on both sides of the war are difficult to establish and verify; the warring sides often estimate rival losses, and are understood to downplay their own,” nearly every top story includes some effort by independent organizations and/or government source to size up the numbers — on the Russian side.
“(The) coverage invariably foregrounds and heavily publicizes Russian losses, while largely de-emphasizing Ukraine’s similar and arguably more devastating ones,” noted writer Branko Marcetic, in a RS article trying to make sense of the carousel of estimates in March.
......
Critics are very well aware that no one truly has accurate figures, though the Mediazone and Meduza reports go through great lengths to examine probate records and other open source data in Russia to extrapolate deaths from the Russian “special operation.” They just don’t put the same energy in the other side.
On the other hand those who think the popular estimates have been suspect point out the math, that 60-65 percent of casualties in the two world wars were due to artillery, and Russia has been firing (reportedly) 10 times as much artillery on the battlefield daily. To their thinking, it would be impossible for Russians to be dying at a 7 to 1 ratio (seven Russians to every Ukrainian), as some have suggested.
Searching for clarity on Ukrainian and Russian casualty figures will most certainly shoot the seeker down a rabbit hole like Alice in Wonderland.
Rep. Tom Massie (R-Ky.) has indicated he has had enough of the madness and has issued an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that forces the secretary of defense to submit a report to Congress on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, “that includes information on casualties, wounded, and materials or equipment losses for both sides of the conflict.”
......
A Google News search of Russian-Ukrainian casualties today will result in the top eight article headlines all speculating on why Russian fatalities and injuries are so high. While there is an acknowledgment that “military casualties on both sides of the war are difficult to establish and verify; the warring sides often estimate rival losses, and are understood to downplay their own,” nearly every top story includes some effort by independent organizations and/or government source to size up the numbers — on the Russian side.
“(The) coverage invariably foregrounds and heavily publicizes Russian losses, while largely de-emphasizing Ukraine’s similar and arguably more devastating ones,” noted writer Branko Marcetic, in a RS article trying to make sense of the carousel of estimates in March.
......
Critics are very well aware that no one truly has accurate figures, though the Mediazone and Meduza reports go through great lengths to examine probate records and other open source data in Russia to extrapolate deaths from the Russian “special operation.” They just don’t put the same energy in the other side.
On the other hand those who think the popular estimates have been suspect point out the math, that 60-65 percent of casualties in the two world wars were due to artillery, and Russia has been firing (reportedly) 10 times as much artillery on the battlefield daily. To their thinking, it would be impossible for Russians to be dying at a 7 to 1 ratio (seven Russians to every Ukrainian), as some have suggested.
Biden orders 3,000 reservists to be ready for Europe deployments
President Joe Biden has authorized the military to call up 3,000 reserve troops to support operations in Europe after tens of thousands were sent there last year after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a top general said Thursday.
Although it is not clear whether Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin plans to actually deploy these reservists anytime soon, the move suggests that the U.S. military’s training mission in Europe, along with the deployment of several new brigades after the invasion, has stretched active-duty forces.
“This reaffirms the unwavering support and commitment to the defense of NATO’s eastern flank in the wake of Russia’s illegal and unprovoked war on Ukraine,” Lt. Gen. Douglas Sims, the director of operations for the Joint Staff, told reporters on Thursday.
While the move gives the military’s European Command “greater flexibility” to defend the continent, it will not change the actual force levels in Europe, Capt. Bill Speaks, a spokesperson for U.S. European Command, said in a statement.
President Joe Biden has authorized the military to call up 3,000 reserve troops to support operations in Europe after tens of thousands were sent there last year after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a top general said Thursday.
Although it is not clear whether Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin plans to actually deploy these reservists anytime soon, the move suggests that the U.S. military’s training mission in Europe, along with the deployment of several new brigades after the invasion, has stretched active-duty forces.
“This reaffirms the unwavering support and commitment to the defense of NATO’s eastern flank in the wake of Russia’s illegal and unprovoked war on Ukraine,” Lt. Gen. Douglas Sims, the director of operations for the Joint Staff, told reporters on Thursday.
While the move gives the military’s European Command “greater flexibility” to defend the continent, it will not change the actual force levels in Europe, Capt. Bill Speaks, a spokesperson for U.S. European Command, said in a statement.
Zelensky’s angry tweet on NATO membership nearly backfired
JAKARTA, Indonesia — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s confrontational tweet this week challenging NATO leaders on the glacial pace of his war-torn country’s admission into the alliance so roiled the White House that U.S. officials involved with the process considered scaling back the “invitation” for Kyiv to join, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ultimately, the United States and its allies agreed they would preserve the declaration’s language as eventually presented Tuesday at the NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania...
......
The Ukrainian leader’s public rebuke of the alliance stunned those assembled in the summit venue, an exposition hall on the outskirts of the Lithuanian capital, leaving the U.S. delegation “furious,” according to one official familiar with the situation. Like others, the person spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive talks.
Ambassadors, ministers and other senior policymakers held informal talks about how the alliance should respond. U.S. officials raised the possibility of revisiting or striking the passage to which Zelensky had so forcefully objected: “We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met,” according to European officials involved in the negotiations.
Although Washington has given Kyiv billions of dollars worth of military aid and other support since the war began early last year, President Biden has favored a cautious approach, fearful that doing too much too quickly could risk escalating the crisis and drawing NATO into direct conflict with Russia...
A U.S. official familiar with the conversations acknowledged that revisions to the declaration had been considered, saying the Biden administration was sensitive to Zelensky’s concerns and had hoped they might address them somehow.
Three other senior policymakers, however, two of whom were direct participants in the talks, said their strong perception was that the United States was getting ready to water down the document’s language — to make it less welcoming to a speedy Ukrainian accession to the alliance.
“Some wanted to withdraw the reference to ‘invitation,’” or find another place to put that word, said one of the senior policymakers, a NATO diplomat who took part in the talks.
JAKARTA, Indonesia — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s confrontational tweet this week challenging NATO leaders on the glacial pace of his war-torn country’s admission into the alliance so roiled the White House that U.S. officials involved with the process considered scaling back the “invitation” for Kyiv to join, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ultimately, the United States and its allies agreed they would preserve the declaration’s language as eventually presented Tuesday at the NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania...
......
The Ukrainian leader’s public rebuke of the alliance stunned those assembled in the summit venue, an exposition hall on the outskirts of the Lithuanian capital, leaving the U.S. delegation “furious,” according to one official familiar with the situation. Like others, the person spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive talks.
Ambassadors, ministers and other senior policymakers held informal talks about how the alliance should respond. U.S. officials raised the possibility of revisiting or striking the passage to which Zelensky had so forcefully objected: “We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met,” according to European officials involved in the negotiations.
Although Washington has given Kyiv billions of dollars worth of military aid and other support since the war began early last year, President Biden has favored a cautious approach, fearful that doing too much too quickly could risk escalating the crisis and drawing NATO into direct conflict with Russia...
A U.S. official familiar with the conversations acknowledged that revisions to the declaration had been considered, saying the Biden administration was sensitive to Zelensky’s concerns and had hoped they might address them somehow.
Three other senior policymakers, however, two of whom were direct participants in the talks, said their strong perception was that the United States was getting ready to water down the document’s language — to make it less welcoming to a speedy Ukrainian accession to the alliance.
“Some wanted to withdraw the reference to ‘invitation,’” or find another place to put that word, said one of the senior policymakers, a NATO diplomat who took part in the talks.
Five controversial amendments complicating McCarthy's job of passing the NDAA
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) may find it difficult to achieve bipartisan support for the National Defense Authorization Act, as the House Rules Committee prepares to consider several controversial amendments that could derail Democrats from voting for the bill.
......
Abortion
One of the most controversial amendments focuses on the Pentagon policy that allows service members to take up to three weeks of leave to travel out of state for abortions and other “non-covered reproductive health care services.” The policy also states the Department of Defense will reimburse members for any expenses related to that travel.
Hard-line conservatives have blasted this policy as a tool of the Biden administration to advance its own agenda...
Diversity, equity, and inclusion
Several amendments proposed by Republicans seek to eliminate Department of Defense policies that focus on DEI.
Reps. Eli Crane (R-TX), Bob Good (R-VA), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Mary Miller (R-IL), and Lauren Boebart (R-CO) introduced an amendment that prohibits the department from making it a requirement for members to participate in training or support for certain race-based concepts for hiring, promotion, or retention.
......
COVID-19
Republicans proposed several changes to DOD policies that handle COVID-19 vaccinations and information.
One of the amendments focuses on prohibiting any "adverse" actions against cadets and midshipmen based on their COVID-19 vaccination status. Another amends service reinstatement and protection provisions for those who refused to be vaccinated to include members of the Coast Guard.
......
Transgender-related issues
Nine Republicans sponsored an amendment that prohibits TRICARE from covering, and the DOD from furnishing, sex reassignment surgeries and gender hormone treatments for transgender individuals.
......
Foreign policy
Several of the amendments touch on the United States's relations with China, Ukraine, and Taiwan.
Some amendments that are likely to cause problems between the parties include striking $300 million in funding for Ukraine and prohibiting security assistance for Ukraine, as the country continues to fight a war against Russia.
China is also the focus of several amendments. Under one amendment, the secretary of defense is prohibited from supporting a film subject to censorship or content regulation from the Chinese Communist Party or the Chinese government. The manufacturing and distribution of Chinese goods at military exchanges would also be prohibited under another amendment.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) may find it difficult to achieve bipartisan support for the National Defense Authorization Act, as the House Rules Committee prepares to consider several controversial amendments that could derail Democrats from voting for the bill.
......
Abortion
One of the most controversial amendments focuses on the Pentagon policy that allows service members to take up to three weeks of leave to travel out of state for abortions and other “non-covered reproductive health care services.” The policy also states the Department of Defense will reimburse members for any expenses related to that travel.
Hard-line conservatives have blasted this policy as a tool of the Biden administration to advance its own agenda...
Diversity, equity, and inclusion
Several amendments proposed by Republicans seek to eliminate Department of Defense policies that focus on DEI.
Reps. Eli Crane (R-TX), Bob Good (R-VA), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Mary Miller (R-IL), and Lauren Boebart (R-CO) introduced an amendment that prohibits the department from making it a requirement for members to participate in training or support for certain race-based concepts for hiring, promotion, or retention.
......
COVID-19
Republicans proposed several changes to DOD policies that handle COVID-19 vaccinations and information.
One of the amendments focuses on prohibiting any "adverse" actions against cadets and midshipmen based on their COVID-19 vaccination status. Another amends service reinstatement and protection provisions for those who refused to be vaccinated to include members of the Coast Guard.
......
Transgender-related issues
Nine Republicans sponsored an amendment that prohibits TRICARE from covering, and the DOD from furnishing, sex reassignment surgeries and gender hormone treatments for transgender individuals.
......
Foreign policy
Several of the amendments touch on the United States's relations with China, Ukraine, and Taiwan.
Some amendments that are likely to cause problems between the parties include striking $300 million in funding for Ukraine and prohibiting security assistance for Ukraine, as the country continues to fight a war against Russia.
China is also the focus of several amendments. Under one amendment, the secretary of defense is prohibited from supporting a film subject to censorship or content regulation from the Chinese Communist Party or the Chinese government. The manufacturing and distribution of Chinese goods at military exchanges would also be prohibited under another amendment.
DeSantis War Room @DeSantisWarRoom
“I don’t want to do ANYTHING that’s going to escalate this conflict.”
LISTEN: @RonDeSantis tells @HowieCarrShow he opposes Biden sending cluster munitions to Ukraine.
“We need to find a way to get a sustainable peace in Europe. You've got to do it in a way that's not going to reward aggression. But this notion of just continuing to do conflicts with no end -- I served in the Iraq war. I remember being involved in what became a quagmire ... We've gotten into trouble as a country when we get involved in areas without a concrete objective for being there. Biden's administration will not say, to this day, what victory looks like."
https://twitter.com/DeSantisWarRoom/status/1679250656572461059
“I don’t want to do ANYTHING that’s going to escalate this conflict.”
LISTEN: @RonDeSantis tells @HowieCarrShow he opposes Biden sending cluster munitions to Ukraine.
“We need to find a way to get a sustainable peace in Europe. You've got to do it in a way that's not going to reward aggression. But this notion of just continuing to do conflicts with no end -- I served in the Iraq war. I remember being involved in what became a quagmire ... We've gotten into trouble as a country when we get involved in areas without a concrete objective for being there. Biden's administration will not say, to this day, what victory looks like."
https://twitter.com/DeSantisWarRoom/status/1679250656572461059
Americans Favor Aiding Taiwan with Arms but Not Troops
If China Invades, Americans Are Willing to Assist Taiwan...
If Beijing does launch an invasion of Taiwan, Americans seem willing to aid Taiwan in a manner similar to current US assistance to Ukraine. Majorities say that if China were to invade Taiwan, they would support imposing economic and diplomatic sanctions against China (76% overall), sending additional arms and military equipment to Taiwan (65%), and using the US Navy to prevent China from imposing a blockade around Taiwan (62%). Public support for providing arms to Taiwan in reaction to a Chinese invasion is higher than past support for selling arms to Taiwan in peacetime; in the 2021 Chicago Council Survey, Americans were split on whether to sell (50%) or not sell (47%) arms and military equipment to Taiwan.
......
... But Not with Boots on the Ground
Americans are generally risk-averse when it comes to sending US troops into combat, a pattern that holds in this case. A majority oppose “sending US troops to help the government of Taiwan defend itself against China” (55%), though a sizable minority would favor it (40%; see figure above) In a separate question that focuses on a range of hypothetical scenarios, a similar proportion of Americans would oppose “the use of US troops if China invaded Taiwan” (54%), with 44 percent in favor. This figure (shown below) is down from a year ago when 52 percent said they would favor sending US troops but is in line with previous trends, which have shown support for using US troops to defend Taiwan steadily increasing since 2013. As with other questions about support for Taiwan, there is little difference between partisans here, though Republicans have traditionally been more supportive of using US troops in this situation.
If China Invades, Americans Are Willing to Assist Taiwan...
If Beijing does launch an invasion of Taiwan, Americans seem willing to aid Taiwan in a manner similar to current US assistance to Ukraine. Majorities say that if China were to invade Taiwan, they would support imposing economic and diplomatic sanctions against China (76% overall), sending additional arms and military equipment to Taiwan (65%), and using the US Navy to prevent China from imposing a blockade around Taiwan (62%). Public support for providing arms to Taiwan in reaction to a Chinese invasion is higher than past support for selling arms to Taiwan in peacetime; in the 2021 Chicago Council Survey, Americans were split on whether to sell (50%) or not sell (47%) arms and military equipment to Taiwan.
......
... But Not with Boots on the Ground
Americans are generally risk-averse when it comes to sending US troops into combat, a pattern that holds in this case. A majority oppose “sending US troops to help the government of Taiwan defend itself against China” (55%), though a sizable minority would favor it (40%; see figure above) In a separate question that focuses on a range of hypothetical scenarios, a similar proportion of Americans would oppose “the use of US troops if China invaded Taiwan” (54%), with 44 percent in favor. This figure (shown below) is down from a year ago when 52 percent said they would favor sending US troops but is in line with previous trends, which have shown support for using US troops to defend Taiwan steadily increasing since 2013. As with other questions about support for Taiwan, there is little difference between partisans here, though Republicans have traditionally been more supportive of using US troops in this situation.
Auron Macintyre: "I think conservatives are learning a reallyim portant lesson that there are no neutral institutions. There never was this neutral marketplace where corporations and educational institutions and media would just play it down the middle. We would be able to section off what these corporations do from their values. And because the conservative movement treated these things as two separate places, two separate marketplaces where neutrality could exist, the left was able to infiltrate all of these places with their values, because there is no neutral space. And now those values are deeply entrenched. All of these mid-level managers, they're not interested about the overall profitability of these corporations. They're interested in their next job. And having a failing corporation, profitability wise, is not as bad as being called a racist."
https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1679897849578893332
https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1679897849578893332
After Suffering Heavy Losses, Ukrainians Paused to Rethink Strategy
In the first two weeks of Ukraine’s grueling counteroffensive, as much as 20 percent of the weaponry it sent to the battlefield was damaged or destroyed, according to American and European officials. The toll includes some of the formidable Western fighting machines — tanks and armored personnel carriers — the Ukrainians were counting on to beat back the Russians.
The startling rate of losses dropped to about 10 percent in the ensuing weeks, the officials said, preserving more of the troops and machines needed for the major offensive push that the Ukrainians say is still to come.
Some of the improvement came because Ukraine changed tactics, focusing more on wearing down the Russian forces with artillery and long-range missiles than charging into enemy minefields and fire.
But that good news obscures some grim realities. The losses have also slowed because the counteroffensive itself has slowed — and even halted in places — as Ukrainian soldiers struggle against Russia’s formidable defenses. And despite the losses, the Ukrainians have so far taken just five of the 60 miles they hope to cover to reach the sea in the south and split the Russian forces in two.
......
The precise numbers of weapons and armored vehicles that have been destroyed in the counteroffensive, as opposed to “mobility kills” that can be repaired, are closely guarded secrets, and the U.S. officials did not give raw numbers, though they did agree on the percentages of weaponry lost. But a combination of open source data and official estimates can provide a snapshot in time of the destruction, particularly in the early going.
Ukraine’s 47th Mechanized Brigade, one of the three Western-equipped and trained units that were deployed early in the campaign, was set to receive 99 Bradleys, according to the leaked U.S. military plans for the counteroffensive from February — still the most recent that have been made public.
Data from Oryx, a military analysis site that counts only losses that it has visually confirmed, show that 28 of those Bradleys have been abandoned, damaged or destroyed, including 15 in a village in Zaporizhzhia Province on June 8 and 9 as the 47th was attacked by helicopters while trapped in a minefield. Six additional Bradleys were reported abandoned or destroyed in Mala Tokmachka on June 26, but Oryx researchers said these losses had occurred earlier, although it is not clear exactly when.
Given that the 47th was the only brigade initially slated to receive the Bradleys, that means that nearly one-third of the original vehicles have been lost — although all but seven of them were blown up at one battleground.
......
It is even slower near Orikhiv in the Zaporizhzhia region, where the bulk of Bradleys and Leopards have been sent to an area of open fields with little cover. There, Ukraine’s army has advanced only about a mile.
In the first two weeks of Ukraine’s grueling counteroffensive, as much as 20 percent of the weaponry it sent to the battlefield was damaged or destroyed, according to American and European officials. The toll includes some of the formidable Western fighting machines — tanks and armored personnel carriers — the Ukrainians were counting on to beat back the Russians.
The startling rate of losses dropped to about 10 percent in the ensuing weeks, the officials said, preserving more of the troops and machines needed for the major offensive push that the Ukrainians say is still to come.
Some of the improvement came because Ukraine changed tactics, focusing more on wearing down the Russian forces with artillery and long-range missiles than charging into enemy minefields and fire.
But that good news obscures some grim realities. The losses have also slowed because the counteroffensive itself has slowed — and even halted in places — as Ukrainian soldiers struggle against Russia’s formidable defenses. And despite the losses, the Ukrainians have so far taken just five of the 60 miles they hope to cover to reach the sea in the south and split the Russian forces in two.
......
The precise numbers of weapons and armored vehicles that have been destroyed in the counteroffensive, as opposed to “mobility kills” that can be repaired, are closely guarded secrets, and the U.S. officials did not give raw numbers, though they did agree on the percentages of weaponry lost. But a combination of open source data and official estimates can provide a snapshot in time of the destruction, particularly in the early going.
Ukraine’s 47th Mechanized Brigade, one of the three Western-equipped and trained units that were deployed early in the campaign, was set to receive 99 Bradleys, according to the leaked U.S. military plans for the counteroffensive from February — still the most recent that have been made public.
Data from Oryx, a military analysis site that counts only losses that it has visually confirmed, show that 28 of those Bradleys have been abandoned, damaged or destroyed, including 15 in a village in Zaporizhzhia Province on June 8 and 9 as the 47th was attacked by helicopters while trapped in a minefield. Six additional Bradleys were reported abandoned or destroyed in Mala Tokmachka on June 26, but Oryx researchers said these losses had occurred earlier, although it is not clear exactly when.
Given that the 47th was the only brigade initially slated to receive the Bradleys, that means that nearly one-third of the original vehicles have been lost — although all but seven of them were blown up at one battleground.
......
It is even slower near Orikhiv in the Zaporizhzhia region, where the bulk of Bradleys and Leopards have been sent to an area of open fields with little cover. There, Ukraine’s army has advanced only about a mile.
How We Can Help Ukraine While Genuinely Prioritizing Asia
...It is critical to think clearly and realistically through this prism about how to prevent Russia from subordinating Ukraine. Crucially, this must be done with a forthright, clear-eyed recognition that China and Asia must be the priority for our military, geopolitical, and economic efforts. A war in the Western Pacific is distinctly possible in this decade, losing it would be catastrophic, and we are not preparing for it with the urgency, scale, or focus needed.
Rectifying this must be the absolute overriding priority of U.S. efforts in every respect. Any resources that could be useful for defeating a Chinese attack along the first island chain should be reserved to that end. This includes strike weapons like HIMARS, ATACMS, GMLRS, and tactical UAVs as well as defensive systems such as Patriot, NASAMS, Harpoons, Stingers, and Javelins that Taiwanese or U.S. defenders could use to degrade an invasion force. Importantly, it also includes things other than weapons, including money, political capital, intelligence resources, and defense industrial base attention and capacity.
......
First and foremost, the U.S. must act to incentivize European nations to take the lead in supporting Ukraine. Europe clearly has the capacity to do just that – what key states, especially but not exclusively Germany, have lacked thus far is the will to spend the money and political capital to both rearm themselves and arm Ukraine consistent with what strategic reality requires. Washington can help to alter those allies’ calculus by changing their incentives to shoulder more of the burden, both by elevating and supporting the efforts of leaders like Poland and by intensifying pressure on laggards like Germany. Making clear and credible that America will in fact focus on the Pacific could help this effort. This approach would require a sharp shift in policy from Washington, which has effectively undercut European incentives to greater self-reliance over the last year, but it is urgently necessary that Europe move toward assuming the bulk of its own defense, including in supporting Ukraine.
...It is critical to think clearly and realistically through this prism about how to prevent Russia from subordinating Ukraine. Crucially, this must be done with a forthright, clear-eyed recognition that China and Asia must be the priority for our military, geopolitical, and economic efforts. A war in the Western Pacific is distinctly possible in this decade, losing it would be catastrophic, and we are not preparing for it with the urgency, scale, or focus needed.
Rectifying this must be the absolute overriding priority of U.S. efforts in every respect. Any resources that could be useful for defeating a Chinese attack along the first island chain should be reserved to that end. This includes strike weapons like HIMARS, ATACMS, GMLRS, and tactical UAVs as well as defensive systems such as Patriot, NASAMS, Harpoons, Stingers, and Javelins that Taiwanese or U.S. defenders could use to degrade an invasion force. Importantly, it also includes things other than weapons, including money, political capital, intelligence resources, and defense industrial base attention and capacity.
......
First and foremost, the U.S. must act to incentivize European nations to take the lead in supporting Ukraine. Europe clearly has the capacity to do just that – what key states, especially but not exclusively Germany, have lacked thus far is the will to spend the money and political capital to both rearm themselves and arm Ukraine consistent with what strategic reality requires. Washington can help to alter those allies’ calculus by changing their incentives to shoulder more of the burden, both by elevating and supporting the efforts of leaders like Poland and by intensifying pressure on laggards like Germany. Making clear and credible that America will in fact focus on the Pacific could help this effort. This approach would require a sharp shift in policy from Washington, which has effectively undercut European incentives to greater self-reliance over the last year, but it is urgently necessary that Europe move toward assuming the bulk of its own defense, including in supporting Ukraine.
Ukraine Recap: US Intel Official Says Conflict at ‘Stalemate’
The conflict between Ukraine and Russia has reached a stalemate, a senior US intelligence official said, offering a downbeat assessment of a counteroffensive that some US and European leaders had hoped would turn the tide in Kyiv’s favor.
“Certainly we are at a bit of a stalemate,” John Kirchhofer, the US Defense Intelligence Agency chief of staff, said at a conference in Washington on Thursday. “One of the things that the Russian leadership believes is that they can outlast the support of the West.”
Kirchhofer’s outlook about the state of Ukraine’s counteroffensive contrasted with more optimistic assessments from other US officials including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, who said last month that Ukrainian forces were “advancing steadily.” At the same time, Milley said no one should have any illlusions about how the fight would be “very long” and “very bloody.”
Kirchhofer was similarly downbeat about Ukraine’s demand for more — and more powerful — weapons from the US and its allies. He cited the US decision to send cluster bombs and HIMARS rocket systems to Ukraine, as well as the UK’s provision of Storm Shadow missiles.
“None of these unfortunately, are the holy grail that Ukrainians looking for that will allow them to break through,” Kirchhofer said.
The conflict between Ukraine and Russia has reached a stalemate, a senior US intelligence official said, offering a downbeat assessment of a counteroffensive that some US and European leaders had hoped would turn the tide in Kyiv’s favor.
“Certainly we are at a bit of a stalemate,” John Kirchhofer, the US Defense Intelligence Agency chief of staff, said at a conference in Washington on Thursday. “One of the things that the Russian leadership believes is that they can outlast the support of the West.”
Kirchhofer’s outlook about the state of Ukraine’s counteroffensive contrasted with more optimistic assessments from other US officials including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, who said last month that Ukrainian forces were “advancing steadily.” At the same time, Milley said no one should have any illlusions about how the fight would be “very long” and “very bloody.”
Kirchhofer was similarly downbeat about Ukraine’s demand for more — and more powerful — weapons from the US and its allies. He cited the US decision to send cluster bombs and HIMARS rocket systems to Ukraine, as well as the UK’s provision of Storm Shadow missiles.
“None of these unfortunately, are the holy grail that Ukrainians looking for that will allow them to break through,” Kirchhofer said.
Kyiv City Council bans public use of Russian-language cultural product
Kyiv City Council has imposed a moratorium on the public use of Russian-language cultural products, in particular books, audiovisual works and musical recordings, the press service of Kyiv City Council reports.
This decision was made by 71 deputies at the plenary session of the II session of Kyiv City Council of the IX convocation on Thursday.
"It is necessary to finally once and for all restrict the Russian-language cultural product on the territory of the capital of Ukraine. In fact, it is envisaged to prohibit public coverage and demonstration of Russian-language goods and services created in the process of carrying out activities in the field of culture. These are books, art albums, audiovisual works, musical sound recordings, handicrafts, theatrical and circus performances, concerts and cultural and educational services. Russian is the language of the aggressor country, and it has no place in the heart of our capital," the press service of Kyiv City Council quoted chairman of the Standing Committee on Education and Science, Youth and Sports Vadym Vasylchuk.
In addition, the moratorium also applies to objects of material and spiritual culture that have artistic, historical, ethnographic and scientific significance and are subject to preservation, reproduction and protection in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine.
Kyiv City Council has imposed a moratorium on the public use of Russian-language cultural products, in particular books, audiovisual works and musical recordings, the press service of Kyiv City Council reports.
This decision was made by 71 deputies at the plenary session of the II session of Kyiv City Council of the IX convocation on Thursday.
"It is necessary to finally once and for all restrict the Russian-language cultural product on the territory of the capital of Ukraine. In fact, it is envisaged to prohibit public coverage and demonstration of Russian-language goods and services created in the process of carrying out activities in the field of culture. These are books, art albums, audiovisual works, musical sound recordings, handicrafts, theatrical and circus performances, concerts and cultural and educational services. Russian is the language of the aggressor country, and it has no place in the heart of our capital," the press service of Kyiv City Council quoted chairman of the Standing Committee on Education and Science, Youth and Sports Vadym Vasylchuk.
In addition, the moratorium also applies to objects of material and spiritual culture that have artistic, historical, ethnographic and scientific significance and are subject to preservation, reproduction and protection in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine.
Progressives’ war on teaching math conquers California
As progressives want to do everywhere, California is destroying math education in the name of “equity.”
The state’s new “math framework” for public schools ditches traditional instruction to emphasize “self-identity” and collaboration in lieu of actual math skills.
It aims to keep all students in the same math courses until 10th grade — no longer grouping students by skill so the kids who can learn more get the more advanced instruction they need.
The result will be far fewer kids able to take advanced classes (calculus, or even algebra), and more “slow” children denied the chance to gain basic skills.
Seriously: The new guidelines push transparent nonsense like “math identity rainbows”: Each student is to pick a color representing his or her individual strength — communicating, perseverance or numerical reasoning (i.e., actual math) — with an eye on teamwork in a supposed “mathematical community.”
They also junk Algebra II for “Introduction to Data Science,” which doesn’t even try to teach core concepts like exponents, logarithms and trigonometry. Black STEM faculty at the University of California warn that this harms, rather than helps, students of color.
As progressives want to do everywhere, California is destroying math education in the name of “equity.”
The state’s new “math framework” for public schools ditches traditional instruction to emphasize “self-identity” and collaboration in lieu of actual math skills.
It aims to keep all students in the same math courses until 10th grade — no longer grouping students by skill so the kids who can learn more get the more advanced instruction they need.
The result will be far fewer kids able to take advanced classes (calculus, or even algebra), and more “slow” children denied the chance to gain basic skills.
Seriously: The new guidelines push transparent nonsense like “math identity rainbows”: Each student is to pick a color representing his or her individual strength — communicating, perseverance or numerical reasoning (i.e., actual math) — with an eye on teamwork in a supposed “mathematical community.”
They also junk Algebra II for “Introduction to Data Science,” which doesn’t even try to teach core concepts like exponents, logarithms and trigonometry. Black STEM faculty at the University of California warn that this harms, rather than helps, students of color.
Marijuana Users Three Times More Likely to Develop Peripheral Artery Disease
May 19, 2023 — Findings from a study examining the relationship between marijuana use and peripheral artery disease (PAD) were presented during the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) 2023 Scientific Sessions, held May 18-20 in Phoenix, AZ. Results found marijuana users are at a significantly increased risk of developing PAD, compared to the general population. The study, “Impact of Marijuana Use on Prevalence and Interventions in Peripheral Artery Disease” was presented by lead author Hirva Vyas, DO, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, and underscores the importance of early and frequent screening in marijuana users.
A summary of findings found that, of the 30 million patients identified, 623,768 were diagnosed as marijuana users. Patients had an average age of 37.4 years, equal distribution across genders, were more likely to be white and more likely to be elective admissions. Of these patients, 2,424 (0.38%) were also diagnosed with PAD. Marijuana users were at more than three times the risk of developing PAD (OR= 3.68, p<0.001) but had no statistically significant increased risk for mortality or requiring percutaneous intervention (p<0.001).
Noting that the growing legalization of marijuana use warrants investigation of its various effects on the vasculature, they aimed to determine whether marijuana users have an increased risk of peripheral artery disease (PAD) and subsequent surgical intervention. Marijuana use has increased in recent years with nearly 50 million people reporting using it at least once (CDC). The SCAI news summary also noted that while many studies have looked at the impact of marijuana use on health, little research has been done to study the effect of marijuana use on the vascular system. PAD, a condition in which narrowed arteries reduce blood flow to the arms or legs, impacts 6.5 million people in the U.S. and can lead to a loss of mobility, reduced quality of life, heart attack, stroke and death, if not treated early.
“With the increase in marijuana use in the U.S., our findings show that users should be aware of the symptoms of PAD such as leg pain while walking, slower or no hair growth and feelings of coldness in the leg,” said Hirva Vyas, DO, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ and lead author of the study. “We know PAD is a progressive disease that can drastically impact quality of life, making ongoing monitoring of this patient population critical.” Other authors included Harsh Jain, DO, Montefiore Medical Center, and Michael Benz, MD, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, University Hospital.
May 19, 2023 — Findings from a study examining the relationship between marijuana use and peripheral artery disease (PAD) were presented during the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) 2023 Scientific Sessions, held May 18-20 in Phoenix, AZ. Results found marijuana users are at a significantly increased risk of developing PAD, compared to the general population. The study, “Impact of Marijuana Use on Prevalence and Interventions in Peripheral Artery Disease” was presented by lead author Hirva Vyas, DO, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, and underscores the importance of early and frequent screening in marijuana users.
A summary of findings found that, of the 30 million patients identified, 623,768 were diagnosed as marijuana users. Patients had an average age of 37.4 years, equal distribution across genders, were more likely to be white and more likely to be elective admissions. Of these patients, 2,424 (0.38%) were also diagnosed with PAD. Marijuana users were at more than three times the risk of developing PAD (OR= 3.68, p<0.001) but had no statistically significant increased risk for mortality or requiring percutaneous intervention (p<0.001).
Noting that the growing legalization of marijuana use warrants investigation of its various effects on the vasculature, they aimed to determine whether marijuana users have an increased risk of peripheral artery disease (PAD) and subsequent surgical intervention. Marijuana use has increased in recent years with nearly 50 million people reporting using it at least once (CDC). The SCAI news summary also noted that while many studies have looked at the impact of marijuana use on health, little research has been done to study the effect of marijuana use on the vascular system. PAD, a condition in which narrowed arteries reduce blood flow to the arms or legs, impacts 6.5 million people in the U.S. and can lead to a loss of mobility, reduced quality of life, heart attack, stroke and death, if not treated early.
“With the increase in marijuana use in the U.S., our findings show that users should be aware of the symptoms of PAD such as leg pain while walking, slower or no hair growth and feelings of coldness in the leg,” said Hirva Vyas, DO, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ and lead author of the study. “We know PAD is a progressive disease that can drastically impact quality of life, making ongoing monitoring of this patient population critical.” Other authors included Harsh Jain, DO, Montefiore Medical Center, and Michael Benz, MD, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, University Hospital.
Mark Galeotti @MarkGaleotti
This is a particularly bad take, epitomising a dangerous kind of triumphalism that also does Ukraine no favours. A short thread 1/
Take away Russia’s nuclear weapons – for Putin is finished and his country may soon collapse - The Telegraph
"Vladimir Putin is finished... He might struggle on for a few more weeks, even months." What possible evidence is there for assuming there could be regime change in weeks? 2/
The answer: "Potential successors are manoeuvring openly. Big companies are building private armies. Whole regions of Russia are laying the ground for independence referendums." Yet none of this is true... 3/
No one is openly setting themselves up as a contender; the merc forces in question are paid for by corporations but not controlled by them - it is really just a way to make them pay for army recruitment; and no one is preparing for independence. This is all nonsense. 4/
Putin's hopes of salvaging *any* kind of victory are, apparently, zero, even if Trump is elected, as "it presupposes that Russia’s demoralised troops could hold out for another 18 months... In practice, it will be over before then." Not could but will. 4/
Indeed, "Prigozhin’s march on Moscow showed ... how poorly defended Russia is. Ukraine could launch a massive left hook through Kursk, aiming to cut off the enemy’s forces." Never mind that all those troops willing to see what happened then would likely fight an actual invader 5/
As is, "The only question is whether there will be regime change in Moscow first, or whether there will be a 1917-style Russian collapse along a section of the front." No other options, no chance of a continued stalemate or slow Russian retreat. Not exciting enough. 6/
So "all sides are limbering up for a bloody interregnum, a Time of Troubles like that which preceded the accession of the Romanovs in 1613. The balance of opposed factions has broken down, the Tsar has lost all authority, and Russia faces the prospect of warlordism." 7/
Some might fear that, but not the columnist: "What is in the West’s power, as some Russian dissidents are now arguing, is to push for denuclearisation, both of any breakaway republics as the price for recognition, and of the rump state around Moscow and St Petersburg." 8/
"Such a state – let’s call it Muscovy – would have few options... Its choice would be to become an ill-tempered Eurasian khanate, a kind of nuclear Kazakhstan, or to embrace the free world, as West Germany did under Konrad Adenauer." 9/
Look I understand newspaper punditry, I do my share: you need to have something to say, and often the more exciting the better. It may seem foolish to be exercised by one more transitory piece of ill-informed nonsense. But, I do have some reasons to consider this dangerous: 10/
First, it is triumphalist. If we start to assume the war will be over relatively soon, we calibrate our policies to match. No need to build long-term ammo stocks, etc, because the Russkies will be folding soon, huzzah! Dangerous short-termism. 11/
It also means that, if the war does drag on, then the backlash is all the greater. Expectation management matters, especially in a fractious coalition where 'Ukraine fatigue' is a real thing. Those who want to push Kyiv into a bad peace are empowered by dashed high hopes. 12/
It's all based on a crass and inaccurate notion of the dynamics going on in Russia, and presupposes a break-up (and subsequent weakening) that is far from likely, or even plausible. Just how would/could Russia be forced into denuclearisation? 13/
The parallel is with the West German economic miracle - are we really likely to be offering massive and generous economic assistance in return for that denuclearisation? At the very time we are helping Ukraine rebuild? I hardly think so. 14/
Finally, although I agree that we need to be thinking about the shape of post-war (and post-Putin) relations with Russia, it rests on what one could almost call a colonial notion of Western power. All this plays to Putin's propaganda and sets us up by overstating our power... 15/
...understating Russian agency. We need
(a) to think beyond the war, yes but
(b) realistically +
(c) with a real sense of the real Russia.
If we assume Putin will soon lose everything + we will be able to define Russia's very shape, we are setting ourselves up for failure. 16/end
https://twitter.com/MarkGaleotti/status/1680523752449228802
This is a particularly bad take, epitomising a dangerous kind of triumphalism that also does Ukraine no favours. A short thread 1/
Take away Russia’s nuclear weapons – for Putin is finished and his country may soon collapse - The Telegraph
"Vladimir Putin is finished... He might struggle on for a few more weeks, even months." What possible evidence is there for assuming there could be regime change in weeks? 2/
The answer: "Potential successors are manoeuvring openly. Big companies are building private armies. Whole regions of Russia are laying the ground for independence referendums." Yet none of this is true... 3/
No one is openly setting themselves up as a contender; the merc forces in question are paid for by corporations but not controlled by them - it is really just a way to make them pay for army recruitment; and no one is preparing for independence. This is all nonsense. 4/
Putin's hopes of salvaging *any* kind of victory are, apparently, zero, even if Trump is elected, as "it presupposes that Russia’s demoralised troops could hold out for another 18 months... In practice, it will be over before then." Not could but will. 4/
Indeed, "Prigozhin’s march on Moscow showed ... how poorly defended Russia is. Ukraine could launch a massive left hook through Kursk, aiming to cut off the enemy’s forces." Never mind that all those troops willing to see what happened then would likely fight an actual invader 5/
As is, "The only question is whether there will be regime change in Moscow first, or whether there will be a 1917-style Russian collapse along a section of the front." No other options, no chance of a continued stalemate or slow Russian retreat. Not exciting enough. 6/
So "all sides are limbering up for a bloody interregnum, a Time of Troubles like that which preceded the accession of the Romanovs in 1613. The balance of opposed factions has broken down, the Tsar has lost all authority, and Russia faces the prospect of warlordism." 7/
Some might fear that, but not the columnist: "What is in the West’s power, as some Russian dissidents are now arguing, is to push for denuclearisation, both of any breakaway republics as the price for recognition, and of the rump state around Moscow and St Petersburg." 8/
"Such a state – let’s call it Muscovy – would have few options... Its choice would be to become an ill-tempered Eurasian khanate, a kind of nuclear Kazakhstan, or to embrace the free world, as West Germany did under Konrad Adenauer." 9/
Look I understand newspaper punditry, I do my share: you need to have something to say, and often the more exciting the better. It may seem foolish to be exercised by one more transitory piece of ill-informed nonsense. But, I do have some reasons to consider this dangerous: 10/
First, it is triumphalist. If we start to assume the war will be over relatively soon, we calibrate our policies to match. No need to build long-term ammo stocks, etc, because the Russkies will be folding soon, huzzah! Dangerous short-termism. 11/
It also means that, if the war does drag on, then the backlash is all the greater. Expectation management matters, especially in a fractious coalition where 'Ukraine fatigue' is a real thing. Those who want to push Kyiv into a bad peace are empowered by dashed high hopes. 12/
It's all based on a crass and inaccurate notion of the dynamics going on in Russia, and presupposes a break-up (and subsequent weakening) that is far from likely, or even plausible. Just how would/could Russia be forced into denuclearisation? 13/
The parallel is with the West German economic miracle - are we really likely to be offering massive and generous economic assistance in return for that denuclearisation? At the very time we are helping Ukraine rebuild? I hardly think so. 14/
Finally, although I agree that we need to be thinking about the shape of post-war (and post-Putin) relations with Russia, it rests on what one could almost call a colonial notion of Western power. All this plays to Putin's propaganda and sets us up by overstating our power... 15/
...understating Russian agency. We need
(a) to think beyond the war, yes but
(b) realistically +
(c) with a real sense of the real Russia.
If we assume Putin will soon lose everything + we will be able to define Russia's very shape, we are setting ourselves up for failure. 16/end
https://twitter.com/MarkGaleotti/status/1680523752449228802
F-16s key step for Ukraine, but won’t be ‘game-changer,’ SECAF says
WASHINGTON — Training Ukrainian pilots to fly F-16 fighters is a key step in building that nation’s future air force, U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said Monday — but he doubts Fighting Falcons will change the course of Ukraine’s war against Russia.
F-16s “will give the Ukrainians an increment of capability that they don’t have right now,” Kendall said in a breakfast roundtable with reporters hosted by the Defense Writers Group. “But it’s not going to be a dramatic game-changer, as far as I’m concerned, for their total military capabilities.”
Kendall said that while F-16s will help Ukraine, they won’t fundamentally alter the balance of power in the war. Effective ground-based air defenses on both sides have meant airpower has not played a decisive role in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Kendall said, and fighters have been used in fairly limited ways as a result.
WASHINGTON — Training Ukrainian pilots to fly F-16 fighters is a key step in building that nation’s future air force, U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said Monday — but he doubts Fighting Falcons will change the course of Ukraine’s war against Russia.
F-16s “will give the Ukrainians an increment of capability that they don’t have right now,” Kendall said in a breakfast roundtable with reporters hosted by the Defense Writers Group. “But it’s not going to be a dramatic game-changer, as far as I’m concerned, for their total military capabilities.”
Kendall said that while F-16s will help Ukraine, they won’t fundamentally alter the balance of power in the war. Effective ground-based air defenses on both sides have meant airpower has not played a decisive role in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Kendall said, and fighters have been used in fairly limited ways as a result.
Ukraine’s push for F-16s risks a battlefield advantage: simplicity
Valery Zaluzhny, the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, recently made another impassioned plea for F-16s, arguing that Western countries would not themselves launch a counteroffensive without air superiority. Yet, Kyiv is trying to do just that while awaiting the delivery of F-16 fighter jets, he complained.
“A very limited number would be enough,” Zaluzhny said, linking their arrival to the success of Ukraine’s ongoing counteroffensive.
That claim is as bold as it is doubtful.
Though an advanced multirole fighter, small numbers of F-16s can neither deliver air superiority to Ukraine nor can they provide a means of breaking through Russia’s heavily fortified defensive lines. And making Ukraine’s operations more complex is a bad strategy. Simplicity is a principle of war, and pivoting to a Western way of air war would be an inherently complex endeavor and raise the odds of failure. Instead of trying to overcome the multi-layered dilemmas posed by Russia’s air- and ground-to-air threats and gain air superiority, Kyiv ought to stay the course with its simple but effective air-denial strategy.
Russia’s air force on offense has failed to impress in this war, but nobody should kid themselves about Russia’s air defenses. To succeed, Ukraine would need to suppress or destroy Russian surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), especially the S-400 threat. Relying on F-16s, equipped with High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missiles (HARM), Ukrainian pilots would have to fly well into the S-400′s envelope to bait Russian operators into emitting. The S-400 has an engagement range of nearly 250 miles, that is, four times the range of an AGM-88 HARM. This makes it an inherently dangerous mission. Even if the F-16s survived to fire their missiles, Russian SAM crews could stop emitting and move — making it difficult for Ukrainian pilots to effectively close the kill chain. Ukraine’s losses would be high, and such a strategy would quickly become unsustainable.
But none of this should come as a surprise. Moscow would be taking a page from Kyiv’s own air-denial playbook, leveraging the inherent advantage of mobile, ground-based air defenses over expensive, fixed-wing aircraft to make the achievement of air superiority prohibitively costly. Put simply, a symmetric contest between a limited number of Ukrainian F-16s and Moscow’s large inventory of SAMs is a losing proposition for Kyiv.
......
The West may be tempted to speed up delivery of F-16s to Ukraine — complex enough, given the logistical challenges — and hope Ukraine can achieve the complicated and ephemeral state of air superiority, but it should ask itself first some hard questions about strategy. Too often, these debates have become fixated on individual weapon platforms and capabilities, and not the soundness of the strategy for employing these assets. The Ukrainian David ought to stay with his simple-but-effective air-defense sling to keep slaying the Russian Goliath in the skies.
Valery Zaluzhny, the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, recently made another impassioned plea for F-16s, arguing that Western countries would not themselves launch a counteroffensive without air superiority. Yet, Kyiv is trying to do just that while awaiting the delivery of F-16 fighter jets, he complained.
“A very limited number would be enough,” Zaluzhny said, linking their arrival to the success of Ukraine’s ongoing counteroffensive.
That claim is as bold as it is doubtful.
Though an advanced multirole fighter, small numbers of F-16s can neither deliver air superiority to Ukraine nor can they provide a means of breaking through Russia’s heavily fortified defensive lines. And making Ukraine’s operations more complex is a bad strategy. Simplicity is a principle of war, and pivoting to a Western way of air war would be an inherently complex endeavor and raise the odds of failure. Instead of trying to overcome the multi-layered dilemmas posed by Russia’s air- and ground-to-air threats and gain air superiority, Kyiv ought to stay the course with its simple but effective air-denial strategy.
Russia’s air force on offense has failed to impress in this war, but nobody should kid themselves about Russia’s air defenses. To succeed, Ukraine would need to suppress or destroy Russian surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), especially the S-400 threat. Relying on F-16s, equipped with High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missiles (HARM), Ukrainian pilots would have to fly well into the S-400′s envelope to bait Russian operators into emitting. The S-400 has an engagement range of nearly 250 miles, that is, four times the range of an AGM-88 HARM. This makes it an inherently dangerous mission. Even if the F-16s survived to fire their missiles, Russian SAM crews could stop emitting and move — making it difficult for Ukrainian pilots to effectively close the kill chain. Ukraine’s losses would be high, and such a strategy would quickly become unsustainable.
But none of this should come as a surprise. Moscow would be taking a page from Kyiv’s own air-denial playbook, leveraging the inherent advantage of mobile, ground-based air defenses over expensive, fixed-wing aircraft to make the achievement of air superiority prohibitively costly. Put simply, a symmetric contest between a limited number of Ukrainian F-16s and Moscow’s large inventory of SAMs is a losing proposition for Kyiv.
......
The West may be tempted to speed up delivery of F-16s to Ukraine — complex enough, given the logistical challenges — and hope Ukraine can achieve the complicated and ephemeral state of air superiority, but it should ask itself first some hard questions about strategy. Too often, these debates have become fixated on individual weapon platforms and capabilities, and not the soundness of the strategy for employing these assets. The Ukrainian David ought to stay with his simple-but-effective air-defense sling to keep slaying the Russian Goliath in the skies.
Daniel DePetris @DanDePetris
There continues to be this myth propagated in DC foreign policy quarters that the 1994 Budapest Memorandum was something more than a piece of paper with a few highly generalized assurances about Ukraine’s security.
Here is the text of the agreement. As you can see, the security commitments @KoriSchake refers to are pretty weak. It’s not as if the U.S. is obliged to come to Ukraine’s defense in the event of an invasion. People need to actually read what Budapest says.
Based on the Budapest Memorandum text, the U.S. has in fact fulfilled its commitments (which, again, are pretty low-bar).
https://twitter.com/DanDePetris/status/1680950281306099713
There continues to be this myth propagated in DC foreign policy quarters that the 1994 Budapest Memorandum was something more than a piece of paper with a few highly generalized assurances about Ukraine’s security.
...the United States and the United Kingdom have failed to fully honor the commitment they made to ensure Ukraine’s security, in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal, under the Budapest Memorandum of 1994.
Here is the text of the agreement. As you can see, the security commitments @KoriSchake refers to are pretty weak. It’s not as if the U.S. is obliged to come to Ukraine’s defense in the event of an invasion. People need to actually read what Budapest says.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon
State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
Based on the Budapest Memorandum text, the U.S. has in fact fulfilled its commitments (which, again, are pretty low-bar).
https://twitter.com/DanDePetris/status/1680950281306099713
U.S. Cluster Munitions Arrive in Ukraine, but Impact on Battlefield Remains Unclear
....“The scale of effect will be modest,” said Jack Watling, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London, who has made several trips to Ukraine. “It will make the Ukrainian artillery a little more lethal. The real impact will be felt later in the year when Ukraine has significantly more ammo than would otherwise have been the case.”
Colin H. Kahl, the under secretary of defense for policy, acknowledged last week that “no one capability is a silver bullet,” but said the cluster munitions would allow Ukraine “to sustain the artillery fight for the foreseeable future.”
President Biden had wrestled with a decision for months. Cluster munitions, which have been outlawed by many of America’s closest allies, scatter tiny bomblets across the battlefield that can cause grievous injuries even decades after the fighting ends when civilians pick up duds that did not explode.
Russia has used weapons of this type in Ukraine for much of the war. The Ukrainians have also used them, and President Volodymyr Zelensky had pressed for more in order to flush out the Russians who are dug into trenches and blocking his country’s counteroffensive.
......
Senior U.S. officials in recent weeks had privately expressed frustration that some Ukrainian commanders, exasperated at the slow pace of the initial assault and fearing increased casualties among their ranks, had reverted to old habits — decades of Soviet-style training in artillery barrages — rather than sticking with the Western tactics and pressing harder to breach the Russian defenses.
When asked about the American criticism, Andriy Zagorodnyuk, a former Ukrainian defense minister who advises the government, said in an email: “Why don’t they come and do it themselves?”
Biden administration officials are hoping the nine brigades, some 36,000 troops, will show that the American way of warfare — using combined arms, synchronized tactics and regiments with empowered senior enlisted soldiers — is superior to the rigidly centralized command-structure that is the Russian approach.
....“The scale of effect will be modest,” said Jack Watling, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London, who has made several trips to Ukraine. “It will make the Ukrainian artillery a little more lethal. The real impact will be felt later in the year when Ukraine has significantly more ammo than would otherwise have been the case.”
Colin H. Kahl, the under secretary of defense for policy, acknowledged last week that “no one capability is a silver bullet,” but said the cluster munitions would allow Ukraine “to sustain the artillery fight for the foreseeable future.”
President Biden had wrestled with a decision for months. Cluster munitions, which have been outlawed by many of America’s closest allies, scatter tiny bomblets across the battlefield that can cause grievous injuries even decades after the fighting ends when civilians pick up duds that did not explode.
Russia has used weapons of this type in Ukraine for much of the war. The Ukrainians have also used them, and President Volodymyr Zelensky had pressed for more in order to flush out the Russians who are dug into trenches and blocking his country’s counteroffensive.
......
Senior U.S. officials in recent weeks had privately expressed frustration that some Ukrainian commanders, exasperated at the slow pace of the initial assault and fearing increased casualties among their ranks, had reverted to old habits — decades of Soviet-style training in artillery barrages — rather than sticking with the Western tactics and pressing harder to breach the Russian defenses.
When asked about the American criticism, Andriy Zagorodnyuk, a former Ukrainian defense minister who advises the government, said in an email: “Why don’t they come and do it themselves?”
Biden administration officials are hoping the nine brigades, some 36,000 troops, will show that the American way of warfare — using combined arms, synchronized tactics and regiments with empowered senior enlisted soldiers — is superior to the rigidly centralized command-structure that is the Russian approach.
The emerging social credit system in the West:
Nigel Farage’s Coutts account closed as bank felt he did not ‘align with their values’
Nigel Farage’s bank accounts were closed down after Coutts decided that his views “do not align with our values”, documents obtained by the former Ukip leader show.
A reputational risk committee “exited” Mr Farage after considering a dossier detailing his comments about Brexit, his friendship with Donald Trump and his views on LGBT rights among many reasons he was not “compatible with Coutts”.
The background briefing paper even made reference to Mr Farage’s friendship with Novak Djokovic, the former Wimbledon champion, as evidence that he was not as “inclusive” as the bank.
Earlier this month, the BBC and the Financial Times reported claims that the reason Mr Farage’s accounts were closed was that they fell below the financial threshold required by the bank. The BBC quoted sources “familiar with” the Coutts decision.
Yet in the 40 pages of documents released to Mr Farage after he made a subject access request to Coutts, the bank repeatedly says he “meets the EC [economic contribution] criteria for commercial retention”.
Writing for The Telegraph, Mr Farage accuses the private bank of “lying” about the real reason he was cut off, saying the documents show that the decision was politically driven.
He describes the file as a “Stasi-style surveillance report” and notes that the word Brexit appears in the report 86 times – which, he says, “perhaps tells us all we need to know”.
“Between 2014 and 2016, when I first banked with Coutts, no problems ever arose. After Brexit became a reality, everything changed,” he writes.
Minutes of a meeting of Coutts’ wealth reputational risk committee held on Nov 17 2022 state: “The committee did not think continuing to bank NF was compatible with Coutts given his publicly-stated views that were at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation.
“This was not a political decision but one centred around inclusivity and purpose.”
Nigel Farage’s Coutts account closed as bank felt he did not ‘align with their values’
Nigel Farage’s bank accounts were closed down after Coutts decided that his views “do not align with our values”, documents obtained by the former Ukip leader show.
A reputational risk committee “exited” Mr Farage after considering a dossier detailing his comments about Brexit, his friendship with Donald Trump and his views on LGBT rights among many reasons he was not “compatible with Coutts”.
The background briefing paper even made reference to Mr Farage’s friendship with Novak Djokovic, the former Wimbledon champion, as evidence that he was not as “inclusive” as the bank.
Earlier this month, the BBC and the Financial Times reported claims that the reason Mr Farage’s accounts were closed was that they fell below the financial threshold required by the bank. The BBC quoted sources “familiar with” the Coutts decision.
Yet in the 40 pages of documents released to Mr Farage after he made a subject access request to Coutts, the bank repeatedly says he “meets the EC [economic contribution] criteria for commercial retention”.
Writing for The Telegraph, Mr Farage accuses the private bank of “lying” about the real reason he was cut off, saying the documents show that the decision was politically driven.
He describes the file as a “Stasi-style surveillance report” and notes that the word Brexit appears in the report 86 times – which, he says, “perhaps tells us all we need to know”.
“Between 2014 and 2016, when I first banked with Coutts, no problems ever arose. After Brexit became a reality, everything changed,” he writes.
Minutes of a meeting of Coutts’ wealth reputational risk committee held on Nov 17 2022 state: “The committee did not think continuing to bank NF was compatible with Coutts given his publicly-stated views that were at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation.
“This was not a political decision but one centred around inclusivity and purpose.”
World of Statistics @stats_feed
Decline in birth rate 1950-2021:
🇰🇷 South Korea: 86%
🇨🇳 China: 81%
🇹🇭 Thailand: 79%
🇯🇵 Japan: 77%
🇮🇷 Iran: 73%
🇧🇷 Brazil: 72%
🇨🇴 Colombia: 70%
🇲🇽 Mexico: 70%
🇵🇱 Poland: 69%
🇹🇷 Turkey: 68%
🇷🇺 Russia: 67%
🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia: 67%
🇲🇾 Malaysia: 66%
🇲🇦 Morocco: 66%
🇺🇦 Ukraine: 66%
🇮🇹 Italy: 65%
🇨🇦 Canada: 63%
🇮🇳 India: 63%
🇵🇪 Peru: 63%
🇧🇩 Bangladesh: 62%
🇲🇲 Myanmar: 62%
🇪🇸 Spain: 62%
🇻🇳 Vietnam: 61%
🇮🇩 Indonesia: 60%
🇩🇿 Algeria: 58%
🇪🇬 Egypt: 58%
🇳🇵 Nepal: 57%
🇵🇭 Philippines: 56%
🇿🇦 South Africa: 52%
🇺🇸 United States: 52%
🇫🇷 France: 49%
🇦🇷 Argentina: 47%
🇰🇪 Kenya: 44%
🇩🇪 Germany: 43%
🇾🇪 Yemen: 42%
🇬🇭 Ghana: 41%
🇺🇿 Uzbekistan: 41%
🇮🇶 Iraq: 40%
🇬🇧 United Kingdom: 39%
🇵🇰 Pakistan: 37%
🇳🇬 Nigeria: 19%
🇨🇩 DRC: 9%
https://twitter.com/stats_feed/status/1671029030261334016
Global Index @TheGlobal_Index
Projected population in 2100:
🇮🇳 India → 1,533 Million
🇨🇳 China → 771M
🇳🇬 Nigeria → 546M
🇵🇰 Pakistan → 487M
🇨🇩 Congo → 431M
🇺🇸 US → 394M
🇪🇹 Ethiopia → 323M
🇮🇩 Indonesia → 297M
🇹🇿 Tanzania → 244M
🇪🇬 Egypt → 205M
🇧🇷 Brazil → 185M
🇵🇭 Philippines → 180M
🇧🇩 Bangladesh → 177M
🇳🇪 Niger → 166M
🇸🇩 Sudan → 142M
🇦🇴 Angola → 133M
🇺🇬 Uganda → 132M
🇲🇽 Mexico → 116M
🇰🇪 Kenya → 113M
🇷🇺 Russia → 112M
🇮🇶 Iraq → 111M
🇦🇫 Afghanistan → 110M
🇲🇿 Mozambique → 106M
🇻🇳 Vietnam → 91M
🇨🇮 Côte d’Ivoire → 88M
🇨🇲 Cameroon → 87M
🇲🇱 Mali → 87M
🇲🇬 Madagaskar → 83M
🇹🇷 Turkey → 82M
🇮🇷 Iran → 79M
🇿🇦 South Africa → 74M
🇾🇪 Yemen → 74M
🇯🇵 Japan → 74M
.
🇬🇧 UK → 70M
🇩🇪 Germany → 68M
🇫🇷 France → 60M
🇨🇦 Canada → 53M
🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia → 50M
🇦🇷 Argentina → 47M
🇦🇺 Australia → 38M
🇮🇹 Italy → 36M
🇪🇸 Spain → 30M
🇰🇷 South Korea → 24M
🇳🇱 Netherlands → 16M
🇦🇪 UAE → 14M
🇸🇪 Sweden → 13M
🇨🇭 Switzerland → 10M
🇦🇹 Austria → 8M
🇳🇴 Norway → 7M
🇩🇰 Denmark → 7M
🇫🇮 Finland → 5M
🇸🇮 Slovenia → 1.6M
🇱🇻 Latvia → 0.95M
🇪🇪 Estonia → 0.83M
🇮🇸 Iceland → 0.37M
🌍 World → 10.35B
https://twitter.com/TheGlobal_Index/status/1671029278987931648
Decline in birth rate 1950-2021:
🇰🇷 South Korea: 86%
🇨🇳 China: 81%
🇹🇭 Thailand: 79%
🇯🇵 Japan: 77%
🇮🇷 Iran: 73%
🇧🇷 Brazil: 72%
🇨🇴 Colombia: 70%
🇲🇽 Mexico: 70%
🇵🇱 Poland: 69%
🇹🇷 Turkey: 68%
🇷🇺 Russia: 67%
🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia: 67%
🇲🇾 Malaysia: 66%
🇲🇦 Morocco: 66%
🇺🇦 Ukraine: 66%
🇮🇹 Italy: 65%
🇨🇦 Canada: 63%
🇮🇳 India: 63%
🇵🇪 Peru: 63%
🇧🇩 Bangladesh: 62%
🇲🇲 Myanmar: 62%
🇪🇸 Spain: 62%
🇻🇳 Vietnam: 61%
🇮🇩 Indonesia: 60%
🇩🇿 Algeria: 58%
🇪🇬 Egypt: 58%
🇳🇵 Nepal: 57%
🇵🇭 Philippines: 56%
🇿🇦 South Africa: 52%
🇺🇸 United States: 52%
🇫🇷 France: 49%
🇦🇷 Argentina: 47%
🇰🇪 Kenya: 44%
🇩🇪 Germany: 43%
🇾🇪 Yemen: 42%
🇬🇭 Ghana: 41%
🇺🇿 Uzbekistan: 41%
🇮🇶 Iraq: 40%
🇬🇧 United Kingdom: 39%
🇵🇰 Pakistan: 37%
🇳🇬 Nigeria: 19%
🇨🇩 DRC: 9%
https://twitter.com/stats_feed/status/1671029030261334016
Global Index @TheGlobal_Index
Projected population in 2100:
🇮🇳 India → 1,533 Million
🇨🇳 China → 771M
🇳🇬 Nigeria → 546M
🇵🇰 Pakistan → 487M
🇨🇩 Congo → 431M
🇺🇸 US → 394M
🇪🇹 Ethiopia → 323M
🇮🇩 Indonesia → 297M
🇹🇿 Tanzania → 244M
🇪🇬 Egypt → 205M
🇧🇷 Brazil → 185M
🇵🇭 Philippines → 180M
🇧🇩 Bangladesh → 177M
🇳🇪 Niger → 166M
🇸🇩 Sudan → 142M
🇦🇴 Angola → 133M
🇺🇬 Uganda → 132M
🇲🇽 Mexico → 116M
🇰🇪 Kenya → 113M
🇷🇺 Russia → 112M
🇮🇶 Iraq → 111M
🇦🇫 Afghanistan → 110M
🇲🇿 Mozambique → 106M
🇻🇳 Vietnam → 91M
🇨🇮 Côte d’Ivoire → 88M
🇨🇲 Cameroon → 87M
🇲🇱 Mali → 87M
🇲🇬 Madagaskar → 83M
🇹🇷 Turkey → 82M
🇮🇷 Iran → 79M
🇿🇦 South Africa → 74M
🇾🇪 Yemen → 74M
🇯🇵 Japan → 74M
.
🇬🇧 UK → 70M
🇩🇪 Germany → 68M
🇫🇷 France → 60M
🇨🇦 Canada → 53M
🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia → 50M
🇦🇷 Argentina → 47M
🇦🇺 Australia → 38M
🇮🇹 Italy → 36M
🇪🇸 Spain → 30M
🇰🇷 South Korea → 24M
🇳🇱 Netherlands → 16M
🇦🇪 UAE → 14M
🇸🇪 Sweden → 13M
🇨🇭 Switzerland → 10M
🇦🇹 Austria → 8M
🇳🇴 Norway → 7M
🇩🇰 Denmark → 7M
🇫🇮 Finland → 5M
🇸🇮 Slovenia → 1.6M
🇱🇻 Latvia → 0.95M
🇪🇪 Estonia → 0.83M
🇮🇸 Iceland → 0.37M
🌍 World → 10.35B
https://twitter.com/TheGlobal_Index/status/1671029278987931648
Female recruit considered resigning after being forced to shower with trans women with full male genitalia
EXCLUSIVE – An 18-year-old military recruit forced to shower with biological males as part of the Biden administration's transgender policies is complaining about being placed in an "extremely uncomfortable position."
The report was first raised at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday. The girl is afraid to speak out of fear it will harm her career, Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) told Fox News Digital in an interview. Her options were slim and included resigning from her early-career position.
It was believed raising the matter in a complaint could have harmful impacts on the new recruit's military career.
According to Rounds, the military recruit, 18, is complaining about being forced to sleep in between "two individuals who were supposedly changing from male to female." The girl also has to shower with the individuals and reported significant distress about the matter. The individuals housed with the 18-year-old had initiated chemical interventions to change genders, but without having reassignment surgery, their genitalia were fully intact.
......
The Pentagon released a statement to Fox News Digital, which said, "DoD policy is that all Service members must be treated with dignity and respect. We would encourage any troop who’s feeling uncomfortable or has concerns about privacy in shared spaces to work through their chain of command. Commanders may employ reasonable accommodations to respect the privacy interests of Service members."
As for the girl's recourse for the discomforting living situation, the senator said "her options were not good."
"She could have basically resigned or stepped away. She could have started over again. But nonetheless, it was an extremely uncomfortable position. And I think this is one of the reasons why we're not meeting our recruitment goals now," he said.
EXCLUSIVE – An 18-year-old military recruit forced to shower with biological males as part of the Biden administration's transgender policies is complaining about being placed in an "extremely uncomfortable position."
The report was first raised at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday. The girl is afraid to speak out of fear it will harm her career, Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) told Fox News Digital in an interview. Her options were slim and included resigning from her early-career position.
It was believed raising the matter in a complaint could have harmful impacts on the new recruit's military career.
According to Rounds, the military recruit, 18, is complaining about being forced to sleep in between "two individuals who were supposedly changing from male to female." The girl also has to shower with the individuals and reported significant distress about the matter. The individuals housed with the 18-year-old had initiated chemical interventions to change genders, but without having reassignment surgery, their genitalia were fully intact.
......
The Pentagon released a statement to Fox News Digital, which said, "DoD policy is that all Service members must be treated with dignity and respect. We would encourage any troop who’s feeling uncomfortable or has concerns about privacy in shared spaces to work through their chain of command. Commanders may employ reasonable accommodations to respect the privacy interests of Service members."
As for the girl's recourse for the discomforting living situation, the senator said "her options were not good."
"She could have basically resigned or stepped away. She could have started over again. But nonetheless, it was an extremely uncomfortable position. And I think this is one of the reasons why we're not meeting our recruitment goals now," he said.
Alex Velez-Green @Alex_agvg
Allen & Pfeiffer make a serious effort to show how to deter China while aiding Ukraine. But their proposal would have us withhold weapons from Taiwan that it needs to defend itself. That necessarily weakens deterrence in Asia, which is a risk we should not accept. 1/11
The authors at first say, “Ukraine & Taiwan don’t need the same things.” They later acknowledge the reality of tradeoffs & rightly so. Ukraine & Taiwan do need many of the same things: Patriots, NASAMS, HIMARS, ATACMS, GMLRS, Harpoons, Stingers, & Javelins are examples. 2/11
Allen & Pfeiffer go on to argue that Ukraine needs some things more than Taiwan (e.g. anti-tank weapons) & Taiwan needs some things more than Ukraine (e.g. anti-ship missiles). They say the best way to manage tradeoffs is to send Ukraine the former & Taiwan the latter. 3/11
But this strategy intentionally leaves Taiwan without some of the weapons it needs. That’s not prioritizing. That’s trying to balance commitments across multiple theaters even if it means jeopardizing our position in the priority theater, just like we’ve done for years. 4/11
Ground weapons are an example. The authors note Ukraine is a “ground war,” while Taiwan “is an island.” Yes, but if Chinese forces make landfall—as seems entirely plausible if not likely—then Taiwan will suddenly be a ground war too. 5/11
Maximizing our ability to deter China means preparing for that scenario by equipping Taiwan’s ground forces to crush any Chinese forces that make landfall, incl. by sending long-range fires, Javelins, Stingers, etc.—even if it's Ukraine that’s currently in a ground war. 6/11
Allen & Pfeiffer say the best way to resolve tradeoffs is to ramp up weapons production. They’re 100% right & HIMARS is a great example of increased production. If we could do that for all weapons, we wouldn’t have a problem. We could arm Taiwan first w/o affecting Ukraine. 7/11
But that's unlikely. DIB limits, contracting, delayed authorizations, lack of timely appropriations, policy decisions—all of these things slow down production. As a result, it’ll probably take years before we can fulfill both sides' requirements. So we must prioritize. 8/11
Washington has spent years saying it'll prioritize Asia. Instead, it's consistently neglected Asia while tending to crises in other regions. First it was the Middle East, now it’s Europe. This refusal to prioritize China is a key part of why we’re in such horrible shape now. 9/11
Our deterrent in Asia has eroded severely. Taiwan’s forces are even worse off. Meanwhile, China is only getting stronger—and fast. If we want to deter China in this decade, we’ve got to prioritize doing so. 10/11
Critically, that means prioritizing Taiwan over other countries, including Ukraine, for weapons both sides need. We should be doing everything possible to arm Taiwan as quickly as possible—with everything it needs to defend itself. That’s the best way to deter China. 11/11
https://twitter.com/Alex_agvg/status/1681678761454977028
Allen & Pfeiffer make a serious effort to show how to deter China while aiding Ukraine. But their proposal would have us withhold weapons from Taiwan that it needs to defend itself. That necessarily weakens deterrence in Asia, which is a risk we should not accept. 1/11
Michael Allen @michaelallenJMA
Thanks to @WSJOpinion for publishing our article on why the US can simultaneously arm Ukraine in its fight against Russia and deter a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
The U.S. Can Help Ukraine and Deter China
The authors at first say, “Ukraine & Taiwan don’t need the same things.” They later acknowledge the reality of tradeoffs & rightly so. Ukraine & Taiwan do need many of the same things: Patriots, NASAMS, HIMARS, ATACMS, GMLRS, Harpoons, Stingers, & Javelins are examples. 2/11
Allen & Pfeiffer go on to argue that Ukraine needs some things more than Taiwan (e.g. anti-tank weapons) & Taiwan needs some things more than Ukraine (e.g. anti-ship missiles). They say the best way to manage tradeoffs is to send Ukraine the former & Taiwan the latter. 3/11
But this strategy intentionally leaves Taiwan without some of the weapons it needs. That’s not prioritizing. That’s trying to balance commitments across multiple theaters even if it means jeopardizing our position in the priority theater, just like we’ve done for years. 4/11
Ground weapons are an example. The authors note Ukraine is a “ground war,” while Taiwan “is an island.” Yes, but if Chinese forces make landfall—as seems entirely plausible if not likely—then Taiwan will suddenly be a ground war too. 5/11
Maximizing our ability to deter China means preparing for that scenario by equipping Taiwan’s ground forces to crush any Chinese forces that make landfall, incl. by sending long-range fires, Javelins, Stingers, etc.—even if it's Ukraine that’s currently in a ground war. 6/11
Allen & Pfeiffer say the best way to resolve tradeoffs is to ramp up weapons production. They’re 100% right & HIMARS is a great example of increased production. If we could do that for all weapons, we wouldn’t have a problem. We could arm Taiwan first w/o affecting Ukraine. 7/11
But that's unlikely. DIB limits, contracting, delayed authorizations, lack of timely appropriations, policy decisions—all of these things slow down production. As a result, it’ll probably take years before we can fulfill both sides' requirements. So we must prioritize. 8/11
Washington has spent years saying it'll prioritize Asia. Instead, it's consistently neglected Asia while tending to crises in other regions. First it was the Middle East, now it’s Europe. This refusal to prioritize China is a key part of why we’re in such horrible shape now. 9/11
Our deterrent in Asia has eroded severely. Taiwan’s forces are even worse off. Meanwhile, China is only getting stronger—and fast. If we want to deter China in this decade, we’ve got to prioritize doing so. 10/11
Critically, that means prioritizing Taiwan over other countries, including Ukraine, for weapons both sides need. We should be doing everything possible to arm Taiwan as quickly as possible—with everything it needs to defend itself. That’s the best way to deter China. 11/11
https://twitter.com/Alex_agvg/status/1681678761454977028
University ‘elite overproduction’ has shifted the UK to the Left
...[T]he enormous growth in graduation rates has not just incurred economic costs, it’s also driven regrettable social changes. We now have a whole generation of young people educated for professional-level jobs but unable to find them: five years after leaving university, a third of graduates are overqualified for their roles. Imagine being saddled with £50,000 of debt, having been told since childhood that a degree will be your passport to a well-paid career and then finding yourself unable to progress from junior barista in Starbucks or an entry-level admin job.
Of course these jobs have value and need to be done, but perceiving yourself to be overqualified for a role is likely to engender resentment. There simply are not enough top-level jobs for the half a million young people graduating each year, and this has social and political consequences.
Indeed, so-called “elite overproduction” has created a generation whose understandable disappointment with society has pushed them down a rabbit hole of destructive ideological causes. It is even argued that some adopt “high status” political views to compensate for the reduced economic status they are able to achieve.
From critical race theory (which says white people are all racist) to radical gender ideology (which threatens the safety of women and children) to extreme climate catastrophism (which seeks to impoverish our nation): the views of those under 30 are markedly different from older people. In fact, almost half of young people believe that Britain was founded on racism.
These causes, championed in universities and the public sector, have no basis in reality, are deeply de-stabilising to society and have nothing concrete to offer our young people.
...[T]he enormous growth in graduation rates has not just incurred economic costs, it’s also driven regrettable social changes. We now have a whole generation of young people educated for professional-level jobs but unable to find them: five years after leaving university, a third of graduates are overqualified for their roles. Imagine being saddled with £50,000 of debt, having been told since childhood that a degree will be your passport to a well-paid career and then finding yourself unable to progress from junior barista in Starbucks or an entry-level admin job.
Of course these jobs have value and need to be done, but perceiving yourself to be overqualified for a role is likely to engender resentment. There simply are not enough top-level jobs for the half a million young people graduating each year, and this has social and political consequences.
Indeed, so-called “elite overproduction” has created a generation whose understandable disappointment with society has pushed them down a rabbit hole of destructive ideological causes. It is even argued that some adopt “high status” political views to compensate for the reduced economic status they are able to achieve.
From critical race theory (which says white people are all racist) to radical gender ideology (which threatens the safety of women and children) to extreme climate catastrophism (which seeks to impoverish our nation): the views of those under 30 are markedly different from older people. In fact, almost half of young people believe that Britain was founded on racism.
These causes, championed in universities and the public sector, have no basis in reality, are deeply de-stabilising to society and have nothing concrete to offer our young people.
New Statistical Evidence Supports the "Minneapolis Effect" as an Explanation for Increases in Homicides
...A few days ago, an important new statistical study found corroboration for my hypothesis in New York City. Professor Dae-Young Kim's article "Did De-Policing Contribute to the 2020 Homicide Spikes?" answers the question posed in the title in the affirmative.
Professor Kim's article examines NYC homicide data from 2017 through 2020. It divides homicides into six different categories: gun, non-gun, domestic, non-domestic, gang, and non-gang. It assesses the connection between homicide rates in those categories and a significant reduction in NYPD police stops of pedestrians. In NYC, stops fell from 13,453 in 2019 to 8,375 in 2020–a 30% decrease in proactive policing.
Professor Kim's article found that the reduction in stops led to an increase in three homicide categories:
......
The explanation Professor Kim gives for this pattern tracks the one that I gave in my paper on the "Minneapolis Effect"–specifically, that police stops are targetted at gun crimes and related gang activity, and thus a reduction in stops will produce the greatest increase in homicides in these specific categories. As Professor Kim puts it:
...A few days ago, an important new statistical study found corroboration for my hypothesis in New York City. Professor Dae-Young Kim's article "Did De-Policing Contribute to the 2020 Homicide Spikes?" answers the question posed in the title in the affirmative.
Professor Kim's article examines NYC homicide data from 2017 through 2020. It divides homicides into six different categories: gun, non-gun, domestic, non-domestic, gang, and non-gang. It assesses the connection between homicide rates in those categories and a significant reduction in NYPD police stops of pedestrians. In NYC, stops fell from 13,453 in 2019 to 8,375 in 2020–a 30% decrease in proactive policing.
Professor Kim's article found that the reduction in stops led to an increase in three homicide categories:
… the interaction term of police stops and the pandemic presents the extent to which the 2020 homicide surges were attributable to reduced proactive law enforcement. Specifically, gun, non-domestic, and gang homicides significantly increased as police stops decreased in the pandemic and post-Floyd era. In addition, the supplementary correlation analyses present a significant correlation of police stops to gun (r=−.406, p =.008), non-domestic (r=-.321, p=.041), and gang (r=−.364, p=.019) homicides, respectively, in the pandemic and post-Floyd era. In contrast, the significant correlations disappear in the pre-intervention era.
......
The explanation Professor Kim gives for this pattern tracks the one that I gave in my paper on the "Minneapolis Effect"–specifically, that police stops are targetted at gun crimes and related gang activity, and thus a reduction in stops will produce the greatest increase in homicides in these specific categories. As Professor Kim puts it:
Pedestrian stops are used to stop and frisk anyone, but mostly known gang members, on the street they suspect might engage in criminal activity or carry concealed weapons. Given the goal of pedestrian stops, the effects of de-policing should be more pronounced on gun, non-domestic, and gang homicides that usually occur in public settings. The current findings echo Piza and Connealy's (2022) study in that the lack of policing caused crime increases, ultimately compromising public safety and endangering communities.
Neither party has a united stance on Ukraine — and it's concerning
The Biden administration’s decision to send cluster munitions to Ukraine has created a policy fight at home, deepening the political mess that the war’s effects have created in the United States. This move has pushed the United States closer to war. All of this comes in the wake of the crucial upcoming 2024 presidential election.
Almost 50 House Democrats snubbed President Joe Biden's move to send cluster munitions to Ukraine by voting for Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-GA) House Amendment 243 to the National Defense Authorization Act, which aimed to prohibit the transfer or sale of cluster munitions to Ukraine. Although the amendment failed in a 147-276 vote, the fact that 49 Democrats and 98 Republicans broke from their colleagues to vote for the amendment is an important development.
The bipartisan effort against the White House's decision created an unexpected alliance between the far-left "Squad" and members of the far-right Freedom Caucus such as Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO). The lack of a clear consensus in both parties around a major policy issue such as this one is rare.
Ukraine’s potential membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has also caused debate. When Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) recently tweeted, "I will be working with Republicans and Democrats in the Senate to pass a resolution urging the admission of Ukraine into NATO," he was met with sharp criticism from Greene, who called his position "madness," and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who responded, "Absolutely not".
Other prominent conservatives, such as GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA Charlie Kirk, termed it "shameful" and called Graham a "warmonger." This is in response to dire implications from Graham's proposal, since according to NATO's Mutual Defense Clause i.e. Article 5 of the treaty, an armed attack against one member state is perceived to be an attack on all members, calling for a collective response against the perpetrator...
The Biden administration’s decision to send cluster munitions to Ukraine has created a policy fight at home, deepening the political mess that the war’s effects have created in the United States. This move has pushed the United States closer to war. All of this comes in the wake of the crucial upcoming 2024 presidential election.
Almost 50 House Democrats snubbed President Joe Biden's move to send cluster munitions to Ukraine by voting for Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-GA) House Amendment 243 to the National Defense Authorization Act, which aimed to prohibit the transfer or sale of cluster munitions to Ukraine. Although the amendment failed in a 147-276 vote, the fact that 49 Democrats and 98 Republicans broke from their colleagues to vote for the amendment is an important development.
The bipartisan effort against the White House's decision created an unexpected alliance between the far-left "Squad" and members of the far-right Freedom Caucus such as Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO). The lack of a clear consensus in both parties around a major policy issue such as this one is rare.
Ukraine’s potential membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has also caused debate. When Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) recently tweeted, "I will be working with Republicans and Democrats in the Senate to pass a resolution urging the admission of Ukraine into NATO," he was met with sharp criticism from Greene, who called his position "madness," and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who responded, "Absolutely not".
Other prominent conservatives, such as GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA Charlie Kirk, termed it "shameful" and called Graham a "warmonger." This is in response to dire implications from Graham's proposal, since according to NATO's Mutual Defense Clause i.e. Article 5 of the treaty, an armed attack against one member state is perceived to be an attack on all members, calling for a collective response against the perpetrator...
Senate votes down measure to rein in NATO war-making authority
The Senate on Wednesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have clarified that Article 5 of the NATO treaty does not obviate the need for Congress to declare war.
Article 5 holds that an attack on any NATO member must be treated as an attack on the whole alliance, as part of the collective defense commitment.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced the measure as NATO membership for Ukraine is being discussed while the country is at war with nuclear-armed Russia.
The final vote was 83 to 16.
The Senate on Wednesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have clarified that Article 5 of the NATO treaty does not obviate the need for Congress to declare war.
Article 5 holds that an attack on any NATO member must be treated as an attack on the whole alliance, as part of the collective defense commitment.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced the measure as NATO membership for Ukraine is being discussed while the country is at war with nuclear-armed Russia.
The final vote was 83 to 16.
With eyes on Trump, Senate votes to make NATO withdrawal harder
WASHINGTON ― The Senate on Wednesday passed a provision to the annual defense bill that would make it more difficult for a U.S. president to withdraw from NATO, a precautionary measure against former President Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House.
The bipartisan amendment to the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act would not allow the president to withdraw from NATO without congressional approval, requiring two-thirds of senators to vote for withdrawal. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., introduced the amendment alongside Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla, which senators adopted in a 65-28 vote.
......
Additionally, the Senate voted down 39-60 an amendment from Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, that would have required the Pentagon to change the way it calculates the cost of weapons sent to other countries under presidential drawdown authority — the mechanism President Joe Biden has used to arm Ukraine from U.S. stockpiles.
Hawley and Vance introduced their amendment after the Pentagon announced last month an accounting error overestimated the cost of weapons it has sent to Ukraine. The error means the Biden administration had more cash on hand than it previously thought to send Ukraine weapons under the authority.
The Hawley-Vance amendment would have required the Pentagon to determine the acquisition and modification costs of weapons sent under presidential authority in addition to the cost of replacing those items. It would have then required the Pentagon to use whichever value is greater to determine the drawdown cost.
“The accurate cost of equipment that we send to Ukraine is how much it costs to replace it for the American taxpayer; it’s not what it originally cost minus some measure of depreciation,” Vance told Defense News ahead of the vote. “It’s important to have an accurate accounting of what we’re spending because how do we compare ourselves against Europe and how we’re carrying the relative burden within NATO?”
WASHINGTON ― The Senate on Wednesday passed a provision to the annual defense bill that would make it more difficult for a U.S. president to withdraw from NATO, a precautionary measure against former President Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House.
The bipartisan amendment to the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act would not allow the president to withdraw from NATO without congressional approval, requiring two-thirds of senators to vote for withdrawal. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., introduced the amendment alongside Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla, which senators adopted in a 65-28 vote.
......
Additionally, the Senate voted down 39-60 an amendment from Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, that would have required the Pentagon to change the way it calculates the cost of weapons sent to other countries under presidential drawdown authority — the mechanism President Joe Biden has used to arm Ukraine from U.S. stockpiles.
Hawley and Vance introduced their amendment after the Pentagon announced last month an accounting error overestimated the cost of weapons it has sent to Ukraine. The error means the Biden administration had more cash on hand than it previously thought to send Ukraine weapons under the authority.
The Hawley-Vance amendment would have required the Pentagon to determine the acquisition and modification costs of weapons sent under presidential authority in addition to the cost of replacing those items. It would have then required the Pentagon to use whichever value is greater to determine the drawdown cost.
“The accurate cost of equipment that we send to Ukraine is how much it costs to replace it for the American taxpayer; it’s not what it originally cost minus some measure of depreciation,” Vance told Defense News ahead of the vote. “It’s important to have an accurate accounting of what we’re spending because how do we compare ourselves against Europe and how we’re carrying the relative burden within NATO?”
FBI told Twitter Hunter Biden laptop was real on day of Post scoop, official says
WASHINGTON — A senior FBI official told Twitter that Hunter Biden’s laptop was legitimate on the same day The Post published the first article in its bombshell reporting series on documents linking President Biden to his son’s foreign business deals, according to deposition testimony released Thursday by the House Judiciary Committee.
That confirmation was not shared with voters ahead of the 2020 election as dozens of former intelligence officials and then-presidential candidate Joe Biden falsely suggested that incriminating documents were Russian disinformation.
“Somebody from Twitter essentially asked whether the laptop was real. And one of the FBI folks who was on the call did confirm that, ‘yes, it was,’ before another participant jumped in and said, ‘no further comment,'” Laura Dehmlow, section chief of the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force, recollected in a closed-door deposition Monday, according to a release from the Republican-led committee.
The FBI’s non-public verification of the laptop occurred on Oct. 14, 2020, hours after The Post published a story detailing how an email showed Joe Biden met while vice president with an executive at Ukrainian gas company Burisma Holdings — contradicting his claims that he “never” discussed foreign business dealings with his relatives.
......
Twitter banned distribution of The Post’s initial article for two days for potentially violating its hacked materials policy — despite no evidence the material was hacked and transparency in The Post’s reporting about how the laptop was acquired from a Delaware repairman after it was legally abandoned by Hunter.
WASHINGTON — A senior FBI official told Twitter that Hunter Biden’s laptop was legitimate on the same day The Post published the first article in its bombshell reporting series on documents linking President Biden to his son’s foreign business deals, according to deposition testimony released Thursday by the House Judiciary Committee.
That confirmation was not shared with voters ahead of the 2020 election as dozens of former intelligence officials and then-presidential candidate Joe Biden falsely suggested that incriminating documents were Russian disinformation.
“Somebody from Twitter essentially asked whether the laptop was real. And one of the FBI folks who was on the call did confirm that, ‘yes, it was,’ before another participant jumped in and said, ‘no further comment,'” Laura Dehmlow, section chief of the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force, recollected in a closed-door deposition Monday, according to a release from the Republican-led committee.
The FBI’s non-public verification of the laptop occurred on Oct. 14, 2020, hours after The Post published a story detailing how an email showed Joe Biden met while vice president with an executive at Ukrainian gas company Burisma Holdings — contradicting his claims that he “never” discussed foreign business dealings with his relatives.
......
Twitter banned distribution of The Post’s initial article for two days for potentially violating its hacked materials policy — despite no evidence the material was hacked and transparency in The Post’s reporting about how the laptop was acquired from a Delaware repairman after it was legally abandoned by Hunter.
A systematic review of the strength of evidence for the most commonly recommended happiness strategies in mainstream media
Dunigan Folk & Elizabeth Dunn
Nature Human Behaviour (2023)
Abstract
We conducted a systematic review of the evidence underlying some of the most widely recommended strategies for increasing happiness. By coding media articles on happiness, we first identified the five most commonly recommended strategies: expressing gratitude, enhancing sociability, exercising, practising mindfulness/meditation and increasing nature exposure. Next, we conducted a systematic search of the published scientific literature. We identified well-powered, pre-registered experiments testing the effects of these strategies on any aspect of subjective wellbeing (that is, positive affect, negative affect and life satisfaction) in non-clinical samples. A total of 57 studies were included. Our review suggests that a strong scientific foundation is lacking for some of the most commonly recommended happiness strategies. As the effectiveness of these strategies remains an open question, there is an urgent need for well-powered, pre-registered studies investigating strategies for promoting happiness.
Dunigan Folk & Elizabeth Dunn
Nature Human Behaviour (2023)
Abstract
We conducted a systematic review of the evidence underlying some of the most widely recommended strategies for increasing happiness. By coding media articles on happiness, we first identified the five most commonly recommended strategies: expressing gratitude, enhancing sociability, exercising, practising mindfulness/meditation and increasing nature exposure. Next, we conducted a systematic search of the published scientific literature. We identified well-powered, pre-registered experiments testing the effects of these strategies on any aspect of subjective wellbeing (that is, positive affect, negative affect and life satisfaction) in non-clinical samples. A total of 57 studies were included. Our review suggests that a strong scientific foundation is lacking for some of the most commonly recommended happiness strategies. As the effectiveness of these strategies remains an open question, there is an urgent need for well-powered, pre-registered studies investigating strategies for promoting happiness.
The Ukraine War Wouldn’t Have Surprised Richard Nixon
When Bill Clinton eulogized Richard Nixon on April 27, 1994, he spoke of the former president’s “wise counsel, especially with regard to Russia . . . based on our last phone conversation and the letter he wrote me just a month ago.” For nearly 30 years, the content of that letter remained a secret. Thanks to its declassification this week through Mr. Clinton’s presidential library, it is hidden no longer.
......
Nixon warned that Boris Yeltsin’s brief experiment with democracy was already over. “As one of Yeltsin’s first supporters in this country and as one who continues to admire him for his leadership in the past, I have reluctantly concluded that his situation has rapidly deteriorated since the elections in December, and that the days of his unquestioned leadership of Russia are numbered,” Nixon wrote to Mr. Clinton. “His drinking bouts are longer and his periods of depression are more frequent. Most troublesome, he can no longer deliver on his commitments to you and other Western leaders in an increasingly anti-American environment in the Duma and in the country.”
Nixon also said that Moscow’s relationship with Kyiv would worsen. Though the dynamic had improved during Yeltsin’s tenure, the situation in Ukraine was “highly explosive.” “If it is allowed to get out of control,” Nixon warned, “it will make Bosnia look like a PTA garden party.”
The former president didn’t think American diplomats were taking the issue seriously enough. “Because of the importance of Ukraine, I reluctantly urge that you immediately strengthen our diplomatic representation in Kiev,” he wrote. It was equally important that the U.S. anticipate Yeltsin’s potential successor. “Bush made a mistake in sticking too long to Gorbachev because of his close personal relationship. You must avoid making that same mistake in your very good personal relationship with Yeltsin.”
It wasn’t clear who that successor might be. “There is still no one who is in Yeltsin’s class as a potential leader in Russia,” Nixon wrote. “The Russians are serious people. One of the reasons Khrushchev was put on the shelf back in 1964 is that the proud Russians became ashamed of his crude antics at the U.N. and in other international forums.” In other words, if the U.S. didn’t act promptly to cultivate Yeltsin’s successor, Russia could again shift to a more nationalist, hard-line leader, as when Leonid Brezhnev succeeded Khrushchev.
When Bill Clinton eulogized Richard Nixon on April 27, 1994, he spoke of the former president’s “wise counsel, especially with regard to Russia . . . based on our last phone conversation and the letter he wrote me just a month ago.” For nearly 30 years, the content of that letter remained a secret. Thanks to its declassification this week through Mr. Clinton’s presidential library, it is hidden no longer.
......
Nixon warned that Boris Yeltsin’s brief experiment with democracy was already over. “As one of Yeltsin’s first supporters in this country and as one who continues to admire him for his leadership in the past, I have reluctantly concluded that his situation has rapidly deteriorated since the elections in December, and that the days of his unquestioned leadership of Russia are numbered,” Nixon wrote to Mr. Clinton. “His drinking bouts are longer and his periods of depression are more frequent. Most troublesome, he can no longer deliver on his commitments to you and other Western leaders in an increasingly anti-American environment in the Duma and in the country.”
Nixon also said that Moscow’s relationship with Kyiv would worsen. Though the dynamic had improved during Yeltsin’s tenure, the situation in Ukraine was “highly explosive.” “If it is allowed to get out of control,” Nixon warned, “it will make Bosnia look like a PTA garden party.”
The former president didn’t think American diplomats were taking the issue seriously enough. “Because of the importance of Ukraine, I reluctantly urge that you immediately strengthen our diplomatic representation in Kiev,” he wrote. It was equally important that the U.S. anticipate Yeltsin’s potential successor. “Bush made a mistake in sticking too long to Gorbachev because of his close personal relationship. You must avoid making that same mistake in your very good personal relationship with Yeltsin.”
It wasn’t clear who that successor might be. “There is still no one who is in Yeltsin’s class as a potential leader in Russia,” Nixon wrote. “The Russians are serious people. One of the reasons Khrushchev was put on the shelf back in 1964 is that the proud Russians became ashamed of his crude antics at the U.N. and in other international forums.” In other words, if the U.S. didn’t act promptly to cultivate Yeltsin’s successor, Russia could again shift to a more nationalist, hard-line leader, as when Leonid Brezhnev succeeded Khrushchev.
Fight Russia? Britain has just 40 tanks and around a dozen frigates and destroyers ready to go war - the lowest figures in modern times
Britain has just 40 tanks and around a dozen frigates and destroyers ready to go to war, it has emerged.
The figures are the lowest in modern times and MPs suggest they show the UK would struggle to fight a war against Russia.
Vladimir Putin's army is estimated to have lost over 2,000 tanks in the conflict in Ukraine but has as many in reserve.
Yesterday, the head of Britain's Armed Forces admitted he was not 'happy' about the situation and improvements in Army and Royal Navy stocks were required.
But Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS), insisted the UK was a major Nato contributor.
At the Commons defence committee yesterday, his claim that Britain could provide a division – around 17,500 fully equipped troops accompanied by vehicles and artillery – to the alliance was dismissed as 'a fantasy'.
The Army is at its smallest since Napoleonic times because of shortages of tanks and armoured vehicles.
Last night Mark Francois MP told the Mail: 'It was clear from the CDS's evidence that Armed Forces would currently struggle to fight a war with Russia...
'It is a fantasy to suggest we could provide a warfighting division to Nato.'
On paper, the UK has around 200. But of these, only 40 are ready to go to war, it emerged yesterday.
Britain has just 40 tanks and around a dozen frigates and destroyers ready to go to war, it has emerged.
The figures are the lowest in modern times and MPs suggest they show the UK would struggle to fight a war against Russia.
Vladimir Putin's army is estimated to have lost over 2,000 tanks in the conflict in Ukraine but has as many in reserve.
Yesterday, the head of Britain's Armed Forces admitted he was not 'happy' about the situation and improvements in Army and Royal Navy stocks were required.
But Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS), insisted the UK was a major Nato contributor.
At the Commons defence committee yesterday, his claim that Britain could provide a division – around 17,500 fully equipped troops accompanied by vehicles and artillery – to the alliance was dismissed as 'a fantasy'.
The Army is at its smallest since Napoleonic times because of shortages of tanks and armoured vehicles.
Last night Mark Francois MP told the Mail: 'It was clear from the CDS's evidence that Armed Forces would currently struggle to fight a war with Russia...
'It is a fantasy to suggest we could provide a warfighting division to Nato.'
On paper, the UK has around 200. But of these, only 40 are ready to go to war, it emerged yesterday.
UK weapons stocks ‘dangerously low’
Britain must step up arms production or risk “prejudicing our own defence”, because stocks of munitions have run dangerously low during the war in Ukraine, the former secretary general of Nato has said.
George Robertson, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, said Russia was “working its factories round the clock” to replace the weapons and ammunition spent in the conflict and warned: “We don’t seem to be doing it at the same pace.”
He was speaking after Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, was criticised for retorting “I’m not Amazon”, the online retail giant, when he was presented with a wishlist of weapons by Ukrainian officials.
Robertson said he sympathised with Wallace and warned that a £5 billion investment in replenishing ammunition and upgrading nuclear capabilities, announced by the prime minister in March, may be insufficient to meet the UK’s strategic needs.
“If you talk to senior military people, even those in office at the moment, some will be quite categoric that we are running dangerously low on stocks of ammunition,” he said.
“If stocks go down and are not reconstituted then clearly the defence profile we have in this country is reduced. Russia is working its factories round the clock in order to reconstitute what it can — [in some areas] they need parts from the West, but they are working to replace the weaponry they are losing.
“We don’t seem to be doing it at the same pace as we are giving the arms away. I am concerned and so indeed are the military. They are gravely concerned that we may be prejudicing our own defence, by not refreshing the stocks that we have.”
Britain must step up arms production or risk “prejudicing our own defence”, because stocks of munitions have run dangerously low during the war in Ukraine, the former secretary general of Nato has said.
George Robertson, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, said Russia was “working its factories round the clock” to replace the weapons and ammunition spent in the conflict and warned: “We don’t seem to be doing it at the same pace.”
He was speaking after Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, was criticised for retorting “I’m not Amazon”, the online retail giant, when he was presented with a wishlist of weapons by Ukrainian officials.
Robertson said he sympathised with Wallace and warned that a £5 billion investment in replenishing ammunition and upgrading nuclear capabilities, announced by the prime minister in March, may be insufficient to meet the UK’s strategic needs.
“If you talk to senior military people, even those in office at the moment, some will be quite categoric that we are running dangerously low on stocks of ammunition,” he said.
“If stocks go down and are not reconstituted then clearly the defence profile we have in this country is reduced. Russia is working its factories round the clock in order to reconstitute what it can — [in some areas] they need parts from the West, but they are working to replace the weaponry they are losing.
“We don’t seem to be doing it at the same pace as we are giving the arms away. I am concerned and so indeed are the military. They are gravely concerned that we may be prejudicing our own defence, by not refreshing the stocks that we have.”
Reviving the Arsenal of Democracy: Steps for Surging Defense Industrial Capacity
...It is no longer a question of whether the U.S. industrial base is prepared to rapidly surge production in the case of a direct conflict with a capable adversary—it is clear that it is not, and that is because the necessary investments have not yet been made to make it so.
In World War II, the United States served as the “Arsenal of Democracy”—a term President Franklin D. Roosevelt used to refer to the key industrial role U.S. industry played in the Allied war effort—but it took more than five years for the industrial base to fully gear up for the war effort.[1] If the United States were to be directly engaged in conflict, the time it could take to surge production represents a serious vulnerability. Why is surging production so complicated, and why would it take so long?
Even before this conflict, concerns about the shallow depth of U.S. precision weapon inventories, the preferred weapons of defense planning scenarios, loomed in the Pentagon and Congress. This vulnerability is just now being elevated by policymakers. Language in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) authorizes an increase in the acquisition of new munitions, for example, including with multiyear buying authorities. Reaching the programmed number may take years to finish at current production rates , so discussions are increasingly about the need to surge production levels as a solution, and the U.S. Army is taking steps to support this. However, years of underinvestment mean that the industrial base may not be sufficient to both refill and increase stocks while meeting demands from allies in the timeframe that can have a warfighting impact at the speed of relevance. Furthermore, the commercial defense industrial base itself faces an incentive structure that motivates a least-cost production model at the expense of capacity and delivery speed, which means that manufacturing slack has been eliminated to the extent possible. While this incentive structure is designed to ensure that the Department of Defense (DOD) can invest in as broad a range of capabilities as possible and to carefully allocate taxpayer funds, it has reduced the ability of the defense industrial base to surge.
Without a formal requirement with clear targets for higher sustained volumes—and with issued contracts—defense contractors have not risked investing in the production capacity that is now needed. This issue is pervasive across the defense manufacturing ecosystem, not just for munitions...
...It is no longer a question of whether the U.S. industrial base is prepared to rapidly surge production in the case of a direct conflict with a capable adversary—it is clear that it is not, and that is because the necessary investments have not yet been made to make it so.
In World War II, the United States served as the “Arsenal of Democracy”—a term President Franklin D. Roosevelt used to refer to the key industrial role U.S. industry played in the Allied war effort—but it took more than five years for the industrial base to fully gear up for the war effort.[1] If the United States were to be directly engaged in conflict, the time it could take to surge production represents a serious vulnerability. Why is surging production so complicated, and why would it take so long?
Even before this conflict, concerns about the shallow depth of U.S. precision weapon inventories, the preferred weapons of defense planning scenarios, loomed in the Pentagon and Congress. This vulnerability is just now being elevated by policymakers. Language in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) authorizes an increase in the acquisition of new munitions, for example, including with multiyear buying authorities. Reaching the programmed number may take years to finish at current production rates , so discussions are increasingly about the need to surge production levels as a solution, and the U.S. Army is taking steps to support this. However, years of underinvestment mean that the industrial base may not be sufficient to both refill and increase stocks while meeting demands from allies in the timeframe that can have a warfighting impact at the speed of relevance. Furthermore, the commercial defense industrial base itself faces an incentive structure that motivates a least-cost production model at the expense of capacity and delivery speed, which means that manufacturing slack has been eliminated to the extent possible. While this incentive structure is designed to ensure that the Department of Defense (DOD) can invest in as broad a range of capabilities as possible and to carefully allocate taxpayer funds, it has reduced the ability of the defense industrial base to surge.
Without a formal requirement with clear targets for higher sustained volumes—and with issued contracts—defense contractors have not risked investing in the production capacity that is now needed. This issue is pervasive across the defense manufacturing ecosystem, not just for munitions...
Ukraine aims to sap Russia’s defenses, as U.S. urges a decisive breakthrough
A U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share the American assessment of the operation, said the United States and other nations had trained Ukrainian troops on integrated offensive maneuvers and provided mine-clearing equipment including rollers and rocket-fired charges.
“Applying all those capabilities in a way that enables them to breach those obstacles, but do it quickly, is paramount,” the official said...
......
Western officials and analysts say Ukraine’s military has so far embraced an attrition-based approach aimed largely at creating vulnerabilities in Russian lines by firing artillery and missiles at command, transport and logistics sites at the rear of the Russian position, instead of conducting what Western military officials call “combined arms” operations that involve coordinated maneuvers by large groups of tanks, armored vehicles, infantry, engineers, artillery and, sometimes, air power.
Ukraine’s military leaders argue that, lacking air power, they must avoid unnecessary losses against an adversary with a far larger pool of recruits and weaponry. To preserve manpower, Ukraine has fielded just four of a dozen trained brigades in the current campaign.
“We cannot use meat-grinder tactics as the Russians do,” Oleksii Reznikov, Ukraine’s defense minister, said in an interview. “For us, the most precious thing is the lives and health of our soldiers. That is why our task is to achieve success at the front while protecting lives.”
A U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share the American assessment of the operation, said the United States and other nations had trained Ukrainian troops on integrated offensive maneuvers and provided mine-clearing equipment including rollers and rocket-fired charges.
“Applying all those capabilities in a way that enables them to breach those obstacles, but do it quickly, is paramount,” the official said...
......
Western officials and analysts say Ukraine’s military has so far embraced an attrition-based approach aimed largely at creating vulnerabilities in Russian lines by firing artillery and missiles at command, transport and logistics sites at the rear of the Russian position, instead of conducting what Western military officials call “combined arms” operations that involve coordinated maneuvers by large groups of tanks, armored vehicles, infantry, engineers, artillery and, sometimes, air power.
Ukraine’s military leaders argue that, lacking air power, they must avoid unnecessary losses against an adversary with a far larger pool of recruits and weaponry. To preserve manpower, Ukraine has fielded just four of a dozen trained brigades in the current campaign.
“We cannot use meat-grinder tactics as the Russians do,” Oleksii Reznikov, Ukraine’s defense minister, said in an interview. “For us, the most precious thing is the lives and health of our soldiers. That is why our task is to achieve success at the front while protecting lives.”
The Risks of Sanctions, the Tool America Loves to Use
Policymakers turn to sanctions so frequently — the United States accounts for 42 percent of sanctions imposed worldwide since 1950, according to Drexel University’s Global Sanctions Database — in part because they are seen as being low cost, especially compared with military action.
In reality, the costs are substantial. They are borne by banks, businesses, civilians and humanitarian groups, which shoulder the burden of putting them into effect, complying with them and mitigating their effects. Sanctions can also take a toll on vulnerable people — often poor and living under repressive governments, as academics are increasingly documenting.
Officials rarely factor in such costs. While sanctions are easy to impose — there are dozens of sanctions programs administered by multiple federal agencies — they are politically and bureaucratically difficult to lift, even when they no longer serve U.S. interests. What’s worse, sanctions also escape significant public scrutiny. Few officials are held responsible for whether a particular sanction is working as intended rather than needlessly harming innocent people or undermining foreign policy goals.
......
What is already known is that sanctions are most effective when they have realistic objectives and are paired with promises of relief if those objectives are met. Perhaps the best example is the 1986 law targeting apartheid-era South Africa, which laid out five conditions for sanctions relief, including the release of Nelson Mandela. Sanctions by the United States and other nations helped convince South Africa’s whites-only government that its policies mandating racial segregation were unsustainable.
Sanctions on Communist Poland in 1981 in response to the crushing of the Solidarity movement are another example of how this can work. The United States and its allies gradually lifted sanctions with the release of most imprisoned activists, helping usher in a new era of political freedom in Poland and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.
It’s notable that the sanctions against South Africa and Poland were aimed at bringing about free and fair elections, not regime change. Sanctions aimed at regime change often incentivize defiance, not reform. They have a terrible track record, as the cases of Cuba, Syria and Venezuela make clear.
In Venezuela, open-ended sanctions with sweeping ambition — to oust the dictator Nicolás Maduro — have so far achieved the opposite. After he dissolved the democratically elected National Assembly in 2017 and was declared the winner of a sham presidential election in 2018, the Trump administration imposed maximum-pressure sanctions on Venezuela’s state-owned oil company to cut off a crucial source of funds to the Maduro dictatorship.
While harsh individual sanctions against Mr. Maduro were necessary, the blacklisting of Venezuela’s oil sector has exacerbated a humanitarian crisis: As this editorial board warned, cutting off oil revenue deepened what was already the worst economic contraction in Latin America in decades...
......
For sanctions to incentivize change rather than merely punish actions in the past, the United States should be prepared to lift sanctions — even against odious actors — if the stated criteria are met.
Sanctions, as attractive as they are, rarely work without specific goals combined with criteria for sanctions to be lifted. That applies to current as well as future sanctions. Without goals and relief criteria, these measures — among the most severe in the U.S. foreign policy arsenal — risk working against American interests and principles in the long run.
Policymakers turn to sanctions so frequently — the United States accounts for 42 percent of sanctions imposed worldwide since 1950, according to Drexel University’s Global Sanctions Database — in part because they are seen as being low cost, especially compared with military action.
In reality, the costs are substantial. They are borne by banks, businesses, civilians and humanitarian groups, which shoulder the burden of putting them into effect, complying with them and mitigating their effects. Sanctions can also take a toll on vulnerable people — often poor and living under repressive governments, as academics are increasingly documenting.
Officials rarely factor in such costs. While sanctions are easy to impose — there are dozens of sanctions programs administered by multiple federal agencies — they are politically and bureaucratically difficult to lift, even when they no longer serve U.S. interests. What’s worse, sanctions also escape significant public scrutiny. Few officials are held responsible for whether a particular sanction is working as intended rather than needlessly harming innocent people or undermining foreign policy goals.
......
What is already known is that sanctions are most effective when they have realistic objectives and are paired with promises of relief if those objectives are met. Perhaps the best example is the 1986 law targeting apartheid-era South Africa, which laid out five conditions for sanctions relief, including the release of Nelson Mandela. Sanctions by the United States and other nations helped convince South Africa’s whites-only government that its policies mandating racial segregation were unsustainable.
Sanctions on Communist Poland in 1981 in response to the crushing of the Solidarity movement are another example of how this can work. The United States and its allies gradually lifted sanctions with the release of most imprisoned activists, helping usher in a new era of political freedom in Poland and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.
It’s notable that the sanctions against South Africa and Poland were aimed at bringing about free and fair elections, not regime change. Sanctions aimed at regime change often incentivize defiance, not reform. They have a terrible track record, as the cases of Cuba, Syria and Venezuela make clear.
In Venezuela, open-ended sanctions with sweeping ambition — to oust the dictator Nicolás Maduro — have so far achieved the opposite. After he dissolved the democratically elected National Assembly in 2017 and was declared the winner of a sham presidential election in 2018, the Trump administration imposed maximum-pressure sanctions on Venezuela’s state-owned oil company to cut off a crucial source of funds to the Maduro dictatorship.
While harsh individual sanctions against Mr. Maduro were necessary, the blacklisting of Venezuela’s oil sector has exacerbated a humanitarian crisis: As this editorial board warned, cutting off oil revenue deepened what was already the worst economic contraction in Latin America in decades...
......
For sanctions to incentivize change rather than merely punish actions in the past, the United States should be prepared to lift sanctions — even against odious actors — if the stated criteria are met.
Sanctions, as attractive as they are, rarely work without specific goals combined with criteria for sanctions to be lifted. That applies to current as well as future sanctions. Without goals and relief criteria, these measures — among the most severe in the U.S. foreign policy arsenal — risk working against American interests and principles in the long run.