Morning music

On this day a year ago

Seen somewhere or other…

“At church this morning people who never come to church, arrived with their newly delivered pet Ukrainian refugees in tow. Actual real ones surprisingly, two white women.

Far more than is normal, the church reeked of sanctimony and confected compassion as a result. As you imagine, the prayers of intercession were unctuous and insufferable.

The two women reminded me of the Ukrainian girl in Derry girls; Miserable, taciturn, unimpressed, ungrateful. 

However, God, who was clearly fed up with this appalling show of cod virtue, intervened. At coffee afterwards one of the Ukrainians said that the war need never have started and that Zelensky was a cocaine addict and a crook. The second Ukrainian piped up and offered that the war was caused by the E.U. and that Zelensky should have surrendered on day one. I have never seen such crestfallen faces since the Brexit vote was announced. 

Asked how they had escaped they said without hesitation; “The Russians got us out”.

To add insult to injury, a few more MSM myths were put to sleep and a sombre and deflated congregation was left somewhat bereft. Thanks be to God: It was wonderful to behold his works at hand.”

Provenance unknown, but it has the ring of truth.

I have met relatively few Ukrainians, but a few were of the sort mentioned. Others, however, were very different.

An old couple on a train in south-east Poland in December 1988, the husband of the couple with several gold teeth, and both talking in broken Russian at me, beaming happily through their fairly obvious poverty.

Another was a charming girl, Lena, who worked as a receptionist at the British Embassy in Almaty (Kazakhstan), where I lived in 1996-1997 (until the late 1990s, Kazakhstan had many minority populations, the result of deportations during the time of Stalin).

The number two man at the Embassy, the Second Secretary (the Ambassador was also the First Secretary), a Basil Fawlty lookalike, had (I heard) proposed marriage to that receptionist, but despite having gone to Surrey (I think Surrey; maybe Hampshire) with him to meet his parents, she declined his offer in the end.

After my time in Almaty was over, I heard that that young woman had died, still in her mid or late twenties, of cancer. Very sad. As for the said Second Secretary of the British Embassy, he returned to London and was, not very long after that, in the late 1990s, appointed H.M. Ambassador to Rwanda.

I enjoyed reading that piece above.

Tweets seen

Is there really no way to remove that creature of evil from office?…

Thinking the unthinkable

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/25/us-diplomats-to-return-to-ukraine-and-fresh-military-aid-unveiled-after-blinken-visit

We see now that the USA (meaning NWO/ZOG) has been continuing with its post-Soviet strategy of weakening Russia to the point that Russia can never again be regarded as a “superpower”, and beyond that weakness to a point where the USA is the only superpower and can dictate terms in every area to Russia (and the rest of the world).

That State Department paper, first leaked in the 1990s, is clearly still the basis, no longer hidden, of US policy in the foreign affairs area.

Russia has one obvious trump card, as had the Soviet Union or, as British diplomats used to call it, “Upper Volta with rockets“.

However shambolic the Soviet Union was in some respects, no-one doubted that most of its long-range missile and inter-continental ballistic missiles [ICBMs] worked. They could be launched, they might be launched and, if they were, most would reach their targets.

The same is true of the unsatisfactory, ideology-deficient Russia of 2022.

Forget the froth about Jew oligarchs’ mega-yachts and travel restrictions, forget the Moscow middle classes losing their jobs and lifestyles. All that scarcely touches deep Russia. In fact, the economic sanctions may actually help the poorer Russians, in that, if Russia finds it hard to export, then whatever is produced will cost less on the domestic market. I mean the things the bulk of Russians need on an everyday basis, such as food, construction materials etc.

Russia still has those missiles. They still work, most of them, as has been seen in Ukraine, where various kinds of missiles have been used (mostly launched from Russia or from under the surface of the sea). They have reached their targets and have detonated, most of them.

The USA, UK and general Western leaderships are determined (under the direction of the secret ruling circles of NWO/ZOG) to keep funnelling arms to the Kiev regime. Britain (Boris-idiot) is even going to send Challenger tanks, we read in the msm.

It seems that the NWO/ZOG rulers of the UK, USA etc are willing to do anything, whatever it takes, not even only to defend the Jew-Zionist regime in Kiev, but also to bleed Russia dry as it attempts to continue to prosecute this invasion and/or war.

There seems to be an assumption that Russia will either give up, returning to pre-2022 boundaries, or will continue with the war of attrition until —if it succeeds— it controls Ukraine south of Kiev, east of the Dnieper and, in the south, to a line maybe 100 miles north of the Black Sea and Sea of Azov.

The latter situation was, and remains, my assumption too: Russian occupation of eastern and southern Ukraine, eventually leading to occupation of both Kiev and Odessa.

However, what if, under increasing pressure from the Western allies (mainly USA and UK), Russia, meaning Putin, feels that it cannot achieve those limited objectives? What if Russian forces are, or are in danger of, truly “losing” this war, of being pushed back behind Russia’s pre-2022, 2014, or even 2012 frontiers? What if that were to happen, and the Ukrainian proxies were to continue to build up their strength with Western help, and on a massive scale? Moscow is only 500 miles from Kiev, and only 300 miles from Ukrainian territory at the nearest point.

At present, Putin ‘s forces are increasing the damage to Ukraine’s infrastructure and logistical capability, using more powerful but still conventional (non-nuclear) weapons. There will surely be a surge in Russian troop numbers and deployments as well. Those, together, might break the Kiev regime. If not, there would still remain the ghastly possibility of the use of tactical or battlefield nuclear weapons.

How far any tactical use of nuclear weapons could go before the war spilled over into Poland, a NATO power, is uncertain. Radioactivity might cross borders, but even without that, could this war be contained within the borders of Ukraine? I do not know.

How far can Russia be pushed? How far can NATO accept Russian advances or gains before NATO gets involved directly? I do not know.

Beyond even that horrific possibility, what if Putin and those with actual command and control decide to go for broke, to change the game completely, to change the international order completely, and perhaps to emerge stronger but 200 years later? What if the “big red button” (so to speak) is pushed?

The fact is that Russia has 6,200 nuclear weapons (we are told), most of them missiles, most of them said to be operational. Even if we discount that by half or three-quarters, and leave a notional 1,500 long-range and inter-continental missiles available, that gives the Russian leadership a very big stick.

Should Russia launch a nuclear strike on the USA and UK using say 500 missiles (after all Russia’s eagle looks both ways, and China is still there), and even if “only” 10% of such missiles detonate on target, that is still, say, 50 missiles, that means Goodbye Britain, almost entirely, even if only 10 missiles hit.

It also means that the USA might suffer, at least, say 40 hits on major installations and cities.

Let’s say that the top 10 cities —by population or other significance— are wiped out: Washington DC, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, maybe Dallas, San Francisco, San Diego. Also, 30 other strikes: maybe Silicon Valley, San Fernando Valley, Imperial Valley (which produces a very high percentage of the US’s fruits and vegetables), Seattle, Palo Alto, and other hi-tech centres.

On the more obviously military and naval side, there might be strikes on CIA headquarters, Langley (near Washington DC), on major naval ports, on command and control centres, on Fort Bragg, Fort Meade, Fort Dietrich.

Could American society survive such an attack? I think not, looking at the sluggish response to, say, Hurricane Katrina etc. The USA would only recover after 100-200 years.

Russia’s major cities and centres of military power would also be hit and destroyed in such a ghastly scenario, but the core Russian people, out in the country, would still be there, probably, living on a basic level.

This is a path down which the world should not go. The West should not have started to re-arm the Kiev regime; it should certainly not continue to build up the power of the Zelensky regime. The main sufferers are the Ukrainian civilians and their companion animals. The West should have let Russia take the south and east, in effect.

There seems to be the belief in the Western power-circles that Putin would not launch a strategic nuclear attack because Russia would also suffer. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction. Very logical. Trouble is, people are not always logical. As a matter of fact, is it logical in the first place? One side might just say “yes we both get hit, but 200 years down the line, we will be pre-eminent, and the other side not“…

MAD, but not as we know it, if you like.

See also: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/01/26/the-tide-is-coming-in-reflections-on-the-possible-end-of-our-present-civilization-and-what-might-follow/.

The West and Russia both still have the chance to think and consider where this is all going.

Late thought

” [After the end of the American Civil War, Robert E.] Lee also expressed his “willingness that blacks should be educated, and … that it would be better for the blacks and for the whites.” Lee forthrightly opposed allowing blacks to vote: “My own opinion is that, at this time, they [black Southerners] cannot vote intelligently, and that giving them the [vote] would lead to a great deal of demagogism, and lead to embarrassments in various ways.” [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee].

I suppose that most of my blog readers imagine that I oppose blacks, or the majority of blacks, voting in the UK. They are not wrong if that is their guess, but where my blog readers may be surprised is that I regard the majority of white English people presently around no differently. They too rarely have the education, life experience, or native intelligence to make an informed choice.

Of course, the fact that the (pseudo-democratic) System puts up mainly very inferior persons as candidates for political office makes the situation worse.

It is not solely a question of education, nor even intelligence, but also of general level of soul, and of to what extent their mentalities have been poisoned by a corrupt msm.

Frankly, the general level of white English people in the UK now is little better than that of the “blacks and browns” living here.

Late tweets seen

…and never will contribute (or be able to, even if they ever wanted to)…