
Aldous Huxley on facts…






The US/NATO/Ukraine/Russia controversy is not entirely new. We already saw the potential of serious trouble in 2014 when the US and European states interfered in the internal affairs of Ukraine and covertly/overtly colluded in the coup d’état against the democratically elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, because he was not playing the game assigned to him by the West. Of course, our media hailed the putsch as a “colour revolution” with all the trappings of democracy.
The 2021/22 crisis is a logical continuation of the expansionist policies that NATO has pursued since the demise of the Soviet Union, as numerous Professors of international law and international relations have long indicated — including Richard Falk, John Mearsheimer, Stephen Kinzer and Francis Boyle. NATO’s approach implements the US claim to have a “mission” to export its socio-economic model to other countries, notwithstanding the preferences of sovereign states and the self-determination of peoples.
Although the US and NATO narratives have been proven to be inaccurate and sometimes deliberately mendacious on numerous occasions, the fact is that a majority of citizens in the Western World uncritically believe what they are told. The “quality press” including the New York Times, Washington Post, The Times, Le Monde, El Pais, the NZZ and FAZ are all effective echo chambers of the Washington consensus and enthusiastically support the public relations and geopolitical propaganda offensive. I think that it can be said without fear of contradiction that the only war that NATO has ever won is the information war. A compliant and complicit corporate media has been successful in persuading millions of Americans and Europeans that the toxic narratives of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs are really true. We believe in the myth of the “Arab Spring” and “EuroMaidan”, but we never hear about the right of self-determination of peoples, including the Russians of Donetsk and Lugansk, and what could easily be called the “Crimean Spring”.
Often I ask myself how this is possible when we know that the US deliberately lied in earlier conflicts in order to make aggression appear as “defense”. We were lied to in connection with the “Gulf of Tonkin” incident, the alleged weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There is abundant evidence that the CIA and M15 have organized “false flag” events in the Middle East and elsewhere. Why is it that masses of educated people fail to take some distance and question more? I dare postulate the hypothesis that the best way to understand the NATO phenomenon is to see it as a secular religion. Then we are allowed to believe its implausible narratives, because we can take them on faith.

Two Christian leaders in Finland stood trial in Helsinki on Jan. 24 for publicly stating the Bible’s teachings on sex and marriage. Longtime Member of Parliament Paivi Rasanen and Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola defended in court their decision to write and publish, respectively, a pamphlet explaining Christian teachings about sex and marriage.
In the trial’s opening arguments, which will resume on Feb. 14, Finnish prosecutors described quotations from the Bible as “hate speech.” Finland’s top prosecutor’s office essentially put the Bible on trial, an unprecedented move for a secular court, said Paul Coleman, a human rights lawyer with Alliance Defending Freedom International who is assisting in the Finns’ legal defense and was present during Monday’s trial.
“The prosecutor began the day by trying to explain that this case was not about beliefs and the Bible. She then, and I’m not kidding, she then proceeded to quote Old Testament Bible verses,” Coleman said in a phone interview with The Federalist after the trial concluded for the day. “Trial attorneys, Finnish trial attorneys who have been in and out of court every day for years, said they didn’t think the Bible had ever been read out like that in a prosecution.”
Never before has a Finnish court had to decide whether quoting the Bible is a crime. Human rights observers consider this case an important marker for whether Western governments’ persecution of citizens for their speech and beliefs increases.
Musician Neil Young’s attempt to force Spotify to censor Joe Rogan’s podcast has failed miserably, with Young deleting the open letter he posted on his website.
The 70’s rocker tried to give Spotify an ultimatum that they had to remove Rogan or delete his music catalogue.
Young accused Spotify of “spreading fake information about vaccines” because Rogan dares to have in depth discussions with esteemed doctors who don’t blindly follow the COVID narrative.
“I am doing this because Spotify is spreading fake information about vaccines – potentially causing death to those who believe the disinformation being spread by them,” he wrote. “Please act on this immediately today and keep me informed of the time schedule.”
“I want you to let Spotify know immediately TODAY that I want all my music off their platform,” he added. “They can have Rogan or Young. Not both.”
While Young may have got some traction on Twitter from the usual crowd of COVID bedwetters and censorship freaks, his efforts have proven completely futile.
Indeed, Spotify is yet to even offer an official response to his public relations stunt.
The singer-songwriter appears to have already backed out of the ultimatum given that he deleted the open letter he had posted to his website.
“Young likely realized that he has no grounds to make the demands. Rogan has an exclusive deal with Spotify and Young sold 50% of the rights to his music to a British investment company a year ago,” writes Christina Maas.
Neil Young’s public hissy fit merely appears to have been a play for attention given that he, like Howard Stern, who also routinely attacks Rogan, is becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Specifically, Rogan enjoys an average of over 11 million listeners per episode, with some hitting as high as 40 million, while Young attracts 6 million listeners per month in comparison.

You must be logged in to post a comment.