Biden announces $800M in aid for Ukraine hours after Zelenskyy’s plea to Congress

President Biden today announced an additional $800 million in security assistance to Ukraine, bringing the total U.S. security assistance committed to Ukraine to $1 billion in just the past week, and a total of $2 billion since the start of the Biden Administration. The assistance will take the form of direct transfers of equipment from the Department of Defense to the Ukrainian military to help them defend their country against Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified invasion.

The new $800 million assistance package includes:

  • 800 Stinger anti-aircraft systems;
  • 2,000 Javelin, 1,000 light anti-armor weapons, and 6,000 AT-4 anti-armor systems;
  • 100 Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems;
  • 100 grenade launchers, 5,000 rifles, 1,000 pistols, 400 machine guns, and 400 shotguns;
  • Over 20 million rounds of small arms ammunition and grenade launcher and mortar rounds;
  • 25,000 sets of body armor; and
  • 25,000 helmets.

In addition to the weapons listed above, previous United States assistance committed to Ukraine includes:

  • Over 600 Stinger anti-aircraft systems;
  • Approximately 2,600 Javelin anti-armor systems;
  • Five Mi-17 helicopters;
  • Three patrol boats;
  • Four counter-artillery and counter-unmanned aerial system tracking radars;
  • Four counter-mortar radar systems;
  • 200 grenade launchers and ammunition;
  • 200 shotguns and 200 machine guns;
  • Nearly 40 million rounds of small arms ammunition and over 1 million grenade, mortar, and artillery rounds;
  • 70 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs) and other vehicles;
  • Secure communications, electronic warfare detection systems, body armor, helmets, and other tactical gear;
  • Military medical equipment to support treatment and combat evacuation;
  • Explosive ordnance disposal and demining equipment; and
  • Satellite imagery and analysis capability.

Keep reading

Ukraine Approves Law Criminalizing Dissent, Punishes Pro-Russia Sentiment with Up to 15 Years in Prison

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has passed a law punishing pro-Russian dissent with up to 15 years in prison.

Zelensky signed a decree claiming that “cooperation with the aggressor state,” which includes pro-Russian statements, could result in up to 15 years in prison.

First Deputy Parliament Speaker Oleksandr Kornienko even wants over 20 “unpatriotic” members of Parliament who have been forced to flee the country jailed for having pro-Russian views.

Keep reading

Ukrainian TV Host Calls For Genocide of Russian Children

Ukrainian TV host Fahruddin Sharafmal took to the airwaves to demand the genocide of Russian children, quoting top Nazi Adolf Eichmann as he called for “killing children.”

Yes, really.

Sharafmal uttered the vile comments during a segment on the Channel 24 news station.

“I know that as a journalist, I have to be objective, I have to be balanced, in order to report information to you with a cold heart, but to tell you the truth, it’s very hard to hold on now, especially at a time like this, and since we are called Nazis, fascists, and so on in Russia — I will allow myself to quote Adolf Eichmann, who said that in order to destroy a nation, you must destroy, first of all, children. Because if you kill their parents, the children will grow up and take revenge. By killing children — they will never grow up and the nation will disappear,” Sharafmal said.

He then went on to assert that he would personally kill Russian children.

Keep reading

YouTube Flags Tulsi Gabbard’s Criticism of “War Machine” as “Offensive” Content

YouTube flagged a Fox News interview in which former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard said war in Ukraine was good for the military industrial complex as “offensive” content.

Yes, really.

Apparently, upsetting war profiteering defense contractors is now grounds for censorship.

During the interview, host Laura Ingraham asked Gabbard why people were still demanding no fly zones, something that would likely cause World War III, when President Zelensky was “stepping back from his earlier NATO wishes and even demands?”

Gabbard responded by pointing out that Zelensky has said he’s willing to negotiate with Putin and “set this NATO membership thing aside.”

According to YouTube, such advocacy for peace is borderline content and needs to be hidden behind a warning screen. The video is also age-restricted.

Keep reading

Firefox removes Yandex search, will auto-switch affected users to Google

Mozilla has pushed a new release of its Firefox browser with one notable change; it will no longer have Yandex, the Russian search engine, and Mail.ru as options.

“Yandex and Mail.ru have been removed as optional search providers in the drop-down search menu in Firefox,” Mozilla said.

“If you previously installed a customized version of Firefox with Yandex or Mail.ru, offered through partner distribution channels, this release removes those customizations, including add-ons and default bookmarks. Where applicable, your browser will revert to default settings, as offered by Mozilla.

“All other releases of Firefox remain unaffected by the change.”

Keep reading

Romney’s “Treason” Smear of Tulsi Gabbard is False and Noxious, But Now Typifies U.S. Discourse

The crime of “treason” is one of the gravest an American citizen can commit, if not the gravest. It is one of the few crimes other than murder for which execution is still a permissible punishment under both U.S. federal law and the laws of several states. The framers of the U.S. Constitution were so concerned about the temptation to abuse this term — by depicting political dissent as a criminalized betrayal of one’s country — that they chose to define and limit how this crime could be applied by inserting this limiting paragraph into the Constitution itself; reflecting the gravity and temptation to abuse accusations of “treason,” it is the only crime they chose to define in the U.S. Constitution. Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution states:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Treason was the only crime to be explicitly defined and limited by the Founders because they sought “to guard against the historic use of treason prosecutions by repressive governments to silence otherwise legitimate political opposition.” In other words, the grave danger anticipated by the Founders was that “treason” would radically expand to include any criticisms of or opposition to official U.S. Government policy, activities they sought in the Bill of Rights to enshrine as an inviolable right of U.S. citizenship, not turn it into a capital crime.

In a 2017 op-ed in The Washington Post, law professor Carlton Larson reviewed the increasing tendency to call other Americans “traitors” and explained: “Speaking against the government, undermining political opponents, supporting harmful policies or even placing the interests of another nation ahead of those of the United States are not acts of treason under the Constitution. Regarding the promiscuous use of the word by liberals against Trump, Professor Larson wrote: “An enemy is a nation or an organization with which the United States is in a declared or open war . Nations with whom we are formally at peace, such as Russia, are not enemies.” For that reason, even Americans actively helping the Soviet Union during the Cold War could not be accused of “treason” given that there was no declaration of war against the USSR. Using the most extreme hypothetical he could think of to illustrate the point, he explained: “Indeed, Trump could give the U.S. nuclear codes to Vladimir Putin or bug the Oval Office with a direct line to the Kremlin and it would not be treason, as a legal matter.”

For that reason, treason has rarely been prosecuted in the U.S.: “according to the FBI, the U.S. government has successfully convicted fewer than 12 Americans for treason in the nation’s history.” While Americans who rebelled against the British crown were technically traitors, as were those who waged war against the union during the Civil War, prosecutions have been exceedingly rare. That means that through all the various wars the U.S. has fought from the 18th Century until now — the War of 1812, the Spanish-American War, the Mexican-American War, the two World Wars of the 20th Century, the Cold War, the wars in Korea and Vietnam, the dirty wars in Central America, the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq, the War on Terror — the number of total treason prosecutions is less than a dozen. That is because Americans understood, based on constitutional constraints and Supreme Court law restricting its scope, that this crime is very difficult to charge and applies only in the narrowest of circumstances.

That understanding is now gone. During the War on Terror and the invasion of Iraq, neocons routinely accused war opponents and skeptics of their “anti-terrorism” civil liberties assaults of being traitors. David Frum’s stint as Bush White House speechwriter enshrined this “patriotism” attack as his and their speciality. Bush and Cheney’s speeches, especially leading up to the invasion of Iraq, the 2002 midterms, and then the 2004 re-election campaign, inevitably featured innuendo if not explicit claims that Americans opposed to their war policies were against America and on the side of the terrorists: i.e., traitors. The Lincoln Project’s Rick Wilson produced a campaign ad for the 2002 Georgia Senate race morphing the face of the Democratic incumbent Max Cleland, who lost three limbs in Vietnam, into Osama bin Laden’s. Upon leaving the White House, Frum continued to build his career on impugning the patriotism and loyalty of anyone — right, left, or in between — who opposed all the various wars he wanted to send other people’s children to go fight and die in.

Keep reading