Tag: ukraine

The Assassination Of Leading Ukrainian Fascist Andrey Parubiy Might Have Been An Inside Job

Although he was an enemy of Russia who many important people likely wanted dead for a while, taking him out right now might impede a speculative US and/or intra-fascist plot to replace Zelensky.

The public assassination of leading Ukrainian fascist Andrey Parubiy has many pointing the finger at Russia and not without good reason. He was infamously implicated in the Maidan sniper provocation at the height of 2014’s Color Revolution, the Odessa Trade Union fire shortly after, and the onset of the then-Ukrainian Civil War in Donbass via his brief role as Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council. Parubiy was therefore an enemy of Russia and many there likely wanted him dead for a while.

At the same time, however, RT political analyst Nadezhda Romanenko put forth a compelling counterview arguing that his assassination was actually an inside job. According to her, Parubiy’s experience in co-organizing EuroMaidan and his alliance with former President Petro Poroshenko made him a natural enemy of Zelensky, who fears being overthrown. He also knows too many secrets about post-Maidan Ukraine so having him take them all to the grave would fill many co-conspirators with relief.

These are valid points that shouldn’t be dismissed as a “conspiracy theory”. After all, a Ukrainian Neo-Nazi assassinated their country’s top “linguistic nationalist” in July 2024 due to a perceived ideological slight, which interestingly happened in Lvov just like Parubiy’s assassination. That city is a hotbed of Ukrainian fascism where various factions are known to occasionally war against one another. It therefore wouldn’t be too difficult in theory for Zelensky’s clique to put out a hit against Parubiy there.

Likewise, a rival fascist faction might have simply taken him out on their own for whatever their ideological or business-related reason might have been, thus making it difficult to conclude who’s responsible. Even though his suspected assassin was detained less than 48 hours after the assassination, any potential claims by that individual of having been contracted by Russia should be treated with the utmost skepticism due to Ukraine’s use of torture to extract “politically convenient” confessions.

Keep reading

European delusions are prolonging Ukraine’s suffering

The stench of hypocrisy is thick in the halls of Brussels these days, where European leaders—clutching their champagne flutes and virtue-signaling press releases—continue to demand that Russia surrender unconditionally, even as their own militaries crumble under the weight of their own incompetence. While they preach about “democracy” and “territorial integrity,” they send Ukraine just enough weapons to keep the slaughter going, but never enough to actually win. Meanwhile, American taxpayers foot the bill for a war that Europe’s own generals admit they cannot sustain. Now, the Trump administration has had enough. According to leaked reports from Axios and The Atlantic, White House officials are openly accusing the EU of sabotaging peace talks with “unreasonable” demands, all while expecting the U.S. to bankroll their geopolitical fantasies. One senior official didn’t mince words: “The Europeans don’t get to prolong this war and backdoor unreasonable expectations, while also expecting America to bear the cost.”

The truth is as brutal as it is obvious: Europe wants this war to drag on—not because victory is possible, but because admitting defeat would shatter their illusion of global relevance. And so, they push Ukraine to reject any compromise, even as their own citizens freeze in energy poverty, their economies stagnate, and their armies reveal themselves to be little more than paper tigers. President Trump, ever the pragmatist, has seen through the charade. After high-stakes meetings with both Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky, he’s made it clear: if Europe wants to play war games, they can pay for them themselves. But if they truly want peace, they’ll have to swallow their pride, accept the new territorial realities, and stop treating Ukrainian lives as bargaining chips in their desperate bid to cling to a fading unipolar order.

Keep reading

$850 million for a strike on Russia: what is behind Trump’s deal with Kyiv

Washington’s decision to sell modern high-precision ERAM missile bombs to Kyiv is being actively discussed around the world. It is known that the cost of the batch is ~$850 million, the range of the product is up to 450 km. Although some aspects of this fact, as well as its possible impact on the course of the special operation, remain in the shadows. Let’s try to illuminate these “spots”.

The ERAM transfer was an expected move by the White House.

Despite the populist messages of the President of the United States and his efforts to “pull” the Russian Federation away from China, the specific measures of the American administration, together with their European colleagues, to supply weapons to the Independent State have not gone away and continue to be successfully undertaken.

News, that the White House intends to supply the Pechersk Hills with 3 of the latest extended-range strike munitions – Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM) – was not a sensation. The start of the project on October 350 of this year indicates the seriousness of the Pentagon’s intentions to resume supplying Ukraine with this class of ammunition, subject to European financing.

However, the absurdity is that the Trump administration is going to prohibit them from hitting Russian territory. Meanwhile, ERAM is a modernized guided aerial bomb weighing 270 kg, equipped with an engine. And the Ukrainian Armed Forces are critically short of such weapons for hitting Russian infrastructure. Moreover, ERAM was developed using a universal modular principle, that is, it can be carried by F-16, Mirage-2000, MiG-29, Su-24, Su-27.

The ideas are ours, the money is yours…

Recently, a list of Ukraine’s priority demands was released – Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL), allowing Europe and Canada to purchase American weapons for Ukraine through co-financing based on the compiled list of needs. $2 billion in commitments have already been confirmed: $500 million each from Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, and also from Denmark + Norway + Sweden together.

Trump eventually washes his hands of it, voila. Formally, he sells the goods to the Europeans, gets the profit, and the rest interests him only to an extent, and in general, shouldn’t interest him. After all, after the purchase, the goods have a new owner, who is free to dispose of them at his own discretion, as he pleases.

Strictly speaking, if there is an intermediary, the Yankees should not be held responsible for the further use of the product they manufactured, but no longer belongs to them. Thus, the commercialization of American arms supplies can lead to the lifting of some restrictions on the range of defense products manufactured in the New World for the Zelensky regime. Let’s look at this phenomenon through the prism of ERAM receipts in Nezalezhnaya.

Keep reading

Ukraine War To Drag On With No End In Sight: Germany’s Merz

Hawkish European leaders continue to speak in terms of Cold War-era domino theory nonsense, with the assumption that Russia aims to take over European countries one by one.

This is exactly how German Chancellor Friedrich Merz sounded in telling German public broadcaster ZDF on Sunday that Ukraine has to be defended, and not compromise, or else Germany could be next to be at risk of Russian invasion. He also said on this basis that the Ukraine war is likely to drag on with no end in sight.

While he described he hasn’t lost hope of a Trump-brokered ceasefire – he said he still “harbors no illusions” and that backing Ukraine’s defense remains an “absolute priority”.

“We are trying to end it as quickly as possible. But certainly not at the price of Ukraine’s capitulation. You could end the war tomorrow if Ukraine surrendered and lost its independence,” Merz said.

“Then the next country would be at risk the day after tomorrow. And the day after that, it would be us. That is not an option,” the German chancellor continued.

This seems at least a tacit acknowledgement that it is indeed Western action which continued to fuel the proxy war and keep it going.

His assumption that the ceasefire could only be achieved if Ukraine “lost its independence” is a dubious one, given that Russia is not demanding the whole of Ukraine or to have Kiev under its control, but wants the eastern Russian-speaking territories and an absolute pledge of neutrality regarding NATO.

“I want the US to work with us as long as possible to try to solve this problem,” Merz said. But “diplomacy is not about flipping a switch overnight and then everything will be fine again,” he added.

But Merz also remarked separately last Thursday it was now “obvious” that a meeting between Zelensky would not happen. The White House has expressed concerns that the Europeans sought to thwart this all along.

The Associated Press has tallied that over the course of the war Germany has committed military support worth some 40 billion euros ($47 billion).

Keep reading

Russian Forces Secure Entire South of Donetsk People’s Republic

“All our cities, all our districts in the south of the republic have been liberated,” Pushilin stated, underscoring what he described as a decisive achievement for local forces.

Pushilin explained that the southern front had been under the responsibility of the ‘Vostok’ military grouping and expressed gratitude to Russian soldiers for their role in the advance.

“They are now improving their positions on the territory of the Dnipropetrovsk region, creating the necessary conditions to ensure the security of our settlements,” the DPR leader added.

Earlier, Pushilin noted that Russian forces continue to “grind down” the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Dobropillia direction, highlighting what he described as mounting pressure on Ukrainian positions.

Keep reading

Ukraine’s battlefield data is being used as LEVERAGE to train the future of military AI

Imagine a drone, no larger than a dinner plate, humming through the skeletal remains of a bombed-out village. It doesn’t hesitate. It doesn’t feel. It simply knows — its artificial brain trained on millions of hours of combat footage, every pixel of destruction meticulously logged, every human movement analyzed like a chessboard. This isn’t science fiction. It’s the future Ukraine is quietly shopping to the highest bidder. Data obtained from the Ukraine-Russia war will soon be used to train military AI to make future war time missions more efficient, more cold and calculated.

For over three and a half years, Ukraine has been more than a battleground — it’s been a lab. A brutal, real-world experiment in how machines learn to kill. Now, as the war grinds on, Kyiv isn’t just fighting for survival. It’s negotiating with its Western allies, dangling something far more valuable than territory or political loyalty: data. Terabytes of it. Footage from first-person-view drones that have stalked Russian tanks like predators. Reconnaissance feeds that map every explosion, every ambush, every death in excruciating detail. And Ukraine’s digital minister, Mykhailo Fedorov, has made one thing clear — this isn’t charity. It’s a transaction. “I think this is one of the ‘cards,’ as our colleagues and partners say, to build win-win relations,” he told Reuters, his words carrying the cold precision of a man who understands leverage. The question isn’t whether this data will be sold. It’s who will wield it — and what happens when they do.

Key points:

  • Ukraine has amassed an unprecedented trove of battlefield data, including drone footage and combat statistics, which is now being positioned as a negotiating tool with Western allies.
  • The data is critical for training military AI, particularly for autonomous drone swarms and target recognition systems, making it a prized asset for defense contractors and governments.
  • Ukraine’s “points system” for confirmed kills has gamified war, incentivizing troops to destroy more Russian targets in exchange for drones and weapons — further feeding the data machine.
  • Experts warn that AI-trained weapons systems could soon operate with full autonomy, raising ethical and existential questions about machine-driven warfare and the risk of uncontrollable kill chains.
  • Historical patterns suggest that warfare technology often escapes its original intent, with civilian casualties rising as automation increases — yet global powers are racing to deploy it.
  • The long-term implications extend beyond Ukraine: this data could accelerate a new arms race, where AI-driven weapons decide who lives and who dies — without human oversight.

The black box of modern war

Fedorov didn’t minced words when he called the data “priceless.” And he’s right. In the hands of defense firms like Palantir — which already works with Ukraine to analyze Russian strikes and disinformation — this isn’t just intelligence. It’s the raw material for the next generation of war. Imagine an AI that doesn’t just assist pilots but replaces them. Drones that don’t just follow orders but make them. Systems that can identify, track, and eliminate targets faster than a human can blink.

Ukraine has already dipped its toes into this future. Fedorov admitted that Kyiv uses AI to scan reconnaissance imagery for targets that would take humans “dozens of hours” to find. They’re testing fully autonomous drones — machines that could soon hunt in swarms, coordinating attacks without a single soldier pulling the trigger. And they’re not alone. The U.S., China, and Russia are all pouring billions into AI-driven warfare, each racing to outpace the others. But Ukraine’s data is different. It’s not simulated. It’s not theoretical. It’s real death, digitized and weaponized.

The problem? We’ve seen this movie before. Every major leap in military technology — from machine guns to atomic bombs — has been sold as a way to end war faster. Instead, it’s made war more efficient, more distant, and more devastating. When the first autonomous drone swarm is unleashed, will it distinguish between a soldier and a civilian? Will it care? Or will it simply follow the patterns it’s been trained on — patterns built on Ukraine’s kill zones, where the line between combatant and bystander has already blurred?

Keep reading

How Ukraine Lost Its Future

As the endgame looms over the proxy war in Ukraine, the catastrophic costs of the unwarranted conflict continue to soar. There was an alternative future for Ukraine, based on development. But it was purposely denied.

Since the onset of hostilities in Ukraine three years ago, I have argued that, whatever its stated rationales, the war would “penalize severely Ukraine, Russia, the US and the NATO, Europe, developing economies and the global economy.”

The war in Ukraine was not only avoidable but there was an alternative and more peaceful future. It was purposely collapsed because it did not fit the neoconservatives’ plans for Ukraine. 

Zelensky’s Dream of Ukraine as China’s Bridge to Europe          

Even as Ukraine-Russian tensions began to escalate a decade ago, trade ties between Ukraine and China expanded after President Viktor Yanukovych’s state visit to Beijing in 2013. Four years later, Ukraine, now under President Poroshenko, joined China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). And in 2019, China bypassed Russia as Ukraine’s biggest single trading partner.Together, China, Ukraine’s new economic partner, and Russia, its historical trade partner, absorbed a fourth of Ukraine’s exports. That figure was over six times the share of the US.

In June 2021, China and Ukraine signed a deal to strengthen cooperation in multiple areas, particularly in infrastructure financing and construction. In 2021, overall trade boomed to $19 billion, having soared 80% since 2013. To Ukraine’s President Zelensky, the BRI meant an alternative future that would be more stable and prosperous. And so, in a phone conversation with President Xi Jinping, he called China “Ukraine’s No. 1 trade and economic partner in the world.” expressing hope that Ukraine could become “a bridge to Europe for Chinese business.”

In just a year, major Chinese companies started operations in construction, food and telecoms. New contracts signed by Chinese companies in the Ukrainian engineering market exceeded $2 billion for two consecutive years.

But this was not the future that was planned for Ukraine in the White House. 

Hammering Ukraine Into a Military-Industrial Hub              

From 1991 to 2014, the US flooded Ukraine with $4 billion in military assistance , even though it wasn’t a NATO member. By 2021, over $2.7 billion was added to the figure, plus over a billion provided by the NATO Trust Fund.

To Erik Prince, it heralded a great money-making opportunity, Iraq déjà vu. As the founder of the private US military contractor, then known as Blackwater, Prince had long supplied mercenaries to the CIA, Pentagon and State Department for covert operations, including torture and assassinations. In early 2020, Prince outlined a roadmap for the creation of a “vertically integrated aviation defense consortium” that could bring $10 billion in revenues.

Prince desperately needed the Motor Sich factory, which already had a deal with Beijing Skyrizon Aviation. The Chinese company had bought its 41% stake already in 2017. However, Biden’s election win undermined Prince’s plan. Moreover, his Ukrainian partners got under criminal investigation for alleged efforts to sway the 2020 presidential election and the investigation included President Biden’s son and his stakes in Ukraine. Washington blacklisted the Chinese firms involved, then Ukrainian court froze their holdings for reasons of “national security” and Chinese companies and dealmakers were sanctioned.

Nonetheless, the idea of a Ukrainian military-industrial complex remained attractive to the US and Ukraine, where the state-controlled defense sector employed more than 1 million people and had been moving, with rising US influence, toward military procurement since 2014. To the Biden administration, it offered a massive military-logistical hub that could serve both the US and NATO.

Yet, by late fall 2022, even European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen acknowledged Ukraine’s losses in the war with Russia amounted to 100,000 soldiers and 20,000 civilians.

Today, three years later, the total cost of reconstruction and recovery in Ukraine is estimated at $524 billion over the next decade – almost three times Ukraine’s GDP 2024.

The military aid has brought neither peace nor security. But it has prolonged Ukrainians’ suffering. To date, the US alone has provided $67 billion in military assistance since February 2022 and $70 billion in military assistance since 2014. These have been coupled with military assistance via the presidential emergency authority by up to $32 billion from Pentagon’s stockpiles.

That’s a total of $167 billion – in wasted lives, economic prospects and global prospects.

Keep reading

Putin Says Curbing NATO Enlargement Crucial to Ukraine Peace Deal

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Sept. 1 that the issue of NATO’s eastward enlargement has to be tackled for there to be a sustainable peace deal in Ukraine.

Putin was speaking after talks with Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation meeting in Tianjin, China.

Putin said the crisis in Ukraine was partly due to “the West’s constant attempts to drag Ukraine into NATO,” which he said “poses a direct threat to Russia’s security.”

He said that the 2014 revolution in Ukraine was a “coup” in which “the country’s political leadership that opposed NATO membership was removed from power.”

“In order for a Ukrainian settlement to be sustainable and long-term, the root causes of the crisis, which I have just mentioned and which I have repeatedly mentioned before, must be eliminated,” he said.

Putin Calls for ‘Fair Balance’

Putin also called for “a fair balance in the security sphere” to be restored.

In February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine—which has expressed interest in joining NATO—and its forces now control a fifth of the country, including Crimea and large swathes of the south and east of Ukraine.

Just days before the invasion, Putin delivered a speech describing the potential accession of Ukraine to NATO as “a direct threat to the security of Russia.”

In the wake of the Russian invasion, Finland and Sweden both waived policies of neutrality they had held for decades and joined NATO in 2023 and 2024, respectively.

NATO now has 32 members, including a string of countries that were once part of the Soviet Union—such as Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia—or were part of the Moscow-dominated Warsaw Pact alliance during the Cold War—such as Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria.

Apart from Ukraine, two other countries—Georgia and Bosnia-Herzegovina—have applied for NATO membership.

The alliance’s website states, “NATO’s door remains open to any European country in a position to undertake the commitments and obligations of membership, and contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area.”

During NATO’s 2008 summit in Bucharest, alliance leaders said in a declaration: “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO.”

But after NATO’s summit in The Hague in June, there was no mention of Ukrainian membership in the declaration issued, which stated simply, “Allies reaffirm their enduring sovereign commitments to provide support to Ukraine, whose security contributes to ours.”

Keep reading

Blitzkrieg Blowback: Nazi Warlord Primed To Lead Post-War Ukraine

On February 19, 2021, almost exactly one year before Russia would invade Ukraine, President Joe Biden addressed the Virtual Munich Security Conference. He said:

“We’re at an inflection point between those who argue that, given all the challenges we face — from the fourth industrial revolution to a global pandemic — that autocracy is the best way forward, they argue, and those who understand that democracy is essential — essential to meeting those challenges.”

The struggle between democracy and autocracy became a central theme and talking point of the administration, with Biden repeatedly extolling the United States as the “arsenal of democracy.”

On February 24, 2022, when Russia escalated its conflict with Ukraine (which began in 2014) by rolling more than 100,000 troops into the country, their president, Vladimir Putin, said:

“The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.”

Now, after more than three years of war, during which time DC has backed Ukraine with hundreds of billions of dollars, sophisticated weapons, intelligence sharing, targeting assistance and a parallel economic war on Russia, and Russia has inflicted hundreds of thousands Ukrainian casualties, an autocratic Nazi is poised to become the next president (or fascist dictator) of Ukraine.

Andriy Biletsky was imprisoned in a Ukrainian jail as the “Revolution of Dignity” (aka the Western-backed Maidan Coup) played out on the streets of Kiev in late 2013 and early 2014.

Biletsky, a partisan of “Social Nationalism” and “all the ancient Ukrainian Aryan values,” was accused of participating in a terrorist plot to blow up a statue of Vladimir Lenin in Boryspil.

On February 21, 2014, Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovych fled the country, on February 22 his government collapsed and on February 24 a new coup-interim junta was created under Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. One of the new government’s first actions, that very day, was to pardon what it called “political prisoners” held by the deposed regime. On February 25, 2014, Biletsky walked out of prison and inherited the coup.

Biletsky founded the Azov Battalion out of his Patriot of Ukraine gang and fellow travelers from Right Sector, the coalition Nazi militia that had accomplished the street putsch weeks before, and quickly established himself as a man willing to lead men into battle against any and all perceived enemies, including Ukrainian civilians. Such enemy civilians immediately presented themselves in Ukraine’s east and south. Anti-coup protestors refused to recognize the new regime’s legitimacy and attempted to assert greater sovereignty for their regions. In response, and on orders from the United States, Kiev launched an “Anti-Terrorist Operation” against the Donbas. Many regular Ukrainian soldiers refused to wage war on their countrymen, with some even defecting to the rebels’ side. Biletsky and Azov, however, plunged into the close quarters, urban combat with alacrity.

Known as “White Leader” or “White Chief” by his men, Biletsky has become the Empire’s new version of a “moderate rebel,” an anti-democratic, Nazi warlord who DC is desperate to spin as a freedom fighter committed to Western values. All the hype in the world cannot change the reality on the ground revealed by his rhetoric and behavior.

In 2007, Biletsky was the leader of Patriot of Ukraine, a direct heir of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which was the “institutional epicenter” of Ukrainian collusion with the Nazis during World War II. He gave a speech entitled “Ukrainian Racial Social Nationalism.” In the speech Biletsky declared:

“The historical mission of our Nation, in this turning point, [is to lead] the White peoples of the whole world into the last crusade for its existence against the Semitic-led untermenschen.”

Keep reading

A Dark Theory: Russian Strategy In Ukraine

Let’s talk about Russian strategy in Ukraine…

Looking at developments lately, specifically:

(1) the Ukrainian casualty leak showing an astronomical 1.7M KIA/MIA; and

(2) the Ukrainian collapse north of Pokrovsk

I thought should revisit a dark thought I had a while ago, namely that, “maybe the killing itself is the point of all of this.”

I’ve said before that the Russians have fought an extraordinarily clean war in Ukraine, but it should be understood that there is a very legalistic shade on that assessment.

They’ve killed very few civilians, and Ukrainian propagandists are perpetually beclowning themselves trying to pretend that the usual single-digit handful of injured civilians that accompany the latest attack using hundreds of standoff weapons fired into city centers (producing secondary explosions visible from outer space as military targets hidden among civilian infrastructure are destroyed with surgical precision) somehow constitute gEnOCiDe rather than some of the most well-controlled warfighting in the history of the business.

There is another and far darker side to Russia’s “clean” war, however.

Let us consider the fate of the Armed Forces of Ukraine – legal combatants all, whom the Russians can and do target and kill without limit. I mentioned the casualty leak earlier, but I feel this needs to have a line drawn under it – one point seven million personnel killed or missing in action in the AFU, over the course of the war. 1.7 MILLION. Seven or eight percent of Ukraine’s prewar population, probably something like a quarter of the entire national cohort of military-aged males, dead or missing. Casualties on the scale of a genocide, sufficient to permanently cripple any postwar Ukrainian nation.

Casualties multiple times that which I assessed two years ago as sufficient to shatter the AFU based on the experience of Nazi Germany.

This brings me to the Ukrainian collapse north of Pokrovsk two weeks ago, in which a run-of-the-mill Russian attack walked through twenty kilometers of Ukrainian defensive belts and into open country.

The Ukrainian propagandists coped by whining about how the single most important front sector for the AFU had somehow “run out of infantry.”

But did the Russians throw in a mobile reserve to collapse the front and chase the AFU back to the Dniper, despite doubtless knowing full well what was going on? No, they did not – they consolidated in the breach and awaited the inevitable, panicked Ukrainian counterattack, in which they would have the opportunity to destroy Ukraine’s remaining elite troops.

Which brings me to my conclusion.

The Russians have had countless opportunities to make large advances in this war, especially recently – the Ukrainian front line is an absolute shambles and their “drone wall” tactic will falter against any serious attack. So ineffectual is the AFU that very few Russian moves at the front even face serious opposition these days, with most geolocations of Russian advances showing them already established in place and dealing with harassment by kill drones after having seized positions bloodlessly. The Russians have in fact consistently foregone breaking the front and taking swathes of ground in favor of killing the largest possible number of Ukrainian soldiers on the existing front line under the existing attritional combat dynamic.

This “tactical directive” held true even during the Battle of Sudzha-Korenevo, fought in prewar Russia. Rather than counterattacking aggressively to evict the AFU, the Russians saw the opportunity to kill gigantic numbers of Ukrainians in a trap the enemy wouldn’t be able to extract themselves from for ideological reasons, and they took it. That battle ended up being nine months of hideously lopsided butchery that broke the back of the AFU.

All of this makes observing the war more than a little maddening, but it’s a consistent pattern of behavior that begs for explanation.

Keep reading