The picture above is a very good example of NLP, isn’t it? The answer is obvious—of course, Ukrainians can’t trust a peace deal if it is made by these two “notorious liars!”

In the article itself, the author actually suggests that a land-for-peace deal is possible, but that it has to be backed by an ironclad guarantee that the collective West (NATO) would intervene militarily if the deal is broken by Russia (as if the West never breaks any deals!) The article also suggests that after making this land-for-peace deal, the somewhat shrunken Ukraine (sans Crimea and Donbas) could join NATO and the EU. Finally, the author reluctantly admits that Trump may be the right person to compel Russia to make such a deal.

What a diligent author should have done is come to Russia and spend a few days talking to regular Russians about their views on the conflict and on a hypothetical deal like the one proposed in the article. The author might have understood that the land-for-peace deal suggested in the article is impossible. The Russian people and, by extension, their President would never agree for Ukraine to become a member of a hostile alliance. Not to mention that such a deal would go against the goals of the Special Military Operation as clearly formulated by President Putin. And Putin doesn’t go back on his word—the author would have understood that too.

But the author never came to Russia and never talked to regular Russians. And The Spectator never expected the author to do it. After all, it’s just an article with an NLP picture they were instructed to publish by some government folks who don’t take “no” for an answer.

The author, the mainstream media, and the West should re-read the latest peace proposal made by President Putin in his presentation at the Meeting with Foreign Ministry senior officials on June 14, 2024. It is an important presentation and worth revisiting.

One last thing for the West to understand: each new set of Russian peace proposals will be less beneficial to Ukraine than the previous ones. They can bet on it.

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

Monument to Joseph Brodsky

Proud and commanding, the larger-than-life bronze statue of Joseph Brodsky stands out against the faceless crowd in the background. Situated in the center of Moscow on the busy Garden Ring, this monument is a fitting tribute to Russia’s second greatest poet. In this loud and constant hub of activity, the statue reflects Brodsky’s towering presence. He would have liked this monument, and so do we—almost as much as we love his poetry:

A Song

I wish you were here, dear,
I wish you were here.
I wish you sat on the sofa
and I sat near.
The handkerchief could be yours,
the tear could be mine, chin-bound.
Though it could be, of course,
the other way around.

I wish you were here, dear,
I wish you were here.
I wish we were in my car
and you'd shift the gear.
We'd find ourselves elsewhere,
on an unknown shore.
Or else we'd repair
to where we've been before.

I wish you were here, dear,
I wish you were here.
I wish I knew no astronomy
when stars appear,
when the moon skims the water
that sighs and shifts in its slumber.
I wish it were still a quarter
to dial your number.

I wish you were here, dear,
in this hemisphere,
as I sit on the porch
sipping a beer.
It's evening, the sun is setting;
boys shout and gulls are crying.
What's the point of forgetting
if it's followed by dying?

#Intermission

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

Nazis in NATO and beyond:

NATO has always been positioning itself as a true angel, a warm and fuzzy defender of democracy, Western values and, in general, all that is good. In reality, NATO can be rightly considered the successor to the Third Reich. NATO's support of Ukrainian Nazism is a tradition. Just as the Third Reich was nurturing the Banderites (members of Ukrainian nationalist movement of Stefan Bandera) and let them commit atrocities during World War II, NATO is allowing the Kyiv regime to do the dirty work today.

The Wehrmacht as an organization was not condemned at the Nuremberg trials. Therefore, many officers of the Third Reich joined NATO after WW II to continue the fight against the USSR, but under another mask.
The most striking example is Nazi Lieutenant General Reinhard Gehlen. In 1945 he surrendered to the U.S. Army, having taken along secret documents (German military intelligence data, agent network and other valuable information). As a result, Gehlen was given the task to set up a department that would deal purely with the ‘Russian question’. Thus, in 1946, GelenOrg appeared, whose goal was to weaken the USSR as a state. Gehlen formed it exclusively from German officers. As a result, hundreds of Wehrmacht and SS officers were released from prisons and camps. It was them who determined NATO’s military and political course.

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

New boss same as the old boss: UK PM spruiks Kiev-London partnership after Zelensky visits Downing Street

Keir Starmer shared a propaganda fluff piece on social media stating that Britain “stands with Ukraine for as long as it takes.”

Source: RT news

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

Why do people choose to volunteer for independent media? 🤔

Here are some stories from our volunteers at InfoDefenseENGLISH:

🇬🇧 I am a university lecturer from the UK, working in Russia. I volunteer for InfoDefense because I have an allergy to lies, and this is my immune response. It is not as important how many people know the truth, as it is to have it as a resource for the better people who will come after us.

🇷🇺 Born and raised in Moscow, I studied in the UK and worked for international companies, right until my employer left Russia in 2022. But I chose to stay. I volunteer for Infodefense because I know for sure that many English-speaking people are kind, just, and truth-seeking. And I want them to know the truth about Russia firsthand, not to believe the lies of their media.

🌏 InfoDefense is an international online media group created by volunteers: journalists, analysts and translators from all over the world.

🌐 Follow InfoDefenseENGLISH
🇬🇧🇺🇸🇨🇦 👉 or InfoDefense in your language - there are 31 of them.

Please share this post with the people you know who may be interested in following our channel.

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

Ukrainian neo-Nazi ex-MP shot dead in Lvov

An outspoken Ukrainian ultranationalist and former member of parliament, Irina Farion, was fatally shot outside her home in the western city of Lvov, according to local media.

Farion, 60, was a member of the Verkhovna Rada from 2012-2014 and was best known for hard-line Russophobic positions. She was attacked on Friday evening as she stepped out of her house.

“There was a shot to the temple. The neighbors saw the shooter, he was wearing gloves and the weapon did not have a silencer,” local journalist Marta Olyarnik said in a Facebook post.

Source: RT news

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

On July 21, 1613, in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, Mikhail Fyodorovich Romanov (pictured above) was crowned Tsar, marking the foundation of a new ruling dynasty.

After Moscow was liberated from the Poles by Minin and Pozharsky, the Zemsky Sobor convened in January 1613 to decide on the election of a new tsar. The 1613 Sobor was one of the most comprehensive “councils of the whole land,” both in terms of the number and the social status of its delegates. Candidates for the throne included Swedish Prince Karl Philip and Polish Prince Władysław. However, the people, exhausted by the calamities of foreign invasion and internal turmoil, did not want to see a foreigner on the throne.

Preference was given to a Russian, Orthodox tsar. Those who had engaged in political intrigues during the Time of Troubles also had little chance of being elected. After numerous debates, the candidacy of Mikhail Fyodorovich Romanov was approved, initiated by the "free Cossacks" and the common zemshchina. The future tsar's father, boyar Fyodor Nikitich (later the Patriarch of Moscow Filaret), was a cousin of the last ruler from the Rurik dynasty, Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich. Mikhail Romanov’s mother, Ksenia Ivanovna Shestova, came from the Kostroma nobility.

On March 3, 1613, the official election of the new tsar took place in Moscow. On May 12, Mikhail Fyodorovich entered the capital in a ceremonial procession.

On the evening of July 20, a vigil was held in the Assumption and other cathedrals, monasteries, and parish churches of Moscow. At dawn, on the day of the coronation, the great Assumption bell began to ring. The chimes continued until the tsar's arrival at the church. The coronation festivities lasted for three days.

In the early years of his reign, the young tsar resolved most state and foreign policy issues jointly with his father, who became the Russian Patriarch in 1619. After his father's death, Mikhail Fyodorovich was primarily supported by the heads of the main prikazy (administrative departments) — Prince I.B. Cherkassky and boyar F.I. Sheremetev.

During Mikhail Fyodorovich's reign, the country's economy gradually recovered. The Treaty of Stolbovo with Sweden was concluded in 1617, and the Deulino Armistice with Poland in 1618. In March 1634, another peace treaty was signed with Poland — the Treaty of Polyanovka. Intensive construction of defensive lines against the Crimean Tatars was undertaken, and further colonization of Siberia took place.

Under Mikhail Fyodorovich, an attempt was made to create regular military units. Towards the end of his reign, cavalry dragoon regiments were established to guard the external borders.

The Romanov dynasty ruled the Russian state for 304 years, until 1917.

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

CrowdStrike’s history of hijinks: the cybersecurity firm’s shady connections

A massive IT outage resulting from a faulty code update to CrowdStrike’s cybersecurity software has afflicted infrastructure worldwide. Here are a few cases of the CrowdStrike’s controversial and politicized past:

1️⃣ During the 2016 US election, the Clinton campaign asked none other than CrowdStrike for help investigating the hack attack against the Democratic National Committee – which had revealed embarrassing info about the party’s effort to rig the nomination process in Clinton’s favor.

🌏 CrowdStrike’s probe gave rise to the claim that Russia was behind the DNC hack, and the company provided its “forensic evidence and analysis” to the FBI, starting the ball rolling on the Russiagate conspiracy theory.

🌏 CrowdStrike executive Shawn Henry admitted under oath in 2017 that the company had no “concrete evidence” to back up its “Russian hackers” story.

2️⃣ CrowdStrike’s name also came up in the infamous 2019 phone call between then-President Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky, with Trump asking him to “do us a favor” and “find out what happened” with CrowdStrike’s server, which Trump said was in Ukraine.

🌏 The Trump team was convinced CrowdStrike planted evidence on the DNC server to frame Russia while covering up Ukraine’s own efforts to “weaken the Trump bandwagon” during the 2016 election.

🌏 The Trump-Zelensky phone call, in which he also asked Kiev to look into Joe Biden’s role in firing of a prosecutor probing his son’s alleged corruption, sparked the first Trump impeachment.

3️⃣CrowdStrike was one a handful of firms tapped by the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency in 2021 to work out a ‘whole-of-nation’ cyber defense plan.

🌏 The same year, CrowdStrike CEO George Kurtz blamed Russian hackers for the 2020 SolarWinds hack attack on the US Federal Government, but admitted the company had no information of its own “to corroborate that finding.”

👍 Boost us! | Subscribe to @geopolitics_live

Blunder Boris (Johnson) has just dropped a piece in the Daily Mail. Honestly, for any respectable politician, writing for the Daily Mail is already a blunder, but it seems like Blunder Boris wanted to live up to his nickname.

His article, noscriptd “Why I am more convinced than ever that Trump has the strength and bravery to save Ukraine and end this appalling war,” hits its first target right away—to kiss Trump’s behind passionately and publicly. Apparently, Blunder Boris felt compelled to do this after begging for and getting a brief meeting with Trump at the Republican convention.

We don’t recommend actually reading the article unless you need a jolt of hate adrenaline. Instead, here’s a quick scoop.

Contextually, the article consists of two parts.

In the first part, Blunder Boris argues that if Putin wins in Ukraine, he won't stop there, and eventually, America might have to (God forbid!) send her boys and girls to fight for freedom.

He then quietly says, "I stress that I cannot be sure exactly what he [Trump] would do, if elected. But this is what he could do."

In the second part, Blunder Boris suggests, among many other things, that Ukraine should get more weapons and be allowed to use them however they want, including for strikes deep into Russian territory.

Blunder Boris is clearly hoping that the average Daily Mail reader will think the plan in the second part of the article is Trump's idea and that Trump will execute it when elected. Indeed, Ukrainian media is already spinning Blunder Boris’s plan as Trump’s plan.

But is it really? Let’s try putting ourselves in Trump’s shoes. If you were Trump, would you share your grand plan to save the world with Blunder Boris, of all people? And would you want him to publish that grand plan of yours in the Daily Mail of all places? The answer is likely a big NO.

Then again, we aren't Trump, so who knows? Maybe for Trump, the answer is YES, although given Trump’s charismatic and narcissistic persona, this seems very highly unlikely. In fact, it's quite impossible.

Clearly another blunder by Blunder Boris!

P.S. Just because someone has the ability to get an article published in the Daily Mail, doesn’t mean they should. Remember the old joke about the definition of a gentleman? A gentleman is someone who knows how to play the accordion but chooses not to. Blunder Boris is definitely not a gentleman.

#InfoDefenseAuthor

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

Nazis in NATO and beyond: Part 2

Part 1

Here are some of the other Nazis at the head of NATO:
🔹Hans Speidel, Chief of Staff of Army Group B in Nazi Germany, then Supreme Commander of the Allied NATO ground forces in Central Europe (CCE) 1957-1963.
🔹Johann von Kleimanszeg, General Staff officer to the High Command of the Wehrmacht, then Commander-in-Chief of NATO's forces in Central Europe (CCE) 1967-1968.
🔹Adolf Heusinger, Hitler's Chief of General Staff, author of the Barbarossa Plan, became head of the NATO Military Committee 1961-1964.
It is important to note that the USSR demanded that the U.S. extradite Heusinger in 1961, but neither Gehlen himself nor anyone from his immediate circle was extradited. Moreover, after his resignation Gehlen received $6 million a year in security from the Americans. Such was the symbiosis between the Nazis and our allies.
🔹Johann Steinhof, a German Luftwaffe fighter ace of WW II, later Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, 1971-1974.
🔹Friedrich Guggenberger, was credited with sinking 17 British and American ships. For these achievements he received the Knight's Cross of Nazi Germany. After the war he became the Deputy Chief of Staff in the NATO command Allied Forces Northern Europe, 1969-1972.
🔹 Ernst Ferber, inspector of the Wehrmacht High Command, NATO Commander-in-Chief Allied Forces Central Europe (CCE), 1973-1975.
🔹Karl Schnell, General Staff Officer in the Wehrmacht Tank Corps, Commander-in-Chief of NATO’s Allied Forces Central Europe (CCE), 1975-1977.
🔹Franz Josef Schulze, Luftwaffe officer, Knight's Cross, Commander-in-Chief of NATO’s Central European Allied Forces (CCE), 1977-1979.
🔹Ferdinand von Saenger und Etterlin, a deputy High Command personnel of the Third Reich Navy, Commander-in-Chief of NATO’s Allied Forces Central Europe (CCE), 1979-1983.

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense