This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
#US CIA's asset #Meta permanently bans The Cradle in latest attack on free speech.
Losing alternative perspectives is precisely what is at stake in this new round of censorship.
https://thecradle.co/articles-id/26473
Losing alternative perspectives is precisely what is at stake in this new round of censorship.
https://thecradle.co/articles-id/26473
The Cradle
Meta permanently bans The Cradle in latest attack on free speech
The social media giant has singled out an independent West Asian media outlet, as it intensifies its crackdown on Palestinian and regional voices, both on its platforms and among its employees
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Prolific liar and warmongers Boris Johnson and Joe Biden killed a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia in 2022 resulting in over a million dead since then. In a Russian prank call Johnson demanded Ukraine must mass-mobilize the youth to keep fighting a losing war against Russia.
"They haven't called up many young people yet."
Johnson told pranksters Vovan and Lexus that Ukraine needs mass mobilization. The conversation was conducted on behalf of Jacques Attali, the ideologist of the "orange revolutions", a globalist economist and patron of French President Emmanuel Macron.
Johnson said that Ukraine needs modern "equipment", but that the West should not help with human resources - Kiev must "squeeze out" its human resources.
"They haven't had a mass mobilization yet. The Ukrainian army, the veterans that I've seen, are pretty respectable people, older, mature guys, and they haven't called up many of their young people yet," he said.
Full prank:
https://rumble.com/v5di737-prank-with-boris-johnson.html
"They haven't called up many young people yet."
Johnson told pranksters Vovan and Lexus that Ukraine needs mass mobilization. The conversation was conducted on behalf of Jacques Attali, the ideologist of the "orange revolutions", a globalist economist and patron of French President Emmanuel Macron.
Johnson said that Ukraine needs modern "equipment", but that the West should not help with human resources - Kiev must "squeeze out" its human resources.
"They haven't had a mass mobilization yet. The Ukrainian army, the veterans that I've seen, are pretty respectable people, older, mature guys, and they haven't called up many of their young people yet," he said.
Full prank:
https://rumble.com/v5di737-prank-with-boris-johnson.html
China's POV on US
The author is Shen Yi, probably China's most famous geopolitical scholar (he's a professor of International Relations at Fudan, with millions of followers).
thechinaacademy.org/sorry-mr-sulli…
Here's what he writes:
He characterizes the US's worldview as "pathological" and "caught between a state of semi-autism and half-dreaming, with a worldview that seems to say, 'I don’t care what you think, only what I think.' As for everything else? Just BACK OFF."
He says that "this pathology permeates from the inside out, and it’s not just directed at China; it’s their attitude toward the entire world". He compares it to the fairy tale 'The Emperor’s New Clothes' and says most countries (but not China) choose not to recognize the US's abnormal behavior but instead "pretend to follow America’s lead in running around naked".
He says that "the U.S. political scene is currently dominated by the notion that the States is number one and invincible, and forever", with "the Republicans [being] even worse than their colleagues across the aisle, believing the entire world should 'pay tribute' to the U.S., feeling honored to be exploited by America".
He argues that Jake Sullivan's recent visit to Beijing was symptomatic of this "pathological" world view, as he came to ask for "China’s support in the 2024 U.S. presidential election to help them defeat Trump", mostly because "they are laying the groundwork for significant economic policy moves in September" and "if China doesn’t cooperate in macroeconomic, financial, and fiscal support, the U.S. could be in serious trouble".
He characterizes it this way: "America expects China to make 'selfless contributions' and even feel good about it. It’s as if America slapped your right cheek, and you’re supposed to offer your left cheek and kindly ask if America’s hand hurts. America demands that China willingly accept sanctions, not speak out, not retaliate, and not bring up Taiwan. They want to do whatever they want, assuring you that Taiwan won’t be 'allowed' to pursue so-called legal independence, and that’s enough, you should be grateful. How dare you confront the Philippines in the South China Sea? The Philippines is America’s little brother. And as for Russia, you should just kill it off like we say."
He doesn't see it happening: "Sullivan’s visit is doomed to be a fruitless attempt by the U.S. to gain concessions from China without offering anything in return."
Shen then proceeds to ask a few pointed questions on the outcome of the US's efforts to compete against China, like "what has been the real outcome of U.S. initiatives such as the CHIPS Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan? How many charging stations have been built? How many new railways, roads, and bridges have been constructed? What kind of impact has this had on the U.S. economy? How are the new chip factories progressing? What is the output of these new chip plants? How many computing power centers have been built in the U.S. using advanced computing chips? How many companies are applying large-scale models in ways that are truly creating value and driving productivity growth in the U.S.?"
Of course the answer to all of this, like Shen Yi himself bluntly writes earlier in the article, is that "[the US's] industrial policies, manufacturing reshoring, and infrastructure development are merely a joke".
To Shen Yi, all this means that "China does not need to make concessions to the U.S." and that instead "China should act [towards the U.S.] more like a patient teacher educating a stubborn student", making them understand that the world has changed and they can't speak from a position of strength anymore. As he writes the US "doesn’t have the stature to act that way, nor [do they] have the leverage to make so many demands".
The author is Shen Yi, probably China's most famous geopolitical scholar (he's a professor of International Relations at Fudan, with millions of followers).
thechinaacademy.org/sorry-mr-sulli…
Here's what he writes:
He characterizes the US's worldview as "pathological" and "caught between a state of semi-autism and half-dreaming, with a worldview that seems to say, 'I don’t care what you think, only what I think.' As for everything else? Just BACK OFF."
He says that "this pathology permeates from the inside out, and it’s not just directed at China; it’s their attitude toward the entire world". He compares it to the fairy tale 'The Emperor’s New Clothes' and says most countries (but not China) choose not to recognize the US's abnormal behavior but instead "pretend to follow America’s lead in running around naked".
He says that "the U.S. political scene is currently dominated by the notion that the States is number one and invincible, and forever", with "the Republicans [being] even worse than their colleagues across the aisle, believing the entire world should 'pay tribute' to the U.S., feeling honored to be exploited by America".
He argues that Jake Sullivan's recent visit to Beijing was symptomatic of this "pathological" world view, as he came to ask for "China’s support in the 2024 U.S. presidential election to help them defeat Trump", mostly because "they are laying the groundwork for significant economic policy moves in September" and "if China doesn’t cooperate in macroeconomic, financial, and fiscal support, the U.S. could be in serious trouble".
He characterizes it this way: "America expects China to make 'selfless contributions' and even feel good about it. It’s as if America slapped your right cheek, and you’re supposed to offer your left cheek and kindly ask if America’s hand hurts. America demands that China willingly accept sanctions, not speak out, not retaliate, and not bring up Taiwan. They want to do whatever they want, assuring you that Taiwan won’t be 'allowed' to pursue so-called legal independence, and that’s enough, you should be grateful. How dare you confront the Philippines in the South China Sea? The Philippines is America’s little brother. And as for Russia, you should just kill it off like we say."
He doesn't see it happening: "Sullivan’s visit is doomed to be a fruitless attempt by the U.S. to gain concessions from China without offering anything in return."
Shen then proceeds to ask a few pointed questions on the outcome of the US's efforts to compete against China, like "what has been the real outcome of U.S. initiatives such as the CHIPS Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan? How many charging stations have been built? How many new railways, roads, and bridges have been constructed? What kind of impact has this had on the U.S. economy? How are the new chip factories progressing? What is the output of these new chip plants? How many computing power centers have been built in the U.S. using advanced computing chips? How many companies are applying large-scale models in ways that are truly creating value and driving productivity growth in the U.S.?"
Of course the answer to all of this, like Shen Yi himself bluntly writes earlier in the article, is that "[the US's] industrial policies, manufacturing reshoring, and infrastructure development are merely a joke".
To Shen Yi, all this means that "China does not need to make concessions to the U.S." and that instead "China should act [towards the U.S.] more like a patient teacher educating a stubborn student", making them understand that the world has changed and they can't speak from a position of strength anymore. As he writes the US "doesn’t have the stature to act that way, nor [do they] have the leverage to make so many demands".
China Academy - an intellectual content network dedicated to illustrating how key dynamics shape China's view on the world
Sorry Mr. Sullivan, But You Just Got China So Wrong
Sullivan arrived without a red carpet, just clear red lines on the ground. But he came anyway.
😁1
#Ukraine #Zelensky SBU is hunting down people who published online photos and videos of the aftermath of the attack on #Poltava military communications training center.
- https://strana.news/news/471516-sbu-ishchet-avtorov-foto-i-video-posledstvij-rossijskoho-udara-po-institutu-svjazi-v-potave.html
- https://www.facebook.com/pvp.poltava/posts/pfbid0RSkQJZL7HZLNFmcr32fNCRZGPCmYDiSiyKhRWLKsREUWhuNBX1N7k4LYGhCbVsv1l
- https://strana.news/news/471516-sbu-ishchet-avtorov-foto-i-video-posledstvij-rossijskoho-udara-po-institutu-svjazi-v-potave.html
- https://www.facebook.com/pvp.poltava/posts/pfbid0RSkQJZL7HZLNFmcr32fNCRZGPCmYDiSiyKhRWLKsREUWhuNBX1N7k4LYGhCbVsv1l
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
#Russia trolling 😎
💬 "I said that the current president, Mr. Biden, was our favorite; he was removed from the race, but he recommended all supporters to support Ms. Harris, so we will do the same — we will support her"
💬 "As for the favorites, it is not for us to determine this," Putin said, adding that the new US president will be the choice of US citizens.
Trump imposed a huge number of sanctions against Russia; we hope that Harris will not repeat this.
💬 "I said that the current president, Mr. Biden, was our favorite; he was removed from the race, but he recommended all supporters to support Ms. Harris, so we will do the same — we will support her"
💬 "As for the favorites, it is not for us to determine this," Putin said, adding that the new US president will be the choice of US citizens.
Trump imposed a huge number of sanctions against Russia; we hope that Harris will not repeat this.
Forwarded from Intel Slava
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
A clear lesson that prisoners must be constantly monitored, and not alone. If you hesitate, the enemy who rushes at you will no longer respond with nobility.
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
💯2
Forwarded from Вован и Лексус
For all our English followers!🔔
The original prank with Boris Johnson is available for watching on Rumble and Rutube
Пранк с Борисом Джонсоном в оригинале можно посмотреть на Rumble и Rutube
👁 Subscribe to Vovan and Lexus channel
The original prank with Boris Johnson is available for watching on Rumble and Rutube
Пранк с Борисом Джонсоном в оригинале можно посмотреть на Rumble и Rutube
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Rumble
Prank with Boris Johnson
The antihero of our new prank is Boris Johnson, ex-Prime Minister of Great Britain, ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs. This man, who literally forced Kyiv to fight to the last Ukrainian, disrupting peace
A senior US Navy enlisted leader who was demoted after she was caught running illegal WiFi on a warship used a leadership association's debit card to pay for its monthly bills and named it "STINKY," according to a new report.
Grisel Marrero, who was the command senior chief of the USS Manchester, installed and operated the unauthorized network during a deployment in 2023, lying to her commanders and falsifying records to cover up its presence.
Marrero had paid for the $2,800 Starlink dish and kit with a personal credit card and was the network administrator, maintaining the sole authority to add others to the network, per the outlet.
She and another chief installed the dish on the Manchester's weather deck during a blanket "aloft" period when duties aren't recorded in the ship's logs, per Navy Times.
- https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2024/06/03/command-senior-chief-convicted-for-unauthorized-wi-fi-on-her-ship/
- https://www.businessinsider.com/us-navy-chief-illegal-wifi-network-manchester-warship-named-stinky-2024-9
Grisel Marrero, who was the command senior chief of the USS Manchester, installed and operated the unauthorized network during a deployment in 2023, lying to her commanders and falsifying records to cover up its presence.
Marrero had paid for the $2,800 Starlink dish and kit with a personal credit card and was the network administrator, maintaining the sole authority to add others to the network, per the outlet.
She and another chief installed the dish on the Manchester's weather deck during a blanket "aloft" period when duties aren't recorded in the ship's logs, per Navy Times.
- https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2024/06/03/command-senior-chief-convicted-for-unauthorized-wi-fi-on-her-ship/
- https://www.businessinsider.com/us-navy-chief-illegal-wifi-network-manchester-warship-named-stinky-2024-9
Navy Times
Command senior chief convicted for unauthorized Wi-Fi on her ship
The Navy relieved then-Command Senior Chief Grisel Marrero from her post with the Manchester’s gold crew in September.
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
#Ukraine spoiled brat #Zelensky in short:
give me, give me more money, give me more weapons, give me everything you have ...
give me, give me more money, give me more weapons, give me everything you have ...
😁1
#France
@RnaudBertrand (X):
The open secret about Macron's nomination of Barnier as Prime Minister is that it has to mean that Macron made an agreement with Le Pen's Rassemblement National (RN).
Why? Because if he hadn't, a Barnier government would be censured by parliament immediately given that the New Popular Front (NPF) on the left plus Le Pen have an absolute majority of seats and can therefore effectively fire any government if they vote for that together. And Macron sure as hell can't have made an agreement with the NPF to appoint a right-winger as Prime Minister...
Which is pretty insane when you think about it because Macron allied with the NPF during the election to erect a "Republican Front" against the RN. Concretely, in the 2nd round of the election, when a RN candidate was running against either a NPF or a Macron candidate, the other party called on their supporters to vote for the non-RN candidate, regardless of political differences.
Fast forward to now: the NPF arrived first in the elections and not only does Macron categorically refuses to nominate a NPF Prime Minister but he allies with the RN to nominate Barnier!
Which really begs the question: why couldn't Macron do the same thing with a NPF Prime Minister? Why couldn't he get his own party to commit not to censure a NPF government like he undoubtedly got the RN to commit not to censure Barnier? His own party together with the NPF have 57% of the seats in parliament so that would have been easily censure-proof.
Which really demonstrates how undemocratic Macron's move is: he refused a NPF Prime Minister on the basis that it'd be censured but then demonstrates, almost in the same breath, that it actually it didn't have to be censured, it was his own choice! He simply refused to respect the results of the votes, results which were a consequence of his own choice to do the "Republican Front" alliance with the NPF, it's just crazy 🤦♂️
And you ask yourself why a majority of the French population now believe France isn't a democracy anymore?...
@RnaudBertrand (X):
The open secret about Macron's nomination of Barnier as Prime Minister is that it has to mean that Macron made an agreement with Le Pen's Rassemblement National (RN).
Why? Because if he hadn't, a Barnier government would be censured by parliament immediately given that the New Popular Front (NPF) on the left plus Le Pen have an absolute majority of seats and can therefore effectively fire any government if they vote for that together. And Macron sure as hell can't have made an agreement with the NPF to appoint a right-winger as Prime Minister...
Which is pretty insane when you think about it because Macron allied with the NPF during the election to erect a "Republican Front" against the RN. Concretely, in the 2nd round of the election, when a RN candidate was running against either a NPF or a Macron candidate, the other party called on their supporters to vote for the non-RN candidate, regardless of political differences.
Fast forward to now: the NPF arrived first in the elections and not only does Macron categorically refuses to nominate a NPF Prime Minister but he allies with the RN to nominate Barnier!
Which really begs the question: why couldn't Macron do the same thing with a NPF Prime Minister? Why couldn't he get his own party to commit not to censure a NPF government like he undoubtedly got the RN to commit not to censure Barnier? His own party together with the NPF have 57% of the seats in parliament so that would have been easily censure-proof.
Which really demonstrates how undemocratic Macron's move is: he refused a NPF Prime Minister on the basis that it'd be censured but then demonstrates, almost in the same breath, that it actually it didn't have to be censured, it was his own choice! He simply refused to respect the results of the votes, results which were a consequence of his own choice to do the "Republican Front" alliance with the NPF, it's just crazy 🤦♂️
And you ask yourself why a majority of the French population now believe France isn't a democracy anymore?...
Forwarded from Pavel Durov (Paul Du Rove)
❤️ Thanks everyone for your support and love!
Last month I got interviewed by police for 4 days after arriving in Paris. I was told I may be personally responsible for other people’s illegal use of Telegram, because the French authorities didn’t receive responses from Telegram.
This was surprising for several reasons:
1. Telegram has an official representative in the EU that accepts and replies to EU requests. Its email address has been publicly available for anyone in the EU who googles “Telegram EU address for law enforcement”.
2. The French authorities had numerous ways to reach me to request assistance. As a French citizen, I was a frequent guest at the French consulate in Dubai. A while ago, when asked, I personally helped them establish a hotline with Telegram to deal with the threat of terrorism in France.
3. If a country is unhappy with an internet service, the established practice is to start a legal action against the service itself. Using laws from the pre-smartphone era to charge a CEO with crimes committed by third parties on the platform he manages is a misguided approach. Building technology is hard enough as it is. No innovator will ever build new tools if they know they can be personally held responsible for potential abuse of those tools.
Establishing the right balance between privacy and security is not easy. You have to reconcile privacy laws with law enforcement requirements, and local laws with EU laws. You have to take into account technological limitations. As a platform, you want your processes to be consistent globally, while also ensuring they are not abused in countries with weak rule of law. We’ve been committed to engaging with regulators to find the right balance. Yes, we stand by our principles: our experience is shaped by our mission to protect our users in authoritarian regimes. But we’ve always been open to dialogue.
Sometimes we can’t agree with a country’s regulator on the right balance between privacy and security. In those cases, we are ready to leave that country. We've done it many times. When Russia demanded we hand over “encryption keys” to enable surveillance, we refused — and Telegram got banned in Russia. When Iran demanded we block channels of peaceful protesters, we refused — and Telegram got banned in Iran. We are prepared to leave markets that aren’t compatible with our principles, because we are not doing this for money. We are driven by the intention to bring good and defend the basic rights of people, particularly in places where these rights are violated.
All of that does not mean Telegram is perfect. Even the fact that authorities could be confused by where to send requests is something that we should improve. But the claims in some media that Telegram is some sort of anarchic paradise are absolutely untrue. We take down millions of harmful posts and channels every day. We publish daily transparency reports (like this or this ). We have direct hotlines with NGOs to process urgent moderation requests faster.
However, we hear voices saying that it’s not enough. Telegram’s abrupt increase in user count to 950M caused growing pains that made it easier for criminals to abuse our platform. That’s why I made it my personal goal to ensure we significantly improve things in this regard. We’ve already started that process internally, and I will share more details on our progress with you very soon.
I hope that the events of August will result in making Telegram — and the social networking industry as a whole — safer and stronger. Thanks again for your love and memes 🙏
Last month I got interviewed by police for 4 days after arriving in Paris. I was told I may be personally responsible for other people’s illegal use of Telegram, because the French authorities didn’t receive responses from Telegram.
This was surprising for several reasons:
1. Telegram has an official representative in the EU that accepts and replies to EU requests. Its email address has been publicly available for anyone in the EU who googles “Telegram EU address for law enforcement”.
2. The French authorities had numerous ways to reach me to request assistance. As a French citizen, I was a frequent guest at the French consulate in Dubai. A while ago, when asked, I personally helped them establish a hotline with Telegram to deal with the threat of terrorism in France.
3. If a country is unhappy with an internet service, the established practice is to start a legal action against the service itself. Using laws from the pre-smartphone era to charge a CEO with crimes committed by third parties on the platform he manages is a misguided approach. Building technology is hard enough as it is. No innovator will ever build new tools if they know they can be personally held responsible for potential abuse of those tools.
Establishing the right balance between privacy and security is not easy. You have to reconcile privacy laws with law enforcement requirements, and local laws with EU laws. You have to take into account technological limitations. As a platform, you want your processes to be consistent globally, while also ensuring they are not abused in countries with weak rule of law. We’ve been committed to engaging with regulators to find the right balance. Yes, we stand by our principles: our experience is shaped by our mission to protect our users in authoritarian regimes. But we’ve always been open to dialogue.
Sometimes we can’t agree with a country’s regulator on the right balance between privacy and security. In those cases, we are ready to leave that country. We've done it many times. When Russia demanded we hand over “encryption keys” to enable surveillance, we refused — and Telegram got banned in Russia. When Iran demanded we block channels of peaceful protesters, we refused — and Telegram got banned in Iran. We are prepared to leave markets that aren’t compatible with our principles, because we are not doing this for money. We are driven by the intention to bring good and defend the basic rights of people, particularly in places where these rights are violated.
All of that does not mean Telegram is perfect. Even the fact that authorities could be confused by where to send requests is something that we should improve. But the claims in some media that Telegram is some sort of anarchic paradise are absolutely untrue. We take down millions of harmful posts and channels every day. We publish daily transparency reports (like this or this ). We have direct hotlines with NGOs to process urgent moderation requests faster.
However, we hear voices saying that it’s not enough. Telegram’s abrupt increase in user count to 950M caused growing pains that made it easier for criminals to abuse our platform. That’s why I made it my personal goal to ensure we significantly improve things in this regard. We’ve already started that process internally, and I will share more details on our progress with you very soon.
I hope that the events of August will result in making Telegram — and the social networking industry as a whole — safer and stronger. Thanks again for your love and memes 🙏
Forwarded from Tucker Carlson
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Jeffrey Sachs: Trump’s Plan to Stop WWIII, CIA Coups, and Warning of the Next Financial Crisis
We’re clearly heading toward war with Iran. Is there any scenario where that’s a good thing for the United States? A definitive answer from Jeffrey Sachs.
Chapters
(1:21) Ukraine Is Losing Their War
(10:14) The Potential for Nuclear War
(25:07) Will We Go To War With Iran?
(47:06) Who’s Running Our Foreign Policy?
(52:25) The First Thing Donald Trump Should Do as President
(1:03:56) Taiwan
(1:17:16) The Free Exchange of Information
(1:28:10) The Trump Assassination Attempt
(1:41:41) Alternative Media
(1:46:11) Credit Card Debt
(1:54:38) The Truth About the 2008 Financial Crisis
(2:14:24) The Next Financial Crisis
@TuckerCarlson
We’re clearly heading toward war with Iran. Is there any scenario where that’s a good thing for the United States? A definitive answer from Jeffrey Sachs.
Chapters
(1:21) Ukraine Is Losing Their War
(10:14) The Potential for Nuclear War
(25:07) Will We Go To War With Iran?
(47:06) Who’s Running Our Foreign Policy?
(52:25) The First Thing Donald Trump Should Do as President
(1:03:56) Taiwan
(1:17:16) The Free Exchange of Information
(1:28:10) The Trump Assassination Attempt
(1:41:41) Alternative Media
(1:46:11) Credit Card Debt
(1:54:38) The Truth About the 2008 Financial Crisis
(2:14:24) The Next Financial Crisis
@TuckerCarlson
👍2
Canada:
The Ottawa police secretly wiretapped five its officers of Somali descent and their family members for months, never laid any charges, and refuses to tell them why, alleges a $2.5-million lawsuit filed by the officers.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/police-wiretaps-1.7219364?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar
The Ottawa police secretly wiretapped five its officers of Somali descent and their family members for months, never laid any charges, and refuses to tell them why, alleges a $2.5-million lawsuit filed by the officers.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/police-wiretaps-1.7219364?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar
CBC
Ottawa police secretly wiretapped 5 Black officers, lawsuit alleges | CBC News
Ottawa police secretly wiretapped five of its Somali officers and their family members for months, never laid charges, and refuses to tell them why, alleges a $2.5-million lawsuit filed by the officers.