Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 154

The Rise and Fall of Western Science

By Tomas Fürst

Before you start reading, take a moment and look around you. There’s a good chance that everything you see is human creations—sophisticated products of human ingenuity and intelligence backed by hundreds of years of accumulated understanding of how and why nature works. The prosperity of our civilization is based on the following virtuous circle:

Find out how and why nature works,based on this understanding, develop technologies and innovations,manufacture them……and sell them.

[…]

However, the virtuous circle needs some important institutions to work properly: Science cannot thrive without freedom of speech and thought, the development of technology, and innovation requires a certain degree of capital accumulation, manufacturing requires stable and predictable property rights, and sales are best organized in a free market. But without Science, the virtuous circle breaks. Thus, we need to understand where and why this wonderful human activity started and where it is heading.

The Technological Sprint of the Late 19th Century

Before the Reformation, one monolithic religious Truth reigned in Europe and there was no room for other opinions. However, the Reformation split this truth into two – mutually exclusive ones. In the gap between the two religious truths, scientific truth began to sprout. Almost immediately, the virtuous circle described above kicked in, and miraculous technologies began to emerge.

For example, in 1742, Benjamin Robins noticed that by combining Newton’s law of motion and the equation of state of gases (discovered a few years earlier by Robert Boyle), the muzzle velocity of an artillery projectile could be calculated. This discovery made artillery much more precise. Frederick the Great of Prussia noticed the discovery and asked Leonhard Euler to translate and supplement Robins’ work. On this basis, Frederick completely rebuilt his army – he introduced fast and accurate horse-drawn artillery, which was an almost unbeatable force in Europe at the time. Napoleon later only copied and perfected this model.

European rulers noticed that the key to these military successes lay in Science. The constant rivalry among states accelerated the spread of innovation and created enormous pressure for further research. This sprint resulted in a technological whirlwind in the late 19th century, the scale and scope of which was incomparable to anything that happened before (and afterward). In 1859, Edmund Drake drilled the first successful oil well in Pennsylvania, starting a revolution in lighting, as burning animal fat could be replaced by kerosene lamps. This was very useful, especially in the sweatshops of the North, where it was always dark.

In 1876 Gottlieb Daimler and Carl Benz invented the four-stroke engine, creating a demand for oil that exceeded the need for lighting by orders of magnitude. Just in time, because Thomas Edison patented the incandescent light bulb two years later, effectively ending the era of kerosene lighting. A year later, Benz came up with the two-stroke engine, and Rudolf Diesel patented the diesel engine in 1892, which allowed internal combustion engines to be scaled up to power trucks, ships, and submarines. At the same time, Werner von Siemens constructed the first electric locomotive.

Ten years later, the Wright brothers introduced the first steerable aircraft powered by an internal combustion engine. This technological whirlwind was brought to a close in 1909 by Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch, who mastered a method of nitrogen-fixing that enabled the mass production of industrial fertilizers, without which the planet could barely support a billion people.

[…]

Collectivist Ideologies of the 20th Century

But then, quite unexpectedly, the world came to an end. Before European nations could reap the fruits of all these fascinating technologies, World War I broke out. The European nations used all the miraculous new technologies and all their scientific potential to kill their fellow humans as efficiently as possible. The generals planned the war on horseback with bayonets. In the end, the war was fought with planes, tanks, battleships, submarines, trucks, and machine guns.

[…]

After the war, the source of legitimacy was no longer religion, but Science. And so the “nationalization” of science gradually began to take place, with various totalitarian regimes supporting Science in exchange for results that served the ideological needs of the regimes. This disease of the 20th century bore its first poisonous fruits in the form of Nazi biology, eugenics, or Soviet Lysenkoism. In the Communist bloc, it continued long past World War II in almost all scientific fields, as some readers may still remember. The current “scientific consensus” on man-made CO2-driven climate change is just another offshoot of state-funded “nationalized” Science, the purpose of which is not to understand the world but to legitimize various collectivist ideologies and their perverse goals.

The interwar collectivist ideologies quickly led the world to another war, which repeated the apocalypse of the previous one – once more and for good. All the murderous technologies of WWI were used again, but perfected, mass-produced and used on a scale that defied all imagination. Cryptography, radar, and the nuclear bomb were added, symbolically confirming the total dominance of Science: The power to destroy the world no longer belonged to God, but to the Scientist. Europe, the cradle of Science, lay in ruins and the center of gravity of the world moved to the United States and the Soviet Union.

Big State and Big Business

Since the beginning of the Cold War, the two superpowers disagreed on everything, apart from one thing: Everything must be based on Science.

[…]

In the West, the original “Naturwissenschaft” was gradually replaced by the victorious Anglo-Saxon Science. At first, it went well. The post-war American conjuncture was supplemented by the open atmosphere of American (mostly private) universities, where a generation of (often Jewish) emigrants with rigorous German interwar education blossomed. After half a century-long orgy of murder and destruction, the world seemed to be returning to the technological whirlwind of the late 19th century. Semiconductors, computers, nuclear power, and satellites appeared, and man walked on the moon.

But then, things started going downhill in the West as well. Science increasingly fell victim to two cancers of the 20th century: Big State and Big Business. In the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson announced the “Great Society” program, and American society embarked on a path that had long since destroyed the social sciences in the East.

[…]

The amount of public funding increased sharply and more and more research areas started to appear, where it was clear which results were politically desirable and which were not. It mostly concerned social sciences, which willingly metastasized under state funding into various branches of Gender Studies, Puppet Arts, and EcoGastronomy, but in the end, Natural Science was not spared either. Historically, the first post-war victim of “nationalized science” was climatology, which today serves exclusively to legitimize the political goals of the deindustrialization of the West.

Moreover, the second deadly threat to Science – corruption by Big Business – started to creep in.

[…]

Going Downhill

More and more disasters followed, in which rigged research overseen by corrupt regulators led to damage on a staggering scale.

For example, pharmaceutical companies managed to convince American doctors that “chronic pain” is a problem that tens of millions of people suffer from. Through a combination of aggressive marketing and manipulated scientific studies, they created an addiction in millions of people to opioids (sold under the names OxyContin or Fentanyl), which they falsely claimed were “safe and effective,” and – above all – non-addictive.

[…]

The opioid story is perhaps the most visible but by no means the only one. Tobacco companies – having lost the battle for lung cancer – used the accumulated capital to buy several food giants (for example, Kraft or General Foods). Their armies of scientists immediately went after the same goal as before, only in a different area: Over the following years, they developed hundreds of addictive substances that the companies started to add en masse to industrially processed food. Instead of a tobacco addiction, they plunged America into a “junk food” addiction.

[…]

Accompanied by almost complete disinterest of the public, more and more scientific fields gradually became victims of the Big State or Big Business. The results came soon – more and more money was poured into Science, but those miraculous technologies and innovations have not appeared. I bet you to name at least three technologies that appeared since 2000 and changed the world as the invention of the internal combustion engine.

[…]

The West Goes out of Its Mind

But the real catastrophe for Western Science has come with the Covid epidemic, when the West went completely out of its mind. At that moment, the two scientific curses of the 20th century met in terrible synergy. Big Business quickly understood that the epidemic represented an opportunity that may not be repeated. If opioids were worth a few lies, the possibility of selling billions of “vaccines” to panicked governments all over the world was worth many lies. Moreover, the American left has just experienced the enormous shock of Trump’s election victory and readily jumped at every opportunity to derail his presidency.

So, when Donald Trump initially (very rationally) refused to panic, refused to introduce drastic mass-scale measures, and encouraged experimentation with available drugs (especially Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine), the American left launched a hysterical campaign to panic as much as possible, implement as drastic across-the-board measures as possible, and attack any attempts to use repurposed drugs to treat Covid.

[….]

The election of Joe Biden finished the disaster. The interests of Big Pharma suddenly became aligned with the interests of the federal government and the entire monstrous power apparatus of the government threw itself into a battle against its own citizens. The military (vaccine distribution), the secret services (censorship of social networks), the police (surveillance of lockdowns), and many other repressive branches of the state became involved in this appalling project. Later generations will remember this as the era of Covid fascism.

In a matter of months, the entire building of Western Science, carefully assembled over several hundred years, collapsed. Every aspect of the Covid disaster has been linked to some scientific failure. It is almost certain that the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself originated from the Wuhan laboratory, where – at the expense of Western taxpayers – extremely problematic gain-of-function research was carried out. Throughout the epidemic, doctors and scientists lied about the ineffectiveness of early treatment because they knew that was exactly what the establishment wanted to hear from them.

As soon as the end of 2021, however, it was clear that Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D (and many other drugs) represented a cheap, safe, and effective treatment and prevention that could have saved millions of lives. Despite that, the entire scientific establishment completely denied the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine and repeated the CDC’s political “You’re not a horse” propaganda.

The experimental gene technology masqueraded as a “vaccine” was the final nail in the coffin of Western Science. The hysterical push for “vaccine” mandates under the Safe and Effective mantra violated almost all professional, legal, and ethical principles of Science. The next few years will reveal the full extent of the catastrophe, but already today it can be said that mRNA “vaccines” prevented few cases of Covid (if any) but harmed millions. Right now, this terrible arithmetic gradually creeps into public space. Once the public realizes the extent of this disaster, it is safe to assume that their anger will turn not only against the political establishment but also against the institutionalized Western Science that caused every aspect of the Covid disaster.

The End of Science

[…]

After 300 years, the Enlightenment project of Western Science has reached an important crossroads. At the end of the 19th century, Science brought fascinating progress to mankind. During the 20th century, Science gained so much prestige that it replaced religion and became the central ideology of the world. Gradually, however, like Christianity before the Reformation, it became a victim of its own success: Instead of seeking the Truth about how and why the world works, it began to abuse its prestige and serve the powerful and rich.

[…]

Via https://brownstone.org/articles/the-rise-and-fall-of-western-science/

 

US Has Stopped Ukrainian ATACMS Strikes On Russia

Moon Over Alabama

As further ATACMS strikes on Russia seem to have stopped this timeline is of interest.

November 18:

U.S. allows Ukraine to use ATACMS missiles against targets within Russia:

The reversal of policy, nearly 1,000 days since Russia started its full-scale invasion on Ukraine, comes largely in response to Russia’s deployment of North Korean troops to supplement its forces, a development that has caused alarm in Washington and Kyiv, a U.S. official and a source familiar with the decision told Reuters.

[Note: There is no evidence that any North Korean troops were deployed by Russia anywhere near Ukraine.]

November 19 and November 20/21:

Ukraine hits an ammunition depot in Russia’s Bryansk Oblast, far from any relevant frontline, as well as military facilities in Russia’s Kursk oblast:

On November 19, six ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles produced by the United States, and on November 21, during a combined missile assault involving British Storm Shadow systems and HIMARS systems produced by the US, attacked military facilities inside the Russian Federation in the Bryansk and Kursk regions.
…
The fire at the ammunition depot in the Bryansk Region, caused by the debris of ATACMS missiles, was extinguished without casualties or significant damage. In the Kursk Region, the attack targeted one of the command posts of our group North. Regrettably, the attack and the subsequent air defence battle resulted in casualties, both fatalities and injuries, among the perimeter security units and servicing staff.

November 21:

Russia fires a new missile with hypersonic kinetic warheads at a military industrial complex in Dnipro:

In response to the deployment of American and British long-range weapons, on November 21, the Russian Armed Forces delivered a combined strike on a facility within Ukraine’s defence industrial complex. In field conditions, we also carried out tests of one of Russia’s latest medium-range missile systems – in this case, carrying a non-nuclear hypersonic ballistic missile that our engineers named Oreshnik. The tests were successful, achieving the intended objective of the launch. In the city of Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine, one of the largest and most famous industrial complexes from the Soviet Union era, which continues to produce missiles and other armaments, was hit.

November 23 and 25:

Ukraine continues with ATACMS strikes against targets within Russia:

On 23 November, the enemy fired five U.S.-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles at a position of an S-400 anti-aircraft battalion near Lotarevka (37 kilometres north-west of Kursk).During a surface-to-air battle, a Pantsir AAMG crew protecting the battalion destroyed three ATACMS missiles, and two hit their intended targets.

As a result of the strike, a radar was damaged. There are casualties among personnel.

On 25 November, the Kiev regime delivered one more strike by eight ATACMS operational-tactical missiles at the Kursk-Vostochny airfield (near Khalino). Seven missile were shot down by S-400 SAM and Pantsir AAMG systems, one missile hit the assigned target. Two servicemen were lightly wounded and infrastructure objects sustained minor damage by missile debris.

After investigating the attacked sites it was confirmed that the AFU delivered strikes by U.S.-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles.

November 27:

The Russian Gen. Valery Gerasimov has a phone call with Gen. CQ Brown, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

Gen. Valery Gerasimov initiated last Wednesday’s call with Gen. CQ Brown, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to provide him with that warning and to also discuss Ukraine and how to avoid miscalculation between the U.S. and Russia about that ongoing conflict.

 

November 28:

Putin announces the response to the November 23/25 strikes:

Last night, we conducted a comprehensive strike utilising 90 missiles of these classes and 100 drones, successfully hitting 17 targets. These included military installations, defence industry sites, and their support infrastructure. I want to emphasise once again that these strikes were carried out in response to the continued attacks on Russian territory using American ATACMS missiles. As I have repeatedly stated, such actions will always elicit a response.

It seems that Russia’s message has finally reached its recipient.

December 5/6:

In another strike on Russia Ukraine has used fix wing UAVs but no ATACMS:

Last night, the Russian Armed Forces have foiled another attempt by the Kiev regime to launch a terrorist attack using a fixed-wing UAV against the facilities in the Russian Federation.Thirty three Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles were intercepted by alerted air defence systems over Kursk region. Fourteen UAVs were shot down over the territory of Voronezh region, eleven over Kursk region, seven over Belgorod region, and one over the Crimean Republic.

Moreover, the naval aviation of the Black Sea Fleet destroyed two uncrewed surface vehicles moving to the Crimean peninsula in waters of the Black Sea.

Since Gerasimov’s phone call (and Putin’s speech) there have been NO reports of any further ATACMS (or Storm Shadow) strikes on Russia!

During his announcement of the latest strikes Putin also described the effects of the hypersonic missile strike:

The system deploys dozens of homing warheads that strike the target at a velocity of Mach 10, equivalent to approximately three kilometres per second. The temperature of the impact elements reaches 4,000 degrees Celsius – nearing the surface temperature of the sun, which is around 5,500–6,000 degrees.Consequently, everything within the explosion’s epicentre is reduced to fractions, elementary particles, essentially turning to dust. The missile is capable of destroying even heavily fortified structures and those located at significant depths.

During several interviews in recent days MIT Prof. Ted Postol disagreed (vid) with Putin’s claim. Postol describes the Oreshnik impacts as shallow surface explosions with the force of about 1.5 times the weight equivalent in TNT explosives. With an estimated warhead weight of 100 kilogram the impact of each of the Oreshnik’s 36 warheads would be no bigger than a regular small bomb. This would make them mostly useless against anything but large area surface targets.

I am doubtful that Postol got this right:

Putin is usually extraordinary well informed and not in the habit of making false claims. If he states that Oreshnik warheads have deep penetration capabilities then they are likely to have these.It would make little to no sense for the Russian’s to demonstrate the Oreshnik on hardened targets, as the bunkers of the Yuzhmash machine plant are, if it does not have significant effects on these. It would be a bluff that could and would be immediately called by the Pentagon specialist inspecting the localities and observing the effects.The U.S. is taking the strike seriously. It has reacted by stopping support for further Ukrainian ATACMS strikes on Russia.

Weapon experts like Postol have little experience with hypersonic projectiles which impact at 10 times the speed of sound. I believe that his assessment is sincere. He also applies the necessary caveats. But I doubt that he, like most other experts, has sufficient experience with the effects of dart like hypersonic projectiles to further back up his claims.

I thus recommend, if only out of abundance of caution, to assume that the Russian claims of bunker busting capabilities of Oreshnik missiles are very real.

[…]

Via https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/12/ukraine-has-stopped-atacms-strikes-on-russia.html

Surface temperatures in frigid Greenland have been DROPPING for 20 years

Dr Eddy Berrman

A team of Thai scientists and mathematicians has determined that surface temperatures throughout Greenland have actually been dropping over the past several decades as opposed to increasing.

Countering the establishment’s global warming claims, the new research involved processing 31,464 satellite recordings from 2000 through 2019. On average, surface temperatures fell by 0.11°C, which is considered a “non-significant change in LST [land surface temperature].”

In other words, surface temperatures in Greenland, one of the coldest regions in the world, have been slightly decreasing year after year, according to the new research, which you can expect to not hear about from the corporate media, by the way.

Casting serious doubt on the so-called “net zero” theory of a coming climate collapse, the new research debunks the myth that ocean waters are “boiling” and that the Greenland ice sheet is in danger of catastrophic melting. If anything, Greenland is gradually entering an even deeper freeze the longer time passes.

(Related: Earlier this year, the journal Nature Communications published an article admitting that the world’s arctic regions used to be a whole lot warmer than they are today, suggesting that the planet is cooling.)

No, the planet isn’t warming

To be fair, the ice-free subregions of Greenland appear to be warmer than they used to be, even if the ice-covered regions are cooler than they used to be. At the same time, the authors admit that the reason the non-ice-covered regions appear to be warming is because of increased “population density.”

It is a known fact that the more development an area has, i.e., lots of concrete and asphalt, the warmer surface temperatures are going to be, even in a place like Greenland that is sparsely populated.

One wonders how the globalist-controlled World Economic Forum (WEF) will respond to these new findings, if it even responds at all. After all, the WEF recently warned that the Greenland ice sheet is at risk of a “total collapse” within the next few months – what will they say when a total collapse does not happen?

“This suggestion is only slightly more ludicrous than the scares routinely published to induce mass psychosis in populations with the aim of promoting a collectivist command-and-control Net Zero solution,” warns Chris Morrison, writing for Watts Up With That.

“The recent farce around the COP in Baku showed the conspiracy operating in plain sight. Stop the developing word developing with hydrocarbons, then invent a number of fake scares such as island states disappearing beneath the waves. Everyone knows this and most of the other scares are false as scientists have shown on numerous occasions, but no matter.”

The sad fact remains that news like this will barely gain traction because too few people are talking about it. It will be considered just another conspiracy theory hatched by “climate deniers” who reject the notion that the planet is on the verge of melting.

“All of this means that genuine attempts to explain the science around the climate changing are stuck in a ‘settled’ narrative hellhole,” Morrison further writes.

“The corals can grow like topsy in record amounts on the Great Barrier Reef and the Arctic Sea ice can show a small decade-long recovery. Meanwhile, mainstream media and politics prefer to take their cue from characters like ‘Jim’ Dale, who points out of the window and attributes every puff of wind to a human cause.”

Antarctica has likewise not been warming as is widely claimed. For the past 20 years, Antarctica’s temperatures have remained largely the same, though there is some degree of complexity when trying to evaluate the data honestly and legitimately.

[…]

Via https://dreddymd.com/2024/12/05/global-freezing-surface-temperatures-greenland-dropping/

What the Trump nominees Have Not Done—And Will Not Do

By Victor Davis Hanson  

The current crew, not their proposed Trump replacements, prompted the sick and tired American people to demand different people.

Deflated by the resounding November defeat, the “left” now believes it can magically rebound by destroying Donald Trump’s cabinet nominees.

Many of Trump’s picks are well outside the usual Washington, DC/New York political, media, and corporate nexus.

But that is precisely the point—to insert reformers into a bloated, incompetent, and weaponized government who are not part of it.

Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel, is already drawing severe criticism.

His furious enemies cannot go after his resume, since he has spent a lifetime in private, congressional, and executive billets, both in investigations and intelligence.

Instead, they claim he is too vindictive and does not reflect the ethos of the FBI.

But what will Patel not do as the new director?

He will not serially lie under oath to federal investigators as did interim FBI Director Andrew McCabe, a current Patel critic.

He will not forge an FBI court affidavit, as did convicted felon and agency lawyer Kevin Clinesmith.

He will not claim amnesia 245 times under congressional oath to evade embarrassing admissions as did former Director James Comey.

He will not partner with a foreign national to collect dirt and subvert a presidential campaign as the FBI did with Christopher Steele in 2016.

He will not use the FBI to draft social media to suppress news unfavorable to a presidential candidate on the eve of an election.

He would not have suppressed FBI knowledge that Hunter Biden’s laptop was genuine—to allow the lie to spread that it was “Russian disinformation” on the eve of the 2020 election.

He will not raid the home of an ex-president with SWAT teams, surveil Catholics, monitor parents at school board meetings, or go after pro-life peaceful protestors.

Decorated combat veteran Pete Hegseth is another controversial nominee for secretary of defense.

What will Hegseth likely not do?

Go AWOL without notifying the president of a serious medical procedure as did current Secretary Lloyd Austin?

Install race and gender criteria for promotion and mandate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training?

Insinuate falsely that cabals of white supremacists had infiltrated the military—only to alienate that entire demographic and thus ensure the Pentagon came up 40,000 recruits short?

Oversee the scramble from Kabul that saw $50 billion in U.S. military equipment abandoned to Taliban terrorists?

Watch passively as a Chinese spy balloon traversed the continental United States for a week?

Allow the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to promise his Chinese communist counterpart that the People’s Liberation Army would first be informed if the President of the United States was felt to issue a dangerous order?

Rotate into the Pentagon from a defense contractor boardship and then leave office to rotate back there to leverage procurement decisions?

Oversee the Pentagon’s serial flunking of fiscal audits?

Health and Human Services nominee Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is certainly a maverick. He may earn the most Democratic hits, given his former liberal credentials.

But what will RFK also not do as HHS secretary?

Oversee his agencies circumventing U.S. law by transferring money to communist China to help it produce lethal gain-of-function viruses of the COVID-19 sort—in the manner of Dr. Fauci?

Organize scientists to go after critics of mandatory masking and defame them?

Give pharmaceutical companies near-lifetime exemptions from legal jeopardy for rushing into production mRNA vaccines not traditionally vetted and tested?

Leave office to monetize his HHS expertise and thus make millions from the pharmaceutical companies?

Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, former congressional representative and military veteran Tulsi Gabbard, will soon be defamed in congressional hearings.

But what has Gabbard not done?

Joined “51 former intelligence authorities” to lie on the eve of the 2020 election that the Hunter Biden laptop “had all the hallmarks” of a Russian information/disinformation operation”—in an effort to swing the election to incumbent Joe Biden?

Lied under congressional oath like former DNI James Clapper, who claimed he only gave the “least untruthful answer” in congressional testimony?

Encourage the FBI to monitor a presidential campaign in efforts to discredit it—in the manner of former CIA Director John Brennan, who lied not once but twice under oath?

Fail to foresee the American meltdown in Kabul, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel, or the Houthis takeover of the Red Sea?

We are going to hear some outrageous things in the upcoming congressional confirmation hearings.

But one thing we will not hear about are the crimes, deceptions, and utter incompetence of prior and current government grandees.

The current crew, not their proposed Trump replacements, prompted the sick and tired American people to demand different people.

Voters want novel approaches to reform a government that they not only no longer trust but also now deeply fear.

[…]

Via https://amgreatness.com/2024/12/05/what-the-trump-nominees-have-not-done-and-will-not-do/

An Accidentalist’s Guide to Denying the Obvious

By Josh Stylman

There’s a peculiar comfort in believing that things simply happen by accident. That the powerful don’t conspire, that institutions don’t coordinate, that the crumbling pillars of society represent mere happenstance rather than design. I’ve come to call these people “accidentalists” – those who find refuge in randomness, who dismiss patterns as paranoia.

The Cost of Seeing

Like the red pill in The Matrix, recognizing patterns changes everything. Many choose comfortable illusions over uncomfortable truths. As Hannah Arendt observed, “The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction no longer exists.”

For the professional class – academics, journalists, corporate managers – acknowledging these patterns means confronting their own complicity. Their success, their status, their sense of self – all are built on supporting rather than questioning power structures.

The accidentalist mindset offers refuge from this self-examination. Better to dismiss than face one’s role in the machinery.

The Death of Coincidence

It requires impressive mental gymnastics to believe that those with power – who achieved it through careful planning and coordination – suddenly stop planning and coordinating once they obtain it. That they abandon the very tools that brought them success. That they become, somehow, passive observers of their own decline.

When confronted with evidence of coordination – be it documented government censorship, institutional narrative control, or coordinated media campaigns – the accidentalist draws an arbitrary line. “Well, that’s different,” they say. “That’s not a conspiracy, that’s just…” And here they trail off, unable to articulate why some coordinated actions by the powerful count as conspiracies while others are merely business as usual.

The Weaponization of Skepticism and Manufacturing Outcasts

The term “conspiracy theory” itself reveals institutional manipulation. The CIA’s 1967 dispatch (Document 1035-960) explicitly directed media assets to use this label to discredit Warren Commission critics. They transformed skepticism into pathology – making the very act of questioning power seem delusional.

This weaponization of language worked brilliantly. Today, pattern recognition itself becomes suspect. In 2022, the New York Times published perhaps the most revealing example of institutional arrogance – an essay warning citizens against “doing their own research,” suggesting they weren’t competent to question expert conclusions. The message was clear: leave the thinking to us. Trust the experts. Stay in your lane.

That this patronizing directive came from a publication with its own history of spreading misinformation speaks volumes. The accidentalist, naturally, sees no problem with experts telling people not to think for themselves. They miss the deeper implication: when institutions actively discourage independent investigation, they reveal their fear of informed scrutiny.

The pattern is unmistakable: identify skeptics, discredit them, make examples of them. The accidentalist never asks why questioning power triggers such coordinated attacks.

Today’s Denials, Tomorrow’s Headlines

Consider a revealing moment: In 2021, several of my friends eagerly recommended Dopesick, (“I think you would especially like this”), condemning the Sacklers’ manipulation of medicine for profit. Yet these same friends mocked me for questioning pharmaceutical companies today – despite their status as the most heavily criminally fined industry in human history. Those who recognized similar patterns were labeled ‘anti-vaxxers’ and ‘threats to public health.’ Scientists suggesting lab origins became ‘conspiracy theorists.’ The pattern repeats: identify skeptics, discredit them, make examples of them.

Let’s examine three cases where “conspiracy theories” transformed into acknowledged history:

The Sugar Deception: In the 1960s, the sugar industry paid Harvard scientists to blame heart disease on fat instead of sugar. These industry-funded studies shaped dietary guidelines for decades, creating a massive public health crisis through “low-fat” but sugar-laden foods. The accidentalist views this as an isolated historical incident rather than a template for corporate manipulation of science.The Tobacco Playbook: For decades, tobacco companies buried evidence linking smoking to cancer while funding research to create doubt. Their infamous internal memo stated, “Doubt is our product.” The accidentalist sees this as a unique case rather than recognizing the same tactics in current corporate practices.The Vioxx Cover-up: Merck concealed evidence that their blockbuster drug caused heart attacks, leading to an estimated 60,000 deaths. Internal documents revealed executives strategizing to “neutralize” critics. The accidentalist treats this as an aberration rather than standard operating procedure.The Pattern Repeats

Consider the timing: A 342-page Patriot Act appeared weeks after 9/11. Operation Lock Step described pandemic measures in 2010. Event 201 simulated responses in October 2019 – the same day as the Wuhan Military Games. Months later, these exact measures were implemented globally. What are the odds?

The patterns of control repeat at every scale:

Globally: WHO/WEF coordinationNationally: Regulatory captureCorporate: Internal suppression of dissentLocal: Community pressure to conform

Power’s fingerprints are everywhere. Once you see them, they can’t be unseen.

The Corporate Convergence

Here’s where the accidentalist worldview truly fails: These weren’t separate conspiracies but a single system perfecting its methods. The tobacco giants that knowingly addicted millions didn’t disappear – they bought food companies (RJR Nabisco) and continued manipulating public health. Those same food conglomerates now merge with pharmaceutical corporations (Monsanto/Bayer), putting the same scientists who engineered addictive cigarettes and processed foods in charge of our medicine.

These corporations don’t just share ownership – they share methods. The same tactics used to addict smokers were applied to processed foods. The same research manipulation that hid tobacco dangers now obscures pharmaceutical risks. The same media control that sold cigarettes as healthy now promotes untested medical interventions.

The Reality Merchants

Consider the current media response to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s nomination as HHS Secretary. The coordinated messaging is impossible to miss – talking heads across networks uniformly label him a “conspiracy theorist” and “danger to public health,” never addressing his actual positions. These are the same voices that championed destructive pandemic policies, now attempting to discredit someone who questioned their wisdom.

Or examine Dr. Jay Bhattacharya – a Stanford professor whose expertise was unquestioned until he challenged lockdown policies. Despite eventual vindication, the institutional response was swift: coordinated media attacks, academic ostracism, and algorithmic suppression. The pattern is clear: expertise is respected only when it aligns with institutional interests.

Engineering Compliance

The template begins with manufactured scarcity and enforced dependency. But understanding the mechanics of fiat systems is just the beginning. The real revelation is recognizing how this architecture extends beyond money into every domain of human existence.

Covid-19 didn’t create new systems of control – it revealed existing ones. The infrastructure for rights suspension, narrative enforcement, and dissent silencing was already in place. The “Great Reset” wasn’t conceived in 2020. The surveillance architecture wasn’t built overnight. The ability to coordinate global policy, control information flow, and reshape human behavior wasn’t developed in response to a crisis – it was waiting for one.

Moreover, the selective enforcement of truth reveals power’s preferences. Regardless of what one thinks about Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook statements, his $900 million fine stands in stark contrast to the total impunity enjoyed by the New York Times and other media outlets whose WMD lies led to hundreds of thousands of deaths. This reveals how power protects its own while punishing outsiders, even when institutional lies cause far greater harm.

The Psychology of Disbelief

“That can’t be true” becomes the mind’s defense mechanism against pattern recognition. This isn’t natural skepticism – it’s programmed rejection (as detailed in “How the Information Factory Evolved”). The larger the pattern, the stronger the denial. They’ve weaponized skepticism against itself, creating a population that reflexively defends authority while attacking any challenge to it.

We’re watching the early stages of converging control systems, with clear signs of what’s coming:

Digital IDs linked to health recordsCBDCs enabling programmable moneySocial credit systems disguised as ESG metricsSurveillance capitalism merging with state controlArtificial scarcity through controlled supply chains

These aren’t predictions – they’re systems actively being built and tested across the globe, from China’s social credit system to Nigeria’s CBDC rollout.

Understanding the Impossible

“But how could they pull this off without anyone knowing?” the accidentalist asks. The answer is simple: compartmentalization. Like the Manhattan Project, most people in global institutions are unaware of the larger plan they’re working on. Even in tech companies, the Gmail team has no idea what YouTube’s content moderators or Google Earth’s mapping division are doing. Each department serves its function without seeing the whole. Professionals across academia, corporate America, and media unknowingly serve a broader agenda, often believing they’re working for noble causes.

The truth isn’t hidden – it’s protected by its own audacity. As Marshall McLuhan observed, “Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity.” This explains why major revelations often hide in plain sight: the scale of coordinated deception exceeds what most people can psychologically accept as possible.

Breaking the Spell

The ultimate revelation isn’t how powerful they are – it’s how fragile their control really is. Their greatest strength – total integration – is also their greatest weakness. Complex systems have more failure points. The more systems are interconnected, the more a disruption in one area can cascade through the whole.

The solution isn’t fighting their systems directly – it’s building parallel structures that make them irrelevant:

Local food systems over global supply chainsPeer-to-peer networks over controlled platformsDirect exchange over surveillance currencyNatural immunity over subscription immunityReal communities over virtual spacesThe Choice

The question isn’t whether power conspires – it’s why we’re so resistant to seeing it. What comfort do we find in believing in accidents? What fear do we harbor of seeing design?

Perhaps it’s simpler to believe in chaos than to confront order. Perhaps it’s easier to dismiss than to engage. Perhaps the accidentalist position isn’t about truth at all – it’s about maintaining the comfort of ignorance in a world that increasingly demands awareness.

Because once you see the pattern, you can’t unsee it. Once you understand that power coordinates, plans, and conspires by its very nature, the only wacky conspiracy theory becomes believing it doesn’t.

The awakening isn’t something that happens to us – it’s something we choose. And that choice, multiplied across millions of individuals, will determine whether humanity enters a new dark age or experiences its greatest renaissance.

[…]

Via https://brownstone.org/articles/an-accidentalists-guide-to-denying-the-obvious/

Syria’s Long History of U.S. Interference and Meddling Dating to the Late 1940s

 

Shane Quinn

US intrusion in Syrian affairs can be traced to the late 1940s, as outlined in 2016 by the American author Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The CIA, at the behest of Harry Truman’s government in Washington, started to destabilise Syria shortly after the country’s official independence in April 1946.

Kennedy Jr. wrote,

“The CIA began its active meddling in Syria in 1949 – barely a year after the agency’s creation. Syrian patriots had declared war on the Nazis, expelled their Vichy French colonial rulers, and crafted a fragile secularist democracy based on the American model”.

Syria at this time was governed by president Shukri al-Quwatli, a man aged in his 50s who had been elected through a democratic process in August 1943. Quwatli is a founding father of the modern Syrian state, and he is regarded by many Syrians as among the most renowned figures in the country’s 20th century history.

Image on the right: Quwatli declaring Syria’s independence from France, 17 April 1946 (Licensed under the public domain)

 

Quwatli had Syria’s interests at heart, and he was well acquainted with the methods of imperial powers. He repeatedly pressed for Syrian independence from its French master, often irritating politicians in France by what they perceived to be Quwatli’s stubbornness and disobedience.

It was inevitable these character traits would annoy the leaders of another major power. This time Quwatli was not dealing with a long-declining colonial state like France, but instead his country’s independence was standing in the way of the geopolitical designs of the world’s strongest country, America.

By the 1930s and 1940s, it was recognised in American political circles that the Middle East was the earth’s richest and most strategically important region, chiefly because it contains vast quantities of oil and gas. The waters beside Syria’s coastline are estimated to hold 122 trillion cubic feet of gas and around 107 billion barrels of oil.

The Truman administration wanted to construct extensive oil infrastructure, called the Trans-Arabian Pipeline, through the US ally and oil dictatorship Saudi Arabia, northwards into Syria and Lebanon. British author James Barr, a Middle East analyst, wrote, “By the fall of 1947, Syria had become as important to the United States as it had been to the Crusaders eight centuries earlier”.

The Trans-Arabian Pipeline was a venture of American corporations like Standard Oil of New Jersey (today ExxonMobil), which in the past had conducted business deals with the fascist regimes in Europe. Also involved in the Trans-Arabian Pipeline was Standard Oil of California (today Chevron) and Texaco (now part of Chevron). Texaco likewise pursued business operations with the far-right European powers, having for example constructed a large oil refinery in Nazi Germany at the city of Hamburg, which supplied fuel for the Luftwaffe.

The CIA itself had been founded in July 1947. Two months later, in September 1947 a 31-year-old CIA agent named Miles Copeland arrived in the Syrian capital Damascus. He thereafter gathered intelligence details on the country. Copeland was soon joined in Syria by another CIA agent, Stephen Meade.

Much to the Americans’ disapproval, president Quwatli was not keen on sanctioning the US-initiated oil pipeline across Syrian territory. As a consequence it was decided in Washington that he would have to go. The CIA agents in Syria, Copeland and Meade, would perform a central role in ousting Quwatli. The Truman administration gave its consent to the installation of a military dictatorship in Damascus, led by Brigadier-General Husni al-Zaim, someone who Kennedy Jr. described as “a convicted swindler”.

The CIA officers in Damascus advised and bribed Zaim, who was the chief-of-staff of the Syrian Army. Meade alone met with Zaim on at least 6 occasions, and they spoke about the possibility of an “army supported dictatorship”. Zaim informed Meade that the “only way to start the Syrian people along the road to progress and democracy” is “with the whip”. Bolstered by the CIA, Zaim overthrew Quwatli on 30 March 1949.

Brazilian historian Moniz Bandeira recognised the underlying reason was that the ousted Quwatli “had hesitated in approving the construction of the Trans-Arabian Pipeline, connecting the oil fields of Saudi Arabia to the ports of Lebanon, which the United States wanted to build through Syria”. Syria’s tentative democracy had been quickly smashed with US assistance.

The CIA-engineered overthrow of Quwatli was one of the first covert operations the intelligence service had undertaken. Zaim’s rule in Damascus was a brief and unpopular one, lasting for four and a half months until mid-August 1949. He was toppled and killed by disloyal military colleagues “with the help of the United States” Bandeira noted. A succession of short-lived and mostly military autocracies reigned in Syria, until the mid-1950s. In an unlikely return Quwatli reassumed power in early September 1955.

Now aged 64, Quwatli chose a foreign policy of non-alignment outside of the American and Soviet camps. With the Cold War between west and east intensifying, Quwatli’s independent strategy bothered the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration. Eisenhower, a famous US Army general who became president in January 1953, described the Middle East two years before as “the most strategically important area of the world”.

For president Eisenhower, the Middle East state of Syria was a valuable piece on the chess board. At this time around 1955 the CIA Director under Eisenhower, Allen Dulles, and his brother the US Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, began formulating a clandestine war against Arab nationalism; which they conveniently linked with communism, particularly when it threatened US hegemony over foreign oil sources. Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers already had leading parts in deposing democratic governments in oil rich Iran (August 1953) not far from Syria, and Guatemala (June 1954) in Central America.

Just as Quwatli was returning to power in Damascus, Eisenhower’s regime change policy towards Syria was taking shape. The CIA Director Allen Dulles considered Syria “ripe for a coup”. From 1955, the CIA worked in tandem with Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and also Turkish intelligence. Together these special services colluded with the conservatives of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, in the hope of removing Quwatli.

On 1 July 1956 the CIA officer Archibald Roosevelt Jr., grandson of former president Theodore Roosevelt, met in Damascus with Wilbur Crane Eveland, a US National Security Council member. Also present at this meeting was an ex-Syrian minister, Michail Bey Ilyan. Displeased with Quwatli’s government, the three men discussed an “anti-communist” takeover of Syria and its biggest cities, such as Damascus, Aleppo and Homs.

On 21 September 1956 – on the pretexts of containing Soviet communism and the influence of Egypt under its new left-wing leader Gamal Abdel Nasser – the Secretary of State John Foster Dulles informed America’s ambassador in Syria, James S. Moose, to continue “to seek means of assisting Western firms which are bidding for the contract for construction of the Syrian national oil refinery, in competition with bids from the Soviet bloc”.

In October 1956, the special services of America, Britain and Turkey gave the green light to what was titled Operation Straggle, a plan to eliminate Quwatli. Secret agents of the Anglo-American-Turkish powers instigated unrest along Syria’s frontiers, which would serve as the pretext for a putsch in Damascus.

The CIA-led Operation Straggle turned into a fiasco. Syria’s head of military intelligence, Colonel Abdel Hamid al-Sarraj, discovered the anti-government plot and arrested the principal Syrian conspirators. A CIA operative, Walter Snowdon, who was also the Second Secretary in the US Embassy in Damascus, was implicated and had to hastily leave Syria. As too did the US military attaché, Colonel Robert W. Molloy.

Operation Straggle was terminated on 29 October 1956, just when the so-called Suez Crisis was erupting nearby to the south-west, as president Nasser of Egypt in following days would get the better of his Western foes.

Undeterred by the setbacks, CIA subversive activities in Syria promptly resumed. In 1957 the CIA dispatched to Syria two of its agents, Howard “Rocky” Stone and Kermit Roosevelt Jr., another grandson of Theodore Roosevelt. Stone and Roosevelt Jr. had helped to organise the previously mentioned coups in Iran (Operation Ajax) and Guatemala (Operation Success), which led to such devastating results for those two countries.

Kennedy Jr. wrote,

“Flush from his Operation Ajax ‘success’ in Iran, Stone arrived in Damascus in April 1957 with $3 million to arm and incite Islamic militants, and to bribe Syrian military officers and politicians to overthrow al-Quwatli’s democratically elected secularist regime”.

Operation Straggle was reconstituted by the Americans under the new codename Operation Wappen. The CIA goals were to gather together right-wing elements in Syria’s officer corps, and bribe them with millions of dollars, along with ex-Syrian politicians exiled in neighbouring Lebanon.

The US Embassy in Damascus was now, however, under constant surveillance by anti-imperialist Syrian Army officers like Colonel Sarraj, who was an admirer of Nasser. Colonel Sarraj had prior knowledge of the coup’s development. The plan was further denounced by Syrian military personnel who refused to accept bribes to oust Quwatli. Stone, the CIA agent in Damascus, was arrested by Syria’s authorities and on television he confessed to the plot. US Ambassador Moose was expelled from Syria, with his tenure officially ending on 30 June 1957.

Eisenhower was seriously annoyed at this turn of events, as US-Syrian relations hit one of its all time lows in mid-1957. His administration in response sent the US Sixth Fleet to the Mediterranean Sea beside Syria. The Americans were contemplating a military attack against Syria, in order to install a Western-friendly leader.

Eisenhower considered the risks too great in the end. Following the failure of these latter coup attempts in Syria, Bandeira wrote,

“President Dwight Eisenhower and Allen Dulles had no alternative but to accept the defeat. An invasion in Syria could lead to a Soviet intervention in Turkey”.

American suspicions towards Syria did not abate in February 1958, when a union was formed that month between Syria and Egypt, called the United Arab Republic. Yet the alliance lasted for less than 4 years. It was undone on 28 September 1961, as a result of a section of the Syrian military being against subordination to Nasser in Cairo.

Following more instability in Syria and another succession of short-lived regimes, General Hafez-al Assad, tied to the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, took power in March 1971. He was the father of the present day Syrian leader. Over ensuing years, General Assad would have a difficult relationship with the US, in part due to his uncompromising stance towards Israel, which Syria shares a southern border with.

At the beginning of his long reign in 1971, General Assad agreed that year to the Soviet Union establishing a naval base in the Syrian city of Tartus, resting on the strategically important Mediterranean Sea. In many ways, Syria is a link between the Middle East and Europe, and the Russians continue to use this vital base of operations at Tartus.

From the 1970s onward, Washington made continued efforts to erode General Assad’s position. There was the 1982 Hama revolt in western Syria, which resulted in a decisive victory for Assad’s Syrian Army. This blood-soaked rebellion may well have been encouraged by both the US and its NATO ally Turkey, according to Bandeira. The efforts to oust Assad continually floundered; on separate occasions he crushed with an iron fist revolts enacted by the right-wing Muslim Brotherhood.

Ongoing US hostility towards Assad predictably pushed him closer to the Soviet Union. David W. Lesch, an expert in Middle East affairs wrote,

“As a function of its [Syria’s] cold war alliance with the Soviet bloc, and its traditional position as the most vehemently anti-Israeli Arab state, Syria has been perceived by Washington as an implacable foe for most of the period since World War II”.

In October 1980, Syria and the Soviet Union signed a Treaty of Friendship and Co-operation, which was meant to last for 20 years. In November 1982, with the assumption to power of the 68-year-old Russian politician Yuri Andropov, the USSR shipped to Syria advanced missile systems and warned Israel “not to take any military action against Syria”. Russian military aid partly enabled the Syrians to defeat the US Expeditionary Force present in Lebanon.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/history-us-interference-syria-dating-late-1940s/5778756

Dick Cheney Put Fauci in Charge of US Bioweapons Program Following 2001 Anthrax Attacks

By Chief Nerd

Dr. Richard Ebright: “It became clear that the anthrax mailings were not an external attack by an external adversary, but were perpetrated by a person from within the U.S. biodefense research sector … There was a direct reaction to the 9/11 and the anthrax mailings that resulted in a very large increase in appropriations for biodefense research … And the person who was placed in overall authority over this entire program … was Anthony Fauci. He was selected by then Vice President Dick Cheney.”

Watch the full interview:

NEW: 20 Million Dead, $25 Trillion in Damages: Professor @R_H_Ebright Warned of a Lab-Created Pandemic For Decades. Why did no one listen?

Molecular Biologist, Richard Ebright, is a leading authority on Gain of Function (GoF) research, which involves manipulating pathogens… pic.twitter.com/SGcfHB0TB4

— Dana Parish (@danaparish) December 4, 2024

[…]

Via https://vigilantnews.com/post/it-was-dick-cheney-who-put-fauci-in-charge-of-the-u-s-bioweapons-program-following-the-2001-anthrax-attacks/

 

SCOTUS Justice Alito Obliterates Notion Of Allowing Trans Surgeries & Drugs For Kids

H P Lovingcraft

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito destroyed the idea of allowing minors to undergo sex change operations and take gender-bending drugs as he made oral arguments in the United States v. Skrmetti case.

Citing the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, Alito pointed out the risks of puberty blockers and “gender-affirming” treatments outweigh “the expected benefits” of the treatments.

He continued to point to a UK report which found a lack of evidence that the benefits of the treatments outweigh the risks.

After referring to the two foreign studies, Alito asked U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar if she’d like to take back her previous statement that there is overwhelming evidence the treatments have benefits that outweigh the risks and dangers.

Prelogar stood by her claim as she argued on behalf of the Biden administration.

Meanwhile, liberal SCOTUS justices made bizarre comparisons during their arguments in favor of allowing children to undergo sex operations and take sex change drugs.

[…]

Via https://hellboundanddown.com/2024/12/05/scotus-justice-alito-obliterates-notion-of-allowing-trans-surgeries-drugs-for-kids/

Do Japanese and Korean Belong to the Same Language Family?

Episode 17 Japanese and Korean: Alike But Different

Language Families of the World

Dr John McWhorter

Film Review

Some linguistics believe Japanese and Korean are Altaic languages (see Languages of the Silk Road and Beyond) because they have the same SOV (subject-object-verb) word order and lots of suffixes. McWhorter believes Japanese and Korean belong to separate language families despite a number of similarities.

Japanese has the most complicated writing system in the world, employing three separate language alphabets: the first uses Chinese symbols (referred to as Kanji), the second {takakana) uses syllabic representation to transcribe foreign words and the third (hiragan) is used for small words.

Spoken Japanese employs honorifics, verb and pronoun changes  depending on the relative status of the persons being spoken to or about.

It has many borrowed words from Chinese and English, with Chinese derivatives used in formal speech and English ones in cosmopolitan etting.

Korean and Japanese grammar is very similar but there a very few word similarities. It also uses honorifics.

McWhorter believes the Japanese language most likely began in mainland Asia as the Austronesian languages did. Once it reached the island of Japan, invading foreign speakers from the north adopted Japanese grammar. In Japanese, the meaning of a word can change depending on whether the consonants are aspirated or non-aspirated.

In contrast the Korean language derives half its words from from Chinese. Written Korean employed Chinese characters until the 15th century, when King sejong invented a unique Korean writing system known as Hangue.

Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/6120000/6120032

Putin: Most Western Firms Stayed in Russia

Moscow, Russia / Frédéric Soltan © Getty Images

RT

Russia has never pressured foreign companies to leave the country amid Western sanctions and the vast majority have stayed, President Vladimir Putin stated on Wednesday at the Russia Calling! forum in Moscow.

Putin noted that despite political pressure from their governments, many companies from the US and Western Europe continue to operate in Russia.

“We never pressured anyone to leave our market,” Putin said. “Half of those firms continue to operate in the country as they did before [sanctions]. Some have transferred operations to local management under their control, and only about a quarter [of such firms] have left or are in the process of leaving the country’s economy,” he added.

According to the president, breaking with Russia has played a major role in the economic problems that the EU countries are currently facing. In particular, this is due to the loss of stable Russian energy supplies at reasonable prices, as well as the opportunity to sell their products and supply components to the Russian market, and to use logistics routes, he explained.

The EU also lost the opportunity to use its currency for settlements, which significantly cuts into profits in the bloc’s economy, Putin added.

“In particular, large companies [in the EU] are closing… others are suffering losses. Glass, chemical, fertilizer production, and agriculture are suffering serious losses because… they have lost the Russian market,” he pointed out.

Putin emphasized that Germany’s economy in particular has suffered the biggest blow due to sanctions imposed on Russia. “Entire enterprises are closing” due to the loss of Russian energy and raw materials, affecting the country’s most important sector of the economy – the automobile industry, according to the Russian president.

Putin said many Western countries have shown themselves as “unreliable partners,” pointing out that many businesses and entire industries in Russia faced serious challenges due to sanctions and the exit of foreign firms.

Despite this, “our doors are always open,” the president told attendees at the forum.

[…]

Via https://www.rt.com/business/608737-russia-putin-west-business/