Wednesday 1st of February 2023

nuking the planet......

We’re being driven toward nuclear war on the completely fictional claim that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a Hitler-like megalomaniac who’s just invading countries completely unprovoked, solely because he is evil and hates freedom and won’t stop invading and conquering until he’s stopped by force.

The news media aren’t telling people about the Western aggressions which led to this war. They’re not telling people the U.S. is keeping this war going with the stated goal of weakening Russia and is rejecting peace talks and refusing to push for peace


By Caitlin Johnstone


All people are being told is that Putin is another Hitler who won’t listen to reason and only understands violence. The world’s two nuclear superpowers are being pushed closer and closer to direct military confrontation based on a complete fiction which omits mountains of facts.

To participate in this madness is indefensible. It is indefensibly immoral to foist a fictional version of events upon a trusting populace in order to manufacture consent for more and more aggressive acts of brinkmanship with a nuclear superpower. These people are depraved.


“No no you don’t understand, if we weren’t being told constantly by the media that this proxy war needs our full support and censoring the voices who dispute this and using giant troll armies to swarm and silence anyone who questions this, we might fall victim to propaganda.”

“You’re not anti-war, you’re just anti-AMERICAN wars,” said the person who is loudly cheerleading America’s proxy war in Ukraine.


Warmongers don’t like being called warmongers when they support a U.S. proxy war that was deliberately provoked by the U.S. and is being sustained by the funding and facilitation of the U.S. with the explicit goal of weakening a longtime geopolitical rival of the U.S. They get very upset when you point out that they are doing this, and when people’s opposition to their warmongering is described as “anti-war”:

They very much prefer to pretend that this time the U.S. is on the good and righteous side of a war, because in that imaginary world they’re the cool anti-fascists standing up to an evil tyrant and those who oppose their warmongering are the real warmongers.

The closer we get to nuclear war the less patience I have for sectarian spats between people who are supposed to be opposing war and militarism. Grow up and get over yourselves. This is more important than you and your ego.

Don’t let anyone tell you your criticisms of U.S. warmongering make no difference; if they didn’t, the empire wouldn’t work so hard to dissuade you from making them. They work so hard to manufacture public consent for their agendas because they absolutely require that consent.

An entire globe-spanning empire rests on our closed eyelids. Depends on keeping us in a propaganda-induced coma. Circulating ideas and information which discredit and dispute that propaganda poses a direct threat to that empire. That’s what all the censorship of dissent is about.

Is your one tweet, video or public demonstration going to bring the empire crashing down? Of course not. But it will spread awareness by that much. And all positive changes in human behavior are always preceded by an expansion of awareness. You’re nudging us all toward awakening to whatever extent you help expand awareness of truth and reality.

We can’t be the Hollywood hero who single-handedly decapitates the machine, but we can all collectively throw sand in its gears, making it harder and harder for it to function. That’s what disrupting the imperial propaganda machine accomplishes, because that machine depends on propaganda. 

The weakest part of an empire that’s held together by lies and manipulation is its lies and manipulations; that’s why it’s such an aggressively protected aspect of its power. And it happens to be the one part that anyone with a voice can attack, and attack effectively.

The nightmare scenario for our rulers is the same as the nightmare scenario for every ruler throughout history: that the masses will get sick of their rule and use the power of their numbers to get rid of them. That’s exactly what the propaganda matrix is designed to prevent.

One aspect of this struggle that is a bit like a Hollywood movie is that it kind of is a struggle between light and darkness, because the empire depends on keeping its activities obfuscated and unseen while we’re all working to make its machinery visible and transparent. 

That’s why Julian Assange is in prison. 

It’s also why internet censorship keeps ramping up, why propaganda is getting more and more blatant, and why online discussion is swarmed by astroturf trolling ops. Those in power are working against the people to keep things dark and unseen.


Caitlin Johnstone’s work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following her on FacebookTwitterSoundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into her tip jar on Ko-fiPatreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy her books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff she publishes is to subscribe to the mailing list at her website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything she publishes.  For more info on who she is, where she stands and what she’s trying to do with her platform, click here. All works are co-authored with her American husband Tim Foley.

This article is from and re-published with permission.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.





FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.........≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥¡¡!!


"war is love" for media and governments....




In the late 1960s I was a student at the University of California, Berkeley. It was a time of strong anti-war sentiment among students opposed the war in Vietnam.

Placards around the Berkeley campus read: “Make love, not war.” “No more wars.” Some suggested the war was fake. “What if they staged a war and nobody came?” read one often seen sign.

In 1968, the Tet Offensive in Vietnam convinced the American public that Washington was not winning the war and the Johnson administration had lied about it. At that juncture opponents of war and a meaningful portion of the general public wanted to get rid of Lyndon Johnson and did.

Meanwhile, citizens became vitiated by the belief spawned during the Eisenhower years that nuclear war between the U.S. and the Soviet Union would spell Armageddon and the end of human life on the planet.

An event in 1970 gave a new focus to this. Abbie Hoffman, a leftist advocate of drugs and a Nixon hater, and his girlfriend Grace Slick, who graduated from the same college as President Nixon’s daughter and got an invitation to a tea at the White House sent to Trish’s classmates, conjured up a plot: spike Nixon’s tea with LSD that would make him go berserk and push the nuclear button.

The duo was discovered before they could do their deed. Nevertheless, leftists everywhere plus those that feared nuclear war, and proponents of rational government, suggested Nixon should not have the authority to launch a nuclear war the Constitution apparently gave him. Some suggested the decision should belong to a group of ten or twenty sane people that included some not known to the public and did not live in the DC area to ensure they were not all kidnapped and forced to launch a nuclear holocaust.

I was for the idea and broached it to several of my friends in high places in the government. The reaction I got was that the U.S. intelligence community and the elite in the foreign policy making community had already thought of this and had probably implemented it.

I then engaged with intellectuals and government officials I knew about the decision-making process relating to strategic matters. We dissected what was known as contingency planning. This turned into discussing what the contingency plan should be for the ultimate scenario: One morning the U.S. military reported thousands of nuclear tipped missiles were in route from the Soviet Union soon to strike the U.S., which would destroy the country and likely kill everyone living in it.

It was deemed illogical for the U.S. to retaliate. Why risk an action that might result in exterminating everyone on earth? The answer was to do nothing and simply die. We could hope, and even expect (logically that is), the Soviet Union had the same contingency plan and thus this scenario would never happen.

A so-called fact of the history of war meanwhile helped resolve the conundrum. During the Cold War nuclear weapons were never used. Experts said a system cannot last if it is based on a weapon nobody employed. Indeed, talk about nuclear war dissipated.

Then, President Reagan and President Bush seemed to guarantee the demise of the nuclear war issues when they defeated the Soviet Union and negotiated a smooth termination of the Cold War.

Fast forward to 2022. President Biden rejected a negotiated peace in the Ukraine and proclaimed Russian President Putin had to go. Putin retaliated proclaiming he might use nuclear missiles to resolve the Ukraine war. President Biden’s reaction was to bloviate more about nuclear war.

America and the world were flabbergasted. Many were overcome with fear. There had not been a threat of a nuclear war since President Kennedy and the Cuba fiasco in 1962.

Yet, many observers did not take Biden seriously. Probably alone he could not launch a nuclear strike. That was presumably not in his purview given the logic of making it a collective decision not to mention the fact some Democrats in Congress earlier spoke of taking away Biden’s red button, if he had one. Few trusted Biden to do anything of any magnitude given his mental state.

So, it was left to the Democratic Party and/or the deep state to act. Their solution was to create anxiety about nuclear war, spawn a crisis, and extend the scope of government in the U.S. They sought to finally get rid of Donald Trump and his policies. Trump had called for an end of America’s pointless wars.

Further, a mid-term election was coming, and the Democratic Party could not be sanguine about the results. They needed a crisis. The coronavirus created one; but it was waning. Global warming was another; but many people feared the cost of gasoline and food more. Crime, an insecure border, inflation looked to help Republicans. Finally, minorities and independents were moving away from the Democrats.

Revisiting nuclear war seemed a solution. But was it credible and would it win public support?

President Biden spoke of Armageddon to scare Americans. He apparently overreached. He did not mention deterrence or balancing that had long been a solution to the U.S.- Soviet nuclear standoff. Nor did he moderate his rhetoric or pursue negotiations. He wanted to create distress.

At that point something came to mind: What if President Biden staged a war and nobody came?









you shall not kill.... etc, blah blah blah-ish......