The document dump fails to disclose while enabling the coverup of ties to Israel and Mossad

Electronic Intifada

• Search the files for “Epstein and Mossad.” No results.
• Search for “Epstein and Israel.” No results.
• Search for “Ghislaine Maxwell and Mossad.” No results
• Search for “Ghislaine Maxwell and Israel.” No results.

Here are a few of the tasty but unsatisfying tidbits from the latest release.

In a 2019 email to the Cleveland office of the FBI, someone in Israel named Erez Zadok wrote that “in 2001, Mr. Epstein transferred approximately $9 million to the Wexner Foundation. During the years 2004-2006, the Wexner Foundation transferred at least 2.3 million USD to the Israeli former Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Mr. Epstein signed personally on [a] few of the transfers’ forms.”

Donors and lawyers

Email between Jeffrey Epstein and a secretary to private equity billionaire Leon Black show that, in 2014, Isaac Herzog, then head of Israel’s opposition Labor party, the former party of Ehud Barak, visited Epstein’s infamous Little Saint James island.

Today Herzog is president of Israel.

Black, also an Epstein associate, has been one of Herzog’s biggest political donors.

Epstein also wrote but never sent an undated letter to Les Wexner in an attempt to rekindle the financial partnership Wexner broke off in 2007 after sexual abuse allegations surfaced against Epstein in Florida.

“You and I had ‘gang stuff’ for over 15 years,” Epstein wrote, noting that “I owe a great debt to you, as frankly you owe to me,” adding that he had “no intention of divulging any confidence of ours.”

A 2020 FBI report states that Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard lawyer who befriended and represented Epstein, told a Confidential Human Source (CHS) that “if he were young again, he would be holding a stun gun as an Israeli Intelligence (Mossad) agent. CHS believed Dershowitz was co-opted by Mossad and subscribed to their mission. CHS still continues to communicate occasionally for Dershowitz.”

The same FBI report goes on to say that Epstein “was represented by Dershowitz. CHS remembered Dershowitz tell Alex Ocasta [sic – Acosta] (US Attorney of Southern District of Florida at the time) that Epstein belonged to both US and allied intelligence services. CHS shared phone calls between Dershowitz and Epstein during which he/she took notes. After these calls, Mossad would then call Dershowitz to debrief.”

An Epstein associate named Greg Brown, meanwhile, pitched plans to Epstein in a 2011 email for tapping into Libya’s $32.4 billion in frozen assets held in the US, alluding to the possible help of former British and Israeli intelligence officials.

A 2016 email from Hyatt Hotel billionaire and Israel investor Tom Pritzker to Epstein mentions an article in the Israeli press alleging that James Comey sabotaged Hillary Clinton’s campaign as revenge for President Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich. Comey had successfully prosecuted Rich for diverting sanctioned Iranian oil to Israel, but Israel – under Ehud Barak – reportedly wanted him pardoned because he had “done work for Mossad.”

The Pritzkers are interconnected to the Epstein web.. Movers and shakers in the Trans movement. (Topic for another day)

DoJ withheld Epstein files related to Trump

The Justice Department allegedly withheld dozens of files related to Jeffrey Epstein that included an FBI investigation into claims of abuse against President Trump, according to a new report.

Trump was accused of sexually assaulting a teen girl in the 1980s, and the FBI investigated those claims and interviewed the alleged victim

“I reviewed unredacted evidence logs at the Department of Justice,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said Tuesday in a statement following NPR’s report. “The DOJ appears to have illegally withheld FBI interviews with this survivor who accused President Trump of heinous crimes.”

However, one woman’s claims were investigated further.

The woman reportedly told investigators that Epstein introduced her to Trump when she was between 13 and 15 years old. She said Trump pushed her head down toward his exposed penis, which she bit, leading Trump to punch her in the head and kick her out of the room.

FBI agents interviewed the woman four times, but only one of those interviews was included in the Epstein files release, according to NPR’s investigation. Another 53 pages of interviews and notes were withheld as well.

The feds also didn’t release files relating to another woman who said Epstein introduced her to Trump while she was a teenager and told the future president, “This is a good one, huh?”

That woman’s accusations were included in discovery materials provided to lawyers for Epstein’s accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, during her trial in 2021. However, they were not included in the DOJ’s Epstein files release, according to NPR.

Those interviews were used during discovery for the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. She was sent to trial and convicted. Interesting they were not included in the DoJ release.

Epstein and the Tech Bros… Not just Musk and Gates

All of the them sitting around the Whitehouse with Donald Trump and JD Vance

Peter Thiel, PayPal and Palantir co-founder 

Peter Thiel, a venture capitalist and co-founder of Palantir and PayPal, where he once worked alongside Elon Musk, also appears in the Epstein files, with the latest release showing correspondence between and about the two.

Those communications began around 2014 and lasted until around 2019, just months before Epstein was arrested on federal sex trafficking char

Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn co-founder 

The latest Epstein file releases feature many references to Reid Hoffman, who co-founded LinkedIn in 2002, with communications between the two showing several friendly email exchanges.

Sergey Brin, Google co-founder 

The file release also contains multiple references to Google co-founder Sergey Brin, including email communications.

One particular email chain in April 2003 showed Brin communicating with Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime companion and convicted co-conspirator, regarding potential dinner plans at Epstein’s New York estate.

The exchange appeared to follow up on an earlier encounter between the two. “Dinners at Jeffrey’s are always happily casual and relaxed. Look forward to seeing you,” Maxwell wrote.  

Steven Sinofsky, ex-Microsoft executive 

More details of the relationship between Epstein and Steven Sinofsky, a former Microsoft executive who oversaw key products like Windows and Office, were revealed in the latest files.

The documents showed that Sinofsky had sought Epstein’s advice on the terms of his exit from Microsoft after leaving in 2012.

Sinofsky, who is now a board partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, then emailed Epstein in September 2013, about three months after Microsoft announced the terms of his $14 million retirement agreement, writing: “Got paid. You will be too :)”

Read entirely at links provided.

One last one, my bad! – Inside Epstein’s network

Interesting charts for you to view

Most of Epstein’s correspondence was with his staff, service providers and business contacts. People who worked for or with him made up a third of the top 500 names and accounted for nearly three-fifths of his messages. Chief among them were Lesley Groff, his assistant; Richard Kahn, his accountant; and Larry Visoski, his pilot. Homes in New York and Palm Beach, and his private Caribbean island, required armies of contractors and housekeepers. The rest of the emails, however, depict a remarkable network. The top 500 correspondents come from a number of different industries. Some 19% of messages were with financiers; 10% with scientists or doctors; 8% with people in media, entertainment or public relations; 7% with technologists; 6% each for lawyers, politicians, academics and other businessfolk; and 5% with property magnates. The share of contacts in finance peaked at 25% in 2014 and then fell as those in academia and law rose. Most correspondents were based in America, though Epstein kept ties with Britain, France, Germany, Nordic countries, Gulf states and even a Venezuelan oil trader.

1- Information on the toing and froing from Epstein’s properties were pretty thoroughly tracked.

2- Someone or some entity has this information and is using it as seen fit. Coupled with whatever videos Mr Epstein was making on his properties- the who, what and where of visitors to Epstein properties is pretty well known and probably much more involved then any of us have considered

3. Your information should you carry a personal tracking device with you everywhere is also thoroughly tracked and traced. The who, what and where of your personal business is also pretty well known too.

I’m aware that my time on line is tracked. I do what can be done to mitigate the footprint. I use a dumb phone and still to this day pay in cash. Avoiding places of business that will not take cash and telling them why.

What measure should we as the masses take to prevent this intrusive tracking. Or are too many accepting the open air prison and calling it freedom? It’s a dilemma. And the push for digital ID is going to make this obtrusive, unwanted meddling that much worse, for all of us

Wired via archive.ph

The data amassed by Near Intelligence, a location data broker roiled by allegations of mismanagement and fraud, reveals with high precision the residences of many guests of Little Saint James, a United States Virgin Islands property where Epstein is accused of having groomed, assaulted, and trafficked countless women and girls.

Some girls, prosecutors say, were as young as 14. The former attorney general of the US Virgin Islands alleged that girls as young as 12 were trafficked to Epstein by those within his elite social circle

The coordinates that Near Intelligence collected and left exposed online pinpoint locations to within a few centimeters of space. Visitors were tracked as they moved from the Ritz-Carlton on neighboring St. Thomas Island, for instance, to a specific dock at the American Yacht Harbor—a marina once co-owned by Epstein that hosts an “impressive array” of pleasure boats and mega-yachts. The data pinpointed their movements as they were transported to Epstein’s dock on Little St. James, revealing the exact routes taken to the island.

The tracking continued after they arrived. From inside Epstein’s enigmatic waterfront temple to the pristine beaches, pools, and cabanas scattered across his 71-acres of prime archipelagic real estate, the data compiled by Near captures the movements of scores of people who sojourned at Little St. James as early as July 2016. The recorded surveillance concludes on July 6, 2019—the day of Epstein’s final arrest.

Eleven years earlier, the disgraced financier was sentenced to 18 months in jail after a guilty plea in 2008 for soliciting and procuring a minor engaged in prostitution, securing a secret “sweetheart” deal to avoid any federal charges. Renewed interest in the case, notably prompted by a Miami Herald investigation, spawned new charges against Epstein, who was apprehended at New Jersey’s Teterboro Airport in July 2019. A raid of Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse by federal agents yielded a cache of child sexual abuse material, nearly 50 individually cut diamonds, and a fraudulent Saudia Arabian passport, which had expired. He reportedly died by suicide a month later while incarcerated at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, a federal detention facility that closed shortly after Epstein’s death.

Ghislaine Maxwell, former British socialite and an Epstein accomplice, was convicted in 2021 on five counts including sexual trafficking of children by force. Maxwell was arrested in New Hampshire, tracked to a million-dollar home by federal agents using location data pulled from her cell phone.

Little is known publicly about Epstein’s activities in the decade prior to his 2019 arrest. The majority of women who came forward that year to accuse the convicted pedophile in court say they were assaulted in the ’90s and early 2000s.

Now, however, 11,279 coordinates obtained by WIRED show not only a flood of traffic to Epstein’s island property—nearly a decade after his conviction as a sex offender—but also point to as many as 166 locations throughout the US where Near Intelligence infers that visitors to Little St. James likely lived and worked. The cache also points to cities in Ukraine, (known for human trafficking of their women and girls long before the military action) the Cayman Islands, and Australia, among others.
Near Intelligence, for example, tracked devices visiting Little St. James from locations in 80 cities crisscrossing 26 US states and territories, with Florida, Massachusetts, Texas, Michigan, and New York topping the list. The coordinates point to mansions in gated communities in Michigan and Florida; homes in Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket in Massachusetts; a nightclub in Miami; and the sidewalk across the street from Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue in New York City.

The coordinates also point to various Epstein properties beyond Little St. James, including his 8,000-acre New Mexico ranch and a waterfront mansion on El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, where prosecutors said in an indictment that Epstein trafficked numerous “minor girls” for the purposes of molesting and abusing them. Near’s data is notably missing any locations in Europe, where citizens are safeguarded by comprehensive privacy laws.

Near Intelligence’s maps of Epstein’s island reveal in stark detail the precision surveillance that data brokers can achieve with the aid of loose privacy restrictions under US law. The firm, which has roots in Singapore and Bengaluru, India, sources its location data from advertising exchanges—companies that quietly interact with billions of devices as users browse the web and move about the world.

Before a targeted advertisement appears on an app or website, phones and other devices send information about their owners to real-time bidding platforms and ad exchanges, frequently including users’ location data. While advertisers can use this data to inform their bidding decisions, companies like Near Intelligence will siphon, repackage, analyze, and sell it.

Several ad exchanges, according to The Wall Street Journal, have reportedly terminated arrangements with Near, claiming that its use of their data violated the exchanges’ terms of service.

Officially, this data is intended to be used by companies hoping to determine where potential customers work and reside. But in October 2023, the Journal revealed that Near had once provided data to the US military via a maze of obscure marketing companies, cutouts, and conduits to defense contractors. Bankruptcy records reviewed by WIRED show that in April 2023, Near Intelligence signed a yearlong contract with another firm called nContext, a subsidiary of the defense contractor Sierra Nevada.

We’re going to skip through the tracking of Epstein pals and/or victims to a more general view on how this tracking is done to just ordinary folk

InContext secured six federal contracts to provide data in support of the National Security Agency and the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, according to reporting by Byron Tau, author of Means of Control, an exposé of the data-broker industry and its ties to the US surveillance state. According to information released during a $100 million funding round in 2019, Near claims to have information on roughly 1.6 billion people in 44 countries.

The data on Epstein’s guests was produced using an intelligence platform formerly known as Vista, which has now been folded into a product called Pinnacle. WIRED discovered several so-called Vista reports while examining Pinnacle’s publicly accessible code. While the specific URLs for the reports are difficult to find, Google’s web crawlers were able to locate at least two other publicly accessible Vista reports: one geofencing the Westfield Mall of the Netherlands and another targeting Saipan-Ledo Park in El Paso, Texas.

Legislation introduced during multiple sessions of Congress have aimed to restrict the sale of location data, chiefly to prevent US law enforcement and intelligence agencies from tracking Americans without a warrant. So far, those efforts have failed.

Separately, US president Joe Biden issued an executive order in February instructing the Justice Department to establish new rules preventing US companies from selling data to rival nations, which might include Iran, China, Russia, and North Korea. This order is unlikely to impact Azira’s business in the United States.

Don’t sell the date to rival nations but feel free to provide it to anyone else. Law enforcement, intelligence agencies etc., And other non rival nations of course!

“The fact that they have this data in the first place and are allowing people to share it is certainly disturbing,” says Eva Galperin, the director of cybersecurity at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital-rights nonprofit. “I just don’t know how many more of these stories we need to have in order to get strong privacy regulations.”

Read entirely at the archive.ph link there is much more to read. 15 minutes worth to be exact. I’ve got this post down to 8 minutes of reading- I think you can listen too. Share some thoughts, of course

Globe and Mail & https://archive.ph/lUTyd

Canada’s tech industry is gearing up for a big boost in defence spending. But the industry is, in many ways, starting from scratch and needs to quickly ramp up expertise among businesses, investors and government owing to the country’s decades of under investment in defence.

Globally, defence tech is one of the fastest-growing sectors, said Daniel Sax, founder and CEO at the Canadian Space Mining Corporation.

“There are tens of billions being deployed into this industry. There are governments around the world getting behind it, and Canada is in the early stages of waking up to that,” Mr. Sax said on the panel, held in Toronto and hosted by the Icebreaker, a defence newsletter.

Mr. Carney has emphasized his desire to prioritize spending on Canadian defence companies, where possible, and diversify away from the country’s reliance on U.S. military goods.

To do this, Mark Maybank, co-founder and managing partner at Maverix Private Equity, said private and public sector investors will likely have to focus on dual-use technologies, which can be used both commercially and for defence.

Used commercially for the technocracy at home- Such as increased border surveillance and more

So, the War from Home- What is it?

Citriniresearch

Missile Defense, Counter-Unmanned Technology, Electronic Warfare, and Surveillance

Cheap drones are torching billion-dollar fortresses and countries are waging direct warfare from thousands of miles away. Last year, Houthi drones successfully blocked global commerce through the Red Sea despite US carrier strike groups stationed in the region. More recently, Ukraine unleashed a surprise attack of 104 drones 800km deep into Russian territory, lighting up the Kirishi refinery and significantly damaging Moscow’s aerial assault capabilities.

Weeks later, Israel ran the same playbook, using smuggled drones (along with traditional assets) to wreak havoc on Iranian nuclear facilities and military targets as a part of its broader “preemptive strike” on the country. Tehran responded to Israeli air strikes by hurling hundreds of Shahed drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles towards Tel Aviv and interior targets. Israel’s missile defenses have successfully blocked a large majority of the strikes, but at roughly $45,000 per Tamir shot such defenses are not free or unlimited. Iranian ballistic missiles have continued to penetrate the Iron Dome, causing direct damage on civilian and military installments. The U.S.’ involvement began with a USAF crew that never had feet on the ground anywhere outside of Missouri.

Iran, the US and Israel are ostensibly “at war” (or at least in conflict). This is occurring with no troops deployed on foreign soil and each country thousands of miles away from the other.

Read entirely at the Citrini link above

Excerpts below, read entirely at link above

Many analysts expecting President Donald Trump’s first foreign trip to yield breakthrough deals on Iran or Gaza may have found his recent four-day jaunt through Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates somewhat underwhelming. But the commercial deals Trump struck on artificial intelligence cooperation will likely shift the global balance of power for one of this century’s most critical technologies. It’s just not clear yet in whose favor.

The Biden and Trump administrations have both been very clear about the importance of winning the global race for AI supremacy. The Biden administration’s approach to AI dominance was to provide financial support through the $280 billion CHIPS and Science Act and then largely play defense with regulation while trusting US companies to outcompete overseas rivals. These regulations included multiple rounds of semiconductor export controls, a broader “AI diffusion” framework that capped chip sales to most countries (including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE), and expanded use of foreign investment screening, including the first-ever regulations on US investment in Chinese AI and semiconductor companies. The Biden administration bet that while these regulations may frustrate some American companies, they would prove a greater drag on the United States’ adversaries and thus preserve the country’s AI head start.

The Trump team feels strongly that these defensive controls undermine the United States’ ability to compete overseas by capping American companies’ revenues and market share. NVIDIA earned just $17 billion in China over the last year compared to more than $61 billion in the United States, a disparity that is largely due to US export controls. Leading American semiconductor tooling company Applied Materials, meanwhile, saw its revenue share from China fall from 43 percent to 25 percent over the last year while overall revenue grew just 6 percent. This is revenue that, according to NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang, could have been reinvested into jobs and innovation in the United States.

The new administration has therefore opted to flip the Biden premise on its head by revoking the AI diffusion rule and announcing the sale of hundreds of thousands of cutting-edge chips to the Saudis and Emiratis, in addition to committing to build the world’s largest AI data center outside the United States in Abu Dhabi. It is gambling that enabling American companies to directly compete against Chinese rivals in the Gulf and beyond will generate sufficient revenue and innovation rewards to offset the increased risk of cutting-edge technology falling into the hands of US adversaries.

It is not clear which approach is right. But Trump’s “all gas, no brakes” approach is high-risk, high-reward, and almost impossible to reverse: once cutting-edge US AI hardware and software are sitting in a foreign data center or on a foreign server, adversaries can more easily target and acquire them. White House AI czar David Sacks dismissed these concerns while in Riyadh, saying there is “not a risk” of our cutting-edge technology falling into the wrong hands via “a friend like Saudi Arabia.”

The Trump administration has left open the real possibility of espionage being engaged in by adversaries in order to acquire the technology. Interesting.

Another 6 paragraphs to read at the link- And they should be read!

Technocracy Inc., technate, Howard Scott, engineers, Edward Bellamy, Thorstein Veblen, Looking Backward 2000-1887, Technical Alliance, Columbia University, Rockefeller family and their connections to Columbia, Committee of Technocracy, Walter Rautenstrauch, Henry Wallace, Continental Committee of Technocracy, Harold Loeb, Technocracy Inc.’s rapid spread in California, energy certificates, work in the technate, Technocracy Inc. defines North America as stretching from Greenland to Panama, Technocracy Inc.’s government, how Technocracy Inc. applies to the twenty-first century, the Crisis of Capitalism, 2008 financial crisis, Are we in a post-capitalist age?, Yanis Varoufakis, technofeudalism, the gig economy & apps as vassalage, the decline of wage labor, the importance of data, is data capital?, how Technocracy Inc can be applied to technofeudalism, World Economic Forum (WEF), universal basic income (UBI), how UBI can be applied to energy certificates, currency that deliberately depreciates, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), Covid lockdowns, “trust the science”, MAGA, Joshua Haldeman, Elon Musk, Trump 2.0 as ushering in technate, the North American technate as a self-sustaining fortress, global war of attrition, DOGE as a trial run for Technocracy Inc., cryptocurrencies, Kardashev scale, USAID, the deliberate destruction of representative democracy by both Democrats and MAGA

During the “pandemic”

I’d mentioned we’d be talkin’ more about technocracy, technocrats and the technate.

First few paragraphs included below, read entirely at TruthDig Link

Much of human history only makes sense in light of the persistent influence of eschatology — a word of Greek origin that means “the study of last things.” This is because many of the most significant historical movements and events have been driven, in one way or another, by eschatological beliefs. The Second World War was motivated in part by Hitler’s promise of a “thousand-year Reich,” an idea that mirrored Christianity’s prophecy of a future “Millennial Kingdom” following the Battle of Armageddon. A recent Pew Research Center survey found that roughly 4 in 10 American adults believe that we are “living in the end times,” while another reports that 41% of Americans expect that Jesus will either “definitely” or “probably” return by 2050. These eschatological convictions have had a significant impact on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, since our current world, in this narrative, cannot end without a Jewish state in Palestine. Some scholars have dubbed this demographic the “Armageddon Lobby.”

Recent years have seen the emergence of a second and arguably more powerful “Armageddon Lobby.” It resides in epicenters of power like Silicon Valley and embraces a “secular” vision of humanity’s grand future — though it shares many similarities with traditional religion, including a belief in “God” and the promise of immortality through cryonics. The renowned media theorist Douglas Rushkoff calls this vision “The Mindset,” whereas the computer scientist Timnit Gebru and I refer to it as “TESCREALism,” which I have discussed in previous articles for Truthdig. I will mostly stick with Rushkoff’s term in what follows.

Advocates of The Mindset claim that the world as we know it will soon expire. In its ashes, a new era dominated by digital lifeforms — that is, artificial intelligences — will emerge. These beings will stand to us as “gods,” though by merging our brains with AI or “uploading” our minds to computers, we may become gods ourselves: Homo deus — the “human god” — as Yuval Noah Harari puts it. “The most devout holders of The Mindset,” Rushkoff writes in reference to Mark Zuckerberg’s failed “metaverse” project,

H5N1 was weaponized to spread more efficiently to humans. Intentionally. I wrote about this GOF (Gain of Function) at my old site. More than a decade ago. One of those older reports was moved here last year

60 Minutes has been spreading the fear as of late.

Keep in mind that Zbigniew Brzezinski was born in Poland. And had actively planned to target, weaken and encircle Russia.- As part of the Technotronic era.

The US does not want peace with Russia- The multi decade plan is in place- Trump’s peace presidency has been a ruse. As he’s talking gibberish in the forefront, all plans are proceeding for direct war via Poland. NATO’s eastern front proxy.

Going back in time- to April 14/ 2014, when the Polish seeds were germinating in order to grow the new big power in the EU. After a certain recalcitrant government was gotten rid of in 2010

Followed up thereafter with many reports expanding on this geopolitical change – I’ve relinked a few of them in this report- Including changes made between Ukraine and Poland. Poland having a Russian government in waiting within it’s borders.

Poland has been reinvigorating its military preparations for a potential war with Russia since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022. Warsaw is bolstering its defenses in anticipation of the growing likelihood of direct armed conflict with its perennial historical rival, given the uncertainties surrounding U.S. President Donald Trump’s attempts to broker peace between Moscow and Kyiv, as well as the prospect of Russia consolidating its territorial gains in Ukraine.

The Polish government calculates that if Washington forces Ukraine to surrender parts of its territory and elements of its sovereignty, while Russia is enabled to restore its economy and military through the lifting of economic sanctions, then Poland will be on the front lines of the next war.

In recent weeks, the coalition government of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has taken several domestic and international steps to strengthen Poland’s military capabilities and social preparedness. In a major speech in parliament on March 7, Tusk explained the basis for Poland’s accelerated military buildup Tusk warned that intelligence reports shared by allies indicate that Moscow is planning for a significantly larger war within three to four years by massively investing in its military expansion and capacity for mobilization. Tusk also noted that it was unlikely that Ukraine would receive any hard security guarantees from the United States under any prospective peace deal, meaning that Poland’s predicament had become more dangerous.

During the parliamentary speech, Tusk announced plans to introduce voluntary military training for every adult male so they will be ready to become “full-fledged soldiers in conflict situations” The purpose of the training is to create a substantial reserve force over the coming years by providing incentives for annual training without implementing compulsory military service The training program will include courses in civil defense, first aid provisioning, and firearms training. In addition to men, women will have the option to join the training program.

Tusk claimed that the government was considering the need to build a half-million-strong army in Poland, including reservists. Poland already possesses the third-largest military in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the largest in the European Union with 216,100 personnel (Notes from Poland, July 16, 2024). It is surpassed only by the United States (1.3 million) and Türkiye (481,000), and is followed by France (204,700), Germany (185,600), Italy (171,400), and the United Kingdom (138,100). The previous Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwośċ, PiS) government had set a target in 2022 to increase the size of the armed forces to 300,000 personnel. That figure has now been increased due to the growing threat from Russia and the uncertainty surrounding the United States’s commitment to defending Europe.
Poland’s focus on national defense has been evident in its consistent increases in military spending and weapons acquisition In 2022, Poland was one of only nine NATO members to maintain its military spending above the 2 percent of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) guidelines agreed upon by NATO leaders and reaffirmed by their 2014 “Defense Investment Pledge” (NATO, June 18, 2024). Warsaw subsequently increased its share to 3.9 percent in 2023, the highest among all NATO members, even ahead of the United States at 3.49 percent. By 2024, Warsaw’s defense spending had reached 4.12 percent of GDP and is projected to grow to 4.7 percent in 2025.

The Alliance also issued guidelines stating that at least 20 percent of annual defense expenditures should be allocated for the purchase of military equipment. Poland has consistently met or exceeded this target, allocating more than 50 percent of its defense spending to military modernization, the highest level in the alliance In one recent acquisition, Poland’s Defense Ministry signed a deal worth about $1.7 billion to acquire 111 Borsuk (Badger) tracked infantry fighting vehicles from the country’s state-run Polish Armaments Group (Polska Grupa Zbrojeniowa, PGR). Defense Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz underscored that Warsaw was delivering on promises to invest in Poland’s defense industry.
Another element in Poland’s military buildup consists of constructing major border fortifications with Belarus and Russia (Kaliningrad oblast)

Recently- Kaliningrad: Russia fury as Poland body recommends renaming exclave

Provocative Poland….

At a cost of 2.4 billion euros ($2.56 billion), Warsaw is fortifying approximately 700 kilometers (435 miles) of its eastern and northern borders in preparation for a potential attack. This “East Shield” (Tarcza Wschód) project includes new physical infrastructure, such as bunkers, minefields, and anti-tank obstacles, together with electronic components, including satellite monitoring, thermal imaging cameras, and anti-drone systems.

According to Kosiniak-Kamysz, the project will be completed by 2028 and will strengthen capabilities against a surprise attack, impede the movement of enemy troops, facilitate the movement of Polish forces, and protect the civilian population Warsaw expects funding for East Shield from various EU defense programs and reached a preliminary agreement in March with the European Investment Bank (EIB) for 1 billion euros ($1.08 billion) in funding. The European Parliament has recognized the project as a flagship initiative for EU-wide defense (European Parliament, March 12).

Please read the entire article at Eurasian Review-

https://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2014/05/zbigniew-brzezinski-between-two-ages.html

*Between Two Ages:America’s role in the Technetronic Age- Book*

If you haven’t read it, you may want to. Published around 1970. So, more then 40 years ago? And yet so timely. 

Besides the pdf , you may find this piece from 2004 very appropriate for this present day. Thinking of the US moves on Ukraine, of course.

The outrageous strategy to destroy Russia– Excerpted from  quite a large article

In 1970, Brzezinski also proposed new ideas in his new book Between two Ages (pdf link above) where he explained that the moment to balance world power had arrived and it had to be in the hands of a new global political order based on a trilateral economic tie between Japan, Europe and the U.S. (hope you read/watched everything from this post-"Toward a Europe Whole & Free" Via NATO global dominance ?) The revolution in production techniques and the transformation of the heavy industry into electronics had to cause a disruption of political systems and a new generation of power elites. David Rockefeller, excited about these concepts, hired him to create the Trilateral Commission and appointed him director. The commission was officially established in 1973 and gathered important personalities related to world trade, the international banking system, governors and the big European, Japanese and American media.

When the first oil crisis took place, the main concern of these world finance masters was to get rid of the foreign debt of developing countries by strengthening the role of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It was also about strengthening and extending U.S.’s hegemony – by that time vulnerable due to its military defeat in Viet Nam- in every geographical boundary of the Eurasian continent where they were very influential after WWII
This mission, if analyzed from an outsider’s point of view, depicts Brzezinski as a peace advocate, a man in favor of multilateral relations and diminishing world tension (Cold War) and -to the eyes of the extreme right- as a man inspired by Marxism.
The best to be done in order to implement the plans of the Trilateral Commission was to make one of its members the President of the United States.

President Carter and the Double-Dealing

Since the creation of the Trilateral Commission, shepherd Jimmy Carter was among the members of Rockefeller-Brzezinski’s team. He has opened the first trade offices of the state of Georgia in Brussels and Tokyo and this turned him into the ideal model or the founding concept of the Commission. [2] For his nomination as an election candidate and to the presidential election in 1976, Rockefeller used his relations in Wall Street and put Brzezinski to work, whose academic influence assisting democratic candidate Jimmy Carter was very helpful for wining the election. And, of course, when Carter won the elections, Brzezinski was appointed national security adviser. [3]

Brzezinski examining the weapon of a pakistani officer

As president, Carter stated the reduction of the military nuclear arsenal of the two blocks (U.S. -USRR) as a priority. However, the Soviet SS-20 missile crisis aimed at Europe forced Carter to deploy the Pershing missiles, an action that ruined his efforts, whether they were sincere or not, and caused the reciprocal distrust of the two countries.
It can be affirmed that by that time, the Soviet block had good reasons to believe that its adversary was involved in double-dealing: the U.S. military defeat in Viet Nam forced it to keep certain reserve in the strategic and military fields whereas Brzezinski was working on his war plan to set a trap for the Soviet Union and force it to come into a peripheral conflict.
The destabilization of the Afghan communist regime and the financing and delivering of the first weapons to anticommunist Jihad followers in 1979 caused, as expected, the intervention of the Red Army in Afghanistan. Brzezinski had the support of Pakistan intelligence and espionage services, the fearful ISI.
When the French magazine Le Nouvel Observateur interviewed Brzezinski in 1998, he admitted that the equipping of Bin Laden’s anti-Soviet troops was before the Russian invasion and was aimed at provoking its reaction:
Le Nouvel Observateur: Former CIA director, Robert Gates, says in his memoirs: the American secret services assisted Afghan mujahedeen six months before the Soviet invasion. By that time, you were President Carter’s adviser and you played a key role on this. Do you confirm it?
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of the story, the CIA began to assist mujahedeen in the year 1980, that is, after the invasion of the Soviet army against Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the truth that remained secret until today is quite different: it was on July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed his first order on the secret assistance to Kabul’s pro-Soviet regime opponents. That day I wrote a memorandum to the President in which I told him that that assistance would cause the Soviet intervention (…) we did not force the Russian intervention, we just, conscientiously, increase the intervention possibilities.
NO: When the Soviets justified their intervention by affirming they were fighting against a secret American interference nobody believed them, though they were telling the truth. Don’t you regret it?
Z. Brz.: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. Its objective was to lead the Russian to the Afghan trap, and you want me to regret it? The very same day the Soviets crossed the Afghan border I wrote the following to President Carter: «This is our chance to give Russia its Viet Nam» (…).
N.O.: Aren’t you sorry either for favoring Islamic fundamentalism and providing weapons and consultancies to future terrorists?
ZBrz.: What is the most important thing when you look at world history, the Taliban or the fall of the Soviet empire? Some excited Islamists or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War? [4]
When Brzezinski talked about «some excited Islamists» in this interview, he did not underestimate Al Qaeda’s power. He just described the reality of what the neo-conservatives has turned into a myth while justifying their world crusade. It is obvious that none of the members of the Council on Foreign Relations would be so categorical.

Objective Alliance with China and Unconditional Support to the Shah of Iran

Even when Nixon and Kissinger were cautious about besieging the Soviet Union and restored relations with China, a number of Carter’s closest advisers did not support this rapprochement Brzezinski had in mind.

When Carter became President, he stated he would establish a dialogue with the USRR and keep the People’s Republic of China at a distance. But, his Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, opposed Brzezinski anti-Russian obsession and Carter had no choice but to conciliate its administration’s antagonism.

Usually, the mediator between these two poles was Richard C. Holbrooke, U.S. future ambassador to the UN and John Kerry’s foreign policy adviser during his campaign, along with Mark Brzezinski, Zbigniew’s son. According to Cyrus Vance and some others in favor of establishing the dialogue, like democrat renegade Averell Arriman, the triangular logic of besieging would only lead, at its best, to a misunderstanding with the USRR, not to mention war.

Meeting between the Shah of Iran, Alfred Atherton, William Sullivan, Cyrus Vance, president Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1977

They recommended dialogues on disarmament and cooperation with the Soviet Union to neutralize the Third World conflicts. The re-establishment of relations with China kept on; Brzezinski even completed a joint program of strategic cooperation and managed to have good personal relations with Deng Xiaoping, something that has really helped him nowadays.
Brzezinski’s distrust towards the USRR can be perceived again in his attitude towards Iran, which under the Shah’s regimen was considered as a bastion against the Soviet influence in the Middle East. Brzezinski promised Shah his support until the last moment and requested U.S. military intervention to keep him in power even when part of Carter’s administration, led by his Secretary of State, opposed it.
However, Washington’s concrete actions were implemented according to the state Department’s point of view and despite all negotiations with the generals that defeated Shah to guarantee a moderate regime in the country; it was Khomeini who took power after a popular seafloor spreading. Khomeini joined Carter at Camp David negotiations in 1977 and played a key role in the peace agreement between Israel and Egypt without even being present in the most important debates. However, when the USRR was the main topic, he was always there.

The Russian Threat and the American Supremacy

In 1989, Brzezinski quit his job at Columbia University where he taught since 1960 to work on Ukraine’s independent status plan. This marks the beginning of his compromise to prevent the resurgence of Russia as a superpower. He defended Russia’s integration to the Western system and the “geopolitical multiparty system” in the territory of the former Soviet Union.
He also developed a “plan for Europe” that included NATO’s expansion to the Baltic republics, a dream that came true when three of them joined NATO in 2002. During the 90s he was the special envoy of the American President to promote the most important oil infrastructure project of the world: the Baku-Tbilissi-Ceyhan pipeline which was his best opportunity to prevent the resurgence of Russia.

He has also been, since 1999, the president of the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, whose headquarters are located at the Freedom House facility. This position allows him to intervene in peace negotiations between the Russian government and independence fighters led by Mashkadov. However, the truth behind these good will “democratic” activities is to assist independence followers to maintain a war in the area, like the Afghan one, to weaken Russian and to keep it away from the gains of the Caspian Sea.
Brzezinski’s doctrine («The power ruling Eurasia will control two of the most economically advanced and productive areas of the world») is related to NATO’s expansion to the East, something the Clinton’s Administration actively worked on. But, how could they sell NATO to Europeans? «The European region located in the Western border of Eurasia and next to Africa is much more exposed to the risks of the increasing global disorder than a more politically united, military powerful and geographically isolated America (…).
The Europeans will be more exposed to risk if an imperialist chauvinism encourages Russia’s foreign policy», said Brzezinski to National Interest magazine in year 2000. [5] The whole thing is quite clear: the deployment of NATO’s forces around Russia was a preventive measure. If Russia’s reaction is to be defensive, it means that it is planning to restore its empire and totalitarianism.

Brzezinski has been working also as a consultant for BP-Amoco and Freedom House in Azerbaijan. His objective is to worship Heidar Alyiev’s image and in a New York Times interview he characterized the dictator as a «nice guy». [6] Brzezinski justifies Aliyev’s Anglo-Saxon support by explaining that after seven decades of communist government nobody can expect Azerbaijan and the former Soviet republics to become democratic nations in such a short period of time.

Even when Aliyev’s political repression increased during the last few years and the gains from the Caspian Sea diminished, Azerbaijan was still considered by Freedom House as a “partially free” country. In 1999, Secretary of State and Brzezinski’s disciple, Madeleine Albright, invited Heidar Aliyev to NATO’s anniversary ceremony. On their part, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Ukraine organized some joint military maneuvers, sponsored by NATO’s “Association for Peace” program, on April 16, 1996. [7]

Despite his activities as BP-Amoco and Freedom House’s consultant, Brzezinski assisted a system of funds and NGOs (non governmental organizations) in support of the former Soviet top-classes, intellectuals and elites.

As an initiative of the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, whose chairman was Brzezinski, a meeting between the main leaders of the Chechnya movement was held from August 16 to August 18, 2002 in Lichtenstein, two months after the one held in Bassaiev and Maskhadov, where an agreement was signed on the mutual direction of the “Armed Forces of the Ichkeria Republic of Chechnya”. The participants concluded that Chechnya should not longer be a part of Russia, that a real autonomy was necessary and the time to negotiate with Maskhadov had arrived. But, was Beslán’s hostages event, as claimed by Bassaiev, part of Chechnya independence demand process or part of Russia’s destabilizing process? [8]
Several questions could be raised if we take into account that the main consequence of this action was a tightening of tensions between North Odessa and neighboring Inguchia, that is, a much more relevant balkanization of the region.

Mark Brzezinski

Nowadays, Brzezinski is very active in CSIS but he still the brain of the Democrats foreign policy program, something that is quite evident in candidate Kerry and his partner John Edwards’s obsession with Russia. Following Mark Brzezinski’s advises they chose as their main priority Russia’s nuclear disarmament in a moment in which it has recovered the same oil production it had before its demise and is benefiting widely of the current oil prices which has allowed it to double its defense budget. Therefore, Russia’s nuclear arsenal is not, as John Kerry says, a present-day threat.
Kerry’s real objective is related to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s strategy of Russia’s subordination but, from now on, it will be much more difficult to convince the world public opinion of Russia’s evil and totalitarianism. [9] Therefore, it is necessary to provoke its reaction as was done with the Afghan case in 1979, because Russia will have no problems with its energy supply in the next decades, a real concern the U.S. has. This is why in some recent Wall Street Journal and Novaya Gazetta interviews, Brzezinski characterized Vladimir Putin as «Russian Benito Mussolini».

We’re going to be talking more about technocracy and technocrats..

I gotta thank Kaz for this gem of an article

Musk, in my opinion, is the Pied Piper: one that offers strong but delusive enticement

Carbon Credits Revenue UP- 38% of Net Income

That’s right 38% of Net Income from selling Carbon Credits

Elon Musk’s Tesla continues to capitalize on the need of its competitors to comply with emissions standards, a business model that has proven highly profitable for the electric vehicle (EV) company. As the EV giant incurs minimal costs to earn these carbon credits, the revenue from their sale translates to pure profit.”

While the specific recipients of these credits remain undisclosed, this revenue stream has been vital for Tesla’s financial success.

In its recent first-quarter 2024 filings, the company reported a $442 million income from the sale of carbon credits (automotive regulatory credits). This figure represents a slight 2% increase from the previous quarter of Q4 2023, which is $433 million.

Remarkably, this credit revenue accounts for a whopping 38.6% of the company’s Q1 2024 net income ($1,144 million). 

Since the company started selling carbon credits to its peers, this revenue stream has become a billion-dollar bonanza for Tesla. Last year, the automaker generated a total annual income from carbon credits amounting to $1.79 billion. That’s a record high so far for the company’s automotive regulatory credit revenue.

Tesla’s Surge in Energy Storage Deployment

Tesla saw growth in other segments of its business, particularly in energy storage, which is becoming increasingly profitable for the company. As Megapack installations continue to increase and fleet expands, Tesla anticipates consistent profit growth in this segment.

Tesla’s Carbon Credit Surprises and Future Innovations

Despite previous expectations that carbon credit income would decline as competitors ramped up electric vehicle (EV) production, Tesla has been surprised by sustained revenue in this area.

In 2020, the company’s former CFO Zachary Kirkhorn anticipated a decrease in the significance of this revenue stream over time. However, contrary to these predictions, Tesla’s earnings from regulatory carbon credits have not experienced a significant decline. In fact, last year’s earnings slightly exceeded the income from the previous year.