Russia Warns Nuclear War ‘Unacceptable’, But Danger Is Real


TEHRAN (FNA)- Russia’s starting position is that atomic war should be unacceptable and Moscow successfully persuaded the US and other nuclear powers to agree on that back in January, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in an interview on Monday. However, he added that the situation has since deteriorated to the point where there is a real and serious threat of such a conflict.

Russia tried to persuade US President Donald Trump to recommit to the 1987 statement by US and Soviet leaders that there can be no winners in a nuclear war, and that such a war should never be fought, Lavrov revealed in the interview with the ‘Great Game’, a political show on Russia’s Channel One.

While the Trump administration declined to do so, his successor Joe Biden “quickly” agreed with Moscow, and the statement was made at the summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Geneva, in June 2021.

China, France and the UK – the remaining three nuclear powers that are also permanent members of the UN Security Council – agreed as well, and made a joint statement in January 2021.

“This is our principled position. We start from it,” Lavrov said.

However, the risks of nuclear war are now “very significant. I don't want them artificially inflated. There are many who would wish for it. The danger is serious, real. It cannot be underestimated,” he added.

Lavrov praised as “good and wise” the Biden administration’s first foreign policy move, which was to agree with Russia that the New Start treaty should be unconditionally extended for 5 years. On the other hand, it is the last arms control agreement left standing, after Washington pulled out of the ABM, INF and Open Skies treaties.

Discussions with US working groups abruptly ended in February, after Russia was “forced to defend the Russians in Ukraine” that had been “bombed for eight years without any reaction from the West”, Lavrov noted.

Russia’s top diplomat compared the current situation to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis – the Caribbean Crisis, as it is known in Moscow. Back then, he stated there weren’t many “written” rules, but the implicit rules of conduct were clear for both Washington and Moscow to follow.

“In those years, there was a channel of communication that both leaders trusted. Now there is no such channel. Nobody is trying to create it. Separate timid attempts made at an early stage did not give much result,” Lavrov added.

In place of the implicit rules of that era, Lavrov said, today “rules are a buzzword the US and its allies use when they are required to behave ‘nicely’”.

"They no longer insist on international law, but on respect for the ‘rules-based world order’, in which the ‘rules’ are never explained in any way," he stressed.

Right now, everyone is “casting spells” saying that a Third World War should not be allowed to break out, Lavrov announced, while adding fuel to the fire by sending weapons to Ukraine and hoping to prolong the conflict in order to bleed out Russia.

The US and the UK advise Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to tighten Kiev’s position at every round of talks with Moscow, Lavrov claimed.

"As for the talks, we know it for sure, that neither the US nor the UK, which seeks to compensate for its current lonely status after the exit from the EU with its unbridled activity, advises Zelensky to speed up the talks. They advise Zelensky to tighten his position every time," he said.

Washington has renounced practically all contacts with Moscow against the background of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, the FM added.

"The US gave up on practically all contacts because we were forced to defend the Russians in Ukraine, who had been bombarded for eight years without any reaction whatsoever form the West, except to encourage Russophobic and neo-Nazi actions of the Kiev regime, when the Russian language was outlawed everywhere - in education, in media, in everyday live, while the neo-Nazi and Nazi theories and practices were encouraged legislatively," Lavrov said.

He also stressed that the US and its allies are using the term ‘rules’ that they apply when everyone is required to behave well, insisting not on respect for international law, but on respect for the world order based on the rules.

"These rules have not been translated in any way", and they are not applicable to Russia, since it respects international law, he continued.

"We respect it and we respect the UN Charter and the key provision of the UN charter which says that the sovereign equality of the states is the main principle," he added.

Kiev backed out of a number of proposals for a treaty with Moscow, which the Ukrainian side proposed during the negotiations in Istanbul, Lavrov said.

"This is how they acted [backed out] on a number of other proposals, which they put forth in Istanbul. Once again, I underscore that these proposals were perceived positively in general," the foreign minister said.

Weapons that Western states ship to Ukraine will later spread to the countries that they were shipped from, Lavrov added.

"As previous experience indicates, these weapons will spread from Ukraine, just like from any other poorly controlled country, […] where neo-Nazi battalions do not follow the commander-in-chief’s orders, to other states, including to the very states that they are being shipped from now," he underlined.

Lavrov pointed out that, in addition to tanks and armored vehicles, thousands of man-portable air defense missile systems (MANPADs) are being shipped to Ukraine.

"This is a terrorists’ weapon," he noted.

"By the way, we had an agreement with the Americans on mutual informing about shipment of MANPADs abroad for years for a reason; this made it clear for them that we will not give our weapons to bad hands, and we also understood that they would not do such mistakes," Lavrov underscored.

China reaffirms commitment to denuclearization of Korean Peninsula
CGTN

China on Tuesday reaffirmed its commitment to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula after Pyongyang vowed to strengthen its nuclear capabilities.

Wang Wenbin, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said China is committed to maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula, realizing denuclearization and resolving disputes through dialogue and consultation.

China will enhance communication and coordination with the relevant parties and jointly promote the political settlement of the peninsula issue, Wang said at a regular press briefing.

A Hwasong-17 ICBM is displayed during a military parade to celebrate the 90th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People's Army at Kim Il Sung Square in Pyongyang, DPRK, April 25, 2022. /CFP

Kim Jong Un, leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), said on Monday that the DPRK will take further steps to strengthen and develop the country's nuclear capabilities to the "fastest possible speed," according to the DPRK's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

"The fundamental mission of our nuclear forces is to deter a war, but our nukes can never be confined to the single mission of war deterrent even at a time when a situation we are not desirous of at all is created on this land," Kim said.

The DPRK held a military parade to celebrate the 90th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People's Army at Kim Il Sung Square in Pyongyang on Monday night, during which the country's largest intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), the Hwasong-17, was displayed, the KCNA reported.

Amid stalled denuclearization talks and escalated tensions on the peninsula, the DPRK conducted over a dozen weapons tests this year, including its first ICBM test since 2017.

New research detects pre-eruption warning signals at Whakaari White Island and other active volcanoes

The Conversation
April 25, 2022

The sudden eruption at White Island was short-lived but produced an ash plume that rose several kilometres above the vent. 

GNZ Science, CC BY-ND

Scientifically and emotively, we think every volcano has its own “personality”. However, we’ve discovered that volcanoes share behavior traits – and this could form the basis for an eruption warning system.

Whakaari White Island, a picturesque volcanic island in the Bay of Plenty, was a tourist magnet, with its alien landscape and spectacular hydrothermal features. This idyll was shattered on December 9 2019 when high-pressure steam and gas exploded, concentrating in a deadly surge of hot ash down its main access valley. Of the 47 guides and tourists present, 22 died while many others suffered horrific burns.


An explosion of steam and gas shot hot ash across the main access valley of Whakaari White Island.

New Zealand Defence Force via Getty Images

Since that tragedy, we have been studying past eruptions at Whakaari, and volcanoes like it, to identify the warning signs of an imminent eruption.
Deciphering volcanic language

Every volcano behaves differently: some have crater lakes while others are “dry”, they have diverse magmas and rise to different elevations. Despite these differences, we think volcanoes such as Whakaari, Ruapehu and Tongariro in New Zealand could be driven to eruption by common processes in the shallow sub-surface below their craters.

In our new research, we used machine learning to sift through 40 years of seismic data from the New Zealand volcanoes and three others around the world, listening for particular frequencies that track the depth where gas, magma or water are moving or building up.

We saw one pattern repeatedly in the days before all the known Whakaari eruptions over the past decade, and most Ruapehu and Tongariro ones. This pattern is a slow strengthening of a quantity called Displacement Seismic Amplitude Ratio (DSAR), which peaks a few days before each event.

DSAR is a ratio that compares the “activity” of fluids (gas, hot water, steam) at the volcano’s surface to those several hundred meters deep. When DSAR increases, surface fluids are quiet, but deep ones are still actively moving and circulating vigorously below ground.

This indicates a blockage or seal has formed, preventing gas escape. Like a pressure-cooker, if the gas can’t escape a volcano, it explodes.

What happened at Whakaari

About a month before the December 2019 eruption, deep gas started to rise into Whakaari’s hydrothermal system. This put pressure onto the groundwater, keeping it in a liquid state, even as it became “superheated”.

As this fluid circulates below the vent, it is registered as noise or “tremor” on seismometers. GNS Science noted this increased tremor and, on November 18, raised Whakaari’s alert level to Volcanic Alert Level (VAL) 2, which is the highest level outside an eruption.

Key changes at Whakaari White Island leading up to the December 9 2019 eruption.
Provided by author, CC BY-SA

About a week later, Whakaari began to pulse. Pressure and tremor would build over about 24 hours, before discharging explosively at the bottom of the crater lake. This resulted in geysers and fountains, throwing mud and debris up to the height of a ten-storey building.

Crucially, these gas bursts were safety valves, easing the pressure in the system.

At the beginning of December, the gas bursts stopped and the surface became quiet. Rather than being cause for relief, we think this indicated a new and much more dangerous phase. A seal had formed, trapping the gas. The high DSAR shows that below the seal, the system was as noisy as ever, with pressure continuing to rise.

Between 9pm and midnight on December 8 2019, there was a strong burst of seismic energy. This was likely fresh magmatic fluid arriving to ramp up the pressure on gas and water already trapped in the rock. It also began the process of explosive release, because it caused small cracks to form in the seal.

The growth of cracks began to accelerate, setting Whakaari on the path to a cascading system failure, as has been seen before in eruptions in 2012 and 2013. Once the weakness was widespread, the seal failed, disgorging the massive steam-explosion at 2:11pm on December 9.


Of the 47 people on Whakaari on the day of the eruption, 22 died and many others suffered horrific burns. John Borren/Getty Images

Understanding Ruapehu

Mount Ruapehu is a 2800m stratovolcano in New Zealand’s central North Island.

It is also capped by a hydrothermal system and a warm crater lake (Te Wai a Moe). The temperature and level of its lake is known to vary in cycles, responding to changes in gas released into its base, local weather or the occasional formation of a gas seal.

Unfortunately, the lake is so large it hides the surface activity that is useful for diagnosing volcanoes like Whakaari.


The same patterns of gas build-up observed at Whakaari have also been seen at Mount Ruapehu. Shutterstock/bondjb

This is where DSAR is so powerful. We have spotted the same pattern that reveals gas sealing at Whakaari numerous times at Ruapehu. We monitor DSAR at Ruapehu closely: over the past month it has increased dramatically.

We think this shows a new seal has formed, building pressure. This could end in an eruption similar to the 2006/07 cycle that generated destructive lahars (volcanic mud flows).

GNS Science has reported similar concerns in their decision to raise Ruapehu’s alert level to VAL 2.

This type of analysis is so new we have not had many chances to test how reliable the DSAR and other automated measures are for forecasting. However, the current high DSAR and lake heating have put all scientist on alert. History shows this state does not always lead to an eruption, but we must remain vigilant.

David Dempsey, Senior lecturer, University of Canterbury; Alberto Ardid, Post Doctoral Researcher, University of Canterbury, and Shane Cronin, Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Auckland

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How London became the dirty money capital of the world: FT report

Yasser Seddiq , Tuesday 26 Apr 2022

"There is no question that London is the dirty money capital of the world," a recent video report by The Financial Times (FT) said.

How London became the dirty money capital of the world | FT Film (Financial Times)

This is taking place near or in countries not far from international bodies and organisations specialised in combating money laundering, where they direct accusations against many other countries, but at the same time turn a blind eye to what is happening in London, according to Western economic sources.

The origins came with the big bang under Margaret Thatcher when she started liberalising the financial services sector, and then that carried on under the labour government with a commission on deregulation, the report said.

The Financial Times published a lengthy investigation that revealed the involvement of British banks and law firms in money laundering operations. It said that London had for decades represented an incubator for corruption and criminals from all over the world, and that it did not turn a blind eye to Russian money, but rather welcomed it.

The Financial Times report said that 31 law firms, 86 banks and 177 educational institutions in Britain accepted or moved dirty money from around the world back home. It added that the London Stock Exchange welcomed many Russian companies, turning the United Kingdom and London to their European base.

There are statements on the record from Boris Johnson, the prime minister, from when he was the mayor of London, saying that he wanted to make London a hub for Russian money. The Stock Exchange welcomed lots of Russian companies, and wanted them to make the UK and London their European base.

“Let's say you wanted to bring dirty money into the City of London and integrate it into the system, there are basically four key stages, placement, layering, integration, and defence. So let's start with bringing your money from, say, a Latvian bank account, a Cayman bank account, you want to then move that into a UK shell company,” the report said.

“You're supposed to tell the Companies House registry who the real owners, the beneficial owners, of the companies are. But in practise, it's really easy to evade those rules. And fundamentally, no one goes after companies that just lie.”

"It is essentially a Wild West of information, which is unverified, and in some cases ludicrous," the report said.

"You can put forward any name, hide your identity. There are Adolf Hitlers, and Donald Ducks, and Mickey Mouses. It is so easy to register a company on Companies House, costs £12, you can do it in minutes. And crucially, no one checks the information."

Usually, the applications are approved within 24 hours. They do not actually have the statutory power to check the information, to investigate false information, or remove it from the register.

"The next stage you want to layer to move this money around in a series of complicated financial transactions that will distance you from the money and from your source of wealth. That's where the UK banks come in. Some 86 banks have been involved in obtaining, moving corrupt wealth around the world," the report said.

The cash, by the time it arrives in London, has probably already gone through a couple of British overseas territories like the British Virgin Islands.

"Step three is you want to integrate your wealth into the UK system. You want to buy assets, including UK property. Lawyers, real estate agents are on hand to help you do that," the report said.

The report detailed that one can own UK property through a shell company, even an offshore shell company.

"And if you do own it through an offshore shell company, you don't have to say who really owns that property."

Lawyers are on hand to advise on these complicated transactions, which creates an opaque ownership structure of some of the most valuable UK homes. Roughly 84,000 homes in the UK are owned anonymously. Some £6.7 billion of UK property has been bought with suspicious wealth, the report said.

One of the attractions of being in London is the network of lawyers, accountants, oligarchs, and kleptocrats, according to the report. English law provides a stamp of legitimacy.

"We've identified 81 law firms, 86 UK banks, and surprisingly 177 UK education institutions that have accepted or moved dirty money from around the world. Russians own our newspapers, their children are in the elite public schools. Their properties are in Mayfair."

The value of money laundering every year is between £23 billion and £57 billion, in Britain; one of the largest economies in the world.

Veteran Labour MP Margaret Hodge said that what is "very worrying is that the government has held extensive consultations on this issue, and had a bill literally waiting on the shelves for years, however, it left many holes in it. We closed some of them, and we were unable to close others. There are many points in it that we cannot achieve."

"I feel uncomfortable that it took the tragedy of Ukraine to get the government to act on the issue of dirty money," she added as quoted by Independent Arabia.

The same newspaper quoted Joe Powell, the co-founder of the Kensington Against Dirty Money campaign as he asserted that ministers have to act now against the illicit wealth stored in the United Kingdom.

'Speaking out': Russian musicians tour for Ukraine refugees

AFP , Tuesday 26 Apr 2022

Russian rapper Noize MC bounds onto the brightly lit stage in Warsaw to the screams of hundreds of adoring fans at his anti-war concert.



After an emotional speech denouncing the Kremlin's sweeping military operation in Ukraine, he flashes a peace sign with his fingers to the mostly Ukrainian but also Russian and Belarusian audience.

"I will be making this sign until my hands are tied behind my back," Noize MC told the crowd, alluding to alleged Russian atrocities in Ukrainian towns such as Bucha, where bodies were found with their hands bound behind their backs.

Noize MC, 37, real name Ivan Alexeyev, is one of two Russian pop acts who have teamed up to perform in the Czech Republic, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland to raise money for the more than 5.2 million Ukrainians forced to flee the conflict.

He and his touring partner -- electronic music star Monetochka -- have so far raised more than 200,000 euros ($214,000) for a Polish charity helping refugees with their "Voices of Peace" concert series.



"I wanted to find a way where I can be most effective in speaking out," Monetochka told AFP in an interview before her set.

When she did take the stage, it was against projections of ballerinas from the Russian ballet Swan Lake, which is highly symbolic in Russia as a byword for Soviet decay and regime collapse.

'Talking about war'



Wearing a white dress -- her hair, as always, in two buns -- Monetochka delighted the crowd with a percussive poem mocking Russia's attack before a set of electro-pop hits.

"We found a way where we can really make a difference and for a second forget about the feeling of guilt," said the softly spoken 23-year-old -- whose real name is Liza Girdimova.

Born just before Russian President Vladimir Putin took power, Monetochka is part of a generation that has known only his rule.

Her lyrics used to reflect concerns about Russia's trajectory "hidden in metaphors." The last two months have changed that.

"I'm talking about war without synonyms," she told AFP, defying a Kremlin order that Russians can refer to the fighting only as a "special military operation."

At the same time, she says, she's wary of ostracising fans who remain in Russia and who are sympathetic to the Kremlin's narrative.

"I try with all my strength not to scare people that are on the fence, but to bring them towards us instead."

The series in Europe is a far cry from previous tours -- even after fighting erupted in 2014 after Ukrainians ousted their Moscow-backed government and the Kremlin annexed Crimea from Ukraine.



After that, she said, Russian artists still performed in Ukraine and there was little practical difference between a gig in Saint Petersburg and Ukraine's now war-scarred city of Kharkiv.

"We could go there and sing in our Russian language, our Russian songs and nobody did anything to us," she said.

"People there knew our songs by heart."

The singing by heart, at least, hasn't changed. Hundreds of her fans in Warsaw sang along, Belarusians, Russians and Ukrainians standing shoulder to shoulder.

'There is hope'

"I'm happy there are some Russian people who aren't indifferent and who help us," said 25-year-old Evgenia Korzhelaya whose parents still live in Ukraine's heavily shelled southern town of Mykolayiv.

Liza Daviskiba, a 26-year-old Russian project manager who lives in Finland, said she was surprised to see such crowds for Russian artists.

"There is hope that there won't be this aggression between our people," she said.

"I'm so happy to see this kind of initiative. It's a statement that things aren't good in Russia and that we Russians are with Ukrainians."

Like tens of thousands of Russians horrified by events in Ukraine, Monetochka scrambled to leave Russia within days.

And like many Russians who fled, she doesn't know when she will go back. In the meantime, the concerts offer a degree of stability.



She derives hope that most of the donations on their concert website -- which also go towards helping refugees -- come from Russia. And, she said, the shows let her and Alexeyev briefly "forget about the fate of the country."

It hasn't all been smooth sailing and she says she has encountered "anger" from Ukrainians and some Europeans.

"They have a right to this," she said.

For now, with more performances planned in Scandinavia, the shows help with the uncertainty of the moment.

The gigs "keep me afloat," she said.

PUTIN'S USEFUL IDIOT

WATCH: Rand Paul ignites clash at Senate hearing by suggesting Ukraine is 'part of Russia'

Travis Gettys
April 26, 2022

CSPAN
Secretary of state Tony Blinken and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) clashed during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.


The Kentucky Republican agreed there was no justification for Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but he expressed strong opposition to Ukraine joining NATO because he said that would commit U.S. troops to the war.

"We have not had advocacy for U.S. troops because they are not part of NATO," Paul said. "Had they been or are they to become part of NATO, that means U.S. soldiers will be fighting in Ukraine and that is something I very much oppose."

Blinken told the senator that his judgment of the situation was different.

"If you look at the countries Russia has attacked over the last years, Georgia, leaving forces in Moldova and repeatedly Ukraine, these are countries not part of NATO," Blinken said. "They do not attack NATO countries for probably good reason."

Then Paul, who the late Sen. John McCain accused in 2017 of "working for Vladimir Putin," responded with what appeared to be Russian talking points.

"You could also argue the countries they attacked were part of Russia, were part of the Soviet Union," Paul said.

The secretary of state said he firmly disagreed, saying those countries had a right to determine their own future, and Paul repeated his claim.

"I'm not saying it's not, but I'm saying the countries that have been attacked, Georgia and Ukraine, were part of the Soviet Union, they were part of the Soviet Union since the 1920s," Paul said.

‘Russian stooge’ Rand Paul blasted for ‘Pro-Iron Curtain speech’ pushing ‘straight Putin propaganda’

David Badash,

 The New Civil Rights Movement
April 26, 2022

Senator Rand Paul (Screen Grab)

U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is under fire for remarks he made Tuesday during a Senate hearing with Secretary of State Antony Blinken that are being called "propaganda" for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Saying that if Ukraine had become part of NATO, or will in the future, U.S. soldiers would be "fighting in Ukraine," Paul called it "something I very much oppose."

President Joe Biden and his administration have repeatedly stated he opposes American boots on the ground in Ukraine.

"If you look at the countries that Russia has attacked," Blinken reminded Paul, "over the last years: Georgia...Moldova, and then repeatedly in Ukraine, these are countries that were not part of NATO. It has not attacked NATO countries for probably very good reasons."

Paul defiant and argumentative, retorted in a jaw-dropping statement, "You could also argue that the countries they've attacked were part of Russia."

Stunned, Secretary Blinken struggled for words to respond, giving Paul time to amend his remarks to say, "or were part of the Soviet Union."

"I firmly disagree with that proposition," Blinken replied. "It is the fundamental right of these countries to decide their own future."

Paul is being blasted online.

"Rand Paul. Russian Stooge," tweeted Brian Karem, the famous CNN and Playboy journalist who was once jailed for refusing to reveal his sources. Karem is also host of the "Just Ask the Question" podcast, and recently returned from Ukraine.

Veteran Washington political reporter Sam Youngman says, "Rand Paul using actual Putin talking points."

Kentucky state Rep. Charles Booker, who is running to win the Democratic nomination for Paul's Senate seat, tweeted: "Rand Paul just attempted to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He is actively pushing Putin’s propaganda in the Senate, and I will remove him from office in November."

Journalist Aaron Rupar, who posted the video above, tweeted, "this is straight Putin propaganda from Rand Paul."

 

Jared Kushner’s Scandalous Saudi $2 Billion
His corruption deserves more attention.

by NICHOLAS GROSSMAN
APRIL 26, 2022 

White House senior adviser Jared Kushner stands among Saudi officials as President Donald Trump talks with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during a meeting in the Oval Office at the White House on Tuesday, March 20, 2018 in Washington, DC.

 (Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

[On the April 22, 2022 episode of The Bulwark’s “Beg to Differ” podcast, guest Nicholas Grossman discussed Jared Kushner’s conflicts of interest and corruption.]

Mona Charen: We’ve had information for a few weeks about Hunter Biden and his various entanglements, and we have word in the last week or two about Jared Kushner launching an investment fund that received a $2 billion investment from the Saudi sovereign wealth fund. . . . Neither one of these is exactly palatable. What should we be taking ultra-seriously here?

Nicholas Grossman: The thing we should be taking ultra-seriously is Jared Kushner’s—and other members of the Trump administration’s—corruption. That doesn’t mean that we should ignore something from Hunter Biden or anybody else, but the comparison of them . . . is often used as a sort of whataboutism. . . .

Hunter has some degree of sleaziness that kind of reminds me of Roger Clinton, or maybe some other sleazy presidential relatives that have maybe traded on the family name. And that’s something that’s a conflict of interest that’s worth investigating perhaps. . . . But also, in the process of looking into it, it’s clear that [Hunter Biden] never held any government position, he didn’t change any government policy as a result of it.

And Kushner puts this into sharp relief. . . . He was somebody who, first, could not pass his security clearance applications because of concerning foreign ties. And Trump gave him a top White House position anyway—which is the president’s legal authority to do so. They can give any classified information to anybody at will. That’s within presidential power. So, it’s legal, but it’s really not good for the country. And the way that we saw it was not good for the country is that Kushner became a prominent consumer of U.S. intelligence—of things that didn’t even pertain to foreign policy he was working on—and he ran a sort of shadow foreign policy going around the State Department and the Defense Department.

He met with MBS [Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia], then trying to rise to and consolidate power, and . . . quite possibly gave him some classified U.S. intelligence. Because the next day, after [Kushner and MBS] had stayed up all night together, there was a big purge, a lot of Saudi arrests and consolidation of power and kind of generational turnover within Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia launched a blockade of Qatar with Kushner’s backing that was a surprise to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and also Defense Secretary James Mattis, who then had to go to the Middle East and try to reassure a bunch of partners because the U.S. was running the anti-ISIS air campaign out of a base in Qatar—which then, thanks to Kushner, the U.S. was now supporting a blockade for. And then, after not too long, there was a big investment from a Qatari company tied to the government that bailed out Jared Kushner’s terrible real estate investment at 666 Fifth Avenue. And then—guess what?—the U.S. backs off with the Qatar crisis.

The U.S. also, in part thanks to Kushner, transferred some nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia, that went around Congress and might not be totally legal. It also helped cover up MBS’s murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the Washington Post journalist. . . . I don’t know how much it is a ‘thank you’ for past services rendered, or it is a down payment on the possibility that he’ll get back into power and future services rendered. But this is some of the biggest corruption that I think we’ve seen in U.S. history. I’m trying to think of a good analogue and there isn’t really one of a president putting his neophyte, corrupt son-in-law into such a senior position, who then uses his position to make money for himself.

I remember writing in 2016, of concerns about the Clinton Foundation, about the charity, that if Hillary was going to win, that there shouldn’t be some private interest of the president that foreign actors can give money to—even though it’s a charity and even though it has a record of having done some good work. . . .

And that was, I still think, a reasonable concern. And now we see the real thing at much bigger scale. And I don’t know if it is so many things going on—the war and COVID and all the other problems—or if it is that there’s so much corruption from the Trump administration, or if people are just kind of fed up with it or exhausted by it, but it is not getting nearly the attention that it deserves. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen something so corrupt, and it changed U.S. policy in real detrimental ways. Part of the reason why U.S. policy is in trouble with Iran now is because Kushner took bribes to change it.

Nicholas Grossman
Nicholas Grossman is a political science professor at the University of Illinois and senior editor of Arc Digital. Follow him on Twitter @ngrossman81.

'An enormous inspiration': More than 30 Starbucks locations have voted to unionize

Jake Johnson, Common Dreams
April 26, 2022

People march in the middle of East Pine Street during the "Fight Starbucks' Union Busting" rally and march in Seattle, Washington on April 23, 2022. 

(Photo: Jason Redmond/AFP)

Overcoming increasingly aggressive opposition from the company's management, workers at more than 30 Starbucks locations across the U.S. have now voted to unionize as the wave of organizing spurred by historic wins in Buffalo just four months ago continues to mount.

On Monday, workers at a Starbucks shop in the township of Hopewell, New Jersey voted unanimously to unionize and join Workers United, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union. The store was the 30th Starbucks location to unionize in the U.S. and the first in New Jersey.

"Howard Schultz's big anti-union campaign seems like a dud that's backfiring."

"We are incredibly proud of the brave and strong Starbucks workers who voted to join Workers United," Lynne Fox, the international president of the union, said in a statement. "Our collective success in Hopewell today reflects the power that working people have to demand positive changes from their employers."

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who rallied with Starbucks workers in Virginia over the weekend, congratulated the Hopewell employees and said that "workers' efforts to demand dignity on the job have been an enormous inspiration to working-class people from coast to coast."

The Hopewell victory was followed by a union win in Baltimore—the first Starbucks location in Maryland to unionize—and announcements from several more shops in California, Washington state, and Texas that they intend to join the rapidly spreading movement.

The growing momentum comes as Starbucks management, led by billionaire CEO Howard Schultz, is working to ramp up a union-busting campaign that has already resulted in several lawsuits from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). On Friday, the NLRB sued the coffee corporation for unlawfully retaliating against three union organizers in Phoenix, Arizona.

"Among other things," the NLRB alleged, "Starbucks disciplined, suspended, and discharged one employee, constructively discharged another, and placed a third on an unpaid leave of absence after revoking recently granted accommodations."

Nevertheless, Starbucks organizing continues to gain steam as workers at the e-commerce behemoth Amazon are also attempting to unionize a second Staten Island warehouse—efforts that advocates hope will galvanize a labor movement that has suffered for decades amid corporate America's concerted offensive.

Last week, after Schultz said that Starbucks and other U.S. companies are "being assaulted" by "the threat of unionization," five Starbucks locations in Richmond, Virginia voted to form a union by a combined margin of 82-14.

"This is just the beginning and we are not going to let a corporation silence our voices."

"This five-for-five yes vote shows that Richmond is a union town, and this is just the beginning and we are not going to let a corporation silence our voices," Starbucks employee Jillian O'Hare told the local Richmond Times-Dispatch. "We are not going to let billionaire union-busters stand in our way."

Longtime labor journalist Steven Greenhouse tweeted Monday that "Howard Schultz's big anti-union campaign seems like a dud that's backfiring." Starbucks has hired the notorious anti-union law firm Littler Mendelson to assist its push to blunt worker organizing, which Schultz has tried to portray as a scheme led by an "outside" group.

"After Starbucks management keeps losing so badly in union vote after union vote, one would think Howard Schultz would decide, 'Hey, our anti-union campaign isn't working. Let's drop it,'" Greenhouse wrote. "But Schultz evidently plans to double down on his anti-union push and make things more divisive."

Starbucks workers who have voted to unionize in pursuit of better pay, benefits, and conditions now face the arduous task of negotiating a contract with a hostile employer—a process that can take years.

An Economic Policy Institute (EPI) study published in 2009 found that "within one year after the election, only 48% of organized units have collective bargaining agreements."

"By two years it increases to 63% and by three years to 70%," EPI noted. "Only after more than three years will 75% have obtained a first agreement."


During a rally in Virginia on Sunday, Sanders said to cheers that "our demand right now is to tell Mr. Schultz and the people who run Starbucks: stop the anti-union activities, stop bringing people into backrooms, stop threatening people, stop intimidating people."

"And, equally important," the Vermont senator added, "start negotiating a first contract with those shops that have voted to form a union.

Second Amazon site in New York kicks off vote on joining union

2022/4/25 

© Agence France-Presse

US Senator Bernie Sanders appeared at a rally to support Amazon Labor Union leader Christian Smalls (R) in his bid to unionize a second Amazon site

New York (AFP) - Workers at an Amazon sorting center in New York began voting Monday on whether to join the Amazon Labor Union, which recently became the first union at the e-commerce giant in the United States.

About 1,800 employees at the center have until Friday to make their way to a tent set up near the site to vote, with the ballot count scheduled for May 2.

The LDJ5 sorting center is in a Staten Island industrial area across the street from the JFK8 warehouse, where 55 percent of workers voted in late March to be represented by the Amazon Labor Union (ALU).

Amazon, the country's second largest employer after Walmart, had successfully staved off efforts to unionize since it was founded in 1994.

ALU president Christian Smalls said on Sunday he was confident about the vote at the LDJ5 sorting center.

"I'm feeling good. We have good vibes with us, a good momentum," he told AFP.

Two prominent figures from the progressive wing of the Democratic party, Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, made appearances to support the workers' movement.

"What this struggle is about is not just Amazon Staten Island," Sanders told workers at a rally at the site.

"Working people are sick and tired of falling further and further behind, while billionaires like (Amazon founder Jeff) Bezos become much richer," he said.

"You have been an inspiration for millions of workers all across this country."

If ALU gets a second victory at LDJ5, it could inspire other warehouses to join in. Union members say they already have been contacted by representatives of several dozen warehouses from all over the United States.

Motivated by treatment of workers during the pandemic and more recently by inflation, employees of several multinationals such as Starbucks and Apple are taking steps to organize, but continue to face pushback from management.

Amazon filed an appeal against the result of the vote at JFK8, saying members of the ALU had "intimidated" employees and accusing the agency responsible for supervising the ballot, the National Labor Relations Board, of being biased.

Male spider species evolves high-speed launch to avoid sexual cannibalism

April 25 (UPI) -- A species of male spiders is ditching its cannibalistic female counterparts after sex, to avoid being dined on alive.

The orb-weaving male spiders use their two front legs to launch themselves to safety as soon as they've mated, according to research published Monday in Current Biology.

The lead author of the study wrote he noticed the tiny males were bouncing away after mating with the larger females, using energy stored in their front leg joints.

"Imagine a man with a height of 1.8 meters catapulting himself 530 meters in one second. That's what these male spiders do," said Shichang Zhang, a behavioral ecologist at China's Hubei University. That equates to someone just under 6 feet launching themselves one-third of a mile.

Researchers discovered the male spiders folded their front legs against the female and catapulted off right after mating. The action is so fast it took a high-speed, high-resolution video to catch the action. Analysis of the high-speed videos show the spiders reaching speeds of 2.9 feet per second, which translates to almost 60 mph.

RELATED After sex, female jumping spiders get shy

Orb spiders don't have venom to kill their prey, so females resort to mummifying their male partners by wrapping them in 450 feet of silk that either suffocates or crushes them to death.

The study's findings suggest the male spiders' catapulting behavior evolved over time to avoid the crushing death and sexual cannibalism. The study found the "bounciest males" father more spiderlings.

I helped write the UN climate report. Here’s why it gives me hope

By Sarah Burch | Opinion | April 25th 2022
Special Report:Reports from the Race to a Safer World

The nearly 3,000-page document details a stark, urgent threat — but it also shows a clear path forward, says one of its lead authors. Photo by Bruno Aguirre / Unsplash

This story was originally published by UNDARK and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

On April 4, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released the final instalment of its Sixth Assessment Report, an epic synthesis of science exploring the causes and consequences of climate change. This latest document focused on the causes — chiefly, the rampant emission of greenhouse gases — and how to reduce them, fast.

As one of the lead authors of the new report, I and more than 230 scientists from around the world collectively reviewed over 18,000 scientific articles and responded to around 60,000 reviewer comments over the course of more than three years. Our goal was to compile the most accurate and nuanced picture of current climate science and social science and to use this to inform international climate change treaty-making and policy design. The result was a nearly 3,000-page document that details a stark, urgent threat — but that also gives us reason for optimism.

First, the grim news: Average annual greenhouse gas emissions were the highest during the past decade than they have been in human history. This, despite escalating social movements, high profile declarations, and splashy vows from political and business leaders to integrate climate into investment and business decisions. Without immediate, deep, and accelerating emissions reductions in all sectors and in all regions of the world, the goal of limiting warming to no more than 1.5 C — the threshold for avoiding the worst, but not all, impacts of climate change — will be out of reach. The human and environmental toll of such a scenario is unfathomable.

But glimmers of hope also emerge from this report. For the first time, we’re seeing evidence of real, sustained decreases in greenhouse gas emissions from some countries. These reductions aren’t blips that can be attributed to the economic recession of 2008 and 2009 or to the hardships inflicted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather, they are the result of effective and, in some cases, targeted efforts to scale up renewable energy, electrify transport, enhance building efficiency, foster compact, sustainable communities, and otherwise reduce society’s carbon footprint. In some countries, these reductions are deep and comprehensive enough to be consistent with limiting global warming to 2 C, the overarching target set in the Paris Agreement of 2015.

These signs of progress also point to a path forward. The solutions to climate change now exist; we just have to adopt them.

In the energy supply sector, which is responsible for around a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, a particularly major transition is required. Limiting warming to 2 C will require us to prematurely shut down oil and gas infrastructure by mid-century. In other words, we will have to leave fossil fuels in the ground, and the new infrastructure that continues to be announced in countries like Canada may end up as stranded assets by 2050. Coal, of course, will have to go. Absent effective carbon capture and storage, neither of which is currently used widely or well enough to measurably impact our climate goals, coal use will need to decline by up to 92 percent by 2030.

There are promising indications, however, that a transition in the energy sector is already underway. As we watch the volatility of gas prices, we’ve also seen the price of renewable energy fall. The costs of photovoltaics used to harvest solar energy plummeted by around 85 per cent over the last 10 years, surpassing even the most optimistic projections. Likewise, the price of wind has come down around 55 per cent over the same time span, and the price of lithium-ion batteries — crucial for when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow — has come down by 85 per cent as well. Fuels like hydrogen and biofuels will fill in the gaps to support a transition in aviation and heavy shipping.

Our report also suggests vast potential to shift our cities toward low-carbon, resilient development. Cities are responsible for more than two-thirds of global greenhouse gas emissions. This is where the transport, building, and infrastructure sectors collide to shape individual decisions. Demand for transport can be reduced by locating homes near workplaces, recreation, and services. The remaining emissions can be dramatically reduced by encouraging a shift toward electric vehicles powered by clean energy sources and toward active transport, like walking and biking. Efficient buildings that use zero net energy or produce zero net carbon emissions will also be critical, and we find evidence that these buildings are springing up in every climate.

But it’s also important not to pin responsibility for mitigating climate change on the individual. We can only choose low carbon transport if the infrastructure is available and affordable; we can more easily make our homes energy efficient if incentives and building codes support these changes. The link between collective decision-making, at all levels of governance, and individual behaviour is a powerful one.

Ultimately, the new IPCC report lays bare the state of our efforts to mitigate the worst harms emerging from the rampant burning of fossil fuels. It shows that we cannot reach our broader sustainable development goals of a vibrant natural environment, clean water, peace, zero poverty, and healthy communities without addressing climate change. It just won’t work. Our report shows that addressing climate change is a matter of justice, and that a stable climate is the foundation upon which our societies thrive. We now have the solutions, and the path ahead is difficult, but clear.

Dr. Sarah Burch is a Canada Research Chair and executive director of the University of Waterloo’s Interdisciplinary Centre on Climate Change. She is a lead author of the IPCC’s 6th Assessment Report.