Tragedy in the Capital: Ukraine Police Chief Resigns Following Kyiv Mass Shooting

Amidst the relentless backdrop of the ongoing war, the resilient city of Kyiv was recently shattered by a different kind of terror. In a shocking domestic incident that has shaken public trust and prompted high-level accountability, the head of Ukraine's patrol police, Yevhen Zhukov, has officially stepped down. His resignation follows intense public outrage and critical scrutiny after video footage allegedly showed two of his officers fleeing the scene of a deadly mass shooting in the capital.

This devastating event not only resulted in a tragic loss of civilian life but has also sparked a nationwide conversation about law enforcement readiness, wartime mental health, and the complexities of gun ownership in Ukraine.

The Unfolding Crisis in the Holosiivskyi District

The horrifying sequence of events began on a Saturday in Kyiv's southern Holosiivskyi district. According to the Ukrainian authorities, the attacker first set fire to his own apartment before descending onto the streets to unleash a shooting spree.

The gunman opened fire on unsuspecting pedestrians before retreating into a nearby supermarket, where he took several terrified civilians hostage. The standoff ultimately concluded when the shooter was killed in a fierce shoot-out with responding police units.

The human toll of this tragic event has been profound. Officials have confirmed the following casualty details:

• Six fatalities, which tragically included the father of a young boy injured in the attack, as well as a woman believed to be the child's aunt.
• 14 individuals injured during the chaotic crossfire.
• Eight victims remain hospitalized, with one adult listed in an extremely serious condition and three others in a serious condition.

A Breach of Duty: Officers Flee the Scene

While the mass shooting itself was a deeply traumatic event, the subsequent emergence of bystander footage escalated the tragedy into a national scandal. Videos shared widely across social media networks appeared to show two patrol officers abandoning civilians and running away from the active shooter scene.

In a profession defined by courage and public service, this alleged dereliction of duty sent shockwaves through the Ukrainian law enforcement community. Interior Minister Igor Klymenko swiftly confirmed that the two officers in question had been suspended pending a comprehensive investigation into their actions.

"'Serve and protect' is not just a slogan," Klymenko stated emphatically on Telegram. "It must be supported by appropriate professional actions. Especially at critical moments, when people's lives depend on it." However, he also urged the public to remain objective, cautioning that it is "not entirely correct to make generalisations about the entire police only by the actions of two employees."

Leadership Accountability: The Resignation of Yevhen Zhukov

In a powerful display of leadership and accountability, Yevhen Zhukov addressed the media the following Sunday. During a solemn news conference, he did not mince words regarding the actions of his subordinates, stating that the officers had "failed to assess the situation properly and left civilians in danger." He condemned their response as both "unprofessionally and unworthily" executed.

Taking full responsibility for the conduct of his department, Zhukov announced his immediate departure. "As a combat officer, I have decided to submit my resignation from the position I currently hold," he declared, marking a significant leadership shift within the national police force.

Presidential Outrage and Official Investigations

The gravity of the situation prompted immediate commentary from the highest levels of the Ukrainian government. President Volodymyr Zelensky addressed the nation, expressing deep sorrow and condemning the officers who failed to intervene.

In his Sunday address, Volodymyr Zelensky confirmed that the officers were "at the scene of the crime, but did not stop the murderer, and fled on their own." He explicitly accused them of "inaction" and announced that the national investigations bureau has launched a formal criminal case to scrutinize their conduct, which will also include a thorough review of their previous service records.

"We are going through a war and every day, unfortunately, there are human losses from Russian strikes," Zelensky reflected. "It is especially painful to lose people like this, in an ordinary city, just on the street."

Profiling the Attacker and the Complexities of Armed Self-Defense

As investigators piece together the motive behind what they are currently treating as a terrorist act, details about the shooter have begun to emerge. The assailant has been identified as a 58-year-old man originally from Moscow, Russia. Prior to moving to the Holosiivskyi district, he had resided in the eastern Donetsk region—an area largely under Russian occupation and the site of prolonged separatist conflict prior to the 2022 full-scale invasion.

Interior Minister Igor Klymenko noted that the attacker's mental state was "clearly unstable." Surprisingly, the firearm used in the massacre was officially registered. Authorities are now rigorously investigating how the shooter managed to obtain the necessary documentation to renew his gun licence.

Despite this isolated tragedy, Klymenko confirmed that the government will not initiate mass checks on legal gun owners. He reaffirmed his belief in the right to armed self-defence, particularly in the context of the ongoing war where civilians have taken up arms for national resistance.

Currently, gun ownership in Ukraine is permitted for non-automatic firearms, provided citizens meet strict licensing conditions, which include:

• Having no prior criminal record.
• Having no documented history of mental illness.
• Passing necessary background checks for civilian carry.

Despite the wartime easing of restrictions to allow citizens to defend their country, a 2023 small arms survey indicated that only about 3.4% of Ukrainian adults officially own a personal firearm.

Moving Forward: Rebuilding Trust in Times of Crisis

Shootings of this nature are exceptionally rare in Kyiv, a city that has otherwise demonstrated remarkable resilience and unity in the face of external aggression. The resignation of Yevhen Zhukov underscores a critical moment for Ukrainian law enforcement as they work to rebuild public trust and ensure that the principles of "serve and protect" are upheld without exception.

As the national investigations bureau continues its work and the injured fight for their recovery in local hospitals, the community is left to mourn the senseless loss of life on an ordinary city street.

Read More

FBI: Nearly 5X More Murders Committed With Knives Than Assault Rifles

Far more murders are committed with knives than so-called “assault rifles,” according to the FBI.

The new crime statistics released by the agency reveal that out of 11,961 murders performed within the U.S. in 2014, 660 were committed unarmed, 1,567 were committed with knives and only 248 murders were known to have been committed using rifles of any type, including single-shot long arms and “assault rifles” routinely demonized by gun control groups.

Granted, the FBI did list 2,052 murders under “unknown firearm type,” but given the percentages of the known firearm categories, it is unlikely that more than four percent of the “unknown firearms” were in fact rifles, and less than that were semi-automatics.

In other words, despite the calls to ban “military-style assault rifles” by anti-gun groups, conservatively less – and likely much less – than four percent of murders were committed using AR-15s, AK-47s and other semi-automatic long arms.

This figure is a decrease from 2013.

In comparison, AR-15s are used far less often in murders than shotguns, a fact which contradicts Vice President Joe Biden who once implied otherwise.

That isn’t that surprising considering the recent study by the University of Chicago Crime Lab which revealed that AR-15s and AK-47s are unpopular amongst criminals.

Overall the number of murders involving guns has plunged from 8,855 in 2012 to 8,454 in 2013 and now 8,124 in 2014, following a significant decline in gun-related violent crimes since the mid-1990s.

“…The 2014 estimated violent crime total was 6.9 percent below the 2010 level and 16.2 percent below the 2005 level,” the FBI stated.

Guns are used exponentially more often to stop crime than to kill; each year firearms prevent an estimated 2.5 million crimes in the U.S., usually without a shot being fired, meaning that guns are used over 300 times more often to save innocent lives, given the 8,124 murders committed with firearms in 2014.

It’s also been estimated that over 56 million people have died due to gun control in the last century, according to Gun Owners of America:

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. Subsequently, from 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, deprived of the means to defend themselves, were rounded up and killed.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. Then, from 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 millon dissidents were rounded up and killed.

In 1938 Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945 over 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill, union leaders, Catholics and others, unable to fire a shot in protest, were rounded up and killed.

In 1935, China established gun control. Subsequently, between 1948 and 1952, over 20 million dissidents were rounded up and killed.

In 1956, Cambodia enshrined gun control. In just two years (1975-1977) over one million “educated” people were rounded up and killed.

In 1964, Guatemala locked in gun control. From 1964 to 1981, over 100,000 Mayan Indians were rounded up and killed as a result of their inability to defend themselves.

In 1970, Uganda embraced gun control. Over the next nine years over 300,000 Christians were rounded up and killed.

Read More

HBO and Snapchat are Actively Working with the U.S. Government to Create Propaganda

In 1953, Joseph Alsop, then one of America’s leading syndicated columnists, went to the Philippines to cover an election. He did not go because he was asked to do so by his syndicate. He did not go because he was asked to do so by the newspapers that printed his column. He went at the request of the CIA.

Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters.

The history of the CIA’s involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception.

– From Carl Bernstein’s 1977 article: The CIA and the Media

What is art, when the artist is working with the host government to promote a particular message?

It is propaganda, and just because it’s your government doing it with the help of your friends and neighbors, doesn’t make it any less so. Even if you agree with the message, it is still propaganda. No wonder so many movies suck.

Today, we learn that both HBO and Snapchat are actively working with the U.S. State Department to push an anti-ISIS message. Again, even if the message is a good one, make no mistake about it, it is still propaganda. This is a very slippery slope, and something that Americans shouldn’t tolerate.

The National Journal reports:

The State De­part­ment is seek­ing a counter-nar­rat­ive to the pro­pa­ganda be­ing spread by IS­IS, and it is re­portedly turn­ing to some of Amer­ica’s pree­m­in­ent storytellers for help. Ac­cord­ing to The Daily Beast, ex­ec­ut­ives from both HBO and Snapchat are part of a team of film­makers and so­cial me­dia spe­cial­ists that’s brain­storm­ing how to hamper the ef­fect­ive­ness of ISIL’s mes­saging.

Notice that when ISIS does it, it’s propaganda, but when the U.S. government does it, it’s a “counter-narrative.”

Cit­ing un­named in­dustry and gov­ern­ment sources, The Daily Beast re­ports that HBO and Snapchat rep­res­ent­at­ives were in­vited to Sunny­lands, a Cali­for­nia re­treat known for host­ing im­port­ant gov­ern­ment fig­ures, in June to meet with State of­fi­cials on how best to counter the IS­IS nar­rat­ive, which has lured young men from the Middle East, Europe, and even the United States, to join its vi­ol­ent ranks. Mark Boal, the Oscar-nom­in­ated screen­writer of Zero Dark Thirty, is re­portedly part of the team as­sist­ing the State De­part­ment.

Ah, Zero Dark Thirty. Where have we hear about that before? Oh yeah…

Remember Zero Dark Thirty? Turns Out it was a CIA Propaganda Film After All

Now back to the National Journal:

Neither HBO nor Snapchat have re­spon­ded to re­quests for com­ment. The State De­part­ment, in a state­ment to Quartz, neither con­firmed nor denied the Daily Beastre­port but noted that film “is an es­pe­cially power­ful me­di­um for build­ing cross­cul­tur­al un­der­stand­ing” of world is­sues. It also said:

Through film, music, and the visual and performing arts, cultural diplomacy helps us make global connections with audiences that are traditionally harder to reach. By supporting creative expression, we help the development of civil society, promote positive role models, and amplify alternative voices. ”

Reread that paragraph from the State Department. Now read it again. I don’t think I could come up with a better definition of government propaganda if I tried.

Finally…

Ac­cord­ing to The Daily Beast, the U.S. now wants to con­nect “in­flu­en­tial Hol­ly­wood fig­ures” with Middle East­ern film­makers, to pro­mote power­ful stor­ies of young people in the Middle East who have re­jec­ted IS­IS’s reign of ter­ror and are act­ively work­ing to make the re­gion a bet­ter place to live. 

Here’s a better suggestion for the U.S. State Department: Stop creating terrorist groups in the first place. And yes, the U.S. government is largely responsible for creating ISIS, as we learned in the following post:

Additional Details Emerge on How U.S. Government Policy Created, Armed, Supported and Funded ISIS

Thanks for playing.

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Read More

Invincible Saudi Prince: Kidnapped, Beat, Raped 3 Women in Beverly Hills Compound, US Lets Him Go. Won't even release his picture.

On the 23rd of September, a servant employed at a Beverly Hills mansion compound saw a woman screaming for help while desperately trying to climb the tall wall surrounding the $37 million estate.

She was bleeding and had just been raped by 28 year old Saudi prince; Majed Abdulaziz al-Saud, the Times reported. She was only the latest of his several victims, who have now come forward. The servant who came to the brutalized woman’s rescue lived and worked within the compound. The police were called and the prince, who had been renting the mansion, was arrested.

The accused prince, a lower-ranking member of the House of Saud, does not have diplomatic immunity and can thus be legally tried for his crimes. He was set to appear in court on October 19th. Yet, despite his status as a non-national and being the very definition of a high flight risk, he was quickly released by the Beverly Hills, California police on a $300,000 bail; a paltry sum for a prince.

He has apparently now fled and hasn’t been seen or heard from since. No photographs of him have been released, and none exist in the public space. In similar fugitive cases, the police have released mugshots to help identify the suspects. Neighbor, Eric Stiskin offered his take on the prince’s whereabouts, “I am sure he has taken off on his private jet by now. I don’t think he even needs a passport to get out of here.”

The Beverly Hills, CA mansion compound rented by the royal kidnapper, as seen on Google Maps.

Last Friday, Three of the victims filed a civil lawsuit against Al-Saud. In it, they accuse him of “inflicting emotional distress, assault and battery, sexual discrimination, and retaliation against his domestic employees.” It is commonplace for affluent Beverly Hills residents to employ illegal immigrants as servants, so that they have no rights and protections and will be unlikely to report abuse for fear of deportation by the state.

Policing of the wealthy in the United States is a very different animal than the brutal tactics employed in low income communities. While a crime suspect from a low-income background will almost always be sucked up by the country’s infamous prison industrial complex; commoditized by the gigantic private prisons that turn every prisoner into a profit source, the authorities are incredibly lenient on wealthy lawbreakers. It is exceedingly unusual in the US, for a kidnapper and rapist of several women to be released on bail. The only logical explanation for the leniency is the suspect’s status as a member of the royal family of Saudi Arabia; one of the US’s key allies.

The ultra-wealthy royal House of Saud is composed of 15,000 members, with about 2,000 of the family enjoying the highest wealth and power. A royal whistleblower revealed more details about her clandestine family:

“We have 15,000 royals and around 13,000 don’t enjoy the wealth of the 2,000. You have 2,000 who are multi-millionaires, who have all the power, all the wealth and no-one can even utter a word against it because they are afraid to lose what they have.”

The Saudi government is about to behead and crucify a young critic of the regime. The record of human rights abuses under the Saudi monarchy is absolutely staggering, so it should be of no surprise to any keen observer that a member of the Saudi ruling class would kidnap, beat and rape women while holidaying overseas, or that he would deny his servants basic worker rights.

In the latest horrific massacre by the Saudi regime, at least 28 people at a party celebrating a wedding in the village of al-Wahga, Yemen were killed by 2 successive airstrikes, with scores more maimed for life. The Saudi’s said the attack was a ‘mistake’.

The US is also famous for its long list of human rights abuses and the invasion and occupation of less affluent nations, so the steadfast alliance between the two ultra-wealthy nations is, if nothing else, a logical pairing.

The ongoing social apartheid that protects the rich and criminalizes the poor has long been the status quo in every capitalist nation. Both the US and Saudi Arabia have a long history of executing dissidents accused of fabricated crimes. The US arguably has a worse record, since many of their executions of the poor are carried out by police officers, without as much as a mock trial.

A US judge recently threw out a lawsuit filed against Saudi Arabia by the families of the almost 3,000 9/11 victims. The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were mainly Saudi citizens. District Judge George Daniels of Manhattan, New York, stated that Saudi Arabia cannot be sued due to the sovereign immunity granted to it by the US government.

Saudi Arabia has just been made chair of the UN Human Rights Council. The US President, Barack Obama is the recipient of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

Read More

Propaganda War Begins: Russia's Syria Strikes Targeted US-Backed "Moderate" Rebels, West Says

With the US having officially lost control of the narrative in Syria now that The Kremlin has called Washington’s bluff on the battle to eradicate ISIS and eliminate the Sunni extremist elements that threaten to wrest control of Syria from President Bashar al-Assad, the only remaining question after Russian lawmakers officially cleared the way for airstrikes was how long it would be before the Western media began shouting about Russian warplanes bombing targets that aren’t affiliated with ISIS.

As we reported earlier today, Moscow wasted no time in launching its first round of air raids.

In turn, the West wasted no time in contending that Russia is targeting areas that aren’t known to be strategically significant for ISIS. Here’s a look at two headlines which do a nice job of summarizing all of the rhetoric which you’re about to hear emanating ceaselessly from every corner of the Western world in the coming days and weeks:

• U.S. IS CONCERNED RUSSIA'S INTENT IS PROTECTING ASSAD: KERRY
• U.S. HAS 'GRAVE CONCERNS' IF RUSSIA STRIKES OUTSIDE ISIL AREAS

And here’s WSJ with a sneak peek at the new narrative which Washington will be working hard to refine:

Russian President Vladimir Putin inserted his country directly into Syria’s war Wednesday, as Russian forces launched their first airstrikes against what Moscow said were Islamic State targets in the Middle Eastern nation.

But Western leaders raised doubts about whether Russia really intended to take the fight to Islamic State, or merely broaden the Syrian regime’s offensive against a wide range of other opponents.

For the U.S., the Russian strikes add new questions about the role of Russian forces in Syria. “While we would welcome a constructive role by Russia in this effort, today’s [meeting in Baghdad] hardly seems indicative of that sort of role and will in no way alter our operations,” a U.S. official said.

Warplanes targeted Islamic State military hardware and weapons stores, a spokesman for Russia’s Ministry of Defense told official news agencies hours after Russian lawmakers approved a request by Mr. Putin to allow the use of force abroad.

Framing the attacks as part of a fight against terrorism, Mr. Putin said that Russia will support the Syrian army from the air, without any ground operations, for the duration of the Syrian offensive.

“The only real way to fight international terrorism…is to act pre-emptively. and not wait till they [terrorists] come to our home,” Mr. Putin said in televised comments. He called for antiterror cooperation with other states through the Russian coordination center in Baghdad.

The official Syrian Arab News Agency reported Wednesday that Russian airstrikes hit areas under Islamic State control in Homs and Hama provinces, including the cities of Al Rastan and Talbiseh, near the town of Salamiyah, and the villages of al-Za’faran, al-Humr Hills, Eidoun, Salamiyah and Deir Fol. The strikes had successfully targeted Islamic State, SANA said, without elaborating.

But with the exception of the area east of the town of Salamiyah in Hama province, none of the areas listed by the Syrian regime have a known presence of Islamic State fighters. They are largely dominated by relatively moderate rebel factions and Islamist groups like Ahrar al-Sham and the al Qaeda affiliate the Nusra Front.

Yes, “relatively moderate rebel factions like al-Qaeda" (check the above, WSJ actually said that) which in July kidnapped the commander and deputy commander of the Pentagon’s ragtag group of US-trained rebels that was supposed to number in the thousands by now but has been reduced to just “four or five” men and which was humiliated last Friday when the remaining fighters were forced to surrender their pickup trucks and ammo to al-Nusra in order to “secure safe passage” to who knows where.

Considering that, and considering the "solid" relationship the US has always maintained with al-Qaeda, it sure would be a shame if a few al-Nusra operatives wound up as collateral damage in Russia’s air campaign. 

Then there's The Telegraph with an epic attempt to spin the news with a single headline: "Putin defies West as Russia bomb 'Syrian rebel targets instead of Isil'".

Meanwhile, France - who recently went full-propaganda by using “self defense” to justify its newly launched Syrian bombing campaign - is out expressing its consternation about which groups Russia is bombing. Via Reuters:

France said it was "curious" that Russian air strikes in Syria on Wednesday had not targeted Islamic State militants and a diplomatic source added that Moscow's action appeared aimed at supporting President Bashar al-Assad against other opposition groups in the country's civil war.

The diplomatic source said it was in line with Russia's stance since 2012 that until there was a viable alternative to Assad, Moscow would not drop its support for him in the war that began in 2011 after a government crackdown on anti-Assad protests.

"Russian forces struck Syria and curiously didn't hit Islamic State," Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told lawmakers.

A French diplomatic source said the strikes, which seemed to have been carried out near Homs, an area crucial to Assad's control of western Syria. 

"It is not Daesh (Islamic State) that they are targeting, but probably opposition groups, which confirms that they are more in support of Bashar's regime than in fighting Daesh," the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"We shall see what they do with their other strikes," the source said.

And then Germany (which, much to Moscow's chagrin, recently announced it’s set to receive a shipment of new US nukes) jumped on the bandwagon. Via Bloomberg:

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier says Russia needs to explain its aims in carrying out airstrikes in Syria. 

“In this highly charged situation in Syria there’s a big risk that there will be further misunderstandings between the partners, all of whom are needed to calm the situation”

“I hope that this isn’t slamming shut all the doors that were laboriously opened in recent days, including in talks between President Obama and President Putin”

“Only coordinated action can lead to a solution. Military action along won’t help us overcome the Syrian crisis. We have to get into a political process. We need the neighbors, Russia, the U.S., and we in Europe can be helpful, too."

There are two things to note here. First, there isn't anything "curious" about this and Vladimir Putin has made no secret of his intent to keep the Assad regime from falling. Indeed, it's not clear what else Putin could do besides invite Charlie Rose for a two hour interview and explain three separate times that Moscow intends to support Assad. Second, Germany's suggestion that Russia is "slamming shut all the doors to cooperation" is ridiculous to the point of absurdity. As the events that have unfolded over the past several weeks have made abundantly clear, it is the West that has slammed the door shut on Russia when it comes to cooperating to fight ISIS and the reason for Washington's trepidation stems directly from i) wanting to oust Assad at all costs even if it means allowing the extremists operating in Syria to remain active until the regime falls, and ii) the fact that no matter what line The White House trots out to the public, the US views the Russia-Iran "nexus" as far more dangerous to America's geopolitical ambitions than ISIS and therefore, allying with Washington's two fiercest foreign policy critics simply isn't an option even if such an alliance would swiftly eradicate Islamic State. 

And of course the narrative wouldn't be complete without some on-the-ground Skype "intelligence". Here's Reuters:

Russian air strikes in northwest Syria which Moscow said targeted Islamic State fighters hit a rebel group supported by Western opponents of President Bashar al-Assad on Wednesday, wounding eight, the group's commander said.

He said the fighters were hit in the countryside of Hama province, where the group has a headquarters.

"The northern countryside of Hama has no presence of ISIS at all and is under the control of the Free Syrian Army," Major Jamil al-Saleh, who defected from the Syrian army in 2012, told Reuters via Skype.

Saleh said his group had been supplied with advanced anti-tank missiles by foreign powers opposed to Assad.

The Homs area is crucial to President Bashar al-Assad's control of western Syria. Insurgent control of that area would bisect the Assad-held west, separating Damascus from the coastal cities of Latakia and Tartous, where Russia operates a naval facility.

"In the early morning this aircraft conducted air strikes in Latamneh city. One targeted a civilian area, and the other targeted al-Izza," Saleh said, referring to his group which he said were set up around two years ago and has 1,500 fighters.

He declined to give further details on the exact location of the strike but said the bombs hit a cave which the group used as a headquarters and was near the front line with the regime in northern Hama countryside.

"Each strike had 8-10 missiles and there were two strikes so there is no way it was an accident," he added.

No, it probably was not an accident, but what the Western powers want you to believe is that because they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge what's going on even when it is patiently explained to them by The Kremlin, then anything that happens is thereby a mystery. 

The bottom line going forward is that the US and its regional and European allies are going to have to decide whether they want to be on the right side of history here or not, and as we've been careful to explain, no one is arguing that Bashar al-Assad is the most benevolent leader in the history of statecraft but it has now gotten to the point where Western media outlets are describing al-Qaeda as "moderate" in a last ditch effort to explain away Washington's unwillingness to join Russia in stabilizing Syria. This is a foreign policy mistake of epic proportions on the part of the US and the sooner the West concedes that and moves to correct it by admitting that none of the groups the CIA, the Pentagon, and Washington's Mid-East allies have trained and supported represent a viable alternative to the Assad regime, the sooner Syria will cease to be the chessboard du jour for a global proxy war that's left hundreds of thousands of innocent people dead. 

Read More

U.S. Bombs Somehow Keep Falling in the Places Where Obama “Ended Two Wars”

“We’ve ended two wars.” — Barack Obama, July 21, 2015, at a DSCC fundraiser held at a “private residence”

“Now that we have ended two wars responsibly, and brought home hundreds of American troops, we salute this new generation of veterans.” — National Security Adviser Susan Rice, May 20, 2015

“His presidency makes a potentially great story: the first African-American in the White House, who helped the country recover from recession and ended two wars.” — Dominic Tierney, The Atlantic, January 15, 2015, “America Will Miss Obama When He’s Gone”

Report from Airwars, August 2, 2015, detailing civilian deaths from continuous U.S.-led airstrikes in Iraq and Syria:

New York Times, today, headlined: “U.S. Planes Strike Near Kunduz Airport as Fight Rages On”

American warplanes bombarded Taliban-held territory around the Kunduz airport overnight, and Afghan officials said American Special Forces were rushed toward the fighting. … The situation for the Afghan forces improved somewhat toward midnight: American warplanes conducted airstrikes at 11:30 p.m. and again at 1 a.m. on Taliban positions near the airport, an American military spokesman said. … Around the same time, soldiers with the American Special Forces headed out toward the city with Afghan commandos, according to Afghan government officials.

How do you know when you’re an out-of-control empire? When you keep bombing and deploying soldiers in places where you boast that you’ve ended wars. How do you know you have a hackish propagandist for a president? When you celebrate him for “ending two wars” in the very same places that he keeps bombing.

All of this, just by the way, is being done without any Congressional approval, at least with regard to Iraq and Syria. As my colleague Cora Currier noted when reporting on the Airwars report in August, these civilian deaths are “a reminder of the extent to which the United States’ air war in Syria and Iraq has rolled ahead with little public debate over its effectiveness. Congress has still not passed a specific legal authorization for the war.”

Russia today announced that its upper Parliament approved its own imperialistic intervention and bombing campaign inside Syria, and that legislative body was widely (and not inaccurately) derided by U.S. commentators for being what the New York Times called a “rubber stamp.” The Obama administration, by contrast, does not even bother with the empty ritual of Congressional approval for its bombing campaigns; the president proved he is even willing to bomb a country after Congress rejected his authorization to do so, as happened in Libya. Indeed, the one and only time Obama venerated the need for Congressional approval for bombing was when he was pressured to bomb the Assad regime for crossing his “red line” but did not actually want to do so; as Charles Davis put it today, “Obama only seeks Congress’ authorization when he doesn’t actually want to do something, as when Assad crossed his ‘red line.'”

Whatever else one wants to say about Iraq and Afghanistan, one cannot honestly say that Obama ended the wars in those countries. The U.S. continues to drop bombs on both, deploys soldiers in both, kills civilians in both, and engages in a wide range of overt and covert force, all without a shred of Congressional approval.

Photo: U.S. soldiers inspect the site of a suicide attack in the heart of Kabul, Afghanistan, Saturday, Aug. 22, 2015. The suicide car bomber attacked a NATO convoy traveling through a crowded neighborhood in Afghanistan’s capital Saturday, killing at least 10 people, including three NATO contractors, authorities said. 

Read More

The Start Of China’s Unrest? Southern China City Rocked By “Massive” Bomb Explosions, At Least 6 Dead

Update: it did not take long to find the possible bombing suspect:

Suspect is a local 33 year-old guy. http://bit.ly/1WyhtMk So far 7 dead, 2 missing, 48 injured

— Fergus Ryan (@fryan) September 30, 2015

* * *

Over the weekend when we reported that one of China’s largest coal miners had laid off 100,000, or 40% of its workforce, we noted that China’s hard-landing is starting to hit where it really hurts: employment, or rather the lack thereof, and the one logical consequence: “now, many migrant workers struggle to find their footing in a downshifting economy. As factories run out of money and construction projects turn idle across China, there has been a rise in the last thing Beijing wants to see: unrest.”

Moments ago we may have witnessed the first direct, and deadly, manifestation of this unrest when as Xinhua reported, a series of at least 17 “massive” explosions rocked the southern Chinese city of Liuzhou earlier today, killing at least three six people and injuring more than a dozen, state media reported.

#BREAKING Rescue work underway after series of explosions in Liucheng county, China's Guangxi on Wednesday (Xinhua) http://pic.twitter.com/R4PTLxlj6m

— CCTVNEWS (@cctvnews) September 30, 2015

 

Web users post photos of a partly collapsed building in Guangxi following explosions; cause of blasts still unknown http://pic.twitter.com/up0rnbstuF

— CCTVNEWS (@cctvnews) September 30, 2015

 

Update:3 killed, 13 injured in blasts, maybe by parcel explosives, in Liucheng county of S China's Guangxi (web pics) http://pic.twitter.com/Hm9JkImN7m

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) September 30, 2015

 

Bombs were apparently hidden in courier packages. The Chinese courier industry is huge & crucial as last-mile infrastructure for e-commerce.

— Christina Xu (@xuhulk) September 30, 2015

 

Guangxi Daily put number of blasts at 17. 7 dead, 51 injured, 2 missing 广西柳城发生17起爆炸 致7死51伤2人失联 http://bit.ly/1O29Cng

— Fergus Ryan (@fryan) September 30, 2015

 

Guangxi police say they know of over 60 suspicious parcels 广西柳城警方:发现可疑包裹60多个 http://bit.ly/1Wyhu2G

— Fergus Ryan (@fryan) September 30, 2015

 

According to NBC, a local police chief told state news agency Xinhua that the 17 explosions hit locations including a hospital, a food market and a bus station, state news agency Xinhua reported.

State-run broadcaster CCTV cited a police chief saying the blasts were caused by “parcels containing explosives,” without providing further information.

In other words, for the first time in recent years, someone in China proactively sent out mailbombs to heavily populated areas including a hospital, a market, and a bus station.

CCTV said at least 6 people had been killed and at least 13 injured. NBC News could not immediately confirm that tally.

Images posted to Twitter by the Chinese media outlets appeared to show partially collapsed buildings, rubble in the streets, and at least one plume of smoke above the city.

According to Xinhua, the incident is being investigated as a criminal act. Which brings us back to our conclusion from Sunday:

if there is one thing China’s politburo simply can not afford right now, is to layer public unrest and civil violence on top of an economy which is already in “hard-landing” move. Forget black – this would be the bloody swan that nobody could “possibly have seen coming.

Three days later we may have the first manifestation of precisely this civil violence “bloody swan.” Will today’s deadly bombing be the end of it, or is it just starting?

Read More