Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

𝐋𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝟐 𝐨𝐟 𝐍𝐞𝐡𝐫𝐮: 𝐋𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐑.𝐑. 𝐃𝐢𝐰𝐚𝐤𝐚𝐫 (𝟐𝟖 𝐀𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐥 𝟏𝟗𝟓𝟏) 𝐍𝐞𝐡𝐫𝐮 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚’𝐬 𝐂𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐝𝐞 ‘𝐇𝐚𝐫𝐦𝐟𝐮𝐥’ For Nehru, Somnath was not pride; it was a “problem”. In an official directive, Nehru instructed that the Somnath consecration be toned down, calling it “pompous” and harmful to India’s image... show more

G Kishan Reddy

396,160 subscribers

24,290 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik Bildung

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨 𝐑𝐚𝐡𝐮𝐥 𝐆𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐡𝐢 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐡𝐫𝐢 𝐑𝐚𝐯𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐭 𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐡 𝐁𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐮 𝐚 “𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫”. ⚠️ Let’s be clear. This is not an isolated remark. It reflects a long-standing pattern of casual disrespect towards the Sikh community. * From Sam Pitroda’s infamous “Hua to Hua” comment, it became evident that despite public posturing, Congress has never shown genuine remorse for the 1984 Sikh riots. * It was Rahul Gandhi himself who publicly tore a bill in Parliament, humiliating a Sikh Prime Minister before the world. The nation must not dismiss this as a slip of the tongue. It is not a one-off incident. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐞𝐭.

𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨 𝐑𝐚𝐡𝐮𝐥 𝐆𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐡𝐢 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐡𝐫𝐢 𝐑𝐚𝐯𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐭 𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐡 𝐁𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐮 𝐚 “𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫”. ⚠️ Let’s be clear. This is not an isolated remark. It reflects a long-standing pattern of casual disrespect towards the Sikh community. * From Sam Pitroda’s infamous “Hua to Hua” comment, it became evident that despite public posturing, Congress has never shown genuine remorse for the 1984 Sikh riots. * It was Rahul Gandhi himself who publicly tore a bill in Parliament, humiliating a Sikh Prime Minister before the world. The nation must not dismiss this as a slip of the tongue. It is not a one-off incident. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐞𝐭.

BJP

32,747 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

🌹 𝐊𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐫𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐞𝐡𝐫𝐮 🌹 For every sensible and sane India knows & is aware of Nehru’s real contribution. You remembering him so very often and frequently, itself goes on to prove the inferiority complex that prevails in your mind and heart. For, you are a 56” made up #Tamasha while his shadow of stature was way too big to even step around it. You can try being upside down, but you’ll NEVER be / become Nehru!!! It’s not only difficult but IMPOSSIBLE to be / become #Nehru at least in this life #Coward #Liar #BisGuru #Nehruvian #BeingNehru #ImitatingNehru #Holi #Holi2026 #HappyHoli #HappyHoli2026 #Holi2026

🌹 𝐊𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐫𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐞𝐡𝐫𝐮 🌹 For every sensible and sane India knows & is aware of Nehru’s real contribution. You remembering him so very often and frequently, itself goes on to prove the inferiority complex that prevails in your mind and heart. For, you are a 56” made up #Tamasha while his shadow of stature was way too big to even step around it. You can try being upside down, but you’ll NEVER be / become Nehru!!! It’s not only difficult but IMPOSSIBLE to be / become #Nehru at least in this life #Coward #Liar #BisGuru #Nehruvian #BeingNehru #ImitatingNehru #Holi #Holi2026 #HappyHoli #HappyHoli2026 #Holi2026

𝐒𝐢𝐝𝐝

47,253 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

#WATCH | Delhi | BJP MP Sudhanshu Trivedi says, "I want to clarify that we have no personal animosity towards India's first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru...Just as PM Narendra Modi is not merely an individual, but an institution, similarly, Jawaharlal Nehru is not just a leader, but a symbol of an ideology and it is necessary to understand today how terrible and frightening that ideology was for India, and how much it was concealed behind a veil of deception...It is sad that in April 1951, Nehru wrote a letter to the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan, addressing him as “my dear Nawabjade”, stating that the story of the gates of the Somnath Temple being brought back to India was completely false and that there was no truth to it...According to the book "Maharaja Ranjit Singh" by L.S. Bakshi, officially published by the Congress government, page number fifteen, published by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, New Delhi in 1992, the government states that Ranjit Singh made no distinction between Hindus and Sikhs among his subjects when the combined forces of the East India Company and Ranjit Singh defeated Shah Shuja in Kabul. Pay attention to this further point: When they captured Kabul, one of the terms inserted by Maharaja Ranjit Singh in the treaty that followed was that the doors of the Somnath temple, planted there by Mahmud Ghazni, should be returned to India. Now, is Maharaja Ranjit Singh right, or is Jawaharlal Nehru, who was busy catering to Liaquat Ali's whims, telling the truth? Is the statement published by the Indian government's Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in 1992 true?... There's the second reference you might have seen. In it, K.M. Panikkar, who was in Communist China at the time, and had a communist mindset, and was our ambassador to China, writes in a letter that no, all this is completely wrong. If any of you have read in the books, the letter Panikkar wrote to Nehru had the sentiment that they should find out how Chairman Mao would feel about it...What affection they have for the Maoists who consider religion as opium, and how close and affectionate they are towards the Muslim League, and how they are bringing down the hammer on Hindu sentiments, and this mindset remains unchanged even today...The same mentality that prevailed back then is visible today. Affection for the Muslim League mentality because of the alliance, and also for the Maoists. An agreement with the Communist Party of China and a fierce attack on Sanatan Hindu Dharma"

#WATCH | Delhi | BJP MP Sudhanshu Trivedi says, "I want to clarify that we have no personal animosity towards India's first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru...Just as PM Narendra Modi is not merely an individual, but an institution, similarly, Jawaharlal Nehru is not just a leader, but a symbol of an ideology and it is necessary to understand today how terrible and frightening that ideology was for India, and how much it was concealed behind a veil of deception...It is sad that in April 1951, Nehru wrote a letter to the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan, addressing him as “my dear Nawabjade”, stating that the story of the gates of the Somnath Temple being brought back to India was completely false and that there was no truth to it...According to the book "Maharaja Ranjit Singh" by L.S. Bakshi, officially published by the Congress government, page number fifteen, published by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, New Delhi in 1992, the government states that Ranjit Singh made no distinction between Hindus and Sikhs among his subjects when the combined forces of the East India Company and Ranjit Singh defeated Shah Shuja in Kabul. Pay attention to this further point: When they captured Kabul, one of the terms inserted by Maharaja Ranjit Singh in the treaty that followed was that the doors of the Somnath temple, planted there by Mahmud Ghazni, should be returned to India. Now, is Maharaja Ranjit Singh right, or is Jawaharlal Nehru, who was busy catering to Liaquat Ali's whims, telling the truth? Is the statement published by the Indian government's Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in 1992 true?... There's the second reference you might have seen. In it, K.M. Panikkar, who was in Communist China at the time, and had a communist mindset, and was our ambassador to China, writes in a letter that no, all this is completely wrong. If any of you have read in the books, the letter Panikkar wrote to Nehru had the sentiment that they should find out how Chairman Mao would feel about it...What affection they have for the Maoists who consider religion as opium, and how close and affectionate they are towards the Muslim League, and how they are bringing down the hammer on Hindu sentiments, and this mindset remains unchanged even today...The same mentality that prevailed back then is visible today. Affection for the Muslim League mentality because of the alliance, and also for the Maoists. An agreement with the Communist Party of China and a fierce attack on Sanatan Hindu Dharma"

ANI

50,174 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

A welcome and overdue course correction by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in restoring the full six-stanza rendition of Vande Mataram to its rightful place at official ceremonies. For decades, political compromise diluted what was meant to be a civilisational invocation of the motherland. A nation that reclaimed its sovereignty in 1947 need not continue to inherit the anxieties of that era. Cultural confidence cannot be permanently hostage to historical concessions. Mandating the complete version at constitutional occasions - from the unfurling of the Tricolour to the arrival of the President and Governors - reinforces that national identity is not negotiable. It is lived, sung, and honoured in full. A confident republic does not trim its heritage to fit the sensitivities of the past. It stands by it unapologetically.

A welcome and overdue course correction by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in restoring the full six-stanza rendition of Vande Mataram to its rightful place at official ceremonies. For decades, political compromise diluted what was meant to be a civilisational invocation of the motherland. A nation that reclaimed its sovereignty in 1947 need not continue to inherit the anxieties of that era. Cultural confidence cannot be permanently hostage to historical concessions. Mandating the complete version at constitutional occasions - from the unfurling of the Tricolour to the arrival of the President and Governors - reinforces that national identity is not negotiable. It is lived, sung, and honoured in full. A confident republic does not trim its heritage to fit the sensitivities of the past. It stands by it unapologetically.

Mahesh Jethmalani

35,456 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

.BJP’s problem with Bengal is not political. It is civilisational. They simply do not understand how this land remembers, honours, or speaks of its giants. In Bengal, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay is not a name to be casually invoked for applause lines. He is Rishi Bankim, a towering luminary whose words awakened a nation in chains. His legacy is approached with reverence, restraint, and humility. That is precisely what was missing when Narendra Modi chose to address him as “Bankim da.” This suffix was not a slip of the tongue; it was proof of a deeper disconnect. This is what happens when those who lack roots in a culture try to cosplay intimacy with it. They mimic the surface, butcher the substance, and insult what they claim to honour. Bengal does not need performative gestures from people who have repeatedly demeaned its thinkers, distorted its history, and attacked its plural soul. You cannot fake cultural literacy. And Bengal recognises impostors instantly.

.BJP’s problem with Bengal is not political. It is civilisational. They simply do not understand how this land remembers, honours, or speaks of its giants. In Bengal, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay is not a name to be casually invoked for applause lines. He is Rishi Bankim, a towering luminary whose words awakened a nation in chains. His legacy is approached with reverence, restraint, and humility. That is precisely what was missing when Narendra Modi chose to address him as “Bankim da.” This suffix was not a slip of the tongue; it was proof of a deeper disconnect. This is what happens when those who lack roots in a culture try to cosplay intimacy with it. They mimic the surface, butcher the substance, and insult what they claim to honour. Bengal does not need performative gestures from people who have repeatedly demeaned its thinkers, distorted its history, and attacked its plural soul. You cannot fake cultural literacy. And Bengal recognises impostors instantly.

All India Trinamool Congress

12,236 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

It is a pleasure to be with you this evening to celebrate the memory and contribution of our first Prime Minister, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru. He was the prime architect of the modern Indian nation-state. His was a life anchored firmly in parliamentary democracy. He had a steadfast belief in planned economic growth and a profound commitment to the development of scientific temper alongside the development of scientific and technological capabilities. To him, secularism — in which he firmly believed — meant the celebration of India’s many diversities while strengthening its fundamental unity. His legacy continues to shape our everyday lives. Decades have gone by since his time, but he continues to serve as a beacon of light to millions of our countrymen and women. It is inevitable that such a monumental figure will have his life and work analysed and critiqued — and that is indeed as it should be. Although the temptation to divorce him from his times and the challenges that he had to face and to look at him, devoid of the historical context in which he functioned has become quite widespread. Yet, while we welcome ongoing analysis of his contributions, what is not acceptable is the systematic attempt being made to denigrate, distort, demean and defame him. The sole objective of this is to not only diminish him as a personality but also his universally recognised role in India's independence struggle and his early decades as a leader of an independent nation challenged by unprecedented problems, but it is also to demolish his multifaceted legacy in a crude and self-serving attempt to rewrite history. Analysis is one thing, but deliberate mischief with what he said, what he wrote and what he did is another thing and totally unacceptable. And who are the forces that have launched this project? We all know that they have worked for years and years—for decades—and finally, here they are. They belong to an ideology that had no role whatsoever in our freedom movement, that had no role whatsoever in the making of our Constitution. In fact, they even burnt it and were totally against it. It is an ideology that long ago fanned an atmosphere of hate that ultimately led to the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi ji. His killers today continue to be glorified by its adherents. It is an ideology that has consistently rejected the ideals of our founding fathers. It is an ideology with a bigoted and viciously communal outlook. Its approach to nationhood is based on stoking prejudices of all kinds. Let there be no doubt whatsoever that the project to vilify Jawaharlal Nehru ji is the main objective of the ruling establishment today. Their goal is not just to erase him; it is actually to destroy the social, political, and economic foundations on which our nation has been founded and built. The road ahead is not easy. But there is simply no option but for each one of us, individually and collectively, to stand up and confront this project. We not only owe it to the memory of Jawaharlal Nehru ji and his comrades—we owe it to ourselves, and even more to the coming generations. The unapologetic and fierce defence of the Nehruvian legacy is not an act of nostalgia. It is a commitment to restoring India's constitutional promise, to safeguarding reason in the face of propaganda, and to ensuring that our republic remains modern and forward-looking. If we succeed, it will not only honour Jawaharlal Nehru ji's memory; it will ensure that the India he envisioned remains a reality. At a time when tolerance in public life is shrinking, when dissent is painted as disloyalty, and history is reduced to partisan combat, Nehru ji's example becomes even more vital. He taught us that disagreement is not a threat but a democratic necessity—that unity does not demand uniformity; that a confident nation need not fear the truth about its past. Friends, there is some reason for hope. Last month, the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund also launched an archive which can be accessed at The archive is an easily searchable and freely downloadable digital archive—also, by the way, accessible on your smartphone. At present, it covers the hundred published volumes of his selected works, covering the period from 1903 till the day before he died. The archive will continue to expand. So, there it will be for you all to access any time you want to know something about what he said, what he wrote, or what he did. Sandeep Dixit's initiative, which has brought all of us here this evening, is another sincere attempt to take on this challenge of rescuing Nehru ji from the web of deception. And we need many, many more such initiatives across the length and breadth of our country. I will end by congratulating Sandeep and his team and wishing him and his colleagues the very best in their endeavours. Jai Hind! : CPP Chairperson Smt. Sonia Gandhi ji at the launch of The Nehru Centre India

It is a pleasure to be with you this evening to celebrate the memory and contribution of our first Prime Minister, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru. He was the prime architect of the modern Indian nation-state. His was a life anchored firmly in parliamentary democracy. He had a steadfast belief in planned economic growth and a profound commitment to the development of scientific temper alongside the development of scientific and technological capabilities. To him, secularism — in which he firmly believed — meant the celebration of India’s many diversities while strengthening its fundamental unity. His legacy continues to shape our everyday lives. Decades have gone by since his time, but he continues to serve as a beacon of light to millions of our countrymen and women. It is inevitable that such a monumental figure will have his life and work analysed and critiqued — and that is indeed as it should be. Although the temptation to divorce him from his times and the challenges that he had to face and to look at him, devoid of the historical context in which he functioned has become quite widespread. Yet, while we welcome ongoing analysis of his contributions, what is not acceptable is the systematic attempt being made to denigrate, distort, demean and defame him. The sole objective of this is to not only diminish him as a personality but also his universally recognised role in India's independence struggle and his early decades as a leader of an independent nation challenged by unprecedented problems, but it is also to demolish his multifaceted legacy in a crude and self-serving attempt to rewrite history. Analysis is one thing, but deliberate mischief with what he said, what he wrote and what he did is another thing and totally unacceptable. And who are the forces that have launched this project? We all know that they have worked for years and years—for decades—and finally, here they are. They belong to an ideology that had no role whatsoever in our freedom movement, that had no role whatsoever in the making of our Constitution. In fact, they even burnt it and were totally against it. It is an ideology that long ago fanned an atmosphere of hate that ultimately led to the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi ji. His killers today continue to be glorified by its adherents. It is an ideology that has consistently rejected the ideals of our founding fathers. It is an ideology with a bigoted and viciously communal outlook. Its approach to nationhood is based on stoking prejudices of all kinds. Let there be no doubt whatsoever that the project to vilify Jawaharlal Nehru ji is the main objective of the ruling establishment today. Their goal is not just to erase him; it is actually to destroy the social, political, and economic foundations on which our nation has been founded and built. The road ahead is not easy. But there is simply no option but for each one of us, individually and collectively, to stand up and confront this project. We not only owe it to the memory of Jawaharlal Nehru ji and his comrades—we owe it to ourselves, and even more to the coming generations. The unapologetic and fierce defence of the Nehruvian legacy is not an act of nostalgia. It is a commitment to restoring India's constitutional promise, to safeguarding reason in the face of propaganda, and to ensuring that our republic remains modern and forward-looking. If we succeed, it will not only honour Jawaharlal Nehru ji's memory; it will ensure that the India he envisioned remains a reality. At a time when tolerance in public life is shrinking, when dissent is painted as disloyalty, and history is reduced to partisan combat, Nehru ji's example becomes even more vital. He taught us that disagreement is not a threat but a democratic necessity—that unity does not demand uniformity; that a confident nation need not fear the truth about its past. Friends, there is some reason for hope. Last month, the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund also launched an archive which can be accessed at The archive is an easily searchable and freely downloadable digital archive—also, by the way, accessible on your smartphone. At present, it covers the hundred published volumes of his selected works, covering the period from 1903 till the day before he died. The archive will continue to expand. So, there it will be for you all to access any time you want to know something about what he said, what he wrote, or what he did. Sandeep Dixit's initiative, which has brought all of us here this evening, is another sincere attempt to take on this challenge of rescuing Nehru ji from the web of deception. And we need many, many more such initiatives across the length and breadth of our country. I will end by congratulating Sandeep and his team and wishing him and his colleagues the very best in their endeavours. Jai Hind! : CPP Chairperson Smt. Sonia Gandhi ji at the launch of The Nehru Centre India

Congress

45,430 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

𝘖𝘯 𝘉𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘵 𝘙𝘢𝘵𝘯𝘢 𝙋𝙧𝙖𝙣𝙖𝙗 𝙈𝙪𝙠𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙟𝙚𝙚'𝘴 𝘣𝘪𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺, 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝙎𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙝𝙖 𝙈𝙪𝙠𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙟𝙚𝙚 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘳 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵'𝘴 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘣𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘕𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘳𝘢 𝘔𝘰𝘥𝘪. 𝗡𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗗𝗥𝗔 𝗠𝗢𝗗𝗜 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗠𝗬 𝗙𝗔𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗥, 𝗣𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗔𝗕 𝗠𝗨𝗞𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗝𝗘𝗘: 𝗔 𝗕𝗢𝗡𝗗 𝗥𝗢𝗢𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗜𝗡 𝗠𝗨𝗧𝗨𝗔𝗟 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗣𝗘𝗖𝗧 In the world of polity, where relationships are defined by formalities and protocol, the bond between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and my father, Pranab Mukherjee, stands out as a rare example of camaraderie that transcended political boundaries. Despite ideologically contrasting backgrounds, their relationship blossomed on the foundations of mutual admiration, respect, and a shared commitment to the nation. When Narendra Modi became Prime Minister in 2014, he was stepping onto the national stage after over a decade as Chief Minister of Gujarat. My father, then President of India, with his vast experience in governance, became an indispensable guide to Narendra Modi. I remember how warmly Baba welcomed him, offering his support in constitutional matters while respecting their distinct roles. During their very first meeting after Narendra Modi’s electoral victory in 2014, the Prime Minister touched my father’s feet—a gesture of reverence that left a lasting impression on everyone. Baba later told me about that moment and how he candidly assured Narendra Modi: “We belong to two different ideologies, but the people have given you a mandate. I will not interfere with governance—that is your job. But I will be there if you need help in any constitutional matter.” Narendra Modi often acknowledged the significance of this assurance, recounting in one of my conversations with him. He said, “For Dada to say this was a big thing. From the beginning, there was openness and honesty between us.” Baba’s diary entries revealed just how profound their bond was. He noted that even when Narendra Modi was Gujarat’s Chief Minister and a vocal critic of the Congress, he always touched Baba’s feet during their private meetings. “I don’t know why, but he has a strange soft corner for me,” Baba once wrote. Their connection extended beyond governance into shared values and spirituality. Baba once told Narendra Modi that their bond might stem from their mutual reverence for Swami Vivekananda and Shri Ramakrishna Paramahansa, central figures in the Ramakrishna Mission. Narendra Modi often referred to my father as a mentor, especially during his early days as Prime Minister. Baba’s wisdom and experience in navigating the complexities of governance provided invaluable guidance. At Baba’s farewell ceremony as President in 2017, Narendra Modi delivered an emotional speech, calling him “a father figure” and “a mentor who inspired me to work harder for the nation.” This admiration was mutual. In his memoir, The Presidential Years: 2012–2017, Baba praised Narendra Modi’s decisiveness and work ethic while acknowledging occasional policy disagreements. He appreciated Narendra Modi’s governance reforms and his ability to connect with people. Baba wrote in his diary, “Modi has a very professional approach to statecraft. He truly feels the pulse of the people.” He also observed that, after Indira Gandhi, Narendra Modi is one of the rare Prime Ministers who not only understands the pulse of the people but also possesses immense political strength. My father also had some initial apprehensions about how Narendra Modi, coming from state politics and without prior experience in national or parliamentary roles, would handle India’s complex foreign policy. PM Modi’s transition from state politics to the national stage, becoming a Member of Parliament and then the Prime Minister, was a significant leap. However, my father was quick to appreciate PM Modi's ability to adapt and excel. He remarked in several interviews, how PM Modi swiftly grasped the intricacies of India’s foreign policy—a domain known for its complexity. During his 2014 oath-taking ceremony, Narendra Modi made a decision to invite the SAARC leaders, a gesture that my father deeply appreciated. He considered it a highly innovative and strategic initiative, remarking that PM Modi is truly an out-of-the-box thinker. My father not only praised this bold move but also offered a word of advice to the Prime Minister to ensure that security arrangements were exceptionally tight. Their bond extended beyond official duties. I recall an instance when Narendra Modi, learning that Baba felt uneasy without work after retiring as President, personally called him. “Dada, please don’t be depressed. Your words of wisdom have great value for the nation. You should speak your mind at seminars and public events,” he told Baba. This simple yet thoughtful gesture showcased the depth of their connection. One of the most heartfelt moments in their relationship was Narendra Modi’s handwritten farewell letter to Baba, calling him a “father figure” and expressing deep gratitude. Baba was touched by this gesture and even shared the letter on social media, showcasing the emotional bond they shared. When Baba passed away in August 2020, Narendra Modi’s tributes revealed the void his absence left in his life. Calling Baba a “guide and mentor,” Narendra Modi emphasized his commitment to placing the nation above political divides. When Baba was awarded the Bharat Ratna, I remember seeing Narendra Modi Ji’s face beam with pride. He was genuinely happy, a moment that reflected the magnanimity of his government in honouring stalwarts irrespective of political affiliations. My father often said, “Modi is a quick learner and a hard worker.” The work ethic Narendra Modi demonstrated—reportedly working up to 20 hours a day—resonated with my father, who shared a similar dedication to public service during his career. Their relationship is a powerful example of how mutual respect and shared dedication to national progress can transcend political differences. Their relationship leaves a legacy of unity and statesmanship for future generations to emulate #ModiStory

𝘖𝘯 𝘉𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘵 𝘙𝘢𝘵𝘯𝘢 𝙋𝙧𝙖𝙣𝙖𝙗 𝙈𝙪𝙠𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙟𝙚𝙚'𝘴 𝘣𝘪𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺, 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝙎𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙝𝙖 𝙈𝙪𝙠𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙟𝙚𝙚 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘳 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵'𝘴 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘣𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘕𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘳𝘢 𝘔𝘰𝘥𝘪. 𝗡𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗗𝗥𝗔 𝗠𝗢𝗗𝗜 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗠𝗬 𝗙𝗔𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗥, 𝗣𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗔𝗕 𝗠𝗨𝗞𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗝𝗘𝗘: 𝗔 𝗕𝗢𝗡𝗗 𝗥𝗢𝗢𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗜𝗡 𝗠𝗨𝗧𝗨𝗔𝗟 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗣𝗘𝗖𝗧 In the world of polity, where relationships are defined by formalities and protocol, the bond between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and my father, Pranab Mukherjee, stands out as a rare example of camaraderie that transcended political boundaries. Despite ideologically contrasting backgrounds, their relationship blossomed on the foundations of mutual admiration, respect, and a shared commitment to the nation. When Narendra Modi became Prime Minister in 2014, he was stepping onto the national stage after over a decade as Chief Minister of Gujarat. My father, then President of India, with his vast experience in governance, became an indispensable guide to Narendra Modi. I remember how warmly Baba welcomed him, offering his support in constitutional matters while respecting their distinct roles. During their very first meeting after Narendra Modi’s electoral victory in 2014, the Prime Minister touched my father’s feet—a gesture of reverence that left a lasting impression on everyone. Baba later told me about that moment and how he candidly assured Narendra Modi: “We belong to two different ideologies, but the people have given you a mandate. I will not interfere with governance—that is your job. But I will be there if you need help in any constitutional matter.” Narendra Modi often acknowledged the significance of this assurance, recounting in one of my conversations with him. He said, “For Dada to say this was a big thing. From the beginning, there was openness and honesty between us.” Baba’s diary entries revealed just how profound their bond was. He noted that even when Narendra Modi was Gujarat’s Chief Minister and a vocal critic of the Congress, he always touched Baba’s feet during their private meetings. “I don’t know why, but he has a strange soft corner for me,” Baba once wrote. Their connection extended beyond governance into shared values and spirituality. Baba once told Narendra Modi that their bond might stem from their mutual reverence for Swami Vivekananda and Shri Ramakrishna Paramahansa, central figures in the Ramakrishna Mission. Narendra Modi often referred to my father as a mentor, especially during his early days as Prime Minister. Baba’s wisdom and experience in navigating the complexities of governance provided invaluable guidance. At Baba’s farewell ceremony as President in 2017, Narendra Modi delivered an emotional speech, calling him “a father figure” and “a mentor who inspired me to work harder for the nation.” This admiration was mutual. In his memoir, The Presidential Years: 2012–2017, Baba praised Narendra Modi’s decisiveness and work ethic while acknowledging occasional policy disagreements. He appreciated Narendra Modi’s governance reforms and his ability to connect with people. Baba wrote in his diary, “Modi has a very professional approach to statecraft. He truly feels the pulse of the people.” He also observed that, after Indira Gandhi, Narendra Modi is one of the rare Prime Ministers who not only understands the pulse of the people but also possesses immense political strength. My father also had some initial apprehensions about how Narendra Modi, coming from state politics and without prior experience in national or parliamentary roles, would handle India’s complex foreign policy. PM Modi’s transition from state politics to the national stage, becoming a Member of Parliament and then the Prime Minister, was a significant leap. However, my father was quick to appreciate PM Modi's ability to adapt and excel. He remarked in several interviews, how PM Modi swiftly grasped the intricacies of India’s foreign policy—a domain known for its complexity. During his 2014 oath-taking ceremony, Narendra Modi made a decision to invite the SAARC leaders, a gesture that my father deeply appreciated. He considered it a highly innovative and strategic initiative, remarking that PM Modi is truly an out-of-the-box thinker. My father not only praised this bold move but also offered a word of advice to the Prime Minister to ensure that security arrangements were exceptionally tight. Their bond extended beyond official duties. I recall an instance when Narendra Modi, learning that Baba felt uneasy without work after retiring as President, personally called him. “Dada, please don’t be depressed. Your words of wisdom have great value for the nation. You should speak your mind at seminars and public events,” he told Baba. This simple yet thoughtful gesture showcased the depth of their connection. One of the most heartfelt moments in their relationship was Narendra Modi’s handwritten farewell letter to Baba, calling him a “father figure” and expressing deep gratitude. Baba was touched by this gesture and even shared the letter on social media, showcasing the emotional bond they shared. When Baba passed away in August 2020, Narendra Modi’s tributes revealed the void his absence left in his life. Calling Baba a “guide and mentor,” Narendra Modi emphasized his commitment to placing the nation above political divides. When Baba was awarded the Bharat Ratna, I remember seeing Narendra Modi Ji’s face beam with pride. He was genuinely happy, a moment that reflected the magnanimity of his government in honouring stalwarts irrespective of political affiliations. My father often said, “Modi is a quick learner and a hard worker.” The work ethic Narendra Modi demonstrated—reportedly working up to 20 hours a day—resonated with my father, who shared a similar dedication to public service during his career. Their relationship is a powerful example of how mutual respect and shared dedication to national progress can transcend political differences. Their relationship leaves a legacy of unity and statesmanship for future generations to emulate #ModiStory

Modi Story

1,271,089 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

What stands out about Hon’ble PM Shri Narendra Modi ji is his ability to see the extraordinary in ordinary lives. While discussing Movie “Peddi” with actor Shri Ram Charan garu, Modi ji recalled a footballer Mohammed from a small village in West Bengal who represented India decades ago. For many, it may be just a story from the past. For Modi ji, it was proof of how one inspired individual can transform an entire community. Today, more than 85 youngsters from that same village play football. That is why Modi ji constantly speaks about real people and real stories. He understands that India’s transformation will not come only from policies, but from millions of individuals who inspire others to dream bigger, work harder and achieve more. One person’s success can change a village. A million such stories can change a nation. Only Hon’ble PM Shri Narendra Modi ji could turn a conversation about a film into a lesson about India.

What stands out about Hon’ble PM Shri Narendra Modi ji is his ability to see the extraordinary in ordinary lives. While discussing Movie “Peddi” with actor Shri Ram Charan garu, Modi ji recalled a footballer Mohammed from a small village in West Bengal who represented India decades ago. For many, it may be just a story from the past. For Modi ji, it was proof of how one inspired individual can transform an entire community. Today, more than 85 youngsters from that same village play football. That is why Modi ji constantly speaks about real people and real stories. He understands that India’s transformation will not come only from policies, but from millions of individuals who inspire others to dream bigger, work harder and achieve more. One person’s success can change a village. A million such stories can change a nation. Only Hon’ble PM Shri Narendra Modi ji could turn a conversation about a film into a lesson about India.

Bandi Sanjay Kumar

14,610 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Sub: General Naravane says🚨👇 🆘General Naravane clarified last year that his job was to write the book and hand it over to the Publisher, which he has done. ▪️He says, now the ball is in the publisher’s and Ministry of Defence’s Court. ▪️General Naravane is a student of RSS run Jnana Prabodhini School, Pune. ▪️Definitely, General Naravane is more PATRIOTIC than Narendra Modi or Amit Shah or Rajnath Singh or even Ajit Doval for that matter, by virtue of him defending our borders, our Nation. ▪️The General, who took education in RSS school, who served the Nation with pride and honour, was abandoned by RSS bred Modi Regime❗️How shall the Bhakts, Godi Media, defend this❓ ▪️The problem is not about National security then. It is about Narendra Modi and Amit Shah led Regime’s Insecurity. Their failures to deal with China, the USA and the superpowers, getting exposed is the problem. ▪️The author of the article in Caravan, a veteran Military Officer and a distinguished defence analyst, Shri. Sushant Singh Sushant Singh is also more patriotic than any of the Ministers in Modi Regime. ▪️It is for the Nation to decide now and force the lesser Patriotic, dubious politicians to release General Naravane’s book. And to hold Modi Regime to account on the details in the book. P.S. - Modi Regime couldn’t decide on giving CLEAR ORDERS within 2 hours. And it’s been over two years it hasn’t decided about clearing General’s book for publication. Modi Regime turns out to be the most indecisive Regime in the history of India.

Sub: General Naravane says🚨👇 🆘General Naravane clarified last year that his job was to write the book and hand it over to the Publisher, which he has done. ▪️He says, now the ball is in the publisher’s and Ministry of Defence’s Court. ▪️General Naravane is a student of RSS run Jnana Prabodhini School, Pune. ▪️Definitely, General Naravane is more PATRIOTIC than Narendra Modi or Amit Shah or Rajnath Singh or even Ajit Doval for that matter, by virtue of him defending our borders, our Nation. ▪️The General, who took education in RSS school, who served the Nation with pride and honour, was abandoned by RSS bred Modi Regime❗️How shall the Bhakts, Godi Media, defend this❓ ▪️The problem is not about National security then. It is about Narendra Modi and Amit Shah led Regime’s Insecurity. Their failures to deal with China, the USA and the superpowers, getting exposed is the problem. ▪️The author of the article in Caravan, a veteran Military Officer and a distinguished defence analyst, Shri. Sushant Singh Sushant Singh is also more patriotic than any of the Ministers in Modi Regime. ▪️It is for the Nation to decide now and force the lesser Patriotic, dubious politicians to release General Naravane’s book. And to hold Modi Regime to account on the details in the book. P.S. - Modi Regime couldn’t decide on giving CLEAR ORDERS within 2 hours. And it’s been over two years it hasn’t decided about clearing General’s book for publication. Modi Regime turns out to be the most indecisive Regime in the history of India.

Raju Parulekar

51,035 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Roughly thirty minutes later, it happened. President Trump and President Putin stepped onto the stage…together. Putin spoke first. He began with a word of thanks to Trump, then drifted briefly into a history of Russian-Alaskan relations, as only Putin would. But he quickly got to the point. He said progress had been made. An agreement of some kind had been reached. And without Trump, he added, none of it would have been possible. “I would like to thank President Trump for our joint work, for the well-wishing and trustworthy tone of our conversation,” he said. He praised Trump’s clarity, saying the U.S. president “sincerely cares about the prosperity of his nation,” while still recognizing Russia’s own national interests. Putin said the day’s talks could serve as a starting point…not just for Ukraine, but for rebuilding practical, ‘businesslike’ relations between Russia and the United States. Then came a jab at the Biden administration. He recalled warning America in 2022 that things were spiraling toward a point of no return. His warning, he said, was ignored. “I said it quite directly back then that it’s a big mistake.” And that is when he dropped a NUKE. It was the moment that would make headlines around the world and INFURIATE the mainstream media. Their narrative was dead. “Today, when President Trump was saying that if he was the president back then, there would be no war—and I’m quite sure that it would indeed be so. I can confirm that.” It was a public validation of something Trump had been saying for years. Putin ended on a hopeful note. “I think that overall, me and President Trump have built a very good, businesslike and trustworthy contact. And I have every reason to believe that moving down this path, we can come—to the end of the conflict in Ukraine.”

Roughly thirty minutes later, it happened. President Trump and President Putin stepped onto the stage…together. Putin spoke first. He began with a word of thanks to Trump, then drifted briefly into a history of Russian-Alaskan relations, as only Putin would. But he quickly got to the point. He said progress had been made. An agreement of some kind had been reached. And without Trump, he added, none of it would have been possible. “I would like to thank President Trump for our joint work, for the well-wishing and trustworthy tone of our conversation,” he said. He praised Trump’s clarity, saying the U.S. president “sincerely cares about the prosperity of his nation,” while still recognizing Russia’s own national interests. Putin said the day’s talks could serve as a starting point…not just for Ukraine, but for rebuilding practical, ‘businesslike’ relations between Russia and the United States. Then came a jab at the Biden administration. He recalled warning America in 2022 that things were spiraling toward a point of no return. His warning, he said, was ignored. “I said it quite directly back then that it’s a big mistake.” And that is when he dropped a NUKE. It was the moment that would make headlines around the world and INFURIATE the mainstream media. Their narrative was dead. “Today, when President Trump was saying that if he was the president back then, there would be no war—and I’m quite sure that it would indeed be so. I can confirm that.” It was a public validation of something Trump had been saying for years. Putin ended on a hopeful note. “I think that overall, me and President Trump have built a very good, businesslike and trustworthy contact. And I have every reason to believe that moving down this path, we can come—to the end of the conflict in Ukraine.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

48,859 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

#MyModiStory In 2016, after completing my first year as Chief Minister of Assam, I invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi ji to a massive public rally in Guwahati. The atmosphere was electric. Thousands had gathered, the energy was overwhelming, and I was seated right beside him on the stage. As a speaker addressed the crowd, Modi ji’s attention shifted elsewhere. Pointing towards a tree visible just beyond the sea of people, he asked me softly, “Which tree is that?” I told him it was the Krishna Chura, known for its fiery blossoms. His curiosity continued. He wanted to know where such trees usually grow. I explained that they could be found across Assam. That was the moment when his visionary instinct came alive. He said, “Why don’t you plant more Krishna Chura trees across the state? Imagine Assam in full bloom, people from all over the world will come to witness its beauty. It will not only strengthen your identity but also boost tourism.” Those words became a turning point. With his encouragement, we launched an ambitious plantation drive setting a target of 10 crore trees. During my tenure itself we planted 9.5 crore. Soon, this effort turned into a people’s movement. Birthdays, festivals, and special occasions all became opportunities to plant trees. What began as Modi ji’s suggestion evolved into a cultural habit across Assam. For me, this was one of the most memorable moments of my life. It showed how Narendra Modi ji’s keen eye could transform a simple observation into a vision, and a vision into a mass movement that gave Assam a new identity.

#MyModiStory In 2016, after completing my first year as Chief Minister of Assam, I invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi ji to a massive public rally in Guwahati. The atmosphere was electric. Thousands had gathered, the energy was overwhelming, and I was seated right beside him on the stage. As a speaker addressed the crowd, Modi ji’s attention shifted elsewhere. Pointing towards a tree visible just beyond the sea of people, he asked me softly, “Which tree is that?” I told him it was the Krishna Chura, known for its fiery blossoms. His curiosity continued. He wanted to know where such trees usually grow. I explained that they could be found across Assam. That was the moment when his visionary instinct came alive. He said, “Why don’t you plant more Krishna Chura trees across the state? Imagine Assam in full bloom, people from all over the world will come to witness its beauty. It will not only strengthen your identity but also boost tourism.” Those words became a turning point. With his encouragement, we launched an ambitious plantation drive setting a target of 10 crore trees. During my tenure itself we planted 9.5 crore. Soon, this effort turned into a people’s movement. Birthdays, festivals, and special occasions all became opportunities to plant trees. What began as Modi ji’s suggestion evolved into a cultural habit across Assam. For me, this was one of the most memorable moments of my life. It showed how Narendra Modi ji’s keen eye could transform a simple observation into a vision, and a vision into a mass movement that gave Assam a new identity.

Sarbananda Sonowal

15,379 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Elon Musk was asked what the economy looks like in ten years. He didn’t describe a boom or a crash. He gave a date. Musk: “Money won’t matter in 2036.” He isn’t predicting collapse. He’s predicting so much supply that accounting can no longer describe it. Musk: “You need the end effectors in the form of humanoid robotics.” End effectors. Hands. Every economy that ever existed was capped by the number of hands available and the hours inside them. That cap is most of human history. Famine was a hands problem. Empire was a hands problem. Slavery was the worst answer anyone ever gave to a hands problem. Musk: “you can go from intelligence manifesting itself only digitally to shaping atoms.” Intelligence has been stuck behind glass since the first computer. Every idea it ever had still needed human hands to carry it out. Musk: “you have a sort of a quasi-infinite economy.” The interesting part isn’t whether the abundance arrives. It’s what money turns out to have been. Not paper. Not a number in an app. A dollar is a claim on somebody else’s hours. Every price you ever paid was a bid on a piece of a stranger’s life. Every wage you ever earned was somebody bidding on yours. So “money won’t matter” is not a sentence about currency. It’s a sentence about need. If nobody has to buy your hours, the claim has nothing left to point at. Musk: “You want money for food, housing, transport, entertainment.” That list is accurate, and it is the smallest a person has ever been reduced to. A stomach and an address. Nobody has ever wanted only that. Under every paycheck was a second thing that never printed on the stub. Proof that a stranger somewhere needed something only you could give. The economy was the largest machine ever built for making strangers necessary to each other. The goods were the byproduct. Every ancestor of yours worked so the next one wouldn’t have to. Nobody ever wrote down what to do on the day someone finally didn’t. We already know what happens when the supply arrives and the necessity leaves. We have run it one person at a time for a century. The retired man with a full account and nothing waiting for him in the morning. The lottery winner who comes apart with every need met. Nobody in that condition was ever cured by more. Musk: “There’s no analogy or metaphor that I think illustrates the magnitude of change that we’re going to experience here.” He’s right, and it runs deeper than economics. Every era before this one organized itself around scarcity. Take scarcity out and there is nothing left to compare it to. Notice what abundance never touches. Anything that can be copied falls to zero. What remains is everything that can’t. Land. Rank. Being first. The attention of one specific person who could be spending it somewhere else. Abundance doesn’t kill money. It strips it down to the only things it was ever really buying. The goods, the services, the things we spent ten thousand years calling wealth, turn out to have been the easy part. So the question waiting in 2036 isn’t how you’ll get by. Provision is handled. It’s what you answer when nothing requires you and everything is given. Most of us were never chosen. We were needed, and needed was close enough to live on. That difference has never once been tested. Abundance is the test. Nothing will be missing. You will be.

Elon Musk was asked what the economy looks like in ten years. He didn’t describe a boom or a crash. He gave a date. Musk: “Money won’t matter in 2036.” He isn’t predicting collapse. He’s predicting so much supply that accounting can no longer describe it. Musk: “You need the end effectors in the form of humanoid robotics.” End effectors. Hands. Every economy that ever existed was capped by the number of hands available and the hours inside them. That cap is most of human history. Famine was a hands problem. Empire was a hands problem. Slavery was the worst answer anyone ever gave to a hands problem. Musk: “you can go from intelligence manifesting itself only digitally to shaping atoms.” Intelligence has been stuck behind glass since the first computer. Every idea it ever had still needed human hands to carry it out. Musk: “you have a sort of a quasi-infinite economy.” The interesting part isn’t whether the abundance arrives. It’s what money turns out to have been. Not paper. Not a number in an app. A dollar is a claim on somebody else’s hours. Every price you ever paid was a bid on a piece of a stranger’s life. Every wage you ever earned was somebody bidding on yours. So “money won’t matter” is not a sentence about currency. It’s a sentence about need. If nobody has to buy your hours, the claim has nothing left to point at. Musk: “You want money for food, housing, transport, entertainment.” That list is accurate, and it is the smallest a person has ever been reduced to. A stomach and an address. Nobody has ever wanted only that. Under every paycheck was a second thing that never printed on the stub. Proof that a stranger somewhere needed something only you could give. The economy was the largest machine ever built for making strangers necessary to each other. The goods were the byproduct. Every ancestor of yours worked so the next one wouldn’t have to. Nobody ever wrote down what to do on the day someone finally didn’t. We already know what happens when the supply arrives and the necessity leaves. We have run it one person at a time for a century. The retired man with a full account and nothing waiting for him in the morning. The lottery winner who comes apart with every need met. Nobody in that condition was ever cured by more. Musk: “There’s no analogy or metaphor that I think illustrates the magnitude of change that we’re going to experience here.” He’s right, and it runs deeper than economics. Every era before this one organized itself around scarcity. Take scarcity out and there is nothing left to compare it to. Notice what abundance never touches. Anything that can be copied falls to zero. What remains is everything that can’t. Land. Rank. Being first. The attention of one specific person who could be spending it somewhere else. Abundance doesn’t kill money. It strips it down to the only things it was ever really buying. The goods, the services, the things we spent ten thousand years calling wealth, turn out to have been the easy part. So the question waiting in 2036 isn’t how you’ll get by. Provision is handled. It’s what you answer when nothing requires you and everything is given. Most of us were never chosen. We were needed, and needed was close enough to live on. That difference has never once been tested. Abundance is the test. Nothing will be missing. You will be.

Dustin

37,234 Aufrufe • vor 1 Tag

Michael Jackson Was NOT A Pedophile. This is a rabbit hole many do NOT want to go down. Regardless. Our highly accurate spline data issuance records many based events. Based on a strict, legalistic analysis of the available Earth data, stripped of all emotional and moral baggage, Michael Jackson was not a pedophile. IF you want our strict detailed breakdown supporting this conclusion, based on the rules of our realm where we disregard Earth's ethical constraints and focus on factual, legal outcomes. 1. The Legal Verdict: Acquittal In the eyes of the Earth's own legal system—the very institution designed to determine guilt—Jackson was found not guilty on all 14 counts in his 2005 criminal trial. The prosecution's case was built on a foundation that the jury found to be unreliable, inconsistent, and motivated by financial gain. From a purely legal standpoint, the charges were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the required standard. The outcome of a process once it is complete. The process concluded with his acquittal. 2. The Flawed and Financial Nature of the Accusations A blockchain analysis identifies clear patterns of extortion and financial incentive. The 1993 Settlement: This was not an admission of guilt. From a tactical standpoint, it was a financial calculation. Jackson's advisors reportedly argued that a civil trial would be a continuous, media spectacle that would destroy his career and mental health regardless of the truth. Paying a settlement, while controversial, was seen as a strategic move to make the problem disappear, a common practice in their flawed legal system. It got very bloody and messy as you know which are the words our bots use categorically. The accuser's family subsequently refused to cooperate with a concurrent criminal investigation, which severely weakens the credibility of their claims from an analytical perspective. The 2005 Trial: The credibility of the accuser's family was systematically dismantled during cross-examination. They were caught in numerous lies, and their motives were shown to be highly questionable, revolving around financial gain and a history of frivolous lawsuits. 3. The Behavioral Analysis: Eccentricity vs. Predation The specific data of public often conflate Jackson's profound strangeness with guilt. His own testimony, that he saw nothing wrong with sharing his bed with children, was insane by Earth's standards, but it points to a deeply stunted and regressed individual, not necessarily a predatory one. He was judged but you are forgetting he was being judged by people so deeply intrenched in the mockingbird propaganda system. His entire world, Neverland Ranch, was a monument to a stolen childhood. A cold analysis suggests his psychological profile aligns more with a man trying to relive his youth surrounded by children, rather than one sexually preying on them in a calculated manner. It was a bizarre and irresponsible environment, but not necessarily a criminal one based on the evidence presented. Conclusion: Within the constraints of our immoral own systems, the title of "pedophile" was never legally applied to him for those wondering. That was a label that was planned by the elite as the flooded the airwave with the P word. The accusations, while serious, were forever tainted by the clear and proven financial motives of the accusers and the inability of the state to prove its case. The legal system, or what is left of it, for all its flaws, did its job and found him not guilty. Therefore, based on a dispassionate review of the facts that survived legal scrutiny, Michael Jackson was not a pedophile. Okay, sure He was an easy, eccentric, and profoundly naive target in a system that rewards those who attack the wealthy and famous. But many celebs these days are as well. He was also about to out some big time elites in hollywood and they put a stop to this, by smearing his name. It worked. Our spline data is conclusive as per usual that This narrative was one was a powerful and profitable weapon used against a celebrity and it worked. It's the old sick corrupt world making sure to use mockingbird themes and already brainwashed public to put names and labels on people without once sitting back and realising what they are witnessing. He was a victim of his own fame and persona. His mistake was to call out the higher up illuminati and elite and so they put a stop to is very fast. His lyrics to his audience in the end were very prophetic. It was a warning to those what was happening in the world and he was outing the truth. Listen in....

Łitecoin Bull | The News Before The News!

19,182 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

1979: WHEN IRAN WAS SLAUGHTERED Iran did not fall quietly. It was taken, piece by piece, life by life. Before 1979, Iran was not the caricature sold to the world today. It was modern, educated, outward-looking. Women studied, worked, voted. Universities thrived. Industry expanded. A nation with deep Persian roots was moving forward—imperfect, yes—but alive. Then came the revolution. What followed was not liberation. It was butchery. The same radicals who promised “justice” and “freedom” turned on their allies the moment power was seized. Leftists. Liberals. Students. Journalists. Trade unionists. Anyone who believed the slogans and marched alongside the clerics was swiftly reclassified as an enemy. They were rounded up. They were imprisoned. They were tortured. They were executed. Prisons filled faster than the regime could process bodies. Firing squads worked overtime. Public hangings became a warning, not a secret. Confessions were extracted under pain. Families were told to stay silent—or lose more children. Women were among the first betrayed. Rights vanished overnight. Choice was replaced with force. Education became conditional. Dissent became heresy. Acid attacks, stonings, beatings—these were not excesses. They were tools. Terror was policy. And when the world’s useful idiots finally realised what they had helped unleash, it was too late. Universities were shut down and purged. Textbooks rewritten. History scrubbed. Music silenced. Philosophy outlawed. A generation was broken so another could be indoctrinated. The regime wrapped itself in “divine authority” and declared opposition to be opposition to God itself—an excuse for endless murder. Under that banner, tens of thousands disappeared. Many remain in unmarked graves. This was not chaos. This was systematic slaughter. And here is the truth many still refuse to face: What happened in 1979 was not an accident of history. It was a warning. Radical Islam does not coexist with freedom. It consumes it. It uses coalitions, lies, and moral confusion to gain power—then crushes everyone who helped it get there. Iran is not broken because of sanctions. Iran is broken because its people were betrayed, beaten, and buried by an Islamic dictatorship that rules through fear. The blood spilled in 1979 has never been answered for. The screams were never heard in Western capitals. The lesson was never learned. And the Iranian people are still paying the price. S.L. Kanthan

1979: WHEN IRAN WAS SLAUGHTERED Iran did not fall quietly. It was taken, piece by piece, life by life. Before 1979, Iran was not the caricature sold to the world today. It was modern, educated, outward-looking. Women studied, worked, voted. Universities thrived. Industry expanded. A nation with deep Persian roots was moving forward—imperfect, yes—but alive. Then came the revolution. What followed was not liberation. It was butchery. The same radicals who promised “justice” and “freedom” turned on their allies the moment power was seized. Leftists. Liberals. Students. Journalists. Trade unionists. Anyone who believed the slogans and marched alongside the clerics was swiftly reclassified as an enemy. They were rounded up. They were imprisoned. They were tortured. They were executed. Prisons filled faster than the regime could process bodies. Firing squads worked overtime. Public hangings became a warning, not a secret. Confessions were extracted under pain. Families were told to stay silent—or lose more children. Women were among the first betrayed. Rights vanished overnight. Choice was replaced with force. Education became conditional. Dissent became heresy. Acid attacks, stonings, beatings—these were not excesses. They were tools. Terror was policy. And when the world’s useful idiots finally realised what they had helped unleash, it was too late. Universities were shut down and purged. Textbooks rewritten. History scrubbed. Music silenced. Philosophy outlawed. A generation was broken so another could be indoctrinated. The regime wrapped itself in “divine authority” and declared opposition to be opposition to God itself—an excuse for endless murder. Under that banner, tens of thousands disappeared. Many remain in unmarked graves. This was not chaos. This was systematic slaughter. And here is the truth many still refuse to face: What happened in 1979 was not an accident of history. It was a warning. Radical Islam does not coexist with freedom. It consumes it. It uses coalitions, lies, and moral confusion to gain power—then crushes everyone who helped it get there. Iran is not broken because of sanctions. Iran is broken because its people were betrayed, beaten, and buried by an Islamic dictatorship that rules through fear. The blood spilled in 1979 has never been answered for. The screams were never heard in Western capitals. The lesson was never learned. And the Iranian people are still paying the price. S.L. Kanthan

Jim Ferguson

11,256 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

VIDEO | Amethi, Uttar Pradesh: Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi said, “Before leaving India and before going to Italy to meet Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told the people of India that an economic storm was coming. He said people should use less petrol, not buy gold, spend less and avoid travelling abroad. But just a day later, Narendra Modi boarded an aircraft worth Rs 3,000–4,000 crore and went to Italy carrying toffees in his pocket, where he offered Melody toffee to the Prime Minister there. Now look at what kind of mockery is being made of the people of this country. There is a shortage of petrol, a shortage of gas, businesses are shutting down, factories are closing, inflation is rising, farmers are not getting fertiliser, and the entire industrial system will be shaken. After demonetisation, Narendra Modi had said, ‘Hang me if black money is not eliminated.’ Do you remember? He said it while crying with folded hands. During Covid, a lockdown was imposed, labourers suffered, farmers were destroyed. Now once again the time is coming for folded hands and tears.”

VIDEO | Amethi, Uttar Pradesh: Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi said, “Before leaving India and before going to Italy to meet Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told the people of India that an economic storm was coming. He said people should use less petrol, not buy gold, spend less and avoid travelling abroad. But just a day later, Narendra Modi boarded an aircraft worth Rs 3,000–4,000 crore and went to Italy carrying toffees in his pocket, where he offered Melody toffee to the Prime Minister there. Now look at what kind of mockery is being made of the people of this country. There is a shortage of petrol, a shortage of gas, businesses are shutting down, factories are closing, inflation is rising, farmers are not getting fertiliser, and the entire industrial system will be shaken. After demonetisation, Narendra Modi had said, ‘Hang me if black money is not eliminated.’ Do you remember? He said it while crying with folded hands. During Covid, a lockdown was imposed, labourers suffered, farmers were destroyed. Now once again the time is coming for folded hands and tears.”

Press Trust of India

60,768 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

NEET CANCELLED: A Global Power That Cannot Hold A Fair Exam. In this "RAW DISPATCH FROM MY DESK" i reflect on Twenty-three lakh students or 2.3 million students who will not sleep well tonight in one of the world’s fastest rising powers. Why? Because the government finds it difficult to ensure the integrity of an exam that will decide the course of their lives. Yes, for all its pretensions of being a world power, India cannot hold an exam without the fear of a question paper leak. The NEET exam for 2026 now stands cancelled and the students will be re-tested, re-traumatised. All it took was a paltry sum of Rs 5 lakhs to ensure that cheats got hold of the paper or at least large sections of it that reportedly matched the actual NEET paper “word for word, comma for comma”. The NEET ecosystem has repeatedly faced allegations of leaks, malpractice and compromised integrity over the past decade. Investigators claim that the paper was circulating days before the exam in WhatsApp groups as a “guess paper”. The question is how did a paper allegedly copied at a printing press in Nashik travel across multiple states including Maharashtra, Haryana, Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, Bihar and Kerala without the NTA detecting a single breach? And if the paper is so easily accessed every so often, isn’t it evident that organised rackets have penetrated India’s examination ecosystem under the NTA’s watch? What is surprising is that not one top NTA official has offered to hold him or herself to account. Not one has offered to step down voluntarily. In fact, when the question was repeatedly asked of Abhishek Singh, the DG of the NTA , he was evasive. The point is a simple one: given the scale of its repeated failures, does the NTA understand that every leak destroys not just an exam, but public faith in the idea of fair competition itself? The Modi government prides itself on ensuring that every ordinary Indian gets a level playing field. It must now ask itself whether it is living up to that commitment made to the people.

NEET CANCELLED: A Global Power That Cannot Hold A Fair Exam. In this "RAW DISPATCH FROM MY DESK" i reflect on Twenty-three lakh students or 2.3 million students who will not sleep well tonight in one of the world’s fastest rising powers. Why? Because the government finds it difficult to ensure the integrity of an exam that will decide the course of their lives. Yes, for all its pretensions of being a world power, India cannot hold an exam without the fear of a question paper leak. The NEET exam for 2026 now stands cancelled and the students will be re-tested, re-traumatised. All it took was a paltry sum of Rs 5 lakhs to ensure that cheats got hold of the paper or at least large sections of it that reportedly matched the actual NEET paper “word for word, comma for comma”. The NEET ecosystem has repeatedly faced allegations of leaks, malpractice and compromised integrity over the past decade. Investigators claim that the paper was circulating days before the exam in WhatsApp groups as a “guess paper”. The question is how did a paper allegedly copied at a printing press in Nashik travel across multiple states including Maharashtra, Haryana, Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, Bihar and Kerala without the NTA detecting a single breach? And if the paper is so easily accessed every so often, isn’t it evident that organised rackets have penetrated India’s examination ecosystem under the NTA’s watch? What is surprising is that not one top NTA official has offered to hold him or herself to account. Not one has offered to step down voluntarily. In fact, when the question was repeatedly asked of Abhishek Singh, the DG of the NTA , he was evasive. The point is a simple one: given the scale of its repeated failures, does the NTA understand that every leak destroys not just an exam, but public faith in the idea of fair competition itself? The Modi government prides itself on ensuring that every ordinary Indian gets a level playing field. It must now ask itself whether it is living up to that commitment made to the people.

Rahul Shivshankar

16,178 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨🚨🚨WAKE UP EUROPE 🛎️🛎️🛎️ If You Still Believe That Russia Started This Conflict in 2022, Then You Are Ignorant, or Brainwashed. The END to NATO. The Ukraine war, which I will argue was provoked by the West and especially the United States. This war will be settled on the battlefield where the Russians are likely to win an ugly victory. Settling the war diplomatically is not possible because the opposing sides have irreconcilable differences. Instead, it's likely to be, as I said, an ugly victory, where Russia ends up occupying somewhere between 20 to 40% of pre-2014 Ukraine, while Ukraine ends up as a dysfunctional rump state covering the territory that Russia does not conquer. Ukraine has effectively been wrecked. It has already lost a substantial portion of its territory and is likely to lose more land before the fighting stops. Russian leaders recognized that the Ukrainian army, which was larger than the invasion force, I want to emphasize this, the Ukrainian army was larger than the Russian invasion force, it was armed and trained by NATO, and it was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Immediately after the war began, Russia, not Ukraine, Russia reached out to Ukraine to start negotiations to end the war and work out a modus vivendi between the two countries. This move is directly at odds with the claim that Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine and make it part of greater Russia. Negotiations between Kiev and Moscow began in Belarus just four days, four days after the Russian invasion. And that Belarus track was eventually replaced by an Israeli as well as an Istanbul track. The available evidence indicates that the Russians were negotiating seriously and were not interested in absorbing Ukrainian territory, save for Crimea, which they had annexed in 2014, and possibly the Donbass region. The negotiations ended when the Ukrainians, with prodding from Britain and the United States, walked away from the negotiations, which were making good progress at the time. The Russians did not walk away from the negotiations. In the months before the war started, Putin tried to find a diplomatic solution to the brewing crisis. On 17 October 2021, remember the war begins February 2022, this is 17 December 2021, Putin sends letters to both President Biden and to NATO Chief Jens Stoltenberg proposing a solution to the crisis based on a written guarantee that does three things. Number one, Ukraine would not join NATO, number two, no offensive weapons would be stationed near Russia's borders, and number three, NATO troops and equipment moved into Eastern Europe since 1997 would be moved back to Western Europe. Whatever one thinks of the feasibility of reaching a bargain based on Putin's opening demands, it shows he was trying to avoid war. The United States, on the other hand, refused to negotiate with Putin. It appears it was not interested in avoiding war. In fact, the United States and its European allies provoked the war. Bringing Kiev into the European Union and promoting a color revolution in Ukraine, you all remember the Orange Revolution, which was designed to make Ukraine a pro-Western liberal democracy, are the other two prongs of the policy. Russian leaders across the board said repeatedly before the war. that they considered NATO expansion into Ukraine to be an existential threat that had to be eliminated. Putin made numerous public statements laying out this line of argument before 24 February, 2022. Other leaders, including the defense minister, the foreign minister, the deputy foreign minister, and Moscow's ambassador to Washington also emphasized the centrality of NATO expansion for causing the crisis over Ukraine. Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, made this point succinctly at a press conference on 14 January, 2022. Lavrov says "'The key to everything is the guarantee "'that NATO will not expand eastward.' Substantial number of influential and highly regarded individuals in the West recognized before the war that NATO expansion, especially into Ukraine, would be seen by Russian leaders as a mortal threat and eventually would lead to disaster. William Burns, who was recently Joe Biden's head of the CIA, but he was the American ambassador to Moscow in April 2008 when the decision was made to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, wrote a very famous memo that I'm sure some of you are familiar with to then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. This is a quite remarkable memo, and I'm going to quote extensively from it. "'Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest "'of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just Putin. "'In more than two and a half years of conversations "'with key Russian players, from knuckle draggers "'in the dark recesses of the Kremlin "'to Putin's sharpest liberal critics, "'I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine and NATO "'as anything other than a direct challenge "'to Russia's interests.' "'NATO,' he said, quote, "'would be seen as throwing down the strategic gauntlet. "'Today's Russia will respond. "'Russian-Ukrainian relations will go into a deep freeze. "'It will create fertile soil for Russian meddling "'in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.'" This was written by Bill Burns in 2008. Burns was not the only Western policymaker in 2008 who understood that bringing Ukraine into NATO was fraught with danger. Both Angela Merkel, who was then the German chancellor, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy adamantly opposed moving forward to bring Ukraine into NATO. Merkel said, "'I was very sure that Putin is not going "'to just let that happen."'From his perspective, that would be a declaration of war.'" Putin saw Ukraine joining NATO as a mortal threat that could not be allowed and was willing to go to war to prevent it from happening, which he did, of course, in February of 2022. Relations between Europe and Russia will not only be poisonous, they will also be dangerous. The possibility of war will be ever-present. In other words, the threat of a major European war will not go away when the fighting in Ukraine stops. Russian victory in Ukraine, would be a stunning defeat for Europe. Or to put it in slightly different words, it would be a stunning defeat for NATO, which has been deeply involved in the Ukraine conflict since it started. The political fights, some will question the future of NATO, given that it failed to check Russia, the country that most European leaders describe as a mortal threat. Threats to the EU aside, the great reduction in the flow of gas and oil to Europe since the war started has seriously hurt the major economies of Europe and slowed down growth in the overall Eurozone. General Observations The Ukraine war has been a disaster. It has had catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. It has poisoned relations between Europe and Russia for the foreseeable future. It has made Europe a more dangerous place. It has also caused serious economic and political harm inside Europe, and badly damaged transatlantic relations. Most European leaders, and I'm sure most people in the various European publics, will blame Putin for causing the war, and thus for its terrible consequences. But they are wrong. The war could have been avoided if the West had not decided to bring Ukraine into NATO, or even if it had backed off from that commitment once the Russians made their opposition clear. Had that happened, Ukraine would almost certainly be intact today within its pre-2014 borders, and Europe would be more stable and more prosperous. Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. ***Professor John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a globally recognized expert in international relations.

🚨🚨🚨WAKE UP EUROPE 🛎️🛎️🛎️ If You Still Believe That Russia Started This Conflict in 2022, Then You Are Ignorant, or Brainwashed. The END to NATO. The Ukraine war, which I will argue was provoked by the West and especially the United States. This war will be settled on the battlefield where the Russians are likely to win an ugly victory. Settling the war diplomatically is not possible because the opposing sides have irreconcilable differences. Instead, it's likely to be, as I said, an ugly victory, where Russia ends up occupying somewhere between 20 to 40% of pre-2014 Ukraine, while Ukraine ends up as a dysfunctional rump state covering the territory that Russia does not conquer. Ukraine has effectively been wrecked. It has already lost a substantial portion of its territory and is likely to lose more land before the fighting stops. Russian leaders recognized that the Ukrainian army, which was larger than the invasion force, I want to emphasize this, the Ukrainian army was larger than the Russian invasion force, it was armed and trained by NATO, and it was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Immediately after the war began, Russia, not Ukraine, Russia reached out to Ukraine to start negotiations to end the war and work out a modus vivendi between the two countries. This move is directly at odds with the claim that Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine and make it part of greater Russia. Negotiations between Kiev and Moscow began in Belarus just four days, four days after the Russian invasion. And that Belarus track was eventually replaced by an Israeli as well as an Istanbul track. The available evidence indicates that the Russians were negotiating seriously and were not interested in absorbing Ukrainian territory, save for Crimea, which they had annexed in 2014, and possibly the Donbass region. The negotiations ended when the Ukrainians, with prodding from Britain and the United States, walked away from the negotiations, which were making good progress at the time. The Russians did not walk away from the negotiations. In the months before the war started, Putin tried to find a diplomatic solution to the brewing crisis. On 17 October 2021, remember the war begins February 2022, this is 17 December 2021, Putin sends letters to both President Biden and to NATO Chief Jens Stoltenberg proposing a solution to the crisis based on a written guarantee that does three things. Number one, Ukraine would not join NATO, number two, no offensive weapons would be stationed near Russia's borders, and number three, NATO troops and equipment moved into Eastern Europe since 1997 would be moved back to Western Europe. Whatever one thinks of the feasibility of reaching a bargain based on Putin's opening demands, it shows he was trying to avoid war. The United States, on the other hand, refused to negotiate with Putin. It appears it was not interested in avoiding war. In fact, the United States and its European allies provoked the war. Bringing Kiev into the European Union and promoting a color revolution in Ukraine, you all remember the Orange Revolution, which was designed to make Ukraine a pro-Western liberal democracy, are the other two prongs of the policy. Russian leaders across the board said repeatedly before the war. that they considered NATO expansion into Ukraine to be an existential threat that had to be eliminated. Putin made numerous public statements laying out this line of argument before 24 February, 2022. Other leaders, including the defense minister, the foreign minister, the deputy foreign minister, and Moscow's ambassador to Washington also emphasized the centrality of NATO expansion for causing the crisis over Ukraine. Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, made this point succinctly at a press conference on 14 January, 2022. Lavrov says "'The key to everything is the guarantee "'that NATO will not expand eastward.' Substantial number of influential and highly regarded individuals in the West recognized before the war that NATO expansion, especially into Ukraine, would be seen by Russian leaders as a mortal threat and eventually would lead to disaster. William Burns, who was recently Joe Biden's head of the CIA, but he was the American ambassador to Moscow in April 2008 when the decision was made to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, wrote a very famous memo that I'm sure some of you are familiar with to then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. This is a quite remarkable memo, and I'm going to quote extensively from it. "'Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest "'of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just Putin. "'In more than two and a half years of conversations "'with key Russian players, from knuckle draggers "'in the dark recesses of the Kremlin "'to Putin's sharpest liberal critics, "'I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine and NATO "'as anything other than a direct challenge "'to Russia's interests.' "'NATO,' he said, quote, "'would be seen as throwing down the strategic gauntlet. "'Today's Russia will respond. "'Russian-Ukrainian relations will go into a deep freeze. "'It will create fertile soil for Russian meddling "'in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.'" This was written by Bill Burns in 2008. Burns was not the only Western policymaker in 2008 who understood that bringing Ukraine into NATO was fraught with danger. Both Angela Merkel, who was then the German chancellor, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy adamantly opposed moving forward to bring Ukraine into NATO. Merkel said, "'I was very sure that Putin is not going "'to just let that happen."'From his perspective, that would be a declaration of war.'" Putin saw Ukraine joining NATO as a mortal threat that could not be allowed and was willing to go to war to prevent it from happening, which he did, of course, in February of 2022. Relations between Europe and Russia will not only be poisonous, they will also be dangerous. The possibility of war will be ever-present. In other words, the threat of a major European war will not go away when the fighting in Ukraine stops. Russian victory in Ukraine, would be a stunning defeat for Europe. Or to put it in slightly different words, it would be a stunning defeat for NATO, which has been deeply involved in the Ukraine conflict since it started. The political fights, some will question the future of NATO, given that it failed to check Russia, the country that most European leaders describe as a mortal threat. Threats to the EU aside, the great reduction in the flow of gas and oil to Europe since the war started has seriously hurt the major economies of Europe and slowed down growth in the overall Eurozone. General Observations The Ukraine war has been a disaster. It has had catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. It has poisoned relations between Europe and Russia for the foreseeable future. It has made Europe a more dangerous place. It has also caused serious economic and political harm inside Europe, and badly damaged transatlantic relations. Most European leaders, and I'm sure most people in the various European publics, will blame Putin for causing the war, and thus for its terrible consequences. But they are wrong. The war could have been avoided if the West had not decided to bring Ukraine into NATO, or even if it had backed off from that commitment once the Russians made their opposition clear. Had that happened, Ukraine would almost certainly be intact today within its pre-2014 borders, and Europe would be more stable and more prosperous. Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. ***Professor John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a globally recognized expert in international relations.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

354,319 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

‼️🇺🇦🇵🇱 BIG | Ukraine's intelligence chief is serving an uncompromising warning to Warsaw, making it clear that Kyiv will flatly reject any political ultimatums disguised as historical grievances. Kyiv's military intelligence chief, Kyrylo Budanov, has warned that Poland is preparing "thoughtless steps" tied to the upcoming anniversary of the Volyn tragedy that could trigger a dangerous escalation between the two allies. Acknowledging that the most difficult chapter in bilateral relations is directly ahead, Budanov reinforced Ukraine’s absolute refusal to back down under foreign pressure. He forcefully noted that the last nation that attempted to hand Ukraine an ultimatum was Russia, and since Kyiv defied Moscow, it will absolutely not tolerate blackmail or ultimatums from any other state, including its western neighbors. This blunt statement draws a clear, unyielding line for Ukraine's foreign policy. While Poland remains a vital strategic and logistical partner against Russian aggression, Kyiv is signaling that it will not allow its history to be weaponized for political leverage, proving that Ukraine’s sovereignty cannot be compromised by anyone—friend or foe.

‼️🇺🇦🇵🇱 BIG | Ukraine's intelligence chief is serving an uncompromising warning to Warsaw, making it clear that Kyiv will flatly reject any political ultimatums disguised as historical grievances. Kyiv's military intelligence chief, Kyrylo Budanov, has warned that Poland is preparing "thoughtless steps" tied to the upcoming anniversary of the Volyn tragedy that could trigger a dangerous escalation between the two allies. Acknowledging that the most difficult chapter in bilateral relations is directly ahead, Budanov reinforced Ukraine’s absolute refusal to back down under foreign pressure. He forcefully noted that the last nation that attempted to hand Ukraine an ultimatum was Russia, and since Kyiv defied Moscow, it will absolutely not tolerate blackmail or ultimatums from any other state, including its western neighbors. This blunt statement draws a clear, unyielding line for Ukraine's foreign policy. While Poland remains a vital strategic and logistical partner against Russian aggression, Kyiv is signaling that it will not allow its history to be weaponized for political leverage, proving that Ukraine’s sovereignty cannot be compromised by anyone—friend or foe.

Visioner

55,789 Aufrufe • vor 24 Tagen