(Before I make my case, and frankly it’s more of an open question than it is a case, I feel it’s important to point out one fact. If anyone chooses to read this, please do so with some caution. I am out of my wheelhouse here. But the video of the feminist group asking for an audit on Ukraine spending in this post doesn’t require any analysis from me. So watch that anyway and decide for yourselves what that means.
But I have dug my own rabbit hole here for anyone who is interested. Of course, any counter arguments or ideas to the contrary are most welcome. Pelase deliver them in the spirit this is written. Thinking out loud. Not prognosticating or in any way being didactic.)
I see Ukrainian flags everywhere in my city in Canada. From what I know, it is mostly on the homes and cars of leftists who have all the correct narrative views on everything. But one thing I absolutely do notice, is that never has there been a report of roving gangs of Russian thugs, torching cars or breaking windows of homes with the Ukrainian flags in or on them. But put an Israeli flag out and chances are you won’t even get an insurance pay out for what happens. And certainly not twice.
This is a meaningful stat. Interpret it how you will. But it sure seems like Russia and Russians are not the enemy they were made out to be by the state-media complex. But the Anti-Israel complex is indeed a state-media creation. Like the facts of Russia-Ukraine, they are non-existent on CBC. Just approved narrative attacks.
This video we post now and again because, well it shows how the people of the Donbas were treated by the Ukrainian state:
This is from 2014:
But here’s the October surprise, as it were, here in Canada. From what might be called a legacy feminist no less. From CPAC
She goes farther than simply accusing Carney of money laundering. She questions the moral authority of the war itself on its premise. She is decidedly contradicting the narrative of an “unprovoked aggression” by Russia. (Although personally I don’t like Jeffrey Sachs as a source, but he is only one of the sources she quotes, and I can’t remember why I don’t like him as one)
In 2018, President Trump went to Germany and spoke at a NATO summit, specifically warning Germany that they had made themselves totally dependant on Russian energy. In fact, Germany has torn down to the roots a brand new state of the art coal plant for electric generation that produced very little CO2 for those that believe this is a problem. Merkel signed the Nord Stream deal in 2015, and once the war was imminent, they did not allow delivery of LNG. But Germany, France etc. really did destroy their own energy production including nuclear, Which you know, doesn’t convert any carbon into gas form.
- The dependency on Russian oil was built with full knowledge before the war — 2015 deal, Trump’s 2018 warning delivered to their faces at NATO, US sanctions on the project from December 2019, and Germany kept laying pipe anyway (construction resumed December 2020 despite sanctions).
- They didn’t stop when they saw the war coming — pipeline finished September 2021 with troops already massing; even the certification freeze only came February 22, 2022, two days before the invasion, and even then it was Scholz, not Merkel (she left office December 2021).
- Merkel defended the decision after the war started, with full knowledge of what it produced — “Nord Stream 2 was not a mistake,” “even in the Cold War, Russia was a reliable energy supplier.” She didn’t sin off on it post invasion. But that she still defended the policy in hindsight after seeing the invasion her policy funded. She had all the information in the world and said she’d do it again.
- The invader’s revenue flowed regardless — NS2 never opened, but Germany kept buying through Nord Stream 1, the Polish and Ukrainian transit lines, and later LNG — ~€140 billion to Russia in the first year of the war. They built a second pipeline to double the money flow while being warned, and when it was blown up in September 2022, the flow just went through the other pipes.
- Nord Stream 2 timeline — Clean Energy Wire (the most complete dated timeline)
- 2015 shareholders’ agreement — OSW analysis
- Scholz freezing certification, Feb 22 2022 — Reuters
- Merkel defending the policy post-war — AP
- Trump’s 2018 remarks, official transcript
- CREA Russia Fossil Tracker — live running total of EU payments since Feb 2022
Then we get to Poland today.
The European Union, which has an astonishing track record of destroying sovereignty, conning member states into surrendering self interest to faceless overpaid bureaucrats in the European Commission, and a litany of other crimes against culture and individuality like mass immigration of Muslims, seem to have managed to pull of a coup in Poland where a successful leader of Poland for the Polish people has been replaced with an EU sycophant.
And now suddenly, there are troops amassed on the Polish border with Russia, although that looks like it may have been a fairly normal response to a Russian military exercise. And given that a Russian military exercise immediately preceded the invasion of the Donbas, was probably a good idea.
Speaking with a knowledgeable Polish expat we know who speaks 5 languages fluently today, Her speculation was interesting.
Poland, I am told, now holds more gold than the European Central Bank. Around 632 tonnes. The ECB, 507.
- Poland is Europe’s largest gold BUYER — by far. It added ~50 tonnes recently per the World Gold Council, holds the top spot on the biggest-increases list, and the NBP has approved a plan for up to 150 more tonnes, targeting 20%+ of reserves in gold and a stated goal around 700+ tonnes.
- Poland is the largest holder in Central and Eastern Europe — Russia aside (and Russia’s ~2,300t is Asia-booked in most analyses since much is held in China/own vaults).
- Poland is the only major European economy whose gold program is explicitly framed as insurance. Glapiski has said categorically: gold is held domestically in Polish vaults specifically because “in the event of a crisis, external markets could become inaccessible” — and Poland repatriated 100 tonnes from London in 2019.
Poland is also a hold out against the Euro. And the EU doesn’t like that at all. They recently suckered Bulgaria into switching to the Euro and our friends there are reporting massive increase in costs of living as a result.
And Poland now faces the EU’s excessive deficit procedure. And the EU is actively trying to hook Poland’s rearmament into EU financing: the SAFE-style EU loans come with a requirement that 65% of components come from EU/Ukraine-based companies — which deliberately excludes Poland’s two main suppliers, the US and South Korea (National Defense Magazine). Warsaw has been resisting: “Poland takes Brussels’s billions but wants US, Korean weapons.” So yes — there is a live EU effort to make Poland’s military build-up financially dependent on Brussels and to redirect the procurement to German/French industry.
It’s almost as if the EU/Germany was more concerned about screwing over Trump and the USA than its own survival. Getting Poland away from its independence through gold holdings, and forcing it to stop using the USA as its supplier of military equipment.
In terms of Tusk and his politics, The Guardian’s account and Politico’s both note the EU Commission immediately sided with Tusk. Which tells you a lot.
Here is some speculation sent in by another reader that the coup in Poland could be a precursor to Martial law there:
