a n i, a scientist made $710000000.00 in royalties from drugs. drug makers, a fax, it's been hidden. let's talk about the fact about, is it right for scientists and doctors getting paid by the american people? government taxpayer paychecks to get patton's where they're paid. millions and hundreds of millions of dollars and royalty fees, especially when the and i age and these government agencies, most powerful agencies in our country are recommending medical suggestions and advice and making up guidelines like 6 feet distant seen in masking of children. do you think that's appropriate to the american people deserve to be abuse like that mister file chief, cause you're not doctor, you're mr. bouchee and my few minutes smaller than 100000000 americans were assigned to the buying because it is yet the vice thing is that was harold. it as a savior turned out to not be as offensive. and initially as an industry claims

side effects of play, some who got the shot, many of those, one of the supporters for the vaccine campaign come out to regret the decision. few went on labor wisely done. coveting, says file to professional conferences is questionable. he's been a fixture in washington for many, many years. he was very significant, for example, in the government's response to the aids epidemic in the 1980s. and he actually dropped the ball on that one too. very much like he did, i think with cove it's focusing so much on waiting for vaccines instead of focusing on therapeutic drugs that can help people who already had disease in the case of h i v aids for example, there was never a vaccine that's been created for that, uh so, but again, there's certain people that no matter how many times they fail,

they continue to get promoted in this country. if he was signing off of things, he wasn't reading and it led to disaster, then he wasn't doing his job. he was being neglige, right? so it's not a very good defense is to say, well, i just wasn't doing my job and i was lazy and i was signing off of things. i didn't read what kind of defense is that. i think he knows a lot more than he claims and i can almost guarantee and no one will be held accountable. that is the sad truth of it because are reaching out there is little accountability in these countries in this country. but those sorts of things, things tend to be just swept under the rug and ultimately forgotten. and i think that's going to happen in this case, as well as all who this is doing to the bell autumn class to come next and we'll be back about 28 minutes. we'll see you then the

the the hello and welcome to cross stock. were all things are considered on peter live out? we're told us president joe buying does not want to stand off with russia over ukraine to trigger a global war. the evidence suggests just the opposite. nature now uses ukraine to attack russia. have no doubts. russia will respond a cross talking nato. i'm joined by my guess, dimitri lot scholars in athens. he is

a lawyer and the freelance journalist involved we have carlos out. he is a political analyst. his during and host of the silk and steel pod cast and invasion. we cross through she, when she is a international affairs commentator as well as a cvt and radio reporter right across top roles and the fact that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate carl, let me go to you 1st and bali a far from the fray and ukraine here. i mean, it's really quite remarkable. we have this new phrase now adapt in a just, that's what nato is doing right now. when it comes to arming ukraine, except for now, oh, you can use nato equipment tissue just a little bit into russians territory, which of course we've been doing for over a year now. but now that's part of their adapt. and it just means this is the path to war, and it's a nato war against russia. they can no longer say they're not part of the conflict . they've been part of the conflict from day one. is there a matter of fact, they started this conflict? go ahead carl. it was this,

the nato is losing its proxy war against russia right now, is our scrambling tried to do whatever they can try to salvage the situation? um, so is there a certain did not have to be more upfront in about the involvement, but, you know, politicians in washington have been very explicit. we say this is a war. this is a proxy words are fighting russians using the ukranian. they're fighting russia to the last ukrainians. this has always been their policy. while it's very interesting, let's go to our guest in beijing. we keep hearing about ukraine has the right to self defense. well, it's a solver and country. of course, it has the right to self defense, but nato's approach to this conflict. this proxy war is karl's pointed out. here. russia is not allowed to have the idea of self defense. so you have american weapons in ukraine going into russia. it's killing civilians because it's a primarily what they've done so far. and russia is war not to react with. this is

not how it works. russia will obviously react, and it is all russia's already warned the west that it will go ahead and basically you're right here actually as press them to teen. uh, so the brisk monthly is the natal on the also, or us, let's nato and eases. it's a restriction on um for ukraine to use lessons weapons there. there won't be serious caused some credits on that and actually, um, we know that so uh, just uh, as you mentioned that the beginning that lincoln said that the us position was the hallmark of the by the associations stands on ukraine to adapt and adjust as needed so we can see that the u. s. policy is foreign policy has been changing time overtime, and it's, it's always contradicts itself. and it's also more interesting is that person by

then i said he will not attend. the upcoming summit is, was a land despite the lensky is urging by them to go, but instead of the by then is sending his vice president, her us to be the or so, i think this is some kind of ironic to see that the us approves you chris ukraine's you solve the west and supplied weapons, russia, which was indeed to escalate the conflict in the region. and so, so i'm highly doubtful about the upcoming re, uh, results of the peaceful. yeah, i want to talk about that in the 2nd part of the program. dimitry, i mean, again, you know, i adapt in a chest. i mean, this is a farce. i mean, the goal is always been nothing to do with ukraine. it's about to inflict a strategic defeat on russia. this has been the policy from the get go now saying,

allowing the ukrainians to use these weapons to shoot missiles and drones into russia. it's some ne toe forces that are the command and control of those missiles and drones. these are americans and europeans making the targeting ordinance and everything else related to firing these arms. i mean, this is absolutely a farce. and of course zalinski, his name is already been mentioned here. he wants this, he wants nato to go to war, to over for his country. and this is something that the united states and nato seemed to be quite willing to go and, and proceed. go ahead, dimitri, as well, the targeting, which is clearly coming from american military personnel because ukraine doesn't have the capacity to do that. the manufacturer of the weapons and switches clearly coming from the united states and united states doesn't even deny that is only part

of the story. in addition, you have us military personnel. they may not be formally designated as active members of the military, although some of them are, if they've been trained by the us military and other western powers, fighting alongside the opinions on the front line. you have the training. again, this is not being denied tens of thousands of ukrainian soldiers trained to native standards, whatever that means by the admission of western governments. you have that as a set and picking on the work that was being waged on were i'm sure, again, the western powers will not denied this, and we're openly bragging about the economic warfare the wage. and there's been a disaster in every conceivable respect. this has been a war binding to against russia, and that has been cleared from the outset. and this whole non sense that uh, this is simply a ukrainian war with the support of nato. it's something that we ought to have seen 3 months ago. this phrase, by the way, adapt and the just, it's a relative phrase. it begs the question of,

what are they adapting and adjusting to yep. what they ducting and adjusting to is a crushing loss on the training battlefield. so they're responding bite to this crushing loss, which they've now realized they cannot avoid by taking the fight. we're trying to, in deep into the territory of russia with the, for rent this consequences that potentially entails. so people need to wake up and listen to the french anthropologist emmanuel todd who offered a book recently which said, which was titled, world war 3 has begun. it has folks, yes i, i the program, i'm that dimitry we are in the, in world war 3, right. now, and we get a, you actually talk maybe another program about how the different blocks are lining up. i agree with that completely. you know, carl of the, there's, there's whole a adapt in adjust. i mean, is giving the, the green light then this is all the public relations been here for ukraine to do that. of course. so it's nato. that's going to be doing that in ukraine and outside of ukraine, quite possibly. but that doesn't change the conditions of the battlefield in

ukraine. you could take out a refinery in russia, but it's not going to change the course of the conflict and ukraine. again, this has nothing to do with ukraine. what it has to do is, is to push russia into a much more aggressive posture. that's what they want. and they'll say, see that guy started it. that's exactly what they're trying to do, carl. and that's exactly what they're trying to do. the, whatever they do, you know, strike is deeper into rush, or that's not going to have any material of effect on the outcome of the work in ukraine. because right now, russia is having the upper end of the battlefields, no matter what, whatever these i just adjustment nato is making, is not making a difference. all he does is to make the russian public to rally more solidly behind, present food and in its special military operation. ukraine. that's so i,

i don't, right, it's, it's written, this is really a lot very desperate. last ditch effort or by the nato alliance to salvage. it's, uh it's, it's, it's, it's a face saving operation now. well, i mean, carl, i mean i, i use the metaphor, a face saving. but essentially what they're going to get is a go on their face, which really bothers me here. let's go back to our guest in beijing because the more nato loses and the more at deploys and losing strategy. the more aggressive the nato alliance is going to be come, because they do, they do not want to lose face. they are the ones that are saying, if we lose in ukraine, russian tanks, we're all in to paris or to the, to the english channel, which is absolutely absurd. even american and british intelligence have agreed with that. but that's not the public relations when the problem here is that we're having to contend with a public relations campaign from the west and not about realities on the ground. go

ahead and vision. you're right either. actually if you look at the utah uh about over 99 percent of those supplies, whether it be military supply. so initial supply or command many terry and 8 to ukraine, came from nato and to us. so if they're not hearing those weapons to ukraine, this conflict could have, i mean, see a result of at least have a back to the negotiation table earlier than what we're seeing today. and you're right, we are seeing that are the mainstream media in the glass to have being not very so i'll say balanced when it comes to as reports on the rush or you create conflict. and i just, i think that's why it's important for us to have this conversation now and to talk about like we, we don't, we, we don't, we no longer need, you know,

like the east restrictions on the west to make that post to you print and what's more interesting is that you have um, if you could recall that for many times we hear us officials are saying and washington well finds onto the last of the ukrainians. it's right. so that's great . yeah, that's very around it because is there enough by to you until the last of america or the last off the you for appeals, they are fighting and to the last of the well entry and put and plus, you know, they're making a lot of money in the process, okay, that the profit motive is in play here. you know, dmitri, they keep saying they want to, you know, by adapting and adjusting to improve ukraine's position at the negotiating table. well, number one, there is no negotiating table. no one is invited, rush into it, and the longer they do this, the smaller ukraine get. so what is improving their position? go ahead, dimitri, as well, the so called any any so called peace conference that doesn't include your

adversary is not a conference, a piece of the conference of war. what they're trying to do, obviously, for those of us who are saying and objective is marshall more support to put pressure on russia to capitulate. and the terms that the lensky has articulated from the outset, are precisely that there are complete and utter capitulation, which takes no account of the legitimate grievances of russia. it takes no account of the crew in 2014. it takes no account of the human rights abuses of the russian speakers in the dawn bass. it takes no account of the assurances that were given a barber shop that nato would not expand one inch eastward. it gives no account to russia's legitimate concerns about nato nuclear tipped missiles, just a few 100 miles from moscow on ukrainian territory. this is a demand for capitulation to demand and capitulation. and that's why so many major countries are not going to participate here. we're just going to jump in here, we're going to go to a hard break, and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on nato state with our to

the, the, or the welcome back across stock where all things are considered. i'm peter is

about to remind you, we're discussing nato, the okay, let's go back to carl and folly. you know, we've already mentioned this ridiculous peace conference, so called peace conference that will be held this month from the 15 to the 18th in switzerland. it's with the oddity of it all is that we have a, a piece proposal from the chinese. we have one from africa. i think the, even the pope's, even the papacy weighed in there's, there's a lot of peace plans out there. if you look at the, the, the demands that the russia sent out in december of 2021 to nato, into the united states about, um, securing a new security architecture in europe. those that is actually part of the process. but they're all ignored. that's a long introduction, carl, the saying, the west has no idea about how to bring peace. all they do is know how to keep the

war going on. that's. that's obviously true from their policies over 2 years. go ahead. that has been in the west has so much hubris that you did. it denies the rush that you've been have legitimate, security, interest, president put, and it has made it very clear call back in 2000 no 7 unix security conference or the word the west that they could no longer make a mockery of russian security interest and re neck on their promises for ever, and now we have witnessed what happened. well, but what, what we're witnessing right now is the, the nato establishment itself is inc, still in denial, in our total failure to degrade russia's capability on the, on the battlefield. ringback the, the ukrainian manpower is being depleted. russia has the issue. russia has the upper hand, and this is why they have to act. they have to, there's a,

natal forces have to be more upfront about 30 involvement because then ukrainians are not holding up. ready uh, holding up their, their line against russian office of right now. well, you know, it is um, when in beijing the, the, the chinese proposal is probably the most balanced of them all. okay. it, it, it, it talks about in terms of how to get to an end game. every country should have secure borders there, so sovereignty should be respected. those are the details, but that's a good way to start. that's how you start the negotiation process. and what we have with this is a landscape piece plan, so called, which was probably drafted in london or in a, in washington d. c is basically say russia, you must admit defeat. ok. you, you should a surrender to, to, to the 1st ukrainian tank. you say,

i mean that's not how it works. it's, this is like, there's no imagination and when it comes to diplomacy in the west anymore, of your rights, peter actually, you know, at the past us, or a lack of the, uh, the assignments in singapore. so let's be, he was so choosing, trying out for now, taking his sides, actually, i'm trying to, there's no such a thing as trying to is pressuring other nations now to attend the p summit in space. atlanta, north. it is helping brush out to disrupt the summit. in fact, as your motion to turn his position on the rush, how you create conflict has been very consistent and it does not target any specific party. and searchlight does know to post assignments. in fact, as the motions, china, us position on those, i would say a counselor to remains the house of 2 or 3 important elements in china's perspective. that a successful piece um,

it should have the 1st as that recommendation of a from both russia and ukraine. the 2nd does that equal participation of both parties. and the last is that a fair discussion all possible peaceful tense. however, if we look at the situation now, obviously the upcoming summit in space of land has not met these 3 importance criterias on 1st. the summit was not recognized by russia the 2nd on this time a did not invite russia and 3rd law of the most important players in this conflict was not invited to the table. how can we guarantee the are going to be an open dialogue to ensure a possible peaceful you know, up to them coming all the help this on that? so i think that's those 6, the most important reason why china is now participating because china believes that so a peaceful conference, i mean the carmen's, the upcoming peace conference,

individual plans, co hartley plague, a substance type role to resolve the issue, a male or i think it's important to point out that so not participating into the assignment does not mean china does not support piece and for search and they shows or participate into the assignment. does not mean they are genuinely supporting piece. because, i mean, trying to just does not want to see that the upcoming summit to become a platform, to support, you know, confrontation among cans or, you know, all it's going to be is a p r son for nato. that, that's it. and, and their academy, and they're going to have their, i, a list, or out as a lensky who is legitimacy, is quite dubious at this point in time and violating the, the constitution of ukraine. you know, dimitri, what i worry about. and i've worried about since the 1st day of this conflict and i, i, i know i cited on this program eventually we will get to an article 5 crisis. i

believe that now more than ever your thoughts. yes, i think we are typically heading that direction because russia will be less than or no alternative. yeah, it's already so there that it's going to have to strike military assets in western in, in central or western europe. i think that's quite clear. for example, there's a large staging area in poland from which a number of these weapons a lot of training, a lot of intelligence is gathered. this is under international law. clearly a legitimate target in russia has refrained from striking it for months. but it's very clear that it will have no alternative if they keep attacking military targets deeper and deeper, and the russian to create the key question, of course, is going to be, as russia has said explicitly, how will the united states respond when russia inevitably attacks one of these european, legitimate military targets, if the people of the united states have their way,

the united states will stay out of it. but the problem, the problem here and those of us who live, you know, have a front row view of what was on united states as i do because i spent a lot of my time in canada, is that the united states political lead doesn't care what the people want, it couldn't care less about the interest of americans as the americans had their way. uh, there would be a lot less military spending, and these wars of aggression would never have happened. so this is the real danger is that the us politically will respond to the article 5 call from europe that will inevitably come despite the demands of the populace to refrain from world war 3 in its hottest phase. we're already in a low intensity world where 3 is we talked about peter, but we're heading to the hot is night. i suspect we're going to end up in a full blown conflagration and i hope very much that i'm wrong. well, i hope you're wrong, and i hope i'm wrong. but it, carl, there's a certain logic of this. one of the, the biggest problems that we've faced in this conflict is the idea of deterrence has been so degraded by the west. see if,

if you want to have the idea of a mutual assured destruction deterrence, both parties have to believe in that theory. that's how we got through the cold war . but we have one party now that is throwing that to the side, rushes saying we will have to deter this type of a salt on those. but the west doesn't speaking that it am anymore. and that's why everything is becoming extremely unstable. because if you have long range missiles or f sixteens, okay, and they leave a, a, a base in poland and they're on a mission. russia is not going to know if they have nuclear taped missile or not. you don't take those kinds of chances. what you do is say, if we say a plane like that, it's going to be destroyed and they're going to say it upfront. and then you know what they're going to say carl. the russians are bluffing. russians don't bluff, they act carl. so western politicians are playing

a very dangerous game of chickens right now, and i very much hope dimitry is wrong, even though i very much respect his analysis. you know, during the cold war, nixon have pioneered the so called madness theory, where east to west acts likes a complete cycle. the other side will back down this, this was work we still get union by today's russia is quite different. political entity fung soviet union of yesteryear, mr. putting has shown that he will not risk. he will not spend dollar from the rightful nato. and so we're going to see we're going to see user a. nato will be called always on bluff or we'll have movers to base for the sake of everyone. here. i hope demetrius wrong. there. the hope of that those, the natal bloss will because they will back down and that i think alternately, people work in the military industrial complex in uh,

in the washington base. their altima game is to lining their own pocket. so well, i mean, what i think call you're on to something what, what they, what like, like is threats. they need a threat, inflation, i think. but if you go to the wall, then you lose your business model. okay. i mean that, that's gotten, you know, that's kind of the logic of it all here. when in, in, in beijing, i suppose china is watching all of this very, very closely. because the, the, what the americans would like is a nato in, in asia, in the pacific. and we know what targets they have. it is tie one here. so i hope that the, the folks in beijing are learning from the dirty tricks from the west. you know, you're right, what, you know, many times people will compare like the case happened, the crane with taiwan. but the thing is taiwan is totally different because it's now the country is not like ukraine type was part of china. and so that's been great by most of the countries in the world, and also by the us us,

the greece was the one china principal. but the, but without i, i agree with you dear, but they don't act that way. they don't act is a big part of the same kind of just typical us foreign policy is there's one thing, but as another setting turn is fully throughout that and trying to, well, i mean the remaining is consistent foreign policy on tie one. and i think the world agree was even the un like in the past, the world health or the event that you wouldn't recognize. china is the only legal country in the u. n. so i think that the, the global and community support stats. yeah. but, you know, unfortunately we've seen the united states and it's relationship with china throwaway, just about every important bilateral agreement going from the, the point of breaking diplomatic relations. and so we see a templates in europe,

and we see a template in asia. and what it's called is the rules based order. and when you hear the rules base order, you should be afraid as all the time we have. i want to take my guess in athens while we and of course in beijing, and i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at ortiz. see you next time and remember, crushed off the the

people of india have shown complete faith in the b j b and the n d a we the n d a the form of government for the better future of india. prime as an or under moody because victory is a lie, as in india is general election and this file is reveal is b j b alone. this seems less but then in the previous of x and 2019 pico and it loses over 1500 susan just one day. here's why i said losses on the bible field for fighting one p. often the time of world john's policy brings you exclusive footage from the heart of the bible. the sniper's job is to cover and paved the way for us.