Shell 子皮 retweeted
🚊 🇪🇸 Hoy estoy muy decepcionado con el país donde nací.
Viajo ahora mismo en el Shinkansen por centésima vez, en este caso desde Tokyo a Nagano, y reflexiono sobre el reciente y horrible incidente en la línea de alta velocidad Madrid-Sevilla.
¿Cómo es posible que haya habido tantos accidentes y fallos en el sistema ferroviario español durante el último año? ¿Cómo es posible que Japón, un país con actividad sísmica continua y una infraestructura extremadamente compleja, especialmente en grandes ciudades, consiga mantener trenes de hasta 18 años de antigüedad intactos funcionando a velocidades por encima de los 300km/h, sin retrasos de un solo minuto (virtualmente no hay retrasos salvo por condiciones inesperadas como tifones, terremotos…), sin un solo graffiti en cualquier tren, sin un solo elemento de la cabina roto, con asientos de terciopelo sin una sola mancha (absolutamente increíble), sin traqueteos (en España aún no he montado en un tren AVE sin batiboleo), con ventanas impolutas…
Todo ello moviendo a 170 millones de pasajeros por año.
Y me pregunto yo: ¿Cómo aceptamos esto, teniendo en cuenta que el contribuyente español paga efectivamente más del 50% de su salario en impuestos directos o indirectos? ¿Cómo aceptamos este estado y cómo aceptamos siquiera una sola víctima?
No lo puedo comprender.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
Replying to @MyLordBebo
Today, another train crash caused 50 deaths in Spain.
Now you can understand why Mbappe and La Liga apologized for Mbappe’s meme that called Mao a “dictator.”
Because China has money. A lot of money. At the same time, Spain is becoming a poor, 3rd-world country. If Mbappe and La Liga want to make money, they cannot say anything the Chinese don't want to hear.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
Replying to @georgegalloway
Mao was a dictator. Stalin was a dictator. Both were responsible (at least shared the responsibility) for the unnecessary deaths of millions of their own people.
However, both Mao and Stalin are very popular in their own countries. One reason is that they were the leaders who restored their national pride.
Mbappe apologized because of the pressure of money: You cannot sell things to people while insulting a figure with almost sacred status in their mind.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
Sweden is officially ditching mRNA vaccines, and they are not hiding their reasons for doing so.
artsencollectief.nl/zweden-k…
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Misleading. Image text is from a Dutch group (Artsen Collectief), not a Swedish source. Sweden’s regions chose Sanofi’s Nuvaxovid as sole supplier for the 2027/2028 campaign only.
There has been no mRNA ban; Public Health Agency says 2026/2027 mainly uses mRNA Comirnaty.
nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artsen_Co…
adda.se/upphandling-oc…
folkhalsomyndigheten.se/publikationer-…
lakemedelsvarlden.se/myndighetsrad-…
Shell 子皮 retweeted
英国和美国为什么仇视俄罗斯人?
转杰弗里·萨克斯在欧洲议会的讲话如下:
“英国人为什么开始仇恨俄罗斯人?为什么?告诉你们吧,因为我昨天刚刚出版了一本关于欧洲恐俄症的书。
在这本书的第一章,我讲述了一位名叫格里森的历史学家在1950年写的一项精彩研究。
他提出了一个非常切中要害的问题,对我们今天也完全适用。
他说,英国和俄罗斯在1815年滑铁卢还是盟友。25年后它们成了敌人。发生了什么?于是他研究了议会辩论记录。他研究了每一份公开记录。他读了一切。他读了下议院说过的每一句话。他读了每一次演讲。他在这本精彩的书里得出的结论是,俄罗斯最大的罪行就是它有1700万平方公里。这就是它最大的罪行。
为什么这么说?因为有了1700万平方公里,英国就认定俄罗斯如此庞大,以至于对大英帝国在印度的统治构成威胁。顺便说一句,这件事从来没有进入过沙皇的脑子。但英国把自己煽动得相当激动。到了1840年,俄罗斯成了敌人。
1853年,帕默斯顿,这个典型的帝国主义者,在克里米亚发动了战争。为什么?说来话长,但基本上就是为了压垮俄罗斯。因为俄罗斯在1852年说,我们可以解决所有的不满,没有任何理由发生冲突。而帕默斯顿说,我们向塞瓦斯托波尔进军。原因就是他想让俄罗斯变成一个无足轻重的存在,这样它就无法入侵大英帝国。于是爆发了三年的血腥战争,克里米亚战争。
这就是我们那革命性的和平方式。你们知道,1945年德国投降几天之后,大家都知道丘吉尔问他自己的战争指挥部,为什么我们现在不入侵苏联?取名为《不可思议行动》。(研究后知道不可行放弃)
而当美国在1945年接管大英帝国之后,俄罗斯成了美利坚合众国的敌人。
当苏联解体时,如果我们愿意,我们手中就握有未来一个世纪的和平。因为俄罗斯人对75年的布尔什维克主义已经相当厌倦了。他们想要和平,想要合作,想要友谊。而美国战略家能想到的只有俄罗斯很大,我们必须确保它仍然是一个三流强国。
于是决定用北约包围俄罗斯。如果你这样行事足够久,最终就会得到乌克兰战争。这不是普京的战争,这是我们的战争。原因与帕默斯顿和拿破仑三世发动第一次克里米亚战争的原因完全相同。因为俄罗斯对进军欧洲没有丝毫兴趣。它从来没有过,除了拿破仑打扰他们的时候和希特勒打扰他们的时候。”
当然中国人仇视俄国有自己的历史原因:一个是前苏联和中国共产党的关系,历史上和西方列强一起入侵过中国,并掠走了中国大片的土地。
Shell 子皮 retweeted
转:“他用乌克兰人的生命换取掌声”:促成2022年俄乌谈判的人公开发声
乌克兰亿万富翁、乌克兰最大钢铁集团Metinvest前共同所有人、前国会议员,以及乌克兰正统东正教会辅祭瓦季姆·诺文斯基(Vadim Novinsky),近日接受乌克兰媒体《Strana》的长篇专访,讲述了泽连斯基如何在2022年同意俄罗斯提出的和平条件,却最终选择退出谈判。
一、谈判是如何开始的
2022年2月24日,俄罗斯对乌克兰发动军事行动当天,泽连斯基所属政党在议会的负责人达维德·阿拉哈米亚(David Arakhamia)给诺文斯基打来电话,并打开免提,询问他应该怎么办。
诺文斯基建议他立即与莫斯科联系,“趁还没有那么多人丧生的时候。”
第二天,乌克兰一名安全部门负责人找到诺文斯基,请他帮助安排谈判,并告诉他:“这是总统的要求。”
五分钟后,诺文斯基便与泽连斯基通上了电话。
随后,诺文斯基联系到时任俄罗斯总统办公厅副主任德米特里·科扎克(Dmitry Kozak)。
泽连斯基拒绝将明斯克作为谈判地点。诺文斯基于是提出在白俄罗斯戈梅利(Gomel)举行谈判,泽连斯基表示同意。五分钟后,科扎克也确认接受这一安排。
二、泽连斯基当时同意了什么
诺文斯基表示,他通过电话与泽连斯基逐条确认了所有谈判条件,并补充说,乌克兰安全部门“应该保存着这些通话录音”。
据他回忆,泽连斯基从未提出争辩,只是问:“你怎么看?”随后便回答:“好,我同意。”
具体条件包括:
1. 将加入北约的目标从乌克兰宪法中删除,并宣布国家中立。
诺文斯基曾问泽连斯基,乌克兰在未来30年内是否有可能加入北约。泽连斯基回答说,不会。
2. 给予克里米亚30年的特殊地位,但不正式承认其属于俄罗斯。
3. 给予顿巴斯地区特殊地位。
按照这一安排,顿巴斯可以继续留在乌克兰境内,采取某种类似邦联的政治结构。
诺文斯基说:
“他当时非常困惑,几乎接受任何方案。”
整个谈判过程持续了大约一个月,直到3月底在伊斯坦布尔举行的那轮谈判。
三、为什么谈判最终破裂
诺文斯基认为,谈判破裂的责任在于乌克兰领导层。
他说,也许是鲍里斯·约翰逊或者其他人影响了泽连斯基,“也可能只是因为泽连斯基喜欢当英雄。”
诺文斯基说:
“他喜欢掌声,喜欢全世界的关注。无论走到哪里,人们都像迎接教皇一样欢迎他。最终,他用乌克兰人的生命,换取了外国议会里的掌声。”
四、此后发生了什么
2025年5月,泽连斯基指控诺文斯基在当年的电话交谈中威胁过他。
诺文斯基称这一指控是“彻头彻尾的诽谤”。
他解释说,当时自己就在基辅,随时可能遭到暗杀小组或乌克兰安全局人员的抓捕。如果他真的威胁总统,根本不可能安全地留在那里。
他说,直到有人警告他,泽连斯基“每天都在要求逮捕他”,他才最终离开乌克兰。
此后,诺文斯基先后三次受到制裁,并被指控叛国。
他表示,所谓叛国罪,实际上是因为他要求基辅履行《明斯克协议》。
此外,他还因为维护自己所属的教会而被指控“煽动宗教仇恨”。
诺文斯基还声称,泽连斯基总统办公室曾试图利用被冻结的公司股份,夺取Metinvest钢铁集团的控制权。
目前,他居住在克罗地亚。由于基辅当局拒绝为他签发新护照,他最近获得了塞尔维亚国籍。
五、要求泽连斯基辞职
10月10日,诺文斯基公开呼吁泽连斯基辞职,并要求乌克兰议会接管国家权力,直接与俄罗斯进行谈判。
几小时后,特朗普表示,乌克兰“需要一位新领导人”。
诺文斯基称,两件事发生在同一天纯属巧合。
谈到俄乌和平谈判的前景,他最后说:
“每一次新的协议,都比上一次更糟糕。与伊斯坦布尔协议相比,《明斯克协议》简直就是一道清淡的沙拉。接下来提出的条件只会更加糟糕。只要泽连斯基还掌握权力,就不会有和平。”
🇺🇦 "He traded Ukrainian lives for applause": the man who set up the 2022 talks speaks out
Vadim Novinsky, a billionaire, former co-owner of Ukraine's largest steel group Metinvest, ex-MP and protodeacon of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, has given a long interview to Ukrainian outlet Strana about how Zelensky agreed to Russia's terms in 2022, then walked away.
🔸️How it started:
On February 24, 2022, David Arakhamia, head of Zelensky's party in parliament, called Novinsky on speakerphone and asked what to do. Novinsky told him to contact Moscow immediately, "while there weren't yet so many dead."
The next day, the head of a Ukrainian security service asked him to arrange talks, saying "the president is asking." Five minutes later he was on the phone with Zelensky.
Novinsky reached Dmitry Kozak, then deputy head of the Russian Presidential Administration. Zelensky refused Minsk as a venue, Novinsky proposed Gomel, Zelensky agreed, and Kozak confirmed within five minutes.
🔸️What Zelensky agreed to:
Novinsky says he cleared every point with Zelensky by phone, and adds that Ukraine's security services "must have the recordings." Zelensky never argued. He only asked "What do you think?" and then said "Fine, I agree."
1. Remove NATO membership from the constitution and declare neutrality. Novinsky asked Zelensky whether Ukraine would join NATO in the next 30 years. Zelensky said no.
2. A special status for Crimea for 30 years, without recognizing it as Russian
3. A special status for Donbass, which could have remained part of Ukraine in a confederation-type arrangement
"He was very confused and accepted any option," Novinsky says. The process lasted about a month, until the Istanbul round in late March.
🔸️Why it collapsed:
Novinsky blames Ukraine's leadership. Maybe Boris Johnson or someone else got to Zelensky, he says, "or Zelensky simply liked being a hero."
"He liked the ovations, the whole world's attention. Wherever he went, he was greeted like the Pope. In the end, he traded Ukrainian lives for applause in foreign parliaments."
🔸️What came after:
In May 2025, Zelensky accused Novinsky of threatening him in those calls. Novinsky calls this "outright slander": he was in Kiev at the time, where a hit squad or the Security Service of Ukraine could have come for him at any moment. He only left after being warned that Zelensky was demanding his arrest "every day."
He has since been sanctioned three times and charged with treason, which he says was for demanding Kiev implement the Minsk agreements, and with "inciting religious hatred" for defending his church. He says Zelensky's office also tried to use his frozen shares to seize control of Metinvest. He now lives in Croatia and was recently granted Serbian citizenship, after Kiev refused to issue him a new passport.
On October 10, Novinsky called on Zelensky to resign and on parliament to take power and negotiate directly with Russia. Hours later, Trump said Ukraine "needs a new leader." Novinsky says it was a coincidence.
"Every new deal is worse than the last. Compared to Istanbul, Minsk was a diet salad. The next proposals will be even worse. As long as Zelensky is in power, there will be no peace."
Shell 子皮 retweeted
🇺🇦 "He traded Ukrainian lives for applause": the man who set up the 2022 talks speaks out
Vadim Novinsky, a billionaire, former co-owner of Ukraine's largest steel group Metinvest, ex-MP and protodeacon of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, has given a long interview to Ukrainian outlet Strana about how Zelensky agreed to Russia's terms in 2022, then walked away.
🔸️How it started:
On February 24, 2022, David Arakhamia, head of Zelensky's party in parliament, called Novinsky on speakerphone and asked what to do. Novinsky told him to contact Moscow immediately, "while there weren't yet so many dead."
The next day, the head of a Ukrainian security service asked him to arrange talks, saying "the president is asking." Five minutes later he was on the phone with Zelensky.
Novinsky reached Dmitry Kozak, then deputy head of the Russian Presidential Administration. Zelensky refused Minsk as a venue, Novinsky proposed Gomel, Zelensky agreed, and Kozak confirmed within five minutes.
🔸️What Zelensky agreed to:
Novinsky says he cleared every point with Zelensky by phone, and adds that Ukraine's security services "must have the recordings." Zelensky never argued. He only asked "What do you think?" and then said "Fine, I agree."
1. Remove NATO membership from the constitution and declare neutrality. Novinsky asked Zelensky whether Ukraine would join NATO in the next 30 years. Zelensky said no.
2. A special status for Crimea for 30 years, without recognizing it as Russian
3. A special status for Donbass, which could have remained part of Ukraine in a confederation-type arrangement
"He was very confused and accepted any option," Novinsky says. The process lasted about a month, until the Istanbul round in late March.
🔸️Why it collapsed:
Novinsky blames Ukraine's leadership. Maybe Boris Johnson or someone else got to Zelensky, he says, "or Zelensky simply liked being a hero."
"He liked the ovations, the whole world's attention. Wherever he went, he was greeted like the Pope. In the end, he traded Ukrainian lives for applause in foreign parliaments."
🔸️What came after:
In May 2025, Zelensky accused Novinsky of threatening him in those calls. Novinsky calls this "outright slander": he was in Kiev at the time, where a hit squad or the Security Service of Ukraine could have come for him at any moment. He only left after being warned that Zelensky was demanding his arrest "every day."
He has since been sanctioned three times and charged with treason, which he says was for demanding Kiev implement the Minsk agreements, and with "inciting religious hatred" for defending his church. He says Zelensky's office also tried to use his frozen shares to seize control of Metinvest. He now lives in Croatia and was recently granted Serbian citizenship, after Kiev refused to issue him a new passport.
On October 10, Novinsky called on Zelensky to resign and on parliament to take power and negotiate directly with Russia. Hours later, Trump said Ukraine "needs a new leader." Novinsky says it was a coincidence.
"Every new deal is worse than the last. Compared to Istanbul, Minsk was a diet salad. The next proposals will be even worse. As long as Zelensky is in power, there will be no peace."
Shell 子皮 retweeted
演员铁粉赞扬他的宁死不屈,寸土不让,现在不知道是否能继续闭眼支持?
认定割让土地是投降的人,只会喊口号不懂现实政治的残酷
战争开始的四年前,我就认定结尾只能是用土地换和平;给乌克兰留点面子,也只能是在俄方占领的乌东再玩一次公投,表明不是我放弃是他们要离开
早知如此何必当初,战争开始时俄乌双方同意的条件比现在的对乌克兰有利的太多;
被英国黄毛美国半傻毁了谈好的协议,多打了四年,留下无数的尸体与废墟
Shell 子皮 retweeted
"Twoja prababcia nie próbowała manifestować wakacji na plaży. Nie dbała o estetykę. Nie optymalizowała niczego. Miała listę, która była krótka i święta:
· Pełna spiżarnia.
· Zdrowe dzieci.
· Dach, który nie przecieka.
· Mąż, który wraca do domu.
· Ogród, który daje plony.
· Kilka ładnych sukienek.
· Niezawodna kuchenka.
· Niedzielny obiad z ludźmi, których kocha.
· Wystarczająca ilość mąki na tydzień.
· I wystarczająca ilość życzliwości dla sąsiadów.
To było całe marzenie. To było całe życie. A według standardów przeważającej historii ludzkości zrealizowanie tej listy było ogromnym sukcesem.
Potem nastał XX wiek i ktoś zorientował się, że zadowolona kobieta to zmora dla biznesu. Kobieta z pełną spiżarnią nie biegnie do sklepu. Kobieta zadowolona ze swojej kuchni nie przebuduje jej co cztery lata. Kobieta, która wie, jak wygląda „wystarczająco”, nie da się namówić na kolejną nowinkę.
Więc zabrali się do roboty:
Sprawili, że mały domek stał się powodem do wstydu.
Sprawili, że stary samochód stał się powodem do wstydu.
Sprawili, że domowy posiłek stał się powodem do wstydu, a kiedy już nikt nie umiał gotować, sprzedali go z powrotem jako zestaw do przygotowania posiłku z wizerunkiem znanego szefa kuchni na opakowaniu.
Podnieśli koszty życia tak bardzo, że oboje rodzice musieli pracować, a potem sprzedali im opiekę nad dziećmi, gotowe dania i weekendową terapię, by zaradzić wyczerpaniu, które od początku wynikało właśnie z konieczności wykonywania dwóch prac.
Wzięli listę twojej Babci i nazwali ją ubóstwem.
Wzięli jej życie i nazwali je ograniczonym.
Wzięli jej zadowolenie i nazwali je brakiem ambicji.
A potem… Sprzedali ci ambicję.
Sprzedali ci większy dom, którego nie jesteś w stanie posprzątać, samochód, którego nie jesteś w stanie spłacić, garderobę, której nie nosisz, kalendarz, z którym nie jesteś w stanie sobie poradzić, oraz niejasne, nieustanne poczucie, że wciąż pozostajesz w tyle.
Nie pozostajesz w tyle. Biegniesz w wyścigu, który został zaprojektowany tak, by nie miał linii mety. Sam wyścig jest produktem!
Wróć i przeczytaj listę Babci.”
(autor nieznany)
Shell 子皮 retweeted
法国究竟在发生什么? 2026年秋季法国抗议概述
起点:学校真的运转不了。
2026年9月,巴黎近郊一所高中因缺老师、缺教室、课表混乱被学生用垃圾桶堵门,迅速蔓延全国。2024—2025学年公立初高中约1540万课时因教师缺勤无人替补而损失;班级常超30人,部分学校缺桌椅、无降温设施。
合流:上街的不止学生。
10月17日全国行动日,参与者包括高中生、大学生、教师、家长、工会、“黄背心”、农民、消防员、护士、退休人员等。学生提供了爆发力和道德感,工会和“黄背心”提供了组织网络与更大叙事。内政部称全法约55万人,总工会称约80万人。
诉求质变:从“修好教室”到“活不下去”。
学生最初要的是代课老师和桌椅;合流后议题扩展为燃油与生活成本、购买力下降、公共服务衰退、警方执法和民主运作。预算案在整体削减约540亿欧元的框架下,中小学还计划削减1588个教师岗位—学生看到的是“学校已经缺人,预算还要更少”。
规模与暴力:
利摩日一座143年历史的市政厅被纵火,里昂旅游办公室被烧,多地商铺遭抢掠;一名17岁示威者被震爆弹击中失去一只手,一名示威者死亡,超600名安全人员受伤。政府紧急部署3000名代课教师、释放1000万桶柴油压油价,但未改变预算方向。
为什么“没钱修学校”不是借口?
10月1日公布的2027年预算草案,提供了一个近乎实验条件的对照。在计划540亿欧元的财政整顿框架下,债务利息增加103亿欧元,国防支出增加62亿欧元,而中小学教育仅增加11亿欧元,同时净削减1588个教师岗位,公务员工资继续冻结。另一口径显示国防增量为64亿欧元,教育仅增8亿欧元。无论取哪组数字,国防一年的增量,是中小学教育增量的五到八倍。
更关键的是制度性的豁免地位。总理勒科尔尼明确要求,2027年除国防外的国家支出“严格保持在2026年的同一水平”,国防被排除在冻结之外,继续增长。这意味着,在“零价值”支出规则的约束下,军费的每一欧元增量,都必须在既定框架内由其他民用领域的削减来对冲。国防获得了“不能省”的政治地位,教育就成了那个“可以省”的答案。
 2026年7月议会通过的《军事规划法》修订案,在原规划基础上追加360亿欧元,使2024—2030年军费总额升至4360亿欧元。L'Humanité给出了一个关键换算:360亿欧元,相当于法国中等教育全年的工资总额;而在未来七年内将初中和高中班级规模压至20人所需的7万名教师,招募成本约为50亿欧元。这不是说这笔钱会自动流向教育,而是在同一个财政空间里,政治选择将十倍于教育改善成本的资源,制度性地赋予了军备扩张。
政治后果:
街头成为2027年总统选举前的预演场:极右翼勒庞以“秩序”回应混乱,极左翼梅朗雄把抗议接入反紧缩议程,中间派进一步边缘化。
所以学生上街,是因为教室里的失灵已经具体到无法忍受;而让这种失灵在2026年秋季以如此烈度转化为全国性抗议的财政主因,是国防开支在乌克兰战争后获得的制度性优先权—它使军费成为紧缩中唯一不可触碰的扩张项,从而将削减的代价系统地转移到了课堂和年轻一代身上。
Shell 子皮 retweeted
在我看来,那些一直主张乌克兰必须战斗到最后一个人的人,否则就是绥靖就是投降者,与当年八九六四期间坚决反对学生撤离广场的人,以及香港反送中运动中某些勇武派的极端作为,并没有什么本质上的区别。在这些人看来,只要自己主义真,谁的头落地都无所谓。而他们坐在电脑前漫溢出来的道德优越感,似乎只有在看到流血、看到人头落地、看到整个社会为此付出巨大代价之后,才能得到满足。
俄乌战争刚刚爆发不久,一位知名的前媒体人士在网上慷慨激昂地表示,恨不得老夫自己能够奔赴战场,为乌克兰抵抗侵略者捐躯,一副义愤填膺、视死如归的样子。
我当时就在网上问他:如果你有孩子,而且明明知道他们一旦上了战场,就有可能再也回不来,你还会不会鼓励让他们去当烈士?
他的回答是:不会,但他自己愿意去。
我接着说,你愿意为自己的信念牺牲,那是你自己的选择。但拿别人的生命去实现自己的信念,鼓励别人为了某种主义去死,在我看来,是非常不人道的。
结果,他质问我:“你是不是带着任务来的“?
回想起来,2022年10月3日,俄乌战争爆发仅仅七个多月,马斯克就在Twitter上提出了一套结束战争的和平方案,包括在联合国监督下重新举行争议地区的公投、承认克里米亚归属俄罗斯、保障克里米亚供水,以及乌克兰保持中立。
这套方案当时遭到铺天盖地的批评,甚至被指责为替俄罗斯说话。而当时的马斯克已开始为乌克兰提供星链的服务。
马斯克当时说过的一句话,今天读起来仍然令人感慨:
“这很可能就是最终的结局,问题只是在此之前,还要死多少人。”
如今,四年多过去了。战争给乌克兰造成了难以估量的生命代价,数百万人流离失所,大片国土沦为战场,部分领土至今仍处于俄罗斯控制之下。战争最终如何结束,至今仍未确定,但当年马斯克提出的那些问题,特别是领土安排、乌克兰的安全地位以及如何通过谈判结束战争,仍然是今天无法回避的现实。
回头再看马斯克当年的那句话,我们是不是应该问一问:为了走到今天这一步,究竟还有多少生命本来是可以挽救的?
这是多么巨大的不幸!
下面转一段推文:“你们的第二战场在哪里?
“普京就是希特勒!”西方的战争鹰派们不断高喊,搬出慕尼黑的幽灵、绥靖政策的耻辱,以及1938年那场灾难性的历史教训。
“你不能和希特勒谈判!”他们声嘶力竭地吼道,“必须在战场上击败他!”
好吧。你们的意思我明白了。
那么,你们他妈的人在哪里?
为什么你们还舒舒服服地坐在沙发上,眼睁睁看着乌克兰人以工业化规模遭到屠杀,仿佛这场战争不过是一场荒诞而恐怖的网络电子游戏——一场现场直播的斯大林格勒战役翻版,只不过这一次,流的是真正的鲜血,倒下的是真正的尸体,化为废墟的是真正的城市?
你们动辄搬出丘吉尔,可你们自己的勇气在哪里?你们召唤1940年的精神,却表现得仿佛敦刻尔克大撤退只是一场供人围观的体育比赛。
你们要求一场堪比1945年的伟大胜利,却指望乌克兰人独自用生命为这场胜利买单。
如果普京真的是希特勒,为什么只有乌克兰人必须与他作战?
你们的军队在哪里?你们的师团在哪里?你们的士兵在哪里?
你们的第二战场在哪里?
1944年,盟军并不是靠着躲在伦敦和华盛顿的安全地带发表慷慨激昂的演说来击败希特勒的。
他们横渡英吉利海峡,强攻诺曼底海滩,让自己的士兵亲身置于枪林弹雨之中。
而今天,你们一边宣扬击败一个新希特勒在道义上的必要性,一边却把流血牺牲的代价外包给乌克兰。
你们想要一场新的诺曼底登陆日,却要别人的儿子去冲锋陷阵。
你们想要再一次战胜法西斯,却要别人的城市沦为斯大林格勒。
你们想要在胜利的历史照片中留下自己的身影,却不愿让自己的名字出现在阵亡者的名单上。
多么方便!多么英勇!又是何等令人作呕的虚伪!
如果这真的是你们这一代人对抗希特勒的战争,那么就别再把乌克兰当成你们自己的东线战场——一个让别人流血牺牲,而你们却可以舒舒服服地坐在扶手椅里,高谈阔论自由的战场。
如果你们根本没有准备好亲自投入这场被你们高声宣称为文明与野蛮之间生死存亡之战的战争,那么至少也应该保有一点起码的诚实与体面,正视你们的言辞与行动之间的巨大矛盾。
因为历史不仅会记住那些姑息侵略的人,也同样会记住那些要求将战争进行到底的人——
只要上战场的是别人,流血牺牲的也是别人。“
Where is your Second Front?
“Putin is Hitler!” the Western war hawks keep shouting, invoking the ghosts of Munich, the shame of appeasement, and the catastrophic lessons of 1938.
“You cannot negotiate with Hitler!” they thunder. “He must be defeated on the battlefield!”
Fine. Point taken.
Then where the hell are you?
Why are you still sitting comfortably on your sofas, watching Ukrainians being slaughtered on an industrial scale, as though the war were some grotesque online video game — a live-streamed remake of Stalingrad, with real blood, real bodies, and real cities reduced to rubble?
You invoke Churchill, but where is your courage? You summon the spirit of 1940, yet behave as though Dunkirk were a spectator sport.
You demand a victory worthy of 1945, but expect Ukrainians alone to pay for it with their lives.
If Putin really is Hitler, why are Ukrainians the only ones expected to fight him?
Where are your armies? Where are your divisions? Where are your soldiers?
Where is your Second Front?
In 1944, the Allies didn't defeat Hitler by delivering stirring speeches from the safety of London and Washington. They crossed the English Channel. They stormed the beaches of Normandy. They put their own soldiers in the line of fire.
Today, you preach the moral necessity of defeating a new Hitler while outsourcing the dying to Ukraine.
You want a new D-Day — but with someone else's sons storming the beaches.
You want another victory over fascism — but with someone else's cities turned into Stalingrad.
You want to stand in the photographs of victory — without appearing in the lists of the fallen.
How convenient. How heroic. How obscenely hypocritical.
If this is truly your generation's struggle against Hitler, then stop treating Ukraine as your personal Eastern Front — a battlefield where others bleed so that you can deliver grand speeches about freedom from the comfort of your armchairs.
And if you are not prepared to fight the war you so loudly proclaim to be an existential battle between civilization and barbarism, then at least have the decency to confront the contradiction between your rhetoric and your actions.
Because history will remember not only those who appeased aggression, but also those who demanded a war to the bitter end — provided someone else did all the fighting and dying.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
The most powerful moment wasn't the signing of the document.
Demanding his pen back, that was the true humiliation 😉
The exact moment a Russian billionaire realized he wasn’t the one calling the shots.
In 2009, Vladimir Putin visited the struggling Russian town of Pikalyovo, where he publicly confronted billionaire businessman Oleg Deripaska during a deepening economic crisis.
With factories shut down and workers left without pay, Putin demanded that Deripaska sign an agreement to restart production and restore operations. In front of television cameras, Putin pushed a pen toward him and insisted he sign the document immediately. Deripaska complied, creating one of the most memorable political confrontations of the time.
The exchange quickly became a powerful demonstration of the Kremlin’s authority over Russia’s wealthiest businessmen. Beyond the economic dispute, the televised confrontation sent a clear message: even the country’s most influential billionaires were ultimately subject to Putin’s power.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
Aleksandar Vučić, über persönliche Treffen mit Wladimir Putin ...
„Ich fuhr einmal zu ihm nach Hause, etwas außerhalb von Moskau. Es war 23 Uhr, und er empfing mich, wir waren allein. Er spielte Klavier, ich wusste gar nicht, dass er das konnte.
Wir waren ohne Sicherheitsdienst. Er nahm mein Geschenk an – ich brachte ihm eine Ikone. Und das, ohne dass der Sicherheitsdienst das überprüft hatte, ohne irgendetwas, obwohl der russische Präsident das normalerweise nie tut. Er küsste die Ikone und kreuzte sich dreimal.
Wir sprachen. Er hatte an diesem Tag einen sehr schlechten, schweren Tag. In Moskau war etwas passiert, ich möchte jetzt nicht darüber sprechen. Aber er zeigte erneut Respekt. Nach einiger Zeit blieben wir noch lange zusammen – bis etwa 21 Uhr nach Moskauer Zeit.
Wir haben viel durchgemacht: schwierige Gespräche, schlechte Gespräche, gute Gespräche. Aber wir haben uns immer gegenseitig respektiert, und er hat immer Respekt für Serbien gezeigt. Und ich bin ihm dafür dankbar.“
Shell 子皮 retweeted
In the United States, letting a 6-year-old ride the subway alone
will get you arrested for child neglect.
Lines of oversized SUVs idle outside suburban schools,
parents terrified to let their children out of sight for sixty seconds.
In Tokyo, step onto a packed train at 7:45 AM.
A small boy, barely forty pounds, carrying a stiff leather backpack nearly the size of his torso.
Yellow safety hat.
Navy blue shorts.
He holds the low handrail.
He checks the digital station sign.
He walks through an ocean of rushed commuters without a parent in sight.
Nobody kidnaps him.
Nobody touches him.
Every adult in that car silently assumes the role of an invisible guardian.
Japan didn’t just build the safest trains on Earth.
Japan protected the most precious freedom modern society destroyed:
The right of a child to explore their own world without fear.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
I didn’t really get the problem with gender ideology at first.
I’m liberal-minded about most things. ‘Live and let live’ has generally been my motto. I believed in inclusion, kindness and not causing unnecessary offence.
I knew some adults chose medical treatments or surgery to resemble the opposite sex. That seemed to me a matter of personal autonomy. Adults can do what they wish with their own bodies.
What I hadn’t realised — and I feel slightly embarrassed admitting this — was that I’d misunderstood what was being claimed.
I thought “transgender” meant a form of self-expression. A man who liked wearing women’s clothes. Someone changing their name. Gender non-conformity.
What I hadn’t grasped was that some activists weren’t just asking for tolerance. They were asserting that declaring yourself the opposite sex made you the opposite sex. Not metaphorically. Literally.
And that this wasn’t just cultural. It had legal consequences.
It meant men who said they were women were demanding access to women’s sports, prisons, domestic violence shelters and hospital wards.
It meant the rewriting of healthcare language — “pregnant people”, “bodies with cervixes” — to avoid saying “women”.
It meant children struggling with identity being affirmed onto medical pathways with lifelong implications.
And also redefining same-sex attraction. Lesbians called ‘bigoted’ for not wanting relationships with men who identify as women. Gay men accused of prejudice for saying they’re not attracted to female bodies.
I’d also overlooked how deeply this had spread into public institutions, schools and workplaces.
And how easily disagreement was framed as cruelty. Speaking up felt risky — because others were being publicly humiliated for doing so.
None of this is abstract.
Because sex is the basis on which safeguarding works. On which data is collected. On which cancer screening programmes run. On which fair sport and single-sex spaces depend. It’s written into law — including the Equality Act — because material differences matter.
If sex becomes a ‘feeling’ rather than a biological category, those protections become unstable.
And once reality becomes negotiable, everything does.
Once I saw it, I couldn’t unsee it.
But I needed to be sure.
So I read. Books, research papers, policy documents. When I finally spoke publicly, there was backlash from all directions.
Many women thanked me, while some feminists criticised me for speaking too late.
Others were angry about a past interview I’d done with the parent of a transgender person, accusing me of promoting harm.
It takes courage to speak when you know your reputation, friendships or livelihood may be on the line — when you know raising your voice could strain, or even end, relationships you value.
Once I understood what was at stake, staying silent was no longer an option.
I lost my livelihood simply for saying I didn’t like the phrase “pregnant people”. That alone tells you something is deeply wrong.
It shouldn’t be this way.
I don’t expect praise for admitting it took me far too long to understand what was happening. Or to say so publicly.
I can only be honest about what I believed then and what I understand now.
But it does take courage to admit publicly that you got something wrong. All I hope is that by acknowledging I wasn’t paying enough attention, another woman (or man) might feel emboldened to do the same.
Because, as many of us know first-hand, there can be professional, social and financial consequences to speaking out.
And I won’t pretend I understood something before I did, simply to make myself more acceptable to those who got there sooner.
Which is why I will never judge another woman for how long it takes her to find her voice.
Because every voice matters. Whenever it is raised.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
Russia and China share a 4,200 km border. The longest land border between any two major powers.
Here's what the West accidentally created:
Russia has: oil, gas, grain, minerals, rare earths, nuclear technology, military hardware, space tech
China has: manufacturing, consumer electronics, machinery, infrastructure, batteries, textiles, pretty much everything else
Everything Russia needs, China makes. Everything China needs, Russia has. And they ship it over land. No naval routes to block. No sanctions that work. Just trains and pipelines.
The West spent 70 years trying to keep them apart. Then forced them together in under 3 years.
Power of Siberia 2: 50 billion cubic meters of gas annually straight to China. No Western middlemen.
Trade in rubles and yuan. No dollars. Can't sanction what you're not part of.
Russia sells energy, wheat, minerals, and weapons to China. China sells phones, cars, machinery, and infrastructure to Russia. Complete loop. Self-contained.
Western policy for decades was: keep Russia and China competitive, not cooperative. Make them compete for influence.
Sanctions did the opposite. Total economic integration.
Now think about what this becomes:
Two nuclear powers. Combined population 1.5 billion. One has all the resources. One has all the manufacturing. Sharing a land border. Operating outside Western financial systems.
The world hasn't seen this before. Two countries that have everything they need from each other. No dependency on the West. No vulnerability to sanctions. Just direct trade over the longest shared border on earth.
The West built this partnership by trying to destroy Russia.
That's the part nobody wants to talk about.
Shell 子皮 retweeted
Simon Andriesz, the British banker who uncovered 2018 emails linking Howard Lutnick to Jeffrey Epstein’s Adfin investment and took them to House Oversight, has died at age 57. BBC reported his findings. Lutnick later admitted to visiting the island but not the business dealings.
Simon Andriesz @SAndriesz has died. He took his own life this week, while staying at a trauma treatment centre, the same place he had gone to try to survive what years of fighting had done to him.
I wrote the piece below about him at the start of August. We last spoke on 13 August. Reading my own words back now feels different. Heavier. I did not know then that this would be the last chapter.
Simon gave me his story directly. The embezzlement he uncovered, the fraud he reported, the heart attacks, the police complaints, the years @TheFCA spent doing almost nothing while his life fell apart around him.
He handed the CFTC and HMRC enough to secure real fines. He handed the BBC enough for a full documentary.
And still the one regulator that was supposed to protect him let him carry all of it alone for 7 years.
He was one of the most credible people I have ever spoken to. Everything he told me checked out. And he still ended up broken by the very system meant to catch people like him when they fell.
I am angry writing this. Angry that a man this capable, this thorough, this willing to hand over evidence and testimony for years, was left to fight completely alone until he could not fight anymore.
Simon Andriesz deserved better. Rest in peace.
If you are struggling right now, please do not go through it alone. Samaritans are free, 24 hours, on 116 123.
@TransparencyTF @stevemiddi1 @MLorrM @JohnCleese @premnsikka @johnmcdonnellMP @Victoria_Rixon @DennyTWright
By the 1980s, the Soviet Union desperately needed reform. Few seriously disputed that, including Soviet citizens themselves.
That was the promise of Perestroika: reform the system, open it up, make it work again. What most Soviet citizens were never asked to embrace was the disappearance of their country.
In March 1991, they were finally asked directly. More than three quarters of those voting in the nine participating republics chose to preserve the USSR as a renewed federation. Nine months later, there was no USSR.
That is the context behind Victor Bout’s accusation against Gorbachev and Yeltsin. In his telling, Soviet citizens were sold reform. What they got was dissolution.
They asked to renovate the house. Instead, they came home to find it demolished.


























