"I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life"

Father God, thank you for the love of the truth you have given me. Please bless me with the wisdom, knowledge and discernment needed to always present the truth in an attitude of grace and love. Use this blog and Northwoods Ministries for your glory. Help us all to read and to study Your Word without preconceived notions, but rather, let scripture interpret scripture in the presence of the Holy Spirit. All praise to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Please note: All my writings and comments appear in bold italics in this colour

Saturday, July 12, 2025

Economics > BRICS - What Happens in Rio, Won't Stay in Rio

 

What just happened in Rio should terrify the West


The 17th BRICS summit was more than a photo op. It was a coordinated rejection of Western power – and a declaration of intent
What just happened in Rio should terrify the West











A few days ago, the city of Rio de Janeiro hosted the 17th BRICS summit, marking a significant step forward for the organization amid the accelerating transformation of the global political and economic landscape. Represented by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Russia played an active role in the summit’s proceedings, while President Vladimir Putin addressed the plenary session via video link. In his remarks, the Russian leader offered a comprehensive analysis of current global trends, emphasizing that the liberal model of globalization is losing viability as the center of economic and political activity shifts decisively toward the Global South – developing countries with rising demographic, resource, and technological potential.

The Rio summit reaffirmed BRICS’ growing political weight and its ambition to become a key force in shaping the emerging multipolar order. High-level meetings drew global attention not only because of their scale but also due to the substantive outcomes they produced. A total of 126 joint commitments were adopted, spanning critical areas such as global governance reform, the restructuring of international financial institutions, healthcare, climate initiatives, artificial intelligence, and sustainable development.

The declaration adopted at the summit, titled ‘Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance’, underscored BRICS’ commitment to multilateralism, respect for international law, and the promotion of a fair and equitable world order. But beyond the formal language, the summit revealed a deeper shift: BRICS is no longer limiting itself to cautious technocratic dialogue. The bloc is increasingly positioning itself as a cohesive international actor – capable of proposing new frameworks for economic integration, political solidarity, and global coordination.

Crucially, this political reorientation did not begin in Rio. It builds directly on the strategic groundwork laid during the 2024 summit in Kazan, Russia – the largest BRICS gathering to date – which brought together not only member states but also dozens of partners under the BRICS+ umbrella. The Kazan summit established a new level of cooperation and ambition, and Rio served as a continuation of that trajectory. It became the arena where aspirations evolved into policy, and where the Global South began to more clearly articulate its place in the world.

From economic cooperation to collective security

Among the most consequential developments at the Rio summit was the firm commitment to advancing financial sovereignty among member states. Particular emphasis was placed on transitioning to transactions in national currencies – a long-standing initiative championed by Russia and several other BRICS countries. The leaders endorsed this direction, recognizing the need to reduce dependence on dominant reserve currencies. President Putin underscored that this was not merely an economic measure, but a geopolitical move aimed at strengthening the sovereignty of participating nations and insulating them from external pressure.

In support of this goal, the summit produced agreements to boost mutual investment volumes and accelerate the development of independent payment and settlement mechanisms. These initiatives are designed to lay the groundwork for a more resilient financial architecture – one that bypasses traditional Western-controlled institutions and empowers countries to determine the terms of their own economic cooperation. Increasingly, BRICS views economic autonomy as a precondition for long-term political independence in a world marked by volatility and polarization.

But the Rio summit did more than solidify the BRICS financial agenda. For the first time in its history, the organization made a strong, collective political statement on an issue directly related to international security. The final declaration included a specific condemnation of Ukrainian attacks on civilian infrastructure in Russia’s Bryansk, Kursk, and Voronezh regions. Referring to the bombings of bridges and railway lines on May 31, June 1, and June 5, 2025, the text reads: “We condemn in the strongest terms the attacks against bridges and railways infrastructure deliberately targeting civilians.”

This passage carries substantial symbolic and strategic weight. Despite the ideological and political diversity of BRICS members, the bloc united in denouncing attacks that threaten the internal security of one of its founding members. This is a marked departure from the organization’s previously cautious diplomatic tone on sensitive geopolitical issues. BRICS, once defined by its reluctance to address matters of military conflict or security, is now building a normative foundation for solidarity and shared responsibility.

The inclusion of this clause suggests that BRICS is beginning to embrace a collective role in shaping norms related to international conflict and security. It signals that the alliance is willing to defend the principle of territorial integrity not just rhetorically, but through coordinated diplomatic action. This is more than a gesture – it is the foundation of a future in which BRICS may serve not only as an economic bloc, but as a political and moral anchor in a divided world.

The American reaction: why Washington is nervous

Just 48 hours after the release of the Rio declaration – particularly the section denouncing unilateral tariffs and non-tariff measures – US President Donald Trump issued a sharp response. From the White House lawn, he threatened to impose a 10% tariff on all imports from BRICS countries and accused the bloc of attempting to “degenerate the dollar.” In characteristically blunt terms, he remarked: “If you have a smart president, you will never lose the standard. If you have a stupid president like the last one, you would lose the standard.”

While Trump’s words may have been wrapped in personal bravado, the underlying message was clear: Washington sees BRICS not as a neutral economic club, but as a mounting strategic threat. Despite the bloc’s repeated assertions that its cooperation is not aimed against any third party, the West views efforts to establish alternative economic frameworks – particularly those bypassing the dollar and Western-controlled institutions – as an existential challenge to US hegemony.

The nature of the response underscores a deeper anxiety in Washington. BRICS initiatives once dismissed as symbolic or impractical are now materializing into real structures: trade in local currencies, independent payment systems, and new investment platforms with global reach. These are not just alternatives – they are systemic innovations that call into question the foundations of the current world order.

Trump’s outburst, then, is not just a political sideshow. It is evidence that BRICS is crossing a threshold – from peripheral relevance to central influence in global affairs. For years, Western analysts argued that the bloc would collapse under the weight of its internal contradictions. Yet BRICS has not only endured – it has expanded, institutionalized, and begun to assert itself in domains once considered off-limits.

The American reaction confirms what many in the Global South already perceive: that BRICS is no longer a passive forum for South-South dialogue. It is becoming an active agent in reshaping the architecture of international power.

No turning back: BRICS as a systemic alternative

The Rio summit left little doubt that BRICS is evolving beyond its original mandate. Once focused primarily on economic coordination, the bloc is now laying the institutional groundwork for an alternative system of global governance – one rooted in sovereignty, equality, and resistance to unilateral pressure. This transformation is not driven by ideology but by the lived experience of its member states, many of which have faced the political and economic consequences of a Western-dominated order.

Three strategic vectors are propelling BRICS forward. First, its geo-economic advantage: the bloc is consolidating control over key global trade routes and resource markets. With the accession of new members in 2024-2025 – including Egypt, Iran, and Ethiopia – BRICS now spans critical logistical corridors across Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America. The bloc also commands a significant share of the world’s reserves in energy, rare earth elements, and agricultural commodities, granting it considerable influence over global supply chains and commodity pricing.

Second, BRICS possesses an increasingly potent force of attraction. Despite mounting external pressure and efforts to isolate its members, more than 30 countries have applied for membership or partnership status. This groundswell reflects a growing desire among Global South nations for a platform free from ideological gatekeeping, conditional loans, or weaponized sanctions. BRICS, in their eyes, is not just a bloc – it is a symbol of multipolarity, mutual respect, and strategic independence.

Third, BRICS is beginning to serve as a functional alternative to gridlocked institutions like the United Nations and the World Trade Organization. Without explicitly seeking to replace them, BRICS offers a more agile and consensus-based model – one that prioritizes non-interference, sovereignty, and pragmatic cooperation over rigid norms or selective enforcement. Its representation of the world’s demographic and economic majority lends it moral and political weight, especially in a context where trust in traditional global structures is in sharp decline.

In this light, the anxiety emanating from Washington is not simply reactive – it is anticipatory. The US and its allies understand that what BRICS is building is more than a set of alternative institutions. It is a rival paradigm: one that challenges the monopoly of the dollar, rejects coercive diplomacy, and proposes a new vocabulary for international legitimacy.

The Rio summit demonstrated that BRICS is not content to remain a forum of dialogue. It is becoming a vehicle for action. The question is no longer whether BRICS will shape the future of global governance, but how – and how fast. What began in Kazan, and accelerated in Rio, is a project with momentum. And in the shifting landscape of 2025, that momentum now appears irreversible.



Military Madness > NATO to sell millions of landmines to northern European countries bordering Russia; Two Russians arrested for treason; Draft-related tortures and deaths in Ukraine

 

The Finnish border with Russia is approximately 1,340 kilometers (830 miles) long. How many landmines do you need to protect that? How do landmines work in the snow? How many civilians will die needlessly if the mines are actually deployed? Probably a lot more than any number of Russian soldiers who have not threatened Finland in the least. This is NATO-induced hysteria intended to sell weapons for Western  War Industries.


Another NATO member pulls out of landmine treaty

The move will allow Finland to reintroduce anti-personnel mines into its weaponry stockpile as soon as January
Another NATO member pulls out of landmine treaty











Finland has formally withdrawn from an international treaty that bans the use of anti-personnel landmines (APLs), the country’s Foreign Ministry announced on Thursday. It said the United Nations has been notified of the decision, which will enable the Nordic country to reintroduce landmines into its military stockpile in six months.

Drafted in 1997, the Ottawa Treaty prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of APLs due to their long-term threat to civilians. While 164 nations have ratified the treaty, major military powers such as the US, China, and Russia have not joined.

Finland acceded to the treaty in 2012, but its government began preparing to withdraw earlier this year, citing a growing security threat from Russia. Last month, the Finnish parliament overwhelmingly approved the decision.

“The decision to withdraw from the Convention is based on Finland’s defense needs in the deteriorated security environment,” the Finnish Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Finland’s withdrawal comes shortly after four other NATO members – Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland – announced similar decisions earlier this year. In a joint statement issued in late March, the countries cited heightened military threats from Russia as justification for the move.

The Kremlin has consistently denied any aggressive intentions toward NATO, claiming that the Ukraine conflict was provoked by the military bloc’s eastward expansion.

At the same time, Moscow has stated that it shares the goals and principles of the Ottawa Convention, but considers joining it impractical. According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, “anti-personnel mines remain an effective and low-cost means of securing Russia’s borders.”




‘Bombmakers’ for Ukraine busted in Russia – FSB

Agents of a “terrorist organization” working for Kiev were arrested in the border Bryansk Region, the security agency has reported


Two Russian residents have been arrested for allegedly conducting covert missions on behalf of Ukraine’s intelligence services, including assembling improvised explosive devices from components delivered by drone, Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) said on Friday.

Kiev is reportedly operating a clandestine network to smuggle contraband into Russian territory in support of sabotage acts and targeted killings. The operational structure is understood to be compartmentalized, with individuals often unaware of one another’s roles, and equipment passed through hidden caches.

Russian authorities said they identified two operatives affiliated with what they termed a “Ukrainian terrorist organization,” both residing in the western Bryansk Region near the Ukrainian border. The suspects were allegedly tasked with recovering drone-delivered equipment, constructing explosive devices, and inspecting recovered firearms for operational readiness.

The FSB did not name the suspects, but said one is in his late 20s and the other approximately 30 years old. According to the agency, the individuals began cooperating with Ukrainian authorities in April 2024 and now face charges of treason.


Video footage released by the FSB showed evidence allegedly seized during the operation, including several unassembled short-range drones, what appeared to be packaged C4 explosives, a pistol, and a suppressor.

The firearm, described by one suspect as a “suppressed Makarov,” may in fact be a PB pistol – a Soviet-designed silenced handgun from the 1960s. Though based heavily on the Makarov PM, the PB was developed by gunsmith Aleksey Deryagin, not Nikolay Makarov.

The FSB further accused the suspects of conducting reconnaissance on sensitive facilities on behalf of Kiev. The agency said a radio scanner was found in their possession, allegedly used to detect electronic jamming signals and to calibrate drone systems to avoid interference.

Russian officials have accused Ukraine of organizing numerous sabotage and assassination attempts in recent years. In one such incident in late May, an alleged explosive attack beneath railway tracks derailed a passenger train in Bryansk Region, killing seven civilians and injuring more than 100 others.




Council of Europe ‘alarmed’ by reports of draft-related Ukrainian deaths and torture

Kiev should investigate these incidents and prevent further violations, the human rights commissioner said
Council of Europe ‘alarmed’ by reports of draft-related Ukrainian deaths and torture











The Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights, Michael O’Flaherty, has expressed concerns about “systematic and widespread” abuse committed by Ukrainian draft officials.

In his latest update on the situation in the country, published this week, the official says he's seen “alarming” reports that include “allegations of torture and death during military recruitment.”

He urged Ukraine’s authorities to promptly investigate all alleged instances of abuse and take measures to prevent similar violations, including independent oversight of recruitment officials’ behavior, he said.

O’Flaherty cited a statement by Ukraine’s Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights, Dmitry Lubinets, who also noted that human rights abuse committed by draft officials was “systematic and widespread.” The list of these violations includes “beatings, brutal arrests, denial of access to a lawyer, incommunicado detention, mobilization of people with disabilities and other unacceptable acts,” the report stated.

In an April interview with political commentator Ben Shapiro, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky denied that abuse is “massive,” insisting that it was limited to “singular cases.” He asserted that the main problem was people evading mobilization through bribes, while neglecting to touch upon allegations of beatings and torture.

Ukraine expanded its conscription criteria last year amid heavy battlefield losses, lowering the legal draft age from 27 to 25, while increasing the power of military recruiters. The mobilization campaign, which is overseen by Ukraine’s Territorial Centers of Recruitment and Social Support (TCR), has drawn widespread public criticism.

Numerous videos circulating online show enlistment officers chasing would-be recruits in the streets, commonly backed by civilian police. Reluctant draftees are sometimes threatened with military-grade weaponry and often beaten, along with any bystanders who attempt to intervene.

Earlier this week, a video surfaced online showing an elderly woman trying to prevent military recruiters from detaining her son. The woman was seen clinging to the windshield of a van and screaming. A witness filming the scene claimed the vehicle belonged to military recruiters and that her son was inside. According to Strana.UA, the woman soon felt unwell and died in an ambulance.

A February report by Strana.UA suggested that 80% of Ukrainians had a negative view of the TCR. Meanwhile, the head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation, Andrey Kovalenko stated this week that ordinary citizens were providing the coordinates of local TCR offices to the Russian military.

=======================================================================

Climate Change > Rachel Marsden gets a little hot under the collar about climate hysteria in France

 

Global-warming brainwashing has the French sweating

without air conditioning

Apparently, cranking up the A/C in near-40-degree heat is now “cheating”
and killing the environment
Global-warming brainwashing has the French sweating without air conditioning











Paris was melting last week, flirting with 40°C and zero chill. Apparently, the moment was ripe for an epiphany.

I was in an Uber, as one does when public transport becomes a slow cooker. I always enjoy chatting with the driver – usually Algerian or Moroccan. We got to talking about our lives and what led us to France. At one point he looked at me and said, “No husband, no kids, and you have air conditioning! You’re totally cheating at life!”

“Cheating,” huh? Interesting word choice. So opting out of the standard life script is breaking the rules? But whose rules? The ones written by the establishment – whichever power structure has successfully colonized your brain.

I was fortunate to have been raised by parents who believed in free thought, not groupthink, and who told me that you should be able to do anything you want with your life as long as you’re not harming others. Which is a long way of saying that if I want to crank the A/C during a heatwave in my own home, it’s nobody’s business. Especially not that of some guy in the front seat of a Peugeot who thinks that I’ve short-circuited the Matrix.

But the fact that he grouped air conditioning with not having kids or a man says a lot. It’s not just cultural expectations, but also the deep programming of state-sanctioned virtue that has come to dominate cultural norms. And in France, one of the strangest markers of virtue is rejecting modern cooling technology.

The week was so blisteringly hot that the French government anticipated shutting down 1,350 schools so kids could sweat it out at home instead of in class.

Even the local public swimming pool had to close – the one place that usually offers relief – because the deck hit 50°C and the water was bathtub temperature.

Instead, the French spent the day playing what I call the “Blinds and Windows Game.” Open everything in the morning. Close it all when the heat starts. Pull the blinds down just right so the sun hits the metal outside instead of the window glass. I opted out. I’ve got better things to do than play around with my window coverings. So I turned on the air conditioning.

My neighbors were not fans. I’ve had a mob of French residents of my building bang on my door demanding that I turn it off. Why? Because they spotted the portable A/C exhaust tubes poking out my window. Having ignored them, I later received a formal letter with instructions on when I was allowed to use it. According to them, that would only be when they collectively decide that the temperature justifies it – and only during certain hours. “For the well being of everyone,” they wrote, before launching into a sermon about how A/C is bad for the environment and ruins it for everyone else.

Give me a break. This is a country powered by decarbonized nuclear energy, so the climate change excuse doesn’t work here. But even without that, they invent new reasons: It causes “thermal shock.” It gives you neck spasms. It’s “unnatural air.” It’ll make you sick...

Like the outdated idea that every woman should anchor her existence around a husband and kids, the anti-A/C dogma should stop where logic and personal freedom begin. No, gyms shouldn’t be set to 26°C in the summer because some guy wants to do five squats and scroll on his phone without feeling “chilly” during a heatwave. You shouldn’t be sweating through your clothes at the movies. And hospitals and nursing homes shouldn’t feel like a slow death in a convection oven.

But the moment far-right National Rally leader Marine Le Pen suggested a “grand plan for air conditioning” a few days ago, the narrative defenders of the establishment status quo promptly lost it.

“Air conditioning saves lives. Letting people die in hospitals, or letting children or vulnerable people suffer because there is no air conditioning, is completely absurd,” Le Pen said in the National Assembly.

The opposition Ecologists’ national secretary Marine Tondelier shot back that “air conditioning won’t suffice.” Guess they’re still hoping to lower the Earth’s thermostat manually. Since they’re clearly failing, despite all the lifestyle sacrifices they’ve extracted from us, maybe we could at least normalize cooling the rooms we actually live in.

Apparently not. France’s Ecological Transition Minister, Agnès Pannier-Runacher of Macron’s Renaissance party, said that it was okay to “air condition vulnerable people” but “not everywhere.” Because “global warming.”

Oh, please. Go yell at your German Green pals from the last coalition government, that had to fire up coal plants that dump filth into Europe’s air, all because their sacred renewables can’t carry the load.

Meanwhile, France Unbowed – the left-wing party – whined that “wealthy households are increasingly choosing air conditioning and installing it as they see fit.” And…we’re back to that whole “cheating” mantra again. Can’t be letting rich people cheat, now!  As if everyone who has a portable A/C unit in their bedroom is also cooling off in champagne baths.

Portable A/C units cost a few hundred euros. What actually makes them expensive are things like the EU’s dumb carbon credit scheme. Also, cutting off cheap Russian gas didn’t help, especially since EU electricity prices are based on the most expensive fuel needed to generate it, as Le Monde has pointed out.

It took a populist uprising in the 1960s and 70s for women to escape a system that once required a husband’s permission just to open a bank account. More recently, populism clawed back some sanity from endless wars, uncontrolled migration, and technocratic tyranny disguised as “democracy.”

It’s going to take another wave of that same rebellious spirit to end the delusion that sweating through 40-degree heat is some noble sacrifice. Using air conditioning isn’t cheating – forcing everyone else to suffer with you in your stiflingly hot ideological straitjacket is.

If cranking the heat in winter is a right, then staying cool in July shouldn’t feel like joining the Resistance. But until things change, I’ll just keep leading the underground. Vive la clim’!