RUNNING UPDATES ON THE CONFLICT IN UKRAINE - 23.06.2024
RUNNING UPDATES ON THE CONFLICT IN UKRAINE - 23.06.2024
Including geopolitical issues affecting the balance of power in the ongoing end game war to establish our common future, a closely monitored prison planet or tolerance for diverse modes of governance.
THE ROAD TO THE ULTIMATE CONCLUSION OF WORLD WAR III RUNS THROUGH HERE.
Please note: We will be in Iceland for the next week.
Updates will be sporadic and perhaps absent during much of this time.
Our apologies for this alteration to your daily updates.
*** WORLD PLUNGES DEEPER INTO WAR, WEST EXCLUDES DIPLOMACY ***
“Ukraine. What is the truth...?
Why won’t western media tell both sides…?”
VIRTUALLY UNREPORTED ATROCITY IN LUGANSK, 2nd JUNE 2014
A lot has been said about atrocities in the western media claimed to have been perpetrated by the Russians, for example at Bucha and Mariupol among others. These assertions are conveyed on the say so of the Ukrainian authorities. How willing though are western news broadcasters to convey atrocities attributed to the Ukrainians? The following will I think provide the answer.
If anyone wonders if they are receiving accurate coverage of the conflict in Ukraine I would suggest watching the video below of an event which occurred on the 2nd of June 2014 and ask themselves if they recall hearing about it on any mainstream media news channel at the time.
The video is harrowing to watch. The bodies (five women and three men) are real. Yet across western media there was only one single news report that occurred a day later. This was from CNN and occurred only because a CNN team happened to be nearby at the time of the atrocity and so the network could hardly ignore it as all others so obviously did.
The video below shows the unvarnished truth that was not considered newsworthy in western mainstream news.
THE SINGLE WESTERN MSM REPORT ON THE LUGANSK ATROCITY, 3rd JUNE 2014
The video at the CNN link below is the crime scene sanitised by CNN, though played straight with honest reporting on the scene not playing things to Kiev’s tune.
(There was a time early in the war in the Donbass when CNN were not afraid to contradict the Ukrainian regime in Kiev.) Watch, because it's the first and last time you will see this.
5 women and 3 men died, all civilians.
Air attack on pro-Russian separatists in Luhansk kills 8, stuns residents.
COLLECTIVE WEST-UKRAINE <-> RUSSIA
SHAMELESS WESTERN MEDIA IGNORED THIS:
Airstrike in Lugansk - 10 Year Anniversary.
Endless FABs | Breakthrough In Toretsk | Russians Entered Vozdvyzhenka | Military Summary 2024.06.23
Fyodor Lukyanov: This is the only way to end confrontation between Russia and the West.
Moscow joined the NATO’s Partnership for Peace program 30 years ago, but today there is neither partnership nor peace.
Russia’s then Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrey Kozyrev signed up to NATO’s Partnership for Peace program in Brussels on June 22, 1994. This marked the beginning of official relations between the Russian Federation and the US-led bloc (prior to that, the USSR and NATO were involved in political dialogue within the framework of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, but it was established only several days before the dissolution of the Soviet Union).
The history of cooperation between Russia and NATO was quite rich and interesting. Over the years, we saw a strange mix of good intentions, political hypocrisy, and mutual misunderstandings which sometimes arose naturally and at other times were deliberate. Experts often talk about unrealized opportunities between the two sides, but this is debatable. In fact, there was never a real chance to establish a true partnership between Russia and NATO, although at some point there were certain illusions regarding this.
The Partnership for Peace program originally served a double goal: it was an alternative to NATO membership, but also a preparatory step for joining the organisation (at least for some countries). When the program was launched, a final decision on the expansion of NATO had not yet been made. Discussions in Washington continued, but the scales generally tipped in favor of spreading its tentacles.
Russia opposed the idea, but was not consistent. Kozyrev warned about the consequences of expansion, but repeatedly said NATO was not Russia’s enemy. Russian President Boris Yeltsin dissuaded Western leaders from growing the bloc, but at the same time told Polish President Lech Walesa that Moscow was not against Warsaw’s accession. At the time, the Partnership for Peace initiative looked like a life-saving compromise. However, two years later, NATO finally announced that it would admit the first group of former communist countries.
Read more: Russia fears a NATO attack. Here’s why.
Currently, the prevailing view in Russia is that, following the dissolution of the USSR, the US and its allies embarked on a course of a military and political takeover of the former Soviet sphere of influence, and NATO became the main instrument in achieving this. Although this is what eventually happened, the initial motivation might not have been that straightforward. The West’s easy and unexpected success in the Cold War created a feeling of unconditional victory – a political and economic success, but most importantly, a moral one.
The West felt that, as the winning side, it had the right to determine the structure of Europe and knew exactly how to go about it. This was not simply a display of conscious arrogance, but rather of joyful euphoria. It seemed that, from now on, things would always be like this.
The concept adopted at the end of the Cold War stated that NATO ensured European security, and a bigger NATO meant a more secure continent. As a first step towards this, everyone (including Moscow) agreed that a reunited Germany would remain a member of the bloc instead of receiving neutral status, as some had suggested earlier. Further, it was implied that each country had the right to choose whether or not to join any alliances. Theoretically, that is what sovereignty implies. But in practice, the geopolitical balance of power had always imposed restrictions that forced alliances to consider the reaction of non-member countries. However, the triumphalism that reigned in the West following the Cold War significantly reduced the willingness to take such reactions into account. In other words, NATO felt like it could do anything and no reply would follow.
The situation could have changed dramatically if Russia had considered the possibility of joining NATO, and if the bloc itself had considered such a scenario. Then the principle of the indivisibility of security, proclaimed in the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe, would have been respected within the framework of the bloc. However, it was impossible for Russia to join NATO, since, even at its weakest, Russia remained one of the world’s largest military powers and possessed the largest nuclear arsenal. The hypothetical accession of such a state to NATO would mean the emergence of a second force within the club that would be on a par with the US, and therefore, would not obey it on the same level as other allies. This would change the very essence of the organization, and alter its principles of Atlanticism (simply because of Russia’s geographical location). No one was prepared for this. The qualitative transformation of NATO was never on the agenda.
As a result, NATO’s expansion, which in a sense became automated, pushed Russia further and further to the east. Moscow’s attempts to regulate this process – first through participation in joint institutions (such as the NATO-Russia Council of 2002, which was an expansion of the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997) and then through growing opposition (starting with Putin’s Munich Speech in 2007) – did not bring the desired results. In addition to the inertia of the West’s initial approach (which implied that the bloc’s very existence is security in itself), the West believed that Moscow didn’t have the right to set conditions and must only follow the rules set by the stronger and more successful Western community. This is how the EU eventually got involved in the current Ukraine war.
Could relations between NATO and Russia have developed in a different way? The West believes that the persistence of Russia, which continued to consider NATO a threat to its security, led to the current military crisis. And, in fact, this became a self-fulfilling prophecy. But even assuming that this was true, the speed and ease with which NATO returned to a strong confrontation with Russia shows that it had been prepared for this.
Russia’s memorandum of December 2021 and the 2022 military operation in Ukraine were designed to put an end to the idea of NATO’s uncontested expansion as the only means of ensuring European security. Two-and-a-half years later, we see that the scale of the conflict has exceeded all initial expectations. Judging by Moscow’s statements, the confrontation may only come to an end when the principles on which European security is based are fundamentally reconsidered.
This is not a territorial conflict, but a conflict which may only end when NATO abandons its main goal and function. So far, there is no compromise on the horizon. The Western side is not willing to agree that the results of the Cold War must be reconsidered, and the Russian side is not ready to retreat without this assurance. Thirty years after the signing of the Partnership for Peace program, there’s still no partnership or peace between Russia and NATO. And neither is there a clear understanding of why the two sides were unable to achieve it.
Fyodor Lukyanov: This is the only way to end confrontation between Russia and the West.
KATIE HALPER: John Mearsheimer Destroys Lindsey Graham.
'America Trying To Break...': As Sanctions 'Fail To Contain' Putin, Biden's Diplomatic Arm-Twisting?
BORZZIKMAN: Run For Your Lives! Russia Deploys FAB-9000 In UKR: The Most Powerful Non-Nuclear Bomb Ever Built!
The West’s fears realized? What Putin’s meeting with Kim Jong-un really means.
With the West-centered world order in decline, the strengthening of a new ‘power triangle’ in the East is a logical development.
On his recent visit to Pyongyang, Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un signed a comprehensive strategic partnership agreement, before moving on to a warm welcome and a similar series of declarations in Vietnam.
Is this really a new level of relations between Moscow and Pyongyang?
Those who consider the visit simply a gesture of support for Pyongyang are missing important details. We now see the term “universal strategic partnership” being used, which implies the highest possible level of cooperation between countries. Compared to earlier descriptions of relations between Moscow and Pyongyang, this is a great leap forward.
There is also the article written by Putin for North Korea’s main newspaper, Rodong Sinmun. It contains an important thesis: the strengthening of relations between Pyongyang and Moscow is the beginning of a new world order based on justice, which will oppose the US model of a rules-based world order. This is very important because currently, we see a self-fulfilling prophecy. The “Western triangle” composed of Washington-Tokyo-Seoul is evolving into the Asian equivalent of NATO and justifies its actions by invoking the hypothetical threat coming from Pyongyang and Moscow. This in turn leads to increasing cooperation between the “Eastern triangle” composed of Moscow-Beijing-Pyongyang, and the close ties that the West warns of can indeed become a reality.
Mutual military aid
Article 4 of the Russia-DPRK strategic partnership treaty states that“if one of the Parties is subjected to an armed attack by any State or several States and thus finds itself in a state of war, the other Party will immediately provide military and other assistance with all the means at its disposal.” However, based on comments made by Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, we know that the agreement is not directed against third countries, so South Korea shouldn’t be worried.
The key point here is the official “state of war” (for example, formally, Russia is conducting a ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine and the countries have not declared war on each other). Other situations are covered by Article 3, which states that“In the event of an immediate threat of an act of armed aggression against one of the Parties, the Parties, at the request of one of the Parties, shall immediately use bilateral channels for consultations in order to coordinate their positions and agree on possible practical measures to assist each other to help eliminate the emerging threat.” During the consultations, a specific strategy and measures will be developed.
Still, judging by the West’s reaction, the treaty has spooked it anyway, because the military-technical cooperation that it has been accusing Moscow and Pyongyang of can now become a reality. For example, if a NATO aircraft bearing a Ukrainian flag attacks a target in Belgorod, this can be interpreted as an act of aggression and Russia may request North Korea’s assistance. North Korea will also supply artillery shells to Russia (this time for real, not just in the imagination of Western propagandists and turbo-patriots), particularly since North Korea is undergoing artillery rearmament and shells of calibers that are no longer needed can be sent to Russia. Moreover, Article 8 hints at the possibility of joint military exercises or other “joint measures to strengthen defense capabilities in the interests of preventing war and ensuring regional and international peace and security.”
We should also note that the Russian delegation included Russia’s Minister of Defense and the head of the Russian space agency, Roscosmos. The current extent of military-technical cooperation is unclear, but most likely the two leaders talked about its further development. Clearly, Putin and Kim spoke a lot more face-to-face than they did publicly, which is also quite noteworthy.
Russia won’t abandon UN sanctions on North Korea – yet
The West expected Russia to drop the sanctions imposed on North Korea by the UN Security Council, but that didn’t happen after all. Both Putin’s article and the treaty stress the importance of cooperation in education, health, and science and make it clear that the sanctions should be lifted, and that the sides will look for ways to do this. But at best, this implies reinterpreting and circumventing the sanctions, rather than openly violating them and refusing to comply. On the one hand, we see a trend towards the disintegration of the traditional world order, including UN structures, which have fallen prey to double standards. As of now, Moscow stands for ‘creatively interpreting’ the sanctions – if something is not prohibited, it means it’s allowed, but Russia will currently comply with the sanctions that it once voted for. The sanctions against North Korea have not been lifted. Article 16 of the treaty, which criticizes “unilateral coercive measures”, may be seen as a desire to change the sanctions regime or look for ways to circumvent it, but nowhere has it been stated that the Russian Federation and North Korea do not consider it necessary to comply with it.
This may change during the next round of escalation, because regardless of whether arms deals between Moscow and Pyongyang are real or not, the West will accuse both countries and will implement some sort of measures.
The appearance of North Korean workers in Russia testifies to the fact that the decision to ignore some of the sanctions has been made, either de jure or de facto. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Marat Khusnullin has long proposed employing workers from North Korea at construction sites, including in Russia’s new territories. These are military construction workers who do their job very well and work on a rotation basis. Cost effectiveness, quality, safety, and inconspicuousness are their strong suits. So, for example, when a woman in Russia’s Far East needs to renovate her apartment, she will hire workers from North Korea.
How will the West respond?
With Russia-North Korea cooperation growing, South Korea’s position is becoming increasingly important, since its leadership will be pushed to cooperate more closely with the US and NATO and to change its policy on Ukraine. Currently, despite the general solidarity with the US regarding Russia, South Korea is trying to keep some room to manoeuvre. Now, it will be more difficult for Seoul to do this, since Washington is trying to convince it that if Moscow is helping Pyongyang and vice versa, Seoul should help Kiev. In such a situation, it’s increasingly likely that South Korea may change its position and there may be a sharp deterioration of its relations with Russia. South Korea may lose its status as the “friendliest of the unfriendly countries” in regard to Russia. However, it will probably try to resist Western pressure.
Another important aspect is that Ukraine and its backers occasionally accuse Russia of being an aggressor country that secretly helps North Korea, and therefore should be deprived of the right of veto or be stripped of permanent membership of the UN Security Council. If Russia openly ignores the sanctions against North Korea, it will add fuel to the fire. But, as mentioned above, trust in UN structures is decreasing. Besides, as described by an acquaintance, “if we escalate, we will be expelled in July; if we don’t, in September,” which has some logic to it.
Read more: NATO ‘moving into Asia’ – Putin
China’s reaction
China’s reaction to Putin’s visit to North Korea was rather restrained – Beijing simply noted that this was an important and serious event. The Global Times wrote that this cooperation may frighten the US, and the Chinese Foreign Ministry called North Korea’s desire to develop relations with Russia normal, which is a rather neutral assessment.
This, however, has been the subject of speculation in the West, revolving around the idea that China is extremely unhappy with the rapprochement between Russia and North Korea and would even pressure the sides not to sign the treaty. But interpreting Beijing’s reaction this way is like being a medieval inquisitor, convinced that he sees a witch and interpreting any facts as proof of guilt. If the witch is pretty, it means the devil has endowed her with beauty, and if the witch is ugly, it means she’s been marked or sacrificed her beauty to practice witchcraft. In a similar way, the West convinced itself that Putin visited North Korea and Vietnam not because these countries are part of the socialist camp, but because they have strained relations with China. Instead, we need to look at solid facts and avoid speculation.
China has an agreement with North Korea which dates back to 1961, and which also guarantees military assistance. But in 2017-2018, before the warming of relations that happened during the Olympics, Chinese analysts noted that if a Korean conflict was initiated by the North, China would limit itself to diplomatic support, but if it was the South that attacked, then Beijing would remember the blood once spilled by its volunteer fighters and step in. No one knows whether the situation has changed now. It is also unclear to what extent Pyongyang has deferred to Beijing’s wishes regarding nuclear tests and why it has refused to conduct them.
Other branches of cooperation
New directions of cooperation between Russia and North Korea include the fields of science, culture, and healthcare, since North Korea needs qualified personnel. Some believe that inviting North Korean students to study in Russia is a way of circumventing sanctions – since students, including foreign ones, are allowed to work, we could hypothetically have 10,000 North Koreans registered as students while working at Russian construction sites. But the number voiced so far is 130 people who will study at the physics and technology department of Moscow State University or the Russian Technological University. These are future military-technical workers who won’t need to work at construction sites since they will study science and help develop the North Korean military-industrial complex.
Another important project is to build an automobile bridge between North Korea and Russia. It came as a surprise to many people that currently, there’s only a railway route between the two countries. For a long time, there has been talk of building an automobile bridge, and finally the corresponding decision has been made. A bridge will make all sorts of exchanges between the two countries a lot more efficient.
Some may remember how during the COVID-19 pandemic, some of our embassy’s diplomatic staff was forced to cross the border on an auxiliary rail vehicle. This happened because families had to be promptly evacuated, and that was the only direct way to cross the border. Now, such problems will be solved much more easily, and, considering the quality of North Korean construction workers, the bridge is likely to be built quickly.
Why was the visit so short?
Even though Putin’s visit was brief, it has accomplished a lot. This indicates that a lot of work had been done beforehand, and the two sides only had to solemnly sign the documents. The Russian embassy in North Korea has a Telegram channel and constantly posts updates there – how the delegation arrived, how it left, and so on. We may see that between Kim’s visit to Russia and Putin’s visit to North Korea, the contacts between officials on both sides were very intensive. There were visits from officials from the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Emergency Situations, and law enforcement agencies. And this cooperation is not just a formality, but a reality.
The West’s fears realized? What Putin’s meeting with Kim Jong-un really means.
ISRAEL-WEST <-> PALESTINE-IRAN-SYRIA-IRAQ-LEBANON-YEMEN
KIM IVERSEN: Jaw Dropping Footage: Journalist Embedded Himself Within Israeli Nationalists At The Gaza Border.
GLENN GREENWALD: Comedian Dave Smith on Criticizing Israel and Refusing to Self-Censor.
KATIE HALPER: Briahna Joy Gray EVISCERATES Sheryl Samburg Oct 7 Documentary.
DANIEL DAVIS: Iran Warns Israel Against War on Lebanon
U.S. Aircraft Carrier Hit In Red Sea? Houthis Claim ‘Successful Strike’; Washington Says… | Watch:
Israel Military Assaults Intensify, 42 Killed in Shati and Tuffah.
Israelis Take To Streets, Accuse Netanyahu Of Playing Politics Over Hostages; ‘We’re Kidnapped By…’
COLLECTIVE WEST <-> GLOBAL MAJORITY
TUCKER CARLSON - NEIL OLIVER: How the Banks Gained Control of World Governments.
EUROPE / UK
ALEX CHRISTOFOROU & ALEXANDER MERCOURIS of THE DURAN: Political establishment furious with Macron.
THE GAGGLE WITH PETER AND GEORGE: Does Germany Any Longer Have National Interests Of Its Own?
Macron May Trigger France's Exit From EU, Says EU's Barnier.
French President Emmanuel Macron's decision to dissolve the country's parliament and hold snap elections could trigger France's exit from the European Union, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, said.
Barnier said in an interview with The Telegraph newspaper that Macron's hopes of beating the right-wing National Rally (RN) party in the elections are very risky, the report read on Saturday.
"I don’t think Ms [the leader of the RN's parliamentary faction, Marine] Le Pen and Mr [president of RN party, Jordan] Bardella changed their minds. They are still anti-European," Barnier said.
On June 9, Macron announced the dissolution of the French parliament's lower house and holding of two-round snap parliamentary elections on June 30 and July 7. The decision was made in the wake of the European Parliament elections in which the National Rally party emerged victorious, finishing with over 15 percentage points ahead of Macron's centrist coalition.
Macron May Trigger France's Exit From EU, Says EU's Barnier.
NON-ENGLISH NEWS
LIU SIVAYA: RUSIA NO LO PERDONARÁ: ESTADOS UNIDOS ESCALA LA GUERRA DE NUEVO (y lo pagará muy caro).
EXPATS IN RUSSIA
My TYPICAL Moscow Saturday ☀️
MAPPING CHANNEL UPDATES
Endless FABs | Breakthrough In Toretsk | Russians Entered Vozdvyzhenka | Military Summary 2024.06.23
Vovchansk Meatgrinder | Russian Concentrated FAB Strike | Firepocket Success.
VICTORY BELONGS TO RUSSIA: IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME
Each day that passes makes a conclusive Russian victory in the Donbass and beyond more certain. As Russia bolsters her forces, and weaponry, those of Ukraine decrease. Russian forces gain ready access to rest and recuperation as troop numbers increase. The increasingly exhausted and demoralised Ukrainian troops have an ever decreasing prospect of such respite. This situation is likely to bring them to complete breakdown as Russia unleashes the firepower of the more modern and advanced weaponry that is arriving with the newly mobilised Russian troops.
The various Ukrainian offensives are now weak when confronted by the reinforced Russian lines. A few futile efforts achieve quite miserable results before fire reigns down on the Ukrainian troops and they are forced back to their starting positions.
And now, all this being said, we have arrived at the wet, and later, freezing conditions where these pathetic Ukrainian forces will be subject to myriad forms of abject misery with death and injury all around them while they lie sodden or frozen, abandoned to their fate by Kiev.
The pitiable young and old of Ukraine have been frogmarched to their deaths as cannon-fodder while the bestial elites of the collective West urge their "president" to add more to their number there at the gates of Hell and their doom. We must feel for the majority of them as they are not the Nazis we revile, in most part they are decent men, fathers, sons, brothers, husband and uncles, who no doubt saw through the coup of 2014 for what it was. But sadly, their fate seems sealed.
Nothing will stop Russia now. Every factor favours them. Victory will be Russia's. In Donbass and beyond and in due course across the world.
Victory belongs to Russia: It is now only a matter of time.
UPDATES TO BE ADDED HERE AS AND WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE OVER THE NEXT 24 HOURS.
UPDATES TO BE ADDED HERE AS AND WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE OVER THE NEXT 24 HOURS.
HOW LONG BEFORE ZELENSKY CRACKS & THE UKRAINIAN REGIME FALLS?
A vicious egomaniac is the illegitimate president of Ukraine. How much longer can he hold onto power while thousands of his ‘subjects’ die each and every day?
Russia is readying its forces for the final push that should deliver the final punch to a tottering Ukrainian army. It truly is only a matter of time. For month after month for the past year Russians have been volunteering to join the Russian military at a rate around 1,500 per day. These new recruits are not sent immediately to the battlefield but have been in training for a great many months. This gives the Russian army strength in depth. Compare this with the Ukrainian regime that is having to drag men forcibly from the streets, some of them very elderly indeed and bring convicts from Ukrainian jails, giving them a week or two’s training then sending them to fight Russia’s highly professional and extremely well-trained army.
The western powers keep throwing money at a problem that has been growing worse day by day for the last year, ever since the failure of Ukraine’s big offensive which was a total flop. No amount of money, weapons or ammunition will help when the best of the Ukrainian army have left the battlefield over the last 30 months, dead and wounded. Russia has a constant supply of volunteers while Ukraine is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Add to this sorry outlook the increasing numbers of Ukrainian men risking death and injury trying to escape over the Romanian or Hungarian border to avoid being sent to die at the front.
While this unfolding disaster takes place Zelensky clings on to power even though he can no longer claim to be the legitimate president of Ukraine. His term of office has now run its course and the Ukrainian constitution does not include any provision allowing him to remain in place. He knows that as soon as he exits and new elections are held the people of Ukraine will reject any candidate for the presidency that advocates continuing this war. The government that follows his administration of comedy club cronies will seek peace and he knows this also. As do the Americans, British and Europeans. Zelensky is still in place largely due to the need of his western sponsors to keep the war going in the vain hope that somehow, some way the tide will turn and Russia will be defeated.
The magical thinking of the concept above along with the need to kick the can further down the road past November in the hope Biden gains a second term is the final, desperate action of a fast failing western plan regarding Ukraine. As we greet 2025 it must surely become clear to all and sundry that the hugely misguided venture to use Ukraine to undermine Russia has backfired in spectacular fashion. All that will be left for the western sponsors of this incredibly reckless, foolhardy and ultimately disastrous policy will be humiliation and the blackest of all possible marks against all their names in the annals of future historians.
And Zelensky, what of him? Where can this rat who refuses to leave his sinking ship flee to? Israel perhaps? The USA? Who will have him? Will there be any among the hordes of misguided sycophants left to harbour such an enormously disgraced individual, destroyer of his nation? No doubt there will be those who, offered a vast amount taken from that pilfered from the billions transferred from the West to Ukraine, will maintain secrecy regarding the whereabout of the fugitive. That he will be a broken man cannot be in doubt. A man filled with regrets at every level. A man who threw away a career in comedy that gained him the love and respect of the majority of Ukrainians who trusted that his election promise to bring peace would be fulfilled. His name, in Ukraine, will elicit then nothing more than spit on the ground and a snarl of absolute hatred. And he will deserve all that is coming to him, bereft of all but his stolen cash, wealth that will never fill the ever-widening black hole in his heart.
