Elsewhere

 

The media/political/international relations scene is depressingly chaotic.

With that in mind, I'm confining my blogging to more cheerful content until things settle down - if they ever do.

Start here.

History Rhyming in Images

 

Los Angeles 2025

This post, gentle reader, is a montage of images.

Half were photographs taken in Europe during the second world war.

Auschwitz 1944

The other half were taken in Los Angeles during the last couple of days.

Los Angeles 2025

They're posted without comment, except to point out that in each case one minority group was targeted by government.

Berlin 1943

Warsaw 1942

Los Angeles 2025

During World War Two those targeted were Jews.           

During the last few days, the people targeted are undocumented immigrants.

You can come to your own conclusions.....

Malice or Bitterness?

Pic courtesy CAWA

No doubt, gentle reader, you came across the reporting of shouts of abuse directed at a Welcome to Country introducing this year's Anzac Day dawn service at Melbourne's Shrine of Remembrance, and at a similar ceremony at King's Park in Perth.

It seems that there was a degree of organisation behind the Melbourne disruption, but the Perth incident was not planned.

Cries of outrage were heard from a range of sources, both directed towards the disruptions, and the place of Welcome to Country rituals at Anzac Day commemorations generally. Ex-service community social media networks lit up, again displaying strong feelings and abysmal ignorance.

The controversy highlights currents of malicious chauvinism that have simmered below the surface in this country for at least a century.  

The first of these currents relates to Anzac Day. The day is simply a commemoration after all. It is not a celebration of national pride, or a glorification of the warrior class - whatever that is. The men who died are not honoured by the screams of outrage directed at the inclusion of Welcome to Country ceremonies. Their memory is demeaned by it.

Anzac Day belongs to the whole nation, and is essentially an inclusive tradition. Welcoming attendees to a dawn service is simply a manifestation of this.  

The ignorance revealed by objections to all Welcome to Country ceremonies, not just those on Anzac Day, is another issue entirely. In the first place, given that indigenous Australians comprised over five hundred  distinct clan groups, welcoming people to country occupied historically by that clan by an elder is an entirely authentic process.

 "Country" does not refer to Australia in this context, something entirely ignored by those who mistakenly believe they are being welcomed to 2025 Australia. Various ex-service organisations made a virtue of declaring that nobody had the right to welcome them to the country they had fought for, completely forgetting that none of these clans have ever claimed to represent the whole country.

Then there are those who take offence because the elders who conduct the ceremonies are usually paid for the privilege. I find that strange, given that one of the hallmarks of a successful capitalist community is its willingness to pay for ritualistic expressions of symbolism. 

It matters not whether putting money into a collection plate at a church service or paying for admission to a football match is payment for witnessing a form of social ritual, these practices are very much part of contemporary mores and have been for a long time.

Frankly, I believe that anyone who would object to a gesture of welcome has been very poorly brought up. As my mother would have said if she had been alive to witness these objections - "They need to grow up!"

  

Karma and the Voice

 

Image courtesy Om Swami

Karma (as it appears in the AI overview in my Google search) is defined as "the ultimate consequences of an earlier action. Essentially, good karma leads to positive outcomes, whilst bad karma leads to negative ones".

The Coalition had a dose of bad Karma on May 3rd, and I'll attempt a quick analysis which I reckon informs the result. I'm no political commentator, but there are patterns in the results that are pretty obvious.

Peter Dutton used the Voice referendum as a wedge to both unite his party with the Nationals, and discredit the ALP. In both those strategies, he was successful, and plenty of pundits forecast that his negative campaigning leading up to the referendum would be poisonous when the country next went to the polls.

So let's see if there's any truth to that notion.

Here's a list of seats that the Coalition lost to Labor -

Banks; Bonner; Leichhardt; Sturt; Bass; Braddon; Deakin; Menzies and Moore.

Quite a few of these seats recorded a better than 40% "Yes" vote in the Voice referendum. Here they are -

Bonner; Sturt; Deakin and Menzies.

Then we should take a look at the so-called Teal seats and other Independents recording better than 40% "Yes" in the referendum -

MacKellar; Warringah; Kooyong; Ryan; Curtin and Clark.

In fact, all of these seats with the exception of Fowler, Indi, and Kennedy, recorded a majority "Yes" vote.

The fact of the matter is that the strong swing recorded against the Coalition on May 3rd was led by voters who supported the Voice. The evidence is clear when you look at the electorates Labor won and the Independents held.

It's completely likely that they carried their disgust about Dutton's campaign to the ballot box.

What goes round comes round..... 

Update -

The Coalition has broken.

Remember how Dutton followed Littleproud in kicking Blackfellas.

More Karma?

A Cautionary Tale

Pic Courtesy Scamwatch

Until a few days ago, gentle reader, I thought I was scam-proof. I've always avoided the usual traps (clicking on links in emails, etc) and am security conscious to the point of hypervigilance.

Not so.

Two days ago, I had my card refused at the bakery early in the morning, so paid cash, wondering what was going on.

I had been home only a few minutes when my bank phoned saying there had been suspicious activity on my card (overseas transaction). Once they knew it was an unauthorised transaction, they gave me the option of cancelling my card, or letting me monitor transactions closely.

I chose the latter because I didn't want to be lumbered with using cash until a new card arrived.

Then, almost on cue, an email arrived, telling me to contact PayPal because there was unauthorised activity on my account. I checked the account, and indeed there was a transaction (purchase of antivirus software) that I had not authorised.

(I use PayPal to sell my book).

I phoned the number on the email, and then began a long conversation with someone who sounded South Asian, was very polite, and had all my details at his fingertips.

The problem was, he wasn't working for PayPal. He was a very sophisticated scammer who had set up a successful ambush. If I had checked the number when I logged into PayPal and found it was different, I would have realised what was going on, but I didn't.

Over about twenty minutes he kept me on the line whilst he claimed he was ensuring my account was secure. He wasn't. He was moving funds from my account using money transfer Apps which he convinced me to download to my phone, on the pretext that he would use them to test the security settings.

At this point I became suspicious, especially when he heard me talking to my bride, who by this time, was also becoming suspicious. He asked me who else was on the call.

I hung up, and phoned my bank. After the usual identity process, they put me through to their security team, who confirmed that $5000 in two separate transactions had been removed from my account.

A prolonged conversation ensued, during which the bank agent sought as much detail as I could provide. It was a very thorough interrogation, and apparently useful.

The bank retrieved the funds overnight, but my card was cancelled, and access to my online banking denied until I could get the two devices I used (iMac and iPhone) certified cleaned. 

This involved cost and inconvenience, and the technician involved told me he was getting an average of five jobs a week cleaning and certifying devices which had been used by scammed customers. 

There are a couple of lessons. One is never to phone a number on an email, until you're absolutely certain it is genuine. It's easy to do so by checking the origin address on the email. I didn't - first time ever.

The other is to follow your instincts, which I subsequently did by terminating the call, but not before the damage was done.

I was very impressed by the thoroughness of the bank, and their persistence in securing the return of the funds. I'm not entirely sure how that was done. Readers may make suggestions through commentary.

I dodged a bullet...

In Memoriam

From left - Bob Hughes, Allan Aldenhoven and John Walker. (Pic courtesy AWM)

Today, gentle reader, is the fifty-fifth anniversary of B Coy, 7 RAR's encounter with a bunker system at grid reference 588698 near a feature which the operational maps called the "bone".

I remember it as if it were yesterday.

We had, as a company, a number of fleeting contacts leading up to the action which had indicated that VC were active in the area. It was the middle of the dry season, and access to water was an issue both for us, and whatever VC were around.

At the end of the encounter, all three platoons had taken casualties - 4 platoon one KIA (Bob Hughes), and one WIA (Karl Metcalf), 5 platoon one WIA (Colin Tilmouth), and 6 platoon (Graham Kavanagh) who died of dehydration on the 21st, the day before we hit the bunkers.

We had been inserted into the AO on the 19th April by patrolling all night along the dry creek bed of a stream called the Suoi Lho O Nho, led by Karl Metcalf, OC 4 platoon. Karl's navigation skills saw the whole company safely arrive in the AO. Most of us were exhausted at the end of the insertion, as we had stumbled for hours in the pitch dark along a rocky creek bed in close single file, fully laden with rations, water and ammunition, and immediately following a period of R & C at Vung Tau, when we'd drunk plenty of beer and other local concoctions. 

A number of men in my (5) platoon had collapsed by the time we arrived, and apparently the same was happening to other callsigns and Graham Kavanagh (6 platoon) had collapsed and became progressively weaker as time passed. I remember seeing a group of soldiers clustered around him as we passed through their position. He died of severe dehydration just before a medivac chopper turned up.

Graham Kavanagh's medical report. (Note misspelling).

Doug Gibbons (OC 5 platoon) had taken a half platoon squad out mid-morning on the 22nd to patrol along a dry creek, and it was a sentry from the bunker system that opened up on that patrol. Colin Tilmouth was wounded and choppered out, after Doug Gibbons retrieved him.

Colin (Charlie) Tilmouth

4 platoon,  led by Karl Metcalf, assaulted the bunkers, and the VC used RPGs to repel them. It was shrapnel from an RPG round fired into a tree that killed Bob Hughes. I was part of a half platoon group that remained as a blocking force on the banks of the dry gully whilst all this was going on. Looking back on it, it was only dumb luck that spared me, and others from my section, from participating in the assault. 

After an afternoon when artillery, a light fire team (Bushranger gunships), and USAF F-100s joined in to attack the bunkers, tanks were summoned. It took them the best part of the evening to turn up, and by then it was too dark to move on the bunkers. Apparently, the combination of tanks, infantry and darkness would not have been conducive to a successful assault.

Next morning the tanks moved in and destroyed the bunkers, but the VC had (wisely) decamped.

This was our first serious contact as a company, and the second time we had been under fire. The first time was when 4 platoon opened up on us on 13th March in a friendly fire incident when Paul Lusk was wounded. I was patrolling next to him at the time, and the incident remains firmly implanted on my memory. Being on the receiving end of a volley of M60 concentrates the mind.

So today, I remember Bob Hughes, Graham Kavanagh and Colin Tilmouth (who was repatriated to Australia, and died in 1990).

May they rest in peace, and their memory be honoured. 

Sed pro gratia dei.....

History Rhymes Again

Image courtesy Reuters

During my short stay in hospital, gentle reader, I did a little reading. 

One of the books I read quickly (easily achieved in a hospital when you are waited on, and aren't interrupted by routine necessary chores) was Mosquito by Rowland White.

I was interested in it because I have an obsession with military aircraft, and find the topic interesting because of personal experience in a variety of these machines in my short and unspectacular military career.

It's an engaging narrative, but more because of its behind-the scenes portrayal of the Danish resistance in World War Two than technical aspects of the aircraft.

De Havilland Mosquitos were used in a spectacular raid on the Shellhaus Gestapo Headquarters in Copenhagen and dropped supplies and personnel to resistance groups. 

They also routinely transported ball bearings from Sweden to the UK to maintain the supply of these much needed components during the height of British aircraft construction during the early stages of the conflict.

But what I hadn't expected to find in this monograph was a the simultaneous contextual outline of the Nazi occupation of Denmark, which was portrayed by the Third Reich's propaganda as an exercise in peaceful cooperation between the Danish authorities and the Nazis.

It wasn't, of course, and when the Danish resistance, supported by the allies, began to have an effect the Nazis retaliated.

This retaliation consisted of rounding up about five hundred Jewish members of the Danish community and transporting them to the Theresienstadt ghetto in Czechoslovakia. 

It could have been a lot worse. Many Danes, with the help of the resistance organised a massive rescue effort. The used boats to ferry Jews across the Oresund strait to Sweden, in an operation coordinated by the resistance, and involving ordinary citizens and some brave members of the Danish police and government. Over seven thousand were saved.

Images of people being herded into railway wagons in August 1943 put me in mind of a similar phenomenon taking place right now in the USA, a country once considered a bastion of democracy. 

The people targeted for deportation into South American Gulags in El Salvador aren't Jews. They're allegedly gang members.  The process is however eerily similar, separated as it is by over eighty years and taking place in different continents..

Again, history rhymes.... 

 

Medicine and Technology

 Image courtesy Medscape

I've been a bit lucky, gentle reader, when it comes to hospital admissions across my seventy-seven years.

The last time I was an inpatient is a hospital was when I had my tonsils out at age four. Courtesy of a pulmonary embolism, I now find myself an inpatient after an emergency admission on Sunday.

Modern hospitals are interesting places. There are a variety of systems which generally work like well oiled machines and most often allow for effective monitoring of vital signs. 

For the first few days of my treatment I was kitted out with a device which recorded my oxygen levels and heart rate in real time and transmitted the information to a screen in the nurses station. It was attached to my chest with stickers and cables, and was only a problem when I needed to shower, as the stickers had to be removed and replaced.

One benefit of this device was that it removed the requirement to be woken at stupid hours to have vital signs checked. Blood pressure could not be measured using this thing, so I still had to be disturbed for that, but that was only once during weird hours, so I was glad of the lumpy technology. It’s amazing what you can put up with sleep wise when it’s necessary.

The only time I had a problem with the monitoring was when I got a little stir-crazy and went for a walk to the cafeteria for a coffee.

The upshot was that the device started beeping, set an alarm at the nurses station, and caused consternation when they went to my room to find me absent.

I was spoken to very sternly….

Mythbusting

 

Image courtesy 6PR

I came across this post the other day.

I have never met Normie Rowe, but have deep respect for him as a fellow Vietnam veteran and Nasho. He left Vietnam just before I got there, but I certainly travelled in APCs belonging to his unit (3 Cav) in 1970. 

It was noisy, but beat walking. It helped to forget about land mines....

Rowe is also a very talented musician. The post is attributed to Normie, but without actually asking him, gentle reader, I won't know whether he wrote it or not. 

In any case, I'm interested in the facts of history, not (in this case) how a Vietnam veteran (including a respected celebrity) allegedly reflects on his experience. There is a time and place for that. 

I find myself agreeing with much of what is attributed to Rowe in the post, especially his remarks about conscription being a political exercise. 

The part that doesn't hold water refers to an anecdote about the deathbed confession by an advisor to Harold Holt. All Normie writes is that he'd heard the anecdote. He makes no judgement about whether it is real.

To cut to the chase, the post alleges that Normie ended up as a conscript because the government believed that calling up a celebrity would improve public support for the scheme, support that had never been on firm ground. The substance of the myth is that his birthdate was never drawn, and that he was enlisted as a publicity stunt. 

Indeed, his birthdate (1st February 1947) was not drawn in the fifth intake on 10th March 1967, but that was irrelevant as he hadn't registered. He was absent from Australia at the time making music in the UK. 

He was required to register when he got home, and did so, in one of the fifteen supplementary ballots held during the course of the scheme. There were sixteen regular ballots, one more than the supplementary ones. I had registered in the normal ballot he missed and my birthdate was drawn in that 10th March ballot. Strangely, that's my bride's birthday, although we hadn't met at the time.

The routine supplementary ballot was held for those registering on return to Australia, and Normie's birthdate was drawn. He was enlisted in January 1968, assigned the regimental number 3793130, did recruit training and was allocated to Armoured Corps.

He was in Vietnam from 14th January until 19th December 1969.

The myth has been bouncing around the interweb for years, and has been debunked before, but it persists. It featured on Media Watch in March 2008.

I was at a meeting of ex-Nashos the other day, and heard the myth being floated again. I had my iPad with me and was able to show the ex-Nasho who was proclaiming it, chapter and verse showing the Normie's birthdate drawn in the supplementary ballot. 

It made no difference, and we parted with his belief in the myth still firm. He claimed the whole thing (including the record of the supplementary ballot draws) was a government conspiracy.

Obviously, the myth is more entertaining than the history.

Shared Values - Take two

 

Monthly value of US merchandise exports to Australia (A$ millions) since 1988

Monthly value of Australian merchandise exports to the United States (A$ millions) since 1988

Pics courtesy Wikipedia

I've posted about this before, but the issue is much more significant now.

The rationale of "shared values" is routinely advanced by our political class to support the notion that we should, as a matter of policy, go along with much of what is happening under the Trump administration at the moment.

Given that, it would be useful to examine just which values we share with Americans, at both the individual and community level. This is difficult, in the first instance, because the diversity that exists across populations in both countries makes it difficult to determine what those individual values are.

Would an African-American from Chicago hold the same values as a white American from the Midwest, or a Latino from Texas? Would a hipster from urban Melbourne hold the same set of values as a wheat farmer from Merredin, or a Murri from Dajarra?

The answer, of course, is that individual comparisons and assumptions simply do not hold, so we will have to look at institutional and political values.

AI will tell you that Australian values respect mateship, and the notion of a "fair go', whereas Americans value individual achievement, free will, and economic success. The institutional outcomes of these factors are universal health programmes, strong social security and welfare structures in Australia, and private insurance and a relatively scelorotic welfare system in the USA.

It describes an Australian laid back attitude to leadership, and a lack of deference to authority, whereas Americans respect authoritative leaders and those in positions of power. These values feed consensus (not weak) politicians in Australia, and authoritarian leadership in the USA. The current situation mirrors that.

It says Australians have a more relaxed approach to the work-life balance, and focus more on enjoying life than making money, but Americans value career advancement and are tolerant of long working hours. 

The cliche of the tall poppy syndrome is cited in Australia, but Americans are painted as admiring "superstars" and those who are very successful.

And when it comes to class structure, Americans are described as categorising people by status, whereas Australia has a relatively low degree of class structure.

Frankly, I believe that there is confusion generated by the fact that we share a common language and there are strong parallels in our national history narrative, as we are post colonial societies which began as British settlements. These commonalities mask or hide significant differences.

These differences were demonstrated starkly to me when I served beside Americans in Vietnam fifty five years ago. I vividly remember situations where the hierarchical culture of many American military units got in the way of getting the job done. As Australians, we often exploited this culture when we were scrounging for materials. It was very easy to use rank as a wedge to get what we wanted.

The attitude towards race demonstrated by the Americans was in strong contrast to ours. We saw indigenous diggers as of equal status. The Americans didn't, and this was sometimes a source of tension when we fraternised with African-American soldiers when on leave.

I remember being pulled aside by a well-meaning GI in a nightclub in Saigon, and being told "You don't want to associate with those motherfuckers". He was referring to a group of black Southerners who were great and generous company.I saw these same attitudes, especially to race and status, when I visited the USA in 2018. Nothing has changed in half a century.

In summary, I believe that the rationalisation of "shared values" as a basis for our alliance is mythology.

We need something more solid than that, given what is at stake.

The Power of Attention

 

Joseph R McCarthy courtesy Wikipedia

 You don't have to look very far in recent American political history, gentle reader, to find a figure resembling Donald Trump.

That figure, Joseph McCarthy, the Senator from Wisconsin, who was prominent from 1950 until 1954, until he was censured by the Senate, had galvanised public opinion around the issue of alleged Communist subversion in American institutional life. 

McCarthy's activities for that relatively brief period of time, had an impact well beyond both the span of his crusade, and the walls of the US Senate.

The combination of power, fame and falsehood has always held a magnetic attraction for the US media. In a country where there is no publicly funded media of any real consequence, corporations that make a profit by selling copy (print or digital) will always be attracted to what is loud, exciting and simple. 

This monopolising of the spotlight is an important pathway to political power across the Pacific. There are any number of cliches bearing witness to the phenomenon. There is no such thing as bad publicity. is just one of those cliches, and one that Trump understands very well.

Trump, either consciously or instinctively, is well aware of this phenomenon and has exploited it adroitly. This exploitation has taken on a sinister turn recently, with his administration's attempt to push aside media agencies that challenge his narrative.

He has also demonstrated that he is prepared to take on many institutions previously protected by their status, including the churches, the courts, and the military.

McCarthy met his demise when he took on the US military, and after he was denounced by Edward R Murrow, a highly respected broadcaster, he quickly lost favour and with it, attention. 

Unfortunately, by that time he had done a great deal of damage during the half a decade of his notoriety. Anti-communist hysteria spread beyond the shores and institutions of the USA, and had an influence in Australian politics lasting well into the early sixties.

Our tragic adventure in Vietnam was just one outcome. Echoes persist even today. They're all over social media.

Social media thrives on memes that are loud, exciting and simple.

Social media is a good earner for a few. It has become a parasite feeding on rumour, fear, and outrage, and the platforms are lining up to take advantage of the spoils. 

That fact that it influences the outcomes of elections and is being harnessed by political operatives is perhaps the most worrying aspect of all.  

 

A Cockeyed Bob?

 

Police station and residence. The government house we lived in was identical.

Those of you living in south-east Queensland and northern New South Wales have probably had enough of cyclone Alfred. 

We've been minimally effected, and apart from my bush house doing the watusi which meant that everything on its shelves ended up in a heap on the floor, life has proceeded as usual.

Tropical cyclones are part of my lived experience, having grown up in north Queensland, and my earliest memories are those surrounding a cyclone which crossed the coast at Carmila on March 11th 1950. I was about three at the time, but can remember parts of it, including sheltering under a sturdy oak table in our kitchen whilst the school residence broke up around us.

This link takes you to a newspaper account in the Townsville Daily bulletin of 13th March 1950. It took two days for the full story to get through, a contrast to the real time reporting we're seeing today. Dad gets a mention in the report.

The house lost all its corrugated iron roof, and part of the gable end at the front. We were obliged to live in the school for a couple of weeks whilst the residence was re-roofed.  

Another early memory was the smell of burning linen. A family down the road from us also moved into the school, and one of them came down with Tuberculosis. Back then, we were advised to burn all bed linen used by this family. My mother had taken bed linen out of storage which had been a wedding gift, and loaned it to this family.

Repair crew that was sent into Carmila by rail.

Mum was very upset when it had to be burned, and I recall the smell, and her distress.

Since then, I lived in Townsville for a while, and was there when cyclone Aivu crossed the coast near the Burdekin River between Townsville and Bowen on April 4th 1989. Whilst that cyclone didn't do a great deal of damage around Townsville, it caused lots of flooding to the north, and for a while looked to be a major threat.

This may have been why,  given my recall of the Carmila experience, I moved my family overnight to my new school which had been built to cyclone proof standards in 1987. I rationalised that if the school was going to be declared a cyclone, I would be prepared by being on site.

As I write this, in Queensland, at least, no lives have been lost, although the same can't be said for Northern NSW.

And the term "Cockeyed Bob?" I haven't heard it used for decades, but apparently it was once applied to severe and unpredictable storms.

That would describe Alfred. 

Textbook Intimidation

I'm posting this, gentle reader, because I've seen nothing more bizarre in my lifetime.

The first few minutes of the video show Zelensky reminding Trump and Vance of the history. They didn't want to hear the facts of history.

They were more interested in grandstanding for the domestic hard liners.

It's a shameful piece of television, and doesn't bode well for international peace. For some reason, Trump is in thrall to Putin, and doesn't seem to have the vaguest respect for Ukraine and its people.

He is obviously quite prepared to appease the Russian Federation simply to get even on his domestic political opponents. That is the only history Trump is interested in. 

Here is a man who will put his own vindictive retribution before the freedom and survival of a country of thirty seven million.

As we say in Australia, he's "getting square".

It doesn't bode well for our relationship with the US, and our billion dollar AUKUS deal.  How can you trust an administration with a leader concerned only with narcissistic revenge?

Here's the transcript. The first few minutes of the grab cover Zelensky's attempt to unwrap the history, but the transcription doesn't include that -

Zelenskyy: What kind of diplomacy, JD, are you are asking about? What do you mean?

Vance: I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country.

Zelenskyy: Yes, but if you …

Vance: Mr President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come to the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American media. Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the frontlines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the president.

Zelenskyy: Have you ever been to Ukraine to see the problems we have?

Vance: I’ve actually watched and seen the stories, and I know what happens is you bring people on a propaganda tour, Mr President.

Do you disagree that you’ve had problems with bringing people in your military, and do you think that it’s respectful to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the administration that is trying to prevent the destruction of your country?

Zelenskyy: First of all, during the war, everybody has problems, even you. You have nice solutions and don’t feel [it] now, but you will feel it in the future.

Trump: You don’t know that. Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel. We’re trying to solve a problem. Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel.

Zelenskyy: I am not telling you, I am answering …

Vance: That’s exactly what you’re doing …

Trump, raising his voice: You’re in no position to dictate what we’re going to feel. We’re going to feel very good and very strong.

Zelenskyy tries to speak.

Trump: You right now are not in a very good position. You’ve allowed yourself to be in a very bad position. You don’t have the cards right now. With us, you start having the cards.

You’re gambling with lives of millions of people, you’re gambling with world war three and what you’re doing is very disrespectful to this country.

Vance: Have you said thank you once?

Zelenskyy: A lot of times.

Vance: No, in this meeting, this entire meeting? Offer some words of appreciation for the United States of America and the president who’s trying to save your country.

Zelenskyy: Yes, you think that if you will speak very loudly about the war …

Trump: He’s not speaking loud. Your country is in big trouble. No, no, you’ve done a lot of talking. Your country is in big trouble.

Zelenskyy: I know, I know.

Trump: You’re not winning this. You have a damn good chance of coming out OK, because of us.

Zelenskyy: We are staying strong from the very beginning of the war, we have been alone, and we are saying, I said, thanks.

Trump, speaking over Zelenskyy: You haven’t been alone … We gave you military equipment. Your men are brave, but they had our military. If you didn’t have our military equipment, this war would have been over in two weeks.

Zelenskyy: I heard it from Putin in three days.

Trump: It’s going to be a very hard thing to do business like this.

Vance: Just say thank you.

Zelenskyy: I said it a lot of times.

Vance: Accept that there are disagreements and let’s go litigate those disagreements rather than trying to fight it in the American media, when you’re wrong. We know that you’re wrong.

Trump: You’re buried there. Your people are dying. You’re running low on soldiers. No, listen … And then you tell us, ‘I don’t want a ceasefire. I don’t want a ceasefire. I want to go and I want this.’

Trump: You’re not acting at all thankful. And that’s not a nice thing. I’ll be honest, that’s not a nice thing.

All right, I think we’ve seen enough. What do you think? Great television. I will say that.

End...

So sad. So bizarre.