Aletho News


FDA Just Approved Kids Covid Booster — with ZERO Testing!

Testing it on 8 baby mice was too much work for Pfizer

By Igor Chudov | October 12, 2022

Pfizer just reported FDA’s decision to approve a bivalent Covid booster for “emergency use” for children 5-17 years of age.

What is amazing is that the approved bivalent vaccine was NOT tested on children or even on baby mice, at all!

For each of the bivalent COVID-19 vaccines authorized today, the FDA relied on immune response and safety data that it had previously evaluated from a clinical study in adults of a booster dose of a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine that contained a component of the original strain of SARS-CoV-2 and a component of omicron lineage BA.1. The FDA considers such data as relevant and supportive of vaccines containing a component of the omicron variant BA.4 and BA.5 lineages. In addition, the FDA has evaluated and considered immune response and safety data from clinical studies of the monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, including as a booster dose in pediatric age groups. These data and real-world experience with the monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, which have been administered to millions of people, including young children, support the EUA of the bivalent COVID-19 vaccines in younger age groups.

May I ask, why no testing? The FDA and Pfizer had plenty of time: they were testing bivalent boosters on adults since the beginning of the year. No testing on children was done with any bivalent booster.

Could Pfizer at least purchase 8 baby mice and try their booster on 8 mouse babies? They surely could do that along with the adult dose testing.

An added touch of ridiculousness here is that the FDA also chose NOT to consult “FDA advisors” and thus did not convene the VRBPAC committee. That committee would, of course, approve anything. So, what is the reason for not convening it? The reason is that the FDA did not want to have any votes — even one vote — against this vaccine and did not want to have a public hearing about this travesty.

Three-Year-Old Spike Injections Still Required for Primary Series

It gets worse, of course. Only 30% of children 5-11 years of age are Covid vaccinated.

Should the parents of the 70% of unvaccinated children decide that they want their child to receive a bivalent (updated with Ba.5 formulation) shot, they would have to first give that child two shots of a three-year-old monovalent Wuhan-based vaccine (primary series), and only then they would be allowed to give their children the new and updated shot. Why? The FDA is not telling us.

The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent is authorized for administration at least two months following completion of primary or booster vaccination in children down to six years of age.

If someone asked me three years ago, whether it is possible that the FDA would approve a children’s vaccine with ZERO testing on children, I would of course laugh the question off as ludicrous. Now it is reality. Even worse, schools and camps may start requiring it.

I thought that the reputation of our health authorities could only bottom at zero. Clearly, though, they want to drive it down to the negative territory.

What do you think?

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, War Crimes | | 1 Comment

Scientists Discover Massive Recent Slowdown in Melting of Antarctica ‘Doomsday’ Glacier

By Chris Morrison | The Daily Sceptic | October 16, 2022

Forget coral reefs and polar bears – they are so yesterday’s climate scare stories. The real big one, the tipping point du jour, is the collapse of the West Antarctica ice shelf and the prospect of global flooding on a biblical scale last reported in the times of Noah. It’s in rapid retreat says every scaremonger from Sir David Attenborough to the BBC’s resident green activist Justin Rowlatt. It is in retreat – a natural process as the Earth slowly moves out of an ice age. But now, new scientific work has found the process at the huge Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica – nicknamed the ‘Doomsday Glacier‘ for the supposed approaching catastrophe of its swift demise – is much slower than in the recent past.

The Thwaites Glacier has long been of interest. It is the second largest ice stream in West Antarctica and occupies an area the size of Florida. A group of oceanographers, led by Dr. Alastair Graham of the University of South Florida, has mapped part of the floor once occupied by the glacier, and discovered it was retreating at twice the rate in the past than that now indicated by the satellite measurements made between 2011-2019. The earlier rate of retreat was said to be “exceptionally fast”. Work is in progress to establish when that fast retreat occurred, but it is almost certain it pre-dates the 1950s, could be about 180 years old, and possibly dates back several centuries. What is completely clear, however, given the timing, is that human-caused climate change was not a factor in the faster retreat.

The results were obtained by using autonomous submersibles to map an area of the sea floor where markings were discovered representing the retreating glacier. Mapping 13 square kilometres, the researchers found a series of ridges caused by the moving glacier hitting the sea floor as it rose and fell with the tides. It was found that during the daily tidal cycle, the glacier retreated around 6-7 metres a day, although sometimes reaching 10m. Over about five months of data, the glacier retreated 2.1 kms a year, twice the current rate measured by the satellites.

The ridges were discovered on a ‘bump’ in the sea floor that had helped pin the glacier. It was found that over a 5.5 month period, the average spacing of the ridges increased upstream from 5.8m to 6.3m. This 8% increase accelerated the annual retreat rate from 2.13km to 2.3km. The results are said to indicate that the movement across the area to the present day position was “probably rapid”. The scientists note: “Our results indicate that the rate of retreat from the bump was double the average estimated for the period 1996-2009, and about three times faster than a location immediately inland of the bump between 2011 and 2017.”

Two years ago, another group led by glaciologist Professor Julian Dowdeswell of Cambridge University measured similar tidal wedges under the Larsen continental shelf in the western Weddell Sea. Grounding line retreat rates of 40-50m a day were discovered, equivalent to 10kms a year. The scientists concluded that this retreat occurred 14,000 years ago and was 100 times faster than the rate over the past 10,000 years.

This is all fascinating scientific work that gives us more information about the natural processes that shape the Earth. But it will be largely ignored in the mainstream if such findings are seen to cast doubt on the ‘settled’ science of human-caused global warming. In March 2020, the BBC’s Justin Rowlatt took a camera crew to the middle of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, an area he called the “front line of climate change”. The equilibrium that had held our world in balance for tens of thousands of years was beginning to slip and crash, he claimed. The “epic forces” at work were like a “scream of anguish”, he continued. “The glacier is being torn and shattered.” The acceleration in melting that affected the entire West Antarctica ice sheet was, “needless to say”, the result of the global warming gases our lifestyles produced. The emotional tosh continued: “A colleague interviews me for a programme we are making and I burst into tears. It takes me days to process my emotions.”

Humans may have a part to play in a climate that has always changed. Considering the massive forces at work in the natural world, many only partly understood, it is probably minor or even insignificant. But the move to declare the science around the subject ‘settled’ is harming our efforts to better understand the natural forces that shape the planet. It is certainly harming our ability to have a reasoned conversation about it. Vast sums of money are being diverted into a command-and-control Net Zero political agenda designed to radically alter the lifestyles and economic prospects of every single human on the planet. Only science that supports this political narrative gets a hearing in the mainstream media, and when politics is involved, emotion is never far from the controlling message.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Replacing Natural Gas With Hydrogen Is A Fairy Tale

Hydrogen as an energy source for powering transport and heating poses colossal technical and cost challenges

No Tricks Zone | October 15, 2022

By Die kalte Sonne 

Article at Telepolis (Heise).

A mostly ignored problem in the hydrogen discussion is that the existing gas grids are not suitable for handling larger amounts of hydrogen. Thus, the Scientific Advisory to the German Bundestag had already dealt with the issue in the past. It came to the conclusion that “unlimited quantities of methane” could be fed into the gas networks. But concluded

For hydrogen produced by means of electrolysis, the limits are currently 1-10 percent by volume.”

Indeed, a problem generally known in materials research is that hydrogen leads to the embrittlement of metals. Many of the pipeline steels currently in use react to contact with hydrogen by significantly reducing elongation at break and becoming hydrogen brittle.”

The article is also critical of heating with hydrogen:

Using hydrogen to heat homes is, by comparison, less economical, less efficient, more resource-intensive and also has a greater environmental impact, Rosenow argues.

But the alternative is not as ‘green’ as hydrogen likes to be called. Among other things, it is pointed out that considerable technical changes would also be required in households, including the piping in the home, among other things due to embrittlement. This would also cost households an enormous amount of money.

In addition, it is abundantly inefficient to use electricity from renewable sources to electrolyze water to produce hydrogen for this purpose. ‘In the UK, heating homes with green hydrogen would use about six times more renewable electricity than heat pumps,’ David Cebon of the Hydrogen Science Coalition and professor of mechanical engineering at Cambridge University tells the BBC.

There is neither the time nor the resources to investigate further the role of hydrogen in heating homes, especially if the laws of thermodynamics are respected, he added.”

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | 3 Comments

Court: Facebook “fact-check’ label does not mean that the assessment is “objective fact”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | October 15, 2022

US TV host and journalist John Stossel sued Facebook (Meta) and its third-party “fact-checkers” – specifically, Science Feedback, as several of these groups’ parent companies, and its site Climate Feedback – for defamation.

But the US District Court, Northern District of  has granted both ’s motion to dismiss the defamation complaint with prejudice (meaning that it cannot be refiled), as well as Meta’s and Science Feedback’s anti-SLAPP motions.

We obtained a copy of the decision for you here.

One of Stossel’s videos, “Government Fueled Fires,” got labeled as “missing context,” and then deliberately downranked by ’s algorithms, resulting in traffic and revenue loss from his account with more than a million followers.

The video was seen as “downplaying” climate change as the decisive factor and primary cause of the 2020 California wildfires, asserting instead that although the phenomenon plays a role, it was bad policies that contributed the most to the scale of that natural disaster.

In April 2021, Stossel published another video, “Are We Doomed?”, that discusses what the journalist calls environmental alarmists and their claims. This one received the “partly false information” from Facebook’s “fact-checking partner.”

Stossel’s failed lawsuit sought to prove that Facebook and the “fact-checker” in question defamed him in the first instance by falsely inferring that he made a statement he says he never did, and in the other, by accusing him of making false statements.

The court explained its decision by saying that, although called a “fact-check program” what Facebook is actually doing – and has the right to do – is “reflect a subjective judgment about the accuracy and reliability of assertions made.”

Therefore, the use of the term “fact” isn’t to say that Facebook is under an obligation to establish actual facts, and apply its censorship accordingly. “Simply because the process by which content is assessed and a label applied is called a ‘fact-check’ does not mean that the assessment itself is an actionable statement of objective fact.”

The defamation complaint was dismissed based on CDA’s Section 230 and the protections it affords Facebook in crafting (and wording) its policies.

Facebook’s and “fact-checker’s” motions to dismiss based on anti-SLAPP (Anti-Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) rules were granted because Facebook is a public forum, the court said.

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | 1 Comment

Et Tu, PayPal? The EU’s Role in Defunding Dissent


PayPal appears unsure whether it should participate in the current crusade against online “disinformation” or not.

First it closed the PayPal accounts of The Daily Sceptic and the Free Speech Union, and even the personal account of their founder Toby Young, and then, two weeks later, it restored them. Then it announced that it would be docking $2,500 from anyone who uses its services in connection with “promoting misinformation” and then, two days later, it again reversed course and announced that this language was never intended to be included in its new Acceptable Use Policy (AUP).

It was not intended to be included? Well, where did it come from then?

Could the EU’s Code of Practice on Disinformation and its Digital Services Act (DSA), about which I wrote in my last Brownstone article, have something to do with PayPal’s skittish forays into “combatting disinformation?” Well, yes, they could, and you may rest assured that EU officials or representatives have already had a word with PayPal about them.

As discussed in my previous article, the Code requires signatories to censor what is deemed by the European Commission to be disinformation on pain of massive fines. The enforcement mechanism, i.e. the fines, has been established under the DSA.

PayPal is not, for the moment, a signatory of the Code. Furthermore, since it is neither a content platform nor a search engine – the potential channels of “disinformation” targeted in the DSA – it is obviously not in a position to censor per se. But the very first commitment in the “strengthened” Code of Practice unveiled by the European Commission last June is dedicated precisely to demonetization.

Unsurprisingly, given the nature of the business models of the most prominent signatories – Twitter, Meta/Facebook and Google/YouTube – this commitment and the six “measures” it comprises are mostly related to advertising practices.

But the “Guidance” that the Commission issued in May 2021, prior to the Code’s drafting, explicitly calls for “broadening” efforts to defund alleged purveyors of disinformation and contains the following highly pertinent recommendation:

Actions to defund disinformation should be broadened by the participation of players active in the online monetisation value chain, such as online e-payment services, e-commerce platforms and relevant crowd-funding/donation systems. (p. 8; emphasis added)

PayPal, the online e-payment service par excellence, was thus already in the Commission’s sights.

Somewhat illogically, given their own emphasis on advertising and the fact that an advertising-based revenue model and a donation or pay model would ordinarily be regarded as alternatives, the signatories of the “strengthened” Code thus pledged to

… exchange best practices and strengthen cooperation with relevant players, expanding to organisations active in the online monetisation value chain, such as online e-payment services, e-commerce platforms and relevant crowd-funding/donation systems. … (Commitment 3)

But the outreach to PayPal has not only occurred via third parties like the Code signatories.

In late May, shortly after the text of the Digital Services Act had been finalized – but before the European Parliament had even had the opportunity to vote on it! – an 8-member delegation from the parliament was dispatched to California to discuss the DSA and the related Digital Markets Act (DMA) with relevant “digital stakeholders.”

In addition to Code signatories Google and Meta, the “host list,” so to say – since the parliamentarians were to be the guests and they were inviting themselves! – also included PayPal. (See the delegation report here.)

Curiously, Twitter was not included among the companies and organizations to be visited, perhaps because of the turmoil unleashed by Elon Musk’s takeover bid. But, as touched upon in my prior article, Thierry Breton, the EU’s Internal Market Commissioner, had already paid a visit to Musk in Austin, Texas earlier in the month to have a word with him about the DSA.

No less than three of the delegation’s eight members – Alexandra Geese, Marion Walsmann and delegation head Andreas Schwab – were German, whereas Germans only account for around 13% of the total members of the parliament. This stark overrepresentation is telling, since Germany has undoubtedly been the prime mover behind the EU’s censorship drive, having already adopted its own online censorship law in 2017 with the express motivation of “combatting criminal fake news in social networks” (p. 1 of the legislative proposal in German here).

The German legislation, commonly known as “NetzDG” or the Network Enforcement Act, threatens platforms with fines of up to €50 million for hosting content that infringes any of a variety of German laws that restrict speech in ways that would be unthinkable and unconstitutional in the United States. It is also the source of the Twitter notices that many Twitter users will have received informing them that their account had been denounced by “a person from Germany.”

As noted above, PayPal is not presently a signatory of the Code of Practice on Disinformation. On July 14, however, just nine days after the passage of the DSA, the Commission issued a “Call for interest to become a Signatory” of the Code. The call is explicitly addressed to, among others, “e-payment services, e-commerce platforms, crowd-funding/donation systems.” The latter are identified as “providers whose services may be used to monetize disinformation.”

Evidently not satisfied merely with “deplatforming,” the Commission has thus made clear that the next frontier in its combat against “disinformation” is attempting to defund dissenters who, despite their discrimination by or banishment from the major online platforms, have managed to preserve a place in the online discussion thanks to platforms of their own.

PayPal, moreover, will know that the “exclusive” – in effect, dictatorial – powers that the DSA confers on the European Commission include the power to designate the “very large” online platforms that are susceptible to incurring the massive DSA fines of up to 6% of global turnover. PayPal will easily satisfy the “very large” size criterion of having at least 45 million users in the EU, but it is obviously not a content platform.

Nonetheless, this appears not to be so obvious to the European Commission. For the Commission press release on the call for signatories treats it precisely… as a content platform! Thus, the press release refers to “providers of e-payment services, e-commerce platforms, crowd-funding/donation systems, which may be used to spread disinformation.” Huh?

In the meanwhile, on September 1, the EU has opened a specially-dedicated office or “embassy” in San Francisco to conduct what it itself describes as “digital diplomacy” with US tech firms. The “ambassador,” Commission official Gerard de Graaf, is reportedly one of the drafters of the DSA. Perhaps he will be able to explain the intricacies of the DSA to PayPal – or even already has. PayPal headquarters are, after all, just a stone’s throw away in Palo Alto.

In any case, PayPal has been put on notice, and, with it, so too have dissident websites that depend on user support for their survival. Ignore the EU at your peril.

Robert Kogon is a pen name for a widely-published financial journalist, a translator, and researcher working in Europe. He writes at

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

PayPal is acting like a feudal overlord

By Josie Appleton | Notes On Freedom | October 13, 2022

In the past, if a government wanted a bank to close or freeze a customer’s account it would have to come banging on the door with a court order. Now, governments have shown that they can close private accounts at the drop of a hat. During the Freedom Convoy protests, the Canadian government drew up a list of individuals – on grounds that were never made clear, although the Justice Minister said that Trump supporters should be ‘worried’ – and banks immediately froze their customers’ accounts, no questions asked.

Indeed, payment companies are taking the lead and freezing their own customers’ accounts, because of vague offences such as perceived ‘misinformation’. PayPal recently closed the accounts of lockdown sceptics, doctors for informed consent, critics of trans ideology, even the Free Speech Union (perhaps for defending trans critical feminists). Other companies such as GoFundMe, MasterCard, Stripe, Etsy, and Patreon have closed the accounts of gender campaigners, right-wing campaigners and critics of vaccine mandates.

PayPal’s recent threat to fine its customers up to $2500 for ‘misinformation’ was a new step. Now they are not only closing accounts but also potentially seizing funds. Although PayPal implausibly claimed that the new ‘acceptable use policy’ was published in error – it was up for several days as a link from its Policy Updates page – the principle of PayPal potentially seizing customers’ funds had already been established. When it closed recent accounts, PayPal stated that it would be holding funds for 180 days to see if any ‘damages’ were due. The idea of holding and perhaps seizing customers’ money was already established in practice.

Similarly, during the truckers’ protests in Canada, GoFundMe decided that it was not going to pass on 9 million Canadian dollars of donations to the Freedom Convoy, since the protests had violated its ‘terms of service’. Instead, it would pass the money to ‘credible and established charities verified by GoFundMe’ (donors could get a refund if they filled in a form). Millions of dollars that had been donated by the public for a particular cause were reappropriated and used for some other cause.

Companies are violating the rules of their own market system. Private property rights are supposed to be sacred, protected with a single-minded obsession that outweighs almost everything else. The sociologist Max Weber said that the operation of the market requires that all authorities work according to ‘calculable rules’ and ‘without regard for persons’ (1). When you put money in an account you need to know that it is safe; when you make a payment you need to know that it will go to its intended beneficiary and not someone else.

Now, governments and companies are randomly freezing people’s accounts and they often won’t even tell you why they have done it. They are lording it over private interests. This has something of the Middle Ages about it, when all lands were nominally held from the king and could be seized at any time if a vassal was not sufficiently loyal; the lands would then be given to a more loyal follower. Now, the bureaucratic-corporate elite nominally holds the wealth of the world; we are graciously allowed to use it, so long as we do not use it for misinformation, in which case it will be taken back and reappropriated to a cause of its choice.

Here is another form of that nefarious principle that your ability to take part in public life is a privilege dependent upon good behaviour. With vaccine passports, you could only take part in society if you had obediently received the correct sequence of vaccines and boosters. If you didn’t get a booster on time, your QR code was deactivated and when you tried to buy a cup of coffee it would not work: ‘This code is no longer valid.’ Now, companies are taking it upon themselves to police the marketplace, so that you can only receive funds and make donations if you express the correct opinions on their flagship issues.

Public life is increasingly becoming subject to an ‘acceptable use policy’. If digital currencies go ahead, the potential for authorities to close accounts, freeze and reclaim funds and refuse purchases will be taken to a new level.

The public backlash against PayPal’s latest account freezes was phenomenal. Thousands of people sent complaints to Paypal and cancelled their PayPal accounts in solidarity, a pressure that led to some of these frozen accounts to be reinstated. The lordly presumption of the new corporate elite is terrifying; we must be prepared to fight it every step of the way.

(1) Max Weber, Economy and Society, Vol 2, Uni California Press, p975

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Americans should know if US pressured Middle East ally – congressman

Samizdat – October 16, 2022

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi should look into whether the White House pressured Saudi Arabia to delay OPEC+’s promised oil production cut, Republican Tom Tiffany demanded in a letter to the congresswoman on Thursday.

The Saudi government had claimed earlier that day that the US government had requested a one-month delay in the 2 million barrels per day production cut announced earlier this month. Putting off the cut, it implied, would postpone the surge in energy prices expected to accompany the move until after the US midterm elections. However, “postponing the OPEC+ decision by a month… would have had negative economic consequences” for Riyadh, a statement from the Kingdom read.

The administration of US President Joe Biden responded by accusing its sometime Arab ally of attempting to “spin and deflect.” The Saudis “knew [the production cut] would increase Russian revenues and blunt the effectiveness of sanctions,” White House spokesman John Kirby reminded Americans.

However, Kirby did not deny their claim outright. He suggested that “other OPEC nations” had “privately” approached the US to support its bid to postpone the reduction, implying that it could not have been solely motivated by the desire to keep control of Congress in November.

“If the Biden administration did attempt to pressure a foreign government to influence the outcome of the US election, that’s something Americans deserve to know,” Tiffany tweeted on Thursday alongside his letter to Pelosi.

If the Saudis’ claims are to be believed, he wrote, the administration’s efforts to postpone the cut amounted to an “illegal solicitation of a foreign in-kind contribution by the White House on behalf of Democrats’ midterm campaign efforts.”

In addition to investigating whether calls took place between the Biden administration and the Saudis about potentially delaying the production cut, Tiffany urged Pelosi to obtain the transcripts of those calls. He also insisted that US administration officials who may have asked Saudi officials to delay the cut be identified.

Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, confirmed on Sunday that the president would act “methodically” to re-evaluate the US relationship with Saudi Arabia. The administration has been threatening to “reassess” the partnership ever since the price cut was announced. However, while the president warned there would be “some consequences” for the Saudis, their nature has yet to be publicly revealed.

Inflation and the high cost of living are the chief issues on voters’ minds heading into the midterms next month, casting the Democrats’ ability to hold onto both the House and Senate into doubt as polls indicate few voters trust Biden to effectively manage the economy.

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Economics | , | 3 Comments

The other Russia-West war: Why some African countries are abandoning Paris and joining Moscow

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | October 15, 2022

The moment that Lieutenant-Colonel Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba was ousted by his former military colleague, Captain Ibrahim Traore, pro-coup crowds filled the streets. Some burned French flags; others carried Russian flags. This scene alone represents the current tussle underway throughout the African continent.

A few years ago, the discussion regarding the geopolitical shifts in Africa was not exactly concerned with France and Russia per se. It focused mostly on China’s growing economic role and political partnerships on the African continent. For example, Beijing’s decision to establish its first overseas military base in Djibouti in 2017 signalled China’s major geopolitical move by translating its economic influence in the region to political influence, backed by military presence.

China remains committed to its Africa strategy. Beijing has been Africa’s largest trading partner for 12 years, consecutively, with total bilateral trade between China and Africa reaching $254.3 billion in 2021, according to recent data released by the General Administration of Customs of China.

The US and its Western allies have been aware of and are warning against China’s growing clout in Africa. The establishment of US AFRICOM in 2007 was rightly understood to be a countering measure to China’s influence. Since then, and arguably before, talks of a new “Scramble for Africa” abounded, with new players including China, Russia and even Turkiye entering the fray.

The Russia-Ukraine war, however, has altered geopolitical dynamics in Africa, as it highlighted the Russian-French rivalry on the continent, as opposed to the Chinese-American competition there.

Though Russia has been present in African politics for years, the war – thus the need for stable allies at the United Nations (UN) and elsewhere – accelerated Moscow’s charm offensive. In July, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Egypt, Ethiopia, Uganda and the Republic of Congo, fortifying Russia’s diplomatic relations with African leaders.

“We know that the African colleagues do not approve of the undisguised attempts of the US and their European satellites. . . to impose a unipolar world order to the international community,” Lavrov said. His words were met with agreement.

Russian efforts have been paying dividends, as early as the first votes to condemn Moscow at the UN General Assembly in March and April. Many African nations remained either neutral or voted against measures targeting Russia at the UN.

South Africa’s position, in particular, was problematic from Washington’s perspective, not only because of the size of the country’s economy, but also because of Pretoria’s political influence and moral authority throughout Africa. Moreover, South Africa is the only African member of the G20.

In his visit to the US in September, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa defended his country’s neutrality and raised objections to a draft US bill – the Countering Malign Russian Activities in Africa Act – that is set to monitor and punish African governments who do not conform to the American line in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

The West fails to understand, however, that Africa’s slow but determined shift toward Moscow is not haphazard nor accidental.

The history of the continent’s past and current struggle against Western colonialism and neocolonialism is well known. While the West continues to define its relationship with Africa based on exploitation, Russia constantly reminds African countries of the Soviet’s legacy on the continent. This is not only apparent in official political discourses by Russian leaders and diplomats, but also in Russian media coverage, which is prioritising Africa and reminding African nations of their historical solidarity with Moscow.

Burning French flags and raising Russian ones, however, cannot simply be blamed on Russian supposed economic bribes, clever diplomacy or growing military influence. The readiness of African nations – Mali, Central African Republic and now, possibly, Burkina Faso – has much more to do with mistrust and resentment of France’s self-serving legacy in Africa, West Africa in particular.

France has military bases in many parts of Africa and remains an active participant in various military conflicts, which has earned it the reputation of being the continent’s main destabilising force. Equally important is Paris’s stronghold over the economies of 14 African countries, which are forced to use French currency, the CFA franc, and, according to Frederic Ange Toure writing in Le Journal de l’Afrique, to: “Centralise 50% of their reserves in the French public treasury.”

Though many African countries remain neutral in the case of the Russia-Ukraine war, a massive geopolitical shift is underway, especially in militarily fragile, impoverished and politically unstable countries that are eager to seek alternatives to French and other Western powers. For a country like Mali, shifting allegiances from Paris to Moscow was not exactly a great gamble. Bamako had very little to lose, but much to gain. The same logic applies to other African countries fighting extreme poverty, political instability and the threat of militancy, all of which are intrinsically linked.

Though China remains a powerful newcomer to Africa – a reality that continues to frustrate US policymakers – the more urgent battle, for now, is between Russia and France – the latter experiencing a palpable retreat.

In a speech last July, French President Emmanuel Macron declared that he wanted a: “Rethink of all our (military) postures on the African continent.” France’s military and foreign policy shift in Africa, however, was not compelled by strategy or vision, but by changing realities over which France has little control.

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

EU blackmails Serbia – interior minister

Samizdat | October 16, 2022

The EU’s offers to Serbia are unacceptable, and Serbs should “accept that they don’t want us,” Interior Minister Aleksandar Vulin told the Novosti news site on Saturday. He added that Belgrade should instead turn its attention to “free countries that accept us without blackmail,” such as Russia and China.

“The question is not whether we want to join the EU, but whether the EU wants Serbia,” Vulin told Novosti. “Judging by the insane blackmail they are exposing us to…they don’t want us. The sooner we accept that they don’t want us and that we don’t belong there, the better off we will be.”

A traditional ally of Russia, Serbia has come under intense pressure from the West to back the sanctions regime against Moscow over its military operation in Ukraine. The European Parliament has considered freezing accession talks with Belgrade over the latter’s refusal to back its eight rounds of economic penalties, US state media reported last month, while Germany and France have offered to “accelerate” Serbia’s path to EU membership if it recognizes the independence of the province of Kosovo, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic stated last week.

For Vulin and Vucic, the answer to these offers is a clear “no.”

“How much would our friends respect us if they saw us neglecting our interests in the face of enemy force?” Vulin asked. “Who would fight for us if we chose not to fight for ourselves?

“Relations with Russia, China and other free countries that accept us without blackmail and conditions are the future of Serbia,” he continued. “I believe that friendship with Russia is of the greatest importance and that without it we risk the physical disappearance of Serbia.”

According to a poll taken in March, some 61% of Serbs oppose any cooperation with the US-led NATO alliance, largely due to the bloc’s support for Kosovo’s independence and its 1999 bombing campaign that brought about the end of Yugoslavia. Furthermore, while Serbia applied for EU membership in 2009, accession looks to be off the table for now. The EU’s latest sanctions package targeting Russian oil exports looks set to cost Belgrade hundreds of millions of euros, Vulin said last week, describing it as the “first EU sanctions package against Serbia.”

Hungary has responded to the sanctions by announcing a new pipeline to help Serbia tap into the supply of Russian crude oil.

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment


By Larry Johnson | A Son Of The New American Revolution |  October 15, 2022 

If you take the time to watch Vladimir Putin’s press conference yesterday (Friday) in Astana and then watch any recent cluster fark by Joe Biden, you will understand why the Russians are so calm in dealing with Ukraine. Putin is remarkable. Low key, well informed, articulate and not afraid of tough questions. He did not get any softballs here and, in fact, faced some tough questions. So much for the myth that Russia is a totalitarian state that brokers no dissent and requires everyone to toe a party line. That characterization more aptly describes the United States under the demented Joe Biden.

Here are the highlights with the relevant time stamp:

9:15 Putin is asked about Germany’s behavior. He notes incisively that Germany has put a priority on serving NATO rather than the interests of its nation and people.

14:40 Putin is asked about attending the G20 and meeting with Joe Biden. Putin said, there is no point. “There is no platform for any kind of negotiations at this point.” And we are in constant contact with some members of the G20, e.g. Turkey.

18;00 Putin is questioned directly about recent arrest of man in Moscow for listening to Ukrainian music. Putin responded that the arrest is wrong and we (Russia) should not behave like the West in trying to cancel a culture, in this case Ukrainian culture. He noted that Ukrainian is still a recognized language in Crimea and would remain so. He emphasized that Neo-Nazis and Nazi symbols on display in Ukraine are NOT Ukrainian culture and must be eliminated.

20:10 Mobilization was a hot topic. Will there be another wave of mobilization? Will there be “total mobilization”? Putin said the Defense Ministry initially planned a smaller number than the 300,000. Putin remarked that he doesn’t see any need right now to expand that number. There are 220,000 mobilized and the work of mobilization will be finished in two weeks.

22:00 Putin was asked about the men who fled Russia for other countries and calls in the Duma to confiscate their property. Putin said it must not be handled based on emotions. Rather it must be dealt with according to the law. In other words, each case must be litigated on an individual basis instead of a blanket action.

24:00 Another reporter cited one person mobilized who died allegedly with no training. Putin emphasized that the mobilized are supposed to receive 5 to 10 days refresher training. Then they go for specialized training that lasts 5 to 15 days. Then they undergo joint combat training. So far 33,000 men have been mobilized already with front line units and 16,000 in units with combat missions. Putin said he will order a review of the training regimen to ensure it is being done appropriately.

29:15 A reporter asked about the retaliatory strikes in response to the terrorist bombing of the Crimea bridge. Putin said there is no massive retaliation. Russia hit 22 of 29 targets and is now working on hitting the remaining 7. He said he saw no need for “massive retaliation” at this point.

30:00 Final question–NATO says that defeat of Ukraine by Russia will be the defeat of NATO. What happens if NATO deploys troops to Ukraine. Putin said “it could lead to a global catastrophe and I hope that those who talk about this will be smart enough not to undertake such dangerous steps.”

Whether you like or despise Putin, give the man his due. He spoke off the cuff. No notes in hand. He did not shy away from any question and he did not get angry or lose his cool. What a contrast with a Joe Biden press encounter. I think that Western politicians and pundits who disparage Putin as an incompetent dictator are making a very dangerous mistake. They fail to take this man at his word. Putin is establishing himself as a man who says what he means and means what he says

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | 2 Comments

Le Pen Blasts EU’s Borrell Over Threat to ‘Annihilate’ Russian Army

Samizdat – 16.10.2022

In a speech on Thursday in which he compared the European Union to a paradise-like “garden” flanked by “jungles,” the EU high representative for foreign and security policy warned that Russia’s military would be destroyed if Moscow used nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

France would probably be at war with Russia if Josep Borrell was in charge of the nation’s foreign and security policy, National Rally Marine Le Pen has said.

“I believe that we must hold to the tools of diplomacy. Because when I hear the statements of the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell – if he made decisions for us, I think we would have already entered the war,” the French opposition leader said, speaking to BFM TV on Sunday.

Le Pen cautioned against crossing the line of assistance to Ukraine and becoming a direct participant in the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. “The French people don’t want this, I don’t want this,” she stressed. “Be careful not to take too big a step which would take us to war.”

The politician also expressed consternation that the term ‘peace’ “has practically disappeared from the lexicon of the participants” of the crisis, and called for negotiations, recalling her idea of Paris hosting a global peace conference.

Borrell warned Thursday that Russia’s army would be “annihilated” by NATO if Russia used nukes in Ukraine.

“There is the nuclear threat, and [Vladimir] Putin says he is not bluffing. Well, he cannot afford bluffing,” Borrell said at a European Diplomatic Academy event in Bruges. “It has to be clear that the people supporting Ukraine and the European Union and the member states, and the United States and NATO are not bluffing either. And any nuclear attack against Ukraine will create an answer – not a nuclear answer but such a powerful answer from the military side – that the Russian army will be annihilated, and Putin should not be bluffing,” Borrell said.

Western officials and media have spent weeks discussing the escalating danger of a nuclear war after deliberately distorting comments made the Russian president last month about statements by senior NATO officials on the possibility or even admissibility of using weapons of mass destruction against Russia.

Russia’s nuclear doctrine expressly forbids the use of nuclear weapons unless WMDs are used against it first, or in the event of a conventional attack so severe that the country’s very existence is threatened. The US nuclear doctrine faces no such restrictions, and the Pentagon explicitly rejects ruling out the concept of a nuclear first strike.

France has committed hundreds of millions of euros-worth of military aid to Ukraine, including heavy towed and self-propelled artillery systems, armored personnel carriers and trucks, anti-tank and anti-air missile systems, radars, engineering equipment and small arms. Moscow has repeatedly called on Paris and other Western countries to halt weapons deliveries, pointing to the danger they pose in escalating the crisis and creating a multi-billion dollar weapons smuggling network.

French Armed Forces Minister Sebastien Lecornu announced Saturday that Paris will be providing general combat, logistics and equipment training for 2,000 Ukrainian troops, who will be assigned to French units for “several weeks.”

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , | 1 Comment

EU parliament wants to give up both Nord Stream pipelines: “Nord Stream” to be abolished

Establishment parties vote for doom in Brussels

FRONT NIEUWS | October 15, 2022

It should now be official. Nord Stream 1 and 2 are not repaired. Last week the EU parliament already voted on the further procedure with the two pipelines. Without much ado they simply decided to abandon the project, with the CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, FDP and Free Voters voting in favour. This means: a further rise in gas prices and further deindustrialization of Germany and Europe, reports

Europe on its way to the abyss

Germany, Austria and all of Europe are suffering from the suicidal sanctions against Russia. The industry goes bankrupt or migrates to the US, which lures German entrepreneurs with cheap energy and good conditions, traditional companies that have already survived economic crises and two world wars will not survive the impoverishment program of the system. The fate of Germany as one of the most important industrialized countries is thus sealed.

This vote shows very clearly that the old parties are simply not interested in promoting the interests of their own country, and even of Europe. They have opened the door to ever-increasing poverty and stabbed their own citizens in the back.

Bernhard Zimniok, MEP of the AfD, reported in a video about the vote and the attempted cover-up by Brussels:

Europe ReloadedHeartfelt thanks to journalist and ER contributor Michel van der Kemp for producing a translation of the video:

Hello from Brussels. Last week, the EU Parliament voted on a motion to finally give up Nord Stream 1 and 2. In doing so, the EU Parliament made a mistake that was very helpful to us:it accidentally initiated a roll-call vote instead of an electronic vote, which nobody noticed at first and which the EU Assist website, which documents all voting results, has therefore recorded on its site. On the one hand, an electronic vote means that it is known exactly how many votes were cast for or against a motion or how many abstained. But it also means that the election takes place more or less anonymously, because no member of parliament has to raise their hand, they just press a button. A roll-call vote is practically the opposite: It is documented exactly which member of parliament voted and how. When the administration realized their mistake and changed it on their website, the child had already fallen into the well, because EU Assist documented exactly who voted and how. Of all the German MPs, only the three non-attached, one from the SPD, the left and of course we from the AfD voted against giving up Nord Stream 1 and 2. The Greens, FDP, Freier Wahler (Free Choice), CDU/CSU and all but one of the SPD MPs voted to finally abandon Nord Stream 1 and 2 and thus voted for the fact that gas prices will continue to rise and that we may soon run out of gas, so voting for potential blackouts and cold apartments. Anyone who supports these parties is calling for a loss of prosperity and the collapse of the German economy, indeed of the entire country. Only the AfD makes politics for Germany!

The “creative” destruction of Europe

The future impoverishment of Germany and all of Europe is probably entirely in the interest of those forces who have [in mind] something very different for the world. With the destruction of the European continent, the breeding ground for the Great Reset has been created. The peoples have been disintegrated and fragmented by mass migration, the economy is virtually non-existent, the population is impoverished and destitute.

“You will own nothing” is one of the dogmas of the future, which the WEF has put into circulation. No one will voluntarily surrender his property, and taking it is not possible without arousing the resentment of the people. This is different in the event of a major crisis, perhaps even a war, where in the end – except for a few – no one is left with anything. A dystopian “brave new world” can be built on such a foundation.

After the end of “Nord Stream” one no longer has to face the unpleasant question of who is responsible for the terrorist attack on the pipelines.

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment