Big Pharma designed WHO’s Global Health Policy from 2000-2009
Corruption and deception, not science, is the foundation of WHO health policy
By Judy Wilyman PhD | Vaccination Decisions | April 1, 2024
“The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth.” – George Orwell, 1984
The history of the GAVI alliance, a board that influences the direction and design of WHO’s global health policies, illustrates how these policies have been directly influenced by industry partners from 2000-2009, and not by an objective board selected by the WHO.
This direct influence was hidden from the public in 2009 when the alliance became known as the Gavi board. At this time its composition and function changed to hide the role that industry had played from 2000-2009 in changing the direction of global health policies to a new focus on vaccine production and global implementation.
History of the Gavi Board:
In 1998 the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI) was established by the Head of the World Bank after a meeting with pharmaceutical companies and other agencies. The GAVI alliance was established on the advice of industry because the pharmaceutical companies were claiming that there was no incentive for them to provide vaccines to the developing countries.
This meeting led to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation providing the seed funding of $750 million in 1999 and governments then matched this figure to establish an alliance of private-public partnerships in 2000, to fund the vaccination programmes for all countries.
In 2000 the alliance was launched at the World Economic Forum (WEF), not the World Health Organisation (WHO), and it established a working party to work with the WHO to design the International Health Regulations (IHR), yet it was a body established outside of the WHO’s charter.
At this time all stakeholders in the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI) were able to directly influence the design of the WHO’s Global Health Policies through this working party (2000-2009), including the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA). They could attend meetings and present information for policy development.
Other stakeholders in the GAVI at this time included the BMGF, the Rockefeller Foundation, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The influence of these stakeholders led to a new focus on vaccine production and implementation in the WHO’s global health policies.
These global policies were presented to countries in the International Health Regulations (IHR) that came into force in June 2007.
This direct influence of all stakeholders changed in 2009 when the GAVI alliance became known as the GAVI board. Its composition was changed to include only four permanent board members – UNICEF, BMGF, the World Bank and WHO – and other partners would be on a part-time basis.
This change to only four permanent board members, one of which was now the WHO, hides the fact that from 2000-2009 all stakeholders were able to directly influence the design of WHO’s global health policies.
The first recorded meeting of the Gavi board on its website is in 2009. It describes the role of the Gavi board as ‘being responsible for strategic direction and policy-making, oversees the operations of the Vaccine Alliance and monitors programme implementation’ .
This alliance of partners, many of whom profit from vaccines, make donations to the Gavi board and still influence global health policies in a more indirect fashion.
The WHO’s IHR are currently being amended with strong influence from this corporate alliance. If the amendments are approved, the draconian directives implemented during the COVID ‘pandemic’ years, will become binding on every WHO member country, whenever the director of the WHO declares another pandemic. This is removing fundamental human rights and objective scientific evidence from global health policies.
It is time for Australians to make our voices heard to ensure that Australia exits the WHO and joins the World Council for Health to protect both human health and fundamental human rights in all public health policies.
[The information above can be referenced from Ch 3 of my PhD 2015]
Important Information:
- Here is the witness statement from ex-Qantas pilot, Captain Graham Hood, describing that lack of evidence for safety and efficacy that was used by the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and the Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, to mandate this mRNA genetically-engineered injection (called a ‘vaccine’) in the Australian population – Ex-Qantas Pilot, Graham Hood, provides a witness statement in the Australian parliament.
- Australian Medical Professional Society (AMPS) presents ‘Too Many Dead’ in Australia, but the Australian government will not investigate and the media does not report these facts.
- Study finds the Majority of Patients with Long COVID were Vaccinated
- Epidemic of Fraud
Israel Passes Law, Giving Itself Power To Temporarily Shut Down Al Jazeera
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | April 1, 2024
On April 1, 2024, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a sweeping statement indicating the immediate ceasing of Al Jazeera’s operations within Israeli territory. The Prime Minister’s staunch decision followed the legislative green light enhancing the authority of senior ministers to terminate the operations of non-domestic news agencies that are perceived as a potential threat to national security.
Emphasizing his intention to immediately commence action according to newly approved legislation, Netanyahu proclaimed, “Al Jazeera will no longer broadcast from Israel.” The declaration, which received widespread publicity through a post on X, was made right after the final iterations of the law received parliamentary approval.
Netanyahu’s decision can be traced back to an ongoing conflict with the Qatar-based media house, which he accuses of biased reporting against Israel. With a 70-10 majority vote in the Knesset, the legislation empowers the Prime Minister, alongside the Communications Minister, to order the closure of foreign networks in Israel and seize their equipment if identified as a security hazard.
An immediate international reaction to the news came from the White House, where spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre opined that restricting Al Jazeera’s operations in Israel would be “deeply concerning.”
Al Jazeera has denied allegations that its coverage jeopardizes Israel’s security, labeling these claims as “dangerous and ridiculous lies.” The network, known for its critical stance on Israel’s military actions in Gaza, has accused Israeli authorities of deliberately targeting its offices and staff.
‘Efforts to Sideline UNRWA Doomed to Fail’: Israel’s Plan for Palestinian Aid Agency Raises Alarms
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 01.04.2024
The Jewish state has yet to verify its allegations that UNRWA – the largest aid organization in Gaza which has been supporting Palestinians since 1950 – was purportedly involved in the October 7, 2023 Hamas incursion.
According to The Guardian, Tel Aviv has demanded that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) be dismantled and its responsibilities and staff transferred to a new entity in exchange for allowing more aid into the Gaza Strip.
The newspaper quoted unnamed sources as saying that the proposal was discussed by Chief of the General Staff Herzi Halevi and UN officials in Israel, and then handed to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
Under the plan, 300 to 400 UNRWA staff will be transferred either to an existing UN agency, such as the World Food Program (WFP), or to a newly established organization focused on food distribution in Gaza. More UNRWA staff and assets may eventually be transferred, although it remains unclear who would administer the new entity or provide security for its operations.
UNRWA was not involved in the proposal-related talks because of Israel’s reluctance to interact with the agency amid Tel Aviv’s unverified claims that 12 of the agency’s 13,000 Gaza staff participated in the October 7 Hamas incursion.
Tamara Alrifai, the agency’s director of external relations, warned that Israel’s plan would undermine the effective distribution of aid in Gaza, while a number of UN insiders, as well as other aid agencies and human rights organizations, insisted that the proposal actually aims to eliminate UNRWA.
“If we allow this, it is the slippery slope to us being completely managed directly by the Israelis, and the UN directly being complicit in undermining UNRWA, which is not only the biggest aid provider but also the biggest bastion of anti-extremism in Gaza. We would be playing into so many political agendas if we allowed this to happen,” The Guardian quoted an unnamed UN official as saying.
Alrifai, for her part, stressed that if the World Food Program were to start distributing food in Gaza tomorrow, they would use UNRWA trucks and bring food to UNRWA warehouses and then distribute food in or around UNRWA shelters.
“So they’re going to need at a minimum the same infrastructure that we have, including the human resources,” she added.
The same tone was struck by Chris Gunness, a former UNRWA spokesman, who said, “It is outrageous that UN agencies like WFP and senior UN officials are engaging in discussions about dismantling UNRWA.” He recalled that it is the UN General Assembly “which gives UNRWA its mandate and only the general assembly can change it, not the secretary general and certainly not a single member state.”
Martin Griffiths, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, tweeted that “attempts to sideline UNRWA must stop”.
“UNRWA is the backbone of the humanitarian operation in Gaza. Any effort to distribute aid without them is simply doomed to fail. No other agency has the same reach, experience or community trust needed to do the job,” Griffiths pointed out.
Russia’s UN envoy Vassily Nebenzya, for his part, called for a review of the decision to dismiss UNRWA staff and also stressed the need to restore funding to the agency. He was referring to the fact that several countries, including the US, the UK, Germany and Japan, have suspended funding in response to Israeli accusations of UNRWA’s involvement in the Hamas attack.
Al-Shifa Hospital completely destroyed after Israeli forces withdraw
MEMO | April 1, 2024
The Israeli army withdrew from inside the Al-Shifa Hospital and the surrounding areas west of Gaza City early Monday, leaving scores of casualties and extensive destruction in the hospital and its vicinity, Anadolu news agency reported.
The army fully withdrew from inside the hospital and the surrounding neighbourhoods towards areas south of Tel al-Hawa neighbourhood, southwest of Gaza City, witnesses told Anadolu.
The Israeli forces burned all buildings in the hospital resulting in complete cessation of services, the witnesses added.
They also noted that the army destroyed the specialised surgery building and burned the main reception and emergency building.
Israeli forces also burned the buildings of the kidney and maternity wards, mortuary refrigerators, and cancer and burn facilities, and destroyed the outpatient clinic building, according to the witnesses.
According to Palestinian medical sources, the hospital is now completely out of service and the army destroyed all medical equipment in the complex, operation rooms, and intensive care units.
The witnesses reported that scores of scattered bodies were found in the hospital and in the streets surrounding it.
They explained that the army destroyed the makeshift cemetery established by Palestinians in the facility and removed the corpses from it, scattering them in various areas of the hospital.
They further noted that Israeli forces burned and destroyed many homes and residential buildings in the vicinity of the hospital.
The Israeli army raided the hospital, the largest medical facility in the Gaza Strip that houses thousands of patients and displaced people, on 18 March.
Israeli officers admit that most Gaza fatalities classified as ‘terrorists’ are civilians
MEMO | April 1, 2024
Israeli officers and soldiers have admitted that most of the fatalities classified by the army as “terrorists” during its war on the Gaza Strip are actually civilians, a report said Sunday.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz collected testimonies from officers and soldiers who have fought in Gaza during the war, which has been ongoing since Oct. 7, 2023.
“The Israeli army says 9,000 terrorists have been killed since the Gaza war began,” the report said.
Israeli officials and soldiers, however, told Haaretz that “these are often civilians whose only crime was to cross an invisible line drawn by the Israeli army.”
“We were explicitly told that even if a suspect runs into a building with people in it, we should fire at the building and kill the terrorist, even if other people are hurt,” one soldier told the newspaper.
According to the testimonies of the officers and soldiers, the Israeli army fires at anyone entering the “kill zone” it has defined, whether armed or civilians.
A reserve officer said that “in practice, a terrorist is anyone the army has killed in the areas in which its forces operate.”
“They ask you how many, and I give a number based on what we see and understand on the ground, and we move on. It’s not that we invent bodies, but no one can determine with certainty who is a terrorist and who was hit after entering the combat zone of an Israeli force,” he added.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is facing severe criticism within Israel for failing to achieve the goals of the war on Gaza, particularly in eliminating the Palestinian group Hamas and returning Israeli hostages.
PA forces covertly entered Gaza to ‘sow chaos’ in coordination with Shin Bet: Report
The Cradle | April 1, 2024
Gaza security officials have accused the West Bank-ruling Palestinian Authority (PA) of deploying covert operatives to the besieged enclave with the goal of “sowing chaos” within the resistance in a scheme coordinated with Israel’s internal spy agency, the Shin Bet.
According to a senior official who spoke with Arabic media, the covert mission took place on the night of 30 March and saw several PA forces sneak into Gaza via the Rafah border crossing with Egypt by escorting trucks carrying humanitarian aid from the Egyptian Red Crescent.
“The suspicious security force that entered yesterday with Egyptian Crescent trucks coordinated its operations entirely with the occupation forces,” an official from the Gaza interior ministry told Al-Aqsa TV on Sunday.
The plan reportedly called to “create a state of confusion and chaos among the ranks of the [Gaza] home front” in an arrangement reached between Tel Aviv and Ramallah “in their meeting in one of the Arab capitals last week.”
Gaza security forces managed to detain 10 of the operatives and are on the hunt for an unknown number of others who evaded capture. Officials also say Cairo informed the border crossing authority that it was “unaware” of the covert force.
The PA forces are reportedly affiliated with the General Intelligence Service in Ramallah and were deployed on an “official mission under direct orders” from the head of the Palestinian General Intelligence Service, Major General Majid Faraj.
Faraj’s name made headlines last month when Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant put his name forward as a possible candidate to “temporarily manage” the Gaza Strip after the genocide of Palestinians comes to an end.
“The 61-year-old Faraj is a close associate of [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas and has close working ties with Israel’s defense establishment … He is responsible for coordinating between Israel’s Shin Bet security agency, American CIA, and other international intelligence organizations,” a report by Israel’s i24NEWS details.
For its part, the PA denied all accusations to Palestinian news agency WAFA, calling them “baseless.” “We will continue to provide everything necessary to provide relief to our people, and we will not be drawn into frenzied media campaigns that cover up the suffering of our people in the Gaza Strip and the killing, displacement, and starvation they are subjected to,” an unnamed PA official told WAFA.
Saturday’s operation came just hours before a new PA government was officially sworn into office as part of a US-drafted plan that calls for a “reformed PA” to control the occupied Palestinian territories.
Popular acceptance for the PA reached rock bottom long before the events of 7 October and the ensuing genocidal war in Gaza, as Palestinians increasingly expressed discontent over the group’s long history of corruption scandals, brutal repression of critics, and deep security coordination with Israel.
Senior IRGC commander, his deputy assassinated in Israeli attack on Iran Embassy’s consular section in Syria
Press TV – April 1, 2024
A commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) in Syria and Lebanon has been martyred in an Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate in the Syrian capital of Damascus.
Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi and his deputy, Mohammad Hadi Haji Rahimi, were killed in the Israeli attack on Monday on the Consular Section of the Embassy.
Syria’s official news agency, SANA, said the strikes were carried out by “the Israeli enemy” and targeted the Mezzeh neighborhood in Damascus on Monday afternoon.
Iran’s Ambassador to Damascus Hossein Akbari confirmed the reports of the Israeli attack and said the regime had targeted the consular building with six missiles.
Akbari said seven people were martyred in the Israeli aggression but the names and the exact number of martyrs have yet to be specified. He also noted that several Iranian military advisors and diplomats were also martyred in the missile attack, whose names would be announced later.
According to the ambassador, the Consular Section of the Embassy was targeted by F-35 fighter jets and six missiles.
Born in 1960, Zahedi joined the IRGC in 1980 and was a commander of the elite force during the Iraqi-imposed war in 1980-88.
He was the commander of the IRGC Air Force from 2005 to 2006. Later he served as the IRGC Ground Force Commander from 2006 to 2008.
Zahedi served as a commander of the IRGC Quds Force from 2008 to 2016.
Consular Section of Iranian Embassy in Damascus comes under missile attack
A building next to the Iranian Embassy in the Syrian capital of Damascus comes under a missile attack on April 1, 2024. (Photo by Sputnik)
Press TV – April 1, 2024
The Consular Section of the Iranian Embassy in the Syrian capital of Damascus has come under a missile attack, with immediate reports of casualties as a result of the act of aggression.
Syria’s official news agency, SANA, said the strikes were carried out by “the Israeli enemy” and targeted the Mezzeh neighborhood in Damascus on Monday afternoon.
“At approximately 00:17 p.m. today, the Israeli enemy launched an air aggression from the direction of the occupied Syrian Golan, targeting the Iranian consulate building in Damascus,” SANA said, citing a military source as saying.
“Our air defense media responded to the aggression’s missiles and shot down some of them. The aggression led to the destruction of the entire building and the martyrdom and injury of everyone inside, and work is underway to recover the bodies.”
SANA, citing one of its correspondents, said the Israeli aggression also caused major destruction to “neighboring buildings.”
Unconfirmed reports said several people had lost their lives in the occupying regime’s airstrikes.
Iranian sources added that members of the Iranian diplomatic mission in Damascus, including the ambassador, are unharmed, but the consulate building was destroyed.
The Photo shows the Consular Section of the Iranian Embassy in the Syrian capital of Damascus that came under a missile attack on April 1, 2024. (Via Tasnim News Agency)
Meanwhile, Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad has visited Iran’s Embassy following the missile attack.
Condemning the Israeli aggression, Mekdad said, “The Israeli occupation entity will not be able to influence the relations between Iran and Syria.”
Ukrainian counteroffensive ‘biggest debacle in modern military history’ – David Sacks
RT | April 1, 2024
The failure of Ukraine’s 2023 summer counteroffensive against Russia was “easily predictable,” according to US tech entrepreneur and venture capitalist David Sacks, who has suggested that the Washington elite should be held accountable for talking up the doomed operation.
Sacks’ comments came in response to a post on Saturday by Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who condemned the unnecessary loss of life suffered by Kiev’s forces as they attempted to “attack a larger army” that had superior defenses.
The failed Ukrainian counteroffensive was “one of the biggest debacles in the history of modern warfare,” Sacks said in agreement, adding that Kiev’s soldiers and tanks had effectively run “headlong into minefields while Russian artillery rained down on them from heavily fortified positions.”
“This should have been easily predictable,” the former PayPal COO and founder of the Yammer corporate social network stressed.
According to estimates released in March by the Russian Defense Ministry, the Ukrainian military saw over 166,000 casualties during last year’s failed counteroffensive. Kiev’s overall casualties since the outbreak of the conflict with Russia stand at 444,000, the ministry has claimed.
Sacks went on to suggest that US officials such as ex-CIA chief David Petraeus, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and current US Secretary of State Antony Blinken should all be held responsible for encouraging the doomed operation.
“These people are fools who should have no credibility left. But of course the MSM never holds them accountable so we will get more of the same until Ukraine finally collapses,” Sacks surmised.
Musk, meanwhile, has called the counteroffensive “a tragic waste of life for Ukraine,” suggesting that Kiev should not have attacked Russian forces – which had deployed vast minefields and had stronger artillery – while Ukrainian forces lacked armor or air superiority.
“Any fool could have predicted that,” the billionaire said, recalling that one year ago he had recommended that Kiev’s forces entrench and apply all resources to defense.
Musk stated that Kiev would continue to have difficulty holding on to territory, but suggested that Russia was unlikely try to take over the entire country, arguing that it would face “extreme” local resistance in western regions of Ukraine.
He also warned that if the conflict “lasts long enough, Odessa will fall,” and advised Kiev to reach a negotiated settlement with Moscow as soon as possible, before Russia gains more territory and Ukraine loses all access to the Black Sea.
Moscow has stressed that it remains open to meaningful talks with Kiev, and has blamed the lack of a diplomatic breakthrough on the Ukrainian authorities, who refuse to accept the “reality on the ground.”
Russia-NATO relations worse than during Cold War – Moscow
RT | April 1, 2024
The current state of relations between Russia and NATO can be described as “something more than a Cold War,” the head of Moscow’s delegation at the Vienna talks on military security and arms control, Konstantin Gavrilov, has said.
During his interview with RIA Novosti on Monday, Gavrilov was asked to comment on French President Emmanuel Macron’s February statement that he “cannot exclude” the possibility of troops from NATO countries being sent to Ukraine to aid Kiev amid the conflict with Moscow.
“The military strategists in Washington and Brussels should realize: if by lifting the taboo on the potential deployment of the bloc’s servicemen to Ukraine they are trying to test our country’s strength, then we are ready for any turn of events,” he replied.
According to the diplomat, the warnings from US President Joe Biden and some other Western politicians, that if Russia defeats Ukraine it is going to take on NATO states next, are actually aimed “to divert the attention of taxpayers from the senseless pumping of their money into the Ukrainian ‘corruption black hole’ as well as to warm up the public opinion in favor of reviving defense industries in their countries.”
His comment echoed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s statement last week that “the claims that we are going to attack Europe after Ukraine – it is utter nonsense and intimidation of their own population just to beat the money out of them.”
Gavrilov said that during the Cold War, almost all NATO statements began with the evaluation of the possibility of a sudden large-scale attack on the bloc by the USSR and its Eastern European allies. Similar rhetoric is prevalent within the US-led military alliance today, he added.
The diplomat recalled that Russia has been labeled “the most significant and direct threat” in NATO’s Strategic Concept, which was adopted in 2022. “Apparently, now their ideal vision of European security is the borders with our country being wrapped in barbed wire,” he said.
“As a result, Russia-NATO relations can now be characterized as something more than a Cold War,” Gavrilov stressed.
Since fighting between Russia and Ukraine began in February 2022, Moscow has said repeatedly that the US and its NATO allies have become de-facto parties to the conflict through the provision of arms, including advanced weaponry, intelligence-sharing, and the training of Ukrainian troops.
Finland supports open war against Russia
By Lucas Leiroz | April 1, 2024
Apparently, Emmanuel Macron’s stance on the Ukrainian conflict is gaining supporters among European warmongers. In a recent statement, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen supported the plan to send troops to Ukraine in the future, if Kiev proves unable to continue fighting. The case is further evidence of how anti-Russian paranoia is reaching worrying levels among European states, leading them to almost engage in open war with Moscow.
According to Valtonen, Macron is assuming a position of “strategic ambiguity” necessary for the current stage of the conflict. This “ambiguity” consists of not making it clear whether or not NATO troops will be sent to Ukraine. The precise time of the possible deployment also remains unknown. Valtonen sees this position as correct, since, according to her, Western countries must deliberate on such a strategic decision, choosing the moment to openly engage in the conflict.
Her view is that the West should avoid self-imposing red lines. She praises Macron for not ruling out direct intervention as this gives the West freedom to decide how and when to act. In an interview to the Financial Times, Valtonen stated that she does not see any need for Western intervention in the conflict for now, but supported the plan to send troops in the near future, if “necessary”. For her, the most important thing is that there are no strategic limits for the West, with NATO countries having maximum freedom to make any decision regarding the conflict.
“Now’s not the time to send boots on the ground, and we are not even willing to discuss it at this stage. But, for the long term, of course we shouldn’t be ruling anything out (…) Why would we, especially not knowing where this war will go and what happens in the future, disclose all our cards? I really wouldn’t know (…) What I liked about two recent announcements of President Macron is that he said that actually why should we impose ourselves red lines when Putin basically has no red lines?”, she told journalists.
As we can see, the Finnish official considers the direct deployment of troops as a Western “card”. She seems not to care – or simply not to understand – the catastrophic consequences of an open conflict between NATO and Russia. This shows, in addition to high bellicosity, a true diplomatic inability, which is particularly worrying since she is the head of Finnish diplomacy.
It is interesting to note how fallacious Valtonen’s speech is. She states that Europeans should not rule out direct intervention because “Putin basically has no red lines.” However, since the beginning of the special military operation, it is Russia, not the West, that has self-imposed strict limits on how to act in Ukraine. Moscow deliberately moderates its military intensity to avoid side effects and civilian casualties. Instead of launching a high-intensity operation for a prolonged period, the Russians prefer a tactic focused on attrition and slow territorial gain, thus reducing damage to the Ukrainian civilian population.
Bombings against Ukrainian critical infrastructure happen rarely, almost always in retaliation for previous terrorist attacks carried out by Kiev on the border. If Russia really didn’t self-impose red lines, there would no longer be any infrastructure in Ukraine and Kiev would have collapsed a long time ago. Moscow clearly sees the conflict as a tragedy and strives to prevent its consequences from being even more serious for innocent people.
On the other hand, the West clearly has no limits when it comes to acting in Ukraine. In the first weeks of the special military operation, NATO countries promised to limit their support to sending money and humanitarian aid. Before long, weapons began to be sent, and then long-range missiles were arriving in Kiev some months later. NATO simply engaged in a proxy all-out war through the neo-Nazi regime – but was quickly defeated.
With the Ukrainians becoming unable to continue fighting and the Western military-industrial complex collapsing in the face of its inability to produce more weapons for Kiev, the West can only choose between retreating or moving towards direct war. Macron, trying to improve his domestic and international image, launched a “PR stunt” talking about sending troops to Ukraine, but showing no real capacity or willingness to take this dangerous step.
The problem is that among Macron’s audience there are European leaders enraged by the anti-Russian paranoia spread by NATO. These leaders have been deceived by the propaganda of their own “allies” and now truly believe that if they do not make “hard decisions” they will be “invaded by Russia” in the future. Finally, it seems that the lack of rationality and strategic sense is leading European countries to make a serious mistake.
You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram.