On 16 July, Jürgen Elsässer (67) woke up startled at 6 a.m., opened the door of his house while still in his dressing gown, and in front of him were dozens of police officers, some with their faces covered, heavily armed, in a surreal image befitting any authoritarian state. However, it was in Brandenburg, on the outskirts of Berlin, in the Germany of the tragicomic Scholz government, aka the ‘Traffic Light’ coalition.
The police were about to raid his house, while more than 200 federal and Brandenburg state agents were deployed to carry out further searches in eight other houses and offices in the region. Other raids were carried out in the states of Saxony, Hesse and Saxony-Anhalt, ordered by Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD), who had ordered Compact to be closed by decree as an ‘association’, when it was legally a publishing house. She also banned any activity by the audiovisual company that produced Compact’s content, such as its YouTube, Facebook and Instagram accounts.
The minister later explained that Compact ‘incites hatred against Jews, against people with a history of migration and against our parliamentary democracy in an indescribable way’. According to the Ministry, the legal basis is the Law on Associations, according to which organisations that are directed against the free and democratic basic order can also be banned.
‘The ban shows that we are also taking action against intellectual arsonists who are fuelling a climate of hatred and violence against refugees and migrants and who want to bypass our democratic state,’ the minister explained. “Our message is very clear: we will not allow ethnicity to define who belongs in Germany and who does not. Our rule of law protects all those who are harassed because of their faith, their origin, the colour of their skin or even their democratic position.”
As early as 2022, the German intelligence services (BND) considered that Compact, ‘as a multimedia company, conveys anti-democratic positions in society and against human dignity’, and since then, it has been classified as far-right by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and under suspicion.
Interviewed by journalists during the police search of the house where he lives with his wife and partner in the company, Elsässer said that ‘in 14 years of existence there has not been a single criminal charge against his magazine’, which is why he was surprised by the minister’s announcement. He also said that he was in contact with his lawyer to defend his rights and jokingly imitated Donald Trump with his fist raised saying that he was ‘ready for a fight’.
Mixed reactions in the press
While journalists from the mainstream media are refusing to give this episode its due importance, others have seen the government’s unusual decision as a clear warning sign. Opinions were divided between the established media and the few journalists still struggling to report, and the internet was abuzz with the event. The tag #Compact was the main topic on German Twitter throughout the day, and Germans and foreigners alike made the Scholz government’s persecution of the media viral. Germany is under the scrutiny of international public opinion for the worst reasons.
Elsässer complains that this is ‘the biggest attack on press freedom in Germany since the 1962 Spiegel Magazine scandal’. At that time, it was discovered that the Adenauer government wanted to silence several journalists by illegal means for political reasons. When this was discovered, Defence Minister Franz Josef Strauß and two state secretaries had to resign. However, not even then was a troublesome media outlet banned, as it is now with his case. Elsässer says that only in the GDR and during National Socialism were things like this scene.
The metamorphosis of Elsässer, the current standard-holder of Germany’s ‘new right’
Jürgen Elsässer is a long-time political activist. With a degree in history and a short career as a teacher, he started out in the far-left anti-German movement in the 1970s, wrote books with a strong anti-national slant, worked on the editorial boards of various left-wing publications such as Junge Welt, Neues Deutschland, he collaborated with Der Freitag and the Jüdische Allgemeine and was editor-in-chief of Konkret magazine, until after disagreements with other elements, he founded Compact magazine in 2010, with the idea of bringing together the best of the left and the right in a transversal front (‘Querfront’), based on national sovereignty, the multipolar world and the rejection of the EU and NATO.
In 2017, with the demonstrations against Merkel’s open-door immigration policy, he joined forces with the leader of the AfD in Thuringia, Björn Höcke, considered a quasi-neo-Nazi, and Martin Sellner, leader of Austria’s Identity Movement. Since then, the magazine has become a major reference point for the so-called ‘new right’ and Elsässer has become one of the central figures in the German nationalist spectrum.
His political proposal and trajectory are controversial and very heterodox. He clearly calls for the ‘remigration’ of non-European foreigners, makes claims to Polish territories, likes to provoke his opponents, has aligned himself with openly Islamophobic elements such as Michael Stürzenberger or the PEGIDA movement, has played on the edge, but always within the rules of the game. At least until today.
Elsässer is an experienced figure, with a huge culture and a large archive of articles and books written, where he has changed his mind, or at least his appearance. He says that he hasn’t changed at all, that he remains in the same political position as he was 40 years ago.
He worked for the Die Linke parliamentary group as a member of the BND enquiry committee in the Bundestag. He is an insightful expert on geopolitical issues. In 2012, he was received by then president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in Tehran, together with a German entourage. About that trip to Iran, he said he enjoyed everything, only missing a good cold beer, like the good German he claims to be. He recently teamed up with Maximilian Krah, the AfD’s European frontrunner, who advocates a Germany that guarantees its status as a pole in the multipolar world that has already been born and is taking its first steps.
A quality magazine
Compact magazine was the centrepiece of the network that included audiovisual channels, the organisation of events, conferences, the publishing and sale of books and Compact TV, with its YouTube channel, which recently reached one million views a day.
Over the years, you could say that the magazine has moved to the right. In 2014, it dedicated a cover to Netanyahu, in which it accused him of perpetrating a ‘Genocide in Gaza’, then shifted its focus to criticising immigration, especially of Islamic origin. Later articles were also read against Hamas. With the pandemic, it took a clear stance against the government, the pharmaceutical industry and the accusation of a biological warfare conspiracy by the great powers of the West.
With Russia’s entry into Ukraine, it advocated dialogue with Moscow and the resumption of Russian energy. It was one of the few media outlets to do an exhaustive report on the Nord Stream attacks, to which it devoted almost an entire issue. In its December 2023 issue, it details how an extremely powerful Zionist sect with global reach, currently in the Israeli government, is planning an eschatological end-of-times war with catastrophic consequences for the whole world.
The absence of the Compact has already been felt since the arrival of the ‘Traffic Light’ government. Heavy pressure on distributors led to the magazine disappearing from petrol stations, supermarkets, newsagents and bookshops. Little by little, it was confined to subscribers. It was one of the few magazines where you could read good geopolitical articles.
The German typhoon
The magazine ban is just one more of the government’s decisions that threaten to divide German society, but it doesn’t seem to bother the establishment, either in the government or in the opposition on the traditional right.
Brandenburg’s Interior Minister Michael Stübgen (CDU) welcomed the federal government’s move. Stübgen accused the magazine of spreading ‘Russian war propaganda and conspiracy theories against the democratic order’. He also said that ‘this platform of enemies of democracy has only one goal, which is the destruction of our liberal society’.
In a comment on social media, historian Hermann Ploppa, identified with the left wing and linked to the famous alternative politics portal Apolut, confesses that ‘the Compact is not to my liking. A lot of it is simply disgusting. But there is no violation of the law. It’s also clear that the Compact ban is the opening fanfare to suppress the inconvenient media. That’s why we shouldn’t stand idly by. WE ARE NEXT.”
Across the party spectrum, only the AfD criticised the magazine ban. The party’s leaders, Tino Chrupalla and Alice Weidel, jointly announced on Tuesday that it was a ‘serious blow to press freedom’. ‘The banning of a media organisation means the denial of discourse and diversity of opinion.’ According to the far-right party, the interior minister is abusing her powers to ‘suppress critical information’.
Sahra Wagenknecht’s BSW had not commented on the Compact ban at the time of writing. Wagenknecht has been on the cover of the magazine on more than one occasion. In its December 2022 issue, she was described as ‘The best chancellor: A candidate for left and right’. The relationship between Elsässer and Wagenknecht goes back to the 90s. In 1996, a still communist Elsässer interviewed his comrade Wagenknecht, long before he became one of the main ideologues of the new ‘Querfront’ between the ‘left of labour and the right of values’, an enterprise for which he has called on Wagenknecht to participate on several occasions in recent times.
The Zakharova interview
If the move against Compact magazine didn’t come without warning, it did coincide with the interview with Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, conducted two days earlier by Compact’s Moscow correspondent Hansjörg Müller and broadcast on the magazine’s website and YouTube channel.
With hundreds of thousands of hits on the first day on the website and more than 250,000 on YouTube, Zakharova ridiculed the “traffic light” government in the one-and-a-half hour interview. She sharply criticised the policies of Scholz, Baerbock and the sanctions, which not only destroy relations between Berlin and Moscow, but also harm Germany’s own interests, all at the behest of “third-party interests”.
The Russian spokeswoman also alluded to the problem of immigration in Germany, which she said had geopolitical origins, with Berlin playing a subservient role to “US and British operations in the Middle East and Southern Africa”, which are causing the migratory chaos that is burdening Europe.
She also spoke about Germany’s obligations under the 1999 2+4 Treaty, the murky role of the German authorities in the case of Navalny’s alleged poisoning in 2020, the pandemic, vaccines and the announced abolition of paper money in Europe, the Federal Reserve, the destruction of Nord Stream, and much more. All in all, a fascinating interview, highly recommended, and very uncomfortable for Western liberal elites, especially Germans.
It’s clear that, once again, the German government is acting in accordance with the Washington Consensus, because the magazine in question was clearly in favour of peace between Germany and Russia, was gaining public influence and threatening several pillars on which Germany’s structure has rested since 1945. The fact that this doesn’t please many people is understandable, but it doesn’t make it an illegal outlet. Mrs Faeser’s decision sets a serious precedent, foreshadowing difficult days ahead for free information in Germany and Europe. Having found no illegality, the German government had to use two paragraphs of a law on associations to ban a publishing house because it was inconvenient. It’s all food for thought.
Ricardo Nuno Costa ‒ geopolitical expert, writer, columnist, and editor-in-chief of geopol.pt.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | European Union, Germany, Human rights, NATO |
1 Comment
Russia is ready for negotiations on Ukraine and European security issues and will incorporate safeguards against dual interpretations in any future European security treaty said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
“We are ready for negotiations, but considering the sad experience of talks and consultations with the West and Ukrainians… I hope a treaty will be reached at some stage on European security, and in this context the Ukraine crisis will be resolved,” Lavrov stated during a press conference following a UN Security Council meeting.
“We will, of course, be very careful with the wording and will incorporate safeguards into this document against repeated unscrupulous, unreliable interpretations,” the foreign minister added.
Lavrov emphasized that, unlike China, the West does not address the root causes of the conflict in its initiatives on Ukraine.
“This already concerns the content of the dialogue; China has very clearly indicated in its first initiative the need to start with addressing the root causes of the current crisis in Europe and to work on agreements to eliminate these causes,” he said.
He noted that “no one at the Copenhagen or Burgenstock meetings even mentioned the root causes.”
Thus, the West is trying to push through Volodymyr Zelensky’s plan by all possible means.
“A course has been set to push through at any cost the so-called Zelensky plan, which has a clearly defined form of an ultimatum,” Lavrov emphasized.
Lavrov’s comments were in response to a question about Russia’s possible participation in the second summit on the Ukraine conflict and the outcomes of the recent conference in Switzerland.
On Russia-US Unofficial Contacts Regarding Ukraine
Russia and the United States have held unofficial and so-called “second level” expert level contacts to discuss issues related to the conflict in Ukraine, Minister Lavrov added.
“I will tell you in confidence — we have had unofficial contacts with the Americans involving political experts, political experts who know each other and understand the policies of their governments,” Lavrov told the press conference, adding that Ukraine was on the agenda of such contacts.
Despite the fact that the two countries are holding phone conversations from time to time, there is nothing significant in these talks, he noted.
On Russia’s Readiness to Work With a New US President
Russia will be ready to work with any elected president of the United States, the foreign minister claimed.
“Once again I want to say: we will work, we will be ready to work with any American leader that the American people elect and who … will be ready for an equal, mutually respectful dialogue,” Lavrov said at the press event.
On Israel Seeking to Involve the US in Regional Escalation
It appears that Israel’s goal is to involve the United States in the escalation of tensions with Iran, the minister observed.
“The sense is that they want to provoke them into full-scale involvement with Hezbollah. The purpose of such a provocation, analysts suggest, is to draw the United States directly into the involvement of its armed forces in this [regional] conflict,” Lavrov emphasized.
Russia hopes the West will do everything to ensure that such ideas, “if they exist in the Israeli leadership,” will remain only ideas.
Moscow is doing everything to “calm down the situation,” Lavrov added.
On the Nord Stream Explosions
Russia will continue seeking the truth regarding the explosions of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, Lavrov said.
“We will pursue the truth – since I’ve mentioned the Nord Streams, we’re going to seek the truth,” he highlighted.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Militarism, Wars for Israel | Israel, Lebanon, Middle East, Russia, Ukraine, United States, Zionism |
2 Comments
Role of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in President Biden’s Slide Into Dementia
Dr. Kevin O’Connor, DO, disclosed on the 2024 presidential health report that Joe Biden has obstructive sleep apnea and wears a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) device at night.
Guay-Gagnon et al from the Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, published a systematic review and meta-analysis applicable to Biden:
“Eleven studies were included, comprising 1,333,424 patients. Patients with sleep apnea had an increased risk of developing any type of neurocognitive disorder (HR: 1.43 [95% CI 1.26-1.62]), Alzheimer’s disease (HR: 1.28 [95% CI 1.16-1.41]), and Parkinson’s disease (HR: 1.54 [95% CI 1.30-1.84]).”
We can add sleep apnea to his list of neurodegenerative determinants including advanced age, two prior craniotomies, permanent atrial fibrillation, and six mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. It is getting more difficult every day for Dr. O’Connor to deny Biden’s cognitive decline. As Biden nears the end of his political career, the amount of reversal his doctor will have to do from his report five months ago is substantial. It is never wise for a doctor to paint a rosy picture to satisfy the ego of the patient, family, or his political party. O’Connor will live to regret this statement February 28, 2024.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science | Joe Biden |
Leave a comment
40 years of failed science is enough. I’m asking Siri, Kennedy and Bigtree to make the right science happen. They can do it.
In their recent publication in the New England Journal of Medicine, Salmon et al. finally acknowledge what many of us have known for years: the so-called comprehensive vaccine safety studies have been woefully inadequate. However, their proposed solution—relying on post-market surveillance—misses the mark entirely in a stunning manner that cannot stem from a lack of self-awareness – and raises more questions than it answers. This critique will expose the fundamental flaws in their approach and underscore the urgent need for long-term, randomized clinical trials.
For over three decades, the medical establishment, spearheaded by figures like Dr. Stanley Plotkin, has assured the public that vaccines are the most rigorously tested medical products using retrospective studies. Yet, Salmon et al. now concede that prelicensure clinical trials often have “limited sample sizes and follow-up durations” and that there are “no resources earmarked for post-authorization safety studies.” This admission not only undermines the credibility of these long-standing claims but also highlights a systemic failure to prioritize safety.
They ignore, however, all of the work done over the years by critics like Brian Hooker, Mark Blaxill, myself, and many, many others that not only demonstrate the fatal flaws in reliance on retrospective studies, but their intentional and therefore criminal abuse in the hands of people working in and for the CDC bent on hiding vaccine risk.
The Mirage of Distorted Retrospective Studies
Retrospective observational studies, the cornerstone of Salmon et al.’s proposed solution, are a poor substitute for robust, prospective research. These studies are rife with potential biases, including selection bias, selective reporting, recall bias, and confounding variables. The findings of such studies are highly dependent on who conducts them, the study design, and adherence to the data analysis plan. Repeated analyses and adjustments for presumed confounders often lead to the convenient disappearance of associations with adverse events via p-hacking.
Consider the association between aluminum exposure from vaccines and persistent asthma, as detected and reported by Daley et al. Despite identifying a positive association, the authors acknowledge the potential for residual confounding and the small effect sizes. This illustrates the inherent limitations of retrospective studies. Moreover, Frank DeStefano’s study on his way out of the CDC linked aluminum to asthma, raising serious questions about the integrity of the surveillance data. Denialists like Paul Offit tried to arm-wave away the result, preventing the next necessary steps, and 1) Finding safe ways to help patients remove aluminum, and 2) Removing aluminum from vaccines.
Before the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) was established in 1986, adverse events like eczema were recognized following vaccinations. Post-1986, it seems there was a collective amnesia within the medical community regarding these associations. Similarly, Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) was first noticed after the swine flu vaccination campaign in 1976. It took 30 years for HHS to put GBS on the table of vaccine injuries. This pattern of intentional lost knowledge is unforgivable. These historical data points should not be ignored or downplayed, yet they have been consistently overlooked in favor of maintaining the vaccination status quo.
One of the most glaring deficiencies in vaccine safety research is the lack of understanding of the biological mechanisms underlying vaccine-related adverse events. Salmon et al. admit this gap, yet they continue to rely on epidemiological data without pushing for mechanistic studies. Yet, in my experience, in reading the literature, these claims result in appeals to ignorance. It is almost certain that knowledge exists that can link vaccines to these conditions; the same authors use argumentation and influence to cast doubt on such studies, or, again, in my experience, they ignore them altogether.
This approach is akin to trying to solve a puzzle with half the pieces missing. Without a thorough understanding of the mechanisms at play, we cannot develop safer vaccines or provide accurate risk assessments. By arguing from ignorance, they reveal their goal.
The insistence on full-population vaccination mandates, without adequately addressing safety concerns, puts public health and public trust at risk. The denial of potential vaccine risks and the imposition of mandates ignore the very real experiences of vaccine-injured individuals and, of course, studies that have found associations. Found associations via retrospective studies become “mere associations”, and are dismissed. In Popperian terms, the retrospective studies fail to provide a critical test. This approach not only fuels vaccine hesitancy but also undermines the credibility of health authorities. Mandating vaccines without comprehensive safety data is a reckless disregard for individual health and autonomy.
It is high time we hold those who have held the keys to databases and conducted sham studies accountable for decades of inadequate safety surveillance and research, as well as for scientific fraud. A prosecutorial investigation into potential scientific fraud at the CDC over the past 40 years is warranted. This investigation should focus on whether there has been success at efforts designed to provide systematic destruction of scientific findings via study manipulation and records destruction, a systematic failure to conduct and report comprehensive safety studies, and whether conflicts of interest have influenced vaccine policy and research. I would also investigate the VSD for data manipulation; the CDC and the vaccine industry have had exclusive control over that dataset far too long.
By exposing these issues and demanding scientific rigor, we can begin to rebuild public trust and ensure that our vaccine policies genuinely serve the best interests of public health. In a sane world, readers would be encouraged to contact their congressional representatives and the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to demand an investigation into these long-standing issues.
Recognizing the failures of the current system, independents and advocates have long proposed an alternative: a large, prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) funded by the government. I disagree. Such studies should only be done by independent research institutions funded through grassroots fundraising. These trials would run for four years and match vaccinated and unvaccinated children to avoid confounding variables and isolate the effects of childhood vaccines on chronic health conditions. This rigorous approach is necessary to provide definitive answers about vaccine safety and to restore public trust. I’m calling on well-funded individuals and organizations like those run by my friends Siri, Kennedy, and Bigtree to pull together, perhaps under the Vaccine Safety Foundation, and fund the studies needed.
We’ve built the infrastructure to do it, including independent journals and an independent IRB. Siri, Kennedy, and Bigtree have sufficient limelight to raise the millions needed to conduct these studies. Lawsuits, reporting, and campaigns are priorities, but I will never trust a study conducted by or funded by CDC. Neither should you.
Aaron, Bobby, and Del – Let’s hold a podcast and raise the funds. I’d be happy to participate in the design of the study and design of analysis.
I’ve tried for ten years to raise funds for such studies via IPAK. I’ve done my part for the sake of objectivity and science for the kids. You guys have the public’s attention. Use the systems we’ve built to safeguard objective science.
Conclusion: A Demand for Real Science
Salmon et al.’s admissions are too little, too late. Their reliance on flawed retrospective studies and post-market surveillance is inadequate. What we need are long-term, randomized clinical trials that can provide definitive answers about vaccine safety. The public deserves transparency, accountability, and a commitment to rigorous, unbiased research. Anything less is an abdication of our responsibility to protect public health.
References
1. Daley MF, et al. Association Between Aluminum Exposure From Vaccines Before Age 24 Months and Persistent Asthma at Age 24 to 59 Months. Acad Pediatr. 2023;23(1):37-46.
2. DeStefano F, et al. Childhood vaccinations and risk of asthma. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2002;21:498-504.
3. Institute of Medicine. Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011.
4. McNeil MM, et al. The Vaccine Safety Datalink: successes and challenges monitoring vaccine safety. Vaccine. 2014;32:5390-5398.
5. Glanz JM, et al. Cumulative and episodic vaccine aluminum exposure in a population-based cohort of young children. Vaccine. 2015;33:6736-6744.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Aletho News | CDC, United States |
Leave a comment
The European Union‘s (EU) top court today ruled that the European Commission’s decision to heavily redact key portions of COVID-19 vaccine contracts with pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic violated the commission’s transparency obligations.
The European Court of Justice found that the commission failed to provide sufficient public access to COVID-19 vaccine purchase agreements, in a ruling that could deal a blow to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on the eve of her re-election bid, according to The Associated Press (AP).
The ruling came in response to legal challenges brought by EU lawmakers and private citizens seeking fuller disclosure of the multibillion-euro vaccine deals.
It highlights ongoing concerns about the secrecy surrounding the EU’s vaccine procurement process, a contentious issue since the early days of the pandemic.
“The Commission did not give the public wide enough access to the contracts for the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines,” the court said in its judgment, pointing to several areas where the executive body fell short in being sufficiently transparent.
In response to the ruling, the commission wrote, “The Commission needed to strike a difficult balance between the right of the public, including MEPs [Members of the European Parliament], to information, and the legal requirements emanating from the COVID-19 contracts themselves, which could result in claims for damages at the cost of taxpayers’ money.”
Green MEP Tilly Metz, one of the deputies who submitted the original request, said, “This ruling is significant for the future, as the EU Commission is expected to undertake more joint procurements in areas like health and potentially defence,” Euractiv reported.
“The new European Commission will have to adapt their handling of access to documents requests to be in line with today’s ruling,” Metz said.
However, Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst told The Defender that the court ruling is not the victory it seems. She argued that the EU court has given the commission a “giant loophole” to keep parts of the contracts secret “to protect ‘business interests.’”
“It is not possible to both protect public health and full transparency and at the same time protect the business interests of the supplier,” Terhorst said. “We, the public, will not get the access to the information we need. The cat and mouse play continues.”
The commission, which has two months to appeal the decision, said it would “carefully study the Court’s judgments and their implications” and that it “reserves its legal options.”
Scale and speed of purchases unprecedented
In 2020 and 2021, von der Leyen negotiated purchase agreements for COVID-19 vaccines with several pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca, according to the AP.
EU member states mandated the European Commission organize the joint procurement of vaccines and lead negotiations with manufacturers.
The scale and speed of these purchases were unprecedented. According to the court, approximately 2.7 billion euros ($2.95 billion) was quickly mobilized to place firm orders for more than 1 billion doses of vaccines. This joint procurement approach allowed for the rapid acquisition of vaccines for all 27 EU member states.
Initially, von der Leyen received praise for her leadership during the COVID-19 crisis, particularly for her role in securing collective vaccine access for EU citizens. However, the spotlight quickly shifted to concerns about the negotiations’ lack of transparency.
In 2021, several members of the European Parliament requested full details of the agreements. The commission, citing confidentiality reasons, agreed to provide only partial access to certain contracts and documents, which were placed online in redacted versions.
The commission also refused to disclose how much it paid for the billions of doses it secured.
Concerns over secret deals with Pfizer
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla twice in 2022 refused to testify before the European Parliament’s special committee on COVID-19. Bourla was expected to face tough questions about secretive vaccine deals and negotiations between Pfizer and the European Commission.
Of particular interest were text messages between Bourla and von der Leyen that preceded a multibillion-euro vaccine contract. In January 2023, The New York Times sued the European Commission over its failure to release the messages.
That suit followed a January 2022 inquiry by the EU ombudsman charging the commission with maladministration over its handling of a previous request for the messages.
In June, a Belgian court took up the issue of the secret negotiations between Bourla and von der Leyen, with a former lobbyist for the EU Parliament claiming “destruction of public documents” and alleging von der Leyen violated the commission’s code of conduct.
Commission officials argued the messages didn’t contain any important information and have thus far refused to provide them, according to the AP.
European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in 2022 opened an investigation into the acquisition of COVID-19 vaccines in the EU during the pandemic. This investigation stems from a criminal complaint filed by an individual, with the governments of Hungary and Poland later joining the lawsuit, euronews reported. EPPO adjourned the case until December.
Implications for the European Commission and von der Leyen
The court’s ruling comes at a critical time for von der Leyen, just one day before the European Parliament is set to vote on her reappointment as commission president.
Von der Leyen had previously won backing from a majority of EU leaders in June. To secure her position, she now needs to garner support from at least 361 MEPs in the 720-seat European Parliament, WIONews reported.
This ruling presents a dilemma for the Greens, who initiated the legal challenge against the commission’s redactions. In recent days, von der Leyen has been courting the Greens to shore up support for her nomination ahead of the vote.
During a press conference in Strasbourg on Wednesday, Manon Aubry, a French MEP from the Left group, expressed strong concerns about the European Commission’s “lack of transparency.”
On the heels of the EU court ruling, German MEP Christine Anderson today said she would call for the removal of von der Leyen and the continuation of the criminal investigation of her actions.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Corruption, Deception | COVID-19 Vaccine, European Union |
Leave a comment
UNITED NATIONS – The United States is unable or unwilling to stop supporting Israel, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Wednesday, adding that the bloodshed will stop if there is no US support.
“However, the US is either unwilling or unable to do so,” Lavrov said at the UN Security Council session.
By supplying arms and ammunition, the US became directly involved in the conflict in the Middle East, “just like in the situation with Ukraine,” Lavrov added.
It seems that Israel does not need any plan that includes reaching a peaceful solution to the conflict, the foreign minister noted.
“Israel doesn’t need any plan with a hint of peace, we saw that again today,” he said.
Russia’s proposal on organizing a meeting of external players that have influence on armed groups in the Gaza Strip is still in force, Minister Lavrov pointed out.
“Our proposal for a meeting of all external players who have influence over the various groups in Gaza and the West Bank, and who can, if they speak with one voice, help overcome the divisions within the Palestinian factions, remains valid,” he emphasized.
Russia supports the admission of Palestine to the United Nations in exactly the same way as it supported Israel joining the organization in 1949, the Russian diplomat highlighted.
“In 1949, we supported Israel’s application for UN membership, provided that it implemented the General Assembly resolutions 181 and 194 on the Partition Plan for Palestine and granted Palestinian refugees the right to return home. This was clearly stated when we voted for Israel’s admission to the UN. Similarly, today we support the admission of Palestine, whose sovereignty has already been recognized by nearly 150 countries, to this world organization,” Lavrov said.
As of June 2024, Palestine is recognized as a sovereign state by 145 of the 193 UN members. It has been a non-member observer state of the United Nations General Assembly since November 2012.
The admission of new members to the UN is decided by the General Assembly upon the Security Council’s recommendation, which requires favorable votes from at least nine of the 15 members of the council and no vetoes from the five permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States).
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Aletho News |
4 Comments
China has frozen arms control talks with the US in response to Washington’s continued weapons sales to Taiwan, the Chinese Foreign Ministry has said.
The US and China held a long-awaited round of nuclear non-proliferation talks in November, the first such meeting since 2018. While the talks produced no concrete results, they were seen as a crucial step in defusing tensions between the two superpowers, after Beijing severed almost all military communication with Washignton a year earlier, over then US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan.
Speaking at a press conference in Beijing on Wednesday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian said that China would not discuss a new round of consultations with the US.
“The responsibility fully lies with the US,” Lin explained. “Over the past weeks and months, despite China’s firm opposition and repeated protest, the US has continued to sell arms to Taiwan and done things that severely undermine China’s core interests and the mutual trust between China and the US.”
“This has seriously compromised the political atmosphere for continuing the arms control consultations,” he said.
The US State Department has authorized more than a billion dollars worth of weapons sales to Taiwan since the last round of US-China arms control talks, according to figures from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency. Most recently, the department approved the sale of hundreds of Altius-600M and Switchblade kamikaze drones to Taipei, prompting Beijing to impose sanctions on US arms giant Lockheed Martin.
China considers Taiwan a part of its sovereign territory, a position referred to as the ‘One China’ principle. The US recognizes, but does not endorse, this policy. Beijing views American arms sales to Taipei, expressions of support for Taiwanese independence, and pledges of military assistance to Taiwan as violations of the ‘One China’ principle.
China maintains that it will peacefully reunify Taiwan with the Chinese mainland, while reserving the right to use military force if necessary.
Lin did not rule out a return to nuclear negotiations in the future. “China stands ready to maintain communication with the US on international arms control… but the US must respect China’s core interests and create necessary conditions for dialogue and exchange,” he said at Wednesday’s briefing.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | China, United States |
Leave a comment
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has indicated he would be less willing to defend Taiwan from mainland China than his Democratic rival and incumbent US President Joe Biden.
It is “stupid” for Washington to offer protection to Taipei for free, Trump insisted in an interview with Bloomberg recorded on June 25 but published in full on Tuesday.
“I know the people very well, respect them greatly. They did take about 100% of our chip business. I think Taiwan should pay us for defense,” he said.
The self-governed island of Taiwan, which China views as part of its territory, produces an estimated 90% of the world’s super-advanced semiconductor chips.
“I don’t think we are any different from an insurance policy,” the former president stressed. “Taiwan doesn’t give us anything” despite being “immensely wealthy,” he added.
According to Trump, protecting Taipei would also be problematic for Washington due to purely geographical reasons. “Taiwan is 9,500 miles (around 15,000km) away [from the US]. It’s 68 miles (just under 110km) away from China,” he explained.
Taiwanese Premier Cho Jung-tai responded to Trump’s comments by saying that the island of 23.5 million is dedicated to boosting its defenses and “willing to take on more responsibility” for its own security.
“Taiwan has steadily strengthened its defense budget and demonstrated its responsibility to the international community,” he said during a press conference on Wednesday.
Cho expressed the belief that “as long as we continue to demonstrate [these efforts], we will receive support from more countries.”
The premier thanked the US several times for paying attention to the issue of Taiwanese security, stressing that Taipei and Washington have “good relations” despite the lack of any formal ties.
Officially, the US accepts the One China policy, which states that Taiwan is an integral part of Chinese territory. However, Washington has been backing Taiwanese pro-independence forces and supplying weapons to the island. Biden has pledged on several occasions that America would defend Taiwan militarily if it were attacked from the mainland.
Beijing vigorously opposes contacts between Washington and Taipei, repeatedly calling the Taiwanese issue its “red line.” The Chinese authorities have said that they would prefer peaceful reunification with the island, but have warned that a military scenario cannot be ruled out.
A poll published earlier this year by the Taiwanese National Chengchi University showed that more than 80% of the island’s population was not seeking independence, but wanted to maintain the status quo with mainland China.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Militarism | China, Donald Trump, United States |
2 Comments
Iran has roundly rejected claims of devising plot to assassinate former US president Donald Trump, but vows to pursue legal channels to consign him to justice for his ordering the assassination of the Islamic Republic’s top anti-terror commander Qassem Soleimani in 2020.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kan’ani made the remarks on Wednesday after US media alleged that American authorities had obtained “intelligence from a human source in recent weeks on a plot by Iran to try to assassinate Trump.”
It followed an assassination attempt against Trump that took place while he was campaigning in Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump survived the attempt, suffering an ear injury.
Kan’ani said Iran strongly rejected allegations of any involvement in the armed attack against Trump or claims of harboring any intention to take such action, Kan’ani said.
The Islamic Republic considers such claims to be a product of malicious political goals and intents, he added.
The country, however, is determined to legally pursue Trump due to his direct role in the assassination of General Soleimani, the spokesman asserted.
Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), and their companions were assassinated in a US drone strike authorized by Trump near Baghdad International Airport on January 3, 2020.
The commanders were highly revered across West Asia due to their key role in fighting the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group in the region, particularly in Iraq and neighboring Syria.
Iran’s permanent mission to the United Nations also reacted to the US media report earlier on Wednesday, considering its claim to be “unfounded and malicious.”
The mission, nevertheless, asserted that “from the Islamic Republic’s standpoint, Trump is a criminal, who should be tried and punished in court for [issuing] General Soleimani’s assassination order.”
“Iran has chosen the legal pathway to hold him accountable,” it stated.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Iran, United States |
1 Comment
MOSCOW – During the presidency of Donald Trump in the United States, nothing particularly good was done for Russia, new restrictions were introduced, but there was a dialogue between the two countries, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday.
“Under Trump, nothing particularly good was done for Russia; on the contrary, more and more restrictions were introduced under Trump. But, nevertheless, there was a dialogue,” Peskov told reporters.
The topics of Russia and personally Russian President Vladimir Putin became an integral part of the US election campaign, Kremlin spokesman said.
“Traditionally, during the election campaign of the United States, especially in recent years, Russia and President Putin personally are an integral part of this election campaign. The topic of Putin and the topic of Russia is always on the agenda in election debates,” Peskov told reporters.
The Kremlin does not share the forecasts of Polish President Andrzej Duda that Russia’s victory in Ukraine could lead to a war against the West, Peskov said.
“No, we do not share such forecasts,” he told reporters.
July 17, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Aletho News | Donald Trump, Russia, United States |
Leave a comment
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
Aletho News 