Panama responds to Trump’s threat to retake vital waterway
RT | December 23, 2024
President Jose Raul Mulino has addressed the nation in response to US President-elect Donald Trump’s threat to retake control of the Panama Canal, a vital waterway that contributes billions of dollars to the Panamanian economy annually and serves as a crucial artery for global trade.
In his video address on Sunday, Mulino emphasized that the sovereignty and independence of the country are “non-negotiable” and underscored the canal’s significance as part of the “history of struggle and an irreversible conquest.”
“Every square meter of the Panama Canal and its adjacent area belongs to Panama, and it will continue to be so,” Mulino declared.
Over the weekend, Trump expressed outrage on Truth Social and during a speech at the AmericaFest conference over what he called “exorbitant” fees charged for the passage of American vessels through the canal, accusing Panama of exploiting the United States with excessive fees.
“We’re being ripped off at the Panama Canal, just like everywhere else,” despite the “extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed on Panama,” he told supporters in Arizona on Sunday.
“If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America. In full. Quickly and without question,” Trump proclaimed, warning officials in Panama to “please be guided accordingly.”
Trump also declared that he would never allow the canal to fall into “the wrong hands,” namely China’s, emphasizing that a “secure Panama Canal is crucial for US commerce and the rapid deployment of the Navy from the Atlantic all the way to the Pacific.”
Trump further emphasized his statements by sharing an image on Truth Social of an American flag over a narrow waterway with the caption, “Welcome to the United States Canal!”
Mulino strongly rejected these claims, stating that the canal’s rates are set publicly and transparently, considering market conditions, international competition, operating costs and maintenance needs. He highlighted that since the transfer of the canal from the United States to Panama on December 31, 1999, as per the Torrijos-Carter Treaties signed in 1977, there have been no objections or complaints regarding Panama’s control.
“These treaties also established the permanent neutrality of the canal, guaranteeing its open and secure operation for all nations,” he said, calling it the best tribute to the martyrs who fought for Panama’s sovereignty and dignity during the 1964 anti-American riots. Mulino rejected any notion that China, the European Union, or any other power has direct or indirect control over the canal.
The canal has become a source of strong national pride, managed by qualified Panamanian professionals who ensure its safe, continuous, efficient, and profitable operation, the president added. It also contributes billions of dollars to the Panamanian economy annually and serves as a crucial artery for global trade.
“Panama respects other nations and demands respect,” the president concluded, stating that he aspires to preserve good relations with the incoming US government on issues such as drug trafficking, terrorism, organized crime, and illegal migration, but the neutrality of the canal is “non-negotiable.”
EU risks losing gas supplies from Qatar – energy minister
RT | December 22, 2024
Qatar will stop gas shipments to the EU if member states enforce new legislation on carbon emissions, the Gulf nation’s energy minister Saad al-Kaabi has told the Financial Times (FT). Qatar has become an important supplier to the bloc after Brussels resolved to wean itself off Russian gas following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.
If any EU country imposes penalties on Qatar under the bloc’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, Doha would stop exporting its liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the bloc, al-Kaabi told the outlet on Sunday.
QatarEnergy, the state-owned energy company, has long-term LNG contracts with several EU countries, including Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands.
The EU’s corporate due diligence rules, adopted in May 2023, are part of the bloc’s strategy to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The legislation states that non-compliance is punishable with fines of up to 5% of the company’s annual global revenue. Al-Kaabi argued that such fines would significantly impact QatarEnergy’s revenue, which directly supports the state of Qatar and its citizens.
”If the case is that I lose 5% of my generated revenue by going to Europe, I will not go to Europe… I’m not bluffing,” Kaabi said. “I cannot lose that kind of money – and nobody would accept losing that kind of money,” he pointed out.
It would be impossible for an energy producer like QatarEnergy to align with the EU’s net-zero target as stipulated by the directive because of the amount of hydrocarbons it produces, the minister explained.
If slapped with hefty penalties, QatarEnergy would not break its LNG contracts but would try and find legal avenues.
”I will not accept that we get penalized,” he said. “I will stop sending gas to Europe.”
Following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, the EU started replacing Russian pipeline gas with more expensive LNG from the Middle East and the US. The bloc still gets pipeline gas from Russia via Ukraine’s transit network but the agreement between Moscow and Kiev is set to expire on December 31. The authorities in Kiev have repeatedly stressed that the deal will not be renewed.
Israel threatens residents of south Syria as troops expand occupation
The Cradle | December 22, 2024
Residents of the town of Baath in the southern Syrian governorate of Quneitra – currently under occupation by Israel’s military – have been ordered by Israeli forces to surrender all weapons present in the town or face invasion.
Israeli troops ordered Baath City’s residents to give up all arms within two hours on 22 December, according to a report by Israel’s Maariv newspaper.
The army has “issued an ultimatum to residents of Baath to surrender their weapons within two hours, threatening to enter the city,” the report says. It is unclear what weapons or military infrastructure are in Baath.
This came as part of a large-scale deployment across southern Syria.
Israel continues to solidify its occupation of southern Syria after expanding its presence beyond the occupied Golan Heights and strategic Mount Hermon (Jabal al-Sheikh) following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government on 8 December.
Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in Syria reported on Sunday “the entry of tanks and mechanized patrols of the occupation army from Al-Hamidiya in the Quneitra countryside towards the center of the governorate. “The entry of Israeli forces coincided with search campaigns that included some homes and farms in the villages of the central countryside.”
According to Al Mayadeen, Israeli troops also opened fire indiscriminately towards the forests of Al-Hamidiya and Al-Hurriya in the Quneitra countryside.
Israel has set up seven permanent outposts along the UN-monitored buffer zone, which Israeli forces expanded in the aftermath of Damascus’ fall.
Two of these outposts in Mount Hermon overlook Damascus and all its western suburbs. Since 8 December, Israeli forces have illegally occupied nearly 500 square kilometers of southern Syria.
Israel’s recent expansion has seen invading troops seize precious water sources such as the Al-Wahda Dam on the Yarmouk River Basin. Syrian and Israeli sources, including Carmel News citing an Iranian source, reported earlier this week that Israel now controls 30 percent of Syria’s water supply and 40 percent of Jordan’s.
After recently taking control of the freshwater basin of Yarmouk, Israeli troops have now reached three new bodies of water: Sheikh Hussein, Sahm al-Julan dam, and the western Baraka.
The Israeli army recently opened fire at protesters near the Yarmouk Basin as they were demonstrating against Tel Aviv’s occupation in Syria. At least one was injured.
The UN has expressed “deep concern” over Israeli violation of Syria’s sovereignty and the 1974 border agreement signed indirectly between the Syrian and Israeli governments. After the fall of Assad’s government, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly announced the end of the agreement.
Israeli airstrikes have decimated the majority of Syria’s military capabilities in a brutal aerial campaign launched after the government fell to extremist groups.
On Tuesday, Netanyahu said that Israeli troops will occupy the recently seized territory in Syria for the foreseeable future.
Yemeni forces target USS Truman, down F-18, thwarting attack on Sanaa
Sputnik – 22.12.2024
Fighters of the Yemeni Ansar Allah (Houthi) group have repelled joint US-UK air forces attack, shooting down a US Navy F/A-18 fighter jet during their attack on USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier in the Red Sea, the group’s military spokesman, Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree said on Sunday.
“During the operation an F/A 18 jet was shot down attempting to repel the attack [on the US aircraft carrier],” Saree said on air of Almasirah TV channel.
Eight cruise missiles and 17 unmanned aerial vehicles were involved in the operation, the spokesman said.
He pointed out that the majority of fighter jets left Yemen’s air space and headed for the neutral waters of the Red Sea trying to repel the attack on the carrier. USS Harry S. Truman left its positions after the strikes, Saree said.
In early December, the Houthis attacked a destroyer and three army supply vessels of the United States with missiles and drones in the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea.
Earlier in the day, the Associated Press, citing CENTCOM, reported that a US Navy F/A-18 jet was downed by friendly fire over the Red Sea during an attack on Houthi targets. Both pilots ejected safely, with one sustaining minor injuries.
Geopolitical auto-asphyxiation: Here’s why Germany is heading for irreversible decline
Berlin is unable or unwilling to finally abandon a pernicious groupthink that subordinates its interests to Washington’s misguided political agenda

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | December 22, 2024
Oops, he’s done it again: Tech mogul, richest man in the world, and also now new bestie of American President-elect Donald Trump, Elon Musk has used his massive social media clout – as owner of X and a personal account with more than 200 million followers – to post about politics. And here we don’t mean his unhelpful recent intervention in how Americans – barely – keep their rickety government contraption from stuttering to a halt for lack of cash.
Nope, this is about Germany: With regard to Europe’s Sick Man on the Spree (there is another one on the Seine, of course), in his first post Musk waltzed in, guns blazing to support the right-wing AfD (Alternative for Germany) party in the run-up to the snap elections on February 23.
Only the AfD, he pronounced with typical modesty, can “save Germany.” In a second post, a few days later, Musk reacted to a murderous attack on a German Christmas market in the city of Magdeburg. This time, he called Germany’s lame-duck Chancellor Olaf Scholz “an incompetent fool” who should resign forthwith.
Some Germans are aghast. How dare Musk, an American, intervene in our elections? Deeply unpopular German minister of health Karl Lauterbach, for instance, went almost comically Victorian with his performance of righteous ire for public display, calling Musk’s statements “undignified and highly problematic.” Shocking, shocking indeed!
Interestingly enough, most of the same Germans still have no problem with Joe Biden, also an American, having helped Ukraine blow up their vital energy infrastructure and then mightily promoting the de-industrialization of Germany and the EU as a whole by subsidizing companies which move to produce in the US. Others think it’s totally normal that German politicians, such as Michael Roth – head of the German parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, no less – massively interfere in the politics of, say, Georgia, not only by messing with its elections but also trying to literally instigate a coup. Judge not, lest ye be judged…
So, let’s cut out the daft pearl-clutching: I am German, and I find it very objectionable when Musk fails to post about the genocide in Gaza, instead taking the side of the Israeli perpetrators. But I could not be less concerned about him stating his opinion – it’s not more than that – about what party would be best for Germany, even thought I do not agree at all. As to calling Scholz what he actually is, go ahead Elon. There, I am even on your side.
Once we dispense with the huffy-puffy theatrics, what is really at stake here? And why would it even matter so much to some Germans what Musk has to say about their politics?
It’s not complicated: Musk has hit a very sore spot. And the name of that very sore spot is Germany. Yes, all of it, or at least, everything that has to do with its tanking economy and, frankly, delusional politics. Here’s how:
On December 16, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz lost a confidence vote in the German parliament. That was no surprise but the plan from the beginning. Or to be precise, since November 6, when the former governing coalition of Greens, Free Democrat market liberals, and Scholz’s own Social Democrats imploded with a nasty bang. After that, the no-confidence vote – even if it came with some predictable yet pretty fake drama and backbiting – was merely a formality on the way to snap elections, scheduled for February 23.
On the face of it, the above may look like a minor politics-as-usual hiccup: Sometimes coalitions don’t work out and a country needs new elections to – hopefully – start over with a new government. In postwar Germany (the Cold War Western version and the post-unification one together), this procedure – based on article 68 of the constitution – is not unprecedented; it has been used 5 times before.
But this is not that sort of case. Rather, the snap elections are only one small symptom of a much deeper, all-pervasive malaise: By regularly reading the news about Germany, you could easily come to feel that Europe’s former economic locomotive and political first-among-not-so-equals is now a very unhappy country, economically in severe, persistent decline and politically – to put it kindly – badly disoriented. And you would be right. Except things are even worse, and I write that, let me remind you, as a German.
For what’s really gloomy – indeed, quite literally hopeless – about the current German doom is that no one with even a remote chance at political power in Berlin is prepared to honestly face the root causes of the country’s misery. Germany is not merely in a mess; it also has a dysfunctional non-elite that is in total denial about how to fix that mess. But before we get to that elephant in the misery room that almost all German politicians fail to acknowledge, with stereotypical thoroughness, let’s look at the wasteland their failure has made.
Take a few highlights. There are 84 million Germans. According to a major research institute in the country, a quarter of them have found out that their income is insufficient to make ends meet. In a similar vein, another new study based on official government data pays special attention to the cost of having a roof, any roof, over your head. It has just found that 17.5 million Germans are living in poverty. That is 5.4 million more than previously assumed. The reason they had escaped the traditional statistics is that the cost of their abodes had simply not been factored in. Once you, realistically, do so, a whopping 20 percent of Germans fall under the official definition of “poor.”
No wonder then that ever more Germans need soup kitchens – in German “Tafeln” – to simply have enough to eat. Indeed, demand for housing has grown so much that they even have to ration the food they are doling out.
More and more Germans have to abandon their pets because they simply can’t afford them anymore: cats and dogs are becoming a “luxury item,” and keep people in a “poverty trap.” Germany’s business mood, meanwhile, is “slumping,” according to Bloomberg.
We could go on, but the picture should be clear enough: Germans may be a little on the “Angst” side in terms of temperament, but this time, they are really in trouble. How did that happen to the industrial powerhouse and export champion? The core of the problem is, of course, the economy. It takes not a grain of alarmism – ask Bloomberg again – to observe that its very future is in danger: It is “ravaged” by an energy crisis; Chinese competitors squeeze it, while Chinese markets are being lost; and then there is US President-elect Donald Trump and his threats of brutal tariffs. And all of that on top of persistent stagnation entering its fifth year.
Indeed, for two years already the German economy has simply “flatlined,” and business is (not) looking forward to yet another year of no growth. Germany, a long report has just summed it up, is “reaching a point of no return,” on a “path of decline that threatens to become irreversible.”
Here is the crux: The mainstream parties now contesting the snap elections recognize that the situation is dire. How could they not without being laughed out of the room? They all offer suggestions, as you would expect, for what to do about it. Let’s set aside that such suggestions look a little silly when coming from the parties that made up the last government coalition. Why didn’t they implement their ideas then, after all?
Let’s just note that everything is rather predictable: The Social Democrats stress public spending and infrastructure and make unfounded promises to protect ordinary Germans from social decline, as if that process were not well underway already.
The mainstream Conservatives (CDU-CSU) emphasize lower taxes, budget cuts, less bureaucracy and red tape, and the magic powers of the market to unleash new growth. The market liberals from the Free Democrats do the same, just more extremely. And the Greens promise everything somehow, and then some, while making no sense at all. Everything as usual, in other words.
And yet, none of the above even dare name the one key issue that a new government could resolve quickly and that would have a decisive and fast impact on the German economy: namely the cause of that energy crisis that has hit crucial “energy-intensive” sectors the hardest but is, of course, affecting every single business and all the households, that is, consumers, one way or the other. The reason for that odd blindness is purely political, because that cause is very easy to identify. It’s the “structural blow” of “the loss of cheap Russian energy,” as even Bloomberg acknowledges.
It is true: Germany has an abundance of problems, some long predating the war in and over Ukraine: demography, under-digitalization, the infamous “debt brake,” a public debt limit so primitively designed it makes reasonable deficits impossible, and so on. And yet, the politically produced and self-imposed (Russia did not cut off the cheap energy, the West did, including via violent sabotage as in the Nord Stream attacks) energy crisis is decisive.
Imagine Germany, if you wish, as a past-their-prime, somewhat out-of-shape middle-class type. In principle, there is no reason such a person cannot rebuild by pursuing a healthy diet and decent exercise. Except, of course, you also cut off their oxygen supply by strangling them.
The added irony: Germany – with plenty of help from its big brother “ally” America and its dependent sponger Ukraine – is strangling itself. Auto-asphyxiation is, of course, a well-known and potentially lethal perversion, but usually it’s associated with aging rock stars in lonely hotel rooms. Seeing a whole country do it is peculiar.
In the current German party system, only two parties show signs of being willing to address this core issue instead of avoiding it: The far-right/right-wing AfD under Alice Weidel and the left-conservative BSW under Sarah Wagenknecht. What do they have in common apart from that? Nothing. Except, they both won’t be able to influence German government policy, at least not soon, and not after the February elections. The AfD is, actually, the second-strongest political party after the CDU-CSU Conservatives, according to current polls. Think what you will about Musk’s political tastes (absolutely not mine), but it’s a fact that he has spoken up for a party that almost a fifth of German voters prefer.
However, the mainstream parties swear that they will not allow it into a governing coalition. The BSW is doing reasonably well for a newcomer but may even be struggling to clear the five-percent barrier to gain seats in the new parliament, and it is certainly far from gathering the amount of votes that would make it indispensable for coalition building.
Here’s the final irony: Germany’s fundamental problem is not actually economic. The economy is in catastrophic shape, make no mistake. But the reason for that is political and even intellectual and moral: The inability or unwillingness to finally abandon a pernicious group think that subordinates obvious and vital German interests to the misguided political agenda of, ultimately, Washington and does not allow for what is obviously needed urgently: re-establishing and repairing a rational relationship with Russia.
Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.
Pro-Western party funded anti-NATO candidate in EU state – media

RT | December 22, 2024
Allegations that Russia was behind a Romanian social media campaign that helped independent presidential candidate Calin Georgescu win a first round vote, and which contributed to the country’s constitutional court canceling the entire election, are false, an investigation has found.
Georgescu’s campaign was not funded by Russia but in fact by the pro-Western National Liberal Party (PNL), the media outlet Snoop has reported, citing the probe’s findings.
A critic of NATO and the EU and a staunch opponent of sending aid to Ukraine, Georgescu topped the first-round vote in Romania with 22.94%, beating other liberal leftist and democrat candidates.
Romania’s Constitutional Court promptly annulled the election ahead of the second-round vote, citing intelligence documents alleging ‘irregularities’ in Georgescu’s performance.
The documents claimed Georgescu’s candidacy was improperly promoted online, including on TikTok, by paid influencers and extremist right-wing groups, and that his campaign may have benefited from Russian interference – an allegation that Moscow has denied as “absolutely groundless.”
According to Snoop, Romania’s tax authorities analyzed financial flows and discovered that the campaign that promoted Georgescu on TikTok was in fact paid for by the PNL and run by Kensington Communication, a company which provides political marketing services, as well as online campaigns.
The briefs delivered to influencers were aimed at promoting “a responsible attitude and a mature choice” among Romanians that would help the country continue its “democratic path,” wrote Snoop.
Influencers were reportedly given a script to describe the qualities of a future president without giving a name. Some of them however left comments below the videos, providing Georgescu’s name.
“It is a shock to everyone that the public money that taxpayers had provided to the PNL was used to promote another candidate,” one expert involved in the investigation told the publication.
Kensington Communication has issued a statement alleging that its campaign had been “hijacked” or “cloned” and said it would file a criminal complaint.
The leak came on Friday, a day before the expiration of Romanian President Klaus Iohannis’ term, and just days before the supreme court is scheduled to hear the case initiated by Georgescu. Iohannis himself had earlier refused to leave office, citing the country’s legislation.
Georgescu, who was labelled “pro-Russian” by his critics, filed a lawsuit with the supreme court to challenge the annulment of the election results. The candidate’s lawyer described the situation as “a flagrant violation of the constitution” and “a coup d’état.” The first hearing is scheduled for December 23.
Western Aid Covers Nearly 90% of Ukraine’s Spending in 2022-2024 – Analysis
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 22.12.2024
Russia has repeatedly warned that the US and its Western sponsors’ assistance to the Kiev regime will only prolong the Ukraine conflict.
Western financing of Ukraine reached a whopping $238.5 billion from February 2022 to the beginning of December 2024, which approximately corresponds to 87% of the country’s budget expenses, Sputnik’s research based on information from the Ukrainian Finance Ministry, the University of Kiel, and open data has shown.
The expenses of the Ukrainian budget in 2022-2023 amounted to $193.3 billion, while in 2024 the figure is expected to stand at $81.3 billion. It means that over the past three years, the expenses have increased to $274.6 billion, according to the analyzed data.
Aid Breakdown
The volume of financial aid sent by Western countries to Ukraine amounted to $106 billion, whereas the West’s military assistance reached $132.5 billion within the aforementioned period. At the same time, the total volume of Western aid is 43% less than the $416 billion the West promised to Kiev, per the analysis.
The US remains Ukraine’s largest donor, having sent $95.2 billion to the Kiev regime in the past three years. Two-thirds of the sum was military aid, while one-third went towards budget financing.
EU member states transferred financial and military aid to Ukraine worth $94.2 billion, with Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands being the bloc’s largest donors with $11.9 billion, $7.5 billion, and $6.3 billion, respectively. The UK sent $13.4 billion, Canada $7.8 billion, and Japan $6.7 billion.
During the December 19 Direct Line and year-end press conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed that Ukraine can fight and exist only with the support of its Western donors.
The statement came after Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Washington’s financial aid to Kiev will not change the situation on the battlefield and will lead to “new victims among Ukrainians.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, for his part, recalled earlier that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken emphasizes that continued aid to Ukraine is a guarantee of creating new jobs in the United States.
“As if he is not speaking about financing a war that has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives in Ukraine, but a lucrative business project,” Lavrov stressed.
This followed Peskov warning that the EU’s hefty sums to Ukraine are “allocated to the detriment of EU economies which are already going through difficult times.” For example, Germany, Europe’s largest economy, is facing a second year of zero growth, in what comes as more Germans oppose Berlin’s excessive financial assistance to the Kiev regime, according to a recent opinion poll conducted by the ARD news channel.
Zelensky’s testing our patience – Slovak MEP

RT | December 21, 2024
Vladimir Zelensky has “gone too far” in its dispute with Slovakia over natural gas, let alone turning Ukraine into a “zombie state” that’s entirely dependent on the West, Slovakian MEP Milan Uhrik has told RT.
Bratislava and Kiev have ended up in a bitter row over supplies of Russian natural gas across Ukraine. The country has refused to extend its gas-transit deal with Russia, on which Slovakia depends for energy supply, and which is set to expire at the end of the year.
While the country, which borders western Ukraine, has enough gas in storage to make it through the winter, the impending end of transit likely spells trouble for Bratislava in the near future, Uhrik is suggesting.
“We have a valid contract with Gazprom which we want to fulfill but Zelensky is preventing us from doing so simply because he wants to harm our economy and simply because he wants more, I don’t know, finance or more weapons from our country, and this is what we do not agree with,” the MEP said.
With a recession “coming to the European Union,” it would be “very unwise to completely cut off from Russian cheap energy sources,” Uhrik also warned.
People are getting angry [at] Zelensky because this has gone too far. He is simply testing our patience, because we did nothing wrong and yet he decides to destroy or continue with destruction, not only of Ukraine but also of our country.
The Slovakian lawmaker questioned the legitimacy of Zelensky’s “very sensitive and serious” decisions, pointing at the cancellation of presidential elections in the country, and to dwindling “support among Ukrainian people.”
Ukraine has long turned into a “zombie state” that is fully dependent on the collective West as a whole and the EU in particular, Uhrik pointed out. While the EU has helped Kiev “with more than €130 billion” (over $135 billion), in return it has been getting “even more and more demands” and “more and more insults,” with the latest row able to “easily raise a bigger conflict between Slovakia and Ukraine,” the MEP added.
Let’s Retire Overused Words. First, ‘Misinformation’
By Dr. Pierre Kory & Mary Beth Pfeiffer | Real Clear Health | December 16, 2024
In a seismic political shift, Republicans have laid claim to an issue that Democrats left in the gutter—the declining health of Americans. True, it took a Democrat with a famous name to ask why so many people are chronically ill, disabled and dying younger than in 47 other countries. But the message resonated with the GOP.
We have a proposal in this unfolding milieu. Let’s have a serious, nuanced discussion. Let’s retire labels that have been weaponized against Robert F. Kennedy Jr., nominated for Health and Human Services Secretary, and many people like him.
Start with discarding threadbare words like “conspiracy theory,” “anti-vax,” and the ever-changing “misinformation.”
These linguistic sleights of hand have been deployed—by government, media and vested interests—to dismiss policy critics and thwart debate. If post-election developments tell us anything, it is that such scorn may no longer work for a population skeptical of government overreach.
Although RFK has been lambasted for months in the press, he just scored a 47 percent approval rating in a CBS poll.
Americans are asking: Is RFK on to something?
Perhaps, as he contends, a 1986 law that all-but absolved vaccine manufacturers from liability has spawned an industry driven more by profit than protection.
Maybe Americans agree with RFK that the FDA, which gets 69 percent of its budget from pharmaceutical companies, is potentially compromised. Maybe Big Pharma, similarly, gets a free pass from the television news media that it generously supports. The U.S. and New Zealand, incidentally, are the only nations on earth that allow “direct-to- consumer” TV ads.
Finally, just maybe there’s a straight line from this unhealthy alliance to the growing list of 80 childhood shots, inevitably approved after cursory industry studies with no placebo controls. The Hepatitis B vaccine trial, for one, monitored the effects on newborns for just five days. Babies are given three doses of this questionably necessary product—intended to prevent a disease spread through sex and drug use.
Pointing out such conflicts and flaws earns critics a label: “anti-vaxxer.”
Misinformation?
If RFK is accused of being extreme or misdirected, consider the Covid-19 axioms that Americans were told by their government.
The first: The pandemic started in animals in Wuhan, China. To think otherwise, Wikipedia states, is a “conspiracy theory,” fueled by “misplaced suspicion” and “anti-Chinese racism.”
Not so fast. In a new 520-page report, a Congressional subcommittee linked the outbreak to risky U.S.-supported virus research at a Wuhan lab at the pandemic epicenter. After 25 hearings, the subcommittee found no evidence of “natural origin.”
Is the report a slam dunk? Maybe not. But neither is outright dismissal of a lab leak.
The same goes for other pandemic dogma, including the utility of (ineffective) masks, (harmful) lockdowns, (arbitrary) six-foot spacing, and, most prominently, vaccines that millions were coerced to take and that harmed some.
Americans were told, wrongly, that two shots would prevent Covid and stop the spread. Natural immunity from previous infection was ignored to maximize vaccine uptake.
Yet there was scant scientific support for vaccinating babies with little risk, which few other countries did; pregnant women (whose deaths soared 40 percent after the rollout), and healthy adolescents, including some who suffered a heart injury called myocarditis. The CDC calls the condition “rare;” but a new study found 223 times more cases in 2021 than the average for all vaccines in the previous 30 years.
Truth Muzzled?
Beyond this, pandemic decrees were not open to question. Millions of social media posts were removed at the behest of the White House. The ranks grew both of well-funded fact-checkers and retractions of countervailing science.
The FDA, meantime, created a popular and false story line that the Nobel Prize-winning early-treatment drug ivermectin was for horses, not people, and might cause coma and death. Under pressure from a federal court, the FDA removed its infamous webpage, but not before it cleared the way for unapproved vaccines, possible under law only if no alternative was available.
An emergency situation can spawn official missteps. But they become insidious when dissent is suppressed and truth is molded to fit a narrative.
The government’s failures of transparency and oversight are why we are at this juncture today. RFK—should he overcome powerful opposition—may have the last word.
The conversation he proposes won’t mean the end of vaccines or of respect for science. It will mean accountability for what happened in Covid and reform of a dysfunctional system that made it possible.
Dr. Pierre Kory, M.D., a pulmonologist and critical care specialist, is president emeritus of the FLCCC Alliance. Mary Beth Pfeiffer is an investigative reporter and author.
Sen. Eric Schmitt Urges Exclusion of State Department’s Global Engagement Center from Government Funding
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 21, 2024
Republican Senator Eric Schmitt has addressed the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, asking for the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC) to be cut off from temporary government funding that’s currently negotiated in Congress.
Schmitt – who was, as Missouri attorney-general, behind the Missouri v. Biden free speech lawsuit (that became Murthy v. Missouri) said in a post on X that GEC “must be excluded from any subsequent piece of legislation for the remainder of the 118th Congress.”
The senator added that Americans “deserve to know their First Amendment rights are being protected.”
The letter to Schumer reveals that the temporary funding measure, known as “continuing resolution (CR)” among its original 1,500 pages provides for GEC as well.
(It has since been removed from the slimmer bill that passed on Friday.)
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
This office has been the subject of scrutiny by legislators and the public for finding a way to flag social media posts for censorship, despite being a part of the government.
Critics say this rendered its activities, conducted with third parties and affecting speech on social media, unconstitutional.
Democrats had hoped to get the CR approved through mid-March (but would extend GEC for another year) – however, President Trump, and consequently Republicans dashed their hopes of reaching a quick, bipartisan deal.
Now Schmitt’s letter shows one of the many objections Republicans have to the proposed CR, slamming it as an example of backroom deals that fly in the face of “transparency, accountability, and responsible government.”
Schmitt notes that GEC was set up to combat foreign propaganda, but then “mutated” into a censorship-facilitating outfit suppressing speech at home on a mass scale.
The senator states that since the target of censorship were narratives which “questioned established thinking” and involved a number of powerful actors (the government, social media), this “risks creating a government-endorsed ‘truth’ immune to public scrutiny.”
And, essentially – there goes true democracy, starting with the First Amendment.
For these reasons, Schmitt urges Schumer to make sure that GEC “under no circumstances” continues to receive public money.
The Republican senator is severely critical of the “giant ‘Christmas tree’ spending bill” itself, not only for undermining trust in government and the country’s institutions but also, due to its size and the rush to adopt it, for “slipping into the text” policies that would have GEC renewed and funded.
Schmitt therefore demands to exclude GEC from any legislation considered by the current Congress.
“I will strongly oppose any end-of-year bills that include reauthorization or funding of the GEC and urge my colleagues to do the same,” Schmitt’s letter concludes.
