Florida Surgeon General Calls for a Complete Halt on Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Vaccines
FDA, CDC Unable to Handle Dr. Ladapo’s Concerns.
By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | January 3, 2024
Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo is a Harvard-trained MD, PhD, and arguably one of the top experts on COVID-19 in the world. Prior to the Florida Surgeon General appointment, Dr. Ladapo was in academic practice at UCLA and published with myself, Dr. John McKinnon, and Dr. Harvey Risch on the efficacy of early hydroxychloroquine in acute COVID-19.
On December 6th 2023, State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo sent a letter to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Robert M. Califf and Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Mandy Cohen regarding questions pertaining to the discovery of DNA process-related impurities found in the the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.
Ladapo’s concerns center around lipid nanoparticles laced with Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer/origin of insertion DNA sequences widely distributed through the body. SV40 is a known promoter of proto-oncogenes.
The 2007, the FDA ‘Guidance for Industry: Considerations for Plasmid DNA Vaccines for Infectious Disease Indications (Guidance for Industry) outlines important considerations for vaccines that use novel methods of delivery regarding DNA integration, specifically:
- DNA integration could theoretically impact a human’s oncogenes – the genes which can transform a healthy cell into a cancerous cell.
- DNA integration may result in chromosomal instability.
- The Guidance for Industry discusses biodistribution of DNA vaccines and how such integration could affect unintended parts of the body including blood, heart, brain, liver, kidney, bone marrow, ovaries/testes, lung, draining lymph nodes, spleen, the site of administration and subcutis at injection site.
The FDA provided a written response on December 14, 2023, indicating the sponsors have NOT addressed risks outlined by the FDA itself in 2007. Because the FDA failed to handle these concerns, Dr. Ladapo has released the following statement:
The FDA’s response does not provide data or evidence that the DNA integration assessments it recommended itself have been performed. Instead, it pointed to genotoxicity studies – which are inadequate assessments for DNA integration risk. In addition, it obfuscated the difference between the SV40 promoter/enhancer and SV40 proteins, two elements that are distinct.
DNA integration poses a unique and elevated risk to human health and to the integrity of the human genome, including the risk that DNA integrated into sperm or egg gametes could be passed onto offspring of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine recipients. If the risks of DNA integration have not been assessed for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings.
Providers concerned about patient health risks associated with COVID-19 should prioritize patient access to non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and treatment. It is my hope that, in regard to COVID-19, the FDA will one day seriously consider its regulatory responsibility to protect human health, including the integrity of the human genome.

Ladapo called for a halt in Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. However, he did not recall the non-genetic, Spike-protein antigen Novavax vaccine. The Bio-Pharmaceutical complex does not promote Novavax largely because Weber Shandwick has a PR contract with the CDC vaccine office to promote only Pfizer and Moderna. Senator Rand Paul has called out this conflict of interest and obvious paid favoritism for mRNA over the safer but equally ineffective Novavax product.

I wonder if Pfizer and Moderna were halted, would our government switch to promotion of Novavax or would they continue to let the smaller company languish?
The Florida State Surgeon General’s announcement today is a milestone as more government officials join a chorus calling for recall of COVID-19 vaccines including myself (US Senate, multiple State Senates, EU Parliament, UK Parliament), 17,000 physicians representing the Global COVID-19 Summit, Australian scientists, the World Council for Health, and the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Facebook Rolls Out “Link History” Showing How it Tracks All The Websites Users Visit

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | January 3, 2024
Facebook, just like the rest of Big Tech, has historically made a great effort to track users across the internet, even when they are not logged into the platform, for data collecting and ultimately monetary reasons.
Now, reports say that a new way to achieve this has been recently launched by the giant, and notably, for the first time this type of tracking is made visible. Called Link History, the new feature is found in the Facebook app as essentially one of the permissions, and “documents” every link a user clicks while using the app.
Once again, fully in vein of what Google, Microsoft, etc., are doing, Facebook says the change – putting all links in one place – is there for better user experience, and again habitually, while the feature is not mandatory, it is there by default and “hiding” behind a pretty solid wall of an “opt-out.”
Whatever the case may be, most users don’t bother jumping over that wall, allowing corporations to at once offer a choice – and in most cases have it their way.
In order to deactivate this on their app, users first need to be aware Link History exists, and then navigate to the appropriate setting in order to “opt out.”
But there is no shortage of criticism of this latest move, from the privacy point of view (although mainstream tech press curiously chooses to single out Facebook while praising Google and Apple as some sort of “privacy warriors” now).
This should be viewed as part of the big (political) picture where keeping pressure on Facebook as still the most influential social media is especially important in an election year – while at the same time rightfully questioning Facebook’s (persistent) motivation for pursuing cross-site user tracking.
A classic example of two things getting to be true at the same time.
Facebook (Meta) doesn’t exactly pretend it is working solely to make sure users “never lose a link again” and enjoy other things that benefit them. A part of Link History’s announcement spells this out: “When you allow link history, we may use your information to improve your ads across Meta technologies.”
What the statement doesn’t clarify is if any of the well-known, ultra-invasive methods it uses to track users will actually change in any way with the introduction of Link History.

Speaker on BBC Verify Correspondent’s Six Month Sabbatical Course Has Called for Jailing Climate Contrarians

BY CHRIS MORRISON | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | JANUARY 1, 2024
Further and better particulars have emerged about the green billionaire-funded course run by the Oxford Climate Journalism Network (OCJN), which has to date attracted over 400 participants from around the world. It recently signed up Marco Silva, the climate ‘disinformation’ specialist employed by BBC Verify. To “hit closer to home”, course participants are told to pick a fruit such as a mango and discuss why it wasn’t as tasty as the year before due to the impact of climate change. Noted climate hysteric Saffron O’Neill has been a past speaker and she is on record as speculating on the need for “fines and imprisonment” for expressing scepticism about “well supported” science. There is something very disturbing about a climate activist from a State-reliant broadcaster attending a course funded by narrative-driven billionaires with a speaker who has suggested that sceptical climate scientists and writers be locked up in prison.
As the Daily Sceptic disclosed, the OCJN six-month course is run by the Reuters Institute, which is funded by the Thomson Reuters Foundation. Direct funding for the course, which started last year, has been provided by the Laudes Foundation and the European Climate Fund, the latter heavily supported by Extinction Rebellion funder Sir Christopher Hohn. Immersion in the correct political narrative surrounding climate collapse, the so-called ‘settled’ science, and the need for extreme Net Zero measures, whatever the cost, is the order of the day. It would appear that the aim of the OCJN is to insert constant fearmongering messages into media stories, as global elites press ahead with a collectivist Net Zero political agenda.
In a recently published essay, two OCJN organisers give chapter and verse as to how this is being directed on the course. It is designed to allow climate journalists to “move beyond their siloed past” into a strategic position within newsrooms “combining expertise with collaboration”. The “pick your mango” strategy is designed to make climate change “less abstract” and delegates are told to pick a “beloved fruit or activity that everyone in your country or region seems to care about, and seems to capture attention when impacted by climate change”.
“Less abstract” is one way of summing up this pseudoscientific hogwash. ‘Infantile’ might be better. None of it is based on a scintilla of scientific proof. Much the same can be said for a presentation by Dr. Friederike Otto who uses computer models to claim her green billionaire-funded World Weather Attribution (WWA) team can attribute individual bad weather events to human-caused climate change. Following Otto’s presentation, attendees are reported to have shown a “massive jump in self-confidence” when attributing individual weather to the long-term climate change.
The distinguished science writer Roger Pielke Jnr. is scathing about weather attribution calling it a new “cottage industry”, adding that the need to feed the climate beast leads to a knock-on effect of creating incentives for researchers to produce studies with links to climate – “no matter how tenuous or trivial”. At the BBC, weather attribution has always been very popular. Writing in a WWA guide for journalists, the former BBC Today editor Sarah Sands says attribution studies have given us “significant insight into the horseman of the climate apocalypse”. Former OCJN attendee, Ben Rich, the BBC’s lead weather presenter, has used the “science” of climate attribution “to help explain to audiences when and how scientists can link extreme weather to climate change”.
None of this ludicrous propaganda can be questioned since the science is deemed to be ‘settled’. Geography lecturer Dr. Saffron O’Neill has taken climate hysteria to a new level with a demand that journalists should not use photos of people enjoying themselves on beaches during summer heat waves. She recently told theGuardian that such images “can hold the same power” as photos of the tanks in Tiananmen Square and smoke billowing from the Twin Towers. After a session with O’Neill, audience members said that “news outlets and photo agencies can and should think ahead of time about how they photograph the risks of hot weather”. And of course if anyone disagrees with O’Neill and her version of the “well supported” science, it is time for fines and prison. The last suggestion was published in Carbon Brief, the activist blog financed by the European Climate Fund. As it happens, Carbon Brief is represented on the OCJN Advisory Board through its editor Leo Hickman.
The OCJN is far from the only billionaire foundation-funded operation trying to spread climate alarm and hysteria throughout the general population. Climate Central targets local media with ready-to-publish stories about significant landmarks disappearing beneath rising sea levels. It recently gulled the Mirror into running a notably silly story about much of London disappearing beneath the waves within 80 years. Covering Climate Now (CC Now) is an off-shoot of the Columbia Journalism Review and is backed by the Guardian. It claims to feed over 500 media operations with pre-written climate stories. Both these operations rely on heavy financial support from a small cluster of green billionaire funds.
The links between these operations spreads far and wide. One of the partners of CC Now is Reuters, the news agency connected to the OCJN through its Reuters Institute. Not everyone is happy with Reuters’ connections to operations such as CC Now that make no secret of a desire to promote a hard-line Net Zero narrative and suppress opposition to it. Neil Winton worked for 32 years at the agency covering science in his time. Politicians and lobbyists are in the process of dismantling our way of life, he notes. If we are going to give up our civilisation, at the very least we ought to have an open debate. “Journalists need to stand up and be counted. The trouble is this requires bravery and energy, and an urge to question conventional wisdom,” he said.
And, he might have added, avoiding the naughty step of Dr. Saffron O’Neill.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
Are EV Fires Stories Being Covered Up?
By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | January 1, 2024
On Boxing Day, we passed this house on our way up to the common where we take the dogs. We go there most days, so were shocked to see this fire damage (photos taken today). On Boxing Day, there was a totally burnt out car on the drive, and also a gas van outside, presumably checking the mains were safe. The last time we went past was, I believe, Saturday, so the fire must have happened between then and Tuesday.
We could not identify the burnt out car at the time, as we did not stop. But there is often a Tesla parked on the driveway.
The fire obviously has all the classic trappings of an EV fire. Note how the right side of the house is hardly affected. The garage door must have been subjected to extreme heat, because it is hopelessly buckled out of shape.
This is not why I am making this post however.
For some reason, there seems to be no record or news at all of this locally. The South Yorkshire Fire Service keep a daily log of all incidents they have been called to, even down to wheelie bin fires. Yet they have no record at all of this fire. I have requested any information they have, but they have so far not responded.
The local newspaper, the Sheffield Star, also appears to have ignored the story, and there is no trace of the news on Google.
Is there some policy afoot to cover up stories of EV fires? It seems far fetched, but I can think of no other explanation.
What We Have Learned
By Craig Murray | December 24, 2023
We have learnt this year that there is no crime so startling, so obvious and so visible to the whole world that the United States and Israel are not willing to commit it brazenly and openly. The massacre of 20,000 people includes the killing of babies and infants, the deliberate shooting of pregnant women and toddlers, the murder of old ladies in church and the execution of prisoners stripped naked.
This is all justified as “Israel’s right of self-defence”.
We have also seen the increasing rise of fascism as western governments crack down on their publics in order to curtail political resistance to the genocide. Tony Greenstein, Mick Napier and I have all been harassed under the Terrorism Act. I have left the country because I fear I am officially “under investigation” under the Terrorism Act and I fear I shall be arrested and placed in jail for two years awaiting trial. Numerous people have been arrested for expressing their horror at the massacre through placards, words or even songs that the police judge “offensive”. Police action is often prompted by instruction from self-appointed Zionist vigilante organisations.
We are also seeing, exactly as I predicted, a replay of the “War on Terror” state Islamophobic propaganda. Do you remember the famous “ricin plot” where the ricin found was the trace level to be found in every kitchen? The British government kept it Top Secret for two years that there was in fact no ricin. Or the non-existent Easter Bomb Plot where the “ingredient of improvised explosives” found turned out to be a bag of sugar?
In Germany they have a great deal of work to do to justify the world’s most extreme anti-Palestinian governmental racism, so they have invented a “Hamas terror plot” and arrested four young Muslims. No evidence at all has been produced to justify this.
Hamas has never, ever conducted any violent attack outside of Palestine and it has always been their policy not to do so – and it still is. The notion is ludicrous that at this time Hamas have decided to suddenly lose the propaganda war which they are winning worldwide, by attacking Germany.
Germany’s governments have form of course, not only for genocide, but also for enthusiastic creation of fake terrorism. The German government was heavily implicated both in false flag terrorist attacks in Tashkent, which I was able to investigate and report to the UK government in real time, and in the creation of a whole fake terrorist organisation, “The Islamic Jihad Union of Uzbekistan”, which was entirely the work of the CIA and the German security services. The aim at that time was to justify the German military airbase at Termez in Uzbekistan, operating into Afghanistan. People forget German participation on the losing side in the last Afghan war.
I have no doubt we are in for a period of more propaganda, fake terrorist plots, false flag actual terrorism and agent provocateur led terrorism. It is the only way the Establishment can hope to regain the propaganda narrative.
I have not quite got used yet to my new position as an itinerant terrorist, so I apologise that posting has been a bit scarce due to a lot of organisational bother and a general sense of discombobulation. This is being dashed off at Milan airport. I am very happy on a personal note to say that my family are joining me at an exotic venue for Christmas and New Year, so you may not hear much from me till mid-January as I owe my children a great deal of my attention.
I do wish you a safe and very happy festive season wherever you are, and hope you can be together with those you love. For all those living in fear and danger, particularly but not only those in Gaza, my thoughts along with those of millions around the world are with you now and always.
Shortly before the first Iraq War, between the invasion of Kuwait and the outbreak of real hostilities, I spent a minute in reply to one from John Major. I was working in a the Embargo Surveillance Centre, a Top Secret establishment operating from an underground NATO HQ in central London. We were among the recipients of a Christmas message from the Prime Minister which combined Christian wishes with a bellicose message. I replied in a formal minute with this verse from the carol It Came Upon the Midnight Clear:
But with the woes of sin and strife
The world has suffered long;
Beneath the angel-strain have rolled
Two thousand years of wrong;
And man, at war with man, hears not
The love-song which they bring; –
Oh hush the noise, ye men of strife,
And hear the angels sing!
Whomever the angels are to you, I hope you hear them sing.
Google to settle $5bn lawsuit for tracking private activity
RT | December 30, 2023
Google has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit filed in 2020, claiming its Chrome browser secretly tracked the internet activity of millions of people, even when they were using the ‘Incognito’ setting, Reuters reported on Thursday.
Filed in the Northern District of California, the lawsuit accused the US tech giant of continuing to “track, collect, and identify browsing data in real time” when users thought they were doing their browsing privately.
The plaintiffs alleged that sites using Google’s analytics collected information from browsers in ‘Incognito’ mode, including web page content, device data, and IP addresses.
The complainants said this turned Google into an “unaccountable trove of information” by letting the company learn about their friends, hobbies, favorite foods, shopping habits, and “potentially embarrassing things.”
They also accused Google of taking Chrome users’ private browsing activity and then associating it with their already existing user profiles.
In August, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected Google’s bid to dismiss the lawsuit, pointing out that the company had never revealed to its users that data collection continued even when using private mode.
“Google’s motion hinges on the idea that plaintiffs consented to Google collecting their data while they were browsing in private mode,” Rogers ruled. “Because Google never explicitly told users that it does so, the Court cannot find as a matter of law that users explicitly consented to the at-issue data collection.”
The lawsuit, filed by Florida resident William Byatt and California residents Chasom Brown and Maria Nguyen, covers “millions” of Google users since June 2016. It sought at least $5 billion, or about $5,000 in damages per user, for violations of wiretap laws.
According to the notice filed earlier this week, Google and the plaintiffs have reached a preliminary settlement that will result in the litigation being dismissed. Settlement terms were not disclosed, but, according to Reuters, the lawyers said they have agreed to a binding term sheet through mediation, and are expected to present a formal settlement for court approval by February 24, 2024.
Ex-Pentagon Analyst: Honest Audit of US’ Ukraine Funding Only Possible Without Team Biden
Sputnik – 28.12.2023
The US government has reportedly been able to trace just $1.5 billion of the $75.4 billion it has approved for Ukraine, as per an RT analysis of a newly declassified US State Department IG report.
RT has obtained and analyzed materials from a declassified report by the inspector general of the US State Department concerning the costs of military support for Ukraine.
As per the report, Kiev has received at least $44 billion from the State Department since the beginning of the Russian special military operation. This was the most significant part of the total flow of American funding into Ukraine which amounted to at least $75.4 billion during 2022 and 2023. For its part, the Pentagon has provided the Ukrainian defense industry with almost $13 billion annually since 2022.
However, the US State Department has so far managed to trace only $1.5 billion – i.e. less than 2% of all monies approved by American lawmakers for Ukraine – explaining that the audit of the remaining funds has been complicated by military conditions. The materials reviewed by RT also blamed the lack of transparency on endemic corruption in Ukraine’s public and private sectors.
“The way the bureaucracies work here is that each department (State, USAID, Pentagon, etc) gets funding, and they dole it out, engage contractors, and associate that money with one of their ‘mission goals’,” retired US Air Force Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, a former analyst for the US Department of Defense, told Sputnik.
“There are at least three departmental channels, with the USAID paying for government salaries. The various channels by which US dollars are shipped into Ukraine probably contain overlap, especially in terms of Pentagon direct aid and foreign military sales activities, conducted by the State Department. While this creates more room for corruption in Kiev and elsewhere, in effect it simply broadens the field for people in the Ukrainian government and military to re-direct and misdirect those resources.”
Washington has routinely funded the Ukrainian military since 2014. Even though the US-funded 2021 Global Organized Crime Index called Ukraine one of the largest arms trafficking markets in Europe, military funding was considerably stepped up in 2022. Still, Ukraine corruption concerns related to an alleged waste of Western aid were openly articulated only at the end of 2023.
“As the US enters into a presidential campaign year, waste of money and fraud in Ukraine becomes an issue that is able to be leveraged by the Republicans and some Democrats who may be unhappy with Biden’s record of waste in Ukraine over the past several years,” explained Kwiatkowski. “Fraud and waste is always a hot-button voter issue, and it is today in the context of the severe drawdown and lack of supplies and munitions we have experienced in the US military, and NATO as well, since the Ukraine war started.”
Washington began on-site inspections in Ukraine to keep track of the arms it supplied around October 2022, following a series of reports alleging that US weapons were hard to trace in Ukraine and warning about potential arms smuggling. In 2023 several US government teams were dispatched to Ukraine to monitor ongoing US security assistance to Kiev.
In October, a confidential US strategy document obtained by Politico revealed that the Biden administration was far more concerned about Ukraine’s corruption than it publicly admitted. The document proposed a series of reforms to root out malfeasance in the US government and its numerous agencies, arguing that “perceptions of high-level corruption” could “undermine the Ukrainian public’s and foreign leaders’ confidence in the war-time government.”
So, will the latest effort to track US aid in Ukraine work?
“Audits take time, and are effective only when there is some institutional reward for cutting costs and exposing waste,” the former Pentagon analyst said.
“I have seen no reports of significance from past audit teams or these most recent efforts. The effective, more honest, audit will only occur after the Biden administration is displaced, whether at the end of 2024 or some later date, if Biden gains re-election. Until then, having ‘audits’ and audit teams in Ukraine are simply window dressing, designed to make Congress feel better about pouring more badly needed cash into the black hole of the Zelensky regime.”
They are covering their tracks
December 23, 2023
“More than 300 medical journal articles have disappeared within the last year.” – Dr. Scott Jensen
@drscottjensen
Europe betrayed by US and Ukraine – Minsk talks negotiator
By Lucas Leiroz | December 25, 2023
The current conflict in Ukraine is a direct result of the failure of the Minsk Agreements. Between 2014 and 2015, Russia and the European Union mediated negotiations between the breakaway republics of Donbass and the Kiev government, reaching a mutually beneficial protocol that was expected to guarantee regional peace. However, the terms of the pact were never respected by the Ukrainian regime, which continued to constantly attack the republics and advance its project of “de-Russification” and ethnic cleansing.
According to former German prime minister, Angela Merkel, the Agreements did not fail, but fulfilled their real objective: to prepare Ukraine for a war against Russia in the near future. Commenting on the beginning of Moscow’s special military operation and the escalation of the conflict in Donbass, the German former official stated that this confrontation was expected from the very beginning, with the ceasefire established in Minsk only working as a way to temporarily alleviate tensions, enabling Kiev to gain time.
However, this does not appear to be the opinion of some other insiders who were also deeply involved in negotiations in the Belarusian capital. I recently had the opportunity to visit the Donbass region as a war correspondent. There I interviewed several local leaders, politicians and state officials, including the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of Lugansk, Vladislav Deinego, who was one of the negotiators in the Minsk process.
In our conversation, I asked the Minister his opinion on the failure of the Minsk Agreements and heard from him a long explanation about how the situation got out of control and escalated to the current status of war. According to Deinego, Merkel is lying when she claims that the plan has always been to simply prepare Ukraine. For him, Europe had a genuine interest in achieving regional peace and stabilizing its relations with Russia, avoiding a military escalation that would put the entire continental security architecture at risk.
Deinego claims that Kiev wanted total war from the beginning. The Minister explains that, before the Minsk Accords were established, the separatists tried to resolve the situation diplomatically in several ways. After non-military means failed, the republics proposed to Kiev that the fighting be somewhat limited to avoid civilian casualties.
First, a ban on the use of artillery and aviation was proposed, which Kiev quickly denied. Next, Donbass’ leaders attempted to establish security zones, limiting the use of heavy weapons according to their distance to civilian areas. In this model, artillery would be allowed only in regions far from inhabited cities, while in the “zero line” combat would be limited to the regular use of infantry, preventing civilians from being hit by heavy weapons. Even so, Ukraine denied signing such a deal.
This insistence by the neo-Nazi regime on waging all-out war against the separatists, according to the minister, generated real concerns among Europeans. The deeper the Ukrainian incursions were, the closer the attacks would come to Russian borders, worsening the security crisis. In practice, the situation could at any time escalate into a situation of absolute violence in which Moscow would be forced to intervene, generating a major conflict in Europe. This worried EU members, especially Germany, which was very dependent on the partnership with Russia.
Being a major importer of Russian gas and depending on friendship with Moscow to guarantee its economic and social stability, Berlin engaged deeply in the diplomatic process to try to end, or at least freeze, the conflict. For this reason, Germany was the main negotiator on Kiev’s side in Minsk, while Russia negotiated in support for the Donbass’ republics. In this sense, after many negotiations, the pact was finally signed, establishing measures such as ceasefire, release of prisoners and respect for the political autonomy of Russian-speaking regions.
Deinego believes that actual compliance with the Agreements would be the best scenario for Europeans as it would guarantee stability in Russia-EU relations, despite Ukrainian hostility towards Moscow. However, as well known, Kiev never obeyed the Minsk’s terms and continued violence in the region – even though the intensity of the fighting obviously decreased. Deinego thinks that this was never in the European interest and that, in fact, the direction taken by the conflict showed the failure of European diplomacy.
Indeed, at the time Russia-EU relations were prosperous, despite ideological and geopolitical rivalry. There was no reason for Europeans to agree to participate in a war plan in which they would be severely harmed. This leads us to believe that other actors worked to escalate the crisis, without considering European interests. Certainly, the US, which always wanted war with Russia, was responsible for this.
The circumstances show that Washington probably took advantage of the “stability” generated by the Minsk Agreements to prepare Kiev to act as a proxy against Russia. The Europeans never participated in this plan and were betrayed by NATO just like the Russians. Currently, Europe continues to be a victim of NATO’s war plans, being forced by the US to impose suicidal sanctions against Russia, affecting its own economy.
The opinion of an insider of the Minsk process is vital to show the real reasons for the conflict. In practice, Deinego presents proof of how relations between the US and EU are semi-colonial, with Europeans being used by Washington in war plans, without having their interests respected.
Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram.


