Fighting for Russia against the New World Order.

Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts

WHO Guidelines Encourage Children Younger Than 4 be Taught “Masturbation” and “Gender Identity”


 WHO guidelines for sex education recommend that children aged 0-4 be taught about “masturbation” and “gender identity.”

The World Health Organization’s ‘Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe: A framework for policymakers, educational and health authorities and specialists’, advises children be taught about sexually pleasuring themselves and transgenderism before they’ve even fully learned to talk.


The WHO advises that children aged 0-4 are given “information about enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s body… masturbation.”

Toddlers are also to be encouraged to “gain an awareness of gender identity” and given “the right to explore gender identities.”

In the ages 4-6 bracket, educators are urged to “give information about same-sex relationships” and “help children develop respect for different norms regarding sexuality.”

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-b31CcV-upZM/Xq06P82tzgI/AAAAAAAAgL0/c1dKkkI6_HI-pbihvbNw6cFElAwbo1iUgCNcBGAsYHQ/s1600/290420who2.jpg


Of course, in any sane world, no child of this age should be exposed to any kind of information about sex whatsoever.

Despite them being complicit in China’s cover-up of the coronavirus outbreak, the media has held up the WHO as an organization beyond reproach which cannot be questioned.

Social media networks are removing material and banning people who criticize the World’s Health Organization’s guidelines.

Given that the global health body is pushing such sickness onto toddlers, the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw funding is looking better every day.

Source: https://summit.news/2020/04/29/who-guidelines-encourage-children-younger-than-4-be-taught-masturbation-and-gender-identity/
Share:

Snowden: Tech giants can enslave entire populations


 Tech giants such as #Facebook and #Google stack vast amounts of user data which "they are happy to hand over to governments", according to NSA whistleblower Edward #Snowden speaking to a human and digital rights conference in London via video link from Moscow on Saturday. "Everything you've done, everything you've typed into their search box, everything you have clicked on, everything you've liked," said Snowden addressing the audience in the UK Open Rights Group Conference (ORGCON19).



According to Snowden, governments were using this data to target journalists, dissidents, immigrants and other vulnerable individuals to protect their own control.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbWNFChCcOo
Share:

Jon Hellevig: Succumbing to US Bullying Made Ukraine Poorest Country in Europe

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – A Finnish political economist and author highlighted predicaments of nations that refused to adopt strategies of resistance against US unilateralism, saying Ukraine, for instance, became “the poorest” country in Europe after succumbing to Washington’s bullying.    


Succumbing to US Bullying Made Ukraine Poorest Country in Europe: Finnish Analyst
“Look at Ukraine; they succumbed to USA bullying and propaganda and now their country has become the poorest in Europe although it used to be the industrial powerhouse of the Soviet Union,” Jon Hellevig said in an interview with the Tasnim News Agency.

“And look at Germany, France, and the whole European Union. Subjugated to the USA, they are being ruined with a stagnant economy for more than a decade and deep social and cultural crises,” he added.

Jon Krister Hellevig is a Finnish lawyer and businessman who has worked in Russia since the early 1990s. Hellevig was a candidate in the European parliament election in 2014. He is the managing partner of the Moscow-based law company Hellevig, Klein & Usov. Hellevig has written several books, including Avenir Guide to Russian Taxes (2002, 2003, 2006 English and Russian editions); Avenir Guide to Labor Laws (2002, 2003, 2006 English and Russian editions). Expressions and Interpretations, a book on the philosophy of law and the development of Russian legal practices; Hellevig takes actively part in public discussion of current affairs and social structure contributing with articles and commentary in the media. He regularly lectures at international seminars on various topics.

Following is the full text of the interview:

Tasnim: International developments are full of examples of how regional and trans-regional countries have successfully adopted strategies of resistance against oppression and unilateralism that have borne good results. As you know, countries like Iran, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and Palestine have protected their national sovereignty against foreign threats and achieved many gains through this strategy. In contrast, some countries have adopted a strategy of appeasement or reconciliation when being hectored and bullied by world powers. Given the experiences of these resistance countries, what do you think about their approach and the concept of resistance?

Hellevig: Naturally, resistance is the only choice, come what comes. At the same time, the resistance strategy must be smart and strive to build bridges to other countries outside the enemy.
Tasnim: Do you think countries that currently toe the line of major powers like the US ought to emulate these experiences of resistance countries to protect their independence and stand against unilateralism?

Hellevig: Obviously they should. It’s a question of both the material and moral well-being of the people and their very existence in the long-term. Look at Ukraine; they succumbed to USA bullying and propaganda and now their country has become the poorest in Europe although it used to be the industrial powerhouse of the Soviet Union. And look at Germany, France, and the whole European Union. Subjugated to the USA, they are being ruined with a stagnant economy for more than a decade and deep social and cultural crises. The traditional way of life of those European countries is rapidly being destroyed with their social structures torn apart. In fact, the very existence of those nations is now at risk.

Tasnim: In an op-ed article written for Tasnim, the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Shamkhani, warned the European countries of the risks of inaction regarding the US administration’s unilateral policies, saying the current EU leaders will be held accountable for Europe’s future challenges. Shamkhani criticized Europe for becoming an unimportant and passive actor that accepts humiliation at the hands of the US and has to live with the destructive effects of Washington’s unilateralism that have affected several international treaties. What is your take on that? Isn’t it better for the EU to stand up to US bullying and unilateralism?

Hellevig: The European Union and its main constituent countries are not independent nations as they have been taken over by US-led globalists. Their armies belong to the US umbrella organization NATO, their intelligence services are CIA branches, their media is owned by the globalists, their capitalists are totally at the mercy of the US market and its bullying terms, etc. Given these circumstances, independent-minded politicians do not have a chance to come to power, not in the individual states nor the totally undemocratic European Union.

The problems are fortunately building up in the European Union and with President Trump’s erratic policies the relationship is becoming increasingly fraught. But things must get much worse before the European people will mature to free themselves from the globalist yoke. I am afraid, it will take an enormous financial and economic crisis to bring that about. But this crisis will come for sure, sooner or later. Paradoxically, an attack on Iran might be the final trigger for that. And this is what holds the Americans at bay from Iran, at least for the time being. On the other hand, the US economy is so bad with enormous asset bubbles in every field of the economy, stock markets, housing etc., massive budget and trade deficits and skyrocketing debt. Therefore, there might be some people in the USA who could possibly consider war and ensuing financial crisis as a means to extract the country from those problems, to let everything crash and start the global economy anew from ground zero.

Source: https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2019/07/10/2050611/succumbing-to-us-bullying-made-ukraine-poorest-country-in-europe-finnish-analyst
Share:

Putin: Immigrants Are Free to ‘Kill, Plunder and Rape’ with Impunity in Europe


Russian President Vladimir Putin says immigrants are allowed to rape, kill and pillage with immunity in the West

Russian President has slammed European leaders for allowing immigrants to “kill, plunder and rape” with impunity.
In an interview with the Financial Times just ahead of the G20 summit, the Russian leader slammed Western leaders’ attempt to destroy ‘traditional family values’ and warned that liberalism was dying:
“[Liberals] cannot simply dictate anything to anyone,” Mr Putin told the newspaper.

Putin added that liberalism conflicted with “the interests of the overwhelming majority of the population,” and criticized Chancellor Angela Merkel for allowing millions of refugees to spill into Germany in 2017.

“This liberal idea presupposes that nothing needs to be done. That migrants can kill, plunder and rape with impunity because their rights as migrants have to be protected.”

Dailymail.co.uk reports: He added: ‘Every crime must have its punishment. The liberal idea has become obsolete. It has come into conflict with the interests of the overwhelming majority of the population.’


The G20 – the countries with the largest and fastest-growing economies – are meeting in Osaka, Japan today and tomorrow and posed for the famous ‘family photo’ of world leaders, including Britain’s Theresa May, China’s Xi Jinping, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Salman and their host, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

The leaders of the G20 meet in Osaka, Japan.
The first major meeting was between Donald Trump and the Russia’s leader where the US President hailed their ‘very, very good relationship’ with Russia’s leader, adding: ‘It’s a great honour to be with President Putin’.

An extraordinary moment then followed their handshake as Trump told Putin: ‘Don’t meddle in the election, please,’ with a smile on his face, turning to grin at the Russian leader.

In sharp contrast, Mr Putin faced a far frostier head-to-head with a grim-faced Theresa May as the two shook hands this morning. The Prime Minister is due to demand he takes responsibility for the nerve agent poisoning of Sergei Skripal in Salisbury last year and tell him to hand over the Novichok assassins sent by the Russian state to kill their former agent.

Outgoing British Prime Minister Theresa May looks miserable as she poses for photo standing next to Russian President Vladimir Putin
Mr Putin has reserved special praise for Donald Trump for trying to stem the flow of migrants and drugs into the US, just before the men met today.

Vladimir Putin today said British claims that his agents carried out the Salisbury poisoning are ‘not worth five pounds’ – but justified attacks on Russian traitors saying: ‘Treason is the gravest crime possible and must be punished’.

The Russian President will meet Theresa May at the G20 in Russia today where the Prime Minister will demand he admits to the Novichok attack and hand over the two spies sent to kill Sergei Skripal last year.

Related: Putin says liberalism is finished

Mrs May has said her decision to speak to Putin in Osaka is not a return to ‘business as usual’ with Russia, whose leader today sought to laugh off claims he ordered the poisoning.


Mr Putin told the Financial Times: ‘Listen, all this fuss about spies and counterspies, it is not worth serious interstate relations. This spy story, as we say, it is not worth five kopecks. Or even five pounds, for that matter’.

But in a chilling admission about how he believes his country should ‘punish’ like Skripal, who was secretly sharing secrets with the British, he added: ‘Treason is the gravest crime possible and traitors must be punished. I am not saying that the Salisbury incident is the way to do it. But traitors must be punished.’

And in admission that he is willing to take risks to protect his country, he said: ‘He who doesn’t take risks, never drinks Champagne’.

Earlier Putin said Anglo-Russian relations were beginning to improve ahead of his face-to-face meeting with Theresa May at this weekend’s G20 summit in Osaka, Japan.

Relations have been rocky since the UK pointed the finger at the Kremlin for the attempted assassination of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury in March last year.

Mr Putin said: ‘I think Russia and UK are both interested in fully restoring our relations, at least I hope a few preliminary steps will be made.’

But in a chilling admission about how he believes his country should ‘punish’ people like Skripal, who was secretly sharing secrets with the British, he added: ‘Treason is the gravest crime possible and traitors must be punished. I am not saying that the Salisbury incident is the way to do it. But traitors must be punished.’

And in admission that he is willing to take risks to protect his country, he said: ‘He who doesn’t take risks, never drinks Champagne’.

Trump’s critics have accused him of being too friendly with Putin and castigated him for failing to publicly confront the Russian leader in Helsinki over Moscow’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

A U.S. special counsel, Robert Mueller, conducted a two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election and whether the Trump campaign colluded with Moscow.

Related: Putin: Globalism Is The Enemy Of Humanity

Mueller found that Russia did meddle in the election but that the Trump campaign did not illegally conspire with Russia to influence the vote.

In a further attempt to lighten the mood, Trump sought common ground with Putin at the expense of the journalists who had gathered to catch the leaders at the outset of their meeting.

President Donald Trump said it was an ‘honor’ to be meeting with the Russian leader
‘Get rid of them. Fake news is a great term, isn’t it. You don’t have this problem in Russia but we do,’ Trump said.

World leaders kicked off one of their most high-stakes G20 meetings in years Friday, with rows brewing over a bruising US-China trade war and climate change despite a more conciliatory tone from US President Donald Trump.

After lashing out at friend and foe alike en route to Osaka in western Japan for the meeting, Trump appeared in a less combative mood when meeting fellow world leaders face-to-face.

Fresh from describing traditionally close US ally Germany as ‘delinquent’ for not paying enough into the NATO budget, he was effusive when meeting Chancellor Angela Merkel.

‘She’s a fantastic person, a fantastic woman and I’m glad to have her as a friend,’ he said.

Source: https://newspunch.com/putin-immigrants-kill-plunder-rape-impunity-europe/
Share:

VIDEO: Foreign Troops “European Gendarmerie Force” Brutalize French Citizens

Europe cracking down on citizen uprising

Dan Lyman, Infowars’ European correspondent, joins Alex Jones live via Skype to give an exclusive recap of the Davos Economic Forum 2019 as well as to inform listeners of foreign troops being used to force French citizens participating in the yellow vest protests to cease and submit to the European Union.

Related: ‘You condemn us because we are not a nation of migrants,’ Orban tells EU before sanctions vote

This militarized police force is called the European Gendarmerie Force and many of them are not even from France.

This type of threat is exactly why many countries are pulling out of or looking to exit the European Union.


Source: https://www.infowars.com/video-foreign-troops-european-gendarmerie-force-brutalize-french-citizens/
Share:

HUNGARY OFFICIAL: “SOROS PULLS THE STRINGS IN BRUSSELS”


Fidesz believes George Soros’s people “are pulling the strings of the European Commission’s leading politicians” and demands an explanation, Fidesz MEP Tamas Deutsch said at a press conference on an unrelated topic in Budapest on Saturday.

Related: [Video] George Soros Lobbies Youtube To Shutdown Content Creators



Deutsch noted that daily Magyar Idok learned that U.S. billionaire Soros had met for talks with the EU leaders on at least 20 occasions. Soros held talks with Jean-Claude Juncker, Frans Timmermans, Emmanuel Macron and Dimitris Avramopoulos, he added.



A poster slamming George Soros in Szekesfehervar, Hungary (Photo by Attila Kisbenedek / Contributor via Getty Images)


Deutsch said it was “absurd” that a person claiming to be a philanthropist who represents the official viewpoint of not a single country can meet with EU leaders more frequently than the prime minister or head of state of any EU member state.
Fidesz will ask for explanations, in writing, on the subject matter of all of these meetings, he added.


Share:

The EU Votes for the Installation of New US Missiles in Europe


Near the United Nations Glass Palace in New York, there is a metallic sculpture entitled “Evil Defeated by Good”, representing Saint George transfixing a dragon with his lance. It was donated by the USSR in 1990 to celebrate the INF Treaty concluded with the USA in 1987, which banned land-based short- and mid-range nuclear missiles (a reach of between 500 and 5,000 km). Symbolically, the body of the dragon is in fact made with pieces of US Pershing-2 ballistic missiles (originally based in West Germany) and Soviet SS-20 missiles (originally based in the USSR).
But the nuclear dragon, which in the sculpture is shown as dying, is now being reborn. Thanks to Italy and other countries of the European Union, which, at the United Nations General Assembly, voted against the resolution presented by Russia on the “Preservation and Implementation of the INF Treaty”, rejected by 46 to 43 with 78 abstentions.
The European Union – of which 21 of its 27 members are part of NATO (including the United Kingdom, which is currently leaving the EU) – has thus taken a uniform stance with the position of NATO, which in turn has taken a uniform stance with that of the United States.


Source: PandoraTV
The Obama administration first, followed by the Trump administration, have accused Russia, without any proof, of experimenting with a missile from the forbidden category, and have announced their intention of withdrawing from the INF Treaty. At the same time, they have launched a programme aimed at renewing the installation of nuclear missiles in Europe to guard against Russia, while others will also be based in the Asia-Pacific region against China.
The Russian representative at the UN has warned that “this constitutes the beginning of a full-blown arms race”. In other words, he warned that if the United States should once again install in Europe nuclear missiles pointed at Russia (as were the Cruise missiles based in Comiso in the 1980’s), Russia would once again install, on its own territory, similar weapons pointed at targets in Europe (but which would be unable to reach the USA).
Ignoring all that, the EU representative at the UNO accused Russia of sabotaging the INF Treaty, and announced the opposition vote by all the countries of the Union because “the resolution presented by Russia avoids the question under discussion”.
Essentially, therefore, the European Union has given the green light to the possible installation of new US missiles in Europe, including Italy.
On a question of this importance, the Conte government, like its predecessors, has abandoned the exercise of national sovereignty and aligned itself with the EU, which, has in turn adopted the position of NATO, under US command. And across the entire political arc, not one voice has been raised to request that it should be the Parliament which decides how to vote at the UNO. And similarly, no voice has been raised in Parliament to request that Italy observe the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which requires that the USA must withdraw its B61 nuclear bombs from our national territory, and must also abstain from installing here, as from the first half of 2020, the new and even more dangerous B61-12’s.
So this is a new violation of the fundamental constitutional principle that “sovereignty belongs to the people”. And since the politico-media apparatus swaddles Italians in the ignorance of these questions of such vital importance, it is also a violation of our right to information, not only in the sense of the freedom to inform, but also the right to be informed.
We must do this now, or else tomorrow there will be no time to decide – a mid-range ballistic missile can reach and destroy its target with its nuclear warhead in between 6 and 11 minutes.
Share:

Ditching Russian gas will be economic suicide for Europe


Washington’s attempts to derail the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project to supply Russian natural gas to the European Union will definitely backfire, according to a geopolitical expert Dr. Pierre-Emmanuel Thomann.
“The more the US puts pressure on Europeans, the more there is a risk that Europeans try to detach themselves from the US and try to make a better deal with Russia,” Thomann, who heads Eurocontinent geopolitical research, told RT.

Related: West Attacks Russia with Piketty’s Overblown Claims About ‘Oligarch’ Wealth by Jon Hellevig
“We cannot abandon the import of Russian gas, this will be economic suicide. So the Americans also have a limit of their pressure capacity,” the analyst stressed.


The comment comes as the US Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell sent out warnings to German companies reminding them about significant sanctions they may face for participating in the building of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline with Russia.
Later, the US Embassy clarified that the letters were not a threat, but rather a statement of US policy. However, the clarification hasn’t stopped a number of German politicians from venting their anger.
“The matter of European energy policy must be decided in Europe, not in the US,” said German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas.
“The US ambassador seems to give the impression he is a viceroy of the Washington emperor,” top Left Party MP Fabio De Masi said, urging the White House to reprimand Grenell.
The US ambassador using direct threats towards German companies is a new unacceptable strengthening of tone in the transatlantic relationship, which the Federal Government should protest against,” said the German foreign policy spokesman for the CDU/CSU Party Juergen Hardt.

Related: Russia & Syria to dump dollar in mutual trade, agree joint energy projects


Nord Stream 2, a joint venture of Russia’s Gazprom and five European energy majors, is currently one third complete. The €9.5 billion pipeline is projected to double capacity of Russia’s gas exports to Germany via the Baltic Sea, and is supposed to come into operation by the end of the current year.

Source: https://www.rt.com/business/448755-nord-stream-us-economic-suicide/?fbclid=IwAR3N90j8R5zaZo593jxVy7-U50-NZQZntcsObjFaqzWCoQXjoF-orQoS4mU
Share:

Professor Says White People Need to Accept That They’re Being Replaced in America and Europe



Professor Says that the Rise in Populism is Attributed to Whites Being Replaced in Europe and America. He Argues that We Need to Break Down White Identity so that Whites Accept this Change Willingly

Professor Eric Kaufmann of Birkbeck University in London has a new book out called ‘White Shift: Populism, Immigration, and the Future of White Majorities.”  In his book he argues that white majority countries will soon be minority majority, but that we need to essentially break down white identity itself so that white people accept this fact willingly.  




Kaufmann, who is the Professor of Politics at Birkbeck attributes the recent worldwide rise in populism to this massive change, and says that the polarization of the current political climate could be a result of white people fighting for the maintenance of their majority in America and Europe.  Kaufmann states that this will only be a ‘temporary’ pushback to the inevitable future of Europe and America.



Kaufmann also surprisingly argues that……….   WATCH THE REST OF THIS REPORT IN THE VIDEO BELOW


Share:

YELLOW VESTS REJECT MACRON’S CONCESSION SPEECH

French President scrambles after realizing he’s losing grip on power



The Yellow Vest movement has largely rejected French President Emmanuel Macron’s concession speech, claiming it was an insincere “charade.”


“He is trying to do a pirouette to land back on his feet but we can see that he isn’t sincere, that it’s all smoke and mirrors,” Jean-Marc, a car mechanic told the AFP Monday.
According to local media, other French citizens described the speech as “window dressing,” “a bluff,” a “drop in the ocean,” “nonsense,” and a “charade.”
“Maybe if Macron had made this speech three weeks ago, it would have calmed the movement, but now it’s too late,” said one Yellow Vest protester. “For us, this speech is nonsense.”
The protesters said Macron’s concessions didn’t amount to much change.
“He is being held hostage so he drops some crumbs,” said a 35-year-old official.
Many protesters indicated they would continue their “Gilet Jaunes” movement.
“We’re really wound up, we’re going back to battle,” said a 55 year-old bike mechanic.
“The door is now open, we must seize the opportunity,” said Jacline Mouraud, an early leader of the protests.
Macron walked back several measures on Monday, including canceling the gas tax, raising the minimum wage, and stripping taxes for pensioners.
“Maybe in the beginning I gave you the impression that I didn’t care, but that’s not true. Maybe I hurt some of you. That was not my intention. I want to find a way to get out of this together,” he said.
“This is why I’m ordering an end-of-year bonus for all employees without any tax. How we treat you is a very important part of our nation. In 2019, you’re going to see this.”
Share:

Hungarian PM: Whoever signs the UN Migration Pact presents a serious risk to his own citizens


The United Nations Global Migration Compact is a flawed document, and whoever signs it presents a serious risk to their own citizens, Prime Minister Viktor Orban said in Prague on Friday.

At a joint press conference following a meeting with his Czech counterpart, Andrej Babis, Orban said the document set down principles that would not reduce illegal migration but stimulate it.
Every substantive legal case in the future will make use of the document as a point of reference, he warned. He said mass migration was a serious issue and decision-makers should not ignore the opinion of the people.
Yet in Europe today, he added, people are not allowed to express their opinions, or leaders fail to take them into account.
“We in central Europe, however, want to remain democrats,” he said. “Migration is testing the democratic nature of political systems,” the prime minister added.
Concerning Hungarian-Czech ties, Orban said that bilateral relations “entered a new dimension” in recent years, and spoke highly of “unprecedented figures” in economic ties as well as good cooperation in defence and in other areas.
He said that the turnover of bilateral trade and investments had increased and added that the two countries mutually supported investments.
Hungarian pharmaceuticals were “doing well” in the Czech Republic, while Czech companies were active in Hungarian agriculture and telecommunications, the prime minister added.

Source: https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/12/whoever-signs-the-un-migration-pact-presents-a-serious-risk-to-his-own-citizens-hungarian-pm/?fbclid=IwAR2nJaTfgvE6_nRubOD5FDbGWCn6TeJbx1j8bYZtabFsFkOEA6fRVsI7l1c#.XAJ6IoqSL-c.twitter
Share:

[Video] Farage calls on Merkel to apologise for migration debacle, denounces call for EU army

Share:

EUROPE SHOULD BECOME AN “EMPIRE” SAYS FRENCH FINANCE MINISTER

France’s finance minister has called on Europe to become an “empire” so that it can better compete with the United States and China.
Asserting that “it takes courage to stand in the way of the government” of Donald Trump, Bruno Le Maire told Handelsblatt newspaper that, “Europe should no longer be afraid of using its power and [become] an empire of peace.”
“I’m talking about a peaceful empire which is a constitutional state,” he added.
Le Maire’s statement follows French President Macron’s call for a “real European army” to counter Russian threats and reduce dependence on the U.S.
During yesterday’s Armistice centenary in Paris, Macron also urged world leaders to reject nationalism, claiming it represented a “betrayal of patriotism”.
Given the internal situation in France, it might be advisable for Le Maire and Macron to focus on their own country’s problems.
In an interview published last month, the country’s former Interior Minister warned that mass immigration could bring societal breakdown within five years.
“Communities in France are engaging in conflict with one another more and more and it’s becoming very violent,” said Gérard Collomb, agreeing with the interviewer that some form of societal breakdown like partition or secession was a major concern.
“How much time do we have before it’s too late?” the interviewer asked Collomb, to which he replied, “I don’t want to create fear, but I think there’s very little time left….It’s difficult to estimate, but I would say that within five years the situation could become irreversible. Yes, we have five, six years to avoid the worst.”
President Macron’s failure to deal with Islamic extremism and tensions caused by dislocated communities of migrants has contributed to his approval rating continuing to plummet.
poll published at the end of last month found that Macron’s approval had dropped a further 4 percentage points to just 26 per cent.

Share:

Not finding itself on Iran exemption list, Europe vows to defy US sanctions

© Global Look Press / Christian Ohde

European countries have vowed to maintain “effective financial channels” and to keep trading with Tehran after the US announced that the EU is not among those spared from its sweeping sanctions against Iran.
European countries suddenly discovered that they were not on the list of the ‘lucky ones’ that their ally, the US, decided to exempt from the new wave of all-encompassing sanctions it plans to unleash on Iran. The sanctions, targeting Iran’s shipping, finance and energy sectors, which come into force on November 5, are also designed to punish those countries that dared to do business with the Islamic Republic in defiance of the US pressure.
Only eight nations were graciously granted exemptions by the US, according to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. However, Pompeo made it clear that the EU as a single entity is not on the list, sparking an angry reaction from the US’ western allies. Washington also specifically mentioned that it plans to target the special mechanism the EU has been creating to circumvent the restrictions, prompting its allies to fight back.
In response, the EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, together with the foreign and finance ministers of Germany, France and the UK, vowed to maintain “effective financial channels with Iran” and in particular to continue buying the Islamic Republic’s oil and gas.
They also said that despite Washington’s pressure the EU is still committed to establishing a “Special Purpose Vehicle” for Iran-EU trade. The European nations will seek to protect its companies engaged in “legitimate business with Iran,” the statement said, adding that the EU will cooperate with Russia and China in particular to achieve these goals.

Since its withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, the US has been pursuing a policy of “maximum pressure” on Tehran, vowing to bring its oil exports to ‘zero’, much to the dismay of the European countries, which praise the agreement as “a key element of the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture” and have re-affirmed their commitment to the deal.

Washington, meanwhile, seems to be ready to stop at nothing to force Tehran to bow to its wishes, with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin even threatening sanctions against the international service SWIFT, if it refuses to block Iran’s transactions.

Source: https://www.rt.com/news/443006-europe-iran-us-sanctions/
Share:

[Video] Farage: The 'Enemy Within' is preventing the UK from breaking free

Farage: The 'Enemy Within' is preventing the UK from breaking free


European Parliament, Strasbourg, 24 October 2018




Share:

Mr. Lucas, Don’t Take Your Readers for Fools! by Prof. Vladimir Golstein

Mr. Lucas, Don’t Take Your Readers for Fools! by Prof. Vladimir Golstein


So Edward Lucas, the columnist at The Times, the long time contributor to the notoriously Russophobic Economist and the author of 2008 The New Cold War: Putin’s Russia and the Threat to the West, where he fully exhibits his own paranoia about the dangers of Putin’s Russia, has came up with a new theological and cultural diagnosis. Paranoia is the religion of Putin’s Russia. Not communism, not capitalism, not Orthodoxy, not atheism. Just plain old paranoia.

Why, and how? Argument number #1 is that RT has put him on the list of ten top Russophobes. Lucas’ complaint: the list is haphazard and flimsy. Fine, any list is haphazard and flimsy – it just points to some people or organizations that like to come up with ridiculous charges and accusations, not dissimilar from his own “academic” investigations. So what? Having never produced anything academic himself, Mr. Lucas can’t expect any academic study from RT, can he?


Argument #2. Mr. Lucas had found an academic study to his liking — Ilya Yablokov’s Fortress Russia — that discovered that Russian conspiracy theorists, who were on the margins in the 1990s have come to the forefront in the current situation. Yablokov has studied Russian TV and found its style paranoid. Yablokov’s conclusion: the US is a paranoid Empire to be sure, but mainstream TV does not usually cater to it, as opposed to the mainstream Russian TV. Maybe, even though CNN and Fox would surely provide serious competition.

Without any desire to defend the rather combative style of Russian TV talk shows where guests clash, fight, and play the roles assigned to them by the hosts, I am certain that these shows do address real foreign policy concerns. Any detached observer looking at the map and seeing NATO bases all around Russia is bound to ask questions. Any detached observer listening to Western news and hearing the endless bacchanalia of Russia this, Russia that, is bound to get nervous. Any detached observer, having witnessed endless the West’s bombing campaigns, wars, invasions, regime changes, mass migrations and destruction, is bound to get a bit edgy about western intentions. And it would not be paranoia. It would be plain common sense.

Creating Russophobia: From the Great Religious Schism to Anti-Putin Hysteria

And what about Russian history? Hasn’t the country been invaded again and again throughout its history? The latest invasion, that of Nazi Germany, is still remembered by all Russians, since one can hardly find a family that did not lose someone in that awful war. Last time Germans and Ukrainians got together, my relatives were brutally murdered in Kiev, mowed downed – along with thousands others in Babi Yar. So even living in the United States, I do get nervous when Ukrainians, helped by their European admirers, burn people in Odessa. Genetic memory is a stubborn thing, you know. So can you really blame Russians for getting a bit anxious about the events in Ukraine, Mr. Lucas, or as the happy denizen of the murderous British Empire, that one that killed, burned, shot, and starved others, you can’t imagine what fears of prosecution are actually all about?

Wait a minute, says Mr. Lucas. “German Unification, EU and NATO enlargement, Ukrainian independence”: These recent events on the borders of Russia — are haphazard. There never was a master plan. Well, if it looks like a duck, and acts like a duck, it has to be a duck. In fact, there are rarely master plans for anything, unless we are talking about Hillary’s campaign to justify her spectacular loss of 2016 presidential campaign. What we’re witnessing, however, is the plain old confluence of interests and appetites that results in wars, sanctions and invasions. Just read some basic history, Mr. Lucas, before you present yourself as the heroic conspiracy theories slayer.


Argument # 3. Russians do a lot of mischief to themselves: corruption, bribes, oligarchs. That’s for sure. But so what? Russian corruption is bad, and one hopes that Russians will get rid of it. But it does not mean there are no countries that want to invade and loot the place, and squeeze away local oligarchs. Even paranoid people have enemies, as the maxim goes. There’s plenty to steal in Russia. Do you think, Mr. Lucas, that western oligarchs want to leave it all to Russians? Don’t underestimate your own sponsors. They don’t like it.

Furthermore, oligarchs and corruption are rampart in Great Britain and US, and still these countries are running on paranoia and arming themselves to the teeth. And what about Poland, the Baltic States, Ukraine – the countries that do indeed thrive on paranoia? But their paranoia fits western narratives, so it’s “our kind of paranoia.” As opposed to Russian paranoia, which is obviously a wrong kind of paranoia. What about the paranoia of the trigger-happy Israel, which manifests itself in endless violence and military excursions against its neighbours? So Israel has Judaism for religion, Poles have Catholicism, but Russians have Paranoia. A strange doctrine, and new.


 And then, Lucas totally reverses himself, and says – that the west should not stoke Russia’s siege mentality by a military build up on its borders and endless provocations. Finally! Lucas dares to rise to the occasion and criticize the West … but we rapidly learn why. This righteous indignation is provoked by Trump’s and Bolton’s proposal to withdraw from the INF treaty. But even this criticism is turned on its head. This new arms race is bad, because it will help Russia to “crack down, lash out and make it look more important than it is.”

In other words, NATO countries should not place their war-heads in Roumania or Poland, they should not claim that they could actually win a nuclear war (something that only American theoreticians, including former Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter, do) – they should not do any of those things because these actions will make Russians think that they are more important than they are. That would be a really dangerous case of paranoia. Much more dangerous than the destruction of life on earth as we know it.


But Lucas does not stop there; playing the role of Candide must be way too enjoyable. He claims that compiling the list of “Russophobes” is a “childish bad habit” – never mind the Magnitsky list, nor plenty of other lists compiled by the State Department, the Mueller investigation, social media police and numerous other western outlets, whose endless lists still can’t satisfy the lust for more and more sanctions against more and more individuals. Those lists are the sign of profound maturity, no doubt.
And in a true demagogic fashion, Lucas concludes: we’ve been paying too much attention to “nasty but grand Russians.” We should celebrate Russia’s “colossal contribution to world culture.” Oh, so Russia is important after all. How refreshing. Let’s wipe Russia off the map with nukes, and then enjoy Russian ballet at Covent Garden or Russian novels in their BBC adaptations.

Source: https://off-guardian.org/2018/10/25/mr-lucas-dont-take-your-readers-for-fools/?fbclid=IwAR0_JZK9AWAo587C45e5vKgiCS1lITZYsWv1ZcvrKPRCCLvhbD9kXzWTgos

Related: Guy Mettan’s Book on Russophobia Is a “Must Read” for Any Person Interested in Russia 
Share:

West Attacks Russia with Piketty’s Overblown Claims About ‘Oligarch’ Wealth by Jon Hellevig

West Attacks Russia with Piketty’s Overblown Claims About ‘Oligarch’ Wealth

Blowing Thomas Piketty’s academic fraud, Awara’s new study debunks the myths about overreaching oligarch grip on the Russian economy and supposed extreme economic inequality in a global comparison

There is no love lost between the Russian people and the oligarchs. You just can’t erase from history the theft of the century when the 1990s oligarchs looted the country through sham privatizations staged by the liberal government. The press has done its best to imprint the memory of those years of robber capitalism on the Western public. It’s a scandalous memory all too easy to exploit and rehash for the purpose of vilifying Putin and “his cronies.” At the same time, everybody seems to have forgotten how the present ruling plutocrats of America made their capital a century earlier.

The United States has already slapped sanctions on influential Russian businessmen, which they refer to as oligarchs. They are supposedly punished for their proximity to the Russian president who is incriminated with imaginary charges of meddling in US elections, a nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy and his daughter in England, and other fabricated allegations. And echoing antisemitic racial slurs of Hitler’s Germany, now with the Russians as the villains, the UK parliament has launched a crusade against “dirty Russian money” of the Russian “super-rich kleptocrats.”


But, the real reasons to go after Russian “oligarchs” and the “super-rich” have nothing to do with a newfound sense of social justice or their supposed ties with the Russian president. (By the flawed logic of the accusers anybody who is rich in Russia must be connected with the president). This time around this image of malign Russian oligarchs is used by the West in a full-frontal attack on Russian capital and Russia’s industry as the United States is hysterically trying to find ways to contain the country. By attacking Russian business tycoons, in addition to the state corporations, the US strives to block out Russian industry from the West and the wider world.

New study demonstrates that talk about Russia’s economic inequality has been greatly exaggerated

Yet, the idea that the rich own a vastly disproportionate share of the Russian national wealth has been disproved in a recent study by the Moscow based https://www.awaragroup.com. The study takes aim at Thomas Piketty’s high-profile report about Russia’s economic inequality. The Awara report does not aim at deflecting from the problem of economic inequality in Russia as the authors merely want to put the problem in its right global proportion. Economic inequality is not any more “extreme” in Russia — as Piketty falsely claims — than in the major Western countries in general. In fact, the Awara study shows that it could be less.

The Awara report exposes the bias and reveals the multitude of methodological errors, distortions and misrepresentation of data, which have informed the Piketty report. After identifying the deficiencies, Awara adjusted the main findings to reflect the actual data. The corrected data shows that instead of owning more than 70% of the national wealth, the share of the top 10 percent of the population was 39% of private wealth and 32% of total national wealth.

Below charts demonstrates the differences in the Piketty study and the corrected data of Awara. Top chart from the Piketty report, bottom, Awara’s corrected findings.



Correspondingly, instead of earning 45–50% of national income as claimed by Piketty, the top 10% of Russians earned less than 30% of the income. The Piketty research team had said that their study expressly replaces the findings of earlier income inequality studies like that of the EBRD, which had allocated 30% of income to the Top 10% richest. After revealing the multitude of flaws in the Piketty study, Awara found it natural to return to those earlier findings. his also puts the wealth figures in perspective as it is obvious that the share of wealth must closely correlate with the share of income.

Western propaganda can’t decide if Russia is owned by oligarchs or by the state

A big contribution towards mitigating economic inequality is delivered by Russia’s substantial public property. But in his study Thomas Piketty has written off the value of Russia’s public wealth as if it did not play any role as an equality inducing factor. It is actually very strange when one set of Western propagandists claim that Russia’s state sector has totally taken over the economy comprising 70% of the total, and another (like Piketty) maintains that the super-rich owns 70% of Russia’s wealth. It seems to us that the propagandists better make up their mind.

The Awara study reports that experts conclude that the state sector makes up a much higher share of the Russian economy than it is the case in all Western countries. The estimates vary from 35% — 70%. The European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has estimated that the share of the public sector (state sector) of the total economy was 35% in 2009. Experts agree that the state sector share has grown since. The Russian competition authority, the Anti-Monopoly Committee, estimated in its annual report for 2015 that the state sector had grown to comprise 70% of the Russian economy.

Small business enterprise value exceeds that of the Russian billionaires

A remarkable finding in the Awara report is that the total value of small and medium businesses (including shadow business) at 35% of total business assets stands way higher than all of “oligarch” wealth, and even at the same level as the combined wealth of the top 10 percent (39%). (Hereby, it should be noted that there is overlap between the categories of small and medium business wealth and top 10 percent wealth).

The 35% share assigned to small and medium businesses (SMEs) is backed up by reference to a study done by the global consultancy EY together with the European Investment Bank, which assessed that SMEs cover 20–25% of Russia’s GDP, in addition to estimates of the size of the shadow economy. The Russia statistics authority (Rosstat) has the shadow economy at 10–14% whereas liberal economists assess it at 32%.

When everything else failed, Piketty conjured up Russian “offshore wealth”

When all the other methodological biases, misrepresentations and distortions failed to produce the screaming inequality — which the scholars undoubtedly had set out to prove — they resorted to adding, some supposed “offshore wealth” to the possessions of the top 10% of Russians. We have all heard about assets Russian “oligarchs” have abroad, like the Chelsea football club, villas and yachts, therefore this one would seem like a safe bet. When the figures don’t prove that the superrich in Russia are so much richer than the Western plutocracy, throw in their offshore wealth. What Piketty therefore did was to add offshore wealth to the tune of the equivalent of 75% of the GDP to the richest top 10%. And Voila! The Piketty figures show extreme inequality for Russia in comparison with other countries.

Not only is there no evidence on the amounts and distribution of such “offshore wealth,” but it also represents a major transgression of Piketty’s own method as such assets abroad have not been taken into consideration in the studies concerning any of the other countries that his research team has examined. After all, the Piketty studies are supposed to represent global comparisons of economic inequality — the comparison is the very point they make. Yet Piketty blatantly breaches his own method just to make Russia look bad. See, no such “offshore wealth” has been summed up to the wealth of the rich in any of the other countries studied.

Piketty’s colonial ideal model

Obviously, the offshore wealth (i.e. assets outside home country) of the capitalist classes of the major Western countries is vastly more (as a share of) than that of the Russian rich. Just think about the holdings of the Western transnational corporations around the world. But Piketty et co. don’t even want to consider the Western transnational capital, going so far as to totally exclude foreign owners as factors of inequality in a given country. In their colonial model foreign owners are a benign class, above criticism. With this kind of logic, Piketty runs into total absurdities. Praising the relative inequality of Eastern European countries, he puts the success down to their colonial economic model, as the Pikettys express it: “the fact the holders of top capital incomes tend to be foreigners rather than domestic residents contributes to lower top income shares in countries like the Czech Republic or Poland or Hungary (as compared to countries like Russia or Germany). I.e. foreign owned countries tend to have less domestic inequality (other things equal).”

So, in Piketty’s perverted logic it is good that foreign capitalists own everything, because that makes the natives more equal between themselves. But in case of Russia it is the other way around, because some nasty rich Russians own property in third countries, it makes Russia’s wealth distribution more inequal.

Why would you call the Russian rich “oligarchs” but those of the West “billionaires”?

Why does the media call the Russian rich “oligarchs” while their peers in the West are just “billionaires”? The reason is obvious, oligarch sounds nastier and therefore it must be reserved for the Russians. That’s what Piketty does, too, calling his report “From Soviets to Oligarchs,” thereby clearly flaunting his biases. This is precisely what drove him, to tarnish the Russian state by alleging it’s a country ruled by a vile oligarchy and Putin’s cronies.

The Awara study demonstrates that the true income and wealth figures on Russia — especially when considering Russia’s substantial state sector — does in no way qualify Russia as an oligarchy any more than any of the other major economic powers in the world. But even if that would not have been the case and Russia’s wealth distribution would be as Piketty mendaciously claims, then still there would be no reason to pick on Russia by calling it an oligarchy. An oligarchy is foremost a political concept signifying that real power in a given country rests with a small number of super-wealthy people termed oligarchs. But, the fact that a country would have a skewed division of wealth with a disproportionate share of billionaires would yet not mean that the country is an oligarchy in the true political meaning of the concept. And certainly, the Russia of today does not qualify as one. It has been widely acknowledged that since his ascendance to Russia’s presidency (2000) Vladimir Putin has effectively stripped the super-wealthy individuals from the political power they actually wielded in the 1990s. Throwing around that disparaging epithet, Piketty has completely omitted any analysis of the political aspect of supposed Russian oligarchy. This clearly demonstrates his ideologically bias to revile the Russian nation and to flag his politically motivated preconceived conclusions

Piketty relies on Forbes billionaire gossip

Apart from the trickery with “offshore wealth,” Piketty builds his case on “data” drawn from the Forbes’s billionaire gossip. Of course, the Forbes billionaire data is an interesting and entertaining source and certainly can serve to guide the reader in the direction of who are the billionaires of one or another country. However, it seems that the Forbes exercises considerable editorial discretion in its reporting exposing and exaggerating the wealth of some billionaires while choosing not to disclose that of certain other billionaires. In any case, it is not a scientific study. The methods of compiling the data are not explained and sufficient details of the composition of the alleged wealth is not disclosed. The validity of that data would then at best be dubious, even in a transparent study.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

The Awara report is not only a criticism of the dubious studies of the Piketty team, but also more in general an attempt to reveal how scholars manipulate public opinion under the cover of statistical methods to advance their ideological or pecuniary objectives. In this regard, the Piketty studies excellently illustrate the old adage “Lies, damned lies, and statistics.” A perfect case of how authority combined with the persuasive power of numbers is employed to bolster false arguments.

Awara explains the glaring differences in its findings with gross methodological errors and skewed or even fabricated data in the Piketty study. When the transparent data sources failed to back up Piketty’s prejudices about Russia, he resorted to blatant distortions.

In general, the Piketty reports never demonstrate to what extent the scholars have relied on one or another set of source data, rather their method is like a recipe for a potpourri, throw in generous amounts of Forbes billionaire data, a bit of survey data, some homemade tax tabulations, and stir everything with a Pareto spatula. The scholars merely tell that they have relied on those sources to make the blend, but the share of emphasis on one or another set of source data is not given and the choices are not discussed. There are also no scientifically falsifiable computations, which would show how the various data sources would supposedly have been mathematically combined to yield the results that these scholars claim to be their science. This is in itself renders the Piketty reports invalid as academic science and relegates them merely to the level of personal opinions.

Their starting point is said to be earlier household income survey data, which then is “corrected,” as they claim, with income tax data on high-income individuals, supposedly drawn from the referenced fiscal data. But the fiscal data does not represent any “raw tabulations by income bracket” as the scholars wrongly maintain. Furthermore, that data source does not contain any data on “high-income-taxpayers income tax data,” as was further gratuitously claimed. The national accounts and wealth inequality data is then somehow applied to all that in order to — supposedly — “impute tax-exempt capital income.”

Obviously, there cannot possibly be any mathematical model that could achieve the feat of combining the multitude of those disparate and overstretching data sources. In reality, the Piketty scholars have by an artful manipulation of the sources picked and chosen what aspects of all that welter of data to refer to in order to verbally motivate their conclusions. All the references to statistical models serve only as smoke and mirrors designed to lend academic credibility to the resulting computations.
The Piketty study is a potpourri of sources without any falsifiable scientific method to combine them.

Propaganda for war

There is no doubt that the scandalous history of Russian “oligarch” wealth and contemporary urban legends about the malicious grip of oligarchs on Russia have initially informed the Piketty scholars in their quest to prove “extreme inequality” in Russia. More than that, I am inclined to see the Piketty report as one more installment in the Russia bashing propaganda in line with notorious propaganda hoaxes like Assad’s supposed chemical attacks, the Salisbury incidents, Russian Olympic doping scandal, invasion of the Ukraine etc. At the end of the day, the question is about propaganda for war, which we must expose.

The Piketty research team is financed by the European Union, needless to say.



Here is the link to the full Awara Study: The Case Against Thomas Piketty. Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.


Countries compared on wealth distrion, Awara corrected data
 
 
Share:

Donate

Please help support us

Big Tech Censorship

Popular searches

Russia Collusion

Liberteon.com