Newly released testimony from former NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins confirms that Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx did not base the pandemic-era six-foot social distancing rule on science, and instead were making things up as they went along.

On Thursday, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), chairman of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, released a transcript from Collins’ January closed-door interview, in which he’s asked about a range of issues – including the lab-leak theory and the six-foot social distancing rule.

“We asked Dr. Fauci where the six feet came from and he said it kind of just appeared, is the quote,” the majority counsel on the committee told Dr. Collins, per the transcript. “Do you recall science or evidence that supported the six-feet distance?“

“I do not,” Collins replied.

Counsel then asked, “Is that I do not recall or I do not see any evidence supporting six feet?”

To which Collins replied “I did not see evidence, but I’m not sure I would have been shown evidence at that point.”

“Since then, it has been an awfully large topic. Have you seen any evidence since then supporting six feet?” Counsel replied.

“No,” said Collins.

BREAKING.🚨@COVIDSelect releases testimony of Dr. Francis Collins, former NIH director who ran America’s Covid response.

Highlights:
• 6-feet social distancing made up
• Wuhan lab leak not ‘conspiracy theory’
• Fauci had agenda to discredit lab leak
• Fauci lied
• NIH… pic.twitter.com/ycFSZKrTQr

— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) May 16, 2024

As the Epoch Times notes further, the remarks by Dr. Collins offer further indication that officials issuing guidelines at the height of the pandemic were, at least to some extent, making decisions that were not explicitly supported by scientific data.

“There is no single number that defines a ’safe’ distance, since spread of viruses can depend on many factors,” the guidance states, which comports with studies such as one from 2021 that concluded that the one-size-fits-all six-foot physical distancing rule is invalid.

However, the CDC’s latest guidance for healthcare settings, updated on March 18, 2024, makes several references to six feet. For instance, it recommends that in dental facilities with open floor plans, one strategy to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to ensure “at lest 6 feet of space between patient chairs.” It also defines “close contact” between individuals as “being within 6 feet for a cumulative total of 15 minutes or more over a 24-hour period with someone with SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

New CDC Director Mandy Cohen recalls how she and her colleagues came up with COVID mandates during her time as NC Health Director.

“She was like, are you gonna let them have professional football? And I was like, no. And she’s like, OK neither are we.”pic.twitter.com/0pZl3dL01D

— Michael P Senger (@michaelpsenger) June 2, 2023

The Epoch Times has reached out to the CDC with a request for comment on Dr. Collins’s remarks and for clarification on what scientific basis the agency incorporated the six-foot figure into its COVID-19 prevention guidance.

The updated guidance indicated that the threat from COVID-19 has fallen to become more similar to that of other respiratory viruses, and so rather than providing additional virus-specific guidelines, the CDC was opting for a “unified, practical approach.”

In justifying its shift to the new guidelines, which basically treat COVID-19 like any other respiratory virus, the CDC said that many people with respiratory virus symptoms often don’t know which pathogen is causing their symptoms, so a unified approach is more practical.

Numerous doctors had long urged the CDC to drop the five-day isolation recommendation, though as recently as mid-February, the agency continued to hold off on making the change, citing the need for more consultation.

In the updated guidelines, the CDC gave a nod to the “personal and societal costs of extended isolation,” including limited paid sick time.

In October 2020, Francis Collins labeled me, Harvard prof. @MartinKulldorff, and Oxford prof. @SunetraGupta “fringe epidemiologists” for opposing lockdowns and school closures. He embraced and recommended “social distancing” on the basis of nothing. https://t.co/FkLHtUOUnU

— Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) May 17, 2024

A number of experts and studies have warned about the harms of prolonged isolation during the pandemic. For instance, the American Psychological Association said in November 2023 that Americans have suffered “collective trauma” related to the pandemic. The association cited a study suggesting that the heavy-handed response to the COVID-19 outbreak—which, in addition to the social distancing rule, included quarantines, school closures, business shutdowns, and near-universal mandating of masks—had a negative effect on people’s physical and mental health.

Another study that looked at a wide array of research into lockdowns concluded that such measures can be an effective tool in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic but only if “long-term collateral damage is neglected.”

The price tag of lockdowns in terms of public health is high: by using the known connection between health and wealth, we estimate that lockdowns may claim 20 times more life years than they save,” the study’s authors wrote.

The researchers also warned about the widespread censorship of dissenting opinions about the lockdowns, noting that it prevents the scientific community from correcting its mistakes and undermines public trust in science.

*  *  *

“SICK LIES”

New York Post goes after Fauci for his lies about dangerous virus research at the Wuhan institute of Virology.

It’s only going to get worse for these liars.
(friend sent me this photo from a NY bodega.) pic.twitter.com/tE9xqB0Ffn

— Paul D. Thacker (@thackerpd) May 17, 2024

Authored by Paul Mueller via The American Institute for Economic Research,

Sometimes smart people make remarkably naïve or deeply problematic comments because their view of the world has been molded by narrow ideology, reinforced by significant consensus in their social circles.

Recently Esther Duflo, a Nobel prize winning economist, revealed herself to be such a person. In a Financial Times interview with Simon Mundy, she said the West owed a “moral debt” of about $500 billion annually to the global south due to its contribution to climate change and the resulting harm.

I’ve questioned such a calculation elsewhere. And I am not commenting on her published economic work, some of which is no doubt decent. Instead, I want to highlight how outrageously naïve global elites, in this case within the economics profession, have become. There are three major examples of Progressive groupthink in this relatively short interview.

Example 1 – People advance the public good by paying taxes

I think we need to rely on taxation because that is the way in which traditionally we ensure that everyone in the economy, private companies and individuals, contributes to the public good. 

Setting aside the dubious claim that all or even most government spending advances the “public good,” what a narrow view of the world!

Does this mean that farmers or doctors or mechanics only contribute to the public good when they pay taxes? The question (should) answer itself! This reasoning suggests that her taxes contribute to the public good, not her research. But perhaps if her work is funded by tax dollars…

The idea that taxes advance the public good informs her claim that we ought to further tax the ultra-wealthy. The super rich don’t and won’t contribute to the public good because, she thinks, they can basically avoid paying taxes.

Example 2 – The ultra-rich don’t pay taxes

In terms of the ultra-rich, I think everyone has recognized [sic] the fundamental unfairness in the fact that the ultra-rich are not being taxed on the income that they are making from their wealth. You are being taxed on the income you’re making by interviewing me; I’m being taxed on the income I’m making as an academic. But if we are sufficiently wealthy to have a lot of money invested in various places, and we keep reinvesting this money, we never have to take it out, and therefore, we are never taxed on it. If [the super-rich] want to consume, in a lot of cases, they will borrow against their wealth. So it’s a loan, not an “income” — so they are not taxed on it. That seems to be fundamentally unfair.

This view that the ultra-wealthy can avoid paying taxes by simply reinvesting their money indefinitely has become canonical in Progressive elite ideological circles due to the peddling of misleading or even incorrect data on income and wealth inequality by economists like Picketty, Saez, and Zucman. They do not seem to care much about the nuanced disincentives of different kinds of taxation. 

A capital gains tax, for example, is a third-order tax. Companies already pay corporate income taxes which, all else equal, reduces the price of a stock. And when people buy stock initially, they usually do so with previous income that has also already been taxed. Group think among elites means that many of them have never even questioned the validity of this data or the downsides of taxing “capital” because it is all “based on a lot of empirical work.” 

As a result, a smart economist like Duflo can say that a 2-percent wealth tax is “not going to be a big burden on the ultra-rich, because 2 percent of their wealth is only 30 percent of their income from their wealth, which is currently untaxed.” As if ultra-wealthy people have a simple mixed stock/bond portfolio that averages a seven or eight percent return annually without any volatility.

For some reason Duflo seems to think that the ultra-wealthy don’t pay taxes. Leaving aside the fact that they obviously pay significant property and sales taxes, they often fund consumption with loans but that only lets them defer their taxes, not eliminate them. Afterall, they have to repay bank loans periodically and they can only do so by realizing (taxable) income or capital gains.

And while the effective tax rate the ultra-rich pay may be small in some years, or even though their tax payments may be small relative to their net worth at a given moment, Duflo misses a major difference between stable employment income and how entrepreneurs amass fortunes: equity and risk.

Take Elon Musk, someone she mentions by name as one of the ultra-wealthy who should pay a global wealth tax. Yes, his net worth is enormous, but so is its volatility. On paper, Musk lost about $165 billion dollars in one year (November 2021 to December 2022). In the past four months he has lost close to $20 billion dollars in the market value of his Tesla shares.

In what world does a 2-percent tax on someone’s wealth equal “only 30 per cent of their income from their wealth”? Such a comment epitomizes the naivety among many Progressive elites.

Then Duflo makes a freshman error when talking about whether raising taxes reduces people’s incentives to work hard and innovate. She says that her “comfort with taxation…is based on a lot of empirical work that shows that rich people will not stop working or inventing because taxation is higher.” This comfort, no doubt, comes from an uncritical acceptance of Piketty-Saez-Zucman data and highly problematic narratives. 

Ever since the marginal revolution in the 1870s, Econ 101 has included the idea of marginal analysis. Economists should not ask questions like: “will people stop work or stop inventing” as if some on-off switch is being thrown. Instead, we ask “how much more” or “how much less” of a certain behavior will occur, and then argue about the significance of that magnitude.

Example 3 – Politicians can and will easily implement this proposal

It’s really necessary. And it’s reasonable. It’s not that hard.

That’s what she thinks of her proposal to raise $500 billion in taxes annually and redistribute it to countries disproportionately harmed by climate change. She thinks a novel tax on wealth can be implemented at a global level with all the revenue going to targeted recipients — it defies belief! Why would power-hungry and spendthrift legislators let go of the new tax revenue? 

Duflo might suggest that we need a “nonpolitical” global organization to enforce and collect the tax. But that begs a similar question: Why would power-hungry and spendthrift legislators authorize or allow such an agency to have such authority? That a Nobel Prize-winning economist can hold these naïve views and fail to use simple economic reasoning should give us pause about how ideology and echo chambers can dull our reasoning. 

Industrialization, and the carbon emissions that accompanied it, created more benefit for people in poor and developing countries than all the philanthropy and anti-poverty programs in history combined, many times over.

That a leading expert in development economics ignores this is nigh unforgivable.

As Ukrainian drones relentlessly target Russia’s energy complex, tensions in the Middle East are once again rising. Early Saturday, Agence France-Presse reported that a crude oil tanker was hit by a missile off the coast of Yemen. These mounting geopolitical risks underscore the possible need for a higher risk premium on Brent crude prices.

Maritime security firm Ambrey told AFP News that the oil tanker was near the Bab el-Mandeb strait and about ten nautical miles southwest of the city of Mokha at the time of the incident. 

Ambrey indicated the Panama-flagged oil tanker was hit by a missile and that there was a fire in the steering gear flat.

Since November, Iran-backed Houthi rebels have been attacking commercial vessels linked to Western nations passing through the Bab el-Mandeb strait and the Red Sea, mostly in response to their support for Israel in the war against Hamas in Gaza.

In recent weeks, Yahya Saree, spokesperson for the terror group, warned in a televised speech that rebels intend to target Israel-linked ships in the eastern Mediterranean. 

With President Biden’s Operation Prosperity Guardian failing to defend maritime traffic in the region, Iran and their proxy groups have successfully severed a major shipping route for some Western companies, forcing them to divert around the Cape of Good Hope.

We have outlined one major example of Biden’s failures in the Red Sea:

• “Dramatic Picture For History Books”: LNG Tankers Still Absent From Red Sea
• Biden’s Red Sea Failure Exhibited In One Map

In April, the international shipping industry pleaded with the United Nations for help, urging increased military patrols along key shipping routes in the Middle East. We have pointed out several maritime chokepoints, including the Suez Canal, Bab-El Mandeb Strait, and Strait of Hormuz, through which a quarter of all global trade flows, are experiencing increased conflict.

In a recent note, MUFG provided a global snapshot of the world’s maritime chokepoints. 

In markets, Brent crude prices have traded between $80/bbl and $90/bbl this year on rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Last month, there was fear that the Israel-Iran conflict would send Brent prices into triple-digit territory. However, prices have since declined to the $83 handle. 

This chaos is a sign of weakness from the West as the world fractures into a multipolar state. More turmoil and disruptions in global supply chains are yet more evidence oil prices will stay elevated unless central banks plunge the world into a global depression.

Rapidan Energy Group commented on this incident: “The latest attack is yet another reminder of an underpriced geopolitical risk premium in oil as multiple armed actors remain undeterred by US-led diplomacy and maritime coalitions.”

Via SchiffGold.com,

The US national debt is so out of control that, ironically enough, even the Federal Reserve chair has expressed concern about the problem. And while America is among the top contributors, it isn’t just the US that’s spending money it doesn’t have: after briefly declining in 2023, the global debt-to-GDP ratio is again at an all-time high.

Even though interest rates are still extremely low by any free market standard, with even modestly elevated interest rates in the US, payments on servicing the debt skyrocket. This blows up the national debt balloon even bigger. With zero chance of Washington reigning in spending anywhere near enough to keep up, the interest can only be paid with even more borrowing.

The largest quarterly increases were unsurprisingly in the US and Japan, and these are a couple of the most indebted national economies overall. But emerging markets are now along for the ride, with some of the largest debt-to-GDP ratio increases this year coming from the likes of China, India, Brazil, and Mexico. Along with Thailand and Korea, China’s ratio of consumer debt to GDP is still above pre-COVID levels.

In any event, 2023’s debt-to-GPT ratio decline was not due to countries spending more responsibly. It was due to inflation, which can have the effect of boosting nominal GDP, because it increases the total on-paper value of the goods that a country produces, and makes tax revenues appear artificially higher.

But while inflation makes prices go up, it doesn’t increase the real, lasting value of an economy. It also steals purchasing power from savers, which can only be spun as an economic positive in a world like ours, ruled by the Keynesian perversion of fiat central banking. The whipsaw effect of monetary policy never truly addresses the root of any problem it attempts to solve. It requires fallible humans with limited information, limited tools, and endless biases to attempt to micromanage a system of near-infinite complexity.

After post-2008 quantitative easing programs flooded the world with cheap credit, it logically resulted in a flood of investment in poorly-rated governments and companies, encouraging risky borrowing. Justified by the need to “stimulate the economy,” expanding the debt with endless central bank money printing promises to fix a problem that was caused by central banking itself. More recently, COVID money-printing “stimulus” shenanigans even more drastically increased the debt-to-GDP ratio to even more epic levels.

Money printing just happens to also enrich those who happen to be closest to the money printer, and financial firms that can scoop up assets for pennies on the dollar during an engineered bust. Meanwhile, Americans are unable to afford basic goods, racking up massive personal debt in addition to what their government owes.

Struggling consumers are starting to realize en masse that something is very wrong. As Peter Schiff said about the Fed in a recent interview with Don Ma on NTD’s Business Matters:

“If it tries to tries to fight inflation, which is worrying the consumer, it’s got to raise interest rates, but that’s already worrying the consumer…on the other hand, if the Fed…cuts them as planned, inflation’s gonna get a whole lot worse, which means consumer confidence can only go down.” 

To make matters worse, the current record level of credit card debt being racked up by struggling Americans doesn’t even count the increasingly popular “pay-as-you-go” programs, which aren’t tracked as part of the overall consumer debt calculation. That’s because they’re individual programs offered by retailers, rather than “official” debt that comes from bank loans.

US credit card debt has reached more than $1.1 trillion, an all-time high.

Year-over-year growth has fallen from nearly 40% to 7.5%. It is still much above the historical average, though.

Meanwhile, interest rate on credit card debt is at record 21.6%

Chart: Liz Ann Sonders pic.twitter.com/0XTYf1KweQ

— Global Markets Investor (@GlobalMktObserv) May 9, 2024

In a few other countries (like Canada and Australia), household debt as a percentage of GDP was even higher in 2022 than in the US — over 100% — with no end in sight. A few Western countries, like Germany and Switzerland, have seen their national debt-to-GDP ratios decrease in 2024, but not nearly enough to offset the overall global increase.

The increasing age of the average global citizen is also exacerbating the global debt powder keg. Labor shortages will increase as populations get older and countries don’t have enough young people to employ and replace elderly folks who are aging out of the workforce. Older citizens also require more social services, but without enough revenue to fund them, the entire balance falls apart. Japan has an especially dire issue with an aging population, but even here in the US, the number of Americans expected to hit 65 and up is slated to increase by 47% by 2050.

The recent CPI report indicates that the Fed could be cutting rates in September, but whether they cut or not, America’s debt will continue to expand unsustainably. And the debt bubble is global — when it pops, it’s going to be spectacular.

In a rare personal visit of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to the battlefield, particularly to the war-ravaged country’s northeastern Kharkiv oblast, he blamed Russia’s rapid advance on “the world” for not sending enough weapons. Ukraine’s front lines in the region have been collapsing amid a major new Russian cross-border offensive.

“Brigades are not totally equipped because of the package, which we waited through for eight months,” he told ABC News during the visit. He was referencing the delayed $61 billion Ukraine aid package which was recently passed and signed into effect by President Biden.

He was specifically asked by a reporter whether he blames the United States for the military setbacks. That’s when he asserted: 

“It’s the world’s fault. They gave the opportunity for Putin to occupy. But now the world can help.”

But he still seemed to lash out at Washington in particular, given the short supply of US-made Patriot systems. “All we need are two Patriot systems. Russia will not be able to occupy Kharkiv if we have those,” he said.

Weeks ago a Ukrainian outlet quoted Zelensky who has been seeking to ramp up the pressure on his backers in NATO:

“Regarding the number of missiles to Patriots, we really expect a positive result in this regard. Thank God that after we convened the Ukraine-NATO Council, we received an assurance that there will be no delays in the process (of supplying missiles to the Patriot systems – ed.), Volodymyr Zelensky said.

EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has also been urging allies to act fast, saying last month: “I don’t have Patriots in Brussels, they are in the capitals, and it is up to them to take decisions.”

European countries have been consistently told of late they must ‘sacrifice’ their anti-air defenses as protection of their own populations isn’t as pressing an issue at this point.

Journalist: What’s happening in Kharkov now, is this America’s fault?

Zelensky: It’s the fault of the world.

I mean it’s everyone’s fault that all that money allocated for defensive fortifications has been lost in the pockets of all these Ukrainians responsible for building it. pic.twitter.com/RPhVUQP9KQ

— Olga Bazova (@OlgaBazova) May 16, 2024

So this is what it has come to: first European populations are dubiously told that Putin is eyeing expansion of the war deeper into Europe, and next Western countries are told to make drastic decisions which severely weaken their own national security. 

But in addition to lack of air defenses, air superiority, and enough ammo, Ukraine faces the even more significant problem of manpower. Even while widening conscription laws in order to gain enough fighting-able men, there’s still the question of properly training new recruits in a timely enough manner.

Authored by Simon Hankinson via The Epoch Times,

This is a lightly edited excerpt from Simon Hankinson’s testimony before the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability at a hearing on “Security Risk: The Unprecedented Surge in Chinese Illegal Immigration,” on Thursday, May 16.

I served as a Foreign Service officer in seven countries. I have adjudicated thousands of visa applications to facilitate lawful visits, commerce, and immigration to the United States while excluding aliens who were legally inadmissible. The visa process I worked with overseas stands in total contrast to what happens at the U.S. border today.

Over the past two years, I have visited the border in Arizona, California, New York, and Texas. On those visits, I saw nationals of many countries apprehended by the Border Patrol. In San Diego last March, I watched Border Patrol dropping off dozens of aliens, including Chinese, at a bus stop to release them into the country.

Mass release of people who entered the country illegally happens nearly every day, multiple times, at multiple locations. At best, this is a mockery of U.S. immigration law and sovereignty. At worst, it is a huge national security and community safety risk. In addition to many Chinese aliens with connections to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), People’s Liberation Army (PLA), and other state entities, it is statistically probable that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is releasing people with serious criminal records.

According to U.S. law, DHS is supposed to detain aliens who enter the country illegally. But the Biden administration has replaced border control with mass processing, parole, and release. DHS has also abused immigration parole at an unprecedented scale.

In January 2021, which included the first 11 days of the new Biden administration, the Border Patrol encountered 17 Chinese aliens between ports of entry. By January 2024, it was 3,700 in that one month alone. As of April 30 this year, DHS had already encountered 48,501 inadmissible Chinese aliens in fiscal year 2024 (which began Oct. 1, 2023); 27,583 of them between ports of entry.

Nearly all are being released into an asylum process that will take years to conclude. At the end of that process, those ordered removed are extremely unlikely to be deported, because the Chinese government does not cooperate in accepting their nationals back.

In fiscal year 2023, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) removed only 288 Chinese aliens, leaving up to 100,000 still in the United States, despite final orders of removal.

Most Chinese entering illegally are seeking employment. They use asylum claims to enter, remain, and work in the United States. Illegal immigration ebbs and flows corresponding to a risk-reward calculation. Today, Chinese are coming in great numbers simply because they can. Worldwide awareness of our open border, spread by social media, shows them how.

For example, Chinese citizens do not need a visa to fly to Ecuador, after which they can continue by land north to the United States. And starting on May 17, Air China will begin direct flights from Beijing to Havana. If Chinese aliens are willing to take the dangerous trek by land from Ecuador to the United States via the Darien Gap, why wouldn’t they also be willing to traverse the 90 miles by water to Florida?

Overseas, an in-person interview by a U.S. consular officer is the first line of “vetting” for foreign visa applicants wanting to come to the United States. This is buttressed by consular staff who know local languages, customs, and news. Larger embassies host other federal agencies that can assist with vetting investigations.

The second line of vetting is through automatic checks of U.S. government databases. Applicants are frequently refused entry based on adverse information that would not have been discovered had the person arrived illegally with no identity documents at the border.

Meanwhile, at the border today, most “national security decisions” of who gets into our country are no longer made by American officers. Under President Joe Biden’s policies, what was once a privilege for aliens has become a right.

Despite what the Biden administration wishes the public to believe, there is no real “vetting” of those released at the border, nor of those allowed in under parole programs, much less of the “gotaways” who enter covertly between ports of entry without inspection. The official visa “front door” competes with a wide-open back door at the border, where there are no routine criminal background checks using records from the person’s home country. Unless a foreign national has a record held by U.S. agencies, DHS is flying blind.

Concerning China specifically, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents have reportedly reduced the number of standard questions asked of inadmissible Chinese aliens at the border from 40 to five.

But, however many questions, the process relies on an alien telling the truth and agents taking them at their word. Even if CBP requests additional information on an individual, China routinely ignores U.S. requests for verification of nationality, and they reportedly hide records of criminal and corruption cases.

DHS releases most aliens caught at the border with a Notice to Appear in immigration court—at a date far into the future. Aliens are then free to go wherever they want, with no way for ICE to easily find them.

There are more than 6 million aliens on ICE’s Non-Detained Docket, of whom only about 184,000 are tracked using what’s called Alternatives to Detention, which uses passive methods to track them, such as having the alien check in with ICE by phone every day. Only 2 percent of aliens tracked using Alternatives to Detention have actual GPS monitors.

To close this dangerous loophole, the United States needs to re-implement agreements with Mexico and Northern Triangle countries of Central America so that inadmissible aliens are not released into the interior of the United States pending the decision in their asylum cases, but instead remain in those countries as they await their determinations (the vast majority of which will result in their asylum applications being rejected).

Given the population, economy, and politics of China, the United States can never meet the demand for those seeking to enter our country illegally. The United States will at some point have to remove those who are ineligible to enter or remain, or else abandon the rule of law that made this country so attractive for so many immigrants in the first place.

*  *  *

Reprinted by permission from The Daily Signal, a publication of The Heritage Foundation. Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

In the latest confirmation that Ukraine’s military has a Nazi streak, the German government revealed that it has expelled seven Ukrainian soldiers who were displaying Nazi symbols while they were in the country for training. 

Wednesday’s disclosure was prompted by an inquiry from the populist Alternative For Germany (AfD) party, which has been surging in popularity on a platform that opposes mass immigration, the green agenda, and the Western proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.

Among other several other questions raising concerns over Ukrainian extremism, the AfD asked if Ukrainian soldiers training in Germany had been found displaying extremist symbols, and if so, “what, if anything, has the federal government done about it.” 

In a four-page response posted to the German Bundestag website, the government said (per Google translate), “Seven such cases were identified during training conducted by the Bundeswehr for the Ukrainian armed forces.” The transgressing Ukrainians were “repatriated” to Ukraine. 

The government added that German soldiers who are charged with training Ukrainians are trained to recognize right-wing extremist symbols and to address them. In addition, upon their arrival in Germany, Ukrainian soldiers are given “instruction regarding Nazi symbolism.”

In its inquiry, AfD highlighted Ukraine’s Azov Regiment, “which is classified by many experts as right-wing extremist and uses the Wolfsangel (a symbol of several SS units, banned in the Federal Republic of Germany) as a symbol.” 

AfD asked if the government was aware that social media shows Nazi symbols appearing on Ukrainian weapons, and asked if the German government had contacted Ukrainian counterparts about that — and especially about their potential appearance on German-supplied weapons. The government said the social media images don’t include German weapons.  

The government noted that approximately 10,000 soldiers were trained “on German soil in 2023.” We can’t help but ponder the likelihood that, beyond the seven deportations, there were plenty more cases where offenders were handled more forgivingly and discretely (“keep that tattoo covered”…”lose that patch!”). 

The AfD asked if Ukrainian extremism poses a threat to a potential peace process in Ukraine. The government replied, “No, it is Russia’s imperialism that underlies the illegal Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, and that threatens security in Europe.” 

When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, President Vladimir Putin said one goal of the “special operation” was the “denazification” of Ukraine. The Soviet Union endured a staggering 24 million civilian and military deaths during World II. 

It’s worth noting a particular irony: The German party that’s routinely demonized as being “far right” and “extremist” is the one that pulled back the curtain on this new evidence of real-world Nazi tendencies in Ukraine. 

Around the time that news of Germany’s deportation of Ukrainian Nazis was breaking, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken was dining in a war-veteran-themed restaurant in Kiev. Predictably, that place is adorned with extremist imagery too: 

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico survived an assassination attempt against him earlier this week after being shot several times at point-blank range by a political extremist who was angry about him suspending armed aid to Ukraine. Fico’s return to office last fall came in spite of American meddling that sought to scare folks away from voting for this conservative-nationalist firebrand, after which he promptly recalibrated his country’s policy towards Ukraine and formed a peace coalition with Hungary.

While some are suspicious that the “lone wolf” who shot him might not have been acting on his own due to Fico making very powerful enemies across the world during his latest term, this incident at the very least proves that fake news can radicalize people into committing heinous crimes. After all, the shooter convinced himself that this was a legitimate form of protest against what he thought was his country’s “pro-Russian fascist dictator”, the perception of which was entirely shaped by fake news.

The Interior Minister warned shortly after the attack that “What was unleashed, the hatred that was sown, has today become a storm. We are standing on the brink of civil war. This assassination attempt against the prime minister is confirmation of that. I want to appeal to the public, to journalists and to all politicians to stop spreading hatred.” It was precisely due to this hatred that was sown since the last election that the shooter became radicalized to the point of trying to take matters into his own hands.

Former Russian President and incumbent Deputy Chair of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev tweeted that Fico “was not a pro-Russian [leader]…just a pragmatist and not a Russophobe”, yet Western media reporting about the assassination attempt against him continued falsely claiming otherwise. The UK’s Sky News arguably attempted to justify the attack against him by implying the shooter was radicalized by his policies, not fake news, which suggested that this was a legitimate form of protest.

No Western media outlet, “NGO”, or “activist” will take responsibility for radicalizing the Slovak opposition, and they’re all now gaslighting that their prior reports about Fico’s policies were “fair and balanced”, but the reality is that they knew what they were doing all along. What they did to Fico was exactly what they’ve been doing to Trump for years already, namely pushing the most extreme fearmongering claims about his policies in the hopes that they’ll radicalize someone into shooting him.

When a leader is repeatedly defamed as a “traitorous pro-Russian dictator with innocent Ukrainian blood on their hands”, psychologically at-risk members of society will inevitably be influenced by this, including to the point of wanting to kill them in order “to save the country” and “bring about justice”. Basically, Western opinionmakers manipulate deranged individuals into doing their dastardly bidding, which rarely succeeds but always has a high political impact whenever someone finally falls for it.  

Fico is their enemy due to his pragmatic stance towards the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine so no one in the West will call for censorship of legacy and social media after what just happened, but they’d surely do so if one of their own warmongers was targeted by a political extremist. “The cure would be worse than the disease” in that case, but the point is that their double standards are on full display for the whole world to see, which discredits their claims of innocence and having no role in what happened.

Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times,

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has called for U.S. federal authorities to investigate whether foreign actors are promoting contentions within the United States, including recent protests over the war in Gaza taking place on U.S. college campuses and other venues around the country.

During a Wednesday, May 15 episode of his personal podcast “The Verdict,” Mr. Cruz noted a recent report by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) alleging connections between the the “Shut It Down for Palestine” (SID4P) movement and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

The NCRI report specifically alleges that convenor organizations that formed the SID4P protest movement, People’s Forum, the International People’s Assembly, and ANSWER Coalition, “serve as the conduit through which CCP-affiliated entities have effectively co-opted pro-Palestinian activism in the U.S., advancing a broader anti-American, anti-democratic, and anti-capitalist agenda.”

“If you look at this report from NCRI, it details how China is spending millions upwards of potentially $100 million funding these protests that are occurring on campuses that are shutting down bridges that are shutting down airports,” Mr. Cruz said.

“And you might think, okay, ‘What does China care about Hamas? What does China care about Israel?’ And the truth of the matter is they don’t, but they care about America, they care about tearing our country apart, they care about chaos and fomenting dissent and dissension that paralyzes our country.”

During the podcast episode, Mr. Cruz also noted a recent article by the New York Post alleging ties between Manolo De Los Santos, a 35-year-old New York-based activist involved in recent pro-Palestinian activism, and Cuba. Mr. De Los Santos was born in the Dominican Republic and now works with The People’s Forum.

Report Says Protest Group May Be Tied to Terrorist Group

The NCRI report also states some Western intelligence assessments indicate Samidoun, an organization that has endorsed SID4P, is connected to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The U.S. government has designated PFLP as a foreign terrorist organization.

The German government banned Samidoun from operating in the country in October.

The NCRI report derives its claims that Samidoun may be linked to PFLP from a November article in the German newspaper Deutsche Welle, which itself cites unnamed intelligence sources for the alleged PFLP connection.

NTD News reached out to Samidoun for comment on these allegations but did not receive a response by press time. The group did, however, publish a statement criticizing the German government’s decision to ban them in October.

“If the German Chancellor and his government support the genocidal war on Gaza being carried out as we speak, it can be no surprise that they also seek to criminalize the ability of Palestinians and people of conscience to act against that war, to speak out, to organize, and to express support for the Palestinian people’s drive and struggle for freedom, justice and liberation,” Samidoun’s October statement reads.

Samidoun said in October that it was committed to challenging the German government’s ban.

Cruz: DOJ and FBI Should Investigate

Mr. Cruz and 15 other Republican U.S. senators signed a letter last week, calling on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to begin investigating whether various nonprofit organizations involved in organizing protests over the war in Gaza should lose their tax-exempt status on the grounds that their activities may constitute prohibit support for terrorist organizations.

The Republican Texas senator took his calls for investigation a step further during the Wednesday podcast, urging the U.S. Department of Justice to also begin investigating these activist groups.

“The Department of Justice should be investigating this. The FBI should be investigating this,” Mr. Cruz said. “We’ve got money coming from communist China, behind these protests, behind these anti-American anti-Israel protests. We’ve got money coming from organizations that have close ties to designated terrorist organizations. And so, whether it is Hamas and Hezbollah pushing this, whether it is affiliated allies of theirs pushing this, whether it is Iran pushing this, or whether it’s Communist China pushing this, the FBI ought to be all over it.”

NTD News reached out to the SID4P convenor organizations for comment about the NCRI report and Mr. Cruz’s calls for investigation but they did not respond by press time.

NTD News also reached out for comment from Mr. De Los Santos but did not receive a response.

In addition to his calls for FBI investigations, Mr. Cruz also advocated for deporting foreign nationals engaged in certain protest activities.

“As far as I’m concerned, if you have a student on a student visa, who gets out there and is burning an American flag and chanting Death to America, you should deport him that day,” Mr. Cruz said. “We have no obligation to allow people to come on student visas, which is permissive, and it is a choice that is a discretionary choice if they are going to tear down this country.”

There’s been quite a stir on X as some users speculate that a NOTAM, or aviation notice to airmen, suggests a potential Russian Navy hypersonic missile test off the coast of Southern California. However, that’s not the case. According to The War Zone, the NOTAM is actually in anticipation of a Russian space booster splashing down in the Pacific. 

Let’s begin with the misguided hype on X about the threats of Russian missile testing off the California coast. These posts collectively have generated more than a million views. 

Russian Navy rocket/gun/missile firing starts this afternoon off the coast of California and Baja until the 26th in International waters. Shouldn’t really affect any flights going to/from Hawaii.

THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION PLANS TO CONDUCT ROCKET FIRINGS. IMPACT AREA WI THE OAKLAND… pic.twitter.com/xLppIZDSae

— Thenewarea51 (@thenewarea51) May 16, 2024

🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺Russian Navy will do hypersonic missile test exercise — 40 miles away from California

Apparently exercise/test will last 10 days will end May 26 , 2024

this will be new hypersonic —(Zirconium) SCRAMJET ENGINE testing off coast of California.

Mach : 8 — 12 top speed🇷🇺🇷🇺 pic.twitter.com/q2oyR1kKl4

— Fish 🐟𝐙 (@fisherofsea) May 17, 2024

Meanwhile, two US defense officials told TWZ the NOTAM is in place through May 26 because of the re-entry of a “Russian space launch booster.” 

“It is not for a launch or a military exercise,” the officials said, commenting on the social media hype. 

Concerns about the Russians in the Pacific surfaced earlier this week in a NOTAM posted on May 13 advising pilots to avoid a large block of airspace between May 16 and May 26 “for Russian Federation impact area by at least 50 nautical miles.”

“This notice is for all aircraft transiting from Hawaii to North America and North America to Hawaii. The following restrictions are due to the Russian Federation rocket firing impact area,” the NOTAM read, which sparked mass confusion. 

US defense officials weren’t entirely sure which Russian rocket booster would splash down in the Pacific. However, Russian media outlet TASS reported earlier today that a Soyuz-2.1b rocket equipped with satellites launched Friday.