Category: International

YouTube: Inquisition-style verdict

Blog, freedom of speech, Human rights, International, World

Brussels 24.09.2026 Today I have recevied one more vague letter regarding the reasons for closing my channel for 90 days. Plenty of words without any evidence of violation. (Image: courtesy Portuguese Gravity)
Here is the “final answer” from the YouTube:
“Thank you for taking time to write back.
“I understand that you strongly disagree with our enforcement decision and are seeking a specific breakdown of which aspect of the policy your video violated, especially when comparing your content to major news networks.
“As previously stated, your video was reviewed by our Trust and Safety team and found to violate our policy regarding violent extremists or criminal organizations. When a video is removed under this policy, it means the content was found to be produced by, or was glorifying, violent criminal or terrorist organizations.
“While we recognize that you are reporting on a global news event as a journalist, our internal specialists evaluated your specific video and determined that the way the content was presented did not meet the strict requirements for an Educational, Documentary, Scientific, or Artistic (EDSA) exception.
“For security reasons, we do not provide line-by-line breakdowns or timestamps of policy violations, nor do we debate comparisons with other channels’ content. If you believe other channels are violating our policies, we encourage you to use the reporting tool on those specific videos.
“Because the specialized team has fully reviewed your appeal and their decision is final, we will not be conducting another review or overturning this strike. As we have provided all the available context regarding this enforcement, we consider this specific matter closed and cannot offer any further escalations.”

As you see from the text above there is no explanation offered for the decision to deprive me of freedom of speech for 90 days. The shutting down of my YouTube channel for three months leads to a total loss of the audience. There is a clear intention to damage, and destroy me as an influencer.
Why? Why leave exactly the same information with the TV channels unhindered? I have an explanation: we, the creators, are used to attracting audiences, and are being removed as soon as we start competing with the TV channels.
In the piece destroyed by the YouTube censors I have informed the audiences about the death of Prigozhin in the plane crash earlier than the big broadcasters, and quoted competent sources – PMC Wagner themselves.
Meanwhile the TV channels are failing miserably, losing trust of the spectators, who are switching to more trusted sources as bloggers, and influencers.

https://platform.x.com/widgets.js

As you see the TV channels entered the digital platforms, and tried to collect missing views in this format, cutting their news production in shorter videos, mimicKing the style of bloggers, and podcasters.

If comparing the situation with the words of YouTube CEO Neal Mohan the structure of the “foodchain” is as follows: welcoming the newcomers who are potential audience for the TV Channels presented on the platform; attract them by the original content of the creators, let them grow until a few of them are becoming competitors, and they erase them.
My channel was silenced after I got 125K subscribers, and millions of views.

YouTube CEO Neal Mohan has frequently emphasized that supporting and empowering newcomers is a core priority for the platform. Since taking over as CEO in 2023, Mohan has focused on growing the creator economy and expanding monetization so that hundreds of thousands of new creators can earn money for the first time. In his official annual strategy letters and interviews, Mohan’s approach to welcoming new voices on the platform. Yes, they are the spectators, and soon as they are competitive creators representing the alternative to the TV Channels they are kicked out.
Look at me now!

YouTube: my channel arrest for “intentions”?!

Politics, World, Conflict, Human rights, International, Blog, freedom of speech

Brussels 23.09.2026 Today I received an answer from YouTube support which remained vague. The relation between my announcement of death of the boss of the “criminal organisation”*, and the accusations of the Community Rules violations are not established. All the other announcements of the same event stayd on display on YouTube. The event was reported globaly considered of pulibc importance.
YouTube answer: “We understand your concerns regarding the recent policy action taken on your video, especially given your long-standing career in international journalism and the presence of similar reporting across major news outlets.

Content intended to praise, promote, or aid violent extremist or criminal organizations is not allowed on YouTube. These organizations are not allowed to use YouTube for any purpose, including recruitment. In some cases, we may make exceptions for content with educational, documentary, scientific or artistic context, including content that is in the public’s interest.

We may terminate your channel or account for repeated violations of the Community Guidelines or Terms of Service. We may also terminate your channel or account after a single case of severe abuse, or when the channel is dedicated to a policy violation. We may prevent repeat offenders from taking policy trainings in the future. Learn more about channel or account terminations.

I understand your frustration, but please know that we have thoroughly investigated your request and, I’m afraid there is nothing more I can add at this stage. ”

My answer today:
“Thank you for your answer.
However it doesn’t contain specific information about the grounds of the measure taken against me.
You write: ““Content intended to praise, promote, or aid violent extremist or criminal organizations is not allowed on YouTube”, pointing to three unacceptable intentions:

Intention to praise criminal organizations
Intention to promote criminal organizations
Intention to aid criminal organizations

Which of them did you apply to my video?
Taking into consideration the gravity of the stigma YouTube cast on me as a journalist, these accusations can not be taken lightly.

YouTube CEO Neal Mohan has already made a number of public promises to improve the system, and I count on his promises.
So far I haven’t received any explanation how the rule you have quoted correlates with the information I had released on the death of the boss of the criminal organisation on August 23, 2023 three years ago.

It was reported on a global scale, and all the other announcements of the same event are left on YouTube display unhindered. I have already sent you a list of the TV channels presented on your platform with exactly the same information.”

Please find the information in my preiouvs posts.
Those who would like to stand for freedom of speech, can sing a petition below:
https://www.change.org/p/stop-neal-mohan-from-being-ceo-of-youtube?source_location=topics_page

Общая ситуация со свободой слова в Европе – описание здесь:

YouTube vs Me: necrology as advertising ?!

Blog, freedom of speech, Human rights, International, Russia, World

Brussels, September 21, 2026. Dear viewers of my YouTube channel @AnnaVanDensky, today I received a response from Mr. Neal Mohan’s team that took me by surprise. It concerns a video announcing the death of the Wagner PMC leader in a plane crash. That video—posted three years ago, on August 23, 2023 — was taken down THREE YEARS LATER, and the channel was suspended for three months on the following grounds:

“We reviewed the video and concluded that it violates our Community Guidelines.
“YouTube prohibits content that praises, promotes, or facilitates the activities of violent criminal organizations.” Such organizations are prohibited from using YouTube for any purpose, including recruitment.

“We removed the video because it violates our policy regarding violent extremist or criminal organizations: it contains material created by such organizations or glorifying their activities.
“Additional information can be found in the Help Center.”

So, does the announcement of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s death—confirmed by the Wagner PMC—contain material “created by the PMC” or material that “glorifies” it? There is a significant difference. The question is: how can a report on the death of Prigozhin and his military strategist Utkin in a plane crash possibly “glorify” their activities? I won’t get carried away with irony regarding the “appeal” of such an advertisement—the prospect of dying in a plane crash. Instead, I will address the argument that censors are likely to try to level against me.

Under US law, the Wagner PMC is designated as a “Significant Transnational Criminal Organization”; however, the status of a full-fledged terrorist organization on the official US list (FTO) entails specific legal nuances and distinctions.

Consequently, quoting a statement from a criminal—or even terrorist—organization that confirms the death of its leader is lawful if done for informational, journalistic, or academic purposes. Simply reproducing or relaying factual information originating from a group deemed illegal under US jurisdiction does not violate the law.

Major media outlets regularly quote official statements …or press releases from organizations designated as terrorist or criminal. For example, reports on the death of a leader resulting from a drone strike or a special operation, intended to inform the public. Coverage of events of global significance is protected by principles of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, such as the First Amendment to the US Constitution or Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

I have currently initiated correspondence with the YouTube team to clarify the exact nature of the claims against me. I am awaiting a response. If I do not receive one in the coming days, I will have to seek legal counsel. Naturally, slander cannot be left unaddressed. Stay tuned!

(Image above: courtesy Elimende Inagella)

YouTube closed my channel again!

Blog, International, Lifestyle, World

Washington DC July 03.2026 Here is the answer from the YouTube censors:
“Hi Anna Van Densky,
We have reviewed your appeal for the following:
Video: 02.07.2026 NYC: Сам черт не брат! (To take on the devil himself)
We have reviewed your content carefully and confirmed that it violates our harmful and dangerous policy. We know that this is probably disappointing news but it’s our job to make sure that YouTube is a safe place for all.
“How this impacts your content
We won’t be putting your content back up on YouTube.
If your appeal was for a warning, you will not be given another warning in the future.
If your appeal was for a strike, the strike will remain on your channel.
You can find more information about warnings and strikes in the YouTube Help Centre.
Learn about your resolution options.Thanks,
The YouTube team”

The video which war removed was devoted to Angelina and Ivan stunt on July 1, 2026.

https://platform.x.com/widgets.js

President Monroe Doctrine: transcript

Blog, International, Politics, World

06.01.2026 Note: The Monroe Doctrine was expressed during President Monroe’s seventh annual message to Congress, December 2, 1823:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The Monroe Doctrine was articulated in President James Monroe’s seventh annual message to Congress on December 2, 1823. The European powers, according to Monroe, were obligated to respect the Western Hemisphere as the United States’ sphere of interest:

President James Monroe’s 1823 annual message to Congress contained the Monroe Doctrine, which warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere.

“…At the proposal of the Russian Imperial Government, made through the minister of the Emperor residing here, a full power and instructions have been transmitted to the minister of the United States at St. Petersburg to arrange by amicable negotiation the respective rights and interests of the two nations on the northwest coast of this continent. A similar proposal has been made by His Imperial Majesty to the Government of Great Britain, which has likewise been acceded to. The Government of the United States has been desirous by this friendly proceeding of manifesting the great value which they have invariably attached to the friendship of the Emperor and their solicitude to cultivate the best understanding with his Government. In the discussions to which this interest has given rise and in the arrangements by which they may terminate the occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers. . .

“It was stated at the commencement of the last session that a great effort was then making in Spain and Portugal to improve the condition of the people of those countries, and that it appeared to be conducted with extraordinary moderation. It need scarcely be remarked that the results have been so far very different from what was then anticipated. Of events in that quarter of the globe, with which we have so much intercourse and from which we derive our origin, we have always been anxious and interested spectators. The citizens of the United States cherish sentiments the most friendly in favor of the liberty and happiness of their fellow-men on that side of the Atlantic. In the wars of the European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy to do so. It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this hemisphere we are of necessity more immediately connected, and by causes which must be obvious to all enlightened and impartial observers. The political system of the allied powers is essentially different in this respect from that of America. This difference proceeds from that which exists in their respective Governments; and to the defense of our own, which has been achieved by the loss of so much blood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of their most enlightened citizens, and under which we have enjoyed unexampled felicity, this whole nation is devoted. We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintain it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States. In the war between those new Governments and Spain we declared our neutrality at the time of their recognition, and to this we have adhered, and shall continue to adhere, provided no change shall occur which, in the judgement of the competent authorities of this Government, shall make a corresponding change on the part of the United States indispensable to their security.

“The late events in Spain and Portugal shew that Europe is still unsettled. Of this important fact no stronger proof can be adduced than that the allied powers should have thought it proper, on any principle satisfactory to themselves, to have interposed by force in the internal concerns of Spain. To what extent such interposition may be carried, on the same principle, is a question in which all independent powers whose governments differ from theirs are interested, even those most remote, and surely none of them more so than the United States. Our policy in regard to Europe, which was adopted at an early stage of the wars which have so long agitated that quarter of the globe, nevertheless remains the same, which is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers; to consider the government de facto as the legitimate government for us; to cultivate friendly relations with it, and to preserve those relations by a frank, firm, and manly policy, meeting in all instances the just claims of every power, submitting to injuries from none. But in regard to those continents circumstances are eminently and conspicuously different.

“It is impossible that the allied powers should extend their political system to any portion of either continent without endangering our peace and happiness; nor can anyone believe that our southern brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord. It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition in any form with indifference. If we look to the comparative strength and resources of Spain and those new Governments, and their distance from each other, it must be obvious that she can never subdue them. It is still the true policy of the United States to leave the parties to themselves, in hope that other powers will pursue the same course….”
Source: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/monroe-doctrine#transcript

Stockholm hosts Bilderberg Club

Blog, Europe, International, Politics, World

Brussels 13.06.2025 The 125 high-profile participants attending this year’s Bilderberg Meeting, which began on Thursday 13 June in Stockholm and runs until Sunday June 15.
The exclusive assembly brings together political leaders, business executives, and academics from both sides of the Atlantic for closed-door discussions under strict confidentiality rules.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The Bilderberg Meeting guest list reflects the forum’s enduring role as a nexus of elite transatlantic influence, with participants drawn from the highest tiers of politics, business, academia, media, and technology.

Roughly one-third of the guests hold or have recently held top-level government roles, including sitting prime ministers–such as Finland’s Alexander Stubb and Greece’s Kyriakos Mitsotakis–Cabinet ministers, European commissioners, and high-ranking military officers from NATO and the US armed forces.

The presence of multiple European commissioners and current or former finance ministers underlines the group’s strong interest in economic governance and geopolitical stability.

Alongside them, major players from global business, such as the CEOs of Microsoft, Spotify, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, TotalEnergies, and Pfizer, signal the continued interweaving of political decision-making and private sector interests.

The tech sector is particularly well represented, with figures such as Demis Hassabis of Google DeepMind, Mustafa Suleyman of Microsoft AI, and investor Peter Thiel indicating a growing focus on AI and defence innovation.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Several prominent journalists and editors, including from The Economist, The New York Times and Bloomberg, suggest media remains a valued lens through which these elites interpret global trends, though under the Chatham House Rule, their participation is private rather than performative.

The inclusion of figures like Applebaum and Stacey Abrams adds transatlantic political-cultural depth, while the involvement of Polish figures such as Sikorski and entrepreneur Rafał Brzoska reflects the region’s increasing visibility in Euro-Atlantic strategic discourse.

The only Russian invited is Alexander Gabuev, the head of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, an institution banned by the Kremlin in 2022.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The meeting is taking place at Stockholm’s prestigious Grand Hôtel, which has been cordoned off by police since Tuesday in anticipation of protests.

The hotel, owned by the influential Wallenberg family, has blocked reservations for the duration of the event, echoing similar security steps taken ahead of Barack Obama’s 2013 visit to Sweden.

This year’s agenda includes topics such as transatlantic relations, the future of Ukraine, the US and European economies, the Middle East, and the so-called “authoritarian axis” of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

Discussions will also explore defence innovation, artificial intelligence and national security, energy geopolitics, and global migration trends.

Founded in 1954, the Bilderberg Meeting aims to promote informal dialogue between Europe and North America.

Around two-thirds of participants come from Europe, with the rest from North America. Roughly a quarter are active in politics and government, while the majority represent business, media, academia, and other sectors.

All discussions are held under the Chatham House Rule, which allows participants to use the information shared but prohibits identifying speakers or their affiliations.
This year agenda includes:

12 June – 15 June 2025 Stockholm, Sweden
Transatlantic Relationship
Ukraine
US Economy
Europe
Middle East
Authoritarian Axis
Defence Innovation and Resilience
AI, Deterrence and National Security
Proliferation
Geopolitics of Energy and Critical Minerals
Depopulation and Migration

The private format, there are no press briefings, resolutions, or official statements, has long fuelled speculation and conspiracy theories about the group’s influence.

However, organizers maintain that the event provides a rare space for candid, off-the-record exchange among global decision-makers, and the guest list is publicly available on the group’s website.

Stockholm, 12 – 15 June participants list:

Abrams, Stacey (USA), CEO, Sage Works Production
Albuquerque, Maria Luís (INT),
EU Commissioner Financial Services and the Savings and Investments Union

Alcázar Benjumea, Diego del (ESP), CEO, IE University
Alverà, Marco (ITA), Co-Founder, zhero.net; CEO TES
Andersson, Magdalena (SWE), Leader, Social Democratic Party
Applebaum, Anne (USA), Staff Writer, The Atlantic
Attal, Gabriel (FRA), Former Prime Minister
Auchincloss, Murray (CAN), CEO, BP plc
Baker, James H. (USA), Former Director, Office of Net Assessment, Department of Defense
Barbizet, Patricia (FRA), Chair and CEO, Temaris & Associés SAS
Barroso, José Manuel (PRT), Chair International Advisors, Goldman Sachs International
Baudson, Valérie (FRA), CEO, Amundi SA
Beleza, Leonor (PRT), President, Champalimaud Foundation
Birol, Fatih (INT), Executive Director, International Energy Agency
Botín, Ana (ESP), Group Executive Chair, Banco Santander SA
Bourla, Albert (USA), Chair and CEO, Pfizer Inc.
Brende, Børge (NOR), President, World Economic Forum
Brunner, Magnus (INT), European Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration
Brzoska, Rafal (POL), CEO, InPost SA
Busch, Ebba (SWE), Minister for Energy, Business and Industry
Caine, Patrice (FRA), Chair & CEO, Thales Group
Calviño, Nadia (INT), President, European Investment Bank
Castries, Henri de (FRA), President, Institut Montaigne
Chambers, Jack (IRL), Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Reform and Digitalisation
Champagne, François-Philippe (CAN), Minister of Finance and National Revenue
Clark, Jack (USA), Co-Founder & Head of Policy, Anthropic PBC
Crawford, Kate (USA), Professor and Senior Principal Researcher, USC and Microsoft Research
Donahue, Christopher (USA), Commander, US Army Europe and Africa
Donohoe, Paschal (INT), President, Eurogroup; Minister of Finance
Döpfner, Mathias (DEU), Chair and CEO, Axel Springer SE
Eberstadt, Nicholas N. (USA), Henry Wendt Scholar in Political Economy, AEI
Ek, Daniel (SWE), CEO, Spotify SA
Ekholm, Börje (SWE), CEO, Ericsson Group
Eriksen, Øyvind (NOR), President and CEO, Aker ASA
Feltri, Stefano (ITA), Journalist
Fentener van Vlissingen, Annemiek (NLD), Chair, SHV Holdings NV
Fraser, Jane (USA), CEO, Citigroup
Freeland, Chrystia (CAN), Minister of Transport and Internal Trade
Friedman, Thomas L. (USA), Foreign Affairs Columnist, The New York Times
Gabuev, Alexander (INT), Director, Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Hammer, Kristina (AUT), President, Salzburg Festival
Harrington, Kevin (USA), Senior Director for Strategic Planning, NSC
Hassabis, Demis (GBR), Co-Founder and CEO, Google DeepMind
Hedegaard, Connie (DNK), Chair, KR Foundation
Heinrichs, Rebeccah (USA), Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
Heraty, Anne (IRL), Chair, Sherry Fitzgerald ana IBEC
Herlin, Jussi (FIN), Vice Chair, KONE Corporation
Hernández de Cos, Pablo (ESP), General Manager Elect, Bank for International Settlements
Hobson, Mellody (USA), Co-CEO and President, Ariel Investments LLC
Hoekstra, Wopke (INT), European Commissioner for Climate, Net Zero and Clean Growth
Hunt, Jeremy (GBR), Member of Parliament
Isla, Pablo (ESP), Vice-Chair, Nestlé SA
Johansson, Micael (SWE), President and CEO, Saab AB
Jonsson, Conni (SWE), Founder and Chair, EQT Group
Karp, Alex (USA), CEO, Palantir Technologies Inc.
Klöckner, Julia (DEU), President Bundestag
Kostrzewa, Wojciech (POL), President, Polish Business Roundtable
Kotkin, Stephen (USA), Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Kratsios, Michael (USA), Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
Kravis, Henry R. (USA), Co-Founder and Co-Executive Chair, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
Kudelski, André (CHE), Chair and CEO, Kudelski Group SA
Kuleba, Dmytro (UKR), Adjunct Professor, Sciences Po
Leeuwen, Geoffrey van (INT), Director Private Office of the Secretary General, NATO
Lemierre, Jean (FRA), Chair, BNP Paribas
Letta, Enrico (ITA), Dean, IE School of Politics, Economics & Global Affairs
Leysen, Thomas (BEL), Chair, dsm-firmenich AG
Lighthizer, Robert (USA), Chair, Center for American Trade
Liikanen, Erkki (FIN), Chair, IFRS Foundation Trustees
Lundstedt, Martin (SWE), CEO, Volvo Group
Marin, Sanna (FIN), Strategic Counsellor, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change
McGrath, Michael (INT), European Commissioner for Democracy, Justice and the Rule of Law
Mensch, Arthur (FRA), Co-Founder and CEO, Mistral AI
Micklethwait, John (USA), Editor-in-Chief, Bloomberg LP
Minton Beddoes, Zanny (GBR), Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
Mitsotakis, Kyriakos (GRC), Prime Minister
Monti, Mario (ITA), Senator for life
Nadella, Satya (USA), CEO, Microsoft Corporation

Netherlands, H.M. the King of the (NLD),

O’Leary, Michael (IRL), Group CEO, Ryanair Group
Ollongren, Kajsa (NLD), Fellow, Chatham House; Senior Fellow, GLOBSEC
Özyeğin, Murat (TUR), Chair, Fiba Group
Papalexopoulos, Dimitri (GRC), Chair, TITAN S.A.
Paparo, Samuel (USA), Commander, US Indo-Pacific Command
Philippe, Édouard (FRA), Mayor, Le Havre
Pouyanné, Patrick (FRA), Chair and CEO, TotalEnergies SE
Prokopenko, Alexandra (INT), Fellow, Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Rachman, Gideon (GBR), Chief Foreign Affairs Commentator, Financial Times
Rappard, Rolly van (NLD), Co-Founder and Chair, CVC Capital Partners
Reiche, Katherina (DEU), Minister of Economic Affairs and Energy
Ringstad Vartdal, Birgitte (NOR), CEO, Statkraft AS
Roche, Nicolas (FRA), Secretary General, General Secretariat for Defence and National Security
Rutte, Mark (INT), Secretary General, NATO
Salvi, Diogo (PRT), Co-Founder and CEO, TIMWE
Sawers, John (GBR), Executive Chair, Newbridge Advisory Ltd.
Scherf, Gundbert (DEU), Co-Founder and Co-CEO, Helsing GmbH
Schimpf, Brian (USA), Co-Founder & CEO, Anduril Industries
Schmidt, Eric E. (USA), Executive Chair and CEO, Relativity Space Inc
Schmidt, Wolfgang (DEU), Former Federal Minister for Special Tasks, Head of the Chancellery
Šefčovič, Maroš (INT), European Commissioner Trade and Economic Security;
Interinstitutional Relations and Transparency

Sewing, Christian (DEU), CEO, Deutsche Bank AG
Sikorski, Radoslaw (POL), Minister of Foreign Affairs
Şimşek, Mehmet (TUR), Minister of Finance
Smith, Jason (USA), Member of Congress
Stoltenberg, Jens (NOR), Minister of Finance
Streeting, Wes (GBR), Secretary of State for Health and Social Care
Stubb, Alexander (FIN), President of the Republic
Suleyman, Mustafa (USA), CEO, Microsoft AI
Summers, Lawrence (USA), Charles W. Eliot University Professor, Harvard University
Thiel, Peter (USA), President, Thiel Capital LLC
Toulemon, Laurent (FRA), Senior Researcher, INED
Uggla, Robert (DNK), Chair, A.P. Møller-Maersk A/S
Valentini, Valentino (ITA), Deputy Minister of Enterprise and Made in Italy
Vassy, Luis (FRA), Director, Sciences Po
Verhoeven, Karel (BEL), Editor-in-Chief, De Standaard
Wallenberg, Jacob (SWE), Chair, Investor AB
Wallenberg, Marcus (SWE), Chair, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB
Weder di Mauro, Beatrice (CHE), President, Centre for Economic Policy Research
Weel, David van (NLD), Minister of Justice and Security
Wilmès, Sophie (INT), Vice-President, European Parliament
Zakaria, Fareed (USA), Host, Fareed Zakaria GPS
Zeiler, Gerhard (AUT), President, Warner Bros. Discovery International

Zelenskyy frantic stunt in White House

Blog, International, Politics, World

Brussels 01.03.2025 Volodimir Zelenskyy should have come with an interpreter to the White House. His English is too rudimentary for a head of state. Unfortunately for Ukrainians he has no adequate assessment of his own skills, and capacities, which is not conducive to public good.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Moreover Zelenskyy doesn’t not think, behave, and act as a President of a country. He looked like some obsessed WOKE ACTIVIST who broke through gates of White House, and was removed by agents to secure work environment.
The necessity to organize elections to return to democracy has never been so urgent in Ukraine as with this failed presidency. Elected due to promise of peace to his compatriots, Zelenskyy quickly mutated to “President of War” in his own words. His outfit, which causes raised brows, stands for incapacity to accept the grim realities: it is impossible to win this war, he is peddling with a remarkable insistence, omitting costs both in human lives, and resources channeled into production of lethal weapons.
It is time for elections in Ukraine to liberate the Ukrainian people from a showman, who can’t stop performing at world stage, confusing virtual reality, created by cameras with the grim realities of endless war his is so exited about. The frustrations outbursts of Zelenskyy in the White House revealed a comedian enjoying a spotlight at cost of a graveyards of young man, an aggressive Narcissist, playing a dream role of his life.
However Zelenskyy’ Harlequin mask have fallen during the White House stunt, revealing his tremendous deficiency of skills, and culture. The stunt which was a self-inflicted catastrophe. Nihilation of reputation.
The Ukrainian people deserve better. The need for elections of a President of Ukraine has become urgent.
The REAL FEEL: farewell to Harlequin !

EU establishes Russia Crime Centre

Blog, Conflict, EU, Human rights, International, Politics, Russia

Today, the International Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine (ICPA) started its operations in the Hague, hosted by the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust). The newly established Centre will be key to investigate Russia’s crime of aggression against Ukraine and facilitate case building for future trials. It will provide a structure to support and enhance ongoing and future investigations into the crime of aggression and contribute to the exchange and analysis of evidence gathered since the start of the Russian aggression.

The Centre will begin operating as of today. Eurojust will work closely with the Commission and the members of the Joint Investigation Team to ensure that the Centre can provide the best possible support to national authorities.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is competent to prosecute the gravest international crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes and the crime of aggression). However, at the moment, the ICC cannot prosecute Russia for the crime of aggression, since Russia is not a State party to the ICC. To close this gap, in November 2022 the Commission presented options to the Member States to guarantee that there is full accountability for all crimes committed in Ukraine. These options explored the possibility of establishing an accountability mechanism to allow the prosecution of the crime of aggression.

While discussions continue, in particular within the Core Group on the establishment of the Special Tribunal, it is crucial to ensure that the relevant evidence is properly secured, and that investigations can begin within the existing legal frameworks.

The evidence collected by the Centre could be used before other jurisdictions, including national and international courts, including a possible tribunal for the crime of aggression or the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes within its jurisdiction.

Prosecutors from the members of the Joint Investigation Centre will be relocated to Eurojust, where they can work together on a daily basis. The prosecutors will be supported by legal and analytical experts from Eurojust. Evidence identified can be stored securely in Eurojust’s Core International Crimes Evidence Database, established following the changes to the Eurojust Regulation based on the Commission’s proposal to amend Eurojust’s regulation.

Russia reacts upon UK depleted uranium shells

Blog, Europe, International, Politics

Brussels 23.03.2023 Radiation effects of depleted uranium shells, in case used on the territory of Ukraine, will be impossible to control, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said at news briefing on Thursday, March 23.

“Now the impact of used weapons and shells will be impossible to control either for neighboring states or for the states of the region. This simply cannot be done,” the diplomat explained, while commenting on London’s intention to provide shells with depleted uranium to Kiev.

“It is possible to participate in the exchange of intelligence, it is possible to ask Washington to control the Kiev regime to ensure it should not carry out strikes at the territory of Poland or shoot down aircraft of some other countries, it is possible to do many other things, but no one can give instructions to radiation, it’s impossible to negotiate with it, there is no way of controlling it.”

Zakharova recalled the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear power plant disasters.

“Both tragedies still have dire consequences. Their scale is different, but the lesson is the same: it’s impossible to come to terms with radiation,” Zakharova concluded.

Lavrov: Donbass “must be liberated”

Blog, Conflict, Europe, International, Russia

Brussels 29.12.2022 The Donetsk (DNR) and Lugansk People’s Republics (LPR), as well as the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, which joined Russia following referendums, “need to be liberated”, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said to Russian Channel One TV. (Image above: archive)

While answering a question about the borders of the regions that he was referring to, Lavrov said: “I am certainly talking about their borders as parts of the Russian Federation, based on the Russian Constitution.”

“It stems from the people’s will expressed in the four regions. It happened a while ago in the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and this fall in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions,” Lavrov added.

The top diplomat underlined that Russia was determined to make sure that its special military operation would achieve its goals. The four regions “need to be liberated from the threat of Nazification that they have faced for years” he added.

From September 23 to September 27, the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) and the Lugansk People’s Republic (LPR), as well as the Kherson Region and the Zaporozhye Region, held referendums where the majority of voters opted to join Russia. On September 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin and the heads of the DPR and the LPR, the Zaporozhye and Kherson Regions signed treaties on their accession to Russia. On October 4, Putin signed laws ratifying the treaties.