EU: Big Tech shields Ursula

Brussels 25.10.2022 Anna van Densky OPINION On Sunday night, October 23 at 10:50 PM, I received an email from the YouTube team, informing me, that my video was removed and my channel was suspended for one week. The explanation of this hostile measure against the Freedom of speech was announced in a standard, non personalized text:

“Our team has reviewed your content, and, unfortunately, we think it violates our medical-misinformation policy. We’ve removed the following content from YouTube: “EU: demand of Ursula resignation”.
I immediately launched an appeal explaining the political and non-medical nature of my reporting from the European Parliament Strasbourg Plenary, but to no avail.

Well… But seriously, what the loud political demands of a group of the Members of the European Parliament for Ursula von der Leyen resignation have to do with the “medical-misinformation”? Ursula von der Leyen holds a position of the European Commission president, or in the other words the Prime-minister of the “United States of Europe”, and the MEPs demands of the resignation are relevant to the democratic practices, in the context of corruption allegations.

In mid-October the European Public Prosecutor’s Office opened an investigation into the EU’s coronavirus vaccines purchases, an announcement attracting attention to the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s questionable actions in concluding €71 bn contracts in total to November 2021.

My reporting censored by YouTube was correct because MEPs articulated the demands publicly a few times during the European Parliament second October Plenary in Strasbourg. Why the YouTube team is suppressing the vital for the EU citizens information, revealing corruption in the institutional highest ranks, and deleting the content about the legitimate demands of people’s representative for transparency enshrined to the EU Treaty?

Who is behind this YouTube team, who claims to be the guardians of the World Health Organization policies? On what grounds a Digital platform manifests itself as a censor, declaring that “YouTube doesn’t allow content that spreads medical misinformation that contradicts local health authorities’ (LHA) or the World Health Organization’s (WHO) medical information about COVID-19”. And what does the “medical misinformation” mean, while WHO, and other influential players in the field as the Chief Medical Advisor to the President of the U.S. spasmodically, but brazenly adapted their own slippery tactics in promotion of the Big Pharma products? Remember?

According to the statistic research the YouTube was among the major beneficiaries from the lockdown policies. According to The Insider YouTube is a powerhouse for Google, with revenue up 46% to almost $7 billion in the last quarter of 2020, doubling its profits due to lockdowns.

Just a few words about the YouTube, which is a video sharing platform where users around the world stream 694,000 hours of content every minute.
It is owned by Google, and is the second most visited website, after Google Search. YouTube has more than 2.5 billion monthly users who collectively watch more than one billion hours of videos each day. However policies of this Big Tech giant are becoming increasingly obscurant, influencing without any democratic mandate the political, and public life, moreover, manipulating and misguiding societies on epic scale.

However the concerns over the active “misinformation” censorship in favour of promotion of Big Pharma scheme of eternal use of their products reached the U.S. Senate. Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Ranking Member of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, sent a letter to YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki demanding documents and communications explaining each instance of YouTube’s censorship of him and requesting information on the development of YouTube’s COVID-19 misinformation policies.

“YouTube has displayed a troubling track record of censoring a sitting United States Senator, the proceedings of the United States Senate, journalists that interview me, and the display of data that is entirely generated from U.S. government health agencies,” the senator said.

Senator Johnson pressed Big Tech executives on censorship,  the silencing of conservative voices internal political bias at social media companies and their role in removing “COVID-19 disinformation.” The executives would not answer his questions.

Meanwhile on the other side of the Atlantic Ursula von der Leyen does not shy away from forceful imposition of decisions in a totalitarian power style, trampling The Nuremburg Code, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Siracusa Principles.

Moreover led by Ursula von der Leyen the European Commission is eager to bring the “Health dictatorship” to another level. The EU is also determined to play a leading role in the negotiations for a new international legally binding agreement on “pandemic prevention, preparedness and response” and targeted amendments to strengthen the 2005 International Health Regulations.

This institution, which has become deeply authoritarian, asks Member States to relaunch their vaccine strategies and to fight against misinformation about the vaccine, which means nothing other than the return of the vaccination pass, and “health dictatorship”.

However, in spite of the heavy “editing” and mass-scale censorship the demands of transparency around the dealing of Ursula von der Leyen and the Big Pharma companies, namely Pfizer are mounting.

Olivier Frot, Doctor of Public Law, from Bordeaux University, France, managed to obtain the framework agreement from the European Commission for the purchase of “anti-Covid vaccines” from the company Pfizer BioNtech.

“We are in the presence of a very original and unusual contractual form in terms of public procurement, an ‘advance purchase agreement’, a form unknown to the writer before this study and not provided for in the texts governing public contracts awarded by the European Commission” commented Oliver Frot.
“This is a type of leonine contract in which the contracting party is exempt from economic risk (firm price over a short period, fixed contractual quantities, significant financial advance), exempt from legal risk (responsibility transferred to the participating Member State” the researcher continued.
“The information making it possible to determine the legality of the procedures for awarding and drafting these contracts is unfortunately not available. Given the totally unbalanced nature of these contracts, one can legitimately ask questions about their award conditions and the absence of corruption and/or conflicts of interest” he added.

Europarliament imposes COVID19 Certificate

Brussels 31.10.2021 EP’s Bureau decided that the request to present an EU Digital COVID Certificate to access Parliament’s buildings will be extended to all people wishing to enter, reads the announcement on the site of the European Parliament.

As of November 3, all people entering Parliament’s buildings in its three places will be requested to present a valid EU Digital COVID Certificate, including journalists. The EU Digital COVID certificate proves that a person is either fully vaccinated, has immunity after having recovered from COVID-19 or can show a recent negative PCR test result. Both digital and paper formats of the EU Digital COVID Certificate or of a recognised equivalent certificate will be accepted.

A proof of a negative result of a PCR test carried out within the last 48 hours in Belgium, Luxembourg or France will also be accepted.

Please note that the existing precautionary measures like the compulsory wearing of a medical face mask and temperature checks at entrances remain in place.

The measure, taken by the Bureau will enable MEPs the return to in-person meetings for parliamentary activities, while continuing to guarantee safety. The decision takes into account the specificity of the European Parliament, an Institution gathering MEPs and other actors travelling to and from different Member States on a regular basis and the significant differences in vaccination level in Member States, according to the latest ECDC data. Please note that the measure was already in place for all external visitors since the beginning of September.

Personal data retrieved from the Certificate during the scanning process will only encompass the name of the holder, the authenticity and the validity of the Certificate. The personal data will be processed in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and its use will be strictly limited to granting access to Parliament’s buildings. Personal data will not be stored, recorded or retained locally or externally or transferred to any other Union body or third party.

EU budget: Sassoli’s Passions

Anna Van Densky OPINION The vivid emotions of the European Parliament president David Sassoli over EU budget came as a surprise – previously he has never gone ‘crescendo‘ about such paramount issues as European values and fundamental rights. For example, he has never raised his voice over Catalan political prisoners in Spain, on contrary in cold blood he signed off Oriol Junqueras from Members list at first opportunity without further consideration about his fate. Zero emotion, zero humanism.

However it was a desire to receive more money to the EU purse and more independence in spending it, that caused a great deal of passion. Unlike a regular enterprise the EU apparatchiks do not consider necessary to deliver, they would like to receive “more and more” regardless their poor prestations. Apparently nobody assumed the responsibility for Brexit, which is a giant failure of the bloc – the perspective to remain in the EU was not sufficiently convincing, but in spite of this breakdown MEPs without any hesitation claim more.

Since Brexit campaign some questions have remained unanswered: the glimpse of murky waters of Brussels has not inspired citizen’s enthusiasm – 10 000 Eurocrats who receive salaries exceeding the one of the British Prime Minister left quite an impression on Europeans in dire straights.

Not less “inspiring” are the Members of the European Parliament, who have successfully forgotten about the concept of rotation, and enjoy life-long career of “eternal” Membership with all included privileges, shiny limousines with chauffeurs at service of “servants of people”, adding some polish to discrete charms of European political bourgeoisie. A diabolo, qui est simia dei!

(Where god has a church the devil will have his chapel).

Jutta URPILAINEN: EU future Santa-Claus?

Undoubtedly Jutta URPILAINEN is exceptionally kind, generous and honest, and above it all sensitive to other people’s grievances. Mother of two adopted Colombian children, she is certainly an exceptional human-being. However are they the qualities to carry on the job of the EU Commissioner on International Partnerships? (Previously International Cooperation and Development led by CroatiaNeven Mimica #DEVCO).

During the October 1 hearing with Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), Urpilainen has successfully avoided all the burning problems of Africa – the major recipient of the EU development funds: CORRUPTION, TERRORISM, ETHNIC CONFLICTS, CHINA EXPANSION, DEMOGRAPHIC EXPLOSION, – none of them were addressed. Even Ebola!

The entire debate she stayed in shallow waters of wooden language of the EU politically correct: important ‘‘improvement”, “empowerment”, “transparency”, “equality”, “listen to people”, and the other “meaningful” cliches, favored by the EU Mandarines, dramatically lacking vision and imagination.

From time to time she was making a nod to MEPs, flattering them with reminding of her “unelected” status vis-à-vis their elected superiority. However these calculated maneuvers could not take away an impression of a dramatic lack of knowledge of the development portfolio.

At most ambivalent impression made Urpilainen  “asymmetric” answers to MEPs questions, clearly prepared in advance, and used without adaptation.

Finally, she promised to “learn”,  “listen”, and to “improve“, however the question remains if the EU needs an “apprentice-Commissioner”?

CONCLUSION: One can’t become pilot over night taking off plane w/ 300 passengers over Atlantic, but one can become aid Commissioner with  €20 000 a  month salary without a clue of international politics. What a soap!

October 1, European Parliament, Brussels Jutta URPILAINEN for International Partnerships Commissioner.

img_7894

Brexit paradoxes continue

Anna van Densky OPINION Next week the European Parliament starts the series of hearings to endorse the team of Ursula von der Leyen Commissioners-designate. In one of paradoxes of protracted Brexit the British Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) will participate and vote for the candidates, influencing the EU politics in spite of the fact that they did not propose a Commissioner themselves for apparent reasons.

Roughly 10% of votes, 73 UK departing MEPs will influence decisions shaping future composition of the top executives of the Commission – the guardian of EU Treaties, and the initiator of new laws.

However it is not the end of the road. In case there will be one more extension of Brexit beyond October 31, British government has to appoint a Commissioner to Brussels. Will Lord Hill come back? (Joke). Will Sir Julian King stay? If ‘yes’, it will be to the greatest joy of the Remainers,  assessing his marriage to the top EU civil servant Dane Lotte Knudsen (Germany, EEAS) as an ultimate sign of this loyalty to Brussels. Conflict of interests? One can hardly blame it to any UK national amid total confusion the protracted Brexit is causing. (Continuation follows),

Memorial to Strasbourg Grand Synagogue

Modern IT technologies will help to give a second life to a destroyed by Nazi Grand Synagogue, this time in a form of a bronze monument, established at the original place at Quai Kléber. The Jewish community, IT scientists, historians, and lovers of history have  collected a significant amount of information, allowing to restore the exact model of the demolished building.

DSCN9824[1]
IT reconstruction model of Grand Synagogue Quai Kléber
On 18th of September, during the European Parliament Plenary week the Jewish Consistory of Bas-Rhin invited to the Synagogue of Peace  Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and Strasbourg politicians to celebrate in a cultural event the upcoming Rosh Hashana (New Year) festivities. The excursion in the building of New Synagogue preceded the assembly.

DSCN9833[1]
Rabbin Mendel Samama (right) and Thierry Roos of Consistoire israélite du Bas-Rhin (left)
The collection of the artefacts and historic objects exposed as precious pieces of mosaic restore the picture of the spiritual past of the  Jewish Community in Alsace  – one of the most ancient in Europe, traced to the Middle Ages.

DSCN9826[1]
Grand Synagogue de la Paix historic objects collection on display
 

After the World War II  the Jews who survived the Holocaust, reformed the Jewish community of Strasbourg, meeting in the Holiday Palace until 1948, because the Grand Synagogue, situated at Place Klèber was destroyed.

Levi horn
Rosh Hashana sound of Shoffar Image: courtesy of Levi Matusof (pictured).

Following the talks with the city of Strasbourg in 1948, the Jewish community agreed to exchange the grounds of the old Synagogue against the site of Contades area, where the new monumental building was erected, by the  architect Claude Meyer-Lévy. The synagogue, called “Peace” replicating its location Rue de la Paix,, and was inaugurated in March 1958.

DSCN9834[1]

The new synagogue also includes the Judaica radio headquarters, a youth center, and the headquarters of several movements, in addition to the four oratories.

Ursula von der Leyen -Spitzenkandidate proxy

Anna van Densky OPINION Nine votes narrow victory of Ursula von der Leyen (60) reveals the fragility of the EU institutions, plagued by political fragmentation, and rise of Euroscepticism, the latter not without reason. The democratic deficit is becoming obvious, especially in crucial moments of appointing the EU top jobs candidates. The obscure procedure of election of the European Commission president, who is de facto ‘Prime Minister of Europe‘, does not inspire confidence neither of the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), no of their electorate. The former Europarl speaker compared it to the election of the Pope: the cardinals plotting behind closed doors, while congregation is awaiting for white smoke from the chimney.

After Manfred Weber (47) Spitzenkandidate (leading candidate) from the European People’s Party was rejected by East European member-states, the candidacy of von der Leyen emerged in contingency plan during crisis Summit of the EU leaders. Hardly known outside Germany, overnight she became the most powerful EU executive, the guardian of the EU Treaties, and the monopolist of the legislative initiative.

Among 733 votes cast (one void) 383 members voted in favor, 327 against, and 22 abstained, – with the slim majority of nine votes, von der Leyen became a sensation: first European Commission female president (born in Brussels, in family of a European Commission civil servant).

In spite an attractiveness of the perspective to appoint a woman, confirming European alignment with the gender equality principles,  the entire election process was on the brink, attacked by many MEPs for its Machiavellian engineering far from public eyes. It is obvious that the next time it might not pass, throwing the EU institutions in a protracted crisis.

Even von der Leyen –  the “jackpot winner” considered necessary ‘to respond to  the need for transparent  Spitzenkandidaten (leading candidate) system to be strengthened and the transnational lists to be reconsidered in future European elections.

With 383 votes in favour, the European Parliament elected Ursula von der Leyen President of the next European Commission in a secret paper ballot. Officially, she will enter office on 1 November 2019 for a five-year term.

Parliament currently comprises 747 MEPs as per the official notifications received by member state authorities, so the threshold needed to be elected was 374 votes, i.e. more than 50% of its component members. President Sassoli formally announced the requisite number before the results were revealed in plenary. The vote was held by secret paper ballot.

Vote ink finger

 

 

EU Brexit charade

Anna van Densky from EP, Brussels. The Members of European Parliament (MEP) raise concerns about perspective of the UK remaining for upcoming European elections, being “one foot in, one foot out”, as Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE, Belgium) said.

The perspective of electing even more Brexiteers is definitely not inspiring  MEPs, open to endorse additional political declarations, if necessary, however standing firmly by the EU Commission, and Council, refusing the revision of the endorsed deal.

While the attempting to convince Westminster to endorse the deal the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker repeated the UK can have one more extension on condition of the Article 50 Agreement (Withdrawal Agreement) endorsement, and proposing clear plans of moving forward with the implementation. The prolongation of uncertainty is not an option.

The tone of the EU top executive was dead, and while he was offering more political declarations. Juncker’s  glances were gloomy, while he switched to the part of speech, describing damages to EU, and even more so to British economy if the no-deal scenario takes place by default. He admitted to read the speech first time during his intervention in Europarliament, because “every word is important“.
If the UK is able to approve the withdrawal agreement with a viable majority by 12 April, then the European Union should accept an extension until 22 May“, Juncker concluded.

Responding to the worst fears of MEPs, Gerard Batten (UKIP, UK) called Britons to vote massively for UKIP in case the country participates in European elections in May.

 

#Brexit: pessimism reigns in Europarl

Anna van Densky OPINION The European Parliament Brexit negotiator Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, ALDE) cancelled his press-conference, so did his major ally – Esteban GONZALES-PONS (Spain EPP). There are no traces of optimism in the corridors of power in spite of British Prime Minister Theresa MAY the last minute spontaneous visit to Strasbourg, attempting to obtain compromises on the Article 50 Agreement.

However the legally-binding interpretations of Brexit deal will be hardly enough to convince the Westminster to accept it in tonight’s vote.

In case of voting down the Article 50 Agreement the relations between the EU and UK will be entering the uncharted waters, as Prime Minister May has stated already. The extension of the deadline (March 29) is possible in the framework of the agreed Brexit only to avoid legal vacuum. The Remainers already threaten to sue their government in the European Court (CURIA) for breaching the Article 50, which clearly describes the timetable, and does not foresee any prolongations.

Originally there were two fixed deadlines: Brexit date on March 29, and the latest date of its possible extension on May 24 (European elections), before which the UK should leave, or it is obliged to participate, according to the Treaties to ensure the right of the citizens to elect their representatives to the European Parliament. In any case the status of the incumbent MEPs could not be extended beyond July 2, when the newly elected Parliament will be constituted.

However there are very few politicians eager to model possible developments in case tonight of House of Commons will vote down the deal. It will be not only the downfall for Theresa May, and her government, but also considered as a major failure for the EU27 to secure orderly Brexit, preserving from blow economies, jobs, and citizens rights. The  failure will certainly reflect on upcoming European elections disfavoring predominant political forces, unable to preserve mutually beneficial relations with one of major European economies.

 

Zuckerberg promotes Facebook in Brussels

As bright as he his,  Mr. Zuckerberg appeared in the European Parliament Brussels for a short address, representing a mixture of advertising for his company and benefits it brings to the EU, and his intentions for future cooperation. Unlike any other CEO of a telecom company he has competences  to provide service and powers to decide if we are good enough to use it. A  very innovative approach, we have never experienced before: is post office allowed to inspect the content of our letters, before sending them? Are telecom operators encouraged to listen to our conversation and decide if we are entitled to remain the clients?…

But in case of the Facebook the MEPs encouraged Mr.Zuckerberg to filter content, banning the “fakenews” in spite of the absence of a legal definition, monitor the exchanges to define if it does not contain a threat.

Mr.Zuckerberg came to European Parliament with an aura of the Emperor of the World, who can make, and overthrow kings: he apologised for Analytica, but accepted the mission of filtering the Facebook content. Who is the judge? Mr.Zuckerberg himself?..

We do not expect the same people to construct the roads, maintain them and monitor those, who use them – ‘unbundling’ is the word for the policy requiring the division of powers. But in case of Mr.Zuckerberg it does not work: he is the one who provides the communication service, monitors the content, bans those, who he thinks are not entitled. Is the Facebook a modern service provider or an old-fashioned monopoly?

Imagine you are coming to a post office, where an agent is opening your envelope, reading a letter, and denying a further service, sending it into trash! That is what Mr.Zuckerberg does: he provides service, monitors the users, and bans those unwanted upon his own subjective criteria. The most striking  element of the entire endeavor is, that it is accepted by the otherwise democratic societies. Where is the division of powers? In case of Facebook, it goes a beggar.