Archive for the ‘France’ Category

COVID-19 DECLARATION

Wednesday, October 7th, 2020

 

PLEASE READ AND, IF YOU AGREE,  SIGN THE DECLARATION ABOUT THE DAMAGING PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF THE COVID-19 POLICIES 
Please click on the link:   gbdeclaration.org 

The Great Barrington Declaration

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e.  the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.

Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.

Co-signers

Medical and Public Health Scientists and Medical Practitioners

(more…)

Share

CORONAVIRUS COMES FOR EUROPE

Thursday, March 19th, 2020

 

Coronavirus Comes for Europe

by Guy Millière   Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.
March 18, 2020

  • The Italian health system is in appallingly bad condition. There are not enough intensive care units and, as everywhere, the possibility of a major crisis simply was not anticipated. In Italy there are 2.62 acute-care hospital beds per 1,000 residents (by comparison, the number in Germany is 6.06 per 1,000 residents). The Italian health system is entirely governed by the government…. Public hospitals must manage shortages, and when an exceptional situation occurs, rationing care leads to horrific choices.
  • The Italian government was hoping for help from the European Union, but neither the other member states nor the European Union itself has given any at all…. The dismissive attitude of the EU and the other members states seems to have been dictated by the fear of sliding into a situation as calamitous as that of Italy.
  • No country in the European Union has taken a clear, hard look at the danger Europe is facing.

 

Italy’s healthcare system is in a state of almost total collapse. As of today, 31,506 people in Italy have been infected with the coronavirus; of which 2,503 people have died. The numbers continue to grow. Hospitals are overwhelmed. Doctors have to choose which sick person to save and which sick person not to save. Pictured: Hospital employees tend to a patient at a temporary emergency structure set up outside Brescia Hospital, in Italy on March 13, 2020. (Photo by Miguel Medina/AFP via Getty Images)

(more…)

Share

TRUMP HAS FEW ALTERNATIVES TO YUCCA MOUNTAIN

Wednesday, March 4th, 2020

 

Washington Examiner

Trump has few alternatives to Yucca

The Trump administration bailing on Nevada’s Yucca Mountain as the nation’s long-delayed nuclear waste storage site has exposed the reality that the United States does not have viable alternative solutions.

“It’s clear we don’t have a way forward for a repository of nuclear waste at the moment,” said Rodney Ewing, a professor of nuclear security and geological sciences at Stanford University.

Until recently, the Trump administration had proposed funding to restart the licensing of Yucca Mountain despite a political onslaught from Nevada’s political delegation fighting against the site ever being completed.

President Trump, due to face voters this year in politically important Nevada, flipped the script with a tweet this month that seemed to take Yucca Mountain off the table. He said previous administrations “failed to find lasting solutions,” and he committed to exploring other “innovative approaches.”

His subsequent budget proposal vaguely pledged to initiate “processes to develop alternative solutions” by working with states and other stakeholders.

The administration plans to form an interagency working group to determine more precise next steps. In the few details described in the budget, the White House indicated that Trump supports the implementation of an interim storage program and research on “alternative technologies” to handle nuclear waste.

Democrats running for president also uniformly oppose Yucca Mountain, but they have not clearly articulated an alternative.

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the federal government promised nuclear power plants that it would handle the waste. The law, amended five years later, directed the Energy Department to take possession of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and dispose of it in a deep geological repository at Yucca Mountain.

“We have seen every kind of ‘other than Yucca’ proposal,” said Jordan Haverly, director of energy and environmental policy for Republican Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois, a longtime Yucca supporter. “All of them talk about these great new ideas, but eventually get to a point where Yucca is still the law as mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act.”

Indeed, alternatives to handle the nation’s 80,000 metric tons of radioactive spent fuel from commercial nuclear power plants have not yet borne fruit.

(more…)

Share

SOCIALIZED MEDICINE KILLED PRINCESS DIANNA, SURGEON TELLS CPAC

Saturday, February 29th, 2020

 

Socialized Medicine Killed Princess Diana, Surgeon Tells CPAC

NATIONAL HARBOR, MD — Congressman Steve Scalise introduced a panel discussion called  “Prescription for Failure: The Ills of Socialized Medicine” at CPAC on Thursday. He established what was at stake in 2020: “2020 will be a contrast election,” he said, between Trump’s freedom agenda or socialism.

“You don’t want socialism, you surely don’t want socialized medicine,” he said. “Tens of thousands of Canadians come to America for life-saving treatment. Do you see Americans going to Canada for life-saving treatment?” he asked rhetorically.

“Healthcare is only one example of what’s at stake in this election,” he said, before concluding that individual freedom will win out in 2020 and predicted that Republicans will keep the Senate and win back the House.

Author Dr. David Schneider, an orthopedic surgeon from Colorado, explained how with socialized medicine, wait times for care “are disastrous.” In Canada, the wait time to see a specialist is two years, and then another two years to get the procedure.

“People in this country would go crazy if you were told you had to wait four months,” he said.

Then he explained how Princess Diana would be alive today, if not for socialized medicine. “Princess Diana was in the car accident in France,” he explained. “They actually don’t have any trauma specialists in France.”

“For the first hour after that accident, she was still in that tunnel,” he continued. “And after an hour, they took her to a nearby hospital and she was alive for another three hours and they couldn’t control the bleeding from her pulmonary artery.”

Schneider explained that “there were no trauma-trained people there.”

He continued, “I really believe, knowing what I know about her care and comparing it to what Congressman Scalise had, Princess Diana would have lived had that accident happened here in America.”

(more…)

Share

EUROPEANS TRY TO HAVE IT BOTH WAYS

Thursday, February 20th, 2020

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Europeans Try to Have It Both Ways

They expect American protection but aren’t prepared to defend their own countries.

By Walter Russell Mead     February 18, 2020

How solid is the West? At last weekend’s Munich Security Conference, the world’s largest gathering of security policy makers and officials, the theme was “Westlessness,” referring to the sense of disorientation that many Europeans feel in this age of America First.

Since the 1940s, U.S. leadership in the service of a united and secure Europe has been the one unchanging feature in the Continental landscape. For generations, the U.S. committed to protect Europe from Russia, maintain bases in Germany to prevent it from threatening its neighbors, and promote European integration. Now Europeans don’t know where they stand, and a mixture of bafflement, anger, disappointment and fear fills the atmosphere at conferences like the one in Munich.

There’s little doubt that Trump administration policies, ranging from trade wars to toughness on Iran, have tested trans-Atlantic relations to the breaking point. But to understand the growing weakness of the Western alliance, Europeans need to spend less time deploring Donald Trump and more time looking in the mirror. A good place to begin is with a Pew poll released earlier this month on the state of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

(more…)

Share

U.S. FINANCING CHINA’S WORLD DOMINATION PLANS

Friday, November 15th, 2019

 

This is an article you have to read as there is so much new information in it regarding China and how our financial markets are being used to finance China’s expansion of their technological and military advances.  Nancy
IMPRIMIS – HILLSDALE COLLEGE

Why and How the U.S. Should Stop Financing China’s Bad Actors

October 2019  • Volume 48, Number 10 • Roger W. Robinson, Jr.

Roger W. Robinson, Jr.
Chairman, Prague Security Studies Institute

Roger W. Robinson, Jr. is president and CEO of RWR Advisory Group and co-founder and chairman of the Prague Security Studies Institute. He earned a B.A. from Duke University and an M.A. from George Washington University. He served as senior director of international economic affairs on President Reagan’s National Security Council, where he was the principal architect of the secret economic and financial strategy that proved decisive to the defeat of the Soviet Union. He later served as chairman of the Congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Prior to his government service, he was a vice president in the international department of the Chase Manhattan Bank.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College on September 9, 2019, during a conference on the topic, “Understanding China.”

In the early 1980s, I served on President Reagan’s National Security Council. Prior to my time at the White House, I was a vice president at Chase Manhattan Bank, in charge of its USSR and Eastern Europe division. It was my job to assess the creditworthiness of the countries in that part of the world, and I had come to realize that the Soviet Union had relatively modest hard currency income—and that what little it had came largely from the West.

In 1982, the Soviets had an empire stretching from Havana to Hanoi, but their hard currency revenue totaled only about $32 billion a year—roughly one-third the annual revenue of General Motors at the time. They were spending about $16 billion more annually than they were making, with the funding gap—the USSR’s life support—being financed by Western governments and banks.

President Reagan had long believed that the Soviet Union was economically vulnerable, because he knew it lacked the entrepreneurship, technological dynamism, and freedoms that are the prerequisites of a strong modern economy. And when he learned that we in the West were financing its brutal regime, he committed to slowing, and ultimately terminating, that flow of discretionary cash.

Our European allies had a completely different approach. Their belief in Ostpolitik, as the Germans called it, presupposed that commercial bridge-building would lead to geopolitical cooperation. If the West would offer financing and trade with the Soviets, peace and prosperity would result. Meanwhile, the Soviets were using the proceeds of Western loans, hard currency revenue streams, and technological support to build up their military, expand their empire, and engage in anti-Western activities.

The Reagan administration drew the line on a project called the Siberian Gas Pipeline, a 3,600-mile twin-strand pipeline that stretched from Siberia into the Western European gas grid. If completed, not only would it become the centerpiece of the Soviets’ hard currency earnings structure, but Western Europe would become dependent on the USSR for over 70 percent of its natural gas, weakening Western Europe’s ties to the U.S. and leaving the continent open to Kremlin extortion. Moreover, the pipeline was being financed on taxpayer-subsidized terms, since France and Germany viewed the USSR as a less developed country worthy of below-market interest rates.

The U.S. at the time had a monopoly on oil and gas technology that could drill through permafrost—which we had developed for Alaska’s North Slopeand we imposed oil and gas equipment sanctions on the USSR and European companies that were helping to build the Siberian pipeline. At one point, despite the strain it placed on relations with our NATO allies, we closed the U.S. market entirely to companies that continued to supply the pipeline project over our objections. Four of the six affected companies went under within six months, and Europeans woke up to the fact that they could do business with us or the Soviets, but not both.

As a result of these efforts we capped Soviet gas deliveries to Western Europe at 30 percent of total supplies, delayed the first strand of the pipeline by years and killed the second strand, and eventually helped dry up the bulk of Western credits to the USSR. In a secret deal, we also persuaded the Saudis to pump an additional two million barrels of oil per day and decontrolled prices at the wellhead in this country, knocking oil prices down to about $10 a barrel—significant because for every dollar decrease in the price of a barrel, the Soviets lost some 500 million to one billion dollars. In short, the Soviet Union never recovered from these economic and financial blows. It defaulted on some $96 billion in Western hard currency debt shortly before the total collapse of the Soviet empire.

The story with China today has certain similarities, but with one big difference: the U.S. has been playing the role of the naïve Europeans. Since adopting the Kissinger policy of engaging with China in the 1970s, our government has operated on the assumption that economic and financial relations with China would lead Beijing to liberalize politically. And since 2001, when we backed China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, the pace at which we have given China access to our best technology and capital and trade markets has accelerated. Yet China has shown no signs of embracing individual freedoms or the rule of law.

Instead, with our support, the Chinese have launched a massive campaign to become the world’s leading superpower. We know about the “Belt and Road Initiative,” a strategic undertaking to place huge segments of the world under China’s influence or outright control. We know about “Made in China 2025,” a strategy designed to dominate key technology sectors—from artificial intelligence and quantum computing to hypersonic missiles and 5G. We know about China’s practice of forced technology transfers: requiring American companies to share their trade secrets and R&D in order to do business in China. We know about China’s predatory trade practices. We know many of these things only because President Trump has brought them to the forefront of national attention, for which he deserves credit. And the ongoing tariff war is a good thing in the sense that we’ve finally begun to take a stand.

(more…)

Share

TURKEY FLOODING EUROPE WITH MIGRANTS

Thursday, October 10th, 2019

 

GATESTONE INSTITUTE

Turkey Flooding Europe with Migrants

by Soeren Kern  

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.
October 10, 2019 

  • The Greek government has said that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan personally controls the migration flows to Greece and turns them on and off to extract more money and other political concessions from the European Union. In recent months, the Turkish government has repeatedly threatened to open the floodgates of mass migration to Greece, and, by extension, to the rest of Europe.
  • “If they [the European Union] do not give us the necessary support in this struggle, then we will not be able to stop the 3.5 million refugees from Syria and another two million people who will reach our borders from Idlib.” — Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
  • “If we open the floodgates, no European government will be able to survive for more than six months. We advise them not to try our patience.” — Turkish Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu.
  • More than six million migrants are believed to be waiting in countries around the Mediterranean to cross into Europe, according to a classified German government report leaked to the newspaper Bild…More than three million others are waiting in Turkey.

 

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and other members of his government have repeatedly threatened to flood Europe with migrants. On September 5, Erdoğan said that Turkey plans to repatriate one million Syrian migrants to a “safe zone” in northern Syria and threatened to reopen the route for migrants into Europe if he does not receive adequate international support for the plan: “This either happens or otherwise we will have to open the gates.” Pictured: Erdoğan speaks at the UN on September 24, 2019. (Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images)

(more…)

Share

BRITISH NAVY – TRUMP TO THE RESCUE !

Saturday, August 17th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Uncle Trump to the Naval Rescue

Europe claims it can’t rely on the U.S., but look who’s protecting ships.

By the Editorial Board   August 9, 2019
Well, well, look who’s coming to the rescue of the British and shipping in the Middle East. None other than the Trump Administration that is supposed to be an unreliable ally. The Brits now say they’re joining a U.S.-led coalition to protect merchant shipping after they failed to get help from the rest of Europe.

The Royal Navy will join the effort organized by the U.S. Central Command after Iran seized a third ship this week. On July 19 the HMS Montrose frigate was patrolling near the Strait of Hormuz but was too far away to stop Iranian forces from taking a British-flagged tanker and crew that Tehran still hasn’t released.

Britain needs help because nearly half of its frigates and destroyers are undergoing major repairs or upgrades. The Royal Navy has around 80 ships, down from more than 130 during the 1982 Falklands War. The country is without a deployable aircraft carrier, though it has plans for two. London spent more than 2% of gross domestic product on defense in 2018, fulfilling its NATO requirement. But former Defence Minister Tobias Ellwood admitted after the tanker seizure that “our Royal Navy is too small to manage our interests across the globe.”

Germany refused to help, perhaps because it doesn’t want to offend Iran and might lose a naval engagement. While the Deutsche Marine has helped fight piracy in East Africa, it struggles to meet basic NATO commitments. At one point in 2018 its entire U-Boat fleet—six submarines—was stuck in dry dock. The surface fleet has held up better, though it’s aging fast.

Berlin spent only 1.2% of GDP on defense in 2018. Chancellor Angela Merkel ’s heir apparent, Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, called for Germany to meet its 2% commitment during her recent swearing-in ceremony. Her fellow lawmakers responded with boos.

The French would have had a limited benefit to a patrol mission, perhaps because La Royale has only a single aircraft carrier after cancelling plans for a second years ago.

(more…)

Share

FRANCE SLOWLY SINKING INTO CHAOS

Saturday, August 3rd, 2019

 

France Slowly Sinking into Chaos

by Guy Millière

Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.
August 3, 2019 

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: 

Macron knows that the partition of France already exists. Most Arabs and Africans livein no-go zonesapart from the rest of the population, where they accept the presence of non-Arabs and non-Africans less and less. They do not define themselves as French, except when they say that France will belong to them. Reports show that most seem filled with a deep rejection of France and Western civilization. An increasing number seem to place their religion above their citizenship; many seem radicalized and ready to fight.

Macron seems not to want to fight. Instead, he has chosen to appease them. He is single-mindedly pursuing his plans to institutionalize Islam in France. Three months ago, the Muslim Association for Islam of France (AMIF) was created. One branch will handle the cultural expansion of Islam and take charge of “the fight against anti-Muslim racism”. Another branch will be responsible for programs that train imams and build mosques. This autumn, a “Council of Imams of France” will be established. The main leaders of the AMIF are (or were until recently) members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a movement designated as a terrorist organization in Egypt, Bahrain, Syria, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — but not in France.

  • President Macron never says he is sorry for those who have lost an eye or a hand… from extreme police brutality. Instead, he asked the French parliament to pass a law that almost completely abolishes the right to protest and the presumption of innocence, and that allows the arrest of anyone, anywhere, even without cause. The law was passed.
  • In June, the French parliament passed another law, severely punishing anyone who says or writes something that might contain “hate speech”. The law is so vague that an American legal scholar, Jonathan Turley, felt compelled to react. “France”, he wrote, “has now become one of the biggest international threats to freedom of speech”.
  • The main concern of Macron and the French government seems not to be the risk of riots, the public’s discontent, the disappearance of Christianity, the disastrous economic situation, or Islamization and its consequences. Instead, it is climate change.
  • “The West no longer knows what it is, because it does not know and does not want to know what shaped it, what constituted it, what it was and what it is. (…) This self-asphyxiation leads naturally to a decadence that opens the way to new barbaric civilizations.” — Cardinal Robert Sarah, in Le soir approche et déjà le jour baisse (“The Evening Comes, and already the Light Darkens”).

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – ELITES VERSUS MIDDLE AMERICA

Sunday, July 28th, 2019

 

One of the most hopeful and inspiring speeches I’ve ever heard. I guarantee you won’t regret the 20 minutes it takes.

Senator Hawley’s keynote at the National Conservatism Conference

10,899 views

Published on Jul 17, 2019

This week Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) delivered a speech at the National Conservatism Conference where he discussed the state of American politics today. Senator Hawley also addressed the growing divide between cosmopolitan elites and the rest of America and the need for policies geared toward the great American middle.

 

 

Share
Search All Posts
Categories