Billionaire George Soros, the founder of the Open Society Foundations, gave a speech this week to the conservative Hoover Institution in which he compared China under President Xi Jinping to Nazi Germany and called for regime change in Beijing.

Soros said in his speech, "Xi Jinping has done his best to dismantle Deng Xiaoping's achievements. He brought private companies under Deng under the control of the [CPC] and undermined the dynamism that used to characterize them." He also said that Xi, unlike other Chinese leaders like Deng Xiaoping, is "a true believer in communism," and added: "It is to be hoped that Xi Jinping may be replaced by someone less repressive at home and more peaceful abroad."

Apart from the facts that this is a pretty bold attempt to interfere in China's internal affairs and that it ignores the reality that Beijing's government has a trust rating of 91% from its citizens, Soros' assessment of what's going on in the country is extraordinarily ignorant and, for the most part, just not true.

Psaki says Spotify disclaimer is welcome, but platform could actually fight misinformation.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki called on music and podcast streaming giant Spotify to do "more" in the fight against Covid-19 misinformation on Tuesday.

At her daily press briefing, President Joe Biden's top spokeswoman was asked about a decision by the company to add disclaimers linking to Covid-19 information hubs to any piece of content that includes discussion of the pandemic, vaccines, or Covid-19 itself. She responded that the change was a good step, but that the company could take steps (if it wanted) to actively prohibit content that contained misinformation that experts have warned is prolonging the pandemic and leading to more deaths.

Russia is to expel the German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) in retaliation for a German ban on broadcasts by Russia's RT.

The foreign ministry said the press credentials of DW's correspondents would be revoked, its bureau in Russia closed, and its German-language broadcasts would be banned from Russian satellite television in the near future. It said this was the first stage of its "retaliatory measures".

The move marks an escalation in Russia's media war with the west, in which there have already been expulsions of a BBC journalist and a Dutch reporter in the last year.


It comes during a period of heightened geopolitical tensions as western governments have accused Russia of preparing to launch an attack on Ukraine and threatened crippling sanctions.

With tensions heating up in eastern Europe, Russian President Vladimir Putin has met his Hungarian counterpart Prime Minister Viktor Orban for talks in Moscow on Tuesday, at which the pair underscored their friendly partnership, despite worsening relations between East and West.

The two leaders, who have been colleagues for more than a decade, greeted each other familiarly, and Putin said he preferred face-to-face meetings over telephone calls.

The Russian president also emphasized the particular importance that energy deals hold in the two country's relations. "In spite of all obstacles, the volume of trade increased by 30% over the past 11 months," he stated. "This is a good sign, and large-scale projects are continuing, such as the construction of nuclear power plants."

There is an old saying that "you should talk to the organ grinder, not his monkey."

This is what Russia has chosen to do in breaking off talks with NATO and negotiating directly with the United States. The wisdom of Russia's choice is amply demonstrated by the contrasting content and tone of the U.S. and NATO responses to Russia's demands concerning NATO expansion and the deployment of troops in eastern Europe, which have just been leaked by the Spanish newspaper El Pais.

The NATO document also raises the important question of who the NATO secretariat (which wrote this document) actually answers to? Not, it seems, NATO members as a whole, several of which would disagree strongly with the tone of this statement. To Washington? But then why a document so much more hostile and undiplomatic than the American one? It seems that the NATO secretariat has developed an internal culture of Russophobia that has now taken on a life of its own and is capable of doing limited but unfortunate and unnecessary damage to European security, despite the fact that in itself the NATO secretariat is nothing but a luxuriously-funded retirement home for ex-politicians, mediocre military bureaucrats, and PR flacks.

Before addressing these statements however, it is worth pointing out that one Western line about Russia's demands has already been proved false: namely, that they were never intended as a serious basis for negotiations; and that Russia always planned to use their rejection as a pretext to invade Ukraine. Clearly, if that were the case, Russia would have invaded by now.

Despite a spate of reports in recent weeks that Russian Armed Forces could stream into neighboring Ukraine, France's foreign minister has stated that Paris sees no sign that Moscow is preparing to launch a full-scale attack against Ukraine.

Speaking as part of an appearance on France 2 Television channel on Wednesday, Jean-Yves Le Drian gave an update on the current tensions in Eastern Europe:

"The situation is very serious - tens of thousands of Russian soldiers are near the Ukrainian border, military maneuvers involving Russian and Belarusian troops are expected near Ukraine's borders. There are all the conditions for an incursion."

However, according to the official, there is currently no information about Russian President Vladimir Putin's desire to act. He pointed out that the priority at this moment should be reducing tensions in the region.

Le Drian said the last meeting of representatives from the Normandy format, which brings together negotiators from Kiev, Moscow, Berlin, and Paris in an effort to resolve the conflict in Donbass, showed "modest progress," and expressed optimism at potential further success. He emphasized:

"We can reach an agreement on Ukraine... Only political will is needed to avoid the worst."

The US Army has ordered commanders to start discharging anti-vax soldiers "immediately," saying they jeopardize the army's ability to "win wars".

US Army commanders are to initiate "involuntary administrative separation proceedings" against any soldier refusing to get a Covid-19 vaccine, the Army said in a statement on Wednesday, citing a fresh directive by Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth.

The order applies to regular army soldiers, active-duty army reservists, and cadets. The only exceptions are those who have approved or pending vaccination exemption requests, the Army said.

Personnel whose requests for exemption on medical or religious grounds have been rejected can appeal that decision, but will have just seven days from the final refusal to either begin a vaccination regimen or face dismissal from service.

Energy-rich countries from Qatar to Azerbaijan have all pledged emergency gas supplies to Europe, but the region is quickly figuring out it can't replace top supplier Russia.

Ongoing tensions over Ukraine and the threat of a potential conflict interrupting energy flows to Europe have overshadowed the continent's gas market in recent weeks, causing volatile price swings. War could interfere with the massive volumes that Russia sends to the continent, about a third of which come through Ukraine.

To mitigate the risk of supply disruption, the European Union is speaking with major producers, seeking partnerships and even potential fuel swaps with Asia, where the market is twice the size of the bloc's. Recent arrivals of liquefied natural gas have helped to ease tightness, as has mild weather, but Europe relies on Russia for more than a third of the gas it uses, and sourcing that fuel from elsewhere could spread the crisis to other regions.

Western countries have refused concessions amid a tense standoff with Russia, newspaper claims

Washington and NATO have formally rejected Russia's key demands for assurances that the US-led military bloc will not expand closer towards its borders, leaked correspondence reportedly shows.

According to documents seen by Spanish daily El Pais and published on Wednesday morning, Moscow's calls for a written guarantee that Ukraine will not be admitted as a member of NATO were dismissed following several rounds of talks between Russian and Western diplomats.

However, officials say in the response, they remain open to dialogue and have offered some areas of possible cooperation. The written reply to Moscow's December proposals largely mirror what Western officials have said publicly during the tense standoff in Europe.

The Year of the Black Water Tiger will start, for all practical purposes, with a Beijing bang this Friday, as Presidents Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, after a live meeting before the initial ceremony of the Winter Olympics, will issue a joint statement on international relations.

That will represent a crucial move in the Eurasia vs. NATOstan chessboard, as the Anglo-American axis is increasingly bogged down in Desperation Row: after all, "Russian aggression" stubbornly refuses to materialize.

After an interminable wait arguably due to the lack of functionaries properly equipped to write an intelligible letter, the US/NATO combo finally concocted a predictable, jargon-drenched bureaucratese non-response "response" to the Russian demands of security guarantees.

The contents were leaked to a Spanish newspaper, a full member of NATOstan media. The leaker, according to Brussels sources, may be in Kiev by now. The Pentagon, in damage control mode, rushed to assert, "We didn't do it". The State Dept. said, "it's authentic."

Even before the leak of the non-response "response", Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was forced to send messages to all NATO foreign ministers, including US Secretary Blinken, asking how they understand the principle of indivisibility of security - if they actually do.

Lavrov was extremely specific: "I am referring to our demands that everyone faithfully implement the agreements on the indivisibility of security that were reached within the OSCE in 1999 in Istanbul and in 2010 in Astana. These agreements provide not only for the freedom to choose alliances, but also make this freedom conditional on the need to avoid any steps that will strengthen the security of any state at the expense of infringing on the security of others."

Lavrov hit the heart of the matter when he stressed, "our Western colleagues are not simply trying to ignore this key principle of international law agreed in the Euro-Atlantic space, but to completely forget it."

Lavrov also made it very clear "we will not allow this topic to be 'wrapped up'. We will insist on a honest conversation and an explanation of why the West does not want to fulfill its obligations at all or exclusively, selectively, and in its favor."

Crucially, China fully supports Russian demands for security guarantees in Europe, and fully agrees that the security of one state cannot be ensured by inflicting damage on another state.

This is as serious as it gets: the US/NATO combo are bent on smashing two crucial treaties that directly concern European security, and they think they can get away with it because there is less than zero discussion about the content and its implications across NATOstan media.

Western public opinion remains absolutely clueless. The only narrative, hammered 24/7, is "Russian aggression" - by the way duly emphasized in NATO's non-response "response".