Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

Switzerland is No Longer Neutral

Published

1 year ago

7 minute read

From Armstrong Economics

By Martin Armstrong

“Neutral like Switzerland” can no longer be a saying as the Swiss government has announced it is joining the European Sky Shield Initiative (ESSI) to develop a shared missile defense system across Europe. Switzerland is neither an official member of the European Union nor a member of NATO. Yet, the nation forfeited its neutrality stance years ago as Swiss leaders continued to adopt globalist rules.

The ESSI was initially proposed by Germany in 2022 amid the Russia-Ukraine war. The program will integrate with NATO’s Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) to enhance Europe’s air defenses. The powers that be know war is on the horizon, but they are betting on most of Europe continuing to fight on the same team. Armament chief Urs Loher has signed the memorandum of understanding (MoU), officially making Switzerland the 15th nation to join this coalition.

Switzerland claims that the MoU does not force it into any binding obligation as the government may choose its level of involvement. The Swiss government also claims that it may withdraw from the ESSI if any member becomes involved in a war. “With its participation in the ESSI, Switzerland is increasing international opportunities for cooperation: ESSI enables better coordination of procurement projects, training and logistical aspects in the area of ground-based air defense,” the government noted in a statement. The initial project will protect Europe against medium-range missiles, but naturally, the plan is to accelerate this technology.

Switzerland lost its tax haven status years ago when it began offering up banking information to foreign governments. Switzerland completely capitulated its historic safe-haven status to the entire world. The country was born from a tax revolt against the Hapsburg dynasty in Austria. The tax collector made William Tell to shoot an apple off his son’s head with an arrow. Switzerland then remained neutral in war and religion, serving as a safe haven for those who would be religiously persecuted. All of that is now gone.

In 2015, the Swiss Senate passed a resolution to exchange ALL information on anyone who has any assets in Switzerland. They have surrendered their sovereignty to this worldwide effort to destroy the entire global economy because politicians can never run any government efficiently.

Of the nation’s three main sectors, the tertiary sector is the most important for the Swiss economy. It includes banking, insurance, and tourism, employing more than 75% of Switzerland’s workforce. Over a fifth of the working population makes up the secondary sector, i.e. industry, trade, and crafts. The machine, metal, watch, and textile industries play a significant role, as do the chemical and pharmaceutical industries, which rely heavily on imports and exports. By far, banking was a major sector at the top of the list.

The Swiss economy was built on its banking expertise and security. That is now gone in the age of hunting cash globally. Consequently, the economy of Switzerland lost its primary competitive advantage economically. Now it must develop industries that are competitive globally. It needs more than chocolate and Rolex watches.

Yet, we saw over COVID how tyrannical the Swiss government has become though countless regulations and threats to imprison any dissenters. They even outlawed singing in public in the name of COVID simply to see how far they push the masses. It comes as no surprise as the nation is part of the globalist agenda for the Great Reset and Agenda 2030. They toyed with the idea of imprisoning citizens for heating their homes in the name of climate change, as one example. Swiss authorities have utterly change the demographics of their country by permitting mass migration as the population surpassed 9 million for the first time in history.

Then, the Swiss government was eager to aid Europe’s proxy war in Ukraine and placed sanctions on Russia. “Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine is a serious violation of the most fundamental norms of international law and is without precedent in recent European history. Within the scope of its political room for manoeuvre, the Federal Council took this into account in its decision to join the EU sanctions,” the government stated. Is that neutrality? If someone loaded your enemy’s gun, would you consider that person to be neutral?

Switzerland continues to claim neutrality. “Neutrality is not set in stone; on the contrary, it is an instrument of foreign, security and also economic policy that must be adapted to the prevailing political climate. The Federal Council has in the past regularly examined and adapted its understanding of neutrality; for example, it did so through the neutrality report of 1993. The war in Ukraine is challenging the existing international and, above all, European security order,” states the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA).

Russia already sees that Switzerland is aligned with the West and rejected the nation’s offer to mediate peace talks in 2022. Switzerland has managed to maintain neutrality for 500 YEARS. The globalist neocons who infiltrated all government cabinets have compromised Switzerland and are stripping it of everything that once made it a great nation.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 9 hours ago

BBC uses ‘neutrality’ excuse to rebuke newscaster who objected to gender ideology

Agriculture / 10 hours ago

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s Bloodlust: Worshipping Policies While Ignoring Science

Energy / 12 hours ago

Thawing the freeze on oil and gas development in Treaty 8 territory

International

BBC uses ‘neutrality’ excuse to rebuke newscaster who objected to gender ideology

Published on November 8, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

Rebuking a female presenter for correcting an ideological script that says men can get pregnant isn’t ‘neutrality,’ by any stretch.

Imagine a society in which the state broadcaster demanded that the female hosts eliminate the word “women” in favor of “people” and rebuked them if their facial expressions betrayed any hit of protest on air.

Welcome to the United Kingdom in 2025. According to the BBC: “Martine Croxall broke rules over ‘pregnant people’ facial expression, BBC says.”

Martine Croxall, a BBC presenter, was introducing an interview about “research on groups most at risk during UK heatwaves,” and the teleprompter script she was reading live on BBC News Channel contained the phrase “pregnant people.”

Croxall visibly raised her eyebrows, and corrected in real-time: “Malcolm Mistry, who was involved in the research, says that the aged, pregnant people … women … and those with pre-existing health conditions need to take precautions.”

When Dr. Mistry, a professor, came on for the interview, she too referred to “pregnant women” rather than “pregnant people.”

Because a female presenter clearly objected to “women” being erased in favor of “people” for the ideological purpose of buttressing gender ideology, the BBC has now upheld “20 impartiality complaints” against Croxall. According to the BBC: “BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) said it considered her facial expression as she said this gave the ‘strong impression of expressing a personal view on a controversial matter.’”

READ: BBC rebukes newscaster for correcting ‘pregnant people’ with ‘women’ on air

In other words, as a woman, Croxall obviously objected to the implication that men can get pregnant. Croxall has a son and has thus been pregnant herself. But in our current clown world, the Executive Complaints Unit “said it considered Croxall’s facial expression laid it open to the interpretation that it ‘indicated a particular viewpoint in the controversies currently surrounding trans identity.’”

The totalitarian trans activists desperately trying to force society to play along with their delusions with force or coercion were behind the complaints, with the ECU reporting that Croxall’s facial expressions were “variously interpreted by complainants as showing disgust, ridicule, contempt, or exasperation.” In other words: Say your lines the way we gave them to you and look like you believe them, bigot.

The ECU was also concerned that those who, you know, disagree with the idea that men can get pregnant were also pleased by Croxall’s act of defiance, and that she received “congratulatory messages” on social media (including one from J.K. Rowling), which “together with the critical views expressed in the complaints to the BBC and elsewhere, tended to confirm the impression of her having expressed a personal view was widely shared across the spectrum of opinion on the issue.”

Clearly the BBC—which is desperately been trying to regain its reputation—is attempting to wave the fig leaf of “neutrality” in order to reestablish its previous bona fides. But rebuking a female presenter for correcting an ideological script and making a facial expression that appeared to indicate opposition to the idea that men can get pregnant isn’t “neutrality,” by any stretch.

Just a decade ago, no media outlet would have considered implementing gender ideology into their coverage as fact. Now presenters are expected to use fundamentally propagandistic language that frontloads the premises of activists while keeping a straight face as if both transgender ideology and observable biological reality are two perspectives deserving of equal respect and consideration.

Featured Image

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National Post, National Review, First Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton Spectator, Reformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

Continue Reading

International

Large US naval presence in Caribbean reveals increased interest in western security

Published on November 8, 2025

By

From The Center Square

By 

As the number of suspected narcotic transport boats destroyed by the U.S. military grows, so does the number of naval vessels in the Caribbean.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced on social media Thursday evening that U.S. forces carried out their 17th strike on alleged drug boats, killing three “male narco-terrorists” in the targeted operation.

President Donald Trump has made it clear that his administration’s intent to target narco-terrorists in the region to help curb the flow of drugs into the country.

Last month, it was announced that the newest and largest U.S. Navy Aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford, and its strike group would be transiting to the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility in the Caribbean.

Ahead of the Ford’s arrival, several naval ships are already in the region, including the USS Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group, according to the U.S. Naval Institute—the Iwo Jima, a Wasp-class amphibious ship, among the larger classes of ships in the Navy.

The Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group deployed in August, carrying over 4,500 sailors and Marines, according to the Department of War. The group includes the Iwo Jima, USS Fort Lauderdale, USS San Antonio, and the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit.

As of early this week, the USNI reported that, in addition to the group, three Navy guided-missile destroyers are operating in the Caribbean, including the USS Jason Dunham, USS Gravely, and USS Stockdale. In addition, USNI reported the USS Lake Erie (CG-70) and the USS Wichita (LCS-13) are operating in the Caribbean.

The buildup of navy ships in the region points to the administration’s commitment to prioritizing targeting narco-terrorists. Still, it could also signal the U.S. focusing on potential adversarial threats in Latin America.

Hegseth told The Center Square last month at an event in the White House that the Department of War is keeping its eyes on adversaries in the region after TCS asked the secretary and the president if they had plans to expand U.S. Naval operations in Puerto Rico, specifically Roosevelt Roads, a Navy base closed in 2004.

“We’re familiar with the location that you’re referring to, and we will make sure that we’re properly placed in order to deal with the contingency we’re dealing with there, and also any ways in which other countries would attempt to be involved also, so we can walk and chew gum. We’re definitely keeping our eyes on near peer adversaries at the same time,” Hegseth told TCS.

The secretary’s response cemented the administration’s “America first” policy, which is beginning to shift focus to its “own backyard.”

“But we think sending a message on these cartels, these narco-terrorists, is an important, important inside our hemisphere, which for far too long other presidents, as the president pointed out, they’ve ignored our own backyard and allowed other countries to increase their influence here, which only threatens the American people. We’re changing that,” Hegseth concluded.

The naval buildup in the region could highlight concerns in recent years that Venezuela, under the dictatorship of socialist Nicolas Maduro, has aligned the country with American adversaries, such as Russia, China and Iran.

In 2022, Venezuela hosted military drills with countries including Russia, China and Iran.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies warns that Latin America is ripe for U.S. adversarial influences.

“While Western observers have focused their attention on joint connivances of Russia and Iran in Eastern Europe, Eurasia, and the Middle East, where Russo-Iranian military-security operations directly affect U.S. and European interests, the Western Hemisphere is not isolated from the two countries’ quests for global influence. In fact, in many ways it is an essential piece of the puzzle. First, both Iran and Russia perceive Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) as a fertile ground for exploiting popular resentment vis-à-vis the United States and the ‘collective West,’ which they – rather successfully – harness to advance their view of a multipolar world,” according to CSIS.

The group cites sanctions from the West, which are growing in large part due to Russia’s ongoing offensive in Ukraine.

“Second, LAC partners could prove instrumental in offsetting the impacts of Western sanctions against Moscow and Tehran by mitigating their diplomatic and economic isolation. Finally, certain LAC countries could also serve as less scrutinized partners for further developing Russo-Iranian warfare capabilities or cooperation, sheltering mercenaries or militias – such as Hezbollah – and acting as vectors for ‘horizontal escalation’ of conflicts in which Russia and Iran are currently involved,” the group added.

Continue Reading

Trending

X