Trust WHO?

This documentary by Lilian Franck shines a light on how industry lobbies have infiltrated the World Health Organization and asks whether the organisation can be trusted to keep the public healthy. They WHO officials have to depend on scientists, and these scientists are supplied by the WTO’s sponsors [i.e. there is a clear and growing conflict of interest involved]. Many of these scientists, who also serve as salesmen, gave advice and made decisions that benefited the pharmaceutical industry. They even went so far as to change the criteria of what constitutes a pandemic.

“At the time of the swine flu outbreak, I was WHO general-secretary in the Department of Public Health, Intellectual Property and Medication. Nobody there was afraid,” says German Velasquez, who currently works with the Green Climate Fund (GCF). “I didn’t know anyone at the WHO who had himself vaccinated, including the director-general, who told journalists in response to their questions that she hadn’t had time but would get herself vaccinated later.”

It’s precisely this type of corruption, combined with arrogance, that feeds skepticism among the public when it comes to the opinions of so-called experts. To those excusing themselves and the WTO’s self-serving actions by invoking the transparency aspect of funding, that doesn’t solve anything and it doesn’t prove they are acting in good faith. Make time to watch this documentary, it’s well worth your time.

Trump thinks we’re all Fools

by Serban V.C. Enache

On the third day of his visit to Japan, Trump publicly insulted the intelligence of his global audience. He said he’s not looking to hurt Iran at all; that he wants the Iranians to say no to nuclear weapons, because the world has enough problems with nuclear weapons – and that he isn’t seeking regime change in Iran. Trump said Iran has tremendous economic potential and that he is willing to let that country achieve its potential if they come to the negotiating table. Utter hogwash!

Let’s take a brief lesson in recent history. Ahead of his term, during the election campaign, wasn’t Trump worried that the USA’s nuclear arsenal was obsolete? Wasn’t he afraid that the nukes won’t go off if the Government launched them? Didn’t he say he wants the US to have more and better nukes? Yes, he did. Did he also speak favorably of nuclear proliferation, if that happened on the USA’s terms? Yes, back during the campaign, he invoked Japan and South Korea as potential candidates; and just recently he entertained the notion of Saudi Arabia developing its own nuclear program. What did that disgusting wretch, Mike Pompeo say about the Iranian Government? Well, he said plenty of nasty things, but the word “thugs” was given particular airtime. What does Pompeo say about the Saudi Government, after Khashoggi’s barbaric assassination and after the butchery displayed by that same Government with the recent executions of dissenters, including the 16 year old boy that was crucified? What about the siege of Yemen? Crickets? Yeah, that’s what I thought too.

Now let’s talk about nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Israel is the single actor in the region which has nuclear weapons. Israel is not even a signatory of the non-proliferation treaty. Iran’s leadership repeatedly said that it doesn’t seek to develop atomic weapons and that it desires the Middle East to be a region free of such weapons. The regime in Teheran has been following the agreement struck with the Obama administration in 2015. The International Atomic Energy Agency [the IAEA] has repeatedly confirmed that Iran is compliant with the nuclear deal’s terms. But let’s say that Iran wished to follow the US in abandoning the accord. Isn’t it hypocritical for Washington to decide which countries can and can’t have nukes? Who is Trump to decide which countries are free to better themselves [economically] and which are forbidden to? From what moral law does such a view stem, because it certainly doesn’t spring from International Law, or from Natural Law [see Vattel, Grotius & others]. I suppose it springs from the [garbage] idea that the United States is god’s chosen country, while the rest of the world’s nations are composed of inferior races. I suppose that’s what many so-called Christians in the US believe; but their god sounds a lot like the barbaric and genocidal Yahweh, and not like Jesus Christ. Then again, the USA is a place full of fake Christians that – since 1776 – has been at peace for less than 20 years. The rest of the time it’s been engaged in some type of military conflict, at home and or abroad.

Trump’s claim that he isn’t looking to hurt Iran at all is absolutely ridiculous, given his Government’s belligerent statements [from press conferences to posts on social media], military operations, and financial sanctions – going so far to threaten any other country willing to do commerce with Iran with the same belligerent actions. The freezing of a country’s foreign assets and trade sanctions is war by other means and it too produces plenty of victims. Trump’s sanctions against Venezuela, initiated in August 2017, are responsible for tens of thousands of deaths in that country. The strong-arm tactic is absolutely about HURTING the other side, to squeeze concessions out of him. It has nothing to do with bargaining in good faith [positive sum outcomes for all].

I think not even Trump’s base believes him anymore when it comes to foreign interventionism. Trump has done so many 180 degree turns on this subject [and others], that one would have to be an utter fool to believe he’s adamant about anything. And that’s precisely what Trump is gambling on; the desire of the American public to remain willfully ignorant. He’s gambling on the larger hatred for the liberals and the SJWs among republicans and independents, to – in their eyes – outweigh his own broken promises and policy failures. If that happens, and it likely will, Trump and his neocons and the Deep State and all the rent-seekers and usurers and war profiteers behind them will get another term, another chance to rob and destroy nations.

The Non-Zionist One State Solution

Ian Lustick, professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania and specialist on the modern history of the Middle East, explains why the two state solution is a hollow and deceitful promise. Just like none of the North’s political elites envisioned a multi-racial democracy in the United States after the civil war [as opposed to a White Christian republic], the Israeli elites aren’t contemplating a multi-racial and secular democracy [Israel-Palestine] either. However, generational struggles [primarily at grassroots level] paved the way for such a change in the US, and that will be or should be the future of Israel and the de facto annexed territories of Gaza and the West Bank. However, Lustick doesn’t see such a fundamental change any time soon, and goes on to make a couple of observations on the region’s geopolitical situation, emphasizing the US-Israeli conflict with Iran and the possibility of a nuclear-free region. Ian Lustick is interviewed by RT’s Oksana Boyko. Watch the video here!

The Duran: Bolton on the way out?

Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris discuss President Trump’s relationship with his national security adviser John Bolton. After the embarrassing failure of the recent US-backed coup in Venezuela, rumor has it that Trump grows frustrated with Bolton’s work. His uber-hawkish worldview and lust for US-led military interventions is at odds with Trump’s core campaign pledge to keep the United States out of costly foreign entanglements. Before becoming POTUS, Trump consistently called for an end to the wars in Afghanistan and Syria.

My comment: Previous US presidents have criticized hawkish foreign policy, especially during political campaigns, and once they got into office, they all did 180 degree turns on that subject. Donald Trump is by no means different from the likes of Obama, Bush Jr, Kennedy, Nixon, Eisenhower and others.

Trump is a genius political whore. He is one of the best salesmen out there, at least for the American political market. Even if Bolton gets fired, or steps down at Trump’s request, another war hawk is going to take his place. During the electoral campaign [in the Trump vs Hillary confines], I actually believed Trump might be the lesser evil, but since then, I’ve come to the conclusion that the lesser evil is a myth… Just like his predecessors, Trump faithfully serves the interests of usurers, rent-seekers, and war profiteers. He is the anti-PC version of Globalism.

I’m certain the White House will soon give the green light in Venezuela for professional mercenaries to go in and attempt a better coup d’etat. Such a move ensures no guarantees of success, but it will certainly be a prolonged and bloody operation – on top of the West’s economic bleeding of Venezuela.

In the geopolitics of empire, if you can’t have it [the treasure], no one can. So if the Russian and Chinese military aid to Maduro won’t suffice, Venezuela may very well face a civil war. As long as European political elites dance to Washington’s tune [making the US hawks and the Deep State bolder], things will only get worse for those countries blacklisted by the West.

Follow the Duran website and youtube channel for future videos and great discussions. If you like their content and are able to spare a few bucks, visit their Patreon page to show your support.

Thoughts on Victory Day: Stalin Tempted Hitler

by Diego Ramiro Lattes & Serban V.C. Enache

It was Stalin’s fault for the Winter War AND the Nazi invasion [at least, for why Germany invaded when it did]. The Red Army was demoralized and suffered massive losses. Things might have gone differently if Stalin had left Finland alone. It was the [Soviet] Winter War’s failure that tempted Hitler to invade. Imagine the intelligence reports:
“Confidence in the leadership waning after the war. Soviet leadership unity is at an all time low. Talks of a coup spoken in whispers…”
“Stalin’s credibility also at all time low. Former supporters critiquing his decision to invade Finland almost openly.”
“Red Army morale is terrible. Losses compounded by recent purge from years back, disorganization levels high, etc.”

But at least Stalin learned something from the USSR’s shameful defeat at the hands of the brave Fins. [Finland’s 300,000–340,000 soldiers, 32 tanks, 114 aircraft vs Soviet Union’s 425,000–760,000 soldiers, 2,514–6,541 tanks, and 3,880 aircraft]. The war’s conclusion? 70,000 total casualties [human & material] for Finland and 321,000–381,000 total casualties [human & material] for the Soviets.

Stalin used the country’s geography and climate to his advantage, allowing the Nazis to move in, instead of mounting resistance from the beginning. And, of course, he benefited from raw materials and military supplies coming in from Britain and the US, without which the USSR would have collapsed.

The Red Army men also committed mass rapes in their path [more than 1.4 million cases in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia alone, children included], while the Soviet intelligentsia imprisoned and killed political dissidents, even those who had struggled against Nazi occupation.

It’s important not to romanticize the rule of Joseph Stalin and the ideology of Bolshevism – whether in Stalinist form, Leninist form, or Trotskyism [in the memory of Fanny Kaplan, Yes to Socialism, NO to Bolshevism], but to remember the many sacrifices and tragedies of all those countries involved in the 2nd Great War – and to always remember it was ‘great’ for all the wrong reasons, reasons inimical to a Humanity that’s morally fit to survive.