A non-profit news blog, focused on providing independent journalism.

Thursday, 20 November 2014

SOTT Exclusive: Send in the troops? Only if ISIS gets hold of a nuclear weapon

© Unknown

What would it take for the U.S. government and its caliphate of psychopaths to deploy ground troops to "fight" ISIS? Recent statements by Obama give us a clue:

President Obama has been unwavering and definitive in declaring he will not deploy U.S. ground troops into combat to fight ISIS militants. Period.

But for the first time since the start of then anti-ISIS offensive dubbed Operation Inherent Resolve, the president volunteered a scenario which he said would change his mind.

"If we discovered that [ISIS] had gotten possession of a nuclear weapon, and we had to run an operation to get it out of their hands, then, yes," the president told reporters at a news conference in Brisbane, Australia, on Sunday. "I would order it."

It seems, however, that Obama doesn't need the threat of a jihadi with a nuke to justify sending more troops to Iraq and Syria, because he recently authorized the deployment of an additional 1,500 troops to Iraq. U.S. Navy Rear Admiral John Kirby recently said:

the troops would be serving in non-combat roles by joining the existing advise-and-assist mission and by initiating a comprehensive training effort for Iraqi-Kurdish forces.

We know that ISIS is largely a creation of the U.S., and that the U.S. government has been helping ISIS, both directly and indirectly, by pretending to arm the 'moderate rebels' who have an unfortunate tendency to hand their weapons over to ISIS when the moderate rebels are routed by US airstrikes. So the real reason for these "advise-and-assist missions" seems to be to ensure that ISIS remains well-equipped with the latest weaponry and that they continue on the course set for them by Washington.

U.S. keeps funding terrorists: ISIS just captured weapons and bases from the mythical 'moderate rebels'

We've repeatedly noted that giving arms to the "moderate" Syrian rebels is idiotic ... as they'll just end up in the hands of the Islamic State.

Even the CIA told Obama that this strategy wouldn't work.

So we're shocked - shocked! - that one of the biggest "moderate" rebel groups backed and armed by the U.S. has just been wiped out ... and all of their arms and bases taken by ISIS.

The U.S. has also been airdropping weapons to ISIS, "by mistake", of course..

US Helping ISIS? One Accidental Airdrop vs Billions in Covert Aid

The Washington Post would report that the United States military accidentally dropped by air at least one pallet of weapons and supplies that ended up in the hands of the so-called "Islamic State" or ISIS.

While the US claims it has "accidentally" allowed weapons to fall into the hands of ISIS terrorists, in reality, the US has been arming, funding, and aiding ISIS and its terrorist affiliates either directly or through Saudi, Qatari, Jordanian, or Turkish proxies since at least 2011.

Judging by the actions of the U.S. government so far, if ISIS somehow does manage to get their hands on a nuclear weapon, we can be fairly certain that it will arrive ''. After all, if an honest Imperial power is going to achieve its plans for the Middle East they have to be prepared to ramp up the phony 'terror threat' to the absolute max.


Ante Sarlija (Profile)

Born and raised in Croatia, Ante joined the SOTT editorial team in 2014. He is also a part of the Croatian Quantum Future Group translation team. In his spare time he enjoys reading and researching.

137 shots by 13 cops plus two dead unarmed civilians equals taxpayers on the hook for $3 million

cleaveland police shooting

© Unknown

Cleveland, Ohio - Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams were driving near downtown Cleveland on November 29, 2012, when Russell's car backfired. Police in the area apparently mistook the sound for gunfire and gave chase.

What took place next was a stunning car chase that involved over 60 police cruisers and lasted almost a half hour.

It's unclear exactly why Russell didn't pull over, but what is clear is that when the chase ended, Russell and Williams were killed in a hail of gunfire after 13 officers unloaded 137 rounds into the vehicle in an elementary school parking lot.

Russell, the driver, was shot 23 times. Williams was shot 24 times while sitting in the front passenger seat. Neither one of the victims were armed, which was confirmed after no weapons were found in the bullet riddled vehicle.

Cleveland police officer Michael Brelo is charged with two counts of voluntary manslaughter, he was released on a $10,000 dollar bond. Brelo is accused of firing 49 of the 137 shots. Randolph Daley, Michael Donegan, Patricia Coleman, Jason Edens and Paul Wilson were all charged with misdemeanor dereliction of duty.

Brelo unloaded 49 shots, the last 15 as he stood on the hood of Russell's car firing through the windshield well after the chase was over and the other officers on the scene had stopped firing. The actions of Brelo that day are nothing short of sociopathic.

Of course police union officials have attempted to denigrate the murder victims by calling them criminals and labeling the incident as a "good shoot."

While the majority of the officers involved only got a slap on the wrist, it's heartening to see that Bralo is being held accountable for his actions.

Prosecutor Tim McGinty put things into perspective when he stated:

"Officers decided to ignore their department's rules on November 29, 2012. The result was a protracted high-speed chase that put the public and officers in danger, the death of two unarmed people - one a totally innocent passenger - and a circular firing squad that nearly killed several of their own."

The City of Cleveland and its taxpayers will now be paying out a settlement of $3 million dollars to the victims of this violent police killing.

Police conduct during the chase sparked a federal investigation of the Cleveland police, by the Department of Justice, and also helped to secure the settlement for the victim's families.

Attorneys for the families released a statement on Monday:

"The families eagerly await the results of the ongoing civil rights investigation of the Cleveland Police by the United States Department of Justice. They are hopeful that meaningful reforms regarding use of force and officer accountability will follow."

The police conduct was so egregious that a report by the Ohio Attorney General's Office found that officers had the car partially surrounded and that officers were actually firing in the direction of each other as they let the bullets fly that day.

It baffles the mind that officers would be so hopped up on fear and adrenaline that not only would they let 137 rounds fly at unarmed civilians, but that they would actually be cross firing at one another.

Obviously all training went out the window and these cops were running on authoritarian autopilot. A very dangerous situation is created for everyone when law enforcement disregards their protocols and training, and they begin to simply run off of emotion as is all too often the case.

The joint statement released by attorneys representing the families went on to say:

"This shooting is one of the worst examples of police misconduct in American history. This settlement sends the clearest signal yet that real reform must be achieved inside the Cleveland Police Department."

Amazingly enough, this incident is not isolated. In May of this year, in South Florida, 23 overzealous police officers fired 377 bullets at two men with 0 Guns, killing both men and actually wounding two of their own in the shenanigans.

Dutch government refuses to reveal ‘secret deal’ into MH17 crash probe

The Dutch government has refused to reveal details of a secret pact between members of the Joint Investigation Team examining the downed Flight MH17. If the participants, including Ukraine, don’t want information to be released, it will be kept secret.

The respected Dutch publication Elsevier made a request to the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice under the Freedom of Information Act to disclose the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) agreement, along with 16 other documents. The JIT consists of four countries - the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Ukraine - who are carrying out an investigation into the MH17 disaster, but not Malaysia. Malaysian Airlines, who operated the flight, has been criticized for flying through a war zone.

Part of the agreement between the four countries and the Dutch Public Prosecution Service, ensures that all these parties have the right to secrecy. This means that if any of the countries involved believe that some of the evidence may be damaging to them, they have the right to keep this secret.

“Of course [it is] an incredible situation: how can Ukraine, one of the two suspected parties, ever be offered such an agreement?†Dutch citizen Jan Fluitketel wrote in the newspaper Malaysia Today.

Despite the air crash taking place on July 17 in Eastern Ukraine, very little information has been released about any potential causes. However, rather than give the public a little insight into the investigation, the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice is more worried about saving face among the members of the investigation.

"I believe that this interest [international relations] is of greater importance than making the information public, as it is a unique investigation into an extremely serious event," the Ministry added, according to Elsevier.

Other reasons given for the request being denied included protecting investigation techniques and tactics as well as naming the names of officials who are taking part in the investigation. The Ministry said it would be a breach of privacy if they were revealed. “If the information was to be released then sensitive information would be passed between states and organizations, which would perhaps they would be less likely to share such information in the future,†said the Ministry of Security and Justice.

Dutch MP Pieter Omtzigt, who is a member of the Christian Democratic Party, has made several requests for the information to be released to the public.

“We do not know what the Netherlands has committed itself to. The government neither published the agreement when we asked for it, nor did it show it to parliament,†he said in reaction to the ministry’s decision. “It is perfectly normal that the Netherlands cooperate with other countries in this complex investigation. Yet they even kept the existence of the agreement secret a first and that was unnecessary."

Journalists walk behind parts of the Malaysia Airlines plane Flight MH17 as Dutch investigators (unseen) arrive near at the crash site near the Grabove village in eastern Ukraine on November 11, 2014 (AFP Photo)

Malaysia is the only country to have directly negotiated with the anti-Kiev militias in the East of Ukraine, while the country’s Ambassador to the Netherlands said he was unhappy that Malaysia had not been included within the JIT. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte flew to Kuala Lumpur on November 5, but Malaysia says it still did not receive an invitation to join.

"We must first be included in the JIT, otherwise it would be hard for us to cooperate in the investigation. The parties inside the investigation must include us in the team, right now we are just a participant," said the Malaysian Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday, which was reported by the New Straits Times.

A preliminary report by the Dutch Safety Board, which was released September said the MH17 crash was a result of structural damage caused by a large number of high-energy objects that struck the Boeing from the outside.

Dutch investigators added that “there are no indications†that the tragedy was triggered “by a technical fault or by actions of the crew.â€

Obama issues executive order on immigration reform

U.S. President Barack Obama

© Reuters/Jason Reed

President Barack Obama announced an executive order on immigration reform Thursday, which he will sign on Friday. The actions will affect up to 5 million undocumented immigrants in the US, many of whom are the parents or spouses of legal residents.

Obama announced his plan for unilateral action on immigration via a prime-time address from the White House. He will sign the executive order during a rally in Las Vegas on Friday. Because the plan will not be passed by Congress, it could also be easily reversed by a new president after Obama's term runs out in just over two years.

The president called his actions "a commonsense middle ground approach," as he continued to push Congress to pass a comprehensive bill reforming the country's immigration system. Under the terms of his order, undocumented immigrants who have lived in the US for five years or more, and are parents of American citizens or lawful residents, will be subjected to criminal and national security background checks. Once these are completed, they can pay taxes and defer deportation for three years at a time.

The US will also increase security at the borders and focus deportation efforts on criminals and potential security threats rather than families.

"Mass amnesty would be unfair. Mass deportation would be both impossible and contrary to our character," Obama said in his remarks. "If you meet the criteria, you can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. If you're a criminal, you'll be deported. If you plan to enter the US illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up."

Obama also defended his decision to issue an executive order against Republicans and those who claim he is overreaching, arguing that every Republican and Democratic president in the last 50 years has used his authority similarly.

"To those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill," he said.

Already, the president's plan has come under fire from conservatives. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) criticized Obama ahead of his speech, saying he is acting like "an emperor."

"Instead of working together to fix our broken immigration system, the president says he's acting on his own," he said in a video statement. "That is just not how our democracy works."

The plan will include a temporary reprieve from deportation for as many as 5 million undocumented immigrants ‒ which includes parents and spouses of US citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for at least five years. Those people may also be made eligible for work permits, but will not have a path to citizenship. Officials said the eligible immigrants will not be entitled to federal benefits ‒ including health care tax credits, food stamps, Medicaid coverage or other need-based federal programs ‒ under Obama's plan.

The plan will cover parents of legal residents, but not the parents who brought their children to the US illegally. In 2012, Obama authorized the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals via executive action, which delayed deportation for the young undocumented immigrants, often referred to as DREAMers. The actions will create a similar program for undocumented parents of children who are in the country legally. Expansions include raising the eligibility age beyond the current limit of 30 and allowing more recent arrivals (those who came after 2007) to apply, among other things.

"These people - our neighbors, our classmates, our friends - they did not come here in search of a free ride or an easy life," Obama said Thursday. "They came to work, and study, and serve in our military, and above all, contribute to America's success."

"Whether our forebears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here only because this country welcomed them in, and taught them that to be an American is about something more than what we look like, or what our last names are, or how we worship. What makes us Americans is our shared commitment to an ideal - that all of us are created equal, and all of us have the chance to make of our lives what we will."

Notably, visas for migrant farm workers will not be expanded, reportedly over concerns about justifying the way that group would be treated compared to other laborers, like construction workers.

Obama's orders will make up to 4 million undocumented immigrants eligible for temporary protective status and provide relief to another 1 million through other means, a senior Democrat familiar with the plans told the . There are roughly 11 million illegal immigrants in the US currently.

The president's plan also includes a program to facilitate visas for people who invest in the United States, as well as for those who pursue degrees in the so-called STEM fields of science, technology, engineering and math.

It will also modify federal immigrant detention procedures. Concerns were raised by immigrant rights activists over the summer, after current facilities were overwhelmed by an influx of tens of thousands of unaccompanied minor children and families with children illegally entering the country.

The actions also include steps to further secure the United States' border with Mexico, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said at a Wednesday appearance at the National Press Club. The administration's lawyers have concluded that the president can legally issue these executive actions, despite intense opposition from Republicans, he noted.

"Legislative action is always preferable," Johnson said. "But we have waited for Congress to act, and the Congress has not acted. The president has waited."

Last Wednesday, following the Republican Party's takeover of the US Senate, Obama warned that he would take whatever lawful actions he feels are necessary to "improve the function of our immigration system," following years of unsuccessful efforts from Congress to accomplish as much on its own. The White House says that the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has previously pushed back on efforts from Democratic lawmakers to introduce immigration reform, and the results of November's midterm elections will soon see to it that the GOP has a majority in the Senate as well next session. Republicans have threatened to impeach the president over the immigration executive actions.

By taking executive action, it is likely that Obama will derail any opportunities to cooperate with the GOP majority in Congress during the rest of his term, including on bipartisan initiatives like tax reform, among other issues.

However, he urged Congress not to let disagreements over immigration to prohibit them from moving forward on other issues.

"I want to work with both parties to pass a more permanent legislative solution," he added. "And the day I sign that bill into law, the actions I take will no longer be necessary."

"Meanwhile, don't let a disagreement over a single issue be a dealbreaker on every issue. That's not how our democracy works, and Congress certainly shouldn't shut down our government again just because we disagree on this. Americans are tired of gridlock. What our country needs from us right now is a common purpose - a higher purpose."

Psychopathic Israel: relentlessly brutalizing millions of Palestinians for decades


Israeli policy is longstanding. Reflecting anti-Palestinian state terror. Institutionalized racism writ large. Vicious repression.

Brutalizing Muslims for not being Jews. Enforcing militarized occupation harshness. Denying Palestinians rights everyone deserves.

According to Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) director Jeff Halper:

"...(T)he 'Zionist answer' to the downward cycle of senseless violence in which Jerusalem finds itself" includes:

"house demolitions, mass arrests, revoking the 'residency' of native-born Jerusalemites, closing Palestinian neighborhoods with concrete blocks, arming Israeli Jewish vigilantes and cheap shots at the last person who believes in a two-state solution, Abu Mazen (Abbas)."

"Everything, that is, except an end to occupation and a just political solution."

"This is what happens when a powerful country forgoes any effort to address the grievances of a people under its control and descends into raw oppression."

Netanyahu lied. He's a serial liar. Everything he says lacks credibility. Big Lies substitute. Claiming Israel locked in "the grip of a terrorist onslaught."

Palestinians face brutalizing Israeli state terror. Police state barbarism writ large. Provoking justifiable Palestinian anger.

Inciting violence. Able to boil over uncontrollably any time. Perhaps into a third intifada. Or pretext for Israeli all-out war on millions of Palestinians.

Risking carnage and displacement matching Israel's so-called War of Independence. Western leaders able to intervene responsibly turn a blind eye. Ignore Israel's worst crimes.

Palestinians isolated on their own. Defenseless against Israel's onslaught. Its killing machine.

Palestinian human rights group Al Haq reported PA forces abusing civilians. Instead of defending them against Israeli state terror.

Targeting peaceful protestors. Demonstrating against IDF and police brutality.

Longtime Israeli collaborator Mahmoud Abbas unleashing PA forces against his own people. Imad Addin Jamal Amro one of many victims.

After Friday, November 7 prayers. Accosting him. Beating him viciously. Until no longer able to stand. Preventing bystanders from helping him.

Arresting him. Beating him severely at Preventive Security headquarters. An officer shouting "die, die." Accusing him of offenses he didn't commit.

Al Haq expressing outrage. Citing the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Articles 7, 9 and 14 prohibiting arbitrary arrests and mistreatment.

Article 19 affirming freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Without interference. Prohibiting coercing practices denying them.

Regardless of views. Respecting those of others. In writing, print or orally.

Article 20 prohibiting incitement, discrimination, hostility, violence, and state-sponsored propaganda for war.

Article 21 affirming the right of peaceful assembly. Prohibiting any restrictions.

Article 19 of Palestinian Basic Law affirming free expression rights. Mandating criminal punishment for violators.

Article 11 affirming personal freedom as a natural right. Article 13 stating "no person shall be subject to any duress or torture, and that detainees should receive proper treatment."

Israel violates ICCPR and other human rights laws unaccountably. So do PA forces against their own people.

It bears repeating. Abbas is a longtime Israeli collaborator. Abusing his own people for special benefits he derives.

According to an unnamed PA source, he ordered no public discussions of Tuesday's synagogue attack.

Canceling media appearances. Issuing a statement following John Kerry saying:

"The Palestinian leadership must condemn this and they must begin to take serious steps to restrain any kind of incitement."

Abbas then "condemn(ing) the killings of worshipers at the synagogue in Jerusalem and condemn(ing) acts of violence no matter their source."

Equating Tuesday's incident with terrorism. Ignoring Kerry saying:

"To have this kind of act, which is a pure result of incitement, of calls for 'days of rage,' of just irresponsibility, is unacceptable."

Kerry turning a blind eye to daily Israeli state terror. Brutalizing millions of Palestinians.

Murdering them. Torturing them. Including young children.

Incarcerating thousands in gulag prison hell. Unaccountably. For demanding fundamental democratic freedoms.

Dominating Palestinians through repressive control. Kafkaesque and then some.

Physical control through land theft. Home demolitions. Settlements. Checkpoints. Ghettoization. Agricultural restrictions.

Permit permission for virtually everything. Military zones. Jews only development. Resource theft.

Borders, air space and offshore waters control. Jews only public spaces. Separation Wall repression. Harassment and intimidation.

Diaspora Palestinians prevented from returning. Claiming Jerusalem as Israel's exclusive capital.

Gazans locked in the world's largest open-air prison. Bureaucratic/legal/militarized control. Including hundreds of restrictive policies.

Covering virtual all aspects of Palestinian life. Imposing politically motivated conditions virtually impossible to live with. Including:

allowable home and village construction;

building permit restrictions;

home demolitions for any reason or none at all;

land expropriation designated for Israeli "public purposes;"

agricultural restrictions;

crop destruction for violations;

licensing and inspection of Palestinian businesses;

closures anywhere, any time, for any reason; and

movement and travel restrictions within and outside Israel and Occupied Territories.

Denying fundamental international law guaranteeing human and civil rights. Brazenly ignoring dozens of UN resolutions. Going back .

Condemning or censuring Israeli lawlessness. Deploring its actions. Demanding state-sponsored repression end.

Israel flaunts rule of law principles with impunity. Arrogating to itself the right to do what it damn pleases.

Law or no law. Because Western leaders able to change things do nothing. Turning a blind eye to Israel's worst crimes.

Washington partnering through military aid. Political support. Mindless of fundamental Palestinian rights. Horrific Israeli mistreatment.

Using violence. Other forms of repression for political, economic and social control.

Flagrantly violating core international humanitarian and human rights laws. Police state harshness writ large.

In November alone, lawlessly arresting nearly 400 Palestinians. Including young children. In largely pre-dawn raids,

In West Bank and East Jerusalem communities. Around two dozen detained on Thursday alone. Collective punishment writ large. Mass arrests and detentions continue.

Following Operation Protective Edge. Premeditated naked aggression. Murdering over 2,200 Palestinians. Injuring about 11,000 more.

Affecting hundreds of young children, women, the elderly and infirm. Unrelated to Hamas rockets. Or Israeli national security.

Launched to prevent Palestinian self-determination. Maintain occupation harshness.

Continue Gaza's blockade. Sabotage Fatah/Hamas unity. Facilitate longstanding Israeli slow-motion genocide.

Get away with mass murder and then some. Violate international law with impunity.

Academically lynched University of Illinois Professor Steven Salaita calling Israel the only nation able to murder hundreds of Palestinian children and claim victimization.

Western leaders able to make a difference turning a blind eye. Horrific Palestinian suffering continues.

Widespread Israeli crackdowns followed Tuesday's synagogue incident. Responding to longstanding Palestinian mistreatment.

Especially vicious under Netanyahu. Exceeding the worst of Sharonian evil.

Including extremist settler violence. Notably against children. At play. To and from school. Running errands for parents.

Targeting Palestinian communities. Farmers in fields. Committing vandalism. Mistreatment. At times murder. Unaccountably.

Israeli security forces able to intervene responsibly do nothing. Facilitating wrongdoing.

B'Tselem calling Israeli punitive home demolitions "fundamentally wrong." Ineffective.

Contravening "basic moral standards." Punishing "people for the of misdeeds of others." Without just cause. Flagrantly violating human rights laws.

Following Tuesday's incident, Israeli security forces are everywhere. Harassing Palestinians. Intimidating them.

Ignoring settler provocations. Helicopters and drones monitor things overhead. Police violence against Palestinian women in Jerusalem increased.

Dozens of children arrested. Brutally interrogated. Detained without just cause.

Tuesday's incident a pretext for escalated Israeli repression. Its ambassador to Washington, Ron Dermer, equating Palestinian resisters with Nazis. Terrorists.

Ignoring decades of occupation harshness. Longstanding Israeli crimes of war and against humanity. Slow-motion genocide.

Dermer outrageously suggesting Palestinians intend targeting America. Hamas no different from IS.

Neocon US Senator Ted Cruz (R. TX) expressing "unequivocal support as the Israeli people continue the fight against the terrorists who have declared war on both our nations."

CNN shamelessly giving him air time to express outlandish views. Other media scoundrels operating the same way.

Reporting one-sided views. Proliferating Big Lies. Burying hard truths.

Ignoring Israeli high crimes. Vilifying Palestinians unjustly. Equating Tuesday's incident with terrorism.

Indicting all Palestinians for crimes of the few. Turning a blind eye to Israel holding entire communities hostage.

Collective punishment. State-sponsored terrorism. Mindless of international law. Palestinians isolated on their own. Victimized for not being Jews.

Meet the Pathocrats, the richest .01%

The richest Americans hold more of the nation's wealth than they have in almost a century. What do they spend it on? As you might expect, personal jets, giant yachts, works of art, and luxury penthouses. And also on politics. In fact, their political spending has been growing faster than their spending on anything else. It's been growing even faster than their wealth.

According to new research by Emmanuel Saez of the University of California at Berkeley and Gabriel Zucman of the London School of Economics, the richest one-hundredth of one percent of Americans now hold over 11 percent of the nation's total wealth. That's a higher share than the top .01 percent held in 1929, before the Great Crash.

We're talking about 16,000 people, each worth at least $110 million.

One way to get your mind around this is to compare their wealth to that of the average family. In 1978, the typical wealth holder in the top .01 percent was 220 times richer than the average American. By 2012, he or she was 1,120 times richer.

It's hard to spend this kind of money.

The uber rich are lining up for the new Aerion AS2 private jet, priced at $100 million, that seats eleven and includes a deluxe dining room and shower facilities, and will be able to cross the Atlantic in just four hours. And for duplexes high in the air. The one atop Manhattan's newest "needle" tower, the 90-story One57, just went for $90 million.

Why should we care?

Because this explosion of wealth at the top has been accompanied by an erosion of the wealth of the middle class and the poor. In the mid-1980s, the bottom 90 percent of Americans together held 36 percent of the nation's wealth. Now, they hold less than 23 percent.

Despite larger pensions and homes, the debts of the bottom 90 percent - mortgage, consumer credit, and student loan - have grown even faster. Some might think the bottom 90 percent should pull in their belts and stop living beyond their means. After all, capitalism is a tough sport. If those at the top are winning big while the bottom 90 percent is losing, too bad. That's the way the game is played.

But the top .01 percent have also been investing their money in politics. And these investments have been changing the game. In the 2012 election cycle (the last for which we have good data) donations from the top .01 accounted for over 40 percent of all campaign contributions, according to a study by Professors Adam Bonica, Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole, and Howard Rosenthal.

This is a huge increase from 1980, when the top .01 accounted for ten percent of total campaign contributions. In 2012, as you may recall, two largest donors were Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, who gave $56.8 million and $46.6 million, respectively. But the Adelsons were only the tip of an iceberg of contributions from the uber wealthy. Of the other members of the Forbes list of 400 richest Americans, fully 388 made political contributions. They accounted for forty of the 155 contributions of $1 million or more.

Of the 4,493 board members and CEOs of Fortune 500 corporations, more than four out of five contributed (many of the non-contributors were foreign nationals who were prohibited from giving). All this money has flowed to Democrats as well as Republicans.

In fact, Democrats have increasingly relied on it. In the 2012 election cycle, the top .01 percent's donations to Democrats were more than four times larger than all labor union donations to Democrats put together. The richest .01 percent haven't been donating out of the goodness of their hearts. They've donated out of goodness to their wallets.

Their political investments have paid off in the form of lower taxes on themselves and their businesses, subsidies for their corporations, government bailouts, federal prosecutions that end in settlements where companies don't affirm or deny the facts and where executives don't go to jail, watered-down regulations, and non-enforcement of antitrust laws.

Since the top .01 began investing big time in politics, corporate profits and the stock market have risen to record levels. That's enlarged the wealth of the richest .01 percent by an average of 7.8 percent a year since the mid-1980s.

But the bottom 90 percent don't own many shares of stock. They rely on wages, which have been trending downward. And for some reason, politicians don't seem particularly intent on reversing this trend.

If you want to know what's happened to the American economy, follow the money. That will lead you to the richest .01 percent.

And if you want to know what's happened to our democracy, follow the richest .01 percent. They'll lead you to the politicians who have been selling our democracy.

Libya's NATO supported "pro-democracy" rebels have joined the Islamic State

© Unknown

The United States has attempted to claim that the only way to stop the so-called "Islamic State" in Syria and Iraq is to first remove the government in Syria. Complicating this plan are developments in Libya, benefactor of NATO's last successful regime change campaign. In 2011, NATO armed, funded, and backed with a sweeping air campaign militants in Libya centered around the eastern Libyan cities of Tobruk, Derna, and Benghazi. By October 2011, NATO successfully destroyed the Libyan government, effectively handing the nation over to these militants. What ensued was a campaign of barbarism, genocide, and sectarian extremism as brutal in reality as what NATO claimed in fiction was perpetrated by the Libyan government ahead of its intervention. The so-called "rebels" NATO had backed were revealed to be terrorists led by Al Qaeda factions including the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

The so-called "pro-democracy protesters" Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi was poised to attack in what NATO claimed was pending "genocide" were in fact heavily armed terrorists that have festered for decades in eastern Libya. Almost immediately after NATO successfully destroyed Libya's government, its terrorist proxies were mobilized to take part in NATO's next campaign against Syria. Libyan terrorists were sent first to NATO-member Turkey were they were staged, armed, trained, and equipped, before crossing the Turkish-Syrian border to take part in the fighting.

admits ISIS is in Libya

in an article titled, "ISIS comes to Libya," claims:

The black flag of ISIS flies over government buildings. Police cars carry the group's insignia. The local football stadium is used for public executions. A town in Syria or Iraq? No. A city on the coast of the Mediterranean, in Libya.

Fighters loyal to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria are now in complete control of the city of Derna, population of about 100,000, not far from the Egyptian border and just about 200 miles from the southern shores of the European Union.

The fighters are taking advantage of political chaos to rapidly expand their presence westwards along the coast, Libyan sources tell .

Only the black flag of Al Qaeda/ISIS has already long been flying over Libya - even at the height of NATO's intervention there in 2011. ISIS didn't "come to" Libya, it was always there in the form of Al Qaeda's local franchises LIFG and AQIM - long-term, bitter enemies of the now deposed and assassinated Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi.

© Unknown

Al Qaeda over Benghazi

latest article is merely the veneer finally peeling away from the alleged "revolution" it had attempted to convince readers had taken place in 2011.

ISIS didn't "Come to" Libya, it came from Libya

Even amid own spin, it admits ISIS' presence in Libya is not a new phenomenon but rather the above mentioned sectarian extremists who left Libya to fight in Syria simply returning and reasserting themselves in the eastern Cyrenaica region. also admits that these terrorists have existed in Libya for decades and were kept in check primarily by Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi. With Qaddafi eliminated and all semblance of national unity destroyed by NATO's intervention in 2011, Al Qaeda has been able to not only prosper in Libya but use the decimated nation as a springboard for invading and destroying other nations.

© Unknown

Libyan Mahdi al-Harati of the Al Qaeda affiliate LIFG, leading Libyan terrorists in Syria.

Worst of all, Al Qaeda's rise in Libya was not merely the unintended consequence of a poorly conceived plan by NATO for military intervention, but a premeditated regional campaign to first build up then use Al Qaeda as a mercenary force to overthrow and destroy a series of nations, beginning with Libya, moving across North Africa and into nations like Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and eventually Iran. From there, NATO's mercenary force would be on the borders of Russia and China ready to augment already Western-backed extremists in the Caucasus and Xinjiang regions.

In 2011, geopolitical analyst Dr. Webster Tarpley in his article, "The CIA's Libya Rebels: The Same Terrorists who Killed US, NATO Troops in Iraq," noted that the US strategy was to:

...use Al Qaeda to overthrow independent governments, and then either Balkanize and partition the countries in question, or else use them as kamikaze puppets against larger enemies like Russia, China, or Iran.

Dr. Tarpley would also note in 2011 that:

One of the fatal contradictions in the current State Department and CIA policy is that it aims at a cordial alliance with Al Qaeda killers in northeast Libya, at the very moment when the United States and NATO are mercilessly bombing the civilian northwest Pakistan in the name of a total war against Al Qaeda, and US and NATO forces are being killed by Al Qaeda guerrillas in that same Afghanistan-Pakistan theater of war. The force of this glaring contradiction causes the entire edifice of US war propaganda to collapse. The US has long since lost any basis in morality for military force.

In fact, terrorist fighters from northeast Libya may be killing US and NATO troops in Afghanistan right now, even as the US and NATO protect their home base from the Qaddafi government.

Indeed, the very terrorists NATO handed the entire nation of Libya over to, are now allegedly prime targets in Syria and Iraq. The "pro-democracy rebels" of 2011 are now revealed to be "ISIS terrorists" with long-standing ties to Al Qaeda.

US Long-Planned to use Al Qaeda as Mercenaries

Not even mentioning the fact that Al Qaeda's very inception was to serve as a joint US-Saudi mercenary force to fight a proxy war in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, the terrorist organization has since played a central role in the Balkans to justify NATO intervention there, and as a divisive force in Iraq during the US occupation to blunt what began as a formidable joint Sunni-Shia'a resistance movement.

In 2007, it was revealed by Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh that the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia were conspiring to use Al Qaeda once again, this time to undermine, destabilize, and destroy the governments of Syria and Iran in what would be a regional sectarian bloodbath.

Hersh would report (emphasis added):

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia's government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

Hersh would note that Iran was perceived to be the greater threat and therefore, despite a constant barrage of propaganda claiming otherwise, Al Qaeda and its various affiliates were "lesser enemies." Even in 2007, Hersh's report would predict almost verbatim the cataclysmic regional sectarian bloodbath that would take place, with the West's extremists waging war not only on Shia'a populations but also on other religious minorities including Christians.

His report would note:

Robert Baer, a former longtime C.I.A. agent in Lebanon, has been a severe critic of Hezbollah and has warned of its links to Iranian-sponsored terrorism. But now, he told me, "we've got Sunni Arabs preparing for cataclysmic conflict, and we will need somebody to protect the Christians in Lebanon. It used to be the French and the United States who would do it, and now it's going to be Nasrallah and the Shiites.

And this is precisely what is happening, word for word, page by page - everything warned about in Hersh's report has come to pass. In 2011, geopolitical analyst Dr. Webster Tarpley and others would also reiterate the insidious regional campaign Western policymakers were carrying out with Al Qaeda terrorists disguised as "rebels," "activists," and "moderate fighters" for the purpose of arming, funding, and even militarily intervening on their behalf in attempts to effect regime change and tilt the balance in the Middle East and North Africa region against Iran, Russia, and China.

CNN's attempt to explain why ISIS is "suddenly" in Libya is one of many attempts to explain the regional rise of this organization in every way possible besides in terms of the truth - that ISIS is the result of multinational state sponsored terrorism including the US, UK, EU, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Israel as its chief backers.

NATO Handed ISIS Libya, Wants to Hand ISIS Syria

Inexplicably, amid allegedly fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria, the United States now claims it must first overthrow the Syrian government, despite it being the only viable, secular force in the region capable of keeping ISIS and its affiliates in check. , in an article titled, "Sources: Obama seeks new Syria strategy review to deal with ISIS, al-Assad," would report:

President Barack Obama has asked his national security team for another review of the U.S. policy toward Syria after realizing that ISIS may not be defeated without a political transition in Syria and the removal of President Bashar al-Assad, senior U.S. officials and diplomats tell .

Neither , nor the politicians it cited in its article were able to articulate just why removing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power would somehow diminish the fighting capacity of ISIS. With recent article on ISIS' gains in Libya despite US-led NATO regime change there, after decades of Libyan leader Qaddafi keeping extremists in check, it would appear that NATO is once again attempting not to stop Al Qaeda/ISIS, but rather hand them yet another country to use as a base of operations.

The goal is not to stop ISIS or even effect regime change in Syria alone - but rather hand Syria over as a failed, divided state to terrorists to use as a springboard against Iran, then Russia and China.

Clearly, ISIS' appearance in Libya negates entirely the already incomprehensible strategy the US has proposed of needing to first depose the Syrian government, then fight ISIS. The Syrian government, like that of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, is the only effective force currently fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda's many other franchises operating in the region. Deposing the government in Damascus would compound the fight against sectarian terrorists - and the West is fully aware of that. Therefore, attempts to topple the secular government in Damascus is in every way the intentional aiding and abetting of ISIS and the sharing in complicity of all the horrific daily atrocities ISIS and its affiliates are carrying out.

The morally bankrupt, insidious, dangerous, and very genocidal plans hatched in 2007 and executed in earnest in 2011 illustrate that ISIS alone is not the greatest threat to global peace and stability, but also those that constitute its multinational state sponsors. The very West purportedly defending civilization is the chief protagonist destroying it worldwide.

Western media bows to their masters by avoiding any mention of Israeli violence against Palestinians

© Omar Sameer/ActiveStills

Palestinians protest at the recent killing — by Israeli police — of Kheir Hamdan in the Galilee village of Kufr Kana

As Tuesday's grisly murder of five Israelis in a Jerusalem synagogue by two Palestinian assailants continues to dominate headlines, major media outlets are actively erasing the Israeli violence that preceded the attack and the surging anti-Palestinian assaults that have followed.

In typical fashion, The New York Times buried information alluding to Palestinian death and suffering in the fourteenth paragraph , while CNN disappeared Palestinians from the discussion entirely.

The Washington Post went even further, using the synagogue attack as an opportunity to erase Israeli violence against Palestinians both past and present.

Noting that the attack site is located in what used to be Deir Yassin - a Palestinian village destroyed in 1948 after Zionist militias deliberately executed more than one hundred of its inhabitants, including children - the Post rendered the massacre an unproven accusation against Israel.

Following an uproar on social media, the Post quietly removed the reference to Deir Yassin from the piece without issuing an explanation or correction.

These same media outlets are gleefully painting Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip as heartless monsters based on a marginal celebration that took place in Gaza City.

"Residents of the Gaza Strip paraded in the streets singing victory songs, giving out candy, waving flags," declared The New York Times, eliciting images of widespread jubilation.

An earlier New York Times piece claimed that in Gaza City, "praise for God and the attackers poured from mosque loudspeakers." That paragraph appears to have been quietly scrubbed without explanation, but not before Zionist ideologues had a chance to exploit it.

Speaking from Gaza where he is currently stationed, journalist and Mondoweiss contributor Dan Cohen told The Electronic Intifada that there was indeed a celebratory rally organized by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in Gaza City but the celebrations were far from widespread.

"A small minority celebrated. That's what being besieged and bombed does to people," said Cohen, adding that it was hardly representative of the sentiment in Gaza, where residents are desperately preoccupied with escaping what he calls the "catastrophic" deterioration of conditions in the rubble-cluttered enclave.

Cohen also rejected The New York Times' claim that celebratory praise for the synagogue attack rang out from mosque loudspeakers. There were a couple of cars driving around with megaphones that could be heard expressing joy for the attack, said Cohen, but that's all. Gaza resident Mohammed Suliman and journalist Jehad Saftawi, who were with Cohen when we spoke, concurred.

While fringe celebrations among Palestinians have been widely reported, the more commonplace right-wing Israeli demonstrations agitating for greater violence and "death to Arabs " have been conspicuously absent from establishment media coverage, even though mainstream reporters are clearly aware of these rallies.

This follows a longstanding pattern that was most apparent during Israel's recent assault on Gaza, which killed nearly 2,200 Palestinians, most of them civilians, including more than five hundred children.

As Israel mercilessly targeted civilians in the densely populated coastal enclave, western media outlets published scandalous justifications for the mounting atrocities, frequently blaming Palestinians for their own slaughter.

Under this convoluted paradigm, racist Israeli mobs joyfully singing "In Gaza there's no studying, No children are left there" were virtually ignored in the mainstream press, as was the rampant genocidal incitement in Israeli social media and from high-level Israeli lawmakers .

Amid a rising tide of Israeli fascism, the mainstream media narrative of an Israel under constant and unrelenting attack from wildly violent and murder-celebrating Palestinians is more than just dishonest. It is dangerous propaganda that shields Israel's unchecked extremism from scrutiny, guaranteeing and inciting further atrocities against the defenseless and disenfranchised Palestinian population, some of whom will respond with violence.

Profiles of the Jewish victims killed in the synagogue attack have appeared in one media outlet after another, interspersed with quotes from heartbroken loved ones. The same cannot be said of the countless Palestinians attacked, maimed and killed by Israeli violence, whose names and photos rarely make it into mainstream news accounts.

Here are some of their harrowing stories from the last two weeks alone, stories that will be replicated thanks in no small part to a mainstream media that sees them as unworthy victims.

Israeli bullet to the face blinds 11-year-old boy

On 13 November, Israeli police shot eleven-year-old Saleh Samer Attiyeh Mahmoud between the eyes at close range with a sponge-tipped bullet in Issawiyeh - a village in occupied East Jerusalem - permanently blinding him in his left eye and severely damaging the vision in his right.

Residents in Issawiyeh had been demonstrating against Israel's closure of three of the village's four entrances when they were met with brute police force, now an everyday occurrence accross East Jerusalem neighborhoods inhabited by Palestinians who dare to push back.

Lining the Israeli police arsenal in this area are "sponge rounds" that "are made of high-density plastic with a foam-rubber head, and are fired from grenade launchers," according to the Ma'an News Agency. "Israeli police have been using them in Israel and occupied East Jerusalem since the use of rubber-coated metal bullets was prohibited, but protocol explicitly prohibits firing them at the upper body," adds Ma'an.

Yet the upper body is exactly where Israeli police are aiming this weapon, especially at child targets.

On 31 August, Israeli police shot sixteen-year-old Muhammad Sinokrot in the head at close range with a sponge-tipped bullet as he chatted on his cell phone while making his way to mosque for night-time prayers in East Jerusalem's Wadi al-Joz neighborhood. He died days later.

Even then Israeli police insisted that they shot him in the leg, causing him to fall and hit his head. This was exposed as a lie after an autopsy determined that the teen was shot in the head, as his family had stated.

Cracking the skull of a 10-year-old girl

On Friday, 14 November, Mayar Amran Twafic al-Natsheh, ten years old, was riding in her grandfather's car near the Shuafat refugee camp checkpoint when Israeli forces opened fire on their vehicle, striking Mayar in the face with a rubber-coated steel bullet that penetrated and shattered the car window.

Adding insult to injury, Israeli police detained Mayar's father as she lay in a hospital bed recovering from a fractured skull.

Ten-year-old Gaza boy shot in the neck for "loitering"

On 16 November, Israeli forces from the Nahal Brigade opened fire on a ten-year-old Palestinian boy for walking too close to the southern fence of the Kissufim checkpoint between present-day Israel and Gaza.

The Israeli army defended the soldiers' actions, arguing that because loitering is prohibited in the area, the soldiers "followed protocol by shooting into the air, shooting the lower body, then ... it was decided to follow the procedure by shooting the center of the body."

Critically wounded by a bullet to the neck, the child was flown out by helicopter for treatment at Soroka University Medical Center in Bir al-Saba (Beersheva), a city in the Naqab (Negev) region of present-day Israel.

To justify shooting a small unarmed child, the Israeli army asserted with zero evidence that "the boy was sent as a scout by one of Gaza's terror factions to test the troops' level of alert and response times."

Settlers attack with knives and bullets

On Tuesday, 18 November, in the aftermath of the synagogue attack, a Palestinian teenager identified by Ma'an News Agency as sixteen-year-old Ibrahim Mahmoud was shot by an Israeli settler following a settler riot near Beitin village in the West Bank.

Ibrahim was one of several Palestinians attacked that day.

While walking in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Kafr Aqab, 22-year-old Fadi Jalal Radwan was stabbed in the legs and back by a gang of Israelis after they asked him for a light.

Over the summer, as Israeli lynch mobs roamed the streets in search of Palestinians to attack, they would ask their potential victims for a cigarette or the time to determine, based on the accent in their response, if they were Arab.

Mysterious and forgotten lynching-style deaths

Almost immediately after 32-year-old Yousuf Hasan al-Ramouni, a Palestinian bus driver, was found hanged to death in his bus at a terminal in West Jerusalem, where anti-Arab sentiment is alarmingly palpable, Israeli police labeled it a suicide, insisting there were "no signs of violence on the body." This was contradicted by photos of al-Ramouni's lifeless body that surfaced on social media, revealing bruises along his torso.

Al-Ramouni's colleague, Muatasem Fakeh, disputed the suicide claim.

"We saw signs of violence on his body," he told AFP. "He was hanged over the steps at the back of the bus in a place where it would be impossible to hang yourself alone."

Al-Ramouni's family adamantly rejects the Israeli line as well, maintaining that he was a happy father and husband who would not take his own life.

The police have since cited an Israeli autopsy report that ruled al-Ramouni's death a suicide as proof that their initial assessment was accurate. But Saber al-Aloul, a Palestinian pathologist who participated in the autopsy, suspects al-Ramouni was murdered and believes further forensic tests will prove this to be the case.

While anything is possible, the Israeli authorities have a history of promoting false narratives to cover up hate crimes committed by Jewish Israelis against Palestinians.

After sixteen-year-old Muhammad Abu Khudair was forced to drink gasoline and burned alive by three Jewish extremists, Israeli police planted the nasty rumor that Abu Khudair was murdered by his family in an anti-gay honor killing.

According to data compiled by Yesh Din , an Israeli legal advocacy group, from 2005 to 2014 Israeli police failed to properly investigate 83 percent of settler hate crimes against Palestinians in the West Bank.

Israeli police have demonstrated a similar lack of interest in getting to the bottom of attacks on Palestinians inside Israel.

Shot dead and deliberately set on fire

On 11 November, Nihad Mufid Ahmad Nalowa, a 35-year-old Palestinian worker from the West Bank, was shot dead by an identified gunman in Zemer, a Palestinian town located inside Israel.

Days earlier, on 8 November, Mahmoud Kamel Qalalweh, a 23-year-old Palestinian worker, was critically injured when unidentified assailants deliberately set his body on fire in Tamra, a Palestinian village in northeastern Israel.

Neither case elicited much attention. Nor is it clear whether Israeli police are investigating the incidents.

Inciting vigilante violence against Palestinians

Israel's Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch was accused of inciting vigilante violence after applauding the swift police execution of the Palestinian driver responsible for a vehicular attack in Jerusalem on 5 November.

"The action of the border police officer who chased the terrorist and quickly killed him is the right and professional action, and that is the way I would like these incidents to end," said Aharonovitch. "A terrorist who strikes civilians should be killed."

Many understood this as a call for police and armed civilians to act as judge, jury and executioner against perceived "terrorists" - which seems to be interchangeable with "Arabs" in the Israeli lexicon.

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel and the Adalah Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights linked Aharonovitch's incitement to the police murder of 22-year-old Kheir Hamdan days later.

On 9 November, in the Galilee village of Kufr Kana, Israeli police shot Hamdan after he banged on their vehicle with an unidentifiable object.

CCTV footage of the killing reveals that, contrary to the police version of events, the officers shot Hamdan at close range without warning as he ran away and then shot him again after he was injured and bleeding on the ground.

Nevertheless, in the immediate aftermath of the synagogue attack, Aharonovitch announced that he would seek the easing of gun restrictions for Israelis. In a society increasingly gripped with genocidal hatred of its indigenous inhabitants, such a move could prove disastrous.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at http://ift.tt/jcXqJW.

Putin marginalized at G20? Imagine if he took center stage and spoke the truth

Mr. Putin is marginalized at the G20 summit in Brisbane Australia. Washington's European vassals are afraid to even get close to the Russian President - it could be ill-seen by Master Obama. Madame Merkel had a brief private conversation with Mr. Putin - the supplier of 30% of Germany's energy. Then, she went on castigating him in public for interfering in Ukraine's democracy. What planet is she from? The others dare aping her critique - after all she represents the strongest nation in Europe - the strongest spineless puppet.

The Kremlin is again blamed for having shot down Malaysian flight MH17 over Ukraine - by world leaders who know very well that they are lying. They cannot have ignored the appalling conclusion of the analysis by the German pilot and airline expert, Peter Haisenko, that MH17 could not have been brought down by a surface-to-air missile, but rather by gunfire of an Ukraine military aircraft, type SU-25, as indicated by shrapnel holes in the cockpit (Global Research July 30, 2014). A plane fitting the description of an SU-25 was spotted near the MH17 by Russian and Kiev airport controllers. Several eyewitnesses on the ground in the conflict zone saw at least one fighter plane approaching the Malaysian airliner, as reported by BBC (though the report was later withdrawn - in an act of BBC self-censuring).

Peter Haisenko's findings were subsequently also confirmed by OSCE analysts. Sadly, the black box that could have further enhanced the analysis is in the hands of the neoliberal Dutch government which in connivance with the White House and to the humiliation of the families of the almost 300 gruesomely murdered passengers of MH17 will not divulge the truth.

What is this all about? Child's play? - The G20, an informal group of self-styled and self-loving arrogant 'world leaders' of the so-called 20 Great Economies, meet regularly to pretend deciding the future of the globe. A group dominated by Washington and its neoliberal mostly Anglos-Saxon and European vassals. What they talk about, promise to the world or threaten the world with, has absolutely no legal binding. As long as other nations go along - these decisions and intimidations gain strength. Those who are not playing along are subject to regime change.

Those 'too big to obey' - not succumbing to the rules of the Anglo-Saxon game plan - will be shunned, like Mr. Putin and to a lesser extent China's President Xi Jinping - shunned by Washington - and, of course, by its lackeys. China enjoys still some clout that Russia is missing thanks to her sheer population and economic strength. China has bypassed the US in terms of GDP earlier this year, as the world's number one economy. Nevertheless, under his self-declared 'pivot to Asia', Obama is not missing an opportunity to harass and humiliate China, from the new military base in Darwin, Australia, to the Transpacific Partnership (TPP) treaty, a Free Trade Agreement, under which Obama wants to exclude China, to a huge US navy presence in the South China Sea which will supposedly increase from the current 50% to 65% of the total US navy fleet by 2015.

The G20 are playing dangerous games. Fortunately, Mr. Putin is a great diplomat. He doesn't fall into the trap.

Imagine - at the next G20 summit the unaligned among them, at least a handful of nations, simply don't show up. They would go into opposition, so to speak; declaring a silent absenteeism - representing the wordless peoples of the world. What a powerful message that would send around the globe!

Vladimir Putin eventually left the G20 summit before it ended - a 17 hour trip home, "I have to work on Monday - no worries, my Finance Minister will attend the final dinner" - and off he went. He was coming home as a hero, applauded for showing the G20 his brave statesmanship, as compared to the spineless lot of EU minions.

Now imagine a possible alternative. Mr. Putin, instead of walking out straight, takes center stage, responding to these senseless lies and accusations about Ukraine by publicly divulging the facts.

"Ladies and Gentlemen - our common interest should be the truth - disseminating the truth as best we know it, and we have the best intelligence to provide us with the facts. Instead, western media are full with self-serving lies and propaganda. The latest target is Russia. There is the downing of the Malaysian MH17 plane, the so called annexation of Crimea - and foremost Ukraine. On the MH17, there is plenty of evidence, even acknowledged by OSCE that the plane has not been shot down by Russia, nor by Russia-sympathizers in Novorossiya; that the plane was not hit by a surface-to-air missile, but was most-likely sprayed by gunfire from a Kiev air force plane of the type SU-25, therefore clearly pointing to the Poroshenko Government. As far as Crimea is concerned - just read up on Russian history. This peninsula was part of Russia for at least the last 350 years. Crimea's population, about 90% of Russian origin, has overwhelmingly voted to rejoin the Russian Federation. The Kremlin has merely accepted their vote."

Vladimir Putin went on to talk about Ukraine, a country that also had hundreds of years of Russian history. It is so rich in natural resources and agriculture that throughout the Soviet Union it was considered the breadbasket of Russia. Most Ukrainians have still close ties to Russia. -

"You can imagine, ladies and gentlemen, Ukraine has closer links to Russia than have Mexico and Canada to the United States. So, how would it feel, Mr. Obama, if Russia were to initiate anti-Washington propaganda and unrest in these two nations? - Nevertheless, you know this very well, Mr. Obama, your Government with the help of the EU and NATO has orchestrated the coup of a democratically elected president of Ukraine on 22 February this year."

The Russian leader reminded the audience of Madame Nuland's overheard telephone conversation with the US Ambassador in Kiev, boasting of the more than 5 billion dollars invested in Ukrainian Regime change, even talking about the new heads of government they were going to put in place. A statement she later repeated to the Washington Press Club.

"The reasons for taking over Ukraine" - Mr. Putin continued - "as we know, are many - the country's richness in natural resources, agricultural potential, US oil giants eager to frack for gas - and foremost, bringing yet a new NATO base at Moscow's doorstep. - You, Mr. Obama, are the first one to understand Russia's discontent, since you would not like to see Russia setting up military bases in Mexico, or anywhere in the Caribbean. - Why do you claim exceptionalism for the United States of America?"

"Yet, Russia has not stopped your Kiev adventure, Mr. President, other than providing the savagely besieged Donbass population with humanitarian aid, while your intelligence and NATO forces are supporting the Kiev army with weapons and strategic advice. - Do you know, Mr. Obama, that Mr. Poroshenko's troops, whose predecessors fought for Hitler, today strengthened by NATO, are viciously torturing and killing the pro-Russian east-Ukrainian population? That since the beginning of the conflict way more than 4,000 people, including women and children have been killed and more than 1.2 million people have fled to Russia? - Wouldn't a Russian military intervention be a natural reaction to stop this western supported bloody civil war? - Of course, it would. And you Mr. Obama - all of you in this room know it, but are unwilling to admit it. - Well, I make it easier for you, by giving you once more the facts."

With a pause of silence, Mr. Putin let his last words sink in.

"And one more thing the G20, Masters of the Universe, should know - Ukraine is just a peon on a square of a much larger chess game - a war game that has become unavoidable for the United States as wars are highly profitable - and - today the US economy depends on them - a war game that strives for Full Spectrum Dominance, as your generals, Mr. Obama, like to call it. They will not shy from killing millions to reach their goal, Washington's goal - a One World Order, controlling the world's resources, the world's nations, their people - and their economies. We the G20 minus one, plus the voiceless billions, have the power to stop this hegemonic bloodletting. But we must be bold and dare to stand up for our collective rights."

"Thank you for listening."

With these last words, Mr. Putin left the audience in awe. He rushed out to the airport to fly home - where he has work to do.

The media representatives were in a state of shock, scurrying from left to right - speechless and hapless. They didn't know what to do. Are we allowed to tell the world the truth? Can the powers controlling us castigate and even reject us? - Didn't this public statement of a G20 world leader free us from the shackles of western power?

This fictitious scenario could really have happened. Why didn't it? - And how might it have changed the world order?

Related articles:

Putin at the G20: Sharing a stage with psychopathic a**holes makes you want to leave early

What really happened at G20 summit in Brisbane

The "Putin is isolated" story is untrue, stupid, and just plain dangerous

'Robbed of their womanhood': Sisters suffer from premature ovarian failure after Gardasil shots

Maddie and Olivia Meylor

Maddie and Olivia Meylor

Olivia and Madelyne Meylor are in their early 20s. They still want the world to know what happened to them as teens after they received three Gardasil shots - an HPV vaccine marketed as a way to prevent cervical cancer.

Diagnoses of Premature or Primary Ovarian Failure (POF) followed leaving only 5 percent chance one of them could ever get pregnant.

[embedded content]

In this story about a pending federal court case they were involved in last year, they reported that not only did their ovaries stop producing eggs, but they also have insomnia, night sweats and headaches. They say they can not get pregnant, but might be able to carry a baby. As teenagers, it would appear that they both entered into full-blown menopause.

Coincidence? Genetic predisposition tests ruled out genetics for the disorder which is rare in teenagers. Their mother says all roads lead back to the fateful shots in 2007. You can see from the local news report that Merck denies any correlation to the vaccine, upholds the results in its clinical trials, and claims that similar adverse were found in placebo studies. Yet, this study in 2013 shows that POF does indeed follow Gardasil shots, and stems from adjuvants in the vaccine causing the body to attack the reproductive system, as well as cause cognitive and psychiatric disturbances.

Imagine if a toy or candy created tens of thousands of adverse health reports and over a hundred deaths? Would there not be some kind of outcry or intervention? It's interesting that legal scrutiny is aimed at energy drink manufacturers, but not for injections given out by doctors.

Could that be because the U.S. Government receives royalties on Merck's Gardasil sales? The NIH does not wish to reveal those figures. In the report on the pending court case last year, the government would be defending Merck, arguing that the POF was not related in any way to the vaccine. However, Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld, from Israel, planned to testify that their disease was autoimmune and brought on by the adjuvant substances. That is, Autoimmune Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants, or ASIA.

Read more on the topic at Health Impact News

America: A Vaxxer-Nation?

© kjngenealogy.com

Recently there has been a lot of 'debate' in the mainstream media about vaccinations. While this debate is not new, it is something to take notice of, at least I have been taking note. What sparked my interest in the current vaccine debate, and the taking of notes, was a comedy segment on T.V.

While I am not a regular viewer or cable subscriber, I had the opportunity while visiting family to watch Comedy Central, I almost fell out of my seat when the topic of saying no to Vaccines appeared on The Daily Show . What really sparked my curiosity was that, the next night, The Colbert Report had the infamous Dr. Offit Profit on, touting the benefits of vaccination, condemning parents that choose opt-out of vaccinations and promoting his book Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All . It really is a sign of the times when a comedy station addresses and gives air-time to pro vaccination propaganda and has a guest host who profits from vaccinations. More information about Dr. Profit later in the article.

Vaccinations: Haters and Ya-Sayers

This 'Anti Vaxxer' debate is a hot topic and the content and/or poking fun on cable t.v. brings this debate to a much wider audience. I am an 'Anti Vaxxer' and have been for years. I have 2 grown children and neither of them was ever vaccinated. I am personally against and highly suspicious of the American vaccination effort that has been ongoing for years. I live in a state, like many in the US, that is very pro-vaccination.

When my children were young, I received phone calls and endless mail about the immediate importance of my children receiving their required immunizations (vaccinations). I have been cornered by emergency room nurses and over zealous doctors about the immediate necessity to comply with vaccination laws and requirements. I have left community health centers in tears, feeling like a horrible mother, because I questioned the safety and effectiveness of required vaccinations. Back then, while holding firm to my 'No' choice, I admit I did not know the facts, I just knew something wasn't right. Fortunately other mothers in my community were 'anti-vaxxers' as well and through experience, research and motherly support, I began to form a more informed basis for my decision to say 'No'.

In today's parenting world things have changed. At least from my personal interactions with families with small children. As a mother and former teacher, I am around young children and their parents often, sooner or later the topic of vaccinations pops up. There are two distinct camps among parents, what I call vaccination Haters and Yay sayers. Those who do not support vaccinations and those who are only to happy to comply with vaccination requirements. While I don't 'go there' right away, when talking to the uninformed (or 'disinformed') about my personal anti-vaxx stance, I wait for the parent to ask a specific question. If the parent is a supporter of vaccinations, the conversation is usually pretty short: 'it's the parents choice, do your research, etc'. If, on the other hand, the parent is really struggling and is looking for some solid research and data on the safety of vaccinations and WHY there is such an intense debate going on, I offer the following information. Readers may find it useful in a similar situation.

Below is the standard email that I send to concerned parents:

Dear Concerned Parent:

Ok, so there is so much information out there that you are going to be TOTALLY overwhelmed! First and foremost you should read: A Shot in the Dark by H. Coulter and then read the following articles on the web, it is disturbing information so you should go through it slowly and take notes if needed, the articles are just a small sample of data demonstrating the negative health impacts of vaccinations. The information about vaccination risks is well documented, if in doubt read the other source material referred to in the articles.

Next you should be clear with the doctor from the start, if you have any doubts you should say NO to all vaccinations and be firm! Don't say yes to this one and no to that one, do the research so you actually know important facts about the negative side effects! Just say to the doctor you are taking your time to decide, the doctor will try very hard to follow a schedule starting the day the your baby is born!

I have found that it is best to say to the doctor that your decision not to vaccinate is a RELIGIOUS CHOICE, the doctor will hesitate to go there, from my experience. Remember, this choice is a basic freedom and right - for now - at least, that can change and will likely change in the near future.

I encourage you to be strong and have support from your spouse! Otherwise the doctor will break you down and use fear tactics, you have to be prepared for that Really!

Hope this helps,


© thesecondsight.blogspot.com

The articles below are included in the email. For most parents the reality of reading through each article is overwhelming, time consuming, and even a bit scary. I have taken the most important information out of the articles and summarized the key message. This way parents can skim the article and find bits of information that confirm what so many Anti-Vaxxers are saying. While vaccination supporters say the anti-vaxxer movement is a loose bunch of rogue scientists, journalists, parents and celebrities, the reality is quite different:

Why the press shouldn't dismiss vaccine skeptics

Those who question vaccination programs are kooks or quacks, the press repeatedly tells us. The Globe and Mail, CBS News, Mother Jones and even scientific journals like Nature label skeptics as "vaccination deniers," much as global warming skeptics are called "deniers."

Slate magazine, citing the medical journal Vaccine, deplores "the global anti-vaccination movement [as] a loose coalition of rogue scientists, journalists, parents, and celebrities, who think that vaccines cause disorders like autism - a claim that has been thoroughly discredited by modern science." Commentary, a serious publication that covers politics, refers to skeptics as "vaccination truthers."

This wholesale demeaning of vaccine skeptics defies explanation. Granted, kooks and quacks exist in the vaccination field, just as they exist elsewhere. But why taint the skeptics as a whole, and fail to respectfully report dissenting views? No journalist would have had any difficulty finding dozens of distinguished skeptical scientists for the very few "rogue" scientists that the press has vilified...

Those who are labelled as anti-vaccination rogue scientists are hardly rogues - they are found at the pinnacle of the medical establishment. And they are hardly anti-vaccination. All of the scientists that I mention in this article value vaccines for the great good that they can do. Their opposition is to mass vaccination of the population, which discounts the risk that people with certain predispositions can react badly to various vaccines, just as people with certain predispositions can react badly to various prescription drugs.

Identify the vulnerable populations, the skeptics say, so that all can be confident when vaccines are administered. For this, they deserve our appreciation, not our ridicule.

The Flawed Theory Behind Vaccinations

Vaccines don't stand up to scientific scrutiny

I realize it may seem odd to invoke the laws of scientific reasoning on this issue.Vaccinations are supposed to be accepted without reason, without question by both medical professional and the public, right? Even daring to question vaccines is akin to questioning Darwinism in the minds of many.

But this, of course, reveals the fatal flaw of the pro-vaccine gang: They are afraid of being questioned. They fear scientific scrutiny so much that they have to reframe the entire debate as one made up of "doctors vs. quacks" rather than one of scientific evidence (which they don't have) vs. quackery (which they have lots of).

This is the strategy of the intellectually desperate. Truth does not fear investigation, and if vaccines are so provably useful for enhancing the health of children, then doctors shouldn't mind people asking questions or even openly debating the merits of vaccination programs. And yet what you see with vaccines today is a cult-like worship of vaccines that despises scrutiny or even solid science. Vaccines are good because they tell us so, and that should be sufficient reason, we're told.

Vaccination Myths and Truths

All vaccines are biological weapons that weaken or destroy the human immune system. They often fail to protect against diseases they're designed to prevent and often cause them. The H1N1 vaccine is experimental, untested, toxic, extremely dangerous, and essential to avoid even if mandated.

In a December 1994 Medical Post article, Dr. Guylaine Lanctot said:

"The medical authorities keep lying. Vaccination has been a disaster on the immune system. It actually causes a lot of illnesses. We are actually changing our genetic code through vaccination....100 years from now we will know that the biggest crime against humanity was vaccines."

Dr. Viera Scheibner is internationally known as perhaps the leading expert on adverse vaccine reactions. Her analysis concluded that "there is no evidence whatsoever of the ability of vaccines to prevent any diseases. To the contrary, there is a great wealth of evidence that they cause serious side effects."

Nonetheless, immunization programs proliferate because the profit potential is enormous despite growing numbers of reputable scientific figures citing concerns.

Currently, over 200 new vaccines are being developed "for everything from birth control to (curbing) cocaine addiction." Around half of them are in clinical trials using human guinea pigs putting their health and safety on the line unwittingly.

New delivery systems are also being developed that include nasal sprays, mosquitoes, and genetically engineered fruits containing vaccine viruses. With every country in the world a potential buyer, health and safety considerations are suppressed for the sake of profits. Unless somehow this madness is stopped, the harm to our children and society will be catastrophic.

Vaccinations - A Health Hazard?

In recent months health authorities have implored parents to be responsible and vaccinate their children.

As well as whooping cough, diptheria, tetanus, polio and German measles (rubella), vaccines are now urged against hepatitis B and the "new" disease Haemophilis Influenzae b (Hib), which causes a host of invasive infections including the brain disease meningitis.

However, leading doctors and scientists here and overseas are seriously questioning the value of mass vaccination programs and claim vaccinations may in fact be doing more harm than good by sabotaging our natural immune systems.

Firstly, that current mass vaccination programs are neither necessary nor effective in normal conditions in developed countries.

Secondly, injecting foreign material into the blood stream is a dangerous process which can cause very serious illnesses. Where viruses are concerned, the results can be even more unpredictable and dangerous.

In contrast, federal and state health authorities still insist that vaccination is necessary and effective.

Their biggest pro-vaccination argument is that without it, our society would be ravaged by epidemics of killer diseases. The director of the communicable diseases section of the Federal Health Department, Dr Robert Hall, points to the success of mass vaccination in reducing the diseases of the 19th Century: small pox, typhoid, diptheria, polio, measles and so on.

Medical literature shows that there has never been an outbreak of any infectious disease in which vaccinated children did not contract that disease. Supporters also admit that there are risks of side-effects from vaccination - including death - and that diseases like whooping cough and rubella will never be eliminated, even if every baby is immunised.

Melbourne specialist Dr John Piesse claims that parents are being given a false picture of vaccinations.

"It's an absolute scandal, there is no examination of the risks and side-effects," he said.

While doctors undoubtedly believe they are doing the best for their patients, surveys have shown that very few general practitioners have the time to read original research.

Vaccination lies and other tales

My answer is lack of acquired natural immunity now apparent in two generations due to mandated vaccinations. That happens when a pregnant mother does not - and cannot - pass on to her fetus naturally-acquired immunities she does not have, nor can acquire, since she did not contract those pesky childhood infectious diseases that apparently were designed by Nature to improve or 'beef up' the human immune system by creating pass-along immunities. Just about every child in the USA has been vaccinated numerous times by medical mandate since the 1980s. That interferes with human physiology and the ability to acquire lifelong immunities - something that apparently would interfere with Big Pharma's marketing plans for vaccines. What vaccines do, in effect, is 'castrate' the natural human immune system we are born with, and substitute a chemical and pharmaceutically-induced antigen response - quite different from natural immunity - which the human immune system apparently has difficulty implementing, as witnessed by adverse reaction events most vaccinees experience after receiving vaccinations - even if only minor and nothing major like febrile seizures, encephalopathy, Guillain-Barre, etc.

The fact that multi-vaccinated children are coming down with the very diseases for which they have been vaccinated ought to be a 'smoking gun' indication that the vaccine antigen response is not recognized by the human immune system. Consequently, vaccines provide no immunity no matter how many times some children may be vaccinated, as has been happening in Pakistan and elsewhere, especially in the USA where the perceived remedy is more and more vaccinations. What is the probable end result of more and more vaccinations?

Inflammation and chronic diseases from the immune system having been 'raped' so many times, it cannot protect the body from other disease patterns taking hold, which we now are seeing in younger and younger children.

Herd immunity: Myth or reality?

Mass vaccination eventually ceases endemic disease outbreaks by removing virus circulation in the community, instead of inducing permanent immunity in the vaccinated. However, viral diseases, although reduced in incidence in many countries, are not fully eradicated from all parts of the World. A region-specific elimination of viral exposure by means of mass vaccination at the time when the virus is present globally is hardly good news. Prolonged mass childhood vaccination is a measure of disease control that with time makes our entire adult population (but more importantly infants) more and more defenseless against the incompletely eradicated virus, which can be easily re-imported. Why do we then choose to put so much effort into a self-defeating public-health venture?

Two epidemiologists, who have recognized the potential problem of this waning vaccine-based protection and have included this parameter into their herd-immunity modeling, predict:

"For infectious diseases where immunization can offer lifelong protection, a variety of simple models can be used to explain the utility of vaccination as a control method. However, for many diseases, immunity wanes over time.... Here we show how vaccination can have a range of unexpected consequences. We predict that, after a long disease-free period, the introduction of infection will lead to far larger epidemics than that predicted by standard models. These results have clear implications for the long-term success of any vaccination campaign and highlight the need for a sound understanding of the immunological mechanisms of immunity and vaccination."[9]

The medical establishment got it all in reverse: it is not vaccine-exempt children who endanger us all, it is the effects of prolonged mass-vaccination campaigns that have done so. When will the medical establishment (and the media) start paying attention to the long-term consequences of mass-vaccination measures instead of hastily and unjustifiably blaming every outbreak on the unvaccinated?

Additional articles: Who are some of the staunch Ya-Sayers of vaccinations? Dr. Profit

Vaccine Advocate Says Children Can Receive 10,000 Vaccines at Once

An example of, let's call it lunacy, from high places in the vaccine industry, Dr. Paul Offit once publicly remarked that children can safely receive 100,000 vaccines at once. He later changed that to 10,000. Unfortunately, this leading pediatrician who holds influential University and Clinical positions has media clout and has been interviewed often.

He has written publications refuting vaccination dangers and condemning those who refuse vaccinations for their children, even to the point of encouraging pediatricians to not provide care for children not vaccinated.

Of course, Offit has made sure Merck's Rotavirus vaccine Rotateq® is included as part of early childhood vaccine schedules. Merck awarded Offit a grant of $350,000 to help develop the vaccine, and he has partial patent rights as well, which have recently been sold for a one time healthy profit of $180 million. This undoubtedly is not the only conflict of interest.

Offit has made these outrageous claims of the vaccination capacity of infants, while assuring their immune systems are able to handle quite a bit in their newly inhabited world. Though passed on by mainstream media without question, his statements are totally false.

But his authoritative bluster does intimidate or confuse the public while boosting his vaccine industry revenue.

Men like Dr. Offit have an agenda, financial or otherwise, and really lack any sort of moral character. It's ironic therefore that he would accuse parents who disagree with his views of being morally reprehensible.

Paul Offit believes that exempting your child from vaccination is morally reprehensible.

The choice to not vaccinate is morally reprehensible Why?! Because corporate medicine and its 'experts' are some how more knowledgeable about what is best for other people's children? Families with legitimate concerns should cower to physicians and experts and allow them to over-ride their parental philosophical and religious rights based on corrupted, profit based science? Really??

Many would say that it is morally reprehensible for a doctor (millionaire vaccine inventor) to support and encourage vaccinations while dismissing important facts and questions regarding vaccine safety. As the Colbert Report segment above shows, Dr. Offit has tremendous influence in the debate:

The status accorded to him by the pharmaceutical and medical fields permits him to influence the opinions and practice of lower rung physicians regarding vaccine exemptions. Unfortunately, even doctors will simply believe the "expert"[2] without bothering to go and check their own medical literature, to see if the self-proclaimed expertise has a solid scientific foundation. Research shows that when people listen to the expert, the part of their brains that is capable of independent thought goes to sleep.[3]

Additional articles on the 'moral character' of Dr. Profit: More truth about vaccinations comes to light with CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson's revelations

CDC whistleblower William Thompson's confession

On August 27, CDC whistleblower William Thompson came out of the shadows and admitted he had omitted vital data from a 2004 study on the MMR vaccine and its connection to autism.

Thompson's official statement was released through his Cincinnati attorney, Rick Morgan.

The key piece in Thompson's statement is:

"I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed."

"My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub group for a particular vaccine. There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines."

Everything else in Thompson's statement is backfill and back-pedaling and legal positioning and self-protection.

But this part, this is big. Within Thompson's community of researchers and the general world of medical research and publishing, people know what it means.

It means major fraud.

Thompson, a co-author of the 2004 study, published in the prestigious journal Pediatrics, is admitting to egregious fraud. Cooking the data.

Major scandal. It directly indicts Thompson's co-authors of the 2004 study, including the lead author, Frank DeStefano, who is also a CDC executive in charge of vaccine safety issues.

Now add to that: concealing the dangers of the MMR vaccine for ten years has resulted in untold numbers of cases of autism that could have been prevented.

Damaged lives of children. Damaged families.

Again, this is not someone coming in from the outside to criticize a published study. This is one of the co-authors of the study.

Thompson was there in 2004. He knows what happened. He participated, along with his colleagues, in a cover-up.

His co-authors are all recognized figures in the world of vaccine research: DeStefano; Tanya Karapurkar-Bhasin; Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsop; and Coleen Boyle.

They have all defended the safety of vaccines in other studies, which are now thrown into doubt . As in: dominos falling.

Additional articles about the ongoing CDC scandal:

© historyofvaccines.org

Pro-Vaccine propaganda

It is obvious that the vaccination yay-sayers are in full propaganda mode. This is made clear by the media coverage that the yay-sayers receive. While this approach is not new, the use of social media has upped the ante, targeting parents and questioning parents' rights and sanity in the process:

UNICEF Surveils, Defames health sites over vaccines

A stunning new report reveals that the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) has been monitoring independent health sites and their users in an attempt to identify 'anti-vaccine influencers' and their effect on lackluster vaccine uptake.

A newly fashioned United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) working paper tracking "the rise of online anti-vaccination sentiments in Central and Eastern Europe" identifies independent health websites, including GreenMedInfo.com, Mercola.com, NaturalNews.com and VacTruth.com, as contributing to lackluster vaccine uptake.

The UNICEF report, obtained data using "state-of-the-art social medial monitoring tools," and confirmed that parents are using social media networks to decide whether to vaccinate their children

Labeling research that contradicts or questions the unilateral view that vaccines are always safe and effective, or that their benefits always outweigh their risks, as "anti-vaccine," or the sites that host or discuss that information "anti-vaccination," is polemic and disingenuous. Indeed, insofar as many of the sites UNICEF labels as "anti-vaccine" consistently cite peer-reviewed and published research, they risk indicting the credibility of their own global immunization agenda, which is ostensibly based on the same "evidence-based" epistemological model.

The report also makes the following recommendations:

"International agencies and other partners will need to combine forces and support governments to reverse this counterproductive trend and develop common strategies to promote immunization, as one of the most successful and cost-effective health interventions known in the world." [emphasis added]

While this report appears to have the objectivity and credibility long associated with world governmental health agencies, UNICEF does little to conceal its willingness to partner with, and accept money from, corporations who may have a vested interest in discrediting valid information about the unintended, adverse health effects of vaccines and/or their lack of effectiveness, such as manufacturers of vaccines themselves.

Additional articles about pro-vaccine propaganda: Exercising Parental rights when refusing vaccinations: Why do people follow medical authorities?

Long time practitioners in the natural health industry ask themselves this question on a daily basis. Why do people follow medical authorities who prescribe toxic vaccinations, medications and treatments which only serve as a detriment to human health? The answer lies in a recent report in PLOS Biology.

What we are experiencing today is essentially medical tyranny where government, pharmaceutical conglomerates and medical colleges conspire to produce blind followers of a system that produces more health risks than benefits to any given population.

People have been misled by authority figures to believe that vaccines have prevented horrific diseases when this is plainly false. The main advances in combating disease over the last 200 years have been better food and clean drinking water...not vaccines. Improved sanitation, less overcrowded areas and better living conditions have contributed as well. This is also borne out in published peer reviewed research which proves that vaccines did not save us.

There is light though. The public is gradually detaching themselves from the medical paradigm. They are not automatically conforming to advice from physicians as they did just one or two decades ago. The days of patients solely acting in terms to comply with group membership or fit in a specific group identity are fading. People who have empowered by the medical model to resist natural health are finally seeing the light.

Professor Reicher concludes that tyranny does not flourish because perpetrators are helpless and ignorant; it flourishes because they are convinced that they are doing something worthy. It will take many more years to convince the masses on the atrocities of conventional medicine and perhaps even more time to convert them to natural health. In the end, people will do what they know is right and truth will eventually guide them in this direction. For those of us showing them the way, all I can say is patience ...lots of patience.


As the anit-vaxxer debate continues and disturbing revelations, such as the CDC whistleblower information, come to light, parents and informed citizens will continue to ask questions about the alleged safety of mandatory vaccinations. The yay-saying pro-vaxxers will not give up easily. There are profits to be made and a medical belief system to uphold! As the UNICF report stated; "International agencies and other partners will need to combine forces and support governments to reverse this counterproductive trend and develop common strategies to promote immunization"

An excellent example of this pro-vaccination strategy at work is a recent Slate Magazine article arguing that those refusing to receive vaccines should be penalized, and the act of refusing to be vaccinated be criminalized . Tony Cartalucci lays out an excellent counter argument to such a ridiculous statement:

Vaccine wars: Penalizing the unvaccinated?

Big-Pharma, not activists, are responsible for the growing mistrust of vaccines

The debate isn't ultimately about the science of vaccines, but rather a lack of trust of those charged with producing, monitoring the safety of, and distributing vaccines. The false narrative of science versus conspiracy theorists is peddled by the media, the government, and the corporations that hold influence over both because a narrative focusing on the wisdom of entrusting criminals and mass murderers with our health is an open and shut case.

Such a conclusion would result in the ditching of big-pharma's vaccines and seeking alternative solutions to immunization, vaccine production and distribution, and overall accountability for healthcare. This would in turn result in the decentralization of healthcare and pharmaceutical production, breaking up the unwarranted wealth and influence of big-pharma and those throughout the government and media that have enriched themselves protecting this monopoly. Clearly this is an outcome many in the media, government, and across the board rooms of big-pharmaceutical corporations across the Western World will fight fanatically to prevent.

For the anti-vaccine movement - it may be wiser to focus on these aspects of the debate rather than be drawn into the false paradigm the media is trying to superimpose upon the issue. It may even be wise to not use the term "anti-vaccine movement," and instead make it an anti-big-pharma movement.

It is my hope that this article will help light the way for those who are interested in knowing the truth about vaccinations, the medical cartel, media manipulation and the importance of exercising your individual and collective rights, while you still can!

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at http://ift.tt/jcXqJW.