Drug Boss Escobar Worked for the CIA


The British-American coup that ended Australian independence

Gough Whitlam and Bob Hawke in 1972

Prime minister Gough Whitlam watches ACTU president Bob Hawke drink beer from a yard glass Melbourne, Australia, 1972. Photograph: News Ltd/Newspix/REX

By John Pilger

In 1975 prime minister Gough Whitlam, who has died this week, dared to try to assert his country’s autonomy. The CIA and MI6 made sure he paid the price
Across the media and political establishment in Australia, a silence has descended on the memory of the great, reforming prime minister Gough Whitlam. His achievements are recognised, if grudgingly, his mistakes noted in false sorrow. But a critical reason for his extraordinary political demise will, they hope, be buried with him.
Australia briefly became an independent state during the Whitlam years, 1972-75. An American commentator wrote that no country had “reversed its posture in international affairs so totally without going through a domestic revolution”. Whitlam ended his nation’s colonial servility. He abolished royal patronage, moved Australia towards the Non-Aligned Movement, supported “zones of peace” and opposed nuclear weapons testing.
Although not regarded as on the left of the Labor party, Whitlam was a maverick social democrat of principle, pride and propriety. He believed that a foreign power should not control his country’s resources and dictate its economic and foreign policies. He proposed to “buy back the farm”. In drafting the first Aboriginal lands rights legislation, his government raised the ghost of the greatest land grab in human history, Britain’s colonisation of Australia, and the question of who owned the island-continent’s vast natural wealth.
Latin Americans will recognise the audacity and danger of this “breaking free” in a country whose establishment was welded to great, external power. Australians had served every British imperial adventure since the Boxer rebellion was crushed in China. In the 1960s, Australia pleaded to join the US in its invasion of Vietnam, then provided “black teams” to be run by the CIA. US diplomatic cables published last year by WikiLeaks disclose the names of leading figures in both main parties, including a future prime minister and foreign minister, as Washington’s informants during the Whitlam years.
Whitlam knew the risk he was taking. The day after his election, he ordered that his staff should not be “vetted or harassed” by the Australian security organisation, Asio – then, as now, tied to Anglo-American intelligence. When his ministers publicly condemned the US bombing of Vietnam as “corrupt and barbaric”, a CIA station officer in Saigon said: “We were told the Australians might as well be regarded as North Vietnamese collaborators.”
Whitlam demanded to know if and why the CIA was running a spy base at Pine Gap near Alice Springs, a giant vacuum cleaner which, as Edward Snowden revealed recently, allows the US to spy on everyone. “Try to screw us or bounce us,” the prime minister warned the US ambassador, “[and Pine Gap] will become a matter of contention”.
Victor Marchetti, the CIA officer who had helped set up Pine Gap, later told me, “This threat to close Pine Gap caused apoplexy in the White House … a kind of Chile [coup] was set in motion.”
Pine Gap’s top-secret messages were decoded by a CIA contractor, TRW. One of the decoders was Christopher Boyce, a young man troubled by the “deception and betrayal of an ally”. Boyce revealed that the CIA had infiltrated the Australian political and trade union elite and referred to the governor-general of Australia, Sir John Kerr, as “our man Kerr”.
Kerr was not only the Queen’s man, he had longstanding ties to Anglo-American intelligence. He was an enthusiastic member of the Australian Association for Cultural Freedom, described by Jonathan Kwitny of the Wall Street Journal in his book, The Crimes of Patriots, as “an elite, invitation-only group … exposed in Congress as being founded, funded and generally run by the CIA”. The CIA “paid for Kerr’s travel, built his prestige … Kerr continued to go to the CIA for money”.
When Whitlam was re-elected for a second term, in 1974, the White House sent Marshall Green to Canberra as ambassador. Green was an imperious, sinister figure who worked in the shadows of America’s “deep state”. Known as “the coupmaster”, he had played a central role in the 1965 coup against President Sukarno in Indonesia – which cost up to a million lives. One of his first speeches in Australia, to the Australian Institute of Directors, was described by an alarmed member of the audience as “an incitement to the country’s business leaders to rise against the government”.
The Americans and British worked together. In 1975, Whitlam discovered that Britain’s MI6 was operating against his government. “The Brits were actually decoding secret messages coming into my foreign affairs office,” he said later. One of his ministers, Clyde Cameron, told me, “We knew MI6 was bugging cabinet meetings for the Americans.” In the 1980s, senior CIA officers revealed that the “Whitlam problem” had been discussed “with urgency” by the CIA’s director, William Colby, and the head of MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield. A deputy director of the CIA said: “Kerr did what he was told to do.”
On 10 November 1975, Whitlam was shown a top-secret telex message sourced to Theodore Shackley, the notorious head of the CIA’s East Asia division, who had helped run the coup against Salvador Allende in Chile two years earlier.
Shackley’s message was read to Whitlam. It said that the prime minister of Australia was a security risk in his own country. The day before, Kerr had visited the headquarters of the Defence Signals Directorate, Australia’s NSA, where he was briefed on the “security crisis”.
On 11 November – the day Whitlam was to inform parliament about the secret CIA presence in Australia – he was summoned by Kerr. Invoking archaic vice-regal “reserve powers”, Kerr sacked the democratically elected prime minister. The “Whitlam problem” was solved, and Australian politics never recovered, nor the nation its true independence.
John Pilger’s investigation into the coup against Whitlam is described in full in his book, A Secret Country (Vintage), and in his documentary film, Other People’s Wars, which can be viewed on http://www.johnpilger.com/


Frankenstein unleashed?: FDA approves 1st ‘living drug’ to treat cancer in the US

FDA approves 1st ‘living drug’ to treat cancer in the US

© National Cancer Institute \ Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center at Baylor College of Medicine
The Food and Drug Administration has approved the first-ever gene therapy to treat cancer in the US. The treatment offers a totally new approach to fighting the disease and could lead to novel treatments of other serious and life-threatening maladies.
On Wednesday, the FDA approved a new leukemia treatment from the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis, which the agency said is “the first gene therapy available in the United States.”
The treatment, called Kymriah, is a “genetically-modified autologous T-cell immunotherapy,” where each dose is created by using the patient’s own T-cells, a type of white blood cell known as a lymphocyte.
Each patient’s T-cells are sent to a manufacturing center where they are genetically modified to include a new gene that contains a specific protein, called a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR). The CAR-T cells known as “a living drug,” are then infused back into the patient, where they target and kill leukemia cells.

What is gene therapy? Find out how they work & about the different types. https://go.usa.gov/xRApg
“We’re entering a new frontier in medical innovation with the ability to reprogram a patient’s own cells to attack a deadly cancer,” FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said in a statement. “New technologies such as gene and cell therapies hold out the potential to transform medicine and create an inflection point in our ability to treat and even cure many intractable illnesses.”
The treatment has been approved for patients up to the age of 25 who have a form of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), a cancer of the bone marrow and blood, that is refractory or in second or later relapse.
Acute lymphoblastic leukemia is the most common childhood cancer in the US, affecting approximately 3,100 patients aged 20 and younger, according to the National Cancer Institute.
With the CAR-T cell therapy, 90 percent of young patients suffering from ALL who used to be considered fatal cases are now able to recover, according to Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Institute of Health (NIH).
The FDA said that Kymriah was shown to be safe and effective in the clinical trials of 63 pediatric and young adult patients with ALL.
“Kymriah is a first-of-its-kind treatment approach that fills an important unmet need for children and young adults with this serious disease,” Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), said in a statement. “Not only does Kymriah provide these patients with a new treatment option where very limited options existed, but a treatment option that has shown promising remission and survival rates in clinical trials.”

Try this at home:  approves 1st direct-to-consumer tests for genetic risk of disease http://on.rt.com/884j 
Novartis, the company behind the treatment, said that they are working to “change the course of cancer care.”
“As a breakthrough immunocellular therapy for children and young adults who desperately need new options, Kymriah truly embodies our mission to discover new ways to improve patient outcomes and the way cancer is treated,” Bruno Strigini, CEO of Novartis Oncology, said in a statement.
Novartis also said the FDA approved a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for Kymriah. The program will inform and educate healthcare professionals about the treatment and the risks that are associated with it.
The company also states they are establishing a network of certified treatment centers across the US, which they said will be “fully trained on the use of Kymriah and appropriate patient care.”


First we spend billions on vaccines that cause cancer and then we need to spend billions to cure children from cancer. Why don’t we just stop vaccinating? Oh, wait money, right.
If you ask me they dazzle you with a lot of BS but in the end it is all:

Voodoo Science from foolishness to fraud

Making stuff up on Twitter is the new ‘journalism’ — and we deserve it

Making stuff up on Twitter is the new 'journalism' — and we deserve it

© Mike Segar / Reuters

By Danielle Ryan

On Monday, The Guardian published a story which should have surprised no one: Information pushed aggressively on Twitter by anti-Trump conspiracy theorist duo Louise Mensch and Claude Taylor came from a hoaxer who duped Taylor in an email.
Taylor, a former White House staffer under Bill Clinton, tweeted out “fake details of criminal inquiries” related to Donald Trump which did not exist and were “invented” by a hoaxer claiming to work for the New York attorney general.
Mensch, a former conservative member of parliament in the UK and now a self-styled journalist, helped Taylor to spread the information on Twitter, while also claiming to have separate sources to back it up.

Conning the con artists

Among the details provided by the hoaxer was a false allegation that Trump’s inactive model agency in New York is being investigated for sex trafficking. The Guardian reports the hoaxer fed information to Taylor by email, acting out of frustration over the “dissemination of fake news” by Taylor and Mensch.
According to the hoaxer, Taylor did not try to verify her identity and did “no vetting whatsoever” to confirm her information was correct. Nor did he try to seek confirmation from a second source, a standard practice in journalism. Instead, the hoaxer claims Taylor “asked leading questions to support his various theories” and asked her to verify his suspicions.
When approached by The Guardian, Taylor, whose Twitter handle ironically remains @TrueFactsStated, admitted he was duped, tweeting: “As a ‘citizen journalist’ I acknowledge my error and do apologize.”
Mensch, for her part, has doubled down. She posted a rebuttal to The Guardian report, claiming she has her own sources (who she claims to know personally) and insisted she did not base her reporting on any interactions with the hoaxer in question. She claims the allegation that Trump’s model agency is being investigated for sex trafficking is “entirely true,” and ongoing.

La La land

Writing for Fair.org, Adam Johnson laid out a series of outlandish and unsubstantiated claims Mensch has made on Twitter. Among other things, Mensch believes Russia is controlling the public WiFi networks in her neighborhood, that Anthony Weiner’s latest sexting scandal was a setup by a Russian hacker and that Vladimir Putin had something to do with the March 22 terror attack in London. She also believes misspelled hashtags on Twitter are Russian “active measures,” that the Kremlin funded riots in Ferguson, and that Steve Bannon may get the death penalty for espionage. Finally, thanks to The Guardian’s reporting exposing the hoax Taylor fell for, Mensch now apparently believes the newspaper is a front for the Russian FSB.
Mensch often claims to have “sources” to back up her random claims, but I imagine any legitimate source in their right mind would steer well clear of Mensch given the reputation she has garnered for peddling absolute nonsense.
Taylor is almost as bad. He hasn’t gained quite the notoriety of Mensch, but has been touted as a legitimate source of information on Trump by many, including a raging Keith Olbermann.
If Mensch and Taylor were just a pair of random trolls on Twitter, they wouldn’t be much of a problem. Their fantastical claims would remain irrelevant and would be kept to the confines of Twitter’s loony bin.
But Mensch and Taylor sadly are not irrelevant. Between them they boast nearly half a million followers on Twitter. Mensch has been propped up by mainstream media and praised by some high-profile figures, including former Democratic National Committee head Donna Brazile and Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe. She has appeared as a guest on US political talk shows and has even been given op-ed space in the New York Times.
Thankfully, Mensch’s star has started to fade, and she has gradually been called out by numerous publications for her lunacy. Slate called her a “paranoid bard” who has created a “cottage industry of conspiracies.” A piece in the National Review lamented her “bastardized relationship with reality.” Commentary Magazine wrote that she has “a habit of seeing Russians behind every darkened corner” — and BuzzFeed called her out for branding innocent people as Russian agents.
My personal favorite, though, is the Daily Beast article about Twitter’s “conspiracy queen” which quotes a Republican political consultant calling Mensch “unbelievably toxic” and a former intelligence officer calling her “batshit crazy” and a “fruit loop of the highest order.”
Mensch is a fanatical tweeter. Since I opened her profile little over an hour ago, there have been 38 new tweets and retweets posted. Consider this: Mensch, a woman now widely panned for spreading totally unverified information, has been verified by a blue tick on Twitter — but the social media platform has refused to verify Julian Assange — a man who has distributed millions of authentic, consequential documents and broken countless legitimate stories through WikiLeaks.

Rot from the top

The rise in prominence of conspiracy theorists like Mensch and Taylor speaks volumes about today’s political climate and the state of journalism.
Legitimized by the mainstream, Taylor and Mensch built a massive following of loyal supporters who will not abandon them for anything. As I type, their devoted fans are tweeting them support and thanking them for their hard work.
This is pure and utter madness. But the fish rots from the head down.
Mensch and Taylor benefit greatly from the lowering of standards across the entire media industry. The problem is not simply that anyone can wake up and post wild claims on the internet. That has always been the case.
The problem is that through unbridled sensationalism, naked bias, a focus on speed over accuracy, less emphasis on basic fact-checking, an increased willingness to rely on anonymous government sources and a need to attract readers with the most clickbait-y headlines — the news media has helped create an appetite for exactly what Taylor, Mensch and their ilk provide: Unadulterated nonsense. What’s more, when people believe (rightly) that they can’t trust the real media, they go looking for alternatives and fall victim to charlatans and opportunists.
A good example of how the media has helped in this regard comes from a Washington Post story published last year claiming that Russia hacked the US power grid through a facility in Vermont. The Post later had to backtrack on the story, which turned out to be untrue. It was later revealed the newspaper did not even contact that Vermont utilities in question to confirm the information. The fact that it was light on evidence and sourcing didn’t matter. The story had everything the public wanted and everything the Post wanted to give the public: sensational, scary and highly click-worthy claims about Russia.
Today’s political and media climate encourages rabid devotion to one’s cause over debate, balance, and self-restraint. It is not simply enough to dislike Donald Trump and oppose him politically. You must hate him with a fiery passion and denounce him from the rooftops with a guttural scream. You must believe he kicks puppies and eats babies for breakfast. You must find the pundit that hates him the most, latch onto their wagon and pledge allegiance for the rest of time.

YouTube economically censors former presidential candidate @RonPaul for criticizing U.S. foreign policy on Afghanistan and WikiLeaks.
The case of Taylor and the hoaxer goes to show just how easily many people will believe a story if they desperately want to believe it. This is not a phenomenon of the left or right. If a story appears to confirm for a group what they think they already know, they will eat it up, no questions asked.
Taylor was no exception – literally. A hoaxer mailed him false information, and because he wanted to believe it, he asked no questions.
He didn’t try to verify it. He didn’t try to find a second source. He didn’t even try to confirm the identity of the woman feeding him this information. He broke every rule in the book because he so badly wanted the information to be true.
This is the kind of “journalism” Taylor and Mensch’s followers are signing up for. But if the “real” media makes no effort to take a long hard look in the mirror, then this is exactly the kind of replacement they deserve.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


I found out on Twitter that people are not looking for truth, they are looking for ‘being right’. Since (my guess) up to 90% are COAs these people are just as brainwashed as the people following the MSM, they just believe different stories.

‘Stalingrad Remains Soviet’: Secret Docs on the WWII-Changing Battle Released

Stalingrad (archive)

© Sputnik/ Georgij Selma
On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the victory of the Red Army over Nazis in Stalingrad, secret documents about the battle that changed the course of the war have been made public.
The documents were released by the Russian Ministry of Defense and include not only various Soviet documents, but also reports from the Wehrmacht’s General Staff.
One of the Wehrmacht’s reports describes what Nazi Germany knew about the position of the Soviet troops as well as the types of the Soviet Army’s armaments.
“The enemy’s behavior in the Stalingrad region has remained unchanged. The enemy attacked 14 Tank Corps and 8th Army Corps between Volga and Don using strong infantry and armored forces,” the document said.
Another secret document from Nazi Germany reported on the situation in the besieged city. In particular, it said that the Red Army had created a special storm force to attack the Germans.
“A blow from the storm force is short, its actions are fast and insolent. The nature of the storm force is determined by the character of the city battle which is a battle in close quarters: the attack implies the seizure of fortified houses, buildings and objects that are used by the enemy as fortifications and military bases,” the document says.


Furthermore, the document describes the work of snipers who were hiding on cranes and in chimneys, and were systematically destroying the defense forces of the Wehrmacht. According to the document, Soviet snipers killed some 10,000 German officers and soldiers in Stalingrad. One of the most famous snipers was Vasily Grigorievich Zaitsev, who killed 240 German soldiers in the first three months of the battle for the beleaguered city.
Vasily Grigorievich Zaitsev and his team in Stalingrad (archive photo)
© SPUTNIK/ GEORGIJ SELMA, Vasily Grigorievich Zaitsev and his team in Stalingrad (archive photo)
Another document published is a Soviet leaflet written in German.
“You have been standing before Stalingrad for one month. What have you achieved? Tens of thousands of Germans have fallen in front of Stalingrad, but the city remains and will remain a Soviet city. Stalingrad means Volga. And Volga is a part of Soviet Russia. The freedom-loving Russian people will never give Stalingrad and the Volga River away. It [the Russian people] will never sink to its knees before the intruder — fascist Germany,” the document said.


CC0 / STALINGRAD, Stalingrad
The Battle of Stalingrad was a major battle of World War II. The Nazi army attacked the Soviet city and tried to maintain it under its control. The battle lasted from July 17, 1942, until February 2, 1943, and ended with the defeat of the German forces. The Soviet Union suffered over 1.1 million casualties during the fighting and the siege of the city.