theduran--2020-01-30--WHO impressed by Chinese response to coronavirus outbreak

On July 1st 1941 , the Soviet Politburo created the Council for Evacuations , an emergency governing body tasked with organizing the evacuation of people , food , farm-livestock , other goods and entire factory complexes to the Urals region before they could be captured or requisitioned by the advancing Wehrmacht .
The deputy-chairman of this committee , a 37 year-old bureaucrat named Alexei Kosygin , was given special responsibility for the evacuation of factories , with a priority placed on industries connected to the Soviet military-industrial complex .
Between July and November 1941 , he succeeded in expediting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factory complexes , and their rapid reassembly and re-commencement of production .
One such factory was # 183 in Kramatorsk , which employed 60,000 workers for 24-hour tank-production .
The factory was still operational in Kramatorsk in October 1941 , was evacuated in November , and resumed full production in Chelyabinsk in December .
Kosygin went on to have a long and illustrious Politburo career – minister for light industry , minister for finance , architect of the 1965 economic reforms package , chairman of GOSPLAN , and Chairman of the Council of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) for 15 years before his death in 1980 .
The Chinese government ’ s response to the coronavirus outbreak might not quite match those Herculean feats of crisis-management , but the news of the past few days is nonetheless somewhat reminiscent of Kosygin ’ s achievements .
In Geneva on January 29th , the World Health Organization team assembled to address the coronavirus outbreak gave a glowing assessment of the Chinese government ’ s response to the crisis .
Dr. Maria Van Der Kerkhove of the WHO stated that one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been so rapid is because the Chinese government had published a full genome-mapping of the new variant within days of the initial outbreak , making diagnosis easier .
This is possible partially because China has been producing an academic golden generation of doctoral candidates in the biological sciences over the past 15-20 years .
China has got an absolutely massive academic talent-pool in the life-sciences , especially in molecular biology , microbiology and biochemistry .
In other words , Dr. Van Der Kerkhove argued , the rapid increase in newly diagnosed cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than as a negative , insofar as it was an indicator of the proficiency of the Chinese response .
It is historically unprecedented that the entire genome-sequence of a new virus is published within days of the virus ’ first appearance .
Dr. Michael Ryan , Executive Director of the WHO Health Emergencies Program , stated that “ China and Chinese scientists have performed probably the most rapid characterization of a novel pathogen in history , and that was shared immediately .
Multiple sequences were shared immediately on global platforms.
” Previously Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China in the previous days , stating that “ China is doing the right things , and China is responding in a massive way….What I took away from that mission was the absolute , relentless and focused determination of the government of China to put the health of people in China ahead of anything else at this point , and to take what are significant economic and other hits in order to put the health of people first .
The levels of meetings , the numbers of meetings and the attendance at those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terms of a government ’ s commitment to do that….
” Answering concerns raised by a Bloomberg correspondent regarding the transparency of the Chinese government ’ s response , Dr. Ryan described the Wuhan regional government ’ s response and dissemination of information as “ state of the art , ” saying that the Wuhan government ’ s public website had declared a red alert extremely early , and that an extremely impressive quantity of new information contained in their daily updates had been published since December 31st/January 1st .
Dr. Ryan said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SARS , and I can tell you from direct operational experience that there is no comparison between the behaviour of China then and the behaviour of China now.
” He described the responses of all countries which had been affected thus far , including China , as “ remarkably transparent.
” So , a glib western journalist asks a cheap propagandist ’ s question , and promptly gets his head handed to him .
WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom said that he had been in almost daily contact with Chinese health minister Ma @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Minister Ma , Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Chinese President Xi Jinping , he had been “ very encouraged and impressed by the president ’ s detailed knowledge of the outbreak and his personal involvement in the response .
This was for me a very rare leadership.
” While reports of the Chinese government building 2 specialized hospitals for the treatment of coronavirus in only 48 hours have been somewhat exaggerated , the scale and rapidity of the Chinese government ’ s infrastructural response to the crisis is still staggering .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ well-governed countries , the defence ministry has a ready-made contingency-plan for almost every imaginable hypothetical national emergency situation .
This makes rapid response and implementation of emergency-measures possible .
Just take the plan off the shelf , and do it !
If we are to take the last few days as evidence , it turns out that in China , the Health Ministry also has ready-made and well devised contingency-plans for almost every imaginable public health emergency .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Padraig McGrath, political analyst…
On July 1st 1941, the Soviet Politburo created the Council for Evacuations, an emergency governing body tasked with organizing the evacuation of people, food, farm-livestock, other goods and entire factory complexes to the Urals region before they could be captured or requisitioned by the advancing Wehrmacht. The deputy-chairman of this committee, a 37 year-old bureaucrat named Alexei Kosygin, was given special responsibility for the evacuation of factories, with a priority placed on industries connected to the Soviet military-industrial complex.
Between July and November 1941, he succeeded in expediting the evacuation of no fewer than 1,300 entire factory complexes, and their rapid reassembly and re-commencement of production. One such factory was #183 in Kramatorsk, which employed 60,000 workers for 24-hour tank-production. The factory was still operational in Kramatorsk in October 1941, was evacuated in November, and resumed full production in Chelyabinsk in December. Kosygin went on to have a long and illustrious Politburo career – minister for light industry, minister for finance, architect of the 1965 economic reforms package, chairman of GOSPLAN, and Chairman of the Council of Ministers (official Soviet head of state) for 15 years before his death in 1980.
The Chinese government’s response to the coronavirus outbreak might not quite match those Herculean feats of crisis-management, but the news of the past few days is nonetheless somewhat reminiscent of Kosygin’s achievements. In Geneva on January 29th, the World Health Organization team assembled to address the coronavirus outbreak gave a glowing assessment of the Chinese government’s response to the crisis.
Dr. Maria Van Der Kerkhove of the WHO stated that one of the reasons why the growth in coronavirus diagnoses has been so rapid is because the Chinese government had published a full genome-mapping of the new variant within days of the initial outbreak, making diagnosis easier. This is possible partially because China has been producing an academic golden generation of doctoral candidates in the biological sciences over the past 15-20 years. China has got an absolutely massive academic talent-pool in the life-sciences, especially in molecular biology, microbiology and biochemistry.
In other words, Dr. Van Der Kerkhove argued, the rapid increase in newly diagnosed cases should be interpreted as a positive rather than as a negative, insofar as it was an indicator of the proficiency of the Chinese response.
It is historically unprecedented that the entire genome-sequence of a new virus is published within days of the virus’ first appearance.
Dr. Michael Ryan, Executive Director of the WHO Health Emergencies Program, stated that “China and Chinese scientists have performed probably the most rapid characterization of a novel pathogen in history, and that was shared immediately. Multiple sequences were shared immediately on global platforms.”
Previously Dr. Ryan had commented on his visit to China in the previous days, stating that “China is doing the right things, and China is responding in a massive way….What I took away from that mission was the absolute, relentless and focused determination of the government of China to put the health of people in China ahead of anything else at this point, and to take what are significant economic and other hits in order to put the health of people first. The levels of meetings, the numbers of meetings and the attendance at those meetings was unprecedented in my memory in terms of a government’s commitment to do that….”
Answering concerns raised by a Bloomberg correspondent regarding the transparency of the Chinese government’s response, Dr. Ryan described the Wuhan regional government’s response and dissemination of information as “state of the art,” saying that the Wuhan government’s public website had declared a red alert extremely early, and that an extremely impressive quantity of new information contained in their daily updates had been published since December 31st/January 1st. Dr. Ryan said “I was involved in 2002/2003 in SARS, and I can tell you from direct operational experience that there is no comparison between the behaviour of China then and the behaviour of China now.”
He described the responses of all countries which had been affected thus far, including China, as “remarkably transparent.”
So, a glib western journalist asks a cheap propagandist’s question, and promptly gets his head handed to him.
WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom said that he had been in almost daily contact with Chinese health minister Ma Xiaowei, and that during his meetings with Minister Ma, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Chinese President Xi Jinping, he had been “very encouraged and impressed by the president’s detailed knowledge of the outbreak and his personal involvement in the response. This was for me a very rare leadership.”
While reports of the Chinese government building 2 specialized hospitals for the treatment of coronavirus in only 48 hours have been somewhat exaggerated, the scale and rapidity of the Chinese government’s infrastructural response to the crisis is still staggering. We already know that in most reasonably well-governed countries, the defence ministry has a ready-made contingency-plan for almost every imaginable hypothetical national emergency situation. This makes rapid response and implementation of emergency-measures possible. Just take the plan off the shelf, and do it! If we are to take the last few days as evidence, it turns out that in China, the Health Ministry also has ready-made and well devised contingency-plans for almost every imaginable public health emergency.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-30--US impeachment trial shows great wisdom of the US Constitution [Video]

If one judges the age of nations by how old their constitutions and governmental structures are , Paul Ryan tells the truth when he says the US has the oldest democracy in the world .
This is verified as True , even on PolitiFact .
The US Constitution was ratified in 1788 , and although it has been successfully amended 27 times , it has never been fundamentally changed since ratification .
While many nations , almost all of them now , have constitutions , none of these have lasted as long as the American document , perhaps because while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ! )
created constitutions modeled after the pattern of the US Constitution , they did not preserve the system of checks and balances that the US document has .
These protect the document from change , making it exceedingly difficult for radical changes to the Constitution , and they also protect the nation from the whims of its own elected leadership , as it is the Constitution , and no one person or group of persons , that the holders of elected office in the US swear allegiance to , “ so help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a surprise to many people to learn that the United States of America is actually the oldest ( constitutionally based ) nation in the world .
Over the past two weeks , the strength of the Constitution has been put to its greatest test with the efforts of the Democrat party to impeach President Donald Trump .
The House of Representatives brought two articles of Impeachment against the President : Obstruction of Congress and Abuse of Power being the titles of these two charges .
The US Senate has been in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President and hearing the arguments against their veracity as delivered by a real dream team of Constitutional experts as attorneys .
The process that the American government is following presently in the Senate displays both the function and the difference between pure democracy and a representative republic , and it displays the difference between the passionate and whimsical nature of the Lower chamber of Congress and the dispassionate view the Constitution prescribes and preserves for the people in the Senate as a check against the hysteria of the day , whatever that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course the Democrat / globalist hysteria over President Trump appears to be breaking on the shores of the Constitution like water breaks on the rocks at the seashore .
It would seem that the Democrats are being forced to face this as well , as the Articles the Democrats presented for trial are resoundingly unconstitutional in nature , only having “ relative ” relevance rather than Constitutional relevance , at best .
The arguments offered by Alan Dershowitz , Jay Sekulow and others in the Trump team ’ s response to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Democrats actually had something that would lead to the President ’ s removal from office .
We offer two videos – the first here below , of Alan Dershowitz ’ entire speech regarding the unconstitutionality of the articles .
These are lengthy , about three hours in total running time , but these are probably three of the most important hours anyone trying to understand the US could spend watching : And this one , with several other attorneys representing the President , giving a mixture of both Constitutional and passionate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exposing the articles for the tripe they really are .
Most of all , these two videos show that when the US government gets down to brass tacks and gets down to basics , we see the genius of the Constitution as well as its great objectivity and strength .
In many of our political articles , even here , we often resort to rhetoric – some very skillfully stated , some not – and in many circumstances , the “ spirit of the age ” and “ what things ‘ ought ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is right and what is wrong , end up dominating the rhetoric on any given issue .
But the Constitution is about principles and not personalities , and thus far it has done a great job standing as an objective observer , judge and preventer of the nation ’ s political activities .
The Constitution had been under great assault for several decades by activist politicians and political action groups who sought to essentially transform America into something “ more like Europe ” , but such moves were being rejected by the American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he began weeding out activist judges and activist politicians , replacing them with strict constitutionalists , people who once again treat the Constitution seriously and literally , not seeking to “ reinterpret the document “ in light of our age .
Does this hold hope for the world in terms of geopolitics , or does it amplify the specter of American Hegemony ?
Based on the efforts by the President to get the US out of places like Syria , Iraq and other places , and the internal dissolution of secondary and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gradually transforming into what it is when it is at its best : A free , constitutional republic , guided by principles that may not be enjoyed much , but which can be trusted precisely because they are not developed at your whim or mine .
No matter how wise we ourselves might be , the document prevents sudden change on the foundation that the whim of the moment may certainly need to be heard , but it ought not be followed unless it passes all the tests that our founding document places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been rightly said that the American Constitution exists not so much to grant liberty to its people as to take it away from the government .
This is the exact opposite of how most governments are formed , where power exists on high and the citizens get what is left over .
This form of governance has been highly successful , yielding the oldest constitutional government in the world .
The final point the impeachment trial shows us is that the US will last as long as its government obeys and adheres to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show this clearly .
The fragmentation of the United States in recent years has only been because the Constitution was not the reference of our elected leaders nor was it the source referred to by our citizens .
In this respect the Impeachment trial is an enormous civics lesson .
The trial is something that ought to be watched and studied deeply in the context of the framers , and maybe a new respect for our nation and what it exists for would be born .
And such a nation would very likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too .
That would probably be a boon to many people in a great many nations who have been hurt by US idiocy during the time that America seemed more concerned with running the world than she was with seeing to herself .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
If one judges the age of nations by how old their constitutions and governmental structures are, Paul Ryan tells the truth when he says the US has the oldest democracy in the world. This is verified as True, even on PolitiFact. The US Constitution was ratified in 1788, and although it has been successfully amended 27 times, it has never been fundamentally changed since ratification. While many nations, almost all of them now, have constitutions, none of these have lasted as long as the American document, perhaps because while other nations (including the Soviet Union!) created constitutions modeled after the pattern of the US Constitution, they did not preserve the system of checks and balances that the US document has. These protect the document from change, making it exceedingly difficult for radical changes to the Constitution, and they also protect the nation from the whims of its own elected leadership, as it is the Constitution, and no one person or group of persons, that the holders of elected office in the US swear allegiance to, “so help me God.”
It may therefore come as a surprise to many people to learn that the United States of America is actually the oldest (constitutionally based) nation in the world.
Over the past two weeks, the strength of the Constitution has been put to its greatest test with the efforts of the Democrat party to impeach President Donald Trump. The House of Representatives brought two articles of Impeachment against the President: Obstruction of Congress and Abuse of Power being the titles of these two charges. The US Senate has been in the process of reviewing the Democrat-led claims against the President and hearing the arguments against their veracity as delivered by a real dream team of Constitutional experts as attorneys.
The process that the American government is following presently in the Senate displays both the function and the difference between pure democracy and a representative republic, and it displays the difference between the passionate and whimsical nature of the Lower chamber of Congress and the dispassionate view the Constitution prescribes and preserves for the people in the Senate as a check against the hysteria of the day, whatever that may be. In this case, of course the Democrat / globalist hysteria over President Trump appears to be breaking on the shores of the Constitution like water breaks on the rocks at the seashore.
It would seem that the Democrats are being forced to face this as well, as the Articles the Democrats presented for trial are resoundingly unconstitutional in nature, only having “relative” relevance rather than Constitutional relevance, at best. The arguments offered by Alan Dershowitz, Jay Sekulow and others in the Trump team’s response to the Democrat claims have really withered the illusion that the Democrats actually had something that would lead to the President’s removal from office.
We offer two videos – the first here below, of Alan Dershowitz’ entire speech regarding the unconstitutionality of the articles. These are lengthy, about three hours in total running time, but these are probably three of the most important hours anyone trying to understand the US could spend watching:
And this one, with several other attorneys representing the President, giving a mixture of both Constitutional and passionate rhetoric that does a good job at exposing the articles for the tripe they really are.
Most of all, these two videos show that when the US government gets down to brass tacks and gets down to basics, we see the genius of the Constitution as well as its great objectivity and strength.
In many of our political articles, even here, we often resort to rhetoric – some very skillfully stated, some not – and in many circumstances, the “spirit of the age” and “what things ‘ought’ to be” as far as what is right and what is wrong, end up dominating the rhetoric on any given issue. But the Constitution is about principles and not personalities, and thus far it has done a great job standing as an objective observer, judge and preventer of the nation’s political activities.
The Constitution had been under great assault for several decades by activist politicians and political action groups who sought to essentially transform America into something “more like Europe”, but such moves were being rejected by the American people. When President Trump was elected, he began weeding out activist judges and activist politicians, replacing them with strict constitutionalists, people who once again treat the Constitution seriously and literally, not seeking to “reinterpret the document “in light of our age.
Does this hold hope for the world in terms of geopolitics, or does it amplify the specter of American Hegemony?
Based on the efforts by the President to get the US out of places like Syria, Iraq and other places, and the internal dissolution of secondary and ternary government agencies, the US is gradually transforming into what it is when it is at its best: A free, constitutional republic, guided by principles that may not be enjoyed much, but which can be trusted precisely because they are not developed at your whim or mine. No matter how wise we ourselves might be, the document prevents sudden change on the foundation that the whim of the moment may certainly need to be heard, but it ought not be followed unless it passes all the tests that our founding document places on such bright ideas.
It has been rightly said that the American Constitution exists not so much to grant liberty to its people as to take it away from the government. This is the exact opposite of how most governments are formed, where power exists on high and the citizens get what is left over. This form of governance has been highly successful, yielding the oldest constitutional government in the world. The final point the impeachment trial shows us is that the US will last as long as its government obeys and adheres to the Constitution. The Trump team arguments show this clearly. The fragmentation of the United States in recent years has only been because the Constitution was not the reference of our elected leaders nor was it the source referred to by our citizens.
In this respect the Impeachment trial is an enormous civics lesson. The trial is something that ought to be watched and studied deeply in the context of the framers, and maybe a new respect for our nation and what it exists for would be born.
And such a nation would very likely stop meddling stupidly in international affairs, too. That would probably be a boon to many people in a great many nations who have been hurt by US idiocy during the time that America seemed more concerned with running the world than she was with seeing to herself.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-30--UK MI6 dumps Steele in plan to mend fences with Trump White House (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the stunning UK Sunday Times article , where the man behind the nearly three year Russiagate hoax , ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele , is revealed to have completely “ fabricated ” the entire infamous dossier on Trump and Russia .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
A British author who specializes in espionage raised serious doubts about former MI6 officer Christopher Steele ’ s salacious dossier , which was included @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into President Trump ’ s 2016 campaign .
Rupert Allason , a former member of Parliament whose pen name is Nigel West , conducted a forensic analysis of Steele ’ s work , which made stunning allegations about coordination between Trump ’ s camp and Russia .
He came away “ stunned ” by what he viewed to be a poor job by a former intelligence officer whom he once considered to be a friend .
“ There is … a strong possibility that all Steele ’ s material has been fabricated , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the British newspaper Sunday Times .
Allason , 68 , was commissioned by a Republican law firm after the dossier , a series of reports that included details of a “ pee tape ” and an alleged video obtained by the Russians of Trump with prostitutes urinating on a bed in a Moscow hotel room , was published by BuzzFeed in January 2017 .
Allason ’ s report comes in the wake of an assessment by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz , who condemned Steele , 55 , and the FBI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obtain warrants for wiretapping onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page .
Additionally , special counsel Robert Mueller concluded an investigation last year that found no criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia .
The FBI has been heavily criticized by Trump and his Republican allies for not making clear to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that Steele ’ s work , commissioned by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS , was funded by Hillary Clinton ’ s 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the Perkins Coie law firm .
Allason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he had “ a strong financial incentive to perpetuate the reporting ” of Trump ’ s links to Russia .
Horowitz ’ s report , which was released in December and faulted the Justice Department and the FBI for 17 “ significant errors and omissions ” in its submissions to the FISA court , showed that FBI interviews with Steele ’ s primary Moscow-based source , beginning in January 2017 , “ raised significant questions about the reliability of the Steele election reporting.
” This source claimed that much of what he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in the case of the “ pee tape , ” just “ rumor and speculation ” from a sub-source , reported by some to likely be Belarus-born businessman Sergei Millian .
Millian , however , has denied being a source for the dossier .
Allason also took issue with Steele ’ s sourcing , writing that from “ a professional intelligence perspective , the dossier as a whole is profoundly troubling and can not be taken at face value.
” “ Source E is credited with access to Ritz-Carlton staff , knowledge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the abuse of Russian diplomatic facilities in the United States .
This appears to be an extraordinarily wide area of expertise , ” Allason wrote , adding , “ The apparent lapses bear the hallmarks of invention.
” In a statement , Steele ’ s Orbis Business Intelligence accused Allason of writing a “ politically motivated ” report as his research was funded by a Republican law firm and asserted that Allason ’ s findings were not “ based on any knowledge ” of its sources and methods .
West ’ s work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authority ” because he “ was never an intelligence officer and has no experience of operational work in the field.
” Orbis also claimed “ much of the dossier has been proven ” since 2017 and declared : “ We stand by the integrity and quality of our work .
”

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the stunning UK Sunday Times article, where the man behind the nearly three year Russiagate hoax, ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele, is revealed to have completely “fabricated” the entire infamous dossier on Trump and Russia.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via The Washington Examiner…
A British author who specializes in espionage raised serious doubts about former MI6 officer Christopher Steele’s salacious dossier, which was included in the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into President Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Rupert Allason, a former member of Parliament whose pen name is Nigel West, conducted a forensic analysis of Steele’s work, which made stunning allegations about coordination between Trump’s camp and Russia. He came away “stunned” by what he viewed to be a poor job by a former intelligence officer whom he once considered to be a friend.
“There is … a strong possibility that all Steele’s material has been fabricated,” Allason wrote in a report obtained by the British newspaper Sunday Times.
Allason, 68, was commissioned by a Republican law firm after the dossier, a series of reports that included details of a “pee tape” and an alleged video obtained by the Russians of Trump with prostitutes urinating on a bed in a Moscow hotel room, was published by BuzzFeed in January 2017.
Allason’s report comes in the wake of an assessment by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who condemned Steele, 55, and the FBI for its reliance on his dossier to obtain warrants for wiretapping onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Additionally, special counsel Robert Mueller concluded an investigation last year that found no criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.
The FBI has been heavily criticized by Trump and his Republican allies for not making clear to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that Steele’s work, commissioned by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, was funded by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the Perkins Coie law firm.
Allason determined that because Steele had Democratic benefactors, he had “a strong financial incentive to perpetuate the reporting” of Trump’s links to Russia.
Horowitz’s report, which was released in December and faulted the Justice Department and the FBI for 17 “significant errors and omissions” in its submissions to the FISA court, showed that FBI interviews with Steele’s primary Moscow-based source, beginning in January 2017, “raised significant questions about the reliability of the Steele election reporting.” This source claimed that much of what he told Steele was “hearsay” or, in the case of the “pee tape,” just “rumor and speculation” from a sub-source, reported by some to likely be Belarus-born businessman Sergei Millian. Millian, however, has denied being a source for the dossier.
Allason also took issue with Steele’s sourcing, writing that from “a professional intelligence perspective, the dossier as a whole is profoundly troubling and cannot be taken at face value.”
“Source E is credited with access to Ritz-Carlton staff, knowledge of Russian government involvement with WikiLeaks and the abuse of Russian diplomatic facilities in the United States. This appears to be an extraordinarily wide area of expertise,” Allason wrote, adding, “The apparent lapses bear the hallmarks of invention.”
In a statement, Steele’s Orbis Business Intelligence accused Allason of writing a “politically motivated” report as his research was funded by a Republican law firm and asserted that Allason’s findings were not “based on any knowledge” of its sources and methods.
West’s work, the firm said, “lacks authority” because he “was never an intelligence officer and has no experience of operational work in the field.” Orbis also claimed “much of the dossier has been proven” since 2017 and declared: “We stand by the integrity and quality of our work.”
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-05--Flaws and merits in US Mideast policy are being corrected under Trump

Every so often , I take up the keyboard to weigh in on the doings of the people running the ancient and great nation of Iran .
There is no cynicism in this statement : Iran is a highly technologically advanced , well-educated and fairly prosperous nation .
However , Western news consumers would never know this because of the way the Iranian government and religious authorities act in trying to get what they want .
Palestine shares similar qualities .
The Palestinian people I know are first-rate .
They are wonderful , hard working , and supportive of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
I must assume the same is true for the Muslim segment of that population , though I know only a few Muslim Palestinians , since most of them I met were living in the US .
Both peoples have the same problem , in my view : They both become completely unhinged about Israel and its presence , and both resort to at least violent rhetoric , if not actual violence , acted on against Israel .
To read the daily doses of propaganda coming out of Iran , the thinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the world for Iranians and Palestinians is the existence of Israel and the support it receives from the United States .
This criticism unabashedly descends into fierce resentment against “ the Jews ” , who seem to be responsible for all that is evil in the world .
Now , people far more informed than I would be very quick to get into all the players in the mighty conspiracy theories regarding Israel , Zionists , the Bilderbergers , the Rothschilds , and so on , ad nauseam .
I am not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be true , all or in part , however , I propose that these conspiracies have their power precisely because they cultivate a culture of victimhood .
“ We are at the mercy of the billionaires !
/ the Jews / the Rockefellers / the evil Americans / insert your favorite THEM here… ” This approach is only a calculus for Iran and Palestine and anyone else who tries it , to lose and go on losing .
It also builds great anger , generationally enduring hatred without true reasoning , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything from changing .
The Palestinians demonstrated this last week when they would not even consider a word of the latest peace initiative offered by President Trump .
This was a big hit against the Palestinians because in viewing the plan seriously and soberly in light of the actual reality of things in Palestine , this solution is excellent , and it stands a chance of working if the Palestinians agree .
I have disagreements with the plan , myself .
I think the Palestinians still should have much more land ; I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definite Trump masterpiece ( President Trump likes to build things ) , but I think the situation may still be untenable for many Palestinians , unless they really agree to follow the deal .
At this point , they are not interested .
The plan ’ s key point is based on what I see the main problem to be with Palestine ( and Iran , if one thinks through this carefully ) : The eternal rage of being a victim .
The Palestinian Authority walked away from a deal in the Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything they asked for .
They shut down the Trump plan before it was announced , and for them , no other solution will do except for Israel to disappear .
Even the assurance that the Dome of the Rock would be protected for Muslim believers who want to pray there was not enough .
President Abbas went public saying he was going to break all relations with the US over this deal ( which the Palestinians refused to even try to talk about with the US and Israeli parties .
How does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Does it actually show that for these people , being victim IS the victory they seek ?
If so , it is a lousy victory .
While the UN often issues statements in support of Palestine , taking the idea that Palestine is being oppressed by the US and Israel ( which it is ! )
, the UN has done nothing to actually help the Palestinians .
No one wants them in their own territory , perhaps owing to the fact that these people have made life work out of being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in their efforts to convince the world how they themselves have been wronged .
There is no peace in such a solution .
There is only rage , anger , self-righteousness and violence .
The Palestinians could win – not only the territory promised them in the deal , but much more , if they were to be humble and engage the negotiations .
One has to start somewhere .
Starting nowhere only breeds rage .
If the Palestinians think this helpless , hapless rage amounts to a victory , or that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world in a way as to attract real help and support , they are simply not looking at the reality around them .
The same thing has shown in Iran ’ s recent behavior , attacking the US base in Baghdad , then their rather unsuccessful missile strike at a base after the assassination of their top general last month .
To date no fatalities are reported by US authorities , though Iran claims something like 80 Americans were killed .
Eighty people are hard to hide , though , and even reporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t report more than minor brain traumas from the concussive force of the blasts .
It is difficult to hide multiple dead people from the American press , especially a press that despises President Trump so much that they simply oppose whatever he does .
All that would be needed is to hear about one American killed in that attack and that would be it .
But no such report has surfaced ; no parent or loved one of an American killed in that attack has come forward to talk about it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Khameini ’ s story about 80 Americans killed is a lie .
I think Iran ’ s Khameini is trying to reassert support from his people with the recent posts he has his name attached to .
There were some problems in Iran over the fate of the Ukrainian jet they shot down and then tried to deny .
While I do not think it was “ the beginning of the end ” for the Iranian ruling authorities , it did demonstrate for at least some people a sense of a breach of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think Khameini ’ s recent posts are his effort to control that before it becomes a big problem .
I know something of the history between Iran and the US and I know that the US president Jimmy Carter did a lot of damage that helped trigger the 1979 Revolution there .
I also know that the Iranian leadership presently is very angry and perhaps justifiably so at the US .
However , when it gets into blaming Zionists or Israel in general for EVERYTHING under the sun , I find this unreasonable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ share of the problem .
I strongly disagree with Israel ’ s hamfisted handling of the Palestinians , and I think the US and UN were absolutely wrong to forcibly establish Israel in 1948 , because the way they did it caused unbelievable sorrow for the Palestinians there ever since that time .
That being said , the Palestinian reaction to this has been unacceptable in the West .
The UN gives Palestine vocal support , but no one really wants to HELP them , and part of the reason is that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not want help .
For them , the only solution is the elimination of the Jewish state .
That is just not going to happen .
I understand the sentiment , and I sympathize with them , but they are not looking at reality : Israel is not going anywhere .
The only way to beat them is to beat them at their own game , by being much better than Israel , and showing , like India did under Ghandi ’ s guidance , that the hostility is only coming from Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rocket attack or throw rocks at IDF soldiers , the Palestinians blow any chance of gaining true credibility in the world .
Right now they look like a bunch of unstable people because they are not playing this game smart .
Iran , in my opinion , is the same way .
Both countries could totally turn their misery into great victories – indeed , President Trump WANTS them to do this , but they are too busy acting out to become reasonable .
I say this with no hostility towards the Palestinian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advice – if you want to win , play the game better than your opponents .
Win by showing you are great people and not just angry victimized people .
Many American Indian groups have done precisely that and have become quite prosperous .
There may be something in some Islamic teaching that advocates this sort of jihad as the way to change things , but I do not see how it can possibly work .
The rest of the world does not want to deal with people who act irrationally .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of both these nations seems to sustain itself on irrational rage and self-victimization .
It has not resulted in prosperity , and it never will .
The people living in these nations might do well to consider this last statement , and maybe take actions to set a different course .
This has happened in history , just look at India , and how that country defeated the most powerful empire on Earth – without firing a shot .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Every so often, I take up the keyboard to weigh in on the doings of the people running the ancient and great nation of Iran. There is no cynicism in this statement: Iran is a highly technologically advanced, well-educated and fairly prosperous nation. However, Western news consumers would never know this because of the way the Iranian government and religious authorities act in trying to get what they want.
Palestine shares similar qualities. The Palestinian people I know are first-rate. They are wonderful, hard working, and supportive of their families and their churches (when Christian). I must assume the same is true for the Muslim segment of that population, though I know only a few Muslim Palestinians, since most of them I met were living in the US.
Both peoples have the same problem, in my view: They both become completely unhinged about Israel and its presence, and both resort to at least violent rhetoric, if not actual violence, acted on against Israel. To read the daily doses of propaganda coming out of Iran, the thinking seems to be that the only problem in the world for Iranians and Palestinians is the existence of Israel and the support it receives from the United States. This criticism unabashedly descends into fierce resentment against “the Jews”, who seem to be responsible for all that is evil in the world.
Now, people far more informed than I would be very quick to get into all the players in the mighty conspiracy theories regarding Israel, Zionists, the Bilderbergers, the Rothschilds, and so on, ad nauseam. I am not going to engage these theories. They may be true, all or in part, however, I propose that these conspiracies have their power precisely because they cultivate a culture of victimhood. “We are at the mercy of the billionaires! / the Jews / the Rockefellers / the evil Americans / insert your favorite THEM here…”
This approach is only a calculus for Iran and Palestine and anyone else who tries it, to lose and go on losing. It also builds great anger, generationally enduring hatred without true reasoning, but with great belief, and it prevents anything from changing. The Palestinians demonstrated this last week when they would not even consider a word of the latest peace initiative offered by President Trump. This was a big hit against the Palestinians because in viewing the plan seriously and soberly in light of the actual reality of things in Palestine, this solution is excellent, and it stands a chance of working if the Palestinians agree.
I have disagreements with the plan, myself. I think the Palestinians still should have much more land; I think the tunnel to Gaza is a definite Trump masterpiece (President Trump likes to build things), but I think the situation may still be untenable for many Palestinians, unless they really agree to follow the deal. At this point, they are not interested.
The plan’s key point is based on what I see the main problem to be with Palestine (and Iran, if one thinks through this carefully):
The eternal rage of being a victim.
The Palestinian Authority walked away from a deal in the Clinton era that would have given Palestine almost everything they asked for. They shut down the Trump plan before it was announced, and for them, no other solution will do except for Israel to disappear. Even the assurance that the Dome of the Rock would be protected for Muslim believers who want to pray there was not enough. President Abbas went public saying he was going to break all relations with the US over this deal (which the Palestinians refused to even try to talk about with the US and Israeli parties.
How does this kind of behavior solve any problem? Does it actually show that for these people, being victim IS the victory they seek?
If so, it is a lousy victory. While the UN often issues statements in support of Palestine, taking the idea that Palestine is being oppressed by the US and Israel (which it is!), the UN has done nothing to actually help the Palestinians. No one wants them in their own territory, perhaps owing to the fact that these people have made life work out of being angry and destructive, even murderous, in their efforts to convince the world how they themselves have been wronged. There is no peace in such a solution. There is only rage, anger, self-righteousness and violence.
The Palestinians could win – not only the territory promised them in the deal, but much more, if they were to be humble and engage the negotiations. One has to start somewhere. Starting nowhere only breeds rage. If the Palestinians think this helpless, hapless rage amounts to a victory, or that it is attractive to the rest of the world in a way as to attract real help and support, they are simply not looking at the reality around them.
The same thing has shown in Iran’s recent behavior, attacking the US base in Baghdad, then their rather unsuccessful missile strike at a base after the assassination of their top general last month. To date no fatalities are reported by US authorities, though Iran claims something like 80 Americans were killed. Eighty people are hard to hide, though, and even reporting by the US site The Hill doesn’t report more than minor brain traumas from the concussive force of the blasts.
It is difficult to hide multiple dead people from the American press, especially a press that despises President Trump so much that they simply oppose whatever he does. All that would be needed is to hear about one American killed in that attack and that would be it. But no such report has surfaced; no parent or loved one of an American killed in that attack has come forward to talk about it.
It is a good chance that Khameini’s story about 80 Americans killed is a lie.
I think Iran’s Khameini is trying to reassert support from his people with the recent posts he has his name attached to. There were some problems in Iran over the fate of the Ukrainian jet they shot down and then tried to deny. While I do not think it was “the beginning of the end” for the Iranian ruling authorities, it did demonstrate for at least some people a sense of a breach of trust with the government, and I think Khameini’s recent posts are his effort to control that before it becomes a big problem.
I know something of the history between Iran and the US and I know that the US president Jimmy Carter did a lot of damage that helped trigger the 1979 Revolution there. I also know that the Iranian leadership presently is very angry and perhaps justifiably so at the US.
However, when it gets into blaming Zionists or Israel in general for EVERYTHING under the sun, I find this unreasonable. I am sure they have their share of the problem. I strongly disagree with Israel’s hamfisted handling of the Palestinians, and I think the US and UN were absolutely wrong to forcibly establish Israel in 1948, because the way they did it caused unbelievable sorrow for the Palestinians there ever since that time.
That being said, the Palestinian reaction to this has been unacceptable in the West. The UN gives Palestine vocal support, but no one really wants to HELP them, and part of the reason is that they are so wound up that they do not want help. For them, the only solution is the elimination of the Jewish state.
That is just not going to happen. I understand the sentiment, and I sympathize with them, but they are not looking at reality: Israel is not going anywhere. The only way to beat them is to beat them at their own game, by being much better than Israel, and showing, like India did under Ghandi’s guidance, that the hostility is only coming from Israel. Every time the Palestinians do another rocket attack or throw rocks at IDF soldiers, the Palestinians blow any chance of gaining true credibility in the world. Right now they look like a bunch of unstable people because they are not playing this game smart.
Iran, in my opinion, is the same way. Both countries could totally turn their misery into great victories – indeed, President Trump WANTS them to do this, but they are too busy acting out to become reasonable.
I say this with no hostility towards the Palestinian people or the Iranians – but with advice – if you want to win, play the game better than your opponents. Win by showing you are great people and not just angry victimized people. Many American Indian groups have done precisely that and have become quite prosperous. There may be something in some Islamic teaching that advocates this sort of jihad as the way to change things, but I do not see how it can possibly work. The rest of the world does not want to deal with people who act irrationally. This is not safe. The leadership apparatus of both these nations seems to sustain itself on irrational rage and self-victimization. It has not resulted in prosperity, and it never will.
The people living in these nations might do well to consider this last statement, and maybe take actions to set a different course. This has happened in history, just look at India, and how that country defeated the most powerful empire on Earth – without firing a shot.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-05--Schiff sounds alarm! Trump to ‘offer Alaska to Russians’ for 2020 election support (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss Adam Schiff ’ s latest , bizarre claim during Monday closing arguments in the Senate impeachment trial , that US President Trump could ‘ offer Alaska to the Russians ’ in exchange for 2020 support .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
California Democrat Adam Schiff painted a doomsday scenario if President Donald Trump is not impeached , including an all-powerful dictator ruling from Mar-a-Lago , letting his son-in-law run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Schiff ’ s high fantasy came during the closing arguments of the Senate impeachment trial on Monday , after a series of procedural votes on Friday made it clear that Trump will not actually be convicted on charges brought on by the House of Representatives .
The president ’ s lawyers argued that Trump could not be impeached since he committed no criminal act in his talks with the president of Ukraine .
Schiff shot back by saying “ abuse of power ” is impeachable and warning about all kinds of dangers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeached – including losing Alaska to Russia and having Trump ’ s son-in-law Jared Kusher as a shadow president .
“ If [ abuse of power ] were not impeachable then a whole range of unacceptable conduct in a president would be beyond reach , ” argued Schiff .
Trump “ could offer Alaska to the Russians in exchange for support in the next election , ” or retire to Mar-a-Lago and let Kushner “ run the country ” and decide when to go to war , he added .
“ Because those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argument would allow that he could not be impeached for such abuses of power , ” Schiff argued .
Schiff ’ s pitch to GOP senators was received with derision on the right .
“ Adam Schiff making up fake scenarios again , ” tweeted conservative commentator Carmine Sabia .
“ You know when you make up fake phone calls and fake scenarios ?
WHEN YOU HAVE NO CASE.
” Schiff had previously read a fake fake transcript of a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky , which he later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dan Bongino called Schiff a “ total goofball ” and an “ embarrassment to sentient beings throughout the cosmos.
” Others described Schiff as “ deluded ” or “ off his rocker ” and “ insane.
” On the left , however , Schiff ’ s impassioned fairy tale was praised as “ one for the ages ” ( Rachel Maddow , MSNBC ) and “ amazing ” ( Michael Moore ) .
“ I wish I disagreed with Adam Schiff ’ s warnings about the consequences [ of ] acquitting the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McMullin , a former CIA operative and failed NeverTrump presidential candidate who found a second career as a TV pundit .
NBC News Correspondent Heidi Przybyla tweeted she saw one Democrat senator “ visibly choking up ” after Schiff ’ s closing appeal .
The notion that Trump would hand Alaska over to Russia – from which the US purchased the territory in 1867 – seems to have come from a brief submitted by the House managers last month , arguing that Trump ’ s attorney Alan Dershowitz had noted that such conduct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book , ‘ The Case Against Impeaching Trump .
’

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss Adam Schiff’s latest, bizarre claim during Monday closing arguments in the Senate impeachment trial, that US President Trump could ‘offer Alaska to the Russians’ in exchange for 2020 support.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via RT…
California Democrat Adam Schiff painted a doomsday scenario if President Donald Trump is not impeached, including an all-powerful dictator ruling from Mar-a-Lago, letting his son-in-law run America, and trading Alaska to Russia.
Schiff’s high fantasy came during the closing arguments of the Senate impeachment trial on Monday, after a series of procedural votes on Friday made it clear that Trump will not actually be convicted on charges brought on by the House of Representatives.
The president’s lawyers argued that Trump could not be impeached since he committed no criminal act in his talks with the president of Ukraine. Schiff shot back by saying “abuse of power” is impeachable and warning about all kinds of dangers America could face if Trump is not impeached – including losing Alaska to Russia and having Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kusher as a shadow president.
“If [abuse of power] were not impeachable then a whole range of unacceptable conduct in a president would be beyond reach,” argued Schiff. Trump “could offer Alaska to the Russians in exchange for support in the next election,” or retire to Mar-a-Lago and let Kushner “run the country” and decide when to go to war, he added.
“Because those things are not necessarily criminal, this argument would allow that he could not be impeached for such abuses of power,” Schiff argued.
Adam Schiff: If Trump isn't removed he "could offer Alaska to the Russians in exchange for support in the next election or decide to move to Mar-a-Lago permanently and leave Jared Kushner to run the country, delegating to him the decision whether they go to war." pic.twitter.com/VBzkonqpmH — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) February 3, 2020
Schiff’s pitch to GOP senators was received with derision on the right.
“Adam Schiff making up fake scenarios again,” tweeted conservative commentator Carmine Sabia. “You know when you make up fake phone calls and fake scenarios? WHEN YOU HAVE NO CASE.”
Adam Schiff making up fake scenarios again. Giving Alaska to the Russians or making Jared Kushner de facto president. You know when you make up fake phone calls and fake scenarios? WHEN YOU HAVE NO CASE. — Carmine Sabia (@CarmineSabia) February 3, 2020
Schiff had previously read a fake fake transcript of a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which he later defended as “parody.”
Conservative pundit Dan Bongino called Schiff a “total goofball” and an “embarrassment to sentient beings throughout the cosmos.” Others described Schiff as “deluded” or “off his rocker” and “insane.”
On the left, however, Schiff’s impassioned fairy tale was praised as “one for the ages” (Rachel Maddow, MSNBC) and “amazing” (Michael Moore).
“I wish I disagreed with Adam Schiff’s warnings about the consequences [of] acquitting the president of his abuses,” tweeted Evan McMullin, a former CIA operative and failed NeverTrump presidential candidate who found a second career as a TV pundit.
NBC News Correspondent Heidi Przybyla tweeted she saw one Democrat senator “visibly choking up” after Schiff’s closing appeal.
Locked eyes w a Dem senator coming out of Senate chamber visibly choking up after @RepAdamSchiff closing appeal for just one GOP senator to say “enough.”
#ImpeachmentTrials — Heidi Przybyla (@HeidiNBC) February 3, 2020
The notion that Trump would hand Alaska over to Russia – from which the US purchased the territory in 1867 – seems to have come from a brief submitted by the House managers last month, arguing that Trump’s attorney Alan Dershowitz had noted that such conduct would not be impeachable in his 2018 book, ‘The Case Against Impeaching Trump.’
Watch my answer that the media mischaracterizes as saying a president can do anything illegal as long as he is motivated by a desire to be re-elected. I don’t say that and Schiff doesn’t say I said it—until the media deliberately distorted my answer. Then he joins the distortion. — Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) February 2, 2020
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-05--Don’t Believe Everything You Hear About Iran

Iran is a terrible place , at least its government is .
That view is dominant in the West , and Iranians living in the West are in the forefront of those promoting it .
One of those is Lisa Daftari , the daughter of Iranian immigrants or more properly Iranian exiles .
Last month she sat down with her fellow American Candace Owens to excoriate her ancestral home .
A while ago , Candace was a rising star on the American conservative scene , and is now well established .
Her main contribution has been to trounce liberals and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , namely that there are more important issues in the modern world than obsessing over race , and , for feminists , sex .
Lisa Daftari is cut from the same cloth , but like so many who oppose Iran ’ s theocracy , she goes too far .
The Owens-Daftari interview can be found on the PraegerU website as well as YouTube .
When you watch it , bear in mind that its rhetoric and errors are typical of those who lobby for régime change in Iran , and even for many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
Herein , the viewer will learn that Harvey Weinstein was convicted of rape .
In the court of public opinion , for sure , but not in January 2020 .
A young woman named Reyhaneh was hanged in Iran for bringing a case against a man who allegedly raped her .
No , no , no !
Coverage of this case by the Western media was extremely biased , but even that could not disguise the facts .
Reyhaneh Jabbari was still a teenager when she met Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in favour of capital punishment for murder are not enthusiastic about executing teenagers , but Jabbari had due process and then some ; she was behind bars for seven years before her execution , including appealing all the way to the Supreme Court .
The victim had offered her employment but was said to have sexually abused her .
So she stabbed him in the back two days after buying the murder weapon specifically for that purpose .
Unlike in the West where the toxic Cyntoia Brown and cold-blooded killer Sally Challen are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women have agency for their bad acts .
Iranian justice is harsh but fair , which brings us to Daftari ’ s claim that a woman ’ s life is valued half that of a man , because in 2006 it executed a 24 year old sexual predator who had been preying on his victims in “ women-only areas ” .
Indeed , in the first half of 2019 , no fewer than 13 men were sentenced to death for rape , although death sentences are sometimes commuted .
It should be pointed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not some of the rubbish we are fed in the West about consent .
Still on the subject of women , Daftari can not but help indulge in hijab hysteria .
This subject has probably generated the flow of more mendacious ink than any other where Iran or Islam are concerned .
Islamic dress codes designate that women cover their heads in public .
We have dress codes in the West but they are seldom alluded to as such .
A man who walks down the street bare-chested may draw odd looks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be arrested , even in high summer .
Iran and Islam have different standards ; that does not make them “ oppressive ” .
And still on the subject of women , it doesn ’ t take much surfing to find an impressive list of Iranian women scientists , doctors , even engineers .
Women ’ s education in Iran lacks for nothing .
Could the average American name even one female engineer ?
In Iranian universities , women study mathematics , chemistry , physics…not lesbian dance theory .
Lisa Daftari does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is alluded to pejoratively as gender apartheid , but the benefits of this are obvious : it protects women from the likes of the aforementioned Harvey Weinstein , and it kills dead any suggestion of a # MeToo Movement with all the resulting false allegations and witch-hunts of innocent men by demented hags and feminist man-haters .
Finally , Daftari takes a swipe at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad , the charismatic traffic engineer who served two terms as President .
She criticises him for handing out money in the street , but not for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to wipe Israel off the map .
When he was in office , Ahmadinejad offered us an olive branch .
In return , we spat in his face .
When he gave a speech at New York ’ s Columbia University , he was not only met with protests but was insulted by the institution ’ s president , Lee Bollinger .
Although Donald Trump says there will be no war with Iran , he is continuing to exert pressure on it , like other Western leaders failing to see the irony of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nuclear weapons in anger branding Iran a threat to world peace .
Sadly , Lisa Daftari and countless others are in broad agreement .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Iran is a terrible place, at least its government is. That view is dominant in the West, and Iranians living in the West are in the forefront of those promoting it. One of those is Lisa Daftari, the daughter of Iranian immigrants or more properly Iranian exiles. Last month she sat down with her fellow American Candace Owens to excoriate her ancestral home.
A while ago, Candace was a rising star on the American conservative scene, and is now well established. Her main contribution has been to trounce liberals and educate other blacks to a simple reality, namely that there are more important issues in the modern world than obsessing over race, and, for feminists, sex.
Lisa Daftari is cut from the same cloth, but like so many who oppose Iran’s theocracy, she goes too far. The Owens-Daftari interview can be found on the PraegerU website as well as YouTube. When you watch it, bear in mind that its rhetoric and errors are typical of those who lobby for régime change in Iran, and even for many who don’t, like Donald Trump.
Herein, the viewer will learn that Harvey Weinstein was convicted of rape. In the court of public opinion, for sure, but not in January 2020.
A young woman named Reyhaneh was hanged in Iran for bringing a case against a man who allegedly raped her. No, no, no!
Coverage of this case by the Western media was extremely biased, but even that could not disguise the facts. Reyhaneh Jabbari was still a teenager when she met Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi. In the West, even those generally in favour of capital punishment for murder are not enthusiastic about executing teenagers, but Jabbari had due process and then some; she was behind bars for seven years before her execution, including appealing all the way to the Supreme Court. The victim had offered her employment but was said to have sexually abused her. So she stabbed him in the back two days after buying the murder weapon specifically for that purpose. Unlike in the West where the toxic Cyntoia Brown and cold-blooded killer Sally Challen are lauded as victims, Iranian justice assumes women have agency for their bad acts.
Iranian justice is harsh but fair, which brings us to Daftari’s claim that a woman’s life is valued half that of a man, because in 2006 it executed a 24 year old sexual predator who had been preying on his victims in “women-only areas”.
Indeed, in the first half of 2019, no fewer than 13 men were sentenced to death for rape, although death sentences are sometimes commuted. It should be pointed out that rape in Iran means rape, not some of the rubbish we are fed in the West about consent.
Still on the subject of women, Daftari cannot but help indulge in hijab hysteria. This subject has probably generated the flow of more mendacious ink than any other where Iran or Islam are concerned. Islamic dress codes designate that women cover their heads in public. We have dress codes in the West but they are seldom alluded to as such. A man who walks down the street bare-chested may draw odd looks, a woman who does the same may be arrested, even in high summer. Iran and Islam have different standards; that does not make them “oppressive”.
And still on the subject of women, it doesn’t take much surfing to find an impressive list of Iranian women scientists, doctors, even engineers. Women’s education in Iran lacks for nothing. Could the average American name even one female engineer? In Iranian universities, women study mathematics, chemistry, physics…not lesbian dance theory.
Lisa Daftari does not mention the vexed subject of what is alluded to pejoratively as gender apartheid, but the benefits of this are obvious: it protects women from the likes of the aforementioned Harvey Weinstein, and it kills dead any suggestion of a #MeToo Movement with all the resulting false allegations and witch-hunts of innocent men by demented hags and feminist man-haters.
Finally, Daftari takes a swipe at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the charismatic traffic engineer who served two terms as President. She criticises him for handing out money in the street, but not for the oft’ repeated lie that he threatened to wipe Israel off the map.
When he was in office, Ahmadinejad offered us an olive branch. In return, we spat in his face. When he gave a speech at New York’s Columbia University, he was not only met with protests but was insulted by the institution’s president, Lee Bollinger.
Although Donald Trump says there will be no war with Iran, he is continuing to exert pressure on it, like other Western leaders failing to see the irony of the only country that has ever used nuclear weapons in anger branding Iran a threat to world peace. Sadly, Lisa Daftari and countless others are in broad agreement.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-05--Donald Tusk says Independent Scotland would be welcomed into EU

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Johanna Ross , journalist based in Edinburgh , Scotland… Former European Council president , Donald Tusk , has ruffled a few feathers by suggesting that Scotland would be welcomed back into Europe ‘ enthusiastically ’ if it were to gain independence .
In an interview with the BBC ’ s Andrew Marr show on Sunday , Tusk revealed his empathy with the Scottish people , stating ‘ I am very Scottish now , especially after Brexit ’ .
Tusk said he had to prevent himself from “ saying something too blunt , ” because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel that I am a Scot here ” .
The plain-spoken Polish politician has never hidden his opposition to Brexit , even as late on as December last year declaring it to be ‘ one of the most spectacular mistakes ’ in the history of the EU .
He has also previously criticised the Leave campaign which preceded the EU referendum , saying it demonstrated ‘ an unprecedented readiness to lie ’ .
The comments come at a time when support for Scottish independence has peaked .
The pro-independence newspaper The National on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll which placed support for abandoning the Union now at 52 % .
Hailed as a ‘ stunning ’ result by the newspaper , it is pointed out that the poll result is 5 points higher than it was in December 2019 .
Another poll conducted by YouGov last week also showed independence support higher than unionist at 51 % to 49 % .
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has yet , however , to declare a second independence referendum , to the dismay of many nationalists .
Many believe that the momentum is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given the reality of Brexit – something which the majority of Scots didn ’ t vote for – there could not be a better time for Scotland to forge its own path .
Sturgeon is being careful .
The scenes of violence in Catalonia and subsequent arrests of politicians after they defied Spain and held their own referendum are not something she wants repeated in Scotland .
Her speech on 31st January made it clear that she doesn ’ t want Scotland to gain independence by force , but by persuasion .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Scottish people themselves , rather than the Westminster government .
She stated : “ Our task is to persuade a majority of people in Scotland to choose it [ independence ] .
So I want to focus today on the work we need to do to persuade a majority in Scotland that independence is the right choice – and how in the process of doing that , we will secure our right to choose it in a referendum.
” Despite being celebrated by SNP politicians as a ‘ stunning result ’ 52 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of independence .
It may be higher than the 45 % who voted ‘ Yes ’ back in the 2014 referendum , but it is nonetheless not high enough for Sturgeon to take too many risks at this stage .
There is clearly still work to do , as she has said herself .
Nevertheless in her speech on Brexit day , Sturgeon explicitly laid bare the process of how a referendum could come about .
She admitted that she would want one this year , but that it may have to happen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she stressed how much she wanted such a referendum to be legal , she also didn ’ t rule out having to hold one against Westminster ’ s wishes .
So far , Johnson ’ s government has refused to transfer the powers to the Scottish parliament in order for a second referendum to be held .
But Sturgeon suggests that if permission is not granted , it may still be legal for the parliament to hold a ‘ consultative referendum ’ even if it would still need Westminster ’ s agreement to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Should the UK Government continue to deny Scotland ’ s right to choose , we may reach the point where this issue does have to be tested.
” Scotland is really venturing into uncharted territory as it seeks to gain independence .
But as Westminster is never likely to comply with any action or legislation that leads to the break-up of the United Kingdom , it will be an uphill struggle for the independence movement .
Undoubtedly there will be many legal challenges to come , as this issue will be one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system to the test .
As for Donald Tusk ’ s comments , it will be reassuring for the Scottish Nationalists to hear any voice of support from Europe , as encouragement from the EU could be critical to Scotland ’ s independent future .
It is a sign that there is sympathy in Europe for Scotland ’ s plight at the hands of Boris Johnson ’ s Brexit , and that as Sturgeon has asked , a light may indeed be ‘ left on ’ for Scotland in the EU .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Johanna Ross, journalist based in Edinburgh, Scotland…
Former European Council president, Donald Tusk, has ruffled a few feathers by suggesting that Scotland would be welcomed back into Europe ‘enthusiastically’ if it were to gain independence.
In an interview with the BBC’s Andrew Marr show on Sunday, Tusk revealed his empathy with the Scottish people, stating ‘I am very Scottish now, especially after Brexit’. Tusk said he had to prevent himself from “saying something too blunt,” because, touching his chest “sometimes I feel that I am a Scot here”.
The plain-spoken Polish politician has never hidden his opposition to Brexit, even as late on as December last year declaring it to be ‘one of the most spectacular mistakes’ in the history of the EU. He has also previously criticised the Leave campaign which preceded the EU referendum, saying it demonstrated ‘an unprecedented readiness to lie’.
The comments come at a time when support for Scottish independence has peaked. The pro-independence newspaper The National on Tuesday published the results of a Panelbase poll which placed support for abandoning the Union now at 52%. Hailed as a ‘stunning’ result by the newspaper, it is pointed out that the poll result is 5 points higher than it was in December 2019. Another poll conducted by YouGov last week also showed independence support higher than unionist at 51% to 49%.
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has yet, however, to declare a second independence referendum, to the dismay of many nationalists. Many believe that the momentum is now with the independence movement, and given the reality of Brexit – something which the majority of Scots didn’t vote for – there could not be a better time for Scotland to forge its own path.
Sturgeon is being careful. The scenes of violence in Catalonia and subsequent arrests of politicians after they defied Spain and held their own referendum are not something she wants repeated in Scotland. Her speech on 31st January made it clear that she doesn’t want Scotland to gain independence by force, but by persuasion. And the first people to be persuaded are the Scottish people themselves, rather than the Westminster government. She stated: “Our task is to persuade a majority of people in Scotland to choose it [independence]. So I want to focus today on the work we need to do to persuade a majority in Scotland that independence is the right choice – and how in the process of doing that, we will secure our right to choose it in a referendum.”
Despite being celebrated by SNP politicians as a ‘stunning result’ 52% is far from a resounding endorsement of independence. It may be higher than the 45% who voted ‘Yes’ back in the 2014 referendum, but it is nonetheless not high enough for Sturgeon to take too many risks at this stage. There is clearly still work to do, as she has said herself.
Nevertheless in her speech on Brexit day, Sturgeon explicitly laid bare the process of how a referendum could come about. She admitted that she would want one this year, but that it may have to happen after the Scottish elections. And although she stressed how much she wanted such a referendum to be legal, she also didn’t rule out having to hold one against Westminster’s wishes.
So far, Johnson’s government has refused to transfer the powers to the Scottish parliament in order for a second referendum to be held. But Sturgeon suggests that if permission is not granted, it may still be legal for the parliament to hold a ‘consultative referendum’ even if it would still need Westminster’s agreement to implement the outcome. She states that “Should the UK Government continue to deny Scotland’s right to choose, we may reach the point where this issue does have to be tested.”
Scotland is really venturing into uncharted territory as it seeks to gain independence. But as Westminster is never likely to comply with any action or legislation that leads to the break-up of the United Kingdom, it will be an uphill struggle for the independence movement. Undoubtedly there will be many legal challenges to come, as this issue will be one which puts the country’s legal system to the test.
As for Donald Tusk’s comments, it will be reassuring for the Scottish Nationalists to hear any voice of support from Europe, as encouragement from the EU could be critical to Scotland’s independent future. It is a sign that there is sympathy in Europe for Scotland’s plight at the hands of Boris Johnson’s Brexit, and that as Sturgeon has asked, a light may indeed be ‘left on’ for Scotland in the EU.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-06--Impeachment vote acquits President Trump, shows American rift

Strictly party-line with an asterisk .
President Trump acquitted of the two articles of impeachment 52-28 not guilty of “ Abuse of Power ” and 53-47 not guilty of “ Obstruction of Congress.
” The asterisk was Utah Republican Senator Mitt Romney , who delivered a lofty sounding defense of the need to follow his principles , religious and otherwise to try and convict a President of a crime that had little more than political significance .
Impeachment is not exactly the same as a real court case that tries a crime against the civil statutes .
As many of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachments are political in nature more than they are criminal .
While adherence to the Constitution is the basis , the political lenses through which the US ’ present crop of Senators understand that adherence varies , and as we can see here , it varies widely and , one might even say , strangely .
One of the admittedly greatest aspects of watching the US House of Representatives and the Senate in action is the sense of decorum .
There is a sense of tradition and honor that keeps things from getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noted in his concluding address , the chief responsibility all involved – the President , the Congress and the Supreme Court – is to preserve , protect and defend the Constitution of the United States .
It is perhaps this resolve – to protect the founding documents of the United States – that keeps things from getting more petty than they were during this extremely politically charged series of events .
However , it was also yet another window into the depth of “ divided America ” , consisting of relatively traditionally-viewed people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ socialist-leaning , grievance culture of small activist minorities on the other , largely represented by the Democrats .
The country is deeply divided .
The party-line vote shows that this division supersedes reason .
I say that as a conservative and a Trump supporter , but I have to acknowledge that any counterparts writing a similar piece as this from the other side would say exactly the same thing about us – that it is we , not them , whose irrationality supersedes reason .
In an effort to offer absolute fairness , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ truly objective evaluation of this situation by any American , including myself , is impossible at this time .
It will not be possible for at least as long as President Trump remains in office , as his presence is the catalyst that drives this polarization at this present time .
Does this division supersede reason on both sides ?
Probably so .
For Trump fans , there are many aspects that energize us to be extremely , maybe even slavishly , loyal to and supportive of , this man .
Here are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is committed to ending ( usually anti-Christian directed ) political correctness • He acknowledges that this country owes its gratitude to God , who gave it to us .
• He is pro-life , public and unafraid to say so – indeed , as seen at the recent March for Life , Mr. Trump is the most pro-life president in the history of the abortion debate .
• His business and entrepreneur friendly policy set and attitude have totally energized the US economy , with the lowest unemployment in over fifty years , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the history of record-keeping , some records going back a very long time .
• Strong borders and reinforcement of citizenship and sovereignty – no free health care for illegal immigrants , for example .
Also the border wall itself , albeit slowly being built .
• His willingness , though often partly thwarted , to get the US out of hegemony-based warfare .
• His visible love for the country on all levels .
• His pragmatism , for while not an “ ideological ” conservative , pragmatism in action energizes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal jurisprudence .
This is shown in action as the President has been packing all the federal courts with judges that are strict constitutionalists , and not liberal activist types .
What does the other side really have to offer that is competitive with all these ?
They are on record for promising : • Free healthcare for all immigrants , legal or not , and access to services that are normally rights of Citizens only in the US .
• The Green New Deal – get the US completely off fossil fuels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ structures to be zero-net energy usage wherever possible • Taxing the wealthy to pay for government services , under the premise that the rich should pay a higher percentage of income tax because they have more money “ to contribute ” to the government .
• Open borders : perhaps the only nation in the world to have such a situation .
• Abortion rights , up to and even after the point of live birth .
The woman has the power of determining life or death .
No one else .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for people , unless it supports gay marriage , infanticide and socialism • Globalist hegemony – though this is also shared by not a few on the GOP side , the notion that American forces should be in war after war after war is being pushed by more Democrats at the present time , some of that simply because President Trump does NOT want it .
• Free college , guaranteed income even for the unemployed , and a whole range of “ get it for free ” programs that would make Sweden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ admittedly , my own bias has me casting the liberals as senseless .
But these lists are for all who read this to consider .
President Trump said himself in the State of the Union speech that maybe some people really want these things – and if so , stand with the people who want to implement these ideas .
The thing that is astounding to me is that there are a great many people who seem to want to implement them .
While this may be comprised of partial political ignorance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these ideas as right .
So , we have a sharply and bitterly divided America .
The saddest part about this whole Compleat Fake Impeachment Inquiry and trial was that it moved the needle almost nowhere .
A couple Democrats in the House maybe , but then again , Mitt Romney is no doubt catching holy hell from his constituents in very red Utah for voting “ guilty ” on “ Abuse of Power.
” His senatorial term is new enough that he will probably win re-election unless he keeps working against the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not guilty ( Obstruction of Congress ) , he will try to prove his conservative stripes and his “ search for the truth ” with this .
However , future pieces here in the Duran will probably do some exposition of this man as an avowed globalist , and not an America First person .
Readers internationally may also take issue with the point of view that “ America First ” is a good thing .
For many in the geopolitical world , the US ’ brazen and disastrous foreign policy is seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ First ” and so , why would any conscientious geopolitical writer say that what Trump wants is good ?
I think the answer is this : The hegemony that rightly draws so much criticism and rage is not actually America First in the way President Trump sees it .
That hegemony is more about American directing a global order , as contrasted with Russia or China or the Muslim world directing it .
However , the main drive is to control the world , mainly for the benefit of rather wealthy people ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to credit such crazy conspiracy theories too much ) , who make a lot of their living through some level of exploitation of other people , usually comfortably far away .
This is not Mr. Trump ’ s vision of “ America First.
” His might resemble more America prior to World War I , where the US took more of an isolationist policy , staying out of world affairs , but refusing also to let the world interfere with the Americans in their own country .
Such a view is taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation , Russia .
While “ Russia First !
” may have some differences in policy than “ America First ” , both leaders wish first and foremost , to develop and help their own nations , and to develop constructive partnerships with others , but not at the expense of national identity or value .
While an extreme point of such nationalism might give us a nation that decides to try to take over the world , such as Nazi Germany did , this kind of nationalism might better be called “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each nation has its culture , borders , language and way of doing things as best suits the people of that country , and the other nations have no right to dictate that any country be any other way than it actually is .
While there are dangers even in this point of view ( none are perfect ) , the opportunity for peaceful and competitive partnerships and alliances is enormous .
“ America First ” in this view will reduce wars , at least the ones where America sends its troops , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s interests to run the rest of the world under such a worldview .
This was a big digression , but probably needed .
The US has been and is at a fork in the road .
Mr. Trump is very strongly supported by those who believe in his vision , and the coming months will show us if this movement is indeed slowly gaining momentum .
It will need to if it is to win .
The weakness displayed by the liberals is not enough to assure a victory for the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard fight , indeed .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Strictly party-line with an asterisk. President Trump acquitted of the two articles of impeachment 52-28 not guilty of “Abuse of Power” and 53-47 not guilty of “Obstruction of Congress.” The asterisk was Utah Republican Senator Mitt Romney, who delivered a lofty sounding defense of the need to follow his principles, religious and otherwise to try and convict a President of a crime that had little more than political significance.
Impeachment is not exactly the same as a real court case that tries a crime against the civil statutes. As many of us have repeatedly read or heard, impeachments are political in nature more than they are criminal. While adherence to the Constitution is the basis, the political lenses through which the US’ present crop of Senators understand that adherence varies, and as we can see here, it varies widely and, one might even say, strangely.
One of the admittedly greatest aspects of watching the US House of Representatives and the Senate in action is the sense of decorum. There is a sense of tradition and honor that keeps things from getting physically violent, and as Chief Justice noted in his concluding address, the chief responsibility all involved – the President, the Congress and the Supreme Court – is to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. It is perhaps this resolve – to protect the founding documents of the United States – that keeps things from getting more petty than they were during this extremely politically charged series of events.
However, it was also yet another window into the depth of “divided America”, consisting of relatively traditionally-viewed people on the Republican side and an increasingly socialist-leaning, grievance culture of small activist minorities on the other, largely represented by the Democrats.
The country is deeply divided. The party-line vote shows that this division supersedes reason. I say that as a conservative and a Trump supporter, but I have to acknowledge that any counterparts writing a similar piece as this from the other side would say exactly the same thing about us – that it is we, not them, whose irrationality supersedes reason. In an effort to offer absolute fairness, it is necessary to say that a truly objective evaluation of this situation by any American, including myself, is impossible at this time. It will not be possible for at least as long as President Trump remains in office, as his presence is the catalyst that drives this polarization at this present time.
Does this division supersede reason on both sides? Probably so. For Trump fans, there are many aspects that energize us to be extremely, maybe even slavishly, loyal to and supportive of, this man. Here are some of them:
President Trump is committed to ending (usually anti-Christian directed) political correctness
He acknowledges that this country owes its gratitude to God, who gave it to us.
He is pro-life, public and unafraid to say so – indeed, as seen at the recent March for Life, Mr. Trump is the most pro-life president in the history of the abortion debate.
His business and entrepreneur friendly policy set and attitude have totally energized the US economy, with the lowest unemployment in over fifty years, and some segments reporting the lowest unemployment in the history of record-keeping, some records going back a very long time.
Strong borders and reinforcement of citizenship and sovereignty – no free health care for illegal immigrants, for example. Also the border wall itself, albeit slowly being built.
His willingness, though often partly thwarted, to get the US out of hegemony-based warfare.
His visible love for the country on all levels.
His pragmatism, for while not an “ideological” conservative, pragmatism in action energizes conservative politics and policy-making as well as legal jurisprudence. This is shown in action as the President has been packing all the federal courts with judges that are strict constitutionalists, and not liberal activist types.
What does the other side really have to offer that is competitive with all these? They are on record for promising:
Free healthcare for all immigrants, legal or not, and access to services that are normally rights of Citizens only in the US.
The Green New Deal – get the US completely off fossil fuels in ten years, modernizing all standing structures to be zero-net energy usage wherever possible
Taxing the wealthy to pay for government services, under the premise that the rich should pay a higher percentage of income tax because they have more money “to contribute” to the government.
Open borders: perhaps the only nation in the world to have such a situation.
Abortion rights, up to and even after the point of live birth. The woman has the power of determining life or death. No one else.
Religion is offensive and “triggering” for people, unless it supports gay marriage, infanticide and socialism
Globalist hegemony – though this is also shared by not a few on the GOP side, the notion that American forces should be in war after war after war is being pushed by more Democrats at the present time, some of that simply because President Trump does NOT want it.
Free college, guaranteed income even for the unemployed, and a whole range of “get it for free” programs that would make Sweden look like the Wild West.
Now admittedly, my own bias has me casting the liberals as senseless. But these lists are for all who read this to consider. President Trump said himself in the State of the Union speech that maybe some people really want these things – and if so, stand with the people who want to implement these ideas.
The thing that is astounding to me is that there are a great many people who seem to want to implement them. While this may be comprised of partial political ignorance, a lot of people are dedicated to these ideas as right.
So, we have a sharply and bitterly divided America. The saddest part about this whole Compleat Fake Impeachment Inquiry and trial was that it moved the needle almost nowhere. A couple Democrats in the House maybe, but then again, Mitt Romney is no doubt catching holy hell from his constituents in very red Utah for voting “guilty” on “Abuse of Power.” His senatorial term is new enough that he will probably win re-election unless he keeps working against the President. Since his other vote was not guilty (Obstruction of Congress), he will try to prove his conservative stripes and his “search for the truth” with this. However, future pieces here in the Duran will probably do some exposition of this man as an avowed globalist, and not an America First person.
Readers internationally may also take issue with the point of view that “America First” is a good thing. For many in the geopolitical world, the US’ brazen and disastrous foreign policy is seen also as the execution of “America First” and so, why would any conscientious geopolitical writer say that what Trump wants is good?
I think the answer is this: The hegemony that rightly draws so much criticism and rage is not actually America First in the way President Trump sees it. That hegemony is more about American directing a global order, as contrasted with Russia or China or the Muslim world directing it. However, the main drive is to control the world, mainly for the benefit of rather wealthy people (not the super-rich, I am not going to credit such crazy conspiracy theories too much), who make a lot of their living through some level of exploitation of other people, usually comfortably far away.
This is not Mr. Trump’s vision of “America First.” His might resemble more America prior to World War I, where the US took more of an isolationist policy, staying out of world affairs, but refusing also to let the world interfere with the Americans in their own country. Such a view is taken by President Vladimir Putin, regarding his nation, Russia. While “Russia First!” may have some differences in policy than “America First”, both leaders wish first and foremost, to develop and help their own nations, and to develop constructive partnerships with others, but not at the expense of national identity or value. While an extreme point of such nationalism might give us a nation that decides to try to take over the world, such as Nazi Germany did, this kind of nationalism might better be called “self sovereignty of nations” meaning that each nation has its culture, borders, language and way of doing things as best suits the people of that country, and the other nations have no right to dictate that any country be any other way than it actually is.
While there are dangers even in this point of view (none are perfect), the opportunity for peaceful and competitive partnerships and alliances is enormous. “America First” in this view will reduce wars, at least the ones where America sends its troops, because it is not in America’s interests to run the rest of the world under such a worldview.
This was a big digression, but probably needed. The US has been and is at a fork in the road. Mr. Trump is very strongly supported by those who believe in his vision, and the coming months will show us if this movement is indeed slowly gaining momentum. It will need to if it is to win. The weakness displayed by the liberals is not enough to assure a victory for the Trump side. It will be a very hard fight, indeed.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report