Monday, October 26, 2015

The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government

Review of David Talbot’s book


cia (1)
This is a bold and profoundly important book, not only for the portrait of the evil spymaster Allen Dulles, but even more so for its examination of the legacy he spawned – the creation of a cabal hidden behind the public  face of  the United States  government  that  secretly  runs  the country  today  on behalf  of wealthy elites. 
The psychopathic Allen Dulles was the enforcer for this group, called “the power elite” by C. Wright Mills in the 1950s.  In recent years, especially since September 11, 2001, as its power has expanded, it has been given different names – the deep state, the national security state, deep politics,etc. – but that has not diminished its power one jot.  Like a patient who goes to a doctor seeking a label for vague yet disturbing symptoms, people may feel relief from the naming, but the dis-ease continues until the root cause is eliminated.  Aye, there’s the rub!
Dulles is dead, but the structure he created lives on and flourishes under new operatives.Because of his intrepid examination of these forces, David Talbot can expect to be ignored and attacked by disinformation specialists  of various stripes,  who will  use specious reasoning,  lies,  and any small weaknesses in his style or sourcing to dismiss the essential truths of his well-documented and beautifully written thesis.   First  ignore,  and if  that  doesn’t  work,  then attack,  is  the modus operandi  of  these propagandists who populate the mainstream media,  the people Dulles had in his pocket and whom Talbot excoriates throughout the book.
When an author has the guts to accuse America’s longest-reigning CIA Director of “a reign of treason,” hecan expect blowback from media and academic spokesmen of the deep-state.
Talbot is a gifted writer whose narrative style quickly engrosses the reader. Two chapters into The Devil’s Chessboard, one can’t help being nauseated by his account of Allen Dulles’s blood-chilling betrayal of large numbers of European Jews targeted by Hitler.  “Dulles,” Talbot writes, “was more in step with many Nazi leaders than he was with President Roosevelt.”
Together with his brother John Foster Dulles, who would become Secretary of State under Eisenhower,  Allen Dulles had long-standing business  ties to German industrial giants such as I G Farben (manufacturers of Zyklon B used in the gas chambers) and Krupp steel.  Their law firm, Sullivan and Cromwell, “was at the center of an intricate network of banks,investment  firms,  and  industrial  conglomerates  that  rebuilt  Germany  after  World  War  I.”   Slow  to publicly break with Hitler and his allies, the Dulles brothers, especially Allen, reserved a place in his hear and a place at the table for his Nazi friends.  When he was recruited into the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in 1941 and slipped into neutral Switzerland in late 1942, he was there not so much to support Roosevelt’s  war efforts as to protect  the interests of his law firm’s German clients.   In doing so, he betrayed personal friends and anonymous Jews to Hitler’s killers in a heartless manner hard to fathom.
Whenever Dulles had a chance to publicize the plight of the Jews, he buried the reports.  For example,when a German cable reported that 120,000 Hungarian Jews, including children, were to be taken for work in the “labor services” – a euphemism for a trip to Auschwitz – “Dulles’s communiques to OSS headquarters  used the same banal  language as  the Nazis,  referring  blandly  to  the ‘conscription’  of Hungary’s Jews.”  While noting that academic researchers decades later remain hesitant to condemn Dulles for this, Talbot will have none of it.  It is for good reason that he entitles his book  The  Devil’s Chessboard.  He thinks Dulles was satanic.
In  addition to his chilling indifference to the slaughter of the Jews, Dulles worked overtime to undermine FDR’s adamant insistence that he would accept nothing less than an “unconditional surrender” and that Nazi war criminals would face justice.  Dulles worked his wiles at saving many Nazi war criminals and returning  them  to  power  in  post-war  West-Germany.   Among  them  was  Reinhard  Gehlen,  Hitler’s notorious chief of intelligence.  In a talk to the Council of Foreign Relations on December 3, 1945, as the first Nuremburg trial was underway, he told the meeting, “Most men of the caliber required to [run thenew Germany]  suffer  a  political  taint.
We have already found out that  you can’t  run the railroads without taking in some [Nazi] party members.”  Couching this in anti-Soviet rhetoric for an audience of like-minded power brokers, many of whom were no doubt as ant-Semitic as he was, Dulles made sure it happened.  He worked hard to save the neck of Himmler’s former chief of staff and commander of the security forces in Italy, SS general Karl Wolff.  Called the “Bureaucrat of Death,” this killer was one of many Dulles  saved  under  his  separate  peace pact,  Operation Sunrise,  a  traitorous circumvention of Roosevelt’s insistence on justice.  SS colonel Eugen Dollman was another.  In this operation, he worked closely with James Jesus Angleton, the future CIA head of counterintelligence who saw Dulles as his maestro.  Working together they helped many notorious Nazi war criminals escape to the United States,Latin America, and other countries via the “Nazi ratlines.”
In Part II of the book, Talbot buttresses these historical and well-sourced facts with a detour into Dulles’s personal life and relationships.  It is not a reassuring portrait.  We learn that his wife Clover and one of his  mistresses,  Mary Bancroft,  called him “the Shark.” (Bancroft was the best  friend of Ruth Paine’s mother-in-law; it was at Ruth Paine’s house that Marina and Lee Harvey Oswald lived at the time of JFK’s assassination. More on the Paine’s below.)
Bancroft refers to “those cold blue eyes of his” and his“peculiar mirthless laugh.”  Carl Jung, who treated both women, said Dulles was “quite a tough nut.”Talbot notes that there was “an impenetrable blankness that made him hard to read.”  This description approximates Jung’s take on Hitler that Talbot juxtaposes on the same page – that Hitler seemed like “a mask, like a robot, or a mask of a robot.”  Mary Bancroft recalled that the emotionally dead Dulles’s favorite word was “useful.”  People were only good to him if they were useful.  His daughter Joan told Talbot that her  father was “clearly not interested in us.”   A grinning Dulles once told Mary that his feigned bonhomie, his avuncular demeanor, and trusting attitude toward people were an act. He said, “I like to watch the little mice sniffing at the cheese just before they venture into the little trap. I like to see their expressions when it snaps shut, breaking their little necks.”
After  his  WW II  work assisting Nazis,  Dulles  turned his  attention to stirring the cauldron in  Eastern Europe.  This time he betrayed many thousands to Stalin’s thugs in a make-believe plot called Operation Splinter Factor that was meant to panic Stalin. It  achieved its goal and once again the victims were “useful”  to  him.
His  ideological  obsession in  countering the Soviet  Union in the Cold War knew no bounds. Talbot reports that private citizen Dulles funded espionage activities with treasure looted from Jewish families; that he set up, together with Frank Wisner and others, his own espionage unit deep within the State Department – the Office of Policy Coordination; that he was instrumental in the rise of Richard Nixon to political prominence.  Throughout the late 1940s and early 1950s he was hard at work constructing the infrastructure of the CIA and a powerful secret government that would outlast him.
Once he finagled his way into the position of CIA Director under Eisenhower, “the CIA would become avast kingdom, the most powerful and least supervised agency in government …. More in keeping with an expanding empire than with a vibrant democracy.”
Talbot closely chronicles the rise of Senator Joseph McCarthy, the bullying Red hunter, and Dulles’s dirty battles with him.  Secret dossiers, sexual blackmail,every trick imaginable – these were the methods Dulles used in his winning battle with McCarthy.  This victory gave him cachet with Washington liberals, who celebrated Dulles’s CIA as a safe place for the liberal intelligentsia.  This was a fateful turn of events; “it established a dangerous precedent,” Talbot notes, for Dulles now had a freer hand to grow the CIA and expand its secret powers with liberal support against the “real” communist threat, not the hyped up sort McCarthy stood for.
“In truth,” he writes,  “the CIA became an effective killing machine under Dulles.”  Assassination had always been one of his favorite methods, and now it had found an institutional home.  Today its home is also in the Obama White House, a development well-documented, and a sign of Dulles’s expanded and enduring influence.
Talbot has two excellent sections on what Dulles felt were two of his greatest successes: the CIA led 1953coup in Iran and the 1954 coup in Guatemala, both of which ousted democratically elected leaders and installed  dictators  for  the  benefit  of  multinational  corporations’  foreign  investments.  Hundreds  of thousands of innocent people were eventually killed and tortured as a result, and we are dealing with the consequences today.
Throughout his narrative Talbot mentions many of Dulles’s protégés who will figure prominently in future events, including assassinations of American and foreign leaders: Howard Hunt, James Angleton, David Atlee Philips, Richard Helms, William Harvey, David Morales, to name but a few. As one reads through his excellent chronicle of the CIA’s coups, its MKULTRA mind control project, its cultural engineering that captivated artists and intellectuals, one can’t help feeling that Dulles’s machinations are leading to adefining culmination.
Enter Senator John F. Kennedy and an explosive speech he delivered on the Senate floor on July 2, 1957. Talbot correctly notes this speech’s significance when he writes, “Breaking from the Cold War orthodoxy that prevailed in the Democratic as well as Republican parties, JFK suggested that Soviet expansionism was not the only enemy of world freedom; so, too, were the forces of western imperialism that crushed the legitimate aspirations of people throughout the Third World.”
This speech set the stage for the CIA’s future war with Kennedy that ended in his assassination on November22, 1963. JFK was challenging the entire worldview of the Eisenhower / Dulles / Republican/ Democratic establishment. He had crossed the Rubicon.  Talbot updates it aptly:
“Even today, no nationally prominent leader in the United States today would dare question the imperialistic policies that have led our country into one military nightmare after another.”
If one could imagine a leader doing so, and that politician was then elected president, what would be his fate?  Talbot’s implication is sobering, and a reader can’t help thinking of those prominent leaders who dared to question   imperialist agenda –JFK, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy.  Former CIA analyst Raymond McGovern has suggested that American presidents since Kennedy are acutely aware of the message sent from the streets of Dallas.
In the last section of the book Talbot covers a lot of familiar territory regarding the Bay of Pigs, Dulles’s firing by Kennedy, and Kennedy’s assassination.  He accurately claims that the Bay of Pigs was a setup of Kennedy by Dulles that “was meant to fail” so as to force Kennedy to launch a full-scale invasion of Cuba.
“The  wily  CIA  chief  set  a  trap  for  Kennedy,  allowing  the  president  to  believe  that  his  ‘immaculate invasion’ could succeed, even though Dulles knew that only U.S. soldiers and planes could ensure that.”
What  he  doesn’t  mention,  but  would  buttress  his  argument  further,  is  that  classified  documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the Soviets had learned of the date of the invasion more than a week in advance, had informed Castro, but never told Kennedy. This treasonous with holding was not lost on Kennedy who knew that “Dulles had lied to his face in the Oval Office about the chances for the operation’s success.”   When JFK refused the bait and courageously avoided the trap Dulles had set for him – “to break his little neck” – Dulles and his followers were enraged.  “That little Kennedy … he thought he was a god,” Dulles let slip in 1965 on a stroll with the writer Willie Morris.
Talbot’s section on the attempted coup d’état against French President Charles de Gaulle is terrific. This CIA backed event, launched in the same month as the Bay of Pigs, was also clearly meant to embarrass Kennedy and to send the message that it was the CIA, not Kennedy, who was in charge.  The July 1962assassination  attempt  on  de  Gaulle  emphasized  the  message:  those  who  dare  to  recognize  the independence of Third World countries, as JFK had proposed in 1957 and de Gaulle was in the process of doing with Algeria, would be eliminated.
Talbot convincingly shows that although he was out as CIA Director, Dulles was still very much in power,avidly conferring and plotting with his CIA acolytes, his moles in the Kennedy administration, and hismilitary  allies  led  by  the Joint  Chief’s  chairman Lemnitzer,  who hated  Kennedy.
“Like  the Time-Life building in Manhattan, Dulles’s brick house on Q Street was a boiling center of anti-Kennedy opposition.The actively ‘retired’ spymaster maintained a busy appointments calendar, meeting not only with CIA old boys like Frank Wisner and Charles Cabell [the brother of the mayor of Dallas on the day Kennedy was murdered], but with a steady stream of top-rank, active- duty agency officials such as Angleton, Helms,Cord Meyer, and Desmond Fitzgerald.  More surprisingly, Dulles also conferred with mid-level officials and operational officers such as Howard Hunt, James Hunt (a key deputy of Angleton, and no relation toHoward), and Thomas Karamessines (Helm’s right-hand man).”
In October 1963 Dulles gave a speech ridiculing the Kennedy administration’s “yearning to be loved” by the rest of the world.  His best-selling book,  The Craft of Intelligence, also appeared that fall and was sycophantically praised by his media allies at The New York Times and Washington Post, papers that would give their seal of approval to the Warren Commission report that Dulles would control and which has been called the Dulles Commission.  Talbot correctly notes throughout the book that Dulles always had the backing of the powerful mainstream media such as The New York Times, The Washington Post,Time-Life, etc.  Their owners and executives were a key part of his network of friends and insiders who worked in tandem to support their mutual interests at home and abroad.
He has a revelatory section on Dulles’s retreat on the weekend of JFK’s assassination to the top-secret“Farm,” a CIA command facility, officially known as Camp Peary.  From Friday, November 22, the day of the assassination, through Sunday, the 24th, the day Ruby shot Oswald, Dulles hunkered down at this training center for assassins, as described by former CIA agents Philip Agee and Victor Marchetti. It was also a “black site” where extreme interrogation methods were used on suspected enemies. What he was doing there is unknown, though highly suspicious.
The weakest part of Talbot’s final  section, where he marshals plenty of circumstantial evidence that strongly suggests but doesn’t prove Dulles’s part in the assassination, is his analysis of Ruth and Michael Paine.  Talbot interviewed them in their retirement community and came away a bit starry-eyed.  Ruth Paine was the Dallas housewife who had befriended Marina Oswald and taken her – and Lee Harvey on weekends – to live with her.  She was the key witness for the Warren Commission.  It was at her home where incriminating evidence against Oswald was found.  The Paine’s connection to the CIA, Dulles’ network,  and other  CIA operations,  confirmed by excellent  researchers in great  detail,  escapes him,although he does note their connection to Mary Bancroft, Dulles’s former mistress.  Of the Paines he writes,  “In  their  immaculate  innocence,  the Paines  played  right  into  the hands  of  those who were manipulating Oswald.”  I’m afraid Talbot is the innocent here.  The Paines are very important figures in the assassination and seeing them clearly would add to his powerful thesis. Perhaps he was tired at this point in his pursuit of the satanic Dulles.
He does raise three interesting issues in his last hundred or so pages. (I  should note that  The Devil’sChessboard is a very long – 661 pages – and heavily documented book.)  They are: the aforementionedaccount of Dulles at “the Farm,” the connections to the attempted coup and assassination against deGaulle,  and the very real  possibility  of  CIA operative William Harvey being involved in the killing ofKennedy.  Otherwise, there is not much new about the assassination, though he does do an excellent jobof  marshalling  the  available  recent  research  on  the  subject  and  sprinkling  his  text  with  intriguingsuggestions.
One of the most interesting new details he offers is from a book by de Gaulle’s information minister Alain Peyrefitte, C’etait de Gaulle,  which was never translated into English.  In it the French president, just home from JFK’s funeral, confides to Peyrefitte that he knew that the CIA was behind the assassination.“What happened to Kennedy is what nearly happened to me.  His story is the same as mine …. The security forces were in cahoots with the extremists …. But you’ll see.  All of them together will observe the law of silence.  They will close ranks.  They’ll do everything to stifle any scandal.  They will throw Noah’s cloak over these shameful deeds.  In order not to lose face in front of the whole world.  In order to not risk unleashing riots in the United States.  In order to preserve the union and to avoid a new civilwar.  In order to not ask themselves questions.  They don’t want to know.  They don’t want to find out.They won’t allow themselves to find out.”
Thus the “unspeakable,” although an open secret, was born. But JFK’s assassination isn’t a mystery.  As Dr. Martin Schotz said twenty years ago, “Any citizen who is willing to look can see clearly who killed President Kennedy and why.”  The basic facts are long known that he was killed by a CIA led operation to eliminate him for his intention to end the Vietnam War, for his support of Third-World independence, for his  opposition to the military-corporate-industrial  complex,  and for  his  efforts to  end the Cold  War.Talbot knows all this.  He knows that JFK’s American University address of June 11, 1963 sealed his fate.He knows and says that Robert Kennedy was also killed as a result of a conspiracy, and he needed to be stopped before he became president and reopened the killing of his brother.  Talbot’s valiant effort to put  faces  on  the  conspirators  is  laudatory.  But  while  being  also  highly  suggestive,  it  may  not  be necessary.
The Devil’s Chessboard is a very important book. David Talbot has exposed the face of evil incarnate in Allen Dulles, the hit-man for the power elite.  He has documented the rise of the secret state that holds the ignorant in its grip today, is waging war around the globe, and spying on the American people.  He has warned us that evil often wears the mask of civility and high society.  Satan, he suggests, wears many masks, and he continues to move the pawns with a smile.
“Dead for nearly half a century,” he concludes,” Dulles’s shadow still darkens the land.”  And although he is  reticent to name today’s names who carry on his legacy,  and refers to them as “faceless security bureaucrats,” they do have faces, and names, as Allen Dulles did – so it’s  time to call them out and name them.  Otherwise we are playing Dulles’s mind-control games, and we will have to wait another fifty years to read a comparably excellent study showing future readers who Dulles’s clones are today.
Like  Arthur  Schlesinger,  Kennedy’s  craven  assistant,  who,  when  asked  to  watch  the  Zapruder  film’s infamous frame 313 kill shot, turned his head and walked away saying, “I can’t look and won’t look,” we will become accomplices by neglect in the ongoing hijacking of the country by the secret state.
David Talbot is a true patriot for giving us this extraordinary book.
Edward Curtin is Professor of Sociology at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, North Adams, MA

Genetically Engineered Soybeans Produce Altered Milk and Stunted Kids: Study

gmo_sign_Crops_735_350-735x350
Mother goats fed on ‘Roundup-ready’ GMO soy produce milk that’s much lower in fat, protein and antibodies than non-GMO controls, writes Jonathan Latham, and contains traces of GE DNA. The milk also stunts their kids’ growth.
Pregnant goats fed with genetically engineered (GE) soybeans have offspring who grow more slowly and are shorter, according to a new Italian study (Tudisco et al., 2015).
Publishing in the journal of Small Ruminant Research, the researchers were testing the results of supplementing the feed of female goats with Roundup Ready GE soybeans.
Roundup Ready soybeans are engineered to resist the herbicide Roundup and are sold by agribusiness giant Monsanto. They are some of the most widely grown soybeans in the world.
The reduced growth of the goat kids was attributed by the researchers to their observation that the milk of the GE-fed mothers was significantly less nutritious and contained less of the IgG antibodies important for early growth.
“This was a carefully conducted study“, commented Dr Judy Carman, Director of the Institute of Health and Environmental Research, Australia. She was not involved in the research, but told Independent Science News:
“The differences in the composition of the colostrum between the mothers fed the GE soy and the non-GE soy were particularly striking. The colostrum from the GE-fed mothers contained only 2/3 of the fat, 1/3 of the protein and close to half of the IgG of the mothers fed the non-GM soy.”
GE-fed milk: less milk, fat, antibodies; presence of GE DNA fragments
To carry out these experiments the researchers divided pregnant female Cilentana goats into four groups, 60 days before kidding. Two of the groups were fed goat food containing GE Roundup Ready soybeans (at two different concentrations). The other two groups were fed conventional (non-GE) soybeans, also at two different concentrations.
After the mothers gave birth all offspring were fed only with their mother’s milk for 60 days. The growth of these kids was measured twice. After both 30 days and 60 days the kids of GE-fed mothers were approximately 20% lower in weight and shorter in stature. Both these differences were statistically significant.
Lower offspring weights were not the only unexpected findings. The researchers also found that the milk of GE-fed goats was lower in protein and fat. This difference in milk quality was large (6% protein in both GE-fed groups versus 18% in both non-GE fed groups) for the first few weeks after birth but gradually disappeared-even though the mothers continued to be fed the GE soybeans.
Additionally, the researchers also found that the colostrum produced by GE-fed mothers had low amounts of IgG antibodies. These antibodies are important for growth and for healthy immune development.
A third difference noted by the researchers was that transgenic DNA could be detected in the colostrum of most (10/16) of the GE-fed goats. No transgene DNA was detected in the milk of goats fed non-GE soybeans. This is not the first time that transgene DNA (or non-transgenic DNA) has been found in the milk of ruminants, however.
The problem expresses in the milk
Interestingly, the researchers found that all of the kids were of similar size at birth, regardless of whether their mothers ate Roundup Ready GE soybeans or not.
The researchers therefore proposed that the stunting of the offspring of GE-fed mothers reflected a milk deficiency – presumably either the lower nutritional value of the colostrum and milk of GE-fed mothers or the colostrum antibody differences that were observed.
The authors noted that low IgG antibody levels in colostrum are correlated in other ruminants with slower growth and also that IgG antibodies are known to have a role in nutrient absorption because they promote gut development in newborns.
The researchers did not discuss whether the transgene DNA fragments found in the milk played a role in altering kid development.
This result is the strongest demonstration so far of altered growth and development in offspring of GE-fed mothers. The same researchers in 2010 showed altered activity of the lactic dehydrogenase enzyme in kids fed milk from mothers that ate GE Roundup Ready soybeans. In that previous study however, no additional effects on goat offspring were detected (Tudisco et al., 2010).
“It is already known that Roundup Ready soybeans have various defects including a Manganese deficiency, said Dr Allison Wilson of The Bioscience Resource Project.
“Yet regulators and GMO developers have continuously dismissed credible reports of GMO crops causing apparent harm to animals, from many different research groups. Hopefully they will not ignore yet another study.
Dr Jonathan R. Latham is editor of Independent Science News, where this article was originally published.
For further details on the studies of R. Tudesco et al see:

Odd Parallels Are Rife Between ‘Ghost Ships’ and Modern UFOsghost ship

Among the myths and legends of the Chilote culture of southwestern Chile, there exists an enduring tale of a “ghost ship” that is occasionally seen, particularly around the area of Chiloé Island. Known as El Caleuche, the story goes that sailors and fishermen have often seen this eerie ghost ship as it sails along silently, often illuminated brilliantly by white light that occasionally gives it the appearance of a modern sailing ship.
The Caleuche ship bears a few other interesting qualities as well, such as its ability to traverse both above, and below the waves as it travels. Another element of the ship’s mystique is the hallmark sound of singing and enjoyment as it passes near which, as a brief aside, is reminiscent of the alleged “airships” reported over the United States during the latter half of the nineteenth century. Such traits can, at times, bear similarity to other underlying themes that appear in modern examinations of strange phenomenon: the amphibious nature of El Caleuche also reminds us of the Flying Dutchman, another famous phantom vessel of the 19th century which, rather strangely,
One of the most unusual things about the mythical Flying Dutchman is that, in at least a few cases, purported encounters with the ship have turned up. Such was the case in 188o when Prince George of Wales (later crowned King George V) described an unusual sailing vessel in the early morning hours of July 11th, while traversing the Bass Strait:
“July 11th. At 4 a.m. the Flying Dutchman crossed our bows. A strange red light as of a phantom ship all aglow, in the midst of which light the masts, spars and sails of a brig 200 yards distant stood out in strong relief as she came up on the port bow, where also the officer of the watch from the bridge clearly saw her, as did the quarterdeck midshipman, who was sent forward at once to the forecastle; but on arriving there was no vestige nor any sign whatever of any material ship was to be seen either near or right away to the horizon, the night being clear and the sea calm. Thirteen persons altogether saw her.”
The description given us by the Prince in this case is ambiguous at best. Rather than describing an actual phantom ship, the description here entails, specifically, “a red light”, and one as of a phantom ship seen some distance away. If we were to rely only on the notion that thirteen people observed a red light, it seems more likely that the cultural notion of the ghost ship–in this case, that of the Dutchman, which became popular in the decades before this encounter–had been attributed to the light that was seen, rather than actually being a spectral vessel of any kind.
Here it is equally interesting to note, though tangentially, that the Bass Strait is the location of one of the most controversial disappearances in modern times: that of Frederick Valentich, who went missing while purportedly observing an unusual object emitting green light as he flew over the area in 1978. Whether the light he described to air traffic control operators in Melbourne was indeed a physical object remains in question, since Valentich presumably did not survive the encounter to be able to relate more about his observation. In equal measure, it would be difficult to relate Valentich’s encounter to that of Prince George and his eerie “red light” which he attributed to the Dutchman; however, the coincidence pertaining to the location is worth noting.
Returning to the tales about Chile’s El Caleuche, in modern times there have also been descriptions of strange sailing vessels–some of which may not truly be of the maritime variety at all–that are seen in the region. Among the most perplexing conspiracy theories pertaining to UFOs in all of South America over the years, the so-called “Friendship Island” affair remains a pivot point of curiosity, and contention (for a summary of this case, see my MU article here). In relation to this case, a number of theories regarding a “UFO base” located on an island somewhere off the Southwestern coast of Chile have been offered by researchers since the early 1980s, with virtually nothing able to substantiate the claims (despite convoluted audio recordings and radio dispatches that are alleged to be related to the case that have emerged).
map
Perhaps of more interest, however, are the various correspondences that have come to light in the last few years, gathered by researcher Raul Nunez of the South American NOUFA organization (Noticiero Ufologico Autonomo). At his blog, Scott Corrales of Inexplicata and the Institute of Hispanic Ufology featured a series of correspondences obtained by Nunez, which describe various strange observations made by local fishermen and others over the years, some of which date as far back as the 1950s and 60s. Among the various correspondences, descriptions of the fabled Caleuche appear, which is described as having the appearance of some strange, and very modern-looking sailing vessel which, just as legend tells, at times glides above the water, rather than merely moving across it.
One of the most impressive stories had been related by Pedro Ignacio Herrera in 1999, in which he tells of seeing a mysterious vessel moving several meters above the water:
“I recall having been fishing near Punta Tajamar near the locality of Abtao. It was evening and we were getting ready to return to the coast when we saw a strange vessel pass in front our barge. It looked like a large tourist yacht, modern and nearly glowing white, but when our eyes adjusted to the glow, and we overcame our initial stupor, we realized that the yacht was not on the waterline, but some meters above it. In other words, it floated and traveled quickly over the waterline. It moved silently and there was no crew visible, nothing beyond an unusual sense of majesty. My father never mentioned the subject to me again. Many local residents told me jokingly that maybe we’d seen an upgraded, modern version of El Caleuche.”
sea
A similar story tells of a man who, suffering from various health effects resulting from years of smoking, was taken to a mysterious island by his “German employers” who operated strange machinery which the local man did not recognize. The story of his strange return from the island presents us with yet another account of a mysterious, modern-looking sailing vessel:
“He returned aboard a very modern vessel, and only saw one of his neighbors, the oldest among them, who informed him that they’d made an exception in his case, as they thought him to be a person of pure feelings, devoted to nature and his family, but told him to never smoke again. Given that his German employers were very reserved and only spoke of agricultural matters, he tried to forget about the subject, repaying them with his work and the same discretion.”
Another report gathered by Nunez discussed an incident where a man, along with two other local fishermen, disappeared for a number of days under strange, secretive circumstances. Stories later surfaced which told of an odd light seen hovering above their boat, which had been accompanied by “beings.” If taken no further, the incident described might appear to present themes nearly identical to popular alien abduction lore; however, the correspondence further describes that the man, much like others in the region had described, had apparently maintained some working relationship with individuals in the region that seemed to be connected with the disappearance:
“My father had been found wandering along the coast. It was believed that he’d suffered an accident and fallen into the water. The arguments with my mother had to do with whether he still worked for at the place where he’d disappeared. My mother knew something about it, but never told me anything. When I would ask her, she would reply that “there are things it’s best to know nothing about.” My father avoided the subject and experienced a change in later years, becoming partial to deepest mysticism.”
The entire series of correspondences can be read here at Scott Corrales’ Inexplicata blog.
Whether or not they indeed have some relation to the Friendship Island affair is yet to be determined, and of course, while bearing a certain degree of promise, the entire notion of a “secret UFO base” off the coast of Chile is largely dismissed today, even among UFO circles. Though perhaps, if there is any truth to the matter, it has less to do with UFOs, and more with secretive operations of some variety, which, due to their clandestine nature, have helped breed curious legends which borrow from the existing local folklore, blending myth and reality into a curious melting pot of truth, folk tales, and speculation of the stickiest sort of.
This, in truth, might offer an equally fair description of the broader UFO phenomenon just as well, as it has billowed forth and unfolded over the years… revealing more convolution, at times, than anything of true substance.


Amish girl who fled United States to escape forced chemotherapy is now cancer-free

by J. D. Heyes
chemotherapy
(NaturalNews) Some might call it a "miracle," but alternative and holistic medicine healers aren't really surprised to learn that a 12-year old Amish girl is now cancer-free — after her doctors testified in court just six months ago that she would be dead by now if her family were permitted to refuse her chemotherapy.

As reported by the Medina Gazette, of Medina County, Ohio, Maurice Thompson, head of the libertarian non-profit group 1852 Center for Constitutional Law, said young Sarah Hershberger now shows no signs of being stricken with cancer at all and appears to be healthy.

"She had MRIs and blood work, and the judge over the last year helped facilitate at least one trip to the Cleveland Clinic. The MRIs did not show any cancer," Thompson told the Gazette recently.

He added that her family is continuing to treat her with less invasive alternative medicine.

"Once you have it, you're never 100 percent out of the woods, whether or not you get chemotherapy," he said. "I know how she looks isn't really an indication of whether she has cancer, but she's looking very healthy."

And yet, as the paper noted, not a single trace of cancer has shown up in any test.


Court finds parents have no rights — again

When Sarah was diagnosed with cancer in 2013, her parents, Andy and Anna Hershberger, initially agreed to chemotherapy treatments. However, they opted to end such treatments when Sarah's condition grew worse, fearing that the treatments themselves might eventually lead to her death.

As is typical in today's post-constitutional America, officials at Akron Children's Hospital responded with a legal attempt to strip Sarah's parents of their right to choose their own daughter's medical treatment. The hospital sought court permission to obtain "limited guardianship" over her, thereby giving them the authority over medical decisions pertaining to her. Doctors testified she would not make it six months without chemotherapy.

Initially, Probate Judge John L. Lohn — since retired — ruled that Sarah's parents were competent enough to make medical decisions on their daughter's behalf. Eventually, however, a higher court ordered him to appoint a guardian.

The family responded by fleeing the country, choosing instead to seek alternative medical treatment in Mexico and Canada. Months thereafter, the hospital decided to relinquish guardianship, seeing no point in pursuing the matter further.

According to the Gazette:

"Thompson said Probate Judge Kevin Dunn — who replaced Lohn when he retired in 2014 — formally terminated Sarah's guardianship on September 24. Thompson said the judge acknowledged that Sarah, who will turn 13 in November, showed no symptoms of cancer and that she appeared to be healthy."

Following Sarah's case, Thompson has since called on Ohio lawmakers to reform rules that give judges the authority to overrule parental health care decisions involving their children.


Low survival rates for chemotherapy

"It is now time for Ohio's legislators to protect Ohio families from wayward judges," Thompson said, as reported by the Gazette.

Primarily, Thompson lashed out against the legal test that judges typically utilize in cases like Sarah's, in order to circumvent parental authority in decisions involving their children's health and well-being.

"This test allows county judges to overrule health care, educational and other important decisions of suitable Ohio parents," Thompson said. "In the wake of Sarah's case, the concept came to be known as 'medical kidnapping.' "

While the children's hospital declined to comment on the story, a spokesperson nonetheless told the Gazette that Akron Children's had established a committee to interact with the Amish community, in order to "facilitate better communication regarding health care in the wake of Sarah's case," the paper reported.

That said, overall survival rates for chemotherapy — not the underlying cancer for which mainstream medicine prescribes it — is very low. According to a 2004 study, while some 60 percent of cancer patients in Australia survived, chemotherapy had little or nothing to do with those survival rates.

"I've never met a person who was cured by cancer with chemotherapy. Not a single one," said Natural News editor Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, following actor Patrick Swayze's untimely death from pancreatic cancer (after receiving chemotherapy). "Never even heard of such a person. They don't exist. Even the cancer industry will tell you their 'cure rate' is zero (because they don't believe cancer can ever be cured)."

Sources:


MedinaGazette.com


NaturalNews.com

NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov