The US intelligence community labeled Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte a “threat to democracy” in their Worldwide Threat Assessment (WTA) report, provoking a rebuke from Philippine leaders in defense of their oft-controversial president.
The WTA was published on February 13 and spent most of its time running down the “threat” posed by the US’ top rivals: Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. The Philippines is only mentioned twice in the 28-page report: once when it’s named alongside Turkey and Venezuela (two countries that the US has a rocky-at-best relationship with) as nations “whose governments used social media to spread government views, to drive agendas and to counter criticism of the government online.”
The other mention discusses the trend of “autocratic tendencies” deepening in Southeast Asia. “In the Philippines, President Duterte will continue to wage his signature campaign against drugs, corruption and crime,” the report reads. “Duterte has suggested he could suspend the Constitution, declare a ‘revolutionary government’ and impose nationwide martial law. His declaration of martial law in Mindanao, responding to the Daesh-inspired siege of Marawi City, has been extended through the end of 2018,” the report notes.
In response to the report, Duterte spokesman Harry Roque told DZMM outlet that Manila viewed the report “with some concern, knowing that at least in one case the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has found the US guilty of interference in the affairs of a domestic state.”
This refers to the 1986 decision by the ICJ that the US violated Nicaragua’s sovereignty by supporting right-wing Contra rebels who opposed the socialist government of Nicaragua during the nation’s decade-long civil war.
“This is something we are taking very seriously,” Roque continued. “It is coming from the intelligence community. It is not even coming from the State Department. It is something that the President will take seriously as well.”
“For one, President Rodrigo Roa Duterte is no autocrat or has autocratic tendencies. He adheres to the rule of law and remains loyal to the constitution,” Roque said in a statement. He added that Duterte has not actually declared a revolutionary government or nationwide martial law.
Duterte did make comments to that effect, however. “Once your destabilization is already creating chaos, I will not hesitate to declare a revolutionary government until the end of my term,” he said in an address to drug kingpins and oligarchs that he blames many of the archipelago’s woes on.
A “revolutionary government” refers to the 1987 decision of then-president Corazon Aquino to give herself dictatorial powers while overseeing the transition of the Philippines from a martial dictatorship to a presidential republic. Aquino relinquished her extra powers in 1988 when she no longer saw them as necessary.
Relations between Washington and Manila tanked shortly after Duterte’s ascension in mid-2016. Duterte openly announced his intention to pivot the Philippines towards China and Russia after decades of strong ties with the US. Then-US President Barack Obama once infamously canceled a planned meeting with Duterte after the firebrand president called him a “son of a whore.”
Relations improved after the election of US President Donald Trump, who is more closely aligned to Duterte’s law-and-order approach to domestic policy, but Duterte has continued to court foreign powers in trade and political agreements.
The WTA is unsurprisingly focused on nations that the US has a cool or hostile relationship with. US allies with spotty human rights records, like Saudi Arabia and Thailand, receive few mentions in the report. Some, like Egypt, aren’t mentioned at all.
Those who care about the environment may want to consider going vegetarian. According to the report Appetite for Destruction, meat consumption is impacting some of the world’s most valuable and vulnerable regions. This is largely due to the substantial amount of land needed to produce animal feed.
The Western diet, which is notoriously high in meat in dairy, is the major culprit. In fact, the growing popularity of the diet means an area 1.5 times the size of the European Union could be saved if global consumption of animal products was cut to meet nutritional requirements, reports The Independent.
The areas most threatened include the Amazon, Congo Basin and the Himalayas. There, water and land resources are already sought after.
According to the report, excessive animal product consumption is responsible for 60 percent of all biodiversity loss. “The world is consuming more animal protein than it needs and this is having a devastating effect on wildlife,” said Duncan Williamson, WWF food policy manager.
“A staggering 60 per cent of global biodiversity loss is down to the food we eat. We know a lot of people are aware that a meat-based diet has an impact on water and land, as well as causing greenhouse gas emissions, but few know the biggest issue of all comes from the crop-based feed the animals eat,” he added.
In addition to overeating, many people consume too much protein. Current dietary guidelines recommend 45 to 55 grams of protein per day. But in the UK, the average person consumes between 64 and 88g. Reportedly, 37 percent is meat-based.
The report claims that if everyone on the planet reduced their animal product consumption to meet nutritional requirements, the total amount of land required for agriculture would be reduced by 13 percent. Such would result in nearly 650 million hectares being saved from agricultural production.
It was also noted that conventionally-produced meat has become less nutritious. Not only are the levels of healthy omega-3 fat declining, there is a rise in unhealthy saturated fat. This combination produces inflammation in the body.
“For people and nature to thrive we need to consume and produce food differently. Eating less animal protein would allow us to farm in a more sustainable way, with less impact on the environment and healthier and more nutritious food.”
What are your thoughts? Please comment below and share this news!
Image Credit1: Pixabay
Image Credit2: tatom / 123RF Stock Photo
An outright frightening dossier released by a former senior United Nations official reveals that United Nations employees have carried out over 60,000 rapes in just the last decade. What’s more, the dosser estimates that the organization currently employs at least 3,300 pedophiles.
In just ten years, under the guise of rendering aid, the United Nations has literally been raping and pillaging countries across the world. The problem has gotten so out of hand that it prompted the former UN insider, Andrew Macleod, to blow the whistle and hand over the evidence to Britain’s Department for International Development (DFID) Secretary Priti Patel.
According to the exclusive report by the Sun, the dossier reveals that on top of the 3,300 pedophiles working for the organization, thousands more “predatory” sex abusers specifically target aid charity jobs to get close to vulnerable women and children.
According to Macleod, anyone who’s attempted to blow the whistle on the horrifyingly rampant abuse is silence and fired.
Sharing his dossier with The Sun, Prof MacLeod last night warned that the spiralling abuse scandal was on the same scale as the Catholic Church’s.
While the report reveals that there are 3,300 current employees who are active pedophiles on the UN’s payroll, Macleod estimates the real number to be far higher.
“There are tens of thousands of aid workers around the world with paedophile tendencies, but if you wear a UNICEF T-shirt nobody will ask what you’re up to.
“You have the impunity to do whatever you want.
“It is endemic across the aid industry across the world”.
“The system is at fault, and should have stopped this years ago.”
According to the report in the Sun:
Professor MacLeod worked as an aid boss for the UN all over the world, including high profile jobs in the Balkans, Rwanda and Pakistan – where he was chief of operations of the UN’s Emergency Coordination Centre.
He is campaigning for far tougher checks on aid workers in the field as well as the abusers among them to be brought to justice, and wants the UK to lead the fight.
The professor’s grim 60,000 figure is based on UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres’s admission last year that UN peacekeepers and civilian staff abused 311 victims in just one 12 month period over 2016.
The UN also admits that the likely true number of cases reported against its staff is double that, as figures outside of war zones are not centrally collated.
Prof MacLeod also estimates that only one in 10 of all rapes and assaults by UN staff are reported, as even in the UK the reporting rate is just 14 per cent.
Based on evidence from Prof MacLeod, ex-Cabinet minister Priti Patel – who resigned in November last year – this week accused senior officials at DFID of being part of the cover up.
“Child rape crimes are being inadvertently funded in part by United Kingdom tax-payer,” explained Macleod.
“I know there were a lot of discussions at senior levels of the United Nations about ‘something must be done’ but nothing effective came of it, and if you look at the record of whistleblowers, they were fired,” he said.
“We are looking at a problem on the scale of the Catholic Church — if not bigger.”
As the Free Thought Project has been reporting for years, none of these predators are ever held liable, and as this report shows, only the ones who expose it are fired.
In a blow to victims of human trafficking worldwide, a massive child sex ring was exposed in Haiti — involving international ‘peacekeepers’ with the United Nations as well as other high-level officials from around the world — and no one went to jail.
For years, UN peacekeepers, their high-level commanders, and other ‘personnel’ from around the globe came to Haiti for sex with boys and girls as young as 12.
In Haiti alone, more than 300 children have come forward in the last decade with these claims and only a tiny fraction of those accused have ever faced any form of accountability. And this is the organization that governments of the world rely on to keep peace…no wonder we are in a perpetual state of war.
Patrick Slattery and Filbert Applebag discuss stock market volatility, foreign exchange margin trading, the Kosher certification racket, and the massive goldmine on Bougainville Island, and much much more.
For more of Dr. Slattery’s daily RBN shows, please visit his archive page at http://www.republicbroadcastingarchives.org/category/patrick-slattery/
Source Article from https://davidduke.com/slattery-applebag-financial-report-for-feb-16-2018/
New report suggests the government should give everyone under 55 £10,000 regardless of employment status or current wealth.
The findings have come from The Royal Society for the encouragement of the Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA) saying it could be the transition needed for everyone to eventually receive a state funded basic wage.
The idea proposes two seperate payments of £5,000 to be paid over a two year period. This would also result in other benefits and tax reliefs being removed.
RSA believe the incentive will support the way work and jobs will be changing during the 2020’s “as automation replaces many jobs, climate change hits and more people face balancing employment with social care”.
The money would be taken from a British sovereign wealth fund, and applicants would only have to explain how they plan to use the money.
Director of the RSA’s Action and Research Centre Anthony Painter has said: “The simple fact is that too many households are highly vulnerable to a shock in a decade of disruption, with storm clouds on the horizon if automation, Brexit and an ageing population are mismanaged.
Without a real change in our thinking, neither tweaks to the welfare state nor getting people into work alone, when the link between hard work and fair pay has broken, will help working people meet the challenges ahead.”
It is thought that the fund would help people who have not had time to pursue their passion: “A low-skilled worker might reduce their working hours to attain skills enabling career progression.” and “The fund could provide the impetus to turn an entrepreneurial idea into a reality. It could be the support that enables a carer to be there for a loved one.”
The BBC reports: The fund would be built from public debt, levies on untaxed corporate assets and investments in long term infrastructure projects, and be similar to Norway’s $1 trillion sovereign wealth fund.
As the dividends would replace payments such as Child Benefit, Tax Credits and Jobseeker’s Allowance, the savings for the government could also be ploughed into the fund.
A similar idea is currently being trialed in Finland were 2000 random unemployed people are all being given around £500 per month.
The idea also has roots in Alaska were since 1982 all residents are entitled to a yearly cash dividend taken from the Alaska Permanent Fund.
Scotland has 4 local authorities currently looking into the idea. And one hopeful US Democrat presidential nominee, David Yang is currently promoting his idea of a $1,000 a month “Freedom Dividend”.
A potential argument against would be- do we want a government being in control of so much of our finances which could be revoked at any time they decide? Although the main argument against it are that it would make people lazy and unmotivated. The arguments for it is the opposite, it will give people the opportunity to pursue their passions, without the fear they will not be able to survive.
Overall it sounds like an interesting incentive, let us know what you think, and please share this article.
Image Copyright: mkos83 / 123RF Stock Photo
I am Luke Miller the author of this article, and creator of Potential For Change. I like to blend psychology and spirituality to help you create more happiness in your life.Grab a copy of my free 33 Page Illustrated eBook- Psychology Meets Spirituality- Secrets To A Supercharged Life You Control Here
Parkland, FL — Multiple students have since come forward after the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida on Wednesday with details that raise some serious questions. These students have reported that a mass casualty drill was scheduled that day as well as at least one other student reporting multiple shooters.
It is important to point out that we are not claiming what these students are saying is true, however, we feel that their points of view are certainly newsworthy.
In one chilling account, a high school student not only told reporters that she witnessed multiple shooters, but she also explained how she was talking to the suspect, Nikolas Cruz, as she heard rounds being fired down the hall.
Alexa Miednik told KHOU-TV journalist Matt Musil:”The fire alarm went off and the principal came on the speaker saying ‘everybody needs to evacuate right now,’ so that’s what I did.”
“As I was going down the stairs I heard a couple of shots fired, everybody was freaking out saying that it was a gun,” explained Miednik.
“As we were walking, the whole class together, I actually was speaking to the suspect Nikolas Cruz,” said Miednik, as she made quotes with her fingers when saying ‘suspect’.
“And as I was speaking to him he seemed very – I don’t know what the word is – he was trouble in high school. So I actually joked to him about and said, ‘I’m surprised you weren’t the one who did it.’ And he just gave me a ‘huh?’,” Miednik said.
After this incredible account, Miednik went on to explain that she was absolutely sure there were multiple shooters.
“So, you were walking down the hall with him?” asks the reporter. “Weren’t you scared?”
“In the moment I wasn’t,” replied Miednik. “because there was obviously…definitely another shooter involved.”
“Oh, you think he was not the only one?” asks the surprised reporter.
“No, definitely not,” replied Miednik.
“Why do you say that?” the reporter asked.
“Because when shots were fired, I saw him after the fact. The shots were coming from the other part of the building. So, there definitely had to be two shooters involved,” she explained.
According to police, there was only one shooter—Cruz—who is currently in custody.
On top of the report of multiple shooters, there were multiple reports of active shooter drills happening the same day.
It has not been confirmed that a drill was planned—other than a fire drill that morning—but students said they’d heard a ‘rumor’ that they would have to take part in a ‘code red’ practice exercise.
“I thought, ‘I don’t know if this is real or fake,’” Kelsey Friend explained to CNN.
“We had rumors going around the school that police would do a fake code red with fake guns but sounding real,” Friend explained to reporters. “I thought, at the beginning that this was all a drill…until I saw my teacher dead on the floor.”
Another student, Will Gilroy, reportedly said that students at the high school in were told there would be an active shooter drill at their school this week. He said that’s why students thought they were participating in a drill when they were evacuating.
Again, it is important to point out that we are merely reporting on eeyewitness testimony and not drawing any conclusions from their statements. However, the reason it is important to report this—outside of the obvious one that the mainstream media is not—is the fact that it is highly suspicious and raises questions like, did Cruz know there were be an active shooter drill that day?
Were the second shots as described by Miednik part of that drill?
If Cruz did know about the rumored drill, who told him?
All these questions and more need to be asked in order to get a clear image of why so many innocent people were killed. There is nothing “tinfoily” or “fake news” about them, it is simply important to leave no stone unturned.
Source Article from http://thefreethoughtproject.com/eyewitness-multiple-shooters-active-drill/
Did you know that the same chemical in municipal drinking water played a key role in producing the atomic bomb? Were you aware that huge quantities of the chemical that supposedly protects teeth from cavities were needed to manufacture the bomb-grade plutonium and uranium for nuclear weapons during the Cold War? There are plenty of reasons that fluoridated drinking water is the topic of such fierce debate throughout the country – and most people don’t even know about its dark origins.
According to WWII-era documents uncovered by journalists Chris Bryson and Joel Griffiths, fluoride quickly emerged as the top chemical health hazard of the U.S. atomic bomb program. Their documents show that it posed a huge health threat to workers and the communities surrounding the manufacturing plants.
Moreover, they maintain that the initial “proof” that fluoride doesn’t harm people in low doses was actually fabricated by scientists working on the atomic bomb program after being ordered to come up with evidence that would be useful in any potential future litigation from those who were poisoned by the chemical. They also explained how the first lawsuits against the atomic bomb program were actually over fluoride damage and not radiation.
Fluoride study results mysteriously disappear
The biggest fluoride study was conducted from 1945 to 1956 in Newburgh, New York. The secret operation, which was known as Program F, saw tissue and blood samples collected from people living there through the New York State Health Department. After comparing the published version of the study and the original one, the journalists found evidence that the negative effects of fluorides were suppressed by the Atomic Energy Commission for reasons of “national security.”
Scientist’s fluoride investigations 50 years later hit roadblocks
In studies on animals carried out in the 1990s by Dr. Phyllis Mullenix at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, fluoride was found to be a strong central nervous system toxin that could adversely affect brain functioning in humans even at low doses. Dr. Mullenix was rejected when applying for a grant to study it further by the National Institutes of Health and informed that fluorides do not affect the central nervous system.
This goes directly against a 1944 memo from the Manhattan Project which said: “Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect…it seems most likely that the F [fluoride] component rather than the [uranium] is the causative factor.”
Dr. Harold Hodge, who was working on the Manhattan Project at the time, then requested a study on the effects of fluoride on the central nervous system. Although it was granted, the records of its results have gone missing.
It’s not a coincidence that Dr. Hodge was then called in 50 years later to “advise” Dr. Mullenix on her own investigations of the effects of fluorides. He never disclosed his past work on fluoride toxicity for the Manhattan Project to her, and she believes that he was enlisted to keep an eye on her and prevent her from sharing any damaging findings.
Dr. Hodge was also the author of a memo suggesting that fluorides be promoted as dental treatments after people started to consider lawsuits after a fluoride pollution incident that took place in New Jersey in 1944. On that occasion, the tomato and peach crops of farmers were destroyed and animals were crippled after widespread fluoride contamination downwind from the Deepwater plant where the first atomic bomb was being worked on. Declassified memos from an emergency meeting show they sought “evidence which may be used to protect the interest of the Government at the trial of the suits brought by owners of peach orchards in … New Jersey.”
So the next time someone tells you that fluoride in your drinking water is all about helping you maintain good dental health, keep in mind that there is so much more to the story.
Sources for this article include:
Source Article from http://www.naturalnews.com/2018-02-15-the-dark-history-behind-fluoride.html
The self-funded report was produced by PR firm 89up, a lobbying firm that runs communications for pro-EU pressure group ‘Best for Britain,’ which is part-funded by billionaire George Soros.
At the time of writing, 89up had removed the slide-show presentation linked to the report from its site. While the agency promised more information would be released in the coming days, it has been pointed out that the initial release contained no statistical evidence in the form of tweets or articles to back up the claims being made. Twitter itself has said that it cannot find evidence of Russian Brexit meddling.
After the release of the 89up report, the findings were reproduced on ‘Byline,’ which is a website purporting to be “crowdfunded independent journalism.” Writer JJ Patrick used the headline “Russia More Influential Than Leave Campaigns During Brexit.”
The claim contained in that headline is not backed up by any part of 89up’s report. The inference of that sensationalist headline would be that RT and Sputnik were somehow more influential in Britain than Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, the Daily Mail, The Sun etc, etc. Even the most anti-Russian, pro-Brussels conspiracy theorist would wonder about the veracity of that claim.
That didn’t prevent 89up CEO Michael Harris from retweeting Byline’s story, calling it “a very good in-depth piece on our report” (Impressively, Byline’s story managed to contain more typos than 89up’s original report).
Do you believe that headline?
— Jim Waterson (@jimwaterson) February 12, 2018
Shortly after that tweet, Political Editor of Buzzfeed UK Jim Waterson, who was clearly suspicious about the interpretation, asked Harris “Do you believe that headline?”
Harris immediately admitted that the headline was not completely accurate and that “The lack of ‘on Twitter,’ which is our caveat, is a bit problematic.” So Harris, one of the leaders behind the report, was sharing a story which he almost immediately admits was not 100-percent correct.
It was then pointed out by another Twitter user that, while 89up talked about Russian media achieving “134 million POTENTIAL impressions” linked to the EU vote, Byline had removed the key word “potential” in its report.
“Impressions” simply measure how many people may have potentially seen a tweet, even if that includes scrolling straight past it. A number of people insisted in relation to this report that it is more or less impossible to measure whether the tweets in question have any influence at all.
In its report, 89up claimed: “The Kremlin’s propaganda channels had three times more impact on Twitter than both the official Leave campaigns combined.”
Whereas the opening of the Byline report claims “New analysis by 89up.org confirms the scale of Russian media influence during Brexit vote dwarfed the main Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns, driving anti-EU propaganda, disinformation and fake news to influence voters.”
The claims in this opening paragraph in Byline are clearly different from its source material – enough to be misleading about what was actually being claimed. There is no mention of Twitter, for example.
While 89up cannot be held responsible for mistakes made by a separate outlet, questions should be asked about why one of the main drivers of the report was still willing to re-share information which he admits is misleading.
Incorrect or misleading information being pushed by a separate entity on social media in order to influence an audience to come to a certain point of view is exactly how fake news is spread.
Let’s say RT ran months of exclusively pro-EU messaging, would your lobbying firm be investigating “foreign interference”? What if the country had voted Remain? I’m guessing no.
— Anna Belkina (@Anabelle10021) February 12, 2018
When Harris was asked by RT’s head of communications whether he would produce a similar report if “RT ran months of exclusively pro-EU messaging,” he failed to provide an answer.
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
They’re called the Little Barbies.
This is America’s dirty little secret.
According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, “Children are being targeted and sold for sex in America every day.”
Sex trafficking—especially when it comes to the buying and selling of young girls—has become big business in America, the fastest growing business in organized crime and the second most-lucrative commodity traded illegally after drugs and guns.
As investigative journalist Amy Fine Collins notes, “It’s become more lucrative and much safer to sell malleable teens than drugs or guns. A pound of heroin or an AK-47 can be retailed once, but a young girl can be sold 10 to 15 times a day.”
Consider this: every two minutes, a child is exploited in the sex industry.
According to USA Today, adults purchase children for sex at least 2.5 million times a year in the United States.
Who buys a child for sex? Otherwise ordinary men from all walks of life.
“They could be your co-worker, doctor, pastor or spouse,” writes journalist Tim Swarens, who spent more than a year investigating the sex trade in America.
In Georgia alone, it is estimated that 7,200 men (half of them in their 30s) seek to purchase sex with adolescent girls each month, averaging roughly 300 a day.
On average, a child might be raped by 6,000 men during a five-year period of servitude.
It is estimated that at least 100,000 children—girls and boys—are bought and sold for sex in the U.S. every year, with as many as 300,000 children in danger of being trafficked each year. Some of these children are forcefully abducted, others are runaways, and still others are sold into the system by relatives and acquaintances.
“Human trafficking—the commercial sexual exploitation of American children and women, via the Internet, strip clubs, escort services, or street prostitution—is on its way to becoming one of the worst crimes in the U.S.,” said prosecutor Krishna Patel.
This is not a problem found only in big cities.
It’s happening everywhere, right under our noses, in suburbs, cities and towns across the nation.
As Ernie Allen of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children points out, “The only way not to find this in any American city is simply not to look for it.”
It is estimated that there are 100,000 to 150,000 under-aged child sex workers in the U.S.
Every year, the girls being bought and sold gets younger and younger.
Social media makes it all too easy for young people to be preyed upon by sexual predators.
As one news center reported, “Finding girls is easy for pimps. They look on MySpace, Facebook, and other social networks. They and their assistants cruise malls, high schools and middle schools. They pick them up at bus stops. On the trolley. Girl-to-girl recruitment sometimes happens.” Foster homes and youth shelters have also become prime targets for traffickers.
With a growing demand for sexual slavery and an endless supply of girls and women who can be targeted for abduction, this is not a problem that’s going away anytime soon.
In fact, this growing evil is, for all intents and purposes, out in the open: trafficked women and children are advertised on the internet, transported on the interstate, and bought and sold in swanky hotels.
Indeed, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the government’s war on sex trafficking—much like the government’s war on terrorism, drugs and crime—has become a perfect excuse for inflicting more police state tactics (police check points, searches, surveillance, and heightened security) on a vulnerable public, while doing little to make our communities safer.
So what can you do?
Educate yourselves and your children about this growing menace in our communities.
Stop feeding the monster: Sex trafficking is part of a larger continuum in America that runs the gamut from homelessness, poverty, and self-esteem issues to sexualized television, the glorification of a pimp/ho culture—what is often referred to as the pornification of America—and a billion dollar sex industry built on the back of pornography, music, entertainment, etc.
This epidemic is largely one of our own making, especially in a corporate age where the value placed on human life takes a backseat to profit. It is estimated that the porn industry brings in more money than Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Apple, and Yahoo.
Call on your city councils, elected officials and police departments to make the battle against sex trafficking a top priority, more so even than the so-called war on terror and drugs and the militarization of law enforcement.
Stop prosecuting adults for victimless “crimes” such as growing lettuce in their front yard and focus on putting away the pimps and buyers who victimize these young women.
Finally, the police need to do a better job of training, identifying and responding to these issues; communities and social services need to do a better job of protecting runaways, who are the primary targets of traffickers; legislators need to pass legislation aimed at prosecuting traffickers and “johns,” the buyers who drive the demand for sex slaves; and hotels need to stop enabling these traffickers, by providing them with rooms and cover for their dirty deeds.
That so many women and children continue to be victimized, brutalized and treated like human cargo is due to three things: one, a consumer demand that is increasingly lucrative for everyone involved—except the victims; two, a level of corruption so invasive on both a local and international scale that there is little hope of working through established channels for change; and three, an eerie silence from individuals who fail to speak out against such atrocities.
But the truth is that we are all guilty of contributing to this human suffering. The traffickers are guilty. The consumers are guilty. The corrupt law enforcement officials are guilty. The women’s groups who do nothing are guilty. The foreign peacekeepers and aid workers who contribute to the demand for sex slaves are guilty. Most of all, every individual who does not raise a hue and cry over the atrocities being committed against women and children in almost every nation around the globe—including the United States—is guilty.
ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].