Josef Mengele: Totesengel died in Brazilian beach

Josef Mengele: Totesengel died in Brazilian beach

Rolf and Josef Mengele

Josef Mengele was perhaps one of the most colourful characters during and after World War Two. The SS Captain lived a very eventful life and earned a living after the war working for his own family business in Latin America where he visited/lived in several countries including Uruguay, Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil. After the war, he went as a far as applying for and obtaining a German passport under his real name and got married in Uruguay also using his real name.

Some Germans lived under their real names and others adopted other names and nationalities including Italian nationality. It was well known that countries like Argentina and Uruguay had important Italian immigrant settlements and therefore entering using an Italian passport was the natural thing to do. In those days, people didn't care much about who came from where as long as you could fit in amongst the masses of European immigrants. Moreover, Germans were highly qualified and in developing countries such levels of expertise were in high demand.

The Cold War was on and therefore there was little interest in chasing highly intelligent people who were excellent at practically every job they applied themselves to do.

My own father knew how to fly and had vast knowledge of cheminal compounds and was a professional time keeper. We used to travel round.

July 4th - For all the talk about rights, Force is always the ultimate deterrent

July 4th - For all the talk about rights, Force is always the ultimate deterrent

July 4th 1776 - Declaration of Independence. Such date is not only important for what is today the United States of America. It simbolizes the ultimate history lesson: if you want rights, you have to be willing to wage war to get what you want.

Britain is at a crossroads. We can talk about rights over and over again but in order to have rights you have to be willing to put your life in harm's way. 

When you hear talk about politicians ignoring the outcome of the 2016 Referendum on European Union Membership, you understand very clearly that there are those willing to overule the popular decision. The question is: what are you willing to do to force them to respect the outcome of the Referendum?

This is a July 4th moment. Make no mistake about it. This is the moment when what you are willing to do matters. In 1776, people knew that there was going to be war. In 1776, people knew that losing was not an option and that many of them would have to give their lives to achieve the desired aim.

Adolf Hitler said that when war begins there are no civilians. Having fought in the trenches, he knew that in each conflict there are at least two sides and there is no disctinction between civilian and military. When German bombs fell on British cities and when Allied bombs fell on German cities, the message was very clear. The bombs would not tell the difference between civilians and military. The only issue was who was going to be alive when the bombing stopped.

The Liberal Democrats and their allies that include some in the Conservative camp have openly said that they don't recognize the outcome of the Referendum and have therefore classed themselves as the Enemy that needs to be defeated by those in the Leave camp.

At this  point in time, there is no Labour Party and no Conservative Party. There are two parties: Leave and Remain. This has all the characteristics of a Civil War and in a Civil War there will be casualties.

The extent of investigations in the United Kingdom regarding gang rape and abuses against children

The extent of investigations in the United Kingdom regarding gang rape and abuses against children

With Angela Merkel's tremor, German faces political tremors

With Angela Merkel's tremor, German faces political tremors

There is fantasy and there is political reality. At ta time when the EU faces extraordinary challenges, to see the German Leader going through what was justified as dehidration is extremely worrying, no matter what they say to justify what is in plein view.

The EU faces a potentially extraordinarily damaging set of circumstances. The struggle with the USA in terms of economics, the upheaval affecting several key EU countries and also some later newcomers into the EU, the prospect of a war in Asia Minor and the Middle East that could make other conflicts looks like minor incidents and the set of circumstances that have led to the loss of faith in so called centre parties are very much part of the picture.

None of those set to replace Angela Merkel is well known enough or has the necessary profile to keep the German ruling coalition together. Let us remember how the present coalition was born. In 2017, the CDU/CSU won a very narrow victory with an ever smaller majority. Because of the reluctance of SPD to form a coaltion after SPD was severely beaten, Angela Merkel had to go for FPD and Grünne. When her attempt to form a coalition with |FPD and Grünne, in despair, she went back to SPD that seeing that the absence of a coalition would lead to yet another Federal Election in which much more could be lost decided to agree terms with Angela Merkel. After that, came several regional elections - one in Bavaria and another one in Hesse where CDU, CSU and SPD lost ever more ground for the benefit of Alternative für Deutschland and Grünne.

As a consequence of loss after loss, Angela Merkel agreed to resign as CDU Leader while remaining German Chancellor until the end of her term in office. Now, the possibility of Angela Merkel having to resign as Chancellor brings back the reality of yet another Federal Election that in view of what is happening right now could lead to major electoral losses and the rise of other political forces including Alternative für Deutschland.

So what you see could herald significant political changes with enormous geopolitical implications.

Who will benefit from war in Middle East and Asia Minor and who will suffer because of it?

Who will benefit from war in Middle East and Asia Minor and who will suffer because of it?

A brief look at EU oil importers tells us that the Russian Federation produce 28.9 % of petroleum related products consumed in the European Union, followed by Norway with 12%. Around 8.9% comes from Saudi Arabia, 4.6% comes from Iraq, 4.6% comes from Azerbaijan, 6.5% comes from Kazahkstan (to name countries close to the conflict zone). About 20% of oil exports come through the straight that is going to be at the centre of a conflict between Iran and USA.

Depending on reserves and the duration of the conflict, the price escalade could and would force countries to recalculate national budgets across the European Union. The financial Tsunami that would be the direct consequence would lead to extraordinary political extremes across Europe. If you think that Democracy is already fragile, think again. What could happen would send nations towards the political abyss.

This, my friends, is the image of Armageddon and is very much a possibility should there be widespread war in the Middle East and Asia Minor. We are entering Nostradamus territory. 

Now, because of the implication of such conflict, how united will old allies be in this regard? Will economic considerations and the potential serious political repercussions be a reason to challenge old alliances? For the United States of America, such a conflict comes with the territory. The number of military bases spread across Iraq and other neighbouring countries of Iran has both a political and an economic dimension. In order to maintain its image as major Superpower, the United States cannot be seen as walking away from conflict after so many statements about 'consequences'. It comes a time when statements that are not supported with actions become not just an embarrassement but a sign of weakness.

Let's look at another issue that very much involves NATO and it is about Turkey's position as member of the alliance. Turkey recently acquired anti-missile defenses and Russian jets are on the way. Calls by the USA to prevent Turkey from acquiring Russian jets and Russian anti-missile defenses have fallen on deaf ears. President Erdogan is not going to do something that goes against Turkish interests. It is well known that Turkey is moving in to fill up a void created by what happened in Iraq and dealing with its own regional agenda that sometimes collides with the interests of the United States of America. As a member of NATO, Turkey is seen as getting too close to the Russian Federation. What can USA do about it? At the moment, it is all about talking and saying 'if you get this, we will not give you that'. Some people might be asking how reliable Turkey would be if there was a massive regional conflict.

How reliable would other members of NATO be if USA actions go against their crucial interests? Britain has been playing a waiting game not to go against agreements signed with Iran and the same attitude has been adopted by others in Continental Europe. USA has been telling Germany that Germany has to stop buying Russian oil and Russian gas. Easier said than done when 28.9% of energy supplies to the European Union come from the Russian Federation. I reckon that Germany and the rest of the EU will be reluctant to engage or support any actions that could undermine their own national interests.

Going farther East, China has been told by the USA that it has to protect its own ships going through waters that could be in the conflict zone if there is war against Iran and what about Japan? A possible confrontation in Asia Minor and in the Middle East would affect the entire world economy. It can be safely said that everybody will be affected in more ways than one and not just economically but politically. What is the Organisation of the United Nations saying about the possibility of such a conflict? Is the USA going to bypass - once again - the Organisation of the United Nations? 
 

Iran: Misreading signals and cultural misunderstandings

Iran: Misreading signals and cultural misunderstandings

The greatest defect of Western Diplomacy is the huge capacity to misread signals and the inability overcome cultural differences. The more the stakes are raised the more entrenched positions become. 

World War Two offers many examples of how bad things can be. One of the said examples involves cultural differences between Japan and Western nations. Japanese soldiers were cultural averse to any surrender. Surrender was seen as shameful, as an act of weakness. For those who shared British heritage, surrender was very much part of the game. If things were bad enough, then surrender was a way out. Those who surrendered to Japanese forces were seen as inferior and treated badly because they were seen as subhumans. When the wheels of war started moving in the opposite direction, many Japanese military and also civilians chose death. There are records of civilians who died jumping off from heights. 

The assumption is that increasing pressure on Iran, Iran will be brought to the negotiations table. Instead, it is fatally weakening moderate politicians that want an agreement and reinforcing hardliners that would choose open war instead of what they see as a surrender.

While some in Britain see a dual-national as somebody that needs rescuing, in Iran they see her as an Iranian national that has engaged in anti-Iran activities.

Geopolitical factors will make positions in Iran ever more entrenched. Increased military presence and sanctions are not fomenting generosity. 

Gordon Brown's Coronation as Labour Prime Minister

Gordon Brown's Coronation as Labour Prime Minister

In 1997, Tony Blair became Prime Minister in a landslide General Election winning a record number of seats in the House of Commons. Behind the curtains, there were several agreements that the general public only became aware of when after an illegal military invasion of Iraq his Prime Ministerial position was becoming untenable and there was the need to think about a replacement. It was said that Gordon Brown was his natural successor, but how natural that succession was. Gordon Brown was crowned Prime Minister by the Labour Party and there were no apparent concerns in the Labour supporting mass media. Now, they seem to be very concerned about the leadership election in the Conservative Party, concerns that they didn't have when Gordon Brown was appointed without people outside the Labour Party having a say.

Folks, this is how the political system works in Britain in all political parties. It is up to each political parties to choose or appoint a leader and if the party in question happens to be power then it is natural and part of the rules that the new Leader becomes Prime Minister. 

The way it operates is based on the principle that people vote for the political party and that the political party chooses its leader. Full stop. 

If Boris Johnson becomes Leader or if Jeremy Hunt becomes Leader then whoever is chosen will be Prime Minister according to the rules.