Industrial Cracks

This blog is a glimpse into the mind of a history nerd sitting behind a laptop screen. Enjoy a series of ideas he hopes to be thought provoking.
I am quite proud of my Contemplations and Discussing Islam pages. Feel free to contact me anytime.

The revolution has sent teachers, doctors, and workers to dozens of Third World countries without charging a penny. It shed its own blood fighting colonialism, fighting apartheid, and fascism. At one point we had 25,000 Third World students studying on scholarships. We still have many scholarship students from Africa and other countries. In addition, our country has treated more children [13,000] who were victims of the Chernobyl tragedy than all other countries put together. They don’t talk about that, and that’s why they blockade us - the country with the most teachers per capita of all countries in the world, including developed countries. The country with the most doctors per capita of all countries…. A country where life expectancy is more than 75 years…. Why are they blockading Cuba? Because no other country has done more for its people. It’s the hatred of the ideas that Cuba represents.

—    Fidel Castro (via basedbrezhnev)

(via kymanijoe21)

Happy 86th Birthday to Comrade Fidel!


Another year, and another slap in the face to the pathetic sods of the CIA. It is such a pleasure to know Castro is alive, smoking a cigar, and enjoying his 86th year. Congradulations to comrade Fidel, and a thank you for inspiring and fighting for the working class and oppressed people the world over.

“The ever more sophisticated weapons piling up in the arsenals of the wealthiest and the mightiest can kill the illiterate, the ill, the poor and the hungry but they cannot kill ignorance, illnesses, poverty or hunger.” - Fidel Castro

(via libertad-igualdad-solidaridad-d)

swagandpassion: Weeks ago I saw a post of people going back and forth about Che. I think he's a little romanticized. One argued he was liberator [who used violence] while the other thought he was as worse as the forces he claimed to despise. You seem to be knowledgeable about Latin America. Thoughts?

Liberator who used violence. Basically a GOOD liberator. the People who did NOT use violence to liberate during that era (people such as Salvador Allende, Mohammad Mossadegh, Kwama Kuma, Oscar Romero…) were all assassinated and failed. Their countries became enveloped in neo-colonization and their people suffered much and are still suffering. Castro and Che were smart. They knew what was necessary, aka Violence, and they were willing to go ahead with it for the greater good of Liberation. Which is what they achieved. After the Cuban independence, many sympathizers of the old regime (Batista, puppet of U.S) and U.S colonization (mainly rich land owners and chiefs in secret police and people close to the govt.) were put to death after fast trials. Many people say that was bad etc etc. If you ask me, it was necessary. Because the people who remained alive and fled to the U.S later came back with Bay of Pigs and lobbied to put Embargo on Cuba as well as assassinate Castro. It is the same people in Miami who demonize Che and Castro with lies. 

As far as romanticization is concerned, i believe it is a necessity to romanticize elements of the past, elements that hold dear to you, elements that you can use to link yourself to your values and spirit. Che is one such figure for Cubans, Latin Americans, and free fighters all over the world. There is a reason why people like Nelson Mandela said “Che’s life is an inspiration for every human being who loves freedom. We will always honor his memory.” In Africa, Che and Cuba helped the freedom fighters in Angola. A war that brought about liberation for South Africa and an end to the disgusting apartheid. The truth of the matter may be that Che was a man. But the reality usually differs from the truth; and the reality is that Che is a larger than life figure. Someone who was able to embody the ideals that drove that era. It is a good thing that Che’s reality has positive impact instead of a negative one. 

Liberals in U.S.A shy away from pragmatic and dogmatic elements (we see that in Occupy movement too). Where as history preaches quite a different story. A story that Blacks in America are all too familiar of. The Blacks in America KNOW the necessity and positive impact of great leaders (Malcolm X and MLK are only TWO of the many many examples). Che is one such figure. Have you come across criticisms of Malcolm X? you will find them similar in nature to criticisms of Che. Either way, you can tell how those criticisms are close to Bull Shit.


people who follow me and i follow then who are of Cuban descent, preferably living in Cuba or have moved from Cuba, are politically aware, AND ARE PRO-REVOLUTION AND CASTRO. please hit me up! i need yalls help!!!

Now, powerful mass movements are being created. They’ll use different tactics -not Bolshevik tactics, or even our tactics- because the world has changed. The era where weapons solved problems is ending. A new period is beginning in which the people’s political conscience, historic needs and ideas will change the world.

—    Fidel Castro Ruz
Fidel Castro Calls Republican Race 'Competition Of Idiocy And Ignorance'


“Castro said he always assumed the candidates would try to outdo each other on the issue of Cuba, but that he was nonetheless appalled by the level of debate.

“The selection of a Republican candidate for the presidency of this globalized and expansive empire is – and I mean this seriously – the greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been,” said the retired Cuban leader, who has dueled with 11 U.S. administrations since his 1959 revolution.”

Cuba: Castro trusts Ahmadinejad to stand against the U.S.

Ahmadinejad met with Castro on Wednesday. They defended “the right of all states to the use of nuclear energy for peaceful ends.” (Iran’s Presidential Press Service)

Channel: Latin American AffairsPolitics

Every now and then, Cubans play around with the alleged news of Fidel Castro’s death. It’s a cruel joke indeed – to exiles, to supporters, to anyone intrigued or caught off-guard by it – but as Twitter is an open place to express oneself and perhaps rabble-rouse, the complete silence from the government fosters speculations … until reality strikes back.

Recently released photographs show a very vital Fidel Castro leading lively conversations with Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his Wednesday visit to La Havana. Castro looks thinner than before, his aging more intense, but he was quick enough to share his thoughts about their anti-U.S. rendez vous.

“(Ahmadinejad) is absolutely relaxed and calm, completely indifferent to yankee threats,” Castro wrote. “He trusts his people’s capability to stand up against any attack and trusts the efficacy of weapons they produce by themselves for the most part.”

According to Iran’s presidential website, Castro and Ahmadinejad “reviewed major international and regional developments,” during their meeting.

“Since capitalism has reached the end of the road, the two great nations of Iran and Cuba now shoulder a heavy responsibility to establish a new world order based on humanity and justice,” Ahmadinejad reportedly said.

As previously reported by Univision News, soon after arriving in La Havana,Ahmadinejad said something similar: “Thankfully we are already witnessing that the capitalist system is in decay. On various stages it has come to a dead end — politically, economically, and culturally.” 

Official Cuban newspaper Granma declared the commitment between the two controversial governments “to the defense of peace, international law, and the principles of the United Nations Charter, and the right of all states to the use of nuclear energy for peaceful ends.” Of course, they were also quick to opposethe implementation of “unilateral economic sanctions.”

At a time when Iran’s ties with Latin American powers are under close scrutiny after Univision’s The Iranian Threat documentary revealed Iran’s attempts to infiltrate and attack several U.S. targets with official help from Venezuela and Cuba, Castro saluted Iran’s “‘outstanding position’ in resisting the arrogant powers, and described the Islamic Republic as ‘the beacon of hope’ for the world nations,” the Iranian press release states.

Ahmadinejad pictured next to Ecuador’s Rafael Correa. “We do not believe in making atomic bombs.” Correa insisted. (Iran’s Presidential Press Service)

On Friday the 13th, Ahmadinejad was already in Ecuador, sitting next to president Rafael Correa in Quito.

“Latin American people possess culture, civilization, dignity, and a good future,” the Iranian leader said. His visit to the country has been severely criticized by observers both in the outside and on the inside.  

“Ahmadinejad’s stop in Ecuador illustrates a growing strategic partnership between Rafael Correa and the regime in Tehran,” U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) said about the issue. “Over the last five years, Iran’s economic investments in Ecuador have been effectively used to secure a loyal ally within our Hemisphere that could help Iran circumvent U.S. and UN sanctions. Iran’s deepened alliance with Correa also facilitates Tehran’s ability to access Ecuador’s uranium deposits.”

Ahmadinejad contested these concerns: “Iran’s nuclear program is not a problem for the hegemonic powers; they’re not pleased with Tehran’s progress and independence,” he said. “The nuclear question is a political excuse. They know that Iran is not looking to make atomic bombs. We do not believe in making atomic bombs.”

Democracy lessons for Fidel Castro.


The US’ tendency to demonise and formulate assassination attempts on Fidel Castro shows a glaring double standard.

 In the 1950s, my father’s uncle Benito was summoned to Havana by Santo Trafficante Jr, Mafia boss for the southeastern United States and Cuba and a childhood friend of Benito’s from the Ybor City neighbourhood in Tampa, Florida.

In Havana, Benito was tasked with surveillance duties at the Sans Souci night club and casino run by Trafficante, a close friend of pro-US Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista. Trafficante had inherited the position from his father, the Sicilian-born Santo Trafficante Sr, who had been appointed by organised crime icons, Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano, to oversee gambling and drug operations in the Cuban capital, which served as a storage facility for heroin en route from Europe to the US.

Benito’s responsibilities at the Sans Souci included sounding an alert if the wife of a casino patron or other relevant figure arrived at an inopportune moment. Prospects for job security were slashed with the triumph of the Cuban Revolution in 1959, however, and Benito returned to Florida to sell furniture while Trafficante enhanced his CV by becoming an accomplice of the CIA in the mission to assassinate Fidel Castro.

As journalists Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair note in their book Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press, anti-Castro plots concocted by the Agency ranged from “tr[ying] to devise a way to saturate the radio studio where Castro broadcast his speeches with an aerosol form of LSD and other ‘psychic energisers’” to sabotaging his appearance before the United Nations in New York in 1960 by “plac[ing] thallium salts in Castro’s shoes and on his night table in the hope that the poisons would make the leader’s beard fall off”.

As for Trafficante’s contributions to the effort, he delivered six lethal CIA-manufactured botulinum pills as well as a box of toxic cigars to an ally within the Cuban government in 1961. The plan fell through.

According to Cockburn and St Clair, US Attorney General Robert Kennedy, “who was obsessed with the elimination of Castro, told [CIA director] Allen Dulles that he didn’t care if the Agency employed the Mob for the hit as long as they kept him fully briefed”.

Lest US taxpayers worry that government expenditures over the years have been wasted on projects that do not reinforce national security, a 2006 article in the Guardian entitled “638 ways to kill Castro” outlines additional CIA assassination schemes:

“Knowing [Castro’s] fascination for scuba-diving off the coast of Cuba, the CIA at one time invested in a large volume of Caribbean molluscs. The idea was to find a shell big enough to contain a lethal quantity of explosives, which would then be painted in colours lurid and bright enough to attract Castro’s attention when he was underwater. Documents released under the Clinton administration confirm that this plan was considered but, like many others, did not make it far from the drawing-board. Another aborted plot related to Castro’s underwater activities was for a diving-suit to be prepared for him that would be infected with a fungus that would cause a chronic and debilitating skin disease.”

Entertainment value aside, such endeavours might of course also be construed as illegal according to international law - just as the blowing up of 73 people on board a Cubana de Aviacion flight might, under objective scrutiny, qualify as terrorism.

The accused mastermind of the latter event, which occurred in 1976, is Luis Posada Carriles: ex-CIA asset, Bay of Pigs veteran, Havana hotel bomber, and would-be Castro assassin. A Cuban exile and Venezuelan national, Posada was recently acquitted by a Texas court on charges related not to terrorism, but rather to lying to US immigration authorities about how he entered the country.

Despite Venezuela’s 2005 extradition request to try Posada on 73 counts of murder, the New York Times described him last year as having “lived freely in Miami since 2007” and as “spending his days painting landscapes, which are sold by the dozens at shows in Miami frequented by a shrinking, but powerful group of hardened anti-Castro exiles”.

One can speculate as to the reaction in the US had, for example, Mohammed Atta survived 9/11, fled to Caracas, and commenced a tranquil life as a watercolour artist, interrupted only by a trial in which he was acquitted of lying to Venezuelan officials by telling them he had swum to the country from New Jersey.

Among the ranks of Cubans who have not evaded long-term castigation by the US justice system, meanwhile, are the Cuban Five - now reduced to Four with the release on probation of René González - who were incarcerated in 1998 on charges of spying against the US after they infiltrated Miami-based groups dedicated to overthrowing Castro.

As Noam Chomsky has pointed out, the Five were in fact, “exposing to the US government crimes that are being committed on US soil[,] crimes the US government is tolerating and theoretically should be punishing itself”. It also bears reiterating that the Cubans have not devised 638 ways to assassinate the US president.

This past October, the Wall Street Journal’s Mary O’Grady - free-market fanatic, apologist for right-wing extremism in Latin America, and hallucinator of an alliance between Castro and the US State Department - detected further proof of the superior Cuban determination to subvert democracy. In an article entitled “Cuba’s Repression Escalates”, she complained: “The non-governmental organisation Capitol Hill Cubans has reported that in the first 12 days of September, [Cuban] authorities detained 168 peaceful activists”.

This is approximately the same number of persons who, according to a WikiLeaks cable released in April, were held for varying numbers of years at a certain illegal US detention facility on Cuban soil despite US knowledge of their innocence.

Perhaps more strikingly, O’Grady’s article was published the day after New York City police arrested 700 anti-Wall Street protesters on the Brooklyn Bridge.

(via zaraahmed-deactivated20120807)

Genocidal Cynicism

No sane person, especially someone who has had access to the elementary knowledge acquired in primary school, would agree that our species, especially those who are children, teenagers or youth, should be deprived of the right to live, today, tomorrow and forever. Never have human beings, throughout their eventful history, as persons endowed with intelligence, ever heard of an experience like that.

I feel the duty to convey to those taking the trouble to read these Reflections the opinion that all of us, with no exception, are obliged to create awareness about the risks that humankind are running in an inexorable manner, towards a final and total catastrophe as the consequence of irresponsible decisions made by politicians who fate, rather than talent or merit, has placed the destiny of humankind in their hands.

Whether they are citizens of their country or not, whether they are followers of some religious belief or unbelievers, no human being in their right mind would agree that their children or closest kin should perish precipitously or as victims of atrocious and torturous misery.

On the heels of the repugnant crimes that are being increasingly committed by NATO under the aegis of the United States and the wealthiest countries in Europe, the gaze of the world focused on the G-20 meeting where the profound economic crisis affecting every nation today should have been analyzed. International opinion, especially in Europe, was awaiting an answer for the profound economic crisis that, with its serious social and even climatic implications, is threatening every inhabitant on the planet. At that meeting, it was being decided whether the Euro would be able to be kept as the common currency for most of Europe and even whether some of the countries would be able to remain in the community.

There was no answer or solution of any kind for the most serious problems of the world economy despite the efforts of China, Russia, Indonesia, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina and other emerging economies, anxious to cooperate with the rest of the world in the search for solutions for the serious economic problems affecting them.

What was unusual was that just when NATO concluded the Libyan operation – after the air attack that injured the constitutional head of that country, destroyed the vehicle carrying him and leaving him at the mercy of the empire’s mercenaries who murdered him and exhibited his body as a war trophy, violating Muslim customs and traditions – the IAEA, a UN body and an institution that ought to stand for world peace, released the political, money-driven and sectarian report putting the world on the brink of war with the use of nuclear weapons that the Yankee empire, in alliance with Great Britain and Israel, has been meticulously preparing against Iran.

After the veni, vidi, vici of the famous Roman emperor more than two thousand years ago, translated to “I came, I saw and he died” broadcast for public opinion by an important television network as soon as the death of Gaddafi had been learned of, there are more than enough words to describe US policy.

Now what is important is the need to create clear awareness in the peoples about the abyss towards which humankind is being led. Twice our Revolution lived through dramatic dangers: in October of 1962, the most critical of all where humankind was on the brink of nuclear holocaust; and in mid-1987 when our forces were facing racist South African troops armed with nuclear weapons that the Israelis had helped them create.

The Shah of Iran also collaborated, along with Israel, with the racist and fascist South African regime.

What is the UN? An organization driven by the United States before the end of World War II. That nation, whose territory was considerably far away from the theatre of war, had incredibly increased its wealth; it accumulated 80% of the world’s gold and under the leadership of Roosevelt, a sincere anti-fascist, it promoted the development of the nuclear weapon that Truman, his successor, a mediocre oligarch, did not hesitate in using against the defenceless cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

The world’s gold monopoly in United States’ power and the prestige of Roosevelt handed the US the Bretton Woods agreement, assigning it the role of issuing the dollar as the only currency to be used for decades in world trade, with no limiting factor other that it’s being backed by the gold metal.

At the end of that war, the US was also the only country possessing the nuclear weapon, a privilege it did not hesitate in transmitting to its allies and members in the Security Council: Great Britain and France, the two most important colonial powers in the world at that time.

Truman had not even informed the USSR one single word about the atomic weapon before using it. China, at that time governed by Nationalist General Chiang Kai-shek, a pro-Yankee oligarch, could not be excluded from that Security Council.

The USSR, seriously stricken by the war, destruction and the loss of more than 20 million of its sons and daughters in the Nazi invasion, dedicated considerable economic, scientific and human resources to bring its nuclear capacity up to par with that of the United States. Four years later, in 1949, it tested its first nuclear weapon: the H-bomb in 1953; and in 1955 its first megaton bomb. France had its first nuclear weapon in 1960.

There were only three countries that had the nuclear bomb in 1957 when the UN, under the aegis of the Yankees, created the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA). Does anybody think that US instrument did anything to warn the world about the terrible dangers to which it would expose human society when Israel, unconditional US and NATO ally, located in the very heartland of the world’s most important oil and gas reserves, would become a dangerous and aggressive nuclear power?

Its forces, cooperating with colonial British and French troops, attacked Port Said when Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, French property; this forced the Soviet premier to send an ultimatum demanding the ceasing of that aggression that the European allies of the US had no alternative other than to attack.

In order to give an idea of the potential of the USSR in its efforts to maintain parity with the United States in this sphere, we only need to point out that when its disintegration occurred in 1991, in Byelorussia there were 81 nuclear warheads, in Kazakhstan 1400 and in the Ukraine approximately 5000; all these went over to the Russian Federation, the only state capable of sustaining its immense cost, in order to maintain independence.

By virtue of the START and SORT treaties on the reduction of offensive weapons signed by the two great nuclear powers, the number of these was reduced to several thousand.

In 2010, a new treaty of this kind was signed by the two powers.

Since then the greatest efforts have been dedicated to improving direction, scope and precision and to the deception of adversary defence.  Huge amounts of money have been invested in the military sphere.

Very few persons in the world, other than a handful of thinkers and scientists, notice and warn about the fact that the explosion of 100 nuclear strategic weapons would suffice to put an end to human life on the planet.  The great majority would have an end that would be as inexorable as it would be horrible, resulting from the Nuclear Winter that would be generated.

The number of countries possessing nuclear weapons at this time has gone up to eight; five of them are members of the Security Council: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and China. India and Pakistan acquired the nature of countries possessing nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998 respectively. The seven aforementioned countries acknowledge this nature.

By contrast, Israel has never acknowledged its nature as a nuclear country. Nevertheless, it is calculated that it possesses between 200 and 500 weapons of this type, without taking the hint when the world becomes concerned by the extremely serious problems that the outbreak of a war in the region producing a large part of the energy moving industry and agriculture on the planet would bring.

Thanks to possessing weapons of mass destruction, Israel has been able to play its role as the instrument of imperialism and colonialism in that Middle Eastern region.

We are not dealing with the legitimate right of the Israeli people to live and work in peace and freedom; we are dealing precisely with the rights for freedom and peace of the other peoples in the region.

While Israel was speedily creating a nuclear arsenal, in 1981 it attacked and destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak. It did exactly the same thing to the Syrian reactor at Dayr az-Zawr in 2007, an occurrence of which world opinion was oddly not informed. The UN and the IAEA were perfectly well aware of that event. Such actions had the support of the United States and the Atlantic Alliance.

There is nothing odd about the fact that the most senior Israeli authorities are now proclaiming their intention of doing the same thing with Iran. That country, immensely wealthy in oil and gas, had been the victim of the conspiracies of Great Britain and the United States, whose oil companies were pillaging their resources. Their armed forces were equipped with the most modern weaponry of the US war industry.

Shah Reza Pahlevi also hoped to be supplied with nuclear weapons. Nobody was attacking his research centers. The Israeli war was waged against the Arab Muslims. Not against those in Iran, because they had become a NATO bastion that was aiming at the heart of the USSR.

The masses in that nation, deeply religious, under the leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeini, challenging the power of those weapons, ousted the Shah from his throne and disarmed one of the best equipped armies in the world without a shot being fired.

Due to their capacity for struggle, the number of inhabitants and the size of the country, an aggression against Iran bears no similarity with the war adventures of Israel in Iraq and Syria. A bloody war would inevitably break out.  We can have no doubts about that.

Israel has a large number of nuclear weapons and the capacity of having them reach any point in Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania. I am wondering: does the IAEA have the moral right to sanction and smother a country if it intends to do what Israel has done in the heart of the Middle East, for its own defence?

I really think that no country in the world should possess nuclear weapons and that energy should be put at the service of the human species. Without that spirit of cooperation, humankind marches inexorably towards its own destruction. Among the citizens of Israel themselves, a hard-working and intelligent people without a doubt, many do not agree with that absurd, irrational policy that is also taking them down the road to total destruction.

What is being said these days in the world on the economic situation?

International news agencies inform that President Barack Obama of the United States and his Chinese peer Hu Jintao presented differing trade agendas, underlining the growing tensions between the two major world economies.

Reuters states that Obama used his speech to threaten China with economic sanctions unless it starts to play according to the rules. Undoubtedly, such rules are US interests.

The news agency states that Obama is embarked on the re-election battle for next year and his Republican opposition is accusing him of not being severe enough with China.

News printed on Thursday and Friday shows the realities we are living much better.

The best informed US agency AP reports that the supreme Iranian leader warned the United States and Israel that Iran’s answer would be energetic if its arch-enemies were to launch a military attack on Iran.

The German news agency informed that China had stated that, as always, it believed dialogue and cooperation were the only way of active rapprochement to solve the problem.

Russia was also opposed to punitive measures against Iran.

Germany rejected the military option but revealed itself to be for strong sanctions against Iran.

The United Kingdom and France advocate strong and energetic sanctions.

The Russian Federation assured that it would do everything possible to avoid a military operation against Iran and it criticized the IAEA report.

Konstantin Kosachov, head of the Duma Foreign Affairs Committee, stated that a military operation against Iran could bring very serious consequences and Russia would have to put all its weight into smoothing feelings over.  According to EFE, he criticized statements by the US, France and Israel about the possible use of force and that the launching of a military operation against Iran is getting closer day by day.

Edward Spannaus, editor of the US magazine EIR, stated that the attack against Iran would end up as World War III.

The US Defence Secretary himself, after a trip to Israel a few days ago, acknowledged that he was not able to get any commitment from the Israeli government on prior consultation with the US on an attack against Iran. Those are the extremes we have reached.

The US under-secretary for political and military affairs harshly revealed the empire’s sinister aims.

On Saturday, Andrew Shapiro, Under-Secretary for Political and Military Affairs of the United States stated that Israel and the United States shall embark on more important joint manoeuvres that are of greater transcendence in the history of the allies.

At the Washington Institute for Middle Eastern Policy, Shapiro announced that more than 5,000 US and Israeli armed forces troops will take part in the manoeuvres simulating the defence of Israel’s ballistic missiles.

He added that Israeli technology was becoming essential to improve US national security and to protect US troops.

Shapiro emphasized the support of the Obama government for Israel, in spite of comments on Friday by a senior US official who expressed his concern about Israel not warning the US before starting military action against Iranian nuclear installations.

He said that US relations with Israeli security are broader, more profound and more intense than ever before.

According to him, the US supports Israel because it is in US national interest to do so. It is the solid Israeli military force that is deterring possible aggressors and helps to promote peace and stability.

Today, on November 13, Susan Rice, US ambassador to the UN, told the BBC that the possibility of military intervention in Iran was not only still on the table but that it was a real option that is growing because of Iranian conduct.

She insisted that the US administration is reaching the conclusion that it will be necessary to end the current regime in Iran in order to prevent it from creating a nuclear arsenal. Rice acknowledged that she was convinced that the change in regime is going to be the US’ only option there.

We do not need to add a single word.

Fidel Castro Ruz

November 13, 2011

8:17 p.m.

Reflections of Fidel Castro

no description necessary, the title alone should make you go here and read these. Seriously, just go here and start reading. Scroll down and see what he says about Chavez, Evo, and Obama with special focus on U.N. It is in two parts but it covers alot of subjects including Palestine, Iran, N.Korea, Zionism etc etc. Seriously! if you are even remotely interested in the truth, you will go here.