Courageous Discourse
Does Europe Yearn for Another General Bloodletting?
By John Leake
Napoleonic Wars, Crimean, Franco-Prussian, World War I, World War II. Has it been too long? Do the Europeans now long for the cathartic release of mass killing?
The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer once remarked that “mankind is doomed to vacillate eternally between boredom and distress.” Have Europe’s leaders grown bored with the long period of peace that has prevailed on most of their Continent since 1945? Do they long for the cathartic release of pent up aggression and negative feelings?
It’s a notable fact that pretty much every serious combat veteran of the Second World War is now gone, which means there is no living witness of the horror of a general war on the European Continent.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has started using Churchillian language since Trump sent Zelensky packing, as though there is a shred of evidence that Vladimir Putin aspires to make a move against Great Britain in the way Hitler did in 1940. I suspect that Starmer is now scheming to escalate hostilities between Russia and Great Britain in whatever way he can.
For three years now I have been posing the question: Why didn’t the Biden administration and its European lackeys at least TRY to work out a neutrality deal like the neutrality deal the Americans and English struck with Russia for Austria in 1955—a deal the Russians have honored ever since?
If Putin had agreed to Ukrainian neutrality and then subsequently violated it, the U.S. and England would have then had a clear casus belli. To this day, not a single member of the pro war faction has even tried to answer my question.
I sometimes wonder if it would be edifying for the Europeans and for many Americans to experience combat in the way the German soldier and writer, Ernst Jünger experienced it. During World War I, Jünger was wounded 14 times, including a .30 rifle shot through the chest.
In his book Storm of Steel, he described his war experience in a strangely detached way, observing and recording extreme acts of violence simultaneously inflicted on thousands of men. He observes the mass destruction and mutilation of young soldiers without passing any judgement. Humans periodically wage war, and he happens to be there to observe an exceptionally terrible one.
 |
War as an aesthetic experience: “In a Thunderstorm of Steel”
In the following passage, Jünger describes how quickly he grew accustomed to the business of war.
During one stop on the way, a driver split his thumb in the course of crank-starting his lorry. The sight of the wound almost made me ill, I have always been sensitive to such things. I mention this because it seems virtually unaccountable as I witnessed such terrible mutilation in the course of the following days. It’s an example of the way in which one’s response to an experience is actually largely determined by its context.
It appears that Starmer et al. are now so determined to have their Churchillian moments that they will make a general European war with Russia inevitable, perhaps with the intention of forcing the Americans to get involved.
Many American and European citizens are apparently delighted to send billions of money and weapons to Ukraine and to let young Ukrainian men do the fighting. I wonder how many young American and European men would be willing to go to Ukraine to do the fighting themselves. In a detached, Jüngerian sort of way, I wonder if the experience would expand their consciousness and provide some sort of moral instruction or edification.
With so many apparently longing to teach the Russian devils a lesson, perhaps they should seriously consider joining the fight as volunteers for the Ukrainian army.
Subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Courageous Discourse
Healthcare Blockbuster – RFK Jr removes all 17 members of CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel!
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
RFK Jr. Orders Clean Sweep of Entire CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel to End Decades of Corruption
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has just announced the removal of all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—the panel tasked with recommending vaccines for the American public—citing longstanding corruption, persistent conflicts of interest, lack of transparency, and a documented history of rubber-stamping vaccines without adequate scrutiny.
The full statement from Secretary Kennedy, published in The Wall Street Journal, is below:
by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Vaccines have become a divisive issue in American politics, but there is one thing all parties can agree on: The U.S. faces a crisis of public trust. Whether toward health agencies, pharmaceutical companies or vaccines themselves, public confidence is waning.
Some would try to explain this away by blaming misinformation or antiscience attitudes. To do so, however, ignores a history of conflicts of interest, persecution of dissidents, a lack of curiosity, and skewed science that has plagued the vaccine regulatory apparatus for decades.
That is why, under my direction, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is putting the restoration of public trust above any pro- or antivaccine agenda. The public must know that unbiased science guides the recommendations from our health agencies. This will ensure the American people receive the safest vaccines possible.
Today, we are taking a bold step in restoring public trust by totally reconstituting the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP). We are retiring the 17 current members of the committee, some of whom were last-minute appointees of the Biden administration. Without removing the current members, the current Trump administration would not have been able to appoint a majority of new members until 2028.
ACIP evaluates the safety, efficacy and clinical need of the nation’s vaccines and passes its findings on to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The committee has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine. It has never recommended against a vaccine—even those later withdrawn for safety reasons. It has failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women. To make matters worse, the groups that inform ACIP meet behind closed doors, violating the legal and ethical principle of transparency crucial to maintaining public trust.
In 2000 the House issued the results of an investigation of ACIP and another vaccine advisory committee under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. It found that enforcement of its conflict-of-interest rules was weak to nonexistent. Committee members regularly participated in deliberations and advocated products in which they had a financial stake. The CDC issued conflict-of-interest waivers to every committee member. Four out of eight ACIP members who voted in 1997 on guidelines for the Rotashield vaccine, subsequently withdrawn because of severe adverse events, had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies developing other rotavirus vaccines. A 2009 HHS inspector-general report echoed these findings. Few committee members completed full conflict-of-interest forms—97% of them had omissions. The CDC took no significant action to remedy the omissions.
These conflicts of interest persist. Most of ACIP’s members have received substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies, including those marketing vaccines. The problem isn’t necessarily that ACIP members are corrupt. Most likely aim to serve the public interest as they understand it. The problem is their immersion in a system of industry-aligned incentives and paradigms that enforce a narrow pro-industry orthodoxy. The new members won’t directly work for the vaccine industry. They will exercise independent judgment, refuse to serve as a rubber stamp, and foster a culture of critical inquiry—unafraid to ask hard questions.
A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science. In the 1960s, the world sought guidance from America’s health regulators, who had a reputation for integrity, scientific impartiality and zealous defense of patient welfare. Public trust has since collapsed, but we will earn it back.
This represents an extremely positive development. We hope ACIP will be repopulated with truly independent experts who prioritize public safety over Vaccine Ideology.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
www.mcculloughfnd.org
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Agriculture
Canada Greenlights Mass Culling of 400 Research Ostriches Despite Full Recovery from Bird Flu Months Ago
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
Federal court upholds CFIA’s reckless cull order—setting a dangerous precedent for the unscientific mass depopulation of genetically important animals.
In March, I interviewed Katie Pasitney of Universal Ostrich and Connie Shields to discuss the alarming implications of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) order to cull 400 research ostriches at Universal Ostrich Farm in British Columbia over bird flu:
Canada Orders Mass Culling of 400 Research Ostriches Over Bird Flu, Refuses to Test Surviving Birds for Natural Immunity
·The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has ordered the culling of 400 ostriches at Universal Ostrich Farm in British Columbia, citing concerns over H5N1 bird flu. However, this decision is not based on sound science and could have serious consequences for both food security and medical research.
Universal Ostrich Farm is a research facility focused on studying the unique antibody-producing capabilities of ostriches. Their research has demonstrated potential in neutralizing viruses, bacteria, and even COVID-19, making it an important contribution to medical science.
In December 2024, the CFIA claimed that two deceased ostriches—which had been lying outside for over 16 hours—tested positive for H5N1 via PCR testing. Just 41 minutes after receiving these results, the CFIA signed an order to cull the entire flock.
The CFIA initially granted the farm an exemption, recognizing the birds as “genetically important.” Later, without clear justification, they reversed this decision, ordering their destruction.
Despite the importance of this research, the CFIA has refused to conduct further testing on the birds and has banned the farm from conducting its own tests, under threat of heavy fines and possible imprisonment. Why is the Canadian government refusing to study the potential antibodies ostriches have developed against H5N1 bird flu?
On January 31, 2025, a court granted a temporary stay of execution, halting the cull. However, the CFIA is appealing this decision, which means the culling could still proceed.
Today, we have received news that the reckless mass cull order will proceed despite their ostriches having already recovered months ago and developed natural immunity against H5N1:
Official Announcement: Federal Court Decision in Universal Ostrich Farms Inc. v. Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Dear friends and supporters,
We are absolutely devastated to share today’s Federal Court decision, issued on May 13, 2025. The court ruled in favour of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), upholding their order to destroy our beloved ostriches and rejecting our plea to save them.
The court’s decision accepted the CFIA’s justification under the Health of Animals Act and their use of the Stamping-Out Policy, which mandates the destruction of animals to control disease outbreaks, regardless of their health status. The court confirmed the CFIA’s approach, prioritizing trade obligations over the welfare of our animals.
In addition, we’ve been ordered to pay $15,000 in CFIA’s legal costs. You can read the full decision here: (2025 FC 878). https://saveourostriches.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/JR-T-294-25-and-T-432-25-Final.pdf
We are heartbroken by this outcome and uncertain about the future of our farm. As we navigate this incredibly difficult time, we ask for your patience and continued support. If you are able, please consider making a donation to help us manage the financial and emotional toll this has taken.
Thank you,
Universal Ostrich Farm
http://SaveOurOstriches.com
This deeply misguided decision sets a dangerous precedent for the Canadian government to recklessly depopulate animals at will.
By upholding the CFIA’s reckless cull order, despite the ostriches’ recovery and natural immunity, the court has prioritized trade protocols over scientific inquiry, animal welfare, and the advancement of life-saving medical research.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
www.mcculloughfnd.org
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Too Graphic For A Press Conference But Fine For Kids In School?
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
Trump deploys National Guard to Los Angeles after violent attacks on ICE agents
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
LA Mayor Karen Bass Makes New Demands Of Trump At Monday Night Press Conference
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
Trump says Ukraine war may need to play out before peace is possible
-
International1 day agoIsrael’s Decapitation Strike on Iran Reverberates Across Global Flashpoints
-
illegal immigration2 days agoLA protests continue as judge pulls back CA National Guard ahead of ‘No Kings Day’
-
Business2 days agoThe carbon tax’s last stand – and what comes after
-
National2 days agoCarney promotes MP instrumental in freezing Freedom Convoy donors’ bank accounts
-
Business2 days agoTrump: ‘Changes are coming’ to aggressive immigration policy after business complaints
-
International2 days agoPentagon agency to simulate lockdowns, mass vaccinations, public compliance messaging
-
conflict2 days agoIsrael strikes Iran, targeting nuclear sites; U.S. not involved in attack
-
Alberta1 day agoPunishing Alberta Oil Production: The Divisive Effect of Policies For Carney’s “Decarbonized Oil”