60 Minutes Australia: Jeffrey Epstein’s International Sex Trafficking Ring

Exposing Jeffrey Epstein’s International Sex Trafficking Ring

Australian Broadcasting Corporation (2019)

Film Review

This documentary concerns the victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking ring and their years’ long battle to bring him and his enablers to justice. The film specifically profiles Virginia Roberts DuFray and Courtney Wild and the New York lawyer assisting them.

Both Dufray and Wild talk about Epstein and his partner Ghislane Maxwell deliberately targeting low income with promises of masseuse training and glamorous new lives. Both women were  flown around the world in Epstein’s private plane (the Lolita Express) to have sex with Epstein’s billionaire friends, politicians and “royalty.”* Both describe threats against their families, ensuring their loyalty and silence. Wild states that Epstein forced her to have sex with other men to “blackmail them so people would owe him favors.**

The documentary goes on to explore charges the State of Florida filed against Epstein in 2005. Despite detailed affidavits from 40 victims, extensive message and flight logs documenting that Epstein was trafficking 13 to 16-year olds to the rich and famous, and the seizure of numerous sexually explicit CDs and photos from his Florida home, prosecutors allowed him to plead guilty to a lesser charge of “soliciting minors for prostitution.”

Instead of serving 45 years in prison on rape and sex trafficking charges, he spent 13 months in a private prison wing. His sentence included work release of 12 hours a day 7 days a week.

The plea deal also granted Epstein full immunity against criminal charges from other, unidentified victims.

It was largely to Wild’s 14-year battle to overturn this immunity provision that pressured federal prosecutors to bring charges against him in 2019. Owing to all the unfortunate “coincidences” that enabled him to commit suicide in a high security prison, the victims’ legal team believes he was murdered. “He knew too much about the wrong people.”

At present the mean legal focus is ongoing victim lawsuits against the Epstein estate, Brislaine Maxwell and French model agent Jean-Luc Brunel (who reportedly procured more than 1,000 girls for Maxwell). Both Maxwell and Brunel have gone into hiding.

The film closes with DuFray describing her 2002 rescue from the trafficking ring by an Australian she subsequently married. She tells her story to ABC Sixty Minutes from her new home in Australia.

---

*DuFray has provided names of all her abusers in court, but except for Prince Andrew name (already publicly identifying), ongoing litigation prevents her from identifying them in the broadcast..

**The ABC documentary makes no mention of Epstein’s role in a long-established CIA scheme to entrap and blackmail politicians, ambassadors, etc by luring them into embarrassing sexual escapades and secretly videotaping them. See

Hidden in Plain Sight: The Shocking Origins of the Jeffrey Epstein Case

How ABC’s 20/20 Framed Mumia Abu Jamal for Execution in 2001

Framing an Execution: ABC News and the Case of Mumia Abu Jamal

Sut Jhally and Danny Glover (2001)

Film Review

This 2001 documentary concerns the hatchet job ABC did in their 20/20 feature on Mumia Abu Jamal. In the late nineties, a number of Hollywood celebrities, including Whoopi Goldberg, Ed Asner and Mike Farrell, brought substantial mainstream media attention to Mumia’s 30+ year battle to win a new trial. In 1999 the West Coast longshoremen’s  union shut down ports from San Diego to Canada to support a new trial for the embattled activist.

When Framing an Execution was first released in 2001, Mumia was still on death row. In 2011, the death sentence would be commuted to life imprisonment.

The intro to ABC 2001 20/20 feature on Mumia is shockingly bloodthirsty in its contention that only the immediate execution of a Black man (already on death row for 20 years) could possibly bring peace of mind to the grieving widow of slain Philadelphia cop Daniel Faulkner.

The 20/20 program also deliberately omits and/or distorts crucial defense evidence. It also carefully edits statements by Ed Asner, Mike Farrel and Mumia’s attorney Leonard Weinglass to make them seem uninformed, irrational and deliberately evasive.

Evidence had already emerged in appellate hearings that the police coerced seven witnesses who saw someone other than Mumia shoot Faulkner to change their testimony. They also dropped three outstanding charges against the  prosecution’s star witness, prostitute Cynthia White, to reward her for incriminating Mumia in the murder.

The other main weaknesses in Mumia’s conviction are the absence of ballistics evidence (there is no evidence showing Mumia fired a gun at the scene nor that the bullet that killed Faulkner came from his gun) and the alleged confession he made while recovering from critical gunshot wounds. The doctor who attended him continuously in the emergency room and intensive care maintains maintains he was barely conscious and didn’t speak at all during this entire period.

Framing an Execution was filmed a few months before Arnold Beverley confessed, via video (below) and sworn affidavit to being hired, with a friend, to murder Faulkner. According to Beverley, the Mob hired them to kill Faulkner due to his crusading efforts to root out police corruption.

In April this year, Mumia finally won  the right to have his appeal reheard in the Philadelphia Supreme Court.

In July, he won the right to continue his lawsuit against prison authorities for denying him antiviral treatment for his hepatitis C.

In September the prosecutor’s office “miraculously” discovered a box of suppressed evidence related to police witness tampering in a janitor’s closet.

 

 

 

 

 

How the World Health Organization Gave Up Its Scientific Independence

Trust WHO: The Business of Global Health

Al Jazeera (2018)

Film Review

This documentary concerns the capture of the UN World Health Organization (WHO) by pharmaceutical and other corporations. The problem originates, according to filmmakers, from the refusal global governments to fully fund the agency. As a result, WHO has come to rely on foundations and corporate sponsors to finance their programs. Forty percent of current WHO funding comes from non-government sources. The Gates Foundation, with their strong GMO and vaccine agenda, is its second largest funder after the US government.

Worse still, only 30% of the WHO budget is discretionary. Seventy-percent must be dedicated to programs specified by donors.

The film examines numerous instances in which WHO has pursued the interest of corporate sponsors to the clear detriment of world health. The most grievous example occurred in 2011, when they failed to recommend that Japanese children take potassium iodide to prevent them from radioactive iodine released from the Fukushima meltdowns. The recommendation for children to take prophylactic potassium iodide following nuclear accidents has been a standard WHO recommendation since 1999.

According to radiation health expert Dr Helen Caldicott (see Fukushima: An Ongoing Radiological Catastrophe, more than 200 Fukushima children had developed thyroid cancer by June 2018. Most, if not all of these cases could have been prevented by giving them potassium iodide. Thyroid cancer in the Japanese population is normally quite rare – it occurs in roughly one of every million individuals.

The film can’t be embedded but can be viewed at the Al Jazeera website:

Trust Who: The Business of Global Health