Venezuela has a powerful neoliberal fifth column, strength of which was enhanced by errors of Madiro government and the return on
neoliberals to power in Argentina and Brazil (see strange non-death of neoliberalism for some analysis of this post 2008
phenomenon). That lead some strategists in Washington came to conclusion that it is ripe for the color revolution,
Ukrainian EuroMaydan style and the Maduro day are numbered and the the USA transactionals can get back to Venezuela on a very
favorable for them conditions. The general orientation of Trump administration on economic racket only helps here, as it
instantly created sizeable assets for financing of the opposition by confiscating CITCO in the USA. Which allows to buy
weapons in Esatern Europe and ship to Venezuela like was done in Ukraine. There are also some difficulties: the operation
"Embassy cash" needs to be switched to UK and other five-eyes embassies as US embassy is in limbo. Also both China and Russia
have sizable economic interest in Venezuela, and they are more eager to defent them then they were in Ukraine. Actually for Russia
it will be the third slap in the face after they lost their investments in Iraq, Libya and Ukraine due to Washington actions.
In a year or so we will see, if they were right or not (Ukrainian Maydan was in place approximately from September 2013 to February
2014).
It is relatively easy to incite protest in any of impoverished nation, as Ukraine had shown to the world very clearly. The
discontent of the population is always present and can be ignited rather easily to the level which allow the color revolution to
start by coordinated action of the neoliberal foifith column within the country.
But now governments also leaned something about color revolution tactics and that puts some sand into the wheel of color
revolution, which Washington injection of money and intelligence services support needs to overcome. For example they failed
in 2011-2012 in Russia because Russian government was more or less competent to deal with this kind of threat. So the attempt
to install Yeltsin II in Russia failed miserably and Ambassador McFaul was forced to leave the country.
The trigger
event is not important. It can be anything. The common (and almost always fake) trigger event are election "irregularities".They
were successfully use ion Orange revolution in Ulraine, which preceded EuroMaydam The level of population dissatisfaction with the government is high
enough to for the color revolution to succeed. The more democratic government under attack is the less chances to survive it
has.
It does not matter if protests are genuine or artificial. They will be co-opted and exploited by the USA color revolution
specialists in the most nefarious
fashion with equal success.
The typical net result of population deceived by the propaganda carrot is the drop of the standard of living or 90% of population
(neoliberalism takes care only about top 10% population or even less) Ukraine is a good example here: the standard of living dropped
more then twice. This is a
neoliberal Catch 22.
It is easy to exploit neoliberalism inflicted poverty for installing via color revolution even more neoliberal, more friendly
to West and more corrupt regime. What a paradox. That's why we can call this "neoliberal Catch 22." When people realize that they were taken for ride and their
standard of living dropped even further, it's too late.
Here is a simple checklist of the status Venezuela color revolution (as of Feb 10, 2019):
[Yes] The USA NGOs and State Department sniff troubles and mistakes of the current government, who start losing popular
support
[Yes] Financial infusions for oppositions
[Yes] Creation and lavish financing of the right wing opposition student movement, as the "professional revolutionaries" of the color revolution.
[??? ] Recruitment for football hooligans and other semi-criminal elements as cannon fodder of the color revolution
[Yes] A pack of neoliberal hyenas was assembled: intelligence agencies, NGO and embassies of NATO and "five-eyes" countries. Conversion of
embassies and NGO into the brain and coordinating center of the opposition; channeling intelligence information to opposition. In Venezuela
case the country broke relations with the USA and that complicates the role on the USA embassy, the role which probably was
transferred to British and several other NATO countries embassies.
[Yes] A group of countries supporting color revolution via their embassies and intelligence services (Lima group)
[Yes] The USA continued pushing the county into debt slavery, deteriorating standard of living of the population
[Yes] Confiscation of state owned money in foreign bank account and/or deposited gold and channeling those funds to opposition.
Embargo on export of vital goods.
[Yes] Economic sanction designed to strangulate the economy
[Yes] Blanket support of the color revolution by the US controlled MSM
[Yes] Attempts to supply weapons under cover of humanitarian aid.
[Yes] Appointment of a specialist in color revolution as either ambassador, or as a Special Representative of the
USA government.
[Yes] De-facto parallel government is created. US President openly extends support to the opposition. Some kind of recognition of the
opposition as the legitimate government by the USA and its vassals.
Venezuela currently has two assemblies that claim the right to legislate. In 2015 the opposition
won a majority in
the National Assembly, the original parliament of Venezuela:
However, the Venezuelan Supreme Court barred four lawmakers from taking their seats while it probed allegations
of electoral fraud. As a result, only 163 of the 167 lawmakers were sworn in on January 5. The next day, three
opposition deputies were sworn in over protests by members from the legislature’s minority who announced their
intention to challenge the move.
[Yes] NED created leader is promoted as the only legitimate leader, the choice of people of Venezuela
A former USAID/OTI member who helped devise US efforts in Venezuela said the “objective was that you had thousands
of youth, high school, and college kids that were horrified of this Indian-looking guy in power.
They were idealistic.
[???] "Embassy cash" for protestors delivered via diplomatic mail ("bombing country with dollars")
[???] Training of militants in third countries.
[Yes] Attempt to supply opposition with weapons, money and other materials under the disguise of humanitarian aid.
[Yes] Defection of high ranking military personnel
[No] Defection of high level diplomatic personnel in foreign countries.
[No] Letter from ambassadors and other high ranking members of foreign ministry supporting opposition
[No] Creation of a sacral victim (Snipers on rooftops false flag); False flag operation in enhance mass protests against
the government and/ort tot trigger armed uprising.
[No] Permanent protestor camps
The pattern we currently observer are similar to EuroMaydan color revolution. Judging from the implemented measures the key
events can be expected within the six month timeframe. The main mistake that Washington probably made in this color revolution
is that Guado is too far right. And while Maduro position is weakening, his support within the society might still be insufficient to
overcome Maduro even with foreign aid, short of open military intervention and Guado is too far to the right to the taste of
most Venezuelans. Looks like Venezuela does not yet have a powerful block of far
right nationalist parties like in Ukraine, hell-bent of acquiring power by any means including armed uprising.
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
When Naomi Klein published her ground-breaking book The Shock Doctrine (2007), which compellingly demonstrated how
neoliberal policy makers take advantage of overwhelming crisis times to privatize public property and carry out austerity programs,
most economists and media pundits scoffed at her arguments as overstating her case. Real world economic developments have since strongly
reinforced her views.
Using the unnerving 2008 financial crash, the ensuing long recession and the recurring specter of debt default, the financial
oligarchy and their proxies in the governments of core capitalist countries have embarked on an unprecedented economic coup d'état
against the people, the ravages of which include extensive privatization of the public sector, systematic application of neoliberal
austerity economics and radical redistribution of resources from the bottom to the top. Despite the truly historical and paradigm-shifting
importance of these ominous developments, their discussion remains altogether outside the discourse of mainstream economics.
The fact that neoliberal economists and politicians have been cheering these brutal assaults on social safety-net programs should
not be surprising. What is regrettable, however, is the liberal/Keynesian economists' and politicians' glaring misdiagnosis of the
plague of austerity economics: it is all the "right-wing" Republicans' or Tea Partiers' fault, we are told; the Obama administration
and the Democratic Party establishment, including the labor bureaucracy, have no part or responsibility in the relentless drive to
austerity economics and privatization of public property.
Keynesian and other liberal economists and politicians routinely blame the abandonment of the New Deal and/or Social-Democratic
economics exclusively on Ronald Reagan's supply-side economics, on neoliberal ideology or on economists at the University of Chicago.
Indeed, they characterize the 2008 financial collapse, the ensuing long recession and the recurring debt/budgetary turmoil on "bad"
policies of "neoliberal capitalism," not on class policies of capitalism per se. [1]
Evidence shows, however, that
the transition from Keynesian to neoliberal economics stems from much deeper roots or dynamics than pure ideology
[2];
that neoliberal austerity policies are class, not "bad," policies [3];
that the transition started long before Reagan arrived in the White House;
and that neoliberal austerity policies have been pursued as vigorously (though less openly and more stealthily) by the Democratic
administrations of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as their Republican counterparts. [4]
Indeed, it could be argued that, due to his uniquely misleading status or station in the socio-political structure of the
United States, and equally unique Orwellian characteristics or personality, Obama has served the interests of the powerful financial
oligarchy much better or more effectively than any Republican president could do, or has done - including Ronald Reagan. By
the same token, he has more skillfully hoodwinked the public and harmed their interests, both in terms of economics and individual/constitutional
rights, than any of his predecessors.
Ronald Reagan did not make any bones about the fact that he championed the cause of neoliberal supply-side economics. This meant
that opponents of his economic agenda knew where he stood, and could craft their own strategies accordingly.
By contrast, Obama publicly portrays himself as a liberal opponent of neoliberal austerity policies (as he frequently bemoans
the escalating economic inequality and occasionally sheds crocodile tears over the plight of the unemployed and economically hard-pressed),
while in practice he is a major team player in the debt "crisis" game of charade, designed as a shock therapy scheme in the escalation
of austerity economics. [5]
No president or major policy maker before Obama ever dared to touch the hitherto untouchable (and still self-financing) Social
Security and Medicare trust funds. He was the first to dare to make these bedrock social programs subject to austerity cuts, as reflected,
for example, in his proposed federal budget plan for fiscal year 2014, initially released in April 2013. Commenting on this unprecedented
inclusion of entitlements in the social programs to be cut, Christian Science Monitor wrote (on April 9, 2013): "President Obama's
new budget proposal ... is a sign that Washington's attitude toward entitlement reform is slowly shifting, with prospects for changes
to Social Security and Medicare becoming increasingly likely."
Obama has since turned that "likelihood" of undermining Social Security and Medicare into reality. He did so by taking the first
steps in turning the budget crisis that led to government shutdown in the first half of October into negotiations over entitlement
cuts. In an interview on the second day of the shutdown (October 3rd), he called for eliminating "unnecessary" social programs and
discussing cuts in "long-term entitlement spending". [6]
Five days later on October 5th, Obama repeated his support for cutting Social Security and Medicare in a press conference, reassuring
congressional Republicans of his willingness to agree to these cuts (as well as to cuts in corporate tax rates from 35% to 28%) if
the Republicans voted to increase the government's debt limit: "If anybody doubts my sincerity about that, I've put forward proposals
in my budget to reform entitlement programs for the long haul and reform our tax code in a way that would ... lower rates for corporations".
[7]
Only then, that is, only after Obama agreed to collaborate with the Republicans on ways to cut both the entitlements and corporate
tax rates, the Republican budget negotiators agreed to the higher budget ceiling and the reopening of the government. The consensus
bill that ended the government shutdown extends the automatic across-the-board "sequester" cuts that began last March into the current
year. This means that "the budget negotiations in the coming weeks will take as their starting point the $1 trillion in cuts over
the next eight years mandated by the sequestration process". [8]
And so, once again, the great compromiser gave in, and gave away - all at the expense of his (unquestioning) supporters.
To prepare the public for the long-awaited attack on Social Security, Medicare and other socially vital programs, the bipartisan
ruling establishment has in recent years invented a very useful hobgoblin to scare the people into submission: occasional budget/debt
crises and the specter or the actual pain of government shutdown. As Sheldon Richman recently pointed out:
"Wherever we look, there are hobgoblins. The latest is … DEFAULT. Oooooo.
Apparently the threats of international terror and China rising aren't enough to keep us alarmed and eager for the tether.
These things do tend to wear thin with time. But good old default can be taken off the shelf every now and then. It works like
a charm every time.
No, no, not default! Anything but default!". [9]
Economic policy makers in the White House and the Congress have invoked the debt/deficit hobgoblin at least three times in less than
two years: the 2011 debt-ceiling panic, the 2012 "fiscal cliff" and, more recently, the 2013 debt-ceiling/government shutdown crisis
- all designed to frighten the people into accepting the slashing of vital social programs. Interestingly, when Wall Street
speculators needed trillions of dollars to be bailed out, or as the Fed routinely showers these gamblers with nearly interest-free
money through the so-called quantitative easing, debt hobgoblins were/are nowhere to be seen!
The outcome of the latest (2013) "debt crisis management," which led to the 16-day government shutdown (October 1-16), confirmed
the view that the "crisis" was essentially bogus. Following the pattern of the 2010, 2011 and 2012 budget/debt negotiations, the
bipartisan policy makers kept the phony crisis alive by simply pushing its "resolution" several months back to early 2014. In other
words, they did not bury the hobgoblin; they simply shelved it for a while to be taken off when it is needed to, once again, frighten
the people into accepting additional austerity cuts - including Social Security and Medicare.
The outcome of the budget "crisis" also highlighted the fact that, behind the apparent bipartisan gridlock and mutual denunciations,
there is a "fundamental consensus between these parties for destroying all of the social gains won by the working class over
the course of the twentieth century". [10] To the extent there were disagreements, they were mainly over the tone, the temp,
the magnitude, the tactics, and the means, not the end. At the heart of all the (largely contrived) bipartisan bickering was how
best to escalate, justify or camouflage the brutal cuts in the vitally necessary social spending.
... ... ...
The atmosphere of panic and anxiety surrounding the debt/deficit negotiations is fabricated because the central claim behind the
feigned crisis that "there is no money" for jobs, education, health care, Social Security, Medicare, housing, pensions and the like
is a lie. Generous subsidies to major Wall Street players since the 2008 market crash has lifted financial markets to new highs,
as evinced by the Dow Jones Industrial Average's new bubble above the 15000 mark.
The massive cuts in employment, wages and benefits, as well as in social spending, have resulted in an enormous transfer of economic
resources from the bottom up. The wealthiest 1% of Americans now own more than 40% of the entire country's wealth; while the bottom
80% own only 7%. Likewise, the richest 1% now takes home 24% of the country's total income, compared to only 9% four decades ago.
[16]
This means that there really is no need for the brutal austerity cuts as there really is no shortage of financial resources. The
purported lack of resources is due to the fact that they are concentrated largely in the deep coffers of the financial oligarchy.
Ismael Hossein-zadeh is Professor Emeritus of Economics, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa. He is the author of
The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave-Macmillan 2007) and Soviet Non-capitalist Development: The Case of Nasser's
Egypt (Praeger Publishers 1989). His latest book, Beyond Mainstream Explanations of the Financial Crisis: Parasitic Finance
Capital, will be forthcoming from Routledge Books.
Think of the new Libya as the latest spectacular chapter in the Disaster Capitalism series. Instead of weapons of mass destruction,
we had R2P, short for "responsibility to protect". Instead of neo-conservatives, we had humanitarian imperialists.
But the target is the same: regime change. And the project is the same: to completely dismantle and privatize a nation that was
not integrated into turbo-capitalism; to open another (profitable) land of opportunity for turbocharged neo-liberalism. The whole
thing is especially handy because it is smack in the middle of a nearly global recession.
It will take some time; Libyan oil won’t totally return to the market within 18 months. But there’s the reconstruction of everything
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) bombed (well, not much of what the Pentagon bombed in 2003 was reconstructed in Iraq
...).
Anyway - from oil to rebuilding - in thesis juicy business opportunities loom. France’s neo-Napoleonic Nicolas Sarkozy and Britain’s
David of Arabia Cameron believe they will be especially well positioned to profit from NATO’s victory. Yet there’s no guarantee the
new Libyan bonanza will be enough to lift both former colonial powers (neo-colonials?) out of recession.
President Sarkozy in particular will milk the business opportunities for French companies for all they’re worth - part of his
ambitious agenda of "strategic redeployment" of France in the Arab world. A compliant French media are gloating that this was "his"
war - spinning that he decided to arm the rebels on the ground with French weaponry, in close cooperation with Qatar, including a
key rebel commando unit that went by sea from Misrata to Tripoli last Saturday, at the start of "Operation Siren".
Well, he certainly saw the opening when Muammar Gaddafi’s chief of protocol defected to Paris in October 2010. That’s when the
whole regime change drama started to be incubated.
Bombs for oil
As previously noted (see "Welcome to Libya’s ’democracy’",
Asia Times Online, August 24) the vultures are already circling Tripoli to grab (and monopolize) the spoils. And yes - most
of the action has to do with oil deals, as in this stark assertion by Abdeljalil Mayouf, information manager at the "rebel" Arabian
Gulf Oil Company: "We don’t have a problem with Western countries like the Italians, French and UK companies. But we may have
some political issues with Russia, China and Brazil."
These three happen to be crucial members of the BRICS group of emerging economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa),
which are actually growing while the Atlanticist, NATO-bombing economies are either stuck in stagnation or recession. The top four
BRICs also happen to have abstained from approving UN Security Council resolution 1973, the no-fly zone scam that metamorphosed into
NATO bringing regime change from above. They saw right through it from the beginning.
To make matters worse (for them), only three days before the Pentagon’s Africom launched its first 150-plus Tomahawks over Libya,
Colonel Gaddafi gave an interview to German TV stressing that if the country were attacked, all energy contracts would be transferred
to Russian, Indian and Chinese companies.
So the winners in the oil bonanza are already designated: NATO members plus Arab monarchies. Among the companies involved, British
Petroleum (BP), France’s Total and the Qatar national oil company. For Qatar - which dispatched jet fighters and recruiters to the
front lines, trained "rebels" in exhaustive combat techniques, and is already managing oil sales in eastern Libya - the war will
reveal itself to be a very wise investment decision.
Prior to the months-long crisis that is in its end game now with the rebels in the capital, Tripoli, Libya was producing 1.6 million
barrels per day. Once resumed, this could reap Tripoli’s new rulers some US$50 billion annually. Most estimates place oil reserves
at 46.4 billion barrels.
The "rebels" of new Libya better not mess with China. Five months ago, China’s official policy was all ready to call for a ceasefire;
if that had happened, Gaddafi would still control more than half of Libya. Yet Beijing - never a fan of violent regime change - for
the moment is exercising extreme restraint.
Because the $31Bn (which is probably understated) would primarily have gone to the lower
classes in which the U.S. caused humanitarian disaster is most prevalent. Rich, formerly
colonial Venezuelan families don't give a shit. The and their ex-pat kids live most of the
year in Miami or Vancouver or Madrid. The white upper class in Venezuela is the exact group
from which Mr. Random Guy-do emanates and who he represent. They live in gated communities
including in the hills around Caracas and their stores are likely fully stocked (as reported
by Max Blumenthal last year). However, they are a small minority compared to the indigenous
peoples who these sanctions are DESIGNED to hurt. The bank accounts of the colonials are safe
while a small number, relatively speaking, of pro-Chavista/Maduro operatives are completely
cut off by the Empire.
Same thing in ANY country that the USA is sanctioning. Have a look at Biden's Iran envoy's
statements about everyday Iranian people.
In response to online criticism, Nephew has claimed that "the main target" of the sanctions
regime he designed was "the oligarchs." But his book on "The Art of Sanctions" tells
another story.
Nephew fondly recalls how he structured sanctions to sabotage Iranian economic reforms
that would have improved the purchasing power of average people. The Obama administration
destroyed the economic prospects of Iran's working-class majority while ensuring that "only
the wealthy or those in positions of power could take advantage of Iran's continued
connectedness," he wrote. As "stories began to emerge from Iran of intensified income
inequality and inflation," Nephew pronounced another success.
As he made clear, the rising inequality "was a choice" that Washington "made on the
basis of helping to drive up the pressure on the Iranian economy from internal sources."
Nephew went on to claim credit for October 2012 protests brought on by the devaluation of
Iran's currency.
So these sanctions and the loss in $31Bn for Venezuela was designed to and in fact did
hurt the poorest of the poor and the working 'middle' class in that country.
here's a snippet, about Venezuela and the US supported/directed economic terrorism, which
has obviously caused much economic mayhem and dislocation, humanitarian disaster, and a large
number of deaths (I have seen figures up to hundred thousand or more, from the food and
medicine sanctions etc. Not to mention England stealing Venezuela's gold. I would imagine the
real death toll is quite a bit larger)
"......Subversion in Venezuela, by contrast, might not require as much 'engagement'. In
Cuba the government is stable and the opposition isolated. In Venezuela, by contrast, the
Maduro government faces a deep economic crisis (dramatically and intentionally exacerbated by
US sanctions) and major public discontent. Betting on Maduro's vulnerability, Biden continues
to recognize the self-appointed 'president' Juan Guaidó. Under Obama, Biden courted
Guaidó ally Leopoldo López – a so-called political prisoner arrested for
inciting violent protests that killed dozens of people – who is now calling for Biden
to lead a renewed international effort to topple Maduro. US support for the far-right forces
of Guaidó and López is intended to prevent a deal between Maduro and the more
pragmatic elements of the opposition. Such a deal might alleviate Venezuela's economic
crisis, but it could leave Maduro in power and thus derail the US's regime change agenda.
In late 2018 Biden complained that Trump's 'intensified sanctions on Venezuela have been
clouded by sabre-rattling' and 'clunky sloganeering'. At that time, those intensified
sanctions had already killed an estimated 40,000 civilians, with an unknown number of
additional deaths after Trump imposed harsher measures in 2019. But the goal of regime change
had not succeeded. Trump's crime in Venezuela was not his lethal denial of food and medicine
to the population, but rather his 'faulty execution' of the policy. This critique informs
Biden's current roadmap for Venezuela, which hinges on refining the sanctions to inflict
maximum political damage. Secretary Blinken argues that sanctions must be honed 'so that
regime enablers really feel the pain', while González favours a 'smart' use of
'multilateral sanctions' over Trump's go-it-alone programme...."
Hawk Elliot Abrams, reborn as a U.S. envoy, is at the spear point of recent aggressive moves
in Venezuela. US Special Representative for Venezuela Elliot Abrams addresses the Atlantic
Council on the future of Venezuela in Washington, DC, on April 25, 2019. (Photo credit NICHOLAS
KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)
Called the "neocon zombie" by officials at the State Department, Abrams is known as an
operator who doesn't let anything stand in his way. He has a long history of pursuing
disastrous policies in government.
"Everything Abrams is doing now is the same thing he was doing during the Reagan
administration. He's very adept at manipulating the levers of power without a lot of
oversight," a former senior official at the State Department told The American
Conservative. The official added that Abrams is "singularly focused" on pursuing regime
change in Venezuela.
A little background on Abrams: when he served as Reagan's assistant secretary of state for
human rights, he concealed a
massacre of a thousand men, women, and children by U.S.-funded death squads in El Salvador.
He was also involved in the Iran Contra scandal, helping to secure covert funding for Contra
rebels in Nicaragua in violation of laws passed by Congress. In 1991, he pled guilty to
lying to Congress about the America's role in those two fiascos -- twice.
But then-president George H.W. Bush pardoned Abrams. He went on to support "measures to
scuttle the Latin American peace process launched by the Costa Rican president, Óscar
Arias" and use "the agency's money to unseat the Sandinistas in Nicaragua's 1990 general
elections," according
to Brian D'Haeseleer.
Under President George W. Bush, Abrams promoted regime change in Iraq.
Abrams was initially blocked from joining the Trump administration on account of a Never
Trump op-ed he'd penned. But Secretary of State Mike Pompeo succeeded in bringing him onboard
last year, despite his history of support for disastrous regime change policies.
It's no surprise that with Abrams at the helm, U.S. rhetoric and actions towards Venezuela
are constantly "escalating," Dr. Alejandro Velasco, associate professor of Modern Latin America
at New York University, said an interview with TAC.
In just the last month, Washington has placed bounties on the heads of President
Nicolás Maduro and a dozen current and former Venezuelan officials. The U.S. also
deployed the largest fleet ever to the Southern Hemisphere.
Meanwhile, Abrams announced the " Democratic
Transition Framework for Venezuela ," which calls on Maduro's government to embrace a
power-sharing deal. The plan doesn't explain how Venezuelan leaders with bounties on their
heads are supposed to come to the table and negotiate with Juan Guaido, whom the U.S.
recognizes as Venezuela's legitimate leader. Abrams has also said that the U.S. does not
support a coup.
A few days after recommending a power-sharing arrangement, and 18 years after the U.S.
backed a putsch against Hugo Chavez, Abrams
warned that if Maduro resisted the organization of a "transitional government," his
departure would be far more "dangerous and abrupt." To many, Abrams'
aggressive rhetoric against Maduro made it sound like the U.S. was "effectively threatening
him with another assassination attempt," like the one Washington had "tacitly
supported" in 2018.
Two weeks after Abrams' warning, Operation Gideon began. Jordan Goudreau, an American
citizen, former Green Beret, and three-time Bronze Star recipient for bravery in Iraq and
Afghanistan, along with Javier Nieto, a retired Venezuelan military captain, posted a video
from an undisclosed location saying they had launched an attack that was meant to begin a
rebellion that would lead to Maduro's arrest and the installation of Juan Guaido.
In a public relations coup for Maduro, the plot was quickly foiled. Given that American
citizens were involved and have produced a contract allegedly signed by Guaido,
the incident has severely harmed the reputations of both the U.S. and the Venezuelan
opposition.
Both President Trump and Pompeo have denied that the U.S. had any "direct" involvement with
Goudreau's plot.
However, the Trump administration has given billions of dollars from USAID to Venezuela, and
that money is largely untraceable due to concerns about outing supporters of Guaido.
"With all the cash and arms sloshing around in Venezuela," it is not hard to imagine how
U.S. funding could inadvertently wind up supporting something like this, said Velasco.
There are other signs that the U.S. may have been more involved in the plot than they are
saying publicly.
For one, American mercenaries don't carry passports identifying themselves as American nor
do they return to the U.S. where they can be brought up on charges for their work, said Sean
McFate, professor of war and strategy at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service and
the National Defense University.
In order to sell weapons or training to another nation, it is necessary to receive
permission from the State Department. It's unclear whether Goudreau and his band did so. But
Goudreau's social media posts look like a pretty "clear cut" violation of the International
Convention Against the Recruitment, Financing and Training of Mercenaries and the U.S.
International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR) said Peter Singer, a senior fellow at New
America.
We know that months before the fated coup, the CIA met with Goudreau in Jamaica and
allegedly warned him off the project. According to the AP, Goudreau is now under
investigation for arms trafficking . Members of Congress have asked the State Department
what they knew of Goudreau's plans. Given the illegal nature of the supposedly unauthorized
project, it's very strange that the ringleader is at present in Florida, talking to the press
and posting on social media.
Besides that warning, it seems no one in government tried to stop this calamitous
operation.
And it's not just regime change. Last year, Abrams
advocated granting special immigration status for the 70,000 Venezuelans residing illegally
in the U.S. as a way to "pressure Maduro" even though Trump ran on the promise to severely
limit the number of people granted Temporary Protected Status.
It was in pursuit of special status for Venezuelans that Abrams showed himself to be
"incredibly pompous, bull-headed, and willing to destroy anyone who opposes him, in a personal
way, including by trashing their reputations in the media," another senior State Department
official told TAC. Abrams is not above hiding policy options he doesn't like and
offering only those he favors to Pompeo to present to Trump, sources said.
Abrams ultimately prevailed and Venezuelans received refugee status from the Trump
administration, despite the fact that it betrayed Trump's campaign promises.
According to Velasco, there are some people in the administration who believe that
Venezuelans are the "new Cubans" -- that they will become a solid, loyal Republican vote in the
swing state of Florida if they're granted special status. They also believe that Venezuelan
expats want to see the U.S. remove Maduro. There are "many Cold Warriors" who believe all it
will take is a "little push" for Venezuelans to rise up and take out Maduro, said Velasco.
The State Department did not respond to a request for comment on whether Abrams is pursuing
a military confrontation in Venezuela.
"Cold Warrior" beliefs are dangerous. While "Operation Gideon" was especially clownish, had
it been more sophisticated, it could have easily sparked a world war. The Russians, Iranians,
and Chinese are all operating in Venezuela.
That specter is even more concerning now that Russia's Foreign Minister Lavrov has
said that Russian special
services are on standby to help Venezuela's investigation of the mercenaries. about the
author Barbara Boland is TAC's foreign policy and national security reporter.
Previously, she worked as an editor for the Washington Examiner and for CNS News. She is
the author of Patton Uncovered , a book about General George Patton in World War II, and
her work has appeared on Fox News, The Hill , UK Spectator , and elsewhere.
Boland is a graduate from Immaculata University in Pennsylvania. Follow her on Twitter
@BBatDC .
"... Although corporations are legally a person (see history below), they are in fact an entity. The sole goal of that entity is
profit. There is no corporate conscience. ..."
"... Perhaps it would be useful to look at the nature of our global expansion. The global expanse of US military bases is well-known,
but its actual territorial empire is largely hidden. The true map of America is not taught in our schools. Abby Martin interviews history
Professor Daniel Immerwahr about his new book, ' How To Hide An Empire ,' where he documents the story of our "Greater United States."
This is worth the 40 minute watch...I learned several new things. One more long clip. However this one is fine to just listen to as
you do things. This is a wonderful interview with Noam Chomsky. The man exudes wisdom. ..."
"... The oligarchy has been with us since perhaps the tribal origins of our species, but the corporation is a newer phenomenon.
A faceless, soulless profit machine. Ironically it is the 14th amendment which is used to justify corporate person-hood. ..."
"... Corporations aren't specifically mentioned in the 14th Amendment, or anywhere else in the Constitution. But going back to the
earliest years of the republic, when the Bank of the United States brought the first corporate rights case before the Supreme Court,
U.S. corporations have sought many of the same rights guaranteed to individuals, including the rights to own property, enter into contracts,
and to sue and be sued just like individuals. ..."
"... But it wasn't until the 1886 case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road that the Court appeared to grant a corporation
the same rights as an individual under the 14th Amendment ..."
"... The United States is home to five of the world's 10 largest defense contractors, and American companies account for 57 percent
of total arms sales by the world's 100 largest defense contractors, based on SIPRI data. Maryland-based Lockheed Martin, the largest
defense contractor in the world, is estimated to have had $44.9 billion in arms sales in 2017 through deals with governments all over
the world. The company drew public scrutiny after a bomb it sold to Saudi Arabia was dropped on a school bus in Yemen, killing 40 boys
and 11 adults. Lockheed's revenue from the U.S. government alone is well more than the total annual budgets of the IRS and the Environmental
Protection Agency, combined. ..."
"... http://news.nidokidos.org/military-spending-20-companies-profiting-the-m... For a list of the 20 companies profiting most off
war... https://themindunleashed.com/2019/03/20-companies-profiting-war.html ..."
"... Capitalism, militarism and imperialism are disastrously intertwined ..."
"... Corporations are Religions Yes they are. They have ethics, goals, and priests. They have a god who determines everything "The
Invisible Hand". They believe themselves to be superior to the state. They have cult garb, or are we not going to pretend that there's
corporate dress codes, right down to the things you can wear on special days of the week. They determine what you can eat, drink and
read. If you say something wrong, they feel within their rights to punish you because they OWN the medium that you used to spread ideas.
OF course they don't own your thoughts... those belong to the OTHER god. ..."
Chris Hedges often says "The corporate coup is complete". Sadly I think he is correct. So this week I thought it might be interesting
to explore the techniques which are used here at home and abroad. The oligarchs' corporate control is global, but different strategies
are employed in various scenarios. Just thinking about the recent regime changes promoted by the US in this hemisphere...
The current attempts at the Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, Cuban, and Iranian coups are primarily conducted
using economic sanctions
.
The US doesn't even lie about past coups. They recently
released a report about the 1953
CIA led coup against Iran detailing the strategies. Here at home it is a compliant media and a new array of corporate laws designed
to protect and further enrich that spell the corporate capture of our culture and society. So let's begin by looking at the nature
of corporations...
The following 2.5 hour documentary from 2004 features commentary from Chris, Noam, Naomi, and many others you know. It has some
great old footage. It is best watched on a television so you have a bigger screen. (This clip is on the encore+ youtube channel and
does have commercials which you can skip after 5 seconds) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpQYsk-8dWg
Based on Joel Bakan's bestseller The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power , this 26-award-winning
documentary explores a corporation's inner workings, curious history, controversial impacts and possible futures.
One hundred
and fifty years ago, a corporation was a relatively insignificant entity. Today, it is a vivid, dramatic, and pervasive presence
in all our lives. Like the Church, the Monarchy and the Communist Party in other times and places, a corporation is today's dominant
institution.
Charting the rise of such an institution aimed at achieving specific economic goals, the documentary also recounts
victories against this apparently invincible force.
Although corporations are legally a person (see history below), they are in fact an entity. The sole goal of that entity is
profit. There is no corporate conscience. Some of the CEO's in the film discuss how all the people in the corporations are against
pollution and so on, but by law stockholder profit must be the objective. Now these entities are global operations with no loyalty
to their country of origin.
Perhaps it would be useful to look at the nature of our global expansion. The global expanse of US military bases is well-known,
but its actual territorial empire is largely hidden. The true map of America is not taught in our schools. Abby Martin interviews
history Professor Daniel Immerwahr about his new book, ' How To Hide An Empire ,' where he documents the story of our
"Greater United States." This is worth the 40 minute watch...I learned several new things. One more long clip. However this one is
fine to just listen to as you do things. This is a wonderful interview with Noam Chomsky. The man exudes wisdom.
So much of this conversation touches on today's topic of our corporate capture. Amy interviewed Ed Snowden this week... (video or text)
This is a system, the first system in history, that bore witness to everything. Every border you crossed, every purchase you
make, every call you dial, every cell phone tower you pass, friends you keep, article you write, site you visit and subject line
you type was now in the hands of a system whose reach is unlimited but whose safeguards were not. And I felt, despite what the
law said, that this was something that the public ought to know.
The oligarchy has been with us since perhaps the tribal origins of our species, but the corporation is a newer phenomenon.
A faceless, soulless profit machine. Ironically it is the 14th amendment which is used to justify corporate person-hood.
Corporations aren't specifically mentioned in the 14th Amendment, or anywhere else in the Constitution. But going back
to the earliest years of the republic, when the Bank of the United States brought the first corporate rights case before the Supreme
Court, U.S. corporations have sought many of the same rights guaranteed to individuals, including the rights to own property,
enter into contracts, and to sue and be sued just like individuals.
But it wasn't until the 1886 case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road that the Court appeared to grant a corporation
the same rights as an individual under the 14th Amendment
More recently in 2010 (Citizens United v. FEC): In the run up to the 2008 election, the Federal Elections Commission blocked the
conservative nonprofit Citizens United from airing a film about Hillary Clinton based on a law barring companies from using their
funds for "electioneering communications" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. The organization sued, arguing
that, because people's campaign donations are a protected form of speech (see Buckley v. Valeo) and corporations and people enjoy
the same legal rights, the government can't limit a corporation's independent political donations. The Supreme Court agreed. The
Citizens United ruling may be the most sweeping expansion of corporate personhood to date.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/how-supreme-court-turned-co...
Do they really believe this is how we think?
More than just using the courts, corporations are knee deep in creating favorable laws, not just by lobbying, but by actually
writing legislation to feed the politicians that they own and control, especially at the state level.
Through ALEC, Global Corporations Are Scheming to Rewrite YOUR Rights and Boost THEIR Revenue. Through the corporate-funded
American Legislative Exchange Council, global corporations and state politicians vote behind closed doors to try to rewrite state
laws that govern your rights. These so-called "model bills" reach into almost every area of American life and often directly benefit
huge corporations.
In ALEC's own words, corporations have "a VOICE and a VOTE" on specific changes to the law that are then proposed in your state.
DO YOU? Numerous resources to help us expose ALEC are provided below. We have also created links to detailed discussions of key
issues...
There is very little effort to hide the blatant corruption. People seem to accept this behavior as business as usual, after all
it is.
Part of the current ALEC legislative agenda involves stifling protests.
I think it started in Texas...
A bill making its way through the Texas legislature would make protesting pipelines a third-degree felony, the same as attempted
murder.
H.B. 3557, which is under consideration in the state Senate after passing the state House earlier this month, ups penalties for
interfering in energy infrastructure construction by making the protests a felony. Sentences would range from two to 10 years.
Lawmakers in Wisconsin introduced a bill on September 5 designed to chill protests around oil and gas pipelines and other energy
infrastructure in the state by imposing harsh criminal penalties for trespassing on or damaging the property of a broad range
of "energy providers."
Senate Bill 386 echoes similar "critical infrastructure protection" model bills pushed out by the American Legislative Exchange
Council (ALEC) and the Council of State Governments over the last two years to prevent future protests like the one against the
Dakota Access Pipeline.
And Chris was on the evening RT news this week discussing how the US empire is striking back against leaders who help their own
people rather than our global corporations.
Financially, the cost of these wars is immense: more than $6 trillion dollars. The cost of these wars is just one element of
the $1.2 trillion the US government spends annually on wars and war making. Half of each dollar paid in federal income tax
goes towards some form or consequence of war . While the results of such spending are not hard to foresee or understand:
a cyclical and dependent relationship between the Pentagon, weapons industry and Congress, the creation of a whole new class of
worker and wealth distribution is not so understood or noticed, but exists and is especially malignant.
This is a ghastly redistribution of wealth, perhaps unlike any known in modern human history, certainly not in American history.
As taxpayers send trillions to Washington. DC, that money flows to the men and women that remotely oversee, manage and staff the
wars that kill and destroy millions of lives overseas and at home. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees and civilian contractors
servicing the wars take home six figure annual salaries allowing them second homes, luxury cars and plastic surgery, while veterans
put guns in their mouths, refugees die in capsized boats and as many as four million nameless souls scream silently in death.
These AUMFs (Authorization for Use of Military Force) and the wars have provided tens of thousands of recruits to international
terror groups; mass profits to the weapons industry and those that service it; promotions to generals and admirals, with
corporate board seats upon retirement ; and a perpetual and endless supply of bloody shirts for politicians to wave via
an unquestioning and obsequious corporate media to stoke compliant anger and malleable fear. What is hard to imagine, impossible
even, is anyone else who has benefited from these wars.
The United States is home to five of the world's 10 largest defense contractors, and American companies account for 57 percent
of total arms sales by the world's 100 largest defense contractors, based on SIPRI data. Maryland-based Lockheed Martin, the largest
defense contractor in the world, is estimated to have had $44.9 billion in arms sales in 2017 through deals with governments all
over the world. The company drew public scrutiny after a bomb it sold to Saudi Arabia was dropped on a school bus in Yemen, killing
40 boys and 11 adults. Lockheed's revenue from the U.S. government alone is well more than the total annual budgets of the IRS and
the Environmental Protection Agency, combined.
The obvious industry which was not included nor considered is the fossil fuel industry. Here's another example of mutual corporate
interests.
"Capitalism, militarism and imperialism are disastrously intertwined with the fossil fuel economy .A globalized economy
predicated on growth at any social or environmental costs, carbon dependent international trade, the limitless extraction of natural
resources, and a view of citizens as nothing more than consumers cannot be the basis for tackling climate change .Little wonder
then that the elites have nothing to offer beyond continued militarisation and trust in techno-fixes."
The US military is one of the largest consumers and emitters of carbon-dioxide equivalent (CO2e) in history, according to an
independent analysis of global fuel-buying practices of a "virtually unresearched" government agency.
If the US military were its own country, it would rank 47th between Peru and Portugal in terms of annual fuel purchases, totaling
almost 270,000 barrels of oil bought every day in 2017. In particular, the Air Force is the largest emitter of greenhouse gas
emissions and bought $4.9 billion of fuel in 2017 – nearly double that of the Navy ($2.8 billion).
The fossil fuel giants even try to control the climate talks...
Oil and gas groups were accused Saturday of seeking to influence climate talks in Madrid by paying millions in sponsorship
and sending dozens of lobbyists to delay what scientists say is a necessary and rapid cut in fossil fuel use.
The corporations are so entwined that it is difficult to tell where they begin and end. There's the unity of private prisons and
the war machine. And it's a global scheme...this example from the UK.
One thing is clear: the prison industrial complex and the global war machine are intimately connected. This summer's prison
strike that began in the United States and spread to other countries was the largest in history. It shows more than ever that
prisoners are resisting this penal regime, often at great risk to themselves. The battle to end prison slavery continues.
The 2017 tax bill cut taxes for most Americans, including the middle class, but it heavily benefits the wealthy and corporations
. It slashed the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent, and its treatment of "pass-through" entities -- companies organized
as sole proprietorships, partnerships, LLCs, or S corporations -- will translate to an estimated $17 billion in tax savings for
millionaires this year. American corporations are showering their shareholders with stock buybacks, thanks in part to their tax
savings.
Even Robert Jackson Jr., commissioner at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Appointed to the SEC in 2017 by President Donald
Trump. Confirmed in January 2018 sees the corporate cuts as absurd.
"We have been to the movie of tax cuts and buybacks before, in the Republican administration during the George W. Bush era.
We enacted a quite substantial tax cut during that period. And studies after that showed very clearly that most corporations use
the funds from that tax cut for buybacks. And here's the kicker. That particular tax cut actually required that companies deploy
the capital for capital expenditures, wage increases and investments in their people. Yet studies showed that, in fact, the companies
use them for buybacks. So we've been to this movie before. And what you're describing to me, that corporations turned around and
took the Trump tax cut and didn't use it in investing in their people or in infrastructure, but instead for other purposes, shouldn't
surprise anybody at all."
So the corporations grow larger, wealthier, more powerful, buying evermore legislative influence along the way. They have crept
into almost every aspect of our lives. Some doctors are beginning to see the influence of big pharma and other corporate interests
are effecting the current practice of medicine.
Gary Fettke is a doctor from Tasmania who has been targeted for promoting a high fat low carb diet...threatened with losing
his medical qualifications. He doesn't pull punches in this presentation discussing the corporate control of big ag/food and big
pharma on medical practice and education. (27 min)
Corporations are Religions
Yes they are. They have ethics, goals, and priests. They have a god who determines everything "The Invisible Hand". They believe
themselves to be superior to the state. They have cult garb, or are we not going to pretend that there's corporate dress codes,
right down to the things you can wear on special days of the week. They determine what you can eat, drink and read. If you say
something wrong, they feel within their rights to punish you because they OWN the medium that you used to spread ideas. OF course
they don't own your thoughts... those belong to the OTHER god.
At least the crazy made up gods that I listen to don't usually
fuck over other human beings for a goddamn percentage. ON the other hand, if a corporation can make a profit, it's REQUIRED to
fuck you over. To do otherwise would be against it's morals. Which it does have, trust us... OH, and corporations get to make
fun of your beliefs, but you CANNOT make fun of theirs. Because that would be heresy against logic and reason.
In a local newspaper showed a couple coming out of a Wal-Mart with their carts piled high with big boxed foreign junk, then
shown cramming their SUV full of said junk. The headline read "Crazy Busy". It pretty much summed up what is wrong with the American
consumer culture. The next day's big headline spotlighted our senator's picture affixed to a LARGE headline boasting "$22 Billion
Submarine Contract Awarded". A good example of of what is wrong with the american war economy.
Thank you for your compilation Lookout! If we can get beyond the headlines, working at grass root and local solutions, maybe
even underground revolution, there may be hope for us. Barter for a better future.
My buddies always say about their mayor..."There's no way we will trade down after this election...but then we do." Perhaps
it is true for more than just their town.
The line running in my head is..."What if they gave a war and nobody came". I want to expand it to..."What if they made cheap
junk no one really wanted and nobody bought it". Or substitute junk food for cheap junk, or...
My point in today's conclusion is much as I try to walk away from corporate culture/control, I really can't totally escape...but
at least I spend most of my time in the open, breathing clean air, surrounded by forest. We do what we can.
Consumerism in our society is a plague, a disease perpetrated upon us by our corporate lords. It has taken over everything
about being an American.
I think the youth are catching on, as they are thrifting more, but they don't understand about food, and that's the rub. Our
youth will be more unhealthy until they understand what corporations are doing to us through food addictions.
We're expecting rain today for most of the day and actually it's just started. The person who will drill our well came by yesterday
and figured out some details. We are behind two other wells, so it will probably be the holiday week when it happens - we'll see.
I can wait til January and hope we do.
Ideas is that new deal of FDR's day had corporate opponents far different than those of today. Sanders does not seem to understand
that the corporations of yesterday, and what worked against them, will not work against the corporations of today. In the early part of the 20th century, corporations were still primarily domestic and local often with charters from the state
where they conducted their primary business, many times all of their business.
Regulation and unions were reasonable anti-dotes to the abuses of these local and domestic corporations. The state still had
some semblance of control over them.
But today corporations are global. They have no allegiance to, or concern for the domestic economy or local people. They do not fear of any anti-dotes that worked for years against domestic or local corporations. Global corporations just leave
and go elsewhere if they don't like the domestic or local situation if they have not managed to completely take over the government.
There is only one reason to incorporate in the first place. That is for the owner(s) of the business to avoid personal liability
or responsibility. The majority of people never understand this idea. Corporate owners are the people who are the genuine personal
responsibility avoiders. Not the poor. The only antidote to corporations these days is the total demise of the corporation and
its similar business entities that dodge personal responsibility. And the state must refuse to allow any such entities to do business.
It is the only way forward. Otherwise nation states will give way to corporate states. Corporate governance is the new feudalism
from which the old feudalism morphed.
Sanders isn't going to advocate doing away with corporate entities or other similar business entities. Nor will any of the
Democratic contenders. They all require corporations to rail against as the basis for their political policy.
...and I've always wondered just how Bernie would dismantle them. However like the impotence of the impeachment, is the impotence
of the primary process.
When the DNC was sued after 2016, they were
exonerated based on the ruling they were a private entity entitled to make rules as the wanted. The primary is so obviously
rigged I can almost guarantee Bernie will not be allowed the nomination, so the question to how he would change corporate control
is really moot.
@Lookout I probably
could get on board with a Sanders campaign if he would run as an Independent. But it is really hard to get on board with him as
a Democrat. If he loses the nomination, he will probably not run as an Independent once again. Once he bailed on an Independent
run last time, I and many others bailed on him. I would support his Independent candidacy just to screw with the Electoral College.
I thought last time an independent candidacy might have thrown the election to the House of Representatives. I could see a Democratically
controlled House voting for him over Trump in a three way EC split if the Democratic candidate took low EC numbers.
But he is so afraid of being tarred with the Nader moniker.
What I said many times on websites last election is that an EC vote is very similar to a Parliamentary Election. And that would
be an interesting change for sure. It would also be a means of having the popular vote winner restored if there is a big enough
margin in the House. And what would be equally cool is that the Senate picks the VP. So you could have President and VP from different
parties.
if Bernie got the nomination, I would vote for him, especially in this imaginary world, if Tulsi was his running mate. Then there
the question about your vote being counted? We'll just have to see what we see and make judgements based on outcomes, IMO.
#4.1 I probably could get on board with
a Sanders campaign if he would run as an Independent. But it is really hard to get on board with him as a Democrat. If he loses
the nomination, he will probably not run as an Independent once again. Once he bailed on an Independent run last time, I and
many others bailed on him. I would support his Independent candidacy just to screw with the Electoral College. I thought last
time an independent candidacy might have thrown the election to the House of Representatives. I could see a Democratically
controlled House voting for him over Trump in a three way EC split if the Democratic candidate took low EC numbers.
But he is so afraid of being tarred with the Nader moniker.
What I said many times on websites last election is that an EC vote is very similar to a Parliamentary Election. And that
would be an interesting change for sure. It would also be a means of having the popular vote winner restored if there is a
big enough margin in the House. And what would be equally cool is that the Senate picks the VP. So you could have President
and VP from different parties.
@Lookout The only
way the Democrats might beat Trump is to have Sanders run as an Independent and prevent Trump from reaching 270. That is a far
better way to beat Trump than impeachment. Would the house vote for the Democrat or an Independent? I guess it would depend on
how Sanders did in the popular vote and EC against his Democratic rival.
#4.1.1 if Bernie got the nomination, I would vote for him, especially in this imaginary world, if Tulsi was his running mate. Then
there the question about your vote being counted? We'll just have to see what we see and make judgements based on outcomes,
IMO.
If it was Hillary "Dewey Cheatem & Howe" Clinton, all bets are off.
#4.1.1.1 The only way the Democrats
might beat Trump is to have Sanders run as an Independent and prevent Trump from reaching 270. That is a far better way to
beat Trump than impeachment. Would the house vote for the Democrat or an Independent? I guess it would depend on how Sanders
did in the popular vote and EC against his Democratic rival.
Good lord.that she did that is unbelievable. Great point. Boycott Fox News, but go on Stern's show. It's going to be fun to
watch how much lower she falls.
MSNBC invited on two former Hillary Clinton aides to criticize Bernie Sanders for taking a "long time to get out of the
race" and that he didn't do "enough" campaigning for her in 2016. pic.twitter.com/6Vsqo0DKZI
@TheOtherMaven They
have to choose from actual EC vote getters. So if she is not the candidate she could not win.
Having Sanders run as an Independent and Warren or Biden run as a Democrat would be a much better strategy to ensure a Trump
loss in the House. Of course it might take some coordination as in asking the voters to vote for the candidate who has the best
chance of beating Trump in certain states. But voters could probably figure that out.
Or a candidate could just withdraw from a state in which the other candidate had a better chance of beating Trump.
Lookout as usual you have done an excellent job of giving me a lot of articles to read and think about this next week.
Of course I need to be loading my car and shutting this place down as I head to the Texas hill country. Will look for an article
about Kinder Morgan and small communities that are fighting the pipeline through their towns. The read was a little hopeful.
Watching the weather and it looks like sunshine and clear skies as I travel. Thanks for all your work in putting this together.
I like to travel on the old roads
I like the way it makes me feel
No destination just the old roads
Somehow it helps the heart to heal.
I hope your road trip is a good one. The less busy tracks are almost meditative....soaking in scenery as the world passes by.
Have fun and be careful.
Lookout as usual you have done an excellent job of giving me a lot of articles to read and think about this next week.
Of course I need to be loading my car and shutting this place down as I head to the Texas hill country. Will look for an
article about Kinder Morgan and small communities that are fighting the pipeline through their towns. The read was a little
hopeful.
Watching the weather and it looks like sunshine and clear skies as I travel. Thanks for all your work in putting this together.
Here are a couple of links to how free markets
help in the corporate takeover. Amazon a corp that has only made a profit by
never paying taxes and accounting fraud. It
became a trillion dollar corp through the use
of monopoly money(stock) it's nothing but the
perfect example of todays "unicorn" corp, i.e.
worth what it is w/out ever making a penny
Corporations can live far beyond a persons lifespan. Corporations can commit homicide and escape execution and justice. Unfortunately,
unions are just as likely to be on the corporations side to get jobs and wages, and bust heads if anything interferes with that.
If we protest we've seen the police ready to use deadly force at the drop of a hat, and get away with it. We get to vote on
candidates that some political club chose for us, and have little incentive to work for the 99%. The gov. has amassed so much
information on us we can't even fathom its depth. We have nowhere left, no unexplored lands out of reach of the government. We
think we own things, but if you think you own a home, see how long it is before the gov. confiscates it if you don't pay your
property taxes.
If I were younger, or a young person asked what to do, I would say.... learn some skill that would make you attractive for
emigrating to another country, because the US looks like it's over. It's people are only here to be exploited. And if Bernie were
to become president I hope he gets a food taster.
run to. No where to hide. As in the U.K., corporations are seeking to to dismantle the NHS and turn it into a for-profit system
like ours. Even as the gilllet-jaune protesters risk life and limb, Macron seeks to install true neoliberalism in France. And
the beat goes on.
Corporations can live far beyond a persons lifespan. Corporations can commit homicide and escape execution and justice.
Look at what chevron did to people in Borapol. I'm sure I spelled this wrong but hopefully people will know what I'm talking
about. They killed lots of people and poisoned their land for decades and the fight over it is still going on. How many decades
more will chevron get to skirt justice? Banks continue to commit fraud and they only get little fines that don't do jack to keep
them from doing it again. Even cities are screwing people. Owe a few dollars on your property taxes and they will take your home
and sell it for pennies on the dollar. How in hell can it be legal to charge people over 600% interest? What happened to usury
rules if that's the correct term.
The International Court of Justice at The Hague ruled last week that a prior ruling by an Ecuadorean court that fined Chevron
$9.5 billion in 2011 should be upheld, according to teleSUR, a Latin American news agency. Texaco, which is currently a part of
Chevron, is responsible for what is considered one of the world's largest environmental disasters while it drilled for oil in
the Ecuadorian rainforest from 1964 to 1990.
https://www.ecowatch.com/will-chevron-and-exxon-ever-be-held-responsible...
The legal battle has been tied up in the courts for years. Ecuador's highest court finally upheld the ruling in January
2014, but Chevron refused to pay.
This is another thing that corporations get away with. Contaminating land and then just walking away from it. How many superfund
sites have we had to pay for instead of the ones who created the mess. Just declared bankruptcy and walked away. Corporations
are people? Fine then they should be held as accountable as the people in the lower classes. Fat chance though right?
Weren't people killed by a gas cloud released from the plant? I read something recently that said the case is still going
through the courts. How much money have they spent trying not to spend more?
Byedone just needs to pack it in and drop out already. Today he was defending the republican party after someone said something
about them needing to go away. Joe said that we need another party so one does not get more power than the other. Yeah right,
Joe. It's not like the Pubs are already weilding power they don't have and them dems cowering and supporting them.
Newsweek reporter quit after being censored on the OPCW story.
I have collected evidence of how they suppressed the story in addition to evidence from another case where info inconvenient
to US govt was removed, though it was factually correct.
First frustrate us with gridlock. Then pass bills benefiting the corporate overlords. Then leading up
to elections pass bills like the one against animal cruelty (who doesn't love kitties and puppies?), or propose a bill to consider
regulating cosmetics. This second bipartisan effort is glaringly cynical since no one apparently knows what is in beauty products.
Sanders must have politicians worried for them to attempt something which has managed to go unregulated for so long.
All this bipartisanship is not even up to the level of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It's more like wiping at
them with a dirty rag while the ship of state continues to sink. While animal cruelty and cosmetic safety are important issues,
they pale in comparison to the systemic ills America suffers. Our fearless leaders will continue to scratch the surface while
corruption and business as usual continue to fester. These bipartisan laws may look good on a politician's resume, but they won't
really help the 99%.
@snoopydawg
the propaganda to give NATO a raison d'être for a pivot to China. This will be doomed to complete failure just as the Russian
pivot has.
But Putin and Xi Jinping are both much too skilled and intelligent to defeat. American WWE trash talkers are completely outclassed
by an 8th dan in judo paired with a Sun Tzu scholar.
Tomoe nage - use your opponent's weight and aggression against him.
"If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent
is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest.
If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he
is unprepared, appear where you are not expected ."
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
@Lookout
What they want is
a controlled collapse. If they can get the US to continue to overspend on war mongering rather than programs of social uplift
the country will rot from the inside.
"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching
spiritual death." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
So much more to say really. Had to stop somewhere but as you know the corruption runs deep and is intermixed with the CIA/FBI/MIC
corporate government under which we live.
On we go as best we can!
There is great dignity in the objective truth. Perhaps because it never flows through the contaminated minds of the unworthy.
Corporate charters were initially meant to be for the public good if i'm not mistaken in recall, it was a trade-off for their
privilege to exist. Maybe a movement political leader could highlight this and move the pendulum back to accountability.
Had a conversation with good friend today, a 3M rep, and he was griping about his competitor's shady marketing product practices
apparently lying to manufacturers about the grades and contents of their competing products.
The essential facts are these. In April 1898, the United States went to war with Spain. The war's nominal purpose was to liberate
Cuba from oppressive colonial rule. The war's subsequent conduct found the United States not only invading and occupying Cuba, but
also seizing Puerto Rico, completing a deferred annexation of Hawaii, scarfing up various other small properties in the Pacific,
and, not least of all, replacing Spain as colonial masters of the Philippine Archipelago, located across the Pacific.
That the true theme of the war with Spain turned out to be not liberation but expansion should not come as a terrible surprise.
From the very founding of the first British colonies in North America, expansion has constituted an enduring theme of the American
project. Separation from the British Empire after 1776 only reinforced the urge to grow. Yet prior to 1898, that project had been
a continental one. The events of that year signaled the transition from continental to extra-continental expansion. American leaders
were no longer content to preside over a republic stretching from sea to shining sea.
In that regard, the decision to annex the Philippines stands out as especially instructive. If you try hard enough -- and some
politicians at the time did -- you can talk yourself into believing that U.S. actions in the Caribbean in 1898 represented something
other than naked European-style imperialism with all its brute force to keep the natives in line. After all, the United States did
refrain from converting Cuba into a formal colony and by 1902 had even granted Cubans a sort of ersatz independence. Moreover, both
Cuba and Puerto Rico fell within "our backyard," as did various other Caribbean republics soon to undergo U.S. military occupation.
Geographically, all were located within the American orbit.
Yet the Philippines represented an altogether different case. By no stretch of the imagination did the archipelago fall within
"our backyard." Furthermore, the Filipinos had no desire to trade Spanish rule for American rule and violently resisted occupation
by U.S. forces. The notably dirty Philippine-American War that followed from 1899 to 1902 -- a conflict almost entirely expunged
from American memory today -- resulted in something like 200,000 Filipino deaths and ended in a U.S. victory not yet memorialized
on the National Mall in Washington.
So the Philippine Archipelago had become ours. In short order, however, authorities in Washington changed their mind about the
wisdom of accepting responsibility for several thousand islands located nearly 7,000 miles from San Francisco.
The sprawling American colony turned out to be the ultimate impulse purchase. And as with most impulse purchases, enthusiasm soon
enough gave way to second thoughts and even regret. By 1907, President Theodore Roosevelt was privately referring to the Philippines
as America's "Achilles heel." The United States had paid Spain $20 million for an acquisition that didn't turn a profit and couldn't
be defended given the limited capabilities of the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy. To complicate matters further, from Tokyo's perspective,
the Philippines fell within its backyard. So far as Imperial Japan was concerned, imperial America was intruding on its turf.
Thus was the sequence of events leading to the Pacific War of 1941-1945 set in motion. I am not suggesting that Pearl Harbor was
an inevitable consequence of the United States annexing the Philippines. I am suggesting that it put two rival imperial powers on
a collision course.
One can, of course, find in the ensuing sequence of events matters worth celebrating -- great military victories at places like
Midway, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa, culminating after 1945 in a period of American dominion. But the legacy of our flirtation with empire
in the Western Pacific also includes much that is lamentable -- the wars in Korea and Vietnam, for example, and now an intensifying
rivalry with China destined to lead we know not where.
If history could be reduced to a balance sheet, the U.S. purchase of the Philippines would rate as a pretty bad bargain. That
first $20 million turned out to be only a down payment.
No. Absolutely not. We would have been much better off had the US not violently dismantled the first Republic of the Philippines.
The canard that our greatest generation of Filipinos (Generation of 1898) was not fit to govern us was a product of US Assimilation
Schools designed to rid the Philippines of Filipinos- by wiring them to automatically think anything non-Filipino will always
be better (intenalized racism) and to train the primarily to leave and work abroad and blend -in as Americans (objectification)
and never stand out as self-respecting Filipinos who aspire to be the best they can be propelled by the Filipino story.
Our multiple Golden Ages only occurred prior to US invasion and colonization.
YES, the USA owes us. We are every American's 2nd original sin.
We do not owe US anything. The USA owes us a great big deal, More than any other country on earth.
THEY (USA) owes us:
1) For violently dismantling the first Republic of the Philippines at the cost of over a million martyrs from the greatest generation
of Filipinos.
2) For US Assimilation Schools denying us the intensity of our golden ages prior to their invasion as our drivers for PH civilization,
turning us into a country that trains its people to leave and assimilate in US culture and become workers for Americans and foreigners
abroad. This results in a Philippines WITHOUT Filipinos.
3) For US bombs turning Intramuros into dust- the centerpiece of the Paris of the East, with treasures, publications and art
much older that the US- without consent from any Filipino leader. And for dismantling our train system from La Union to Bicol.
4) For the US Rescission Act which denied Filipino veterans due recognition, dignity and honor- vets who fought THEIR war against
Japan on our soil.
5) For the canard that Aguinaldo, our 29-year old father and liberator of the Republic of the Philippines, is a villain and
a traitor, even inventing the heroism of Andres Bonifacio which ultimately resulted in "Toxic Nationalism" which Rizal warned
us about in the persona of Simoun in El Filibusterismo who will drive our nation to self-destruction and turn a paradise into
a desert by being automatically wired to think anything non-Filipino will and always be better.
The core of colonial mentality is the misguided belief that we cannot have been a greater country had the US not destroyed
the first Republic of the Philippines- a lie that was embedded in our minds by the US discrediting Aguinaldo and the Generation
of 1896/1898- the greatest generation of Filipinos.
It does seem to me that every country which was able and could afford to expand its territory did so. In Europe, exceptions to
that a wish were Switzerland, Slovakia, Finland, Ireland, Norway, Slovenia, Ukraine, ?Romania and Chechia.
So, US had company!
President William McKinley defends his decision to support the annexation of the Philippines in the wake of the U.S. war in that
country:
"When I next realized that the Philippines had dropped into our laps I confess I did not know what to do with them. . . And
one night late it came to me this way. . .1) That we could not give them back to Spain- that would be cowardly and dishonorable;
2) that we could not turn them over to France and Germany-our commercial rivals in the Orient-that would be bad business and discreditable;
3) that we not leave them to themselves-they are unfit for self-government-and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there
worse than Spain's wars; and 4) that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and
uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God's grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ
also died."
Making Christians of a country that had its first Catholic diocese 9 years before the Spanish Armada sailed for England, with
4 dioceses in place years before the English sailed for Jamestown.
Dan Carlin did an outstanding podcast on the choices America faced after acquiring the Philippines. McKinley was anti-empire,
but the industrialists in his administration hungered to thwart the British, French and Dutch empires in the Pacific by establishing
a colony all of our own.
As someone born in Latin America, we never saw the US as anything but a brutal predator, whose honeyed words were belied by their
deeds. I wonder if it began with the Philippines. There was the Mexican war first, which wrested a lot of territory from Mexico.
And then there was the invasion of Canada to bring the blessings of democracy to Canadians (it ended with the White House in flames).
I suspect that the beliefe that you are exceptional and blessed by God can lead to want to straighten up other people "for their
own good", and make a profit besides - a LOT of profit.
"... A chorus of neocons rushed to second his praise: Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA officer and prominent Never Trumper, lauded Trump's intestinal fortitude, while Representative Liz Cheney hailed Trump's "decisive action." It was Carlson who was left sputtering about the forever wars. "Washington has wanted war with Iran for decades," Carlson said . "They still want it now. Let's hope they haven't finally gotten it." ..."
"... Neoconservatism as a foreign policy ideology has been badly discredited over the last two decades, thanks to the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan. But in the blinding flash of one drone strike, neoconservatism was easily able to reinsert itself in the national conversation. It now appears that Trump intends to make Soleimani's killing -- which has nearly drawn the U.S. into yet another conflict in the Middle East and, in typical neoconservative fashion, ended up backfiring and undercutting American goals in the region -- a central part of his 2020 reelection bid . ..."
"... The neocons are starting to realize that Trump's presidency, at least when it comes to foreign policy, is no less vulnerable to hijacking than those of previous Republican presidents, including the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The leading hawks inside and outside the administration shaping its approach to Iran include Robert O'Brien, Bolton's disciple and successor as national security adviser; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook; Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; David Wurmser, a former adviser to Bolton; and Senators Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton. Perhaps no one better exemplifies the neocon ethos better than Cotton, a Kristol protégé who soaked up the teachings of the political philosopher Leo Strauss while studying at Harvard. Others who have been baying for conflict with Iran include Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who is now Trump's personal lawyer and partner in Ukrainian crime. In June 2018, Giuliani went to Paris to address the National Council of Resistance of Iran, whose parent organization is the Iranian opposition group Mujahedin-e-Khalq, or MeK. Giuliani, who has been on the payroll of the MeK for years, demanded -- what else? -- regime change. ..."
"... The fresh charge into battle of what Sidney Blumenthal once aptly referred to as an ideological light brigade brings to mind Hobbes's observation in Leviathan : "All men that are ambitious of military command are inclined to continue the causes of war; and to stir up trouble and sedition; for there is no honor military but by war; nor any such hope to mend an ill game, as by causing a new shuffle." The neocons, it appears, have caused a new shuffle. ..."
"... the killing of Soleimani revealed that the neocon military-intellectual complex is very much still intact, with the ability to spring back to life from a state of suspended animation in an instant. Its hawkish tendencies remain widely prevalent not only in the Republican Party but also in the media, the think-tank universe, and in the liberal-hawk precincts of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, the influence and reach of the anti-war right remains nascent; even if this contingent has popular support, it doesn't enjoy much backing in Washington beyond the mood swings of the mercurial occupant of the Oval Office. ..."
"... The neocons supplied the patina of intellectual legitimacy for policies that might once have seemed outré. ..."
"... But it was the neoconservatives, not the paleocons, who amassed influence in the 1990s and took over the GOP's foreign policy wing. Veteran neocons like Michael Ledeen were joined by a younger generation of journalists and policymakers that included Robert Kagan, Bill Kristol (who founded The Weekly Standard in 1994), Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas J. Feith. The neocons consistently pushed for a hard line against Iraq and Iran. In his 1996 book, Freedom Betrayed, for example, Ledeen, an expert on Italian fascism, declared that the right, rather than the left, should adhere to the revolutionary tradition of toppling dictatorships. In his 2002 book, The War Against the Terror Masters, Ledeen stated , "Creative destruction is our middle name. We tear down the old order every day." ..."
"... Still, a number of neocons, including David Frum, Max Boot, Anne Applebaum, Jennifer Rubin, and Kristol himself, have continued to condemn Trump vociferously for his thuggish instincts at home and abroad. They are not seeking high-profile government careers in the Trump administration and so have been able to reinvent themselves as domestic regime-change advocates, something they have done quite skillfully. In fact, their writings are more pungent now that they have been liberated from the costive confines of the movement. ..."
"... And so, urged on by Mike Pompeo, a staunch evangelical Christian, and Iraq War–era figures like David Wurmser , Trump is apparently prepared to target Iran for destruction. In a tweet, he dismissed his national security adviser, the Bolton protégé Robert O'Brien, for declaring that the strike against Soleimani would force Iran to negotiate: "Actually, I couldn't care less if they negotiate," he said . "Will be totally up to them but, no nuclear weapons and 'don't kill your protesters.'" Neocons have been quick to recognize the new, more belligerent Trump -- and the potential maneuvering room he's now created for their movement. Jonathan S. Tobin, a former editor at Commentary and a contributor to National Review , rejoiced in Haaretz that "the neo-isolationist wing of the GOP, for which Carlson is a spokesperson, is losing the struggle for control of Trump's foreign policy." Tobin, however, added an important caveat: "When it comes to Iran, Trump needs no prodding from the likes of Bolton to act like a neoconservative. Just as important, the entire notion of anyone -- be it Carlson, former White House senior advisor Steve Bannon, or any cabinet official like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo -- being able to control Trump is a myth." ..."
"... One reason is institutional. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Hudson Institute, and AEI have all been sounding the tocsin about Iran for decades. Once upon a time, the neocons were outliers. Now they're the new establishment, exerting a kind of gravitational pull on debate, pulling politicians and a variety of news organizations into their orbit. The Hudson Institute, for example, recently held an event with former Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, who exhorted Iran's Revolutionary Guard to "peel away" from the mullahs and endorsed the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign. ..."
"... Meanwhile, Wolfowitz, also writing in the Times , has popped up to warn Trump against trying to leave Syria: "To paraphrase Trotsky's aphorism about war, you may not be interested in the Middle East, but the Middle East is interested in you." With the "both-sides" ethos that prevails in the mainstream media, neocon ideas are just as good as any others for National Public Radio or The Washington Post, whose editorial page, incidentally, championed the Iraq War and has been imbued with a neocon, or at least liberal-hawk, tinge ever since Fred Hiatt took it over in 2000. ..."
"... Above all, Trump hired Michael Flynn as his first national security adviser. Flynn was the co-author with Ledeen of a creepy tract called Field of Fight, in which they demanded a crusade against the Muslim world ..."
"... At a minimum, the traditional Republican hard-line foreign policy approach has now fused with neoconservatism so that the two are virtually indistinguishable. At a maximum, neoconservatism shapes the dominant foreign policy worldview in Washington, which is why Democrats were falling over themselves to assure voters that Soleimani -- a "bad guy" -- had it coming. Any objections that his killing might boomerang back on the U.S. are met with cries from the right that Democrats are siding with the enemy. This truly is a policy of "maximum pressure" at home and abroad. ..."
There was a time not so long ago, before President Donald Trump's surprise decision early this year to liquidate the Iranian commander
Qassem Soleimani, when it appeared that America's neoconservatives were floundering. The president was itching to withdraw U.S. forces
from Afghanistan. He was staging exuberant photo-ops with a beaming Kim Jong Un. He was reportedly willing to hold talks with the
president of Iran, while clearly preferring trade wars to hot ones.
Indeed, this past summer, Trump's anti-interventionist supporters in the conservative media were riding high. When he refrained
from attacking Iran in June after it shot down an American drone, Fox News host Tucker Carlson
declared , "Donald Trump was elected president precisely to keep us out of disaster like war with Iran." Carlson went on to condemn
the hawks in Trump's Cabinet and their allies, who he claimed were egging the president on -- familiar names to anyone who has followed
the decades-long neoconservative project of aggressively using military force to topple unfriendly regimes and project American power
over the globe. "So how did we get so close to starting [a war]?"
he asked. "One of [the hawks'] key allies is the national security adviser of the United States. John Bolton is an old friend
of Bill Kristol's. Together they helped plan the Iraq War."
By the time Trump met with Kim in late June, becoming the first sitting president to set foot on North Korean soil, Bolton was
on the outs. Carlson was on the president's North Korean junket, while Trump's national security adviser was in Mongolia. "John Bolton
is absolutely a hawk,"
Trump
told NBC in June. "If it was up to him, he'd take on the whole world at one time, OK?" In September, Bolton was fired.
The standard-bearer of the Republican Party had made clear his distaste for the neocons' belligerent approach to global affairs,
much to the neocons' own entitled chagrin. As recently as December, Bolton, now outside the tent pissing in, was hammering Trump
for "bluffing" through an announcement that the administration wanted North Korea to dismantle its nuclear weapons program. "The
idea that we are somehow exerting maximum pressure on North Korea is just unfortunately not true,"
Bolton told Axios . Then Trump ordered the drone
strike on Soleimani, drastically escalating a simmering conflict between Iran and the United States. All of a sudden the roles were
reversed, with Bolton praising the president and asserting that Soleimani's death was "
the first step to regime change in Tehran ." A chorus of neocons rushed to second his praise: Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former
CIA officer and prominent Never Trumper, lauded Trump's intestinal fortitude, while Representative Liz Cheney hailed Trump's
"decisive action." It was Carlson
who was left sputtering about the forever wars. "Washington has wanted war with Iran for decades,"
Carlson said . "They
still want it now. Let's hope they haven't finally gotten it."
Neoconservatism as a foreign policy ideology has been badly discredited over the last two decades, thanks to the debacles
in Iraq and Afghanistan. But in the blinding flash of one drone strike, neoconservatism was easily able to reinsert itself in the
national conversation. It now appears that Trump intends to make Soleimani's killing -- which has nearly drawn the U.S. into yet
another conflict in the Middle East and, in typical neoconservative fashion, ended up backfiring and undercutting American goals
in the region -- a central part of his
2020 reelection bid
.
The anti-interventionist right is freaking out. Writing in American Greatness, Matthew Boose
declared , "[T]he Trump movement, which was generated out of opposition to the foreign policy blob and its endless wars, was
revealed this week to have been co-opted to a great extent by neoconservatives seeking regime change." James Antle, the editor of
The American Conservative, a publication founded in 2002 to oppose the Iraq War,
asked , "Did
Trump betray the anti-war right?"
In the blinding flash of one drone strike, neoconservatism was easily able to reinsert itself in the national conversation.
Their concerns are not unmerited. The neocons are starting to realize that Trump's presidency, at least when it comes to foreign
policy, is no less vulnerable to hijacking than those of previous Republican presidents, including the administrations of Ronald
Reagan and George W. Bush. The leading hawks inside and outside the administration shaping its approach to Iran include Robert O'Brien,
Bolton's disciple and successor as national security adviser; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Special Representative for Iran Brian
Hook; Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; David Wurmser, a former adviser to Bolton; and Senators
Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton. Perhaps no one better exemplifies the neocon ethos better than Cotton, a Kristol protégé who soaked
up the teachings of the political philosopher Leo Strauss while studying at Harvard. Others who have been baying for conflict with
Iran include Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who is now Trump's personal lawyer and partner in Ukrainian crime. In
June 2018, Giuliani went to Paris to address the National Council of Resistance of Iran, whose parent organization is the Iranian
opposition group Mujahedin-e-Khalq, or MeK. Giuliani, who has been on the payroll of the MeK for years, demanded -- what else? --
regime change.
The fresh charge into battle of what Sidney Blumenthal once aptly referred to as an ideological light brigade brings to mind
Hobbes's observation in Leviathan : "All men that are ambitious of military command are inclined to continue the causes of
war; and to stir up trouble and sedition; for there is no honor military but by war; nor any such hope to mend an ill game, as by
causing a new shuffle." The neocons, it appears, have caused a new shuffle.
Donald Trump has not dragged us into war with Iran (yet). But the killing of Soleimani revealed that the neocon military-intellectual
complex is very much still intact, with the ability to spring back to life from a state of suspended animation in an instant. Its
hawkish tendencies remain widely prevalent not only in the Republican Party but also in the media, the think-tank universe, and in
the liberal-hawk precincts of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, the influence and reach of the anti-war right remains nascent; even
if this contingent has popular support, it doesn't enjoy much backing in Washington beyond the mood swings of the mercurial occupant
of the Oval Office.
But there was a time when the neoconservative coalition was not so entrenched -- and what has turned out to be its provisional
state of exile lends some critical insight into how it managed to hang around respectable policymaking circles in recent years, and
how it may continue to shape American foreign policy for the foreseeable future. When the neoconservatives came on the scene in the
late 1960s, the Republican old guard viewed them as interlopers. The neocons, former Trotskyists turned liberals who broke with the
Democratic Party over its perceived weakness on the Cold War, stormed the citadel of Republican ideology by emphasizing the relationship
between ideas and political reality. Irving Kristol, one of the original neoconservatives,
mused in 1985 that " what communists call the theoretical organs always end up through a filtering process influencing a lot
of people who don't even know they're being influenced. In the end, ideas rule the world because even interests are defined by ideas."
At pivotal moments in modern American foreign policy, the neocons supplied the patina of intellectual legitimacy for policies
that might once have seemed outré. Jeane Kirkpatrick's seminal 1979 essay in Commentary, "Dictatorships and Double Standards,"
essentially set forth the lineaments of the Reagan doctrine. She assailed Jimmy Carter for attacking friendly authoritarian leaders
such as the shah of Iran and Nicaragua's Anastasio Somoza. She contended that authoritarian regimes might molt into democracies,
while totalitarian regimes would remain impregnable to outside influence, American or otherwise. Ronald Reagan read the essay and
liked it. He named Kirkpatrick his ambassador to the United Nations, where she became the most influential neocon of the era for
her denunciations of Arab regimes and defenses of Israel. Her tenure was also defined by the notion that it was perfectly acceptable
for America to cozy up to noxious regimes, from apartheid South Africa to the shah's Iran, as part of the greater mission to oppose
the red menace.
The neocons supplied the patina of intellectual legitimacy for policies that might once have seemed outré.
There was always tension between Reagan's affinity for authoritarian regimes and his hard-line opposition to Communist ones. His
sunny persona never quite gelled with Kirkpatrick's more gelid view that communism was an immutable force, and in 1982, in a major
speech to the British Parliament at Westminster emphasizing the power of democracy and free speech, he declared his intent to end
the Cold War on American terms. As Reagan's second term progressed and democracy and free speech actually took hold in the waning
days of the Soviet Union, many hawks declared that it was all a sham. Indeed, not a few neocons were livid, claiming that Reagan
was appeasing the Soviet Union. But after the USSR collapsed, they retroactively blessed him as the anti-Communist warrior par excellence
and the model for the future. The right was now a font of happy talk about the dawn of a new age of liberty based on free-market
economics and American firepower.
The fall of communism, in other words, set the stage for a new neoconservative paradigm. Francis Fukuyama's The End of History
appeared a decade after Kirkpatrick's essay in Commentary and just before the Berlin Wall was breached on November 9,
1989. Here was a sharp break with the saturnine, realpolitik approach that Kirkpatrick had championed. Irving Kristol regarded it
as hopelessly utopian -- "I don't believe a word of it," he wrote in a response to Fukuyama. But a younger generation of neocons,
led by Irving's son, Bill Kristol, and Robert Kagan, embraced it. Fukuyama argued that Western, liberal democracy, far from being
menaced, was now the destination point of the train of world history. With communism vanquished, the neocons, bearing the good word
from Fukuyama, formulated a new goal: democracy promotion, by force if necessary, as a way to hasten history and secure the global
order with the U.S. at its head. The first Gulf War in 1991, precipitated by Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, tested the neocons'
resolve and led to a break in the GOP -- one that would presage the rise of Donald Trump. For decades, Patrick Buchanan had been
regularly inveighing against what he came to call the neocon "
amen corner" in and around the
Washington centers of power, including A.M. Rosenthal and Charles Krauthammer, both of whom endorsed the '91 Gulf War. The neocons
were frustrated by the measured approach taken by George H.W. Bush. He refused to crow about the fall of the Berlin Wall and kicked
the Iraqis out of Kuwait but declined to invade Iraq and "finish the job," as his hawkish critics would later put it. Buchanan then
ran for the presidency in 1992 on an America First platform, reviving a paleoconservative tradition that would partly inform Trump's
dark horse run in 2016.
But it was the neoconservatives, not the paleocons, who amassed influence in the 1990s and took over the GOP's foreign policy
wing. Veteran neocons like Michael Ledeen were joined by a younger generation of journalists and policymakers that included Robert
Kagan, Bill Kristol (who founded The Weekly Standard in 1994), Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas J. Feith. The neocons consistently
pushed for a hard line against Iraq and Iran. In his 1996 book, Freedom Betrayed, for example, Ledeen, an expert on Italian
fascism, declared that the right, rather than the left, should adhere to the revolutionary tradition of toppling dictatorships. In
his 2002 book, The War Against the Terror Masters, Ledeen
stated , "Creative destruction
is our middle name. We tear down the old order every day."
We all know the painful consequences of the neocons' obsession with creative destruction. In his second inaugural address, three
and a half years after 9/11, George W. Bush cemented
neoconservative ideology into presidential doctrine: "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of
democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." The neocons'
hubris had already turned into nemesis in Iraq, paving the way for an anti-war candidate in Barack Obama.
But it was Trump -- by virtue of running as a Republican -- who appeared to sound neoconservatism's death knell. He announced
his Buchananesque policy of "America First" in a speech at Washington's Mayflower Hotel in 2016, signaling that he would not adhere
to the long-standing Reaganite principles that had animated the party establishment.
The pooh-bahs of the GOP openly declared their disdain and revulsion for Trump, leading directly to the rise of the Never Trump
movement, which was dominated by neocons. The Never Trumpers ended up functioning as an informal blacklist for Trump once he became
president. Elliott Abrams, for example, who was being touted for deputy secretary of state in February 2017, was rejected when Steve
Bannon alerted Trump to his earlier heresies (though he later reemerged, in January 2019, as Trump's special envoy to Venezuela,
where he has pushed for regime change). Not a few other members of the Republican foreign policy establishment suffered similar fates.
Kristol's The Weekly Standard, which had held the neoconservative line through the Bush years and beyond , folded
in 2018. Even the office building that used to house the American Enterprise Institute and the Standard, on the corner of
17th and M streets in Washington, has been torn down, leaving an empty, boarded-up site whose symbolism speaks for itself.
Still, a number of neocons, including David Frum, Max Boot, Anne Applebaum, Jennifer Rubin, and Kristol himself, have continued
to condemn Trump vociferously for his thuggish instincts at home and abroad. They are not seeking high-profile government careers
in the Trump administration and so have been able to reinvent themselves as domestic regime-change advocates, something they have
done quite skillfully. In fact, their writings are more pungent now that they have been liberated from the costive confines of the
movement.
It was Trump -- by virtue of running as a Republican -- who appeared to sound neoconservatism's death knell.
But other neocons -- the ones who want to wield positions of influence and might -- have, more often than not, been able to hold
their noses. Stephen Wertheim, writing in The New York Review of Books, has perceptively dubbed this faction the anti-globalist
neocons. Led by John Bolton, they believe Trump performed a godsend by elevating the term globalism "from a marginal slur
to the central foil of American foreign policy and Republican politics,"
Wertheim argued . The U.S. need not
bother with pesky multilateral institutions or international agreements or the entire postwar order, for that matter -- it's now
America's way or the highway.
And so, urged on by Mike Pompeo, a staunch evangelical Christian,
and Iraq War–era figures like
David Wurmser , Trump is apparently prepared to target Iran for destruction. In a tweet, he dismissed his national security adviser,
the Bolton protégé Robert O'Brien, for declaring that the strike against Soleimani would force Iran to negotiate: "Actually, I couldn't
care less if they negotiate,"
he said . "Will be totally up to them but, no nuclear weapons and 'don't kill your protesters.'" Neocons have been quick to recognize
the new, more belligerent Trump -- and the potential maneuvering room he's now created for their movement. Jonathan S. Tobin, a former
editor at Commentary and a contributor to National Review ,
rejoiced in Haaretz that "the neo-isolationist wing of the GOP, for which Carlson is a spokesperson, is losing the struggle
for control of Trump's foreign policy." Tobin, however, added an important caveat: "When it comes to Iran, Trump needs no prodding
from the likes of Bolton to act like a neoconservative. Just as important, the entire notion of anyone -- be it Carlson, former White
House senior advisor Steve Bannon, or any cabinet official like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo -- being able to control Trump is
a myth."
In other words, whether the neocons themselves are occupying top positions in the Trump administration is almost irrelevant. The
ideology itself has reemerged to a degree that even Trump himself seems hard pressed to resist it -- if he even wants to.
How were the neocons able to influence another Republican presidency, one that was ostensibly dedicated to curbing their sway?
One reason is institutional. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Hudson Institute, and AEI have all been sounding the
tocsin about Iran for decades. Once upon a time, the neocons were outliers. Now they're the new establishment, exerting a kind of
gravitational pull on debate, pulling politicians and a variety of news organizations into their orbit. The Hudson Institute, for
example, recently held an event with former Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, who exhorted Iran's Revolutionary Guard to "peel away"
from the mullahs and endorsed the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign. The event was hosted by Michael Doran, a
former senior director on George W. Bush's National Security Council and a senior fellow at the institute, who
wrote in
The New York Times on January 3, "The United States has no choice, if it seeks to stay in the Middle East, but to check
Iran's military power on the ground." Then there's Jamie M. Fly, a former staffer to Senator Marco Rubio who was appointed this past
August to head Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty; he previously co-authored an essay in Foreign Affairs contending that it isn't enough to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities: "If the United States seriously considers military action,
it would be better to plan an operation that not only strikes the nuclear program but aims to destabilize the regime, potentially
resolving the Iranian nuclear crisis once and for all."
Meanwhile, Wolfowitz, also writing in the Times , has
popped up to warn Trump against
trying to leave Syria: "To paraphrase Trotsky's aphorism about war, you may not be interested in the Middle East, but the Middle
East is interested in you." With the "both-sides" ethos that prevails in the mainstream media, neocon ideas are just as good as any
others for National Public Radio or The Washington Post, whose editorial page, incidentally, championed the Iraq War
and has been imbued with a neocon, or at least liberal-hawk, tinge ever since Fred Hiatt took it over in 2000.
But there are plenty of institutions in Washington, and neoconservatism's seemingly inescapable influence cannot be chalked up
to the swamp alone. Some etiolated form of what might be called Ledeenism lingered on before taking on new life at the outset of
the Trump administration. Trump's overt animus toward Muslims, for example, meant that figures such as Frank Gaffney, who opposed
arms-control treaties with Moscow as a member of the Reagan administration and resigned in protest of the 1987 Intermediate-Range
Nuclear Forces Treaty, achieved a new prominence. During the Obama administration, Gaffney, the head of the Center for Security Policy,
claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated the White House and National Security Agency.
Above all, Trump hired Michael Flynn as his first national security adviser. Flynn was the co-author with Ledeen of a
creepy tract called Field of Fight, in which they demanded a crusade against the Muslim world: "We're in a world
war against a messianic mass movement of evil people." It was one of many signs that Trump was susceptible to ideas of a civilizational
battle against
"Islamo-fascism,"
which Norman Podhoretz and other neocons argued, in the wake of 9/11, would lead to World War III. In their millenarian ardor
and inflexible support for Israel, the neocons find themselves in a position precisely cognate to evangelical Christians -- both
groups of true believers trying to enact their vision through an apostate. But perhaps the neoconservatives' greatest strength lies
in the realm of ideas that Irving Kristol identified more than three decades ago. The neocons remain the winners of that battle,
not because their policies have made the world or the U.S. more secure, but by default -- because there are so few genuinely alternative
ideas that are championed with equal zeal. The foreign policy discussion surrounding Soleimani's killing -- which accelerated Iran's
nuclear weapons program, diminished America's influence in the Middle East, and entrenched Iran's theocratic regime -- has largely
occurred on a spectrum of the neocons' making. It is a discussion that accepts premises of the beneficence of American military might
and hegemony -- Hobbes's "ill game" -- and naturally bends the universe toward more war.
At a minimum, the traditional Republican hard-line foreign policy approach has now fused with neoconservatism so that the
two are virtually indistinguishable. At a maximum, neoconservatism shapes the dominant foreign policy worldview in Washington, which
is why Democrats were falling over themselves to assure voters that Soleimani -- a "bad guy" -- had it coming. Any objections that
his killing might boomerang back on the U.S. are met with cries from the right that Democrats are siding with the enemy. This truly
is a policy of "maximum pressure" at home and abroad.
As Trump takes an extreme hard line against Iran, the neoconservatives may ultimately get their long-held wish of a war with the
ayatollahs. When it ends in a fresh disaster, they can always argue that it only failed because it wasn't prosecuted vigorously enough
-- and the shuffle will begin again.
Jacob Heilbrunn is the editor of The National Interest and the author of They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons.
@ JacobHeilbrunn
"... As Bolivian soldiers were firing tear gas at a funeral for slain protesters recently, the US State Department issued a statement saluting "Bolivia's political transition to democracy" and declaring that the military leaders who had just overthrown the elected government were "standing up for their constitution." It was the latest example of intensifying US support for violently oppressive regimes south of our border. We are paying attention to Latin America again. That's bad news for Latin America. ..."
As Bolivian soldiers were firing tear gas at a funeral for slain protesters recently, the
US State Department issued a statement saluting "Bolivia's political transition to democracy"
and declaring that the military leaders who had just overthrown the elected government were
"standing up for their constitution." It was the latest example of intensifying US support
for violently oppressive regimes south of our border. We are paying attention to Latin
America again. That's bad news for Latin America.
The US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan nearly 20 years ago are sometimes described as
wars in which everyone lost. In an odd way, though, Latin America won those wars. For more
than a decade, the US government focused so obsessively on the Middle East that it forgot
about Latin America. Free of intervention from Washington, voters in several countries
elected progressive or leftist leaders whom the United States would never have tolerated in
an earlier era. That cycle is now ending. The United States is returning to its traditional
role in Latin America, embracing retrograde regimes just as we did during the dark days of
military dictatorship in the 1970s and 1980s.
In Bolivia, the landlocked heart of South America, the military deposed President Evo
Morales on Nov. 10 after opponents charged that he had used fraud to secure his re-election
three weeks earlier. Morales was Bolivia's first indigenous president and an outspoken
socialist. He had nationalized the oil and gas industries. Some feared that he was preparing
to limit foreign exploitation of his country's rich lithium deposits. His indigenous identity
was a permanent affront to the white ruling class. The little-known politician who has
installed herself as provisional president, Jeanine Añez, once tweeted: "I dream of a
Bolivia free of satanic indigenous rituals."
Morales may have -- manipulated election laws to give himself an extra presidential term.
But in its first days, the new regime has shown little democratic impulse. Morales has been
forced to flee the country. Senior members of his party have been attacked or arrested. If
his masses of indigenous followers are pushed back into political isolation despite
constituting the country's majority, many will feel disenfranchised and angry.
Their cousins in Honduras would know the feeling. Late one night in 2009, the elected
Honduran president, Manuel Zelaya, who like Morales had alienated both the United States and
his own ruling elite, was pulled out of bed and put on a plane out of the country while still
in his pajamas. In the decade since then, the new regime in Honduras has eagerly handed out
mining and hydroelectric contracts to foreign corporations. It has abolished term limits for
presidents -- the very sin for which we denounced President Morales in Bolivia. Mass protests
have been harshly suppressed. Environmental activists are killed with impunity.
Last month in a New York court, the brother of Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez
was convicted on charges of large-scale drug trafficking. A witness testified that the drug
lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman had contributed $1 million to Hernandez's presidential
campaign. Yet just a couple of days after the trial ended, the senior American diplomat in
Honduras was photographed partying with President Hernandez. Hondurans who saw those pictures
could hardly miss the message: the United States happily supports a Latin American government
that holds power unconstitutionally, allows political killers to rampage freely, and is
widely reported to be infiltrated by drug traffickers -- as long as it is friendly to the
United States. How has Honduras showed that friendship? By keeping leftists out of power and
agreeing to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
The other Latin American country in which the United States is most assiduously wrecking
prospects for democracy is Guatemala. Like neighboring Honduras, it has long been dominated
by a clique of lavishly corrupt oligarchs. But over the last decade, a force has emerged that
for the first time mounted a serious challenge to drug traffickers, larcenous politicians,
organized-crime kingpins, and death squad leaders. In 2006, the government invited a squad of
investigators and prosecutors assembled by the United Nations to come to Guatemala and build
cases against powerful criminals. Since then the squad, known by the Spanish acronym CICIG,
has secured more than 400 convictions and deeply shaken the political elite. Presidents
George W. Bush and Barack Obama recognized that this process might help stabilize Guatemala,
and provided moral support and funding for CICIG.
This year, at the request of senior Guatemalan officials who seemed likely to be indicted
for corruption, the State Department agreed to stop backing CICIG. That crippled the first
serious effort in generations to confront the violent corruption that throttles civic life in
Guatemala. What did President Trump ask in return? That Guatemala open an embassy in
Jerusalem and agree to serve as a "safe haven" for Honduran and Salvadoran immigrants the
United States doesn't want to accept -- a sick joke considering that Guatemala is plagued by
violence and has one of the world's highest murder rates.
Bashing leftists in Latin America and embracing their quasi-fascist enemies is one of
Washington's oldest habits. It feels good and pays electoral dividends in Florida. Bolivians,
Hondurans, and Guatemalans might be forgiven for wishing that United States would once again
plunge into all-consuming war somewhere far away. That might allow them to try shaping their
societies as they see fit.
In addition to L.A., others in California submitting briefs include Sacramento, San Diego,
Fresno, Riverside and Orange counties, as well as a slew of cities, including Sacramento,
Fullerton, Torrance and Newport Beach. Several states including Idaho, Texas and Alaska have
as well. Their reasons for doing so vary.
"We're saying that we agree with the central tenet of Boise that no one should be
susceptible to punishment for sleeping on a sidewalk at night if there's no alternative
shelter at that point," said Los Angeles City Atty. Mike Feuer. "But the rationale sweeps too
broadly ... It makes the opinion unclear and, therefore, the opinion raises more issues than
are resolved. And so it leaves jurisdictions like us without the certainty that we need."
---
The ninth curt ruling specified that without enough shelters, public camping cannot be
banned.
LA is spewing horse manure, claiming they want a humane solution, but they are filing to
have the ruling overturned. LA wants to ban homeless camping and they make up a bunch of
irrational horse manure because they had already invited the homeless to California with
promises of shelter that does not exits. They re caught in a contradiction and end up talking
out of the side of their mouth.
And no, more national debt to promise apartments for everyone just make inequality worse
because we end up doing bad deals with the primary dealers. The evidence is in on that. Our
ten year experiment of the '50 little hoovers' crowd has been proven fraudulent.
"... Citing a "political and humanitarian crisis" committed by Caracas, the White House Office of the Press Secretary issued a "suspension of entry as immigrants and nonimmigrants of persons who threaten Venezuela's democratic institutions." ..."
"... The move comes as the latest effort from the Trump administration to oust Venezuela's president. ' ..."
'US President Donald Trump has moved to suspend Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's
senior officials, relatives, and others who receive financial benefits from entering into
the US in Wednesday press release from the White House.
Citing a "political and humanitarian crisis" committed by Caracas, the White House
Office of the Press Secretary issued a "suspension of entry as immigrants and nonimmigrants
of persons who threaten Venezuela's democratic institutions."
The move comes as the latest effort from the Trump administration to oust Venezuela's
president. '
"... One of the reasons that I doubt Biden's version of the story stems from my experience in Venezuela. After Chavez took power, Venezuelans told me that he had found that a critical subsidiary of the Venezuelan oil company PDVSA was basically a CIA shop. The names of CIA on the Board of Directors were not just ordinary CIA, but were recognizable figures at the very top. ..."
"... To me this is entirely plausible. Control of oil is critical to US global hegemony. And what better way to control foreign oil than to have trusted American asset sit on the BOD? ..."
One of the reasons that I doubt Biden's version of the story stems from my experience in
Venezuela. After Chavez took power, Venezuelans told me that he had found that a critical
subsidiary of the Venezuelan oil company PDVSA was basically a CIA shop. The names of CIA on
the Board of Directors were not just ordinary CIA, but were recognizable figures at the very
top.
To me this is entirely plausible. Control of oil is critical to US global hegemony. And
what better way to control foreign oil than to have trusted American asset sit on the BOD?
This brings us to Hunter Biden's appointment to Ukrainian energy giant Burisma. After the
coup in 2014, why wouldn't Biden want a trusted asset on the board of the biggest natural gas
producer in Ukraine? IOW it was unpublicized standard operating procedure.
This is a Marxist critique of neoliberalism. Not necessary right but they his some relevant
points.
Notable quotes:
"... The ideology of neoliberal capitalism was the promise of growth. But with neoliberal capitalism reaching a dead end, this promise disappears and so does this ideological prop. ..."
"... The ex ante tendency toward overproduction arises because the vector of real wages across countries does not increase noticeably over time in the world economy, while the vector of labor productivities does, typically resulting in a rise in the share of surplus in world output. ..."
"... While the rise in the vector of labor productivities across countries, a ubiquitous phenomenon under capitalism that also characterizes neoliberal capitalism, scarcely requires an explanation, why does the vector of real wages remain virtually stagnant in the world economy? The answer lies in the sui generis character of contemporary globalization that, for the first time in the history of capitalism, has led to a relocation of activity from the metropolis to third world countries in order to take advantage of the lower wages prevailing in the latter and meet global demand. ..."
"... The current globalization broke with this. The movement of capital from the metropolis to the third world, especially to East, South, and Southeast Asia to relocate plants there and take advantage of their lower wages for meeting global demand, has led to a desegmentation of the world economy, subjecting metropolitan wages to the restraining effect exercised by the third world's labor reserves. Not surprisingly, as Joseph Stiglitz has pointed out, the real-wage rate of an average male U.S. worker in 2011 was no higher -- indeed, it was marginally lower -- than it had been in 1968. 5 ..."
"... This ever-present opposition becomes decisive within a regime of globalization. As long as finance capital remains national -- that is, nation-based -- and the state is a nation-state, the latter can override this opposition under certain circumstances, such as in the post-Second World War period when capitalism was facing an existential crisis. But when finance capital is globalized, meaning, when it is free to move across country borders while the state remains a nation-state, its opposition to fiscal deficits becomes decisive. If the state does run large fiscal deficits against its wishes, then it would simply leave that country en masse , causing a financial crisis. ..."
"... The state therefore capitulates to the demands of globalized finance capital and eschews direct fiscal intervention for increasing demand. It resorts to monetary policy instead since that operates through wealth holders' decisions, and hence does not undermine their social position. But, precisely for this reason, monetary policy is an ineffective instrument, as was evident in the United States in the aftermath of the 2007–09 crisis when even the pushing of interest rates down to zero scarcely revived activity. 6 ..."
"... If Trump's protectionism, which recalls the Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1931 and amounts to a beggar-my-neighbor policy, does lead to a significant export of unemployment from the United States, then it will invite retaliation and trigger a trade war that will only worsen the crisis for the world economy as a whole by dampening global investment. Indeed, since the United States has been targeting China in particular, some retaliatory measures have already appeared. But if U.S. protectionism does not invite generalized retaliation, it would only be because the export of unemployment from the United States is insubstantial, keeping unemployment everywhere, including in the United States, as precarious as it is now. However we look at it, the world would henceforth face higher levels of unemployment. ..."
"... The second implication of this dead end is that the era of export-led growth is by and large over for third world economies. The slowing down of world economic growth, together with protectionism in the United States against successful third world exporters, which could even spread to other metropolitan economies, suggests that the strategy of relying on the world market to generate domestic growth has run out of steam. Third world economies, including the ones that have been very successful at exporting, would now have to rely much more on their home market ..."
"... In other words, we shall now have an intensification of the imperialist stranglehold over third world economies, especially those pushed into unsustainable balance-of-payments deficits in the new situation. By imperialism , here we do not mean the imperialism of this or that major power, but the imperialism of international finance capital, with which even domestic big bourgeoisies are integrated, directed against their own working people ..."
"... In short, the ideology of neoliberal capitalism was the promise of growth. But with neoliberal capitalism reaching a dead end, this promise disappears and so does this ideological prop. To sustain itself, neoliberal capitalism starts looking for some other ideological prop and finds fascism. ..."
"... The first is the so-called spontaneous method of capital flight. Any political formation that seeks to take the country out of the neoliberal regime will witness capital flight even before it has been elected to office, bringing the country to a financial crisis and thereby denting its electoral prospects. And if perchance it still gets elected, the outflow will only increase, even before it assumes office. The inevitable difficulties faced by the people may well make the government back down at that stage. The sheer difficulty of transition away from a neoliberal regime could be enough to bring even a government based on the support of workers and peasants to its knees, precisely to save them short-term distress or to avoid losing their support. ..."
"... The third weapon consists in carrying out so-called democratic or parliamentary coups of the sort that Latin America has been experiencing. Coups in the old days were effected through the local armed forces and necessarily meant the imposition of military dictatorships in lieu of civilian, democratically elected governments. Now, taking advantage of the disaffection generated within countries by the hardships caused by capital flight and imposed sanctions, imperialism promotes coups through fascist or fascist-sympathizing middle-class political elements in the name of restoring democracy, which is synonymous with the pursuit of neoliberalism. ..."
"... And if all these measures fail, there is always the possibility of resorting to economic warfare (such as destroying Venezuela's electricity supply), and eventually to military warfare. Venezuela today provides a classic example of what imperialist intervention in a third world country is going to look like in the era of decline of neoliberal capitalism, when revolts are going to characterize such countries more and more. ..."
"... Despite this opposition, neoliberal capitalism cannot ward off the challenge it is facing for long. It has no vision for reinventing itself. Interestingly, in the period after the First World War, when capitalism was on the verge of sinking into a crisis, the idea of state intervention as a way of its revival had already been mooted, though its coming into vogue only occurred at the end of the Second World War. 11 Today, neoliberal capitalism does not even have an idea of how it can recover and revitalize itself. And weapons like domestic fascism in the third world and direct imperialist intervention cannot for long save it from the anger of the masses that is building up against it. ..."
The ideology of neoliberal capitalism was the promise of growth.
But with neoliberal capitalism reaching a dead end, this promise disappears and so does this
ideological prop.
Harry Magdoff's The Age of
Imperialism is a classic work that shows how postwar political decolonization does not
negate the phenomenon of imperialism. The book has two distinct aspects. On the one hand, it
follows in V. I. Lenin's footsteps in providing a comprehensive account of how capitalism at
the time operated globally. On the other hand, it raises a question that is less frequently
discussed in Marxist literature -- namely, the need for imperialism. Here, Magdoff not only
highlighted the crucial importance, among other things, of the third world's raw materials for
metropolitan capital, but also refuted the argument that the declining share of raw-material
value in gross manufacturing output somehow reduced this importance, making the simple point
that there can be no manufacturing at all without raw materials. 1
Magdoff's focus was on a period when imperialism was severely resisting economic
decolonization in the third world, with newly independent third world countries taking control
over their own resources. He highlighted the entire armory of weapons used by imperialism. But
he was writing in a period that predated the onset of neoliberalism. Today, we not only have
decades of neoliberalism behind us, but the neoliberal regime itself has reached a dead end.
Contemporary imperialism has to be discussed within this setting.
Globalization and
Economic Crisis
There are two reasons why the regime of neoliberal globalization has run into a dead end.
The first is an ex ante tendency toward global overproduction; the second is that the
only possible counter to this tendency within the regime is the formation of asset-price
bubbles, which cannot be conjured up at will and whose collapse, if they do appear, plunges the
economy back into crisis. In short, to use the words of British economic historian Samuel
Berrick Saul, there are no "markets on tap" for contemporary metropolitan capitalism, such as
had been provided by colonialism prior to the First World War and by state expenditure in the
post-Second World War period of dirigisme . 2
The ex ante tendency toward overproduction arises because the vector of real wages
across countries does not increase noticeably over time in the world economy, while the vector
of labor productivities does, typically resulting in a rise in the share of surplus in world
output. As Paul Baran and Paul Sweezy argued in Monopoly Capital , following the lead of
Michał Kalecki and Josef Steindl, such a rise in the share of economic surplus, or a shift
from wages to surplus, has the effect of reducing aggregate demand since the ratio of
consumption to income is higher on average for wage earners than for those living off the
surplus. 3
Therefore, assuming a given level of investment associated with any period, such a shift would
tend to reduce consumption demand and hence aggregate demand, output, and capacity utilization.
In turn, reduced capacity utilization would lower investment over time, further aggravating the
demand-reducing effect arising from the consumption side.
While the rise in the vector of labor productivities across countries, a ubiquitous
phenomenon under capitalism that also characterizes neoliberal capitalism, scarcely requires an
explanation, why does the vector of real wages remain virtually stagnant in the world economy?
The answer lies in the sui generis character of contemporary globalization that, for the
first time in the history of capitalism, has led to a relocation of activity from the
metropolis to third world countries in order to take advantage of the lower wages prevailing in
the latter and meet global demand.
Historically, while labor has not been, and is still not, free to migrate from the third
world to the metropolis, capital, though juridically free to move from the latter to the
former, did not actually do so , except to sectors like mines and plantations, which
only strengthened, rather than broke, the colonial pattern of the international division of
labor. 4
This segmentation of the world economy meant that wages in the metropolis increased with labor
productivity, unrestrained by the vast labor reserves of the third world, which themselves had
been caused by the displacement of manufactures through the twin processes of
deindustrialization (competition from metropolitan goods) and the drain of surplus (the
siphoning off of a large part of the economic surplus, through taxes on peasants that are no
longer spent on local artisan products but finance gratis primary commodity exports to
the metropolis instead).
The current globalization broke with this. The movement of capital from the metropolis to
the third world, especially to East, South, and Southeast Asia to relocate plants there and
take advantage of their lower wages for meeting global demand, has led to a desegmentation of
the world economy, subjecting metropolitan wages to the restraining effect exercised by the
third world's labor reserves. Not surprisingly, as Joseph Stiglitz has pointed out, the
real-wage rate of an average male U.S. worker in 2011 was no higher -- indeed, it was
marginally lower -- than it had been in 1968. 5
At the same time, such relocation of activities, despite causing impressive growth rates of
gross domestic product (GDP) in many third world countries, does not lead to the exhaustion of
the third world's labor reserves. This is because of another feature of contemporary
globalization: the unleashing of a process of primitive accumulation of capital against petty
producers, including peasant agriculturists in the third world, who had earlier been protected,
to an extent, from the encroachment of big capital (both domestic and foreign) by the
postcolonial dirigiste regimes in these countries. Under neoliberalism, such protection
is withdrawn, causing an income squeeze on these producers and often their outright
dispossession from their land, which is then used by big capital for its various so-called
development projects. The increase in employment, even in countries with impressive GDP growth
rates in the third world, falls way short of the natural growth of the workforce, let alone
absorbing the additional job seekers coming from the ranks of displaced petty producers. The
labor reserves therefore never get used up. Indeed, on the contrary, they are augmented
further, because real wages continue to remain tied to a subsistence level, even as
metropolitan wages too are restrained. The vector of real wages in the world economy as a whole
therefore remains restrained.
Although contemporary globalization thus gives rise to an ex ante tendency toward
overproduction, state expenditure that could provide a counter to this (and had provided a
counter through military spending in the United States, according to Baran and Sweezy) can no
longer do so under the current regime. Finance is usually opposed to direct state intervention
through larger spending as a way of increasing employment. This opposition expresses itself
through an opposition not just to larger taxes on capitalists, but also to a larger fiscal
deficit for financing such spending. Obviously, if larger state spending is financed by taxes
on workers, then it hardly adds to aggregate demand, for workers spend the bulk of their
incomes anyway, so the state taking this income and spending it instead does not add any extra
demand. Hence, larger state spending can increase employment only if it is financed either
through a fiscal deficit or through taxes on capitalists who keep a part of their income
unspent or saved. But these are precisely the two modes of financing state expenditure that
finance capital opposes.
Its opposing larger taxes on capitalists is understandable, but why is it so opposed to a
larger fiscal deficit? Even within a capitalist economy, there are no sound economic
theoretical reasons that should preclude a fiscal deficit under all circumstances. The root of
the opposition therefore lies in deeper social considerations: if the capitalist economic
system becomes dependent on the state to promote employment directly , then this fact
undermines the social legitimacy of capitalism. The need for the state to boost the animal
spirits of the capitalists disappears and a perspective on the system that is epistemically
exterior to it is provided to the people, making it possible for them to ask: If the state can
do the job of providing employment, then why do we need the capitalists at all? It is an
instinctive appreciation of this potential danger that underlies the opposition of capital,
especially of finance, to any direct effort by the state to generate employment.
This ever-present opposition becomes decisive within a regime of globalization. As long as
finance capital remains national -- that is, nation-based -- and the state is a nation-state,
the latter can override this opposition under certain circumstances, such as in the post-Second
World War period when capitalism was facing an existential crisis. But when finance capital is
globalized, meaning, when it is free to move across country borders while the state remains a
nation-state, its opposition to fiscal deficits becomes decisive. If the state does run large
fiscal deficits against its wishes, then it would simply leave that country en masse ,
causing a financial crisis.
The state therefore capitulates to the demands of globalized finance capital and eschews
direct fiscal intervention for increasing demand. It resorts to monetary policy instead since
that operates through wealth holders' decisions, and hence does not undermine their
social position. But, precisely for this reason, monetary policy is an ineffective instrument,
as was evident in the United States in the aftermath of the 2007–09 crisis when even the
pushing of interest rates down to zero scarcely revived activity. 6
It may be thought that this compulsion on the part of the state to accede to the demand of
finance to eschew fiscal intervention for enlarging employment should not hold for the United
States. Its currency being considered by the world's wealth holders to be "as good as gold"
should make it immune to capital flight. But there is an additional factor operating in the
case of the United States: that the demand generated by a bigger U.S. fiscal deficit would
substantially leak abroad in a neoliberal setting, which would increase its external debt
(since, unlike Britain in its heyday, it does not have access to any unrequited colonial
transfers) for the sake of generating employment elsewhere. This fact deters any fiscal effort
even in the United States to boost demand within a neoliberal setting. 7
Therefore, it follows that state spending cannot provide a counter to the ex ante
tendency toward global overproduction within a regime of neoliberal globalization, which makes
the world economy precariously dependent on occasional asset-price bubbles, primarily in the
U.S. economy, for obtaining, at best, some temporary relief from the crisis. It is this fact
that underlies the dead end that neoliberal capitalism has reached. Indeed, Donald Trump's
resort to protectionism in the United States to alleviate unemployment is a clear recognition
of the system having reached this cul-de-sac. The fact that the mightiest capitalist
economy in the world has to move away from the rules of the neoliberal game in an attempt to
alleviate its crisis of unemployment/underemployment -- while compensating capitalists
adversely affected by this move through tax cuts, as well as carefully ensuring that no
restraints are imposed on free cross-border financial flows -- shows that these rules
are no longer viable in their pristine form.
Some Implications of This Dead End
There are at least four important implications of this dead end of neoliberalism. The first
is that the world economy will now be afflicted by much higher levels of unemployment than it
was in the last decade of the twentieth century and the early years of the twenty-first, when
the dot-com and the housing bubbles in the United States had, sequentially, a pronounced
impact. It is true that the U.S. unemployment rate today appears to be at a historic low, but
this is misleading: the labor-force participation rate in the United States today is lower than
it was in 2008, which reflects the discouraged-worker effect . Adjusting for this lower
participation, the U.S. unemployment rate is considerable -- around 8 percent. Indeed, Trump
would not be imposing protection in the United States if unemployment was actually as low as 4
percent, which is the official figure. Elsewhere in the world, of course, unemployment
post-2008 continues to be evidently higher than before. Indeed, the severity of the current
problem of below-full-employment production in the U.S. economy is best illustrated by capacity
utilization figures in manufacturing. The weakness of the U.S. recovery from the Great
Recession is indicated by the fact that the current extended recovery represents the first
decade in the entire post-Second World War period in which capacity utilization in
manufacturing has never risen as high as 80 percent in a single quarter, with the resulting
stagnation of investment. 8
If Trump's protectionism, which recalls the Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1931 and amounts to a
beggar-my-neighbor policy, does lead to a significant export of unemployment from the
United States, then it will invite retaliation and trigger a trade war that will only worsen
the crisis for the world economy as a whole by dampening global investment. Indeed, since the
United States has been targeting China in particular, some retaliatory measures have already
appeared. But if U.S. protectionism does not invite generalized retaliation, it would only be
because the export of unemployment from the United States is insubstantial, keeping
unemployment everywhere, including in the United States, as precarious as it is now. However we
look at it, the world would henceforth face higher levels of unemployment.
There has been some discussion on how global value chains would be affected by Trump's
protectionism. But the fact that global macroeconomics in the early twenty-first century will
look altogether different compared to earlier has not been much discussed.
In light of the preceding discussion, one could say that if, instead of individual
nation-states whose writ cannot possibly run against globalized finance capital, there was a
global state or a set of major nation-states acting in unison to override the objections of
globalized finance and provide a coordinated fiscal stimulus to the world economy, then perhaps
there could be recovery. Such a coordinated fiscal stimulus was suggested by a group of German
trade unionists, as well as by John Maynard Keynes during the Great Depression in the 1930s.
9
While it was turned down then, in the present context it has not even been discussed.
The second implication of this dead end is that the era of export-led growth is by and large
over for third world economies. The slowing down of world economic growth, together with
protectionism in the United States against successful third world exporters, which could even
spread to other metropolitan economies, suggests that the strategy of relying on the world
market to generate domestic growth has run out of steam. Third world economies, including the
ones that have been very successful at exporting, would now have to rely much more on their
home market.
Such a transition will not be easy; it will require promoting domestic peasant agriculture,
defending petty production, moving toward cooperative forms of production, and ensuring greater
equality in income distribution, all of which need major structural shifts. For smaller
economies, it would also require their coming together with other economies to provide a
minimum size to the domestic market. In short, the dead end of neoliberalism also means the
need for a shift away from the so-called neoliberal development strategy that has held sway
until now.
The third implication is the imminent engulfing of a whole range of third world economies in
serious balance-of-payments difficulties. This is because, while their exports will be sluggish
in the new situation, this very fact will also discourage financial inflows into their
economies, whose easy availability had enabled them to maintain current account deficits on
their balance of payments earlier. In such a situation, within the existing neoliberal
paradigm, they would be forced to adopt austerity measures that would impose income deflation
on their people, make the conditions of their people significantly worse, lead to a further
handing over of their national assets and resources to international capital, and prevent
precisely any possible transition to an alternative strategy of home market-based growth.
In other words, we shall now have an intensification of the imperialist stranglehold over
third world economies, especially those pushed into unsustainable balance-of-payments deficits
in the new situation. By imperialism , here we do not mean the imperialism of this or
that major power, but the imperialism of international finance capital, with which even
domestic big bourgeoisies are integrated, directed against their own working people.
The fourth implication is the worldwide upsurge of fascism. Neoliberal capitalism even
before it reached a dead end, even in the period when it achieved reasonable growth and
employment rates, had pushed the world into greater hunger and poverty. For instance, the world
per-capita cereal output was 355 kilograms for 1980 (triennium average for 1979–81
divided by mid–triennium population) and fell to 343 in 2000, leveling at 344.9 in 2016
-- and a substantial amount of this last figure went into ethanol production. Clearly, in a
period of growth of the world economy, per-capita cereal absorption should be expanding,
especially since we are talking here not just of direct absorption but of direct and indirect
absorption, the latter through processed foods and feed grains in animal products. The fact
that there was an absolute decline in per-capita output, which no doubt caused a decline in
per-capita absorption, suggests an absolute worsening in the nutritional level of a substantial
segment of the world's population.
But this growing hunger and nutritional poverty did not immediately arouse any significant
resistance, both because such resistance itself becomes more difficult under neoliberalism
(since the very globalization of capital makes it an elusive target) and also because higher
GDP growth rates provided a hope that distress might be overcome in the course of time.
Peasants in distress, for instance, entertained the hope that their children would live better
in the years to come if given a modicum of education and accepted their fate.
In short, the ideology of neoliberal capitalism was the promise of growth. But with
neoliberal capitalism reaching a dead end, this promise disappears and so does this ideological
prop. To sustain itself, neoliberal capitalism starts looking for some other ideological prop
and finds fascism. This changes the discourse away from the material conditions of people's
lives to the so-called threat to the nation, placing the blame for people's distress not on the
failure of the system, but on ethnic, linguistic, and religious minority groups, the
other that is portrayed as an enemy. It projects a so-called messiah whose sheer
muscularity can somehow magically overcome all problems; it promotes a culture of unreason so
that both the vilification of the other and the magical powers of the supposed leader
can be placed beyond any intellectual questioning; it uses a combination of state repression
and street-level vigilantism by fascist thugs to terrorize opponents; and it forges a close
relationship with big business, or, in Kalecki's words, "a partnership of big business and
fascist upstarts." 10
Fascist groups of one kind or another exist in all modern societies. They move center stage
and even into power only on certain occasions when they get the backing of big business. And
these occasions arise when three conditions are satisfied: when there is an economic crisis so
the system cannot simply go on as before; when the usual liberal establishment is manifestly
incapable of resolving the crisis; and when the left is not strong enough to provide an
alternative to the people in order to move out of the conjuncture.
This last point may appear odd at first, since many see the big bourgeoisie's recourse to
fascism as a counter to the growth of the left's strength in the context of a capitalist
crisis. But when the left poses a serious threat, the response of the big bourgeoisie typically
is to attempt to split it by offering concessions. It uses fascism to prop itself up only when
the left is weakened. Walter Benjamin's remark that "behind every fascism there is a failed
revolution" points in this direction.
Fascism Then and Now
Contemporary fascism, however, differs in crucial respects from its 1930s counterpart, which
is why many are reluctant to call the current phenomenon a fascist upsurge. But historical
parallels, if carefully drawn, can be useful. While in some aforementioned respects
contemporary fascism does resemble the phenomenon of the 1930s, there are serious differences
between the two that must also be noted.
First, we must note that while the current fascist upsurge has put fascist elements in power
in many countries, there are no fascist states of the 1930s kind as of yet. Even if the fascist
elements in power try to push the country toward a fascist state, it is not clear that they
will succeed. There are many reasons for this, but an important one is that fascists in power
today cannot overcome the crisis of neoliberalism, since they accept the regime of
globalization of finance. This includes Trump, despite his protectionism. In the 1930s,
however, this was not the case. The horrors associated with the institution of a fascist state
in the 1930s had been camouflaged to an extent by the ability of the fascists in power to
overcome mass unemployment and end the Depression through larger military spending, financed by
government borrowing. Contemporary fascism, by contrast, lacks the ability to overcome the
opposition of international finance capital to fiscal activism on the part of the government to
generate larger demand, output, and employment, even via military spending.
Such activism, as discussed earlier, required larger government spending financed either
through taxes on capitalists or through a fiscal deficit. Finance capital was opposed to both
of these measures and it being globalized made this opposition decisive . The
decisiveness of this opposition remains even if the government happens to be one composed of
fascist elements. Hence, contemporary fascism, straitjacketed by "fiscal rectitude," cannot
possibly alleviate even temporarily the economic crises facing people and cannot provide any
cover for a transition to a fascist state akin to the ones of the 1930s, which makes such a
transition that much more unlikely.
Another difference is also related to the phenomenon of the globalization of finance. The
1930s were marked by what Lenin had earlier called "interimperialist rivalry." The military
expenditures incurred by fascist governments, even though they pulled countries out of the
Depression and unemployment, inevitably led to wars for "repartitioning an already partitioned
world." Fascism was the progenitor of war and burned itself out through war at, needless to
say, great cost to humankind.
Contemporary fascism, however, operates in a world where interimperialist rivalry is far
more muted. Some have seen in this muting a vindication of Karl Kautsky's vision of an
"ultraimperialism" as against Lenin's emphasis on the permanence of interimperialist rivalry,
but this is wrong. Both Kautsky and Lenin were talking about a world where finance capital and
the financial oligarchy were essentially national -- that is, German, French, or British. And
while Kautsky talked about the possibility of truces among the rival oligarchies, Lenin saw
such truces only as transient phenomena punctuating the ubiquity of rivalry.
In contrast, what we have today is not nation-based finance capitals, but
international finance capital into whose corpus the finance capitals drawn from
particular countries are integrated. This globalized finance capital does not want the world
to be partitioned into economic territories of rival powers ; on the contrary, it wants the
entire globe to be open to its own unrestricted movement. The muting of rivalry between major
powers, therefore, is not because they prefer truce to war, or peaceful partitioning of the
world to forcible repartitioning, but because the material conditions themselves have changed
so that it is no longer a matter of such choices. The world has gone beyond both Lenin and
Kautsky, as well as their debates.
Not only are we not going to have wars between major powers in this era of fascist upsurge
(of course, as will be discussed, we shall have other wars), but, by the same token, this
fascist upsurge will not burn out through any cataclysmic war. What we are likely to see is a
lingering fascism of less murderous intensity , which, when in power, does not
necessarily do away with all the forms of bourgeois democracy, does not necessarily physically
annihilate the opposition, and may even allow itself to get voted out of power occasionally.
But since its successor government, as long as it remains within the confines of the neoliberal
strategy, will also be incapable of alleviating the crisis, the fascist elements are likely to
return to power as well. And whether the fascist elements are in or out of power, they will
remain a potent force working toward the fascification of the society and the polity, even
while promoting corporate interests within a regime of globalization of finance, and hence
permanently maintaining the "partnership between big business and fascist upstarts."
Put differently, since the contemporary fascist upsurge is not likely to burn itself out as
the earlier one did, it has to be overcome by transcending the very conjuncture that produced
it: neoliberal capitalism at a dead end. A class mobilization of working people around an
alternative set of transitional demands that do not necessarily directly target neoliberal
capitalism, but which are immanently unrealizable within the regime of neoliberal capitalism,
can provide an initial way out of this conjuncture and lead to its eventual transcendence.
Such a class mobilization in the third world context would not mean making no truces with
liberal bourgeois elements against the fascists. On the contrary, since the liberal bourgeois
elements too are getting marginalized through a discourse of jingoistic nationalism typically
manufactured by the fascists, they too would like to shift the discourse toward the material
conditions of people's lives, no doubt claiming that an improvement in these conditions is
possible within the neoliberal economic regime itself. Such a shift in discourse is in
itself a major antifascist act . Experience will teach that the agenda advanced as part of
this changed discourse is unrealizable under neoliberalism, providing the scope for dialectical
intervention by the left to transcend neoliberal capitalism.
Imperialist
Interventions
Even though fascism will have a lingering presence in this conjuncture of "neoliberalism at
a dead end," with the backing of domestic corporate-financial interests that are themselves
integrated into the corpus of international finance capital, the working people in the third
world will increasingly demand better material conditions of life and thereby rupture the
fascist discourse of jingoistic nationalism (that ironically in a third world context is not
anti-imperialist).
In fact, neoliberalism reaching a dead end and having to rely on fascist elements revives
meaningful political activity, which the heyday of neoliberalism had precluded, because most
political formations then had been trapped within an identical neoliberal agenda that appeared
promising. (Latin America had a somewhat different history because neoliberalism arrived in
that continent through military dictatorships, not through its more or less tacit acceptance by
most political formations.)
Such revived political activity will necessarily throw up challenges to neoliberal
capitalism in particular countries. Imperialism, by which we mean the entire economic and
political arrangement sustaining the hegemony of international finance capital, will deal with
these challenges in at least four different ways.
The first is the so-called spontaneous method of capital flight. Any political formation
that seeks to take the country out of the neoliberal regime will witness capital flight even
before it has been elected to office, bringing the country to a financial crisis and thereby
denting its electoral prospects. And if perchance it still gets elected, the outflow will only
increase, even before it assumes office. The inevitable difficulties faced by the people may
well make the government back down at that stage. The sheer difficulty of transition away from
a neoliberal regime could be enough to bring even a government based on the support of workers
and peasants to its knees, precisely to save them short-term distress or to avoid losing their
support.
Even if capital controls are put in place, where there are current account deficits,
financing such deficits would pose a problem, necessitating some trade controls. But this is
where the second instrument of imperialism comes into play: the imposition of trade sanctions
by the metropolitan states, which then cajole other countries to stop buying from the
sanctioned country that is trying to break away from thralldom to globalized finance capital.
Even if the latter would have otherwise succeeded in stabilizing its economy despite its
attempt to break away, the imposition of sanctions becomes an additional blow.
The third weapon consists in carrying out so-called democratic or parliamentary coups of the
sort that Latin America has been experiencing. Coups in the old days were effected through the
local armed forces and necessarily meant the imposition of military dictatorships in lieu of
civilian, democratically elected governments. Now, taking advantage of the disaffection
generated within countries by the hardships caused by capital flight and imposed sanctions,
imperialism promotes coups through fascist or fascist-sympathizing middle-class political
elements in the name of restoring democracy, which is synonymous with the pursuit of
neoliberalism.
And if all these measures fail, there is always the possibility of resorting to economic
warfare (such as destroying Venezuela's electricity supply), and eventually to military
warfare. Venezuela today provides a classic example of what imperialist intervention in a third
world country is going to look like in the era of decline of neoliberal capitalism, when
revolts are going to characterize such countries more and more.
Two aspects of such intervention are striking. One is the virtual unanimity among the
metropolitan states, which only underscores the muting of interimperialist rivalry in the era
of hegemony of global finance capital. The other is the extent of support that such
intervention commands within metropolitan countries, from the right to even the liberal
segments.
Despite this opposition, neoliberal capitalism cannot ward off the challenge it is facing
for long. It has no vision for reinventing itself. Interestingly, in the period after the First
World War, when capitalism was on the verge of sinking into a crisis, the idea of state
intervention as a way of its revival had already been mooted, though its coming into vogue only
occurred at the end of the Second World War. 11
Today, neoliberal capitalism does not even have an idea of how it can recover and revitalize
itself. And weapons like domestic fascism in the third world and direct imperialist
intervention cannot for long save it from the anger of the masses that is building up against
it.
Samuel Berrick Saul, Studies in British Overseas Trade, 1870–1914
(Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1960).
Paul A. Baran and Paul M. Sweezy, Monopoly Capital (New York:
Monthly Review Press, 1966).
One of the first authors to recognize this fact and its significance was Paul Baran in
The Political Economy of
Growth (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1957).
For the role of such colonial transfers in sustaining the British balance of payments and the
long Victorian and Edwardian boom, see Utsa Patnaik, "Revisiting the 'Drain,' or Transfers
from India to Britain in the Context of Global Diffusion of Capitalism," in Agrarian
and Other Histories: Essays for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri , ed. Shubhra Chakrabarti and
Utsa Patnaik (Delhi: Tulika, 2017), 277-317.
Federal Reserve Board of Saint Louis Economic Research, FRED, "Capacity Utilization:
Manufacturing," February 2019 (updated March 27, 2019), http://fred.stlouisfed.org .
This issue is discussed by Charles P. Kindleberger in The World in Depression,
1929–1939 , 40th anniversary ed. (Oakland: University of California Press,
2013).
Joseph Schumpeter had seen Keynes's The Economic Consequences of the Peace as
essentially advocating such state intervention in the new situation. See his essay, "John
Maynard Keynes (1883–1946)," in Ten Great Economists (London: George Allen
& Unwin, 1952).
Utsa Patnaik is Professor Emerita at the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning,
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Her books include Peasant Class Differentiation (1987),
The Long Transition (1999), and The Republic of Hunger and Other Essays (2007). Prabhat Patnaik
is Professor Emeritus at the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru
University, New Delhi. His books include Accumulation and Stability Under Capitalism (1997),
The Value of Money(2009), and Re-envisioning Socialism(2011).
"... The trojan horse for the return of neoliberalism in Venezuela, Juan Guaidó, stated that he's going to borrow money from the IMF to fund his government, which would make all Venezuelans indebted to this predatory institution. Guaidó spends the money, the poor and working people work to pay taxes that pay off the principal and the interest. ..."
"... The IMF was created in New Hampshire in 1945 to internationalize and standardize capitalism and its rules in an increasingly globalized and U.S.-dominated world. ..."
"... Its primary function is acting as an international lender-of-last-resort to indebted countries. IMF member states decide which countries will receive loans, but the member states with the largest say are the ones that own the largest share of the IMF's funds, which have always been the United States and its allies. ..."
"... This is why the IMF's standard "structural adjustment program" is based on the so-called Washington Consensus, a set of 10 economic policies entirely concocted by U.S. think tanks, the IMF, the World Bank and the Treasury Department. The Washington Consensus is as follows: ..."
Think about who gets rich off of the Venezuela regime-change agenda. It's the same people
that said we had to invade Iraq in order to prevent nuclear apocalypse. It's the same people
who said the world would stop turning on its axis if we didn't carpet bomb Libya and
Syria.
Transcript -- This video was produced as part of a MintPress News and Grayzone collaboration -- Of all the reasons to
plot an elaborate and risky coup, there's one reason that always stands out: profit. Money
makes the world go around and in far more ways than we might think. Here are the top five
special interest groups and institutions that seek to benefit from the U.S. backed coup in
Venezuela.
Number 1: The International Monetary Fund (IMF), which wants to saddle the
Venezuelan people with enormous debt to the IMF
The trojan horse for the return of neoliberalism in Venezuela, Juan Guaidó, stated
that he's going to borrow money from the IMF to fund his government, which would make all
Venezuelans indebted to this predatory institution. Guaidó spends the money, the poor
and working people work to pay taxes that pay off the principal and the interest.
The IMF was created in New Hampshire in 1945 to internationalize and standardize capitalism
and its rules in an increasingly globalized and U.S.-dominated world.
Its primary function is acting as an international lender-of-last-resort to indebted
countries. IMF member states decide which countries will receive loans, but the member states
with the largest say are the ones that own the largest share of the IMF's funds, which have
always been the United States and its allies.
This is why the IMF's standard "structural adjustment program" is based on the so-called
Washington Consensus, a set of 10 economic policies entirely concocted by U.S. think tanks, the
IMF, the World Bank and the Treasury Department. The Washington Consensus is as follows:
In exchange for a loan, often with a high-interest rate that many would call predatory, the
IMF overhauls the protective and redistributive policies of a country for neoliberal policies,
making the target country ripe for finance capital investment and profit-making.
Number
2: The Oil Industry, out to control the oil reserves
There's little doubt that the oil industry is pushing the U.S. to overthrow the Maduro
government, especially when National Security Advisor John Bolton openly states this on
national television.
Bolton was himself once part of the oil industry, serving as the director of Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. in 2007. He's no stranger to advocating for the interests of the
fossil-fuel industry.
Venezuela has the world's largest oil reserves by far and Washington won't let that wealth
go unexploited, or worse, be shared among its enemies like the Maduro government, Russia,
China, or Iran.
And with so many politicians, Republican and Democratic, bought off by industry players --
companies like ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, and Chevron -- it's impossible to imagine anyone in
Washington successfully advocating for Venezuela maintaining ownership over its own sovereign
natural resources.
Number 3: The Military-Industrial Complex, working to military
dominance and arm another U.S. puppet
One of the most bizarre things about America is that we've created one of the world's
largest private industries around arms dealing. And like any industry, whether it be JDAM bombs
or beef, private businesses often resort to lobbying Congress to squeeze political favors out
of the government in the form of subsidies -- or in the case of the military industrial
complex, a foreign policy of endless war, one based on elusive ideas like combating terrorism
or defending democracy.
You can see that wherever the U.S. goes, expensive construction projects follow. Behind
every multi-billion dollar base construction, some private contractor is there reaping the
profits.
Once our military presence is firmly established, the weapons sales begin. And we all know
no U.S. ally or puppet state is complete without a full fleet of Lockheed Martin F-16s -- then
they'll be able to fend off all of those pesky leftist rebels with freedom missiles.
With Venezuela's neighbors, Colombia and Brazil, growing closer to NATO and accepting U.S.
military presence in their countries, we can only assume Venezuela is Washington's next
target.
As the strategic approach of regime change evolves, new industries arise to meet these
needs.
After the massive anti-war protests following the invasion of Iraq, outright invasion and
occupation are no longer viable strategies, owing to negative public opinion. So Washington
sought to disguise war propaganda using humanitarian rhetoric.
Number 4: "Humanitarian"
NGOs to create and implement the alibi
Privately owned NGOs dedicated to human rights and promoting "American style" democracy have
played a much larger role in regime-change operations in recent years. They serve as soft-power
institutions that attempt to subtly sway a population against its own government through
propaganda laced with words like freedom, democracy, and human rights.
These NGOs are given the full blessing of the U.S. government and the two often work in
tandem. Don't believe me? Take it from former CIA case officer Phillip Agee.
The US Agency for International Development's (USAID) regime-change arm, the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED), funded opposition groups in Nicaragua, Venezuela (during the
2002 coup), Haiti, Ukraine, and most recently China and North Korea. And whenever U.S. foreign
policy sets its sights on a certain target, private industries usually develop to help meet
that goal as well as make a quick buck along the way.
For example, Thor Halvorssen -- the first cousin of Leopoldo Lopez, the founder of Juan
Guaidó's party, Popular Will -- calls himself a human-rights activist. He founded the
notorious Human Rights Foundation (HRF) and makes a living giving speeches and TV appearances
talking about why the governments of Venezuela or North Korea are not legitimate and need to be
overthrown.
Unsurprisingly, HRF is funded by the conservative Sarah Scaife Foundation, which is itself
funded by think tanks like the top neoconservative think tank, the American Enterprise
Institute, as well as the Heritage Foundation. HRF is also funded by the Donors Capital Fund
and the Diana Davis Spencer Foundation, which are also funded by the American Enterprise
Institute. It's one big web of moving money that all leads back to the same cast of
characters.
The crisis in Venezuela has been a huge gift for people like Halvorssen, who use the U.S.'s
war on Venezuela to promote themselves and their organizations.
Number 5: Think Tanks
selling reports that tell the MIC what it wants to hear
Like NGOs, think tanks also play an important role in giving regime change a sense of
legitimacy -- in their case, intellectual legitimacy. Think tanks rely on donations to operate
and many find willing donors among the capitalist class. These fat cats pay for fancy looking
reports meant to justify their desired goal, the delegitimization of socialist governments and
the legitimization of coup governments that uphold the Washington Consensus.
The Cato Institute has been deeply involved in overthrowing the Venezuelan government. In
2008, Cato awarded Venezuelan opposition leader, Yon Goicoechea, the Milton Friedman Prize for
Advancing Liberty and $500,000 for his role in disrupting a constitutional referendum in
Venezuela. That money was used to finance the political rise of Juan Guaidó, and his
clique known as Generation 2007.
These seemingly independent research groups have intimate networks that they leverage to
amplify the message their donors have given them. Here's an article in the Washington
Post written by a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute saying the U.S.'s failure to
intervene in Venezuela has caused the Maduro government to destabilize the region.
Whether it was the bank bailouts following the 2008 crisis, or the lack of action on climate
disaster, in America it seems the government always puts the interests of the rich ahead of the
poor and working class, and the situation in Venezuela is no exception.
As the U.S. continues to attack the Maduro government, keep these special interests in mind.
Think about who gets rich off of the regime-change agenda. It's the same people that said we
had to invade Iraq in order to prevent nuclear apocalypse. It's the same people who said the
world would stop turning on its axis if we didn't carpet bomb Libya and Syria.
Now they're trying to get us to support war in Venezuela. You won't be any freer or more
prosperous after the Maduro government is toppled. It's just war propaganda.
Top photo | A worker counts Venezuelan bolivar notes at a parking lot in Caracas, Venezuela
May 29, 2018. Marco Bello | Reuters
Kei Pritsker is a journalist and activist located in Washington DC. Kei focuses on
international politics and economics. He previously worked as a producer at RT America.
"For the US its better to wreck Venezuela's economy than to allow it to flourish and expand
its influence.."
Not necessarily. The US is gambling that it will beat Venezuela. But if it doesn't, if
Venezuela simply outlasts the imperialist sanctions, it will emerge much stronger.
In recent years there has been a drift towards compromise with the US in Venezuela. Chavez
was always very generous towards his opponents and this has continued. As a result the old
Creole ruling class has been relatively undisturbed. It has retained its power over the
media, for example and left in a position to sabotage the economy through its control of
supermarkets, banks and commerce. It has retained its landholdings and maintained its
agribusiness.
And now, in cahoots with the imperialists, it has come out against the government and
chavismo. Its racist, neo fascist propensities and its contempt for its own countrymen and
women- the poor and the working class- have been revealed. While the people are fighting to
defend themselves against imperialism, Guido and the Venezuelan right, the capitalist class
have made their positions very obvious. Given any sort of opportunity they will smash the
social security and food security networks that keep the poor from starvation. They will
privatise- Honduras style- and death squads will roam the working class districts torturing
and killing.
In short the people of Venezuela have been shown exactly what to expect if the US wins. And
the allies of the US have been revealed to be the country's worst enemies: traitors and
Quislings.
In the end, if the US does not replace the Maduro government, it will find itself much
worse off. All its Fifth Columnist friends will be in exile or hiding. All their wealth will
have been distributed to the poor or nationalised.
And the US will have one more sworn and permanent enemy, the people of Venezuela.
"... Cute – immediate goal, humanitarian aid so everybody gets a couple of free meals and some medicine. Next job, roll back socialism. At which time all the poor will not be able to afford to eat or get medicine. But who'll give a fuck then, right? Because corporate America will already be in charge by then, kicking ass and taking names and privatizing everything so that even Guaido will not be able to say he owns anything in Venezuela but his house. And of course, the equation for Venezuelans has not changed a bit: Captain America really wants to help, but it has to be under Guaido – they're really, really stuck on him for some reason. So it's Guaido or starvation. What's it gonna be, Venezuela? ..."
"In a post-Maduro Venezuela, the U.S. will remove sanctions, foster pro-market and
pro-business reforms and help rebuild confidence, Ross said. An immediate priority will be
providing humanitarian aid, while a medium-term focus will be rolling back socialism, Ross
said."
They are even promising to privatize garbage collection and sewer system! In the
medium-term focus, of course. Immediate focus on reign of terror, while handing out tins of
spam to the swarming masses. After that, setting up slave markets, just like in Tripoli!
Cute – immediate goal, humanitarian aid so everybody gets a couple of free meals and
some medicine. Next job, roll back socialism. At which time all the poor will not be able to
afford to eat or get medicine. But who'll give a fuck then, right? Because corporate America
will already be in charge by then, kicking ass and taking names and privatizing everything so
that even Guaido will not be able to say he owns anything in Venezuela but his house. And of
course, the equation for Venezuelans has not changed a bit: Captain America really wants to
help, but it has to be under Guaido – they're really, really stuck on him for some
reason. So it's Guaido or starvation. What's it gonna be, Venezuela?
I hope somebody else will help them out. I'd dearly love to see Venezuela get on its feet
without American assistance, and then tell the entire Yoo Ess of Aye to kiss its ass. No more
heavy crude for your refineries, maybe you can turn them into basket shops, what say? No
thanks; we'll buy our food elsewhere, if it's all the same to you. Oh, and Bolsonaro? Eat a
bag of shit. Invite your Colombian buddy over for dinner
Yes, I meant to remark on that as well. It's funny that the western regime-change model
relies on countries loaned huge amounts of money to be enslaved by their honesty, and
actually pay it back.
"... This is the first major expansion of sanctions against a western hemisphere nation by the US in over 30 years, and is intended to put Venezuela into the same level of economic isolation as similarly restricted Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria. ..."
President Trump signed an executive order late Monday imposing a
full economic embargo against Venezuela , freezing all government assets in the US and
forbidding all transactions of any Venezuelan officials.
This is the first major expansion of sanctions against a western hemisphere nation by the
US in over 30 years, and is intended to put Venezuela into the same level of economic
isolation as similarly restricted Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria.
The order cites human rights abuses, and the fact that President Maduro is still in power
in Venezuela, even though the US recognized opposition leader Guaido as the rightful ruler of
the country.
This is the latest US effort to try to impose regime change in Venezuela, after a failed
military coup earlier this year. It's not clear how broadly the US intends to enforce the
sanctions, for example if they intend to use military force to prohibit naval trade from the
Venezuelan coast
Trump had recently told reporters he was considering a naval blockade or full "quarantine"
of Venezuela as the latest effort to try to impose regime change, something the US announced
it had recognized month ago but which so far hasn't happened.
President
Maduro denounced the comments , and called on his ambassador to complain to the UN
Security Council about the "illegal" US threat to blockade the Venezuelan coastline. Maduro
added it was "clearly illegal."
Clearly illegal as a practical matter is likely to be very much beside the point for US
policy. Previous indications were that Trump had become bored with Venezuela because of the
lack of progress, and it's likely he'll only try to impose a regime change in this manner if
he believes it will work.
Looks like the world order established after WWIII crumbed with the USSR and now it is again the law if jungles with the US as the
biggest predator.
Notable quotes:
"... The root cause is clear: After the crescendo of pretenses and deceptions over Iraq, Libya and Syria, along with our absolution of the lawless regime of Saudi Arabia, foreign political leaders are coming to recognize what world-wide public opinion polls reported even before the Iraq/Iran-Contra boys turned their attention to the world's largest oil reserves in Venezuela: The United States is now the greatest threat to peace on the planet. ..."
"... Calling the U.S. coup being sponsored in Venezuela a defense of democracy reveals the Doublethink underlying U.S. foreign policy. It defines "democracy" to mean supporting U.S. foreign policy, pursuing neoliberal privatization of public infrastructure, dismantling government regulation and following the direction of U.S.-dominated global institutions, from the IMF and World Bank to NATO. For decades, the resulting foreign wars, domestic austerity programs and military interventions have brought more violence, not democracy ..."
"... A point had to come where this policy collided with the self-interest of other nations, finally breaking through the public relations rhetoric of empire. Other countries are proceeding to de-dollarize and replace what U.S. diplomacy calls "internationalism" (meaning U.S. nationalism imposed on the rest of the world) with their own national self-interest. ..."
"... For the past half-century, U.S. strategists, the State Department and National Endowment for Democracy (NED) worried that opposition to U.S. financial imperialism would come from left-wing parties. It therefore spent enormous resources manipulating parties that called themselves socialist (Tony Blair's British Labour Party, France's Socialist Party, Germany's Social Democrats, etc.) to adopt neoliberal policies that were the diametric opposite to what social democracy meant a century ago. But U.S. political planners and Great Wurlitzer organists neglected the right wing, imagining that it would instinctively support U.S. thuggishness. ..."
"... Perhaps the problem had to erupt as a result of the inner dynamics of U.S.-sponsored globalism becoming impossible to impose when the result is financial austerity, waves of population flight from U.S.-sponsored wars, and most of all, U.S. refusal to adhere to the rules and international laws that it itself sponsored seventy years ago in the wake of World War II. ..."
"... Here's the first legal contradiction in U.S. global diplomacy: The United States always has resisted letting any other country have any voice in U.S. domestic policies, law-making or diplomacy. That is what makes America "the exceptional nation." But for seventy years its diplomats have pretended that its superior judgment promoted a peaceful world (as the Roman Empire claimed to be), which let other countries share in prosperity and rising living standards. ..."
"... Inevitably, U.S. nationalism had to break up the mirage of One World internationalism, and with it any thought of an international court. Without veto power over the judges, the U.S. never accepted the authority of any court, in particular the United Nations' International Court in The Hague. Recently that court undertook an investigation into U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan, from its torture policies to bombing of civilian targets such as hospitals, weddings and infrastructure. "That investigation ultimately found 'a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes and crimes against humanity." ..."
"... This showed that international finance was an arm of the U.S. State Department and Pentagon. But that was a generation ago, and only recently did foreign countries begin to feel queasy about leaving their gold holdings in the United States, where they might be grabbed at will to punish any country that might act in ways that U.S. diplomacy found offensive. So last year, Germany finally got up the courage to ask that some of its gold be flown back to Germany. U.S. officials pretended to feel shocked at the insult that it might do to a civilized Christian country what it had done to Iran, and Germany agreed to slow down the transfer. ..."
"... England refused to honor the official request, following the direction of Bolton and U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo. As Bloomberg reported: "The U.S. officials are trying to steer Venezuela's overseas assets to [Chicago Boy Juan] Guaido to help bolster his chances of effectively taking control of the government. The $1.2 billion of gold is a big chunk of the $8 billion in foreign reserves held by the Venezuelan central bank." ..."
"... But now, cyber warfare has become a way of pulling out the connections of any economy. And the major cyber connections are financial money-transfer ones, headed by SWIFT, the acronym for the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, which is centered in Belgium. ..."
"... On January 31 the dam broke with the announcement that Europe had created its own bypass payments system for use with Iran and other countries targeted by U.S. diplomats. Germany, France and even the U.S. poodle Britain joined to create INSTEX -- Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges. The promise is that this will be used only for "humanitarian" aid to save Iran from a U.S.-sponsored Venezuela-type devastation. But in view of increasingly passionate U.S. opposition to the Nord Stream pipeline to carry Russian gas, this alternative bank clearing system will be ready and able to become operative if the United States tries to direct a sanctions attack on Europe ..."
"... The U.S. overplaying its position is leading to the Mackinder-Kissinger-Brzezinski Eurasian nightmare that I mentioned above. In addition to driving Russia and China together, U.S. diplomacy is adding Europe to the heartland, independent of U.S. ability to bully into the state of dependency toward which American diplomacy has aimed to achieve since 1945. ..."
"... By following U.S. advice, countries have left themselves open to food blackmail – sanctions against providing them with grain and other food, in case they step out of line with U.S. diplomatic demands. ..."
"... It is worthwhile to note that our global imposition of the mythical "efficiencies" of forcing Latin American countries to become plantations for export crops like coffee and bananas rather than growing their own wheat and corn has failed catastrophically to deliver better lives, especially for those living in Central America. The "spread" between the export crops and cheaper food imports from the U.S. that was supposed to materialize for countries following our playbook failed miserably – witness the caravans and refugees across Mexico. Of course, our backing of the most brutal military dictators and crime lords has not helped either. ..."
"... But a few years ago Ukraine defaulted on $3 billion owed to Russia. The IMF said, in effect, that Ukraine and other countries did not have to pay Russia or any other country deemed to be acting too independently of the United States. The IMF has been extending credit to the bottomless it of Ukrainian corruption to encourage its anti-Russian policy rather than standing up for the principle that inter-government debts must be paid. ..."
"... It is as if the IMF now operates out of a small room in the basement of the Pentagon in Washington. ..."
"... Anticipating just such a double-cross, President Chavez acted already in 2011 to repatriate 160 tons of gold to Caracas from the United States and Europe. ..."
"... It would be good for Americans, but the wrong kind of Americans. For the Americans that would populate the Global Executive Suite, a strong US$ means that the stipends they would pay would be worth more to the lackeys, and command more influence. ..."
"... Dumping the industrial base really ruined things. America is now in a position where it can shout orders, and drop bombs, but doesn't have the capacity to do anything helpful. They have to give up being what Toynbee called a creative minority, and settle for being a dominant minority. ..."
"... Having watched the 2016 election closely from afar, I was left with the impression that many of the swing voters who cast their vote for Trump did so under the assumption that he would act as a catalyst for systemic change. ..."
"... Now we know. He has ripped the already transparent mask of altruism off what is referred to as the U.S.-led liberal international order and revealed its true nature for all to see, and has managed to do it in spite of the liberal international establishment desperately trying to hold it in place in the hope of effecting a seamless post-Trump return to what they refer to as "norms". Interesting times. ..."
"... Exactly. He hasn't exactly lived up to advanced billing so far in all respects, but I suspect there's great deal of skulduggery going on behind the scenes that has prevented that. ..."
"... To paraphrase the infamous Rummy, you don't go to war with the change agent and policies you wished you had, you go to war with the ones you have. That might be the best thing we can say about Trump after the historic dust of his administration finally settles. ..."
"... Yet we find out that Venezuela didn't managed to do what they wanted to do, the Europeans, the Turks, etc bent over yet again. Nothing to see here, actually. ..."
"... So what I'm saying is he didn't make his point. I wish it were true. But a bit of grumbling and (a tiny amount of) foot-dragging by some pygmy leaders (Merkel) does not signal a global change. ..."
"... Currency regime change can take decades, and small percentage differences are enormous because of the flows involved. USD as reserve for 61% of global sovereigns versus 64% 15 years ago is a massive move. ..."
"... I discovered his Super Imperialism while looking for an explanation for the pending 2003 US invasion of Iraq. If you haven't read it yet, move it to the top of your queue if you want to have any idea of how the world really works. ..."
"... If it isn't clear to the rest of the world by now, it never will be. The US is incapable of changing on its own a corrupt status quo dominated by a coalition of its military industrial complex, Wall Street bankers and fossil fuels industries. As long as the world continues to chase the debt created on the keyboards of Wall Street banks and 'deficits don't matter' Washington neocons – as long as the world's 1% think they are getting 'richer' by adding more "debts that can't be repaid (and) won't be" to their portfolios, the global economy can never be put on a sustainable footing. ..."
"... In other words, after 2 World Wars that produced the current world order, it is still in a state of insanity with the same pretensions to superiority by the same people, to get number 3. ..."
"... Few among Washington's foreign policy elite seem to fully grasp the complex system that made U.S. global power what it now is, particularly its all-important geopolitical foundations. As Trump travels the globe, tweeting and trashing away, he's inadvertently showing us the essential structure of that power, the same way a devastating wildfire leaves the steel beams of a ruined building standing starkly above the smoking rubble." ..."
"... He's draining the swamp in an unpredicted way, a swamp that's founded on the money interest. I don't care what NYT and WaPo have to say, they are not reporting events but promoting agendas. ..."
"... The financial elites are only concerned about shaping society as they see fit, side of self serving is just a historical foot note, Trumps past indicates a strong preference for even more of the same through authoritarian memes or have some missed the OT WH reference to dawg both choosing and then compelling him to run. ..."
"... Highly doubt Trump is a "witting agent", most likely is that he is just as ignorant as he almost daily shows on twitter. On US role in global affairs he says the same today as he did as a media celebrity in the late 80s. Simplistic household "logics" on macroeconomics. If US have trade deficit it loses. Countries with surplus are the winners. ..."
"... Anyhow frightening, the US hegemony have its severe dark sides. But there is absolutely nothing better on the horizon, a crash will throw the world in turmoil for decades or even a century. A lot of bad forces will see their chance to elevate their influence. There will be fierce competition to fill the gap. ..."
"... On could the insane economic model of EU/Germany being on top of global affairs, a horribly frightening thought. Misery and austerity for all globally, a permanent recession. Probably not much better with the Chinese on top. I'll take the USD hegemony any day compared to that prospect. ..."
"... Former US ambassador, Chas Freeman, gets to the nub of the problem. "The US preference for governance by elected and appointed officials, uncontaminated by experience in statecraft and diplomacy, or knowledge of geography, history and foreign affairs" https://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_882041135&feature=iv&src_vid=Ge1ozuXN7iI&v=gkf2MQdqz-o ..."
"... Michael Hudson, in Super Imperialism, went into how the US could just create the money to run a large trade deficit with the rest of the world. It would get all these imports effectively for nothing, the US's exorbitant privilege. I tied this in with this graph from MMT. ..."
"... The Government was running a surplus as the economy blew up in the early 1990s. It's the positive and negative, zero sum, nature of the monetary system. A big trade deficit needs a big Government deficit to cover it. A big trade deficit, with a balanced budget, drives the private sector into debt and blows up the economy. ..."
The end of America's unchallenged global economic dominance has arrived sooner than expected, thanks to the very same Neocons
who gave the world the Iraq, Syria and the dirty wars in Latin America. Just as the Vietnam War drove the United States off gold
by 1971, its sponsorship and funding of violent regime change wars against Venezuela and Syria – and threatening other countries
with sanctions if they do not join this crusade – is now driving European and other nations to create their alternative financial
institutions.
This break has been building for quite some time, and was bound to occur. But who would have thought that Donald Trump would become
the catalytic agent? No left-wing party, no socialist, anarchist or foreign nationalist leader anywhere in the world could have achieved
what he is doing to break up the American Empire. The Deep State is reacting with shock at how this right-wing real estate grifter
has been able to drive other countries to defend themselves by dismantling the U.S.-centered world order. To rub it in, he is using
Bush and Reagan-era Neocon arsonists, John Bolton and now Elliott Abrams, to fan the flames in Venezuela. It is almost like a black
political comedy. The world of international diplomacy is being turned inside-out. A world where there is no longer even a pretense
that we might adhere to international norms, let alone laws or treaties.
The Neocons who Trump has appointed are accomplishing what seemed unthinkable not long ago: Driving China and Russia together
– the great nightmare of Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski. They also are driving Germany and other European countries into
the Eurasian orbit, the "Heartland" nightmare of Halford Mackinder a century ago.
The root cause is clear: After the crescendo of pretenses and deceptions over Iraq, Libya and Syria, along with our absolution
of the lawless regime of Saudi Arabia, foreign political leaders are coming to recognize what world-wide public opinion polls reported
even before the Iraq/Iran-Contra boys turned their attention to the world's largest oil reserves in Venezuela: The United States
is now the greatest threat to peace on the planet.
Calling the U.S. coup being sponsored in Venezuela a defense of democracy reveals the Doublethink underlying U.S. foreign
policy. It defines "democracy" to mean supporting U.S. foreign policy, pursuing neoliberal privatization of public infrastructure,
dismantling government regulation and following the direction of U.S.-dominated global institutions, from the IMF and World Bank
to NATO. For decades, the resulting foreign wars, domestic austerity programs and military interventions have brought more violence,
not democracy.
In the Devil's Dictionary that U.S. diplomats are taught to use as their "Elements of Style" guidelines for Doublethink, a "democratic"
country is one that follows U.S. leadership and opens its economy to U.S. investment, and IMF- and World Bank-sponsored privatization.
The Ukraine is deemed democratic, along with Saudi Arabia, Israel and other countries that act as U.S. financial and military protectorates
and are willing to treat America's enemies are theirs too.
A point had to come where this policy collided with the self-interest of other nations, finally breaking through the public
relations rhetoric of empire. Other countries are proceeding to de-dollarize and replace what U.S. diplomacy calls "internationalism"
(meaning U.S. nationalism imposed on the rest of the world) with their own national self-interest.
This trajectory could be seen 50 years ago (I described it in Super Imperialism [1972] and Global Fracture [1978].) It had to
happen. But nobody thought that the end would come in quite the way that is happening. History has turned into comedy, or at least
irony as its dialectical path unfolds.
For the past half-century, U.S. strategists, the State Department and National Endowment for Democracy (NED) worried that
opposition to U.S. financial imperialism would come from left-wing parties. It therefore spent enormous resources manipulating parties
that called themselves socialist (Tony Blair's British Labour Party, France's Socialist Party, Germany's Social Democrats, etc.)
to adopt neoliberal policies that were the diametric opposite to what social democracy meant a century ago. But U.S. political planners
and Great Wurlitzer organists neglected the right wing, imagining that it would instinctively support U.S. thuggishness.
The reality is that right-wing parties want to get elected, and a populist nationalism is today's road to election victory in
Europe and other countries just as it was for Donald Trump in 2016.
Trump's agenda may really be to break up the American Empire, using the old Uncle Sucker isolationist rhetoric of half a century
ago. He certainly is going for the Empire's most vital organs. But it he a witting anti-American agent? He might as well be – but
it would be a false mental leap to use "quo bono" to assume that he is a witting agent.
After all, if no U.S. contractor, supplier, labor union or bank will deal with him, would Vladimir Putin, China or Iran be any
more naïve? Perhaps the problem had to erupt as a result of the inner dynamics of U.S.-sponsored globalism becoming impossible
to impose when the result is financial austerity, waves of population flight from U.S.-sponsored wars, and most of all, U.S. refusal
to adhere to the rules and international laws that it itself sponsored seventy years ago in the wake of World War II.
Dismantling International Law and Its Courts
Any international system of control requires the rule of law. It may be a morally lawless exercise of ruthless power imposing
predatory exploitation, but it is still The Law. And it needs courts to apply it (backed by police power to enforce it and punish
violators).
Here's the first legal contradiction in U.S. global diplomacy: The United States always has resisted letting any other country
have any voice in U.S. domestic policies, law-making or diplomacy. That is what makes America "the exceptional nation." But for seventy
years its diplomats have pretended that its superior judgment promoted a peaceful world (as the Roman Empire claimed to be), which
let other countries share in prosperity and rising living standards.
At the United Nations, U.S. diplomats insisted on veto power. At the World Bank and IMF they also made sure that their equity
share was large enough to give them veto power over any loan or other policy. Without such power, the United States would not join
any international organization. Yet at the same time, it depicted its nationalism as protecting globalization and internationalism.
It was all a euphemism for what really was unilateral U.S. decision-making.
Inevitably, U.S. nationalism had to break up the mirage of One World internationalism, and with it any thought of an international
court. Without veto power over the judges, the U.S. never accepted the authority of any court, in particular the United Nations'
International Court in The Hague. Recently that court undertook an investigation into U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan, from its torture
policies to bombing of civilian targets such as hospitals, weddings and infrastructure. "That investigation ultimately found 'a reasonable
basis to believe that war crimes and crimes against humanity."
[1]
Donald Trump's National Security Adviser John Bolton erupted in fury, warning in September that: "The United States will use any
means necessary to protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court," adding that
the UN International Court must not be so bold as to investigate "Israel or other U.S. allies."
That prompted a senior judge, Christoph Flügge from Germany, to resign in protest. Indeed, Bolton told the court to keep out of
any affairs involving the United States, promising to ban the Court's "judges and prosecutors from entering the United States." As
Bolton spelled out the U.S. threat: "We will sanction their funds in the U.S. financial system, and we will prosecute them in the
U.S. criminal system. We will not cooperate with the ICC. We will provide no assistance to the ICC. We will not join the ICC. We
will let the ICC die on its own. After all, for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already dead to us."
What this meant, the German judge spelled out was that: "If these judges ever interfere in the domestic concerns of the U.S. or
investigate an American citizen, [Bolton] said the American government would do all it could to ensure that these judges would no
longer be allowed to travel to the United States – and that they would perhaps even be criminally prosecuted."
The original inspiration of the Court – to use the Nuremburg laws that were applied against German Nazis to bring similar prosecution
against any country or officials found guilty of committing war crimes – had already fallen into disuse with the failure to indict
the authors of the Chilean coup, Iran-Contra or the U.S. invasion of Iraq for war crimes.
Dismantling Dollar Hegemony from the IMF to SWIFT
Of all areas of global power politics today, international finance and foreign investment have become the key flashpoint. International
monetary reserves were supposed to be the most sacrosanct, and international debt enforcement closely associated.
Central banks have long held their gold and other monetary reserves in the United States and London. Back in 1945 this seemed
reasonable, because the New York Federal Reserve Bank (in whose basement foreign central bank gold was kept) was militarily safe,
and because the London Gold Pool was the vehicle by which the U.S. Treasury kept the dollar "as good as gold" at $35 an ounce. Foreign
reserves over and above gold were kept in the form of U.S. Treasury securities, to be bought and sold on the New York and London
foreign-exchange markets to stabilize exchange rates. Most foreign loans to governments were denominated in U.S. dollars, so Wall
Street banks were normally name as paying agents.
That was the case with Iran under the Shah, whom the United States had installed after sponsoring the 1953 coup against Mohammed
Mosaddegh when he sought to nationalize Anglo-Iranian Oil (now British Petroleum) or at least tax it. After the Shah was overthrown,
the Khomeini regime asked its paying agent, the Chase Manhattan bank, to use its deposits to pay its bondholders. At the direction
of the U.S. Government Chase refused to do so. U.S. courts then declared Iran to be in default, and froze all its assets in the United
States and anywhere else they were able.
This showed that international finance was an arm of the U.S. State Department and Pentagon. But that was a generation ago,
and only recently did foreign countries begin to feel queasy about leaving their gold holdings in the United States, where they might
be grabbed at will to punish any country that might act in ways that U.S. diplomacy found offensive. So last year, Germany finally
got up the courage to ask that some of its gold be flown back to Germany. U.S. officials pretended to feel shocked at the insult
that it might do to a civilized Christian country what it had done to Iran, and Germany agreed to slow down the transfer.
But then came Venezuela. Desperate to spend its gold reserves to provide imports for its economy devastated by U.S. sanctions
– a crisis that U.S. diplomats blame on "socialism," not on U.S. political attempts to "make the economy scream" (as Nixon officials
said of Chile under Salvador Allende) – Venezuela directed the Bank of England to transfer some of its $11 billion in gold held in
its vaults and those of other central banks in December 2018. This was just like a bank depositor would expect a bank to pay a check
that the depositor had written.
England refused to honor the official request, following the direction of Bolton and U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo.
As Bloomberg reported: "The U.S. officials are trying to steer Venezuela's overseas assets to [Chicago Boy Juan] Guaido to help bolster
his chances of effectively taking control of the government. The $1.2 billion of gold is a big chunk of the $8 billion in foreign
reserves held by the Venezuelan central bank."
Turkey seemed to be a likely destination, prompting Bolton and Pompeo to warn it to desist from helping Venezuela, threatening
sanctions against it or any other country helping Venezuela cope with its economic crisis. As for the Bank of England and other European
countries, the Bloomberg report concluded: "Central bank officials in Caracas have been ordered to no longer try contacting the Bank
of England. These central bankers have been told that Bank of England staffers will not respond to them."
This led to rumors that Venezuela was selling 20 tons of gold via a Russian Boeing 777 – some $840 million. The money probably
would have ended up paying Russian and Chinese bondholders as well as buying food to relieve the local famine.
[4] Russia denied this report, but Reuters has confirmed is that Venezuela has sold 3 tons of a planned 29 tones of gold to the
United Arab Emirates, with another 15 tones are to be shipped on Friday, February 1.
[5] The U.S. Senate's Batista-Cuban hardliner Rubio accused this of being "theft," as if feeding the people to alleviate the
U.S.-sponsored crisis was a crime against U.S. diplomatic leverage.
If there is any country that U.S. diplomats hate more than a recalcitrant Latin American country, it is Iran. President Trump's
breaking of the 2015 nuclear agreements negotiated by European and Obama Administration diplomats has escalated to the point of threatening
Germany and other European countries with punitive sanctions if they do not also break the agreements they have signed. Coming on
top of U.S. opposition to German and other European importing of Russian gas, the U.S. threat finally prompted Europe to find a way
to defend itself.
Imperial threats are no longer military. No country (including Russia or China) can mount a military invasion of another major
country. Since the Vietnam Era, the only kind of war a democratically elected country can wage is atomic, or at least heavy bombing
such as the United States has inflicted on Iraq, Libya and Syria. But now, cyber warfare has become a way of pulling out the
connections of any economy. And the major cyber connections are financial money-transfer ones, headed by SWIFT, the acronym for the
Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, which is centered in Belgium.
Russia and China have already moved to create a shadow bank-transfer system in case the United States unplugs them from SWIFT.
But now, European countries have come to realize that threats by Bolton and Pompeo may lead to heavy fines and asset grabs if they
seek to continue trading with Iran as called for in the treaties they have negotiated.
On January 31 the dam broke with the announcement that Europe had created its own bypass payments system for use with Iran
and other countries targeted by U.S. diplomats. Germany, France and even the U.S. poodle Britain joined to create INSTEX -- Instrument
in Support of Trade Exchanges. The promise is that this will be used only for "humanitarian" aid to save Iran from a U.S.-sponsored
Venezuela-type devastation. But in view of increasingly passionate U.S. opposition to the Nord Stream pipeline to carry Russian gas,
this alternative bank clearing system will be ready and able to become operative if the United States tries to direct a sanctions
attack on Europe.
I have just returned from Germany and seen a remarkable split between that nation's industrialists and their political leadership.
For years, major companies have seen Russia as a natural market, a complementary economy needing to modernize its manufacturing and
able to supply Europe with natural gas and other raw materials. America's New Cold War stance is trying to block this commercial
complementarity. Warning Europe against "dependence" on low-price Russian gas, it has offered to sell high-priced LNG from the United
States (via port facilities that do not yet exist in anywhere near the volume required). President Trump also is insisting that NATO
members spend a full 2 percent of their GDP on arms – preferably bought from the United States, not from German or French merchants
of death.
The U.S. overplaying its position is leading to the Mackinder-Kissinger-Brzezinski Eurasian nightmare that I mentioned above.
In addition to driving Russia and China together, U.S. diplomacy is adding Europe to the heartland, independent of U.S. ability to
bully into the state of dependency toward which American diplomacy has aimed to achieve since 1945.
The World Bank, for instance, traditionally has been headed by a U.S. Secretary of Defense. Its steady policy since its inception
is to provide loans for countries to devote their land to export crops instead of giving priority to feeding themselves. That is
why its loans are only in foreign currency, not in the domestic currency needed to provide price supports and agricultural extension
services such as have made U.S. agriculture so productive. By following U.S. advice, countries have left themselves open to food
blackmail – sanctions against providing them with grain and other food, in case they step out of line with U.S. diplomatic demands.
It is worthwhile to note that our global imposition of the mythical "efficiencies" of forcing Latin American countries to
become plantations for export crops like coffee and bananas rather than growing their own wheat and corn has failed catastrophically
to deliver better lives, especially for those living in Central America. The "spread" between the export crops and cheaper food imports
from the U.S. that was supposed to materialize for countries following our playbook failed miserably – witness the caravans and refugees
across Mexico. Of course, our backing of the most brutal military dictators and crime lords has not helped either.
Likewise, the IMF has been forced to admit that its basic guidelines were fictitious from the beginning. A central core has been
to enforce payment of official inter-government debt by withholding IMF credit from countries under default. This rule was instituted
at a time when most official inter-government debt was owed to the United States. But a few years ago Ukraine defaulted on $3
billion owed to Russia. The IMF said, in effect, that Ukraine and other countries did not have to pay Russia or any other country
deemed to be acting too independently of the United States. The IMF has been extending credit to the bottomless it of Ukrainian corruption
to encourage its anti-Russian policy rather than standing up for the principle that inter-government debts must be paid.
It is as if the IMF now operates out of a small room in the basement of the Pentagon in Washington. Europe has taken
notice that its own international monetary trade and financial linkages are in danger of attracting U.S. anger. This became clear
last autumn at the funeral for George H. W. Bush, when the EU's diplomat found himself downgraded to the end of the list to be called
to his seat. He was told that the U.S. no longer considers the EU an entity in good standing. In December, "Mike Pompeo gave a speech
on Europe in Brussels -- his first, and eagerly awaited -- in which he extolled the virtues of nationalism, criticised multilateralism
and the EU, and said that "international bodies" which constrain national sovereignty "must be reformed or eliminated."
[5]
Most of the above events have made the news in just one day, January 31, 2019. The conjunction of U.S. moves on so many fronts,
against Venezuela, Iran and Europe (not to mention China and the trade threats and moves against Huawei also erupting today) looks
like this will be a year of global fracture.
It is not all President Trump's doing, of course. We see the Democratic Party showing the same colors. Instead of applauding democracy
when foreign countries do not elect a leader approved by U.S. diplomats (whether it is Allende or Maduro), they've let the mask fall
and shown themselves to be the leading New Cold War imperialists. It's now out in the open. They would make Venezuela the new Pinochet-era
Chile. Trump is not alone in supporting Saudi Arabia and its Wahabi terrorists acting, as Lyndon Johnson put it, "Bastards, but they're
our bastards."
Where is the left in all this? That is the question with which I opened this article. How remarkable it is that it is only right-wing
parties, Alternative for Deutschland (AFD), or Marine le Pen's French nationalists and those of other countries that are opposing
NATO militarization and seeking to revive trade and economic links with the rest of Eurasia.
The end of our monetary imperialism, about which I first wrote in 1972 in Super Imperialism, stuns even an informed observer like
me. It took a colossal level of arrogance, short-sightedness and lawlessness to hasten its decline -- something that only crazed
Neocons like John Bolton, Elliot Abrams and Mike Pompeo could deliver for Donald Trump.
[2] Patricia Laya, Ethan Bronner and Tim Ross,
"Maduro Stymied in Bid to Pull $1.2 Billion of Gold From U.K.," Bloomberg, January 25, 2019. Anticipating just such a double-cross,
President Chavez acted already in 2011 to repatriate 160 tons of gold to Caracas from the United States and Europe.
Well, if the StormTrumpers can tear down all the levers and institutions of international US dollar strength, perhaps they
can also tear down all the institutions of Corporate Globalonial Forced Free Trade. That itself may BE our escape . . . if there
are enough millions of Americans who have turned their regionalocal zones of habitation into economically and politically armor-plated
Transition Towns, Power-Down Zones, etc. People and places like that may be able to crawl up out of the rubble and grow and defend
little zones of semi-subsistence survival-economics.
If enough millions of Americans have created enough such zones, they might be able to link up with eachother to offer hope
of a movement to make America in general a semi-autarchik, semi-secluded and isolated National Survival Economy . . . . much smaller
than today, perhaps likelier to survive the various coming ecosystemic crash-cramdowns, and no longer interested in leading or
dominating a world that we would no longer have the power to lead or dominate.
We could put an end to American Exceptionalism. We could lay this burden down. We could become American Okayness Ordinarians.
Make America an okay place for ordinary Americans to live in.
If Populists, I assume that's what you mean by "Storm Troopers", offer me M4A and revitalized local economies, and deliver
them, they have my support and more power to them.
That's why Trump was elected, his promises, not yet delivered, were closer to that then the Democrats' promises. If the Democrats
promised those things and delivered, then they would have my support.
If the Democrats run a candidate, who has a no track record of delivering such things, we stay home on election day. Trump
can have it, because it won't be any worse.
I don't give a damn about "social issues." Economics, health care and avoiding WWIII are what motivates my votes, and I think
more and more people are going to vote the same way.
Good point about Populist versus StormTrumper. ( And by the way, I said StormTRUMper, not StormTROOper). I wasn't thinking
of the Populists. I was thinking of the neo-etc. vandals and arsonists who want us to invade Venezuela, leave the JCPOA with Iran,
etc. Those are the people who will finally drive the other-country governments into creating their own parallel payment systems,
etc.
And the midpoint of those efforts will leave wreckage and rubble for us to crawl up out of. But we will have a chance to crawl
up out of it.
My reason for voting for Trump was mainly to stop the Evil Clinton from getting elected and to reduce the chance of near immediate
thermonuclear war with Russia and to save the Assad regime in Syria from Clintonian overthrow and replacement with an Islamic
Emirate of Jihadistan.
Much of what will be attempted " in Trump's name" will be de-regulationism of all kinds delivered by the sorts of basic Republicans
selected for the various agencies and departments by Pence and Moore and the Koch Brothers. I doubt the Populist Voters wanted
the Koch-Pence agenda. But that was a risky tradeoff in return for keeping Clinton out of office.
The only Dems who would seek what you want are Sanders or maybe Gabbard or just barely Warren. The others would all be Clinton
or Obama all over again.
I couldn't really find any details about the new INSTEX system – have you got any good links to brush up on? I know they made
an announcement yesterday but how long until the new payment system is operational?
arguably wouldn't it be better if for USD hegemony to be dismantled? A strong USD hurts US exports, subsidizes American consumption
(by making commodities cheaper in relative terms), makes international trade (aka a 8,000-mile+ supply chain) easier.
For the sake of the environment, you want less of all three. Though obviously I don't like the idea of expensive gasoline,
natural gas or tube socks either.
It would be good for Americans, but the wrong kind of Americans. For the Americans that would populate the Global Executive
Suite, a strong US$ means that the stipends they would pay would be worth more to the lackeys, and command more influence.
Dumping the industrial base really ruined things. America is now in a position where it can shout orders, and drop bombs,
but doesn't have the capacity to do anything helpful. They have to give up being what Toynbee called a creative minority, and
settle for being a dominant minority.
Having watched the 2016 election closely from afar, I was left with the impression that many of the swing voters who cast
their vote for Trump did so under the assumption that he would act as a catalyst for systemic change.
What this change would consist of, and how it would manifest, remained an open question. Would he pursue rapprochement with
Russia and pull troops out of the Middle East as he claimed to want to do during his 2016 campaign, would he doggedly pursue corruption
charges against Clinton and attempt to reform the FBI and CIA, or would he do both, neither, or something else entirely?
Now we know. He has ripped the already transparent mask of altruism off what is referred to as the U.S.-led liberal international
order and revealed its true nature for all to see, and has managed to do it in spite of the liberal international establishment
desperately trying to hold it in place in the hope of effecting a seamless post-Trump return to what they refer to as "norms".
Interesting times.
Exactly. He hasn't exactly lived up to advanced billing so far in all respects, but I suspect there's great deal of skulduggery
going on behind the scenes that has prevented that. Whether or not he ever had or has a coherent plan for the havoc he has
wrought, he has certainly been the agent for change many of us hoped he would be, in stark contrast to the criminal duopoly parties
who continue to oppose him, where the daily no news is always bad news all the same. To paraphrase the infamous Rummy, you
don't go to war with the change agent and policies you wished you had, you go to war with the ones you have. That might be the
best thing we can say about Trump after the historic dust of his administration finally settles.
Look on some bright sides. Here is just one bright side to look on. President Trump has delayed and denied the Clinton Plan
to topple Assad just long enough that Russia has been able to help Assad preserve legitimate government in most of Syria and defeat
the Clinton's-choice jihadis.
That is a positive good. Unless you are pro-jihadi.
Clinton wasn't going to "benefit the greater good" either, and a very strong argument, based on her past behavior, can be made
that she represented the greater threat. Given that the choice was between her and Trump, I think voters made the right decision.
Hudson's done us a service in pulling these threads together. I'd missed the threats against the ICC judges. One question:
is it possible for INSTEX-like arrangements to function secretly? What is to be gained by announcing them publicly and drawing
the expected attacks? Does that help sharpen conflicts, and to what end?
Maybe they're done in secret already – who knows? The point of doing it publicly is to make a foreign-policy impact, in this
case withdrawing power from the US. It's a Declaration of Independence.
It certainly seems as though the 90 percent (plus) are an afterthought in this journey to who knows where? Like George C.Scott
said while playing Patton, "The whole world at economic war and I'm not part of it. God will not let this happen." Looks like
we're on the Brexit track (without the vote). The elite argue with themselves and we just sit and watch. It appears to me that
the elite just do not have the ability to contemplate things beyond their own narrow self interest. We are all deplorables now.
The end of America's unchallenged global economic dominance has arrived sooner than expected
Is not supported by this (or really the rest of the article). The past tense here, for example, is unwarranted:
At the United Nations, U.S. diplomats insisted on veto power. At the World Bank and IMF they also made sure that their
equity share was large enough to give them veto power over any loan or other policy.
And this
So last year, Germany finally got up the courage to ask that some of its gold be flown back to Germany. Germany agreed
to slow down the transfer.
Doesn't show Germany as breaking free at all, and worse it is followed by the pregnant
But then came Venezuela.
Yet we find out that Venezuela didn't managed to do what they wanted to do, the Europeans, the Turks, etc bent over yet
again. Nothing to see here, actually.
So what I'm saying is he didn't make his point. I wish it were true. But a bit of grumbling and (a tiny amount of) foot-dragging
by some pygmy leaders (Merkel) does not signal a global change.
"So what I'm saying is he didn't make his point. I wish it were true. But a bit of grumbling and (a tiny amount of) foot-dragging
by some pygmy leaders (Merkel) does not signal a global change."
I'm surprised more people aren't recognizing this. I read the article waiting in vain for some evidence of "the end of our
monetary imperialism" besides some 'grumbling and foot dragging' as you aptly put it. There was some glimmer of a buried lede
with INTEX, created to get around U.S. sanctions against Iran ─ hardly a 'dam-breaking'. Washington is on record as being annoyed.
Currency regime change can take decades, and small percentage differences are enormous because of the flows involved. USD
as reserve for 61% of global sovereigns versus 64% 15 years ago is a massive move. World bond market flows are 10X the size
of world stock market flows even though the price of the Dow and Facebook shares etc get all of the headlines.
And foreign exchange flows are 10-50X the flows of bond markets, they're currently on the order of $5 *trillion* per day. And
since forex is almost completely unregulated it's quite difficult to get the data and spot reserve currency trends. Oh, and buy
gold. It's the only currency that requires no counterparty and is no one's debt obligation.
That's not what Hudson claims in his swaggering final sentence:
"The end of our monetary imperialism, about which I first wrote in 1972 in Super Imperialism, stuns even an informed
observer like me."
Which is risible as not only did he fail to show anything of the kind, his opening sentence stated a completely different reality:
"The end of America's unchallenged global economic dominance has arrived sooner than expected" So if we hold him to his first
declaration, his evidence is feeble, as I mentioned. As a scholar, his hyperbole is untrustworthy.
No, gold is pretty enough lying on the bosom of a lady-friend but that's about its only usefulness in the real world.
Always bemusing that gold bugs never talk about gold being in a bubble . yet when it goes south of its purchase price speak
in tongues about ev'bal forces.
thanks Mr. Hudson. One has to wonder what has happened when the government (for decades) has been shown to be morally and otherwise
corrupt and self serving. It doesn't seem to bother anyone but the people, and precious few of them. Was it our financial and
legal bankruptcy that sent us over the cliff?
Indeed! It is to say the least encouraging to see Dr. Hudson return so forcefully to the theme of 'monetary imperialism'.
I discovered his Super Imperialism while looking for an explanation for the pending 2003 US invasion of Iraq. If you
haven't read it yet, move it to the top of your queue if you want to have any idea of how the world really works. You can
find any number of articles on his web site that return periodically to the theme of monetary imperialism. I remember one in particular
that described how the rest of the world was brought on board to help pay for its good old-fashioned military imperialism.
If it isn't clear to the rest of the world by now, it never will be. The US is incapable of changing on its own a corrupt
status quo dominated by a coalition of its military industrial complex, Wall Street bankers and fossil fuels industries. As long
as the world continues to chase the debt created on the keyboards of Wall Street banks and 'deficits don't matter' Washington
neocons – as long as the world's 1% think they are getting 'richer' by adding more "debts that can't be repaid (and) won't be"
to their portfolios, the global economy can never be put on a sustainable footing.
Until the US returns to the path of genuine wealth creation, it is past time for the rest of the world to go its own way with
its banking and financial institutions.
In other words, after 2 World Wars that produced the current world order, it is still in a state of insanity with the same
pretensions to superiority by the same people, to get number 3.
UK withholding Gold may start another Brexit? IE: funds/gold held by BOE for other countries in Africa, Asian, South America,
and the "stans" with start to depart, slowly at first, perhaps for Switzerland?
Where is the left in all this? Pretty much the same place as Michael Hudson, I'd say. Where is the US Democratic Party in all
this? Quite a different question, and quite a different answer. So far as I can see, the Democrats for years have bombed, invaded
and plundered other countries 'for their own good'. Republicans do it 'for the good of America', by which the ignoramuses mean
the USA. If you're on the receiving end, it doesn't make much difference.
Agreed! South America intervention and regime change, Syria ( Trump is pulling out), Iraq, Middle East meddling, all predate
Trump. Bush, Clinton and Obama have nothing to do with any of this.
" So last year, Germany finally got up the courage to ask that some of its gold be flown back to Germany. "
What proof is there that the gold is still there? Chances are it's notional. All Germany, Venezuela, or the others have is
an IOU – and gold cannot be printed. Incidentally, this whole discussion means that gold is still money and the gold standard
still exists.
What makes you think that the gold in Fort Knox is still there? If I remember right, there was a Potemkin visit back in the
70s to assure everyone that the gold was still there but not since then. Wait, I tell a lie. There was another visit about two
years ago but look who was involved in that visit-
And I should mention that it was in the 90s that between 1.3 and 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten blanks were manufactured in the
US under Clinton. Since then gold-coated tungsten bars have turned up in places like Germany, China, Ethiopia, the UK, etc so
who is to say if those gold bars in Fort Knox are gold all the way through either. More on this at --
http://viewzone2.com/fakegoldx.html
It wasn't last year that Germany brought back its Gold. It has been ongoing since 2013, after some political and popular pressure
build up. They finished the transaction in 2017. According to an article in Handelblatt (but it was widely reported back then)
they brought back pretty much everything they had in Paris (347t), left what they had in London (perhaps they should have done
it in reverse) and took home another 300t from the NY Fed. That still leaves 1236t in NY. But half of their Gold (1710t) is now
in Frankfurt. That is 50% of the Bundesbanks holdings.
They made a point in saying that every bar was checked and weighed and presented some bars in Frankfurt. I guess they didn't
melt them for assaying, but I'd expect them to be smart enough to check the density.
Their reason to keep Gold in NY and London is to quickly buy USD in case of a crisis. That's pretty much a cold war plan, but
that's what they do right now.
Regarding Michal Hudsons piece, I enjoyed reading through this one. He tends to write ridiculously long articles and in the
last few years with less time and motivation at hand I've skipped most of his texts on NC as they just drag on.
When I'm truly fascinated I like well written, long articles but somehow he lost me at some point. But I noticed that some
long original articles in US magazines, probably research for a long time by the journalist, can just drag on for ever as well
I just tune out.
This is making sense. I would guess that tearing up the old system is totally deliberate. It wasn't working so well for us
because we had to practice too much social austerity, which we have tried to impose on the EU as well, just to stabilize "king
dollar" – otherwise spread so thin it was a pending catastrophe.
Now we can get out from under being the reserve currency – the currency that maintains its value by financial manipulation
and military bullying domestic deprivation. To replace this old power trip we are now going to mainline oil. The dollar will become
a true petro dollar because we are going to commandeer every oil resource not already nailed down.
When we partnered with SA in Aramco and the then petro dollar the dollar was only backed by our military. If we start monopolizing
oil, the actual commodity, the dollar will be an apex competitor currency without all the foreign military obligations which will
allow greater competitive advantages.
No? I'm looking at PdVSA, PEMEX and the new "Energy Hub for the Eastern Mediterranean" and other places not yet made public.
It looks like a power play to me, not a hapless goofball president at all.
So sand people with sociological attachment to the OT is a compelling argument based on antiquarian preferences with authoritarian
patriarchal tendencies for their non renewable resource . after I might add it was deemed a strategic concern after WWII .
Considering the broader geopolitical realities I would drain all the gold reserves to zero if it was on offer . here natives
have some shiny beads for allowing us to resource extract we call this a good trade you maximize your utility as I do mine .
Hay its like not having to run C-corp compounds with western 60s – 70s esthetics and letting the locals play serf, blow back
pay back, and now the installed local chiefs can own the risk and refocus the attention away from the real antagonists.
Indeed. Thanks so much for this. Maybe the RICS will get serious now – can no longer include Brazil with Bolsonaro. There needs
to be an alternate system or systems in place, and to see US Imperialism so so blatantly and bluntly by Trump admin –
"US
gives Juan Guaido control over some Venezuelan assets" – should sound sirens on every continent and especially in the developing
world. I too hope there will be fracture to the point of breakage. Countries of the world outside the US/EU/UK/Canada/Australia
confraternity must now unite to provide a permanent framework outside the control of imperial interests. The be clear, this must
not default to alternative forms of imperialism germinating by the likes of China.
" such criticism can't begin to take in the full scope of the damage the Trump White House is inflicting on the system of global
power Washington built and carefully maintained over those 70 years. Indeed, American leaders have been on top of the world for
so long that they no longer remember how they got there.
Few among Washington's foreign policy elite seem to fully grasp the complex system that made U.S. global power what it
now is, particularly its all-important geopolitical foundations. As Trump travels the globe, tweeting and trashing away, he's
inadvertently showing us the essential structure of that power, the same way a devastating wildfire leaves the steel beams of
a ruined building standing starkly above the smoking rubble."
I read something like this and I am like, some of these statements need to be qualified. Like: "Driving China and Russia together".
Like where's the proof? Is Xi playing telephone games more often now with Putin? I look at those two and all I see are two egocentric
people who might sometimes say the right things but in general do not like the share the spotlight. Let's say they get together
to face America and for some reason the later gets "defeated", it's not as if they'll kumbaya together into the night.
This website often points out the difficulties in implementing new banking IT initiatives. Ok, so Europe has a new "payment
system". Has it been tested thoroughly? I would expect a couple of weeks or even months of chaos if it's not been tested, and
if it's thorough that probably just means that it's in use right i.e. all the kinks have been worked out. In that case the transition
is already happening anyway. But then the next crisis arrives and then everyone would need their dollar swap lines again which
probably needs to cleared through SWIFT or something.
Anyway, does this all mean that one day we'll wake up and a slice of bacon is 50 bucks as opposed to the usual 1 dollar?
Driving Russia and China together is correct. I recall them signing a variety of economic and military agreement a few years
ago. It was covered in the media. You should at least google an issue before making silly comments. You might start with the report
of Russia and China signing 30 cooperation agreements three years ago. See
https://www.rbth.com/international/2016/06/27/russia-china-sign-30-cooperation-agreements_606505
. There are lots and lots of others.
He's draining the swamp in an unpredicted way, a swamp that's founded on the money interest. I don't care what NYT and
WaPo have to say, they are not reporting events but promoting agendas.
The financial elites are only concerned about shaping society as they see fit, side of self serving is just a historical
foot note, Trumps past indicates a strong preference for even more of the same through authoritarian memes or have some missed
the OT WH reference to dawg both choosing and then compelling him to run.
Whilst the far right factions fight over the rudder the only new game in town is AOC, Sanders, Warren, et al which Trumps supporters
hate with Ideological purity.
Highly doubt Trump is a "witting agent", most likely is that he is just as ignorant as he almost daily shows on twitter. On
US role in global affairs he says the same today as he did as a media celebrity in the late 80s. Simplistic household "logics"
on macroeconomics. If US have trade deficit it loses. Countries with surplus are the winners.
On a household level it fits, but there no "loser" household that in infinity can print money that the "winners" can accumulate
in exchange for their resources and fruits of labor.
One wonder what are Trumps idea of US being a winner in trade (surplus)? I.e. sending away their resources and fruits of labor
overseas in exchange for what? A pile of USD? That US in the first place created out of thin air. Or Chinese Yuan, Euros, Turkish
liras? Also fiat-money. Or does he think US trade surplus should be paid in gold?
When the US political and economic hegemony will unravel it will come "unexpected". Trump for sure are undermining it with
his megalomaniac ignorance. But not sure it's imminent.
Anyhow frightening, the US hegemony have its severe dark sides. But there is absolutely nothing better on the horizon, a crash
will throw the world in turmoil for decades or even a century. A lot of bad forces will see their chance to elevate their influence.
There will be fierce competition to fill the gap.
On could the insane economic model of EU/Germany being on top of global affairs, a horribly frightening thought. Misery and
austerity for all globally, a permanent recession. Probably not much better with the Chinese on top.
I'll take the USD hegemony any day compared to that prospect.
Michael Hudson, in Super Imperialism, went into how the US could just create the money to run a large trade deficit with the
rest of the world. It would get all these imports effectively for nothing, the US's exorbitant privilege. I tied this in with this graph from MMT.
The trade deficit required a large Government deficit to cover it and the US government could just create the money to cover
it.
Then ideological neoliberals came in wanting balanced budgets and not realising the Government deficit covered the trade deficit.
The US has been destabilising its own economy by reducing the Government deficit. Bill Clinton didn't realize a Government surplus is an indicator a financial crisis is about to hit. The last US Government surplus occurred in 1927 – 1930, they go hand-in-hand with financial crises.
Richard Koo shows the graph central bankers use and it's the flow of funds within the economy, which sums to zero (32-34 mins.).
The Government was running a surplus as the economy blew up in the early 1990s. It's the positive and negative, zero sum, nature of the monetary system. A big trade deficit needs a big Government deficit to cover it. A big trade deficit, with a balanced budget, drives the private sector into debt and blows up the economy.
It should be remembered Bill Clinton's early meeting with Rubin, where in he was informed that wages and productivity had diverged –
Rubin did not blink an eye.
However, when virtually no one in the upper circles of power in Caracas ended up backing
Guaidó, Trump thought that his national security adviser John Bolton and his director
for Latin American policy, Mauricio Claver-Carone, "got played" by the opposition and key
Maduro officials, The Post reported.
Two senior White House officials told
The Post that the president "chewed out the staff" after the failure on April 30 to
shift Maduro from power and that now Trump's administration has no fixed strategy to remove
him.
Trump had "always thought of" Venezuela "as low-hanging fruit" on which he "could get a win
and tout it as a major foreign policy victory," the former official said. "Five or six months
later . . . it's not coming together," the unnamed official added.
However, this was rejected by National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis who
described the official's claims as, "patently false."
Trump was eager to boast about Moscow's withdrawal of its troops from Venezuela, but it
turned out that he or someone else in the administration just made it up:
The Kremlin said on Tuesday it didn't know where U.S. President Donald Trump had got the
idea Moscow had removed most of its military specialists from Venezuela, who it said
continued to work there.
Trump tweeted on Monday that Russia had told the United States it had removed "most of
their people" from Venezuela, where Moscow has maintained close military and economic ties
with socialist President Nicolas Maduro.
Trump's Venezuela policy is a shambles, and Russia previously brushed off his ultimatum to
remove their forces from the country. It isn't surprising that he would try to spin any
development in his favor, but in this case it seems that he just invented something out of thin
air so that his Venezuela policy wouldn't look quite so feckless. He has no genuine successes
that he can talk about, so he has to have pretend victories instead. The original tweet is
still up:
Claiming that "Russia informed" him of this thing that didn't happen makes it even sillier,
because it immediately prompted the Russian government to announce that they couldn't have
informed Trump about something that hadn't occurred. Now that Russia has corrected the record,
the president looks even more ridiculous than usual.
This episode isn't that important by itself, but it shows how easily Trump can be convinced
of the reality of things that haven't happened and how readily he will accept any story, no
matter how unfounded it may be, if it flatters him and bolsters his agenda. That makes him
unusually easy to manipulate and provoke, and it makes him an exceptionally easy mark for
misinformation. That puts the president's decision-making completely at the mercy of the
advisers that control what he sees and hears.
that his Venezuela policy wouldn't look quite so feckless.
Not a Trump fan, but is Trump's Venezuela policy feckless? Or just Trump somehow
understands that it is not our problem and/or military intervention is just a bad investment.
For the life of me, I don't understand why Russia desires to part of the Venezuelan mess, but
most of their interference is minimal in nature and really has little impact on the
situation. I get the Bay Of Bolton was half assed coup that probably did more damage to
Guaido chances for new elections. (Guaido is being painted as the Trump Imperialism candidate
which is not popular.)
The big question is why this is not China's problem? At this point, Venezuela is
completely with them.
Re: "Trump's Venezuela policy is a shambles, and Russia previously brushed off his
ultimatum to remove their forces from the country."
Agree. But the larger subtext is that the U.S. now has zero credibility with
anything . The assumption by every country on the planet has to be that the U.S. word
is not worth squat.
Fat Pompeo with his big mouth, "We lie, cheat and steal" mind-dump says it all. The
Russians are anything but saints, but they knew that the U.S. planned on having Russia
ejected from its Crimean Naval Base in Sevastopol after the coup that Nitwit Nuland and her
barrel of CIA monkeys engineered.
Similarly, the Russians know that if/when the U.S. puts sock puppet Guaido in power, they
will ensure he stiffs the Russians out of all of their claims and assets in Venezuela.
The Russians don't want to wrestle with the Gorilla, but they have no other choice.
Given the way the dealings with North Korea have gone, I expect that Trump will soon be
announcing that Kim Jong-Un has destroyed all his nuclear weapons and pledged not to build
any more. Needless to say, it will not have happened.
But, as they say, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. The question
really becomes why so many of Trump's followers continue to believe everything he says when
he lies so blatantly so often.
"The question really becomes why so many of Trump's followers continue to believe
everything he says when he lies so blatantly so often."
I don't know that they do. I tend to think that they just hate what has happened to the
country since Reagan and Clinton so much that they just want Trump to keep bashing Congress
over the head, even with stupidity.
Not to mention that humans have an innate exploitable weakness: the desire to transfer
someone else's perceived greatness on to themselves. Hence the inclination of sports fans and
adoration of the military.
So "Team America" is great, therefore I am great, and Trump represents us, therefore Trump
is great.
One should not wish ill on any other human being, even though i have contemplated several
slapstick scenarios involving certain politicians, however
Donald Trump is in the process of discovering that one cannot ignore Reality, since it
Bites, that live is not a reality TV show (the most unreal thing on television), and that
chickens do indeed come home to roost.
Unfortunately, it's been a difficult learning curve, and pathetic boasts to the contrary,
he has managed to turn both the Conservative Movement and the Republican Party into a pile of
smoking rubble.
It conservatism can be rebuilt in a score of years, it would be a miracle. More like, a
generation.
Trump's Venezuelan policy is a series of hallucination's. This article just describes the
most recent. It begins with the hallucination that Maduro is a dictator, when in reality he
won an election in May 2018 with 67% of the vote in an election that more than 150
international election observers unanimously agreed met all international standards for
democratic elections. It follows with the hallucination that the Venezuelan military would
join the US in rising up against their elected president rather than support the
constitutional government. It continues with the hallucination that the people of Venezuela
would join a US-inspired coup against the president they had just re-elected rather than join
a 2 million person plus civilian militia to defend against a US attack. And, it continues
with the hallucination that Juan Guaido is the interim president when his self-appointment
violated the Venezuelan Constitution and the United Nations and Venezuelan law recognize
Nicolas Maduro as the legitimate president of Venezuela.
The antidote of these ongoing hallucinatory experiences is for Trump to no longer trust
his advisors and end the US coup attempt, which has already failed multiple times in
Venezuela. John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Elliot Abrams have made Trump see hallucinations
that are complete falsehoods. They have led the president into an embarrassing trap that he
now needs to get out of. They have made Trump look like a fool.
It is time for Trump to take steps to normalize relations with Venezuela. That begins with
a mutual Protecting Power Agreement between the US and Venezuela for Switzerland to be a
Protecting Power of the US Embassy in Caracas and Turkey to be a Protecting of the Venezuelan
Embassy in Washington, DC. Following from that the US and Venezuela should negotiate the sale
of Venezuelan resources, primarily oil, in return for the end of the illegal unilateral
coercive measures (inaccurately called sanctions) against Venezuela. Negotiating with
Venezuela will be less expensive than a war that will become a quagmire that will end in
failure after costing more than $1 trillion and causing chaos in the region. Then, Trump and
Maduro should meet to chart a course that begins with mutual respect for the independence and
sovereignty of each nation and then determines where the two nations interests are consistent
with each other. It is time to leave the hallucinations behind and come back to reality.
The ease with which Trump is manipulated and provoked can be added to the explanation of why
Bibi is now in possession of Jerusalem and war against Iran is a high probability. That
should terrify Americans.
"... The shipments to Cuba and Russia and possibly a few others just aren't enough. Remember that Venezuela's population in 1989 was 19.3 million while today it is 32.7 million. And back then that nation didn't have to cope with smothering economic sanctions of every kind along with the physical attacks and sabotage of infrastructure. ..."
"... I believe Russia buys oil from Venezuela. US refiners then buy oil from Russia to replace the Venezuelan oil. ..."
Venezuela oil exports seem to be imploding. Headline:
Venezuela Oil Exports Slump to a 28-Year Low
By Lucia Kassai January 2, 2019
More recent:
Shipping data shows that imports of fuel and diluents necessary to make Venezuela's extra
heavy crude refinable have dropped to 86,000 b/d in the first part of May from 225,000 b/d
for April. Fuel rationing is being overseen by the military as shortages begin to bite
deeper. As local crude oil production continues to fall, and refineries operate much below
capacity, the lines at gas stations outside of the capital are now miles long.
The shipments to Cuba and Russia and possibly a few others just aren't enough. Remember
that Venezuela's population in 1989 was 19.3 million while today it is 32.7 million. And back
then that nation didn't have to cope with smothering economic sanctions of every kind along
with the physical attacks and sabotage of infrastructure.
... and a worthwhile analysis of the causes of the Venezuelan economic collapse (including
a lot of analysis of their oil export industry) from Francisco Rodriguez who Mark Weisbrot
(from the 40k deaths report with Jeffrey Sachs) says knows more about the Venezuelan economy
than anyone in the world (although he is a critic of Chavez and Maduro).
This was true about Iraq war. This is true about Venezuela and Syria.
Notable quotes:
"... In a rather odd article in the London Review of Books , Perry Anderson argued that there wasn't, and wondered aloud why the U.S. war on Iraq had excited such unprecedented worldwide opposition - even, in all places, within the U.S. - when earlier episodes of imperial violence hadn't. ..."
"... Lots of people, in the U.S. and abroad, recognize that and are alarmed. And lots also recognize that the Bush regime represents an intensification of imperial ambition. ..."
"... Why? The answers aren't self-evident. Certainly the war on Iraq had little to do with its public justifications. Iraq was clearly a threat to no one, and the weapons of mass destruction have proved elusive. The war did nothing for the fight against terrorism. Only ideologues believe that Baghdad had anything to do with al Qaeda - and if the Bush administration were really worried about "homeland security," it'd be funding the defense of ports, nuclear reactors, and chemical plants rather than starting imperial wars and alienating people by the billions. Sure, Saddam's regime was monstrous - which is one of the reasons Washington supported it up until the invasion of Kuwait. The Ba'ath Party loved to kill Communists - as many as 150,000 according to some estimates - and the CIA's relationship with Saddam goes back to 1959 . ..."
"... Iraq has lots of oil , and there's little doubt that that's why it was at the first pole of the axis of evil to get hit. (Iran does too, but it's a much tougher nut to crack - four times as big, and not weakened by war and sanctions.) ..."
Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small c rappy little country and
throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.
- Michael
Ledeen , holder of the Freedom Chair at the American Enterprise Institute
Actually, the U.S. had been beating Iraq's head against the wall for a dozen years, with
sanctions and bombing. The
sanctions alone killed over a million Iraqis, far more than have been done in by weapons of
mass destruction throughout history. But Ledeen's indiscreet remark, delivered at an AEI
conference and reported by Jonah Goldberg in National Review Online , does capture some
of what the war on Iraq is about.
And what is this "business" Ledeen says we mean? Oil, of course, of which more in a bit.
Ditto construction contracts for Bechtel. But it's more than that - nothing less than the
desire, often expressed with little shame nor euphemism, to run the world. Is there anything
new about that?
The answer is, of course, yes and no. In a rather odd article in the London Review of Books ,
Perry Anderson argued that there wasn't, and wondered aloud why the U.S. war on Iraq had
excited such unprecedented worldwide opposition - even, in all places, within the U.S. - when
earlier episodes of imperial violence hadn't. Anderson, who's edited New Left Review for years, but who has almost no
connection to actual politics attributed this strange explosion not to a popular outburst of
anti-imperialism, but to a cultural antipathy to the Bush administration.
Presumably that antipathy belongs to the realm of the " merely cultural ," and is of no great
political significance to Anderson. But it should be. U.S. culture has long been afflicted with
a brutally reactionary and self-righteous version of Christian fundamentalism, but it's never
had such influence over the state. The president thinks himself on a mission from God, the
Attorney General opens the business day with a prayer meeting, and the Pentagon's idea of a
Good Friday service is to invite Franklin Graham , who's pronounced Islam a "wicked and
evil religion," to deliver the homily, in which he promised that Jesus was returning soon. For
the hard core, the Iraq war is a sign of the end times, and the hard core
are in power.
Lots of people, in the U.S. and abroad, recognize that and are alarmed. And lots also
recognize that the Bush regime represents an intensification of imperial ambition. Though the
administration has been discreet, many of its private sector intellectuals
have been using the words "imperialism" and " empire " openly and with
glee. Not everyone of the millions who marched against the war in the months before it started
was a conscious anti-imperialist, but they all sensed the intensification, and were further
alarmed.
While itself avoiding the difficult word "empire," the Bush administration has been rather
clear about its long-term aims. According to their official national security strategy and the
documents published by the Project
for a New American Century (which served as an administration-in-waiting during the Clinton
years) their goal is to assure U.S. dominance and prevent the emergence of any rival powers.
First step in that agenda is the remaking of the Middle East - and they're quite open
about this as well. We all know the countries that are on the list; the only remaining issues
are sequence and strategy. But that's not the whole of the agenda. They're essentially
promising a permanent state of war, some overt, some covert, but one that could take
decades.
Imperial returns?
Why? The answers aren't self-evident. Certainly the war on Iraq had little to do with its
public justifications. Iraq was clearly a threat to no one, and the weapons of mass destruction
have proved elusive. The war did nothing for the fight against terrorism. Only ideologues
believe that Baghdad had anything to do with al Qaeda - and if the Bush administration were
really worried about "homeland security," it'd be funding the defense of ports, nuclear
reactors, and chemical plants rather than starting imperial wars and alienating people by the
billions. Sure, Saddam's regime was monstrous - which is one of the reasons Washington
supported it up until the invasion of Kuwait. The Ba'ath Party loved to kill Communists - as
many as 150,000 according to some estimates - and the CIA's relationship with Saddam goes back
to 1959
.
Iraq has lots of oil , and there's little doubt that that's why
it was at the first pole of the axis of evil to get hit. (Iran does too, but it's a much
tougher nut to crack - four times as big, and not weakened by war and sanctions.)
It now looks
fairly certain that the U.S. will, in some form, claim some large piece of Iraq's oil. The
details need to be worked out; clarifying the legal situation could be very complicated, given
the rampantly illegal nature of the regime change. Rebuilding Iraq's oil industry will be very
expensive and could take years. There could be some nice profits down the line for big oil
companies - billions a year - but the broader economic benefits for the U.S. aren't so clear. A
U.S.-dominated Iraq could pump heavily and undermine OPEC, but too low an oil price would wreck
the domestic U.S. oil industry, something the Bush gang presumably cares
about. Mexico would be driven into penury, which could mean another debt crisis and lots of
human traffic heading north over the Rio Grande. Lower oil prices would be a boon to most
industrial economies, but they'd give the U.S. no special advantage over its principal economic
rivals.
It's
sometimes said that U.S. dominance of the Middle East gives Washington a chokehold over oil
supplies to Europe and Japan. But how might that work? Deep production cutbacks and price
spikes would hurt everyone. Targeted sales restrictions would be the equivalent of acts of war,
and if the U.S. is willing to take that route, a blockade would be a lot more efficient. The
world oil market is gigantic and complex, and it's not clear how a tap could be turned in
Kirkuk that would shut down the gas pumps in Kyoto or Milan.
Writers like David Harvey argue
that the U.S. is trying to compensate for its eroding economic power by asserting its military
dominance. Maybe. It's certainly fascinating that Bush's unilateralism has to be financed by
gobs of foreign money - and he gets his tax cuts, he'll have to order up even bigger gobs. But
it's hard to see what rival threatens the U.S. economically; neither the EU nor Japan is
thriving. Nor is there any evidence that the Bush administration is thinking seriously about
economic policy, domestic or international, or even thinking at all. The economic staff is
mostly dim and marginal. What really seems to excite this gang of supposed conservatives is the
exercise of raw state power.
Jealous rivals
And while the Bushies want to prevent the emergence of imperial rivals , they may only be encouraging that. Sure, the EU
is badly divided within itself; it has a hard enough time picking a top central banker , let alone deciding on a common
foreign policy. German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder is already semi-apologizing to Bush for
his intemperate language in criticizing the war - not that Bush has started taking his calls.
But over the longer term, some kind of political unification is Europe's only hope for acting
like a remotely credible world power. It's tempting to read French and German objections to the
Iraq war as emerging not from principle, but from the wounded narcissism of former imperial
powers rendered marginal by American might. Separately, they'll surely hang. But a politically
united Europe could, with time, come to challenge U.S. power, just as the euro is beginning to look like a credible rival to the dollar.
(Speaking of the euro, there's a theory circulating on the net that the U.S. went to war
because Iraq wanted to price its oil in euros, not dollars. That's grossly overheated
speculation. More on this and related issues when LBO begins an investigation of the
political economy of oil in the next issue.)
An even more interesting rivalry scenario would involve an alliance of the EU and Russia.
Russia is no longer the wreck it was for most of the 1990s. The economy has been growing and
the mildly authoritarian Putin has imposed political stability. Russia, which has substantial
oil interests in Iraq that are threatened by U.S. control, strongly opposed the war, and at
least factions within the Russian intelligence agency were reportedly feeding information
unfriendly to the U.S. to the website Iraqwar.ru . There's a lot recommending an EU-Russia
alliance; Europe could supply technology and finance, and Russia could supply energy, and
together they could constitute at least an embryonic counterweight to U.S. power.
So the U.S. may not get out of Iraq what the Bush administration is hoping for. It certainly
can't want democracy in Iraq or the rest of the region, since free votes could well lead to
nationalist and Islamist governments who don't view ExxonMobil as the divine agent that Bush seems to. A
New York Times piece celebrated the outbreak of democracy in Basra, while conceding that
the mayor is a former Iraqi admiral appointed by the British. The lead writers of the new
constitution are likely to be American law professors; Iraqis, of course, aren't up to the task
themselves.
Certainly the appointment of Lt. Gen. Jay M. Garner (Ret.) - one of the
few superannuated brass not to have enjoyed a consulting contract with a major TV network - to
be the top civilian official guiding the postwar reconstruction of Iraq speaks volumes. A
retired general is barely a civilian, and Garner's most recent job was as president of
SY Technology , a military
contractor that worked with Israeli security in developing the Arrow antimissile system. He
loves antimissile systems; after the first Gulf War, he enthused about the Patriot's
performance with claims that turned out to be nonsense. He's on record as having praised
Israel's handling of the intifada. If that's his model of how to handle restive subject
populations, there's lots of trouble ahead.
lightness
In the early days of the war, when things weren't going so well for the "coalition,"
it was said that the force was too light. But after the sandstorm cleared and the snipers
were mowed down, that alleged lightness became a widely praised virtue. But that force
was light only by American standards: 300,000 troops; an endless rain of Tomahawks,
JDAMs, and MOABs; thousands of vehicles, from Humvees to Abrams tanks; hundreds of
aircraft, from Apaches to B-1s; several flotillas of naval support - and enormous
quantities of expensive petroleum products. It takes five gallons of fuel just to start
an Abrams tank, and after that it gets a mile per gallon. And filling one up is no
bargain. Though the military buys fuel at a wholesale price of 84¢ a gallon, after
all the expenses of getting it to the front lines are added in, the final cost is about
$150 a gallon. That's a steal compared to Afghanistan, where fuel is helicoptered in,
pushing the cost to $600/gallon. Rummy's "lightness" is of the sort that only a $10
trillion economy can afford.
The Bush gang doesn't even try to keep up appearances, handing out contracts for Iraq's
reconstruction to U.S. firms even before the shooting stopped, and guarding only the oil and
interior ministries against looters. If Washington gets its way, Iraq will be rebuilt according
to the fondest dreams of the Heritage Foundation staff, with the educational system reworked by
an American contractor, the TV programmed by the Pentagon, the ports run by a rabidly antiunion
firm, the police run by the Texas-based military contractor Dyncorp , and the oil taken out of
state hands and appropriately privatized.
That's the way they'd like it to be. But the sailing may not be so smooth. It looks like
Iraqis are viewing the Americans as occupiers, not liberators. It's going to be hard enough to
remake Iraq that taking on Syria or Iran may be a bit premature. But that doesn't mean they
won't try. It's a cliché of trade negotiations that liberalization is like riding a
bicycle - you have to keep riding forward or else you'll fall over. The same could be said of
an imperial agenda: if you want to remake the world, or a big chunk of it, there's little time
to pause and catch your breath, since doubt or opposition could gain the upper hand. Which
makes stoking that opposition more
urgent than ever.
Losing it all
There's a feeling around that Bush is now politically invulnerable . Certainly the atmosphere
is one of almost coercive patriotism. That mood was nicely illustrated by an incident in
Houston in mid-March. A teenager attending a rodeo failed to stand along with the rest of the
crowd during a playing of Lee Greenwood's "Proud to be an American," a dreadful country song
that has become a kind of private-sector national anthem for the yahoo demographic, thanks to
its truculent unthinking jingoism. A patriot standing behind the defiantly seated teen started
taunting him, tugging on his ear as an additional provocation. The two ended up in a fight, and
then under arrest.
There's a lot of that going around, for sure. Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins get disinvited
from events, websites nominate
traitors for trial by military tribunal, and talk radio hosts organize CD-smashings. But things
aren't hopeless. A close analysis of Greenwood's text might suggest why. The song's core
argument is contained in its two most famous lines: "I'm proud to be an American/where at least
I know I'm free." But the oft-overlooked opening reads: "If tomorrow all the things were
gone/I'd worked for all my life," the singer would still be a grateful patriot. That's
precisely the condition lots of Americans find themselves in. More than two million jobs have
disappeared in the last two years. Millions of Americans have seen their retirement savings
wiped out by the bear market, and over a million filed for bankruptcy last year. Most states and
cities are experiencing their worst fiscal crises since the 1930s, with massive service cuts
and layoffs imminent. In the song, such loss doesn't matter, but reality is often less
accommodating than a song.
As the nearby graphs show, W's ratings are much lower than his father's at the end of Gulf
War I, and his disapproval ratings much higher. Their theocratic and repressive agenda is
deeply unpopular with large parts of the U.S. population. Spending scores of billions on
destroying and rebuilding Iraq while at home health clinics are closing and teachers working
without pay is potentially incendiary. Foreign adventures have never been popular with the
American public (much to the distress of the ruling elite). An peace movement that could draw
the links among warmongering, austerity, and repression has great political potential. Just a
month or two ago, hundreds of thousands were marching in American streets to protest the
imminent war. Though that movement now looks a bit dispirited and demobilized, it's unlikely
that that kind of energy will just disappear into the ether.
"... Particularly shameless was Florida Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart, who went on Tucker Carlson's show to peddle half-baked innuendo as brazen as anything claimed in the lead up to the Iraq War. If Maduro's government survived, he claimed, it would be "a green light, an open door for the Russians and for the Chinese and for others to increase their activity against our national security interest right here in our hemisphere." ..."
Russiagate hysteria is already being used to push Trump into an act of armed aggression against Venezuela. It's a disastrous result
of a pointless delusion.
One of the things Russiagate skeptics found unsettling about the frenzy over supposed "collusion" was that it made war more likely.
Not only did the now-debunked conspiracy theories and resulting political climate push officials into a more aggressive posture toward
Russia, but once the Kremlin was returned to its status as the foreign policy elite's Big Bad, it was easy to imagine a situation
where the threat of a Russian bogeyman could be used to justify any number of unrelated foreign adventures. This appears to be exactly
what's happening with
Venezuela
right now.
First there was Fareed Zakaria, who two months ago
tried to goad Trump into attacking Venezuela by pointing to Russia's support for Maduro. "Putin's efforts seem designed to taunt
the United States," he said (it might also have something to do with the
billions of dollars Russia
sank into the country), making reference to the Monroe Doctrine. He asked if Washington would "allow Moscow to make a mockery of
another American red line," warning that "if Washington does not back its words with deeds" the country could become another Syria.
Zakaria concluded: "will Venezuela finally be the moment when Trump finally ends his appeasement?"
More recently, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
charged that Russia had "invaded" Venezuela before claiming the Kremlin had dissuaded Maduro from fleeing the country at the
last moment, something Pompeo has provided no evidence for but much of the media has treated as fact since.
National Security Advisor
John Bolton has
said that "this is our hemisphere"
and "not where the Russians ought to be interfering." Democratic Sen. Doug Jones
echoed this sentiment on CNN, praising the Trump
administration for saying "all options are on the table" to deal with Venezuela, something he suggested may have to be acted on "if
there is some more intervention [by] Russia."
The national press, taking a break from warning about Trump being a dangerous authoritarian, has been
demanding to know why he hasn't been more aggressive toward the country over this.
Particularly shameless was Florida Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart, who went on Tucker Carlson's show to
peddle half-baked
innuendo as brazen as anything claimed in the lead up to the Iraq War. If Maduro's government survived, he claimed, it would be "a
green light, an open door for the Russians and for the Chinese and for others to increase their activity against our national security
interest right here in our hemisphere."
He went on to claim that Russia had already placed nuclear missiles in the country, and that it could lead to a Cuban missile
crisis-like conflict. There is no evidence this is true, and Díaz-Balart didn't provide any.
Of course, no coverage of the Trump administration's relations with Russia would be complete without a trip into Rachel Maddow's
fractured psyche. After Trump repeated Putin's personal assurances that he wasn't interested in getting involved in Venezuela --
contradicting Pompeo and Bolton -- Maddow addressed the two
officials :
Hey John Bolton, hey Mike Pompeo, are you guys enjoying your jobs right now? You each thought your job this week was to name
and shame and threaten and counter Russian government involvement in Venezuela while saber-rattling about how everybody else better
get out of the way because the US is really mad about it. Guys, turns out your actual job is figuring out how and why you work
for a president who says whatever Vladimir Putin tells him.
Maddow went on to express her sympathy for one of the
most unhinged warmongers
in a city teeming with them ("I mean, John Bolton, God bless you"), and again seemed to suggest that Bolton's "job" of "push[ing]
Russia back because of what they're doing in Venezuela" was the correct course of action.
It's now clear there is nothing -- not Trump's years-long belligerence toward Russia's Venezuelan ally, not his
near-constant
bellicosity toward Russia since taking office, not
Robert Mueller's failure
to indict a single person for conspiring with Russia, not even his report's explicit and implicit denial that any such conspiracy
existed -- that will make these people give up the talking point that Trump is secretly in bed with Putin. If Mueller himself denied
it, they would claim he was a Russian in disguise. It's simply too convenient an attack line, and too professionally embarrassing
to admit otherwise.
There is also an Orwellian level of doublethink going on here. Russia, a Venezuelan ally, has sent personnel and equipment to
the country with the consent of its government at a time when it's being threatened by multiple hostile regional powers. Meanwhile
the US, one of those hostile powers, has for years been
laying siege to the country
and killing its people, trying to destabilize and oust its leadership, and even threatening to invade it.
Yet according to the media and political class, it's Russia's actions that are an unacceptable intrusion into another country's
affairs -- an "invasion," even. They are holding up four fingers to your face and telling you you're seeing five.
Meanwhile, these same quarters, after spending close to three years hyperventilating about Russia's meddling in domestic US affairs
-- an "act of war," in some minds -- have now seamlessly pivoted to cheering Trump as he attempts to
engineer a change
of Venezuela's government, even calling for him to possibly attack the country. This is glaringly hypocritical, but the
Russiagate
frenzy was never about principled outrage or any sort of moral consistency.
Lastly and most significantly, the rhetoric around Venezuela is now taking on an explicitly imperialistic character, in the most
literal sense of that word. Zakaria invoked the Monroe Doctrine to urge Trump to intervene in Venezuela; National Security Advisor
John Bolton "proudly proclaim[ed]" upon
launching
a fresh round of sanctions that "the Monroe Doctrine is alive and well," and one MSNBC guest
insisted the Trump administration was "right in being completely flabbergasted" at Russia's presence in the country because "this
is our hemisphere," echoing
Bolton
.
When these figures talk about "our hemisphere," they don't mean the hemisphere in which the US happens to be located; they mean
this is literally their hemisphere. The US is the imperial power with dominion over this part of the world, and only it has
the right to interfere in the countries that populate it.
Their objection is not that an outside power is involving itself in a Latin American country's business, but that this outside
power isn't the one in Washington. The fact that the US has been doing this very thing for years in Russia's part of the world --
expanding NATO right up to its
border, sending weapons to Ukraine -- goes conveniently unmentioned.
Russiagate skeptics were criticized for being hyperbolic in
comparing that scandal to the bogus
WMD tale that led to the Iraq War; the latter, after all, killed hundreds of thousands and destabilized an entire region. But the
full consequences of Russiagate will not be felt immediately; they will unfold over time. And while floating the specter of Russia
might not work this time, expect it to be used over and over in the coming years to justify all manner of
military aggression
.
As usual. When
it suits, the rule book goes out the window. But equally when it suits they will quote rule after rule from the very
same book when it suits their agenda.
When a CIA-backed military coup is attempted by a long term CIA puppet, roared on by
John Bolton and backed with
the offer of Blackwater mercenaries, in the country with the world's largest oil reserves,
I have no difficulty whatsoever in knowing which side I am on.
Juan Guaido has been
groomed for 15 years as a long-term CIA project. His coup attempt yesterday, which so far
appears to have stalled, was the culmination of these efforts to return Venezuela's oil
reserves to US hegemony.
It is strange how the urgent installation of liberal democracy by force correlates so often
with oil reserves not aligned to the USA, as in Libya, Iraq or Venezuela, while countries with
massive oil reserves which permit US military domination and align with the West and Israel can
be as undemocratic as they wish, eg Saudi Arabia. Venezuela is an imperfect democracy but it is
far, far more of a democracy than Saudi Arabia and with a much better human rights record. The
hypocrisy of Western media and politicians is breathtaking.
Hypocrisy and irony are soulmates, and there are multiple levels of irony in seeing the
"liberal" commentators who were cheering on an undisguised military coup, then complaining
loudly that people are being injured or killed now their side is losing. Yesterday the MSM had
no difficulty in calling the attempted coup what anybody with eyes and ears could see it
plainly was, an attempted military coup. Today, miraculously, the MSM line is no coup attempt
happened at all, it was just a spontaneous unarmed protest, and it is the evil government of
Venezuela which attempts to portray it as a coup. BBC Breakfast this morning had the headline
"President Maduro has accused the opposition of mounting a coup attempt" Yet there is no doubt
at all that, as a matter of plain fact, that is what happened.
The MSM today is full of video of water cannons against "protestors" and a horrible video of
a military vehicle ramming a group. But it has all been very carefully edited to exclude hours
of footage of the same military vehicles being pelted and set alight with molotov cocktails,
and shot at. The presentation has been truly shocking.
In any civilised country, attempting to mount a military coup would lead to incarceration
for life, and that is what should now happen to Juan Guaido. The attempt by the West to protect
their puppet by pretending the failed military coup never happened, must be resisted, if only
in the cause of intellectual honesty.
The resort to violence forces binary choice. I have been and am a critic of Maduro in many
respects. I believe the constitutional changes to bypass Parliament were wrong, and the
indirectly elected Constituent Assembly is not a good form of democracy. Venezuela does have a
rampant corruption problem. US sanctions exacerbate but are not the root cause of economic
mismanagement. There are human rights failings. But Chavez made revolutionary changes in
educating and empowering the poor, and it is a far better governed country for the mass of its
population than it would ever be under a US installed CIA puppet regime. Maduro was
legitimately elected. The attempt at violence forces a binary choice.
I know which side I am on. It is not Guaido and the CIA.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the
Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no
source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary
subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the articles,
but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Sure. Let's invade Venezuela. Another jolly little war. It's full of commies and has a sea
of oil. The only thing those Cuban-loving Venezuelans lack are weapons of mass destruction.
... ... ...
Venezuela is in a huge economic mess thanks to the crackpot economic policies of the Chavez
and Maduro governments – and US economic sabotage. But my first law of international
affairs is: 'Every nation has the absolute god-given right to mismanage its own affairs and
elect its own crooks or idiots.'
"... We absolutely have won most of those little wars it's just that majority of the population doesn't have the same definition of victory that our Neocon masters do. As long as we leave a county in ruins so it's development is set back for decades and there are multiple factions fighting for power, the Neocons cobble together a wonderful democratic election and call it a victory. ..."
"... Stay as long as it takes to make sure no major faction is strong enough to set nationwide policy, bomb everything that's required for a 20th Century society, then leave. If one faction plays nice by scraping and bowing to the US, fine, let them have a bit of electricity and running water. Otherwise, leave the factions to fight one another in the rubble and enjoying their new found freedom and democracy. ..."
"... Considering all the oil Venezuela has, they're just begging for some freedom and democracy. ..."
Sure. Let's invade Venezuela. Another jolly little war. It's full of commies and has a sea of oil. The only thing those Cuban-loving
Venezuelans lack are weapons of mass destruction.
This week, leading US neocons openly threatened that if the CIA's latest attempts to stage a coup to overthrow Venezuela's Maduro
government failed, Washington might send in the Marines.
Well, the coup was a big fiasco and the Venezuelan army didn't overthrow President Maduro. The CIA also failed to overthrow governments
in Moscow, Tehran and Damascus. Its only 'success' to date has been in overthrowing Ukraine's pro-Moscow government and putting a
bunch of corrupt clowns in its place at a cost near $10 billion.
The US has not waged a major successful war since World War II – unless you count invading Grenada, Panama and Haiti, or bombing
the hell out of Iraq, Syria, Somalia and Libya. That's a sobering thought given the Pentagon's recent announcement that it is cutting
back on little colonial wars (aka 'the war on terror') to get ready for real big wars against Russia and China, or even North Korea.
Venezuela is in a huge economic mess thanks to the crackpot economic policies of the Chavez and Maduro governments – and US economic
sabotage. But my first law of international affairs is: 'Every nation has the absolute god-given right to mismanage its own affairs
and elect its own crooks or idiots.'
Now, however, the administration's frenzied neocons want to start a war against Venezuela, a large, developed nation of 32.7 million,
at the same time we are threatening war against Iran, interfering all around Africa, and confronting Russia, China and perhaps North
Korea. Large parts of the Mideast and Afghanistan lie in ruins thanks to our 'liberation' campaigns.
Invading Venezuela would not be much of a problem for the US military: half the population hates the current government and might
welcome the Americans. Venezuela's military has only limited combat value. Right-wing regimes in neighboring Colombia and Brazil
might join the invasion.
But what then? Recall Iraq. The US punched through the feeble Iraqi Army whose strength had been wildly exaggerated by the media.
Once US and British forces settled in to occupation duties, guerilla forces made their life difficult and bloody. Iraqi resistance
continues today, sixteen years later. The same would likely happen in Venezuela.
There is deep anti-American sentiment in Latin America that existed long before Col. Chavez. Recall, for example, the large anti-American
riots that greeted Vice President Nixon's visit to Caracas in 1958.
'Yankees Go Home' is a rallying cry for much of Latin America. Blundering into Venezuela, another nation about which the Trump
administration knows or understands little, would stir up a hornet's next. Their ham-handed efforts to punish Cuba and whip up the
far right Cuban-American vote in Florida would galvanize anti-American anger across Latin America. Beware the ghost of Fidel.
ORDER IT NOW
Talks over Venezuela are underway between Washington and Moscow. Neither country has any major interest in Venezuela. Moscow is
stirring the pot there to retaliate for growing US involvement in Russia's backyard and Syria. Both the US and Russia should get
the hell out of Venezuela and mind their own business.
Instead, we hear crazy proposals to send 5,000 mercenaries to overthrow the Maduro regime. How well did the wide-scale use of
US-financed mercenaries work in Iraq and Afghanistan? A complete flop. The only thing they did competently was wash dishes at our
bases, murder civilians, and play junior Rambos.
For those who don't like the American Raj, a US invasion of Venezuela would mark a step forward in the crumbling of the empire.
More aimless imperial over-reach, more lack of strategy, more enemies generated.
The big winner would, of course, be the Pentagon and military industrial complex. More billions spent on a nation most Americans
could not find on a map if their lives depended on it, more orders for 'counter-insurgency' weapons, more military promotions, and
cheers from Fox News and wrestling fans.
Worst of all, the US could end up feeding and caring for wrecked Venezuela. How did we do with storm-ravaged Puerto Rico? It's
still in semi-ruin. Few want Venezuela's thick, heavy oil these days.
Venezuela could turn out to be a big, fat Tar Baby.
The "crackpot economic policies" of Chavez and Madero increased the health of the people through access to medical care, improved
housing, brought the literacy rate to one of the highest in Latin Americs, added years to average lifespan among other things
by emphasizing that the country's resources should improve the lives of Venezuela's citizens. This was accomplished by selling
resources in the capitalistic market -crackpot I grant you. The American sanctions and the seizure of Venezuelan assets are all
illegal under American law and Constitution given the treaties we have signed, but then if you want to know what those laws mean
all you have to do is ask any Native American tribe.
Who would pay Eric Prince's 5000 Blackwater hired assassins? Would the cash come from the pirate booty war chest or would the
citizens of America be stuck with the tab, once again?
@Walter Duranty Something
seems different. With Russian and Chinese intelligence help, the Guaido coup was a laughable joke. It made the US look like bozos.
I think Venezuela and allies tipped their hand there, and it is a strong one. I fear the US may be walking into a trap
It is interesting but several Pentagon/military officers are saying the Pentagon is not enthusiastic about invading Venezuela.
It is a rugged, jungle cloaked, country that is quite large and an American effort may end up being like the one in Vietnam.
I wonder how many are aware that Venezuela owns a majority of the oil company Citgo?
I wonder how many Americans know that for many years during Winter Citgo gave free heating oil to a large number of low income
households in the US northeast? while our own government was cutting back on low income heating oil subsidies.
We absolutely have won most of those little wars it's just that majority of the population doesn't have the same definition
of victory that our Neocon masters do. As long as we leave a county in ruins so it's development is set back for decades and there
are multiple factions fighting for power, the Neocons cobble together a wonderful democratic election and call it a victory.Stay as long as it takes to make sure no major faction is strong enough to set nationwide policy, bomb everything that's required
for a 20th Century society, then leave. If one faction plays nice by scraping and bowing to the US, fine, let them have a bit
of electricity and running water. Otherwise, leave the factions to fight one another in the rubble and enjoying their new found
freedom and democracy.Considering all the oil Venezuela has, they're just begging for some freedom and democracy.
It may be true that neither the US or Russia 'has any major interest in Venezuela', and that Putin may be 'stirring the pot'.
The real danger is, and globally the evidence points to this, an eventual clash between the major nuclear powers (world war).
It is ominous if Washington is getting for 'ready for real big wars against Russia and China, or even North Korea.' https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
Color revolution is a military operation in which protesters are just a tip of the iceberg. the key
players are Embassy staff, three letter agencies, NGOs, bought and foreign owned neoliberal press,
some oligarchs (who might be pressed into submission with the threat of confiscating their
assets), compradors and bought players within the government.
The initial crash with police was organized by one of such players (supposedly Lyovochkin). One of the key instruments were huge cash
flows in diplomatic mail that feed the protest ("bombing country with dollars"). In a
sense in any neoliberal republic color revolution is designed to be a success, the fact which
EuroMaidan proved quite convincingly.
Ukraine actually was a very easy target. Yanukovich was
essentially neutralized and paralyzed by threats from Biden. Security services were
infiltrated and partially work for Americans. Several bought members of the government (Lyovochkon?)
did their dirty job in organizing the necessity clashes with policy to feed the protest.
Notable quotes:
"... The script writers of the Maidan, in his opinion, were Americans. ..."
Former Prime Minister Azarov explained his version of events on the Maidan. The script
writers of the Maidan, in his opinion, were Americans.
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov told the NTV about how coup d'état of February of
the last year was organized. According to him, the script of the coup d'état was written at the
U.S. Embassy.
"The main puppeteers were not on the Maidan," Azarov said. The protests started because of the
decision of Ukrainian authorities to suspend the signing of the Association agreement with the EU.
"There was, of course, the enormous pressure from the leaders of the European Union, from
several European countries. The meaning of this pressure was the fact that we must put aside
all doubts and to sign this agreement," said the former Prime Minister. "They just needed an
excuse, a reason to overthrow our government. Because we were frankly told: "If you do not you sign
this agreement, it will sign another government, another President,"
In this regard, according to Azarov, they needed a provocation to start protest and such a
provocation became the use of force on Independence square in Kiev, where supporters of European
integration were staying for several nights. "The action was slow. The organizers understood
that without the sacred victims they will be unable to ignite the crowd. Suddenly around 3 am
several TV crews arrive, set lights, camera. What to shoot? This ordinary situation, when people
spend the night at the square?" - said Azarov.
Ukrainian people were cynically played. According to Azarov at this moment
"prepared by gunmen in masks" arrived to the square. They started beating on duty policemen with
metal sticks. When police called reinforcements instigators quickly disappeared. And when riot
police began detention, "they detain generally innocent people who spend night at the square as a
part of peaceful protest."
Speaking about the negotiations Yanukovich with the opposition, Azarov noted that the current
Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk "every day spend most of his time in the American Embassy and
following their instructions to the letter."
In the end, an agreement was signed between the President and opposition leaders on the peaceful
resolution of the conflict, the guarantor which were several European countries, but no one except
the Yanukovich, fulfilled their obligations. "I still do not understand, how foreign Ministers of
Poland, Germany, France, which signed an agreement on February 21 feel themselves. In the history
of diplomacy this agreement will be included as an example of the utmost degree of cynicism and
deceit," said Azarov.
"... "What I am saying is that I am confident that the people of Venezuela know a thing or two about what happened in Chile." ..."
"... They also know what happened when the "militares" took over in Argentina (Videla), Paraguay (Stroessner), Brazil (1964-1985), Nicaragua (Somoza), Dominican Republic (Trujillo), Guatemala (1954), Honduras (2009) Panama 1983 (Noriega – see Confessions of an Economic Hit Man on plane crash of Omar Torrijos), and on and on. ..."
"... If there is a US military attack on Venezuela one thing's for sure; many, many young men and women will be making their way from all over Latin America to take on the Gringos. ..."
"... I'm sure the Venezuelan govt knows all about Operation Condor and how that lost the entire South American continent a generation of its best people and degraded its progress and development. ..."
"... Bolton and Abraham are senile. They are totally out of touch with the new realities of the new millenium. they stupidly think that their old tricks still work... in my view both and also Pompeo are near the door out of the White House for good... they won't survive the summer. ..."
"... Clearly, Venezuelans take their oaths of allegiance far more seriously. By comparison, the Outlaw US Empire's entire Neocon and Neoliberal cabal are traitors to their nation and their oaths of office. And it's that very major distinction that's known by the vast majority of Venezuelans that's the real difference maker whereas the US public's mostly illiterate. ..."
"... One curious aspect of the recent events in Venezuela is the lack of signs of wider support for Guaido compared with "energetic" demonstrations and riots few years ago. ..."
"... Initially, some thugs were mobilized to support "humanitarian relief", but it was a smallish crowd and their most spectacular achievement was torching a "relief truck". ..."
"... Then there were "electricity protests", I have no data about their scope. I would theorize that electricity issue decreased the support for Guaido ..."
"... Seems that Russia acted in a characteristically minimalist fashion. Security of power system was improved, gasoline supplies* were improved, and a subtle security operation was launched. Bear in mind that when dealing with domestic opposition Putin is highly flexible, no "one hammer fits all", similarly with "near abroad". Letting Guaido walk around and repetitively make idiot of himself has a resemblance of handling Navalny and similar folks in Russia. ..."
@ 36 William Gruff "What I am saying is that I am confident that the people of Venezuela know a thing or two
about what happened in Chile."
They also know what happened when the "militares" took over in Argentina (Videla),
Paraguay (Stroessner), Brazil (1964-1985), Nicaragua (Somoza), Dominican Republic (Trujillo),
Guatemala (1954), Honduras (2009) Panama 1983 (Noriega – see Confessions of an Economic
Hit Man on plane crash of Omar Torrijos), and on and on.
If there is a US military attack on Venezuela one thing's for sure; many, many young
men and women will be making their way from all over Latin America to take on the
Gringos.
I really do not know Maduro. I do not know how ideologically grounded he is. But I heard
stories about corruption and connections with drug syndicates. I hope that is not true.
Otherwise, his apparent weakness will be exploited to the hilt by his ideological
enemies.
I'm sure the Venezuelan govt knows all about Operation Condor and how that lost the
entire South American continent a generation of its best people and degraded its progress and
development.
Bolton and Abraham are senile. They are totally out of touch with the new realities of the
new millenium. they stupidly think that their old tricks still work...
in my view both and also Pompeo are near the door out of the White House for good... they
won't survive the summer.
Yes, most certainly wasn't lost on Chavez. The changes he made after 2002 to the military
and other security-related areas of government are now serving Maduro well. If there was the
sort of 5th Column anti-government feelings required of a coup, they would have manifested
themselves when the armed demonstrations first began to beset Maduro in 2014, a year after
Chavez's passing, which in essence is when the slow moving coup began. Condor and other
operations were certainly used in educating higher level officers about the importance of
loyalty to Constitutional methods and that one owes their allegiance to the Constitution not
the individual just as it's supposed to be within the USA
Clearly, Venezuelans take their oaths of allegiance far more seriously. By comparison,
the Outlaw US Empire's entire Neocon and Neoliberal cabal are traitors to their nation and
their oaths of office. And it's that very major distinction that's known by the vast majority
of Venezuelans that's the real difference maker whereas the US public's mostly
illiterate.
One curious aspect of the recent events in Venezuela is the lack of signs of wider support
for Guaido compared with "energetic" demonstrations and riots few years ago.
Initially, some thugs were mobilized to support "humanitarian relief", but it was a
smallish crowd and their most spectacular achievement was torching a "relief truck".
Then there were "electricity protests", I have no data about their scope. I would
theorize that electricity issue decreased the support for Guaido . First, the tales that
the troubles were due to mismanagement and neglect look not so probable if you look at the
timing of incidents: a wave of incidents at the time "convenient" for the "cause of Guaido"
preceeded and followed by rather normal situation. Government surely spend effort to explain
the incidents with transmission lines and transformer stations as vile sabotage, ruthlessly
inflicting severe hardships on the entire population (including the middle class that should
be the social base of Guaido).
Seems that Russia acted in a characteristically minimalist fashion. Security of power
system was improved, gasoline supplies* were improved, and a subtle security operation was
launched. Bear in mind that when dealing with domestic opposition Putin is highly flexible,
no "one hammer fits all", similarly with "near abroad". Letting Guaido walk around and
repetitively make idiot of himself has a resemblance of handling Navalny and similar folks in
Russia.
Who supported 12 hours of revolution? Videos showed a motorcycle gang, few hundred of
energetic young men who blocked a highway bridge and a smallish crowd of housewives and other
non-violent type -- I must stress that I wholly approve non-violent types, but in part
because this is not a coup material. Why so little? (a) Guaido was never popular, he was in a
most histrionic of several opposition parties, popular mobilization without support of the
rest of the opposition was a flop. (b) The first two episodes of his "revolution" did not
approve his support, to the contrary. (c) On the gangland front that could provide armed
muscle and provoke bloody incidents Maidan style, the government probably did some
preparatory homework.
"... I know the Venezuelan military; I've trained some of them .... The majority of them, if the U.S. military arrives in Venezuela, will take to the hills – very formidable hills, with jungle-like backdrops – and they will harass, kill, take prisoner from time to time, and generally hold out forever or until the "gringos" leave. We might remember how the North Vietnamese and the Taliban accomplished this; well, so will the Venezuelans. ..."
Venezuela is not an easy target. Colonel (ret.) Larry Wilkerson, the former Chief of Staff
for Secretary of State Colin Powell, writes
:
I know the Venezuelan military; I've trained some of them ....
The majority of them, if the U.S. military arrives in Venezuela, will take to the hills
– very formidable hills, with jungle-like backdrops – and they will harass, kill,
take prisoner from time to time, and generally hold out forever or until the "gringos" leave.
We might remember how the North Vietnamese and the Taliban accomplished this; well, so will
the Venezuelans.
Many believe U.S. troops could ignite internal conflicts within the military, irregular
forces linked to Maduro and criminal cartels. Intervention would also undermine
Guaidó's claim to be a grass roots Venezuelan leader by seeming to confirm that he's
exactly what Maduro has claimed: A puppet of the United States.
A U.S. military intervention would "bring more problems than solutions, " said Carlos
Valero, a Guaidó supporter in the National Assembly.
...
Political analyst Felix Seijas, director of the Delphos polling agency in Caracas, says fewer
than a fifth of the Venezuelans he has surveyed this year support a military intervention.
The numbers have gone up only slightly since the beginning of the year.
There were more warnings from Russia during a Trump-Putin phone call today :
While exchanging views on the situation around Venezuela, the President of Russia underscored
that only the Venezuelans themselves have the right to determine the future of their country,
whereas outside interference in the country's internal affairs and attempts to change the
government in Caracas by force undermine prospects for a political settlement of the crisis.
The planning and decision making for the next phase of the U.S. attack on Venezuela will
take time.
Meanwhile we can continue to analyze why the U.S. coup plan failed so devastatingly.
"... Trump *escalated* US-Iran and US-Venezuela conflicts and intensified the sabre rattling towards both countries, according to all analysts. For the first time a POTUS openly said direct US invasion to Venezuela "is on the table" and his Adelson bought appointment for USNSA Bolton publicly showed in a notebook the writing "5000 troops to Colombia" openly suggesting a direct invasion was imminent. For the first time the White House asked the Pentagon to draw up options for military strikes against Iran. ..."
"... Trump's administration declared a whole branch of the Iran armed forces (IRGC) as a terrorist organisation. This is an escalation and according to most analysts, considered an act of war. ..."
"... Trump administration heavily increased sanctions to Iran, Russia and Venezuela and in the latter case even instigated a failed uprising and coup d'etat, going as far as to declare a virtual political Venezuelan nobody the "official" president of the country, which is in itself unbelievable and has no historic precedent. Another act of war actually. ..."
"... Trump administration also escalated the tensions with China, ordered the arrest and de facto kidnapping of Chinese corporate executives and openly used the US legal apparatus to attack and hinder a foreign corporation. ..."
"... Trump has been, objectively, the most neocon Israel-firster POTUS in US history. ..."
"... Friendly reminder that voting for Republicans and expecting US Jewish lobby/Corporate America promoted policies such as open borders and US imperialist interventions to stop is moronic beyond belief. Republicans are the most pro corporate pro US Jewish lobby of the two parties by far. At least there is talk and critique about how the Israel Lobby owns the USG in the Dem party. Nothing of the sort going on in the GOP. ..."
The U.S. missile strike on Shayrat Airbase on 7 April 2017 was the first time the U.S.
became a deliberate, direct combatant against the Syrian government and marked the start of
a series of deliberate direct military actions by U.S. forces against the Syrian government
and its allies in May -- June 2017 and February 2018.
Trump *escalated* the war from covert support to insurgents to direct intervention and
official *invasion* in Syria. This is the equivalent of going from financing and supporting a
faction in a so called proxy war in say Vietnam to leading the US to go full Iraq WMD and
become a warring and invading faction in the conflict. Again, this is an escalation.
The number of boots on the ground vs Obama's is data you just took out of your bottom.
Sources for your cheap PR shilling? You don't have any because this statement of yours is a
blatant lie.
Trump *escalated* US-Iran and US-Venezuela conflicts and intensified the sabre rattling
towards both countries, according to all analysts. For the first time a POTUS openly said
direct US invasion to Venezuela "is on the table" and his Adelson bought appointment for
USNSA Bolton publicly showed in a notebook the writing "5000 troops to Colombia" openly
suggesting a direct invasion was imminent. For the first time the White House asked the
Pentagon to draw up options for military strikes against Iran.
Trump's administration declared a whole branch of the Iran armed forces (IRGC) as a
terrorist organisation. This is an escalation and according to most analysts, considered an
act of war.
Trump's administration ended the Iran deal without any objective reasons, ie Obama's
effort to deescalate the Israel firsters driven Iran-US conflict
Trump administration heavily increased sanctions to Iran, Russia and Venezuela and in
the latter case even instigated a failed uprising and coup d'etat, going as far as to declare
a virtual political Venezuelan nobody the "official" president of the country, which is in
itself unbelievable and has no historic precedent. Another act of war actually.
Trump administration declared Golan Heights part of Israel brought US embassy to
Jerusalem, increasing the tensions and animosity towards the US in the ME.
Trump administration will declare Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organisation, increasing
the animosity from Arab countries in the ME to unbelievable levels. This includes non Arab
country Turkey also, a traditional ally until neocon Trump took power.
Trump administration also escalated the tensions with China, ordered the arrest and de
facto kidnapping of Chinese corporate executives and openly used the US legal apparatus to
attack and hinder a foreign corporation.
Trump has been, objectively, the most neocon Israel-firster POTUS in US history.
Friendly reminder that voting for Republicans and expecting US Jewish lobby/Corporate
America promoted policies such as open borders and US imperialist interventions to stop is
moronic beyond belief. Republicans are the most pro corporate pro US Jewish lobby of the two
parties by far. At least there is talk and critique about how the Israel Lobby owns the USG
in the Dem party. Nothing of the sort going on in the GOP.
Immigration restrictionism is a traditional pro working class, leftist policy.
Non intervention and "pacifist" policies the same. How many GOP supporters were against
the Vietnam and Iraq war? Not many yeah.
Trump has dropped more bombs and missiles on Middle Eastern countries in a comparable
period of time than any modern U.S. President. Presidents Bush, Obama and now [2017] Trump
have dropped nearly 200,000 bombs and missiles on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Pakistan,
Yemen and Somalia. Trump's rate of bombing eclipses both Bush and Obama; and Trump is on a
pace to drop over 100,000 [180,000 to be precise] bombs and missiles on Middle Eastern
countries during his first term of office -- which would equal the number of bombs and
missiles dropped by Obama during his entire eight-year presidency.
Here's more perspective:
The United States Government, under the Trump administration, reportedly drops a bomb
every 12 minutes, which means that 121 bombs are dropped in a day, and 44,096 bombs per year.
The Pentagon's data show that during George W. Bush's eight years he averaged 24 bombs
dropped per day, that is, 8,750 per year. Over the course of Obama's time in office, his
military dropped 34 bombs per day, 12,500 per year. This shows that even though American
presidents are all war criminals, Trump is the most vicious of them all.
Yes, Trump is dropping almost FOUR TIMES MORE BOMBS than Barack Obama and over FIVE TIMES
MORE BOMBS than G.W. Bush -- which included military invasions of two countries.
We also know that Trump expanded America's wars in Afghanistan and Syria (and, no, he is
NOT bringing U.S. troops home from Syria) and is ramping up America's war machine against
Venezuela, Iran, China and Russia. And this does not even take into account the way Trump has
given Benjamin Netanyahu's raunchy racist regime the green light to expand its wars against
the Palestinians, Lebanon, Syria and Iran or the U.S./Israeli proxy war (with Saudi Arabia
taking the lead) in Yemen.
Then there is Somalia:
In the age of Donald Trump, wasn't that [the Battle of Mogadishu -- Black Hawk Down] a
million presidencies ago? Honestly, can you even tell me anymore what in the world it was all
about? I couldn't have, not without looking it up again. A warlord, starvation, U.S.
intervention, 18 dead American soldiers (and hundreds of dead Somalis, but that hardly
mattered) in a country that was shattering. President Clinton did, however, pull out those
troops and end the disastrous mission -- and that was that, right? I mean, lessons learned.
Somalia? Africa? What in the world did it all have to do with us? So Washington washed its
hands of the whole thing.
And now, on a planet of outrageous tweets and murderously angry white men, you probably
didn't even notice, but more than two years into the era of Donald Trump, a quarter-century
after that incident, American airstrikes in yep, Somalia, are precipitously on the rise.
Last year's 47 strikes, aimed at the leaders and fighters of al-Shabaab, an Islamist
terror outfit, more than tripled the ones carried out by the Obama administration in 2016
(themselves a modest increase from previous years). And in 2019, they're already on pace to
double again, while Somali civilians -- not that anyone (other than Somali civilians) notices
or cares -- are dying in significant and rising numbers.
And with 500 troops back on the ground there and Pentagon estimates that they will remain
for at least another seven years, the U.S. military is increasingly Somalia-bound, Congress
hasn't uttered a peep on the subject, and few in this country are paying the slightest
attention.
So consider this a simple fact of the never-ending Global War on Terror (as it was once
called): the U.S. military just can't get enough of Somalia. And if that isn't off the
charts, what is? Maybe it's even worth a future book (with a very small print run) called not
Black Hawk Down II but U.S. Down Forever and a Day.
And now that I've started on the subject (if you still happen to be reading), when it
comes to the U.S. military, it's not faintly just Somalia. It's all of Africa.
After all, this country's military uniquely has a continent-wide Africa Command (aka
AFRICOM), founded in 2007. As Nick Turse has often written for TomDispatch, that command now
has its troops, thousands of them, its planes, and other equipment spread across the
continent, north to south, east to west -- air bases, drone bases, garrisons, outposts,
staging areas, you name it. Meanwhile, AFRICOM's outgoing commanding general, Thomas
Waldhauser, only recently told Congress why it's bound to be a forever outfit -- because,
shades of the Cold War, the Ruskies are coming! ("Russia is also a growing challenge and has
taken a more militaristic approach in Africa.")
And honestly, 600-odd words in, this wasn't meant to be a piece about either Somalia or
Africa. It was meant to be about those U.S. wars being off the charts, about how the Pentagon
now feeds eternally at the terror trough, al-Shabaab being only a tiny part of the slop it
regularly digests.
And, while America's wars are way up, according to Gallup, church attendance in America is
way down:
As Christian and Jewish Americans prepare to celebrate Easter and Passover, respectively,
Gallup finds the percentage of Americans who report belonging to a church, synagogue or
mosque at an all-time low, averaging 50% in 2018.
U.S. church membership was 70% or higher from 1937 through 1976, falling modestly to an
average of 68% in the 1970s through the 1990s. The past 20 years have seen an acceleration in
the drop-off, with a 20-percentage-point decline since 1999 and more than half of that change
occurring since the start of the current decade.
Most interesting is this Gallup observation:
Although the United States is one of the more religious countries, particularly among
Western nations, it is far less religious than it used to be. Barely three-quarters of
Americans now identify with a religion and only about half claim membership in a church,
synagogue or mosque.
The rate of U.S. church membership has declined sharply in the past two decades after
being relatively stable in the six decades before that. A sharp increase in the proportion of
the population with no religious affiliation, a decline in church membership among those who
do have a religious preference, and low levels of church membership among millennials are all
contributing to the accelerating trend.
Obviously, America's Jewish and Muslim populations pale compared to its Christian
population. The vast decline of attendance to religious services, therefore, primarily means
church attendance. Notice, also, that this steep decline commenced at the beginning of this
century (2000) -- when G.W. Bush became President of the United States.
I tried to warn readers -- and listeners to my nationwide radio talk show -- that due to
his insatiable war fever, G.W. Bush was going to forever warp the perception in people's
minds of Christianity. And, sadly, I was absolutely right. After eight years of the
warmongering G.W. Bush in the White House, millions of Americans came to associate
Christianity with wars of aggression. As a result, the exodus out of America's churches began
in earnest.
Enter Donald Trump.
As noted above, Trump has expanded Bush's war fever exponentially. But Trump has done more
than that: He has aggressively put the United States smack dab in the middle of Israel's
wars. It could even be argued that Donald Trump has turned the U.S. military into a proxy
army for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
Don't get me wrong: I am very cognizant of the fact that G.W. Bush's "war on terror" was
nothing more than a proxy war for Israel. But the Israeli connection was covert and
completely covered up. Not anymore. Donald Trump is unabashedly and explicitly partnering the
mission of the U.S. military with that of the IDF. No wonder Benjamin Netanyahu promises to
name a community in the Israel-seized, Israel-occupied Golan Heights after Donald Trump.
(Trumplinka would fit Netanyahu's concentration-style occupation nicely.)
So, not only are millions of Americans now associating Christianity with G.W. Bush's wars
of aggression, they are associating Christianity with Donald Trump's wars of aggression for
the racist apartheid State of Israel. The result: the steepest decline in church attendance
and church affiliation in U.S. history.
The longer evangelical Christians continue to support Donald Trump's radical pro-Israel,
pro-war agenda, the deeper America will plunge into an anti-Christian country.
The good news is that all over America, people are waking up to the Israel deception.
Support for the erroneous doctrine of dispensational eschatology is in a giant free fall; the
myth of Zionist Israel being a resurrected Old Testament Israel is being repeatedly exposed;
the attempts by Israel's toadies to characterize people whose eyes are open to the truth of
Zionism as being "anti-Semitic" is losing more and more credibility by the day; and more and
more people are becoming aware of the utter wickedness of the Zionist government in Israel.
Plus, more and more people are beginning to understand the plight of the persecuted people
(including Christian people) in the Israeli-occupied territories of Palestine.
Ron, maybe your shipmates on the USS LIBERTY didn't die in vain after all.
From an historical perspective, overextended wars are the downfall of any empire; from a
financial perspective, warfarism is the precursor to an economically depressed middle class;
and from a Scriptural/spiritual perspective, God cannot and will not bless a warmongering
nation.
Let's be clear: God is not building a "Greater Israel." God is not building a third Jewish
temple. God is not speaking through phony prophets who are attributing some sort of divine
calling to Trump's pro-Israel warmongering. God is not blessing America because we are
blessing Zionist Israel. Just the opposite: The more America aligns itself with Israel's
belligerence, bullying and bombing of innocent people, the more God will deliver us over to
becoming an antichrist country. After all, one cannot idolize and partner with antichrists
without becoming one himself.
Burning down the house. Driving like a madman on the road to nowhere has put the nation on a
path to its own demise. Our foreign policy is a disaster that does nothing to promote
democracy anywhere in the world. Our military has provided nothing but instability in the
world since the end of world war 2. Ask yourself, why are we involved in so many useless wars
that don't make the world a better place?
Don't you feel like we are being used by war hawks who see every skirmish as a threat to our
national security? Why can't we cut out all the military BS and just trade with with nations
that want to trade, and ignore those who want to kill each other. Let them figure it out on
their own. Social Capitalism is the only policy we should be supporting.
"All statements of Trump do not count. All Trump statements are results from stress of
torture by Democrats, and deep state."
When this president stated during the campaign,
that christians don't have to forgive their enemies, I rolled my eyes stated he wrong, and
understood well he doesn't know what christianity means and supported him anyway
that he supported same sex marriage, I rolled my eyes, rebuffed the the silliness of his
comments and understood, he is not a conservative and beyond that he doesn't know what
christianity means
when it was uncovered that he had in fact had relations outside of marriage, I rolled my
eyes, and understood that alone could be a disqualifying factor in light of the competition
and supported him anyway
when some of the most respected departments of government leaders said he colluded with
Russians, based on the evidence, I said "poppycock" and supported him anyway
when media swirled with tales of Russian bath houses and carousings abounded, I thought
nonsense and supported hum anyway
when the rumors of underage girls and same sex parties and orgies seped into the main, I
rolled my eyes and supported him anyway . . .
when he spouted off about Charlottesville prematurely, I supported him anyway . . .
when became clear he actually advocated torture, I choked, spat and supported him anyway,
afterall he's not schooled in international relations and the consequences for our service
personnel, much less apparently the basics of tortures effectiveness, especially in large
scale strategies such as the US is engaged in
when it came to light he was completely ignorant of how our criminal justice system gets
it wrong as exampled by the Cen 5 case, I supported him anyway . . .
I supported him in spite of his comments about the poor and people like me who supported
him
There's a long list of tolerance is support of this president based on his advocacy
regarding turning the attention to the US welfare . . .
And when he actually agreed that the Russians had sabotaged the US elections and even
engaged in murder in the states of our European allies -- I knew, that in all liklihood the
turn inward was dead.
Here' a man who beat all the odds because of stalwart support of people like me, who
repeatedly bit the sides of our cheeks in the understanding that the returns would exceed the
price only to discover that the man who beat the odds doesn't seem to have a spine to stand
on ideologically which were the foundations of my advocacy: national security, less reckless
spending, holding business and financial organizations accountable for misbehavior, investing
in the US citizen, restructuring our trade deals to benefit the US, not merely shooting up
tarrifs that would in turn be priced to the citizens the supposed tarrifs were intended to
protect, tax cuts that actually gave middle americans less, no evidence of a draw down in our
careless ME behaviors, i even gave him some room to deal with israel as perhaps a new way
forward -- it's a new way alright – no pretense of acting as honest brokers –
that's new, Immigration is worse and by worse he might as well be serving tea and crumpets at
the border welcoming illegals . . .
If the man you elected to turn the corner actually becomes the vehicle for of what you
elected him to reject and change, eventually one has to acknowledge that fact. he beat the
deep state, he just either had not the courage, the integrity, or the ability, perhaps all
three to withstand the victory and do the work. Of course he had opposition and not much of
it very fair and nearly all of it damaging to the country. But he had support to stand
against it -- he chose an easier path.
And while I support him still, I have no intention of pretending that he is fulfilling the
mandate for which he was elected. I would be lying to myself and doing a disservice to
him.
I have not changed, I knew he was a situational leader, I knew what that meant, but I
voted for a particular agenda, he left the reservation on his own accord and the "deep
state", the establishment", the democrats, the liberals, the libertarians, can only be held
to blame for so much --
But several weeks ago, on top of a complete failure to ensure US order security, the armed
forces paid homage to Mexicans on US territory by relinquishing their weapons and
surrendering -- and given the tenure thus far -- - it devastatingly fitting that this
occurred under this admin.
And in the midst of all this, he is pandering to those engaged in same sex behavior --
– deep state my eye . . .
the path of least resistance. I cling to the belief that having voting for any of the
other candidates -- matters would have been far worse.
I make no apologies for being a conservative and Christian and holding a loyalty to the
US.
I reject your whine, it had legs and even some salience still, but at this stage, very
little.
Now he is bed with Sen. Rubio, Sen. Cruz and others on mucking around in SA -- I can only
consider your comments as an attempt at humor.
"... As much as Trump has proven to be a disaster with his appointments of Bolton/Pompeo/E Abrams, things could still be worse. We could have wound up with Little Marco, the John McCain of his generation. All praise to Tucker for having the guts to go against the grain. ..."
"... The answer here is simple. When the President of of the US stated that he believed Russia under the instructions of Pres. Putin attempted to sabotage the democratic process, and from the mouths many of our leadership -- was successful he made a major power on the world stage a targeted enemy of the US. When that same president accused Pres. Putin of plotting the same in Europe and ordered the murders inside those sovereign states -- ..."
"... He essentially stated that our global strategic interests include challenging the Russian influence anywhere and everywhere on the planet as they are active enemies of the US and our European allies. What ever democratic global strategic ambitions previous to the least election were stifled until that moment. ..."
"... Sanctions and blockades are acts of war. Try doing it to Washington or one of its vassals, and watch the guns come out. ..."
"... Historically, sanctions are not an alternative to war; they are a prelude to it. Sanctions are how Uncle Scam generally softens up foreign countries in preparation for an invasion or some sort of 'régime-change' operation. ..."
"... All of this is smoke in mirrors. The real story is that Washington is headed for default on it's 22 trillion dollar debt and the Beltway Elites are losing it. They are desperate to start a conflict anywhere, but especially with an oil rich nation like Venezuela or Iran install their own puppets and keep this petro-dollar scam running a little while longer. ..."
"... Syria, Iraq and Libya were not destroyed for oil. Oil provided cover for the real reason. In fact, oil companies opposed war for oil. It doesn't benefit the US or those companies. Those three countries were and are Israel's primary enemies and neighbors and that is why they were destroyed. Only if you stick your head in the sand and ignore the enormous power of Israel and their Jewish supporters which is constantly on full display constantly can someone not see that. ..."
"... Venezuela has one of the highest murder rates in the world. I'm pretty sure there are still lots of guns around. They're not using rocks to kill one another. The U.S. military richly deserves to get itself trapped in a Gaza type situation of house to house fighting in the favellas above Caracas. ..."
"... Trump is a Trojan horse under zionist control who had 5 draft deferments but now is the zionists war lord sending Americans to fight and die in the mideast for Israel just like obama and bush jr. , same bullshit different puppet! ..."
"... America is Oceania , war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and I would add to what Orwell said, war in the zio/US is perpetual for our zionist overlords. ..."
"... Imperialists always see themselves as spreading good things to people who will benefit from them. And imperialists necessarily always dilute their own culture. ..."
"... If the imperialist culture is already rootless cosmopolitan, it will see no downside to the above. If the Elites of a culture have become cosmopolitans divorced from any meaningful contact with their own people (i.e. those of their own blood and history), then they will lead their people into ever more cultural pollution and perversion. ..."
"... Remember. The choice was between Trump and Clinton. Not Trump and Jesus. ..."
"... The funny thing is, the Alt-Right or the 2.0 movement is united to a man on opposing the Trump administration's military interventions in Syria, Iran and Venezuela, but has failed at articulating its own ardent opposition to imperialism and its commitment to humanity and international peace. No one in American politics is more opposed to destructive regime change wars. ..."
"... I'm not sure what "Alt-Right" or "2.0 movement" really means in the current shills-vs-people wars but all the best and the brightest in our ranks are clearly against the globalists. ..."
Venezuela illustrates why a 3.0 movement is necessary.
The funny thing is, the Alt-Right or the 2.0 movement is united to a man on opposing the
Trump administration's military interventions in Syria, Iran and Venezuela, but has failed at
articulating its own ardent opposition to imperialism and its commitment to humanity and
international peace. No one in American politics is more opposed to destructive regime change
wars.
The Trump administration's interventions in Syria and Venezuela are victimizing mainly poor
brown people in Third World countries. And yet, the Alt-Right or the 2.0 movement is extremely
animated and stirred up in a rage at the neocons who are currently running Blompf's foreign
policy. Similarly, it has cheered on the peace talks between North Korea and South Korea.
Isn't it the supreme irony that the "racists" in American politics are the real
humanitarians
while the so-called "humanitarians" like Sen. Marco Rubio and Bill Kristol are less adverse
to bloodshed and destructive wars in which hundreds of thousands of people die than the
"racists"?
It is ironic. There is also the issue of economic-based US interventionism, particularly in
the oil-gifted nations mentioned. It's their oil. Since the US economy is oil-dependent --
and since fracking is a short-lived "miracle" of unprofitable companies that have already
extracted the easy pickings -- it is the role of US leaders to make sure that we can buy oil
from nations like Venezuela, keeping relations as good as possible for those means. But US
leaders have no business telling them who should rule their country, much less stirring up
trouble that can end up in bloodshed.
There's a comment on here about US forces and the Kurds in Syria, helping themselves to
oil, while Syrians wait in long lines for gas in a country that is an oil fountain. I have no
idea whether or not it is true, and since the US press would rather gossip than report, we'll
probably never know. But since oil prices have gone up recently in the USA, it might be true,
especially since politicians always want to pacify the serfs facing other unaffordable
expenses, like rent. If true you can see how that would make the people in an oil-rich
country mad.
Isn't it the supreme irony that the "racists" in American politics are the real
humanitarians while the so-called "humanitarians" like Sen. Marco Rubio and Bill Kristol
are less adverse to bloodshed and destructive wars in which hundreds of thousands of people
die than the "racists"?
There is nothing ironic about your simple statement of fact. The humanitarians you mention
are about as much interested in human rights as John Wayne Gacy. There is gold in them there
hills, and their "friends" no longer control that gold. So we must go to war.
Rubio is running neck and neck in my mind as one of the most disgusting political whores
of all time.
As much as Trump has proven to be a disaster with his appointments of Bolton/Pompeo/E Abrams,
things could still be worse. We could have wound up with Little Marco, the John McCain of his
generation. All praise to Tucker for having the guts to go against the grain.
How is that working out now?
Those are rocks those guys are throwing..right?
Why not let THEM do the fighting and keep the guys from Ohio and Alabama here?
The funny thing is, the Alt-Right or the 2.0 movement is united to a man on opposing the
Trump administration's military interventions in Syria, Iran and Venezuela
What Trump administration military intervention? Number of Boots on the ground:
Syria -- Reduced vs. Obama, at most a few thousand
Iran -- ZERO
Venezuela -- Again ZERO
It is quite amazing that Trump Derangement Syndrome [TDS] can take ZERO troops and falsely
portray that as military intervention. In the real, non-deranged world -- Rational thought
shows ZERO troops as the absence of military intervention.
Trying to use non-military sanctions to convince nations to behave better is indeed the
exact opposite of military intervention. If the NeoConDem Hillary Clinton was President. Would the U.S. have boots on the ground in
Iran And Venezuela?
Why is the Trump Derangement Syndrome [TDS] crowd so willing to go to war for Hillary
while misrepresenting TRUMP's non-intervention?
Those who pathologicially hate Trump are simply not rational.
The answer here is simple.
When the President of of the US stated that he believed Russia under the instructions of
Pres. Putin attempted to sabotage the democratic process, and from the mouths many of our
leadership -- was successful he made a major power on the world stage a targeted enemy of the
US. When that same president accused Pres. Putin of plotting the same in Europe and ordered
the murders inside those sovereign states --
He essentially stated that our global strategic interests include challenging the Russian
influence anywhere and everywhere on the planet as they are active enemies of the US and our
European allies. What ever democratic global strategic ambitions previous to the least
election were stifled until that moment.
Until that moment foreign policy could have been shifted, but after that moment
Don't forget the genocide in Yemen. Wanting to exclude Yemenis from the USA means you're an
evil racist, but turning a blind eye to mass murder is A-OK.
Gold, Black Gold and Pirates : all about wealth and people getting in the way of the 21st
Century Privateers who will stop at nothing including overthrowing governments in Syria,
Libya, Iraq and elsewhere.
@A123Historically, sanctions are not an alternative to war; they are a prelude to it.
Sanctions are how Uncle Scam generally softens up foreign countries in preparation for an
invasion or some sort of 'régime-change' operation.
I appreciate the fact that Team Trump has not actually sent in the tanks yet, whereas
Hellary probably would have by now. Believe me, that is probably one of the very few good
arguments in favor of Trump at this point. But if we want to make sure that he never does
attack, then now is the time to make some noise– before the war starts.
All of this is smoke in mirrors. The real story is that Washington is headed for default on
it's 22 trillion dollar debt and the Beltway Elites are losing it. They are desperate to
start a conflict anywhere, but especially with an oil rich nation like Venezuela or Iran
install their own puppets and keep this petro-dollar scam running a little while longer.
If we weren't on the brink of economic collapse I could never see the Washington Elites
risking it all with a game of nuclear chicken with Russia and China over Ukraine and
Taiwan.
This commentator lost me when he decided Guaido was as socialist as Maduro. Nope. He would
not have US backing were that the case.
I checked out Telesur on Youtube on April 30 – its continued functioning was one sign
the coup attempt had failed. The comments section was full of Guaido supporters ranting about
how much they hated Chavistas and socialists and some were asking where Maduro was, probably
trying to sustain the myth that he had fled.
"When was the last time we successfully meddled in the political life of another country" The
answer to that, Tucker, depends on who you ask. While Syria, Iraq and Libya were "failures"
because we were told we would bring peace and prosperity to those countries, that was not the
goal of the architects of those wars, neither was it oil. The primary goal was to pacify
these countries and neuter them so they would not stand up to their neighbor and enemy
Israel. And if they had to be destroyed to accomplish that, that's fine. Minus Egypt, those
three countries were Israel's primary enemies in the three Arab-Israeli wars. Venezuela is
not "another" war for oil, but it might be the first.
Syria, Iraq and Libya were not destroyed for oil. Oil provided cover for the
real reason. In fact, oil companies opposed war for oil. It doesn't benefit the US or those
companies. Those three countries were and are Israel's primary enemies and neighbors and that
is why they were destroyed. Only if you stick your head in the sand and ignore the enormous
power of Israel and their Jewish supporters which is constantly on full display constantly
can someone not see that.
@EliteCommInc.
The russians are not the ennemies of the europeans , the russians are europeans , the yankees
are nor european .
If the yankees were the allies of the europeans , why they should need hundreds of
military occupation bases in Europe ? why they should impose on europeans self defeating
trade sanctions against Russia ? , strange " allies " .
@conatus
you are late conatus , the russians are building in Venezuela a factory of Kalasnikov rifles
, and Maduro is traing a militia of two million men , to help the army .
@conatusVenezuela has one of the highest murder rates in the world. I'm pretty sure there are still
lots of guns around. They're not using rocks to kill one another.
The U.S. military richly deserves to get itself trapped in a Gaza type situation of house
to house fighting in the favellas above Caracas.
@War
for Blair Mountain{If JFK were alive ..and POTUS in 2019 he would give the order to
overthrow the Maduro Goverment .}
JFK was alive way back then, when he gave the order to overthrow Castro and the result was
the Bay of Pigs disaster. And – for better or worse – Cubans are still running
their own country, not some foreign installed puppet.
'The order to overthrow Maduro' today would have the same disasterous end.
It should be obvious by now, that despite all the hardships, majority of Venezuelans don't
want a foreign installed puppet.
Carlson is right on Venezuela but was wrong on 911 truthers which he said back in September
2017, that 911 truthers were nuts! 911 which was done by Israel and the zionist controlled
deep state lead to the destruction of the mideast for Israel and the zionist NWO!
Trump is a Trojan horse under zionist control who had 5 draft deferments but now is the
zionists war lord sending Americans to fight and die in the mideast for Israel just like
obama and bush jr. , same bullshit different puppet!
America is Oceania , war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and I would
add to what Orwell said, war in the zio/US is perpetual for our zionist overlords.
One more thing, if Venezuela did not have oil the zio/US would not give a damn about
it!
Imperialists always see themselves as spreading good things to people who will benefit from
them. And imperialists necessarily always dilute their own culture.
If the imperialist culture is already rootless cosmopolitan, it will see no downside to
the above. If the Elites of a culture have become cosmopolitans divorced from any meaningful
contact with their own people (i.e. those of their own blood and history), then they will
lead their people into ever more cultural pollution and perversion.
Jews are a people who fit the opening sentence of the preceding paragraph. The WASP Elites
fit the second sentence.
If "no one is more opposed to destructive regime-change wars than the Alt-Right", it means
that the Alt-Right are traditional conservatives, paleo-(as opposed to neo)conservatives.
Real conservatives have always opposed getting into foreign wars that posed no threat to the
U.S. They opposed Wilson lying us into WW1, Roosevelt lying us into WW2. When the
neo-conservatives (American Jews loyal to Israel) got Washington under their thumb, we
started our decades of disastrous regime-change wars based on lies, starting with the
invasion of Iraq. Those neocon mf ers are still in charge.
An Alt Right 2.0 concept that is compassionate with the damage done by US war and economic
exploitation against the poorest people of the world who are mostly brown people is an
interesting concept.
But I think it will ultimately fail, since so many of the white people who make up the Alt
Right are angry with minorities and see them as a lower race. And these white people are more
interested in playing the victim card anyways.
@A123
You speak truth and cite facts, these loons go bananas.
Thank God they have no real power.
Hopefully they don't even own a hamster . probably would make the little fella read Mien
Kempf.
Because a hamster reading is just as cogent and linear as their arguments.
They are frustrated they cannot find a way to blame the Jews! for Maduro being a greedy
murdering sweathog who lets zoo animals starve while he looks like animated male
cellulite.
Funny- in their prostrations to dictators ( these retards actually defend and admire
Jong-Un) they conveniently have omitted Putin is cutting Russia from the WWW- the
Internet.
They will have a Russia intranet.
Pointing out to the obtuse daily commenters that under the tyrants that practically
fellate- they would be arrested and tortured for their Unz hissy fits and word diarrhea
Nationwide radio talk show? Wow! What's the station name, number and air time?
If you listen to people with actual media shows, they don't call people TROLL just because
they have a different opinion. They don't engage in female hysterical ranting because someone
has a different idea about the mechanics of the world.
Who are your sponsors? I can't imagine you would not want the free publicity .
I agree, there is irony in labels, in trying to tell who is more disposed towards 'bloodshed
and destructive wars in which hundreds of thousands of people die'. Why do we fight? It is
for power. Power (manifested as interest) has been present in every conflict of the past
– no exception. It is the underlying motivation for war. Other cultural factors might
change, but not power. Interest cuts across all apparently unifying principles: family, kin,
nation, religion, ideology, politics – everything. We unite with the enemies of our
principles, because that is what serves our interest. It is power, not any of the above
concepts, that is the cause of war. And that is what is leading the world to nuclear
Armageddon. https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
@TKK
My sponsors are truth and America first. All Zionist hucksters are on my hit list. Again, I
suggest you and yours consider "making aliyah". https://www.nbn.org.il/
Number of Boots on the ground:
-- Syria -- Reduced vs. Obama, at most a few thousand
-- Iran -- ZERO
-- Venezuela -- Again ZERO
We will see in the future. Trump has to stir the pot. The foaming at the mouth media and his political opposition, in
both parties, need something to blather on about. Jus like rasslin'. Remember. The choice was between Trump and Clinton. Not Trump and Jesus.
@TKK
Oh, I see a point there, and it's an interesting one – openly Christian presidents
discredit their Christianity by engaging in non-righteous wars. After contemplating the
point, I don't think the foreign policy of W or Trump is anywhere close to being the primary
factor in the decline in church attendance. After all, the Catholic Church and other
denominations are mired in myriad sex scandals, the internet pulls people from God with
private depravity, science offers compelling hows if not whys, entertainment options abound,
and so on. Nonetheless, an orthodox and faithful Christian president committed to peace and
not fighting for oil or foreign interests would be a thing to behold. With caveats relating
to perceived sanity, that person would get my vote.
"The russians are not the ennemies of the europeans , the russians are europeans , the
yankees are nor european . "
These comments don't make any sense to me based on what I wrote. My comments have no
bearing on whether the Russians are an actual threat or not. I see them as competitors with
whom there are some places to come to some agreements. They doesn't mean I truth them.
Furthermore, my comments have no bearing on the territorial nature of Russian ethos.
That's not the point. Europeans have been at each other since there were Europeans. From the
Vikings and before to Serbia and Georgian conflicts. But none of that has anything to do with
my comments.
You might want to read them for what they do say as opposed to what you would like them to
say.
Jul 26, 2017 CIA director hints US is working to topple Venezuela's elected government
CIA Director Mike Pompeo indirectly admitted that the US is pushing for a new government
in Venezuela, in collaboration with Colombia and Mexico.
Feb 22, 2019 An Ocean of Lies on Venezuela: Abby Martin & UN Rapporteur Expose
Coup
On the eve of another US war for oil, Abby Martin debunks the most repeated myths about
Venezuela and uncovers how US sanctions are crimes against humanity with UN investigator and
human rights Rapporteur Alfred De Zayas.
"After all, the Catholic Church and other denominations are mired in myriad sex scandals . .
."
Not even to the tune of 4%, and I am being generous. The liberals have managed to make the
Church look a den of NAMBLA worshipers -- hardly. In the west the Churches are under pressure
from the same sex practitioners to reject scriptural teachings on the behavior, but elsewhere
around the world, Catholic institutions, such as in Africa -- reject the notion.
@TKK
Thanks. Ignoring mindless trolls is a necessary skill for the site.
____
Given the end of the Mueller exoneration, both Trump and Putin are looking to strengthen
ties. Thus it is:
-- Unlikely that Putin is heavily committed to helping Maduro. The numbers are too small
for that. Also, what would Putin do with Maduro? The last thing Putin needs is a spoiler to
the developing detente.
-- Much more likely the troops have a straightforward purpose. Brazilian
military/aerospace technology would jump ahead 20 years if they could grab an intact S-300
system. Russia doesn't want a competitor in that market, so they have a deep interest in
reclaiming or destroying S-300 equipment as Maduro goes down.
@EliteCommInc.
You are certainly right. I have no doubt that the vast majority of priests are good men
innocent of these charges, and that there are more public school sex scandals (by both raw
numbers and percentage) then similar Church scandals. The scandals do have public currency
and legs, though, and are one reason often cited as to why the pews are empty. I am at fault
for helping to keep this ruinous perception alive with my online rhetoric, and thank you for
pointing it out.
' It's the oil ' canard has always been the excuse cultivated for suckers, and boy
do suckers fall for it.
US oil companies have not received the big oil deals in countries where the US, at the
behest of "that shitty little country", have interfered militarily. However, Russia, China,
& to a limited degree, a few European companies have.
@PeterMX
Bibi's biggest enemy, his main prize, has always been Iran. He is afraid that, if Trump
refuses to do his bidding now, it may well be too late in an election year. One way or
another Bolton and Pompeo are going to convince their token boss to green light a massive
bombing campaign, especially if Iran attempts to shut down the Straits of Hormuz. It will
happen this year if Trump fails to come to his senses.
@Scalper
In the first place, your bizarre partisan rant is a little out of place. There aren't too
many QAnons here at Unz, and there are probably a fair number of regulars here who wouldn't
even identify as Republicans or 'conservatives' (whatever that term means today).
Secondly, some of your talking points aren't even accurate:
Trump administration will declare Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organisation,
increasing the animosity from Arab countries in the ME to unbelievable levels. This
includes non Arab country Turkey also, a traditional ally until neocon Trump took
power.
If Trump were truly to declare the Brotherhood to be a terrorist organization, a lot of
Arab rulers would actually thank him. You see, the Brotherhood is actually illegal in
most Arab countries today, precisely because it has a history of collaborating with foreign
intelligence services such as MI6, the CIA and Mossad. More recently, it was strongly
associated with failed régime-change projects in countries like Egypt and Syria; so
with a few exceptions (like Qatar), the Brotherhood is not well liked by Arab rulers.
Immigration restrictionism is a traditional pro working class, leftist policy.
Traditionally leftist? Sure up until the Hart-Celler Act of 1965! The sad fact is,
we don't an anti-immigration party in the US at all today. Neither the Republicans nor the
Democrats have any interest whatsoever in halting–or even just slowing
down–immigration.
@PeterMX
It's obvious that FOX is giving Tucker a lot of latitude. They continued to support him when
advertisers left, and when accusations of racism emerged from a radio interview he'd done
years ago with a shock jock. They dare not fire him as he has the largest and most fervent
base of supporters on cable news. But Tucker knows that there is one big issue, the Elephant
in the room, of which he dare not speak. It's that shitty little country calling the shots,
whose name begins with an I.
@Anonymous
I think there may be more alt-righters opposed to foreign wars and exploitative 'free' trade
treaties than you assume. Most of the alt-righters I know oppose the current régime's
"invade the world, invite the world" policies (to borrow a phrase from our own Steve Sailer).
But unlike the anti-imperialist left (with whom they often do ally), they usually argue
against such policies based on popular self-interest rather than abstract universal morality.
They usually choose to argue that being a mighty world empire has worked to the
detriment of the majority of people in America; that the whole thing is just a scam to
enrich and empower a small, corrupt élite.
what goes unremarked here and elsewhere is the ethnic composition of Venezuela. From a few
searches, Whites are only about one-third of V.
The Tipping Point for chaos is clear. Brazil is half White, Argentina is near 100 % White,
ditto Chile.
(Argentina ca. 1900 exterminated a large number its "Indigenous." )
The most stable of Latin America is Costa Rica, which is apparently about three quarters
White.
Meanwhile the jewyorktimes reports the narco-traffickers in the Maduro administration.
Hopeless. Any Brown or Black Country is doomed. Brazil works cuz Whites know how to
control the 45% mulattos and 5 % Blacks. For now anyway. Mexico is a narco-state with the
only 9% Whites able to control the half breeds and Indigenous thru co-option. Wait for Mexico
to blow up.
The funny thing is, the Alt-Right or the 2.0 movement is united to a man on opposing the
Trump administration's military interventions in Syria, Iran and Venezuela, but has failed
at articulating its own ardent opposition to imperialism and its commitment to humanity and
international peace. No one in American politics is more opposed to destructive regime
change wars.
That's an amazing point. I'm not sure what "Alt-Right" or "2.0 movement" really means in the current
shills-vs-people wars but all the best and the brightest in our ranks are clearly against the
globalists.
@Avery
The Deep state/CIA did the Bay of Pigs. JFK was not informed about it before it happened. JFK
was fighting the CIA and deep state throughout his presidency. He wanted to shatter the CIA
into a million pieces. Read "JFK and the Unspeakable" by James W. Douglass. His peace speech
on June 10, 1963 was too much for our deep state. That speech was the biggest triggers that
set the motion for his assassination.
Whatever anyone thinks about the Alt-Right it did expose a lot of things about our current
era, our history, our politics, and power paradigms that once seen can not be unseen.
And what are you going to do about it? What can anyone really do, honestly?
Not too much at least in America. Eastern Europe still has a good chance.
In America, the trajectory and machinations of power have been set for a long time and
revolutionary romanticism tends to work better for the Left than the Right. A quick look at
the data easily reveals this.
So what do you do when you realize how so much of everything that's presented as real and
true isn't real or true? And there are so many truly bad human beings with major power over
our culture, politics, and society?
Well, when has that not been the case in human history? At some point, acknowledging all
the black pills is sort of like accepting your human limits, your finitude, your genetics,
the unanswered mysteries of existence, the nothingness of Earth in the grand scheme, and just
basic gravity.
You could become a courageous online revolutionary and eventually trigger some unstable
person to get things shut down and deplatformed.
Or you could organize with socially and psychologically healthy and mature adults who try
to prioritize attainable and realistic goals and gain some moralizing victories that can
buffer against the demoralizing defeats.
Luckily, out of the winter of our discontent have emerged many healthy tendrils of new
growth.
"... Will the overthrow of disputed President Nicolas Maduro make Venezuela a more stable and prosperous country? More to the point, would it be good for the United States? Lots of people claim to know the answer to that, but they don't. They have no idea. If recent history is any guide, nothing will turn out as expected. Few things ever do. ..."
"... Are we prepared for the refugees a Venezuelan war would inevitably produce? A study by the Brookings Institution found that the collapse of the Venezuelan government could force eight million people to leave the country. Many of them would come here. Lawmakers in this country propose giving them temporary protected status that would let even illegal arrivals live and work here, in effect, permanently, as many have before, with no fear of deportation. Are we prepared for that? ..."
TUCKER CARLSON: There is much we don't know about the situation in Venezuela. What we do
know is that Venezuela's current government has done a poor job of providing for its own
people. Venezuela has the world's largest oil reserves, yet it remains one of the most
impoverished and the most dangerous places on the planet. That is beyond dispute.
Everything else is up for debate. Will the overthrow of disputed President Nicolas Maduro
make Venezuela a more stable and prosperous country? More to the point, would it be good for
the United States? Lots of people claim to know the answer to that, but they don't. They have
no idea. If recent history is any guide, nothing will turn out as expected. Few things ever
do.
But that has not stopped the geniuses in Washington. It has not even slowed them down. On
Tuesday afternoon, on a bipartisan basis, they agreed that the United States ought to jump
immediately, face-first, into the Venezuelan mess. When asked whether U.S. presence in
Venezuela would make any difference, Sen. Rick Scott of Florida told Neil Cavuto the following:
"Absolutely. I was down at the Venezuelan border last Wednesday. This is just pure genocide.
Maduro is killing his own citizens."
When asked whether Venezuela was worth risking American troops' lives, Scott said, "Here is
what is going to happen. We are in the process, if we don't win today, we are going to have
Syria in this hemisphere. So, we can make sure something happens now, or we can deal with this
for decades to come. If we care about families, if we care about the human race, if we care
about fellow worldwide citizens, then we've got to step up and stop this genocide."
All right, I just want to make sure that it is clear. If you care about families and you
care about the human race -- if you want to stop genocide -- you will send your children to
Venezuela to fight right now, without even thinking about it, without even weighing the
consequences. You will just do it. Assuming you are a good person, of course.
If you don't care about families or the human race -- if for some reason you despise human
happiness and support genocide -- then you will want to join Satan's team and embrace
isolationism, the single most immoral of all worldviews. That is what they're telling you. That
is what they are demanding you believe.
Message received. We've heard it before. But before the bombers take off, let's just answer
a few quick questions, starting with the most obvious: When was the last time we successfully
meddled in the political life of another country? Has it ever worked? How are the democracies
we set up in Iraq, in Libya, in Syria, and Afghanistan right now? How would Venezuela be
different? Please explain -- and take your time.
Are we prepared for the refugees a Venezuelan war would inevitably produce? A study by the
Brookings Institution found that the collapse of the Venezuelan government could force eight
million people to leave the country. Many of them would come here. Lawmakers in this country
propose giving them temporary protected status that would let even illegal arrivals live and
work here, in effect, permanently, as many have before, with no fear of deportation. Are we
prepared for that?
Are we prepared to absorb millions of new Venezuelan migrants? All of them great people, no
question, But many would have little education or skills or would not speak English.
Finally, how, exactly, is any of this good for the United States? Our sanctions on Venezuela
have already spiked our gas prices. That hurts our struggling middle class more than virtually
anything we could do. So what's is the point of doing that? So our lawmakers can feel like good
people?
And if they are, indeed, good people, why do they care more about Venezuela than they care
about this country, the one that they run? They are happy to send our military to South America
at the first sign of chaos. But send U.S. troops to our own border to stem the tide of a
hundred thousand uninvited arrivals a month? "No way," they tell us. "That is crazy talk!"
"... The Empire is not weak, this is poor analysis. India and Europe stopped buying Iranian oil. 1 billion $ of Iranian oil stays blocked in China, no one wants to touch it. Even Khamenei admitted that Europe left the JCPOA in practice. ..."
"... Iran is in deep recession. Venezuela is in deep recession and is surrounded. ..."
"... Iraq? US troops are staying there. Syria? US troops are staying there long term. 1 third of the country containing the biggest oil fields is under US control. There is fuel shortage crisis due to sanctions. Europe is not stopping its sanctions either. ..."
"The Empire only appears to be strong. In reality it is weak, confused, clueless"
The Empire is not weak, this is poor analysis. India and Europe stopped buying Iranian oil. 1 billion $ of Iranian oil stays blocked in
China, no one wants to touch it. Even Khamenei admitted that Europe left the JCPOA in
practice.
Iran is in deep recession. Venezuela is in deep recession and is surrounded. Almost
all of Latin America now has pro-US governments. CIA linked Bolsonaro took over in Brazil.
Turkey is in deep recession and Erdogan lost the big cities.
India is moving closer to the US. Europe remains a vassal. Russian economic growth is
weak. The US won the trade war against China as Andrei Martyanov himself admitted.
Iraq? US troops are staying there. Syria? US troops are staying there long term. 1 third
of the country containing the biggest oil fields is under US control. There is fuel shortage
crisis due to sanctions. Europe is not stopping its sanctions either.
There is no doubt that they will be weaker in the future, but they will fight hard to stop
this and gain time.
"... The opposition's hoped-for split in the military didn't emerge, a plane that the United States claimed was standing by to ferry Maduro into exile never took off and by nightfall one of the government's bravest opponents, who defied house arrest to join the insurrection, had quietly sought refuge with his family in a foreign embassy. ..."
"... Those that didn't take explicit positions nonetheless wrote articles blaming all or most of Venezuela's woes on Maduro and Chávez. Economics wiz Paul Krugman (New York Times, 1/29/19) gave his spiel: ..."
"... Hugo Chávez got into power because of rage against the nation's elite, but used the power badly. He seized the oil sector, which you only do if you can run it honestly and efficiently; instead, he turned it over to corrupt cronies, who degraded its performance. Then, when oil prices fell, his successor tried to cover the income gap by printing money. Hence the crisis. ..."
"... Note that Krugman failed to mention the 57 percent reduction in extreme poverty that followed Chávez's replacement of management of the state-owned oil industry ..."
"... The total failure of the coup is obvious when one looks at what happened to Leopoldo López, the mentor of Juan Guaidó. He was under house arrest for leading the violent demonstrations and deadly riots in 2014 ..."
"... The generals in the Pentagon will not like the rhetorical build-up at all. They will look at their maps and find that Venezuela is twice the size of Iraq and 30% larger than Afghanistan. ..."
"... It is unlikely that Trump wants to launch a war on Venezuela. He likely knows that it would not be a cake walk, and that it would be a severe risk for his reelection. But who knows what Bolton or Pompeo might tell him to get their way. They just got snookered by the Maduro government. Why would they not snooker Trump? ..."
gjohnsit on Wed, 05/01/2019 - 12:50pm Juan Guaido's U.S.-backed coup
failed pitifully yesterday.
He called it the moment for Venezuelans to reclaim their democracy once and for all. But as
the hours dragged on, opposition leader Juan Guaidó stood alone on a highway overpass
with the same small cadre of soldiers with whom he launched a bold effort to spark a military
uprising and settle Venezuela's agonizing power struggle...
The opposition's hoped-for split in the military didn't emerge, a plane that the United
States claimed was standing by to ferry Maduro into exile never took off and by nightfall one
of the government's bravest opponents, who defied house arrest to join the insurrection, had
quietly sought refuge with his family in a foreign embassy.
Guaido's mentor Leopoldo Lopez sought refuge in Chile's embassy in Caracas, while at least
25 pro-Juan Guaido troops asked Brazil for refuge.
President Nicolas Maduro is actually in a stronger position now than a week ago.
So does the U.S. give up this imperialist project?
Nope.
We simply take it to the next level. Juan Guaido must die .
He has been a kind of a hapless figure so far. He calls for mass protests and no one shows
up. I don't think he realizes right now that he is actually now worth more dead than alive
not only to the CIA, but also to his own opposition people. A shot in the crowd or something
like that to take Guaido out. It might shock you, Dr. Paul, but the CIA is pretty good at
this kind of things.
Juan Guaido probably only has days or weeks to live.
I wonder if he realizes the danger he is in?
It's unlikely
that the Trump Administration will wait long before putting a bullet in their CIA
puppet.
"The President has been crystal clear and incredibly consistent. Military action is possible.
If that's what's required, that's what the United States will do," Pompeo said on Fox
Business Network. "We're trying to do everything we can to avoid violence. We've asked all
the parties involved not to engage in the kind of activity. We'd prefer a peaceful transition
of government there, where Maduro leaves and a new election is held.
But the President has
made clear, in the event that there comes a moment -- and we'll all have to make decisions
about when that moment is -- and the President will have to ultimately make that decision. He
is prepared to do that if that's what's required."
@dfarrah
Thinks arresting Guaido triggers a US military invasion. Eric Prince is trying to put
together a mercenary force if the US troops don't go in.
calling for the same results that Pompous, Bolton, tRump etc. advocate, the 'liberals'
just use nicer language. (highlights are mine)
"...Francisco Rodríguez and Jeffrey D. Sachs (New York Times, 2/2/19) envision
similar efforts for a "peaceful and negotiated transition of power," and (Ro) Khanna made
sure to characterize Maduro as "an authoritarian leader who has presided over
unfair elections, failed economic policies, extrajudicial killings by police, food shortages
and cronyism with military leaders."
In other words, Maduro the Dictator must be overthrown -- but don't worry, the US would be
diplomatic about it.
Those that didn't take explicit positions nonetheless wrote articles blaming all or most
of Venezuela's woes on Maduro and Chávez. Economics wiz Paul Krugman (New York Times,
1/29/19) gave his spiel:
Hugo Chávez got into power because of rage against the nation's elite, but used the
power badly. He seized the oil sector, which you only do if you can run it honestly and
efficiently; instead, he turned it over to corrupt cronies, who degraded its performance.
Then, when oil prices fell, his successor tried to cover the income gap by printing money.
Hence the crisis.
Note that Krugman failed to mention the 57 percent reduction in extreme poverty that
followed Chávez's replacement of management of the state-owned oil industry (.
I picked the examples above from the article above but it would be a mistake to not point
out that this is about all of the media but the NY Tool really stands out, of course Wapoop
is never far behind.
However to not make this post too long I'll put up just two of the opening paragraphs and it
gets a lot better...
"A FAIR survey of US opinion journalism on Venezuela found no voices in elite corporate media
that opposed regime change in that country. Over a three-month period
(1/15/19–4/15/19), zero opinion pieces in the New York Times and Washington Post took
an anti–regime change or pro-Maduro/Chavista position. Not a single commentator on the
big three Sunday morning talkshows or PBS NewsHour came out against President Nicolás
Maduro stepping down from the Venezuelan government.
Of the 76 total articles, opinion videos or TV commentator segments that centered on or
gave more than passing attention to Venezuela, 54 (72 percent) expressed explicit support for
the Maduro administration's ouster. Eleven (14 percent) were ambiguous, but were only
classified as such for lack of explicit language. Reading between the lines, most of these
were clearly also pro–regime change. Another 11 (14 percent) took no position, but many
similarly offered ideological ammo for those in support.
@aliasalias a choice between corrupt socialists and corrupt capitalists. Yay.
So now I'm watching tv, and oh noes, some guy says that Caracas is a war zone! But all I
see is a bunch of people and some sort of smoke bombs going off. But no one yet is shooting.
People are throwing rocks at some military vehicles.
@aliasalias I'm also willing to bet he was perfectly fine with the US ordering its
client states in the Middle East to ramp up oil production to manipulate prices.
What I find particularly laughable is the fact that so many idiots on and offline think
Venezuela is socialist despite the fact that their economy is 70 percent private, or mixed,
like ours used to be before the capitalist pigs sold off the commons to the highest bidders
piece by god damn piece.
Liberals and conservatives are just 2 sides of the same fascist coin at this point.
Even after an effective multi-year economic embargo that's caused hyperinflation in
Venezuela, and despite a plague of Stuxnet-like viruses that took down most of the country's
electrical and communications grid, all the CIA has managed to do is make itself look
ineffectual at what really matters. Same in Iran.
All we really still do well is wreck stuff, cause starvation, and cut down the supply of
oil going to the world market.
The Agency doesn't really confuse and intimidate anyone, anymore, except The New York
Times.
Or is the American public missing the obvious? All I see from the folks advocating for a
coup in Venezuela is that
1) people are starving,
2) Maduro is a "dictator" (supported by
what evidence I don't know) and
3) something must be done. They have no evidence for the
counter argument that
4) they are comprador elites who want nothing more than
5) to get their
hands on PdVSA's oil after 6) their American sponsors take the lion's share and that
7) it's
perfectly obvious that, apart from the end of the US-led embargo, nothing is going to get any
better for the vast majority of Venezuelans if the comprador elites are allowed to take over
the country. This is because their methods are
9) at least as dictatorial as those they
accuse Maduro of employing. And then we have the undemocratic idea that
10) the United States
government should somehow have a "say" in who rules Venezuela, a proposition that appears to
have the open assent of most of the world's governments.
Generals promised him that they were with him, but they were not.
US failed again. And the world knows it.
The total failure of the coup is obvious when one looks at what happened to Leopoldo
López, the mentor of Juan Guaidó. He was under house arrest for leading the
violent demonstrations and deadly riots in 2014. Yesterday morning the guards let him go.
While the circumstances are not clear, the police chief responsible for the guards has been
fired. López promised his followers that he would go to the Miraflores Presidential
Palace. But he wasn't even able to leave eastern Caracas.
Yesterday evening López,
with his wife and daughter, fled into the Chilean embassy. They seem to have disliked the
accommodations. Two hours later they moved into the Spanish embassy.
While the embassy food
may be good, it will be a quite different life than in their own comfortable mansion. A few
of the soldiers who supported Guaidó took refuge in the Brazilian embassy.
Guaidó is still free.
The generals in the Pentagon will not like the rhetorical build-up at all. They will
look at their maps and find that Venezuela is twice the size of Iraq and 30% larger than
Afghanistan. It has impenetrable jungles, mountains and slums that even Venezuelan troops
do not dare to enter. It has a functioning army and halfway decent air defenses which were
recently upgraded by Russian specialists.
It is unlikely that Trump wants to launch a war on Venezuela. He likely knows that it
would not be a cake walk, and that it would be a severe risk for his reelection. But who
knows what Bolton or Pompeo might tell him to get their way. They just got snookered by the
Maduro government. Why would they not snooker Trump?
There are absolutely no vital U.S. interests at stake in Venezuela, and the Venezuelan government poses no threat to the United
States. There is no way under these circumstances that military action could be "required," so when Pompeo suggests that it could
happen we are clearly talking about a war of choice divorced from any U.S. security interests. It would be a war fought solely for
the purpose of achieving regime change, and the only reason why the U.S. would do that is to vindicate the Trump administration's
reckless blunder of taking sides in an internal political dispute. No Americans should die for the sake of Trump's ego or for the
ambitions of hawkish senators.
Attacking the Venezuelan government would be a terrible error and a violation of international law. It would be a calamity for
the people of Venezuela, who would bear many of the costs of turning their internal crisis into an international war, and it would
likely cause more displacement and increase the number of people fleeing the country in the short term. I suspect it would also be
a more difficult and costly war than most of us expect, and it would be a massive waste of U.S. resources and American lives in an
unjustified and unnecessary war. If all that isn't enough, an unauthorized Venezuelan war would also be completely illegal under
U.S. law. The American people have no appetite for a new war for regime change anywhere in the world, and there is not much support
for it even in Congress. If Trump tries to take the U.S. to war in Venezuela, he will be in clear violation of the Constitution and
should be impeached for it.
The thing I really don't understand about Venezuela here is why is this not China's problem while the US and Russia doing old
cold war dance here? They are in debt to their eyeballs here with them.
At this point, Bolton and Pompeo are doing everything to suck President Trump into the battle for Venezuela and we must be
not support military action. (I fear the talking heads at Fox News here.) Because it appears the people, or majority, of Venezuela
are generally tiring of Maduro government but they do not want US military assistance. (Note any truth the CIA dropped weapons
to the Guiadro forces? They do have US guns but this stuff get trade fairly easily without US government doing.)
If America goes to war in Venezuela, Trump loses my vote in 2020. If we don't get out of at least one more unnecessary war like
Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, etc, he's on thin ice. Getting OUT of foreign wars was one of his major campaign promises.
It seems that wars of opportunity are the only kind we engage in over the past few decades. If we don't have a war with either
Venezuela or Iran, I will be shocked and very relieved.
However, I am not optimistic. Our foreign policy seems to be completely controlled by NeoCons, arms merchants, and Saudi / Israeli
interests, with no honest benefits to our own nation's security or strategic interests.
Apologies to b, but today's Xymphora post really tickled my fancy.>
Bay of piglets, Tuesday, April 30, 2019
"Venezuelan coup attempt 'directly planned in Washington' – FM". Guido's cute little
coup-let. If you stage a coup and nobody notices as it is so half-assed, is it really a coup?
"Venezuela: Military Uprising in Caracas (in Development)".
"Venezuela - Bay of Pigs Redux?" (Lang).
Obviously, the government can no longer tolerate Guido's shenanigans, which have become a
public safety matter.
I look forward to the embassy video showing them skateboarding in their quarters. I don't,
however, believe any self-respecting cat will befriend either one of these tools.
Correction to 114 above. The Venezuela Analysis tweet linking to the Chile Today story
claiming that both Guaidó and López had taken refuge in the Chilean embassy has
been removed, and the story only claims that López is there. Miscommunication in a
rapidly developing situation? In any case, surely Guaidó is seeking refuge SOMEplace.
multiple sources are reporting similar information to telesur's update:
UPDATE: 3:11
pm Chile's Foreign Affairs Minister Roberto Ampuero confirmed that Venezuelan opposition
politician Leopoldo Lopez and his family requested asylum at the Chilean embassy in
Caracas.
"Lilian Tintori and her daughter entered as guests of our diplomatic mission in
Caracas. A few minutes ago her spouse, Leopoldo Lopez, joined his family in that place. Chile
reaffirms commitment with Venezuelan democrats," Minister Ampuero tweeted.
that seems that this iteration of the coup has fizzled. stay tuned for what comes
next.
The difference with EuroMaydan is that there is no distinct region of the country which supports the opposition.
Notable quotes:
"... US media will milk this to increase sanctions and economic blockade on the country. ..."
"... The show will go on produced and directed by US intelligence. They are using psychological warfare not only on Venezuelans but on American and European citizens. ..."
So called "coup" attempt was just a show for American and European audience consumption.
You can easily tell by watching the Western coverage the last couple of days(CNN, fox,
European news) and compare it to actual reality on the ground seen through interviews with
Venezuelans and social media videos.
US media will milk this to increase sanctions and economic blockade on the country.
It seems Guaido and even López were used as pawns in this scheme by US intelligence
and/,or Venezuelan and Russian intelligence. You can tell by looking at their faces on photos
taken that early morning and by the fact that López immediately ran to the Chilean
embassy. They knew they'd been duped and used as pawns.
The show will go on produced and directed by US intelligence. They are using psychological
warfare not only on Venezuelans but on American and European citizens.
Be aware US
intelligence is running the show they don't spend 100 billion in Intelligence to let an idiot
like Guaido run the show. Guaido is their dancing monkey. Watch the monkey dance. Dance
monkey! Dance!
Is Maduro put in Yanukovich situation by Washington. If so he is doomed...
Notable quotes:
"... Cue the snipers on rooftops. Not wishing for this, but that's what history suggests. Naturally, Maduro would then be blamed. ..."
"... The carnage was blamed on Yanukovich and the Berkut, but the actual killers were from the rebels. ..."
"... All that's needed are a few snipers killing some actually innocent protestors, and blame for the carnage would be pinned on Maduro. Like others in this blog, I think that Maduro should immediately arrest Guaido et al., and not allow the situation to progress further. He should be wary of repeating Yanukovich' mistake. ..."
"... That said, I agree with previous commenters that Guaidó and his clique have gone beyond seditious "baiting" and advocating violent rebellion to engaging in armed insurrection-- however staged and phony. ..."
"... My guess - the CIA want Guaido out of the way to start a serious run at Madura. Sacrifice Guaido and blame Madura (he'll be dead in a week I guess) ..."
Beware of snipers on the roof alla the Takism massacre in Turkey 1977 May Day with the Ecevit (leftist) gov't in power.
Of course Bengazi and Kiev come to mind as well.
Jackrabbit | Apr 30, 2019 12:00:05 PM | 37
Cue the snipers on rooftops. Not wishing for this, but that's what history suggests.
Naturally, Maduro would then be blamed.
Absolutely correct, Prince's mercs could not actually win territory and hold it. Their
attack would just be a "bloody their nose" sort of thing that American psychos are so fond
of. Basically Prince's attack dogs create chaos as long as they can get away with and when
the Venezuelan military begins a methodical counterattack they retreat to Colombia. Beyond
destabilizing the government somewhat I don't see what it could accomplish, though.
I think the concern raised by others is much more likely; that is snipers killing dozens
or hundreds of people celebrating May Day in such a way that the mass media can spin it as
the government's doing. Most Americans do not know what May Day is and will assume that any
Venezuelan crowds their TVs show them will be Random Guaido's faithful flock protesting
against Maduro. Guaranteed that's how the New York Langley Times will spin
it tomorrow. If mystery snipers (CIA death squads) shoot up the festival-goers it will not be
difficult to fool Americans into thinking that the mystery snipers are pro-Maduro forces
trying to kill a few Guaidog supporters for some reason.
What further suggests this possibility is that the US State Department's astroturf Twitter
army has been trying to force the meme that Random Guaido is actually a socialist and is more
left than Maduro. This is to seed the idea among people who actually do know what May Day is
about that Maduro would oppose May Day celebrations and thus reinforce the forced meme that
Maduro loyalists are responsible for tomorrow's sniper attacks.
Still, selling it to the gullible American public is one thing. It is another entirely to
fool the Venezuelans since many of them will be seeing this happen firsthand. If the
Venezuelan people don't buy that the government is behind the sniper attacks then they will
close up ranks around Maduro rather than throw their lot in with Guaidog's coup attempt.
@jayc (68) Are the coup planners and advisors smart or dumb? In one sense, they are smart,
because they can reason from some basic assumption and reach a conclusion that seemingly
flows from the rules of logic. OTOH, they are dumb, because the basic assumption from which
their reasoning begins is a steaming pile of crap. So, I vote for DUMB.
This is a very dangerous situation. Recall the leaked conversation between Cathering Ashton
and Umas Paet, indicating that Maidan sniping was coming from the hotel occupied by the
protestors.
The carnage was blamed on Yanukovich and the Berkut, but the actual killers were from the
rebels.
All that's needed are a few snipers killing some actually innocent protestors, and blame
for the carnage would be pinned on Maduro. Like others in this blog, I think that Maduro
should immediately arrest Guaido et al., and not allow the situation to progress further. He
should be wary of repeating Yanukovich' mistake.
This is just to further confirm that this stunt is being hyped by US mass-media as if it is
"the big one", i.e. that Guaidó and his "revolutionary" forces are practically
storming the presidential palace.
I listen to the local all-news radio station at the top of the hour. It's a reliable
indicator of the tune du jour being played on the mass-media Mighty Wurlitzer.
This morning, as noted, it was the "top story"-- and presented as if the long-anticipated
nation-wide coup was raging. Despite the usual overwrought sensationalism, I suspected that
there was less than met the ear: this local station didn't throw over to their parent network
for a Special Report, as it typically would if the conflict had actually escalated into open
rebellion.
"Special Report" mode is announced with dramatic theme music, and Team Coverage featuring
the Usual Suspect celebrity network correspondents and a gaggle of house "experts".
So I correctly concluded that despite the breathless tone, this was much ado about
little. ____________________________________________________
That said, I agree with previous commenters that Guaidó and his clique have gone
beyond seditious "baiting" and advocating violent rebellion to engaging in armed
insurrection-- however staged and phony.
It seems to have intentionally crossed a line to
further test the Maduro government's patience and resolve.
I'm not one of those who finds fault with embattled statesmen for refusing to act
precipitously in response to obvious provocations. Maduro and loyal Venezuelans know
perfectly well that even a reasonable response to blatant illegal and illicit provocations
may be used by the golpistas (which includes the US/Western sponsors and enablers) as
a pretext for foreign intervention.
But the prudent policy of tolerance and forbearance cannot continue indefinitely in the
face of outright treasonous provocations, since this will eventually be perceived as the
government turning a blind eye, or winking at, the rule of law upon which it relies for
legitimacy.
It's a difficult dilemma.
William Gruff | Apr 30, 2019 3:25:23 PM | 93
psychohistorian @87 said
"...with very few shots being fired."
This is an important point. The Russians and Chinese seem to have the psycho empire psychoanalyzed and are offering good
guidance to Venezuela, assuming Venezuelans themselves are not also clued into how the psycho empire works.
In essence, America needs a pretext to attack. Americans need to maintain the delusion that they are the victims, and that
it was their victims who forced America to attack against America's bogus peace-loving will.
The pretext doesn't need to be very convincing, but it needs to exist. For this reason it could be wiser to just leave
Random Guaido alone, but arrest and court martial the military personnel who took part in this little stunt. Lopez should also
be re-arrested and tried for violating the terms of his detention.
This arresting should be done by regular police for Lopez and military police for the military personnel who violated the
chain of command. No shooting or even guns drawn. Just calmly take them into custody and let the legal process work on them.
NOBTS | Apr 30, 2019 3:34:39 PM | 96
Now that CIA poster boy Leopoldo is available to take charge Juan Doe is prime sniper fodder!
The Unconventional Warfare Manual sets out the techniques of subversion the US uses in targeting nation states
that don't toe the line.
Although the document is of recent date, the policy has clearly existed for a long time.
Based on Church Committee hearings, it has been estimated that the US has carried out tens of thousands of covert
operations since WW2.
Guaido is just an opportunity for Bolton to stir up trouble.
He has never been part of a CIA long term regime change plan. If he was then his wikipedia page would not have been
created just 2 weeks before Trump recognised him as President (or at least it would have been manipulated to appear a lot
older).
And he would have been mentioned in WaPo a hundred times in the last 2 years instead of only a week before Trump
recognition.
My guess - the CIA want Guaido out of the way to start a serious run at Madura. Sacrifice Guaido and blame Madura
(he'll be dead in a week I guess).
"... it was Russia that attacked Iraq on the basis of lies? ..."
"... It must have been Russia that turned Libya into a failed state, complete with slave markets? ..."
"... Instead of spinning fantasies about Maduro going into exile or being overthrown by some kind of joint (and illegal) Latin American task force, how's about we consider the very reasonable idea of Guaidó being arrested and tried for treason? ..."
Please refrain in using the term "democracy" so easily. US is a republic with the surface of
elected representative system, and we know exactly how that works. See the election of Truman
as VP instead of Wallace in 1944 or so or very recently the election of Hillary Clinton as
democratic representative.
A true democracy is done via a sortition system that selects randomly from the roster of
eligible citizens to represent the will of the people.
Imagine that in the Second Amendment instead of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary
to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed" we would have: "A well educated Citizenry, being necessary to the security and
well-being of a free, moral, and ethically sound State, the right of the people to get a
sound Education in Philosophy, Ethics, Civics, Logic, Finance, and Health, shall not be
infringed".
it was Russia that attacked Iraq on the basis of lies?
It is China that is gleefully assisting the Saudi tyrants to commit genocide?
It must have been Russia that turned Libya into a failed state, complete with slave
markets?
Is China now that is frantically threatening war on Iran?
Russia must have been responsible for supporting jihadists to turn Syria into another failed
state, right?
For that matter, is it Russia and China that are threatening war on the elected and UN
recognized government of Venezuela?
Seriously, after America's long and bloody track record of failed and bloody
interventions, it baffles me that anyone could say something so ridiculous.
" fearmongering about the "Yankee" empire to the north."
What, this isn't justified?
Instead of spinning fantasies about Maduro going into exile or being overthrown by some
kind of joint (and illegal) Latin American task force, how's about we consider the very
reasonable idea of Guaidó being arrested and tried for treason?
Guaidó seems to have neither a base nor large scale military support nor access
to significant military equipment. If that does not change this coup attempt is likely to
fail within a few hours.
We may have jumped the shark in to the realm of the monthly
coup attempt. Mostly a media event to see if they can get a buy-in. Didn't work? Not to
worry we will try again next month!
Can you imagine a force of 5000 or so mercs staging a combat assault on a large and
reasonably well armed country?
If it didn't involve so much killing and dying it would be amusing to watch the "private
army" get pinned down and butchered.
Seriously without air cover it would turn into bloody squalor. Meanwhile Russia and
perhaps China are likely providing signal intel fo the Venezuelan military and keeping a
close eye on what the gringoes are up to. Much like the RAND document on destabilizing
other nations it will probably be a slow bleed by sabotage and scarcity.
I can't see either Guaido, the US, or any other of the coup fomentors ceasing their
attempts until they've achieved some kind of result. Guaido running around, and I can see
the rationale behind allowing him to do so, is an ongoing problem. Too much is at stake for
the powerful interests to let go of any of their global plans. People everywhere do not
really matter all that much.
Looks like the Neo-Cons just replied with their unavoidable escalation, this smacks of
desperation. I wouldn't be surprised if Abrams told Random Guy to announce a coup and even
if it fails the US will protect him or use it as an excuse to invade. Once this coup fails
Maduro should stick both of these traitors in a "real" prison and see if that loosens their
tongues a bit, neither of these fools have experienced real hardship so just taking away
their sliver spoons and private aircraft would convince them to rat out their fellow
traitors
While everyone is aware of the existence of fake news, we are less aware of how
editorial conflicts of interest can be used to sway public opinion, particularly in the
case of a highly influential and widely read newspaper like the New York Times.
Harvard Law School
Barack Obama, an alumni of Harvard Law School, was the United States President who ordered
the destruction of Africa's richest, most literate and developed country, Libya, and
reduced that country to rubble and a state of lawlessness. Thousands died.
The sovereign wealth fund of the oil rich country has disappeared without trace. Libya's
premier medical facilities that were the envy of it's continent and it's neighbours in the
Middle East have been destroyed, precisely at the time that it's citizens required them.
Many of the doctors, nurses and ancillary staff, as highly trained as their counterparts in
Europe, have also disappeared without trace, many presumed drowned in the waters of the
Mediterranean trying to flee to save their lives. Libya is now the poorest state in Africa.
The leader who had united it and raised the infrastructural standards to be on a par with
the first world, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, never had his day in a court of any description,
he was beaten, tortured and sodomised with a knife, before being murdered on the blood
soaked streets by a mob.
We have to wonder what it is that they are teaching at the Harvard Law School? In the
1980's the tiny countries of Central America, Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua suffered
from their own brutal civil wars. Extreme, right wing governments and militias were either
trying to hold onto power or to seize it for themselves from the impoverished indigenous
citizenries who sought democracy and guarantees of their fundamental civil and human
rights. The United States sent in Elliot Abrams, now to be found lurking in the jungles of
Venezuela, to support the fascistic regimes in the brutal battle against their own
civilians. Mr Abrams was another product of the esteemed Harvard Law School. By the end of
his time there, hundreds of thousands of some of the world's poorest people and been
murdered, their bodies tossed into mass graves if they were lucky. There was no rule of
law, in spite of the fact that there were constitutions and courts, judges and the concept
of jurisprudence.
The current Secretary of State of the United States, Mr Mike Pompeo, recently addressed
an audience of American students and told them that his former department, the Central
Intelligence Agency, of which he was the Director from 2017 until 2018, routinely "lied,
cheated and stole" as and when it suited or the occasion demanded. Mike Pompeo is another
American official who studied at and graduated from the Harvard Law School.
This Massachusetts institution has had scores of it's students graduate and pass
through, onwards and upwards into positions of authority in the halls of power. It is
difficult to see what ethical foundations were laid down in those formative years of
studying the law in the seminars of that Cambridge campus. Three alumni of Harvard Law
School who have recently served and continue to serve in some of the highest offices of the
United States, have done irreparable damage to a number of countries and have done so by
breaking every international law that existed to protect them. They did this
unapologetically, in order, as Secretary of State Pompeo admitted in a rare moment of
candour, to "cheat and steal" from defenceless nation states and their helpless
populations.
Perhaps Harvard Law School is not the best place to send one's kids to learn about
ethics, democracy and the rule of law.
Couldn't help noticing that Guyaido looks like a frightened little bunny which just soiled
its underwear or is about to. Lopez seems to be in a similar state of near-panic. I don't
know why the govt doesn't just disappear them. They could be stuffed and embalmed and put
on display in the National Museum as a reminder that abject stupidity isn't a virtue in
Venezuela.
OK, both Random Guy and Lopez are openly committing armed insurrection and high treason.
Now is the time to arrest both, try in the courts (public and televised) for high treason.
Unlimited military force (as required) is fully justified in making the arrests. Not to do
so is appeasing the criminal actions of a foreign force attempting to use violence to usurp
the legitimate and democratically elected government of a sovereign state.
Until now there have been legitimate strategic grounds for holding off from arresting
Random Guy. No longer. They must be crushed with the full force of the law backed by
military power if necessary, and immediately prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Limit the prosecution in the first instance to Random Guy and Lopez, and to High Treason
and military insurrection. All other charges and defendents can be tried later in a
separate trial, but these two need a straightforward and legally watertight conviction as
quickly as possible, so that there is then no rotting carcase of ambiguity left.
Trump won't be gaining any "wave" from attacking Venezuela. In fact, it stands to alienate
a large part of his base and energize the meekly antiwar Democrats.
It might be moot since it looks like this putsch has failed to get more support, and if
so Guadó will spend the next months in a cage.
Maduro didn't arrest random guy to deny the US an excuse to invade. The US was bluffing I
think but simply ignoring random dudecwas wise at that point.
But things have changed now. Lopez and Guaidó must be arrested and tried now.
Failure to do so would encourage additional coups.
This does indeed smack of desperation as a previous poster observed.
Remember the (if I remember correctly) supposed 1800+ Venezuelan soldiers being kept in
hotels in Cucuta, Colombia across the border? This and the white house rejection of the
Prince scheme show that some combination of the US, the Colombians, and Guaidó's
people have had little faith in the route of using that as the core of a contra force. Now
they might have to.
As for our boy Juan, presidente encargado, unless something drastic happens very soon,
he'll be wishing for some black helicopters to show up and pluck him off that bridge.
Unless, of course, being arrested is the plan. This may be a case of believing your own
propaganda - the opposition claims it's 90% of Venezuela. Maybe Guaidó truly
believed all he needed to do was orchestrate something like Prince's "dynamic" event and
the army would rally to Altamira with the masses in tow.
About a month ago, when his motorcade went outside of his east Caracas haunts and got
pelted by rocks, you had all the internet trolls denouncing it as staged.
You see, there are mafialike Chavista bosses, Cubans all, forcing the barrios to act
like they hate their beloved interim president. Maybe instead of taking the hint and
changing strategy, Juan believed his own spin.
Or maybe he did take the hint, and figures the struggle against Cuban oppression is
better waged from the dock than the streets, where he can force action from his allies and
supporters by claiming abuse. Time will tell.
The US media is really talking up this latest coup attempt by random guy, but I still don't
see the meat on it. successful coups are fast moving and depend on quickly seizing key
targets like media centers, power generators and most importantly of all seizing high value
government officials. Currently, it looks like Random Guy just found some more random guys
to stand around him and pose while he declares a coup. so this looks doomed to failure
within a few more hours (6-8), what really matters is what does the US do once it fails,
realistically, there aren't anymore sanctions they can put on Venezuela and Colombia has
made it clear they won't send their own army in to fight the US's war.
That basically leaves just Erik Prince's planned mercenary army or a direct US invasion,
previously Prince's plan had faced a lot of opposition so it is interesting that this
failure of a coup is launched right now. If Trump was ever serious about not starting
anymore stupid wars (and thus won't invade Venezuela before the 2020 elections) I imagine
he'll now be more supportive of the idea of loaning money to Random Guy's backers so that
they can buy Erik Prince's mercenaries and use them. Even if they use Prince's troops I
doubt that they will succeed, Prince's mercenaries might be good at massacring civilians,
but Venezuela has a massive civilian militia made up of the poorest citizens they will know
right away what Random Guy's mercenaries will do to them and their families if their coup
succeeds. So they will fight very, very hard. This could setup another Bay of Pigs type
situation for the US and their mercenaries.
Trump will be lied to by CIA and NSC and State, so if he okays this or really wants
this, it does not matter. He was couped and the Deep State uses him. He's happy being
POTUS. That is all that matters to Trump.
The uprising will depend on hundreds of thousands in the streets, not several
thousand.
The goal is hundreds of dead protesters.
Maduro has to snatch Guaido and put him on trial.
Looks like they are massing the people successfully.
The question for the moment is will the US agents and officers on the ground turn this
into a Venezuelan Tiananmen 2. They certainly know how.
Imagine trying to overthrow your elected government at the behest of John Bolton?
If anyone in the United States pulled a stunt like this - and, remember, the US is
packed with armed extremist loons like militias and survivalists and Aryan churches - they
would be stormed with federal agents and soldiers and either dragged away to prison in
chains or shot.
I am not exaggerating in the least. He would be charged with treason, and I think we all
know, from our memories of how the United States has treated prisoners at Guantanamo what
kind of treatment he would receive in prison for treason.
But the same United States not only thinks this is just fine to do in another country,
they encourage it.
Simply the most lawless of all advanced nations, that's America. Utter contempt for rule
of law and blind belief that American laws should overrule everything else everywhere.
So, what is Canada's Foreign Minister, Ms Chrystia Freeland - someone who has shamed
Canada with her fervent support for Washington's illegal activities in Venezuela - doing
today to assist Bolton and his unelected, self-appointed "president?"
If I were a Russian or Chinese strategist, I would be salivating at the thought of the US
willfully creating another Vietnam right on its own doorstep and throwing the only
Continent connected to it by a landbridge into complete upheaval and stark class warfare.
Class-based Civil War could easily spread to Brazil, Colombia, and beyond, throwing the
lives of hundreds of millions of people into upheaval, all on Uncle Sam's dollar.
After the failures of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and the Ukraine, the several
million Latino refugees and the expenditure of another 6 trillion or so over the next
decade should be enough to throw the US itself into Civil War and Coup territory and finish
off its hegemony over EurAsia for good.
Don't give Maduro too much aid just yet. Sucker the US to commit its hand and go in,
then, as elsewhere, give just enough aid to keep the US in perpetual zugzwang as it slowly
bleeds itself to death.
Austerity and War for the Americas, OBOR and peaceful development for EurAsia.
"Maduro has to snatch Guaido and put him on trial."
This might be exactly what the U.S. wants Maduro to do. The arrest and/or imprisonment
of Guaido by the "repressive regime" could be the pretext for a sudden "popular uprising"
to which the "Venezuelan State" (ie. CIA operatives and hired assassins) responds
"violently." A small gathering in any city square suddenly disrupted by the gunfire death
of a dozen or so innocents--all miraculously captured "live" on cell-phone video and
streamed direct to social media--is all that it would take to give the US sufficient
domestic support for any further action. I suspect this action would not take the form of
direct US military action but rather the freeing of Erik Prince and his mercenaries upon
the dirty brown socialist peasants.
Maduro surely has anticipated that his arrest of Guaido is likely to play into US hands.
Guaido may be too stupid to know he is being used as live bait, or he may be simply being
coerced by his handlers to undertake increasingly reckless actions until Maduro bites.
I think the best thing Maduro might do would be to arrange for a public meetin and
reconciliation between him and Guaido away from his U.S. handlers. The US is not expecting
that and would then have to explain why they are opposed to the peaceable reconciliation of
the conflict. If Guaido feels he has become disposable to the US, he may not be
disagreeable to some kind of pardon and face-saving but largely superficial compromise.
The Rovian dictat We make our own reality (mutter it in growling mafia accent) is
shredded to confetti, or almost.
Look at Ukraine, a comedian who acts the part of a nobody guy propelled to a
presidential position in a TV show, is elected as president in RL!
Coluche was a French comedian who stood for president, 1980. Polls showed 16 to 25% of
the vote. (He was supported by Charlie Hebdo.. them again..)
His manager was murdered and Coluche withdrew.
He was then himself killed (1985) in mysterious, highly suspicious, circumstances. Won
awards for Best Actor and died because.. a truck..
Beppe Grillo is another comedian who created a Pol Party, the 5 Star, Cinque Stelle,
party in Italy (with another guy.) Grillo could not be elected, by law, because he has a
conviction on his blotter, for manslaughter.
Random Guy-do is within this landscape a feeble contender - a clown who pretends to be
serious! He has no acting credentials, nada. No self proclamation presence. A confused,
hapless, manipulated placeholder.
No way that is going to end well. For him. Maybe night - school acting classes? Ouch..
Idk. Operation Freedom, anyone who takes that on is pushed offstage..
Better to be a real clown! One can live on (Grillo) or die an honorable death
(Coluche)!
Venezuela's FM is wisely playing down the guilt of the thirty or so military personnel
involved in the coup. Such personnel were first described as likely deceived or misled by
Guaido and now the FM is explicitly claiming plan and execution of coup came from
Washington. The military personnel were not involved in its planning and so can be treated
mercifully. (Who knows if some of them weren't blackmailed to join in? We are dealing with
the CIA after all.)
MediaLens has this story today:
"A new report on April 25 by a respected think tank has estimated that US sanctions imposed
on Venezuela in August 2017 have caused around 40,000 deaths."
The question for Canadians is whether Freeland and Trudeau are ready to take ownership for,
say, 5,000 of those deaths..and counting. Toss them in with the thousands killed thanks to
Canadian assistance in Ukraine and a share of the daily carnage in Yemen and the bloody
nature of the Ottawa cabal begins to become clear.
According to reports, a group from Venezuela's Sebin intelligence service freed Leopoldo
Lopez from house arrest early Tuesday morning.
Lopez and Guaido could have been set up in a stunning black op. Get Lopez and Guaido to
come out openly and claim they're running a coup which is treason. If they stayed out of
jail previously will they stay out of jail now? Probably not.
BTW, it's interesting that today's events are being called a coup. The coupist, Guaid
and Lopez, have maintained the fiction that Guaido is president of Venezuela so in their
narrative, how can this be a coup implying they're the usurpers. Surely it should be a
counter-coup, which it obviously isn't so someone has fucked up big time. Perhaps John
Bolton and/or Elliott Abrams as they're both stupid and arrogant enough to do so.
Now, finally, after letting the clown run around creating a lot of noise, now that they
tried a hapless attempt at a military uprising will the government of Venezuela arrest,
imprison, and put on trial for treason the moron Guaido and the idiot Lopez?
Christian J Chuba , Apr 30, 2019 1:38:40 PM |
link
Where is the money we stole from Venezuela?
We keep hearing the Neocons saying that Maduro and his 'thugs' are thieves and robbing
the 'Venezuelan people'. The Administration has stolen many of their assets like Citgo and
given them to Guaido.
So where is that money, his bank account? I'd love to hear someone in the MSM ask Pompeo
that question.
Despite the sanctions, the Lima Group, the OAS, and the relentless public relations stunts,
all the self-declared "government" has to show for itself is thirty recruits standing on a
bridge. That's a poor result. Maybe all the smart think-tank people who dreamed up the
Guaido charade aren't actually so smart, or place too much faith in PR optics as opposed to
actual politics. The lack of smarts certainly characterizes the Venezuelan opposition - who
would want these people to be in charge of anything?
Credit to Mexico for retaining clearly articulated principles, as displayed at OAS
recently.
to steve keith # 7 and anitspin # 12 - School of International Atrocities is just right.
Remember Haaahvaaad gave us napalm which was field tested in North Korea, along with other
such treats as Larry "Garbagemen" Summers, and MacGeorge "Green Ford Foundation" Bundy. "
Fight fiercely Harvard, do...." ah yes, and Geo "Is Our Children Learning" Bushboy.
Wonderful.
Photograph Source: US State Department – Public Domain
If you're in the market for a troika of tyranny, Donald Trump, John Bolton, and Mike Pompeo
certainly fit the bill. Or, if you'd rather focus on countries not individuals, you might
single out Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt as the three most likely
candidates. Perhaps, if you're in a confessional mood, how about Christian fundamentalism,
Jewish extremism, and Salafist Wahhabism?
A troika, for those who haven't read any 19th-century Russian novels recently, is a carriage
drawn by three horses. So, the ultimate troika of tyranny, from the point of view of the planet
as a whole, would feature the three horsemen of the ongoing apocalypse: climate change, nuclear
proliferation, and global pandemic.
But no, that's not what National Security Advisor John Bolton had in mind when he talked
last week of a "troika of tyranny." In a rehash of a speech he gave
in November in Miami , Bolton declared
last week that the "troika of tyranny -- Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua -- is beginning to
crumble." Further laying on the insults, Bolton called Cuba's Miguel Díaz-Canel,
Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro, and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega "the three stooges of
socialism."
Ever since George W. Bush included Iraq, Iran, and North Korea in an "axis of evil,"
speechmakers have been in search of the holy grail of geopolitical matchmaking (for instance,
Condoleezza Rice's "outposts of tyranny").
Bush's phrase, which proved so enduring, was an extraordinarily flawed piece of work. The
three countries he grouped together had little to no relationship at the time. Iraq and Iran
had fought a nearly decade-long war that left them bitter regional rivals. North Korea, which
has no ideological affinity to either country, was probably included in the list so that it
didn't appear anti-Islamic. This particular axis didn't have a leg to stand on.
Bolton's more alliterative phrase suffers from the same conceptual problems. Worse, it
revives an anti-Communist crusade that could easily expand to include North Korea, China, and
any left-leaning country (New Zealand?) that makes the mistake of looking at Bolton funny.
A New Monroe Doctrine?
Trump understands the world in terms of three types of leaders. There are the autocrats he
like. There are the autocrats he doesn't like. And then there are all the rest: the democrats
he doesn't respect.
Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel is one of those autocrats that Trump doesn't like.
It's not Díaz-Canel's ideology that rubs the American president the wrong way. After
all, Trump has no problem praising China's Xi Jinping or falling in love with North Korea's Kim
Jong Un. Rather, Cuba made the unpardonable error of negotiating a détente with Trump's
predecessor, Barack Obama. So, by the logic of the Trump administration, Cuba is guilty by
association.
Over the last two-plus years, Trump has rolled back the elements of the agreements that the
Obama administration negotiated with Cuba that culminated in diplomatic recognition in July
2015. The Trump administration has restricted travel to the country, the amount of money that
Cubans in America can remit to their families back home, and the deals that U.S. businesses can
negotiate with Cuban counterparts. Also, the administration will now allow U.S. entities to
file lawsuits against foreign companies operating on property appropriated by the state after
the 1959 revolution.
The Obama policy was all about nudging Cuba in a particular direction. More people-to-people
contact would increase the free flow of information. More business deals would encourage the
growth of market activities. Meanwhile, unrestricted remittances would help Cubans deal with
the myriad difficulties of everyday life.
The Trump administration isn't interested in nudging Cuba in a particular direction. Its
punitive measures are designed to encourage regime change, pure and simple. The decision to
allow lawsuits to go forward is aimed at scaring off European investors in particular who've
been operating in Cuba despite decades of U.S. sanctions and embargo. In response, Spain
wants the
EU to challenge the new U.S. policy at the World Trade Organization.
Bolton never liked Cuba. When he was undersecretary of state for arms control in the George
W. Bush administration, Bolton
accused the country of making biological weapons. This accusation came only two months
after Bush had inaugurated the "axis of evil," and Bolton was eager to shoehorn Cuba into the
new group. But his efforts to designate the Caribbean island a "terrorist threat" -- and
prepare the ground for yet another U.S. invasion -- foundered when a congressional
investigation
turned up no evidence of a biological weapons program in the country.
Now Bolton is excited to have a second chance to group Cuba with two other countries that
have fallen afoul of the United States: Venezuela and Nicaragua.
Like the original members of the "axis of evil," they don't have much in common with one
another. Cuba is avowedly Marxist in orientation, with a Third World agrarian spin. Venezuela,
on the other hand, is a corrupt petro-state led by a leader who calls himself socialist but is
really just a klutzy kleptocrat. Then there's Daniel Ortega, who was once a socialist
revolutionary but has transformed himself into a Catholic dictator along the lines of Francisco
Franco.
None of these countries poses even the remotest threat to the United States. They have
dismal human rights records, but that hasn't been a concern for the Trump administration
anywhere else in the world.
So, why is Bolton bothering to waste his rhetorical flourishes on the trio? The national
security advisor claims that Cuba is propping up Maduro. He hints that Ortega's days are
numbered. Is Bolton campaigning to revive what had once been the traditional U.S. approach to
Latin America: invasion, occupation, regime change?
After all, his most recent "troika of tyranny" speech was timed to coincide with the
anniversary of the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba on April 17, 1961. And the audience for
his speech was similarly chosen with care: the Bay of Pigs Veterans Association.
When it comes to Bolton, war is always a possibility pretty much anywhere in the world. But
with the Trump administration focusing most of its wrath against Iran , the
"troika of tyranny" speech is probably not the opening salvo of a new, hyper-militarist Monroe
Doctrine.
Bolton likely has a longer game plan in mind.
Expanding the Troika
You can almost see the lips beneath the walrus moustache purse in displeasure when Donald
Trump shakes hands with Xi Jinping, murmurs sweet nothings to Kim Jong Un, and has quiet
confabs with Vladimir Putin.
John Bolton has never concealed his
profound antipathy to the current government in North Korea. He wants to
rewrite the one-China policy and is willing to use military force against Beijing as part
of that effort. As for Russia, Bolton
believes that Putin is a liar and Moscow represents a serious long-term strategic threat to
the United States.
This, then, is the shadow "troika of tyranny" that John Bolton would roll out in a speech if
only Donald Trump's personal predilections didn't get in the way.
But that isn't stopping the national security advisor from carefully preparing the ground to
do just that as soon as Trump gets frustrated with Kim, Xi, and/or Putin.
Toward that end, Bolton carefully chose "troika" for his phrase: a Russian word that can
later be repurposed to suggest that Moscow is in fact at the root of these problems. And Bolton
is hammering away at the "socialist-communist" nature of the three Latin American countries,
which will prove enormously useful later on when expanding the troika to include North Korea
and China.
In the end, Bolton is after nothing short of a new Cold War.
Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua are small countries with no desire or means to attack the
United States. North Korea with its nuclear weapons, China with the world's second largest
military, and Russia with its geopolitical ambitions, on the other hand, are much worthier
adversaries.
Prolonged conflict with these three will keep militarists like Bolton in business for
decades. As importantly, Bolton can use these larger confrontations to unravel all
international institutions, all forms of international cooperation, in fact anything that
smacks of an international community.
With all eyes focused these days on Trump and his myriad crimes, John Bolton's speeches are
a reminder that even worse options are waiting in the wings. Join the debate on
Facebook More articles by: John Feffer
John Feffer is the director of Foreign Policy
In Focus , where this article originally appeared.
As the US continues to attack the Maduro government, keep these special interests in mind.
Think about who gets rich off of the regime-change agenda. It's the same people that said we
had to invade Iraq in order to prevent nuclear apocalypse. It's the same people who said the
world would stop turning on its axis if we didn't carpet bomb Libya and Syria.
Now they're trying to get us to support war in Venezuela. You won't be any freer or more
prosperous after the Maduro government is toppled. It's just war propaganda.
Saddle the Venezuelan people with enormous debt to the IMF
The trojan horse for the return of neoliberalism in Venezuela, Juan Guaido, stated that he's
going to borrow money from the IMF to fund his government, which would make all Venezuelans
indebted to this predatory institution. Guaido spends the money and the poor and working people
work to pay taxes that pay off the principal and the interest.
The IMF was created in New Hampshire in 1945 to internationalize and standardize capitalism and
its rules in an increasingly globalized and US-dominated world.
Its primary function is acting as an international lender-of-last-resort to indebted countries.
IMF member states decide which countries will receive loans, but the member states with the
largest say are the ones with the largest share of the IMF's funds, which have always been the
United States and its allies.
This is why the IMF's standard "structural adjustment program" is based on the so-called
Washington Consensus. A set of 10 economic policies entirely concocted by US think tanks, the
IMF, the World Bank and the Treasury Department.
The Washington Consensus is as follows:
In exchange for a loan, often with a high-interest rate that many would call predatory, the IMF
overhauls the protective and redistributive policies of a country for neoliberal policies,
making the target country ripe for finance capital investment and profit-making.
Control the oil reserves
There's little doubt that the oil industry is pushing the US to overthrow the Maduro
government, especially when John Bolton openly states this on national television.
Bolton was himself once part of the oil industry, serving as the director of Diamond Offshore
Drilling, Inc. in 2007. So, he is no stranger to advocating for the interests of the
fossil-fuel industry.
Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world by far and Washington won't let that wealth
go unexploited, or worse, be shared among its enemies like the Maduro government, Russia,
China, or Iran.
And with so many politicians, Republican and Democratic, bought off by industry players --
companies like ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, and Chevron -- it's impossible to imagine anyone in
Washington advocating for Venezuela maintaining ownership over its own sovereign natural
resources.
Establish military dominance and arm your puppet
One of the most bizarre things about America is that it created one of the world's largest
private industries around arms dealing. And like any industry, whether it be JDAM bombs or
beef, private businesses often resort to lobbying Congress to squeeze political favors out of
the government in the form of subsidies. Or, in the case of the military industrial complex, a
foreign policy of endless war, one based on elusive ideas like combating terrorism or defending
democracy.
You can see that wherever the US goes, expensive construction projects follow. Behind every
multi-billion dollar base construction, some private contractor is there reaping the
profits.
Once the US military presence is firmly established, the weapons sales begin. And we all know
no US ally, or puppet state, is complete without a full fleet of Lockheed Martin F-16s. Then
they'll be able to fend off all of those pesky leftist rebels with freedom missiles.
With Venezuela's neighbors, Colombia and Brazil, growing closer to NATO and accepting US
military presence in their countries, we can only assume Venezuela is Washington's next
target.
As the strategic approach of regime change evolves, new industries arise to meet these
needs.
After the massive anti-war protests following the invasion of Iraq, outright invasion and
occupation were no longer viable strategies due to negative public opinion. Washington sought
to disguise war propaganda using humanitarian rhetoric.
Create the humanitarian alibi
Privately owned NGOs dedicated to human rights and promoting "American style" democracy have
played a much larger role in regime-change operations in recent years. They serve as soft-power
institutions, which attempt to subtly sway a population against its own government through
propaganda laced with words like 'freedom', 'democracy', and 'human rights'.
These NGOs are given the full blessing of the US government and the two often work in
tandem.
The US Agency for International Development's regime-change arm, the National Endowment for
Democracy (NED), funded opposition groups in Nicaragua, Venezuela (during the 2002 coup),
Haiti, Ukraine, and most recently China and North Korea. And whenever US foreign policy sets
its sights on a certain target, private industries usually develop to help meet that goal as
well as make a quick buck along the way.
For example, Thor Halvorssen -- the first cousin of Leopoldo Lopez, the founder of Juan
Guaido's party, Popular Will -- calls himself a human-rights activist. He founded the notorious
Human Rights Foundation (HRF) and makes a living giving speeches and TV appearances, talking
about why the governments of Venezuela or North Korea are not legitimate and need to be
overthrown.
Unsurprisingly, the HRF is funded by the conservative Sarah Scaife Foundation, which is itself
funded by think tanks like the top neoconservative think tank, the American Enterprise
Institute, as well as the Heritage Foundation. HRF is also funded by the Donors Capital Fund
and the Diana Davis Spencer Foundation, which are also funded by the American Enterprise
Institute. It's one big web of moving money that all leads back to the same cast of
characters.
The crisis in Venezuela has been a huge gift for people like Halvorssen, who use the US's war
on Venezuela to promote themselves and their organizations.
Buy the facts from the think tanks funded by the Military Industrial Complex
Like NGOs, think tanks also play an important role in giving regime change a sense of
legitimacy -- in their case, intellectual legitimacy. Think tanks rely on donations to operate
and many find willing donors among the capitalist class. These fat cats pay for fancy looking
reports meant to justify their desired goal: the delegitimization of socialist governments and
the legitimization of coup governments that uphold the Washington Consensus.
The Cato Institute has been deeply involved in the attempted overthrow of the Venezuelan
government. In 2008, Cato awarded Venezuelan opposition leader, Yon Goicoechea, the Milton
Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty and $500,000 for his role in disrupting a constitutional
referendum in Venezuela. That money was used to finance the political rise of Juan Guaido, and
his clique known as Generation 2007.
These seemingly independent research groups have intimate networks that they leverage to
amplify the message their donors have given them.
Whether it was the bank bailouts following the 2008 crisis, or the lack of action on climate
disaster, in America it seems the government always puts the interests of the rich ahead of the
poor and working class, and the situation in Venezuela is no different.
"... Plenty of people still fool themselves into believing Trump has been captured by the deep state and is only going along with them to stay alive. Bunk. Ever since Trump sat in the power chair he willingly joined the deep state. He's even going one further and his goal is a one world government led by the US. He knows the American populace won't condone a new war so his weapons are sanctions, the dollar, and trade wars. All viable tools as long as the US continues to control the financial system. ..."
It's complete fiction that the US is going after Venezuelan oil so as to confront Iran. If
Maduro goes so does Venezuela as civil war erupts and spreads to other countries. No oil
company is going to put itself and it's employees in such a danger zone.
It is also complete fiction that Trump was against going after Venezuela as he has been on
them almost from day one and every time Trump announces more sanctions or makes threats he's
as giddy as a kid in a candy store and relishes handing out the pain. In one of his latest
speeches to a gathering of the faithful he not only gleefully stomped on Venezuela but also
announced the US is going to overthrow the governments of Cuba and Nicaragua.
Trump was barely in office when the US undid the efforts by Obama to normalize relations
with Cuba and as of the first of the year put sanctions on Nicaragua.
This after NED and USAID last summer brought radicals from Nicaragua to DC for training in
riots and rabble rousing. Which they did after returning home. In his speech Trump claimed
that by overthrowing those governments this hemisphere will be the "only totally free
hemisphere in the world". If the plan was to get Venezuelan oil so as to shut off Iran the US
would have supported Maduro, Venezuela is no danger to US security, and offered to send in
the best engineers to get the oil industry rolling. The US is now sanctioning the tankers so
as to cut off even more revenue to Venezuela and deprive Cuba of oil.
Plenty of people still fool themselves into believing Trump has been captured by the deep
state and is only going along with them to stay alive. Bunk. Ever since Trump sat in the
power chair he willingly joined the deep state. He's even going one further and his goal is a
one world government led by the US. He knows the American populace won't condone a new war so
his weapons are sanctions, the dollar, and trade wars. All viable tools as long as the US
continues to control the financial system.
If the US does attack Iran it will be a Libya affair using only air power to cripple them
and cause internal chaos.
" Venezuela tops the list with 300.9 billion barrels of oil in reserve – but even
this vast wealth in natural resources has not been enough to save the country from its
recent economic and humanitarian crisis."
LOL, good one. It's BECAUSE of their vast wealth that they cannot operate a country free
of external interference, internal sabotage and the world's biggest bully attacking its
electrical generation and grid. We can't have a successful socialist economy with THAT much
oil, now, can we? And while Maduro did make some mistakes with the economy, it wasn't enough
to bring about this "economic and humanitarian crisis." No, that level of shitstorm requires
the intervention of the Yoo Nited States of America and "experts" on the region like Elliot
Abrams (why isn't he in jail again? Oh yeah never mind, two systems of law in this country)
and Mike Pom-Pom-Peon.
If the U.S. hadn't attempted coup after coup after coup, and actually let Venezuela's
little experiment in Chavismo socialism play out on its own, we'd probably be seeing a South
American version of Libya - at one time the richest country in Africa with healthcare for
everyone - before France and the Yooo Nited States decided to destroy it. Of course it's too
much to ask for a blog called "Visual Capitalist" to acknowledge this, and it's also pretty
much par for the course with the sour right who comes to ZH for their daily fix of liberal
bashing and rah, rah America is great! And so are (((they))). Of course.
You're way out of your depth on this topic. You wouldn't be able to point to a single
thing that Maduro did which would have had long-lasting consequences such as what we are
seeing now. Total moron - the Venezuelan masses wealth was stolen by the landed former
Spanish colonialists and their offspring, who then were given all the good oil leases, and
bailed on the country (sabotaged it on their way out - along with the food supply) as Chavez
started giving wealth BACK to the masses. You know NOTHING about Venezuela and like many
other things you parade around pretending to be some kind of expert while you're just a
typical zionist moron.
The US and our buddies have been cutting VZ off from any external capital, but more
importantly FREEZING their assets and preventing them from accessing THEIR OWN gold. If that
was happening to one of our so-called allies, we'd be calling it THEFT. You idiot.
But let's play - find me a source that backs your assertions. Point to paragraph and
sentence where your claims are laid out clearly for all to see. How did Maduro COMPLETELY
**** up Venezuela? Your turn...
The Bolivarian Revolution, a series of economic and social reforms that dramatically
reduced poverty and
illiteracy while greatly improving health and other living conditions for millions of
Venezuelans, drew worldwide acclaim. The reforms, which included
nationalizing key components of the nation's economy as part of an agenda of socialist
uplift, made Chávez a hero to millions of people and the enemy of Venezuela's
oligarchs. The exportation of the Bolivarian Revolution, which included forging stronger,
more peaceful inter-American relations and even the provision of
free home heating oil for hundreds of thousands of needy people in the United States,
made Chávez a marked man in Washington.
The administration of George W. Bush -- whom Chávez infamously called "the
devil" in a speech before the United Nations -- backed a failed military
coup against Chávez in 2002. The attempted coup was closely linked to prominent
neoconservatives including
Elliott Abrams , the disgraced Iran-Contra criminal who played a key role in covering up
massacres committed by US-backed death squads in Central America and Otto Reich, a staunch
supporter of Cuban exile terrorists who have
killed at least hundreds of innocent men, women and children throughout the Americas. Two
key coup plotters, Army commander Efraín Vasquez and Gen. Ramirez Poveda, were
trained at the US Army
School of the Americas. The coup briefly ousted Chávez but loyalist forces and popular
support restored his rule 47 hours later.
Barack Obama continued Bush's policy of demonizing Chávez, whose government he
called "authoritarian." This, despite the fact that former president Jimmy Carter, who won
the Nobel Peace Prize for his work at the election-monitoring Carter Center,
called Venezuela's election process "the best in the world." In 2015, Obama
declared Venezuela an "extraordinary threat to national security," a bewildering
assertion considering the country has never started a war in its history. The United States,
on the other hand, has intervened in, attacked, invaded or occupied Latin American and
Caribbean nations more than 50 times and, as Obama spoke, the US military was busy bombing
seven countries in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. For decades, successive US
administrations have also lavished Venezuela's neighbor Colombia -- which has been condemned
for its government and paramilitary
death squad massacres and deadly corporate-backed crackdowns on
indigenous peoples and workers -- with
billions upon billions of dollars in military and economic aid.
How would they reinstate that "talent" if it was being blocked and bribed not to go to
Venezuela by....you know who?
Chavez purged the firm because it was the same rich elites running it and threatening to
use it as a form of blackmail.
Failure to regrow human capital base? Is that a repeat of what you just said about PDVSA?
What does that even mean?
What about the US sanctions, freezing of their access to their own money, coup attempts,
sabotage, the rich cutting off the food supply chain, etc? Which of these things contributed
more to the current state of VZ?
President Chávez had to withstand three successive attempts to remove him -- the
2002 coup, 2002-03 bosses' lockout and the 2004 recall referendum. Five times he was
elected president, never with less than 55 percent of the vote, and overall he won 16 of 17
elections and referendums in which his movement participated. The election system put in
place by the Chávez government was declared by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter's
Carter Center to be "
the best in the world ." None of this prevented the late president from being furiously
denounced as a "dictator."
The latest, issued on January 28, freezes all property and interests of PDVSA subject to
U.S. jurisdiction -- in other words, blocking Venezuela from any access to the profits
generated by PDVSA's U.S. subsidiary, Citgo, or any PDVSA activities in the United States.
The Trump administration expects Venezuela
to lose US$11 billion this year, The New York Times reports.
and Maduro being a "dictator"
President Maduro is repeatedly called a "dictator," an epithet endless repeated across
the corporate media. But when a portion of the opposition boycotts, can it be a surprise
that the incumbent wins? The opposition actually asked the United Nations
to not send observers , a sure sign that they expected to lose a fair election despite
their claims that the election would be rigged. Nonetheless, a coalition of Canadian
unions, church leaders and other officials declared the election to be "a transparent,
secure, democratic and orderly electoral and voting process."
So yeah, you're on the same side of this issue as Barack Obama, George Soros and Hillary
Kkklinton. Hope you're happy with that company.
Have you ever noticed how whenever someone inconveniences the dominant western power
structure, the entire political/media class rapidly becomes very, very interested in letting us
know how evil and disgusting that person is? It's true of the leader of every nation which
refuses to allow itself to be absorbed into the blob of the US-centralized power alliance, it's
true of anti-establishment political candidates, and it's true of WikiLeaks founder Julian
Assange.
Corrupt and unaccountable power uses its
political and
media influence to smear Assange because, as far as the interests of corrupt and
unaccountable power are concerned, killing his reputation is as good as killing him. If
everyone can be paced into viewing him with hatred and revulsion, they'll be far less likely to
take WikiLeaks publications seriously, and they'll be far more likely to consent to Assange's
imprisonment, thereby
establishing a precedent for the future prosecution of leak-publishing journalists around
the world. Someone can be speaking 100 percent truth to you, but if you're suspicious of him
you won't believe anything he's saying. If they can manufacture that suspicion with total or
near-total credence, then as far as our rulers are concerned it's as good as putting a bullet
in his head.
Those of us who value truth and light need to fight this smear campaign in order to keep our
fellow man from signing off on a major leap in the direction of Orwellian dystopia, and a big
part of that means being able to argue against those smears and disinformation wherever they
appear. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any kind of centralized source of information
which comprehensively debunks all the smears in a thorough and engaging way, so with the help
of hundreds of
tips from my
readers and social media followers
I'm going to attempt to make one here. What follows is my attempt at creating a tool kit people
can use to fight against Assange smears wherever they encounter them, by refuting the
disinformation with truth and solid argumentation.
This article is an ongoing project which will be updated regularly where it appears on
Medium and caitlinjohnstone.com as new information comes in and new smears spring up in need of
refutation.
"The media's interest in the well-being of a foreign population is directly proportional
to the West's interest in toppling its government, while editorial standards are inversely
proportional to its enemy status."--John McEvoy
So, lets employ this maxim to Russiagate and the Skripal Saga and the respective national
media. In the first case, the Russian public's completely ignored unless it's a member of the
so-called opposition while Putin and Russia get slandered constantly. The same treatment goes
for the UK media and a case could be made that the two act in tandem, implying
innerconnectivity between their spy agencies as suspected.
Defending The
Revolution a short film about the People's Militia in Venezuela. Not gonna be easy.
And one more time,
Whitney Webb is doing a bang up job with this series:
This article is Part II of a multi-part investigative series examining the efforts of the
global elite, as well as powerful elements of the global Zionist lobby and the government
of Israel, to create an independent state out of Argentina's southern Patagonia region in
order to plunder its natural resources and to fulfill long-standing Zionist interest in the
territory that dates back to the "founding father" of Zionism, Theodore Herzl. Part I,
which focuses on the de facto "parallel state" created by British billionaire Joe Lewis in
Argentina's Patagonia, can be read here. Part II focuses on Eduardo Elsztain -- one of
Argentina's wealthiest businessmen, who is deeply connected to the global elite and global
Zionist lobbies -- and his role in a scheme to undercut Argentina's democracy by hijacking
its voting system.
See my "lost" comment at the end of OT 2019-20, #167
"... Even if Maduro were forced out by his current supporters in the military, it does not follow that Guaido or any other opposition figure would take over later. At that point, does the policy of forcing regime change continue shuffling forward like a zombie, or will the U.S. then accept a military government in Venezuela that is run by someone not named Maduro? How long does the U.S. keep trying to install its preferred government in power before admitting that it won't work? ..."
"... Since these haven't occurred, they have no plan except to strangle Venezuela's economy further through sanctions. Perhaps the best part is that the administration claims that Guaido is president of Venezuela, but that his presidency hasn't actually started yet. The administration's special representative, Elliott Abrams, claimed this in a press briefing last month , saying that the 30-day "interim" period of Guaido's "presidency" won't begin until after Maduro leaves office. ..."
"... Abrams' comments remind us of the shaky legal basis for everything that Guaido has been doing this year. As Noah Feldman pointed out shortly after this started, the provision in the Venezuelan constitution that Guaido invoked to claim his position as "interim" president was intended to apply in cases of death or incapacity of the incumbent president. It wasn't a loophole for declaring the presidency vacant when it is still very much occupied. Now because it is occupied, the official line is that Guaido's "interim" presidency hasn't really begun. Judging from how the regime change effort has been going so far, it probably never will. ..."
Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Credit: StringerAL/Shutterstock
The Trump administration's statements about Venezuela are beginning to
sound eerily like Western governments' pronouncements about Syria over the last seven years:
The United States has no timeline for a change in government in Venezuela, a U.S. top official said, but is certain embattled
President Nicolas Maduro will not remain in power.
Almost three months have passed since the U.S. threw its support behind Guaido as "interim" president. During that tine, the opposition
has made no discernible progress in taking over, and the military remains firmly on Maduro's side for now. The administration has
no "timeline" for when Maduro will leave power because they and the opposition have no idea how to achieve the regime change they
are seeking, but that isn't stopping them from pursuing it anyway. Like the confident Western assertions from 2012 that Assad "must
go," the administration is "certain" of an outcome that seems increasingly unlikely to happen.
It is possible that the top military brass will eventually decide that it is better for them to rid themselves of the unpopular
ruler and retain power for themselves, just as Algeria's military did with Bouteflika and Sudan's military did with Bashir recently,
but there is no guarantee that this would lead to a "restoration of democracy."
On the contrary, a transition that depends so heavily on the military is much more likely to produce another dictatorship.
Even if Maduro were forced out by his current supporters in the military, it does not follow that Guaido or any other opposition
figure would take over later. At that point, does the policy of forcing regime change continue shuffling forward like a zombie, or
will the U.S. then accept a military government in Venezuela that is run by someone not named Maduro? How long does the U.S. keep
trying to install its preferred government in power before admitting that it won't work?
The absurdity of the administration's current policy is quite remarkable. They insist that Maduro is no longer president, but
the president they recognize controls nothing. The success of their ill-conceived regime change "plan" depended almost entirely on
mass defections from the military, but they have
found no way to spur
these defections.
Since these haven't occurred, they have no plan except to strangle Venezuela's economy further through sanctions. Perhaps
the best part is that the administration claims that Guaido is president of Venezuela, but that his presidency hasn't actually started
yet. The administration's special representative, Elliott Abrams, claimed this in a
press briefing last month , saying that the 30-day
"interim" period of Guaido's "presidency" won't begin until after Maduro leaves office. According to them, Guaido is the "legitimate"
president but has not yet assumed office:
QUESTION: So Juan Guaido is the interim president of an interim that doesn't exist yet?
MR ABRAMS: The 30-day end to his interim presidency starts counting. Because he's not in power, that's the problem [bold
mine-DL]. Maduro is still there. So they have decided that they will count that from when he actually is in power and Maduro's
gone. I think it's logical.
QUESTION: So then he really isn't interim president, then?
MR ABRAMS: He is interim president, but he's not --
QUESTION: With no power.
MR ABRAMS: -- able to exercise the powers of the office because Maduro still is there.
Abrams' comments remind us of the shaky legal basis for everything that Guaido has been doing this year. As Noah Feldman
pointed out shortly after this started, the provision in the Venezuelan constitution that Guaido invoked to claim his position
as "interim" president was intended to apply in cases of death or incapacity of the incumbent president. It wasn't a loophole for
declaring the presidency vacant when it is still very much occupied. Now because it is occupied, the official line is that Guaido's
"interim" presidency hasn't really begun. Judging from how the regime change effort has been going so far, it probably never will.
Nearly three months later, Venezuela's top-heavy military remains largely intact under
President Nicolás Maduro. The once-brisk pace of defections to neighboring Colombia
has slowed to a trickle. Fewer than 1,500 Venezuelan soldiers, relieved by the Colombian
government of their weapons and uniforms and housed in sparsely furnished hotel rooms near
the border, now sit waiting for something to happen.
The idea that the Venezuelan army would defect was always crazy. Anyone with a bit of
knowledge of Venezuela could predict that it would never do so. Reports of lonely soldiers
isolated in fourth class hotels in Columbia will not incite any further defections. While the
random opposition guy promised amnesty for any soldier moving to his site, the U.S. seeks to
arrest one of the few who did:
Venezuela's longtime spy chief was arrested Friday in Madrid by Spanish police acting on a
U.S. drug warrant a few weeks after he threw his support behind opponents of President
Nicolas Maduro.
...
The opposition saw Carvajal's criticism of Venezuela's socialist government as a stimulus to
prod other military figures to defect, but the country's armed forces have remained largely
loyal to current Maduro.
With the situation stalled the U.S. is ramping up talk of a military attack on
Venezuela:
EXCLUSIVE: Away from the public eye, the Center for Strategic and International Studies
(CSIS) think tank hosted a top-level, off-the-record meeting to explore US military options
against Venezuela.
Such talks are poor attempts to create some psychological pressure. There are no sound
military options. The U.S. is not going to invade Venezuela. It will ramp up sanctions and
press its 'allies' to do the same. Venezuela and its people will suffer but they will not give
up on resisting U.S. pressure. The current situation will only resolve itself when the regime
in Washington or in one of Venezuela's neighboring countries changes.
"... While Russia is being set up as the scapegoat of the collapsing western liberal establishment, this most recent red alarm by Freeland and Canada's response to the "danger" is useful for two reasons: ..."
"... First and foremost, Freeland's shameless warnings over "foreign interference" have become so loud that an irony has become unavoidable. She has after all been caught red handed behind the destabilization of both Ukraine and Venezuela. Secondly, by reviewing the mechanisms being created by Canada to counter-act this "threat", a clear insight is provided into the inner workings of the actual foreign influences which infiltrated Canada many decades ago. ..."
"... On the first point, Freeland's role as a co-architect of the nazi-fueled overthrow of a pro-Russian government in February 2014 is now well known. Aside from her family's Nazi connections going back to her grandfather Michael Chomiak's leading role as a Nazi collaborator in WWII, and her own mother's role in helping to draft Ukraine's neo-liberal constitution, Freeland herself not only befriended leading neo-Nazi collaborators such as Canadian Ukrainian Congress' president Paul Grod and but has also promoted NATO's anti-Russian expansion across eastern Europe. ..."
"... Freeland set up a program for regime change which involved a two-part formula of 1) mobilizing mass direct support for the overthrow of a government, and 2) gaining international support for said overthrow. ..."
"... Canada itself was infiltrated by a foreign player many years ago and what we will briefly see is that Canada can only be called the "world's first post national-state nation" because it never really became a genuine nation in the first place, but was always manipulated by a foreign power... although not the one you think. ..."
"... It is from this cybernetics central node that the web of governance both in Canada and also across other British infiltrated territories in the Trans-Atlantic system is coordinated under the directives of London. ..."
In the midst of one of the
most de-stabilizing scandals to rock Canada in years, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland
announced on April
5 that the threat of "Foreign interference" going into the October 2019 elections was at an all-time high. Sitting beside her UK
counterpart at a G7 meeting in France, Freeland stated:
"Interference is very likely and we think there have already been efforts by malign foreign actors to disrupt our democracy"
. Her warning was echoed by an embattled puppet Prime Minister in Ottawa who
stated it is "very clearly that countries like Russia are behind a lot of the divisive campaigns that have turned our politics
even more divisive and more anger-filled than they have been in the past. "
The Measures to Defend the British Deep State
In order to counteract this "foreign threat", several Canadian mechanisms have been announced to "keep democracy safe" in alignment
with the G7, Five Eyes and NATO. These mechanisms are:
The creation of an " Incident
Public Protection Panel " run by five Privy Council bureaucrats under the Clerk of the Privy Council which will exist outside
of the authority of the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, whose job is to maintain the integrity of elections. In defense of this
mysterious group, Canada's Democratic Institutions Minister Karina Gould stated that "it won't be one person who will decide what
Canadians will be allowed to know" (apparently having five people decide is more democratic). The new Clerk of the Privy Council
is Ian Stugart, who served as former deputy minister to Chrystia Freeland until just a few weeks ago.
A
Security and Intelligence Election Threats Task Force which will incorporate all of Canada's intelligence agencies such as the
Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the RCMP, the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) and Freeland's Global Affairs Canada.
All of these agencies are Privy Council organizations.
The Rapid
Response Mechanism of the G7 created in June 2018 and headquartered in Ottawa Canada in Freeland's Global Affairs Office and
Privy Council Office.
While Russia is being set up as the scapegoat of the collapsing western liberal establishment, this most recent red alarm
by Freeland and Canada's response to the "danger" is useful for two reasons:
First and foremost, Freeland's shameless warnings over "foreign interference" have become so loud that an irony has become
unavoidable. She has after all been
caught red handed
behind the destabilization of both Ukraine and Venezuela. Secondly, by reviewing the mechanisms being created by Canada to counter-act
this "threat", a clear insight is provided into the inner workings of the actual foreign influences which infiltrated Canada many
decades ago.
Chrystia Freeland: Regime Change Princess of Ukraine and Venezuela
On the first point, Freeland's role as a co-architect of the nazi-fueled overthrow of a pro-Russian government in February
2014 is now well known. Aside from her family's Nazi connections going back to her grandfather Michael Chomiak's leading role as
a
Nazi collaborator in WWII, and her own mother's role in helping to draft Ukraine's neo-liberal constitution, Freeland herself
not only befriended leading neo-Nazi collaborators such as Canadian Ukrainian Congress'
president Paul
Grod and but has also promoted NATO's anti-Russian expansion across eastern Europe.
Working alongside fellow Oxford operative Ben Rowswell (now head of the Canadian International Council/ Chatham House of Canada)
during his three year tenure as Ambassador to Venezuela (2014-2017), Freeland set up a program for regime change which involved
a two-part formula of 1) mobilizing mass direct support for the overthrow of a government, and 2) gaining international support for
said overthrow.
Rowswell's on-the-ground work was designed to achieve the former as he himself admitted in
a 2017 interview saying "We became one of the
most vocal embassies in speaking out on human rights issues and encouraging Venezuelans to speak out" . Before leaving his post to
become the head of the Chatham House of Canada,
he tweeted "I don't think they (anti-Maduro forces) have anything to worry about because Minister Freeland has Venezuela way
at the top of her priority list" .
Working on fulfilling the 2nd part of the formula, Freeland directed the creation of the "Lima Group". A
Global News article of
January 24 described the group in the following terms:
"Playing a key role behind the scenes was Lima Group member Canada, whose Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland spoke to Guaido
the night before Maduro's swearing-in ceremony to offer her government's support should he confront the socialist leader".
It shouldn't be too surprising in our day and age that a nation with such a high reputation as "polite Canada" is actuality, an
active agency for regime change and global governance. Canada's very Prime Minister
did assert in 2016 that
"Canada is the world's first post national-state nation" . What may surprise some readers is that Canada itself was infiltrated
by a foreign player many years ago and what we will briefly see is that Canada can only be called the "world's first post national-state
nation" because it never really became a genuine nation in the first place, but was always manipulated by a foreign power... although
not the one you think.
The "Foreign Influence" Controlling Canada
While a longer presentation is needed to do this story justice, it is enough to note for now that neither Freeland, nor Rowswell
are operating on behalf of Canada's interests, but are rather both operatives run by an entity that took over Canada many decades
ago and are currently directed by two interlocking organizations: The Privy Council Office and the Rhodes-Milner Round Table Group
.
The Privy Council Office
The Privy Council office was set up in 1867 in order to act as the British hand guiding its newly formed confederacy (Canada nearly
became a part of Lincoln's America in the wake of the Civil War. The only thing stopping that outcome was Britain's creation of a
confederation. The full story is told in the
Imperial Myth of Canada's National
Policy. ). While its power was always great, there was still room for independent policy making by nationalistic elected officials
when the international conditions were favorable.
This was nearly entirely destroyed during the reign of technocratic golden boy Pierre Elliott Trudeau during his
1968-1973 reform of the Federal Government
under the guidance of the OECD's
Sir Alexander King. It was during this time Sir King's Club of Rome (Ottawa branch) was set up in Ottawa under the guidance of
Trudeau and his clerk of the Privy Council Michael Pitfield, and other neo-Malthusian technocrats such as Privy Council President
Michel Lamontagne, Maurice Strong, and Governor General Roland Mitchener.
It was from this control point in Ottawa in 1971 that the work later to become known as Limits to Growth was funded by tax payers
and which became the bible for the new Malthusianism and blueprint for the "post-industrial society". It is from this cybernetics
central node that the web of governance both in Canada and also across other British infiltrated territories in the Trans-Atlantic
system is coordinated under the directives of London.
this whole world wide medeling thing after our govs have been unashamedly meddling everywhere for years , it just shows thier
fear, they are loosing thier populaces and looking for scapegoats, i love it, times are changing
...will Canada follow suit in order to become a true sovereign nation freed of all foreign imperial influence once and for
all?
Ha ha (Bart Simpson style). Canada has, and will always be, a British-USA vassal-state (with a veneer of democratic elections).
Washington tells the Ottawa government to jump! After asking permission from the UK, Canada negotiates with America as to how
high - since the country is technically insolvent there isn't that much jumping room.
Russia is charged with bringing things in the open, to the light, instead of letting creatures of the dark skulk in shadows,
plotting, backstabbing, poisoning and conducting their "business" as usual. Because apparently democracy flourishes in darkness
and ignorance...
" it seems the usa is no longer willing to go full on.."
What is being missed by most is that we entered a new era March 2018 when Putin unveiled
his new toys. The u.s. is no longer the presumed supreme military power on the planet. Of
course they will not not admit this, but I believe we are approaching the moment when the
U.S. will be told to stand down or suffer the consequences, whether it be in Syria, Venezuela
or Ukraine.
"I want to tell all those who have fueled the arms race over the last 15 years, sought
to win unilateral advantages over Russia, introduced unlawful sanctions aimed at containing
our country's development: Everything that you wanted to impede with your policies has
already happened," he said. "You have failed to contain Russia."
"No one listened to us then. So listen to us now," Putin said to thunderous applause in
the speech, which was held at a venue just outside the Kremlin and televised live
nationwide.
The pentagon has admitted it has no defense against those hypersonic missiles.
"If that happens, what kind of defense do we have against the hypersonic threat?"
Inhofe asked.
Hyten replied, "We have a very difficult -- well, our defense is our deterrent
capability. We don't have any defense that could deny theemployment of such a weapon against
us, so our response would be our deterrent force, which would be the triad and the nuclear
capabilities that we have to respond to such a threat."
Putin has quite clearly stated the what the Russian response will be should the U.S.
resort to the use of nuclear weapons.
"Only when we know for certain – and this takes a few seconds to understand
– that Russia is being attacked we will deliver a counter strike. This would be a
reciprocal counter strike. Why do I say 'counter'? Because we will counter missiles flying
towards us by sending a missile in the direction of an aggressor. Of course, this amounts to
a global catastrophe but I would like to repeat that we cannot be the initiators of such a
catastrophe because we have no provision for a pre-emptive strike. Yes, it looks like we are
sitting on our hands and waiting until someone uses nuclear weapons against us. Well, yes,
this is what it is. But then any aggressor should know that retaliation is inevitable and
they will be annihilated. And we as the victims of an aggression, we as martyrs would go to
paradise while they will simply perish because they won't even have time to repent their
sins. "
Russia is not going to allow the U.S. to destroy Venezuela, Iran, Syria or Ukraine. It makes
sense because Ru cannot allow the United States and vassals to continually put Ru in the
position of one step forward two steps backs via their destructive policies and I firmly
believe that Putin will not allow the u.s. time to develop counters to their new missiles.
That would be foolish as the u.s. has shown what they are capable of when there is no serious
threat to their military. It will be a world war and the unites states has been pushing hard
to keep its allies on a short tether.
U.S. has been stalemated in Syria, (soon to be ejected) Ukraine is about to fall back into
ru orbit after the elections next week. Venezuela has Russians on the ground. They dare not
go into Iran, because the iron dome is rusty and one direct hit by the foab about 13k
southeast of dimona is going to make a large part of that illegal settlement called israel
uninhabitable .
There is much room for miscalculation, and I believe war is an almost certainty. At the
same time, I think we need a few tens to hundreds of millions to meet their maker as the
human race is only growing more stupid by the minute and eliminating a large portion of the
race will likely extend its survival. Sad but true.
That happened often when a second rate provincial lawyer became the Secretary of State. At least Kerry knows French. Pompeo
knows absolution nothing and is capable only of repeating old cliché.
Today's special word is: Projection
Notable quotes:
"... Pompeo should go into advertising. Since the late '50's, we've torn Latin America to shreds, but we're the good guys, eh?!. ..."
"... Doesn't Pompeo also believe in the rapture. ..."
Pompeo should go into advertising. Since the late '50's, we've torn Latin America to
shreds, but we're the good guys, eh?!.
I luv my country, but I hate my government.
beemasters
This must have been the most transparently crooked administration ever in the US history! Ain't that the pot calling the
kettle black!
2willies
Doesn't Pompeo also believe in the rapture.
Idaho potato head
At some point even the most deluded sheep has got to realize he is being lied to. Or is it just as in the Matrix, there is
an age limit as to when a mind can be awoken.
After reading CYMS1 below I retract that question.
@ Grieved with the UN/Pence story....here is China's take on the situation
"
UNITED NATIONS, April 10 (Xinhua) -- The Chinese ambassador to the United Nations on
Wednesday rejected U.S. Vice President Mike Pence's accusation against China over Venezuela.
"China categorically rejects the accusation," Ma Zhaoxu, China's permanent representative
to the United Nations, told a Security Council meeting on the situation in Venezuela.
"Earlier in his intervention, the U.S. representative leveled an unfounded accusation on
China's position on Venezuela in the Security Council," he said, referring to Pence's remarks
that Russia and China obstructed Council action on Venezuela with their veto power.
China has all along maintained friendly and cooperative relations with other countries
around the world, including Venezuela, on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful
Coexistence, he said.
"We support peoples of all countries in independently choosing their development paths
that cater to their national conditions. We never interfere in other countries' internal
affairs, nor do we impose anything on other countries," Ma added.
Members of the Security Council should faithfully abide by the purposes and principles of
the UN Charter and the universally recognized norms of international relations, genuinely
respect the choices of peoples of other countries, and do more positive and practical things
for the people of Venezuela rather than the opposite, said the Chinese envoy."
"Nearly a quarter million people were killed between 1962 and 1996 in Guatemala, 93 percent at the hands of pro-government forces.
The UN-backed Commission for Historical Clarification classified the massacre of Mayan Indians, treated by the military as a potential
constituency for guerrillas, as genocide, including the destruction of up to 90 percent of the Ixil-Mayan towns and the bombing
of those fleeing. In El Salvador, 988 of the 75,000 killed between 1980 and 1992 -- also overwhelmingly by pro-government forces
-- were massacred in the Morazán Department in the "El Mozote" case, whose prosecution is at risk.
Most of the victims were children, who were shot down, burned and raped en masse or hung upside down and bled from their throats.
Refuting claims by defendants that victims were combatants, the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team has stated: "We only found
marbles, toys, coins, cooking utensils, sandals and flip-flops next to their bodies." It was the largest single documented massacre
in modern Latin American history.
What the ruling class wants to be "forgotten" is the fact that their only response to the crisis of global capitalism is dictatorship,
war and barbarism."
There are always pick-and-shovel men like Abrams around to do the wet work – for their part, because they like it, and are contemptuous
of those who shrink from violence. But they are singularly useful for the reigning government, as well, since it has to sing soothing
songs of respect for human rights and pretend to view violence as repugnant and unnecessary. It would be, if the government had
forever to achieve its aims. But it usually has to bank on putting America in the place it wants it to be in four years. Sometimes
that means a bunch of people have to be eliminated, or else you run out of time.
People like Elliott Abrams are seldom kept around after the goals are won, though – too much danger they might develop loose
lips. So, often, something 'happens' to them. In this case, it couldn't 'happen' to a righter guy.
Just to point out once again, it is a war crime and a violation of the International Rules of
Armed Conflict for the ENEMY to cut civilians off from the services they need to live. And he
wants to lead the country??!!
Certainly getting the poor and the middle class on his side. Here's an NPR interview with
Ari Shapiro, on the Colombian border with Venezuela. Along with bigging up the impression
that there is a shitload of military deserters just waiting to have a crack at Maduro,
including the 80% who want him gone but don't dare say so out of fear – by the simple
device of interviewing some young men we know nothing about, not even their names because
their identities must be kept secret – he says this:
"This is the Colombian ambassador to the U.S., Francisco Santos. Ambassador Santos
insists there is still time for what we'll call plan A – international pressure and
sanctions to force Maduro out. Venezuela would then hold elections, and Guaido would take
power."
Guaido would take power. Oh, wait, wait: we have to have an election first.
Obviously it is inconceivable that anyone else might win. The guy most of the country had
never heard of a year ago, now is a shoo-in for the presidency. Isn't democracy fun
???? You just never know what's going to happen!
The USA and its 'partners' are moving forward with a debt-restructuring plan for Venezuela
– which you just know is going to include massive loans by the IMF and arm-twisting of
allies to persuade them to forgive debt to help the US State Department's newest plaything
– just as if Guaido is inevitable.
Well, he's not. And few things would give me as much pleasure as seeing the smirk slapped
off their faces.
"And I repeat, the cessation of darkness will definitely come with the cessation of
usurpation," culminates the self-proclaimed Juan Guaidó"
It's odd that the sabotage includes that element of blackmail, i.e., "put me in office,
and I will turn the lights on again." How would he expect to do that, if the grid has been
damaged?
Such blackmail only makes sense if Guaidó had, like, the secret password that would
turn off the viruses(?)
Because, if the damage is physical, then it will take a while to fix, even if Guaidó
and the American engineers worked at it night and day.
Even if he has no control over it, he is talking it up like he has, more like "I know
people". Which tends to make it sound more as if it is his backers doing it.
I would say he is well on his way to making himself the most hated man in Venezuela, at
least barring those who hope to sweep him into power.
I know. How can you even imagine being that guy? Who deprives your neighbors of their
electricity and then asks them to vote for you, so you would turn it on again?
A person like that would be lynched!
As Grayzone Project's Max Blumenthal says, the irony is that Nicolas Maduro's government
is protecting Guaido and his freedom to travel around Caracas through the police. So much for
Maduro being a tyrannical dictator
Because there is a presidential
election coming up next year, the Donald
Trump Administration appears to be looking for a
country that it can attack and destroy in order to prove its toughness
and willingness to
go all the way in support of alleged American interests. It is a version of the old neocon doctrine
attributed to Michael Ledeen, the belief that every once in a while, it is necessary to pick out
some crappy little country and throw it against the wall just to demonstrate that the United States
means business.
"Meaning business" is a tactic whereby the adversary surrenders immediately in fear of
the possible consequences, but there are a couple of problems with that thinking.
The first is that an opponent who can resist will sometimes balk and create a
continuing problem for the United States, which has a demonstrated inability to start and end
wars in any coherent fashion.
This tendency to get caught in a quagmire in a situation that might have been resolved
through diplomacy has been exacerbated by the current White House's negotiating style, which is
to both demand and expect submission on all points even before discussions begin. That was
clearly the perception with North Korea, where National Security Advisor John Bolton insisted
that Pyongyang had agreed to American demands over its nuclear program even though it hadn't and
would have been foolish to do so for fear of being treated down the road like Libya, which
denuclearized but then was attacked and destroyed seven years later. The Bolton mis-perception,
which was apparently bought into by Trump, led to a complete unraveling of what might actually
have been accomplished if the negotiations had been serious and open to reasonable compromise
right from the beginning.
Trump's
written
demand
that Kim Jong Un immediately hand over his nuclear weapons and all bomb making
material was a non-starter based on White House misunderstandings rooted in its disdain for
compromise. The summit meeting with Trump, held in Hanoi at the end of February, was abruptly
canceled by Kim and Pyongyang subsequently accused Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo of
making "gangster-like" demands.
The second problem is that there are only a few actual casus belli situations under
international law that permit a country to attack another preemptively, and they are usually
limited to actual imminent threats.
The current situation with Venezuela is similar to
that with North Korea in that Washington is operating on the presumption that it has a right to
intervene and bring about regime change, using military force if necessary, because of its
presumed leadership role in global security, not because Caracas or even Pyongyang necessarily
is threatening anyone. That presumption that American "exceptionalism" provides authorization to
intervene in other countries using economic weapons backed up by a military option that is "on
the table" is a viewpoint that is not accepted by the rest of the world.
In the case of Venezuela, where Trump has dangerously demanded that Russia withdraw the hundred
or so advisors that it sent to help stabilize the country, the supposition that the United States
has exclusive extra-territorial rights is largely based on nineteenth and early twentieth century
unilaterally declared "doctrines."
The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 and the Roosevelt Corollary
of 1904 de facto established the United States as the hegemon-presumptive for the entire Western
Hemisphere, stretching from the Arctic Circle in the north to Patagonia in the south.
John Bolton has been the leader in
promoting
the Monroe Doctrine
as justification for Washington's interference in Venezuela's politics,
apparently only dimly aware that the Doctrine, which opposed any attempts by European powers to
establish new colonies in the Western Hemisphere, was only in effect for twenty-two years when the
United States itself annexed Texas and then went to war with Mexico in the following year
"... Putin understands that both the loser and the winner lose in the confrontation. Therefore, he always offers a compromise for a long time, almost to the last opportunity, even to those who clearly do not deserve it, moving to other solutions only after the opponent has clearly crossed all possible red lines and can pose a threat to the vital interests of Russia. An agreement based on consideration of each other's interests is always stronger than any short-term 'victories', which tomorrow will result in the need to reaffirm their status of the winner again and again. It seems to me that Putin understands this well. Hence the effectiveness of his actions. ..."
That's a great piece by Escobar, and it contains snippets from his talk with Ishchenko,
which I recall he said was coming but which I don't think I ever saw anywhere until now.
I have to quote this perfect illustration of Putin from Ishchenko:
Putin understands that both the loser and the winner lose in the confrontation. Therefore,
he always offers a compromise for a long time, almost to the last opportunity, even to
those who clearly do not deserve it, moving to other solutions only after the opponent has
clearly crossed all possible red lines and can pose a threat to the vital interests of
Russia. An agreement based on consideration of each other's interests is always stronger
than any short-term 'victories', which tomorrow will result in the need to reaffirm their
status of the winner again and again. It seems to me that Putin understands this well.
Hence the effectiveness of his actions.
As to Pepe's main theme, that the Pentagon is hardening its stances, it's well reported,
and fits nicely with the latest piece from Whitney Webb, which Escobar linked form his
Facebook page, by the way (I get a lot of good "heads-up" links from there). I'll post it in
the next comment.
Webb's story is about the newly developed RED team, the "sole contractor" to USAID with
regard to Venezuela. The piece illustrates both the exact playbook to be used in Venezuela
and a hardening of stance in the covert activity sphere equal with the military sphere's
hardening that karlof1 cites @73:
For instance, one respondent asserted that the RED Team system would "restore the long-lost
doing capacity of USAID." Another USAID official with 15 years of experience, including in
"extremely denied environments," stated that:
"We have to be involved in national security or USAID will not be relevant. Anybody
who doesn't think we need to be working in combat elements or working with SF [special
forces] groups is just naïve. We are either going to be up front or irrelevant USAID
is going through a lot right now, but this is an area where we can be of utility. It must
happen."
This seems to speak a lot of the Trump administration's true ambitions in the Rambo
theater of fantasy and cruelty. This RED team is armed with cash and weaponry for offensive
violence, along with an entire vocabulary of institutional words that almost seem harmless
until you explore the implications, as Webb does.
I have to say in passing that I just don't know if we've ever been able to see so clearly
before - i.e. at the level of one magazine article citing the published declarations of the
actors - the exact and precise methods by which regime change will attempt to be imposed on a
target country.
Presumably Gerasimov and the rest of the Russia team are hip to every one of these moves,
and will counter effectively and creatively.
"The Supreme Court of Justice of #Venezuela ratifies precautionary measures to Juan
#Guaidó: prohibition to exit the country, prohibition to transfer his property,
blockade and immobilization of bank accounts or any other financial instrument in
Venezuela."
"The Supreme Court of Justice imposes a fine on Juan #Guaidó and asks the National
Constituent Assembly to lift the parliamentary immunity after Guaidó broke the
prohibition of leaving the country."
What will be the next "Or Else" utterance by the Naked Emperor's Agents be? Will they
threaten to throw the table holding all those possibilities? Perhaps also add the chairs?
Meanwhile, China delivers another freighter full of medical supplies.
This article by late Robert Parry is from 2016 but is still relevant in context of the
current Ukrainian elections and the color revolution is Venezuela. The power of neoliberal
propaganda is simply tremendous. For foreign events it is able to distort the story to such an
extent that the most famous quote of CIA director William Casey "We'll know our disinformation
program is complete when everything the American public believes is false" looks like
constatation of already accomplished goal.
Exclusive: Several weeks before Ukraine's 2014 coup, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State
Nuland had already picked Arseniy Yatsenyuk to be the future leader, but now "Yats" is no
longer the guy, writes Robert Parry.
In reporting on the resignation of Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the major
U.S. newspapers either ignored or distorted Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland's
infamous intercepted
phone call before the 2014 coup in which she declared "Yats is the guy!"
Though Nuland's phone call introduced many Americans to the previously obscure Yatsenyuk,
its timing – a few weeks before the ouster of elected Ukrainian President Viktor
Yanukovych – was never helpful to Washington's desired narrative of the Ukrainian people
rising up on their own to oust a corrupt leader.
Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the
Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders.
Instead, the conversation between Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt
sounded like two proconsuls picking which Ukrainian politicians would lead the new government.
Nuland also disparaged the less aggressive approach of the European Union with the pithy
put-down: "Fuck the E.U.!"
More importantly, the intercepted call, released onto YouTube in early February 2014,
represented powerful evidence that these senior U.S. officials were plotting – or at
least collaborating in – a coup d'etat against Ukraine's democratically elected
president. So, the U.S. government and the mainstream U.S. media have since consigned this
revealing discussion to the Great Memory Hole.
On Monday, in reporting on Yatsenyuk's Sunday speech in which he announced that he is
stepping down, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal didn't mention the Nuland-Pyatt
conversation at all. The New York Times did mention the call but misled its readers regarding
its timing, making it appear as if the call followed rather than preceded the coup. That way
the call sounded like two American officials routinely appraising Ukraine's future leaders, not
plotting to oust one government and install another.
The Times
article by Andrew E. Kramer said: "Before Mr. Yatsenyuk's appointment as prime minister in
2014, a leaked recording of a telephone conversation between Victoria J. Nuland, a United
States assistant secretary of state, and the American ambassador in Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt,
seemed to underscore the West's support for his candidacy. 'Yats is the guy,' Ms. Nuland had
said."
Notice, however, that if you didn't know that the conversation occurred in late January or
early February 2014, you wouldn't know that it preceded the Feb. 22, 2014 coup. You might have
thought that it was just a supportive chat before Yatsenyuk got his new job.
You also wouldn't know that much of the Nuland-Pyatt conversation focused on how they
were going to "glue this thing" or "midwife this thing," comments sounding like prima facie
evidence that the U.S. government was engaged in "regime change" in Ukraine, on Russia's
border.
The 'No Coup' Conclusion
But Kramer's lack of specificity about the timing and substance of the call fits with a long
pattern of New York Times' bias in its coverage of the Ukraine crisis. On Jan. 4, 2015, nearly
a year after the U.S.-backed coup, the Times published an "investigation" article declaring
that there never had been a coup. It was just a case of President Yanukovych deciding to leave
and not coming back.
That article reached its conclusion, in part, by ignoring the evidence of a coup, including
the Nuland-Pyatt phone call. The story was co-written by Kramer and so it is interesting to
know that he was at least aware of the "Yats is the guy" reference although it was ignored in
last year's long-form article.
Instead, Kramer and his co-author Andrew Higgins took pains to mock anyone who actually
looked at the evidence and dared reach the disfavored conclusion about a coup. If you did, you
were some rube deluded by Russian propaganda.
"Russia has attributed Mr. Yanukovych's ouster to what it portrays as a violent,
'neo-fascist' coup supported and even choreographed by the West and dressed up as a popular
uprising," Higgins and Kramer
wrote . "Few outside the Russian propaganda bubble ever seriously entertained the Kremlin's
line. But almost a year after the fall of Mr. Yanukovych's government, questions remain about
how and why it collapsed so quickly and completely."
The Times' article concluded that Yanukovych "was not so much overthrown as cast adrift by
his own allies, and that Western officials were just as surprised by the meltdown as anyone
else. The allies' desertion, fueled in large part by fear, was accelerated by the seizing by
protesters of a large stock of weapons in the west of the country. But just as important, the
review of the final hours shows, was the panic in government ranks created by Mr. Yanukovych's
own efforts to make peace."
Yet, one might wonder what the Times thinks a coup looks like. Indeed, the Ukrainian coup
had many of the same earmarks as such classics as the CIA-engineered regime changes in Iran in
1953 and in Guatemala in 1954.
The way those coups played out is now historically well known. Secret U.S. government
operatives planted nasty propaganda about the targeted leader, stirred up political and
economic chaos, conspired with rival political leaders, spread rumors of worse violence to come
and then – as political institutions collapsed – watched as the scared but duly
elected leader made a hasty departure.
In Iran, the coup reinstalled the autocratic Shah who then ruled with a heavy hand for the
next quarter century; in Guatemala, the coup led to more than three decades of brutal military
regimes and the killing of some 200,000 Guatemalans.
Coups don't have to involve army tanks occupying the public squares, although that is an
alternative model which follows many of the same initial steps except that the military is
brought in at the end. The military coup was a common approach especially in Latin America in
the 1960s and 1970s.
' Color Revolutions'
But the preferred method in more recent years has been the "color revolution," which
operates behind the façade of a "peaceful" popular uprising and international pressure
on the targeted leader to show restraint until it's too late to stop the coup. Despite the
restraint, the leader is still accused of gross human rights violations, all the better to
justify his removal.
Later, the ousted leader may get an image makeover; instead of a cruel bully, he is
ridiculed for not showing sufficient resolve and letting his base of support melt away, as
happened with Mohammad Mossadegh in Iran and Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala.
But the reality of what happened in Ukraine was never hard to figure out. Nor did you have
to be inside "the Russian propaganda bubble" to recognize it. George Friedman, the founder of
the global intelligence firm Stratfor, called Yanukovych's overthrow "the most blatant coup
in history."
Which is what it appears if you consider the evidence. The first step in the process was to
create tensions around the issue of pulling Ukraine out of Russia's economic orbit and
capturing it in the European Union's gravity, a plan defined by influential American neocons in
2013.
On Sept. 26, 2013, National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman, who has been a
major neocon paymaster for decades, took to the op-ed page of the neocon Washington Post and
called Ukraine "the biggest prize" and an important interim step toward toppling Russian
President Vladimir Putin.
At the time, Gershman, whose NED is funded by the U.S. Congress to the tune of about $100
million a year, was financing scores of projects inside Ukraine training activists, paying for
journalists and organizing business groups.
As for the even bigger prize -- Putin -- Gershman wrote: "Ukraine's choice to join Europe
will accelerate the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin represents.
Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near
abroad but within Russia itself."
At that time, in early fall 2013, Ukraine's President Yanukovych was exploring the idea of
reaching out to Europe with an association agreement. But he got cold feet in November 2013
when economic experts in Kiev advised him that the Ukrainian economy would suffer a $160
billion hit if it separated from Russia, its eastern neighbor and major trading partner. There
was also the West's demand that Ukraine accept a harsh austerity plan from the International
Monetary Fund.
Yanukovych wanted more time for the E.U. negotiations, but his decision angered many western
Ukrainians who saw their future more attached to Europe than Russia. Tens of thousands of
protesters began camping out at Maidan Square in Kiev, with Yanukovych ordering the police to
show restraint.
Meanwhile, with Yanukovych shifting back toward Russia, which was offering a more generous
$15 billion loan and discounted natural gas, he soon became the target of American neocons and
the U.S. media, which portrayed Ukraine's political unrest as a black-and-white case of a
brutal and corrupt Yanukovych opposed by a saintly "pro-democracy" movement.
Cheering an Uprising
The Maidan uprising was urged on by American neocons, including Assistant Secretary of State
for European Affairs Nuland, who passed out cookies at the Maidan and reminded Ukrainian
business leaders that the United States had invested $5 billion in their "European
aspirations."
A screen shot of U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland
speaking to U.S. and Ukrainian business leaders on Dec. 13, 2013, at an event sponsored by
Chevron, with its logo to Nuland's left.
Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, also showed up, standing on stage with right-wing extremists
from the Svoboda Party and telling the crowd that the United States was with them in their
challenge to the Ukrainian government.
As the winter progressed, the protests grew more violent. Neo-Nazi and other extremist
elements from Lviv and other western Ukrainian cities began arriving in well-organized brigades
or "sotins" of 100 trained street fighters. Police were attacked with firebombs and other
weapons as the violent protesters began seizing government buildings and unfurling Nazi banners
and even a Confederate flag.
Though Yanukovych continued to order his police to show restraint, he was still depicted
in the major U.S. news media as a brutal thug who was callously murdering his own people. The
chaos reached a climax on Feb. 20 when mysterious snipers opened fire, killing both police and
protesters. As the police retreated, the militants advanced brandishing firearms and other
weapons. The confrontation led to significant loss of life, pushing the death toll to around 80
including more than a dozen police.
U.S. diplomats and the mainstream U.S. press immediately blamed Yanukovych for the sniper
attack, though the circumstances remain murky to this day and some investigations have
suggested that the lethal sniper fire came from buildings controlled by Right Sektor
extremists.
To tamp down the worsening violence, a shaken Yanukovych signed a European-brokered deal on
Feb. 21, in which he accepted reduced powers and an early election so he could be voted out of
office. He also agreed to requests from Vice President Joe Biden to pull back the police.
The precipitous police withdrawal opened the path for the neo-Nazis and other street
fighters to seize presidential offices and force Yanukovych and his officials to flee for their
lives. The new coup regime was immediately declared "legitimate" by the U.S. State Department
with Yanukovych sought on murder charges. Nuland's favorite, Yatsenyuk, became the new prime
minister.
Throughout the crisis, the mainstream U.S. press hammered home the theme of white-hatted
protesters versus a black-hatted president. The police were portrayed as brutal killers who
fired on unarmed supporters of "democracy." The good-guy/bad-guy narrative was all the American
people heard from the major media.
The New York Times went so far as to delete the slain policemen from the narrative and
simply report that the police had killed all those who died in the Maidan. A typical Times
report on March 5, 2014, summed up the storyline: "More than 80 protesters were shot to death
by the police as an uprising spiraled out of control in mid-February."
The mainstream U.S. media also sought to discredit anyone who observed the obvious fact that
an unconstitutional coup had just occurred. A new theme emerged that portrayed Yanukovych as
simply deciding to abandon his government because of the moral pressure from the noble and
peaceful Maidan protests.
Any reference to a "coup" was dismissed as "Russian propaganda." There was a parallel
determination in the U.S. media to discredit or ignore evidence that neo-Nazi militias had
played an important role in ousting Yanukovych and in the subsequent suppression of anti-coup
resistance in eastern and southern Ukraine. That opposition among ethnic-Russian Ukrainians
simply became "Russian aggression."
Nazi symbols on helmets worn by members of Ukraine's Azov battalion. (As filmed by a
Norwegian film crew and shown on German TV)
This refusal to notice what was actually a remarkable story – the willful unleashing
of Nazi storm troopers on a European population for the first time since World War II –
reached absurd levels as The New York Times and The Washington Post buried references to the
neo-Nazis at the end of stories, almost as afterthoughts.
The Washington Post went to the extreme of rationalizing Swastikas and other Nazi symbols by
quoting one militia commander as calling them "romantic" gestures by impressionable young men.
[See Consortiumnews.com's " Ukraine's
'Romantic' Neo-Nazi Storm Troopers ."]
But today – more than two years after what U.S. and Ukrainian officials like to
call "the Revolution of Dignity" – the U.S.-backed Ukrainian government is sinking into
dysfunction, reliant on handouts from the IMF and Western governments.
And, in a move perhaps now more symbolic than substantive, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk is
stepping down. Yats is no longer the guy.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The
Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen
Narrative, either in print here or
as an e-book (from
Amazon and
barnesandnoble.com ).
Khalid Talaat , April 16, 2016 at 20:39
Is it too far fetched to think that all these color revolutions are a perfection of the
process to unleash another fake color revolution, only this time it is a Red, White and Blue
revolution here at home? Those that continue to booze and snooze while watching the tube will
not know the difference until it is too late.
The freedom and tranquility of our country depends on finding and implementing a
counterweight to the presstitutes and their propaganda. The alternative is too
destructive in its natural development.
Abe , April 15, 2016 at 18:49
Yats and Porko are the guys who broke Ukraine. By the end of December 2015, Ukraine's
gross domestic product had shrunk around 19 percent in comparison with 2013. Its decimated
industrial sector needs less fuel. Yatsie did a heck of a job.
The timing of "Yats" departure is ominous. Mid-April, six weeks from now would be the
first chance to renew the invasion of DPR Donesk/Lugansk."Yats" failed in 2014, and didn't
try in 2015. Who is "the new guy"? Will the new Prime Minister begin raving about renewing
the holy war to recover the lost oblasts? 2016 is really Ukraine's last chance. Ukraine
refuses to implement Minsk2, and they have been receiving lots of new weapons. I believe
President Putin put the Syrian operation on " standby" not only to avoid approaching the
border, provoking a Turkish intervention, but also so he can give undistracted attention to
DPR Donesk/Lugansk.
Bill Rood , April 12, 2016 at 11:50
I guess I must be inside the Russian propaganda bubble. It was obvious to me when I
looked at the YouTube videos of policemen burning after being hit with Molotov
cocktails.
We played the same game of encouraging government "restraint" in Syria, where we
demanded Assad free "political prisoners," but we now accuse him of deliberately encouraging
ISIS by freeing those people, so that he can point to ISIS and ask, "Do you want that?"
Targeted leaders are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Andrei , April 12, 2016 at 10:26
"the Ukrainian coup had many of the same earmarks as such classics as the
CIA-engineered regime changes in Iran in 1953 and in Guatemala in 1954", Romania 1989 Shots
were fired by snipers in order to stirr the crowds (sounds familiar?) and also by the army
after Ceasescu ran away, which resulted in civilians getting murdered. Could it possibly be
that it was said : "Iliescu (next elected president) is the guy!" ?
Joe L. , April 12, 2016 at 11:00
Check out the attempted coup against Hugo Chavez in Venezuela 2002, that is very
similar with protesters, snipers on rooftops, IMF immediately offering loans to the new coup
government, new government positions for the coup plotters, complacency with the media
– propaganda, funding by USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy etc. John
Pilger documents how the coup occurred in his documentary "War on Democracy" –
https://vimeo.com/16724719 .
archaos , April 12, 2016 at 09:45
It was noted in the minutes of Verkhovna Rada almost 2 years before Maidan 2 , that
Geoffrey Pyatt was fomenting and funding destabilisation of Ukraine.
All of Svoboda Nazis in parliament (and other fascisti) then booed the MP who stated
this.
Mark Thomason , April 12, 2016 at 06:57
Also, the Dutch voted "no" on the economic agreement the coup was meant to force through
instead of the Russian agreement accepted by the President it overthrew. Now both "Yats" and
the economic agreement are gone. All that is left is the war. Neocons are still happen.
They wanted the war. They really want to overthrow Putin, and Ukraine was just a tool in
that.
Realist , April 12, 2016 at 05:51
You're right, it doesn't have to be the military that carries out a coup by deploying
tanks on the National Mall. In 2000, it was the United States Supreme Court that exceeded
its constitutional authority and installed George W. Bush as president, though in reality he
had lost that election. I wonder when that move will rightfully be characterized as a coup by
the historians.
"On Sept. 26, 2013, National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman, who has
been a major neocon paymaster for decades, took to the op-ed page of the neocon Washington
Post and called Ukraine "the biggest prize" and an important interim step toward toppling
Russian President Vladimir Putin."
It should be remembered that Victoria Nuland took up the post of Assistant Secretary of
State for European and Eurasian Affairs in Washington on September 18, 2013.
Coincidentally, two other women closely connected to events in Ukraine were also in
Washington during September 2013.
Friend of Nuland and boss of the IMF, which has its own HQ in Washington, Christine
Lagarde was swift to respond to a Ukraine request for IMF loans on February 27th 2014, just
five days after the removal of Yanukovych on February 22nd. Lagarde is pictured with
Baronness Catherine Ashton in Washington in a Facebook entry dated September 30th 2013.
Ashton was High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy at the
time.
Though visiting Kiev at the same time as Nuland in February 2014 Catherine Ashton never
appeared in public with her, which seems a little odd considering the women were on the same
mission, and talking to the same people. Nevertheless, despite appearing shy of being
photographed with each other the two women weren't quite so shy of being pictured with
leaders of the coup, including the right wing extremist, Oleh Tyahnybok.
Ashton refused to be drawn into commenting on Nuland's "Fuck the E.U.!" outburst,
describing Nuland as "a friend of mine." The two women certainly weren't strangers, they had
worked closely together before. September 2012 saw them involved in discussions with Iran
negotiator Saeed Jalili over the country's supposed nuclear arms ambitions.
The question is not so much whether the three women talked about Ukraine's future –
it would be ridiculous to think they did not – but how closely they worked together,
and exactly how closely they might have been involved in events leading up to the overthrow
of the legitimate government in Kiev. More on this here:
Another failed "regime change". Aren't these guys (Neoconservatives) great. They fail,
piss off/kill millions, yet seem to keep making money and retaining power. Time to WAKE UP
AMERICA.
Skip Edwards , April 11, 2016 at 20:06
Read "The Devil'Chessboard" by David Talbot to understand what has been occurring as a
result of America's Dark, Shadow government, an un-elected bunch of vicious psychopaths
controlling our destiny; unless stopped. Get a clue and realize that "Yats is our guy"
Victoria Nuland was Hillary Clinton's "gal." Hillary Clinton is Robert Kagen's "gal." Time to
flush all these rats out of the hold and get on with our lives.
Joe L. , April 11, 2016 at 18:40
Mr. Parry thank you for delving into the proven history of coups and the parallels with
Ukraine. It amazes me how anyone can outright deny this was a coup especially if they know
anything about US coups going back to WW2 (Iran 1953, Guatemala 1954, Chile 1973, attempt in
Venezuela 2002 etc. – and there are a whole slew more). I read before, as you have
rightly pointed out, that in 1953 the CIA led a propaganda campaign in Iran against Mossadegh
as well as financing opposition protesters and opposition government officials. Another
angle, as well, is looking historically back to what papers such as the New York Times were
reporting around the time of the coup in Iran – especially when we know that the
US/Britain overthrew the democratically elected Mossadegh for their own oil interests
(British Petroleum):
New York Times: "Mossadegh Plays with Fire" (August 15, 1953):
The world has so many trouble spots these days that one is apt to pass over the odd one
here and there to preserve a little peace of mind. It would be well, however, to keep an eye
on Iran, where matters are going from bad to worse, thanks to the machinations of Premier
Mossadegh.
Some of us used to ascribe our inability to persuade Dr. Mossadegh of the validity of our
ideas to the impossibility of making him understand or see things our way. We thought of him
as a sincere, well-meaning, patriotic Iranian, who had a different point of view and made
different deductions from the same set of facts. We now know that he is a power-hungry,
personally ambitious, ruthless demagogue who is trampling upon the liberties of his own
people. We have seen this onetime champion of liberty maintain martial law, curb freedom of
the press, radio, speech and assembly, resort to illegal arrests and torture, dismiss the
Senate, destroy the power of the Shah, take over control of the army, and now he is about to
destroy the Majlis, which is the lower house of Parliament.
His power would seem to be complete, but he has alienated the traditional ruling classes
-the aristocrats, landlords, financiers and tribal leaders. These elements are
anti-Communist. So is the Shah and so are the army leaders and the urban middle classes.
There is a traditional, historic fear, suspicion and dislike of Russia and the Russians. The
peasants, who make up the overwhelming mass of the population, are illiterate and
nonpolitical. Finally, there is still no evidence that the Tudeh (Communist) party is strong
enough or well enough organized, financed and led to take power.
All this simply means that there is no immediate danger of a Communist coup or Russian
intervention. On the other hand, Dr. Mossadegh is encouraging the Tudeh and is following
policies which will make the Communists more and more dangerous. He is a sorcerer's
apprentice, calling up forces he will not be able to control.
Iran is a weak, divided, poverty-stricken country which possesses an immense latent wealth
in oil and a crucial strategic position. This is very different from neighboring Turkey, a
strong, united, determined and advanced nation, which can afford to deal with the Russians
because she has nothing to fear -and therefore the West has nothing to fear. Thanks largely
to Dr. Mossadegh, there is much to fear in Iran.
My feeling is that the biggest sin that our society has is forgetting history. If we
remembered history I would think that it would be very difficult to pull off coups but most
media does not revisit history which proves US coups even against democracies. I actually
think that the coup that occurred in Ukraine was similar to the attempted coup in Venezuela
in 2002 with snipers on rooftops, immediate blame for the deaths on Hugo Chavez where media
manipulated the footage, immediate acceptance of the temporary coup government by the US
Government, immediately offering IMF loans for the new coup government, government positions
for many of the coup plotters, and let us not leave out the funding for the coup coming from
USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy. I also remember seeing the New York Times
immediately blaming Chavez and praising the coup but when the coup was overturned and US
fingerprints started to become revealed (with many of the coup plotters fleeing to the US)
then the New York Times wrote a limited retraction buried in their paper. Shameless.
SFOMARCO , April 11, 2016 at 15:16
How was NED able to finance "scores of projects inside Ukraine training activists,
paying for journalists and organizing business groups", not to mention to host such
dignitaries as Cookie Nuland, Loser McCain and assorted Bidens? Seems like a recipe for a
coup "hidden in plain sight".
Bob Van Noy , April 11, 2016 at 14:36
Ukraine, one would hope, represents the "Bridge Too Far" moment for the proponents of
regime change. Surely Americans must be catching on to what we do for selected nations in the
name of "giving them their freedoms". The Kagan Family, empowered by their newly endorsed
candidate for President, Hillary Clinton, will feel justified in carrying on a new cold war,
this time world wide. Of course they will not be doing the fighting, they, like Dick Cheney
are the self appointed intellects of geopolitical chess, much like The Georgetown Set of the
Kennedy era, they perceive themselves as the only ones smart enough to plan America's
future.
Helen Marshall , April 11, 2016 at 17:11
I wish. How many Americans know ANYTHNG about what has happened in Ukraine, about Crimea
and its history, and/or could even locate them on a map?
Pastor Agnostic , April 12, 2016 at 04:11
Nuland is merely the inhouse, PNAC female version of Sidney Blumenthal. Which raises the
scary question. Who would she pick to be SecState?
"... Given that Guaidó was trained by a group funded by USAID's sister organization, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) -- and is known to take his marching orders from Washington, including his self-proclamation as "interim president" and his return to Venezuela following the "humanitarian aid" showdown -- it is worth considering that this USAID document may well serve as a roadmap to the upcoming and Guaidó-led "tactical actions" that will comprise "Operation Freedom." ..."
"... Titled "Rapid Expeditionary Development (RED) Teams: Demand and Feasibility Assessment," the 75-page document was produced for the U.S. Global Development Lab, a branch of USAID. It was written as part of an effort to the "widespread sentiment" among the many military, intelligence, and development officials the report's authors interviewed "that the USG [U.S. government] is woefully underperforming in non-permissive and denied environments," including Venezuela. Notably, some of the military, intelligence and development officials interviewed by the report's authors had experience working in a covert capacity in Venezuela. ..."
"... The report goes on to state that "RED Team members would be catalytic actors, performing development activities alongside local communities while coordinating with interagency partners." It further states that "[i]t is envisioned that the priority competency of proposed RED Team development officers would be social movement theory (SMT)" and that "RED Team members would be 'super enablers,' observing situations on the ground and responding immediately by designing, funding, and implementing small-scale activities." ..."
"... Also raising the specter of a Venezuela link is the fact that the document suggests Brazil as a potential location for a RED Team pilot study. Several of those interviewed for the report asserted that "South American countries were ripe for pilots" of the RED Team program, adding that "These [countries were] under-reported, low-profile, idiot-proof locations, where USG civilian access is fairly unrestrained by DS [Diplomatic Security] and where there is a positive American relationship with the host government." ..."
"... This January, Brazil inaugurated Jair Bolsonaro as president, a fascist who has made his intention to align the country close to Washington's interests no secret. During Bolsonaro's recent visit to Washington, he became the first president of that country to visit CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. President Donald Trump said during his meeting with Bolsonaro that "We have a great alliance with Brazil -- better than we've ever had before" and spoke in favor of Brazil joining NATO. ..."
"... This is supported by the troubling correlation between a document produced by the NED-funded group CANVAS and the recent power outages that have taken place throughout Venezuela, which were described as U.S.-led "sabotage" by the country's government. A recent report by The Grayzone detailed how a September 2010 memo by CANVAS -- which trained Juan Guaidó -- described in detail how the potential collapse of the country's electrical infrastructure, like that recently seen in Venezuela, would be "a watershed event" that "would likely have the impact of galvanizing public unrest in a way that no opposition group could ever hope to generate." ..."
"... The document specifically named the Simon Bolivar Hydroelectric Plant at Guri Dam, which failed earlier this month as a result of what the Venezuelan government asserted was "sabotage" conducted by the U.S. government. That claim was bolstered by U.S. Senator Marco Rubio's apparent foreknowledge of the power outage. Thus, there is a precedent of correlation between these types of documents and actions that occur in relation to the current U.S. regime-change effort in Venezuela. ..."
With its hands tied when it comes to military intervention, only covert actions - such as those described in the RED Team document
- are likely to be enacted by the U.S. government, at least at this stage of its ongoing "regime change" effort in Venezuela.
Juan Guaidó, the self-proclaimed "interim president of Venezuela" who is supported by the United States government, recently announced
coming "tactical actions" that will be taken by his supporters starting April 6 as part of "
Operation Freedom ," an alleged grassroots effort
to overthrow Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
That operation, according to Guaidó, will be
led by "Freedom and Aid Committees" that in turn create "freedom cells" throughout the country -- "cells" that will spring to
action when Guaidó gives the signal on April 6 and launch large-scale community protests. Guaidó's stated plan involves the Venezuelan
military then taking his side, but his insistence that "all options are still on the table" (i.e., foreign military intervention)
reveals his impatience with the military, which has continued to stay loyal to Maduro throughout Guaidó's "interim presidency."
However, a document released by the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) in February, and highlighted last month in
a report
by Devex, details the creation of networks of small teams, or cells, that would operate in a way very similar to what Guaidó
describes in his plan for "Operation Freedom."
Given that Guaidó
was trained by a group funded by USAID's sister organization, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) -- and is known to take
his marching orders from Washington, including
his self-proclamation as "interim president" and his return to Venezuela following the "humanitarian aid" showdown -- it is worth
considering that this USAID document may well serve as a roadmap to the upcoming and Guaidó-led "tactical actions" that will comprise
"Operation Freedom."
RED Teams
Titled "Rapid Expeditionary Development (RED) Teams: Demand and Feasibility Assessment," the 75-page
document was produced for the U.S. Global Development Lab,
a branch of USAID. It was written as part of an effort to the "widespread sentiment" among the many military, intelligence, and development
officials the report's authors interviewed "that the USG [U.S. government] is woefully underperforming in non-permissive and denied
environments," including Venezuela. Notably, some of the military, intelligence and development officials interviewed by the report's
authors had experience working in a covert capacity in Venezuela.
The approach put forth in this report involves the creation of rapid expeditionary development (RED) teams, who would "be deployed
as two-person teams and placed with 'non-traditional' USAID partners executing a mix of offensive, defensive, and stability operations
in extremis conditions." The report notes later on that these "non-traditional" partners are U.S. Special Forces (SF) and the CIA.
The report goes on to state that "RED Team members would be catalytic actors, performing development activities alongside local
communities while coordinating with interagency partners." It further states that "[i]t is envisioned that the priority competency
of proposed RED Team development officers would be social movement theory (SMT)" and that "RED Team members would be 'super enablers,'
observing situations on the ground and responding immediately by designing, funding, and implementing small-scale activities."
In other words, these teams of combined intelligence, military and/or "democracy promoting" personnel would work as "super enablers"
of "small-scale activities" focused on "social movement theory" and community mobilizations, such as the mobilizations of protests.
The decentralized nature of RED teams and their focus on engineering "social movements" and "mobilizations" is very similar to
Guaidó's plan for "Operation
Freedom." Operation Freedom is set to begin through "Freedom and Aid committees" that cultivate decentralized "freedom cells" throughout
the country and that create mass mobilizations when Guaidó gives the go ahead on April 6. The ultimate goal of Operation Freedom
is to have those "freedom cell"-generated protests converge on Venezuela's presidential palace, where Nicolás Maduro resides. Given
Guaidó lack of momentum and popularity within Venezuela, it seems highly likely that U.S. government "catalytic actors" may be a
key part of his upcoming plan to topple Maduro in little over a week.
Furthermore, an appendix included in the report states that RED Team members, in addition to being trained in social movement
theory and community mobilization techniques, would also be trained in "weapons handling and use," suggesting that their role as
"catalytic actors" could also involve Maidan-esque behavior. This is a distinct possibility raised by the report's claim that RED
Team members be trained in the use of both "offensive" and "defensive" weaponry.
In addition, another appendix states that RED Team members would help "identify allies and mobilize small amounts of cash to establish
community buy-in/relationship" -- i.e., bribes -- and would particularly benefit the CIA by offering a way to "transition covert
action into community engagement activities."
Feeling Bolsonaro's breath on its neck
Also raising the specter of a Venezuela link is the fact that the document suggests Brazil as a potential location for a RED Team
pilot study. Several of those interviewed for the report asserted that "South American countries were ripe for pilots" of the RED
Team program, adding that "These [countries were] under-reported, low-profile, idiot-proof locations, where USG civilian access is
fairly unrestrained by DS [Diplomatic Security] and where there is a positive American relationship with the host government."
This January, Brazil inaugurated Jair Bolsonaro as president, a fascist who has made his intention to align the country close
to Washington's interests no secret. During Bolsonaro's
recent visit to Washington, he became the first president of that country to visit CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. President
Donald Trump said during his meeting with Bolsonaro that "We have a great alliance with Brazil -- better than we've ever had before"
and spoke in favor of Brazil joining NATO.
Though Bolsonaro's government
has claimed late in February that it would not allow the U.S. to launch a military intervention from its territory, Bolsonaro's
son, Eduardo Bolsonaro -- an adviser to his father and a Brazilian congressman --
said
last week that "use of force will be necessary" in Venezuela "at some point" and, echoing the Trump administration, added that
"all options are on the table." If Bolsonaro's government does allow the "use of force," but not a full-blown foreign military intervention
per se, its closeness to the Trump administration and the CIA suggests that covert actions, such as those carried out by the proposed
RED Teams, are a distinct possibility.
Frontier Design Group
The RED Team report was authored by members of Frontier Design Group (FDG) for USAID's Global Development Lab. FDG is a national
security contractor and its mission statement on its website is quite revealing:
Since our founding, Frontier has focused on the challenges and opportunities that concern the "3Ds" of Defense, Development
and Diplomacy and critical intersections with the intelligence community. Our work has focused on the wicked and sometimes overlapping
problem sets of fragility, violent extremism, terrorism, civil war, and insurgency. Our work on these complex issues has included
projects with the U.S. Departments of State and Defense, USAID, the National Counterterrorism Center and the U.S. Institute of
Peace."
FDG also states on is website that it also regularly does work for the Council on Foreign Relations and the Omidyar Group -- which
is controlled by Pierre Omidyar, a billionaire with deep ties to the U.S. national security establishment that were the subject of
a recent MintPress series. According to journalist Tim Shorrock, who mentions the document in
a recent investigation
focusing on Pierre Omidyar for Washington Babylon , FDG was the "sole contractor" hired by USAID to create a "new counterinsurgency
doctrine for the Trump administration" and the fruit of that effort is the "RED Team" document described above.
One of the co-authors of the document is
Alexa Courtney , FDG founder
and former USAID liaison officer with the Department of Defense; former manager of civilian counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan
for USAID; and former counterinsurgency specialist for U.S. intelligence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton.
In addition, according to Shorrock, Courtney's name has also been found "on several Caerus [Associates] contracts with USAID and
US intelligence that were leaked to me on a thumb drive, including a $77 million USAID project to track 'licit and illicit networks'
in Honduras." Courtney, according to
her LinkedIn account, was also
recently honored by Chevron Corporation for her "demonstrated leadership and impact on development results." MintPress
recently reported
on the role of Chevron in the current U.S.-led effort to topple Maduro and replace him with Guaidó.
Send in the USAID
Though Devex was told last month that USAID was "still working on the details in formulating the Rapid Expeditionary Development
(RED) Teams initiative," Courtney
stated
that the report's contents had been "received really favorably" by "very senior" and "influential" former and current government
officials she had interviewed during the creation of the document.
For instance, one respondent asserted that the RED Team system would "restore the long-lost doing capacity of USAID." Another
USAID official with 15 years of experience, including in "extremely denied environments," stated that:
We have to be involved in national security or USAID will not be relevant. Anybody who doesn't think we need to be working
in combat elements or working with SF [special forces] groups is just naïve. We are either going to be up front or irrelevant
USAID is going through a lot right now, but this is an area where we can be of utility. It must happen."
Given that the document represents the efforts of the sole contractor tasked with developing the current administration's new
counterterrorism strategy, there is plenty of reason to believe that its contents -- published for over a year -- have been or are
set to be put to use in Venezuela, potentially as part of the upcoming "Operation Freedom," set to begin on April 6.
This is supported by the troubling correlation between a document produced by the NED-funded group CANVAS and the recent power
outages that have taken place throughout Venezuela, which were described as U.S.-led "sabotage" by the country's government. A
recent report by The Grayzone detailed how a September 2010 memo by CANVAS -- which trained Juan Guaidó -- described in detail
how the potential collapse of the country's electrical infrastructure, like that recently seen in Venezuela, would be "a watershed
event" that "would likely have the impact of galvanizing public unrest in a way that no opposition group could ever hope to generate."
The document specifically named the Simon Bolivar Hydroelectric Plant at Guri Dam, which failed earlier this month as a result
of what the Venezuelan government asserted was "sabotage" conducted by the U.S. government. That claim was bolstered by U.S. Senator
Marco Rubio's apparent foreknowledge of the power outage. Thus, there is a precedent of correlation between these types of documents
and actions that occur in relation to the current U.S. regime-change effort in Venezuela.
Furthermore, it would make sense for the Trump administration to attempt to enact such an initiative as that described in the
document, given its apparent inability to launch a military intervention in Venezuela, despite its frequent claims that "all options
are on the table." Indeed, U.S. allies -- including those close to Venezuela, like Colombia --
have rejected military intervention, given the U.S.' past role in bloody coups and civil wars throughout the region.
Thus, with its hands tied when it comes to military intervention, only covert actions -- such as those described in the RED Team
document -- are likely to be enacted by the U.S. government, at least at this stage of its ongoing "regime change" effort in Venezuela.
"... On Wednesday while meeting with the wife of opposition leader Juan Guaidó, President Trump called on Russia to pull its troops out of Venezuela, warning that "all options" were on the table to make that happen. ..."
Days after Trump's Secretary of State Mike Pompeo demanded that Russia " cease its unconstructive behavior " by landing a transport
plane
full of Russian troops in Caracas last Saturday, the Kremlin has responded - essentially telling Washington to pound sand - and
that their troops will remain in Venezuela "for as long as needed " according to the
Independent .
In the latest indication the crisis in Venezuela is taking on elements of a proxy battle between the former Cold War rivals,
a spokeswoman for Russia's foreign ministry said the troops had been dispatched to fulfil "military contracts".
" They are involved in the implementation of agreements in the sphere of military and technical cooperation ," said Maria Zakharova,
according to the AFP, adding that the troops would stay there " for as long as needed ".
" Russia is not changing the balance of power in the region, Russia is not threatening anyone ," she said. -
Independent
Last week we also noted that
new satellite images reveal a major deployment of S-300 air defense missile systems to a key air base south of Caracas shortly
after Russia arrived.
On Wednesday while meeting with the wife of opposition leader Juan Guaidó, President Trump called on Russia to pull its troops
out of Venezuela, warning that "all options" were on the table to make that happen.
Juan Guaido getting a ''warm'' welcome from population in El Valle. Apparently, Venezuelan
masses have had enough of comprador sellouts backed by European powers.
Without police presence, the Yankee puppet would in all likelihood end up lynched and
hanging from lamppost.
Exceptionals are in for a rude awakening, if they attempt to overthrow Chavistas using
direct kinetic operations.
Any invasion will be met with fierce resistance. No volveran to Pre-Chavez years. Orange
dotard and his neo-confederates in the white house fancy themselves crushing ''subhuman''
resistance from shitholes and securing the hemisphere for wall street looters. The gambit
will backfire, and could end up kickstarting hostilites that will span the Continent from
Patagonia to Rio Grande. MAGA the gift that keeps on giving. #winning... https://www.facebook.com/venesolidarite/videos/814971605532561/
Seems to me what that BigLie's about is this tale: Relations with Russia during the
post-USSR age were going along swell until Russia began involved in the Venezuelan
Crisis.
The attempt is to try a new narrative using a different angle to blame Russia which is the
goal of the BigLie. Signal a new line of approach in dealing with the attitude toward Russia
to the trusty echoers of His Master's Voice.
They lost control of Saudi Arabia, after trying to take down MBS and then betraying him by unexpectedly allowing waivers on
Iranian oil in November.
The U.S. cannot take down Iran without Venezuelan oil. What is worse, right now they don't have access to enough heavy oil
to meet their own needs.
Controlling the world oil trade is central to Trump's strategy for the U.S. to continue its empire. Without Venezuelan oil,
the U.S. is a bit player in the energy markets, and will remain so.
Having Russia block the U.S. in Venezuela adds insult to injury. After Crimea and Syria, now Venezuela, Russia exposes the
U.S. as a loud mouthed-bully without the capacity to back up its threats, a 'toothless tiger', an 'emperor without clothes'.
If the U.S. cannot dislodge Russia from Venezuela, its days as 'global hegemon' are finished. For this reason the U.S. will
continue escalating the situation with ever-riskier actions, until it succeeds or breaks.
In the same manor, if Russia backs off, its resistance to the U.S. is finished. And the U.S. will eventually move to destroy
Russia, like it has been actively trying to do for the past 30 years. Russia cannot and will not back off.
Venezuela thus becomes the stage where the final act in the clash of empires plays out. Will the world become a multi-polar
world, in which the U.S. becomes a relatively isolated and insignificant pole? Or will the world become more fully dominated by
a brutal, erratic hegemon?
Stay Out Of Western Hemisphere! Bolton Warns Russia Over Troops In Venezuela
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/29/2019 - 18:25 162 SHARES
The White House has dramatically stepped up its rhetoric threatening action against Russia's
military presence in Venezuela after the Kremlin deployed a troop contingency to Caracas last
Saturday.
Trump's national security adviser John Bolton took tensions to a new level, on Friday
issuing a new Monroe doctrine of sorts, telling Moscow any attempt to establish or expand
military operations in the western hemisphere constitutes a "provocative" and "direct threat"
to international peace and security in the region. "We strongly caution actors external to the
Western Hemisphere against deploying military assets to Venezuela, or elsewhere in the
Hemisphere, with the intent of establishing or expanding military operations," Bolton said in
a statement .
"We will consider such provocative actions as a direct threat to international peace and
security in the region," he added. This follows the president's own warning on Wednesday that
"all options" are on the table regarding potential expanding Russian presence in Venezuela.
Two Russian aircraft carrying about 100 servicemen and 35 tons of cargo arrived in Caracas
last Saturday, led by Russian General Vasily Tonkoshkurov, identified as chief of the Main
Staff of the Ground Forces and First Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Land Forces of
Russia.
This prompted Trump's Wednesday warning to Russia against involvement in the Latin American
nation; he told reporters in
the Oval Office that :
" Russia has to get out."
Kremlin officials responded by explaining that it deployed military specialists merely to
service preexisting arms contracts with Venezuela, and that Russia is not interfering in the
Latin American country's internal affairs.
Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said at a press briefing on Thursday when asked how long the
Russian troop contingency led by a high ranking general will stay:
"How long? As long as they need to, and as long as the Venezuelan government needs them.
It all is being done based on bilateral agreements."
Russia's position is that it is not interfering in Venezuela's internal affairs by merely
cooperating on legal and existing service contracts, and that no other country should do so
either. It said that only "specialists" had entered Venezuela under a pre-existing agreed upon
military cooperation deal .
However, the White House isn't buying it, as Bolton's Friday statement further condemned
Maduro's "use of foreign military personnel in his attempt to remain in power, including the
introduction of Russian military personnel and equipment into Venezuela."
"Maduro will only use this military support to further repress the people of Venezuela;
perpetuate the economic crisis that has destroyed Venezuela's economy; and endanger regional
stability," Bolton
said .
All of this also comes as the Maduro government stripped US-backed opposition leader Juan
Guaido of his position in the National Assembly, further barring
him from holding public office for 15 years .
"... When we mix this with the recent India-Pakistan scuffle, a wider message emerges. There was absolutely no interest by Prime Minister Imran Kahn, the Pakistani Army and the Pakistani intelligence, ISI, to launch an attack on India in Kashmir. Pakistan was about to run out of money and about to be bolstered by the U.S., via Saudi Arabia with $20 billion and an IMF loan. ..."
"... At the same time, there were two almost simultaneous terrorist attacks launched from Pakistan – against Iran and against India in mid-February. There's no smoking gun yet, but these attacks may have been manipulated by a foreign intelligence agency. ..."
"... Lavrov explained how Washington was engaged in acquiring mortars and portable air defense systems "in an East European country, and mov(ing) them closer to Venezuela by an airline of a regime that is rather absolutely obedient to Washington in the post-Soviet space." ..."
"... That leaves Plan D – which is essentially to try to starve the Venezuelan population to death via viciously lethal additional sanctions. Sanctioned Syria and sanctioned Iran didn't collapse. Even boasting myriad comprador elites aggregated in the Lima group, exceptionalists may have to come to grips with the fact that deploying the Monroe doctrine essentially to contain China's influence in the young 21stcentury is no "cakewalk." ..."
A hefty case can be made that the Empire of Chaos currently has no allies; it's essentially
surrounded by an assortment of vassals, puppets and comprador 5thcolumnist elites professing varied
degrees of – sometimes reluctant – obedience.
The Trump administration's foreign policy
may be easily deconstructed as a crossover between The Sopranos and late-night comedy
– as
in the whole episode of designating State Department/CIA regime change, lab experiment Random Dude
as President of Venezuela. Legendary cultural critic Walter Benjamin would have called it
"the
aestheticization of politics,"
(turning politics into art), as he did about the Nazis, but this
time it's the Looney Tunes version.
To add to the conceptual confusion, despite countless "an offer you can't refuse" antics
unleashed by psychopaths of the John Bolton and Mike Pompeo variety, there's this startling
nugget
.
Former Iranian diplomat Amir Moussavi has revealed that Trump himself demanded to visit Tehran, and
was duly rebuffed. "Two European states, two Arab countries and one Southeast Asian state" were
mediating a series of messages relayed by Trump and his son-in-law Jared "of Arabia" Kushner,
according to Moussavi.
Is there a method to this madness?
An attempt at a Grand Narrative would go
something like this: ISIS/Daesh may have been sidelined – for now; they are not useful anymore, so
the U.S. must fight the larger "evil": Tehran. GWOT has been revived, and though Hamza bin Laden
has been designated the new Caliph, GWOT has shifted to Iran.
When we mix this with the recent India-Pakistan scuffle, a wider message emerges. There was
absolutely no interest by Prime Minister Imran Kahn, the Pakistani Army and the Pakistani
intelligence, ISI, to launch an attack on India in Kashmir. Pakistan was about to run out of money
and about to be bolstered by the U.S., via Saudi Arabia with $20 billion and an IMF loan.
At the same time, there were two almost simultaneous terrorist attacks launched from Pakistan –
against
Iran
and against India in mid-February. There's no smoking gun yet, but these attacks may have
been manipulated by a foreign intelligence agency. The Cui Bono riddle is which state would profit
immensely from a war between Pakistan and Iran and/or a war between Pakistan and India.
The bottom line:
hiding in the shadow of plausible deniability – according to which
what we understand as reality is nothing but pure perception – the Empire of Chaos will resort to
the chaos of no-holds-barred Hybrid War to avoid "losing" the Eurasian heartland.
Show Me How Many Hybrid Plans You Got
What applies to the heartland of course also applies to the backyard.
The case of Venezuela shows that the "all options on the table" scenario has been de
facto aborted by Russia,
outlined in an
astonishing
briefing
by Maria Zakharova, spokeswoman of the Russian Foreign Ministry, and then
subsequently
detailed
by Russian
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
Meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj at a
crucial RIC (part of BRICS) summit in China, Lavrov said, "Russia keeps a close eye on brazen US
attempts to create an artificial pretext for a military intervention in Venezuela The actual
implementation of these threats is pulling in military equipment and training [US] Special Forces."
Lavrov explained how Washington was engaged in acquiring mortars and portable air defense
systems "in an East European country, and mov(ing) them closer to Venezuela by an airline of a
regime that is rather absolutely obedient to Washington in the post-Soviet space."
The U.S. attempt at regime change in Venezuela has been so far unsuccessful in several ways.
Plan A – a classic color revolution -has miserably failed,
in part because
of a lack of decent local intelligence.
Plan B was a soft version of humanitarian imperialism,
with a resuscitation
of the nefarious, Libya-tested
responsibility to protect (R2P)
; it also failed, especially
when the American tale that the Venezuelan government burnt humanitarian aid trucks at the
border with Colombia was a lie exposed, no less, than by
The New York Times.
Plan C was a classic Hybrid War technique: a
cyberattack
,
replete with a revival of
Nitro
Zeus
, which shut down 80 percent of Venezuela's electricity.
That plan had already been
exposed
by
WikiLeaks, via a 2010 memo by a U.S.-funded, Belgrade-based color revolution scam that helped
train self-proclaimed "President" Random Dude, when he was just known asJuan Guaidó. The leaked
memo said that attacking the Venezuelan power grid would be a "watershed event" that "would
likely have the impact of galvanizing public unrest in a way that no opposition group could ever
hope to generate."
But even that was not enough.
That leaves Plan D – which is essentially to try to starve the Venezuelan population
to death
via viciously lethal additional sanctions. Sanctioned Syria and sanctioned
Iran didn't collapse. Even boasting myriad comprador elites aggregated in the Lima group,
exceptionalists may have to come to grips with the fact that deploying the
Monroe
doctrine
essentially to contain China's influence in the young 21stcentury is no "cakewalk."
Plan E -- for extreme -- would be U.S. military action, which Bolton won't take off the
table.
Show Me the Way to the Next War Game
So where do all these myriad weaponizations of chaos theory leave us? Nowhere, if they
don't follow the money.
Local comprador elites must be lavishly rewarded, otherwise you're
stuck in hybrid swamp territory. That was the case in Brazil – and that's why the most
sophisticated hybrid war case history so far has been a success.
In 2013, Edward Snowden and WikiLeaks revealed how the NSA was spying on Brazilian energy giant
Petrobras and the Dilma Rousseff government beginning in 2010. Afterwards, a complex, rolling
judicial-business-political-financial-media coup ended up reaching its two main objectives; in
2016, with the impeachment of Rousseff, and in 2018, with Lula thrown in jail.
Now comes arguably the juiciest piece of the puzzle. Petrobras was supposed to pay $853 million
to the U.S. Department of Justice for not going to trial for crimes it was being accused of in
America. But then a dodgy
deal
was struck
according to which the fine will be transferred to a Brazilian fund as long as Petrobras commits to
relay confidential information about its businesses to the United States government.
Mattis: Wrote on hybrid war in 2005.
Hybrid war against BRICS member Brazil worked like a charm, but trying it against nuclear
superpower Russia is a completely different ball game. U.S. analysts, in another case of culture
jamming, even accuse Russia itself of deploying hybrid war – a concept actually invented in the
U.S. within a counter-terrorism context; applied during the occupation of Iraq and later
metastasized across the color revolution spectrum; and featuring, among others, in an
article
co-authored
by former Pentagon head James "Mad Dog" Mattis in 2005 when he was a mere lieutenant general.
At a recent conference about Russia's military strategy, Chief of General Staff Gen.
Valery Gerasimov stressed that the Russian armed forces must increase both their "classic" and
"asymmetrical" potential.
In the U.S. this is interpreted as subversion/propaganda hybrid
war techniques as applied in Ukraine and in the largely debunked Russia-gate. Instead, Russian
strategists refer to these techniques as "complex approach" and "new generation war".
Santa Monica's RAND Corporation still sticks to good ol' hot war scenarios. They have been
holding "Red on Blue"
war
games
simulations since 1952 – modeling how the proverbial "existential threats" could use
asymmetric strategies. The latest
Red on Blue
was not exactly swell.
RAND analyst
David Ochmanek famously said that with Blue representing the current U.S. military potential and
Red representing Russia-China in a conventional war, "Blue gets its ass handed to it."
None of this will convince Empire of Chaos functionary Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, who recently told a Senate Armed Services Committee that the Pentagon will
continue to
refuse
a "no first use" nuclear strategy.
Aspiring Dr. Strangeloves actually believe the U.S. can start a nuclear war and get away with it.
Talk about the Age of Hybrid Stupidity going out with a bang.
Following the 'red lines' meeting between Ryabkov and Elliot Abrams in Rome a couple of
days ago, after which Ryabkov said bluntly:
"We assume that Washington treats our priorities seriously, our approach and
warnings."
One of those warnings delivered by Ryabkov is understood to have been that no American
military intervention in Venezuela will be tolerated by Moscow.
For his part, Abrams sounded as if he had emerged from the meeting after having been given
a severe reprimand.
"No, we did not come to a meeting of minds, but I think the talks were positive in the
sense that both sides emerged with a better understanding of the other's views," he told
reporters.
"A better understanding of the other's views," means that the American side was given a
red line to back off.
So, the Russian Army advanced party has arrived today, 99 in an Il-62 and goodness knows
what in an An-124 on a direct flight from Syria.
And now, according to journalist Javier I. Mayorca, Colonel General Vasily Tonkoshkurov,
chief of the Main Staff of the Ground Forces - First Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Land
Forces of Russia, arrived in Venezuela.
So we have one of the most significant Russian Generals now in Venezuela with his staff
and protection teams with their equipment coming out the back of the Antonov and I think we
can be certain that there is no beachware included.
This is looking more like the start up of Russian ops in Syria. This is the 'what do you
need, how can we help' team.
This could be Venezuela transforming from a hedgehog into a porcupine.
I bet the An-124 was filled with captured NATO arms, particularly TOWs, of which there're
many warehouses in Syria packed to the rafters--$billions$ in armaments at no charge! In
contrast with France, every Saturday there's a massive Solidarity March in
Caracas and other Venezuelan cities in support of Maduro, the government and the Bolivarian
Constitution. One of the most important differences between Venezuela and other
South-of-the-border regime changes is that an entire generation has grown up under
Chavezismo, the Bolivarian Constitution, and the great social changes--literacy and education
for the masses being #1--that have occurred over the past 20+ years. Those coming of age now
will be even more Anti-USA and Anti-OAS than ever before. This chart shows almost 50% of
the current population's coming of age During the Bolivarian/Chavista Age proves that
point.
As with Iran and Cuba, the Bolivarian Revolution's ingrained into the government's
structure, and perpetuated by society and culture. The penchant for the Outlaw US Empire to
task its vassals with killing off the entire Leftist political spectrum leaving only
reactionaries and their kin has always been genocidal in scope, and in Venezuela's case would
amount to @22 million requiring purging. And let's not kid ourselves--A world filled with
docile reactionaries is exactly the sort of prole-based planet the Outlaw US Empire
craves.
Guado looks more and more like Russian Navalny -- another color revolution Trojan Horse.
Notable quotes:
"... Half a BILLION dollars to be spent to overthrow Maduro, and they spent how much time making claims like Putin hacked the election.... Lies, More lies, Damn lies..... Same as it ever was. ..."
"... "The first round of the U.S. 'regime change' change attempt in Venezuela failed but it is far from over. The State Department alone foresees to spend $500 million more on it: ..."
"... The Fiscal Year 2020 budget request includes funding to support democracy in Venezuela and provides the flexibility to make more funds available to support a democratic transition, including up to $500 million in transfer authority." ..."
"... Given the results of the last 70 years of US policies I would say that quote should now be updated to "Trillions for war, but not one cent for the people." ..."
On February 23 the U.S. created a 'humanitarian aid' stunt at the border between Colombia
and Venezuela. The stunt ended in a riot during which the supporters of the self declared
'president' Guaidó burned the trucks that where supposed to transport the 'aid'. Even
the New York Times had to admit that.
The riots also marked the day that Guaidó
lost the legal argument he had used to make himself 'interim president'.
Guaido also lost his original legal position. He claimed the presidency on January 23 under
this paragraph of article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution :
When an elected President becomes permanently unavailable to serve prior to his
inauguration, a new election by universal suffrage and direct ballot shall be held within
30 consecutive days . Pending election and inauguration of the new President, the
President of the National Assembly shall take charge of the Presidency of the Republic.
That the "elected President becomes permanently unavailable" was never the
case to begin with. But if article 233 would apply Guaido would have had 30 days to hold
new elections. The 30 days are over and Guaido did not even call for elections to be held.
He thereby defied the exact same paragraph of the constitution that his (false) claim to
the presidency is based on.
The hapless coup plotters in Washington DC were finally put on notice that the issue
creates a legal problem for them. During a March 15 press briefing Elliott Abrams, the
U.S. Special Representative for Venezuela, was asked about the issue:
QUESTION: [C]ould you explain to us the article under which Mr. Guaido declared himself
president? It is said that it has expired last month. Could you explain that to us? What is
the --
MR ABRAMS: As to the Venezuelan constitution, the National Assembly has passed a resolution
that states that that 30-day period of interim presidency will not start ending or counting
until the day Nicolas Maduro leaves power. So the 30 days doesn't start now, it starts
after Maduro. And they – that's a resolution of the National Assembly.
A resolution of the National Assembly, which the Supreme Court of Venezuela holds in
contempt over the seating illegally elected persons, can change the country's constitution?
That does not sound convincing to me. The journalists in the briefing were equally curious of
how the rules could be changed like that during the ongoing game:
During Bosonaro's visit to the US Trump also announced his support for
Brazil's entrance into the NATO alliance, if I was Germany I'd veto that idea outright, the
last thing NATO needs is a basket case like Brazil.
But I imagine the Pentagon is already
counting all the additional arms they can sell to Brazil as a member of NATO without having
to go through all the additional hoops they would while it's just an ally of NATO
Never Mind the Bollocks , Mar 19, 2019 2:39:09 PM |
link
Random Guy also appointed an ambassador, Carlos Vecchio, to the US who just took over the
Venezuela's diplomatic buildings (empty since Venezuela broke off relations with the US over
the attempted coup), including the consular building in New York.
So far it doesn't look like
the US has succeed in replacing Venezuela's representative to the UN with a US stooge, but I
imagine the US is working hard on that front as well.
The US looks just ridiculous doing a
stunt this, but B is right, the US always doubles down, especially on a losing plan.
Half a BILLION dollars to be spent to overthrow Maduro, and they spent how much time making
claims like Putin hacked the election.... Lies, More lies, Damn lies..... Same as it ever was.
thanks b... some crazy talk in that daily press briefing with abrams...
"Q: So Juan Guaido is the interim president of an interim that doesn't exist yet?
A: The 30-day end to his interim presidency starts counting. Because he's not in power,
that's the problem. Maduro is still there. So they have decided that they will count that
from when he actually is in power and Maduro's gone. I think it's logical.
Q: So then he really isn't interim president, then?
A: He is interim president, but he's not --
Q: With no power."
that sounds about par fe the course for the usa... as kadath says - they always double
down on losing plans!
i am a bit mystified as to the plan of maduros to get the cabinet to resign.. what is the
concept there? does he have a number of members that could be persuaded by the logic of
abrams? with a little bribery money, no doubt..
i wonder how brazilians are looking at the stooge they have in power now, sucking up to
the usa-cia..
The optics of groveling to the US and Israel, and military opposition, are not good for our
friend Jair. It's only a matter of time until Bolsonaro starts hemorrhaging support and
Brazilian nationalism abandons him.
- If Maduro is in power, then the office is not vacant. Therefore, Guaidó cannot be
interim president.
- If the office is vacant, then there is no president. Therefore, Guaidó either is or
isn't the interim president (i.e. he can't be the interim president of the interim president,
which in this case is nobody).
If you want to suspend the Constitution, declare a civil war. If you win the civil war,
then you can do whatever you please (including obeying and/or reinterpreting the old
Constitution). In the strict legal sense, Guaidó's position is untenable. Even the
counting of days was wrong: January has 31 days, not 30, therefore his alleged 30-day mandate
was over at the 21st of February, not at the 23rd.
Re:#6 James, normally when you request that your own cabinet resigns it means that you've
either lost faith in their ability to perform their jobs - OR - your making a drastic change
in direction for your government and you need people with a different skill set to run the
various government departments. I imagine Maduros's decision is a mixture of needing to
create a "war government" to fight the economic war the US is waging against him and ensuring
the loyalty of powerful political rivals by giving them cabinet posts. Maduro will probably
announce some major new policies in the coming weeks aimed at 1) resisting US economic
pressure 2) increase Maduro's support among the population (maybe some policies aimed at the
urban middle class to split them off from Random Guy) and 3) announce some foreign
relationship drive to hopefully block more countries from supporting random guy's
pseudo-government and hopefully win some countries back. economic advisors from Russia, Cuba,
China and maybe Iran & Syria will be providing vital support for any economic policies
aimed at avoid US sanctions
"The first round of the U.S. 'regime change' change attempt in Venezuela failed but it is far
from over. The State Department alone foresees to spend $500 million more on it:
The Fiscal Year 2020 budget request includes funding to support democracy in Venezuela and
provides the flexibility to make more funds available to support a democratic transition,
including up to $500 million in transfer authority."
Tell me again how much it will cost to bring clean water to Flint, MI and our other cities
with water problems. You know, the things we don't have money for.
@ lgfocus who asked
"
Tell me again how much it will cost to bring clean water to Flint, MI and our other cities
with water problems. You know, the things we don't have money for.
"
Keep asking those questions and maybe Americans will grow the sentiments necessary to
stand up.
Where are the Bernie crowd that are going to make so much difference in the coming
(s)election?
Even the counting of days was wrong: January has 31 days, not 30, therefore his alleged
30-day mandate was over at the 21st of February, not at the 23rd.
Posted by: vk | Mar 19, 2019 3:33:55 PM | 10
They made their general ops to produce public results specifically at 23 of this month or
for several more months. They obviously wanted to make a point like they were doing at least
since 2016 for almost each consequtive month, only for that period favorable date number was
11. Check events for every 11th of each month since 2016 and check what dominated US and EU
news.
Yet in current Venezuela events there seem to be so much FAIL regarding the US
clandestine strategies.
There's also rising domestic pushback within the Outlaw US Empire while the hypocrisy of
Russiagate rises like a massive iceberg on the horizon. This also puts additional pressure on
Vassal EU governments whose publics see through the Empire's lies and thus further
delegitimizes their national governments.
French Yellow Vests will not surrender until Macron
and his backing Establishment does, and they're motivating other nation's citizens.
Will
Poroshenko get reelected in 12 days or ?
IMO, both Trump and Bolsonaro will be ousted before
Maduro. It appears the Truth Brigades outnumber the liebots thanks to b and a host of other
genuine journalists.
@11 kadath.. thanks for the response to my question.. we will have to wait and see how this
unfolds.. it reminds me a bit of the ukraine 2014 scenario, but different too... in ukraines
case, they already had a split dynamic in the country itself.. here, i don't see it.. the
split seems to be along economics - who are the upper class, with some middle class in tow,
verses everyone else..
@13 lgfocus - that sounds suspiciously like something a COMMUNIST would say!!!!!!! During the
1797 XYZ scandal C.C. Pinckney reportedly said "Millions for defense, but not one cent for
tribute." which has been quoted by the Military Industrial Complex ad nauseam for the last 70
years to justify massive military budgets to fight the forever wars.
Given the results of the
last 70 years of US policies I would say that quote should now be updated to "Trillions for
war, but not one cent for the people."
So if Elliott Abrams is correct, the Venezuelan National Assembly (a now illegitimate entity
by the way) has passed a resolution that Juan Guaido's "interim presidency" only begins AFTER
Nicolas Maduro leaves the presidency? Is that not admitting that Maduro is the legitimate
president?
That Jair Bolsonaro is visiting the CIA to discuss overthrowing Maduro may alarm quite a
few people even among the top tiers of the Brazilian military who otherwise support him.
What's to stop Bolsonaro from discussing with the CIA how to get rid of more than a few top
Brazilian generals who disagree with overthrowing the government of a neighbouring
country?
Now let's all imagine what would happen if Brazil was accepted into NATO like Trump &
the MIC wants and the Brazilian Generals decided to continue their time-honoured tradition of
toppling the current Brazilian President. NATO has no means of ejecting or even suspending a
member so any such crisis in Brazilian leadership would immediately trigger a crisis within
NATO itself on how to respond and accepting a coup government into NATO would kill the
illusion that NATO is some sort of league of Democracies that Bolton hopes to promote as a
replacement to the UN assembly.
Well, Bolsonaro's complete and absolute submission to Donald Trump and the US is probably
surprising even the most optmistic hawks in the White House. The golden shower president will
probably accept anything the US tries to push to Brazil.
It strikes me that the futility of trying to stir up a revolution with an elite constituency
seems completely lost on the coup planners. The Venezuelan elite might want the government
overthrown but there is no way that they'll put their own blood on the line for it. It's
really puzzling trying to understand how they see this playing out. And what will their elite
supporters think if US sanctions mean they can't use their Visa or MasterCard? And the
businesses that cater to the elite?
The Brazil to NATO call sounds awfully like a forecast of significant cross-border
provocations by Brazil which, if responded to by the Venezuelans, could trigger the old
Article 5 musketeers to intervene militarily. Just as ludicrous (and dangerous) as the UK 's
FCE attempt to confer diplomatic status on the BBC Farsi woman jailed in Iran. Student union
politics.
Abrams is attempting to claim that Random Guy is "interim President-in-waiting".
Q: What is that Interim President-in-waiting actually waiting for?
A: He's waiting for the position of President to become vacant.
THAT is the fatal flaw in all of Abrams legal mumbo-jumbo i.e. the articles of the
Venezuelan Constitution that Random Guy invoked to claim the title of Interim President are
only applicable when the office of President (and also Vice President) are VACANT.
Then and only then can the leader of the National Assembly take on the role of "interim
President" until elections take place 30 days later.
Abrams is admitting that the office of President isn't vacant.
This is an important legal point, so it bears repeating: Abrams accepts that someone holds
that position, albeit he is insisting that the current office-holder's claim to that chair is
illegitimate (in Constitutional terms, Maduro is "unfit" to be President).
Again, that exposes Abrams argument as legal mumbo-jumbo, precisely because the leader of
the National Assembly does not possess the authority to declare that a sitting President is
"unfit" for the office. The Venezuelan Constitution is quite clear on that point: that
authority rests with the supreme court, who are perfectly satisfied with Madura's fitness to
be President.
Abrams argument is therefore fraught with danger for Random Guy.
The Constitution clearly states that he can not claim the "interim Presidency" unless the
position is already vacant, which it clearly is not.
The Constitution also clearly states that he does not have the authority to declare the
position to be vacant.
Yet Guaido has done both, and done so at the acknowledged urging of a foreign power.
At the very least that amounts to insurrection, if not treason.
1. Counterpunch
I want to add extra focus on the excellent interview b linked to over at Counterpunch which
was also posted over at Zerohedge.
CG: There's not the chaos US and Trump were expecting. (Opposition leader and
self-proclaimed president Juan) Guaidó is the most hated guy in Venezuela. He has to
stay in luxury hotel in La Mercedes, an expensive neighbourhood of Caracas. They have
electricity there, as they were prepared, so bought generators. That is why Guaidó
went there, and has a whole floor of a luxury hotel for him and his family. While people
are suffering Guaidó is trying on suits for his upcoming trip to Europe. It is a
parallel world.
AG: You think Guaidó will fail?
CG: Venezuelans are making so many jokes with his name, as there's a word similar to
stupid in Spanish – guevon. And look at the demonstration in La Mercedes the other
day (12 March), the crowds didn't manifest. It is becoming a joke in the country. The more
the Europeans and the US make him a president, the more bizarre the situation becomes, as
Guaidó is not president of Venezuela! Interestingly, Chavez predicted what is
happening today, he wrote about it, so people are going back to his works and reading him
again.
2. Military Times
It could well have been me making b's conclusion on the following as well but since it isn't
it gives me an opportunity to warn about and completely disagree when it comes to the content
at Military Times and the conclusions drawn from it: that content if anything is
circumstantial proof that a decision has already been made in favor of a larger war
(technically the US has already launched a war by its actions, or at least according to its
own definitions as it applies it to others attacking them, if I remember correctly they would
even allow themselves to respond with nuclear weapons in such a scenario).
It might not have been the intent of Military Times (I do not know them) but everything
about their content at that link screams war is coming.
Notice how the US congress etc. portrays themselves as unwilling to go to war. We all know
this is untrue.
Notice how "everyone" portray themselves as more or less being forced against their will to
get involved. We all know this is untrue.
"They" love to do this, to wallow in "reluctance", to play innocent, to further the
narrative of "the good guys", because doing so preys on those who still believe they are on
the side of good (or in this case preys on anybody's remaining hope that they have some shred
of sanity left or that they've run out of bloodlust) and more or less guarantees their
support or silent acceptance in the general public. I recognize this all to well because I
fell for it myself in the past. It is a large part of their cherished narrative and has
self-reinforcing properties. They would say it even if no one listened but it is still
completely untrue.
Notice how they constantly hint at what amounts to "if we had to we would".
Notice that despite how every US action mentioned (except for some nebulous bill that might
as well be a unicorn fart) goes against avoiding a war they quote some ex-CIA person on all
of it being the exact opposite and a way to avoid war (but still meet their objective
consisting of unconditional demands).
Notice how at first they claim to believe it would be hard and thus something they obviously
wouldn't want to choose and thus if given no choice then it can't be their fault.
Nevertheless, the crisis is deteriorating rapidly.
Yeah of course it is, as planned and as caused by themselves.
Notice the laundry list of "bad stuff happening".
Notice the appeal to military solutions.
Notice how they then claim it might not be so hard after all, or at least necessary or worth
it.
Notice how they list military options to choose between.
It has already been decided and has already started.
3. Refinery fires
Did anyone else wonder at the sudden pair of refinery fires in Houston?
Posted by: Peter VE | Mar 19, 2019 4:22:48 PM | 19
Yes, since the second larger one went off because I didn't hear about the first one until
then and don't know anything more than that there was one. These things do happen during
normal operation of plants and refineries because every day it doesn't happen
unavoidably breeds some false sense of security and familiarity with the potential energies
involved.
And if that's not what happened then it will be a very hot US summer.
For those who didn't catch it here's all I've got (two measly links). RT
(2nd one)
ZH today (2nd one is now bigger):
This Moderate Rebels Transcript contains excellent revelatory points about Bolsonaro, the
rise of Brazilian Fascism and its connections to the Outlaw US Empire and its ally Zionistan.
I'm uncertain if b linked to it previously as I just stumbled across it.
After the people of Brazil got a taste of power with Lula, their social and national
conscience has risen. A Brazilian military aggression in Venezuela on behalf of American
Imperialism will be viciously opposed by the peoples of Latin America and Spain and Portugal.
The Colombian ELN and Venezuela's Bolivarian militias will unite and begin to attack the US
military in Colombia and fight the vassal state of Colombia. These militias will fight to the
death. Ecuador will catch on fire as well since traitor Moreno backs the US invasion. This
will get ugly.
US will just make up another excuse. These guys don't follow any laws so there is no point
interpreting them. Raw power and a good defense strategy is what it counts now for Venezuela.
They need more S-300, Buk, coastal defense and allies. This is the key for survival of
Venezuela. US will then back down or nuke Venezuela into democracy and freedom of press.
The always interesting Florida Maquis YT channel covers S. America extensively and mentioned
today Trump is putting Brazil forward for OECD membership which may give leverage to their
fascist leader.
The news that Maduro is making a new cabinet could be very important. The current cabinet was
chosen to implement policies designed to prevent a coup by compromising with moderate
elements of the bourgeoisie. Such policies involved the watering down of the revolutionary
policies of 21st Century Socialism, which has led to the erosion of political support for
Maduro without making any perceptible difference the bourgeois commitment to coups and other
antidemocratic measures.
If the revolution is to survive it must continue to deepen, bringing gains to the masses
besides which the inconveniences of sanctions/sabotage are pinpricks which only serve to
deepen popular support of national independence and socialist reform.
If the revolution deepens it will not only increase the strength of the popular movement but
broaden the appeal of Venezuela's policies to the millions of Latin Americans currently
watching in dismay as neo-liberalism cuts into their living standards and aspirations of
security. Nowhere are there millions more sympathetic to revolutionary programmes than in
Colombia, a byword for bad government and inequality and Brazil where the current Presidency
is completely illegitimate.
It will be interesting to see whether Maduro's new cabinet is more attuned to the revolution
and less interested in compromises with a comprador class whose alliance with the US is based
as much on racism and hatred of its own countrymen as it is on greed. Anbd that is saying
something.
Thank you Karlof1 and Zachary Smith, I'll do my best to remember not to go "link crazy" in
the future :D
Aside from all that and on the comments here on Colombia it makes me reconsider if there
was any positive value at all in the mediation by Norway (and others? I think the current
"social democrat" secretary general of NATO was prime minister there at the time...) to
curtail or end the civil war or if it was all a ploy in bad faith. I could be wrong about
this.
I was wrong but I've found out where the confusion stems from; Norway was the second
"guarantor country" after Cuba.
Once the negotiators had been agreed upon, the two sides moved to designate foreign
guarantor countries. Cuba, host to previous encounters, was a logical choice, while Norway
was chosen as the second guarantor country for its active role in international conflict
mediation. Additionally, two facilitator or 'accompanying countries' were also designated.
The FARC chose Venezuela, while the Colombian government chose Chile.[14] Exploratory
meetings continued in Havana in February 2012, with limited [...]
"With more candidates early on, it takes all that energy and diffuses it for petty warfare
instead of a firmly focused "machine" that would take over Congress through the Dem
party."
Well, when your strategy is identity politics you do need a crowd; so all of your supporters
can "identify" with their own special someone and be sad and upset when they lose.
Keep them divided, keep it about race/sexual identity/religion/favorite vegetable if need be,
oh, and of course that favorite mantra; hatred of the "other(s)."
The Dem party is gone, what is left is a divisive machine whose sole purpose seems to be to
separate people into separate boxes with separate identities only united by their hatred of
"other" parties and always completely blind to what is being done in the world in their (US)
name.
Nowhere are there millions more sympathetic to revolutionary programmes than in Colombia, a
byword for bad government and inequality ... bevin | Mar 19, 2019 8:34:12 PM
Current president was elected with rather thin majority -- not as thin as Trump -- and
while economy is "thriving" according to some measures, the fruits of it are even less evenly
distributed than in USA, and the resurgence of the left is fully possible. Importantly,
Colombian society is still very divided in the aftermath of La Violencia of 1950-s, violence
that never truly went away. Colombia and Venezuela are closely connected since colonial times
and troubles easily cross the border. In turn, Venezuelans seems to be easy going
bunglers.
Chavista have "the heart in right place", but even in easier times they had troubles with
the economy. The opposition is all thumbs. The freedom fighters who defected into Colombia
seem to be a bunch of loosers, correctly evicted from a homeless shelter once found useless.
Their putative paymasters seem particularly egregious, good for them to manage to get rid of
the traitors before the latter found a nerve to unionize, but what was the plan anyway?. Sic
sempter traditoribus.
"The Colombian ELN and Venezuela's Bolivarian militias will unite and begin to attack the US
military in Colombia and fight the vassal state of Colombia. These militias will fight to the
death. Ecuador will catch on fire as well since traitor Moreno backs the US invasion. This
will get ugly."
You left out the elephant or rather landmass in the room; Latin America is connected to the
US by land. This US misadventure will come home to roost, it will explode everywhere and
anywhere, finally and at long last IMO the US will reap what it has sown.
lgfocus @ 13 said in part;"Tell me again how much it will cost to bring clean water to Flint,
MI and our other cities with water problems. You know, the things we don't have money for."
This would be a excellent point for all the Dems chasing the POTUS, but, even if they did,
it probably wouldn't get any play on the corporate MSM.
It makes too much sense!
kudos for the relevant mention......
German foreign policy disaster. German freelancer journalist Billy Six jailed in Venezuela,
now back in Germany after intervention by Russian foreign minister Lawrov.
Press conference
with Billy after his arrival in Germany. Must see (German) Germany is accused in the
participation of the drone attack against Maduro.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tsg5Jx5xzrU
Abrams trying to explain Guano and Venezuelan law is a bit like trying to explain western
democracy VS 'non democratic' Assad and Putin and Maduro. Doesn't matter the majority of
people have voted for them. That's not 'democratic'. A lot of Guano in western so called
democracy.
"The far-right President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil supported that but the military of Brazil,
which holds significant power in the cabinet, vetoed it..."
I would be willing to bet that one of the purposes of Bolsonaro's visit to the CIA and DC
was to see how he could remedy that situation, perhaps by getting rid of just a few of these
troublesome military generals who are opposed to his using the Brazilian military, overt and
covert, against Venezuela....
not to mention of course the usual and disgusting CIA options of subversion and other
covert operations agasint Venezuelan democracy
Maybe Maduro is changing his cabinet to get people in who are not under US sanctions. The US
claims most of it's sanctions are against bad guys but the reality is naming individuals is a
propaganda ruse as the sanctions go far deeper than the individuals. People who don't look
past the headlines believe it's only individuals so they fall for the US line it's Maduro and
his polices not the US that's causing the economic problems in Venezuela. Thus a new cabinet
could give Maduro some breathing room until the US can sanction the new guys.
If the US does shut off Mastercard and Visa it will be huge mistake as I doubt very few of
the governments supporters have credit cards. Those the US claims to be hitting with this
action can get a Russian credit card if it's possible. The upper class Gweedo lovers will be
the ones hardest hit which doesn't bode well for Gweedo boy who spouts guano and promises he
can't keep every time he opens his mouth.
Lots of blather of the citizens of the US should stand against the governments actions in
Venezuela. The US government and it's lap dog press control the narrative thus it won't
happen. But if it came to a military invasion the citizens will come out of cocoons and say
hell no like they did with Syria when Obama wanted to bomb that country into the stone age
when Assad, it was the rebels that used gas, crossed his red line. A military invasion and
resulting guerilla warfare in Venezuela will send American boys and girls home in body bags
and Trump can kiss his reelection goodbye and he knows it. Thus no invasion by the US but
that doesn't rule out covert commando raids and sabotage by US personnel inside the
country.
The attack took place when vehicle traffic was stopped at a train crossing, but whether the
raiders indeed had intended to steal the uranium shipment has yet to be determined. Civil
Police are now trying to establish the motive behind the incident. The attackers have
managed to flee the scene, but police have recovered a 9mm pistol which they are now trying
to trace back to the armed group.
I don't speak Portuguese or Brazilian Portuguese but those that do will likely find more
information in the
Globo article .
The Globo article says an enriched Uranium convoy, sent to the Angra dos Reis nuclear power
plant, was attacked by local criminal gangs. The area of Angra dos Reis, renowned for its
beautiful coastline and luxury resorts, is now roamed by criminal gangs that threaten the
population and overtly defy law enforcement forces. Police forces and armed convoys moving
along the highway are frequently ambushed.
Despite Bolsonaro's campaign promises, gangs seems to remain in charge, even in Angra dos
Reis! From the Globo article:
"One of the most beautiful places of the State of Rio, the county of Angra dos Reis has
experienced an increase in violence, with the presence of fire-armed drug dealers inside
communities that were previously considered peaceful."
There is also an extended version of the press conference where Billy Six answers some
more questions. One is particulary interesting as he points out the economic interests of the
German government in Venezuela. He mentions explicitly SIEMENS, Linde, Lufthansa and DHL
which are excluded from free-convertability into Dollar-reserves since Chavez established
currency controls in 2003.
He also claims that the Federal Government in the person of the now expelled German
ambassador to Venezuela Daniel Kriener has met with the father of Juan Requesens who is/was
member of the National Assembly, associated to the student protest newtwork of 'Generation
2007' to which Juan Guaido belongs, and whose party Primero Justicia is the party of Julio
Borges - the former president of the National Assembly and co-plotter of the 2002 coup on
Chavez. Juan Requesens is under arrest and accused to be part of the drone attack on Maduro
in August last year along with 16 other conspirators. According to Six - who had contact with
several of these plotters in prison - the coup in effect did happen and failed because the
Maduro government was pre-informed about the plot and an anti-drone shield could prevent the
assault.
What made it even worse for Six, according to what was told to him by SEBIN (political police
force of Venezuela), was that the German government was aware of this drone in advance which
is why the German embassy had taken such a stand for Juan Requesens to get him out of prison.
This, however, is suppose to be one of the reasons why, of those foreign ambassadors of
Venezuela who received Guaido at the airport two weeks ago, German ambassador Kriener was the
only one who was to leave the country upon the advice of the Bolivarian Government.
There is certainly more to follow and it is perhaps not wrong to keep an eye on this
I would not trust the Brazilian people or the Brazilian left to take care of the issue.
The non-Venezuelan Latin American left is one of the most innofensive, docile and
innefective lefts of the Third World. This is specially the case of the Brazilian left, which
is also deeply balkanized, torn down in inumerous factions -- from the social liberals to
communists.
Besides, the far-right has genuine and huge popular support in Brazil. Bolsonaro's is not
a political giant by any means, nor is he the novelty/outsider e.g. Trump is (he was a
Congressman for 28 consecutive years before becoming president). The far-right is at least
25% of the voting adult population, most probably around 40%, and this mass will go until the
end with their design. Bolsonaro is no Temer.
Excellent post B. Thanks for keeping Venezuela front and center in your blogs.
From my perspective, it looks like Russia is effectively running Venezuela.
What are the indicators:
- Russia is handling Venezuelan oil sales
- Russia is handling Venezuelan international banking
- Maduro has made no strategic mistakes during the coup attempt. Every U.S. move has been
effectively thwarted.
- With few exceptions, military discipline has been maintained.
- The new government realignment looks like something that Maduro would not have come up with
on his own. It is probably a part of the economic plan the Russia prepared for Venezuela over
the past couple of months.
Venezuela is starting to look a lot like Crimea. The U.S. wanted Crimea in order to take
over the Russian naval base and effectively neutralize Russia's Black Sea Fleet. But Russia
was there first, thwarted the U.S.' every move, and now the U.S., in the Black Sea, is in a
much weaker position than before 2014.
In Venezuela, the U.S. wanted Venezuelan oil. But Russia was there first. So far every
U.S. move has been thwarted and the U.S. is starting to suffer from a scarcity of heavy
crudes. If past is prologue, the U.S. will have no more success in Venezuela than it did in
Crimea. It will not dare to take on Venezuela militarily, as this would mean to take on
Russia militarily.
Venezuela will represent another watershed moment in separating the world into those who
are with the U.S., and those who are against. And the U.S. side will be somewhat smaller than
it was before their Venezuelan adventure started.
There's a mind-boggling Extortiongate scandal going on in Argentina - with links throughout
Latin America including Venezuela, and to Elliot Abrams:
Don't Spy
for Me Argentina In fact, it connects with virtually everything!
Abrams to media....."Constitutional rules? We ain't got no rules! We don't need no rules!
I don't have to show you any stinking rules!" The US cannot be serious, $500 million to take
over Venezuela with the greatest oil reserves on the planet. Victoria Nuland said the US
spent $5 Billion on regime change in Ukraine.. F-----g cheapskates. They will double down,
wait for the secondary sanctions, it is so important that Venezuela keeps its oil markets,
especially Russia and China.
Contrary to what the article states, Brazil has a negligible wheat production. However,
Argentina has, and its main importer until now was Brazil. A huge blow to the Argentinian
economy, whose trade balance will fall even more. The situation in Brazil so calamitous that it produced an extremely rare Chinese
manifestation about the country:
It looks like the US is having to rescue some of the Venezuelan oligarchs from the effect
of the sanctions. This being Fox, it blames socialism, which is utterly backwards, but the
facts are there.
US lifts
sanctions on wives of Venezuela TV magnates
Oh the poor dears. How they must have suffered.
Also, it looks like they (US) are thinking about cutting off credit cards, which as you've
opined, would hurt the middle and upper classes much more than the typical Chavista.
Credit card
sanctions?
That whole press conference exchange has a faintly Mad Hatter Tea Party quality to it.
At one point Abrams says the interim presidency doesn't start counting until "after
Maduro", but the whole raison d'etre of article 233 in the first place is to ensure a
constitutional transition of power in the event that the president becomes unavailable. So
that (the president becoming unavailable) would had to have happened FIRST -- prior to the
implementation of (the relevant passage of) article 233. In other words, that would have to
be the triggering event.
If this seems a bit like stating the obvious -- it is. As the article states,'That the
"elected President becomes permanently unavailable" was never the case to begin with.' That's
end of discussion right there. It never happened. And they have everybody talking in circles
about whether or not the thirty day election requirement was fulfilled? It's absurd.
One thing I'll give the neo-cons credit for is their ability to take obvious lies/complete
fabrications and somehow get people to discuss them as if there was any reality to it. Like
in the case of Iraq they had the whole world discussing the threat of non-existent WMDs. All
these "serious" pundits would prattle on endlessly about the pros and cons of an issue for
which there was not a scintilla of evidence. I think even Goebbels would have to stand back
in awe of what they do.
"The #TrumpRegime is not a government that can provide services. It is a transnational
criminal organization which should be designated as a terrorist group."
Holy crap on a cracker, Batman! Half of all the evil entities in the world are crawling
about within this massive web of crime and treason.
I would beg to make one small change to the exposé; instead of --
" The CIA, under 'extraordinary rendition' proponent Gina Haspel, has become a foot
soldier army for Trump's whims and Bolton's and Pompeo's neo-con dark policies, "
-- I would say that Trump, Bolton, Pompeo and Haspel have become foot-soldiers for the
CIA's neo-con dark policies.
Venezuela: Guaido loyalists seize diplomatic properties in US
Envoys loyal to Venezuela's interim president have taken control of diplomatic buildings
and a consulate. Caracas has severed ties with the US, accusing it of staging a coup against
acting President Maduro.
Don't Spy for Me Argentina. In fact, it connects with virtually everything!
Posted by: BM | Mar 20, 2019 11:35:21 AM | 69
The CIA, under "extraordinary rendition" proponent Gina Haspel, has become a foot soldier
army for Trump's whims and Bolton's and Pompeo's neo-con dark policies. It is clear that
Abrams, Bolton, Pompeo, Rubio, Bannon, and their cohorts, including Macri and Bolsonaro,
are attempting to re-create OPERATION CONDOR, the 1960s, 70s, and 80s alliance of the
intelligence services of the Latin American military dictatorships of Argentina, Bolivia,
Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay, which were full members, with Ecuador and Peru as
associate partners. Tens of thousands of leftist dissidents were tracked down and executed
during CONDOR, which operated with the full approval and involvement of the CIA.
They lost so many opportunities during the 70's. USSR was in their way in so many places.
But now happy days are here again, with Russia, China containment strategies and Trump and
other supremacist leaders being installed everywhere in the West and Americas.
It's about opening Pandora's Box though. 0 latency networks, even negative time ...with
whatever that implicates and a space programe but not the one you see in plain view.
There is a three part video of the UN conference featuring Anya Parampil, Alfred de Zayas and
Max Blumenthal which has debunked the US propaganda on Venezuela at a United Nations Human
Rights Council session in Geneva on March 19.
See also "The Visible Hand of the Market- Economic War in Venezuela" by Pasqualina
Curcio.
Perhaps random guy Guaidó will join other collaborators with the US are just seen as
throw-away pawns by the Empire:
"The Venezuelan military deserters who crossed over to Colombia on February 23, 2019, now
find themselves abandoned both by Colombia and the United Nations High Commission for
Refugees. The UNCHR and the Colombian Government have given the soldiers 4 days to leave the
refugee camp"
The good news is that the health of Venezuelans is improving due to a more healthy diet
due to US led sanctions. Everyone has been forced to have a vegetarian diet substituting
vegetables, lentils, and black beans for meat. Seems that lots of people are growing their
own (organic) vegetables.
From a sociological point of view even the electrical blackouts are bringing the people
together as they spend the time sharing:
"During blackouts, people told stories, played music, or went out and talked on the streets.
It was a paradise, no TVs, smartphones, but real human contact. People cook together. During
the day they're playing board games, dominoes, and kids are having fun."
Thanks for your report! The unintended consequences as you note can be powerful allies for
those being attacked. The well stated case at the UN will also have consequences and generate
more solidarity for Venezuela and condemnation of the Outlaw US Empire, Pompeo, Rubio,
Abrams, Bolton, and Trump.
Venezuela production is not only being hit by the blackout – which seems to have
damaged their overall grid capacity – but by new sanctions. Their diluent supplier has
just stated they will stop business.
Perhaps useful to note that Maduro was just as incompetent 6 months ago as presumably he is
now. He was just as incompetent 9 months ago as presumably he is now. And indeed, he was just
as incompetent three months ago as he is now. In fact we could take it back years.
Thus, it surely is just a coincidence that their blackout occurred at a point in time when
a foreign coup attempt was underway, rather than 9 or 6 or 3 months ago. Sabotage could not
be involved because we're told that incompetence and corruption is responsible, of the sort
that just happened to manifest itself at this point in time.
The 20 folks who are alleged to have died in hospitals from lack of power just
coincidentally died at this particular point in time. Because it is merely coincidence, the
saboteurs probably cannot be tried for murder.
Power has apparently been restored. Oil will resume its flow at whatever magnitude.
Of course there are no coincidences, just the things that the CIA, the Illuminati, the
freemasons, the jewish bankers and the Martians wanted to happen.
"Thus, it surely is just a coincidence that their blackout occurred at a point in time when a
foreign coup attempt was underway, rather than 9 or 6 or 3 months ago. Sabotage could not be
involved because we're told that incompetence and corruption is responsible, of the sort that
just happened to manifest itself at this point in time."
I am sure the US is trying to speed up the process. After all, those Aid buses were not
torched by Mo or his supporters but by Western agents. Its difficult to know who is really to
blame for the blackout, but the US has an agenda to take control over VZ. I would not rule
out the US causing it.
Well Pelosi, here we have attempted murder as a high crime to Impeach Trump, Pence,
Pompeo, Bolton and Abrams with, or is that something too "trivial" for you!
Washington announced late Monday that it is withdrawing all of its embassy personnel from
Caracas in what may signal preparations for a direct US military intervention to consummate
the protracted regime change operation unleashed against Venezuela.
"This decision reflects the deteriorating situation in Venezuela as well as the conclusion
that the presence of U.S. diplomatic staff at the embassy has become a constraint on U.S.
policy," Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement.
Pressed at a State Department press conference Tuesday as to what Pompeo meant by
"constraint," Elliott Abrams, the Trump administration's special envoy for regime change in
Venezuela, said that it was "prudent to take these folks out" because their presence made it
"more difficult for the United States to take the actions that it needed to do to support the
Venezuelan people."
Asked whether military intervention was being prepared and if the Maduro government should
see Pompeo's statement as a threat, Abrams, a former Reagan administration State Department
official who oversaw vast war crimes in Central America in the 1980s and was convicted of
lying to Congress about an illegal operation to fund the "contra" terrorist war against
Nicaragua, responded that he would "continue to say, because it is true, all options are on
the table."
"... When Guaido returned to Venezuela on March 4 he was greeted at the airport by several foreign diplomats. Among the receiving dignitaries was Germany's envoy Daniel Kriener. ..."
"... What's more, the explicit backing of Juan Guaido by Germany's envoy was carried out on the "express order" of Foreign Minister Heiko Maas , according to Deutsche Welle. ..."
"... Russia's envoy to the UN Vasily Nebenzia, at a Security Council session last month, excoriated the US for its gross violation of international law with regard to Venezuela. Moscow's diplomat also directed a sharp rebuke at other nations "complicit" in Washington's aggression, saying that one day "you will be next" for similar American subversion in their own affairs. ..."
"... German politicians, diplomats and media were apoplectic in their anger at perceived interference by the US ambassador in Berlin's internal affairs. Yet the German political establishment has no qualms whatsoever about ganging up – only weeks later – with Washington to subvert the politics and constitution of Venezuela. ..."
Germany has
taken the lead among European Union member states to back Washington's regime-change agenda for
Venezuela.
Berlin's hypocrisy and double-think is quite astounding.
Only a few weeks ago, German politicians and media were up in arms protesting to the
Trump administration for interfering in Berlin's internal affairs.
There were even
outraged complaints that Washington was seeking "regime change" against Chancellor Angela Merkel's
government.
Those protests were sparked when Richard Grenell, the
US ambassador to Germany,
warned
German
companies involved in the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline with Russia that they could be hit with
American economic sanctions
if they go ahead with the Baltic seabed project.
Earlier, Grenell provoked fury among Berlin's political establishment when he openly gave his
backing to opposition party Alternative for Germany. That led to consternation and denunciations of
Washington's perceived backing for regime change in Berlin. They were public calls for Grenell to
be expelled over his apparent breach of diplomatic protocols.
Now, however, Germany is shamelessly kowtowing to an even more outrageous American
regime-change plot against Venezuela.
Last week, the government of President Nicolas Maduro ordered the expulsion of German ambassador
Daniel Kriener after he greeted the US-backed opposition figure Juan Guaido on a high-profile
occasion. Guaido had just returned from a tour of Latin American countries during which he had
openly called for the overthrow of the Maduro government. Arguably a legal case could be made for
the arrest of Guaido by the Venezuelan authorities on charges of sedition.
When Guaido returned to Venezuela on March 4 he was greeted at the airport by several
foreign diplomats. Among the receiving dignitaries was Germany's envoy Daniel Kriener.
The opposition figure had declared himself "interim president" of Venezuela on January 23 and
was immediately recognized by Washington and several European Union states. The EU has so far not
issued an official endorsement of Guaido over incumbent President Maduro. Italy's objection blocked
the EU from adopting a unanimous position.
Nevertheless, as the strongest economy in the 28-member bloc, Germany can be seen as de facto
leader of the EU. Its position on Venezuela therefore gives virtual EU gravitas to the geopolitical
maneuvering led by Washington towards the South American country.
What's more, the explicit backing of Juan Guaido by Germany's envoy was carried out on
the "express order" of Foreign Minister Heiko Maas
,
according
to
Deutsche Welle.
"It was my express wish and request that Ambassador Kriener turn out with representatives of
other European nations and Latin American ones to meet acting President Guaido at the airport,"
said Maas.
"We had information that he was supposed to be arrested there. I believe that the presence
of various ambassadors helped prevent such an arrest."
It's staggering to comprehend the double-think involved here.
Guaido was hardly known among the vast majority of Venezuelans until he catapulted on to
the global stage by declaring himself "interim president".
That move was clearly executed
in a concerted plan with the Trump White House. European governments and Western media have
complacently adopted the White House line that Guaido is the legitimate leader while socialist
President Maduro is a "usurper".
That is in spite of the fact that Maduro was re-elected last year in free and fair
elections by a huge majority of votes.
Guaido's rightwing, pro-business party boycotted
the elections. Yet he is anointed by Washington, Berlin and some 50 other states as the legitimate
leader.
Russia, China, Turkey, Cuba and most other members of the United Nations have refused to
adopt Washington's decree of recognizing Guaido.
Those nations (comprising 75 per cent of
the UN assembly) continue to recognize President Maduro as the sovereign authority. Indeed, Russia
has been highly critical of Washington's blatant interference for regime change in oil-rich
Venezuela. Moscow has warned it will not tolerate US military intervention.
Russia's envoy to the UN Vasily Nebenzia, at a Security Council session last month,
excoriated
the
US for its gross violation of international law with regard to Venezuela. Moscow's diplomat also
directed a sharp rebuke at other nations "complicit" in Washington's aggression, saying that one
day "you will be next" for similar American subversion in their own affairs.
Germany's hypocrisy and double-think is, to paraphrase that country's national anthem,
"über alles" (above all else).
German politicians, diplomats and media were apoplectic in their anger at perceived interference
by the US ambassador in Berlin's internal affairs. Yet the German political establishment has no
qualms whatsoever about ganging up – only weeks later – with Washington to subvert the politics and
constitution of Venezuela.
How can Germany be so utterly über servile to Washington and the latter's brazen
criminal aggression towards Venezuela?
It seems obvious that Berlin is trying to ingratiate itself with the Trump
administration. But what for?
Trump has been pillorying Germany with allegations of "unfair trade" practices. In particular,
Washington is recently stepping up its threats to slap punitive tariffs on German auto exports.
Given that this is a key sector in the German export-driven economy, it may be gleaned that Berlin
is keen to appease Trump. By backing his aggression towards Venezuela?
Perhaps this policy of appeasement is also motivated by Berlin's concern to spare the
Nord Stream 2 project from American sanctions.
When NS2 is completed later this year, it
is reckoned to double the capacity of natural gas consumption by Germany from Russia. That will be
crucial for Germany's economic growth.
Another factor is possible blackmail of Berlin by Washington.
Recall the
earth-shattering revelations made by American whistleblower Edward Snowden a few years back when he
disclosed that US intelligence agencies were tapping the personal phone communications of
Chancellor Merkel and other senior Berlin politicians.
Recall, too, how the German state
remarkably
acquiesced
over what should
have been seen as a devastating infringement by Washington.
The weird lack of action by Berlin over that huge violation of its sovereignty by the Americans
makes one wonder if the US spies uncovered a treasure trove of blackmail material on German
politicians.
Berlin's pathetic kowtowing to Washington's interference in Venezuela begs an ulterior
explanation. No self-respecting government could be so hypocritical and duplicitous.
Whatever Berlin may calculate to gain from its unscrupulous bending over for Washington,
one thing seems clear, as Russian envoy Nebenzia warned: "One day you are next" for American
hegemonic shafting.
Germany already forgot, how they blew up Yugoslavia.
It was
because of German diplomacy plotting and meddling, that Croatia
and Slovenia announced their abandonment of federation of Balkan
states - which Yugoslavia de facto was.
Another reason for this, was to destroy a forming Hexagonale -
an alliance of central and southern european states.
As long as Germany has its imperial resentements, there will be
no peace in Europe.
They want in on the Venezuelan petroleum game if/when regime
change happens, obviously. Aruba (controlled by the Dutch) is
about 20miles off the coast of Venezuela and and there is a small
but significant population of German Venezuelans in Venezuela.
CITGO was was trying to restart the large refinery located in
Aruba not long back, haven't heard anything about it lately.
The Strategic Culture Foundation. A culture of strategy? That
sounded interesting. So I dug.
". . . Benefiting from the expanding power of the Internet,
we work to spread reliable information, critical thought and
progressive
ideas
."
That explains why I'm seeing
socialists defending socialists. What a surprise. Not very
critical if you ask me, but definitely "progressive" to the
core.
And as for the author, nearly every one of his articles attack the
US and its allies. You'd think that if he's writing for the
Strategic Culture Foundation, he'd be into
critical thought
.
Meaning, we'd see some minuses
and
pluses in his
work. The fact that we don't, makes him a propagandist, not a
journalist. Then again,
is there such a thing as a journalist
anymore these days
?
I'd like to think so. Yet, when you evaluate someone's work and
see little more than the fermenting of hatred and discontent,
there has to be a motive. For him, it could be personal, given
the amount of passion and conspiracy theory that he puts into his
hatred. For his employers, though, the motive seems to be
strategic
.
Anyway, it's disappointing to find it here at ZH, but I guess the
bills must get paid somehow.
"Military intervention in
Venezuela is totally unacceptable."
She opposed the US and the self-appointed Guaido.
It follows that she had to act not only with the consent of
Berlin and Paris, but in their mandate. This suggests that the EU
has reassessed the situation and changed its position on President
Maduro.
Berlin has come to know that the EU has created an
international contact group, including Germany and France. The
group is conducting talks with the Venezuelan government and with
the opposition, aiming to achieve a peaceful solution to the
critical situation in Venezuela, and as the group spokesman said,
everything will be done to make the solution democratic.
The unnamed French source claims that Beijing and Moscow are
behind the change of Berlin and Paris.
"Hypocrisy" or "getting it right for a change" - that is the
question ! Merkel, the putative Conservative, has sold her own
people down the river many times in the last few years. She has
demonstrated the George W Bush style, over the people in her own
Party. And the results are obvious.
Now, after ruining her
country both culturally and financially, she makes ONE correct
decision. Hardly HYPOCRISY; more like contrition for her
ineptitude.
Well, Merkel is doing a good job of protecting Germany's interests
by opposing the U.S. regarding North Stream 2. The German stand on
Venezuela is disappointing, but they might be figuring no skin off
their back, since Venezuela is not in Europe, so might as well
appease cheeto head.
Shocking, right? Lol. I could have written this article myself.
Just had this conversation with a friend here regarding German
hypocriscy. Germany is a true vassal nation run by puppets.
Highlights the total lack of coordination at the highest levels of
German government. They just can't concieve that anyone is onto
their game but it is blatanly obvious to anyone who can chew gum
and walk simultaneously. The link to the demographic crisis (and
by exstension the coming pension crisis) to the importation of
"refugees" is a bit harder for many to see but still plainly
obvious if one tries just a little. Truly sad state of affairs in
all of Europe only masked over by the ECB. At least for now.
After almost 1 week it seems Venezuela is still around
85%
to 90% blacked-out
'We call it survival': Venezuelans improvise solutions as
blackout continues
With the crisis in its sixth day, neighbors are sharing
generators, contraband supplies and skills for survival
Joe Parkin Daniels and Patricia Torres in Caracas
Tue 12 Mar 2019
18.30 AEDT
Last modified on
Wed 13 Mar 2019
03.06 AEDT
People use their mobile phones at the Distribuidor Altamira
-main exit of Francisco Fajardo highway- where they can get
telephone service during a partial power outage in Caracas on
March 9, 2019.
At a street corner in eastern Caracas, Rosa Elena stepped
from her car and started picking handfuls of leaves from a
modest tree growing at the roadside. "This is neem," she said.
"It's high in sugar and great in a tea." Her interest was more
than academic: Rosa Elena is diabetic, and when the lights went
out in Venezuela last Thursday, she began to worry that the
blackout would ruin her insulin supply, which must be kept
refrigerated. Since then she has been making rounds of the
city, stockpiling neem leaves, which some people believe can be
used to control diabetes.
As a crippling blackout drags into a sixth day,
Venezuelans are being forced to improvise solutions for a
crisis that is affecting every aspect of daily life. Although
there is intermittent power in the capital, some neighbourhoods
have been in the dark since last week, and schools and
businesses will remain closed on Tuesday.
Food has rotted in refrigerators, hospitals have struggled
to keep equipment operating, and people gather on street
corners to pick up patchy telephone signals.
At Residencias Karina, an apartment complex in the
south-eastern municipality of Baruta – the power was still off
on Monday evening, and residents had come together to share
expertise and survival tactics. One elderly resident has lent
his generator to the operation, with cables running up the side
of the red-brick building into a flat where neighbours charge
their phones. To stop the device overheating or getting rained
out, they have fashioned a cover out of cardboard and
tarpaulin.
In ordinary times, petrol is practically free in Venezuela,
due to government subsidies. But power cuts have put many pumps
out of action, and fuel is hard to come by. It is illegal to
fill jerry cans at petrol stations, so people are often forced
to resort to the black market to obtain fuel for generators.
"The government calls it contraband – we call it survival,"
said Carolina, one resident who preferred not to give her
surname for fear of reprisals.
Members of the Bolivarian National Police escort a tanker as
they help organize the distribution of drinking water to
residents of San Agustin neighbourhood in Caracas on March 11,
2019, while a massive power outage continues affecting parts of
the country.
Another neighbour, Pedro Martínez, was once a farmer in the
country's vast western plains, and has brought his own unique
skillset to the team. "I'm a campesino," he said. "I don't know
about phones and I can live without them. But I do know how to
salt meat." Martínez has been turning the residents' supplies
of beef into jerky, so food supplies can last longer. "The
chicken and the fish people had is already rotten," he said.
Late on Sunday night, the housing complex was rocked by a
string of explosions after an electrical substation caught fire
in circumstances which remain unexplained. "It sounded like a
plane taking off," said Carolina, as the stench of burnt
plastic drifted across from the smouldering power plant. The
explosion added to a sense of desperation in a neighbourhood
that had already seen outbreaks of looting. Residents have
mounted lookouts to warn of the government security forces and
paramilitary gangs called colectivos, who they fear will take
down their jerry-rigged infrastructure. "It's like Jumanji
here," Martínez said. "Except instead of elephants and lions
running around it's the national guard and colectivos."
Residents have started pumping water from a well behind the
front gate, and taking turns to carry supplies to elderly
neighbours on higher floors. Water is in short supply across
the city: at a pharmacy in the upmarket commercial
neighbourhood of Las Mercedes, the queue for bottled water
stretched for several blocks – longer than the line outside
some petrol stations. Moisés de Lima, a homeowner and new
father, loaded gallon bottles of water into his car. He was
stockpiling in expectation of a prolonged crisis.
"We are in a wartime economy now," De Lima said, his
voice trembling with anger. "This is what this government has
done to us, and it has the nerve to just make excuses and play
the blame game."
On Monday night Maduro made a
conspiratorial televised address to the nation,
claiming the
power cut was part of a "demonic" plot dreamed up in the White
House by Donald Trump
in an attempt to plunge Venezuela
into chaos and justify a military invasion and occupation.
Most locals, however, are convinced the cause is years of
under-investment, mismanagement and corruption. "Chavistas have
been in power for 20 years and we have had 20 years of energy
crises," said De Lima
, who paid for his water in dollars,
which swiftly became the de facto currency as cashpoints and
card-readers went out of action.
"After 20 years, you can't
blame other people for your problems."
Outside La Carlota military airbase near the centre of the
city, locals had descended on a tap outside a local police
station, bringing empty bottles, jugs and tubs. Waiting in line
was Jeancary Lugo, a business administrator, who was dismayed
by the efforts of some storekeepers to profit from the crisis.
"On Friday, I bought a bag of ice from a store for $1.50.
Yesterday they wanted $8," she complained. "There's a lot of
solidarity here but there's also people taking advantage. I
feel like they are [trying to] rob us."
Across the road, dozens of national guardsmen lined up,
with riot shields and gas masks at the ready. "Is this what
Venezuela deserves?" one person in line shouted at a police
officer by the station house. The officer shrugged. "In the
command centre there's no water either, and electricity comes
and goes. We're all suffering the same," he said.
Venezuela: Guaidó under investigation for 'sabotage' of
power grid
Tom Phillips Latin America correspondent
Wed 13 Mar 2019
06.20 AEDT
First published on Wed 13 Mar 2019 05.13 AEDT
Venezuelans head to collect water from a sewage canal at the
river Guaire in Caracas. President Nicolás Maduro has alleged a
US attack crippled the country's electrical system.
Venezuela's chief prosecutor has asked the country's supreme
court to open an investigation into opposition leader Juan
Guaidó for alleged involvement in the "sabotage" of the
country's power grid. Tarek Saab announced the inquiry on
Tuesday, a day after the embattled president, Nicolás Maduro,
accused Donald Trump of masterminding a "demonic" plot with the
country's opposition to force him from power.
Guaidó – who most western governments now recognize as
Venezuela's legitimate interim leader – is already under
investigation for allegedly fomenting violence, but authorities
have not tried to detain him since he violated a travel ban and
then returned home from a tour of Latin American countries.
Saab said the case against Guaidó also involves messages
allegedly inciting people to robbery and looting during the
crippling blackout which began on Thursday.
Maduro's political foes and many specialists believe the
nationwide blackout is the result of years of mismanagement,
corruption and incompetence. "We are in the middle of a
catastrophe that is not the result of a hurricane, that is not
the result of a tsunami," Guaidó told CNN on Sunday. "It's the
product of the inefficiency, the incapability, the corruption
of a regime that doesn't care about the lives of Venezuelans."
But in a televised nationwide address on Monday night
Maduro accused the White House of launching an imperialist
"electromagnetic attack".
Critics condemned it as a cynical
attempt to deflect criticism of his regime's responsibility.
"The United States' imperialist government ordered this
attack," Maduro claimed in his 35-minute speech, only his
second significant intervention since the crisis began last
week. "They came with a strategy of war of the kind that only
these criminals – who have been to war and have destroyed the
people of Iraq, of Libya, of Afghanistan and of Syria – think
up." Maduro alleged the US had conducted the attack – in league
with "puppets and clowns" from the Venezuelan opposition – to
create "a state of despair, of widespread want and of conflict"
that would justify a foreign intervention.
Maduro, who gave no evidence for his claims, gave little
hint that an end was in sight to a crisis that the opposition
blames for at least 21 deaths and many fear could plunge the
country into violence and turmoil.
On Tuesday, the foreign
minister, Jorge Arreaza, ordered US diplomats to leave the
country within 72 hours. "The presence on Venezuelan soil of
these officials represents a risk for the peace, unity and
stability of the country," the government said in a statement.
The US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, had announced on Monday
night that Washington was withdrawing all remaining diplomatic
staff from Caracas. "This decision reflects the deteriorating
situation in Venezuela as well as the conclusion that the
presence of US diplomatic staff at the embassy has become a
constraint on US policy," Pompeo tweeted.
Maduro has been fighting for political survival since
January when Guaidó declared himself Venezuela's legitimate
leader and was swiftly recognised as interim president by
dozens of western nations including the US and Britain.
Maduro's many opponents –
who blame him for an economic
collapse that has triggered the most severe migration crisis in
recent Latin American history
– ridicule his claims that
the outage is part of a White House conspiracy. Anna Ferrera, a
student activist in Caracas, said:
"They go around and
around saying this was sabotage and how the US always sabotages
things and the empire is going against Venezuela. But they
haven't given any [credible] explanation. "They always make up
stories to explain the flaws of the system. This is
outrageous," added Ferrera, who said she feared many might
accept Maduro's version because the blackout had knocked out
communication systems across the country, giving his
administration a monopoly on information.
Dimitris Pantoulas, a Caracas-based political analyst, said
Maduro had appeared "worried, anxious and absolutely
desperate" in his Monday night broadcast,
suggesting the
situation was dire. "It is clear, from what he said, that
the government does not control the situation (nobody does) and
they do not have any plan or strategy,"
Pantoulas tweeted.
In his speech, Maduro, who inherited Hugo Chávez's
Bolivarian revolution after his 2013 death, vowed that the
supposed attack on Venezuela's grid would be thwarted. "Victory
belongs to us," he declared. "What you can be certain of is
that sooner rather later, in the coming days, we will win this
battle definitively. We will win – and we will do it for
Venezuela. We will do it for our homeland. We will do it for
you. We will do it because of our people's right to happiness."
An epic cautionary tale of the danger of electing loony left
governments, led by hopey water-melons and warped and insane
neo-communist idiots. These poor sad scared people are going to be
stuffed for at least the next generation.
Germany excuse in WWII: "just obeying orders"
Germany excuse in VZ: "just obeying orders"
Some people never learn. It is obvious that Germany after ww2
became a US vassal following the dictamenes from WDC otherwise
it will face the consequences.
With Germany awash with migrant crime - no go areas - their
women and children afraid to go to swimming pools, concerts,
new year celebrations, rather than deal with their own horrific
issues they want to overthrow a democratically elected leader -
just another USA poodle state
Nah, the Orange Messiah doesn't need an excuse. He'll cut SS
and Medicare for the poor while giving trillions to his
oligarch buddies in tax cuts and crony capitalist MIC
contracts, while spending huge treasury to advance ZioNazism
and Bolshevism worldwide. TrumpTARDs suck his mushroom to his
satisfaction in any event.
A U.S. official has stated that the position from Trump's administration is to "persuade, urge and argue"
for India to stop buying oil from Venezuela.
The United States government "persuades and urges" India to stop buying oil from Venezuela, Washington's
special envoy for the Latin American country, Elliot Abrams stated Sunday.
"We say you should not be helping this regime," Abrams added as President Donald Trump's
administration continues to increase sanctions and interventionist tactics to financially pressure the
Venezuelan government.
Actions that come as a response to India's position to continue doing business with Venezuela on the
basis of purely economic considerations, despite international pressure. As India's Ministry of Foreign
Affairs spokesman, Raveesh Kumar,
said
Feb. 14 their nation "doesn't have any barter system with Venezuela; commercial considerations
and related factors will determine the value of trade which we have with any country."
A sovereign position that is key for Venezuela. The Indian market is a potential lifeline for
Venezuela's economy as it has historically been the second-largest cash-paying customer for the
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries country's crude, behind the United States, which
through Trump's sanctions have handed control of the revenue to Juan Guaido, the opposition lawmaker who
self-proclaimed as the "interim president" of the country.
Currently, Venezuela exports approximately 366,000 oil barrels per day to India, a figure that the
nation's Oil Minister, Manuel Quevedo,
expressed
they expect to double in the near future. However, such plans could be stopped by the
intervention of the U.S.
On the NYT story, you have to love how transparent the propaganda is, and yet they (Bolton, Pompeo, Rubio) don't care whatsoever.
Oh, and not one critical word about people throwing Molotov cocktails. Like that's a perfectly normal, non-violent means of protest.
Predictably during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee
hearing on Thursday , Republican chairman Marco Rubio condemned Venezuela's Maduro as a
"clear danger" and a "threat to the national security of the US." To be expected the hearing
was filled with plenty of threats and talk of flipping "military elites" and enforcing tougher
sanctions.
But perhaps unexpected was just how out in the open and brazen Rubio's own admissions of how
far he's willing to go in promoting regime change in Caracas. In public testimony he called on
the US to promote " widespread unrest " in order to eventually bring down the Maduro
government. It appears Rubio is now urging the White House to initiate a full-on "Syria
option" for Venezuela , which implies covert arming, funding, and militarization of the
opposition to reach peak escalation and confrontation with the government, perhaps inviting
broader external military intervention, similar to efforts to topple Syria's Assad over the
past years.
We've commented before about how popular anti-Maduro protests seemed to have lost
significant momentum of late, pretty much fading out altogether over the past couple weeks,
after tensions came to a head on Feb. 23 when US-backed opposition leader Juan Guaido
led a failed attempt to get an unauthorized humanitarian aid convoy across the
Colombian-Venezuelan border.
This as it appeared the opposition was itching for a provocation that might draw the US and
regional allies into some of kind of more direct intervention , and as a significant uptick in
US military flights went to and from Colombia near the border with Venezuela. During Thursday's
Senate hearing, there appeared a willingness to admit the fact that it appears Maduro is not
going anywhere anytime soon , for example, when the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Bob Menendez
of New Jersey, said
, "Confronting tyranny requires sustained commitment. But Maduro is not invincible. He's far
from it."
Though issuing plenty of threats of tighter sanctions and strangling Venezuelan oil exports,
the Democrats on the committee stopped short of endorsing military action: "The support that we
have lent unequivocally on Venezuela does not include the use of force," Menendez said
further .
However, Rubio's extreme "regime change by any means possible" hawkishness was on full
display. Journalist Max Blumenthal reports:
At Senate hearing on Venezuela just now, Marco Rubio called for the US to promote
"widespread unrest" as a means of encouraging regime change . His proposal was met with
approval .
Blumenthal noted this was a reference to instigating further "violent guarimba riots" --
referencing the local Spanish word -- that have been a feature of Venezuelan city streets since
Maduro was sworn in for a second six year term in January, and which has further represented
the more violent side of Venezuelan politics for years.
Your Spanish lesson for the day is guarimba , (feminine, as in ' me voy a la
guarimba ' I'm going to the guarimba ) the blocking of roads, lighting of tires,
and sometimes involving defensive acts of rock-throwing , a practice adopted by the
Venezuelan opposition in response to elections they feel are unfair. Those who participate in
the guarimbas are known as guarimberos . It is presently the season of
guarimbas , and one can only hope, for the sake of the nation, that they will soon
come to an end.
Though Maduro has survived the latest round of international pressure to succumb to internal
coup efforts led by a US-supported opposition, the fires of unrest Venezuela don't look to be
extinguishable anytime soon.
As Ben Norton also pointed out on Thursday while speaking of using "humanitarian aid" as a
pretext for regime change: "They're not even hiding it at this point."
Bravo Much respect to this woman as opposed to the gutless spineless members of the US
Congress as a whole who function as enablers of the fascist war criminals who themselves are
the stooges and puppets of the American elite.
Absolutely. I like that her contention the west intended to use the aid trucks as a wedge to
start an intervention is described as a 'far-left conspiracy'; in fact I heard it said that
the trucks which were burned contained wire and materials for making barriers, among their
foodstuffs. You will not hear it in any western publications, but according to a Colombian
news source, the reports are accurate.
It also answers the question of where Guaido is now – not holed up in the US Embassy
in Venezuela, but in Bogota, still trying to overthrow the government of his own country from
there, although I daresay he spends much of his time in the US Embassy in Bogota. At present
he cannot return to Venezuela, and it seems to me a talented child could make out a case for
treason – he openly colluded with a foreign government to overthrow the elected
government of his own country. Try that in the USA, and see if they think it is treason.
So much of US meddling operations in foreign countries depends on momentum – getting
something going and then constantly accelerating, action piling on top of action with no time
to think, until when the dust settles, the US aim has been achieved and any reservations are
drowned out by a burst of cheering and flag-waving – a triumphant parade featuring the
victors, as everyone is invited to join in celebrating the latest bold step in the democratic
adventure. But if there is a pause in which people have time to think, many of them think
"there's something not right about this".
One more thing – the western governments encouraged the Venezuelan opposition to
boycott the election, because they knew very well they were unlikely to make any gains. They
then used that as an excuse to call the elections illegitimate, and that as an excuse to
declare Guaido the rightful ruler since the elected president came to power through a sham
election. Neat trick – you'll want to watch for that one, because it is likely to
appear again in some guise or other. The opposition was not shut out of the election; it
chose not to participate. New elections have to be held within 30 days, so let's see if the
opposition tries the same trick again, afraid to face Maduro.
All the Venezuelan people who are quoted in the western press, usually just a first name
and age (Rosa, 32, says she can't go on under Maduro, can't feed her children), have the
perfect right to vote against him. If not enough people do so to prevent him from winning,
then surprise!! that's how democracy works. Any time not liking the results of an election is
reason to declare it illegitimate and appoint someone else, let me know; there's quite a few
western leaders who could be looking for new jobs before next week's out.
Yes, she is impressing many people with her courage but not the Washington Party (I no longer
distinguish between Democrats and Republicans as there is no meaningful difference on issues
that matter).
I don't think so; look at all the time Navalny has been around, and although they have not
quite gotten around to announcing him as the new president of Russia (that'd be funny, but it
would be wise to note the differences and why the west thought it would work in Venezuela),
he is still rated as the 'opposition leader' although he is not even really a politician, has
no party and only engages in politics when prodded by the west. But he has not been
sacrificed in a blaze of glory. No reason for Guaido to be, either. If Maduro was going to
rub him out, he would have already done so, and instead seems to be proceeding deliberately
toward legal action for treason or something like that.
Guaido very much alive is a useful reminder of the failed coup, and perhaps the west would
like to get rid of him for that reason, but their capacity for taking decisive action in
Venezuela seems to be a little short of what they thought it was.
Navalny has no chance to lead a revolution in Russia but he is a useful biting insect. His
death would not advance the Western objective one micron (going metric here). So, keeping him
around has value to the West.
Guaido has an expiration date. His value is diminishing at an exponential rate. Soon, he
will need to be written out of the script. Killing him off would seem the most obvious, but,
not the only choice. Much depends if the US in planning an imminent military invasion, If
they are, they will need Guaido, otherwise, he may be more useful dead as part of a
longer-term propaganda operation.
It closes with a recommendation that some other entity than the United States take over
mediation, and try to work out a solution which would culminate in 'free elections' (the west
is obsessed with the idea that Maduro stole the last election, or at least is committed to
that narrative). But I'm pretty confident that Condition Number One for such 'free' elections
would be that Maduro must not stand as a candidate – the west fears a win that could
not be called illegitimate.
Interestingly, the piece also discusses that Guaido is merely a smiley face for some of
the most radical figures in Venezuelan politics, fierce liberals who would hand control of
the nation's energy industry to the conqueror. Also, it explains how the wealthy make a bit
extra on the side by re-selling state-subsidized commodities in neighbouring countries at a
significant markup.
Guaido's main mentor is Leopoldo Lopez who is currently under house arrest in Venezuela. He
was previously involved in the 2002 coup to remove Hugo Chavez as President and has tried
hijacking student protests, Dar'aa-style, to instigate violence from which coup attempts can
be launched. He's far more dangerous than Lorenzo Mendoza.
God, that Trish Regan is a moron on steroids. But, it was very heartening to see Russia
stepping up with aid. Certainly, the physical aid is important to Venezuela but, more
important, is the knowledge that they are not facing the US alone – cautiously
optimistic that Venezuela can survive the assault.
Soooo many bullshit moments, my head is reeling. "The ones who are the aggressors here are
the RUSSIANS, the United States supports a peaceful transition of power". Yes, to the leader
it picked for the country, in a process about as far from democracy as an egg is from an
eggplant. "Russia might not have the same good sweet deals, there would be a more competitive
landscape, and they don't like that". Trish, baby – your National Security Advisor is
on record as publicly stating it would make a big difference to the US economy if the USA
could invest in and produce Venezuela's oil. It already has complete control of the refining
end – if it were also investing in it and producing it what would be left for the
Venezuelans?
It is important to Americans that they always are doing the right thing, the just thing,
the altruistic thing, and that nothing so smutty as American profit and financial gain come
into it. It is for this reason they are fed such self-serving pablum daily by their news
media.
But why should someone as wealthy and well known as Robert Kraft visit a massage parlor in a
strip mall? He could have top whores from around the world flown in to his penthouse . For
god's sake, he could have gone to that private Caribbean Island where the insiders go for
illicit sex with whomever/whatever they could imagine. Something is weirder than average
here.
Log books show Bill Clinton just loved Island hospitality as evidenced by his numerous
visits. Odd, how utterly quiet the MSM is about this – y'ld think that industrial scale
rape of young girls would be newsworthy in the MSM. No, just the Covington Kid get them
going. Eyes Wide Shut at work here.
I think it's the thrill of the chase that appeals, plus knowing that you did something
illegal (either secretly or in full view) and got away with it. Having whores flown to your
place wouldn't have the same appeal.
Well, I suppose being a Peeping Tom could his next adventure. Nevertheless, it still makes
little sense from a psychological aspect. Some say he was somehow set up as a lot of NFL
owners are tired of his team winning the Superbowl every other year and wanted to take him
down a notch or two.
I suspect that most super rich, if not perverts from a young age, end up being perverted
– the power of money and a highly developed market offering perversion is just too much
to resist for most humans. That is a major reason why capitalism or free markets or whatever
you want to call a system that encourages accumulation of vast amounts of wealth is (drum
roll) perverted.
Again, the only defense needed by a cop in killing a suspect was "I thought my life was in
danger" regardless if that were actually the case. In the particular instance, I do think the
cops may have thought such but they were apparently trigger happy and reacted to a "flash of
light" or glint off some something metallic. They thought it was a muzzle blast. Really? They
offered confusing statements as well – the suspect advanced on them in a shooting
stance but refused to show his hands. What kind of shooting stance would that be?
I don't think it was cold blooded murder in this case – just manslaughter. They
ought to be charged accordingly and kicked off the force. But no, everything is OK, nothing
to see. Besides, it would have a chilling effect on police everywhere if they were fearful of
being charged every time they killed someone. I mean, like, who would want to be a cop?
I note that in this instance, though, the deceased was committing a crime; a series of them,
in fact. Nothing he needed to be killed for, certainly, but a case removed from all the other
black men who have been shot with their cell phone in their hand, or nothing at all, while
the cops who decided to 'question' them ( sometimes for nothing more than walking on the
sidewalk in a mostly-white neighbourhood) had no apparent reason to be bothering them. Police
intervention was certainly called for here, although it is hard to believe it could not have
been carried out without any real violence at all. The list of people who actually decided to
go for their gun when ordered to put their hands up by police who already have their weapons
out must be a short one.
Police in America seem uniformly convinced that black men they detain will try to kill
them. I wonder why? Have a lot of police officers been shot to death by black men? I bet the
list of black men killed by police is a lot longer.
To partially address the question of how many police are killed by felonious acts (shot, run
over, etc.) versus how many they have killed by shooting (not counting fatalities from
crashes during police chases), its roughly 65 to 1,000+. or better than a 15 to 1 kill ratio.
31% of the civilian victims were black.
In Britain and Japan, there were a few civilians killed by police last year. China had 4
(US rate was 1,500 times higher per capita). Could not find info on Russia. Philippines was
way higher than the US rate apparently due to the drug war and terrorists may be included in
that data as well.
The standoff between Venezuela and the AngloZionist Empire last week-end has clearly ended
in what can only be called a total defeat for Elliott Abrams. While we will never know what was
initially planned by the demented minds of the Neocons, what we do know is that nothing
critical happened: no invasion, not even any major false flag operation. The most remarkable
facet of the standoff is how little effect all the AngloZionist propaganda has had inside
Venezuela. There were clashes, including some rather violent ones, across the border, but
nothing much happened in the rest of the country. Furthermore, while a few senior officers and
a few soldiers did commit treason and join forces with the enemy, the overwhelming majority of
the Venezuelan military remained faithful to the Constitution. Finally, it appears that Maduro
and his ministers were successful in devising a strategy combining roadblocks, a concert on the
Venezuelan side, and the minimal but effective use of riot police to keep the border closed.
Most remarkably, "unidentified snipers" did not appear to shoot at both sides (a favorite
tactic of the Empire to justify its interventions). I give the credit for this to whatever
Venezuelan (or allied) units were in charge of counter-sniper operations along the border.
Outside Venezuela this first confrontation has also been a defeat for the Empire. Not only
did most countries worldwide not recognize the AngloZionist puppet, but the level of protest
and opposition to what appeared to be the preparations for a possible invasion (or, at least, a
military operation of some kind) was remarkably high. While the legacy corporate Ziomedia did
what it always does (that is whatever the Empire wants it to do), the Internet and the
blogosphere were overwhelmingly opposed to a direct US intervention. This situation also
created a great deal of internal political tensions in various Latin American countries whose
public opinion remains strongly opposed to any form of US imperial control over Latin
America.
In this respect, the situation with Brazil is particularly interesting. While the Brazilian
government fully backed the US coup attempt, the Brazilian military was most uncomfortable with
this. My contacts in Brazil had correctly predicted that the Brazilian military would refuse to
attack Venezuela and, eventually, the Brazilians even issued a statement to that effect
.
Alas, there are still plenty of US puppet regimes in Latin America to mindlessly do whatever
Uncle Shmuel wants them to (Colombia would be the worst offender, of course, but there are
others). But that is not the main problem here.
The main problem is that the Neocons cannot accept defeat and that they are likely to do
what they always do, double down and make a bad situation even worse. The head of the Russian
Security Council, Nikolai Patrushev, has warned
that the US has deployed special forces in Colombia and Puerto Rico in preparation for a
possible invasion. Uncharacteristically, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs made
intelligence information public, which described in some detail what kind of plans the Empire
and its allies had, even before this past week-end's confrontation. See for yourself:
In fact, the leaders of the Empire and their puppets are not keeping any secrets about their
determination to overthrow the constitutional government and replace it with the kind of
comprador regime the US already imposed in Colombia. Pompeo, Abrams and Pence have been
particularly hysterical in their threats, but the entire "Lima Group" is still at it:
As for the Russian UN Ambassador, he was very clear on what Russia expects to happen
next:
The Neocons are not even content to threaten Venezuela, and John Bolton could not help
himself and publicly
threatened Nicaragua as being next in line for a US-sponsored regime change. He even spoke
of a "
Troika of Tyranny " reminiscent of the famous " Axis of Evil ".
This is all hardly surprising: US politicians always resort to infantile comic-book kind of
language when they want to give their threats a special gravitas. Next we will be told that
Maduro is a "New Hitler" and that he is "genociding his own people", possibly with chemical
weapons ("highly likely", no doubt!). If not that, then Maduro will be distributing Viagra to
his forces to
help them rape more women . To those puzzled by the fact that presumably adult politicians
use the kind of language one could find in grade school, I can only say that this just reflects
the state of the political discourse in the US, which has been dumbed-down to an incredibly low
level. Be careful, however, because while US politicians are rather comical in their infantile,
ignorant, illiteracy, and while they have an almost perfect record of embarrassing failures,
the past decades have also shown that they are quite capable of murderous rampages (in Iraq
alone the US invasion resulted in over one million dead Iraqi civilians) or of wrecking even a
very prosperous country (which Libya under Muammar Gaddafi definitely was).
Next, the Empire will probably strike-back
There is a small chance that Abrams & Co. will conclude that the situation in Venezuela
is a total mess and that the Empire cannot capitalize on it in the short to middle term. This
is possible, yes, but also highly unlikely.
The truth is that Mr MAGA and his Neocon puppet-masters have failed, at least so far, at
absolutely everything they tried. And if taking on China, Russia, Iran or even Syria is no easy
task, Venezuela is by far the most fragile country in what could be called the "Resistance
countries": Venezuela is far away from it's allies (except Cuba), it is surrounded by more or
less hostile countries (especially Colombia), it's economy is crippled by US sanctions and
sabotage and its armed forces are dwarfed by the immense firepower the Empire has available in
the region. Add to this the truly demonic mindset of Neocons like Abrams and the future for
Venezuela looks bleak.
ORDER IT NOW
The good news is that the Colombians and the rest of the Lima Group "friends of Venezuela"
probably don't have the military power to take on Venezuela by themselves. The preferred option
for the US would be to use the Colombians like the KLA was used in Kosovo or how al-Qaeda (and
derivatives) were used against Syria: as boots on the ground while the US provides air power,
electronic warfare capabilities, intelligence, bomb and missile strikes, etc. The US also has
immense naval capabilities which could be used to assist (and, of course, direct) any military
operations against Venezuela (I highly recommend this analysis by my friend Nat South who
describes in some detail the US naval capabilities and operations in the region).
My gut feeling is that this approach will not work. As is often the case, the US has all
sorts of impressive capabilities except for the main one: a military force capable of providing
the boots on the ground (as opposed to a non-US proxy). The problem for the US military would
not be so much getting in, as staying inside and getting something done before leaving –
what the US called an "exit strategy". And here, there are really no good options for the
US.
It is therefore far more likely that the US will use the weapon which it truly masters
better than anybody else on earth: corruption.
There is big money, really big money, all around the Venezuelan crisis: not only oil money,
but also drug money. And there are a lot of truly evil and corrupt people involved in this
struggle who will use that corruption-weapon with devastating effect against the
constitutionally elected government. And, just to make things worse, Venezuela is already
devastated by corruption. Still, there are quite a few factors which might well save Venezuela
from being reconquered by the Empire.
First, while US Neocons are too arrogant to bother with anybody's opinion except their own,
and while the various US agencies primarily talk with the immensely wealthy rulers of Colombia
and the rest of Latin America, it does appear that a strong majority of Venezuelans support
their elected government. Furthermore, US leaders simply don't understand how hated the
"Yankees" are in Latin America (at least among the masses, not the comprador elites) and
how fantastically offensive the appointment of a felon like Elliott Abrams as Envoy to
Venezuela is to the vast majority of the people of this continent.
Second, Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro did empower, for the very first time, the masses of
the Venezuelan people, especially those who lived in abject poverty when Venezuela was still a
US colony. These people are under no illusion about what a Guaido regime would mean to them.
And while most of the supporters of Chavez and Maduro are not influential or wealthy, there are
a lot of them and they will probably fight to prevent a complete reversal of all the
achievements of the Bolivarian revolution.
Third, Latin America might well be changing, just like the Middle-East did. Remember how,
for years, the Israelis could attack their neighbors with quasi-total impunity and how poorly
the Arab armies performed? That suddenly changed when Hezbollah proved to the entire region and
even the world, that the "Axis of Kindness" (US, Israel, KSA) could be successfully defeated,
even by a comparatively tiny resistance with no air force, no navy and very little armor. As I
never cease to repeat – wars are not won by firepower, but by willpower . Oh sure,
firepower helps, especially when you can fire from far away with no risk to yourself and your
victim cannot fire back, but as soon as big firepower is met by big willpower the former
rapidly fails. There is a very real possibility that Venezuela might do for Latin America what
the Ukraine did for Russia: act as a surprisingly effective "vaccine" against the AngloZionist
propaganda. An indigenous leader like Evo Morales, who has declared his full and total support
for the elected government of Maduro, is an inspiration to the people of Latin America far
beyond the borders of Bolivia. The Russian ambassador to the UN got it right: there are already
other leaders after Maduro which the AngloZionists want to eliminate and replace by a pliable
puppet à la Guaido or Duque Márquez. At the end of the day, this is a
typical dialectical problem: the more brutal and overt the US aggression against Latin America
is, the more successful coups or even invasions the US organizes, the stronger the anti-Yankee
feelings generated among the people of the continent. Think of it this way: the US has already
terminally alienated the people of China, Russia and Iran, along with most of the Arab and
Muslim world, and thanks to that alienation, the leaders of China, Russia and Iran have enjoyed
the support of their people in their struggle against the AngloZionist Empire. Could something
very similar not already be happening in Latin America?
Conclusion: focus on the right question
To defeat the Empire's plans for Venezuela, it is crucial that we all keep hammering over
and over again: the choice is not between Maduro or Guiado, the choice is not between poverty
under the Chavistas and prosperity under the AngloZionists. This is how the agents of the
Empire (whether paid or simply stupid) want to frame the discussions. The real issue at stake
here is the rule of law . The rule of law inside Venezuela, of course, and the rule of law
internationally.
First year law students are often taught that the purpose of the law is not "justice" per
se, but to provide a mechanism to solve disputes. That mechanism is, admittedly, a highly
imperfect one, but it is understood by civilized people as being preferable to the alternative
. The alternative, by the way, is what happens in every time a so-called "humanitarian
intervention" is launched: a humanitarian disaster.
Yet, this is the typical modus operandi of the Neocons (and of all imperialists,
really). First, chose a country for destabilization, then use your control of the international
financial markets and trade to trigger an economic crisis; then, send your "democracy
promoting" spooks and agents of influence to foment protests or, even better, violent
disorders; then send some "unidentified snipers" if the legitimate government does not use
enough violence to quell the protests, then denounce the leader you want replaced as "monster"
"animal" or even "new Hitler" and threaten to overthrow him. After that, declare urbi et
orbi that it is "highly likely" that the "new Hitler" will massacre his own people, add a
false flag op if needed, and then declare a "coalition of the willing" composed of "friends" of
the country you want to occupy who will take action due to the "ineffectiveness of the US",
ditch any thoughts about international law and only speak of " rules-based order ". Check out
how Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov explains the meaning of this substitution:
When you listen to the supporters of Guaido you will always hear them talking about how
terrible Maduro is, how horrible the economic situation of Venezuela really is, how corrupt the
members of the regime are, etc. etc. etc. This is all a smokescreen. Even the accusation that
the last elections were stolen by Maduro is just another smokescreen. Why? Because even if
Maduro did steal the election, Guaido did not have the right to declare himself President,
Trump had no right to recognize him as such, and the Empire had no business threatening a
military intervention or even a violation of the sovereign border of Venezuela under the
ridiculous pretext of bringing in humanitarian aid while, at the same time, keeping the country
under draconian (and fully illegal) sanctions. The solution to a crisis brought about by a
violation of law cannot be a wholesale abandonment of the very core principles of law, but such
a solution can only be a restoration of law and order by legal means. Kinda obvious, but so
many seem to forget this, that it is worth repeating. And here, I will again post a graphic
which really says it all:
The most powerful tools in the arsenal of the Empire are not it's nuclear forces or its
bloated, if generally ineffective, armed forces. The most powerful tool in the Empire's arsenal
is its ability to frame the discussion, to set what is focused upon and what is obfuscated. The
Empire's legacy corporate Ziomedia even dictates what words should or should not be used in a
discussion (example: never speak of "illegal aggression" but speak of "humanitarian
intervention").
This is why we must speak of " true sovereignty ", of " international law ", of "
constitutional procedures " and of " aggression " and " threat of aggression " as war crimes.
We need to continue to demand that basic fundamental principles of civilized societies (such as
the principle of "innocent until proven guilty") be upheld by governments and by the media. We
need to deny the rulers of the Empire the right to declare that they have the right to
completely ignore the most sacred principles of the post-WWII international order . We need to
continue to insist that a just international order can only be a multi-polar one; that a single
World Hegemon can never deliver justice and that there shall be no peace if there is no
justice. Finally, we need to ceaselessly demand that each country and each nation live
according to its own traditions and beliefs and reject the notion that a single political model
must, or even can, be applied universally.
These are all principles which the Neocons hate and which they would love to bundle together
under a single all encompassing concept, like George Orwell's " crimethink ". Mostly, the Neocons like to
use the "anti-Semite" and "anti-Semitic" to dismiss these principles, and when that fails, then
"terrorist" is always available for use. Don't let them do that: every time they try that
trick, immediately denounce it for what it is and continue focusing on what really matters. If
we can force the Neocons to deal with these issues we win. It is really that simple.
It is impossible for me to guess how this conflict will play itself out. Will the brazen
arrogance of "the Yankees" be enough to seriously red-pill the people of Venezuela and the rest
of Latin America? Maybe. My hope and my gut feeling is that it might
I'm probably the only one who's willing to entertain the possibility that Pompeo, Bolton
and Abrams were chosen and placed with the Empire's demise in mind. They're almost comic book
level caricatures of the worst any Empire could offer. Certainly, no serious empire would
allow them more than a soapbox on an obscure street corner. Shouting wild-eyed, spittle
filled gibberish at astonished passersby suits them better.
Anyway, give 'em some rope and they'll hang both themselves and the Empire with it.
They've been given all the rope they can carry, and are blundering forward at such a pace
they may yet hang the Empire before hanging themselves.
If the Russians didn't "suggest" it, they're counting their lucky stars. Do Presidents in
private discussion make personnel suggestions? No idea, but if they do, Putin couldn't have
suggested a better threesome. Having Grade A, strategically myopic, politically immune
megalomaniacs manning the highest levels of your adversary's security apparatus, alienating
both friends and neutrals while clusterf*cking every Imperial project they're charged with,
sounds too good to be true.
I know, it's an idyll. Be that as it may, we should be grateful, rather than revulsed that
they're at the helm. Coldly practical, talented Imperialists (such as a James Baker) would
have a vastly better chance at extending the late stages of the Empire's life to the entire
planet's detriment.
We're otherwise left with the hope the Russians have a sufficiently strong hold on their
power cords to unplug them before they do something suicidally stupid.
@Erebus I appreciate your sentiments re: the "almost comic book level caricatures of the
worst any Empire could offer. "
My worry is: such bunglers, when presented with a crisis I shudder to imagine Bolton's
reaction to a Cuban-missile level crisis
@Erebus Your suggestion is interesting and appears to have some face validity but it
wouldn't really explain the willingness of other countries to support those policies.
My own view is that the hereditary oligarchs of the western world, by which I mean
primarily the banking dynasties, are in the final stages of degeneration. Whilst the founders
of those dynasties were evidently intelligent people (regardless of what one thinks of their
ethics) their descendants evidently are not. Owing to the phenomenon known as the "mean
recession to the norm" we now find ourselves ruled by mundane individuals who consider
themselves practically supermen. The combination of arrogance, ignorance and a lack of real
intellectual weight, in combination with a tendency to hire "advisers" who are telling them
what they want to hear is destroying the west. The closest parallel is probably the end of
the Roman empire. We are living in the modern equivalent of the days of Nero and
Caligula.
They're almost comic book level caricatures of the worst any Empire could offer.
Certainly, no serious empire would allow them more than a soapbox on an obscure street
corner. Shouting wild-eyed, spittle filled gibberish at astonished passersby suits them
better.
The problem with empires is hubris and pomposity. They are so enamored with themselves
they don't notice their ass showing.
This is why I don't have high hopes for Tulsi Gambard:she is not a ruthless debater, and
therefore, she has allowed the neocons to define the terms of debate .The Framework .
Tulsi Gambard should have denounced John McCain Pompeo .Abrams as War Criminals who should
be brought to justice ..
If the neocons responded:"ASSAD IS A WAR CRIMINAL!!! .Gambard should respond:"Israel,
Saudi Arabia, and the Trump Administration aid and abett ISIS in Syria ."
But Tulsi Gambard at the end of the day is a Democrat onboard with the race war against
The Historic Native Born White Working Class Majority And this will be her focus during the
Democratic Party POTUS debates .along with homo rights She will make the rights of homos in
Iran a very high priority in her POTUS campaign.
Very good article. You're absolutely correct that the most powerful weapon the Zioempire has
is framing the situation through the Ziomedia and other Zio talking heads.
US leaders simply don't understand how hated the "Yankees" are in Latin America . .
.
Where is Latin America's media? You would think it would be easy to inveigh against
Yankees. They should have an entire news desk devoted to watching the US imperialists.
In Brazil, Brazil's corporate media led to Bolsonaro's victory. Why is there no strong
opposition media? How did the Corporate Media get so dominant?
Magisterial work. One cavil: characterizing criminal officials by their ideology as "Neocons"
plays into a particular aspect of US dogma. US state criminals like to pretend that
everything is policy: Torture is policy. Aggression is policy. Coercive foreign interference
is policy. Unilateral sanctions are policy. No, they're not, they're crimes. They're
internationally wrongful acts.
US official criminality is not ideological but institutional. It emanates from particular
organizations: from CIA, which depends on impunity for its existence; and CIA's Israeli
cutouts, AIPAC, ADL, &c. CIA's Israeli cutouts carry out illegal domestic coercive
interference for CIA including but not limited to bribery, blackmail, and propaganda.
If you want to make a state criminals' head pop like a zit, read them the laws that
they're trying to wreck. The "basic fundamental principles of civilized societies" are real.
They're written down in black and white:
@MarkU Yes, this globalist fish is rotting from the head down. Mediocrities on the top
are very confident and completely out of their depth. This will get ugly.
International Law, and law in general, mean nothing to Israel and all of its client states,
especially the USA. Israel and the US are the only states that consistently ignore judgements
against them.
Venezuela, like Iraq, is doomed. The only questions ares how much damage will be done, and
how will it be inflicted?
Capitalism and communism both thrive on conflict, and are intolerant of other economic
systems, of which Venezuela is one.
@Erebus I think the Russians must be relieved that the Americans are busy concocting
narratives away from the Ukraine. However, Porky is busy trying to regain their attention.
Here is the Kiev version – a total travesty of the truth:
Four Ukrainian soldiers wounded in action in Donbas since Tuesday morning 09:49, 27
February 2019 War 855 0 Nine invaders were killed on Tuesday, intelligence reports
say
This one won't be as easy as the Reagan era coups. The Venezuelans are pretty well armed and
ready to defend their homeland. Abrams and his goons were good at massacring indigenous
villagers armed with machetes. Venezuela knew this was coming, so they have prepared.
I think this will be as successful as the attempted coup on Erdogan, and will backfire on
the Wall St neocon scum spectacularly. Trump is a fool.
I know people who have been on the ground in Venezuela. It does sound pretty terrible. They
pay their employees with food. Now why this is, sanctions or awful government I don't pretend
to know.
I am a Chinese. I know quite a few Chinese people object to the legitimacy of Chinese
government.
My neighbor is an Iran family. I have seen demonstration against Iranian policy back home
held by Iranian immigrants on the street in my city. I have also worked in Russia for many
years. How can the author say "The US has already terminally alienated the people of China,
Russia and the leaders of China, Russia, Iran have enjoyed the support of their people"?
Quite contrary to the statement. , a few or even a lot of the Chinese, Russian and Iranian
people do no like their government and have to live with it.
Diasdado Cabello already sent two children to China via Moscow.
Even if US do not use force, Maduro will lose grip of power because water(people) can carry
boat(government) and sink boats too!
In Brazil, Brazil's corporate media led to Bolsonaro's victory.
Not true, what led to Bolsonaro´s victory was, in the first place the connivance of
the judicial system with the far-right to keep Lula Da Silva in jail and thus unable to
concur to the elections ( which he would have winned, as the polls were clearly showing )
under invented charges, and in the second place a social media massive campaign on fake-news
related to the left candidate which were spreaded by WhatsApp application to hundreds of
thousands of Brazilians directed by no other than Steve Bannon, which after that was
denounced and already apologized by WhatsApp ( but apologies does not reverse an unfair
elections result .)
The same strategy on massive WhatsApp messages was unfolded during Andalusian elections in
Spain in favor of far-right party Vox .
Why is there no strong opposition media? How did the Corporate Media get so
dominant?
Because they lack the money. Because they have the money.
Where is Latin America's media? You would think it would be easy to inveigh against
Yankees. They should have an entire news desk devoted to watching the US imperialists.
LatinAmerica´s media have been since ages in the hands of the cacique elites
comprador of the USA. Why wiould be easy to inveigh against yankees for LatinAmericans who,
until recently, were mainly illiterate people ( that only changing a bit under socialist
tendence governments ) left in that state by the "elites" in charge during fascist
dictatorships stablished by the US, when i tis not easy even for European people far more
literate and having experienced far more years of, at least resembling, democracy?
Can you in the US inveigh corporate media? I am seeing you are not capable, thus ..
While of course international law must be promoted, as it supposedly is by everyone, even by
the US whenever it suits its purpose, nobody really gives a rat's ass about it, as it is
hardly ever upheld if it stands in the way of the powerful and mighty.
I think what has really deterred the US military intervention so far has not been
mentioned, but the planners in the State Department, CIA, Pentagon, and wherever else they
make such decisions, have surely considered it, are the masses of freedom loving and
anti-imperialist, and mostly left wing, people of South and Latin America, in spite whatever
the political coloration of their present governments and regardless of what their MSM spew
out as being public opinion.
An invasion of Venezuela by the US military, even with any Colombian and Brazilian
assistance, has the potential to ignite the entire region and seriously threaten US long-term
interests and the newly elected right wing governments, and surely this is the last thing
they would all want. I think the protests and public unrest US military intervention would
unleash would be something unseen of in this world previously, and would make the Yellow
Vests protests look like a weekend picnic. Not to mention the potential for revitalising
guerilla wars and terrorist activity in an area rich with "gringo" targets. I don't think the
US, or the current leaders of Brazil, Colombia, etc. would want the region to plunge into
chaos. The US got away with it with Grenada and Panama, but taking on a country such as
Venezuela would send a much stronger message to the people elsewhere. Especially if the
Venezuelans can offer a stiff resistance and not cave in quickly, or mount a viable
insurgency against any US occupation quisling government.
Maybe this Maduro regime is useless and doesn't deserve to survive, and doesn't merit
popular support inside and outside of the country, but US imperialist machinations and
interests throughout the region surely deserve a severe drubbing, and more than just a bloody
nose, considering the bloody history of US interference, and I think the Latinos are capable
of it.
It is not simply a smokescreen to say that Maduro has brought poverty and economic collapse.
I believe that true legimacy in the eyes of GNON derives from success or failure. Maduro is
not illegitimate because he the US says so. He is illegitimate in the eyes of GNON because he
is unimaginably incompetent and has brought national economic failure in one of the most
resource rich nations on Earth where prosperity should be easy. By sharp contrast I mobilized
my network hard against international efforts to unseat Assad because I felt his competence
made him naturally the legitimate leader of an almost unrulable place.
A term like "Anglo-Zionist propaganda" is awkwardly descriptive of the United States. Anglo
Saxons were the founders of the nation but are now a small minority dwarfed by German
Americans, Italian Americans, Irish Americans, Latino Americans and African Americans.
Zionists or Jews are a similarly tiny percentage in the land. None of these much larger
groups have any love for Anglo Saxons and most have no clue nor interest in who is a Jew.
@MarkU"Your suggestion is interesting and appears to have some face validity but it
wouldn't really explain the willingness of other countries to support those policies. "
Most Western countries have lost any autonomy in defining their foreign policy and are
obliged to follow that drawn out by the US/Israel-based "Neo Conservatives" instead.
The turning point at which stage this autonomy was lost occurred about 30 years ago, when
financial globalisation rendered national sovereignty almost obsolete and established
overwhelming primacy of the banking industry over nation states.
The banking dynasties have reached such a level of control over Western democracies that
they can impose obedient and intellectually-challenged "yes-men" such as Bolton in foremost
positions, while in the past they would have to make compromise with more powerful political
apparatus and civil service, and accept "talented imperialists such as James Baker".
The real question that deserves an honest answer should be: do the interests and agenda of
the banking oligarchy really match those of the Western countries they control?
I know people who have been on the ground in Venezuela. It does sound pretty terrible.
They pay their employees with food. Now why this is, sanctions or awful government I don't
pretend to know.
Come on man, how many times have we seen this now? Yeah of course there are poor people in
Vene. like anywhere else, including America, but they're much better off under Chavez/Maduro
than they were when CIA puppets were in charge. The majority of refugees fleeing to America
are coming from countries where CIA puppets are in control, Honduras for example, which the
obama/Clinton regime overthrew in 2009, is where the "caravans" are coming from.
Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Venezuela still have democratically elected govts. in place, there
are minimal immigrants/refugees coming from these countries. But Bolton, Pompeo, Abrams, and
Trump aim to change that. So expect more "invaders" if they get their way.
After Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, etc you can't see what the "problem" is? Sanctions
are siege warfare, nothing less. Sanctions are intended to starve people into submission or
turn them against their govt. Add to that sabotage by the elites in the country that own the
warehouses and distribution, hoarding needed items. This is the same playbook they've been
using for decades now.
All the information is out there, I would suggest you check out Abby Martins videos on
youtube, Grayzone Project website and videos, Jimmy Dores videos, John Pilgers videos, all of
it is explained pretty well. Search youtube for CIA Coups Latin America. I would post a lot
of the videos but I don't want to hog up the page. Sometimes I think people here choose to be
willfully ignorant, the internet is your friend! The CIA/Wall St crowd wants to loot
Venezuela, this is nothing new, read the link in my comment above for some history on CIA
plundering and genocide in Latin America. Read Smedley Butlers book "War is a Racket".
Telesur is a good source for news in Latin America also.
Heres another interesting article on CIA/mercenary operations in Miami. Read the article then
think about 9/11 and all the connections there. Add the "mass shootings" in Orlando and
Parkland. Sure are a lot of coincidences when you start looking..
Miami and southern Florida were major operating areas for cells of Israeli Mossad agents
masquerading as "art students," who were living and working near some of the identified
future Arab "hijackers" in the months preceding 9/11.
@redmudhooch Some people are blind and deaf, or just fools who repeat ad nauseam
Einstein's definition of an idiot, or just shameless idiots (as in that saying "fool me once
), or just plain bastards propagating the eternal lie, or bots (but do they really need to
pay people to post comments on websites with so many idiots anyway taken in by their MSM
lies?). It's a shame seeing people propagating viewpoints of the wealthy and powerful,
especially when they won't benefit in any way when their evil plans come to fruition. What
benefits did ordinary westerners get from supporting wars in the Middle East? Getting blown
up by terrorists and raped by invading refugees in their own countries maybe.
Thanks for the links and videos but I for one can't be bothered looking at the details,
finer points, and all the wealth of evidence that proves a point – by now I know the
general outline of things, it's always the same old, same old, just applied to a new country.
Anyway good work on collating all this and hopefully it benefits someone not yet
convinced.
This is from 2015. Not much changed... But relevant for Venezuela. So what will happen with Venesuellians if
the color revolution suceeed, is easy to predict using Ukrainian example
Notable quotes:
"... Ukraine, what a mess. As though it was ever about the people. It was a grab for resources, 19-century style. But with 21st-century stakes. You can see what the West is after when you look at the US-Ukraine Business Council. ..."
"... Meanwhile last night & this morning, just to distract the people of what is going on in the West, Kiev launched a massive shelling over Donetsk and other places in Donbass using weapons forbbiden by the Minsk agreements, including Tor missiles, one of which fell at a railway station but didn't explode... it was defused by emergency workers but the proof is there if you care to see... it was thesecond biggest attack since the cease fire... ..."
"... This is the IMF hired guns now going after the very people who helped the Wall Street IMF shysters in the illegitimate coup and the set up of the illegitimate Kiev junta, a mix of half Ukrainian and non-Ukrainian mongrels. ..."
"... Furthermore, instead of bringing in the people who helped overthrow Janukovich into the government fold, the IMF is placing it's foreign collaborators in ministerial positions by making them instant Ukrainian citizens, while keeping the right wing, without whose help the coup would not have succeeded, out of government and slowly trying to eliminate them with their private foreign mercenary force. ..."
"... Madame "F*ck the EU Nuland from the US state department bordello, a devout Zionist, enticed these supposed Ukrainian NAZIs to help her in her dirty deeds, no doubt with promises of power sharing. ..."
"... She no doubt got her position not by intelligence but by connections. More than 6000 Ukrainians, human beings, innocent men women and children, have died in madame Nuland's engineered coup, putting her in league with her mentor, Henry Kissinger, aka the butcher of Vietnam. ..."
"... The Ukrainian sub-saharan African minimum wage is now being accompanied by Somali-style politics. ..."
"... The BBC are bravely sticking to their decision not to report this story. Congratulations are in order for such dedication. The graun protected its readership from this confusing information for 24 hours and then caved to the temptation to report news. Too bad. ..."
"... Can we officially congratulate Nuland for a crappy job and also for providing Putin with all the tools he needed to bring back Ukraine under his wing. False flag operations for American private interests must stop now. They are immoral, unethical and only bring death and destruction to otherwise stable societies. The UN should have a say. ..."
"... Neither Azov nor Right Sector want peace. On 3 July 4,000 men from these units protested in Kiev, calling for resumption of the war against the eastern provinces. They favour ethnic cleansing. ..."
"... The west would not have dialogue with Russia because it was not what Washington wanted. Washington wanted to push a wedge between Russia and EU at any cost even 6500 lives and unfortunately they succeeded ..."
"... The Right Sector does not exist, or if it does, it has been created by Moscow. The crisis in Greece is also the work of Russian agents. The ISIS is financed and trained by Putin. Ebola was cooked up in a laboratory in Saint Petersburg. Look for the Russian! ..."
"... this is what happens when you play with fire: you get burned. Using Neo-Nazi's to implement Nato expansionist policies was always a very bad idea. It's just a shame it is not people like Victoria 'fuck the EU' Nuland who will have to suffer the blowback consequences- it is the poor Ukrainian people. This is not that different to what has happened in Libya- where Islamic extremists were used as a proxy force to oust Gaddafi. ..."
"... the jihadists in Ukraine are the integral part of Iraqization of Ukraine. The lovers of Nuland's cookies are still in denial that Ukraine was destined by the US plutocrats to become a sacrificial lamb in a fight to preserve the US dollar hegemony. ..."
"... Why, don't you know? They infiltrated Ukraine, the CIA (and NATO and the EU somehow) created Maidan, their agents killed the protesters, then they overthrew a legitimate government and installed a neo-nazi one, proceeded to instigate a brutal oppression against Russian speakers, then started a war against the peaceful Eastern Ukrainians and their innocent friends in the Kremlin, etc etc. Ignorant question that, by now you should know the narrative! ..."
"... The BBC investigative reported earlier this year that a section of Maidan protesters deliberately started shooting the police. This story was also reported in the Guardian. Google and you will easily find it. The BBC also reported that the Prosecutors Office in Kiev was forbidden by Rada officials from investigating Maiden shooters. ..."
"... have you ever studied geography? If yes, you should remember the proximity of Ukraine to Russia (next door) and the proximity of Ukraine to the US (thousands miles away). Also, have you heard about the CIA Director Brennan and his covert visit to Kiev on the eve of the beginning of the civil war in Ukraine? This could give you an informed hint about the causes of the war. Plus you may be interested to learn about Mrs. Nuland-Kagan (Ms. Nudelman), her cookies, and her foul language. She is, by the way, a student of Dick Cheney. If you were born before 2000, you might know his name and his role in the Iraq catastrophe. Mrs. Nuland-Kagan (and the family of Kagans she belongs to) finds particular pleasure in creating military conflicts around the globe. It is not for nothing that the current situation in Ukraine is called Iraqization of Eastern Europe. ..."
"... This newspaper and other western media documented the armed members of far right groups on Maidan. One BBC journalist was actually shot at by a Svoboda sniper, operating from Hotel Ukraina - the video is still on the BBC website. ..."
"... As predicted the real civil war in Ukraine is still to happen. The split between the east and the ordinary Ukrainian was largely manufactured ..."
"... "When the Guardian claims to be a fearless champion of investigative journalism - as it is, in some areas - why did it obey the dictats of the US neocon media machine which rules all Western mainstream media over the Ukrainian land grab, instead of telling the truth, at that time?" ..."
"... in time Ukrainians will regard Maidan's aftermath as most of them view the Orange Revolution -- with regret and cynicism. ..."
"... Of course the Guardian doesn't like to explain that 'Right Sector' are genuine fascists - by their own admission! These fascists, who wear Nazi insignia, were the people who overthrew the elected government of Ukraine in the US / EU-supported coup - which the Guardianistas and other PC-brainwashed duly cheered on as a supposed triumph of democracy. Since that glorious US-financed and EU-backed coup, wholly illegal under international law, Ukraine's economy has collapsed, as has Ukrainians' living standards. ..."
The Georgian authorities have asked Interpol to put a Red notice on Mikheil Saakashvili as the
request to Ukraine to return him for trial in Georgia was refused.
ww3orbust PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 20:22
That does not detract from the fact that the Ukrainian cabinet has been chosen by the US state
department. Natives of the US, Georgia and Lithuania were hastily granted Ukrainian citizenship
in order to maintain an iron grip on Ukraine, while accusing Putin of appointing majors or governors
- in his capacity as head of state?
ww3orbust 13 Jul 2015 20:16
Amazing, nothing at all mentioned by the BBC. It does not fit in to their narrative to see the
country descend into a new stage of anarchy, between the people who murdered police and protesters
on Maidan square, and the US state department installed cabinet. Presumably if Right Sector refuse
to disarm and continue torturing civilians and murdering police, the BBC will continue to ignore
it and focus instead on its Russo-phobic narrative, while accusing Russia of propaganda with the
self-righteous piety that only the BBC are capable of. Or god forbid, more stories about what
colour stool our future king has produced this week.
The thing is, Ukraine is unique in allowing their Nazi thugs to be armed and have some semi-official
status. Everywhere else (including Russia), governments are looking to constrain the activities
of Nazis and prosecute them where possible.
jgbg Pwedropackman 13 Jul 2015 18:26
If it was not for the right sector, Ukraine would still be one united nation.
Them and Svoboda. If it had just been Orange Revolution II, with a simple change of Jewish
oligarchs in charge, there might have been some complaints but little more. It is the Russian-hating
far right that has brought about the violence and everything that has happened since.
PrinceEdward GreatMountainEagle 13 Jul 2015 18:22
Last I heard, Ukraine owes China billions for undelivered Grain.
HollyOldDog gimmeshoes 13 Jul 2015 18:11
But the Euro Maidan press is just an Ukrainian rag that invents stories to support its corrupt
government in Kiev.
jgbg PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 17:54
I forget the article, but in the comments I mentioned that multiple Georgians were being
appointed to high level positions by Kiev, and some Russophobe called me a liar.
Not a few days later, Shakashvilli was appointed governor of Odessa. An ex-president of another
country, as governor of a province in another one! Apparently, none of the millions upon millions
of Ukrainians were qualified for the job.
Sakashvilli's former Minister of Internal Affairs in Georgia, Eka Zguladze, is First Deputy
Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. Of course, the Georgian people removed these chumps from
power the first chance they got but the Ukrainian electorate haven't had any say in the appointments
of foreigners in their country.
Well ... when it comes to Ukraine, the need to stock up on popcorn. This bloody and unpredictable
plot is not even in the "Game of Thrones." And this is only the middle of the second season.
Today Speaker of the "RS" Andrew Sharaskin, said: Sports Complex in Mukachevo where the shooting
occurred, was used as the base of the separatists DNR.
- A place 1,000 kilometers from Donetsk! But it's a great excuse to murder the guard in the café
and wounded police officers.
I think tomorrow will say that there have seen Russian Army tanks and Putin - 100%
"Ukraine is part of Europe" - the slogans of the Maidan in action...
Pravyi Sektor were not wrong. However, you cannot have armed groups cleaning up corruption
outside the law...that only works in Gotham City.
Right Sector weren't trying to clean up corruption, they were simply trying to muscle in on
the cigarette smuggling business. If Right Sector cared about crime and public order, they wouldn't
be driving around, armed to the teeth, in vehicles stolen in the EU. (In the video linked in the
article, all of their vehicles have foreign number plates. At least one of those vehicles is on
the Czech police stolen vehicle database:
http://zpravy.idnes.cz/pravy-sektor-mel-v-mukacevu-auta-s-ceskymi-spz-fqj-/zahranicni.aspx?c=A150713_102110_zahranicni_jj)
The EU and the US have stated on many occasions that there are "No Right Wing Nationalists" operating
in Ukraine and its simply propaganda by Putin.
So there shouldn't be anything to worry about should there ?
Stas Ustymenko hfakos 13 Jul 2015 15:15
Yes, yes. You seem to tolerate Medvedchuk and Baloga mafias way better, for years.
Transcarpathian Region is the most corrupt in all of Ukraine (which is quite a fit). What we see
here is a gang war in fatigues.
tanyushka Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 15:14
sorry i posted the same above... i was just to hasty.. sorry again...
in the main picture of the same article it's interesting to notice the age of most of the conscripted
soldiers... they are in their 30's, theirs 40's and even in their 50's... it's forced conscription,
they are not volunteers... while all the DPR & LPR soldiers are real volunteers...
an uncle, the father of a cousin, was conscripted in Kherson... my cousin had to run away to South
American to say with an aunt to avoid conscription... many men are doing it in Ukraine nowadays...
not because they are cowards but because they don't want to kill their brothers & sisters for
the benefit of the oligarchs and their NATO masters (and mistresses...)
did you know that all the conscripts have to pay for their own uniforms and other stuff, while
in the National Guard and the oligarchs batallions everything is top quality and for free... including
bulletproof vests and other implements courtesy of NATO
Demi Boone 13 Jul 2015 15:13
Well finally they reveal themselves. These Ukraine Nationalists are the people who instigated
the anarchy and shootings at Maidan and used it as an excuse to wrongfully drive out an elected
President and in the chaos that followed bring in a coup Government which represents only West-Ukraine
and suppress' East-Ukraine. You are looking at the face of the real Maidan and not the dream that
a lot of people have tried to paint it to be.
Stas Ustymenko MartinArvay 13 Jul 2015 15:11
Many Right Sector members are indeed patriots. But it looks like the organisation itself is,
sadly, much more useful for providing thugs for hire than "justice".
BMWAlbert PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 14:20
But seriously, the naval base is probably the reason, it is too important for some interests
to have a less-reliable (Ukrainian) in charge, this is a job only for the most trusted poodles.
If things had gone differently, the tie-eatimng chap would have been appointed Mayor of Sebastopol.
BMWAlbert PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 14:15
There appears to be a Quisling-shortage in Ukraine at present.
Stas Ustymenko obscurant 13 Jul 2015 13:32
More accurately, Kolomoyskiy is Ukrainian oligarch. Who happens to be ethnically, culturally
and, by all accounts, religiously, a Jew.
Stas Ustymenko Kaiama 13 Jul 2015 13:24
Ukrainian Volunteer Corps of the Right Sector fighting in Donbass is two battalions. How is
this a "key organization"? They are a well-known brand and fought bravely on some occasions, but
the wider org is way too eager to brandish arms outside of combat or training. They will be reigned
in, one way or another, and soon.
GameOverManGameOver Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 12:02
Shh shh shh. This news does not exist yet in the western media, therefore it's nothing but
Russian propaganda.
Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 11:54
It gets worse - soldiers from the UA are now refusing to follow orders in protest against the
total anarchy sweeping the chain of command, and their lack of rest and equipment.
Tensions have been rising between the government and the Right Sector militia that has
helped it fight pro-Russian separatists in the east of the country.
Finally, the Guardian decided to report the actual new after satisfying itself with ample discussion
of the quality of Russian cheeses. Right sector "helped" to fight "separatists"? Really? Does
Alec Luhn know that there are currently two (!) RS battalions at the front and 19 (!) inside Ukraine?
They are some warriors. Now they are occupying themselves fighting as criminals they are for the
control of contraband.
At the ATO zone, they help consists of plundering, murdering and raping the local population.
They enter a village, take everything of value from houses and then blow them up. They rape women
and girls as young as 10 years old. They've been doing this for more than a year, and we've been
telling you that for more than a year. But apparently in the fight against "pro-Russian separatists"
everything is good. These crimes are so widespread, even the Ukrainian "government" is worried
this will eventually becomes impossible to deny. Some battalions such as Shakhtersk and Aidar
have been officially accused of crimes and ompletely or partially reformed.
Examples: http://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR50/040/2014/en/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bfb_1413804655
Ukraine, what a mess. As though it was ever about the people. It was a grab for resources,
19-century style. But with 21st-century stakes. You can see what the West is after when you look
at the US-Ukraine Business Council. It bring NATO, Monsanto and the Heritage Foundation under
one roof:
You'd be surprised, but I like Bandera (controversial as he was) way more than I trust some
people who wrap themselves in his red-and-black Rebel banner. Yarosh included. Banderite rebellion
ended 60 years ago. Its major goal was establishing a "united, free Ukrainian state"; by contrast,
stated ultimate goals of the Right Sector are way murkier; I'm not sure even most of the movement's
members are clear on what these are.
With present actions, Right Sector has a huge image problem in the West. If it will come to all-out
conflict, no doubt the West will back Poroshenko government over a loose confederation of armed
dudes linked by the thin thread of 30ies ideology (suspect even then). And the West will be right.
Stas Ustymenko Nik2 13 Jul 2015 11:03
Methinks you're way overselling a thug turf war as "major political event. Truth is, the region
has been long in the hands of organized crime. The previous regime incorporated and controlled
almost all organized crime in the country, hence no visible conflict. Now, individual players
try to use temporary uncertainty to their advantage.
Right Sector claims they were trying to fight
the smuggling, but this doesn't sound plausible. The word is, what's behind the events is struggle
for control over lucrative smuggling between two individuals (who are both "businessmen" and "politicians",
members of Parliament). Both are old-school players, formerly affiliated with Yanukovitch party.
One just was savvy enough to buy himself some muscle under Right Sector banner. Right Sector will
either have to straighten out its fighters (which it may not be able to do) or disappear as a
political player. I fail to see how people see anything "neo-Nazi" in this gang shootout.
PaddyCannuck Cavirac 13 Jul 2015 10:21
Nobody here is an apologist for Stalin, who was a brutal and cruel despot, and the deportations
of the Crimean Tatars were quite indefensible. However, a few observations might lend some perspective.
1. Crimea has been invaded and settled by an almost endless succession of peoples over the
millennia. The Crimean Tatars (who are of Turkic origin) were by no means the first, nor indeed
the last, and cannot in any meaningful sense be regarded as the indigenous people of Crimea.
2. The Crimean Tatars scarcely endeared themselves to the Russians, launching numerous raids,
devastating many towns, including the burning of Moscow in 1571, and sending hundreds of thousands,
if not millions of Russians into slavery in the Ottoman Empire.
3. The deportations took place in 1942 - 1943 against the backdrop of World War II, when a lot
of bad stuff happened, including -
4. The American (and also Canadian) citizens of Japanese ethnicity who had their property confiscated
and were likewise shipped off to camps. Their treatment, if anything, was worse.
Sevastopol, Pearl Harbor. What's the difference? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Meanwhile last night & this morning, just to distract the people of what is going on in the West,
Kiev launched a massive shelling over Donetsk and other places in Donbass using weapons forbbiden
by the Minsk agreements, including Tor missiles, one of which fell at a railway station but didn't
explode... it was defused by emergency workers but the proof is there if you care to see... it
was thesecond biggest attack since the cease fire...
Nik2 6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:53
Not exactly. By now, BBC has made good coverage of these events in Ukrainian and Russian languages,
but not in English. It looks like BBC considers that Western public does not deserve the politically
sad truth about armed clashes between "champions of Maidan Revolution" and "new democratic authorities,
fighting corruption". Western public should not be in doubt about present-day "pro-European" Ukraine.
And "The Guardian" still has only one article on the issue that could be a turning point in Ukrainian
politics. This is propaganda, not informing about or analyzing really serious political events.
VictorWhisky 13 Jul 2015 09:51
This is the IMF hired guns now going after the very people who helped the Wall Street IMF shysters
in the illegitimate coup and the set up of the illegitimate Kiev junta, a mix of half Ukrainian
and non-Ukrainian mongrels.
Furthermore, instead of bringing in the people who helped overthrow Janukovich into the government fold, the IMF is placing it's foreign collaborators in ministerial
positions by making them instant Ukrainian citizens, while keeping the right wing, without whose
help the coup would not have succeeded, out of government and slowly trying to eliminate them
with their private foreign mercenary force.
Madame "F*ck the EU Nuland from the US state department
bordello, a devout Zionist, enticed these supposed Ukrainian NAZIs to help her in her dirty deeds,
no doubt with promises of power sharing.
So madame Nuland was perfectly willing to get in bed
with the Ukrainian NAZI devils (her Jewish friend should be proud) and when the dirty deed was
done, she is now turning against Ukrainian nationalists in the attempt to have outside forces
in control of Ukraine. Madame Nuland is not as intelligent or capable as portrayed, because if
she was, she would have known Ukraine has a very delicate and very complicated political structure
and history with nearly half the country speaking Russian and more loyal to the Russians than
to the US.
An intelligent person familiar with Ukrainian history would know any attempt of placing
a US stooge in Kiev would certainly result in a civil war.
She no doubt got her position not by
intelligence but by connections. More than 6000 Ukrainians, human beings, innocent men women and
children, have died in madame Nuland's engineered coup, putting her in league with her mentor,
Henry Kissinger, aka the butcher of Vietnam. That intelligent idiot's policies resulted in the
death of 3 million Vietnamese and 50,000 young Americans. Does madame Nuland intend to sacrifice
that many Ukrainians to prove her ultimate stupidity?
Jeremn Luminaire 13 Jul 2015 09:51
The conscripts didn't want to shoot their fellow Ukrainians. The nationalists don't believe
the people in the east are their fellow Ukrainians.
Because they were lovely guys, evidently, and their "popularity" has nothing to do with armed
thugs beating you up if you say anything against them (or the state prosecuting you for denying
or questioning their heroism).
Jeremn jezzam 13 Jul 2015 09:35
Ukrainian media, reporting Ukrainian government official:
12 police dead in two days, 180 wounded with gunshot wounds.
Still Kremlin lies?
Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 09:30
Thank God Ukraine is finally free and democratic. The old autocratic regime actually had the
gall to make running street battles illegal - but those dark days are in the past. In the liberated
Ukraine you are free spend the dollar a day you get paid on a bullet proof vest so the rampant
Nazi street gangs don't kill you.
Jeremn SHappens 13 Jul 2015 09:26
You'd be surprised, there are Bandera-lovers in the UK too. There's a Bandera museum. And there
is this lot, teaching Christian values to children. And telling them that Bandera was a hero.
Future Right Sector supporters being crafted as we type.
6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:24
The Ukrainian sub-saharan African minimum wage is now being accompanied by Somali-style politics. Luckily, the Russians have liberated Crimea so piracy on the high seas isn't an option for
the Ukrainians.
6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:18
Apparently, UAVs generously supplied to Ukrainians by the Canadian taxpayers are being put
to good use smuggling cigarettes into Slovakia.
6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:12
The BBC are bravely sticking to their decision not to report this story. Congratulations are
in order for such dedication.
The graun protected its readership from this confusing information for 24 hours and then caved
to the temptation to report news. Too bad.
aucontraire2 13 Jul 2015 08:36
Can we officially congratulate Nuland for a crappy job and also for providing Putin with
all the tools he needed to bring back Ukraine under his wing.
False flag operations for American private interests must stop now. They are immoral, unethical
and only bring death and destruction to otherwise stable societies. The UN should have a
say.
SomersetApples 13 Jul 2015 08:25
The country is bankrupt; the Kiev putschists are selling off the country's assets to their
New York allies, the oligarchs and Nazis are at war against each other and the illegal putschist
government and now toilet mouth Nuland is back on the scene. Looks like a scene form Dante's Inferno.
todaywefight Polvilho 13 Jul 2015 07:54
Which Russian invasion will this be the of he approximately 987 mentioned by Poroshenko and
our man Yatz...or are you referring to the people of the AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA's (yes
that was what was called after the 1994 referendum) massive wishes to (like Donbass) go against
a government who illegally dismissed an elected president a wish that was reflected on a referendum
which was allowed by their constitution 18(7)
Bosula Scepticbladderballs 13 Jul 2015 07:38
Yes. Most of the protesters are good people who just want a better deal in life.
monteverdi1610 13 Jul 2015 06:54
Remember all those CIF threads when those of us who pointed to the neo-Nazis in Ukraine were
immediately called ' Putinbots ' ?
PS/ Apologies would be the order of the day , perhaps ?
Sturney 13 Jul 2015 06:49
Apparently this conflict is over. Temporarily over. Anyway in ever-contracting economy, in
a Mariana trench between Russia and EU, in the most totalitarian country in history, such conflicts
will continue. Since Nuland tossed yeast in the outhouse nobody can stop fermentation of sh*t.
Help yourself with some beer and shrimps. I am looking forward when these masses splash out to
EU, preferably to Poland. Must be fun to watch. (Lipspalm)
Justin Obisesan 13 Jul 2015 06:33
In the run-up to the Euro 2012 football tournament, jointly hosted by Poland and Ukraine, I
remember how the media in this country worked themselves into a frenzy harping on about the presence
of violent neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine. After the removal of Mr Yanukovych from office, the same
media organisations changed their tune by describing any talk of neo- Nazis in Ukraine as "Russian
propaganda". The Western media coverage of the Ukrainian crises has been so blatantly pro-Kiev
and anti-Donbass that their claims of impartiality and objectivity cannot be taken seriously anymore.
Jeremn jgbg 13 Jul 2015 06:16
It is fine when they are shooting at Donetsk, but not so good when they use the same tactics
in western Ukraine.
Azov are the same, violent neo-Nazi thugs given authority, and this article notes that PrivatBank
is the bank that services requests for donations to the Azov funds, using J P Morgan as intermidiary.
Neither Azov nor Right Sector want peace. On 3 July 4,000 men from these units protested in
Kiev, calling for resumption of the war against the eastern provinces.
They favour ethnic cleansing.
Jeremn William Fraser 13 Jul 2015 06:10
The people who support Bandera are in western Ukraine. They are the ones who say Stalin starved
the Ukrainian people.
Trouble is, in the 1930s, western Ukraine belonged to Poland.
It was the Russians, eastern Ukrainians and other Soviet people who starved, not the western
Ukrainians.
Kefirfan 13 Jul 2015 06:02
Good, good. Let the democracy flow through you...
Pwedropackman SHappens 13 Jul 2015 05:53
It will be interesting to see which side the US and Canada will support. Probably Poroshenko
and the Oligarchs because the Right Sector is not so happy about the ongoing sales of Ukraine
infrastructure to US corporates.
SHappens 13 Jul 2015 05:14
Harpers' babies are out manifesting, supporting the good guys:
"Supporters of Ukraine's Right Sector extremist group rallied in Ottawa Sunday amid the
radicals' ongoing standoff with police in western Ukraine."
The rally outside the Ukrainian embassy was organized by the Right Sector's representative
office in the Canadian capital, 112 Ukraine TV channel reported, citing the Facebook account of
the so-called Ukrainian Volunteer Corps.
careforukraine 13 Jul 2015 05:09
I wonder how long it will be before the us denounces nazi's in ukraine?
Kind of seems like we have seen this all before.
Almost like how ISIS were just freedom fighters that needed our support until ?.....
Well we all know what happened there.
Pwedropackman 13 Jul 2015 05:04
If it was not for the right sector, Ukraine would still be one united nation.
GameOverManGameOver Chris Gilmore 13 Jul 2015 04:41
Yes, I agree, they do wreck the economy. That was my point. Russia want's strong economies
to do business with, not broken economies that only ask for financial aid.
Like I said, no evidence of Russian troops in Donbass and South Ossetia asked for the presence
of Russian troops to deter the Georgian government from trying another invasion.
And organisations like CIS are meant to expand economic ties. Just like the EU I suppose. They
function in pretty much the same way with everyone getting a chance to lead. So I don't know why
that should be a bad thing. Since the EU is not interested in admitting Russia why can't Russia
go to other organisations?
VladimirM Dmitriy Grebenyuk 13 Jul 2015 04:26
It's a poisonous sarcasm, I think. But I've heard that RS accuse the Ukrainian government of
being pro-Putin as the government accuse them of being Russian agents. Surreal a bit.
stewfen FOHP46 13 Jul 2015 04:24
The west would not have dialogue with Russia because it was not what Washington wanted. Washington
wanted to push a wedge between Russia and EU at any cost even 6500 lives and unfortunately they
succeeded
GameOverManGameOver Chris Gilmore 13 Jul 2015 03:54
I'll admit that frozen conflicts could be useful to Russia. But only from a security point
of view. And why not, exactly? NATO is Russia's biggest threat, so it would make sense for the
government to want to avoid it expanding any further. I understand your misgivings since you're
speaking from the position that NATO should expand to deter Russi I mean 'Iran', but surely you
understand that Russia wanting to prevent that makes logical sense? Sure, it's at someone else's
expense but let's not pretend that big countries doing something at someone else's expense is
a new and revolutionary concept reserved only to Russia. And the Georgian conflict dates back
to the very early 90's.
From an economic point of view though, no sense at all. Frozen conflicts usually bring economic
barriers. Believe it or not Russia's priority isn't expansion, but the economy. And trade with
it's neighbours is an important element of the Russian economy. It's very hard to trade with areas
that are in the middle of a frozen conflict. So in that sense the last thing Russia would want
are profitable areas in a frozen conflict around it's borders hampering it's economic growth.
And none of this has anything to do with Marioupol.
Debreceni 13 Jul 2015 03:38
The Right Sector does not exist, or if it does, it has been created by Moscow. The crisis in
Greece is also the work of Russian agents. The ISIS is financed and trained by Putin. Ebola was
cooked up in a laboratory in Saint Petersburg. Look for the Russian!
Kaiama PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 02:50
We don't know if PS were also doing it as well or just poking their noses into someone else's
business. Who started it? I doubt the correct answer will ever be known. Two unsavoury groups
arguing about an illegal business. The problem is that the MP is an MP whereas PS is a national
organisation.
It's never the US....it's never the West.....
(you know, to balance things) : )
todaywefight 13 Jul 2015 01:53
If any one on the other side, the dark side, ever thought that these lot will hold hands with
any one, lay down their arms and sing Kumbaya, uou are either utterly naive or willfully ignorant.
Apparently, these lot have 23 battalions, armed to their teeth, the added bonus for the Privy
Sektor is that , due to expedience and cowardice , they have just made legal and incorporated
into the Ukrainian army, Kyiv is in a highway to nowhere.
Incidentally, unlike the maidan demonstrations which essentially were only in Kyiv there are
demonstrations in more than a dozen cities, and have established dozen of check points already
and Yarosh a member of the VT. have clearly instructed them to fight if necessary.
GameOverManGameOver Omniscience 13 Jul 2015 01:35
So? Yes there are nationalists in Russia, just like everywhere else. You get a gold star for
googling. Shall I get some articles with European and American nationalists to parade around to
make a vague point? If you want I can get you an article of Lithuanians dressed up as the Waffen
SS parading around Vilnius. That's Lithuania the EU and Nato member. Funny how EU principles disappear
when it's one of their own violating them.
You seem to be missing the point entirely. While all countries have their nationalists, those
nationalists are a very small minority, have no power, have no popular support, have no seats
in government, usually derided by the majority of the population and they certainly aren't armed
to the teeth roaming around the country killing, torturing and kidnapping people with the blessing
of their government
HollyOldDog Joe way 13 Jul 2015 00:09
The Right Sector were / are Ukrains Storm Troopers who have had more advanced training by the
Americans. If the Right Sector turn on the Kiev Government they will be difficult to defeat, and
who knows if the civilian population of Ukraine may join in the 'fun' by ousting the current unpopular
Ukrainian government.
sorrentina 12 Jul 2015 23:35
this is what happens when you play with fire: you get burned. Using Neo-Nazi's to implement
Nato expansionist policies was always a very bad idea. It's just a shame it is not people like
Victoria 'fuck the EU' Nuland who will have to suffer the blowback consequences- it is the poor
Ukrainian people. This is not that different to what has happened in Libya- where Islamic extremists
were used as a proxy force to oust Gaddafi.
annamarinja jgbg 12 Jul 2015 23:31
The threshold has been guessed impatiently by the US neocons (while the provocateur Higgins/
Bellingcat fed the gullible the fairy tales about Russian army in Ukraine). The US needs desperately
a real civil war in Ukraine, the Ukrainians be damned. Just look what the US-sponsored "democracy
on the march" has produced in the Middle East. Expect the same bloody results in eastern Europe.
annamarinja obscurant 12 Jul 2015 23:25
perhaps you do not realize that your insults are more appropriate towards the poor Ukrainians
that have been left destitute by the cooky-carrying foreigners and their puppets in Kiev. The
Ukrainian gold reserve has disappeared... meanwhile, the US Congress has shamed the US State Dept
for collaborating with Ukrainian neo-nazis. Stay tuned. But do not expect to hear real news from
your beloved Faux News.
annamarinja quorkquork 12 Jul 2015 23:14
the jihadists in Ukraine are the integral part of Iraqization of Ukraine. The lovers of Nuland's
cookies are still in denial that Ukraine was destined by the US plutocrats to become a sacrificial
lamb in a fight to preserve the US dollar hegemony.
Bud Peart 12 Jul 2015 22:59
Well we always knew it would end this way. With a stalemate in the war with the East the Right
wing paramilitaries and private oligarch militias (whom the west funded and trained) have gone
completely feral and are now in fighting directly with whats left of the Ukrainian National Army.
This is pretty much the rode to another breakaway in Galacia which would effectively end the Ukraine
as a functional state.
The government should move as fast as possible to get a decent federal structure (copy switzerland)
in place before the whole of the West goes into revolt as well.
DelOrtoyVerga LostJohnny 12 Jul 2015 22:38
That is what you get when you put fascists in your government.
I rather reword it to
That is what you get when you enable and rely on thugish pseudo-fascist radical para-military
groups to impose order by force and violence against dissident segments of your own population
(which is armed to the teeth probably by Russia)
Bosula Scepticbladderballs 12 Jul 2015 22:37
What do you think it is?
There were several people identified directly or indirectly in this BBC story whose stories should
have been formally pursued by legal authorities in Kiev.
If you lived in the West you would understand that we call these references as possible 'leads'
- you follow these 'leads' and see where they take you. That is what Western police do.
The story says that Kiev didn't want to follow up any of these points. Why? What harm could this
do?
You state that you do not understand the point that this BBC journalist was making. But I have
in a fair way tried to to explain the point that the BBC was making.
This story caused quite a stir went it came out - and the BBC chose to stick with it and support
their British reporter. In an edited and shorter form the story is still on the BBC - the editing
is also acknowledged by the BBC.
Do you think the BBC should have blocked or not published this investigative piece?
If so - why?
And why hasn't Kiev followed up these issues?
Have I addressed your point yet?
HollyOldDog Scepticbladderballs 12 Jul 2015 21:34
I am just watching a program recorded earlier. Hiroshima: The Aftermath. I have got past the
part when the Japanese 'survivors' had to drink from the pools of Black Rain ( highly radioactive)
and watched the part when American Army Tourists visited the city to take a few photos ( no medical
help though) while gawking at the gooks. In fact the Japanese civilians recieved no medical assistance
at all from the Americans. The commentator just said that they were just there to study the effects
of nuclear radiation on a civilian population. These nuclear bombs were just dropped on Japan
to save One Day of the surrender of the Japanese forces.
The next documtary I will watch another day is the sinking of the Tirpitz by the RAF using
Tallboy bombs. At least this had a useful pupose in helping to stop the destruction of the North
Atlantic convoys, sending aid to Russia. That aid along with the rebuilding of the Soviet Armies
helped the Soviet Union to destroy the invading Nazi forces and provided a Second Front to the
Western Allies to invade Normandy. A lot of good can be achieved when the East and West work together
- maybe avoiding the worst effects of Global Warming but the Americans only seem to want to spend
Trillions $ building more powerful nuclear weapons. Is this all that America has now, an Arms
Industry - I can see it now, cooling the planet with a Nuclear Winter.
HollyOldDog Scepticbladderballs 12 Jul 2015 20:33
The USA caused the chaos in Ukraine so they must pay the billions of $ to fix it then leave
Ukraine alone.
6i9vern 12 Jul 2015 20:29
One of the amusing features of the Soviet media was the long silences it maintained on possibly
embarrassing breaking news until it became clear what the Party Line was.
Eventually, a memo would go out from Mikhail Suslov's office to various media outlets and the
silence would be broken.
At least everyone knew exactly how that system worked. What is happening with the British media
is much more murky.
The beeb/graun seem to be the Pravda/Izvestia, whilst the torygraph is a sort of Trybuna Ludu
- ie real news very occasionally appears in it.
6i9vern 12 Jul 2015 20:08
So, after a mere 24 hours the Graun ran a story on Mukachevo. The Torygraph actually had the
nerve to run the AFP wire report more or less straight away.
The BBC are still keeping shtum.
The Beeb/Graun complex have well and truly had the frighteners put on them.
PrinceEdward Kaiama 12 Jul 2015 20:07
There's no doubt. I agree that the MP was probably running cigarettes, but also Right Sektor
was going to muscle in.
If you asked somebody 3 years ago if Ukraine would be rocked by armed bands with RPGs and Light
Machine Guns fighting in towns, they would have thought you were crazy.
This isn't Russia, this is the Ultranats/Neo-Nazis.
PrinceEdward obscurant 12 Jul 2015 20:05
Right, it's the people in Donbass who bury 14th SS Division veterans with full honors, push
for full pensions to surviving Hiwi and SS Collaborators... not those in Lvov. Uh huh.
BMWAlbert 12 Jul 2015 20:04
11 months of investigations by the newKiev regime, attempting to implicate the the prior one
for the murder of about 100 people in Kiev early last year was unsuccessful. There may be better
candidates here.
fragglerokk ploughmanlunch 12 Jul 2015 19:55
It always amazes me that the far right never learn from history. The politicians and oligarchs
always use them as muscle to ensure coup success then murder/assasinate the leaders to make sure
they dont get any ideas about power themselves. Surprised its taken so long in ukraine but then
the govt is barely hanging onto power and the IMF loans have turned to a trickle so trouble will
always be brewing, perhaps theyve left it too long this time. Nobody will be shedding any tears
for the Nazis and Banderistas.
Why, don't you know? They infiltrated Ukraine, the CIA (and NATO and the EU somehow) created
Maidan, their agents killed the protesters, then they overthrew a legitimate government and installed
a neo-nazi one, proceeded to instigate a brutal oppression against Russian speakers, then started
a war against the peaceful Eastern Ukrainians and their innocent friends in the Kremlin, etc etc.
Ignorant question that, by now you should know the narrative!
Kaiama gimmeshoes 12 Jul 2015 19:53
If you think Pryvi Sektor want to "clean up" then yes, but not in the way you imagine - they
just want the business for themselves.
Geordiemartin 12 Jul 2015 19:51
I am reminded of AJP Taylor premise that Eastern Europe has historically had either German
domination or Russian protection.
The way that the Ukrainian government had treated their own Eastern compatriots leaves little
reason to believe they would be welcome back into the fold and gives people of Donbass no reason
to want to rejoin the rest of the country.
If government is making an effort to reign in the likes of Right sector it is a move in the
right direction but much much more will be needed to establish any trust.
Some Guy yataki 12 Jul 2015 19:45
just because they are nazis doesnt mean they are happy about doing any of this... now. look
at greece and the debacle that has unfolded over the past week has been . the west ukraine wanted
to be part of the euro zone and wanted some of that ecb bail out money. now they are not even
sure if they could skip out on the bill and know they are fighting for nothing . russia gave them
14 bil dollars . the west after the coup only gave the 1 bil
Andor2001 Kaiama 12 Jul 2015 19:44
According to the eyewitnesses the RS shot a guard when he refused to summon the commanding
officer. It was the beginning of the fight.
Andor2001 yataki 12 Jul 2015 19:41
Remember Shakespeare "Othello"? Moor has done his job, Moor has to go..
The neo-Nazis have outlived their usefulness.
Bosula caaps02 12 Jul 2015 19:39
The BBC investigative reported earlier this year that a section of Maidan protesters deliberately
started shooting the police. This story was also reported in the Guardian. Google and you will
easily find it.
The BBC also reported that the Prosecutors Office in Kiev was forbidden by Rada officials from
investigating Maiden shooters.
Maybe the BBC is telling us a lie? The BBC investigation is worth a read - then you can make up
your own mind.
Bosula William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 19:29
Kazakhstan had the highest percentage of deaths from Stalin's policies in this period when
he prevented the nomad herders moving from the mountains to the planes to take advantage of the
benefits of seasons and weather.
Stalin forced the nomads to stay in one area and they perished in the cold of the mountains or
the heat of the summer plains (whichever zone they were forced to stay in).
Some of my family is Ukrainian and some recognise that Stalin's policies weren't specifically
aimed at Ukrainians - the people of Kazakhstan suffered the most (as a percentage of population).
Either way, there is no genetic difference between Slavs or Russian or Ukrainian origin in Ukraine
or Russia - they are all genetically the same people.
This information should be better taught in Ukraine.
The problem is that it would undermine the holy grail story of right wing nationalism in Ukraine.
It's been one of the biggest mistakes ( although Ukraine's military started in a desperately
poor condition ) , to allow militia groups to get so powerful. Right sector should not have arms
and guns... The national Ukraine military should, If members of Right sector want to fight , they
should leave Right sector and join the army.
This was and will happen if they don't disband such armed groups.
annamarinja silvaback 12 Jul 2015 18:18
have you ever studied geography? If yes, you should remember the proximity of Ukraine to Russia
(next door) and the proximity of Ukraine to the US (thousands miles away). Also, have you heard
about the CIA Director Brennan and his covert visit to Kiev on the eve of the beginning of the
civil war in Ukraine? This could give you an informed hint about the causes of the war. Plus you
may be interested to learn about Mrs. Nuland-Kagan (Ms. Nudelman), her cookies, and her foul language.
She is, by the way, a student of Dick Cheney. If you were born before 2000, you might know his
name and his role in the Iraq catastrophe. Mrs. Nuland-Kagan (and the family of Kagans she belongs
to) finds particular pleasure in creating military conflicts around the globe. It is not for nothing
that the current situation in Ukraine is called Iraqization of Eastern Europe.
Bev Linington JJRichardson 12 Jul 2015 18:10
Ukrainians shot down the plane. East, West does not matter as they were all Ukrainians before
the government overthrow. Leaders of the new government could not look past some Ukrainian citizens
ethnicity, instead of standing together united, they decided to oppress which lead to the referendum
in Crimea and the rise of separatists in the East.
jgbg Chirographer 12 Jul 2015 17:53
And for the Pro-Russian posters the newsflash is that could also describe the situation
inside the Donbass.
It certainly describes the situation in Donbass where Right Sector or the volunteer battalions
are in charge. In Dnepropetrovsk, Right Sector would simply turn up at some factory or other business
and order the owner to sign document transferring the enterprise to them. In other cases, they
have kidnapped businessmen for ransom. Some people have simply disappeared under such circumstances.
The Ukrainian National Guard simply break into homes left empty by people fleeing the war and
steal the contents. Such was the scale of looting, the Ukrainian postal service have now refused
to ship electrical goods out of the ATO area unless the senders have the original boxes and receipts.
jgbg AlfredHerring 12 Jul 2015 17:45
Maybe Kiev just needs to bomb them some more.
Putin promised to protect the Russian speaking people in Ukraine - but he hasn't really done
that. His government has indicated that they would not allow Kiev to simply overrun or obliterate
the people of Donbass. Quite where their threshold of actual intervention lies is anyone's guess.
The "pro-Russian" government that you refer to was only elected because it promised to sign
the EU trade agreement. It then reneged on that promise...
Yanukovych's government was elected the previous one was useless and corrupt.
Yanukovych wanted to postpone the decision to sign for six months, while he attempted to extract
more from both the EU and Russia. Under Poroshenko, the implementation of the EU Association Agreement
has been delayed for 15 months, as the governments of Ukraine, the EU and Russia all recognised
that Russian trade (with the favourable terms which Ukraine enjoys) are vitail to Ukraine's economic
recovery. Expect that postponement to be extended.
.... severely and brutally curtailing freedom of speech and concentrating all power in the
hands of Yanukovich's little clan...
As opposed to sending the military to shell the crap out of those who objected to an elected
government being removed by a few thousand nationalists in Kiev.
There was no "coup".
An agreement had been signed at the end of February 2014, which would see elections in September
2014. The far right immediately moved to remove the government (as Right Sector had promised on
camera in December 2013). None of the few mechanisms for replacing the president listed in the
Ukrainian constitution have been followed - that makes it a coup.
The Maidan protesters were not armed
This newspaper and other western media documented the armed members of far right groups on
Maidan. One BBC journalist was actually shot at by a Svoboda sniper, operating from Hotel Ukraina
- the video is still on the BBC website.
....the interim government that was put in place by the parliament in late February and
the government that was elected in May and Oct. of 2014 were and are not fascist.
The interim government included several ministers from Svoboda, formerly the Socialist Nationalist
Party of Ukraine. These were the first Nazi ministers in a European government since Franco's
Spanish government that ended in the 1970's. In a 2013 resolution, the EU parliament had indicated
that no Ukrainian government should include members of Svoboda or other far right parties.
pushkinsideburn vr13vr 12 Jul 2015 16:45
There has been a marked change in rhetoric over the last few weeks. Even CiF on Ukraine articles
seems to attract less trolls (with a few notable exceptions on this article - though they feel
more like squad trolls than the first team). Hopefully a sign of deescalation or perhaps just
a temporary lull before the MH17 anniversary this week?
pushkinsideburn calum1 12 Jul 2015 16:38
His other comments should have been the clue that arithmetic, like independent critical thinking,
is beyond him.
normankirk 12 Jul 2015 16:19
Right sector were the first to declare they wouldn't abide by the Minsk 2 peace agreement.Nevertheless,
Dmitry Yarosh, their leader is adviser to Ukraine's Chief of staff. Given that he only received
about 130,000 votes in the last election, he has a disproportionate amount of power.
As predicted the real civil war in Ukraine is still to happen. The split between the east and
the ordinary Ukrainian was largely manufactured . In the long term no body would be able to live
with the right sector or more precisely the right sector cant share a bed with anyone else.
sashasmirnoff RicardoJ 12 Jul 2015 15:44
"When the Guardian claims to be a fearless champion of investigative journalism - as
it is, in some areas - why did it obey the dictats of the US neocon media machine which rules
all Western mainstream media over the Ukrainian land grab, instead of telling the truth, at
that time?"
This may be why:
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media." - former CIA Director William
Colby
Alexander_the_Great 12 Jul 2015 15:43
This was so, so predictable. The Right Sector were the main violent group during the coup in
2014 - in fact they were the ones to bring the first guns to the square following their storming
of a military warehouse in west Ukraine a few days before the coup. It was this factor that forced
the Police to arm themselves in preparation.
Being the vanguard of the illegal coup, they then provided a useful tool of manipulation for
the illegal Kiev government to oppress any opposition, intimidate journalists who spoke the truth
and lead the war against the legally-elected ELECTED governments of Donetsk and Lugansk.
Having failed in the war against the east, western leaders have signalled the right sector
has now outlived its usefulness and has become an embarrassment to Kiev and their western backers.
The Right Sector meanwhile, feel betrayed by the establishment in Kiev. They have 19 battalions
of fighters and they wont go away thats for sure. I think one can expect this getting more violent
in the coming months.
SHappens jezzam 12 Jul 2015 15:40
Putin is a Fascist dictator.
Putin is not a dictator. He is a statist, authoritarian-inclined hybrid regime ruler that possesses
some democratic elements and space for opposition groups.
He has moderate nationalist tendencies in foreign affairs; his goal is a secure a strong Russia.
He is a patriot and has a charismatic authority. Russians stay behind him.
ploughmanlunch samuel glover 12 Jul 2015 15:31
'this notion that absolutely everything Kiev does follows some master script drawn up
in DC and Brussels is simplistic and tiresome'
Agreed.
As is everything is Russia's fault.
ConradLodziak 12 Jul 2015 15:26
This is just the latest in a string of conflicts involving the right sector, as reported by
RT, Russian media and until recently many Ukrainian outlets. The problem, of course, is that Porostinko
has given 'official' status to the right sector. Blow back time for him.
CIAbot007 William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 15:06
Yes, Russia (USSR) from the USSR foundation had been forcing people of the then territory of
Ukraine to identify themselves as Ukrainians under the process of rootisation - Ukrainization,
then gave to Ukraine Donbass and left side Dniepr and Odessa, Herson and Nikolaev, and then decided
to ethnically cleane them.. It doesn't make sense, does it? Oh, wait, sense is not your domain.
annamarinja William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 15:05
let me help you with arithmetics: 72 years ago Europe was inflamed with the WWII.
There was a considerable number of Ukrainians that collaborated with Hitler' nazis:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)
In short, your government finds it is OK to glorify the perpetrators of genocide in Europe during
the WWII.
Nik2 12 Jul 2015 15:04
These tragic events, when YESTERDAY, on Saturday afternoon, several civilians were unintentionally
wounded in gun battles in previously peaceful town near the Hungary and Slovakia borders, vividly
exposes Western propaganda. Though mass media in Ukraine and Russia are full of reports about
this from the start, The Guardian managed to give first information exactly 1 day later, and BBC
was still keeping silence a few minutes ago. Since both sides are allies of the West (the Right
Sector fighters were the core of the Maidan protesters at the later stages, and Poroshenko regime
is presumably "democratic"), the Western media preferred to ignore the events that are so politically
uncomfortable. Who are "good guys" to be praised? In fact, this may be the start of nationalists'
revolt against Ukrainian authorities, and politically it is very important moment that can fundamentally
change Ukrainian politics. But the West decides to be silent ...
annamarinja William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 14:59
Do your history book tell you that the Holodomor was a multiethnic endeavor? That the Ukrainians
were among the victims and perpetrators and that the whole huge country had suffered the insanely
cruel policies of multiethnic bolsheviks? The Holodomor was almost a century ago, whereas the
Odessa massacre and the bombardments of civilian population in east Ukraine by the neo-nazi thugs
(sent by Kiev), has been going during last year and half. Perhaps you have followed Mr. Brennan
and Mrs. Nuland-Kagan too obediently.
foolisholdman zonzonel 12 Jul 2015 14:58
zonzonel
Oops, the presumably fascist govt. is fighting a fascist group.
What is a poor troll to do these days??
Antiukrainian copywriting just got more difficult, perhaps a raise is needed? Just sayin.
What's your problem? Never heard of Fascist groups fighting each other? Never heard of the
"Night of the Long Knives"? Fascists have no principles to unite them. They believe in Uebermenschen
and of course they all think that either they themselves or their leader is The Ueberuebermensch.
Anyone who disagrees is an enemy no matter how Fascist he may be.
samuel glover ploughmanlunch 12 Jul 2015 14:55
Y'know, I'm no fan of the Russophobic hysteria that dominates English-language media. I've
been to Ukraine several times over the last 15 years or so, and I'm sorry to say that I think
that in time Ukrainians will regard Maidan's aftermath as most of them view the Orange Revolution
-- with regret and cynicism.
That said, this notion that everything, absolutely everything Kiev does follows some master
script drawn up in DC and Brussels is simplistic and tiresome. Most post-revolution regimes purge
one end or the other of the current ideological wings. Kiev has already tangled with the oligarch
and militia patron Igor Kolomoisky. So perhaps this is another predictable factional struggle.
Or maybe, as another comment speculates, this is a feud over cigarette tax revenue.
In any case, Ukraine is a complex place going through an **extremely** complex time. it's too
soon to tell what the Lviv skirmish means, and **far** too soon to lay it all on nefarious puppetmasters.
TheTruthAnytime ADTaylor 12 Jul 2015 14:49
The only thing that makes me reconsider is their service to their country,...
Is the CIA their country? So far they've only seemed to serve the interests of American businesspeople,
not Ukrainian interests. Also, murdering eastern Ukrainians cannot really be considered such a
great service to Ukraine, can it?
annamarinja ID075732 12 Jul 2015 14:44
Maidan was indeed a popular apprising, but it was utilized by the US strategists for their
geopolitical games. The Ukrainians are going to learn hard way that the US have never had any
interest in well-being of the "locals" and that the ongoing civil war was designed in order to
create a festering wound on a border with the Russia. The Iraqization of Ukraine was envisioned
by the neocons as a tool to break both Russia and Ukraine. The sooner Ukrainians come to a peaceful
solution uniting the whole Ukraine (for example, to federalization), the better for the general
population (but not for the thieving oligarchs).
vr13vr 12 Jul 2015 14:38
"Couple of hundred Right Sector supporters demonstrated in Kiev?" Come on! Over the last week,
there have been enough of videos of thousands of people in fatigues trying to block access to
government buildings and shouting rather aggressive demands. The entire battalions of "National
Guard." This is much bigger than just 100 people on a peaceful rally. Ukraine might be heading
towards Maidan 3.0.
ID075732 12 Jul 2015 14:26
The situation in Ukraine has been unravelling for months and this news broke on Friday evening.
The Minsk II cease fire has not been honoured by Poroshenko, who has not managed to effect
any of the pledges he signed up to. The right sector who rejected the cease-fire from the start
are now refusing the rule of their post coup president in Kiev.
Time for Victoria Nuland to break out the cookies? Or maybe it's too late for that now. The
country formerly know as Ukraine is turning out to be another outstanding success of American
post -imperial foreign policy.
Meanwhile in UFA the BRIC's economic forum is drawing to a close, with representatives from
the developing world and no reporting of the aspirations being discussed there of over 60% of
the world's population. It's been a major success, but if you want to learn about it, you will
have to turn to other media sources - those usually reported as Russian propaganda channels or
Putin's apologists.
The same people who have been reporting on the deteriorating situation in Kiev since the February
coup. Or as Washington likes to call it a popular up rising.
'The only thing that makes me reconsider is their service to their country'
Don't get me wrong. I detest the fascist militias and their evil deeds.
However, despite their callousness, brutality and stupidity, they have been the most effective
fighting force for Kiev ( more sensible Ukrainians have been rather more reluctant to kill their
fellow countrymen ).
Deluded ? Yes. Cowardly ? No.
Even more reprehensible, in my opinion are the calculating and unprincipled Kiev Government
that have attempted to bully a region of the Ukraine that had expressed legitimate reservations,
using those far right battalions, but accepting no responsibility for the carnage that they carried
out.
mario n 12 Jul 2015 12:52
I think it's time Europe spoke up about dangers of Ukrainian nationalism. 72 years ago Ukrainian
fascists committed one of the most hideous and brutal acts of genocide in the human history. Details
are so horrifying it is beyond imagination. Sadly not many people remembers that, because it is
not politically correct to say bad things about Ukraine. Today mass murderers are hailed as national
heroes and private battalions and ultranationalist groups armed to the teeth terrorise not only
Donbas but now different parts of the country like Zakarpattia where there is strong Hungarian,
Russian and Romanian minority.
How many massacres and acts of genocide Europe needs before it learns to act firmly?
SHappens 12 Jul 2015 12:49
Kiev has allowed nationalist groups including Right Sector to operate despite allegations
by groups like Amnesty International, that Right Sector has tortured civilian prisoners.
You know what, you dont play with fire or you will get burnt. It was written on the wall that
these Bandera apologists would eventually turn to the hand that fed them. I wonder how Kiev will
manage to blame the russians now.
RicardoJ 12 Jul 2015 12:33
Of course the Guardian doesn't like to explain that 'Right Sector' are genuine fascists - by
their own admission! These fascists, who wear Nazi insignia, were the people who overthrew the elected government
of Ukraine in the US / EU-supported coup - which the Guardianistas and other PC-brainwashed duly
cheered on as a supposed triumph of democracy. Since that glorious US-financed and EU-backed coup, wholly illegal under international law,
Ukraine's economy has collapsed, as has Ukrainians' living standards.
The US neocons are losing interest in their attempted land grab of Ukraine - and the EU cretins
who backed the coup, thinking it would be a nice juicy further territorial acquisition for the
EU, are desperately looking the other way, now that both the US and EU realize that Ukraine is
a financial black hole.
When the Guardian claims to be a fearless champion of investigative journalism - as it is,
in some areas - why did it obey the dictats of the US neocon media machine which rules all Western
mainstream media over the Ukrainian land grab, instead of telling the truth, at that time?
jgbg 12 Jul 2015 12:15
The move came after a gunfight broke out on Saturday, when about 20 Right Sector gunmen
arrived at a sports complex controlled by MP Mikhail Lano. They had been trying to stop the
traffic of cigarettes and other contraband, a spokesman for the group said.
Put another way, one group of gangsters tried to muscle in on the cigarette smuggling operation
of another group of gangsters. Smuggling cigarettes into nearby EU countries is extremely lucrative. Here's some video of some of the events:
Note the registration plates driven by both Right Sector and the other gangsters i.e. not Ukrainian.
In all likelihood, these cars are all stolen. Right Sector and fighters from "volunteer battalions" have become accustomed to muscling in
on other people's activities (legal or not) in Donbass. This sort of thuggery is routine when
these folk come to town. It is only when since they have continued such activities on their home
turf in west and central Ukraine that the authorities have taken any notice.
This is true but the USSR collapsed by and large due to degeneration of Bolshevik's elite
(who later became turncoats and were bribed to accept neoliberalism) and mismanagement of the
economy. So if Maduro mismanaged the economy he is doomed, no matter how well his regime tried to
support the bottom 80% of population. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The United States has for more than a hundred years, two reasons to interfere in the
Soviet Union/Russia. One was ideological with the United States wanting to focus its wealth
in the hands of the one percent it could not allow communism to succeed as it was too great a
threat to capitalism. The other is that it wants unobstructed access to the Soviet
Union/Russian mineral wealth in the east, i.e., it wants to "own" Siberia.
With a successful Soviet Union/Russia, it was possible that revolution would spread through
Europe and even to the United States. End of capitalism. Prior to the Second World War, the
Soviet economy was doing well Then the Second World War came along and although militarily
the Soviet Union was the victor it was at the price of its industrial base being severely
damaged, so to make capitalism more attractive the United States poured wealth into Western
Europe in the Marshall Plan and allowed European parties such as the British Labour Party, a
nominally socialist party but a supporter of capitalism, to introduce the Welfare State to
calm down the restless natives. With the ossification of the Soviet leadership and the
eventual collapse of the USSR, the United States saw that there was no effective competition
with capitalism so it pushed the world away from the Welfare State and towards neo-liberalism
and austerity. The only problem is that the natives are getting restless again but with
largely right-wing politicians in charge. Since most of those right-wing politicians are
ardent capitalist, they're not prepared to make the jump to socialism of any type. When the
right-wing politicians fail, then perhaps you'll see a massive shift to the left as people
start to understand that capitalism, particularly the unregulated kind so beloved in the
United States can't meet their needs.
BTW, it's not difficult to imagine what the MSM would make of a country that was socialist
and nationalist, just look at the hatred directed at the SSNP.
I stopped by to thank you for the link to Greg Grandin you offered in the last thread. I
just finished reading it, and it's a gem of historical storytelling, weaving great themes of
law in a superbly easy read. The concept of national sovereignty originated for the world in
the Latin American colonies, and over time the US embraced it as international law, only to
discard it later, from about the Nixon era on.
So Bolton and the like are actually acting within a current Washington school of thought.
And how well the concept of interventionism has been captured by neoliberalism. The concept
of individual sovereignty was used to dissolve the borders of national sovereignty, but it
wasn't the individual who won. As Grandin states towards the end:
"Economic globalisation promised a prosperous, borderless world, even as its promoters
signed a raft of treaties that freed capital but effectively criminalised labour mobility."
This matter of the mobility of capital and the demise of the individual is something shown
clearly in that other excellent piece you linked a couple of weeks back:
I've wanted to come here to comment on it but the task seemed daunting. Foster's
magisterial article traces the history of neoliberalism - almost 100 years old - and shows
how the mobility of capital was always what it aimed towards. And this financially
borderless world is what we live in now - how ironic that the US can enforce imperial borders
through financial sanctions.
~~
So the stories told by Grandin and Foster seem to intertwine. The rich desire a borderless
world to move capital freely. This has killed the prosperity of the working classes because
of the ease of offshoring industry - the ultimate threat against the worker. And you can no
longer restore equity to a society simply by taxing wealth, because it's too easy for wealth
to flee to other havens. The only thing you can do is nationalize it, to force it to stay
in-country.
Indeed, Venezuela is the enemy of the US on both of these crucial fronts: it insists on
the national sovereignty of its resources and it insists on sharing that wealth with its
workers. It becomes ever more clear that the struggle for true national sovereignty can only
come with the empowerment of the sovereign people, through fair law and fair distribution of
national wealth.
But to do all this, in an era of borderless capitalism, takes socialism.
And this is the crucial aspect of the time we live in. Justice Holmes I think said that he
paid taxes as the price for civilization. But moving forward the only way we can pay for
civilization now is through socialism. This is the dynamic that all the roads lead to,
inexorably.
You see what trouble you stir up when you share links?
This is true but the USSR collapsed by and large due to degeneration of Bolshevik's elite
(who later became turncoats and were bribed to accept neoliberlaim) and mismanagement of the
economy.
The United States has for more than a hundred years, two reasons to interfere in the
Soviet Union/Russia. One was ideological with the United States wanting to focus its wealth
in the hands of the one percent it could not allow communism to succeed as it was too great a
threat to capitalism. The other is that it wants unobstructed access to the Soviet
Union/Russian mineral wealth in the east, i.e., it wants to "own" Siberia.
With a successful Soviet Union/Russia, it was possible that revolution would spread through
Europe and even to the United States. End of capitalism. Prior to the Second World War, the
Soviet economy was doing well Then the Second World War came along and although militarily
the Soviet Union was the victor it was at the price of its industrial base being severely
damaged, so to make capitalism more attractive the United States poured wealth into Western
Europe in the Marshall Plan and allowed European parties such as the British Labour Party, a
nominally socialist party but a supporter of capitalism, to introduce the Welfare State to
calm down the restless natives. With the ossification of the Soviet leadership and the
eventual collapse of the USSR, the United States saw that there was no effective competition
with capitalism so it pushed the world away from the Welfare State and towards neo-liberalism
and austerity. The only problem is that the natives are getting restless again but with
largely right-wing politicians in charge. Since most of those right-wing politicians are
ardent capitalist, they're not prepared to make the jump to socialism of any type. When the
right-wing politicians fail, then perhaps you'll see a massive shift to the left as people
start to understand that capitalism, particularly the unregulated kind so beloved in the
United States can't meet their needs.
BTW, it's not difficult to imagine what the MSM would make of a country that was socialist
and nationalist, just look at the hatred directed at the SSNP.
The supposed Western aid convoy seeking to enter Venezuela from Columbia was obviously a
set-up for false flags designed to trigger an escalation of Trump's war on Maduro's
democratically-elected, constitutionally-legitimate government.
There are multiple analogies between Venezuela color revolution and EuroMaydan... This
article is from April 17 2017 or one month after Ukraine far right came to power via armed
uprising, deposing sitting President (which paradoxically was subservant to Washington
neoliberal, with Biden as his best friend) which barely managed to escape alive.
Looks like closing the US embassy was a good move but "too little too late" on the part of
Maduro government, if we are thinking about the typical mechanics of the color revolution, as was
displayed during EuroMaydan. But functions of the US embassy probably were probably quickly re-
distributed to UK and other NATO countries embassies, so this is a half-measure. In any case as
this article suggests the defense against color revolution is a difficult art, as forces that try
to unleash the color revolution are very powerful indeed and are very skillful in exploiting
economic difficulties created with their own participation via sanction to topple the
government.
They can also allow themselves huge injection of money into the country to feed the
opposition, as well as performing coordination and planning role. Because the next stage is the
economic rape of the country and in this sense those are money well spend.
In case of Venezuela the confiscation of CITCO is an ominous sign as it allows confiscated
from the Maduro government funds to be used against him.
As Trump entered the Presidential race for 2020 election, the question of Venezuela color
revolution success became the question of his prestige. that's probably why stanch neocon Elliott
Abrams, who is the expert in regime change and covert operations for undermining the government,
that US government want to topple, was dusted off and put in charge.
The Director of Fund of research of problems of democracy Maxim Grigoriev -- technology coup
in Ukraine
The political conflict between the authorities and the population in Ukraine is rapidly
growing into a large-scale civil war, which leads to the split of the country. After Crimea,
several other southeastern regions declared their desire to join Russia. The head of the
"Foundation for the Research of the Problems of Democracy" , member of the Public Chamber and
author of the book "the Regime of Saakashvili: how it was accomplished" Maxim Grigoriev told
the correspondent of "Izvestia" Natalia Bashlykova why the new government can not agree with
its own people, as well as which political force is interested in new Presidential Elections in
the current conditions.
Q: Are there any facts that Ukraine really had a prepared project of the "orange
revolution"?
- There are many such facts. To begin with, shortly before the activation of the Maidan in
Ukraine, as if by a click of the switch, a number of oppoosition TV channels were created,
which simultaneously began broadcasting on the Internet. Their main theme, of course, was the
translation of opposition's speeches and protests. Actually propaganda of any activities of the
opposition. On the Maidan they created for this purpose the whole military style system of
uninterrupted provision of Internet. Which did have any interruption since it was created.
There were temporary blackouts, but 99% of the time the Internet was availble. A large number
of television cameras were purchased for the protesters. We know the facts when they went with
cameras on lashes with the law enforcement, on occupation of government institutions... There
were live broadcasts from everywhere.
In addition, Ukraine has a whole network of human rights organizations, all activists of
which in the hour of the ICS were in the ranks of the opposition.
There is a very well-known statement of the presidential candidate of Ukraine Oleg Tsarev,
made almost one day before the Maidan. November 20 in the Verkhovna Rada, he said that with the
active support of the US Embassy the preparation is under way toward unleashing the civil war.
The American instructors are actively training specialists trained in discrediting state
institutions. He talked about the project" Techcamp", which was carried out under the patronage
of the US Ambassador to Ukraine.
That is, there is a strong evidence from multiple sources, indicating that the EuroMaidan in
terms of resources, mobilization of people was prepared at a very high level. If the choice of
the date of uprising was not fixed and probably occurred somewhat spontaneously, but the script
itself was prepared well in advance.
Q: Who and how implemented this scenario? Is the technology known?
- The main force that actually implemented the coup, were trained in Ukraine and hired
fighters who were part of the"Right sector". They played a major role in the overthrow of
power: attacked law enforcement agencies, carried out seizures of state institutions. The "
Right sector "includes a number of organizations, but most of it, up to 70-80%, is a detachment
of" Trident " named after Stepan Bandera under the leadership of Dmitry Yarosh. These are
people who directly consider themselves the heirs of Bandera and talk about it with pride. They
exist with the support of various state authorities of Ukraine. They have been training their
people for almost 20 years. There is evidence that they worked closely with the security
services of Ukraine. For example, with Valentin Nalivaychenko, who was and is now the head of
the security Service of Ukraine. Yarosh was his assistant in his stay as the Deputy of the
Verkhovna Rada. To the Yarosh book "Nation and state" Nalyvaychenko, wrote the Preface, which
calls "the Right sector" partnership structure and looks forward to continued cooperation with
him.
That is, the training was quite large-scale, it was attended by such elements as the removal
of sentries, the attack of a subversive group, separation from prosecution, sniper shooting and
others.
Q: Why neither the authorities, nor security officers didn't react to it?
Because the Ukrainian government itself supported the "Right sector", helped with funding
and training. As I said, the security service of Ukraine participated in this work. Of course,
there were those who perceived the "Right sector" as a force that can instll itself at power at
any time, but there were also a number of politicians who saw it as a support for their
interests, including for the maintaining of the power or neoliberal oligarchs.
Q: Why these forces came the population, after all, the Maidan was and ordinary people?
They didn't know what was going on?
-- Here it is necessary to understand accurately what groups of the population came to the
Maidan. First, the part of the population that supported the European Union and European
integration. We can say that these are those who in Moscow call themselves the creative class,
and I would rather call it the serving class. These are people who were sincerely sure that
after signing the Association agreement with the European Union, their lives will change:
Europe will begin to Finance the country, all problems with corruption will disappear,
high-paying jobs will appear.
Secondly, the students, most of whom came out -- it is important to pay attention to this
-- to these actions on the direct instructions of the rectors. They were exempted from
attending lectures, supplied with food.
The most significant part on protesters were specially brought from the Western Ukraine, at
some point they became the dominat force for EuroMaidan.
There were at meeting representatives of political parties to which it is possible to carry
supporters Vitaly Klitschko and Arseniy Yatsenyuk, but at some point this political management
ceased to control a situation. As a result, the Maidan passed into the hands of the "Right
sector" and self-defense units of Andrei Parubiy. It is on the militants of these groups all
kept. These are those people who sincerely consider themselves successors of Stepan Bandera's
business. They consider that the present situation in Ukraine-continuation of that situation in
1941 when their ancestors willingly cooperated with fascist Germany.
Q: How true that part of the people who went to the Maidan, received money for
it?
-- Part of the insurgents, but I find it difficult to talk about any specific amounts,
because the payment was differentiated. In addition, everyone had different sources of funding.
But as a clear example of who was paid well -- Parubiy, which the media accused that during the
Maidan he bought three apartments in Kiev.
Q: Was the removal of Yanukovych pre-planned?
- It was impossible to predict that Viktor Yanukovich would act in such a strange, cowardice
way. There is an interesting comment of the Minister of internal Affairs of Ukraine Arsen
Avakov who says that it isn't clear to him how actually Yanukovych in the first days treated
the Maidan: supported it or not, or was for European integration or against. At the end
Yanukovich tried to avoid bloodshed and barely managed to escape the country alive. But, as we
see now, this has led to even more bloodshed. Therefore, to predict this kind of situation was
quite difficult.
Q: What was the final result expected by the authors of "project Ukraine"?
- The difficulty is that the Maidan was not one single project. It was a series of such
interrelated projects. Because, for example, Europeans initially would like to see the
President of Ukraine Vitali Klitschko. Americans on the contrary put on Yatsenyuk.
The main task of all external forces, of course, was to continue the policy of containment
of Russia, as once the USSR. If Ukraine was not connected with Russia, it would not be of any
interest except as another market for the sale of products and the market for cheap labor,
perhaps even a transit route.
In addition, a number of internal interests of political players of Ukraine, primarily
oligarchs, worked on the euromaidan. Therefore, the goal was not only the signing of the
agreement on Ukraine's accession to the European Union and the imposition of Pro-American
power, this is only part of the plan, which, perhaps, we do not fully know.
Q: How similar is this situation to the revolution in Georgia?
- There are similarities and differences. I studied Georgia a lot and studied in detail how
Mikhail Saakashvili came to power, how he built his regime of retaining power and actually
built a totalitarian regime. But nevertheless I can say that Saakashvili came to power with
substantial support of the population. At first, Georgians lived with great expectations of
positive changes. In Ukraine, the situation is fundamentally different: half of the country
practically does not support the authorities from the Maidan. Most Ukrainians understand that
it is focused on the interests of the Western regions, the Bandera region. While the other part
of the country adheres to completely opposite views.
Therefore, the situation in Ukraine, unlike Georgia, is more serious, and it is difficult to
say how it will develop. So far, what I see in Ukraine, I can evaluate as a negative
scenario.
Actions for which the former oppostions, while Maylan was active, criticized Yanukovych, are
now widelyly deployed to crahs the protests. But Yanukovich, in contrast, refused to use the
armed forces in the fight against those who went to the Maidan. A new Ukrainian government can
not exist without the support of the military and in accelerated pace leads the country to the
civil war.
Although, as in the elections of the President of Georgia, in Ukraine today began with the
support of US NGO such as the McCain Institute, which was conducting opinion polls,
overestimating the ratings of the most convenient for the USA candidates, as well as engaged in
the organization of election.
According to my information, the money allocated to Ukraine is 10 times more than to
Georgia.
"... the False flag has arrived, the Washington post is now spreading the lie that Venezuelan soldiers shot civilians - now to see if the lie takes hold ..."
Special Representative for Venezuela Elliott Abrams will travel to Homestead Air Reserve
Base, Florida and Cucuta, Colombia February 21-22 to support the delivery of humanitarian
aid to some of the most vulnerable people in Venezuela in response to Interim President
Guaido's request.
Special Representative Abrams will lead a U.S. government delegation to accompany
humanitarian supplies to be transported from Florida to Colombia by military aircraft.
While in Colombia Special Representative Abrams will meet Colombian President Duque and
visiting delegations from Central and South America.
Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams has defended his role in authorizing the
shipment of weapons on a humanitarian aid flight to Nicaraguan rebels, saying the operation
was "strictly by the book."
Mr. Abrams spoke at a news conference Saturday in response to statements by Robert
Duemling, former head of the State Department's Nicaraguan humanitarian assistance office,
who said he had twice ordered planes to shuttle weapons for the contras on aid planes at
Mr. Abrams's direction in early 1986.
According to Strategic Culture Abrams is not the slickest of operators, for
example, while leading the crusade against Nicaragua:
"Abrams solicited an illegal $10 million contribution to the Contras from the Sultan of
Brunei. When North later gave Abrams the Swiss bank account number for Lake Resources, a CIA
front in Geneva, he gave Abrams the wrong prefix of 368 instead of the actual number 386.
Abrams then passed the account number to Brunei. In Brunei, Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah wired $10
million from the Citibank branch in Brunei to the wrong account at Credit Suisse in Geneva.
Due to North's and Abram's error, a Swiss shipping magnate was suddenly $10 million
wealthier. .."
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/02/22/trump-contra-war-redux-in-latin-america.html
A fatality at the Brazilian border apparently but the situation is confusing. It's unclear
where the empty truck incident took place but it wasn't at the actual Venezuela/Colombia
border. Mariara is a town between Caracas and Cucuta.
"One person has been killed and 12 are injured after Venezuelan troops opened fire on
civilians trying to keep a border checkpoint open for aid deliveries, it has been
claimed.
Troops arrived at a checkpoint set up by an indigenous community in Kumarakapai, on
Venezuela's southern border with Brazil early this morning.
But when civilians tried to block military vehicles, soldiers opened fire shooting 12 and
killing a woman named as Zorayda Rodriguez, 42, according to the Washington Post. "
Don't have the link, but I urge you to take a look at www.mintpressnews.com for an update on
the "take over" of the
Venezuelan embassy in Costa Rica. The person in charge (!?) is Maria Faria whose father is in
jail for his part in an
assasination attempt on Chavez. The gov of Costa Rica is not amused. These are the people who
will "bring democracy to Venezuela" Right. BTW, she bribed her way into the building.
Meanwhile, the false flag may be occurring. Zero hedge has a report of a civilian at the
brazilian border.
Strictly by the "CIA book", that is. The one that allows Americans to cheat, lie and murder
as much as they like, and then say it's all for the good of those who are cheated, lied to
and murdered.
Hopefully someone can explain. Current inflation rate in Venezuela is 2.6 million %! Is this
correct? If so how did this happen and how is country surviving? And how is Maduro
maintaining his support?
Venezuela have acted naive the whole time, they know US will provoke for weeks and haven't
done anything. Even the ambassadors from US, EU are still in Venezuela!
China, Russia haven't done anything for all these months, they are also to blame for not
stopping this aggression.
The just-published new episode of Empire Files is a gift to all infowarriors
containing most relevant topical information. Share widely and kudos to Abby Martin and Mike
Prysner:
@ 11
"The one that allows Americans to cheat, lie and murder as much as they like, and then say
it's all for the good of those who are cheated, lied to and murdered." I have come to the belief that that is what they mean by the word "FREEDOM".
Interesting facts about the economy in Venezuela. There isn`t enough currency in the hands of
the population but inflation keeps rising and stores are "empty". Some unions are asking for
pay increases at the same time saying that their currency is worthless. The value of the
dollar is fixed in Miami by DollarToDay or some crap like that but the government doesn't do
anything about it.
Is this Econ101 or the Twightlight Zone School of Economics.
Your post is terrifying to me, and hopefully B will approve of my reposting it in case
anyone misses it the first time.
"It seems they are a pleasant family the Abrams. On her blog, Rachel Adams, wife of
Elliott wrote about the Palestinians:
"Transformer-doodling, homework-losing children of Others -- and their offspring -- those
who haven't already been pimped out by their mothers to the murder god -- as shields, hiding
behind their burkas and cradles like the unmanned animals they are, and throw them not into
your prisons, where they can bide until they're traded by the thousands for another child of
Israel, but into the sea, to float there, food for sharks, stargazers, and whatever other
oceanic carnivores God has put there for the purpose.""
re the Daily Mail and ZeroHedge article(s) on the "shooting." Not sure that the shooting
story is legit.
There are no photos of the troops shooting, there is video of the troops NOT shooting when
attacked by various people, there are photos of people on gurneys with possible wounds, but
we all have been down THAT road before...(White Helmets....)I will wait for the govt's take
on the event.
IMO all of this is setting us up for the idiotic concert, my guess is we will see a Maidan
set to music or possibly a rerun of the Vegas shooting.
BTW, I have posted the NY Times 1987 article above in reply to several Daily Mail and Sputnik
posts. Thank you B for enabling me to do so.
ah, shoulda known they wouldn't give up this easily. mueller doesn't have any evidence, so
there will probably be a few weeks of handwringing about the report being doctored, followed
by entreaties to vote for a centrist democrat to beat trump, and for god's sake don't vote
for sanders, cause he can't protect us against putin or something.
@ Posted by: Victor J. | Feb 22, 2019 12:55:57 PM | 20
Hyperinflation can be easily explained by the fact the Venezuelan right-wing is the
bourgeoisie, thus they control the circulation of goods. Without the stores (lock-out), there
is not goods in a monetized society.
But that doesn't stop there: lack of circulation fuels black market. The stronger the
black market, the higher the prices, the higher the inflation. To top it off, it is
embargoed, so imports are not an option. In this scenario (siege + lockout), bandits
thrive.
However, the situation is artificial. Where the shops are open, there is no
shortage of essential goods . There is no hunger in Venezuela -- at least nothing out of
the extraordinaire for capitalist standards (and specially, Latin American standards, where
extreme poverty is ubiquitous). The defficiency is with the more manufactured goods
(specially medicine, but alos hygiene products etc). Since Venezuela also has a very weak
milk production, they also suffer with its supply and of its derivatives.
Venezuela is a textbook Dutch Disease country. It is astonishing Chávez didn't
redirect the resources of the oil boom towards industrialization. Lenin and Stalin did it
under a much more severe situation, so there is no excuse for Chávez putting the cart
in front of the oxen.
From Reuters: on Indigenous person was allegedly killed by Venezuelan solidiers in the
city of Kumarakapay. The rumor also claims there are many wounded.
Have you forgotten? 1975: CIA + MI5/6 coup against Australian Prime Minister Gough
Whitlam
re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nugan_Hand_Bank
Poor Gough got too curious about Nugan Hand and that simply won't do. Next up, Malcolm Fraser
who immediately flew off to DC and a meeting with Ronnie RayGun. Good ole Malcolm reportedly
made time in his busy schedule for a meeting with David Rockefeller also.
D's run around wanting all these nice things for Americans while they continue to support
"regime change" wars that kill, maim and destroy the infrastructure of countries all over the
world so our corporations can steal their resources and we keep our military/intelligence and
congressional community fat and happy. When all that money we use on destruction could be
used here at home on something constructive. What a bunch of hypocrites. Sanders among
them.
The house even passed a bill unanimously that allows us to sanction anyone aiding in the
reconstruction of any Syrian land held by the Syrian government. The demise of this country
can't happen soon enough.
"The house even passed a bill unanimously that allows us to sanction anyone aiding in the
reconstruction of any Syrian land held by the Syrian government."
Sadly the US is among the sorest losers of all time. Salting the earth where ever it
goes. Although, I recall Assad said that no country that participated in the country's attempted
destruction could ever have a role in the rebuild, so we may be just seeing sour grapes:)
Thanks so much for posting this link to Abby Martin's new piece. The interview with the UN
Human Rights Investigator Alfred de Zayas is extermely revealing, I strongly recommend
viewing it to really understand the situation and the machinations of the power interests
that want to control Venezuela. As well as what he calls "the ocean of lies". He says so
much, a very knowledgeable and truthful person, an expert in fact.
The revolution of the bourgeois/grand children of ex cololianlists who simply cannot accept
that their grandparents' loot have been taken over by the brown people.ie, Native Indians and
black Africans.
What's happeing in Venezuela is a small part of a wider trend sweeping across Latin
America.ie: the old colonialists want their possisions back and they have a willing partner
in the US to help them achieve this dream. Thet've succeeded in Brazil, Argentina etc and
won't stop until the make Latin America great again.
Funny thing about this coup is that, the execution was so sloppy that it's almost comical.
Essentially some wimpy guy with very powerful connections suddenly appoints himself as leader
of the country and is almost immediately legitimaized by ex-colonial powers - how
democratic!
It's even got to a point where some US officials are now issueing personal death threats
against members of the Venezuelan government if they don't defect. I guess one has to do
whatever it takes.
As things currently stand, it's a satlemate which might end up with the bourgeois moving on
to Miami to join their Cuban cousins who're still wating for the US to install them leaders
of Cuba again someday.....soon(whatever that means).
PS: I heard Richard Branson is throwing a rave for the revolition this weekend. Goes to
show how much vested interest are involved in this coup. It's like Cuba all over again.
Has anyone watched any of the Branson concert? It's dire.
There are only about 22,000 viewers on Youtube and the shots of the very large
crowd have a completely different colour balance to the rest suggesting that they were filmed
somewhere else, and occasionally they pan from the performers out towards the audience but
the numbers don't come close to the 250,000 claimed.
Posted by: Victor J. | Feb 22, 2019 12:55:57 PM | 20
I understand that people in Venezuela use plastic cards for day to day transactions, as
the paper currency is scarce. I suspect those millions of percent inflation figures relate
the the convertible value of the currency into foreign currency, not day to day purchases of
staple foods grown in the country.
I've watched a lot of video reports from the streets recently from Telesur and similar and
most people look well fed to me. You can see the contrast with Haiti - many of those oeople
really do look hungry and desperate.
Notice in the real images the stage is located on the curved portion of the bridge and is
positioned in a -45 degree angle (to face the crowd) relative to the flow of traffic, whereas
the fake images the stage is in the middle of the bridge on a straight portion of the bridge
and is faced at 180 degrees relative to the flow of traffic. Two completely different
scenes!
The attack on Venezuela is a flop and it isn't going anywhere. The US military has to already
be extremely aware they can't possibly win (see my comment 114 in "Trump Likes 'Beautiful'
Border Walls" and then Juliana mentioned/added the Darién Gap which means the US has
even less options for logistics).
Venezuela already has anti-aircraft and anti-ship systems that can reach well outside its
borders and of its supporters have systems that reach much further (anywhere).
- Billionaire Bernie is just another fake, as is anyone at all who's running for POTUS no
matter how small their party is.
- Washington Post has no journalists at all and thus no one either outside or inside
Venezuela. Ignore their noise.
- The zombie slaves of the US inside the US and elsewhere aren't going to make any
difference.
- The public propaganda is not actually for public consumption, it is only for the purpose of
continued delirium by the "elites" continuously telling themselves they're not addicts to
evil and that they're getting away with it all even though the year is 2019 and it's
incredibly difficult to figure out what they're supposedly not failing at or how they're not
making everything worse for everybody including themselves (privately hoarding green waste
paper is not a victory only a mental deficiency born of insecurity).
- There's no hyperinflation when it comes to oil and gold which are the de facto
international currencies of Venezuela and considering a full tank of gas in Venezuela costs
something like 1 Bolivar (let's call that 1 millionth of a US dollar according to the
bullshit about hyperinflation) the local economy is completely unaffected. It is interesting
that US dollars are practically unusable in Venezuela (as they should be because they're
worthless).
- Venezuela is incredibly far off from reaching the 20 Trillion USD debt level of the US.
I'm starting to think the whole attack against Venezuela is simply noisy misdirection away
from something else more significant. Either way it's going to cost the US dearly (what made
them think it was a good idea to antagonize Venezuela further? If there's no war they
continue to lose influence and if there's a war they lose much more).
Seeing Elliot ( I only spread democracy and freedom ) Abrams digress into a lisping,indignant
mess while being grilled by a very brave Ihan Omar was priceless. Such a display of courage
is almost non existent by the invertebrates in today's political parties. Unfortunately
getting your feathers ruffled is a weak punishment for genocide. As Alan Nairn pointed out
years ago if all was fair Elliot Abrams would be a perfect fit in the dock.
Venezuelas debt is 3 times GDP, and much of it in a currency they dont control. US debt equals its GDP, and all if it in its own currency. I am pretty sure dollars on the black market are in great demand.
Addendum to my previous post. Finally figured out where the fake concert photos are from.
They are from the 'Peace Without Borders concert of March 16 2008' . Moreover, the
300K number that has been pushed by Branson and by the MSM is no coincedence at all either.
That number is the estimated number of attendees from the
actual 2008 concert .
Trump is accusing Cuba of having troops in Venezuela. Could Trump be wanting to do Cuba too?
Trump scraps the INF and wants to give Saudis nuclear technology, and representing the
party of the Christian Right wants to force all countries to legalize homosexuality. LOL.
World gets crazier every day
Recent WSJ item said Trump's plan included Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua. According to
Pepe Escobar, Cuba has 15,000 troops in Venezuela. Any transfer of nuclear tech to Saudi
violates numerous US laws and NPT as well. Trump's move on gay rights is supposed to pressure
Iran.
This is also from Saker - I will put the heading in without that attribution, sorry I am not
good at appropriate links but scrolling down on the front page at that site will get you to
this important message:
There are 9 purported aid trucks in Cucuta vs. what the vice president is saying are 149
being already mobilized by the Venezuelan government. She begins by thanking the Holland
government for their support, remarks that there are 'no attention or programs directed to
vulnerable sectors of our sister republic of Columbia' and ends by saying the Venezuelan
government has apprised the governments of Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic of concern
about special forces arriving there.
Did anyone else notice the news story yesterday of eight heavily armed American special
forces types detained in Haiti, then taken to the airport and flown back to USA? National
Post & CTV in Canada ran story, but no follow up.
"
Curacao government communications officer Corinne Leysner told AFP the island's parliament
had agreed to act as a hub for aid "but that goods cannot leave for Venezuela until there is
a safe environment to receive them."
She said the government could not permit the boat to leave with the shipment for security
reasons after Maduro's government ordered the closure of Venezuela's sea and air borders with
Curacao.
"It is a safety issue. Of course we want to help the people of Venezuela but we are not
going to be choosing fights," Leysner said.
Thanks for the info. I had no idea Cuba had so many troops in Venezuela.
Not entirely sure how Trump can pressure Iran into legalizing Homosexuality. Interested in
seeing how his supporters take it. Of course his mentor Roy Cohn was a homosexual who died of
AIDS. Trumps also recently come out saying he wants to focus on eliminating AIDS. A tribute
to his late mentor (partner?)
Trump's aim is based on his assumption that Iran will never allow equal rights for
homosexuals, wants it to become the only nation denying them, then use the R2P concept to
attack Iran.
RE Venezuela, the entire aid charade is also being utilized to promote the R2P concept as
basis for invasion.
Colombian military bases leased by Outlaw US Empire can be seen
on this map .
Interesting. That would be a way to get the LGBT crowd to go along with a war against
Iran, at least that portion that is not owned by the Israeli lobby
The Cuban connection adds another group that will support war on Venezuela in the hopes it
could topple Cubas government, although he frankly has the support of both parties for
Venezuela regime change, short of all out war
All thats needed now is Iran to be found supporting Venezuela and Venezuela and Cuba added
to the list of countries supporting Terrorists. Maybe thats what the next FF brings us. After
that he can get support to take on Venezuela , Iran and Cuba together and get NATO to support
this. Hope not .
He plays by the book, alright, it's called The Book of High Crimes and Misdemeanors. and those are impeachable and Go to Jail offenses. he's a monster.... But he's our monster, sayeth the spooks and Trumpster
Over at the Open Comments thread (thanks to M @ 64 who posted the link), a commenter (GF)
there has said that 2 days after the Brumadinho dam disaster in Minas Gerais (occurred 25
January 2019), the Brazilian government allowed an Israeli plane with 136 personnel and 16
tonnes of equipment to land in the area to assist in emergency aid efforts. The Brazilian
Congress had given no approval for the Israeli plane to fly in and there was no audit or
control over the movements of the people and equipment on the plane. The plane stayed for 2
days and then left.
Google suggests that driving from Brumadinho to Santa Elena de Uairen at the sole
Brazil-Venezuela crossover point would take 64 hours (nearly 3 days) via the BR-174
highway.
As we enter the "silly season"(election fever), the disinformation will fly fast and
furiously. Be careful who and what you believe. One thing you can be sure of, the empire and
it's minions, have limitless amounts of $ to convince anyone that water isn't wet.
I for one, will be shocked if the Mueller investigation produces anything concrete. DJT is
the perfect rep for the people he represents, and it's NOT the working classes.
Wishing the Venezuelan people all the best, as they struggle against another onslaught
from the evil empire.
QUESTION: If you're moving against these regimes that are not democratic, many Nicaraguan
people, Cuban people are saying, "Are you going to help us next?"
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yes, President Trump's administration has done so and will continue
to do so not just in Venezuela but certainly Nicaragua and Cuba as well .
<...>
It is astonishing Chávez didn't redirect the resources of the oil boom towards
industrialization.
Industrialization requires the cooperation of the educated middle and upper classes -- but
these classes were precisely the people opposing Chávez. So he needed to educate his
people, and that needed time (a generation or two). Chávez died too soon.
Lenin and Stalin did it under a much more severe situation, so there is no excuse for
Chávez putting the cart in front of the oxen.
The USSR had a civil war and defeated the White Army, much as China defeated its
Nationalists (also in a civil war). Note that these countries were able to industrialize.
Venezuela could not, probably because its elites were undefeated and were fighting
Chávez hard, and are fighting Maduro even harder.
"Soon the music is going to stop with us Americans being blamed and not those who own
private finance and everything else."
Exactly. The script is already written. After all this support will be there for a Global
Government that will issue the Carbon Dollar/Credits and monitor/control energy consumption
and be run by those who today run international private finance and the major Central Banks.
They will demand reparations from American Citizens in the form of a higher carbon tax and
asset forfeiture ( resources, military,etc) which is why they will be supported by 95% of the
worlds population. The US elite will support this after being assured of global citizenship
and protection of their assets. Global citizenship entitles you to reside in any country
.
They might even split us up into 10-12 pieces with each piece as a separate government
along FEMA/COGS lines.
Trump will get an Oscar for his role in finishing off what Sir Bush Sr and those who
knocked off JFK started. He might even get ownership of Cuba and run the country as the
worlds biggest Casino
Putin probably gets to be Global President and Xi can be Minister of Security and Israel's
Sanhedrin will head the Global Justice Department, Google and Twitter will merge as the
Ministry of Truth and Bibi will handle the Population Control Department aka Extermination
Department. Bibi will appoint MBS as Chief Shiah Exterminator, use your imagination for the
rest.
To those who say Chavez didn't do enough, I say You'd have surrendered in 2002 and the
Revolution would've died with you.
I closely watched Chavez and Venezuela. The most important accomplishment was getting the
Bolivarian Constitution composed and passed into existence. The 2nd most important feat was
constructing TeleSur as before it and the myriad low-power radio stations also devised there
was only the elite-owned BigLie Media, Venezuelan edition. Those two stellar accomplishments
allowed Venezuelans to participate in and defend their democracy . Contemporaneous
with those developments was the rapid drive to improve literacy, for participatory democracy
demands a literate citizenry. IIRC, literacy went from @40% to 90+% in time for the vote on
the Constitution. And those are just the basic fundamentals. Land reform and redistribution
was attempted as was reorganizing the petroleum industry. Could Chavez have instituted more
radical reform? Yes, but at substantial risk. The recent developments prompted me to suggest
that Maduro go all the way and nationalize all important businesses since he really has
nothing to lose. But I'm not there observing everything, so my suggestion isn't totally
credible. It's hard not to want vengeance on the reactionary forces and their stooges; but as
the Russian and Chinese Civil Wars proved, it's probably better to eject those forces and
most of its stooges and struggle without whatever expertise they provided.
Have you forgotten? 1975: CIA + MI5/6 coup against Australian Prime Minister Gough
Whitlam.
...
Same as it ever was
Posted by: Desolation Row | Feb 22, 2019 2:03:24 PM | 34
No, I haven't forgotten.
What makes Gene Sharp's AUSTRALIA claim so bizarre is that the entire purpose of his various
Regime Change Bibles is to provide cherry-picked seeds for large anti-govt protests in order
to create the illusion of a Citizen's Popular Uprising as a prelude to "Step Down"
demands.
But that's not what happened to Whitlam. There were no pre-Step Down public protests. He
was the victim of a Palace Coup contrived by politicians who ignored the Will of The People
when making their moves.
It's 'interesting' because...
1. Gene Sharp claims Whitlam's demise as a victory for his teachings.
2. It bore no resemblance whatsoever to his recommended template.
3. Sharp was often accused of being funded by the CIA, which he tries to laugh off in the
doco.
4. But he's claimed a behind-the-scenes manipulation victory, with CIA and British Empire
fingerprints all over it, as a Gene Sharp victory.
To those who say Chavez didn't do enough, I say You'd have surrendered in 2002 and the
Revolution would've died with you.
Agreed.
I closely watched Chavez and Venezuela. The most important accomplishment was getting the
Bolivarian Constitution composed and passed into existence. The 2nd most important feat was
constructing TeleSur as before it and the myriad low-power radio stations also devised there
was only the elite-owned BigLie Media, Venezuelan edition. Those two stellar accomplishments
allowed Venezuelans to participate in and defend their democracy . Contemporaneous
with those developments was the rapid drive to improve literacy, for participatory democracy
demands a literate citizenry. IIRC, literacy went from @40% to 90+% in time for the vote on
the Constitution. And those are just the basic fundamentals. Land reform and redistribution
was attempted as was reorganizing the petroleum industry.
Good summary, thank you. Clearly, Chávez had a monumental task. He died far too
soon.
Could Chavez have instituted more radical reform? Yes, but at substantial risk.
Indeed. Leaving hostile oligarchs in place has the substantial risk that they could stab
the revolution in the back. (Because of this, Putin has to be very careful.)
A democratic change of government has the advantage that the change can be accomplished
with little bloodshed, at least at first, and the disadvantage that the change is unlikely to
last: Brazil will be undoing everything Lula did.
I would like to add another country, besides the USSR and China, that was able to
industrialize after overcoming its elites: the USA.
It's hard not to want vengeance on the reactionary forces and their stooges; but as the
Russian and Chinese Civil Wars proved, it's probably better to eject those forces and most of
its stooges and struggle without whatever expertise they provided.
So the poor people of Venezuela are being attacked by: a) rich and middle-class people of
Venezuela, who withhold food and essential products from them, as well as put them under
extreme stress by creating hyperinflation, b) the United States, reducing Venezuela income
and thus reducing its ability to help its poor. Then these two groups claim to be so worried
about the plight of the poor that they threaten military action against the Venezuelan armed
forces staffed by the same Venezuelan poor, unless the democratically elected, legitimate
President of the poor is removed and an illegitimate usurper, President of the rich, is
installed. Inversion is the hallmark of a sociopath.
One cannot focus exclusively on one border. Since assuming command in November of US
Southern Command, US Admiral Faller has "visited" Brazil and Curaçao, Trinidad &
Tobago and Columbia -- all surrounding Venezuela -- as well as El Salvador, Guatemala and
Honduras.
"Humanitarian hubs" were established during these visits in Colombia, Brazil and
Curacao, with the agreement of NATO bloc member Netherlands which controls the island's
defence and foreign policy.
Naval deployments cannot be ignored either, as the post on the USS Abraham Lincoln
reminds. The HMCS Charlottetown is also in that area, with the ship's transponder turned
off.
The decision of the Maduro government to close the border with Brazil and the maritime
border with Curacao is correct and in defence of his country's sovereignty. It also confirms
there is far more ominous moves afoot than advertised in the psychological war by American
actors such as Sen Marco Rubio grandstanding with US Air Force transport aircraft and cookies
in Cúcata, Colombia or the forthcoming concert on Feb. 23 in that city of the
billionaire Richard Branson of the "white man's burden" type. At the same time, the situation
is very fluid.
Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez, at a press conference for the national and
international media, held at Minrex headquarters, February 19, 2019, pointed out:
The Revolutionary Government statement dated February 13, with full responsibility and
all necessary facts, affirmed, and I reiterate, that U.S. military transport flights are
taking place, originating at U.S. military installations from which operate special forces
units and marine infantry used for undercover actions, including those directed against
leaders or persons considered valuable.
Entirely without the knowledge of governments in the areas involved, and with total
disregard for the sovereignty of these states, the preparation of a military action
continues, using a humanitarian pretext.
Yesterday afternoon, President Donald Trump and other high-ranking functionaries and
spokespeople for the U.S. government repeated and confirmed that the military option is among
those being considered. Yesterday, the President said: All options are open.
According to the media in the U.S. itself, high-ranking U.S. military commands, which
do not, have never, taken charge of humanitarian aid, have held meetings with politicians in
the U.S. and other nations, and have made visits to sites clearly related to the issue we are
addressing.
Rebuttal Speech by Venezuela's Minister of Defense leaves no doubt as to the loyalty of
the military and puts all the Gringo neocons in their place. While not too long, I thought
this verbal pointed stick at the end of his explanation of what it takes to lead in Venezuela
was great:
"You of course have to be elected and get a majority of votes. After you gain the
majority of votes, the people will have freely expressed their voluntary willingness.
Indirect elections occur in the United States. In Venezuela, we have direct elections
according to the procedures of National Electoral Council."
The point being, Trump is NOT a man of the people's choosing and has zero authority to
command anything Venezuelan.
Someone mentioned the Treaty of Rome and the insane idea that Venezuela could be indicted
for a war crime which is totally ludicrous as it's very plain that the Outlaw US Empire's
been in violation of international law over its illegal sanctions and other measures that are
indeed War Crimes and crimes against its own constitution.
IMO, Venezuela should only fear the nuclear assets of the Outlaw US Empire. Yet, employing
them will only serve to contaminate the very resources the Empire wants to steal and in
reality are useless. Neither the Colombian or Brazilian militaries have the proper assets
to secure a victory over Venezuela's military, nor does the Outlaw US Empire unless it
commits all its Naval & Marine assault assets--and even then those won't be enough. One
of the key indicators being ignored by the Empire is that many in the Opposition are against
any invasion of their nation, and that the small 5th Column will quickly evaporate once the
civilian slaughter begins.
Other musings: How many Venezuelan pilots have secretly received combat training in
Syria once this confrontation loomed and are not green as anticipated? What about all those
munitions captured by Syria, particularly all those TOWs, RPGs and enough small arms to
outfit at least one entire division?
Trump's to meet Kim Feb 27-28, but will 23 Feb and follow-on events nullify that? (I
expect there to be a pan-Korean celebration of the 100th anniversary of the March 1st Movement Kim
ought to deem of greater import.)
Then there's the reaction to Putin's challenge to do the math.
Trump Likes 'Beautiful' Border Walls - Venezuela Should Build Him OneHmpf ,
Feb 20, 2019 10:36:09 AM |
link
Aaron Mate, who is currently on the ground in
Venezuela (vid), notes how Trump early on targeted Venezuela:
Aaron Maté @aaronjmate - 20:59 utc - 18 Feb 2019
Page 136 of McCabe's new book, recounting a 2017 Oval Office meeting: "Then the president
talked about Venezuela. That's the country we should be going to war with, he said. They
have all that oil and they're right on our back door."
It is not only Trump's idea to 'regime change' Venezuela. Ever since 1998, when Hugo
Chavez was elected, the U.S. plotted to
'regime change' Venezuela. It was Obama who put sanctions on the country. Right wing
economists have for years thought up detailed plans on
how to rob Venezuela of its national assets .
Plan A for the recent coup attempt
failed when the Venezuelan military did not accept Random Guyido's brazen claim to the
presidency. There was no plan B. The U.S. is now improvising. The delivery of "humanitarian
aid" is a pretext to break the border between Colombia and Venezuela.
U.S. government "aid" is always political. U.S. aid workers are suspects. Consider these
USAID RED teams which
a 2018 study , commissioned by the U.S. foreign aid agency, recommended:
RED Team officers, the report explains, would carry out development activities, but they
would also have training and expertise that are not typically included in USAID job
requirements.
"RED Team personnel would be able to live and work in austere environments for extended
periods of time and actively contribute to their own security and welfare. They would be
deployed farther forward than USAID personnel traditionally deploy and would routinely
operate under the authority of the host agency with whom they deploy, acting in accordance
with their security posture," the report reads.
"RED team members would be trained and authorized to conduct themselves as a
force-multiplier able to contribute a full suite of security skills as needed," it
says.
USAID officers will also be special forces? Special forces will also be USAID workers?
Which is it? How many of these 'Red Teams' are now in Colombia waiting to cross into
Venezuela?
On Saturday February 23 a breach of the Venezuelan border will be attempted with the
intent to provoke an escalation. That escalation will then be used to justify further action
up to military strikes or even an invasion.
How exactly the game will be played out is still not
clear :
Despite the tough language, it remained unclear how the Venezuelan opposition would break
Mr. Maduro's blockade of the border with a delivery of food and medication on Saturday. Mr.
Trump's own national security adviser said the American military -- which has airlifted
tons of supplies to Venezuela's doorstep on the Colombia border -- will not cross into the
country.
The so called "aid" is also supposed to come via sea and through the border with Brazil.
To prevent that Venezuela
closed down the maritime border with the Dutch Caribbean Islands:
The closure blocks movement of boats and aircraft between the western Venezuelan coastal
state of Falcon and the islands of Aruba, Bonaire and Curacao, said Vice Admiral Vladimir
Quintero, who heads a military unit in Falcon. He did not provide a reason.
The Brazil route is for now too remote for the desired media attention.
Everything will concentrate on the border crossing with Colombia near the Colombian city
of Cúcuta:
Leaders of several Latin American nations plan to travel to Colombia's border with
Venezuela on Friday ahead of the delivery of aid, Chilean President Sebastian Pinera said
on Tuesday, adding that he had accepted an invitation from Colombia's president, Ivan
Duque.
It was not immediately clear which leaders would attend. Most Latin American countries
now recognize Guaido as president, though Bolivia, Cuba and Nicaragua still support
Maduro.
Billionaire businessman Richard Branson is backing a "Live Aid"-style concert on Friday
in the Colombian border city of Cucuta with a fundraising target of $100 million to provide
food and medicine for Venezuela. Maduro's government has announced two rival concerts just
across the border.
Pink Floyd musician Roger Waters spoke out (video) against
the Richard Branson's Not-really-for-AID concert and the U.S. 'regime change' attempt in
Venezuela:
Roger Waters @rogerwaters - 22:57 utc - 18 Feb
2019
The Red Cross and the UN, unequivocally agree, don't politicize aid. Leave the Venezuelan
people alone to exercise their legal right to self determination.
On Saturday, when the U.S. proxy crowd will try to cross the border with unneeded "aid"
some sniper shooting is likely to happen while dozens of cameras roll. Any casualties will be
blamed on the Venezuelan military. The incident will be the propaganda pretext for further
U.S. action. Already days ago Russia's Foreign Ministry warned of such 'false flag' attacks:
A provocation, involving victims, is being put together under the guise of a humanitarian
convoy," Zakharova stressed. "They need it just as a pretext to use outside force, and
everyone should understand that."
Trumps National Security Advisor is preparing the field:
John Bolton @AmbJohnBolton - 1:41 utc - 20 Feb
2019
The Venezuelan military must uphold its duty to protect civilians at the Colombian and
Brazilian borders, and allow them to peacefully bring in humanitarian aid without violence
or fear of persecution.
John Bolton @AmbJohnBolton - 2:14 utc - 20 Feb
2019
Any actions by the Venezuelan military to condone or instigate violence against peaceful
civilians at the Colombian and Brazilian borders will not be forgotten. Leaders still have
time to make the right choice.
Venezuela is not in need of U.S. aid. It is need of an end to the economic sanctions that
put it under a medieval siege. There is no current lack of food or medicine like in Yemen
though some products may run short.
The UN, the Red Cross and Caritas already have aid distribution projects within Venezuela.
They reject the U.S. aid delivery as a political stunt. The International Committee of the
Red Cross recently
doubled its budget for Venezuela to $18 million and is ready to provide more. Last week
933 tonnes of medicines from Cuba and China arrived. Another 300 tons from Russia is
supposed to arrive today.
The Venezuelan government has had enough time to game out how best to respond to the
breach attempt of the border. It needs to block the roads AND it needs to prevent
provocations. Trump likes walls on the border. Venezuela should give them to him.
"I don't mind having a big beautiful door in that wall so that people can come into this
country legally. But we need, Jeb, to build a wall, we need to keep illegals out." - Donald
Trump - Aug 6 2015 GOP
debate
My advise to Venezuela is to use high concrete barricades with barbed wire and mines in
front of them across all vehicle border crossings points. The purpose of the mines is to
prevent attempts to remove the wire and the barricades. Large posters should warn of the
deadly danger of the mines. If someone gets hurt by them, it will clearly be their own
fault.
Passage on foot must be allowed as usual. Armed soldiers should be kept out of sight.
Trump said a lot about the national security need for " beautiful walls ." A large banner with a relevant Trump
quote should top each of the barricaded crossings.
Posted by b on February 20, 2019 at 10:12 AM |
Permalink 'The Brazil route is for now too remote for the desired media attention.'
Maybe, maybe not. There's a new airport at St. Helena and by car/bus it's easily
accessible too.
Boa Vista, Brazil isn't that far off and it's a nice little highway stretching all the way up
to Ciudad Bolivar. In the 90s this has been a major route for drug trafficking into Brazil
and across the Atlantic ocean, not sure if this is still the case as I haven't been down
there for a long time but that road certainly could handle some traffic.
Merida, February 18, 2019 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan authorities have
expelled six deputies of the European Parliament (EP) this Sunday after denying them
entrance to the country.
The European politicians, who travelled in a personal capacity, had previously been
warned through diplomatic channels that they would not be allowed in the country, but the
group opted to proceed with the trip.
The delegation was made up of MEP Esteban Gonzalez Pons, MEP Jose Ignacio Salafranca,
and MEP Gabriel Mato, all from Spain's hard-right Popular Party.Also present were MEP Juan
Salafranca from Spain's European People's Party; MEP Esther de Lange of the Dutch Christian
Democratic party, and MEP Paulo Rangel from Portugal's Social Democratic Party.
PS: Apparently they've headed for Cucuta in Colombia and now Richard Branson has got into the
act!
Following their denied entry, the deputies accepted an invitation from Colombia's Foreign
Ministry to travel to the Venezuelan-Colombian border city of Cucuta to attend a concert
sponsored by Virgin CEO Richard Branson on Saturday, when Guaido plans to see US-supplied
"humanitarian aid" cross the border, despite orders from Maduro to block it.
Roger Waters versus Richard Branson. The BBC appreciates the entertainment value.
"To say Venezuela is in the middle of a political crisis would be an understatement.
President Nicolás Maduro is locked in a power struggle with Juan Guaidó, an
opposition politician and the self-declared interim leader of the country.
So what better way to make the situation less complicated than to add a spat between one
of the world's richest people and the bass player from Pink Floyd?
"
Yes... it's a pretty weird situation.
They should fill the roads at the borders with trucks. Pointing into Venezuela. Backs of the
trucks wide open, ready for lading the aid that the west is so generously providing.
thanks b... as you note - > "On Saturday February 23 a breach of the Venezuelan border
will be attempted with the intent to provoke an escalation. That escalation will then be used
to justify further action up to military strikes or even an invasion." the intent of the usa
and it's gang of puppets is on full display right here...
Craig
Murray today without any qualification whatsoever stated matter-of-factly:
"... the Saudi backed jihadist group Daesh, originally launched by the CIA as a
counterweight to Shia influence in Iraq ."
We here at MoA have written similarly; but aside from General Flynn, few people having any
"weight" have said so straightforwardly that Daesh is yet another Death Squad CIA construct,
which is what a CIA "counterweight" is always. IMO, the fact that the Outlaw US Empire
created its own adversary for multiple uses hasn't been shouted out nearly enough, just as
al-Qaeda's genesis and usage is similarly glossed over by far too many who know better.
Now that the Hybrid Third World War is opening a new theatre of operations in South
America where the CIA has previously created Death Squads in almost every one of its nations,
we must anticipate the creation of yet another such "auxiliary" force, perhaps consisting of
those specially trained USAID personnel. We know CIA was deeply involved in Colombia's
various drug cartels and the quasi-governmental Death Squads used against Unionists and other
members of the public, and that even corporations like Coca-Cola provided monies for the
"services" of such Squads. IMO, a recap of Outlaw US Empire terrorist operations South of the
Border is demanded by the operation targeting Venezuela.
This travesty gets more and more bizarre.
It seems a classic battle between good and evil and I hope that justice prevails for a
change. Viva Venezuela.
Not mines, but rather tons of manure next to the barrier. Effective, but harmless and
cheap.
Nah, most people can cope with manure as it is usual of vegetarian origin. Pig shit is
better but the one most people have a problem with is human faeces. The Russians should loan
Venezuela a couple of their Il-76 fire fighting aircraft. Dropping 40 tons each of waste
water loaded with human faeces would discourage most people. But a better solution would be
two-three Bunning Lowlander Widebody – 380 HD HBD on each road the "humanitarians"
intend to use. Hell, I'd help crowdfund them if John Bolton and Elliott Abrams were on the
receiving end of a giant pig shit pile.
I can't believe Branson doesn't understand that he's participating in an attempted coup that
could destroy a country. If this border stunt turns into a war he will have blood on his
hands. What a terrible move, all of his companies should be boycotted from here on out.
Amazing this guy wants to get personally involved with the empire's assault on Venezuela,
maybe he was promised some sort of future deal concerning the nation's natural resources?
USAID already has a doubtful reputation, as everything that is supplied by them MUST
be made in the US. One example; even the painted letters on the food sacks must be by
US made paints put on by US personnel on US made sacks . The desired effect seems to
have been to destroy local markets and producers by providing free food that can only be
supplied from the US.(this happened in Africa) Thus making them dependent.
So now as guns are the principal US export, it is not hard to see what the "aid" will
consist of.
The most critical part in deflating the US moves will be ensuring the sniper teams and other
proxies, local or foreign, that will instigate the violence on the 23rd are taken out and
taken out just as the US begins its move.
As a U.S. citizen maybe I should take a little satisfaction that for all the money my govt
spends, at least they are good at something. Granted, it is in all of the wrong things,
information warfare, subversion, causing global chaos and blaming others but we are genius at
doing that if nothing else.
We are the Dr. Smith of the world but wihtout any of his redeeming qualities.
Venezuela
Analysis provides an article that ought to be entitled "Academic War Criminals" or
"Academic Societal Rapists" whose aim is "to bring back the 'wonderful Venezuela of old,' as
in pre-1998 Chavez that requires destroying everything done to improve the lot of the poor
majority:
"The post-coup Venezuelan economy will not be all about mathematically rigorous
experiments in economic growth like Hausmann's academic work. It will be about the
privatization of Venezuela's assets ." [My Emphasis]
This Harvard academic, Hausmann, ought to be known as an academic terrorist, for what he
promotes is terrorism:
"Hausmann's 2004 statistical gambit is actually an established part of the U.S.-coup
playbook. The academic analysis of an election and the finding of flaws, real or imagined,
in an electoral process are the beginning of an ongoing claim against the target's democratic
legitimacy. The created flaw is then repeated and emphasized. Even if it was spurious and
debunked, as was Hausmann's 2004 analysis, it can continue to perform in media campaigns
against the target. After years of such repetition, the target can safely be called a
'dictator' in Western media, even if the 'dictator' has more electoral legitimacy than most
Western politicians." [My Emphasis]
The article discusses a few other similar academic terrorists connected with events in
Haiti and Colombia. The entire Terrorist Network within the Outlaw US Empire is vast and
exists in places some would deem odd. It's also rather lucrative for those willing to abase
themselves as terrorists and clean too since the blood spilt is done at a comfortable, unseen
distance. Such academics must be exposed as the terrorists they are. This article exposes but
a few of the hundreds whose work aims at destroying entire societies; perhaps they ought to
be known as Genocidalists.
The initial step's been taken, but even if a special session of the UNSC is convened,
little of substance will come of it since FUKUS would veto any useful resolution or
declaration. Push back is happening
:
#FromTheSouth | The Venezuelan armed forces have rejected calls by the US president to
turn their backs on President @NicolasMaduro, condemning Trump for promoting terrorism
." [My Empasis]
Yes, it's indeed terrorism to do what Trump's now doing and what every previous US
President has done since 1945. The Outlaw US Empire is modern Terrorism's Mother &
Father.
Ultimately Suicidal. A country ruled by a dynasty of Gollums.
It's not like the US has a chance no matter what because they don't want to nuke the oil.
Venezuela will be harder than Viet Nam and the US didn't do too well there, didn't learn
anything from it and forgot more.
Both Russia and China will involve themselves more if needed, zero doubt about it. If one
compares with the Viet Nam war they already have done what they did then and this is already
in advance of any potential war. "Supplies!" like a certain joke ends :D
In Venezuela there is nothing to compare to South Viet Nam, Brazil will not capoeira
themselves across the border in any meaningful manner, there's only a few neighborhoods of
spoilt rich people inside Venezuela that act as dead weight.
As for US Aid "RED teams" (Red? Naming fail & backronym retardism) it's a big meh in
my opinion. How short is the average lifespan of their (actual) "specials" these days? Three
weeks after first leave as they can't escape constantly reminding themselves of their service
to evil? Poor fuckers thought they were heroes willing to give it all for a just cause and
finally they did at least give something by offing themselves at home thus denying any
further availability to their masters.
Maybe I'm too sympathetic towards them but I lived most of my life believing the same lies
to be true as they did.
Anyway the outcome is clear: given a few years the US will no longer be in any kind of
control of the Caribbean, they are literally giving it away to Russia and China by creating
this situation.
...
No one in the US understands what a carrot is, they think it's some kind of bribe like sex
or drugs, a "kind" threat in advance not to kill you if you roll over, some kind of veiled
stick used in the middle ages (possibly an arcane torture device), or simply an orange
("carrot is orange").
Sir Richard always brings to mind both the vacuous "smiley-face" icon, and Chaucer's image of
"the smiler with the knife under his cloak". He is obviously an overclass Sheriff of
Nottingham who markets himself as a benevolent, contrarian Robin Hood.
The Venezuelan Caper is rotten from top to bottom, and Trump is wholly complicit; unlike
his previous adventures, there's no indication that he's somehow "playing his own game" and
provisionally giving his neocon Hounds of Hell room to run only to abruptly pull back on the
leash when it suits him.
Even so, I personally distrust the odious McCabe's tendentious and utterly self-serving
assertions.
"Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" is a Latin phrase meaning "false in one thing,
false in everything." It is an ancient common-law principle that a witness who testifies
falsely about one matter is not credible to testify about any matter.
This standard is easily abused, and problematic because even testimony full of lies and
deceit usually contains some truth. But I'm surprised that the best-selling Trump-critical
potboilers, including the dubious Bob Woodward's "Fear: Trump in the White House"* mercenary
exercise in blatant fearmongering, are regarded as reliable and trustworthy.
In this case, Trump may have said exactly what McCabe quoted. But I'm not taking
McCabe's word for it.
___________________________________
* NB (nota Bernhard) : The "U" HTML tag listed under "Allowed HTML Tags" doesn't
work. It's a minor problem, but I hope that it can be enabled.
This opinion piece is from earlier in the month, but gives a pair of photos describing the
bridge near Cucuta, which b's map shows straddling the Pan-American Highway which runs out of
Columbia to the Carribean shore in Venezuela, close to the Tortugas. The photos show the
bridge barricaded at both ends, which would seem to indicate that neither country wanted it.
Who did, I wonder?
So long as Maduro has the backing of the army and the people are fed [here Russia and China
can help out]the US can only huff and puff,in the longer term new sales to sympathetic states
must be a priority. How many of the opposition would be willing to be slaughtered in order to
install Trump's appointee, not that many I'll bet. In my opinion International Law is dead,
we are now entering into the period [thanks to the US] where Mao's doctrine is becoming fact
"Power grows out the barrel of a gun"
Partisan Girl explores an
important topic related to the rights of combatants, not that the Outlaw US Empire
respects them, but it seems the UK and others are tussling with the issue but not for their
announced reasons:
"The @foreignpolicy magazine is hell-bent on pushing the idea that #ISIS wives are
protected by international law. It's because they have to make the same legal argument for
Israeli "settlers" and they don't want there to be a precedent."
The short thread is worth reading.
Blooming Barricade , Feb 20, 2019 3:15:00 PM |
link
If Trump wanted a wall, surely he could use those phoney psyop trucks to block the US-Mexico
border? They seem to have the money and chutzpah to do it?
If I were advising the Venezuelan army I would keep a close look (for a false-flag event or
some other infiltration attempts into Venezuela by easily disguised concert goers) at the
Live Aid Concert that is scheduled to
take place this Friday Feb. 22 near the Venezuelan border in Colombian town of Cucuta.
This venue provides a distraction and a good way to blend into the crowd for any hostile
forces to smuggle weapons, personnel one day ahead of the so-called "humanitarian-aid"
crossings.
Here is a red-flag as to who asked for this Live Aid Concert:
So who asked Richard Branson to do this?
Mr Branson says it was a direct request from Mr Guaidó and opposition leader
Leopoldo López .
It's a simple solution for the Venezuelan government. Friday evening close the Bridge and
then detonate the entire or half of the structure. Then announce the other half is covered
with explosives.
I really wish it was realistic for US citizens to stage protest marches on this, perhaps we
will if the Trump administration decides to provoke a military confrontation.
But the propaganda blitz has probably neutered the ability to do so, with almost everyone
I know fully believing that Maduro is an unelected dictator, murderous thug and that
SOSHULIZMS ruins EVERYTNING!!! Waaaaaaah....
No mentions are made of the draconian sanctions, continual sabotage, theft of the
Venezuelan gov't and people's money/gold, constant coup attempts, and all of it stretching
back decades, across Republican and Democrat Presidential administrations.
But you gotta give 'em credit - the corporate "liberal" MSM (and right-wing media) are
afraid of any change or perceived threat to the crony corporate Wall Street MIC cabal's
control of the gov't and economy and the corresponding hit to their quarterly bonuses and EPS
at the stock market. So they're doing everything they can, and the aforementioned propaganda
blitz (as coined by Media Lens and reprinted by FAIR.org) is actually much more all
encompassing than just Venezuela regime change. This is a concerted war on Democratic
Socialism and any new regulations on the banks and corps that rule the Western countries.
@27 "In this case, Trump may have said exactly what McCabe quoted. But I'm not taking
McCabe's word for it."
Here's another source which highlights Trump's early propensity to get involved in
Venezuela:
Donald Trump repeatedly raised the possibility of invading Venezuela in talks with his
top aides at the White House , according to a new report.
Trump brought up the subject of an invasion in public in August last year,
saying: "We have many options for Venezuela, including a possible military option, if
necessary." But the president's musings about the possibility of a US invasion were more
extensive and persistent than that public declaration , according to the Associated
Press.
The previous day Trump reportedly took his top officials by surprise in an Oval
Office meeting, asking why the US could not intervene to remove the government of
Nicolás Maduro on the grounds that Venezuela's political and economic unraveling
represented a threat to the region.
...
The administration officials are said to have taken turns in trying to talk him out
of the idea , pointing out that any such military action would alienate Latin American
allies who had supported the US policy of punitive sanctions on the Maduro regime.
Their arguments do not seem to have dissuaded the president .
...
In the weeks that followed, Trump remained preoccupied with the idea of an
invasion , according to AP. Shortly after the Bedminister remarks, he raised the issue
with the Colombian president, Juan Manuel Santos, and then brought it up again at that
year's UN general assembly in September, at a private dinner with allied Latin American
states.
At that dinner, Trump made clear he was ignoring the advice of his aides.
"My staff told me not to say this," Trump said and then asked the other leaders at
the table in turn, if they were sure they didn't want a military solution.
McMaster finally succeeding in persuading Trump of the dangers of an invasion ,
the report said, and the president's interest in the notion subsided.
Seems like saturday (the 23rd) could be a busy day.
1/ The "Aid" convoy tries to enter Venezuela.
2/ Gaydo as "interim" president comes to the end of the 30 day period he is allowed. (....in
the case of an incapacitated President), but as Speaker of the Assembly - he has immunity.
BUT can he be both at once, Speaker and President? Will Maduro arrest him at that date?
3/ The destroyer "Donald Cook" is in the Black Sea, and is supposed to participate in
"exercises" with the Ukrainian Navy, In front of Odessa and - the Kersh Strait. (Also on the
23 if my memory serves me correctly, but I may have mistaken the month !). Provocation
planned?
A big wind up for the big event on Saturday. I think the US would want all eyes and media
attention to be there when 'innocent' people delivering 'aid' will be shot or whatever,
rather than distracted by Ukraine.
I posted some of my thoughts about Putin's State of the Nation Address made earlier today
at
previous Russia-related thread , but rather doubt few have bothered to read them or the
speech itself. Putin's speech was mostly directed at Domestic issues with Foreign Policy
saved for the end. What Putin says in that regard impacts every conceivable topic we might
discuss here. I ought to copy/paste the entire portion of Putin's speech devoted to relations
with the Outlaw US Empire, but b discourages overly-long citations; so, click here and scroll down to the
paragraph beginning thusly:
"The unilateral withdrawal of the USA "
However, the following three paragraphs deserve to be highlighted--Russian media certainly
thought so, too--which are toward the speech's closing remarks:
"Let me say outright that this is not true. Russia wants to have sound, equal and friendly
relations with the USA. Russia is not threatening anyone, and all we do in terms of security
is simply a response, which means that our actions are defensive. We are not interested in
confrontation and we do not want it, especially with a global power like the United States of
America. However, it seems that our partners fail to notice the depth and pace of change
around the world and where it is headed. They continue with their destructive and clearly
misguided policy . This hardly meets the interests of the USA itself. But this is not for
us to decide.
"We can see that we are dealing with proactive and talented people, but within the elite,
there are also many people who have excessive faith in their exceptionalism and supremacy
over the rest of the world. Of course, it is their right to think what they want. But can
they count? Probably they can. So let them calculate the range and speed of our future arms
systems. This is all we are asking: just do the maths first and take decisions that create
additional serious threats to our country afterwards . It goes without saying that these
decisions will prompt Russia to respond in order to ensure its security in a reliable and
unconditional manner.
"I have already said this, and I will repeat that we are ready to engage in disarmament
talks, but we will not knock on a locked door anymore. We will wait until our partners are
ready and become aware of the need for dialogue on this matter ." [My Emphasis]
I rather doubt Putin's well meaning message will have its desired impact, for as he said
those in power are essentially deluded by their thoughts. Unfortunately, the only part of the
speech likely to be highlighted is the Italicized portion while the bolded remainder gets
ignored:
" I would like to emphasise again that we need peace for sustainable long-term
development . Our efforts to enhance our defence capability are for only one purpose:
to ensure the security of this country and our citizens so that nobody would even consider
pressuring us, or launching an aggression against us.
Also, I rather doubt Bolton, Pompeo and company can do the math.
BBC pretends that Roger Waters's only role in Pink Floyd was as bass player. Who was
the singer and songwriter then?
Question should be rephrased: Who was the Pink Floyd songwriter who wrote all the lyrics
to the band's best known albums "The Dark Side of the Moon", "Wish You Were Here", "Animals"
and "The Wall" then?
In a two-minute video posted on Twitter, the musician says Mr Branson's "Live-Aid-ish"
concert has "nothing to do with humanitarian aid at all".
The Red Cross and the UN, unequivocally agree, don't politicize aid. Leave the
Venezuelan people alone to exercise their legal right to self determination.
pic.twitter.com/I0yS3u75b6
-- Roger Waters (@rogerwaters) February 18, 2019
Report
"It has to do with Richard Branson, and I'm not surprised by this, having bought the US
saying: 'We have decided to take over Venezuela, for whatever our reasons may be,'" Mr
Waters says.
"But it has nothing to do with the needs of the Venezuelan people, it has nothing to do
with democracy, it has nothing to do with freedom, and it has nothing to do with aid."
He adds that he has "friends that are in Caracas" who claim there is "no civil war, no
mayhem, no murder, no apparent dictatorship, no suppression of the press".
So who asked Richard Branson to do this?
Mr Branson says it was a direct request from Mr Guaidó and opposition leader
Leopoldo López.
Skip Twitter post by @richardbranson
The humanitarian crisis in Venezuela worsens every day. Join Venezuela Aid Live, support
the cause to help the country's suffering people https://t.co/0ARSI1GpBk pic.twitter.com/IIg8sxGlGh
-- Richard Branson (@richardbranson) February 15, 2019
Report
End of Twitter post by @richardbranson
In an earlier social media video, the billionaire says: "Juan Guaidó, who has
been recognised as Venezuela's legitimate president by over 40 nations, and the EU, and
Leopoldo López, an opposition leader currently under house arrest in Caracas, have
asked us to help organise a beautiful concert, to help bring global attention to this
unacceptable, and preventable, crisis."
Mr López has been under house arrest since 2014.
Who is going to perform?
An official line-up hasn't been released yet but a few celebrities have confirmed that
they're taking part.
The concert's organisers have also released a list of 32 people they have invited to
perform, which includes young Latin stars Rudy Mancuso, Juanes and Despacito singer Luis
Fonsi, and Swedish DJ Alesso.
Lele Pons, a Venezuelan-American singer and actress who was the most-looped individual
on Vine before it shut down in 2016, and Venezuelan singer Danny Ocean have both released
videos saying that they will perform.
Thanks for the response, but don't put away the salt just yet.
The Guardian isn't the bastion of dispassionate, objective reporting it pretends to be. So
I read the linked story with particular interest in its sources for the material you
quoted.
I wasn't surprised to find this telling explanation:
Quoting an unnamed senior administration official, the AP report said the suggestion
stunned those present at the meeting, which included the then national security adviser, HR
McMaster, and secretary of state, Rex Tillerson. Both have since left the
administration.
So once again, all of the ominous quotes are allegedly derived from, or
provided by, an uncorroborated anonymous source-- moreover, a "senior administration
official"; such seemingly authoritative sources are notorious for using the "on background"
convention to vent personal pique or ideological dissatisfaction.
And the Associated Press is also notorious for its consent-manufacturing bias.
The entire Russophobia campaign, and other current Big Lie-based stories, have been rife
with multiple uncorroborated sources appearing to validate each other. Unfortunately, this
strategy exploits the rational tendency to assume that a fact is authentic and reliable if it
seems to be corroborated and confirmed by multiple sources.
Usually, confirmation bias blinds targets of this strategy to the possibility that the
confirmation is spurious because some or all of the "multiple sources" are mendacious.
So I'm not impressed or persuaded by The Guardian passing on multiple hearsay from
compromised, or at least dubious sources: "Some unidentified but important insider told AP,
and they told us" just doesn't cut it.
@42 I guess they want to make it difficult for the border guards to stop Venezuelans going to
the concert on Friday. Then the next day they will head back home with their free stuff.
Their bags will need to be searched of course so that will help to get everybody riled up for
the cameras.
A repeat of the Las Vegas Concert Massacre, perhaps. Good to see people commenting at your
provided link about the situation's reality and calling out Branson for his support for
Imperialism and its crimes. I'm sure Branson can get Pussy Riot to appear, but what of any
legitimate musical groups as none are cited. I wonder if Russian satellite tech's progressed
so it can pick out individual humans--like snipers--amidst all else? Indeed, how would one
plan to deter this probable provocation?
The Guardian is a lying sack of imperialist shit, masquerading as a leftwing paper.
Outrageous, the stuff fascism is made of.
El Cartero Atómico , Feb 20, 2019 5:44:58 PM |
link
As a citizen of the US it's interesting that so many of these pro-war/intervention people
like Trump, Abrams and Bolton were draft dodgers during the Vietnam War. Several years ago I
read a History of Rome and one of the few things I remember was that around 80 Roman Senators
were killed in the Battle of Cannae against Hannibal. How many of the pro intervention types
in our government would be be willing to serve on the front lines like the Roman politicians?
I think we would have a lot fewer interventions and wars if they and their families had to
fight in any war they started.
It will be very difficult to prevent a provocation, but even if the US manage to get their
news footage of people delivering so called aid being shot, or whatever is planned for them,
Russia will be stepping in.
I have notice a change in rhetoric from the Russian leadership over the past few weeks. I
suspect Putin's speech you referred to earlier officially marks a turning point in the way
Russia deals with the US and its machinations.
The organizer of the event, British billionaire Richard Branson, said that it is planned
that up to 300,000 people attend the concert on Friday in Cúcuta, on the border of
Colombia with Venezuela
Perhaps Moscow senses something is about to happen?:
To add to my comment @51, Russia moved into Syria when it was on its last legs and has put
most of it back together. I suspect Russia would have liked a few more years to get its own
house in order before moving back into the world to block US moves.
Now I think we may see Russia willing to stop the US in its tracks as far as US moves on
Venezuela, and willing to escalate as far as the US wishes to take it.
I too share your cynicism at unnamed sources, but my point was when these pieces of
information are then coupled with Trump's own behavior and rhetoric, one tends to lean
towards this overall aggressive posture against Venezuela as more credulous.
Thanks for that. The concert will be at one of the bridges apparently. Ill bet my balls
they are going to use to concert goers for the planned provocation.
Push the fools into delivering so called aid across the border.
I was wondering who would volunteer to be the sacrificial goats.
deja vu of ukraine 2014, but i don't know that the middle class guaido crew are up for it...
i am sure the cia is though.. anyone see nuland handing out cookies on the streets of cucata
yet?? or did they replace her with some other hag?? speaking of hags - richard branscum is
really showing his true colours here..
A couple of press releases that I downloaded from one of the Venezuela aid live sites.
Only in pdf so will copy paste them.
MORE THAN 32 ARTISTS HAVE BEEN
INVITED TO CHANGE VENEZUELA's
HISTORY
The team that organizes Venezuela Aid Live -in collaboration with
Richard Branson- has summoned the following artists to join the cause
and be the musicians that change the history of Latin America this
coming February 22nd at a free concert that will take place at the
Tienditas Bridge, with the aim of raising funds to enter the
humanitarian aid into Venezuela:
THE VENEZUELA AID LIVE
CONCERT WILL TAKE PLACE
AT THE BORDER
VENEZUELA AID LIVE, THE FREE CONCERT that
will take place this Friday, February 22nd, is moving
to Puente Tienditas.
We'll live more than just a concert at this place, we'll
see how Venezuela's freedom doors are opened....
Concert at the Tienditas Bridge and concert goers will also get to see how "Venezuela's
freedom doors are opened". I think that may be a painful experience for many.
@57 dh.. if they are anything like us custom officers, you may as well as stay at home, lol..
iv> What happened to "The Resistance" that was supposed to oppose Trump at
every turn? Why is mainstream media and politics going along with Trump in this coup when they
are against him in everything else?
Posted by: QuietRebel , Feb 20, 2019 6:30:03 PM |
link
What happened to "The Resistance" that was supposed to oppose Trump at every turn? Why is
mainstream media and politics going along with Trump in this coup when they are against him
in everything else?
Posted by: QuietRebel | Feb 20, 2019 6:30:03 PM |
link
Seems to me the only force that can stand up to this US government belligerence are the
citizens of US. A bit of wishful thinking but if they don't want to see their sons and
daughters, not to mention their tax dollars, spent on yet another war of hegemony, they
should be in front of congress, a million man march style, and demand the end of hostilities
and resignation of fuckos like Bolton and Pompeo.
"I repeat for the 1000th time: US 'aid' in Venezuela or any other country has nothing to
do with actually helping people. It is about expanding US power and domination.
"USAID is a regime-change arm. Trump is maki0ng a decades-old US covert strategy
explicit."
Norton provides lots of evidence in the thread to indict ASAID as a supporter of terrorism
over many decades.
Alpi57@62:
"Seems to me the only force that can stand up to this US government belligerence are the
citizens of US."
We would be in deep trouble of that were the case. But it isn't. Syria, half torn apart stood
up to them. So did Iraq, after it had been invaded by the US and a plague of poodles. If
Venezuelans stand their ground they will not just keep invasion at bay but spark a conflict
in the region that will end up with the last friends of America leaving in helicopters from
the roofs of the burning embassies.
Urban warfare requires the kind of practice that our military has been missing, what with
too many drones, bombings, and village firefights. Maybe the Pentagon's reluctance to invade
was simply borne out of lack of training. Now that they have mad skills, they can make Mr.
Bolton proud.
Venezuela's a bi-partisan target which is why the so-called Resistance evaporated just as
Trump knew it would.
Peter AU 1 @53--
Thanks for your reply. I know Russia's providing intel, logistical and material support.
Could there be a Russian sub or two outside Maracaibo? I read somewhere a few days ago that
Venezuelan Air Force was practicing flying Mig-31s armed with the Kinzal hypersonic anti-ship
killer but was unable later to find the link. There's no way an R2P type of UNSCR being
passed. Somehow it must be shown that Venezuelan forces invaded Colombia such that Colombia
calls to the Outlaw US Empire for help in defending itself for any such intervention to be
remotely legal. Refutation of any invasion evidence is paramount, but that's far easier said
than done. Fortunately, Brazilians seem incapacitated by domestic issues, so It's up to
Colombia to act in concert with El Gringo Diablo Norte.
Does Mr. Branson carry liability for any person injured at his concert?
If he is the promoter of this gig, then he should have insurance for this.
Scotch Bingeington , Feb 20, 2019 7:18:18 PM |
link
Outstanding piece, b, thank you!
Meanwhile, the
USS Abraham Lincoln's Carrier Strike Group is crossing the Florida Straits , southbound.
They're in the final stages of naval exercises that are meant to be held before the start
of a mission . The exercises take about a month, and they started on 25 Jan. Easy to see
that Guiado's "big moment of truth" scheduled for 23 Feb was timed with respect to US Navy
needs. I also read that the Lincoln's social media feeds have gone silent recently. Spy
planes are surveying the seas close to Venezuelan waters. In Venezuela, there have been
drills involving their S-300 and Buk-M2 systems. Cuba has been calling out on a lot of
flights from military airports in the US to Caribbean destinations.
All of this doesn't bode well.
There is something else scheduled for on or about February 23. The 30 day expulsion
extension given to the American diplomats is set to expire. It will be interesting to see how
that plays out.
Fallujah, Najaf, Ramadi, Mosul and Baghdad all provided some experience with urban warfare
, and the military has been conducting urban warfare training for awhile. Last year Congress
gave the military instructions to increase the amount of training and submit a report on Feb
1 to describe what is needed to improve urban warfare readiness. A single specialized urban
army unit has been suggested as well as a new and consolidated Army urban training center to
replace the Indiana National Guard's Muscatatuck Urban Training Center
Anyways, it looks like the Empire has plans for more urban wars, perhaps even in the US. I
heard soldiers are asked about their feelings on using arms against US civilians if ordered
to as part of their profiling for future deployments
Economic Zionism[EZ] At work? Recall EZ is a system of economics that demands to control,
ownership and management access to everything, EZ focuses its membership and their
corporations and the Armed rule making Nation States[ARMS] they control on destroying all
competition of whatever kind while at the same time keeping populations in the dark and or
misled. EZ destroys the structures that support, the leadership that represents ownership,
control or authority over any type competition (including oil and gold and privatization
booty). The objects of EZ include use of force, rule of law, and propaganda and are often
used to be sure its adherents are the sole possessors of the valuables found anywhere on the
entire earth. Economic Zionism a system that depends on rule by law for its monopoly powers.
Branson's concert @32 Live Aid concert requested by Mr Guaidó and opposition leader
Leopoldo López could be an example https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-47271182
; certainly the event fits the long history of network powers able to bring monetary and
political forces to any spot sufficient to enable EZ elements to take over or to quash
competition or ownership that restricts EZ access or that competes with it. Branson may not
even be aware ..of the possibilities or how it is he might be used?
I could be wrong but it will take a mountain of facts to convince me otherwise.
Several oil and gold companies want the oil, farming , gold interest as well as several
giants want to privatize much of the state owned service infra structure in Venezuela.
Probably the EZ believe they cannot get adequate public support; it takes time to convince
the governed of foreign nations that it is a crime for Venezuelans to own the oil, gold, and
to provide the water, electric power, and cell phone service to Venezuelans? only the EZ can
make it legal.
These kinds of events are money laundering wet dreams (this one may not be?) and these
kinds of events provide platforms that can be used to persuade EZ all over the world
immediate contributions are necessary to help destroy blatant competition and to convert
Venezuela into another EZ owned monopoly.
It will be interesting to see if accounting for all of the funds raised will be made
public, and if a complete, adequate and uncontroversial accounting is given within a few
days, that clearly shows how, when and to whom the funds were collected from and distributed
to.
Invasion, destruction, removal and replacement of those in the way of EZ are common;
promoting fake news, engineering mind directing, population controlling propaganda and
maintaining absolute back room secrecy are tools of the Economic System known as EZ.
Certainly looks suspicious, but then maybe there is a better explanation?
Private fund raising is always problematic because it allows to hide the source and use of
the money from the public? Promoting and marketing a private fund raising event in one nation
to various other countries, in various languages, keeps secret the flow of funds, both in and
out? I know only one network large enough to pull something like this off, on such short
notice?
From another of the pdf press releases...
"Fundación Solidaridad por Colombia is the strategic ally that will
provide support during the donations collection.
PwC will be the auditor that will ensure total transparency during the
handling of the resources.
Fundación Solidaridad por Colombia is an NGO with 44 years of
experience managing resources for vulnerable populations."
I did a little research on this group, did not find a lot in english, but the woman
running the show is a Columbian who spent a number of years working in Miami and New
York.
Vesti
provides a video clip of the latter portion of Putin's speech some of which I provided
via transcript above that Canthama posted to his Twitter. It's about 11 minutes and fitted
with English subtitles. It's far more dramatic to watch than read, and much of what Putin
says isn't in the bit of transcript I provided. Putin can't be accused of being humorless as
he makes a joke at the European's expense, but the subject matter underlying that joke is no
laughing matter.
23 Feb 2019
Action Alert translated and posted by The Saker in preparation of possible False Flag
Event. No one section is worthy of being read out of context, so I encourage everyone to read
the entire document at the link. Thankfully, numerous FFEs have occurred over the past
several years so we know how they're manipulated such that some counters can be provided.
What can't be initially countered will be the violence used and the lives restored to those
murdered by the Outlaw US Empire--for it most certainly will be the guilty party.
I think I said this before but it seemed what saved the Hugo Chvez government after 2002 was
that the US imperialists' attention was distracted towards conquering Iraq. The US simply did
not have enough forces freely available to finish off Chavez after their failed coup in 2002.
At that time no one predicted that the US was in the process of losing both of the wars in
Afghanistan and Iraq. After those failures the US decided to go to war against Libya and
Syria. Won 1 (at least killed Khadaffi) and lost the other.
In any case the US does have large numbers of troops available for imperial adventures in
other theaters. I fear for the Venezuelans at this time. The US is withdrawing from their
failed ventures in the Mid East while the US threatens and pounds its chest in the Persian
Gulf and the South China Sea -- but no one expects the US military to actually commit itself
to another losing military engagement. Unfortunately, I do fear the US is ready to go to war
in Venezuela -- if they do so decide to do so the Modura government would not last very long.
In the short term that would be considered a victory for the US Neo cons. In the longer term,
say 5 years out, it would likely result in a war on the South American continent that has not
been seen since Bolivar.
Why is Richard Branson putting on a concert for a humanitarian crisis in Venezuela but he
cared squat about the famine in Yemen? Someone get this short-sighted hypocrite a good pair
of bi-focals.
Trump wants Venezuela's oil. I see the shine is finally wearing out on Trump with folks
here. It took Venezuela for everyone to see through the Zionist charlatan. Finally, we're all
on the same page. The best description I've heard yet is calling this humanitarian aid a
Trojan Horse. That's exactly what it is.
So, I have more bad news. Trump is considering Joe Lieberman for U.N. Ambassador. Can you
believe he was considering this Zionist shill to replace Comey at the FBI??? Lieberman thinks
that Howard Shultz entering the 2020 campaign is a positive thing. I believe Schultz will
enter the race to help the chosen one Trump win. It's all fixed.
Finally the road to toppling Tehran turned out not to run through Syria. It runs through
Venezeula.
ToivoS "I do fear the US is ready to go to war in Venezuela"
The good colonel at SST seems quite pleased at the prospect. Shoot some commies, grab some
loot. I guess he is like Trump. Doesn't like endless wars that the US eventually walks away
from without any loot.
According to the link: five (EPP) deputy MEP (European Parliament) persons, Esteban Gonzalez
Pons, Jose Ignacio Salafranca, Gabriel Mato Adrover, Esther de Lange and Paulo Rangel were
invited to Venezuela by Guaido but have had their passports retained, also the link says
Maduro supports the "Montevideo Mechanism," a four-step proposal presented by Mexico,
Uruguay, Bolivia and the Community of Caribbean States (Caricom), a solution mechanism for
domestic crisis. https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/02/18/588847/Venezuela-expels-EU-lawmakers
I have to disagree with your assessment. How many more Syrias and Iraqs should happen in
order for the people in US to wake up? How much more innocent blood should be shed for US
citizens to tell their government: live and let live? The days of military might is at an
end. The only force of superiority is an economic one.
Why should we allow this government to muscle in on a little country just on the whim of a
few evil animals like Bolton? They are selling this country to the average citizen on the
illusion of the government of the people, by the people and for the people. Then let the
people exercise that privilege. And that is the only thing that scares this government. The
mob.
I am utterly embarrassed and infuriated by statements of Bolton. He is openly telling
governments is our way or the highway. No country should have that kind of power and/or
mentality. The only force that can eradicate that kind of mentality are the people
themselves. They just need to wake up. I have a feeling they will be forced to soon.
@ all barflies,
In Honduras, the current president receives support from Chump's administration even though
Juan Orlando Hernandez stole millions from the Social Security Institute and other government
ministries to finance his campaign and become very wealthy. Hernandez ran for president
against the honduran constitution, committed electoral fraud and still the business attache
at the US embassy (Heidi Fulton) stood right in front of cameras, where the ballots were
being opened and counted and said that everything was ok with the elections ! She's still
supporting Juan Orlando even though his brother was arrested in the United States on major
drug trafficking charges. Hermano Hernandez was using the army and police to protect his
cocaine shipments to the United States. It seems neo-confederates around Trump need this guy
in power to counter Maduro and keep the honduran masses down. Elites in Honduras violating
their constitution have hosted one of the most strategic US military base in the hemisphere,
the country is also known as USS Honduras... It's known Juan Orlando Hernandez received about
250,000 $ from the Los Cachiros drug cartel and also from other cartels. So there you have
Trump's administration abetting drug cartel related crimes to contain socialist forces in the
americas. I'm pretty sure his base of maggots can't find Honduras on a map. Never mind the
cocaine, let's build that wall to keep Hondurans out. Derp, #MAGA
https://www.counterpunch.org/2015/06/29/honduras-bleeding/?fbclid=IwAR2ieHSD8pRrPykjXgk2fguxZMsIWdspGEHFxrKoPqFlkpQXfcVDwtjv8pU
Thanks b and all the commentators.
#13 Bevin thanks for the link. Very good article with good links embedded in it.
#43 Karlof1 I was reading a transcript from Putin's State of the Nation Address and later
watched a u-tube clip of part of it. The transcript (from the Saker) read as follows, "What
are they doing in reality? First, they violate everything, then they look for excuses and
appoint a guilty party. But they are also mobilising their satellites that are cautious but
still make noises in support of the USA. The video clip went as follows "In addition they
mobilize their satellites. They carefully oink along with the Americans on this matter"
Judging from the loud round of applause and smiles on many in the audience at that point in
the clip, I'd say the "oink" was the correct translation! YouTube clip was from Canthama
twitter page.
Karlof1 #66 Colombia is one of NATO's "Partners across the globe". Sure hope article 5
doesn't apply to this scenario. Sure hope you are right about Venezuela having a few Mig 31
and Kinzal missiles and the YANKS know they do. Currently the USS Lincoln is off the coast of
Florida undergoing "training".
John Bolton has now threatened the families of those remaining loyal to Maduro. It's not like
he hasn't done this before. He threatened the head of OPCW I believe as well.
I doubt that Branson is as careless or stupid as we're being lead to believe. He started a
successful music retailing company and a successful cut-price airline. Both industries are
highly competitive and the pre-launch business plan for each would have required a prodigious
amount of research/ homework in order to accurately evaluate the prospects for success.
I'm far from convinced that he'd consider Random Guyido to be a legitimate replacement for
the elected President of Venezuela without doing some careful research and contemplating the
outcome of any precedents. If he did conduct such research he would have discovered that
History strongly suggests that Random Guyido is almost certainly a fraud.
So imo Branson knows exactly what he's doing, but we'll have to wait until the cash has
been handed over before we find out. I believe he's got a wry sense of humour and will
probably enjoy making Random Guydo (and his backers) look stupid and gullible. You need a
certain amount of courage to take the risks Branson took to get where he is.
Looks like it is critical for US plans to get hold of Venezuela's oil "no matter what" ASP.
https://www.foxnews.com/world/us-says-it-will-deliver-aid-blocked-by-venezuela-setting-up-confrontation-with-maduro-regime
"The U.S. government says it will position 190 metric tons of supplies by Friday, ready to
deploy throughout Venezuela, according to Mark Green, the administrator of the U.S. Agency
for International
Development (USAID).
The problem is figuring out how to get that aid into Venezuela.
"That really is up to Juan Guaido and his people and his team," Green told Fox News. "We are
working with them to try and pre-position that assistance and give them the tools to lead
their people and provide hope."...
...Green said he's coordinating with the Colombian government to ensure that Guaido, the
opposition leader, has the aid his country needs -- though he said the next step is up to
Guaido.
"We know it's not enough that the humanitarian aid enters," Guaido said at a Caracas news
conference. "We must open the humanitarian channel, no matter what."
b writes that "delivery of "humanitarian aid" is a pretext to break the border between
Colombia and Venezuela".
Perhaps, but there may be another purpose in terms of legal framing the Maduro
government.
The Rome Statute, when defining War Crimes, under the section entitled 'other serious
violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict' there is
"Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of
objects indispensible to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supplies "
In other words, the non-acceptance of relief supplies will be framed as a war crime by the
US government.
@85 hoarsewhisperer.. oh brandscum knows exactly what he is doing... promoting his scummy
brand.. that is what he is doing.. everything else is a charade.... but, it is cut throat biz
and that is what he does best... slime ball that he is..
Looks like Branson is in it for some cheap post-coup plane fuel discounts for his Virgin
empire. Too bad I just purchased some Virgin tickets for a short flight in April. But after
that I'll be boycotting them along with the Palestinian Occupation Entity whose products I
avoid as much as possible.
Branson never did it for me. Cool rich 'hippie' PR image always seemed too canned. Somehow
reminds me of Tony Blair for some reason. Perhaps he's looking for some military AID cargo
contracts out of we-know-where.
Yes, this is all very interesting about the ongoing Venezuela crisis. But have you seen the
Tucker Carlson interview of Rutger Bregman? It is a MUST SEE. Bregman, a Dutch historian who
gave the Davos millionaires a most deserved smackdown, did an interview with Carlson. Bregman
totally, completely out debates Carlson until Carlson is left speechless, stumbling his
words–then completely, totally loses his temper. Check it out-
In any case the US does have large numbers of troops available for imperial adventures in
other theaters. I fear for the Venezuelans at this time. The US is withdrawing from their
failed ventures in the Mid East while the US threatens and pounds its chest in the Persian
Gulf and the South China Sea -- but no one expects the US military to actually commit
itself to another losing military engagement. Unfortunately, I do fear the US is ready to
go to war in Venezuela -- if they do so decide to do so the Maduro government would not
last very long. In the short term that would be considered a victory for the US Neo cons.
In the longer term, say 5 years out, it would likely result in a war on the South American
continent that has not been seen since Bolivar.
Posted by: ToivoS | Feb 20, 2019 10:05:13 PM | 76
As always, friend, your contribution
to this forum is very perceptive. ...and how will this all look 50 years out? Even worse!
I have transcribed the interview in full so one can find it through a search engine and so
that fellow MoA commenters can repost it. Here it is:
News Anchor: Well, you know, there's oil sanctions that the Trump White House has put on Venezuela, they're now having
a pretty big impact on the Maduro Administration. We're talking $20b in estimated losses already. And now an increasingly desperate
Nicholas Maduro, he's looking for a financial lifeline from outside. Let's bring in TrendMacro CIO Donald Luskin. Great to
see you, Don!
Donald Luskin: Great to be here!
News Anchor: Okay, $20b losses - what does that mean, first of all, for the Maduro Administration?
Donald Luskin: The problem we've got here is that we're not just dealing with the Maduro Administration. We are dealing
with his partner in crime: Vladimir Putin. And what's going on right now is there's just a game of geopolitical global chess
being played, where we take financial resources away from the regime in order to topple it, and Putin just steps in there and
plugs the hole with money. For instance, one of the most powerful tools we have to isolate Venezuela is to put what the experts
call "secondary sanctions" on financial institutions outside the United States that facilitate economic transactions for Venezuela.
The sanctions we put on say: if we catch you, say, Mr. French Bank, doing a transaction for Venezuela, we will bar you from
ever doing business in the United States, and if you have a branch here in the United States, we'll fine you $10b, right? So,
the Russians, we learned this morning, have set up a special-purpose bank that they think is gonna be beyond these sanctions,
'cause this bank they've set up You know, so we sanction them, we say: new Russian bank, you can't do business with United
States. They say: we don't care, you're our enemy anyway! So this is how Russia is in there, propping up the the (chuckle)
the, the war criminal Maduro regime that is resorting to starving its own
News Anchor: Yeah.
Donald Luskin: people by blockading humanitarian aid that the rest of the world is trying to send
News Anchor: I
Donald Luskin: Folks! They do ring a bell, they do give you clues, these people are evil!
News Anchor: I hear what you're saying, I mean Oil worldwide is traded in dollars, Maduro wants dollars, Russia
is facilitating the dollar exchange here for oil. You made the point, too - and it's well taken - that Russia's Rosneft owns
about 49.9% of the shares of Citgo, the PdVSA unit that, basically, is collateralizing, you know, billions of dollars worth
of loans that Russia's given. I mean, now Maduro's worried about a potential oil blockade. Do you think the U.S. Is going to
do that?
Donald Luskin: Well, you know, that's the endgame. If we're serious about this, there's only one place that we can
meet Putin head-on, and that's on the high seas. This is where we have to think about re-enacting the Cuban missile crisis
of 1962, where we're not just talking about penalties for banks, we're talking about an actual, physical blockade, where put
our ships off the coast of Venezuela and say: nothing comes in, nothing goes out. And let's see who blinks on that one. I have
a funny feeling the blinker is the man named Vladimir Putin.
News Anchor: Yeah, and, you know, he hasn't come out publicly in support, but, Don, your points well taken. Cuba's
in there, Hezbollah is in there, Iran is in Venezuela, really bad actors are in there, Don.
Donald Luskin: That's not
News Anchor: Yep.
Donald Luskin: exactly the
News Anchor: Okay.
Donald Luskin: guest list you'd like to have come at
...[Trump] administration is still filled with Hawks ...
1) The administration action in Iran is aggressive and counter-productive to long term peace. The nuclear deal was an effective
way of ensuring Iran controlling behavior for 15 years as the other parties, Europe and China, wanted to trade with Iran. (Additionally
it makes our nation depend more on the Saudia relationship in which Washington should be slowly moving away from.)
2) Like it or not, Venezuela is another mission creep for the Trump Administration. Recommend the administration
stay away from peace keeping troops and suggest this is China's problem. (Venezuela in debt to their eyeballs with China.)
3) Applaud the administration with peace talks with NK but warn them not to overstate their accomplishments. It is ridiculous
that the administration signed big nuclear deals with NK that don't exist.
"... The precedent was established in Italy with assistance to non-Communist candidates from the late 1940s to the 1960s. "We had bags of money that we delivered to selected politicians, to defray their expenses," said F. Mark Wyatt, a former C.I.A. officer, in a 1996 interview . ..."
"... A self-congratulatory declassified report on the C.I.A.'s work in Chile's 1964 election boasts of the "hard work" the agency did supplying "large sums" to its favored candidate and portraying him as a "wise, sincere and high-minded statesman" while painting his leftist opponent as a "calculating schemer." Advertisement ..."
"... C.I.A. officials told Mr. Johnson in the late 1980s that "insertions" of information into foreign news media, mostly accurate but sometimes false, were running at 70 to 80 a day. In the 1990 election in Nicaragua, the C.I.A. planted stories about corruption in the leftist Sandinista government, Mr. Levin said. The opposition won. ..."
"... Over time, more American influence operations have been mounted not secretly by the C.I.A. but openly by the State Department and its affiliates. For the 2000 election in Serbia, the United States funded a successful effort to defeat Slobodan Milosevic, the nationalist leader, providing political consultants and millions of stickers with the opposition's clenched-fist symbol and "He's finished" in Serbian, printed on 80 tons of adhesive paper and delivered by a Washington contractor. ..."
"... Similar efforts were undertaken in elections in wartime Iraq and Afghanistan, not always with success. After Hamid Karzai was re-elected president of Afghanistan in 2009, he complained to Robert Gates, then the secretary of defense, about the United States' blatant attempt to defeat him, which Mr. Gates calls in his memoir "our clumsy and failed putsch." ..."
"... At least once the hand of the United States reached boldly into a Russian election. American fears that Boris Yeltsin would be defeated for re-election as president in 1996 by an old-fashioned Communist led to an overt and covert effort to help him, urged on by President Bill Clinton. It included an American push for a $10 billion International Monetary Fund loan to Russia four months before the voting and a team of American political consultants (though some Russians scoffed when they took credit for the Yeltsin win). ..."
"... In 2016, the endowment gave 108 grants totaling $6.8 million to organizations in Russia for such purposes as "engaging activists" and "fostering civic engagement." The endowment no longer names Russian recipients, who, under Russian laws cracking down on foreign funding, can face harassment or arrest. ..."
"... What the C.I.A. may have done in recent years to steer foreign elections is still secret and may not be known for decades. It may be modest by comparison with the agency's Cold War manipulation. But some old-timers aren't so sure. ..."
"... "I assume they're doing a lot of the old stuff, because, you know, it never changes," said William J. Daugherty, who worked for the C.I.A. from 1979 to 1996 and at one time had the job of reviewing covert operations. "The technology may change, but the objectives don't." ..."
Bags of cash delivered to a Rome hotel for favored Italian candidates. Scandalous stories leaked to foreign newspapers to swing
an election in Nicaragua. Millions of pamphlets, posters and stickers printed to defeat an incumbent in Serbia.
The long arm of Vladimir Putin? No, just a small sample of the United States' history of intervention in foreign elections.
On Tuesday,
American intelligence chiefs warned the Senate Intelligence Committee that Russia appears to be preparing to repeat in the 2018
midterm elections the same full-on chicanery it unleashed in 2016: hacking, leaking, social media manipulation and possibly more.
Then on Friday, Robert Mueller, the special counsel, announced the indictments of 13 Russians and three companies, run by a businessman
with close Kremlin ties, laying out in astonishing detail a three-year scheme to use social media to attack Hillary Clinton, boost
Donald Trump and sow discord.
Most Americans are understandably shocked by what they view as an unprecedented attack on our political system. But intelligence
veterans, and scholars who have studied covert operations, have a different, and quite revealing, view.
"If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,"
said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States
"absolutely" has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, "and I hope we keep doing it."
Loch K. Johnson, the dean of American intelligence
scholars , who began his career in the 1970s investigating the C.I.A. as a staff member of the Senate's Church Committee, says
Russia's 2016 operation was simply the cyber-age version of standard United States practice for decades, whenever American officials
were worried about a foreign vote.
"We've been doing this kind of thing since the C.I.A. was created in 1947," said Mr. Johnson, now at the University of Georgia.
"We've used posters, pamphlets, mailers, banners -- you name it. We've planted false information in foreign newspapers. We've used
what the British call 'King George's cavalry': suitcases of cash."
The United States' departure from democratic ideals sometimes went much further. The C.I.A. helped overthrow elected leaders in
Iran and Guatemala in the 1950s and backed violent coups in several other countries in the 1960s. It plotted assassinations and supported
brutal anti-Communist governments in Latin America, Africa and Asia.
But in recent decades, both Mr. Hall and Mr. Johnson argued, Russian and American interferences in elections have not been morally
equivalent. American interventions have generally been aimed at helping non-authoritarian candidates challenge dictators or otherwise
promoting democracy. Russia has more often intervened to disrupt democracy or promote authoritarian rule, they said.
Equating the two, Mr. Hall says, "is like saying cops and bad guys are the same because they both have guns -- the motivation
matters."
This broader history of election meddling has largely been missing from the flood of reporting on the Russian intervention and
the investigation of whether the Trump campaign was involved. It is a reminder that the Russian campaign in 2016 was fundamentally
old-school espionage, even if it exploited new technologies. And it illuminates the larger currents of history that drove American
electoral interventions during the Cold War and motivate Russia's actions today.
"I'm not in any way justifying what the Russians did in 2016," Mr. Levin said. "It was completely wrong of Vladimir Putin to intervene
in this way. That said, the methods they used in this election were the digital version of methods used both by the United States
and Russia for decades: breaking into party headquarters, recruiting secretaries, placing informants in a party, giving information
or disinformation to newspapers."
His findings underscore how routine election meddling by the United States -- sometimes covert and sometimes quite open -- has
been.
The precedent was established in Italy with assistance to non-Communist candidates from the late 1940s to the 1960s. "We had bags
of money that we delivered to selected politicians, to defray their expenses," said F. Mark Wyatt, a former C.I.A. officer, in
a 1996 interview .
Covert propaganda has also been a mainstay. Richard M. Bissell Jr., who ran the agency's operations in the late 1950s and early
1960s, wrote casually in his autobiography
of "exercising control over a newspaper or broadcasting station, or of securing the desired outcome in an election."
A self-congratulatory
declassified report on the C.I.A.'s
work in Chile's 1964 election boasts of the "hard work" the agency did supplying "large sums" to its favored candidate and portraying
him as a "wise, sincere and high-minded statesman" while painting his leftist opponent as a "calculating schemer."
Advertisement
C.I.A. officials told Mr. Johnson in the late 1980s that "insertions" of information into foreign news media, mostly accurate
but sometimes false, were running at 70 to 80 a day. In the 1990 election in Nicaragua, the C.I.A. planted stories about corruption
in the leftist Sandinista government, Mr. Levin said. The opposition won.
Over time, more American influence operations have been mounted not secretly by the C.I.A. but openly by the State Department
and its affiliates. For the 2000 election in Serbia, the United States funded
a successful effort to defeat Slobodan Milosevic, the nationalist leader, providing political consultants and millions of stickers
with the opposition's clenched-fist symbol and "He's finished" in Serbian, printed on 80 tons of adhesive paper and delivered by
a Washington contractor.
Vince Houghton, who served in the military in the Balkans at the time and worked closely with the intelligence agencies, said
he saw American efforts everywhere. "We made it very clear that we had no intention of letting Milosevic stay in power," said Mr.
Houghton, now the historian at the International Spy Museum.
Similar efforts were undertaken in elections in wartime Iraq and Afghanistan, not always with success. After Hamid Karzai was
re-elected president of Afghanistan in 2009, he complained to Robert Gates, then the secretary of defense, about the United States'
blatant attempt to defeat him, which Mr. Gates
calls in his memoir
"our clumsy and failed putsch."
At least once the hand of the United States reached boldly into a Russian election. American fears that Boris Yeltsin would be
defeated for re-election as president in 1996 by an old-fashioned Communist led to an overt and covert effort to help him, urged
on by President Bill Clinton. It included an American push for a $10 billion International Monetary Fund loan to Russia four months
before the voting and a team of American political consultants (though some Russians scoffed when they took credit for the Yeltsin
win).
That heavy-handed intervention made some Americans uneasy. Thomas Carothers, a scholar at the Carnegie Institute for International
Peace, recalls arguing with a State Department official who told him at the time, "Yeltsin is democracy in Russia," to which
Mr. Carothers said he replied, "That's not what democracy means."
But what does democracy mean? Can it include secretly undermining an authoritarian ruler or helping challengers who embrace democratic
values? How about financing civic organizations?
Advertisement
In recent decades, the most visible American presence in foreign politics has been taxpayer-funded groups like the National Endowment
for Democracy, the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute, which do not support candidates but
teach basic campaign skills, build democratic institutions and train election monitors.
Most Americans view such efforts as benign -- indeed, charitable. But Mr. Putin sees them as hostile. The National Endowment for
Democracy gave a $23,000 grant in 2006 to an organization that employed Aleksei Navalny, who years later became Mr. Putin's main
political nemesis, a fact the government has used to attack both Mr. Navalny and the endowment.
In 2016,
the endowment
gave 108 grants totaling $6.8 million to organizations in Russia for such purposes as "engaging activists" and "fostering civic
engagement." The endowment no longer names Russian recipients, who, under Russian laws cracking down on foreign funding, can face
harassment or arrest.
It is easy to understand why Mr. Putin sees such American cash as a threat to his rule, which tolerates no real opposition. But
American veterans of democracy promotion find abhorrent Mr. Putin's insinuations that their work is equivalent to what the Russian
government is accused of doing in the United States today.
"It's not just apples and oranges," said Kenneth Wollack, president of the National Democratic Institute. "It's comparing someone
who delivers lifesaving medicine to someone who brings deadly poison."
What the C.I.A. may have done in recent years to steer foreign elections is still secret and may not be known for decades. It
may be modest by comparison with the agency's Cold War manipulation. But some old-timers aren't so sure.
"I assume they're doing a lot of the old stuff, because, you know, it never changes," said William J. Daugherty, who worked for
the C.I.A. from 1979 to 1996 and at one time had the job of reviewing covert operations. "The technology may change, but the objectives
don't."
Correction : Feb. 18, 2018
An earlier version of this article stated incorrectly that Aleksei Navalny, a political opponent of the Russian president,
Vladimir V. Putin, had received grants from the National Endowment for Democracy. In fact, an organization employing him received
one $23,000 grant from the endowment in 2006.
Scott Shane is a national security reporter for The Times and a former Moscow correspondent.
A version of this article appears in print on Feb. 18, 2018 , on Page SR 4 of the New York edition with the headline: America
Meddles in Elections, Too.
"... "Whether under your watch a genocide will take place and you will look the other way because American interests were being upheld is a fair question because the American people want to know that anytime we engage in a country that we think about what our actions could be and how we believe our values are being furthered," Omar said. ..."
"... After again downplaying her question, Abrams said "the entire thrust of American policy in Venezuela is to support the Venezuelan people's effort to restore democracy to their country." ..."
As assistant secretary of state during the Reagan administration, Abrams was involved in a
secret arms deal in which the U.S. sought to trade missiles and other weapons to Iran and use
the funds to support right-wing paramilitaries known as the "contras," who were seeking to
topple a leftist government in Nicaragua. In a 1991 plea agreement with an independent
commission tasked with probing the scandal -- which became known as the Iran-Contra affair --
Abrams admitted to lying to members of Congress about the clandestine deal. In 1992, he and
other Reagan administration officials embroiled in the scandal were pardoned by former
President George H. W. Bush.
Omar also pressed Abrams about his role in shaping an interventionist American foreign
policy in other Latin American countries during his first stints at the State Department.
During the Cold War, the U.S. supported various violent coups in Latin America, including some
against democratically-elected governments.
The freshman Democrat asked Abrams about a remark he made in 1993, when he called the Reagan
administration's record in El Salvador a "fabulous achievement." Between 1979 and 1992, the
U.S. backed a right-wing military government in El Salvador during a civil war against leftist
guerrillas that resulted in the deaths of more than 75,000 people, according to the Center for Justice and
Accountability , an international human rights group.
Omar specifically cited the massacre of hundreds of civilians by the American-trained El
Salvadoran army at the El Mazote village in 1981.
"Yes or no, do you think that massacre was a 'fabulous achievement' that happened under our
watch," she asked.
"That is a ridiculous question," Abrams responded, again accusing Omar of crafting a
"personal attack."
Omar continued her questioning, asking Abrams if he would be in favor of the U.S. supporting
armed groups in Venezuela that participate in war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide
if he believed it would serve America's interests. Abrams refused to answer the specific
question, saying it was not a "real" question.
"Whether under your watch a genocide will take place and you will look the other way because
American interests were being upheld is a fair question because the American people want to
know that anytime we engage in a country that we think about what our actions could be and how
we believe our values are being furthered," Omar said.
But Maduro and other leftist leaders in the region, including in Bolivia and Cuba, have
accused the American government of trying to stage a coup in Venezuela. Standing alongside
diplomats from Russia, China, North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Nicaragua and Iran, Venezuela's foreign
minister Jorge Arreaza told CBS News' Pamela Falk Thursday that Maduro's government has formed
a coalition to oppose interference in his country's affairs.
After again downplaying her question, Abrams said "the entire thrust of American policy in
Venezuela is to support the Venezuelan people's effort to restore democracy to their
country."
In her final question, Omar asked Abrams whether American foreign policy prioritized
upholding human rights and protecting people against genocide.
"That is always the position of the United States," he replied.
"... American imperialists (and many Americans) truly believe that they are superior and that the world would become a better place if nations submitted to their leadership ..."
"... Early promoters of American intervention were zealous patriots. They proclaimed love of country and loyalty to the flag. Yet they could not imagine that people from non-white countries might feel just as patriotic. ..."
"... Americans have been said to be ignorant about the world. ..."
"... Violent intervention in other countries always produces unintended consequences. ..."
"... Generations of American foreign policy makers have made decisions on three assumptions: the US is the indispensable nation that must lead the world; this leadership requires toughness; and toughness is best demonstrated by the threat or use of force. ..."
"... Most American interventions are not soberly conceived, with realistic goals and clear exit strategies. ..."
"... Foreign intervention has weakened the moral authority that was once the foundation of America's political identity. Today many people around the world see it as a bully, recklessly invading foreign lands. ..."
"... Nations lose their virtue when they repeatedly attack other nations. ..."
"... America is the HIGHLY narcissistic, high functioning, psychopathic garden variety neighbor, highly destructive businessman you work hard to avoid. ..."
"... As Taleb nicely put: Our political leaders have no skin in the game and are completely unaccountable. Best preconditions for disaster! ..."
"... They even call the idea of not mass murdering people 'isolationism'. Hey, well guess what? I don't want to murder other people who never bothered me. ..."
As the world watches aghast at another US and allies' attempt to engineer a coup in
Venezuela, I would like to offer a few insights from Stephen Kinzer' provocative chapter, "The
deep hurt," (pp. 227-250) in his book, The True Flag: Theodore
Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of the American Empire (2017). This remarkable text
carries some hope and lessons for all of us. It tells the story of the great conflict around
the turn of 20th century about the role that the US might play in either dominating the world
or building a cosmopolitan democracy where all people feel secure that they reside in one
country, the earth.
Indeed, Kinzer states:
"Anti-imperialists decisively influenced American history by helping to ensure that the
first burst of American annexation would be the last" (p. 228).
Even swash-buckling Teddy Roosevelt was influenced, losing his zest for the idea of
conquest. When he charged into the White House he held two views simultaneously, intervene to
help other people, without oppressing them. Kinzer thinks that this dichotomy "torments our
national psyche" (p. 229). In the early parts of the book Kinzer sets out the anti-imperialist
(Mark Twain) and pro-imperialist visions (Henry Cabot Lodge). These speeches are worth
gathering round for reflection.
During the following hundred years much of what the anti-imperialists predicted has come to
pass. The United States has become an "actively interventionist power. It has projected
military or covert power into dozens of countries on every continent except Antarctica"(ibid.).
George Frisbie Hoar was right, Kinzer points out, when he "warned that intervening in other
lands would turn the United States into a 'vulgar, commonplace empire founded upon physical
force"" (ibid.).
Anti-imperialists also predicted that an "aggressive foreign policy would have pernicious
effects at home" (ibid.). Military budgets have soared to heights unimaginable in the days of
fervent expansionism in the 1898 war with the Philippines. The armaments industries wield
extraordinary clout. The wealth-soaked elites dominate politics. The invasion and overthrowing
of distant regimes resides in the hands of a few decision-makers. And militaristic values and
rituals saturate American life and expunge peaceful ones.
To be sure, American intervention brought some material blessings (good schools and orderly
systems of justice, etc) and rising American power was perceived as "good for everyone simply
because it means strengthening the world's most beneficent nation" (p. 230). The expansionists
of 1898 believed that America was "inherently benevolent," and subject nations would rally
around the May pole in celebratory dance. "The opposite happened .Carl Schurz was right when he
warned that dominating foreigners would ultimately force Americans to 'shoot them down because
they stand up for their independence'" (p. 231).
Kinzer states that: " In the face of profound new challenges, Americans are once again
debating the role of the United States in the world. Should it intervene violently in other
countries? This remains what Senator William V. Allen called it in 1899: 'The greatest question
that has ever been presented to the American people'" (p. 231). American culture carries a
current of anti-imperialism and commitment to an international legal order. They played a big
role in the establishment of the UN and nurturing global governance. They remain the world's
only superpower with enormous capacity to move towards building the cosmopolitan world order.
What is evident now in this dark moment of history is that the world as it is, is not the way
it has to be.
It is difficult, I think, for the United States with its inordinate military might and
present delusionary self-understanding to wrench itself free from wanting to intervene for
political and economic reasons. Many in the post-WW I world had placed their bet for a better
world on the Presbyterian professor Woodrow Wilson. Famously, Wilson triggered immense
hopefulness to the disenfranchised in the colonies of European powers. He preached that they
should "choose the sovereignty under which the shall live" (p. 232). In office, American troops
were dispatched to intervene in Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Mexico and Russia .Like
his predecessors -- and successors -- Wilson insisted that he was doing it for the good of the
target countries. Americans would leave them alone, he promised, as soon as they learned 'to
elect good men'" (ibid.). Today scholars speak of the "shattered peace" of the post-WW I world.
Was the desire to begin building, slowly, carefully, a cosmopolitan world order, as Jan Smuts
thought, an "impossible dream"?
Kinzer observes that "this most compassionate of presidents not only invaded countries that
defied the United States, but studiously ignored appeals from colonized people outside Europe,
notably in Egypt, India, Korea, and Indochina. His hypocrisy set the stage for generations of
war and upheaval" (ibid.). Margaret MacMillan's lively and densely detailed book, Paris 1919
(2001) , provides the stories for these outcast colonized countries.
Today, the US has intervened one more time. The difference now may well be that there is
little pretence that the US is engaging in the bully politics of "might is right." They don't
care two hoots about what the world thinks. They do not give a damn about the
self-determination of all countries and peoples. This invasion is stripped of any moral or
legal justification. The US has decided to declare the Speaker of the House, Juan Guaido,
president. This is unheard of! And Canada has forsaken the best of its liberal and social
democratic traditions of adherence to rule of law to hitch its caboose to the US's rampaging
imperialist train.
There are several lessons that Kinzer draws from American history of intervention that our
worth careful reflection.
1) American imperialists (and many Americans) truly believe that they are superior and
that the world would become a better place if nations submitted to their leadership . The
United States would be better off, Kinzer says, if it became a learning nation and not a
teaching one.
2) Early promoters of American intervention were zealous patriots. They proclaimed love of
country and loyalty to the flag. Yet they could not imagine that people from non-white
countries might feel just as patriotic. Love of country was a mark of civilization. Lesser
peoples, therefore, couldn't grasp it.
3) Americans have been said to be ignorant about the world. They are, says Kinzer, but so
are other peoples. The difference is that American leaders, puffed with a sense of mission,
acted on ignorance. American leaders see little reason to bother learning about the nations
whose affairs they intrude.
4) Violent intervention in other countries always produces unintended consequences. Cuba
was turned into a protectorate in 1901. A fine idea? It led ultimately to a bitter
anti-American regime. Intervention in the Philippines sparked waves of nationalism across
East Asia that contributed to the Communist revolution in China in 1949. Later American
interventions also had terrible results planners never anticipated. From Iran and Guatemala
to Iraq and Afghanistan, intervention has devastated societies and produced violent
anti-American passion.
5) Generations of American foreign policy makers have made decisions on three assumptions:
the US is the indispensable nation that must lead the world; this leadership requires
toughness; and toughness is best demonstrated by the threat or use of force. Thus: America is
inherently righteous; its influence on rest of world always benign.
6) Most American interventions are not soberly conceived, with realistic goals and clear
exit strategies. But violent invasions always leave so-called "collateral damage": families
killed, destroyed towns, ruined lives, damaged land.
7) The argument that the United States intervenes to defend "freedom" rarely matches facts
on the ground. Many (most?) interventions prop up predatory regimes. The goal is simply to
increase American power rather than to liberate the suffering.
8) Foreign intervention has weakened the moral authority that was once the foundation of
America's political identity. Today many people around the world see it as a bully,
recklessly invading foreign lands. The current invasion of Venezuela is such an example. The
name "United States" is associated with bombing, invasion, occupation, night raids, covert
action, torture, kidnapping, and secret prisons. Who wants to be saved by America? John
Bolton recently threatened Maduro with prison in Guantanamo if he doesn't get the hell out of
Venezuela.
9) Nations lose their virtue when they repeatedly attack other nations. That loss, as
Washington predicted, has cost the United States its felicity. Kinzer says that the US can
regain it only by understanding its own national interests more clearly. He thinks it is late
for the United States to change its course in the world -- but not too late.
America has not become an interventionist power. What has happened is a Coup d'Etat has
been staged through Congressional rules that give unconstitutional powers to a tiny group on
the basis of their 'seniority' and reconcilliation committee appointment. These few, not the
American people want intervention, war, you name it. They spent $5 trillion in the Middle
East alone. So, let's not blame the American people.
5) Generations of American foreign policy makers have made decisions on three assumptions:
the US is the indispensable nation that must lead the world; this leadership requires
toughness; and toughness is best demonstrated by the threat or use of force. Thus: America is
inherently righteous; its influence on rest of world always benign.
6) Most American interventions are not soberly conceived, with realistic goals and clear
exit strategies. But violent invasions always leave so-called "collateral damage": families
killed, destroyed towns, ruined lives, damaged land.
7) The argument that the United States intervenes to defend "freedom" rarely matches facts
on the ground. Many (most?) interventions prop up predatory regimes. The goal is simply to
increase American power rather than to liberate the suffering.
8) Foreign intervention has weakened the moral authority that was once the foundation of
America's political identity. Today many people around the world see it as a bully,
recklessly invading foreign lands. The current invasion of Venezuela is such an example. The
name "United States" is associated with bombing, invasion, occupation, night raids, covert
action, torture, kidnapping, and secret prisons. Who wants to be saved by America? John
Bolton recently threatened Maduro with prison in Guantanamo if he doesn't get the hell out of
Venezuela."
America is the HIGHLY narcissistic, high functioning, psychopathic garden variety
neighbor, highly destructive businessman you work hard to avoid. How any American can see the US and it's people as exceptional is beyond me. No yellow vests anti WAR protests have evolved to STOP the US genocidal killing
machine.
The US, the white supremacist nation has zero trouble killing maiming and displacing
millions of brown Muslims & Christians in 3 world countries. This WILL come home to roost as what the Zionazi empire of psychopaths does to other
countries they will do to US
9) "Nations lose their virtue when they repeatedly attack other nations. That loss, as
Washington predicted, has cost the United States its felicity. Kinzer says that the US can
regain it only by understanding its own national interests more clearly. He thinks it is late
for the United States to change its course in the world -- but not too late."...
I don't even think Teddy as self righteous and psychopathic as he was at the turn of the
20th Century would have ponied up to cannibalizing his own ( https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it
) in order to build ever more "pretexts" through the torture and murder of other sovereign
nations simply as a means to "control" resources for the good of his $currency and it's banks
and not a Country and it's peoples under the rule of law to a parasite/cyst that it is
willing to die for (
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-19/top-us-general-says-american-troops-should-be-ready-die-israel
) before it's own Nation!...
Another gr8 lesson about American freedom and democracy is in book: The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism. Americans should know that before slaves from Africa white trash from Britain was shipped
as slaves. See: They were white and they were slaves.
" Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all.
... In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate
antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be
excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be
cultivated....
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow
citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and
experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican
government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the
instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive
partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they
actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of
influence on the other....
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our
commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as
we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us
stop. ... GEORGE WASHINGTON
Foreign intervention has weakened the moral authority that was once the foundation of
America's political identity. Today many people around the world see it as a bully,
recklessly invading foreign lands.
Indeed, as that's the nature of the state in any and all its iterations. Reform it? Yes. But only by eradicating it altogether. Why? Because, as the great Albert
Jay Nock said,
"Sending in good people to reform the state is like sending in virgins to
reform the whorehouse."
McCabe, evil whitey on the front line here too? ; chickens coming home to roost
finally? Guess there are two kind of people, those who work for a living, and the barbarians who
appropriate the fruits of other's labor.
Mark Twain wrote savagely and derisively about the Moro Massacre, where the US killed
around a thousand Filipino natives who were hiding in a dormant volcano, they just rimmed it
with artillery and killed everyone.
Because they would not pay tribute. We waterboarded about 200 important people, the
equivalent of mayors and councilmen, ranking officers in militias we had no business
disbanding.
1898 was lies and deceit from the outset. We promised the Philippine General Aguinaldo
that if he fought the Spanish on land, then we would fight them at sea. In exchange for
victory over the Spanish, the Philippines would be freed from colonization.
Except then we took it ourselves and killed anyone who disagreed. Slaughter, rape,
torture, it was never for one moment noble. The USA granted the Philippines its independence
after the Japanese conquered them, lol.
Empires do not give up power, their grip weakens ... Empires do not devolve back into "republics", they crash and burn ... And there are really only two options: a) soft collapse b) hard collapse (there is no [c] option)
Exactly -The article was written by another delusional trying to reconstruct/masquerade
the US criminal empire behind the a new facelift, too little too late. The guy didn't get the
memo from Putin/Xi, telling him tat it is a multipolar world & that the US criminal
empire is death & that it will never come back in any shape, way or form, to violate
international law & carry out war crimes.
American or uk coups are not beneficial. Very sad. Checking USA coups online there is a huge list, after the Allende govt in Chile, comes
Australia, the Whitlam govt, much loved, but ousted in a coup, bloodless by his choice. The
people were waiting for Gough to call them out. Newspaper staff arrived from overseas.
first day in office his govt had let the conscientious objectors out of the 2 years they
were serving in jail. There had been mass demonstrations against Aus participation and
incarceration to no avail with the previous govt. Brought back our Australians from Vietnam,
and twenty or 30 or more major things. Every day.
We have learned nothing. Apparently we are using the taming of the lion method which has
been used for thousands of years to take control of countries on Venezuela. The apparent goal
is to take over several Latin and south American countries. Will this be good or bad? Our
past history indicates it will be a disaster. Have we had any successes?
Craving for respect. This started after the first bite in the apple, history said.
Religion is based on that happening. Americans invented the extra load called fastest. Watch
Hollywood portraying it. Respect shown all over the show for plain murderers. Graveyard
managers and priest making the picture complete. Making that part of the world the right
place for a second coming. Resulting in sending all believers to the place named hell.
The fact that this is not taken for granted is exactly what is wrong with America. If only
we could just learn to leave other people alone unless attacked. They even call the idea of
not mass murdering people 'isolationism'. Hey, well guess what? I don't want to murder
other people who never bothered me. I can't say I'm a Christian, but aren't they supposed to
disagree with this sort of thing? They're also supposed to be like 80% of the population, why
don't we ever hear, 'murder bad' from them?
The leading figures were Vice President Pence, Secretary of State Pompeo and Senator Marco
Rubio as well as hawks in in the National Security Council
Notable quotes:
"... Bolton and Pompeo are both experienced politicians and bureaucrats. They likely knew that their plan was deeply flawed and would require much more than Trump would normally commit to. My hunch is that the soon coming mission creep was build into their plan, but that they did not reveal that. ..."
"... The U.S. said it was paying for the aid but wanted Colombia to find trucks and drivers to move it in. The Colombians said no one would accept the mission because the Venezuelan military would arrest them. The aid remains in warehouses near the border. ..."
"... The little spontaneous support the Random Guyidó had in some parts of the population is already lessening. Yesterday's demonstration he had called for saw less attendance than the one on January 23. ..."
"... f the U.S. does not do more than it has done so far the government under President Maduro can sit this out. The sanctions and the lack of oil revenue will create many immediate problems. But in a few weeks Venezuelan oil will have found new buyers. Fresh money will come in and new sources for imports of medicine and staple food will have been found. ..."
"... Over the same time the Random Guy will lose support. The party he nominally leads only won 20% of the votes. The other opposition parties were never informed of his plan to declare himself president. Their support for the step was lukewarm and will cool further. They may in the end support the mediation talks Maduro has offered and which the UN, Uruguay and Mexico also support. The talks could lead to new parliament and/or presidential elections in a year or two and thereby solve the situation. ..."
"... Waging an open war against that country would be very messy, expensive and difficult to justify. To start and support a guerilla war - Elliott Abrams specialty - takes time also costs a lot of money. The chances to win it are low. Moreover Trump wants to get re-elected but could lose many votes over both scenarios. ..."
"... Venezuela follows the neoliberal doctrine, perhaps not by choice, but they buy what they can't produce. Now they can't buy much and they do not produce much but oil, and they are denied payment by their biggest customer of oil. Ouch. Their gold in London cant be used. Revenues from Citgo are denied. Cant even sell their overseas assets now. ..."
"... People need to eat, once they start going hungry they become more receptive to change. US wont use force unless Venezuela is so beaten down by lack of food and medicines they can be rolled over without much of a fight, perhaps after softening them up with mercenaries or other countries troops ..."
"... Its a process. There is no hurry for the US. Time is on their side. That's the reality. Chinise refineries cant handle too much of their heavy oil and its not about to intervene in any military conflict, and Russia does not need their oil plus Venezuela owes them a lot of money, and they own 49% of Citgo and its US refineries. They will cut a deal that minimizes their losses. ..."
"... I find an interesting parallel between Syria and Venezuela. The US allies who are supposed to sacrifice for the regime change and thieving of the neighbouring country. When US assembled a Thieving Coalition on behalf of Israel to rip apart Syria, Turkey and GCC (Saudis) were the prominent local members, just as Columbia and Brazil in ripping apart Venezuela (also with puppet master Israel on top). ..."
"... We usually think of Israel only as a tormenter of the Palestinians. But Israel is much, much more - it is the Capo Di Tutti i Capi of the global crime. Tormenting Palestinians is only a hobby, a sport, but destroying countries to steal their wealth is the day job. US is a dumb bully, the blunt tool that the Israel Crime Syndicate uses for stealing on a global scale. This is my new perspective after Israel's involvement in the coup in Venezuela. ..."
"... I've been following this story on Telesur and MintPress News for a few days. It confirms the theory that what the US could be doing is igniting -- inadvertently -- civil wars in the Lima Group countries. ..."
"... The Washington Mafia won't admit defeat that easily. Some false flag action somewhere at the border or the u.s. embassy will come. The howling of the Relotius media will be deafening. Maybe a Colombian or a Brazilian military is stupid enough to do what Tronald Dumb would rather avoid in consideration of his electorate. ..."
"... It's likely that the Brazilian and Colombian governments don't command the loyalty of their armed forces (especially the foot soldiers who would have shoulder the burden of invasion) to the extent that the Venezuelan government under Maduro does of its own. Especially if money allocated to the armed forces in Brazil and Colombia has gone to a few favored individuals in the officer hierarchies while the grunts have seen no increased pay or support, or have even seen their pay levels dwindle as their responsibilities grow. ..."
"... That's a possible scenario in Brazil given that since Dilma Rousseff's impeachment as President in 2016 it has been governed by corrupt neoliberal politicians. ..."
"... those are good parallels between syria and venezuala that you draw and to which i agree with.. my thought on trump is basically - it doesn't matter who is in the presidents seat in the usa, as the president seems to have little to say on that matter.. ..."
"... One other thing also to consider is that in addition to conventional armed forces, Venezuela also has popular defense committees and militias among urban and rural communities who would be fighting any invasion forces. ..."
"... If the US nag croaks financially, EU will not be much of a replacement, whilst the potential of parasitising on Russia and China approaches zero. Therefore, I conclude that "strategy of flogging the nag to death" is not really a strategy, it is an urge. That is, it comes from a mix of chutzpah, psychopathy and pig manure in the nature of the parasite. After all, who puts up a sofa on top of a hill of a stolen land to watch the final extinction of the previous owner. Obviously, this goes far beyond just stealing the women and the cattle. ..."
"... These guys are pretty smart. Many like to think otherwise, perhaps it makes them feel better. You can't judge their actions by Hollywood standards of winning and losing. Chaos and denial of resources to anyone opposed to the Empire is enough of a Win , at least temporarily. Its a long game they play, its been played for over a century now, even much longer. ..."
"... The elites, referred to by Plato as Philosopher Kings , want to rule the world as living Gods, or at least their descendants. It's only over the last 150-250 years or so that control of science, finance, military, capitalism and democracy (manipulated via the printing press) gave them the means to realize their goals. It was a long road for them, operating through secret societies and monopoly control of money and government debt, and dealing with factions who were bound by morality (hence the war on religion) . In the battle between Good and Evil tbe good guys have been annihilated or at least silenced, at least in the West and most likely much of the East. ..."
On January 25, two days after Random Guyidó declared himself President of Venezuela,
the lack of planing in the U.S. coup attempt was
already obvious :
My impression is that Trump was scammed. It was long evident that he gives little
attention to details and does not think things through. Most likely Bolton, Pompeo and
Rubio presented him with a three step plan:
Phase 1. Support the self declared president Guaidó; Phase 2: ... (wishful
thinking) ...; Phase 3: Take half of their oil!
... Bolton and Pompeo are both experienced politicians and bureaucrats. They likely knew
that their plan was deeply flawed and would require much more than Trump would normally
commit to. My hunch is that the soon coming mission creep was build into their plan, but
that they did not reveal that.
The U.S. coup planners and their Venezuelan puppets had hoped that the Venezuelan
military would jump to their side. That was wishful thinking and unlikely to happen. They
also thought up some "humanitarian aid" scheme in which pictures of trucks crossing a long
blocked bridge would soon shame the Venezuelan president into stepping down. That was
likewise nonsense.
Unless the U.S. is willing and able to escalate, the coup attempt is destined to
fail.
'Western' media now recognize that phase 2 of the coup plan is in deep trouble. Today
the Guardian , Bloomberg and the New York Times all describe
growing frustration with the lack of success.
[T]hree weeks after Guaidó electrified the previously rudderless opposition
movement by declaring himself interim leader, there are signs his campaign risks losing
steam.
An anticipated mass defection of military chiefs – which opposition leaders
admit is a prerequisite to Maduro's departure – has not materialized, and Maduro's
inner-circle has begun claiming it has weathered the political storm.
Since Juan Guaido declared himself interim president three weeks ago and offered amnesty
to officers who abandon Maduro, more than 30 countries led by the U.S. have hailed the
move, waiting for the military to follow. There hasn't been a rush to his side.
...
In a country with more than 2,000 generals and admirals, only one top officer -- who
commands no troops -- has pledged allegiance to Guaido.
...
This is a major reason why the revolution isn't moving as quickly as some had hoped
when Guaido electrified the world on Jan. 23 with his declaration. This has led to
impatience and finger-pointing. U.S. policy makers and those around Guaido -- as well as
leaders in Brazil and Colombia -- are eyeing one another and worrying about failure.
Officials in each camp have said privately they assumed the others had a more developed
strategy.
[The opposition's] goal was to bring the supplies into Venezuela, forcing a confrontation
with Mr. Maduro, who has refused the help. This would cast Mr. Maduro in a bad light,
opposition leaders said, and display their ability to set up a government-like relief
system in a nation where the crumbling economy has left many starving, sick and without
access to medicine.
Worry about what comes next has intensified . At a meeting in the U.S. embassy in Bogota,
Colombia, last week, military, intelligence and civilian leaders from both countries
discussed ways of moving humanitarian aid into Venezuela. There was a sense of
frustration in the air, according to a participant who agreed to discuss it on condition
of anonymity.
The U.S. said it was paying for the aid but wanted Colombia to find trucks and
drivers to move it in. The Colombians said no one would accept the mission because the
Venezuelan military would arrest them. The aid remains in warehouses near the
border.
At similar meetings in the Colombian border city of Cucuta, a person who attended said
the dynamic was the same -- the U.S. expecting Colombia to find the means to deliver the
aid and the Colombians saying they can't.
The opposition is only now thinking up
its own crazy scheme for delivering the "aid":
In Cúcuta, members of the opposition say they are considering options to
physically force the shipment into Venezuela.
Omar Lares, a former opposition mayor in exile in Cúcuta, said organizers want
people to surround an aid truck on the Colombian side and accompany it to the bridge. A
crowd of thousands would be gathered on the other side to push through a security cordon,
move the containers blocking the bridge, and accompany the aid into Venezuela.
"One group over there, one over here, and we'll make one large human chain," he
said.
And what does he think the battalion of Venezuelan soldiers between the two groups will
do? Just step aside and allow an invasion of their country?
The struggle could make for some marketable TV pictures but it would not achieve
anything. The lack of planning is daunting even to the lobbyists in Washington DC:
" The opposition has created immense expectations, and it's not at all clear they have a
plan for actually fulfilling them ," said David Smilde, a Venezuela analyst at the
Washington Office on Latin America.
The U.S. coup plotters and their Venezuelan proxies seem to recognize that there will be
no imminent change :
Addressing a congressional hearing, the US special envoy on Venezuela, Elliott Abrams,
claimed "Maduro and his band of thieves" were finished. He claimed international pressure
meant "there is a storm brewing inside the Maduro regime that will eventually bring it to
an end".
But while Abrams said Washington was "hopeful and confident" of Maduro's demise he
admitted it was "impossible to predict" when it might come. The US would maintain
pressure "over the next weeks and months", he added, suggesting a quick resolution is no
longer expected.
Opposition leaders have spent recent days trying to dampen expectations that Maduro's
exit is imminent.
Juan Andrés Mejía, an opposition leader and Guaidó ally, admitted
that goal "could take some time".
The little spontaneous support the Random Guyidó had in some parts of the
population is already lessening. Yesterday's demonstration he had called for saw less attendance than the one on
January 23. He now says that he will force the 'aid' crossing on February 23 but he
does not seem to have a real plan to achieve that:
President of the National Assembly Guaido also promised the country that US-delivered
humanitarian aid will "enter the country no matter what" on February 23, issuing an
"order" for the military to allow it to enter. However, military leaders have dismissed
these calls, with the Central Defense Region tweeting in response that the armed forces
would not take any orders from an "imperial lackey."
"One month after the swearing in we have done it. This February 23 the humanitarian
aid will enter the country. The Armed Forces have 11 days to decide if they are on the
side of the Venezuelans and the Constitution or on that of the usurper," he claimed in
reference to President Maduro.
I f the U.S. does not do more than it has done so far the government under President
Maduro can sit this out. The sanctions and the lack of oil revenue will create many
immediate problems. But in a few weeks Venezuelan oil will have found new buyers. Fresh
money will come in and new sources for imports of medicine and staple food will have been
found.
Over the same time the Random Guy will lose support. The party he nominally leads
only won 20% of the votes. The other opposition parties were never informed of his plan to
declare himself president. Their support for the step was lukewarm and will cool further.
They may in the end support the mediation talks Maduro has offered and which the UN,
Uruguay and Mexico also support. The talks could lead to new parliament and/or presidential
elections in a year or two and thereby solve the situation.
The U.S. would not be satisfied by a compromise solution. Trump is now committed to
'regime change' in Venezuela. But how can he do it?
Waging an open war against that country would be very messy, expensive and difficult
to justify. To start and support a guerilla war - Elliott Abrams specialty - takes time
also costs a lot of money. The chances to win it are low. Moreover Trump wants to get
re-elected but could lose many votes over both scenarios.
What else then can he do?
Posted by b on February 14, 2019 at 01:58 PM |
Permalink
Have Russia and/or China taken any steps to provide any medications that may be urgently
required by Venezuelan hospitals or doctors? ...one or two planeloads would seem to get it
done
Given the nation's massive economic potential, America's bankers must be excited about
the prospect of even higher profitability based on increased business opportunities in the
nation that has the world's largest oil reserves.
Simply put, whilst the regime change in Venezuela is faltering the Trump's retreat to Deep
State is escalating. After a couple of months of no movement in Venezuela, he will be
forced to commence his first open war.
Clintons, Bushes and Obama started theirs, how could Trump disappoint? Starting a war
would complete the outcome which is a mirror image (opposite) to what Trump promised and
was elected on.
Some would say that Trump's achievement is zero. Yet, the system which delivered two
worst Presidential candidates ever in history is to blame. Trump was just the worst
candidate for President. If the other, worstest candidate won, there already would have
been no Venezuela and no US, the World would have been a pile of radioactive dust. It is
still not impossible that the worst candidate could achieve the same as the worstest, but
for the other one the outcome was a virtual certainty.
As to 2020 election, expect deja vu - Republican Trump the Worst and some Democratic the
Worstest. Who are you gonna vote for? Who with brains will waste time voting?
Backlash is arriving already. The people of Haiti are toppling their corrupt US puppet
president in naked anger over his betrayal of Venezuela when he voted with the Empire's
dictate in a January OAS event declaring Maduro "illegimite". Must read :
'Between February 6 and 10 of 2019, several military transport aircraft have flown to the
Rafael Miranda Airport in Puerto Rico, the San Isidro Air Base in the Dominican Republic,
and other strategically located Caribbean Islands, most certainly without the knowledge
of the governments of those nations. These flights took off from U.S. military facilities
where Special Operation Troops and U.S. Marine Corps units operate. These units have been
used for covert operations, even against leaders of other countries.'
thanks b... you said this in one of your previous post - they don't have a plan!
@5 kiza - lol! - the way i see it, trump is almost the most successful as he hasn't
engaged in a direct war, and had to work thru other ones started by other presidents... i
like entertaining the idea it is trump against the deep state... it is a fun thought, but i
think it is extremely unrealistic.. trump will do what he is told even if it is in a round
about way.. if the deep state want a war, he will cosign it.. as b also shared - all the
sanctions on russia haven't let up and instead have just increased steadily since he
entered office.. trump may talk a good line - no more wars, why can't we be friends with
russia and etc - but he is missing in action on these same fronts.. now, maybe if he can
hold off on following Netanyahu's war plan for Iran, or hold off on bombing Venezuela or
whatever he is supposed to do here, he might have a chance for a 2nd term... the democrats
have shown real skill in shooting themselves in the foot! anything is possible..
i too enjoyed the congresswomen who was up on anti-Semite charges taking a real strip
out of Elliot Abrams yesterday.. kudos to her for going for it..
Nobody volunteering to be the martyrs as yet, so some will have to be volunteered. The
Trump regime has put a lot of work into gaining Venezuelan oil, so I doubt they will be
stopped by a little hiccup.
I didn't see this posting from Reuters about the next ploy in b's posting
"(Reuters) - President Donald Trump will give a speech on Venezuela in Miami on Monday
and voice support for Venezuela's National Assembly President Juan Guaido, whom the
United States considers the legitimate president of that country, a White House official
said on Wednesday. Trump is to make remarks on Venezuela and "the dangers of socialism"
at Florida International University in Miami, the official said."
We have had this discussion before but there is only top/bottom and not left/right. That
said, the elite are now setting up to cast top/bottom as capitalism/socialism......neither
of which exist in the same way that TOP/BOTTOM does.
Within the definition of TOP/BOTTOM one could suggest that
Capitalism is where (TOP) a historical elite perpetuate the God of Mammon global finance
jackboot without oversight and TBTF on the BOTTOM that acts like powerless zombies, and
Socialism is where the God of Mammon global finance is a set of public utilities as a
managed resource for the public commons and strict restrictions are made on ongoing
ownership of private property
Venezuela follows the neoliberal doctrine, perhaps not by choice, but they buy what
they can't produce. Now they can't buy much and they do not produce much but oil, and they
are denied payment by their biggest customer of oil. Ouch. Their gold in London cant be
used. Revenues from Citgo are denied. Cant even sell their overseas assets now.
People need to eat, once they start going hungry they become more receptive to
change. US wont use force unless Venezuela is so beaten down by lack of food and medicines
they can be rolled over without much of a fight, perhaps after softening them up with
mercenaries or other countries troops
Its a process. There is no hurry for the US. Time is on their side. That's the
reality. Chinise refineries cant handle too much of their heavy oil and its not about to
intervene in any military conflict, and Russia does not need their oil plus Venezuela owes
them a lot of money, and they own 49% of Citgo and its US refineries. They will cut a deal
that minimizes their losses.
Max Blumenthal continues to try and reclaim his former position as a believable journalist.
I provided his observational tweet on the previous Venezuelan thread, and do so
again :
"At Tuesday's opposition march, among the most ferociously anti-Chavista elements
in Venezuela, I struggled to find a single person willing to openly support a direct US
military intervention. Not that Bolton, Rubio, or Abrams would care."
Of course, those sentiments do pose a problem for the Orange Gringo. Down the thread is
a cute cartoon vid that will bring out the wry smile in most.
'"The opposition has created immense expectations, and it's not at all clear they
have a plan for actually fulfilling them," said David Smilde, a Venezuela analyst at the
Washington Office on Latin America'.
No. Actually, the US government and media have created immense expectations. Apparently
Trump's plans as President and Commander-in-Chief are just as half-baked as his business
projects were.
Blooming Barricade , Feb 14, 2019 4:12:34 PM |
link
And Roberto Lovato professor at UCLA on Democracy Now (they're redeeming themselves a
bit IMO with their Venezuela coverage, considering their abysmal coverage of Syria and
"Russiagate"): here
.
@james 9
Thanks for all your previous comments as well as this one. I do not subscribe to the
concept that Trump is a Deep State puppet. Even the horrible Obama was not. All those
sh**bags enter the vice of Presidency and after being squeezed a little by the Deep State
wizards behind the curtain, they start dancing to the tune. The system selects them on the
basis of low resistance, that is on the basis of being worthless, characterless
individuals. Watch the pre-selection/Primaries debates to realise how it comes to the final
match between the worst and the worstest.
But I find an interesting parallel between Syria and Venezuela. The US allies who
are supposed to sacrifice for the regime change and thieving of the neighbouring country.
When US assembled a Thieving Coalition on behalf of Israel to rip apart Syria, Turkey and
GCC (Saudis) were the prominent local members, just as Columbia and Brazil in ripping apart
Venezuela (also with puppet master Israel on top).
The Syria rip off failed because of what I called "the honesty between the thieves". It
appears that the Venezuela rip off is faltering due to the same reason. Perhaps it is an
in-built, systemic weakness of thieving coalitions that all the members want a piece of the
dismembered victim, but are too careful to sacrifice more of their own blood and money than
the next to achieve it.
Israel passes the buck down to US, US passes the buck down to Columbia and Brazil,
Columbian and Brazilian regimes try to pass it down to some internal fool, but those are
hard to find.
The thieving, murdering pyramid falters for the lack of self-sacrificial, extremist
fools (rarer in South America than in Middle East).
We usually think of Israel only as a tormenter of the Palestinians. But Israel is
much, much more - it is the Capo Di Tutti i Capi of the global crime. Tormenting
Palestinians is only a hobby, a sport, but destroying countries to steal their wealth is
the day job. US is a dumb bully, the blunt tool that the Israel Crime Syndicate uses for
stealing on a global scale. This is my new perspective after Israel's involvement in the
coup in Venezuela.
I've been following this story on Telesur and MintPress News for a few days. It
confirms the theory that what the US could be doing is igniting -- inadvertently -- civil
wars in the Lima Group countries.
Talking of which: The Canadian government is looking very weak. There are calls for
Trudeau's resignation after the unveiling of a corruption scandal involving Lavalin which
was heavily involved in the Libyan war in which Canada played a leading and ignominious
role -- Pilots, enforcing the 'no fly' zone, were said afterwards to have been
disillusioned, having been used as Al Qaeda's Air Force.
Canada has been taking the lead as a US surrogate in propagandizing for regime change in
Venezuela, if there is a government crisis it could lead to Freeland taking Trudeau's
place. On the other hand it might lead to a saner person being appointed to Foreign
Affairs.
The Washington Mafia won't admit defeat that easily. Some false flag action somewhere
at the border or the u.s. embassy will come. The howling of the Relotius media will be
deafening. Maybe a Colombian or a Brazilian military is stupid enough to do what Tronald
Dumb would rather avoid in consideration of his electorate.
I'm not sure the plan was ever meant to be a success. Oh sure, Rubio would have loved it if
the military stepped in and took over but he probably felt there was no real downside.
If in 6 months Maduro is still in power Guaido will be able to keep claiming Maduro is
illegitimate.
He can run across the border to Colombia and in the next election claim it is fraudulent
because he is not allowed to run. Meanwhile, sanctions will continue to do their magic and
eventually the people will stop supporting Maduro, not because they want the opposition in
charge, but because they want sanctions lifted.
At that point the military will be easily able to take over and launch elections that
only allow US-backed candidates. No big deal for Trump. What does it cost him? We have
plenty of oil for the time being. This kind of plan has few downsides (other than being
extremely immoral).
Far more likely that Brazil and Colombia refuse to commit any troops or other support
for a US-led coalition to invade Venezuela. These countries have long borders going through
thinly populated tropical forest or mountain areas with Venezuela.
They don't want the prospect of fighting continuous border wars with militias that would
sap their own military strength and which could go deep into their own territories. Imagine
how unpopular that would make their current governments with their publics.
It's likely that the Brazilian and Colombian governments don't command the loyalty
of their armed forces (especially the foot soldiers who would have shoulder the burden of
invasion) to the extent that the Venezuelan government under Maduro does of its own.
Especially if money allocated to the armed forces in Brazil and Colombia has gone to a few
favored individuals in the officer hierarchies while the grunts have seen no increased pay
or support, or have even seen their pay levels dwindle as their responsibilities
grow.
That's a possible scenario in Brazil given that since Dilma Rousseff's impeachment
as President in 2016 it has been governed by corrupt neoliberal politicians.
The problem with your hypothesis is the Venezuelan People support the Bolivarian
Revolution AND its constitution by over 80% as was shown in one of the first threads on
this topic.
Thanks to the People's Media, TeleSur, the People are well informed of the economic war
being waged against them, and they well know what abandoning the Revolution would
mean--they just celebrated a holiday dedicated to a revolt against a previous Yankee-backed
Dictator. Furthermore, the majority of the planet's people through their governments back
Maduro.
Stonewalling the offered dialog by Maduro goes against the Opposition's interest, just
as sitting out elections has every time. And if polls related to BigLie Media believability
within the Outlaw US Empire can be used as a proxy indicator, then it isn't doing a good
job manufacturing consent globally either.
South of the Border, majorities in every nation loathe the Gringo-Yankee Imperialist, so
reactionary governments can only stay in power through force. Bevin notes Lima Group
nations are already experiencing Blowback, and Haiti's already in revolt--again.
thanks... those are good parallels between syria and venezuala that you draw and to
which i agree with.. my thought on trump is basically - it doesn't matter who is in the
presidents seat in the usa, as the president seems to have little to say on that
matter..
they are compliant, or made to be compliant to agenda that seems to override every dream
a normal american might have for some role of harmony on the world stage which always
includes war, or some threat of war, with endless sanctions in prep for more of the same..
all to secure the us$ and yes - i think israel plays a pivotal role in all this as
well.
i like @24 jen's overview on the response that is more likely from the new puppets
surrounding venezuala..
Blooming Barricade , Feb 14, 2019 6:08:37 PM |
link
@20 Yes, Christina Freeland formed the Lima Group with her Ukrianian fascism's ideological
partners: Bolsonaro and his party alongside Columbia and to an extent Argentina. South
America a haven for Nazis once more.
"China will stay committed to pursuing peaceful development, comprehensively
deepening reform and breaking new grounds in opening-up on all fronts, and building a new
type of international relations and a community with a shared future for mankind in order
to create new opportunities for and make fresh contributions to world peace and
development."
"Putin's Lasting
State" or "Modern Russian Governance Explained," by Vladislav Surkov, Tr. Dimitry
Orlov. Excerpt:
"And so the Russian state continues, now as a new type of state that has never
existed here before. It took form mostly in the middle of the 2000s, and so far it has
been little studied, but its uniqueness and its viability are now apparent.
The stress tests which it has passed and is now passing have shown that this
specific, organically arrived at model of political functioning provides an effective
means of survival and ascension of the Russian nation not just for the coming years, but
for decades and, most likely, for the entire next century."
Both provide an amazing counterpoise to what we see the Outlaw US Empire doing. A very
curious proposal from the last article:
"[T]the political system that has been made in Russia is fit to serve not just future
domestic needs but obviously has significant export potential."
The import of what you said is that the people of Venezuela are well informed. The
people of the Evil Empire and its vassals are not. Thirteen weeks of revolt in France and a
week in Haiti -- Evil Empire MSM -- crickets.
"All states can be placed on a continuum which ranges from states whose authority is
based on their power to states whose power is based on their authority." Alexander
Solzhenitsyn
My favorite talking point is how anyone who is interviewed in the U.S. insists that the
'rank and file' are with the new President and only a handful of the most corrupt, upper
echelon Generals still support Maduro.
And I really love it when the Sock Puppets who do the interviews nod their heads as if
this is some great new insight when they should respond, 'how the hell do you know, when
were you in Venezuela?'
Kiza @ 33: Thanks for the compliment but I was really only guessing! Although it's not
difficult to think that any increases in Brazil's military budget that Bolsonaro makes (and
the country is on austerity spending and cutting back on social programs) are likely to go
into buying foreign (ie US) armaments, enriching Bolsonaro's allies in the military and in
Brazil's own armaments production, and not into better pay and conditions for soldiers.
One other thing also to consider is that in addition to conventional armed forces,
Venezuela also has popular defense committees and militias among urban and rural
communities who would be fighting any invasion forces. This is something we MoA
barflies had not considered before as few of us live in countries where militia groups have
been allowed to exist and even receive government support and money for arms and training.
https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13968
"We usually think of Israel only as a tormenter of the Palestinians. But Israel is
much, much more - it is the Capo Di Tutti i Capi of the global crime. Tormenting
Palestinians is only a hobby, a sport, but destroying countries to steal their wealth is
the day job. US is a dumb bully, the blunt tool that the Israel Crime Syndicate uses for
stealing on a global scale. This is my new perspective after Israel's involvement in the
coup in Venezuela."
This is how I see Israel as well, one difference though; IMO the US is being used to
bully yes, but it is also being destroyed and once dead Israel will move on to its next
victim
That's the gist of the narrative, that "democracy's being restored" instead of usurped.
Fortunately, that narrative is well past its sell date and its rot is all too plain for
many to see. It only works on the blindly indoctrinated, which fortunately are no longer a
majority within the Outlaw US Empire.
@42 It would be interesting to know who got Branson involved. He probably sees Guaido as
young and progressive. Maduro not so much. It shows which side of the fence Branson sits
on.
@ Jen 37
Yes, you are absolutely right, the last line of defence of Venezuela is what is usually
called the "territorial defence". I have never seen a territorial defence act effectively
in a military situation, and I am guessing that this is because of poor leadership, poor
armaments and amateurs against professionals. Having written all this, it is the remnants
of the "defence popular" which would be the bedrock of the guerrilla resistance. Therefore,
do not count on them stopping a professional military invasion, but do count on them
increasing the cost of the Mission Accomplished to the "peace keepers", that is those who
want to have peace just to enjoy their loot.
@ frances 38
Dear Frances, you raise this very interesting point about why a rider would flog his nag
to death. I know that there are two opposite strategies in the biological world - parasites
which maintain their host and parasites which kill their host. I simply do not understand
the strategy of a parasite killing its host. This would be a sensible strategy only in a
situation of plentiful replacement hosts, but both US and EU host are pretty warn out
nags.
If the US nag croaks financially, EU will not be much of a replacement, whilst the
potential of parasitising on Russia and China approaches zero. Therefore, I conclude that
"strategy of flogging the nag to death" is not really a strategy, it is an urge. That is,
it comes from a mix of chutzpah, psychopathy and pig manure in the nature of the parasite.
After all, who puts up a sofa on top of a hill of a stolen land to watch the final
extinction of the previous owner. Obviously, this goes far beyond just stealing the women
and the cattle.
Exxon-Mobil drilling exploration analyses results scheduled announcements at South Eastern
Mediterranean basin (location is situated a small birds flying distance south from Akrotiri
British base in Cyprus which will be obviously harbor HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft
carrier/s designed from ground up for F-35 deployment) were accidentally cancelled a few
days short before the Venezuela situation was grabbing the international headlines.
Day before yesterday unexpectedly the results were forwarded to the presses. It was
being timed to synch with the Venezuela humanitarian 'crisis' show?
What's the hidden message here? No oil revenues for you Med folks to use for boosting
social programmes political strategies?
" Therefore, I conclude that "strategy of flogging the nag to death" is not really
a strategy, it is an urge. That is, it comes from a mix of chutzpah, psychopathy and pig
manure in the nature of the parasite. After all, who puts up a sofa on top of a hill of a
stolen land to watch the final extinction of the previous owner. Obviously, this goes far
beyond just stealing the women and the cattle."
I agree, given the kill or be killed pathology of Israel's leadership combined with its
death grip on the US govt, all I see is a US collapse.
Israel in its madness assumes that somehow out of all of this it will rule the ME so why
would it have further need of its American dead horse?
To me, Israel has a Circe (Game of Thrones) mentality; lots of schemes, little to show for
it other than the death of others, lots of others.
"1981–1987: Package holiday industries and Virgin Atlantic Airways success
Branson's first successful entry into the airline industry was during a trip to Puerto
Rico. His flight was cancelled, so he decided to charter his own plane the rest of the way
and offer a ride to the rest of the stranded passengers for a small fee in order to cover
the cost.[24]
In 1982, Virgin purchased the gay nightclub Heaven."
To me it suggests that the guy might have been involved in kompromat operations in some
MI-sonething back at the day?
You're right – a war is all but inconceivable. Here are the numbers: The
Venezuelan army numbers 500,000 members. In addition, there are the uniquely Venezuelan
entities known as the national, regional and municipal-level militias numbering two million
more citizens under arms.
Modern military theory posits that an invading force must number at least three times
the numbers of the defensive force. The US military cannot muster even an equivalent number
to those who would be waiting for them "behind every blade of grass."
Even a strictly air attack intended to wreak widespread destruction and leave nothing
but chaos (a US specialty) would suffer significant casualties from the very sophisticated
air defense systems in Venezuela.
Of course, no quantity of dead military would be of slightest concern to the oligarchs
in the US and in Venezuela who would hope to make a killing from all the killing, but some
substantial number of US politicians would worry about the effect on their constituencies,
and the results in their vote counts next year.
A US military assault on Venezuela would be extremely stupid, and would wreak havoc on
the political class in DC.
The popular militias are not Venezuela's last line of defence, but the key to it. Venezuela
is one of those are countries in which the government can distribute arms and munitions to
the populace without fear that they will be used against it. And that is why so far the
allure of invading Venezuela, on behalf of the US and rich people everywhere, is not
sufficient to attract Colombia or Brazil.
As I have said before there is a real possibility that, by provoking the Venezuelan
masses back into active defence of the Bolivarian system, the imperialists risk starting a
war of poor against rich that would find eager partisans from Patagonia to Panama.
It would be instructive to consider the vast amounts of money and military that it took
to bring FARC to the negotiating table. The reason why Colombia has been invited into NATO
is that, for the past three decades NATO, in the form of US, UK and mercenaries, plus the
narcotics industry's paramilitaries, plus Israel have been spending billions to suppress a
guerrilla uprising in the jungle. And FARC fought entirely on its own, without regular
assistance from any outside power.
What Venezuela must do, however, is to do as Cuba did and become self sufficient in
foodstuffs. It has to break away from its dependency on commodity exports/imports. There is
no reason why it cannot achieve this within months. But to do so it has to break from the
bourgeoisie, who have broken decisively with it, and expropriate their 'property.'
Such an example would thrill millions across the continent and around the world,
millions who would rally- as Britain's dockers did in 1919 when they refused to load ships
supplying the anti-Bolshevik forces in Russia- to the support of the people of Venezuela
fighting for the right to govern themselves.
I don't really believe the Regular Guy nor the opposition want 'elections'.... why should
they? they have essentially lost nearly all of the 30 or more elections since 1998 and yet
they keep howling about elections. They just can't accept it - that they only have 20-30%
of the population with them.
They want power - and some/many of them are now willing to call on the USA to intervene
and give them illegitimate power through a coup d'etat and/or military sabotage and
subversion. they want a return of the totally pernicious and anti-democratic Oligarchy
which rules for hundreds of years until Chavez kicked them out..... These guys are so
arrogant that they are talking, among other nefarious things, about seizing/using funds in
the bank accounts of the Venezuelan embassy in DC
really it's time for Maduro to do something a bit more sane and radical because these
guys are out of control, or he'll lose - in other words, use the courts... but he keeps
talking about "sooner or later" , well it looks to me like later is getting pretty late
Venezuela is a proxy battlefield for the Western way/NOT-Western way. I don't want to throw
ism definitions at the sides when I believe it it all about the money....global private
finance versus alternatives like China, Russia, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela....I
am missing ???
Anyway, I think this "existential" conflict is being forced now before the alternatives
get more influence on the "slave" Western nations.
I don't like to think about the repressive environment that will exist in the remaining
Western block of nations after this global "divorce".
In the coming "public discussion" about capitalism/socialism will the true power of
those that own global private finance be exposed? I hope so but keep seeing identity
politics, wars, etc. being played against the chances.
"A US military assault on Venezuela would be extremely stupid, and would wreak
havoc on the political class in DC."
It would be stupid. Which is precisely why it wont happen, except as fake humanitarian
intervention after Venezuela is divided and weakened from sanctions and starvation. It
could happen earlier with a FF attack killing a large number of Americans blamed on
Venezuela, but the US has been very cautious about putting troops in harms way since
Vietnam. We engage against enemies we know cant hurt us much.
These guys are pretty smart. Many like to think otherwise, perhaps it makes them feel
better. You can't judge their actions by Hollywood standards of winning and losing. Chaos
and denial of resources to anyone opposed to the Empire is enough of a Win , at least
temporarily. Its a long game they play, its been played for over a century now, even much
longer.
The elites, referred to by Plato as Philosopher Kings , want to rule the world as living
Gods, or at least their descendants. It's only over the last 150-250 years or so that
control of science, finance, military, capitalism and democracy (manipulated via the
printing press) gave them the means to realize their goals. It was a long road for them,
operating through secret societies and monopoly control of money and government debt, and
dealing with factions who were bound by morality (hence the war on religion) . In the
battle between Good and Evil tbe good guys have been annihilated or at least silenced, at
least in the West and most likely much of the East.
"... I have to agree with the false flag suggestions. anyone who saw abrams get reamed by omar yesterday saw the true face of delusional and unaccountable psychopathy at work. the closest he's ever come to paying for his war crimes was a brief period before a pardon and as such he's more entitled and fearless than the average deep state scumbag. add the typical zionist persecution complex ("pre-traumatic stress disorder") and a healthy dose of spite and it's clear this won't end until it has to. ..."
"... As for the western media, they'll screech no matter what happens. I "hate watch" the BBC's american coverage and it is even more painful than you'd think. They're fixated at an autistic level on "OMG TEH AID WTF!!!!111!!" and parade out rando "opposition" types who claim they're tortured martyrs while wearing make-up in a new york TV studio. ..."
"... I have to agree with the false flag suggestions. anyone who saw abrams get reamed by omar yesterday saw the true face of delusional and unaccountable psychopathy at work. the closest he's ever come to paying for his war crimes was a brief period before a pardon and as such he's more entitled and fearless than the average deep state scumbag. add the typical zionist persecution complex ("pre-traumatic stress disorder") and a healthy dose of spite and it's clear this won't end until it has to. ..."
"... As for the western media, they'll screech no matter what happens. I "hate watch" the BBC's american coverage and it is even more painful than you'd think. They're fixated at an autistic level on "OMG TEH AID WTF!!!!111!!" and parade out rando "opposition" types who claim they're tortured martyrs while wearing make-up in a new york TV studio. ..."
Market shelves in the scruffy Colombian town of Puerto Santander are loaded with
Venezuelan maize flour, rice, cheese spread and more, heavily subsidized consumer goods
smuggled by government officials and ordinary citizens alike and sold at big mark-ups.
Gasoline is ferried from Venezuela too, as people cash in on the arbitrage opportunities
created by extreme price distortions. The spectacle of food being spirited out of a country
where hunger is becoming epidemic shows in microcosm how Maduro's socialist government has
created an economic and humanitarian disaster. While this black-market trade has been going
on for years now, it's jarring to witness it at a time when much of the world has thrown its
support behind efforts by Maduro's rival, Juan Guaido, to bring emergency supplies into the
country. "It makes you angry to see these products for sale," said Lisbeth Cisneros, 28, a
pregnant mother of four who fled the Venezuelan town of San Cristobal three months ago and
works as a street vendor on the Colombian side of the border. "The situation is horrible over
there."
@israel
shamir I read the link The setting for this incident is British soldiers and colonists
under siege at Fort Pitt by Indians allied with Pontiac. There is no evidence for any
sustained program of attempting to infect Indians with smallpox in U.S. history. This charge
is of a piece with the general use of the term "genocide" regarding American relations with
the Indians. And it is equally fallacious.
In this struggle, President Trump is his own bitter enemy. He seeks approval of the War
Party, and his own base will be disappointed by his actions.
Sad but true. Trump is over. Any Qanons out there still trying desperately to convince
themselves that he's secretly fighting the deep state are just delusional specimens at this
point. Don't get me wrong: I'm still glad Hillary's still not president. I'm just saddened
that there'll be no MAGA but then, I guess that was always unlikely.
A bigger problem is that Venezuela had become a monoculture economy: it exports oil and
imports everything else. It does not even produce food to feed its 35 million inhabitants.
Venezuela is a victim of neoliberal doctrine claiming that you can buy what you can't
produce. Now they can't buy and they do not produce. Imagine a democratic Saudi Arabia hit
by blockade.
This point is worth emphasizing, since it's not a problem unique to Venezuela. In fact,
the Globalist institutions (IMF, WorldBank, USAid, etc.) have worked tirelessly for decades
now to increase third-world countries' dependence on import-export agriculture, rather than
encouraging them to become more self-sufficient. Instead of extending them credit to grow
food for the domestic market, for example, the WorldBank will only extend them credit to grow
crops–usually dry crops like cotton–for export, forcing them to import
much of the food they need. Meanwhile, Washington throws crazy subsidies at agri-giants like
Monsanto (rather than 'small family farms') to encourage them to export more of their GMO
garbage to these countries. Just ask the Mexicans what happened to their domestic
corn-growing industry after NAFTA came into effect. Now, all those Mexicans who lost their
farms are up in the US working as laborers for the very agri-businesses that put them
out of business in the first place!
But hey: sactionable countries, broke farmers heading pa' norte to look for work,
and constant instability throughout the third world–those are all features of
the NWO, not bugs.
By the way, am I the only one who thinks Juan Guaidó looks sort of like a gay
Obama?
Unlike Asians and Arabs, Latin Americans don't have it in them to fight a war. Sure they can
bluster, but like Africans, it's all just chest puffing noise.
When the U.S. decides to go in, they'll meet little resistance. The tragedy will be what
comes later as when the U.S. exported democracy to Iraq, Syria and Libya. Rich Venezuelans
will make out like bandits, the poor will be reduced to selling their daughters.
What surprises me is the silence of both the left and Hispanics. Trump is about to do a
regime change in a Latin American socialist country and they have nothing to say about
it.
Israel Shamir should have better sense than to spread the 'diseased blankets' given by
Americans to the Indians nonsense. Even the link fails to come close to proving a single
case. First, the only known written suggestion that anyone had considered it is from Colonial
days – those are officers of the British Empire. Second, the one case of a possible
such transmission, and it perhaps an accident, also is from the Colonial era.
The most genocidally inclined Americans with power and authority who might have done such
a thing, Union Generals Sherman and Sheridan, did not take advantage of their positions to do
such an evil.
The real decimation of the Native American population was caused by diseases brought by the
Spanish to which they had no immunity. This occurred before widespread settlement on the
Eastern seaboard.
Yes, there was one recorded incident of an army officer giving infected blankets to the
Indians but that was not a widespread program in itself.
Venezuela invasion thing is double-faceted: a trap for Trump & a bluff. if the invasion
is, then bye-bye 2020 election, mission accomplished. if no invasion on sight then the bluff
of Pompeo-Bolton-Abrams is called & the 2020 reelection assured. Venezuela in the role of
bait.
@Anonymous
And of course the trail of tears by the Cherokees and later by the Navaho added to it, as
hundreds if thousand didn't died from the lack of blankets and the lack of food, only to be
used as forced labor living in holes in the ground young women selling them selves for a loaf
of bread while they built a fort.The truth was we tried to kill off by any means as many as
we could for the dead has no claim to the land.!!!.!!c
@Jake
Hmm I believe it was Sherman to said "kill the children for nits breed lice" and surly don't
leave out Custer who the Indians call the 'eastern sun" for he always attacked as the sun
came up attacking friendly villages as well as those not so friendly !!
"... First, you starve people; then you bring them humanitarian aid. This was proposed by John McNaughton at Pentagon: bomb locks and dams, by shallow-flooding the rice, cause widespread starvation (more than a million dead?) "And then we shall deliver humanitarian aid to the starving Vietnamese". Or, rather, "we could offer to do [that] at the conference table." Planning a million dead by starvation, in writing: if such a note would be found on the ruins of the Third Reich, it would seal the story of genocide, it would be quoted daily. But the story of the genocide of the Vietnamese is rarely mentioned nowadays. ..."
"... They did it in Syria, too. At first, they brought weapons for every Muslim extremist, then they blockaded Damascus, and then they sent some humanitarian aid, but only to the areas under rebel control. ..."
"... The Israelis practice it in Gaza. They block all export or import from the Strip, interdict fishing in the Mediterranean and drip-feed the captive Palestinians by 'humanitarian aid'. Jews, being Jews, make it one better: they made the EU to pay for the humanitarian aid to Gaza AND to buy the aid stuff from Israel. This made Gaza an important source of profit for the Jewish state. ..."
You are so kind-hearted! I shed a tear thinking of American generosity. "So many delightful
goodies: sacks of rice, canned tuna and protein-rich biscuits, corn flour, lentils and pasta,
arrived at the border of troubled Venezuela – enough for one light meal each for five
thousand people", – reported the news in a sublime reference to five thousand fed by
Christ's fishes and loaves. True, Christ did not take over the bank accounts and did not seize
the gold of those he fed. But 21st century Venezuela is a good deal more-prosperous than 1st
century Galilee. Nowadays, you have to organise a blockade if you want people to be grateful
for your humanitarian aid.
This is not a problem. The US-UK duo did it in Iraq, as marvellous Arundhati Roy wrote in
April 2003 (in The Guardian of old, before it turned into an imperial tool): After
Iraq was brought to its knees, its people starved, half a million of its children killed, its
infrastructure severely damaged the blockade and war were followed by you guessed it!
Humanitarian relief. At first, they blocked food supplies worth billions of dollars, and then
they delivered 450 tonnes of humanitarian aid and celebrated their generosity for a few days of
live TV broadcasts. Iraq had had enough money to buy all the food it needed, but it was
blocked, and its people received only some peanuts.
And this was rather humane by American standards. In the 18th century, the British colonists
in North America used more drastic methods while dispensing aid to disobedient natives. The Red
Indians were expelled from their native places, and then they were provided humanitarian aid:
whiskey and blankets. The blankets had been previously used by smallpox
patients . The native population of North America was decimated by the ensuing epidemics
from this and similar measures. Probably you haven't heard of this chapter of your history: the
USA has many Holocaust museums but not a single memorial to the genocide near home. It is much
more fun to discuss faults of Germans and Turks than of your own forefathers.
First, you starve people; then you bring them humanitarian aid. This was proposed by John
McNaughton at Pentagon: bomb locks and dams, by shallow-flooding the rice, cause widespread
starvation (more than a million dead?) "And then we shall deliver humanitarian aid to the
starving Vietnamese". Or, rather, "we could offer to do [that] at the conference table."
Planning a million dead by starvation, in writing: if such a note would be found on the ruins
of the Third Reich, it would seal the story of genocide, it would be quoted daily. But the
story of the genocide of the Vietnamese is rarely mentioned nowadays.
They did it in Syria, too. At first, they brought weapons for every Muslim extremist,
then they blockaded Damascus, and then they sent some humanitarian aid, but only to the areas
under rebel control.
This cruel but efficient method of breaking nations' spirit has been developed by lion
tamers for years, perhaps for centuries. You have to starve the beast until it will take food
from your hands and lick your fingers. 'Starvation-taming', they call it.
The Israelis practice it in Gaza. They block all export or import from the Strip,
interdict fishing in the Mediterranean and drip-feed the captive Palestinians by 'humanitarian
aid'. Jews, being Jews, make it one better: they made the EU to pay for the humanitarian aid to
Gaza AND to buy the aid stuff from Israel. This made Gaza an important source of profit for the
Jewish state.
So in Venezuela they follow an old script. The US and its London poodle seized over 20
billion dollars from Venezuela and from Venezuelan national companies. They stole over a
billion in gold ingots Venezuela had trustingly deposited in the cellars of the Bank of
England.
Well, they said they will give this money to a Venezuelan Random Dude, rather. To the guy
who already promised to give the wealth of Venezuela to the US companies. And after this
daylight robbery, they bring a few containers of humanitarian aid to the border and wait for
the rush of bereft Venezuelans for food.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tweeted : "The Venezuelan people
desperately need humanitarian aid. The U.S. & other countries are trying to help, but
Venezuela's military under Maduro's orders is blocking aid with trucks and shipping tankers.
The Maduro regime must LET THE AID REACH THE STARVING PEOPLE."
Venezuelans aren't starving, even though they are going through difficulties. The biggest
noise is made by the wealthy, as always. If Pompeo wants to help Venezuelans, he might lift the
sanctions, return the funds, lift the blockade. The biscuits he wants to provide are of but
little use.
President Maduro is right when he refuses to let this hypocrisy bribe the stomachs and
hearts of his people. It is not just that he remembers his Virgil and knows, Timeo danaos
et dona ferentes , "beware gift-bearing Greeks." There are too many American and Colombian
soldiers around the pending delivery place, and this place is suspiciously close to an airport
with an extra-long runway suitable for a an airlift.
The US is known for its propensity to invade its neighbours: Panama was invaded in 1989 to
keep the Panama Canal in American hands and to roll back the agreement signed by the
good-hearted President Jimmy Carter. President George Bush Sr sent his airborne troops in after
calling Panama president "a dictator and cocaine smuggler". This is exactly what President
Trump says about Venezuela's president.
They are likely to use this aid to invade and suborn Venezuela. Wisely, Maduro began large
military exercises to prepare the army in case of invasion. The situation of Venezuela is dire
enough even without invasion. Their money has been appropriated, their main oil company is as
good as confiscated; and there is a strong fifth column waiting for Yankees in Caracas.
ORDER IT NOW
This fifth column consists mainly of compradors , well-off young folk with a
smattering of Western education and upbringing, who see their future within the framework of
the American Empire. They are ready to betray the unwashed masses and invite the US troops in.
They are supported by the super-rich, by representatives of foreign companies, by Western
secret services. Such people exist everywhere; they tried to organise the Gucci Revolution in
Lebanon, the Green Revolution in Iran, the Maidan in the Ukraine. In Russia they had their
chance in the winter of 2011/2012 when their Mink-Coat Revolution was played at
Moscow's Bolotnaya Heath.
In Moscow they lost when their opponents, the Russia-First crowd, bettered them by fielding
a much-bigger demo
at Poklonnaya Hill. The Western news agencies tried to cover the defeat by broadcasting
pictures of the Putin-supporters demo and saying it was the pro-Western Heath. Other Western
agencies published pictures of 1991 rallies saying they were taken in 2012 on the Heath. In
Moscow, nobody was fooled: the mink-coat crowd knew they were licked.
In the Ukraine, they won, for President Yanukovich, a hesitant and pusillanimous man of two
minds, failed to gather massive support. It is a big question whether Maduro will be able to
mobilise Venezuela-First masses. If he is, he will win the confrontation with the US as
well.
Maduro is rather reticent; he hasn't disciplined unruly oligarchs; he does not control the
media; he tries to play a social-democrat game in a country that is not Sweden by long shot.
His subsidies have allowed ordinary people to escape dire poverty, but now they are used by
black marketeers to siphon off the wealth of the nation. Far from being a disaster zone,
Venezuela is a true Bonanza, a real Klondike: you can fill a tanker with petrol for pennies,
smuggle it to neighbouring Colombia and sell it for market price. Many supporters of the Random
Guy have made small fortunes this way, and they hope to make a large killing if and when the
Americans come.
A bigger problem is that Venezuela had become a monoculture economy: it exports oil and
imports everything else. It does not even produce food to feed its 35 million inhabitants.
Venezuela is a victim of neoliberal doctrine claiming that you can buy what you can't produce.
Now they can't buy and they do not produce. Imagine a democratic Saudi Arabia hit by
blockade.
In order to save the economy, Maduro should drain the swamp, end the black market and
profiteering, encourage agriculture, tax the rich, develop some industry for local consumption.
It can be done. Venezuela is not a socialist state like orderly Cuba, nor a social-democratic
one like Sweden and England in 1970s, but even its very modest model of allowing the masses to
rise out of misery, poverty and ignorance seems too much for the West.
It is often said there are two antagonists in the West, the Populists and the Globalists,
and President Trump is the Populist leader. The Venezuela crisis proved these two forces are
united if there is a chance to attack and rob an outsider country. Trump is condemned at home
when he calls his troops back from Afghanistan or Syria, but he gains support when he threatens
Venezuela or North Korea. He can be sure he will be cheered on by Macron and Merkel and even by
The Washington Post and The New York Times .
He has the real WMD, the Weapons of Mass Deception, to attack Venezuela, and these WMD had
been activated with the beginning of the creeping coup. When a rather unknown young politician,
the leader of a small neoliberal rabidly pro-American fraction in the Parliament, Random Dude,
claimed the title of president, he was immediately recognised by Trump, and the Western media
reported that the people of Venezuela went out in mass demos to greet the new president and
demand Maduro's removal.
They beamed videos of huge Caracas demos back to Venezuela. Not many viewers abroad noticed
that the video was old, filmed in 2016 demos, but the Venezuelans saw that at once. They
weren't fooled. They knew that there is no chance for a big protest demo on that day, the day
of a particularly important baseball game in the professional league between Leones of Caracas
and Cardenales de Lara from Barquisimeto.
But the WMD kept lying. Here is a report by
Moon of Alabama : the reports of large anti-government rallies are fake news or prophecies
hoping to become self-fulfilling ones:
Agence France-Press stated at 11:10 utc yesterday that "tens of thousands" would
join a rally.
Tens of thousands of protesters are set to pour onto the streets of Venezuela's capital
#Caracas Saturday to back opposition leader Juan Guaido's calls for early elections as
international pressure increased on President #Maduro to step down http://u.afp.com/Jouu
They lie that there are army deserters spoiling for a fight with the army. The young guys
CNN presented weren't deserters, and they didn't live in Venezuela. Even their military
insignia were of the kind discarded years ago, as our friend The Saker
noticed .
However, these lies won't avail -- my correspondents in Caracas report that there are demos
for and against government (for Maduro slightly bigger crowds), but the feelings aren't strong.
The crisis is manufactured in Washington, and the Venezuelans aren't keen to get involved.
That's why we can expect an American attempt to use force, preceded by some provocation.
Probably it won't be a full-blown war: the US never fought an enemy that wasn't exhausted prior
to the encounter. If the Maduro administration survives the blow, the crisis will take a low
profile, until sanctions do their work and further undermine the economy.
ORDER IT NOW
In this struggle, President Trump is his own bitter enemy. He seeks approval of the War
Party, and his own base will be disappointed by his actions. His sanctions will send more
refugees to the US, wall or no wall. He undermines the unique status of the US dollar by
weaponising it. In 2020, he will reap what he sow.
I am pretty sure that there won't be any military intervention by US in Venezuela. How do I
know this? Well, if it was any other nation, – for example a nation of people whose
brains have been turned into mush by decades long propaganda – then I would be worried.
Luckily, US have one of the best informed populations on earth – they have all those
bastions of truth like CNN, CBS, NYT and so on. That's why I am fairly certain that the US
wouldn't dare to attack Venezuela. Their peace-loving nation wouldn't let them.
The only way it can happen is if in the next few weeks a group of Venezuelan terrorists
hijacked few planes and flew them into some tall buildings in the US. That's the only way
that the public opinion in the peace loving nation can be swayed towards war.
Remember, every time the US has gone to war, they had to stage various versions of 9/11
– in order to convince the well informed and peace loving Americans that someone hates
their freedoms, so they have to go over there to fight for those freedoms, rather than wait
over here for someone to bring the fight to them.
I am pretty sure that there won't be any military intervention by US in Venezuela. How do I
know this? Well, if it was any other nation, – for example a nation of people whose
brains have been turned into mush by decades long propaganda – then I would be worried.
Luckily, US have one of the best informed populations on earth – they have all those
bastions of truth like CNN, CBS, NYT and so on. That's why I am fairly certain that the US
wouldn't dare to attack Venezuela. Their peace-loving nation wouldn't let them.
The only way it can happen is if in the next few weeks a group of Venezuelan terrorists
hijacked few planes and flew them into some tall buildings in the US. That's the only way
that the public opinion in the peace loving nation can be swayed towards war.
Remember, every time the US has gone to war, they had to stage various versions of 9/11
– in order to convince the well informed and peace loving Americans that someone hates
their freedoms, so they have to go over there to fight for those freedoms, rather than wait
over here for someone to bring the fight to them.
@Verymuchalive
According to numbers from Venezuela's Ministry of Agriculture, after relatively stagnant food
production throughout the 1990s, from 2003 to 2011 milk production increased by 230 percent,
beef production by 19 percent, chicken by 60 percent, rice by 25 percent, corn by 116
percent, and beans by 320 percent.
As can be seen, the claims among Chavez's critics of a decrease in food production are
simply false. And while it is true that there have been food shortages, the real reason is
quite different from what the media reports. An impressive increase in food production in
recent years has simply been outpaced by growing consumption that has increased even more
rapidly, creating supply problems in many basic items and the need to import increasing
amounts of food. Though often cited as a major failure of the Chavez government, it is
actually the result of millions of poor Venezuelans eating better and consuming more than
ever before. As one Venezuelan recently said to an opposition activist who insisted that
empty supermarket shelves were proof of the government's failures and demanded to know, "Then
where is the milk?": "The milk," he replied, "is in the bellies of Venezuela's poor." https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/7513
As for the USSR, only now the Russians are coming to the levels of modest affluence circa
1985, after the disaster of anti-communist rule in 1990s.
Russian Communism is a secularised Russian Orthodox Christianity. Likewise, American system
is secularised Judaism.
BRAVO OMAR ..2 nd time in my life I have seen balls in congress.
Venezuela Envoy Elliott Abrams Lose His Cool During Tense Exchange With Rep. Ilhan
Omar
Watch the video at link
"Mr. Abrams, in 1991 you pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding information from
Congress regarding your involvement in the Iran-Contra affair, for which you were later
pardoned by president George H.W. Bush," began Omar. "I fail to understand why members of
this committee or the American people should find any testimony that you give today to be
truthful."
"If I could respond to that " interjected Abrams.
"It was not a question," shot back Omar.
After a brief exchange in which Abrams protested "It was not right!" Omar cut Abrams off,
saying "Thank you for your participation."
@bluedog
Please present you proof your 'forced labor living in holes in the ground, women selling
themselves for bread'.
You cannot, or you would have.
We note your avoidance of the facts. Violent Stone Age 'Indians':
– kept slaves
– were in constant states of war with other tribes
– treated & traded women like cattle
– practiced genocide against other 'Indian' tribes
– used crude environmentally destructive slash & burn agricultural methods
– decimated the animal populations
– the first acts by them when they got horses from the Spaniards was to attack and
decimate other tribes
– engaged in cannibalism
– roasted people alive
– routinely butchered children
– engaged in human sacrifice
– constant rapes
– took scalps from their enemies
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kw/crichton.html "The noble savage is a fantasy, and it was never true. That anyone still believes it, 200
years after Rousseau, shows the tenacity of religious myths"
@bluedog
I've read biographies of Custer and can only recall two villages attacked by him at the head
of his regiment, the 7th U.S. Cavalry. In November 1868 he led an attack on the Cheyenne
encampment on the Washita River, in Oklahoma. Reports differ on the casualties, but this was
decidedly not a friendly village. The second is his celebrated and perhaps precipitous attack
on the massive summer encampment of Lakota/Cheyenne/Arapaho on the Little Bighorn River.in
June of 1876. They had refused President Grant's order to return to their reservations the
previous January, and placed themselves subject to military action. He had been involved in
other skirmishes with hostile Indians, in Kansas in 1867 and on the Yellowstone Expedition of
1873, but I'm unaware of any other attacks on villages.
I'm hardly a communist myself, but not everything can be blamed on communism.
Venezuela is not a communist state by any stretch of the imagination, and Chavez and Maduro
can hardly be compared to Lenin and Stalin, that's just a bit too much .
I didn't claim that Chavez and Maduro were Communists. Only that they had had a disastrous
effect on Venezuelan agriculture as Lenin and Stalin had on Soviet agriculture – though
of course Bolshevism was many degrees worse. I said elsewhere that Chavez used money from oil
to import ever more food from abroad, rather than stimulate indigenous food production. I
said that this was a very odd form of Socialism. In fact, it's not Socialism at all.
Back in the 1970s and 1980s – if, like me, you are old enough to remember – there
were a number of pseudo-Communist 3rd World States, like North Yemen, Angola and Ethiopia.
Beneath the very thin veneer, they were kleptocracies run to benefit those in power.
Venezuela is a similar pseudo-Socialist kleptocracy. Before he obtained power, Chavez
presented himself as a Reformer, rather than a Socialist. Afterwards, he claimed he was "
Bolivarian Socialist ".
Oil is a very capital intensive industry. If you fail to invest sufficiently, then production
will tail off, particularly the heavy, sulphurous product Venezuela produces. Chavez took
this money and used it to bribe the masses in welfare payments. Talk about being bribed by
your own money ! As much money if not more was stolen by the kleptocracy for their own
benefit – over $200bn or more if Forbes is to believed.
Oil production has gone down from 3.5bbp day before Chavez to 2.4bbp day on his death. It is
now down to 1 bbp day. By the end of the year, it will be be 0.5bbp day or less, regardless
of what America does.
I totally agree with you. The US should stay out of this conflict. Whether it wishes to
embargo Venezuelan crude imports is up to the American government. Otherwise, keep out.
Regardless, the Venezuelan Government would collapse within 18 months. Venezuela will need a
great deal of aid, not only to reconstruct their country, but also to invest heavily in oil
production. If the Us supplies this, let them have the oil. It will be the most expensive oil
in the world
A bigger problem is that Venezuela had become a monoculture economy: it exports oil and
imports everything else. It does not even produce food to feed its 35 million inhabitants.
Venezuela is a victim of neoliberal doctrine claiming that you can buy what you can't
produce.
Under two decades of Chavismo, Venezuela became much more a monoculture economy than it
used to be. Oil exports as a percentage of Venezuelan exports increased from 71.7% in 1998,
the year Chávez was elected, to 97.8% by 2013. Which implies that Chávez was
following, to quote your words, a "neoliberal doctrine claiming that you can buy what you
can't produce."
Yet you say this about the current Chavismo opponent.
When a rather unknown young politician, the leader of a small neoliberal
rabidly pro-American fraction in the Parliament, Random Dude, claimed the title of
president,
You inform us the leader of the opposition is "neoliberal," which implies that Maduro and
Chavismo are NOT neoliberal, in fact are far from being neoliberal. Yet you also inform us
that Chavismo, in its two decades in power followed "neoliberal doctrine claiming that you
can buy what you can't produce."
You are not making sense.
Fuel exports (% of merchandise exports)
1998 71.7%
2013 97.8%
CARACAS (Reuters) – Venezuelans reported losing on average 11 kilograms (24
lbs) in body weight last year and almost 90 percent now live in poverty, according to a new
university study on the impact of a devastating economic crisis and food shortages.
Over 60 percent of Venezuelans surveyed said that during the previous three months they had
woken up hungry because they did not have enough money to buy food. About a quarter of the
population was eating two or less meals a day, the study showed.
Last year, the three universities found that Venezuelans said they had lost an average
of 8 kilograms during 2016. This time, the study's dozen investigators surveyed 6,168
Venezuelans between the ages of 20 and 65 across the country of 30 million people.
Most people would term "difficulties" a euphemism for that.
@israel
shamirAs can be seen, the claims among Chavez's critics of a decrease in food
production are simply false.
FAO Stats tell us otherwise. You could find no data beyond 2011? Probably because your
information source, the Venezuelan Ministry of Agriculture didn't want to release
embarrassing data.
Chávez was elected in 2016. FAO Stats inform us that from 1998 to 2016,
Venezuela's net per capita Crops (PIN) production has fallen 35.7%.
Venezuela's net per capita Cereals, Total production (here corn and rice) has fallen
46.9%.
Cereals production fell a further 17% in 2017. From 2014-2017, Cereals production in
Venezuela fell 59%.
"Claims among Chavez's critics of a decrease in food production are simply false ?" As
they say in Venezuela, "Dime otro de vaqueros." Tell me another cowboy story. Tell me
another fish tale.
BRAVO OMAR ..2 nd time in my life I have seen balls in congress.
Venezuela Envoy Elliott Abrams Lose His Cool During Tense Exchange With Rep. Ilhan
Omar
Watch the video at link
"Mr. Abrams, in 1991 you pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding information from
Congress regarding your involvement in the Iran-Contra affair, for which you were later
pardoned by president George H.W. Bush," began Omar. "I fail to understand why members of
this committee or the American people should find any testimony that you give today to be
truthful."
"If I could respond to that " interjected Abrams.
"It was not a question," shot back Omar.
After a brief exchange in which Abrams protested "It was not right!" Omar cut Abrams off,
saying "Thank you for your participation."
"... The book Giants: The Global Power Elite by Peter Philips provides extensive detail on how imperial capital issues its instructions to the institutions it controls. ..."
"... I am very suspicious of the 32% figure. I don't trust it. A poll conducted a few weeks ago has shown just 20% of Venezuelans knew who Guaidó was. How can it be that 32% now consider him the legitimate President? ..."
"... I can certainly picture Trump pulling out all of the stops to overthrow the Venezuelan government the closer it gets to the US elections. I could even see Trump encouraging Colombia and Brazil to invade Venezuelan, but we'll have to wait see. ..."
"... Polls have had a long history of being used to bend the public narrative, slide the Overton window and otherwise obfuscate the core issue(s)......because money pays for them ..."
"... It is so weird to see this unfolding. Nobody even seems to be asking why Guaido didn't just run for president -- he wasn't barred. ..."
"... the moment the Venezuelan right-wing realized the USA chose Guaidó, they quickly begun to "support" him. Of course, this is all a farce: they know Guaidó is merely a code word for American military intervention and regime change. This is textbook color revolution. ..."
This poll basically reflects the Venezuelan people's polarization. The Chavistas always
had circa 60% and the right-wing circa 40%.
What this poll shows, though, is that the people knows how to play politics: those 32% who
answered Guaidó is the "legitimate president" know he's not, but they say he is either
way; they're sending a message to the USA: "please, bomb our country and exterminate the
Chavistas, and we'll serve you as a Puppet State".
Patricia E Schild , Feb 11, 2019 3:17:11 PM |
link
I can't wrap my brain around Venezuela "wanting" the USA to intervene in their sovereign
affairs... When Chavez took power the rich were scattering like cockroaches....Now, they're
seeking their revenge and trying to get back into power. After the results we've seen from
western intervention in the Middle East, I hope very strongly that the USA fails in Veneuela.
The true people of Venezuela deserve so much better. #Istandwiththepeopleofvenezuela
I'm surprised that even out of the right wing/bourgeois constituency of Venezuela, 32% would
say the Guaido is the legitimate President. However, I guess that means the "opposition" are
at least temporarily united behind Random Guy, for now. (Of course, constitutionally, even if
Maduro did step down the Vice President, Delcy Rodriguez, would be the next Constitutional
President.)
@9 AriusArmenian No, don't arrest him. Not yet. According to the Venezuelan constitution an
"interim President" can only be in that position for 30 days, no more, no less.
Let him run around making a fool of himself for 30 days, then tap him on the shoulder and
say "times up buddy, you haven't even called for an election. What was the point of all
this?"
This about it this way: whatever thin veneer of "legitimacy" he has claimed for himself
disappears after a month, so there is no need to rush this. After all, it isn't as if Guaido is building up any momentum.
Quite the opposite, by the look of things.
@9 Good question. I think Maduro is being smart by ignoring Random Dude's pleas. Arresting
him might create a martyr for their cause and serve as a pretext for more US ingerence. The
longer he talks the more he shows the workd the shallowness and ineffectiveness of the coup
attempt..
Hinterlaces' poll that B cites above does not say where the polling was done or how it was
done. For all we know, the "direct interviewing" - one assumes this is face-to-face polling,
not polling by phoning people selected randomly from city phone-books or electoral rolls -
could have been done in neighbourhoods where the interviewers felt most comfortable and these
neighbourhoods may be less supportive of the government on average.
Areas where the people are most in favour of the government are likely to be areas deemed
unsafe to travel on foot because there is a perception that these neighbourhoods are violent
and dominated by drug and other gangs.
I got some information about Hinterlaces itself using Google Translate and this is what
the agency says about itself:
Hinterlaces is the first Venezuelan Intelligence Agency, specializing in public opinion
and market research services, situational analysis and strategic consulting, with emphasis on
the scientific interpretation of the cultural and symbolic dimension of society.
Our mission
Hinterlaces provides intelligence for strategic decision making. Through studies of
public opinion and markets, Hinterlaces is dedicated to producing knowledge, making
situational and environmental analyzes, providing strategic lines to build, enrich, renew and
/ or surpass the social, political, business and commercial performance of our
clients. http://hinterlaces.com/quienes-somos/
This is a polling agency whose agenda might incline towards favouring the private
commercial sector. So take heart that even with in-built bias, the poll Hinterlaces conducted still showed
that a majority of Venezuelans support the Maduro government.
Gee, imagine if the U$A actually lived up to the rhetoric it spews daily about it caring for
democracy and freedom. Then I woke up. The millions of lives ruined, and the innocents we kill daily, all for the sake of greed
and avarice of a few wealthy elites, is mind numbing.
Venezuela is just the latest target in the empire's lust for global domination...
I ask you to step back for a moment and take a look at the whole world. The US is at war in
one form or another with the entire world, 7 or 8 countries in the Middle East in its effort
to gain control of central Eurasia just a Brzezinski dreamed, threatening Iran for its access
to the Caspian Sea and more. The US has troops and is actually fighting and killing in 52 of
54 African countries. The US has built numerous new military bases all around Latin America
and is threatening Venezuela. It is doing everything it can to contain China with military
maneuvers in the South China Sea and trade, and of course Russia nothing needs to be said.
It is the US led western empire against the rest of the world. The Empire apparently
believes it is all or nothing time.
The US led Empire is not the US, the US government is the home of the imperial
institutions, it is Imperial HQ.
The actual "king" and ruler of the Western world is its core block of capital which acts
as one force it is today 50 trillion dollars which is managed by 17 management funds - and
guess what - they all invest in each other.
The book Giants: The Global Power Elite by Peter Philips provides extensive detail on
how imperial capital issues its instructions to the institutions it controls.
The Venezulean military have been running massive exercises (scheduled 11-15 February) -
showing their willingness to fight for Venezuela under Maduro. Their actual combat abilities
are unknown but motivation goes a long way.
That was my thought too, that the percentage for Guaido was so high it must have been an
attempt to get a majority, which failed. If the poll had asked whether the US should be
sponsoring an unelected president, I'm sure the number would be 80% saying "no".
@9 AriusArmenian
Regarding whether Guaido should be arrested - he can't be. As the speaker of the National
Assembly, he's immune from prosecution except as the Venezuelan supreme court rules. The
government applied to the Court, which ruled to prohibit Guaido from leaving the country, and
to freeze his assets. Beyond this, we have not yet heard any more.
Everything is being played by the Maduro government to the letter of the law - which is
the great tactical weakness in the US play here, and the place to strike back.
It is the oil ..... the 'bananas' of United Fruit Company when a neighbor country was over
run by Americans. WTF, I've been brainwashed by them little Russian puppies on social media,
we (US) don't interfere in other countries.
I think it is better to wait. Of course, the interpretation that the Venezuelan presidency is
vacant and that in that special case, the president of the National Assembly rather than the
vice president takes over is odd. It presupposes quite a number of things that defy reality
(there is an elected president) and certainly should not be claimed by anyone outside
Venezuela (for that view, all Venezuelan institutions except the National Assembly and in
particular the Supreme Court would have to be regarded as illegitimate, not just the
president).
But even if that interpretation is odd, it is still a fiction that is probably quite
important for some European governments that now support an attempted (and so far failed)
coup against the democratically elected president of Venezuela.
What will happen after 30 days when the „interim presidency" of Guaido is over? If
he still claims to be president after the 30 days are over, he is an illegitimate usurper
even according to the strange fiction many governments cling to in order to pretend they
support the constitution of Venezuela when in fact they support a would-be coup leader (or
rather the puppet of one). Will these governments then say that they don't care about the
constitution of Venezuela, after all, and still support Guaido after he has even lost any
semblance of legitimacy? Will Guaido call for new elections or even „conduct" them,
which he certainly can't?
Then, I think it is also relevant that (unless I am mistaken), the next regular date for
elections for the National Assembly is already 2020. Perhaps these uncooperative opposition
parties should rather think about how they are going to campaign - after all, it seems likely
that they will lose (more moderate opposition parties that are not involved in the current
coup attempt might have better chances). The playbook for the coup attempt has probably been
written in Washington, but the fear of the parties that currently dominate the National
Assembly that they will lose the 2020 elections is probably a motivating factor, they want to
escalate the situation beforehand in the hope that the 2020 elections either will not take
place or under undemocratic circumstances after a coup or foreign invasion that are favorable
to them.
The elections in Venezuela have all generally used the same system. The pro-US forces have
won just once, while in most elections the Chavists won. These pro-US forces that support
sanctions against their own country and even don't exclude supporting a foreign invasion of
their country have won just one election, and they claim that all elections they lost or in
which they voluntarily did not participate are illegitimate. Probably, they don't have much
hopes of winning the 2020 elections after their despicable behavior since the last elections,
so they want to come to power by force and with foreign support rather than by democratic
means.
Our political parties and media have as much contempt for the democratic process and people
choosing their leaders as the Rhodes/Milner group. They didn't respect the Syrian elections
of 2012 or 2014 even with multiple parties participating and monitors present.
The evidence of Maduro's popularity in Venezuela comes through plain as day in the MSM. This
newest coalition of the killing to take down the Syrian government is calling for new
elections in which Maduro does not participate. There can be no other reason for this other
than the coalition of the killing know that Maduro will win any free and fair election.
Same applied to Assad.
32% is roughly the % that voted for opposition presidential candidates. I'd like to see a polling company ask if the Outlaw US Empire has any right to interfere
with Venezuela whatsoever; and if yes, then how so.
I am very suspicious of the 32% figure. I don't trust it. A poll conducted a few weeks ago
has shown just 20% of Venezuelans knew who Guaidó was. How can it be that 32% now
consider him the legitimate President? Perhaps the poll asked whom they supported/sympathized
with/wanted as President, not who was the legitimate one?
Keep in mind that 75% of Venezuela's radio and TV stations are in private hands and property
of oligarchs bent on sabotaging the bolivarian revolution. Under 5% of media in Venezuela are
state-owned...
So even though western proxies and compradors elites holding iron clad
propaganda monopoly, they can barely muster a third of venezuelans to support their
reactionary program of social regression.
We're witnessing Hugo Chavez's failure to
neutralize the brutal European oligarchy that ran Venezuela as a latifundia for centuries.
One thing is certain 60% of slaves are now refusing to go back to pre-Bolivarian years.
Without kinetic action, the compradors aligned with the West have no chance to pull off a
successful change of regime.
The longer this Guaidó (i'm sorry I mean Gweedo) farce goes on the stronger the Maduro
government's position becomes (although not necessary Maduro's position itself). given that
the US has been working to overthrow the Venezuelan government since at least 2003 and have
now crossed the Rubicon by declaring "Gweedo" president (there's no way to take that back and
return to recognizing Maduro).
I imagine that the Maduro government's plan is to ride out
this crisis till the next election cycle (I think in 2023/2024) and have Maduro step down in
favour of his hand-picked successor, this would then give the US a face-saving option of
recognizing Maduro's successor as the new President, without the humiliation of having to go
back to recognizing Maduro.
The problem however is the 2020 election cycle in the US. For the last 30 years, US
presidents have developed a (another) terrible tradition when going into reelection (the US
also never seems to end a war once it starts one, which is why the US is now current fighting
at least 7 undeclared wars, plus dozens of military operations in various countries). Trump
is desperate for a "Win" going into the 2020 cycle and right now that column is pretty
thread-bare in terms of achievements for the average American worker (the economy is doing
well, but more and more people are concerned that the US is heading towards a recession in
2019, so that may not hold until the 2020). although Trump launching a full-scale invasion
seems unlikely, I can certainly picture Trump pulling out all of the stops to overthrow the
Venezuelan government the closer it gets to the US elections. I could even see Trump
encouraging Colombia and Brazil to invade Venezuelan, but we'll have to wait see.
I don't trust the numbers. Does anyone have the specific questions that were asked? Who owns this "independent" polling company? I didn't read who paid for the poll? I keep think that the US is being set up to fail big time so that default on the US debt
seems "reasonable" given the circumstances. That is when the deals will be made to set the
next stage of ??? humanity....though it might be a bit rocky for a while...
Psychohistorian @ 36 (and anyone else who is interested): Oscar Schemel is the director of the Hinterlaces polling agency which carried out the
survey. He was elected to the National Constituent Assembly (the legitimate legislative body
of the government) in 2017, representing the business sector.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Schemel (You'll need Google Translate.)
The results from the Grayzone article do not comport with what is reported here by b and
so maybe is another study but seems to be the same number of participants.....but then says
was done before Guaido became a thing. Still don't know specific questions for reported results nor who funded it.
Polls have had a long history of being used to bend the public narrative, slide the
Overton window and otherwise obfuscate the core issue(s)......because money pays for them
@Jen: Okay, so, according to The Grayzone translation of Schemel's presentation, only 17%
support U.S. sanctions applied against Venezuela to remove Maduro, only 20% support
international intervention to remove Maduro, only 12% support international military
intervention to remove Maduro, and only 15% don't want any dialogue between government and
opposition to resolve economic problems in the country.
How does that fit in with 32%
supposedly recognizing Guaidó as "legitimate President"? This can't be. Something is
fishy with the 32% figure.
86% "DISAGREE" WITH MILITARY INTERVENTION AGAINST VENEZUELA
Monitor País reveals that 66% of Venezuelans would prefer Maduro to take
effective measures and solve Venezuela's economic problems.
71% are "in disagreement" with the United States applying economic and financial
sanctions against Venezuela to remove President Nicolás Maduro from power, while 24%
"agree", reveals Monitor País de Hinterlaces about what Venezuelans think of an
eventual international intervention and the "exit" of Maduro from the presidency.
The study carried out between July 22 and August 9, conducted through 1,580 telephone
interviews, details that 67% of Venezuelans believe that the presidential elections of 2018
should be expected , while 32% demand the "exit" of the Mature.
With a level of confidence of 95% and a maximum admissible error of +/- 2.5% for the
figures obtained, the research maintains that 66% of Venezuelans would prefer the Maduro
government to take effective measures and solve the economic problems of the country, while
30% would prefer an opposition government to come.
Opinion on intervention
86% of Venezuelans are "in disagreement" with an international military intervention in
Venezuela to get Maduro out of power, while 13% are "in agreement",
76% of Venezuelans are "in disagreement" that there is an international intervention in
Venezuela to remove President Maduro from power, while 22% are "in agreement".
59% believe that the US government is promoting a foreign intervention in Venezuela to
get President Maduro out of power, while 31% consider "no".
How do we know the company still exists? And if it does, how do we know Globovisión
is citing it properly and not just inventing some random numbers?
@ ben #38
There is one Democratic candidate that is in the race specifically to fight the Empires
forever wars. Tulsi Gabbard. And she is being smeared badly by the MSM. But getting a lot of
support from the non-MSM, even from many on the other side of the spectrum.
Pro-coup Twitter accounts actually accuse Hinterlaces of working for "the regime" (skim
through this
thread ), while, in my opinion, its numbers (if true) are skewed in favor of
Guaidó. Anyway, this whole discussion is pointless: anybody can claim anything, as the
company seems to have stopped operating a year and a half ago.
Apart from reinforcing the case that Maduro's Presidency has the support of a simple majority
of voters, this poll is virtually meaningless and irrelevant. The only way to make it
relevant would be to insist that each of the Nazified, Christian Colonial countries which
oppose Maduro conduct a similar poll of the voters in their own country.
i.e. Compare the popularity of the President/PM of the country with popularity of current
Opposition contenders for the Leadership role.
Would Trump, Micron, Mrs May or Scum Mo score anything like 57%?
No effing way, imo.
To keep everything neat and tidy it would be helpful, and conducive to much mirth and
merriment, to conduct the same poll in the countries whose leaders have recognised and
endorsed Maduro's legitimacy.
It is so weird to see this unfolding. Nobody even seems to be asking why Guaido didn't just
run for president -- he wasn't barred. There was lots of criticism of Maduro in the papers,
so the press had the freedom to get behind one or another candidate. There was other
opposition that ran.
Why did some of the opposition boycott the elections? Who was the
opposition that was barred from running by the supreme court, where they wildly popular? Why
didn't they declare themselves president with popular support, rather than this newbie? Why
did the opposition ask UN observers to stay away? It is so blatant that there are narratives
being sold.
I don't see this poll as good news for the Maduro govt at all; looking at other people's
comments, I don't seem to be the only one.
A short month ago, Guaido was a nobody, while
Maduro was the unquestioned, even though not universally liked of course, president.
Once
Uncle Sam went to work on the issue, some clown who basically just started calling himself
president seems to have over 1/3 behind him, while Maduro is only slightly above 50%.
Washington probably feels it's successful in moving the needle, and will go all out trying to
move it further.
B quotes Globovision's report that the Hinterlaces poll was carried out some time between
21 January and 2 February 2019. Grayzone Project refers to a poll carried out in early
January 2019 before 23 January 2019 when Guaidó made his announcement. So there is a
possibility that these are two separate questionnaires conducted at different times - but
maybe with the same sample (too small, in my opinion, for the issue the surveys address).
Please also refer to my comment @ 13 about my misgivings about the validity of the poll.
We do not know how the sample was selected, how the interviews were done (although since I
posted the comment, I found some other online sources suggesting they were telephone
interviews) and whether the interview design had inbuilt biases reflecting Hinterlaces' own
agenda. The website offers no explanation and appears to have been neglected since 2017.
@ Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 12, 2019 2:29:47 AM | 48
Well, news travel fast nowadays: the moment the Venezuelan right-wing realized the USA
chose Guaidó, they quickly begun to "support" him. Of course, this is all a farce:
they know Guaidó is merely a code word for American military intervention and regime
change. This is textbook color revolution.
"... Originally published: FAIR by Gregory Shupak (February 6, 2019) ..."
"... In contact with the popular communities, we consider that one of the fundamental causes of the economic crisis in the country is the effect [of] the unilateral coercive sanctions that are applied in the economy, especially by the government of the United States. ..."
"... While internal errors also contributed to the nation's problems, Russian said it's likely that few countries in the world have ever suffered an "economic siege" like the one Venezuelans are living under. ..."
The U.S. media chorus supporting a U.S. overthrow of the Venezuelan government has for years
pointed to the country's economic crisis as a justification for regime change, while
whitewashing the ways in which the U.S. has strangled the Venezuelan economy ( FAIR.org
, 3/22/18 ).
Sister Eugenia Russian, president of Fundalatin , a Venezuelan human rights NGO
that was established in 1978 and has special consultative status at the UN, told the
Independent (
1/26/19 ):
In contact with the popular communities, we consider that one of the fundamental causes
of the economic crisis in the country is the effect [of] the unilateral coercive sanctions that
are applied in the economy, especially by the government of the United States.
While internal errors also contributed to the nation's problems, Russian said it's
likely that few countries in the world have ever suffered an "economic siege" like the one
Venezuelans are living under.
While the New York Times and the Washington Post have lately professed
profound (and definitely 100 percent sincere) concern for the welfare of Venezuelans, neither
publication has ever referred to Fundalatin.
Alfred de Zayas, the first UN special rapporteur to visit Venezuela in 21 years, told the
Independent (
1/26/19 ) that U.S., Canadian and European Union "economic warfare" has killed Venezuelans,
noting that the sanctions fall most heavily on the poorest people and demonstrably cause death
through food and medicine shortages, lead to violations of human rights and are aimed at
coercing economic change in a "sister democracy."
It's a great article. I want to thank CN, because I feel that Steve's conclusions and his
predictions are excellent.
But like anyone, I always hate to show my ignorance's, and do I have to admit that I need
some help. In this case my ignorance has to do with the word sanction.
For instance ( to name just a few ):
1- In order for the U.S. to legally implement sanctions, it declared "..a national emergency
with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States". What, and where was this evidence provided, and was it
conducted under fair hearings with both sides represented?
2 – How does a State seize the property of another State when no trial has been
conducted?
3 – Isn't this punishing victims (34 million in this case) who have committed no
crime?
4 – Did countries like England, France, Germany, etc., provide any proof of
"emergency", in order to wholesale deny it's own citizens the right to free markets (.. let
alone, Venezuelans)?
5 – Since, sanctions only have significant (wmd) impact when they are implemented by
empires, does a collective body like the U.N., (that I assume) is suppose to represent every
country, want to touch sanctions with a forty foot pole?
6 – What about that "Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement" with Israel?
I could go on & on with many more questions.. But, I know that most here can dissect
this word "sanction" much better than I. .. And, I wish you would.
This is from 2014: http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=2377482&CategoryId=10717
"President Obama today issued a new Executive Order (E.O.) declaring a national emergency
with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States posed by the situation in Venezuela. The targeted sanctions in
the E.O. implement the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014, which
the President signed on December 18, 2014, and also go beyond the requirements of this
legislation.
..
"We are committed to advancing respect for human rights, safeguarding democratic
institutions, and protecting the U.S. financial system from the illicit financial flows from
public corruption in Venezuela," the White House said.
..
We are deeply concerned by the Venezuelan government's efforts to escalate intimidation of
its political opponents. Venezuela's problems cannot be solved by criminalizing dissent. We
have consistently called on the Venezuelan government to release those it has unjustly jailed
as well as to improve the climate of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, such
as the freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly. These are essential to a functioning
democracy, and the Venezuelan government has an obligation to protect these fundamental
freedoms. The Venezuelan government should release all political prisoners, including dozens
of students, opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez and Mayors Daniel Ceballos and Antonio
Ledezma."
.. And as I understand it, declaring that "national emergency" -- was of course, the legal
prerequisite to imposing today's sanctions..
Thank You.
jaycee , February 12, 2019 at 1:50 pm
The declaration of national emergencies is one facet of "executive power" as envisioned by
the lawyers Dick Cheney brought into the White House. This allows for policy to be declared
and implemented without Congress and without public debate. These theories of executive power
have never actually been challenged on Constitutional/ legal grounds, and in fact the W Bush
administration several times backed away from an executive power directed policy rather than
have it challenged in court. The Democrats, once assuming executive power themselves under
Obama, dropped their Constitutional objections to embrace the convenience a wide-ranging
executive power concept provided.
bevin , February 12, 2019 at 11:47 am
"How does it get more inappropriate, more threatening than American officials contacting
members of Venezuela's armed forces and luring them to revolt?
"Americans, is this the kind of work you elect your government to perform?"
It most certainly is. It is precisely the way that President Zelaya was removed, overnight,
in Honduras, after the State Department , under Hillary Clinton, had given permission.
Garrett Connelly , February 12, 2019 at 11:17 am
Only three brave congressional representatives voted against the united democratic and
republican party war lust directed at Venezuela.
Antonio Costa , February 12, 2019 at 10:46 am
The UN has recognized the Maduro government as the official administration. This was
determined by the UN's general assembly.
There is nothing in the Venezuelan constitution that would allow Guaidó (a small
time instigator and relatively small opposition party member) to swear himself in as
president. This was also confirmed by the Venezuelan high court. Furthermore, after the May
election of 2018, the opposition parties signed off on the election results (which were
monitored by hundreds on internation observers and declared fair election), Maduro was sworn
in, end of story.
Therefore any negotiation and/or aid must go through the Maduro administration, not
Guaidó. This is a covert thug regime change by the US.
torture this , February 12, 2019 at 10:14 am
"The stigma would undoubtedly scuttle their chances of maintaining longstanding majority
support and in doing so would undermine their authority and ability to govern."
Support of the people doesn't matter in the U.S. because all the avenues to power are
largely blocked for anyone except those endorsed by the elites, themselves. So, I doubt that
the oligarchs will have any problems in disappearing and murdering anybody who speaks up for
ordinary people in Venezuela. What the U.S. does to its own dissenters is anything but
democracy.
Sally Snyder , February 12, 2019 at 8:16 am
As shown in this article, American intervention to protect its economic interests in South
America is not unprecedented:
Unfortunately, Washington is incapable of seeing the unintended consequences of its global
agenda.
michael , February 12, 2019 at 7:13 am
While I am sure that the regime change in Venezuela is a long time in coming (with Trump
or not), as evidenced by most of the EU (UK, Spain, France, Germany, Sweden and Denmark)
'instant' recognition of Guaido, I am curious as to the lack of American politicians at least
giving lip service against the coup (has anyone outside of Tulsi Gabbard spoken up?)
In addition to the albatross of John Bolton around his neck, the neocons have also saddled
Trump with Elliott Abrams? There are no decent diplomats/ bureaucrats willing to work (and
risk their careers) with Trump?
Venezuela production should take a larger drop in February. Today Interim President
Guaidó announced Feb 23 would be the day a big push would be made to push humanitarian
aid columns into Venezuela. Collection points for food and medicine are now available in
Colombia and Brazil, and others are being prepared.
Maduro moved 700 special forces (FAES) which are usually kept serving as death squads in
large cities, to cover the bridges between Ureña in Venezuela and Cucuta in Colombia,
with orders to fire on the humanitarian relief trucks. Guaidó responded the border was
plenty long and Maduro lacked enough FAES and Cubans to stop the relief from crossing the
border. He also pointed out that if Maduro had to use death squads to patrol the border it
meant he didn't trust the Army, the National Guard or the National Police, so he asked for
volunteers inside Venezuela to help overcome Maduro's thugs with sheer numbers.
Today it became very common to see an individual scream "Maduro!" and the crowd respond "f
k you!". It's the way people pass the time at metro stations and while waiting in line. And
the police seem to have abandoned the usurper, because they seldom do anything about it.
Looks like events have complex dynamics and Washington did not fully understand possible blowback from its actions to unseat Maduro.
As usual Trump administration actions are not consistent with the rule of law and elementary knowledge of international
relations. It's pure imperial bulling and as such it might well backfire. In addition to the albatross of John Bolton
around his neck, the neocons put Elliott Abrams? looks like there are no decent diplomats/ bureaucrats willing to work (and risk
their careers) with Trump...
Notable quotes:
"... Furthermore, Venezuelans will perceive any sign of economic recovery under a Guaidó government as made possible by aid, if not handouts, from Washington, designed to discredit Maduro's socialist government, though such assistance will undoubtedly be used to further U.S. economic and political interests. In fact, U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton has indicated that he is already calling on oil companies to opt for investments in Venezuela once Maduro is overthrown. ..."
"... The U.S. effort to encourage the military to step in was again made evident on Wednesday in a tweet by John Bolton . ..."
"... The Wall Street Journal ..."
"... The Trump administration's blatant and undisguised interventionism may in fact backfire and help Maduro counter his sagging poll numbers, which last October the polling firm Datanálisis reported was 23 percent. Maduro recently lashed out on Twitter at the close nexus between Washington and the opposition, saying "Aren't you embarrassed at yourselves, ashamed at the way every day by Twitter Mike Pence, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo tell you what you should do." ..."
"... Anti-imperialism is, of course, a major cornerstone of the Chavista movement, born from resentment of U.S. interventionism and heavy-handedness that had for decades controlled many of Venezuela's resources and dictated its economic policies. The maneuvers of the Trump administration and its allies only double down on this narrative, and are counterproductive at best when it comes to solving the crisis. Their actions also risk fanning the flames of anti-Americanism throughout the continent ..."
"... Meanwhile, President Donald Trump appointed neocon Elliott Abrams as special envoy to Venezuela. As a longtime U.S. diplomat, Abrams has in many ways personified the application of the Monroe Doctrine with his blatant disregard for human rights violations and the principle of non-intervention in Guatemala , Nicaragua, and El Salvador in the 1980s and his alleged involvement in the 2002 coup against Hugo Chávez. ..."
"... While condemning anti-democratic actions and fraudulent elections in Venezuela, these sanctions ignore the rule of law. The Maduro government was never given the opportunity to defend itself and legal procedures were not followed ..."
"... Yet regardless of short-term results of U.S. support for Guaidó, the final outcome will be negative. There are a number of reasons why: first, it bolsters the position of the most radical elements of the opposition led by the VP party, thus contributing to the fragmentation of the anti-Chavista movement. Second, it attaches a "made in U.S.A." label to those positioned to govern should Maduro fall. ..."
"... the appeal to the military to save Venezuela has terrifying implications for a continent with a long history of military rule. And finally, the seizure of Venezuelan assets, which have then been turned over to a political ally, violates sacred norms of property rights, and in the process erodes confidence in the system of private property ..."
"... NACLA: Report on the Americas ..."
"... Latin American Perspectives ..."
"... The intention behind the pressure directed at Venezuela is quite clear: the current government is being told to resign and hand power over to a selected member of the opposition. To advance this strategy, various degrees of, frankly, organized crime style threats of punishment or positive inducement are daily publicized, iterated by US public officials. ..."
Trump's backing of Juan Guaidó's shadow government could weaken the opposition's longstanding support among the majority of Venezuelans,
writes Steve Ellner.
Since its outset, the Trump administration has ratcheted up pressure on Venezuela and
radicalized its positions. In the process, the Venezuelan opposition has become more and more associated with -- and dependent on
-- Washington and its allies. An example is the opposition protests that occurred last week. The actions were timed to coincide with
the European Union's "
ultimatum ," which stated they would recognize the shadow government of Juan Guaidó if President Nicolás Maduro had not called
elections within a week's time.
The opposition's most radical sectors, which include Guaidó's Voluntad Popular party (VP) along with former presidential candidate
María Corina Machado, have always had close ties with the United States. Guaidó, as well as VP head Leopoldo López and the VP's Carlos
Vecchio, who is the shadow government's chargé d'affaires in Washington, were educated in prestigious U.S. universities -- not uncommon
among Latin American economic and political elites. The ties between the opposition and international actors are strong: last weekend,
Vecchio called the campaign to unseat Maduro "an international
effort ." At the same time, Guaidó, referring to opposition-called protests, stated "today, February 2, we are going to meet
again in the streets to show our gratitude to the support that the European Parliament has given us." In doing so, Guaidó explicitly
connected the authority of outside countries to his own assumption of leadership.
The outcome of Washington's actions is bound to be unfavorable in a number of ways, regardless of whether or not they achieve
regime change. Most importantly, a government headed by Guaidó will be perceived both by Venezuelans and international observers
as "made in U.S.A." Further, the opposition's association with foreign powers has enabled the Maduro leadership to keep discontented
members of the Chavista movement in their ranks.
Furthermore, Venezuelans will perceive any sign of economic recovery under a Guaidó government as made possible by aid, if
not handouts, from Washington, designed to discredit Maduro's socialist government, though such assistance will undoubtedly be used
to further U.S. economic and political interests. In fact, U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton has indicated that he is already
calling on oil companies to opt for investments in Venezuela once Maduro is overthrown. As he
told
Fox News , "we're in conversation with major American companies now It will make a big difference to the United States
economically if we could have American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela."
Washington Dictating Strategy
Either explicitly or implicitly, Washington is dictating strategy, or at least providing input into its formulation. One of the
challenges the opposition faces is the need to demonstrate to rank-and-file Venezuelans that the current offensive against Maduro
will be different from the disastrous attempts of 2014 and 2017, when anti-government leaders assured protesters that the president
would be toppled in a matter of days. The opposition leadership claims that this time is different for two reasons. First, the regional
Right turn has deepened, and the opposition is more able than ever to rely on decisive support from Washington and other governments,
regardless of how democratic they are -- see the neofascist credentials of
Brazil's
Jair Bolsonaro .
Second, the opposition is counting on the backing of military officers, particularly lower-ranking ones who have allegedly lost
patience with Maduro. In addition to some defections, junior officers attempted to
stage a military coup just two days before
mass opposition protests on Jan. 23 when Guaidó declared himself president. Previously, the Venezuelan opposition expressed a degree
of contempt for military officers for their unwillingness to defy the Chavista government. The opposition's new perspective dates
back to Trump's three
meetings with
military rebels and his
statement
, made alongside President Iván Duque of Colombia in September of last year, that the Maduro government "could be toppled very quickly
by the military if the military decides to do that." The U.S. effort to encourage the military to step in was again made evident
on Wednesday in a tweet by
John Bolton .
Recently, Guaidó made a similar offer to military officers, implying continuity and closeness between Washington and the shadow
government.
Also noteworthy is that Guaidó and other VP leaders are closer to Washington than the rest of the opposition. The Wall Street
Journal reported that Guaidó consulted Vice President Mike Pence the night before his self-proclamation as president on Jan.
23. According to ex-presidential candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski the majority of the
opposition parties were not aware of Guaidó's intentions
and in fact did not support the idea.
Calling on Military
To make matters worse, the VP-led opposition is openly working hand-in-glove with Washington. Last week Guaidó announced that
he would attempt to transport
humanitarian aid the United States has deposited on the Colombian and Brazilian borders into Venezuela. He called on the Venezuelan
military to disobey orders from the Maduro government by facilitating the passage of goods, while Maduro ordered it blocked. While
playing political benefactor, Washington was clearly manipulating the optics of the situation to discredit Maduro and rally more
international support for Guaído. In an apparent rebuke to Washington and Guaidó, UN spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric on Wednesday
insisted that the humanitarian aid be "
depoliticized. "
Opposition leaders and the Trump government are also working together to isolate Venezuela economically throughout the world.
Julio Borges, a leading member of the opposition, has campaigned to convince international financial institutions to shun Venezuelan
transactions and has
urged Great Britain to refuse to repatriate Venezuelan gold stored in London. President Maduro has responded by calling on the
attorney general to open judicial proceedings against Borges on grounds of treason. Along similar lines, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury
Steven Mnuchin and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross are currently attempting to convince international business interests to
deny the Venezuelan government access to national assets in their possession.
The Trump administration's blatant and undisguised interventionism may in fact backfire and help Maduro counter his sagging
poll numbers, which last October the polling firm Datanálisis reported was 23 percent. Maduro recently
lashed out on Twitter at the close nexus between Washington and the opposition, saying "Aren't you embarrassed at yourselves,
ashamed at the way every day by Twitter Mike Pence, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo tell you what you should do."
Cornerstone of Chavista Movement
Anti-imperialism is, of course, a major cornerstone of the Chavista movement, born from resentment of U.S. interventionism
and heavy-handedness that had for decades controlled many of Venezuela's resources and dictated its economic policies. The maneuvers
of the Trump administration and its allies only double down on this narrative, and are counterproductive at best when it comes to
solving the crisis. Their actions also risk fanning the flames of anti-Americanism throughout the continent. It wouldn't be
the first time: In 1958, then-Vice President Richard Nixon was attacked by a riotous crowd in Caracas, and a decade later Nelson
Rockefeller's fact-finding tour arranged by then-President Nixon faced off with angry disruptive protests. Both incidents were responses
to Washington's self-serving support for regimes that came to power through undemocratic means, in some cases with U.S. involvement.
In its strategy towards Venezuela, Washington is invoking not only its Cold War policy but the
Monroe
Doctrine and its view of Latin America as the U.S.' "backyard," -- a claim that is especially anathema throughout the region.
Indeed, Pence told
Fox News
, in answering a question about why Trump is withdrawing troops from Syria and Afghanistan while intervening in Venezuela: "President
Trump has always had a very different view of our hemisphere. He's long understood that the United States has a special responsibility
to support and nurture democracy and freedom in this hemisphere and that's a longstanding tradition."
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump appointed neocon Elliott Abrams as special envoy to Venezuela. As a longtime U.S. diplomat,
Abrams has in many ways personified the application of the Monroe Doctrine with his blatant disregard for human rights violations
and the principle of non-intervention in
Guatemala , Nicaragua, and El Salvador in the 1980s and his alleged involvement in the 2002 coup against Hugo Chávez.
Finally, Trump's decision regarding CITGO, a U.S.-based company owned by Venezuela's state oil company, speaks to a dangerous
precedent. Last week he declared that jurisdiction over CITGO would be turned over to the shadow government, and appealed to other
countries to follow similar steps. While condemning anti-democratic actions and fraudulent elections in Venezuela, these sanctions
ignore the rule of law. The Maduro government was never given the opportunity to defend itself and legal procedures were not followed.
It is always a dubious exercise to guess at Trump's intentions. His actions in Venezuela could be designed to divert attention
from the multiple probes into his own unethical behavior, or they may be a way to draw attention away from the utter fiasco of U.S.
interventions in the Middle East, from Libya to Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Trump may also view his Venezuela policy as a quick
fix to Make America Great Again. Along similar lines, Trump evidently sees the downfall of the Maduro government as the ultimate
proof that socialism doesn't work. He indicated as much in his
State of the Union address when he used the topic of Venezuela as a springboard for declaring: "We are born free, and we will
stay free America will never be a socialist country."
Yet regardless of short-term results of U.S. support for Guaidó, the final outcome will be negative. There are a number of reasons
why: first, it bolsters the position of the most radical elements of the opposition led by the VP party, thus contributing to the
fragmentation of the anti-Chavista movement. Second, it attaches a "made in U.S.A." label to those positioned to govern should Maduro
fall.
The stigma would undoubtedly scuttle their chances of maintaining longstanding majority support and in doing so would undermine
their authority and ability to govern. Third, the appeal to the military to save Venezuela has terrifying implications for a continent
with a long history of military rule. And finally, the seizure of Venezuelan assets, which have then been turned over to a political
ally, violates sacred norms of property rights, and in the process erodes confidence in the system of private property. These four
considerations are an indication of the multiple adverse impacts that the Trump administration's rash approach to the Maduro government
will have on the United States, Venezuela, and the rest of the region.
Steve Ellner is a retired professor from Venezuela's University of the East, a long-time contributor to NACLA: Report on the Americas , and currently associate managing editor
of Latin American Perspectives . Among his over a dozen
books on Latin America is his edited "The Pink Tide Experiences: Breakthroughs and Shortcomings in Twenty-First Century Latin America"
(Rowman & Littlefield, 2019).
jaycee
,
February 12, 2019 at 1:34 pm
The intention behind the pressure directed at Venezuela is quite clear: the current government is
being told to resign and hand power over to a selected member of the opposition. To advance this
strategy, various degrees of, frankly, organized crime style threats of punishment or positive
inducement are daily publicized, iterated by US public officials.
The government-in-waiting is
supposedly preparing new elections, at least that's wha they say – but Guaido's representative in
Washington told reporters last week that such elections might happen by the end of the year, maybe
not, but a new government's priorities would be changing the structural underpinnings of the country's
economy.
So the new government will be installed and will swiftly dismantle all of the popular
programs instituted by the Chavistas over the past twenty years. That is, a political platform which
has lost elections consistently for these past twenty years will be engaged without popular mandate,
and before any new elections will be permitted. That's a coup, not a restoration of democracy.
"... Earlier this month, Maduro stated that smuggling seizure efforts in Colombia have recovered close to $400 million U.S. dollars worth of goods. Due to these smuggling incidents, the Venezuelan government intends to introduce a biometric tracking system that will limit citizens' food purchases via a fingerprint scanning. ..."
Venezuela's
government continues to battle a food hoarding and smuggling
epidemic . It accuses food smugglers of causing national food shortages in the country. The
government states that food smugglers hoard goods to resell for profit and smuggle such items
into Venezuela's neighboring countries.
Due to currency controls and a lack of U.S. dollars, Venezuela has found it to be
increasingly difficult to import foreign food products from other countries. One of the most
popular countries for food smuggling is Colombia , which borders Venezuela.
Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro
and Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos have both acknowledged the problem.
Earlier this month, Maduro stated that smuggling seizure efforts in Colombia have
recovered close to $400 million U.S. dollars worth of goods. Due to these smuggling incidents,
the Venezuelan government intends to introduce a biometric tracking system that will limit
citizens' food purchases via a fingerprint scanning.
A military spokesperson for the government told El Universal newspaper that the quantity of
goods smuggled to Colombia "would be enough to load the shelves of our supermarkets."
This July, the government seized more than 11 tons worth of fish, chicken and beef.
Last month, Venezuela began to close its border to Colombia at night and deploy thousands of
troops in an effort to stop the smuggling in Venezuela from taking place. However, opposition
to the plan suggests that the policy will treat Venezuelan citizens as criminals and even
breach individual privacy. Many have suggested that the policy leans toward food rationing.
Smuggling is a way of life in the Colombian border town of Cúcuta -- and for decades,
that's meant drugs. But in recent years it's ordinary goods like gasoline or oranges or diapers
that make their way from Venezuela to Colombia. The side of the road into Cúcuta is
dotted with illegal gasoline vendors, while the shelves of the local stores are stocked with
products labeled "Produced for the Venezuelan market." That's because the combination of the
extremely low valuation of the Venezuelan Boliviar -- it takes 800 boliviars to buy a U.S
dollar compared to just 200 one year ago -- and the strong price controls that the Venezuelan
government has applied to many basic goods has made it extremely profitable to buy just about
anything cheaply in Venezuela, and smuggle it into neighboring Colombia, where no such price
controls exist and the local currency, the peso, is significantly stronger.
Venezuela is hurting -- for the second year in a row, Bloomberg has ranked the Venezuelan
economy "the most miserable economy" and the IMF predicts that the country's inflation rate
will hit 720 percent this year, up from 141.5 percent near the end of last year. For
comparison, the U.S. has maintained an inflation rate between one and five percent over the
last decade. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has repeatedly blamed both the smuggling and
the migration of people into Venezuela to take advantage of the highly subsidized health and
education for his country's economic woes.
... ... ...
Though Maduro announced a crackdown on smuggling last year and closed the
major border crossings, the financial incentive to keep goods flowing is high. McDermott
estimates that the smuggling trade is back up to previous levels. And Colombian smugglers like
Gabriela and Camila -- two sisters in their 30s, each divorced, who work to support their
mother and multiple children -- are part of the reasons why.
Early each morning Gabriela and Camila hitch a ride along a road that runs north from
Cúcuta and traces the river that makes up the border between Colombia and Venezuela.
They head past the small city of San Faustino and across the river into Venezuela. Once there,
they meet a local who has purchased about 60 kilos of beef at the Mercal, the state subsidized
supermarket, for the equivalent of just $54. By the end of the day that same quantity of meat
will be on a market shelf in Cucuta, where it will sell for over $200.
On one recent morning, the sisters hitched a ride back to Cúcuta from Venezuela.
Along the way they had to pass back through San Faustino, where a police check point was
established to crack down on just this kind of smuggling. Their car was stopped, and as police
officers began to inspect the plastic bags of meat in the trunk, Camila slipped a 10,000-peso
bill–worth just over three dollars–to the police officer. After initially
expressing concern over the goods, he decides everything is fine and allows the car to continue
on.
... ... ...
The neighborhood of Escobal in Cúcuta was once a busy and free-flowing crossing point
between Venezuela and Colombia. Now, under orders from Maduro, the bridge has been blockaded to
prevent any vehicles from passing, while police and customs agents check the papers of those
who cross by foot. Even here, a location actively monitored by law enforcement, the smuggling
is obvious. Those crossing east into the Venezuelan town of Ureña are usually empty
handed or just carrying a backpack. Those on the return path lug huge bags, often working in
pairs just to carry the weight. Inside is everything from baby diapers to cooking oil to
cigarettes -- all illegal imports, all much cheaper in Venezuela than in Colombia.
These commuters are mostly Colombian citizens who lived in Venezuela for years before Maduro
announced a crackdown on both smuggling and migration following the murder of three Venezuelan
soldiers who were looking for smugglers late last year. The government expelled over a thousand
Colombians, while another 20,000 fled back over the border out of fear. Maduro accused many of
the banished Colombians of being part of paramilitary groups and involved in the long-running
Colombian civil conflict between the government and various paramilitary forces. However, many
of these same people had originally fled into Venezuela to escape violence in Colombia, and
were now being forced to return.
... ... ...
After months of negotiations, the two governments agreed to allow some Colombians to return
to Venezuela for schooling or health care. But the border remains officially closed at night.
In a land with rule-of-law that is vague at best, however, simply closing bridges at night
isn't anywhere near enough come to stop the flow of contraband across the border, though it has
pushed much of the activity to more rural areas.
... ... ...
Less than a quarter-mile downstream from the official crossing point in
Escobal, young smugglers gather on the under the shade of tropical trees on the riverbank
waiting for work. Using their rugged motorcycles, they spend the day and night ferrying people
across the border who don't have the proper papers to cross the nearby bridge, or they pick up
contraband brought back over the river by hikers or people on bicycles and deliver it to the
market towards the center of Cúcuta.
They might appear harmless and disorganized -- but they're not. A ruthless paramilitary
group controls this territory, like each of the areas along the border. Within Cúcuta
there are about a dozen such groups, and they have a well-earned reputation for violence.
Paramilitary-related murders are common in this part of Colombia. For many years Cúcuta
was a stronghold of an armed criminal group called the Rastrojos, but they have weakened in
recent years and since 2011 the Urabeños, one of the most powerful criminal
organizations in Colombia, has taken control of the contraband hub, according to InSight Crime,
a foundation that studies organized crime in the Americas.
Less than a thousand feet away from the riverbank is a police station. The motorcycles
travel right past with their freshly smuggled contraband. Those police officers, like the
majority of the police officers charged with cracking down on smuggling in Cúcuta, are
paid off, explained "El Jefe," a smuggler who has been in the business for decades and who
served three years in prison after getting caught smuggling cocaine several years ago. He got
out of the drug business, but still runs a profitable commodity depot where smugglers drop off
and repackage goods coming from Venezuela. In Cúcuta there is an unspoken rule: as long
as the officials remain paid off, business continues as usual. "The few times that local police
make big busts, it is often a punishment for a certain group of smugglers failing to pay off
the proper authorities," said El Jefe.
... ... ...
The majority of contraband moves over the border at night and arrives at the Cúcuta
market called Cenabustos in the early hours of the morning. At 1am wood-paneled trucks start
pulling into large parking lots outside sprawling warehouses. They are filled with rice,
citrus, onions, potatoes, plantains and any other kind of produce or commodity subsidized by
the Venezuelan government. The citrus gives away the smuggling operation. Citrus isn't produced
in Cúcuta or any of the surrounding areas, which means it must have come from
Venezuela
Gene Sharp recipes in action: the talking point in the article below were taken directly from EuroMaydan: opposition rallies are huge; pro-government rally are
tiny and
activists were delivered by buses.
This gambit with aid delivery is pretty inventive and might play in favor of opposition: they try present the
government as cruel and indifferent to sufferings of common people. Meanwhile smuggling food out of Venezuela continues unabated.
"Thousands of Venezuelans living near the border discovered years ago that smuggling heavily subsidized food into Colombia made them
far more money than the meager wages from regular jobs."
Reuters
Guaido, who says he's the rightful leader of Venezuela after Maduro's election was widely disputed, has made a
political tool of the food stalled in the Colombian border town of Cucuta. Traditional aid groups have shunned the
effort as a ploy, and it's been unclear whether the trailers of rice, flour and other staples would actually be
able enter the country. Maduro's security forces are using shipping containers and a tractor-trailer to close off
an international bridge.
'In Caravans'
Guaido's supporters had spoken of using clandestine means, even bringing it in by sea. He said Tuesday that
250,000 people have signed up on a website to volunteer for his initiative. "We'll have to go in caravans, as a
protest," he said.
People cross a bridge from Cucuta, Colombia to Urena, Venezuela on Feb. 12.
Photographer: Luis Robayo/AFP via Getty Images
While Venezuela faces deep shortages of necessities like antibiotics, first-aid supplies and baby formula,
Maduro has portrayed the shipments as a pretext for an invasion, sent to humiliate him and undermine his
presidency.
Vice President Delcy Rodriguez said at a news conference Tuesday that the food sent by the U.S. is a
"biological weapon."
"That humanitarian aid is contaminated and poisoned," she claimed. "It's carcinogenic. This has been proven by
different scientific studies."
'So Desperate'
The U.S. Agency for International Development has said the first phase of a $20 million assistance program will
include food and hygiene kits, nutritional supplements and emergency medical kits. Lester Toledo, Guaido's
international coordinator for humanitarian aid, said Brazil had authorized a collection center in the border state
of Roraima. Supplies will also come through a Caribbean island.
People eat at a soup kitchen for Venezuelan migrants in the town of La Parada, Cucuta, Colombia, on Feb. 11.
Photographer: Ivan Valencia/Bloomberg
At the blocked Tienditas Bridge in Cucucta, small groups of opposition protesters gathered Tuesday, singing the
national anthem and praying the Lord's Prayer.
"Our relatives and our compatriots die for the lack of antibiotics or something as simple as a dehydration
caused by diarrhea," said Rafael Polos, a 48-year-old former airport manager who fled to Colombia and now sells
candies in the street. "The change in Venezuela is close. We are so desperate. In fact we wanted to enter the
bridge and take all that humanitarian aid to Venezuela, but we have to do things the right way."
Tuesday's protests were the third protest in the past two weeks against Maduro, the largest wave of overt
resistance since 2017. The regime has largely allowed citizens to march, however, police have raided neighborhoods
at night in search of opposition supporters. At least 35 people have died and more than 850 have been
detained, according to human-rights groups including Provea and Penal Forum.
Supporters of Juan Guaido during a rally in Caracas on Feb. 12
Photographer: Fabiola Ferrero/Bloomberg
In eastern Caracas, Guaido's supporters filled the streets. People streamed down Francisco de Miranda Avenue,
draping flags over their shoulders and holding signs. Shops and restaurants remained open, but some of the main
avenues in downtown Caracas were closed near a plaza where government supporters took in a video address from
Maduro. A large truck blasted reggaeton with government propaganda.
The opposition march filled several blocks with thousands of people, and it seemed more like a celebration than
a protest. Rap singers took selfies with demonstrators, who walked with small children or dogs. There were no
hooded protesters or the confrontational mood seen in 2017.
"We're moving forward. We have international support, and soon we'll open a path for elections," said Nathalie
Torres, 37, a shopkeeper. She was marching from the working-class neighborhood of La Candelaria alongside three
other women, all wearing white shirts and tricolor hats. At least one U.S. flag waved amid the Venezuelan colors.
Supporters of Nicolas Maduro participate in a pro-government demonstration in Caracas on Feb. 12.
Photographer: Rodrigo Abd/AP Photo
Many fewer people came to the rally point for the regime's march: Hundreds filled only a couple of blocks,
despite the government buses that lined the streets to transport them. Many who marched were state employees and
wore shirts and hats representing ministries and public institutions.
"The United States refuses to understand that we are free," said Pedro Villegas, 25, a student leader in
Maduro's socialist PSUV party. "Guaido is a lackey; he has been imposed by a foreign agenda to steal power."
Thousands of Venezuelans living near the border discovered years ago that smuggling heavily
subsidized food into Colombia made them far more money than the meager wages from regular
jobs.
But with crisis-hit Venezuela suffering drastic food shortages this year and local resale
prices spiraling, some have decided to flip the business model: zipping into Colombia to buy
flour, rice and even diapers for desperate shoppers back in Venezuela.
... ... ...
Rice, for instance, can be bought in Colombia for the equivalent of about 1,300 bolivars and
sold in Venezuela for around 1,800 bolivars.
Venezuela's government fixes a kilo of rice at some 120 bolivars, but on the local black
market the coveted product now fetches approximately 2,000 bolivars - just $2 at the unofficial
foreign exchange rate but around one-fifth of a monthly minimum wage, factoring in monthly food
tickets.
"... These illegal operations for destabilization have a two-fold purpose: (1) To disrupt the lives of the people, create unrest and blame the government for inefficiency and inability to provide food and other essentials for the people. (2) To occupy government time and resources, diverting it from the regular daily work on infrastructure, social and security services that are normally expected from all governments. ..."
Anyone who has been paying attention to the economic war against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela will be familiar with the
hoarding, dumping and smuggling of food as part of destabilization efforts by opposition food processing plants, points of sale and
foreign entities.
Here in my home state of Aragua, we have been experiencing certain missing products in our retail markets for a week or two, only
to reappear in a later week to create long lines of people waiting to buy from the new delivery. That problem has to do with the
privately-run distribution system over which the government still hasn't gained control. When a big shipment of the missing item(s)
does arrive at a later date, it is typically off-loaded at a single store in this city of 300,000 people, creating the long lines
of buyers who may wait for hours to make their purchase. The store itself often opens only one cashier for the desired product to
make the sale of the product even slower. When the missing product does appear, another suddenly disappears. During the past two
weeks our local supermarkets suddenly had zero rice or pasta, products that were there in abundance during weeks past. The illegal
smuggling and hoarding operations are being busted on a weekly basis if not daily. But imagine the cost and difficulty for the government
to search out all the hidden sites in a country of 30 million people across 23 states. However, the fact that the smuggling mafia
are resorting to new innovative methods to hoard their stolen products (see second report with photos below) shows that the pressure
is on.
These illegal operations for destabilization have a two-fold purpose: (1) To disrupt the lives of the people, create unrest
and blame the government for inefficiency and inability to provide food and other essentials for the people. (2) To occupy government
time and resources, diverting it from the regular daily work on infrastructure, social and security services that are normally expected
from all governments.
We could report on Axis of Logic these discoveries of food held in secret warehouses and kept off the retail markets on a regular
basis but the two that follow will serve as examples for the doubters.
On August 13, Noticias 24 reported the confiscation of 14,144 tons of processed whole chicken in the State of Falcon. The government's
Superintendency for the Defense of Socio-Economic Rights (Sundde) coordinated the operation with the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB)
and authorities in Falcon State to locate and confiscate the birds. The final destination of the shipment a warehouse located in
Puerto Cumarebo on the northwest tip of Venezuela's Caribbean coast. The massive illegal cargo was detected through Sundde's contact
network.
The fact that the opposition can conspire and operate openly is proof that the
government has not suppressed them in any way. While it is dangerous that they continue to
collaborate to overthrow the government, they are emboldened by the freedoms granted and
upheld by the same Constitution they seek to obliterate. Their continued freedom is
evidence that Venezuela is not only a democracy, but a tolerant, peaceful society.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 12, 2019 9:47:29 AM | 60
In case the link between Scientology and Venezuela which I'm proposing isn't obvious, and
obviously reliant on pitiful levels of Public Gullibility, it is adequately illustrated by
the fact that the goals of the Venezuela Scam are just as nebulously unspecified as the goals
of Scientology itself.
In the doco mentioned above there's a segment exposing an entire lavishly funded Dept withing
Scientology which is tasked with recruiting celebrities.
The segment outlines the way the
decision to recruit Tom Cruse was planned and executed. It involved flattering Cruse into
accepting 'help' from cult members in every aspect of his life.
Fiendishly clever, but unflattering to Tom's intelligence, imo.
Posted by: anonymous | Feb 12, 2019 1:52:16 AM | 47
(Lots of questions NOT being asked about Guiado)
You've nailed it.
The whole charade is about tightly controlling the narrative, and there are many ugly
precedents for this modus operandi. There was a reminder of one particularly well-known and
infamous example on TV this evening in the form of one of a series of docos about Scientology
called Scientology And The Aftermath.
Basically, the crux of the Scientology scam is a set of Utopian Principles which
prospective members are required to swear to uphold at any cost and to pledge undying
devotion and obedience to the Church. These pledges are then used to blackmail members into
'proving' their loyalty to The Dream by undertaking unconscionable and unethical tasks in
pursuit of the Church's nebulously unspecified goals.
There's plenty of damning info about Scientology in general, and this series in
particular, on the www including a Rolling Stone article called 5 Things We Learned From Leah
Remini's Scientology TV Show.
When this phase of the Empire's regime change operation loses steam and Guido's moment in
the spotlight is fading, the CIA will murder him to provide the corporate mass media with
evidence of how brutal the Venezuelan government is. They will personally blame Maduro for
Random Guido's death. When Random Guido's trajectory of fame begins to turn from polarizing
figure to laughingstock, the CIA will terminate him to extract a bit of extra value and hide
the fact that the coup failed to win popular support.
Screenshots of today's pro-Guaido
demo show a rather tiny crowd exceedingly smaller than earlier boasts. The opposition
refuses to talk while the government continues to govern and attempt to alleviate its
citizen's complaints. The theft of National Wealth that's owned by all Venezuelans by the
Outlaw US Empire was a disastrous move. Every day that goes by Maduro grows stronger while
the usurper weakens further.
It's quite possible the outcome will be far worse than the Bay of Pigs for the forces of
reaction within the region.
Donald Trump imagines Juan Guaidó is the rightful president of Venezuela. Mr.
Guaidó, a man of impeccable illegitimacy, was
exposed by Cohen and Blumenthal as "a product of a decade-long project overseen by
Washington's elite regime change trainers."
Argentinian sociologist Marco Teruggi described Guaidó in the same article as "a
character that has been
created for this circumstance" of regime change.
Here, his constitutional credentials to be interim president of Venezuela are deconstructed.
Educated at George Washington University in DC, Guaidó was virtually unknown in his
native Venezuela before being thrust on to the world stage in a rapidly unfolding series of
events. In a
poll conducted a little more than a week before Guaidó appointed himself president
of the country, 81% of Venezuelans had never even heard of the 35-year-old.
To make a short story shorter, US Vice President Pence phoned Guaidó on the evening
of January 22rd and presumably asked him how'd he like to be made president of Venezuela. The
next day, Guaidó announced that he considered himself president of Venezuela, followed
within minutes by US President Trump confirming the self-appointment.
A few weeks before on January 5, Guaidó had been installed as president of
Venezuela's National Assembly, their unicameral legislature. He had been elected to the
assembly from a coastal district with 26% of the vote. It was his party's turn for the
presidency of the body, and he was hand-picked for the position. Guaidó, even within his
own party, was not in the top leadership.
Guaidó's party, Popular Will, is a far-right marginal group whose most enthusiastic
boosters are John Bolton, Elliott Abrams, and Mike Pompeo. Popular Will had adopted a strategy
of regime change by extra-parliamentary means rather than engage in the democratic electoral
process and had not participated in recent Venezuelan elections.
Although anointed by Trump and company, Guaidó's Popular Will Party is not
representative of the "Venezuelan opposition," which is a fractious bunch whose hatred of
Maduro is only matched by their abhorrence of each other. Leading opposition candidate Henri
Falcón, who ran against Maduro in 2018 on a neoliberal austerity platform, had been
vehemently opposed by Popular Will who demanded that he join their US-backed boycott of the
election.
The Venezuelan news outlet, Ultimas Noticias , reported that prominent opposition politician
Henrique Capriles, who had run against Maduro in 2013, "affirmed during an interview that the
majority of
opposition parties did not agree with the self-swearing in of Juan Guaidó as interim
president of the country." Claudio Fermin , president of the party
Solutions for Venezuela, wrote "we believe in the vote, in dialogue, we believe in coming to an
understanding, we believe Venezuelans need to part ways with the extremist sectors that
only offer hatred, revenge, lynching." Key opposition governor of the State of Táchira,
Laidy Gómez, has rejected
Guaidó's support of intervention by the US, warning that it "would generate death of
Venezuelans."
The Guaidó/Trump cabal does not reflect the democratic consensus in Venezuela, where
polls consistently show super majorities oppose
outside intervention . Popular opinion in Venezuela supports negotiations between the
government and the opposition as proposed by Mexico, Uruguay, and the Vatican. The Maduro
administration has embraced the negotiations as a peaceful solution to the crisis facing
Venezuela.
The US government
rejects a negotiated solution , in the words of Vice President Pence: "This is no time for
dialogue; this is time for action." This intransigent position is faithfully echoed by
Guaidó. So while most Venezuelans want peace, the self-appointed president, backed by
the full force of US military power, wrote in a New York Times
op-ed that it was possible to "end the Maduro regime with a minimum of bloodshed."
The Guaidó/Trump cabal's fig leaf for legitimacy is based on the bogus
argument that Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution gives the National
Assembly the power to declare a national president's "abandonment" of the office. In which
case, the president of the National Assembly can serve as an interim national president, until
presidential elections are held. The inconvenient truth is that Maduro has shown no inclination
to abandon his post, and the constitution says no such thing.
In fact, the grounds for replacing a president are very clearly laid out in the first
paragraph of Article 233 of the Venezuelan
constitution and do not include fraudulent or illegitimate election, which is what the cabal
has been claiming . In the convoluted logic of the US government and its epigones, if the
people elect someone the cabal doesn't like, the election is by definition fraudulent and the
democratically elected winner is ipso facto a dictator.
The function of adjudicating the validity of an election, as in any country, is to be dealt
with through court challenges, not by turning to Donald Trump for his approval.
And certainly not by anointing an individual from a party that could have run in the 2018
election but decided to boycott.
The Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ), which is the separate supreme court branch of the
Venezuelan government has certified Maduro's reelection, as have independent international
observers. Further, no appeal was filed by any of the boycotting parties, while all
participating parties – including opposition ones – signed off on the validity of
the election after the polls closed.
The far-right opposition has boycotted the high court as well as the electoral process. They
contest the legitimacy of the TSJ because some members of the TSJ were appointed by a lame duck
National Assembly favorable to Maduro, after a new National Assembly with a majority in
opposition had been elected in December 2015 but not yet seated.
Even if President Maduro were somehow deemed to have experienced what is termed a falta
absoluta (i.e., some sort of void in the presidency due to death, insanity, absence, etc.), the
National Assembly president is only authorized to take over if the falta absoluta occurs before
the lawful president "takes possession." However, Maduro was already "in possession" before the
January 10, 2019 presidential inauguration and even before the May 10, 2018 presidential
election. Maduro had won the presidency in the 2013 election and ran and won reelection last
May.
If the falta absoluta is deemed to have occurred during the first four years of the
presidential term, the vice president takes over. Then the constitution decrees that a snap
election for the presidency must be held within 30 days. This is what happened when President
Hugo Chávez died while in office in 2013. Then Vice President Nicolás Maduro
succeeded to the presidency, called for new elections, and was elected by the people of
Venezuela.
If it is deemed that the falta absoluta occurred during the last two years of the six-year
presidential term, the vice president serves until the end of the term, according to the
Venezuelan constitution. And if the time of the alleged falta absoluta is unclear – when
Maduro presided over "illegitimate" elections in 2018, as is claimed by the far-right
opposition – it is up to the TSJ to decide, not the head of the National Assembly or even
such an august authority as US Senator Marco Rubio . Or the craven US press (too numerous to
cite), which without bothering to read the plain language of the Bolivarian Constitution,
repeatedly refers to Guaidó as the "constitutionally authorized" or "legitimate"
president.
As
Alfred de Zayas , United Nations independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and
equitable international order, tweeted: "Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution is
inapplicable and cannot be twisted into legitimizing Guaidó's self-proclamation as
interim President. A coup is a coup ."
A self professed country calling itself a Capitalista and democracy erects a Gov't for the
people of Venezuela. What a shill murica has become. They did it for Ukraine as well. When
the capitalistas lost the prize, the Russian military port, they abandoned the whole country
an left it to the neo-nazis they erected. The neo nazi regime went after Russians living in
Ukraine and were killing them, while muricans sat by silently. The Russians stepped in and
took in the refugees to safety and also sent caravans of aid for those that choose to stay,
mostly the elderly.
Capitalists and democracy. POS dictators masking as a democracy while their own country
becomes a **** hole.
The latest senior military officer to defect from the Nicolas Maduro government claims that
90% of the armed forces are "unhappy" with Maduro and stand ready to defect, according to
The Times .
Colonel Rubén Paz Jimenez posted a short video to social media over the weekend
declaring his support for US-backed opposition leader Juan Guaidó. "Ninety per cent of
us in the armed forces are really unhappy," he said in the video message. "We are being used to
keep them in power." He further urged soldiers to resist orders to block humanitarian aid
shipped by the United States and to instead facilitate its entry into the country.
According
to The Times Col. Paz is a military doctor and appears to be taking advantage of Guaido's offer
of amnesty to army officers who switch loyalties to him
as interim president :
A stockpile of US aid -- medicines, medical equipment and nutritional supplements -- is in
the Colombian border city of Cucuta. Colonel Paz, a doctor, urged soldiers to help the aid
get into Venezuela . Mr Guaidó has offered amnesty to those in the army who abandon Mr
Maduro, 56, peacefully.
He's been further described as deputy of the Directorate of the Military Hospital in
Maracaibo and the timing of his defection is interesting given the contested issue of US
humanitarian aid.
Trump administration officials like John Bolton have also of late actively encouraged
Venezuelan military defections, something that so far has been limited to a tiny handful of
officers, at least one of them
an Air Force commander -- while also attempting to force the issue of American aid
delivery.
Colonel Ruben Paz Jimenez, deputy of the Directorate of the Military Hospital in Maracaibo,
announced his support for Guaido and urged others to follow: Bolton recently invoked the
"authorization" of Interim President Juan Guaido to ship humanitarian aid into the country
including "medicine, surgical supplies, and nutritional supplements for the people of
Venezuela" according to his statement. He urged Maduro "to get out of the way".
The Times report noted the Venezuelan pharmaceutical association has put the situation of
medicine access to the population at
extreme crisis levels :
The Venezuelan pharmaceutical association has said that 80 per cent of medicines are in
short supply . Most Venezuelans report involuntary weight loss over the past two years, and
three million people -- almost a tenth of the population -- have left since 2014. The economy
has collapsed and inflation is estimated at 2.7 million per cent .
Meanwhile the socialist government in Caracas insists it isn't experiencing a humanitarian
crisis; instead Maduro has slammed US aid to the country as a "political show".
The United States urged the UN to act by presenting a draft resolution before the security
council demanding that Venezuelan forces unblock the aid at the border, reportedly coming via
Brazil and US ally Colombia, in order for the people to access it. Russia is expected to block
the resolution.
Interestingly, prior to this latest defection of military doctor Col. Paz, another high
ranking officer had cited the exact same "90 percent" figure describing armed forces who are
actually against Maduro. The
highest ranking armed forces member to defect thus far, Air Force General Francisco Yanez,
who was part of the air force's high command, in his own video message early this month claimed
a wave of defections is coming.
The obvious question remains: is this a mere opposition propaganda talking point employed in
the hopes of gaining momentum? Given the scant number of high level officers willing to abandon
Maduro over the past two weeks as international pressure grows, it appears merely an empty
scripted claim.
Last month National Assembly leader and now US-recognized "Interim President" Guaido first
began appealing to the military to switch sides following a local and short-lived attempt of 27
officers to lead a revolt on Jan. 21, quickly put down by security forces after they stormed an
armory and police checkpoint.
To encourage more such defections, which so far hasn't appeared to penetrate the top layers
of military leadership, Guaido has offered amnesty protection to any officer previously accused
of corruption or human rights abuses should they defect.
But so far there's been a tiny - we might even say insignificant - trickle as the country's
most powerful institution continues to stand by Maduro's side against "foreign aggression" and
the regime change rhetoric issuing from the White House.
"... Maduro might not possess widespread legitimacy, but his government retains control of much of the state apparatus and remains far more entrenched than many opposition members and their supporters would like to believe. ..."
"... Nearly every day over the past two weeks, both National Security Adviser John Bolton and Republican Senator Marco Rubio have used their Twitter accounts to call on the military to align with Guaidó, "defend democracy," and oust Maduro. ..."
"... Guaidó's announcement assuming the role of interim president generated a wave of support from some capitals as well as the Organization of American States. Now the crisis is in a stalemate. Indeed, as Francisco Toro notes , the United States, in granting diplomatic recognition to Guaidó's "government," has created a precarious situation by confusing a normative judgment about who should run the country with the objective fact of who does run the country -- that is, who actually has control over national territory and the state apparatus. ..."
"... If this gamble, this all-or-nothing approach, does not go as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, NSA adviser Bolton, and others hope it will, what will happen in a few weeks, if Maduro remains president? Will Washington continue with economic sanctions and fall into a pattern similar to its decades-long standoff with Cuba? Will it take to exploding cigars and other absurd and criminal plots of subversion? ..."
"... The United States now has little room to play a constructive role in interim efforts, such as the negotiations proposed by Mexico and Uruguay to bring the two sides to the table ..."
"... In fact, Guaidó is from one of the most hard-line political parties among the opposition. ..."
"... More than anything else, Guaidó appears to be a product of the right-wing, middle-class student movement that developed in opposition to the Chávez government in the mid-to-late 2000s. This movement, which took to the streets of Caracas to demand the ouster of Chávez, received much of its funding and training from Washington ..."
"... Over the course of several years, Washington worked with middle-class, opposition-aligned students through the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and its Office for Transition Initiatives (OTI). Indeed, OTI often works in war-torn countries that are, as the office's name indicates, experiencing a "political transition," such as Burma, Iraq, and Libya. When Gill asked a former high-ranking USAID member why OTI worked in Venezuela, he stated that OTI are "the special forces of the democracy assistance community." Another USAID functionary told Gill that OTI allowed the United States to provide funds to opposition members in Venezuela faster than if they used traditional channels. ..."
"... What were the ultimate objectives of USAID/OTI in Venezuela during the years they worked with the student movement? US Ambassador to Venezuela William Brownfield specifically laid them out in a secret embassy cable secured by Chelsea Manning and released by WikiLeaks: "1) Strengthening Democratic Institutions, 2) Penetrating Chavez' Political Base, 3) Dividing Chavismo, 4) Protecting Vital US business, and 5) Isolating Chavez internationally." ..."
"... Thereafter, USAID/OTI largely shifted its efforts toward the burgeoning student movement that developed in the mid-2000s -- the movement in which Guaidó "cut his political teeth," according to a report in The Guardian . A former USAID/OTI member who helped devise US efforts in Venezuela said the "objective was that you had thousands of youth, high school, and college kids that were horrified of this Indian-looking guy in power. They were idealistic. We wanted to help them to build a civic organization, so that they could mobilize and organize. This is different than protesting." In other words, USAID/OTI sought to take advantage of racialized fear of Chávez to organize middle-class youth around a long-term strategy to defeat him. ..."
"... most successful time was during 2007, when the student movement developed. The US had a very daring movement and brought a lot of money to the students through OTI, and it grew a lot as a result ..."
"... Although they could not confirm the specific US origins of this assistance, this sort of aid has been used for CIA operations in the past. ..."
"... While it is unclear what Guaidó's role was in these groups at the time, it is clear that US "democracy promotion" financed his cohort's formation and its demonstrations for over a decade . ..."
"... This is not to suggest that Guaidó, Goicoechea, or any other opposition member is merely a puppet of the United States. But it is clear that Guaidó and others in his circle share a worldview and certain goals with the US government. Many of them linked up with US agencies, which provided them with the resources needed to amplify their voices and reach a much larger audience. ..."
"... A recently released document outlining some of Guaidó's proposals -- accepting much-needed humanitarian aid, eliminating currency controls, and courting private investment -- did little to clarify his vision for the future. Still hanging in the air is how Guaidó intends to accomplish these goals. The lack of specificity is at least partly due to the heterogeneity of the opposition coalition, which is composed of former Communist Party members as well as proponents of neoliberalism. But Guaidó's already cozy relationship with the United States certainly raises concerns that his plans remain vague because they involve massive privatization, the rollback of state services, and other policies that would make Venezuela more "inviting" for foreign investors at the expense of many Venezuelans ..."
"... Finally, though most Venezuelans may not be aware of the ties between Guaidó's party and the United States, his uncritical acceptance of US support has filled some with uncertainty about his motives. ..."
"... At the international level, the stars have surely aligned for Guaidó and the opposition, with right-wing allies like Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil and Donald Trump in the United States now in power. ..."
"... The only real hope for a peaceful outcome lies in dialogue. Given that many citizens do not trust either Maduro or Guaidó, the two sides would need to make serious gestures toward working together to resolve both the economic and political crisis. This would require that Guaidó walk back his refusal to participate in negotiations. ..."
"... Decoupling humanitarian aid from political interests could also demonstrate that Guaidó isn't just focused on gaining power. The Red Cross has already cautioned the United States about the dangers of sending aid to Venezuela if it is not "shielded" from politics and does not have the approval of Venezuelan authorities. ..."
in February 4, more than a dozen European countries recognized the president of Venezuela's National Assembly, Juan Guaidó, as
the country's legitimate president. This decision came almost two weeks after the United States, Canada, and most countries in Latin
America backed Guaidó's claim to the presidential office. Despite continued Chinese and Russian support for Nicolás Maduro's government,
the international community is quickly isolating it, as never before. A strange coalition of left- and right-wing political parties
has formed to assist Guaidó, and knee-jerk support from both pundits and politicians who profess concern about the country's humanitarian
crisis has generated an allegiance to this little-known politician and his call for Maduro's resignation. Many of Guaidó's supporters
have cited Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution as grounds for his assumption of the presidency, arguing that the unfair nature
of the 2018 presidential election has rendered the Maduro government illegitimate. There is no question that Venezuelans are suffering
and want to see a change in governance. Maduro is wildly unpopular, even among the working class, and many have grown tired of the
economic crisis that has exploded under his watch. This doesn't mean, though, that citizens necessarily support the opposition or,
worse, US military intervention.
Many continue to identify as chavista , and even those who have shed this identification continue to acknowledge that the
Bolivarian Revolution once improved their livelihoods. Those improvements, though, have largely evaporated under Maduro.
Since some of the most powerful countries in the world have now decided to back Guaidó, there is good reason to ask who he is,
what sort of future he represents for Venezuela, and whether domestic support for Guaidó's call for Maduro's resignation equals support
for him as leader of the country.
Dangerous Brinkmanship
Maduro might not possess widespread legitimacy, but his government retains control of much of the state apparatus and remains
far more entrenched than many opposition members and their supporters would like to believe. In many ways, chavismo remains
dominant and has reshaped Venezuelan society. Whether they like it or not, the opposition will not be able to entirely overturn the
legacy of the Bolivarian Revolution or erase the fondness that many citizens still have for the late Hugo Chávez and the policies
he implemented as president. Some members of the opposition
seem to realize this.
There should not be any doubt, though, about what the United States, alongside other countries within and beyond the Western Hemisphere,
are pushing for in Venezuela: a military overthrow of the Maduro government. The situation is messy, and there are multiple interpretations
concerning the origins of the political-economic crisis in Venezuela, as well as how to solve the political crisis and reboot the
Venezuelan economy. But Washington and its allies seem intent on some basic interventionist strategies. Nearly every day over
the past two weeks, both National Security Adviser John Bolton and Republican Senator Marco Rubio have used their Twitter accounts
to call on the military to align with Guaidó, "defend democracy," and oust Maduro.
For now, the United States has seemed to settle for imposing harsh sanctions on Venezuela that portend economic catastrophe. These
sanctions target the lifeblood of the economy: the state oil company (PDVSA) and its sales to the United States. The aim, of course,
is to weaken Maduro's position by taking away the government's most important source of revenue. But this could very easily backfire.
Venezuelan citizens might blame the United States for worsening the economic crisis, though it won't automatically translate into
support for Maduro. And it certainly won't help build support for international mediation or fondness for the United States on the
part of most Venezuelans.
If these sanctions do break the government, it is likely some portion of the population will feel that whatever comes next is
the product of coercion. If the opposition centered around Guaidó then wins a presidential election, that government may face questions
regarding its own legitimacy. Even for many who do not support Maduro, anti-imperialist sentiments run deep; elections that take
place as a result of US strong-arming will be tainted by these dynamics.
Guaidó's announcement assuming the role of interim president generated a wave of support from some capitals as well as the
Organization of American States. Now the crisis is in a stalemate. Indeed,
as Francisco Toro notes
, the United States, in granting diplomatic recognition to Guaidó's "government," has created a precarious situation by confusing
a normative judgment about who should run the country with the objective fact of who does run the country -- that is, who actually
has control over national territory and the state apparatus.
If this gamble, this all-or-nothing approach, does not go as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, NSA adviser Bolton, and others
hope it will, what will happen in a few weeks, if Maduro remains president? Will Washington continue with economic sanctions and
fall into a pattern similar to its decades-long standoff with Cuba? Will it take to exploding cigars and other absurd and criminal
plots of subversion?
The United States now has little room to play a constructive role in interim efforts, such as the negotiations proposed by
Mexico and Uruguay to bring the two sides to the table.In fact, Washington's intransigence only bolsters opposition
intransigence. Indeed, since January 23, we have seen escalation upon escalation, potentially setting the stage for violent conflict,
even civil war.
Washington's Campaign: 'Dividing Chavismo' and 'Protecting Vital US Business'
Following the opposition's victory in 2015 parliamentary elections, opposition-party leaders agreed to a rotating cast of leadership
within the National Assembly. In 2019, Guaidó, representing the Voluntad Popular party, assumed the position of National Assembly
president. Very few know much about the 35-year-old Guaidó. Indeed, a common remark about him from Venezuelans is that he has "come
out of nowhere" ( viene de la nada ).
In fact, Guaidó is from one of the most hard-line political parties among the opposition. While some parties have sought
to displace chavismo through an electoral route, Leopoldo López, one of the founders of Voluntad Popular, led protests in 2014 --
many of which became violent -- demanding Maduro's exit. After Maduro's first election, in 2013, López justified undemocratic approaches
to removing him by declaring his government illegitimate. One of the few things we do know about Guaidó is that López has been one
of his political mentors; some have even suggested López is continuing to call the shots while still under house arrest in suburban
Caracas.
More than anything else, Guaidó appears to be a product of the right-wing, middle-class student movement that developed in
opposition to the Chávez government in the mid-to-late 2000s. This movement, which took to the streets of Caracas to demand the ouster
of Chávez, received much of its funding and training from Washington.
The following reporting is based on Tim Gill's extensive research on US foreign policy toward Venezuela under Chávez, and the
ways in which Washington sought to"promote democracy." Gill conducted interviews with numerous US state actors and members Venezuelan
civil society.
Over the course of several years, Washington worked with middle-class, opposition-aligned students through the US Agency for
International Development (USAID) and its Office for Transition Initiatives (OTI). Indeed, OTI often
works in war-torn countries that
are, as the office's name indicates, experiencing a "political transition," such as Burma, Iraq, and Libya. When Gill asked a former
high-ranking USAID member why OTI worked in Venezuela, he stated that OTI are "the special forces of the democracy assistance community."
Another USAID functionary told Gill that OTI allowed the United States to provide funds to opposition members in Venezuela faster
than if they used traditional channels.
What were the ultimate objectives of USAID/OTI in Venezuela during the years they worked with the student movement? US Ambassador
to Venezuela William Brownfield specifically laid
them out in a secret embassy cable secured by Chelsea Manning and released by WikiLeaks: "1) Strengthening Democratic Institutions,
2) Penetrating Chavez' Political Base, 3) Dividing Chavismo, 4) Protecting Vital US business, and 5) Isolating Chavez internationally."
These efforts initially focused on setting up community groups in working-class neighborhoods, which appeared neutral but were
actually operated by opposition activists. Since USAID/OTI could not directly fund political parties, they worked with party leaders,
including those from Voluntad Popular, to help opposition activists set up these community groups in neighborhoods where chavistas
were predominant. The groups, which claimed to promote and provide training related to participatory democracy, ultimately aimed
to put opposition activists in contact with Chávez supporters in an effort to generate chavista support for their political
parties. One USAID/OTI contractor who helped to organize these groups in Venezuela explained to Gill:
We even developed new NGOs that were looking very neutral in the eyes of the government; by them we can help people in the
poor neighborhoods. They looked neutral because they had no affiliation with no political party. They were people from the neighborhood,
even though they were opposition. They create the organizations with no past relation to political parties. So when they worked
in the barrios , they looked very neutral. So we gave them money, but they succeeded in helping democratic values. They
were pulling people away from Chávez in a subtle manner. We were telling them what democracy is, and showing them what democracy
means. We developed very nice materials and took care of every word to give them, so it didn't look like we were sympathizing
with the opposition.
The campaign didn't work out as planned. Chávez continued to garner support among the popular classes, and many barrio
inhabitants eventually caught on that the community groups were organized by the opposition, so most stopped attending.
Thereafter, USAID/OTI largely shifted its efforts toward the burgeoning student movement that developed in the mid-2000s --
the movement in which Guaidó "cut his political teeth," according to
a report in The Guardian . A former USAID/OTI member who helped devise US efforts in Venezuela said the "objective was that you
had thousands of youth, high school, and college kids that were horrified of this Indian-looking guy in power. They were idealistic.
We wanted to help them to build a civic organization, so that they could mobilize and organize. This is different than protesting."
In other words, USAID/OTI sought to take advantage of racialized fear of Chávez to organize middle-class youth around a long-term
strategy to defeat him.
How exactly did the United States help these students? One USAID/OTI contractor who worked directly with them on a routine basis
revealed to Gill that Washington provided funding and training to the student groups that developed at the same time Guaidó was part
of them. This contractor said that for USAID/OTI, the
most successful time was during 2007, when the student movement developed. The US had a very daring movement and brought
a lot of money to the students through OTI, and it grew a lot as a result. I can say with pride that a lot of people
[now] in the Congress -- I know them from our projects. I'm proud. It's like you see your son and daughter grow up. I knew them
when they grew up the potential leaders when/if there is a change of government, and we were the ones who showed them the first
steps.
Washington gave money to these student groups for a number of purposes. As one USAID/OTI employee put it, the funding was for
"all the things they needed: microphones, things for presentations, paper." Another USAID/OTI employee described hosting seminars
and courses with student protesters. One employee described the training this way: "what is democracy, what is the vote, all the
pillars with the democracy system, to reinforce them, what language they have to use." However, one USAID worker contended that Washington
-- albeit not through USAID -- was also providing the students with items that could "be used in the street and protect themselves,
[such as] masks, but it was not part of open grants." Although they could not confirm the specific US origins of this assistance,
this sort of aid has been used for CIA operations in the past.
While it is unclear what Guaidó's role was in these groups at the time, it is clear that US "democracy promotion" financed
his cohort's formation and its demonstrations for over a decade . Two of the key actors that USAID/OTI contractors interacted
with during this period were Yon Goicoechea and Freddy Guevara, who like Guaidó were from Voluntad Popular. All three have been widely
documented in the media as leading student protests against the Chávez government at the same time, putting them in the same organizational
circles.
This is not to suggest that Guaidó, Goicoechea, or any other opposition member is merely a puppet of the United States. But
it is clear that Guaidó and others in his circle share a worldview and certain goals with the US government. Many of them linked
up with US agencies, which provided them with the resources needed to amplify their voices and reach a much larger audience.When Gill asked one USAID/OTI member whether the goal was "to get Chávez out of office," the member responded, "That was the
idea."
What Does Guaidó Want?
Fast-forward to 2019, when Guaidó is at the forefront of the movement to oust Maduro. As with much of the Venezuelan opposition,
though, Guaidó has been vague about his actual policies. On January 30, he presented a "Plan País" at the Central University of Venezuela.
But much of this time was spent criticizing what the government has done and talking in generalities about how Guaidó would improve
the economy. This included vague references to "stabilizing the economy" and "establishing legal certainty for business."
A recently released document outlining some of Guaidó's proposals -- accepting much-needed humanitarian aid, eliminating currency
controls, and courting private investment -- did little to clarify his vision for the future. Still hanging in the air is how Guaidó
intends to accomplish these goals. The lack of specificity is at least partly due to the heterogeneity of the opposition coalition,
which is composed of former Communist Party members as well as proponents of neoliberalism. But Guaidó's already cozy relationship
with the United States certainly raises concerns that his plans remain vague because they involve massive privatization, the rollback
of state services, and other policies that would make Venezuela more "inviting" for foreign investors at the expense of many Venezuelans.
According to a glowing
recent article in The New York Times , "While it's still far from certain that Mr. Guaidó will ever set foot in the presidential
palace, the number of ordinary Venezuelans and foreign powers taking his side is growing." This formulation confuses provisional
support for Guaidó as a means of clearing the way for elections with support for Guaidó as president -- a dangerous conflation to
make in a country where it could take up to one or two years to organize elections. And so far, we still don't know what Guaidó is
more committed to: putting his friends and party members into power, or supporting democratic elections, regardless of the outcome.
The only thing we know for sure is that in the short term, he wishes to fully assume the presidency.
Guaidó's intransigent opposition to negotiations is perhaps another reason to question his motives. Undoubtedly, previous talks
have not generated confidence or optimism on either side. In lockstep with the United States and several other countries, Guaidó
has asserted that the time for dialogue is over. This position seems to have only encouraged Maduro to dig in his heels.
It's unlikely the Maduro government will simply calmly step aside and cede the government to Guaidó. High-ranking military members
seemingly remain on board with Maduro -- maybe because they fear an end to the economic benefits they now receive, or even prosecution
under an opposition government. The opposition, for its part, is working to provide an exit ramp for military officers tangled up
with the Maduro government. Given this standstill, Guaidó's resistance to dialogue only moves the needle closer to US military intervention.
And his embrace of economic sanctions will hammer the poor before anyone else.
Guaidó's calls for more protests and military defections, and his actions at the international level (for example, his rush to
appoint ambassadors to sympathetic countries) seem designed to bait Maduro into pursuing him legally. Bolton et al. have publicly
warned Maduro that actions against Guaidó will have consequences. Clearly, the Iraq War–endorsing national-security adviser and his
new colleague -- the
notorious neocon Elliott Abrams, Trump's recently appointed special envoy to Venezuela -- are eager to assert US political and
military dominance over a neighboring country that has irritated Washington for two decades.
Guaidó's Shaky Support
Over the past few years, discontent with the Maduro government has clearly grown, but we should not conflate that growth in opposition
with support for Guaidó. For years, the opposition coalition has asserted that it represents a majority of the country, even as it
has ignored the poor and working class. The fact that Guaidó's mobilizations in Caracas on February 2 were centered in Las Mercedes,
one of the richest neighborhoods, does not generate confidence that the opposition has moved beyond its narrow, elitist base. In
late January Rebecca Hanson conducted research in Catia, a conglomeration of poor and working-class neighborhoods in west Caracas
where she has worked since 2009, on perceptions of the self-proclaimed interim president. She found that even those who voice support
for Guaidó do so because he is not Maduro -- that is, they support him not for who he is, but for who he isn't. At most, there may
be tentative agreement that Guaidó represents una esperanza (a hope) for a change in government.
It was not excitement about potential change but rather pessimism and hopelessness that characterized one group interview that
Hanson organized with women in Los Magallanes, a section of Catia, only 10 days after Guaidó's proclamation. Though the women participating
said that Guaidó offered some hope, this was limited to getting Maduro out of office. Most of them felt that there is no real difference
between Maduro and Guaidó, with one fighting to maintain his position in power and the other fighting to seize it. As one participant
in the interview put it, the two are in a fight to distribute the spoils of war among their respective inner circle. "You don't know
who to believe"; "I don't believe in anyone"; and "All politicians want the same thing" were common refrains.
What is more, no one Hanson interviewed was under the illusion that the opposition under Guaidó was different from when it was
under López or Henrique Capriles, the opposition's 2012 and 2013 presidential candidate. In other words, no one was convinced that
Guaidó had the interests of the people at heart. These and other conversations suggest that at least some Venezuelans will support
Guaidó only, or at least primarily, because they feel they have been backed into a corner, either by Maduro's incompetence or his
unwillingness to make serious economic changes.
Finally, though most Venezuelans may not be aware of the ties between Guaidó's party and the United States, his uncritical
acceptance of US support has filled some with uncertainty about his motives.Some would prefer that he "put his house
in order" without outside intervention -- that he demonstrate his ability to generate support within Venezuela. For others, his very
public endorsement of the United States recalls memories of Venezuela's status decades ago, during the cuarta republica ,
when "our oil was not our own," as chavistas that Hanson has conducted research with often say. Still others worry that Venezuela
is being sold off bit by bit to Russia and China. The choice between Guaidó and Maduro could, sadly, end up being a question of which
empire to serve.
No Peace Without Chavismo
At the international level, the stars have surely aligned for Guaidó and the opposition, with right-wing allies like Jair
Bolsonaro in Brazil and Donald Trump in the United States now in power. Yet the Venezuelan government has fended off international
intervention before. Hugo Chávez survived Bush and his overt support for the 2002 coup (as well as former Colombian President Alvaro
Uribe and his saber rattling). However, in earlier years, the so-called Latin American Pink Tide, with leftist governments in countries
like Ecuador and Brazil, gave Venezuela firm regional allies. This is no longer the case.
True, Maduro does retain the support of China and Russia. Over the past decade they have supplied Venezuela with shipments of
missiles, advanced aircraft, and tanks, which have shored up a sizable military. This could make a US invasion more complicated than
what the Pentagon faced in Grenada in 1983 and Panama in 1989, two military forays that Trump and others often reference in defense
of this possibility.
The only real hope for a peaceful outcome lies in dialogue. Given that many citizens do not trust either Maduro or Guaidó,
the two sides would need to make serious gestures toward working together to resolve both the economic and political crisis. This
would require that Guaidó walk back his refusal to participate in negotiations. A few global actors like Mexico and Uruguay
understand this and have urged the government and opposition to sit down and work out a plan for the future.
Dialogue is a much better option than the current US plan to starve Venezuelans into revolt by applying crippling economic sanctions.
Have US elites learned nothing from the experience of Cuba, Iran, or Zimbabwe? These economies limped on, and their leaders clung
to state power for decades, despite sanctions. Far from damaging US foes, sanctions have primarily taken their toll on the citizens
they were allegedly designed to liberate.
Guaidó could invest less time in courting international actors and more time winning over sectors in Venezuela that have traditionally
supported chavismo . For example, he could take a page from the playbook of Henrique Capriles, who announced during his 2012
presidential campaign that social programs like Barrio Adentro, which provided free health care in popular sectors, should not only
be maintained but improved and extended. Although Guaidó has criticized militarized police raids that have killed hundreds in poor
neighborhoods, the Guaidó-led opposition has remained silent about how their government would protect the rights and well-being of
the poor, suggesting that it has yet to concede that these sectors, the majority of the population, must be the priority of any future
government. Given the high level of discontent with the Maduro government, this is a luxury he can probably afford -- in the short
term. Eventually, however, he will need to put forward a platform demonstrating that the poor and working-class sectors will not
end up bearing the brunt of the transition if he wishes to secure their support.
Decoupling humanitarian aid from political interests could also demonstrate that Guaidó isn't just focused on gaining power.
The Red Cross has already cautioned the United
States about the dangers of sending aid to Venezuela if it is not "shielded" from politics and does not have the approval of Venezuelan
authorities. Humanitarian aid should not be a bargaining chip, and using it as such contributes to the perception that the battle
Guaidó is waging is for power, not el pueblo . Finally, and not least, Guaidó should put forward a concrete plan for new elections,
guaranteeing the participation of chavista candidates. There is no political future in Venezuela without chavista participation,
and, one way or another, the opposition and chavismo will eventually need to work together toward a new future. See also
Dismal economic performance of Venezuelan economy and impoverishment of population created perfect environment for the color revolution...
Notable quotes:
"... But after a single phone call from from US Vice President Mike Pence, Guaidó proclaimed himself president of Venezuela. Anointed as the leader of his country by Washington, a previously unknown political bottom-dweller was vaulted onto the international stage as the US-selected leader of the nation with the world's largest oil reserves. ..."
"... CANVAS is a spinoff of Otpor, a Serbian protest group founded by Srdja Popovic in 1998 at the University of Belgrade. Otpor, which means "resistance" in Serbian, was the student group that gained international fame -- and Hollywood-level promotion -- by mobilizing the protests that eventually toppled Slobodan Milosevic. ..."
Juan Guaidó is the product of a decade-long project overseen by Washington's elite regime change trainers. While posing as a champion
of democracy, he has spent years at the forefront of a violent campaign of destabilization.
Before the fateful day of January 22, fewer
than one in five Venezuelans had heard of Juan Guaidó. Only a few months ago, the 35-year-old was an obscure character in a politically
marginal far-right group closely associated with gruesome acts of street violence. Even in his own party, Guaidó had been a mid-level
figure in the opposition-dominated National Assembly, which is now held under contempt according to Venezuela's constitution.
But after a single phone call from from US Vice President Mike Pence, Guaidó proclaimed himself president of Venezuela. Anointed
as the leader of his country by Washington, a previously unknown political bottom-dweller was vaulted onto the international stage
as the US-selected leader of the nation with the world's largest oil reserves.
Echoing the Washington consensus, the New York Times editorial board
hailed Guaidó as a "credible
rival" to Maduro with a "refreshing style and vision of taking the country forward." The Bloomberg News editorial board
applauded
him for seeking "restoration of democracy" and the Wall Street Journal
declared him "a new democratic leader."
Meanwhile, Canada, numerous European nations, Israel, and the bloc of right-wing Latin American governments known as the Lima Group
recognized Guaidó as the legitimate leader of Venezuela.
While Guaidó seemed to have materialized out of nowhere, he was, in fact, the product of more than a decade of assiduous grooming
by the US government's elite regime change factories. Alongside a cadre of right-wing student activists, Guaidó was cultivated to
undermine Venezuela's socialist-oriented government, destabilize the country, and one day seize power. Though he has been a minor
figure in Venezuelan politics, he had spent years quietly demonstrated his worthiness in Washington's halls of power.
"Juan Guaidó is a character that has been created for this circumstance," Marco Teruggi, an Argentinian sociologist and leading
chronicler of Venezuelan politics, told The Grayzone . "It's the logic
of a laboratory – Guaidó is like a mixture of several elements that create a character who, in all honesty, oscillates between
laughable and worrying."
Diego Sequera, a Venezuelan journalist and writer for the investigative outlet Misión Verdad, agreed: "Guaidó is more popular
outside Venezuela than inside, especially in the elite Ivy League and Washington circles," Sequera remarked to The Grayzone, "He's
a known character there, is predictably right-wing, and is considered loyal to the program."
While Guaidó is today sold as the face of democratic restoration, he spent his career in the most violent faction of Venezuela's
most radical opposition party, positioning himself at the forefront of one destabilization campaign after another. His party has
been widely discredited inside Venezuela, and is held partly responsible for fragmenting a badly weakened opposition.
"'These radical leaders have no more than 20 percent in opinion polls,"
wrote Luis Vicente León, Venezuela's leading pollster. According to León, Guaidó's party remains isolated because the majority
of the population "does not want war. 'What they want is a solution.'"
But this is precisely why he Guaidó was selected by Washington: He is not expected to lead Venezuela toward democracy, but to
collapse a country that for the past two decades has been a bulwark of resistance to US hegemony. His unlikely rise signals the culmination
of a two decades-long project to destroy a robust socialist experiment.
Targeting the "troika of tyranny"
Since the 1998 election of Hugo Chávez, the United States has fought to restore control over Venezuela and is vast oil reserves.
Chávez's socialist programs may have redistributed the country's wealth and helped lift millions out of poverty, but they also earned
him a target on his back.
In 2002, Venezuela's right-wing opposition briefly ousted Chávez with US support and recognition, before the military restored
his presidency following a mass popular mobilization. Throughout the administrations of US Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama,
Chávez survived numerous assassination plots, before succumbing to cancer in 2013. His successor, Nicolas Maduro, has
survived
three attempts on his life.
The Trump administration immediately elevated Venezuela to the top of Washington's regime change target list, branding it the
leader of a
"troika of tyranny." Last year, Trump's national security team
attempted
to recruit members of the military brass to mount a military junta, but that effort failed.
According to the Venezuelan government, the US was also involved in a plot, codenamed Operation Constitution, to capture Maduro
at the Miraflores presidential palace; and another, called
Operation Armageddon , to assassinate him at a military parade in July 2017. Just over a year later, exiled opposition leaders
tried and failed to kill Maduro with drone bombs during
a military parade in Caracas.
More than a decade before these intrigues, a group of right-wing opposition students were hand-selected and groomed by an elite
US-funded regime change training academy to topple Venezuela's government and restore the neoliberal order.
Training from the "'export-a-revolution' group that sowed the seeds for a NUMBER of color revolutions"
On October 5, 2005, with Chávez's popularity at its peak and his government planning sweeping socialist programs, five Venezuelan
"student leaders" arrived in Belgrade,
Serbia to begin training for an insurrection.
The students had arrived from Venezuela courtesy of the Center for Applied Non-Violent Action and Strategies, or CANVAS. This
group is
funded largely through the
National Endowment for Democracy , a CIA cut-out that functions as the US government's main arm of promoting regime change; and
offshoots like the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. According
to leaked internal emails
from Stratfor, an intelligence firm known as the "
shadow CIA ,"
CANVAS "may have also received CIA funding and training during the 1999/2000 anti-Milosevic struggle."
CANVAS is a spinoff of Otpor, a Serbian protest group founded by
Srdja Popovic in 1998 at the University of Belgrade.
Otpor, which means "resistance" in Serbian, was the student group that gained international fame -- and Hollywood-level
promotion -- by mobilizing the protests that eventually toppled Slobodan
Milosevic.
This small cell of regime change specialists was operating according to the theories of the late Gene Sharp, the so-called "Clausewitz
of non-violent struggle." Sharp had worked with a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst, Col.
Robert Helvey , to conceive a strategic blueprint that
weaponized protest as a form of hybrid warfare, aiming it at states that resisted Washington's unipolar domination.
Otpor at the 1998 MTV Europe Music Awards
Otpor was supported by the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, and Sharp's Albert Einstein Institute. Sinisa Sikman, one
of Otpor's main trainers, once
said the group even received
direct CIA funding.
According to a
leaked email
from a Stratfor staffer, after running Milosevic out of power, "the kids who ran OTPOR grew up, got suits and designed CANVAS
or in other words a 'export-a-revolution' group that sowed the seeds for a NUMBER of color revolutions. They are still hooked into
U.S. funding and basically go around the world trying to topple dictators and autocratic governments (ones that U.S. does not like
;)."
Stratfor revealed that CANVAS "turned its attention to Venezuela" in 2005, after training opposition movements that led pro-NATO
regime change operations across Eastern Europe.
While monitoring the CANVAS training program, Stratfor outlined its insurrectionist agenda in strikingly blunt language: "Success
is by no means guaranteed, and student movements are only at the beginning of what could be a years-long effort to trigger a revolution
in Venezuela, but the trainers themselves are the people who cut their teeth on the 'Butcher of the Balkans.' They've got mad skills.
When you see students at five Venezuelan universities hold simultaneous demonstrations, you will know that the training is over and
the real work has begun."
Birthing the "Generation 2007" regime change cadre
The "real work" began two years later, in 2007, when Guaidó graduated from Andrés Bello Catholic University of Caracas. He moved
to Washington, DC to enroll in the Governance and Political Management
Program at George Washington University, under the tutelage of Venezuelan economist Luis Enrique Berrizbeitia, one of the top
Latin American neoliberal economists. Berrizbeitia is a
former executive director of the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) who spent more than a decade working in the Venezuelan energy sector, under the old oligarchic regime that was
ousted by Chávez.
That year, Guaidó helped lead anti-government rallies after the Venezuelan government
declined to to renew the license of Radio Caracas Televisión
(RCTV). This privately owned station played a leading role in the 2002 coup against Hugo Chávez. RCTV helped mobilize anti-government
demonstrators, falsified information blaming government supporters for acts of violence carried out by opposition members, and banned
pro-government reporting amid the coup. The role of RCTV and other oligarch-owned stations in driving the failed coup attempt was
chronicled in the acclaimed documentary The Revolution Will Not
Be Televised .
That same year, the students claimed credit for stymying Chavez's constitutional referendum for a "21st century socialism" that
promised "to set the legal framework for the political and
social reorganization of the country, giving direct power to organized communities as a prerequisite for the development of a new
economic system."
From the protests around RCTV and the referendum, a specialized cadre of US-backed class of regime change activists was born.
They called themselves "Generation 2007."
The Stratfor and CANVAS trainers of this cell identified Guaidó's ally – a street organizer named Yon Goicoechea – as a "key factor"
in defeating the constitutional referendum. The following year, Goicochea was
rewarded for his efforts with the Cato Institute's
Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty, along with a $500,000 prize, which he promptly invested into building his own Liberty
First (Primero Justicia) political network.
Friedman, of course, was the godfather of the notorious neoliberal Chicago Boys who were imported into Chile by dictatorial junta
leader Augusto Pinochet to implement policies of radical "shock doctrine"-style fiscal austerity. And the Cato Institute is the libertarian
Washington DC-based think tank founded by the Koch Brothers, two top Republican Party donors who have become
aggressive supporters of the right-wing across Latin America.
Wikileaks published a 2007 email from American
ambassador to Venezuela William Brownfield sent to the State Department, National Security Council and Department of Defense Southern
Command praising "Generation of '07" for having "forced the Venezuelan president, accustomed to setting the political agenda, to
(over)react." Among the "emerging leaders" Brownfield identified were Freddy Guevara and Yon Goicoechea. He applauded the latter
figure as "one of the students' most articulate defenders of civil liberties."
Flush with cash from libertarian oligarchs and US government soft power outfits, the radical Venezuelan cadre took their Otpor
tactics to the streets, along with a
version of the group's
logo, as seen below:
"Galvanizing public unrest to take advantage of the situation and spin it against Chavez"
In 2009, the Generation 2007 youth activists
staged their most provocative demonstration yet, dropping their pants on public roads and aping the outrageous guerrilla theater
tactics outlined by Gene Sharp in his regime change manuals. The protesters had mobilized against the arrest of an ally from another
newfangled youth group called JAVU. This far-right group "gathered funds from a variety of US government sources, which allowed it
to gain notoriety quickly as the hardline wing of opposition street movements," according to academic George Ciccariello-Maher's
book, "Building the Commune."
While video of the protest is not available, many Venezuelans have
identified Guaidó as one of its key participants.
While the allegation is unconfirmed, it is certainly plausible; the bare-buttocks protesters were members of the Generation 2007
inner core that Guaidó belonged to, and were clad in their trademark Resistencia! Venezuela t-shirts, as seen below:
That year, Guaidó exposed himself to the public in another way, founding a political party to capture the anti-Chavez energy his
Generation 2007 had cultivated. Called Popular Will, it was led by
Leopoldo López , a Princeton-educated right-wing firebrand
heavily involved in National Endowment for Democracy programs and elected as the mayor of a district in Caracas that was one of the
wealthiest in the country. Lopez was a portrait of Venezuelan aristocracy, directly descended from his country's first president.
He was also the first cousin of
Thor Halvorssen , founder of the US-based Human Rights Foundation that functions as a de facto publicity shop for US-backed anti-government
activists in countries targeted by Washington for regime change.
Though Lopez's interests aligned neatly with Washington's, US
diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks highlighted the
fanatical tendencies that would ultimately lead to Popular Will's marginalization. One cable identified Lopez as "a divisive figure
within the opposition often described as arrogant, vindictive, and power-hungry." Others highlighted his obsession with street confrontations
and his "uncompromising approach" as a source of tension with other opposition leaders who prioritized unity and participation in
the country's democratic institutions.
By 2010, Popular Will and its foreign backers moved to exploit the worst drought to hit Venezuela in decades. Massive electricity
shortages had struck the country due the dearth of water, which was needed to power hydroelectric plants. A global economic recession
and declining oil prices compounded the crisis, driving public discontentment.
Stratfor and CANVAS – key advisors of Guaidó and his anti-government cadre – devised a shockingly cynical
plan to drive a dagger through the heart of
the Bolivarian revolution. The scheme hinged on a 70% collapse of the country's electrical system by as early as April 2010.
"This could be the watershed event, as there is little that Chavez can do to protect the poor from the failure of that system,"
the Stratfor internal memo declared. "This would likely have the impact of galvanizing public unrest in a way that no opposition
group could ever hope to generate. At that point in time, an opposition group would be best served to take advantage of the situation
and spin it against Chavez and towards their needs."
By this point, the Venezuelan opposition was receiving a staggering $40-50 million a year from US government organizations like
USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy, according to
a report by the Spanish think tank, the FRIDE Institute. It also had massive wealth to draw on from its own accounts, which were
mostly outside the country.
While the scenario envisioned by Statfor did not come to fruition, the Popular Will party activists and their allies cast aside
any pretense of non-violence and joined a radical plan to destabilize the country.
Towards violent destabilization
In November, 2010, according to emails obtained
by Venezuelan security services and presented by former Justice Minister Miguel Rodríguez Torres, Guaidó, Goicoechea, and several
other student activists attended a secret five-day training at the Fiesta Mexicana hotel in Mexico City. The sessions were run by
Otpor, the Belgrade-based regime change trainers backed by the US government. The meeting had
reportedly received the blessing of Otto Reich, a fanatically anti-Castro Cuban exile working in George W. Bush's Department
of State, and the right-wing former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe.
At the Fiesta Mexicana hotel, the emails stated, Guaidó and his fellow activists hatched a plan to overthrow President Hugo Chavez
by generating chaos through protracted spasms of street violence.
Three petroleum industry figureheads – Gustavo Torrar, Eligio Cedeño and Pedro Burelli – allegedly covered the $52,000 tab to
hold the meeting. Torrar is a self-described "human rights activist" and "intellectual" whose younger brother Reynaldo Tovar Arroyo
is the representative in Venezuela of the private Mexican oil and gas company Petroquimica del Golfo, which holds a contract with
the Venezuelan state.
Cedeño, for his part, is a fugitive Venezuelan businessman who claimed asylum in the United States, and Pedro Burelli a former
JP Morgan executive and the former director of Venezuela's national oil company, Petroleum of Venezuela (PDVSA). He left PDVSA in
1998 as Hugo Chavez took power and is on the advisory
committee of Georgetown University's Latin America Leadership Program.
Burelli insisted that the emails detailing his participation had been
fabricated and
even hired a private investigator to prove it. The investigator
declared that Google's records showed the emails
alleged to be his were never transmitted.
Yet today Burelli makes no secret of his desire to see Venezuela's current president, Nicolás Maduro, deposed – and even dragged
through the streets and sodomized with a bayonet, as Libyan leader Moammar Qaddafi was by NATO-backed militiamen.
The alleged Fiesta Mexicana plot flowed into another destabilization plan revealed in a
series of documents produced by the Venezuelan government. In May 2014, Caracas released documents detailing an assassination
plot against President Nicolás Maduro. The leaks identified the Miami-based Maria Corina Machado as a leader of the scheme. A hardliner
with a penchant for extreme rhetoric, Machado has functioned as an international liaison for the opposition,
visiting President George W. Bush in 2005.
"I think it is time to gather efforts; make the necessary calls, and obtain financing to annihilate Maduro and the rest will fall
apart," Machado wrote in an email to former Venezuelan diplomat Diego Arria in 2014.
In
another email , Machado claimed that the violent plot had the blessing of US Ambassador to Colombia, Kevin Whitaker. "I have
already made up my mind and this fight will continue until this regime is overthrown and we deliver to our friends in the world.
If I went to San Cristobal and exposed myself before the OAS, I fear nothing. Kevin Whitaker has already reconfirmed his support
and he pointed out the new steps. We have a checkbook stronger than the regime's to break the international security ring."
Guaidó heads to the barricades
That February, student demonstrators acting as shock troops for the exiled oligarchy erected violent barricades across the country,
turning opposition-controlled quarters into
violent fortresses known as guarimbas . While international media portrayed the upheaval as a spontaneous protest against
Maduro's iron-fisted rule, there was ample evidence that Popular Will was orchestrating the show.
"None of the protesters at the universities wore their university t-shirts, they all wore Popular Will or Justice First t-shirts,"
a guarimba participant said at the time. "They might
have been student groups, but the student councils are affiliated to the political opposition parties and they are accountable to
them."
Asked who the ringleaders were, the guarimba participant said, "Well if I am totally honest, those guys are legislators
now."
Around 43 were killed during the 2014 guarimbas . Three years later, they erupted again, causing mass destruction of public
infrastructure, the murder of government supporters, and the
deaths of 126 people, many of whom were Chavistas. In several
cases, supporters of the government were burned alive by armed gangs.
Guaidó was directly involved in the 2014 guarimbas . In fact, he tweeted video showing himself clad in a helmet and gas
mask, surrounded by masked and armed elements that had shut down a highway that were engaging in a violent clash with the police.
Alluding to his participation in Generation 2007, he proclaimed, "I remember in 2007, we proclaimed, 'Students!' Now, we shout, 'Resistance!
Resistance!'"
Guaidó has deleted the tweet, demonstrating apparent concern for his image as a champion of democracy.
On February 12, 2014, during the height of that year's guarimbas , Guaidó joined Lopez on stage at a rally of Popular Will
and Justice First. During a lengthy diatribe against the government, Lopez
urged the crowd to march to the office of Attorney General Luisa Ortega Diaz. Soon after, Diaz's office came under attack by armed
gangs who attempted to burn it to the ground. She denounced what she called "planned and premeditated violence."
In an televised appearance in 2016, Guaidó
dismissed deaths resulting from guayas – a guarimba tactic involving stretching steel wire across a roadway in
order to injure or kill motorcyclists – as a "myth." His comments whitewashed a deadly tactic that had
killed unarmed civilians like Santiago Pedroza and
decapitated a
man named Elvis Durán, among many others.
This callous disregard for human life would define his Popular Will party in the eyes of much of the public, including many opponents
of Maduro.
Cracking down on Popular Will
As violence and political polarization escalated across the country, the government began to act against the Popular Will leaders
who helped stoke it.
Freddy Guevara, the National Assembly Vice-President and second in command of Popular Will, was a principal leader in the 2017
street riots. Facing a trial for his role in the violence, Guevara
took shelter in the Chilean embassy, where he remains.
Lester Toledo, a Popular Will legislator from the state of Zulia, was wanted by Venezuelan government in September 2016 on charges
of financing terrorism and plotting assassinations. The plans
were said to be made with former Colombian President Álavaro Uribe. Toledo escaped Venezuela and went on several speaking tours with
Human Rights Watch, the US government-backed Freedom House, the Spanish Congress and European Parliament.
Carlos Graffe, another Otpor-trained Generation 2007 member who led Popular Will, was
arrested in July 2017. According to police, he was in possession of a bag filled with nails, C4 explosives and a detonator. He
was released on December 27, 2017.
Leopoldo Lopez, the longtime Popular Will leader, is today under house arrest, accused of a key role in deaths of 13 people during
the guarimbas in 2014. Amnesty International
lauded Lopez as a "prisoner of conscience" and slammed his transfer from prison to house as "not good enough." Meanwhile, family
members of guarimba victims introduced a petition for
more charges against Lopez.
Yon Goicoechea, the Koch Brothers posterboy and US-backed founder of Justice First, was arrested in 2016 by security forces who
claimed they found
found a kilo of explosives in his vehicle. In a New York Times
op-ed , Goicoechea protested
the charges as "trumped-up" and claimed he had been imprisoned simply for his "dream of a democratic society, free of Communism."
He was
freed in November 2017.
David Smolansky, also a member of the original Otpor-trained Generation 2007, became Venezuela's youngest-ever mayor when he was
elected in 2013 in the affluent suburb of El Hatillo. But he was stripped of his position and sentenced to 15 months in prison by
the Supreme Court after it found him culpable of stirring the violent guarimbas .
Facing arrest, Smolansky shaved his beard, donned sunglasses and
slipped into Brazil disguised as a priest with
a bible in hand and rosary around his neck. He now lives in Washington, DC, where he was hand picked by Secretary of the Organization
of American States Luis Almagro to lead the working group on the Venezuelan migrant and refugee crisis.
This July 26, Smolansky held what he called a "cordial reunion" with Elliot Abrams, the convicted Iran-Contra felon
installed by Trump
as special US envoy to Venezuela. Abrams is notorious for overseeing the US covert policy of arming right-wing death squads during
the 1980's in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala. His lead role in the Venezuelan coup has stoked fears that another blood-drenched
proxy war might be on the way.
Four days earlier, Machado rumbled another violent threat against Maduro,
declaring that if he "wants to save his
life, he should understand that his time is up."
A pawn in their game
The collapse of Popular Will under the weight of the violent campaign of destabilization it ran alienated large sectors of the
public and wound much of its leadership up in exile or in custody. Guaidó had remained a relatively minor figure, having spent most
of his nine-year career in the National Assembly as an alternate deputy. Hailing from one of Venezuela's least populous states, Guaidó
came in second place during the 2015 parliamentary elections, winning just 26% of votes cast in order to secure his place in the
National Assembly. Indeed, his bottom may have been better known than his face.
Guaidó is known as the president of the opposition-dominated National Assembly, but he was never elected to the position. The
four opposition parties that comprised the Assembly's Democratic Unity Table had decided to establish a rotating presidency. Popular
Will's turn was on the way, but its founder, Lopez, was under house arrest. Meanwhile, his second-in-charge, Guevara, had taken refuge
in the Chilean embassy. A figure named Juan Andrés Mejía would have been next in line but reasons that are only now clear, Juan Guaido
was selected.
"There is a class reasoning that explains Guaidó's rise," Sequera, the Venezuelan analyst, observed. "Mejía is high class, studied
at one of the most expensive private universities in Venezuela, and could not be easily marketed to the public the way Guaidó could.
For one, Guaidó has common mestizo features like most Venezuelans do, and seems like more like a man of the people. Also,
he had not been overexposed in the media, so he could be built up into pretty much anything."
In December 2018, Guaidó sneaked across the border and junketed to Washington, Colombia and Brazil to coordinate the plan to hold
mass demonstrations during the inauguration of President Maduro. The night before Maduro's swearing-in ceremony, both Vice President
Mike Pence and Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland called Guaidó to affirm their support.
A week later, Sen. Marco Rubio, Sen. Rick Scott and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart – all lawmakers from the Florida base of the right-wing
Cuban exile lobby – joined President Trump and Vice President Pence at the White House. At their request, Trump
agreed that if Guaidó declared himself president, he would back him.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met personally withGuaidó on January 10, according to the Wall Street Journal. However, Pompeo
could not pronounce Guaidó's name when he mentioned him in a press briefing on January 25, referring to him as "Juan Guido."
By January 11, Guaidó's Wikipedia page had been
edited 37 times, highlighting the struggle to
shape the image of a previously anonymous figure who was now a tableau for Washington's regime change ambitions. In the end, editorial
oversight of his page was handed over to Wikipedia's elite council of "librarians," who pronounced him the "contested" president
of Venezuela.
Guaidó might have been an obscure figure, but his combination of radicalism and opportunism satisfied Washington's needs. "That
internal piece was missing," a Trump administration
said of Guaidó. "He was the piece we needed for our strategy to be coherent and complete."
"For the first time," Brownfield, the former American ambassador to Venezuela,
gushed to the
New York Times, "you have an opposition leader who is clearly signaling to the armed forces and to law enforcement that he wants
to keep them on the side of the angels and with the good guys."
But Guaidó's Popular Will party formed the shock troops of the guarimbas that caused the deaths of police officers and
common citizens alike. He had even boasted of his own participation in street riots. And now, to win the hearts and minds of the
military and police, Guaido had to erase this blood-soaked history.
On January 21, a day before the coup began in earnest, Guaidó's wife delivered a
video address calling on the military
to rise up against Maduro. Her performance was wooden and uninspiring, underscoring the her husband's limited political prospects.
At a press conference before supporters four days later, Guaidó
announced his solution to the crisis: "Authorize a humanitarian
intervention!"
While he waits on direct assistance, Guaidó remains what he has always been – a pet project of cynical outside forces. "It doesn't
matter if he crashes and burns after all these misadventures," Sequera said of the coup figurehead. "To the Americans, he is expendable."
Max Blumenthal is an award-winning journalist and the author of several books, including best-selling
Republican Gomorrah
, Goliath ,
The Fifty One Day War , and
The Management of Savagery . He has
produced print articles for an array of publications, many video reports, and several documentaries, including
Killing Gaza . Blumenthal founded The Grayzone in 2015 to shine a journalistic
light on America's state of perpetual war and its dangerous domestic repercussions.
Dan Cohen Dan Cohen is a journalist and filmmaker.
He has produced widely distributed video reports and print dispatches from across Israel-Palestine. Dan is a correspondent at RT
America and tweets at @ DanCohen3000 .
http://www.dancohenmedia.com/
@Tyrion 2 good, as Venezuela "resists" America." This is complete nonsense. "Doing
things" is corrupt" ? Thus, doing nothing is "good ? I mean, WHAT ? Venezuela is not "good",
per se, except that in this particular case of international relations its largely
innocent . The US has unilaterally decided that the election loser is the election
winner
( Clinton actually "won" in 2016; she's the real president).
US sanctions, threats & striving for a civil war is not just "doing something"
–but doing something wrong (but then, who gives a fuck for international law ?
Who respects sovereignty ?)
What a despicable ideology makes people think like that? It is cloying and maudlin and
resentful.
US sanctions, threats & striving for a civil war is not just "doing something"
–but doing something wrong (but then, who gives a fuck for international law ? Who
respects sovereignty ?
Sovereignty is exercised by the legitimate government. Maduro is not the legitimate head
of the Venezuelan government. Expecting him to step down or at least call a proper
Presidential election is respecting this.
We can argue about that, but pearl clutching appeals to "but America is competent so
America is bad" are gross.
@Tyrion 2 Your mindless postmodernism is astonishing. So you think that facts don' t
matter and you haven't noticed that people are commenting facts based on what is happening,
what different acteurs have done? If you have no idea about Venezuela, why don't you read
what Mark Weisbrot or Max Blumenthal and others have written about the theme recently?
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - The United States will continue to use all measures available to stop
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's revenue streams, National Security Advisor John Bolton
said in a statement on Friday.
"The US will continue to use all tools to separate Maduro [and] his cronies from money that
rightfully belongs to the people of Venezuela", Bolton said via Twitter. "Those who continue to
plunder the resources of Venezuela & stand against its people will not be forgotten".
He also called on Russia and other nations to recognise Juan Guaido as Venezuelan
President.
Bolton added that countries and companies buying Venezuelan oil must take steps to ensure
that President Nicolas Maduro and his government cannot access and divert the payments for
their own use. In late January, the United States blocked all assets of Venezuela's state
energy giant PDVSA in its jurisdiction and imposed a ban on deals with the company. US Treasury
Secretary Steven Mnuchin explained the United States was taking care of the PDVSA in the
interests of the Venezuelan people and also protecting its own market.
On January 23, opposition leader Juan Guaido proclaimed himself interim president of
Venezuela after the opposition-controlled National Assembly claimed Maduro has usurped power.
The United States and some of its allies have recognised Guaido as interim
president.
Russia, China, Mexico and several other countries have said they recognise Maduro
as Venezuela's only legitimate president.
Maduro has accused the United States of orchestrating a coup and informed the US of his
decision to sever diplomatic relations. Washington, however, has refused to withdraw its
diplomatic mission personnel from the Latin American country.
"... The US State Department announced last month that Washington froze some $7 billion in assets belonging to Venezuelan state-owned oil company PDVSA in order to make some of that money available to Guaido and his team. ..."
"... Maduro, after launching a signature-gathering campaign against alleged US interference, has repeatedly stressed his sentiment that the main objective behind Washington's interest in the political outcome in Venezuela is the nation's oil reserves, said to the largest in the world. ..."
The US intelligence community is directly communicating with members of Venezuela's military
in attempts to convince them to abandon beleaguered President Nicolas Maduro while also
considering additional sanctions to ramp up the pressure, a senior White House official
divulged to Reuters. Despite the fact that only a few senior officers have to date abandoned
Maduro, the Trump administration expects additional military personnel to jump ship.
In late January, Juan Guaido, the head of the opposition-led National Assembly, proclaimed
himself the South American nation's interim president, in a move swiftly recognized by the US
and a handful of other countries.
"We believe these to be those first couple pebbles before we start really seeing bigger
rocks rolling down the hill," the unnamed White House official speaking on a condition of
anonymity, told Reuters. "We're still having conversations with members of the former Maduro
regime, with military members, although those conversations are very, very limited."
The unnamed official did not provide additional details regarding what form motivation was
being offered to top military officials to gain their support, according to Reuters.
Many members of the Venezuelan military remain loyal to Maduro, mostly in fear of being
targeted by the embattled leader. To convince those on-the-fence members to abandon Maduro, the
US must offer something that makes a turncoat move worthwhile, noted Eric Farnsworth, vice
president of the Council of the Americas think tank in Washington.
"It depends on what they're offering," Farnsworth told Reuters. "Are there incentives built
into these contacts that will at least cause people to question their loyalty to the
regime?"
A few European nations have joined the Trump administration in its support of Guaido as the
interim president, although those nations professing political support have not taken the
additional step of backing US sanctions on Venezuela's state-owned oil giant PDVSA as well as
other restrictions on financial transactions imposed by Washington.
The US State Department announced last month that Washington froze some $7 billion in
assets belonging to Venezuelan state-owned oil company PDVSA in order to make some of that
money available to Guaido and his team.
According to the US official who spoke anonymously to Reuters, the Trump administration is
also considering imposing sanctions on Cuban military and intelligence officials who are
thought to be assisting Maduro.
Maduro, after launching a signature-gathering campaign against alleged US interference,
has repeatedly stressed his sentiment that the main objective behind Washington's interest in
the political outcome in Venezuela is the nation's oil reserves, said to the largest in the
world.
It looks like a specialist on illegal transferee of weapons is needed to make the color revolution a success...
Notable quotes:
"... Elliott Abrams got a new high level job last month, Special Envoy on Venezuela. Within weeks, the United States recognized a new President of Venezuela while the elected Venezuelan President is still in office. Chatter and rumor from the White House suggests that military intervention is possible. The "new" recognized-by- the-US-President of Venezuela is a veteran of color revolution type regime change, groomed for service with the help of the snakelike National Endowment for Democracy (NED). ..."
It's a sad fact that the full and unconditional
pardon given by President George H.W. Bush to Elliott Abrams (a member of the second
generation neo-conservative royalty by way of marriage to the daughter of neo-con co-creator,
Midge Decter), protected him from disbarment and possible prison. Abrams, who pled guilty to
the crime of lying to Congress in the investigation of the Iran-Contra, embraced the plea
option reportedly in order to avoid heavier charges from the office of then independent
counsel, Lawrence E. Walsh, prosecutor in the Iran-Contra cases. Bush is gone, Walsh is gone,
but Mr. Bush's Attorney General William Barr is – surprise – now Attorney General
of the United States.
What that portends for future regime change adventures remains to be seen, but the
historical record is ominous.
In 1992, when Bush issued the Iran-Contra pardons on the eve of his leaving office after
losing reelection to President Bill Clinton, William Barr fully supported the pardons.
Presidential pardons are, after all, Constitutional. But, Lawrence Walsh said at the time,
reported NPR, "It demonstrates that powerful people with powerful allies can commit serious
crimes in high office, deliberately abusing the public trust without consequences."
Now the Iran-Contra era neo-cons and the Dick Cheney/Iraq Invasion 2003 era neo-cons are
marching back into the institution of the Presidency.
Elliott Abrams got a new high level job last month, Special Envoy on Venezuela. Within
weeks, the United States recognized a new President of Venezuela while the elected Venezuelan
President is still in office. Chatter and rumor from the White House suggests that military
intervention is possible. The "new" recognized-by- the-US-President of Venezuela is a veteran
of color revolution type regime change, groomed for service with the help of the snakelike
National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
Regime change, putting in questionable, if not nefarious new leaders, seems to be Abrams'
delight: Nicaragua, Iraq while a government official. Many others in his dreams.
In 1986, even before the Iran-Contra debacle was revealed, as Assistant Secretary of State
for Inter-American Affairs, Elliott Abrams told Congress that Nicaraguan "Contras" involved in
drug running didn't have the okay from Contra leaders. It was just underlings. This, while
Abrams and company were busy doing end-runs around the Boland Amendment and other Congressional
actions that barred military supplies to the Contras. Even Khomeini's Iran was not off limits
in getting money for the Nicaraguan fight.
In another time and place, i.e., Saudi Arabia, present day, where regime change in Syria was
a high priority, we've heard excuses similar to those made by Elliott Abrams about the Contras,
about the responsibility for the killing and butchering of the corpse of Saudi journalist Jamal
Khashoggi, and about the financing and arming of ISIS and Al Nusra terrorists by Saudi Arabia
in Syria. Deja vu.
With more neo-cons in the Administration, the trajectory is more wasted blood and
treasure.
"... Last year, oil production dropped by 37% compared with 2017. So, Maduro has been struggling to pay back the loans and last year, Sechin had to fly to Caracas to negotiate with the Venezuelan leader over delayed oil supplies. ..."
As of 2017, Russia controlled 13% of Venezuela's crude exports, Reuters
reported . According to some experts, Rosneft has been taking advantage of Venezuela's
difficulties to secure deals which will be profitable in the long term.
... ... ...
The beleaguered country's economy is on the verge of collapse and the oil sector, which
accounts for over 90% of national export revenues, has not been spared. Last year, oil
production dropped by 37% compared with 2017. So, Maduro has been struggling to pay back the
loans and last year, Sechin had to fly to Caracas to negotiate with the Venezuelan leader over
delayed oil supplies.
Russia's concern about a collapse in Venezuela's economy is tangible. A delegation of
high-ranking Russian officials flew to Caracas in October to advise the government on how to
overcome the crisis. With the country in a state of turmoil, Russia's Deputy Minister of
Finance Sergei Storchak
said he expects Venezuela to struggle to repay its debt, and the next $100 million tranche
is due next month.
"... Recently, Guaido addressed both Russia and China, trying to convince them that a change in government would actually be in their economic interests. "What most suits Russia and China is a change of government," he said. "Maduro does not protect Venezuela, he doesn't protect anyone's investments, and he is not a good deal for those countries." ..."
"... But despite these power projection ploys, Russia's real capabilities to influence the outcome of the crisis seem limited. After a new US oil embargo against PDVSA was announced last week, Maduro's regime was cut off from its main source of revenue. Analysts say that the fate of Venezuela now rests in the hands of the military – on whether, and how long, it will remain loyal to Maduro. ..."
As of 2017, Russia controlled 13% of Venezuela's crude exports, Reuters
reported . According to some experts, Rosneft has been taking advantage of Venezuela's
difficulties to secure deals which will be profitable in the long term.
The Kremlin's point man for Venezuela is Igor Sechin, CEO of Russian state-owned company
Rosneft and a close Putin ally, who has made frequent visits to Caracas in recent years.
Rosneft has provided $6 billion in loans to PDVSA, which is repaying them with oil. Rosneft has
also gained a share of ownership in five of Venezuela's petroleum projects, while playing a
middleman role in global markets, selling Venezuelan oil on to customers worldwide.
However, Russia's investments in Venezuela look far from lucrative. In 2017 the two
countries agreed to restructure Venezuela's debt, amounting to over $3 billion, by shifting the
repayment terms to 2027.
The beleaguered country's economy is on the verge of collapse and the oil sector, which
accounts for over 90% of national export revenues, has not been spared. Last year, oil
production dropped by 37% compared with 2017. So, Maduro has been struggling to pay back the
loans and last year, Sechin had to fly to Caracas to negotiate with the Venezuelan leader over
delayed oil supplies.
Russia's concern about a collapse in Venezuela's economy is tangible. A delegation of
high-ranking Russian officials flew to Caracas in October to advise the government on how to
overcome the crisis. With the country in a state of turmoil, Russia's Deputy Minister of
Finance Sergei Storchak
said he expects Venezuela to struggle to repay its debt, and the next $100 million tranche
is due next month.
... ... ...
Recently, Guaido addressed both Russia and China, trying to convince them that a change in
government would actually be in their economic interests. "What most suits Russia and China is
a change of government," he said. "Maduro does not protect Venezuela, he doesn't protect
anyone's investments, and he is not a good deal for those countries."
But Russia's switch of sides is highly unlikely at this point, for economic interests are
not the only factor involved.
Russian bridgehead
As Krutikhin pointed out, supporting Maduro is a matter of principle for Russia. Betraying
Maduro at this point would make the Kremlin look weak in front of its domestic audience.
Also, Russia's support for the Maduro regime is based on geopolitics. Together, with
Ecuador, Bolivia and Cuba, Maduro's regime is a key Russian ally on the American continent.
This alliance is essentially a Cold War legacy, dating back to when the Kremlin actively
supported anti-US governments in Latin America, such as Fidel Castro's Cuba and the Sandinista
regime in Nicaragua.
Today, Putin's Russia is defying the US-led world order by supporting leaders such as
Syria's Bashar Assad and Maduro's Venezuela, even though, in the case of the latter, that comes
with substantial economic costs.
In return, Venezuela has been taking Russia's side in international disputes. One example
came after the brief Russo-Georgian conflict in 2008. Venezuela was among the few states
recognizing the Russia-backed breakaway republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
On the strategic front, Russia has been granting Venezuela multi-billion dollar loans to buy
Russian heavy weaponry, such as Sukhoi fighter jets, T-72 tanks and S-300 air defense
systems.
In return, Maduro has been offering Russia a platform to showcase its military power right
in the US backyard. In late 2018, Russian TU-160 strategic bombers – which are capable of
carrying nuclear weapons – flew to Caracas for joint exercises. That provided proof of
Russia's global reach in a region a long way from its traditional area of influence.
According to Reuters, Russian military contractors arrived recently in Caracas to protect
Maduro from a possible violent coup. The mercenaries reportedly belong to the secretive private
military company "Wagner," which has been defending Russian interests in both Syria and Eastern
Ukraine. The Kremlin, however, denied these claims.
But despite these power projection ploys, Russia's real capabilities to influence the
outcome of the crisis seem limited. After a new US oil embargo against PDVSA was announced last
week, Maduro's regime was cut off from its main source of revenue. Analysts say that the fate
of Venezuela now rests in the hands of the military – on whether, and how long, it will
remain loyal to Maduro.
For Russia, a best-case scenario looks unlikely.
If Guaido's revolution succeeds, Russia will lose a major ally in the region. If Maduro
manages to hold on to power, the Kremlin will preserve its geopolitical foothold, but at a
hefty economic price.
The problem for the USA military intervention is whether the Venezuelan resistance can make
it a second Iraq?
Notable quotes:
"... It is stupid and dangerous for Guaido to be talking about U.S. military intervention, and in doing so he is almost certainly making it more difficult to resolve the crisis in Venezuela peacefully. ..."
"... Floating the idea of a foreign invasion for any reason gives the top military commanders an added incentive to stick with Maduro and resist attempts to depose him, and they already have several reasons to remain on his side. ..."
"... An all-or-nothing approach to the crisis is likely to lead to escalation, and so far that has been the only kind of approach that the Trump administration knows how to do. Military intervention would be the absolute worst form that approach could take, and Congress and the public need to oppose any moves by this administration in that direction. ..."
Venezuela's self-proclaimed acting president Juan Guaido refused to rule out on Friday the
possibility of authorizing United States intervention to help force President Nicolas Maduro
from power and alleviate a humanitarian crisis.
National Assembly leader Guaido told AFP he would do "everything that is necessary to save
human lives," acknowledging that US intervention is "a very controversial subject."
It is stupid and dangerous for Guaido to be talking about U.S. military intervention,
and in doing so he is almost certainly making it more difficult to resolve the crisis in
Venezuela peacefully. The military's support for Maduro remains the largest and most
significant obstacle to the opposition's claim to power. Floating the idea of a foreign
invasion for any reason gives the top military commanders an added incentive to stick with
Maduro and resist attempts to depose him, and they already have
several reasons to remain on his side.
U.S. military intervention in Venezuela must not happen, and members of Congress should make
clear that it is not an option. Rep. Ro Khanna responded to Guaido's statements earlier
today:
Attacking Venezuela would be a costly and unnecessary war for the U.S., but more than that
it would be a calamity for the people of Venezuela, whose country would be plunged into even
worse conditions for the duration of the conflict. The U.S. needs to be willing to consider
some sort of compromise solution, whether it is a power-sharing arrangement or negotiations
that lead to the holding of early elections. An all-or-nothing approach to the crisis is
likely to lead to escalation, and so far that has been the only kind of approach that the Trump
administration knows how to do. Military intervention would be the absolute worst form that
approach could take, and Congress and the public need to oppose any moves by this
administration in that direction.
From oil to infrastructure, why China has plenty to lose from political turmoil in
Venezuela
Caracas needs Chinese loans and investment in various sectors, but the relationship
offers mutual benefits
Instability and a struggling economy in the South American country have already cost
Beijing dearly
As Venezuela's biggest creditor, China is bound to be affected by the outcome.
Here are some of the Chinese investments that have already hit trouble in Venezuela:
Oil-for-loan deals
The last loan Maduro got from China was one of US$5 billion in September 2017. This was in
addition to US$65 billion loaned by China to Caracas over the past decade, which the South
American nation has been repaying in oil shipments.
Several state-owned Chinese oil corporations have bought stakes in or entered joint
ventures with Venezuelan counterparts.
But after the escalating political chaos, it was reported last week by Reuters that
PetroChina planned to drop Petroleos de Venezuela as a partner in a planned US$10 billion oil
refinery and petrochemical project in southern China.
China has provided more than US$100 billion in loan commitments to Latin American
countries and firms since 2005. This would mean China's loans to Venezuela accounted for well
over half of its loans to South America.
China, as the biggest oil importer in the world, is receiving 240,000 barrels of oil a day
– mostly as debt repayment – from Venezuela, which has the world's biggest oil
reserves.
Latin America's high-speed railway
Even before the current chaos over the presidential race, Venezuela's economy had long
been hampered by its political instability. This led to the abandonment in 2016 of a
Chinese-backed high-speed rail project that had cost US$7.5 billion.
The 462km Tinaco-Anaco line was intended to become part of South America's first
high-speed rail route and carry 5 million passengers and 9.8 million tonnes of cargo a
year.
Beijing-backed China Railway Engineering Corporation had a stake of 40 per cent in the
project, with Venezuela holding the rest, and construction began in 2009.
But it fell behind schedule and was abandoned by the Chinese state company in 2015,
according to an Associated Press report. By 2016, the construction sites and factories had
been ransacked for power generators, computers, metals, ceramics and other materials.
Mining opportunities
In 2017, China agreed to help diversify Venezuela's oil-dependent economy by developing
its mining sector. A US$400 million joint venture was established between the Corporacion
Venezolana de Mineria, Chinese firms CAMCE and Yankuang Group, and Colombia's Inter-American
Coal to boost Venezuela's coal mining and port operations.
CAMCE, a construction engineering affiliate of state-owned China National Machinery
Industry Corporation, and Yankuang, a Shandong-based coal company, have also promised to
invest US$180 million to develop the country's nickel industry.
No progress has been reported from the project so far, but other mining projects in the
country have been hindered.
Baoji Oilfield Machinery Company suspended its activities in Venezuela in 2015 following a
series of political protests. In March 2016, a gang gunned down 17 miners in an area of the
Orinoco Mining Arc site that was licensed to Yankuang.
Everything is as usual. Old American slogan: Do you have oil? We are going to you to teach
you democracy (that is, we will rob, but democratically). And after that, Americans sincerely
wonder why the rest of the world (except for Israel and Saudi Arabia) "loves" them so
much.
The USA has no interest in other communist regimes of the world that have no gold or oil.
Seems to me the MO is obvious. The use of the outdated MSM planting lies is also worth noting
because it's not even on the fringe of expansion or acceptance, it's dying a slow death.
The old American way of invading a country because it has oil and, coincidentally, is
experiencing a "humanitarian crisis" while using corrupt MSM outlets is so friggin'
old.......
I went to Venezuela to drink some beer. I find that it's pointless to try to tell the
truth about Venezuela to most Americans. People say that, because I went to a small town
instead of Caracas, I couldn't possibly know the 'real' situation.
Zorov description of Caracas is a giant Potemkin Village. The refugees flooding into
Columbia and Brazil are just actors hired by CIA to make Maduro look bad. Sounds like
paradise!
Gresham's Law is reversed in the socialist paradise and good money drives the bad from
circulation? Right. Got it. If this trolling reporter actually believes that, I have some
Continentals for him. I'll print them up to order.
I start to think that I don't feel sorry for Maduro at all. He really corrupted en
entire country with such generous handouts. And they willingly take, but no one says "thank
you," just that they want more and more.
Sounds familiar, I see this **** in the US and the left is setting up it's constituents to
starve and suffer.
Our Air France flight was grounded in Paris for 5 hours; no one wants to land in
Venezuela in the middle of the night, due to the "dangerous criminal situation."
So what would you call the situation in Paris, exactly? Mayberry? And this is precisely
why journalistic bias works better than anything else when it comes to exposing the kind of
stupidity that rivals what existed during the Dark Age. They call themselves out, shout "Hey!
I'm a moron!", and then we all laugh.
I don't know what ZH has gone but on the fake news this morning the experts were telling
me Maduro was stopping humanitarian aid sent from the US at the border.
This is the same thing that happens to anybody that questions Trump. Doing that means they
support Honest Hill'rey or is a "libtard". Without knowing much at all about Maduro, US
intervention in Venezuela is somthing I do not support at all and the maverick outside is
POTUS. So right or wrong I blame him.
This is the personal view of the correspondent on today's life of Caracas.
Translated by Scott
Day one...
Our Air France flight was grounded in Paris for 5 hours; no one wants to land in Venezuela
in the middle of the night, due to the "dangerous criminal situation." The airliner is half
empty, the passengers, judging by nervous conversations, are only Venezuelans. A taxi driver,
while leaving the airport, locks the doors, and sweetly warns that after dark, bandits scatter
spikes on the roads and rob the stranded cars. "Oh, don't worry, Amigo, I have an old car. They
are not interested in old, cars." That's where you understand why Caracas is ranked first in
the ranking of the most dangerous cities in the world. It's too late for supper, but I at least
want to exchange my US dollars for Venezuelan bolivars. I ask my cab driver. He violently
shakes his head:
"No, no, no. I do not mess with such things, it's illegal!"
"Whatever," I laugh at him.
"Tomorrow, someone will take the dollars, maybe even with my hands torn off." I was
wrong
The following morning, no one at the hotel wants to look at my dollars.
The hotel employee tells me to go to one of the official "exchange stores" but honestly
adds: "only Americans, or complete jerks go there."
In Venezuela, the official dollar exchange rate is 200 bolivars, and the "black market"
exchange rate is 2,715. And if you exchange your currency in a bank, then according to this
calculation, a bottle of ordinary water will cost 330 rubles, and a modest lunch in an
inexpensive cafe -- 7,000 rubles per person. Judging by the stories on the Internet, in
Venezuelan people should simply kill each other for dollars, but this is not the case.
There is also other things different from perception. On western news, it is shown that
demonstrators fight with police daily, tens killed, hundreds wounded, the sea of blood. But in
Caracas, all is quiet. In an afternoon, people are sitting in cafes and idly sipping rum with
ice, while maintenance crews sweep the streets. It turns out that the world 's leading TV new
sources (including CNN and the BBC) show some fantasy film about Venezuela. "Demonstrations?"
yawns Alejandro, a street vendor selling corn. "Well, Saturday there will be one, sort of. On
one end of the city will be a rally of opposition supporters, and on the other, Maduro
supporters. The police keep them separate to prevent fights."
Amazing.
You browse the Internet, you turn on the TV, and you see the revolution, the people dying on
streets to overthrow the "evil dictator Maduro." And you come here, and nobody cares.
Then it got even better. Never in my life have I had so many adventures while trying to
exchange one currency for another. The country has a problem with cash money, long queues
waiting for the ATM, and even the street dealers of "currency" have no "efectivo," as they call
cash. I wander inside a jewelry store and ask if they want some "green." The answer is "No."
Everyone acts like law-abiding citizens. I am told that police recently started arresting
people for private exchange, that's why people don't want to associate. One owner of the
jewelry store almost agrees.
"What do you have? Dollars? No, I won't take that."
"Why now?"
"I take only the Euros dollar, man, is the currency of the aggressor, they try to tell us
how to live!"
Damn it! I have money in my pocket, and I can't even buy lunch! Finally, a certain woman,
nursing a baby in a workplace, very reluctantly agrees to exchange 2,200 bolivars for a "buck."
I want to curse her out, but I have to live somehow. Bolivars seem like a beautiful,
unattainable currency, which hides all the benefits of the world, that's why they are so hard
to get. I'm nodding in agreement. The woman calls somewhere, and asks to wait. After 15 minutes
she tells me that "there is a problem." Of course, money is not to be found. Her man couldn't
withdraw them from the ATM, everywhere the ATMs are on a strict daily rate.
"President Maduro is fighting for the strengthening of the national currency," explained
the nursing mother. "We all use our cards to pay for everything."
I don't know how it works, but yesterday an exchange rate was 3,200 bolívars for 1
dollar, and today the "bucks" fell to 2,700. I have started to realize that in the very next
few days I'll starve to death with dollars in my pocket. A unique fate, perhaps, that has never
happen in history.
In the next kiosk cash for gold place I am offered a plastic debit card loaded with local
money, and then I would try my luck withdrawing bills from neighboring ATMs. "Or, maybe not, if
you're not lucky." Well, of course. By the way, an attempt to buy a SIM card for the phone also
fails. They don't sell them to foreigners, you need a Venezuelan ID card. Yes, and I have
nothing to pay for it. The feeling is that the dollar is a gift that no one wants. Sadly, I
walk by stores. People come out of there with packages of eggs, bread, packs of butter. The
range is not like in Moscow, of course, but again, if you believe the news on TV, Venezuela is
suffering from a terrible famine, supermarkets are empty, and people are fighting each other
for food. Nothing like that. There are queues, but not kilometers long. In general, television
stations in the United States and Europe (and ours too) created their own Venezuela, drawn like
a terrible cartoon. I walk into a cafe at random.
"Will you accept dollars for lunch?" I ask hopelessly.
"Yes, at the rate of "black market" they whispered to me.
"But the change will also be in dollars... sorry, no bolivars at all...we've been hunting
for them ourselves for weeks."
My first day in Venezuela is over. How unusual. I've been here for 24 hours, and I've not
held a Bolivian bill in my hand. Oh, but there will be more...
Day two...
60 liters of gasoline here cost five cents, and a basket of basic food products - 50 rubles
(about 90 cents).
"The gas station," my driver reaches into his purse and takes out a banknote of 2 Bolivar.
The exchange rate of the Venezuelan currency changes every day, and today it is 2,580 bolivars
per one dollar. In Russian money, that is 10 cents. "We must now fill a full tank," says the
taxi driver. 60 liters of gasoline cost 1 bolívar, but we give the 2 bolivars bill,
because there is no 1 bolivar bill. I can't believe that is a full tank of fuel costs FIVE
CENTS?
"And how much can you even fill at this price?"
"Once a day for every citizen. And it's enough for me."
All the way to the center city, the driver scolds President Maduro, and tells me how much he
loves America, and how it will be good when the "guy with mustache" is finally overthrow by the
Americans.
I start to think that I don't feel sorry for Maduro at all. He really corrupted en entire
country with such generous handouts. And they willingly take, but no one says "thank you," just
that they want more and more.
On the street there is a long line into a "social supermarket," a place you can buy 400
types of goods at the solid low prices. These shops were established by the late President Hugo
Chavez "to fight inflation and protect the poor." The stores are funded by the Venezuelan
government. The buyer comes with a passport, gets a number, and waits in line until they are
allowed to enter and buy a certain set of products. The selection isn't very impressive, only
the essentials: chicken, bananas, pineapples, sausages, milk. A box of these food items costs
of equivalent of 50 rubles. CNN and the BBC show videos of Venezuelans wrapped in rolls of
toilet paper and sadly wandering across the border with Colombia. The toilet paper is found in
absolutely every store, and without any problems. I am once again simply amazed: Western TV
news is something from Hollywood, they are not reporting but making fantasy blockbusters. On
the BBC website I read that hungry Venezuelan children after school go to take a look at the
street vendors cooking meat. I've been all over the town. Restaurants, cafes, eateries, during
the lunch hour are crowded, and people look well-dressed. The mass hunger, the Western media
paints for us, doesn't exist in reality.
I take a few pictures inside the supermarket, and I am immediately approached by the workers
or "Maduro followers."
"It's forbidden to take pictures here."
"Is this a military facility?"
"Leave or we'll call the police."
"Listen, everywhere on TV they tell us that there is hunger in Venezuela. I want to prove
that the reality is different."
"We are not interested, we just work here: leave immediately!"
I started to understand perfectly well why Nicolas Maduro lost the information war. Hugo
Chavez was often praised even in private conversations, but even Chavez supporters find little
positive to say about Maduro. When people protested against Hugo's endless nominations as the
head of state, he used to meet them with the open arms, smiling and saying : "Guys, what's the
problem? I'm your President, I love you, let's sit down and talk!" Maduro doesn't have this
image of being one of the guys. He is not able to communicate with the public, and his
assistants, like the employees of the social store, can only push and ban and threaten with the
police.
On the streets, provincial farmers sell fruits and vegetables: mango, tomatoes, cucumbers.
All about the same price of 25 rubles per kilogram. Here, a dozen eggs from street vendors is
4,800 bolivars or about 130 rubles, and that is not cheap . During the peak of oil prices, when
a barrel of oil was sold for $150, Venezuela lived on the principle of a rich fool. To develop
domestic production? No, what is that nonsense? We can buy every triviality abroad. Even the
managers of the oil production weren't local, they hired specialists from Europe, and paid them
a lot of money. Food imports into the country reached 95 percent. And now the situation is not
too different. When I order my meal in a cafe (incidentally, still paying in dollars, all
attempts to change dollars to bolivars failed), I get excellent pork. "Where is it from?" "From
Colombia." "And chicken?" "From Brazil, that's why it's so expensive." Even flour for bread
comes from neighboring Guyana. Chavez and his successor Maduro wanted to be "people's
presidents," handing out money left and right. But then oil prices collapsed, food shortages
began, and people rebelled. People demand as before: cheap food in supermarkets, gasoline for
nothing, and they don't want to hear anything more or less.
"Chavez was a great guy!" says a fan of the former president, 75-year-old Raul Romero,
dressed in a red "chavist" shirt.
"Maduro is nothing like him! There is speculators on the streets, he does nothing. In his
time, Chavez arrested the dealers raising food prices, closed their shops, confiscated land
from landowners, and gave it to the people. We need a firm hand, a real dictatorship!"
In the TV world, Maduro is portrayed as a dictator and executioner, although in Venezuela,
he is openly scolded for being meek; they draw cartoon of him, and insult him as much as they
can. But who cares about the truth? Much more colorful to show the suffering for the toilet
paper.
Day three...
"I got robbed by a COP for my phone. I'm talking on the cell phone outside, he walks over
to me, pokes in my side with his gun. "Give me your mobile." I don't understand immediately,
and automatically continue the conversation. He cocks his gun, and says, "Kill." I give him
my phone. It's still good, I love being robbed by cops. They are not bandits from the
"Barrios," the poor neighborhoods in the mountains, who can shoot you first and then rummage
your corpse's pockets. I'm lucky, I've lived in Venezuela for 27 years and this was the first
time I was "hop-stopped." A lot of people get robbed every year.
I am talking to Mikhail, a citizen of Russia living in Venezuela since the beginning of the
nineties. He helps me move around Caracas and instructs me on how to visit the local slums.
"You don't have protection? Oh, who would doubt that. Then leave your watch, phone, and camera
at the hotel. Take some money for a taxi, you also have to have some cash in case you get
ambushed, otherwise they might get offended and kill you. Sometimes, people get shot in an arm
and a leg, that survivable." After such a nice story, I still go to the "Barrios." It is there
that the supporters of President Nicolas Maduro mainly live. According to CNN and BBC,
impoverished people in Venezuela are revolting against the government. Nothing can be further
from the truth; it's a wealthy middle class that goes to demonstrate. Maduro is applauded in
poor neighborhoods, because the President gives their residents free food sets enough for a
month and gives free (!) apartments. Formally, they belong to the state, but people live in
them for generations.
"I will cut a throat for the President," a heavily-tattooed man smiles menacingly, and
introduces himself as Emilio.
"Who else would give me food and a 'roof ' for free? He is our father and benefactor."
Maduro deliberately does not touch such people, which is why crime in Caracas gushes over
the edge. I am advised not to stop on the street to look at anything, but just to keep going,
otherwise bandits will have time to look closely at me. That's why they have constant robberies
on the streets, plus the police and the national guard can easily take away your favorite
things. No one can be happy about all these. "I love Russians," told me the businessman Carlos
while conversing over coffee near the Plaza de Bolivar.
" But you'd better send Maduro economic advisers. Teach him a lesson! He doesn't know
anything about economy. He has one recipe for everything, to give more money to the poor,
more free apartments, free food, free gasoline, to build a full communism here. But with
this, sorry, any state would collapse ."
The opposition rally in the Western part of Caracas is huge, at least 100 thousand people
gathered. The protesters are friendly to me, Russia here is respected. It is not considered an
enemy. Zero aggression at all and then I wonder about what I see on CNN, videos of the
opposition being rolled into a pancake by tanks. The police keep the neutrality, it disappears
from the streets, to not give a cause to provocateurs. People are happily waving flying in the
sky military helicopter. Many-in t-shirts with the American flag, a man passes by, holding a
hand-written poster with the altered slogan of Donald Trump -"Make Venezuela great again."
"Do you love the U.S.?"
"Yes, adore it!"
"I remember you already had a pro-American President in 1993, Carlos Andrés
Pérez. He sharply raised the price of gasoline, 80% of the goods were imported, he
drove the republic into billions of IMF debts. People went to demonstrations, and
Pérez drowned them in blood, killing 2,000 people then he fled to America."
The man freezes, with his mouth open. Finally, he gets the gift of speech back.
"I hope this time the pro-American President will be different."
"Are you sure?"
"Sorry, I have nothing to say."
Asking the girl from the opposition how she feels about the US:
"The US is our neighbor, let them change the power here." "In countries where the US changed power like Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, hundreds of
thousands people were killed. Are you ready for this?"
Again, she pauses and sighs.
"No, no, no. We are not Africa or Asia. All will go peacefully. Venezuelans will not kill
each other."
Where the opinions splits is the question of whether the free gasoline and free food
packages will remain with an American-instilled government. Many are sincerely sure that the
"freebies" will remain under a new president. How else? The minority that recognizes that state
gifts will be canceled say that they at least "we will be free." As I said, the protesters are
mostly well-dressed, well-off people. By the way, the leader of the opposition, Juan Guido,
also has no real economic program promising to "quadruple the oil production." No one thinks
that after that price will fall four times. In short, I get a feeling that neither the
President, nor the opposition, know anything about the economy in Venezuela.
The demonstrations in support of Maduro take place at the other end of the city, to prevent
the opponents from fighting.
"You Americans are insolent!" screamed an old woman in a red t-shirt rushing towards
me. "Bastards! You should be hanged on a first tree! Cheers to socialism!"
"I'm Russian, grandma."
The old lady recoils.
"Sorry, please." "Don't get that upset, senora."
Many people gathered here are joyful, dancing and singing. A soldier stands in front of me and doesn't allow me to take any pictures. Not just me, but
also other passers-by.
"You can't take pictures here." "Says who?" "President Maduro."
No, Maduro is definitely doing everything he can to be disliked. Those gathering here are
poor, blue-collared workers and farmers from the suburbs. I am interested , honestly, were you
brought here on the busses? "Yes, he did!" says one grandfather, proudly displaying a portrait
of Che Guevara.
"But I would walk here for Maduro! It's a lie that we were paid to be here."
Other people applaud him happily. I shake hands. "Russians are welcome! Venezuela loves you,
you're home."
The day of rallies is over. The maintenance crews came to the sidewalk, strewn with plastic
bottles, crumpled packs of cigarettes, and other debris left after by a cloud. At the entrance
of an old house, old people drink coffee.
"They say that today some general has defected to the side of the opposition," says one of
them. "Some significant person." "What's this guy's name?" "Who knows?"
It is all moving same pieces of capitalistic BS around. Basic imperialistic struggle among
former hegemon who is going down due to stupidity and bad choices and newly rising hopefuls.
Once USA is safely put out and hopefully down, new great powers will suck lesser powers
dry probably by smarter and less aggressive means but nevertheless.
Souverenity is being used as a tool now, but truly sovereign can be only few great powers
in capitalistic world and Venezuela will never be sovereign.
Sacker as usually lacks imagination to go beyond his narrow views. He is also
contradictory.
Fighting the only successful socialist state in the world which was the only one capable
to put his anglozios in place yet defending this pathetic entity pretending to be
socialist.
If it is socialist how come all those oligarchs and their base is still around to keep
creating troubles? They should have gotten rid off long time ago and their all assets and
capitals nationalized for common good.
Regarding USA I have never had any illusions about this entity. Not even in 80s. All those
birth Mark's were there from the start. As with every old person they turned into marasm at
certain age.
Venezuela has claimed to have unveiled a mass conspiracy involving military personnel
and politicians trying to unseat the country's government by force, as well as plans of
potential U.S. military action.
Venezuelan Communications Minister Jorge Rodriguez has alleged that Julio Borges, an
opposition politician and former head of the National Assembly, was behind both a failed
2014 coup and an assassination attempt last August against Venezuelan President
Nicolás Maduro. The information was allegedly gathered by confessions from
recently-arrested Colonel Oswaldo García, who was behind another unsuccessful
conspiracy to unseat Maduro last year and was seen confessing on video during Thursday's
conference.
I am not so sure the Pinochet would be able to overthrow Allende government so early without
CIA support and infiltration (people, money, intelligence)
Notable quotes:
"... what more do you to see or hear or read before you believe that US had been hyper -focused and heavily engaged and entirely illegally to destroy Valenzuela independence form crony capitalism? ..."
@mike k I try to separate the effects of US aggression from that effects of the
Venezuelan governments own failures.
I agree with what another commentator pointed out. US influence in Latin America is often
overestimated. In my opinion by both the "left" who see it as cause of most problems and the
"right" who tend to see it positive.
Certain groups in Latin America tend to ally with the US. But they do this so they can
easier to pursue their own interests. For example imho Pinochet would have successfully
overthrown Allende in Chile even without US support. Latin Americans aren't mindless puppets
that are controlled and played from Washington. Moscow or Beijing.
@EliteCommInc. I don't advocate and American (supposed you are American or British)
intervention in Venezuela. I merely wanted to point out that this article/interview one sided
and and therefore not better that the bullshit the Murdoch media and their likes are probably
spreading lately.
@Captain Willard A key to Chavez’s current weakness is the decline in
the electricity sector. There is the grave possibility that some 70 percent of the
country’s electricity grid could go dark as soon as April 2010. Water
levels at the Guris dam are dropping, and Chavez has been unable to reduce consumption
sufficiently to compensate for the deteriorating industry. This could be the watershed event,
as there is little that Chavez can do to protect the poor from the failure of that system.
This would likely have the impact of galvanizing public unrest in a way that no opposition
group could ever hope to generate. At that point in time, an opposition group would be best
served to take advantage of the situation and spin it against Chavez and towards their needs.
Alliances with the military could be critical because in such a situation of massive public
unrest and rejection of the presidency, malcontent sectors of the military will likely decide
to intervene, but only if they believe they have sufficient support. This has been the
pattern in the past three coup attempts. Where the military thought it had enough support,
there was a failure in the public to respond positively (or the public responded in the
negative), so the coup failed. --
The GiFiles,
Files released: 5543061
The GiFiles
Specified Search
@Matthias Eckert For example imho Pinochet would have successfully overthrown Allende in
Chile even without US support"
This is called softening of arguments and doubt and making room for possible exoneration
of US.
Tomorrow we will hear that Haiti's Aristides would have been forced by Haitian to board
plane and leave
Tomorrow we will know that Honduran president would have been anyways sent to the pasture
of retirement by some military without Clinton's ( Mrs this time ).
@Matthias Eckert 1 "Soldiers eat out of garbage cans & their families go hungry in
Venezuela while Maduro & friends live like kings & block humanitarian aid," Mr. Rubio
wrote. He then added: "The world would support the Armed Forces in #Venezuela if they decide
to protect the people & restore democracy by removing a dictator."
2
In a speech in April, when he was still White House policy chief for Latin America, Mr.
Cruz issued a message to the Venezuelan military. Referring to Mr. Maduro as a "madman," Mr.
Cruz said all Venezuelans should "urge the military to respect the oath they took to perform
their functions. Honor your oath."
3
Roberta Jacobson, a former ambassador to Mexico who preceded Ms. Aponte as the top State
Department official for Latin America policy, said that while Washington has long regarded
the Venezuelan military as "widely corrupt, deeply involved in narcotics trafficking and very
unsavory," she saw merit in establishing a back channel with some of them
4. Mr. Tillerson raised the potential for a military coup.
"When things are so bad that the military leadership realizes that it just can't serve the
citizens anymore, they will manage a peaceful transition," he said.
what more do you to see or hear or read before you believe that US had been hyper
-focused and heavily engaged and entirely illegally to destroy Valenzuela independence form
crony capitalism?
Analyst Canthama agrees with Pepe (BTL SyrPer #286513):
The Saker has a nice article on Venezuela, few days old, but quite balanced on his
analysis, people could disagree with one or two things but in general quite to the point on
all fronts.
Though Colombia and Brazil border Venezuela on its West and South, any sort of military
invasion from those directions will first have to conquer nature.
So there are only two ways to remove Maduro:
1) US cruise missiles hitting hundreds of spots in Venezuela would be completely
unacceptable for any Latina America population, a violence that would cause the US to lose
support even its most vassal States.
In parallel, such violence would spark the return of the Colombian guerrilla, blowback will
be very bad and wide spread. Thus military intervention is not likely.
2) The second option is assassination of Maduro , and this is where some of
Venezuela's allies are trying to help, either with security guards, intel and direct
protection.
As in Syria, time is an ally for Venezuela, the Venezuela Government will become stronger
and diplomacy will take shape, There is a real danger though for a false flag, and this is in
fact what Bolton and Pompeo are preparing with Guaidó's supporters knowledge [as in
Syria].
Time is also important since the US regime and its dying fiat economy, 2019 will be a
tough year for the G7, meaning theses regimes will either have to create another massive QE
that will bring them down or start a big war, which the vast majority of their country
citizens will never support, see France with yellow vest, many more countries would see the
same -- even the US.
So, time is good friend to the Venezuela, they must push it as long as they can, and
things will be all right.
Pepe Escobar gives the global view; with Venezuela, Iran, Russia and China abandoning the
mythical petrodollar, Uncle $cam's fiat currency is heading for the dustbin of history:
https://thesaker.is/venezuela-lets-cut-to-the-chase/
"That is a signal to every country that has or may have difficulties with the US, [that
they had] better get their money out of England and out of London because it's not the safe
place as it once was," he said.
"One of the few things left for Britain is to be the financial center that London has been
for so long. And one of the ways you stay a financial center is if you don't play games with
other people's money," he said.
Listening to David Graeber in this interview there is no mention of declining energy
surpluses in the discussion of the economic paradigm of the coming future. No consideration
of the role of the labour of fossil fuels in the economy of the past two centuries.
It's amazing, the argument seems not to have reached them, such that it is doesn't even get a
look in. (Listen from 40 min mark, and you will hear a completely opposite view of what is to
come -- " We are not going to have the problem of how to deploy scarce resources, given an
only moderate level of productivity ").
https://novaramedia.com/2019/02/01/david-graeber-bullshit-jobs-direct-democracy-the-end-of-capitalism/
Fittingly, there is a fascinating section (52.min 30 sec onwards) exploring Graeber's new
book project about how much of the enlightenment thinking of pre-revolutionary France was
either a pilfering of, or a reaction to, the ideas of social organisation coming from
pre-European Americans.
The Graun seems to have been anti-Chavez from the get go. With a set of 'journalists' who
seem to jave made it their lifes work to reverse that democratic revolution. It is not easy
to find their biogs.
This whole business of "recognizing a president" not yet in power has a precedent: Rwanda.
When the bUgandan army invaded Rwanda (with US, Canadian, British and Belgian backing) in
1990 (1 October), or in propaganda terms, the RPA started its "liberation," the US moved its
embassy to Mulindi, and sent the bUgandan chief of intelligence from his IMET junket at Fort
Leavenworth, to take over in northern Rwanda. I refer to Paul Kagame.
International institutions also started to deal with Mulindi, rather than Kigali.
Accusations of genocide within a year
Loathsome though he is, Bolton is probably the only honest neocon around. In Iraq, while the
likes of Blair were banging on about 45 minutes, human rights and democracy etc, Bolton
always made it clear that is was simply a matter of US interests. AKA Oil. He has never
pretended to represent anything but rapacious US self interest.
Fair play. At least you know what you're getting with that tash.
Prior to being assigned to Latin America, Phillips was the Guardian's China correspondent for
five years or so. His task, which he diligently accomplished, was to produce a couple of
articles a week on "Why China Is No Good" . I don't think he ever once found anything
positive to say about the place.
As an individual he's a complete Jodrell, but there are few to compare with him in his
ability to relentlessly toe the Washington neocon line. You couldn't get a fag paper in
between him and Luke Harding. I wonder if he's paid for it, or whether it's just that
seductive sense of 'belonging' that comes from rubbing shoulders with really powerful
people .
Principally, the principles , better said the absence of statute & principle in Law,
behind mass surveillance, was what Snowden was desperate to highlight and that the public's
principal concern of the Guardian's hard drives, were the least of our problems, legally
speaking , coz' other copies existed already elsewhere, anyway
OFFG could always ask Glen Greenwald to explain why he ceased to 'copulate' with the
Guardian and maybe even 'intercept' an opinion or two from Snowden, whilst he's at it
intercepting. Indeed , a few extra nails in the Guardian's coffin , could be delivered quite
speedily & succinctly , with some professional journalistic exchange of Question &
Answer, with nail-gun loaded & mutual benefit would seem to be an all round obvious
win-win debate on matters of principle, legal permissions & submissions.
In some ways it is refreshing to have these power hungry narcissists in charge of the US as
they cannot seem to not blurt out their naked ambitions, which in this example ftom the ft
basically shows kidnap is an agreeable part of trade negotiation.
'Five days after a top executive of Huawei, the Chinese telecoms group, was arrested on a
US request in Canada, President Donald Trump said he was willing to intervene -- if it helped
secure "the largest trade deal ever made". The detention of Meng Wanzhou, one of China's best
known executives, was undoubtedly an incendiary step, escalating trade tensions with Beijing.
But presidential interference in the case would send entirely the wrong message about the US
justice system -- and about how the administration conducts international affairs.
The US and western allies have legitimate concerns about China's reputation for digital
espionage and theft of intellectual property. They agree a more robust stance is needed
towards Beijing. But arresting a star of Chinese business -- Ms Meng has been called China's
Sheryl Sandberg -- on a Canadian stopover en route to Mexico from Hong Kong is not the way to
persuade Beijing to change its behaviour.
Even if the Huawei chief financial officer was held on unrelated charges of violating US
sanctions on Iran, the move smacks of using individuals as pawns in negotiations. It is seen
in Beijing as Washington rewriting the rules of engagement. Such waywardness and
unpredictability from a country that used to portray itself as a pillar of the international
rules-based order will tempt China to respond in kind, leading to a downward spiral of
tit-for-tat behaviour. Indeed, the detention of a former Canadian diplomat, Michael Kovrig,
in Beijing looks worryingly like retaliation.
It may be necessary to take at face value Mr Trump's claims that he was unaware of the US
extradition application, and of the detention itself -- which occurred on the day he was
holding talks on a trade truce with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in Buenos Aires. Had
he known, even Mr Trump seems unlikely to have been cynical enough not to mention the arrest
to Mr Xi. Presidential ignorance, however, offers little reassurance.
That Mr Trump would not be notified of such a sensitive case by his justice department
strengthens the impression of a dysfunctional administration, whose different arms pursue
their agendas with little co-ordination, if not in open competition. It strains credibility
that his recent presidential predecessors would have been left in the dark in similar
situations. The Huawei incident comes in the same week that John Kelly's departure as chief
of staff seemed to confirm the extent to which the Trump White House defies conventional
management.
The president's offer to do "whatever's good for this country" regarding Ms Meng's case
reflects a dealmaker's desire to put his talks with Mr Xi back on track, while extracting
whatever advantage he can. But it amounts, in effect, to saying he is holding the Huawei CFO
hostage as a trade negotiating chip. The situation carries echoes of the White House's
reversal in July of a seven-year executive ban on ZTE, the Chinese telecoms equipment maker,
on purchasing critical equipment from the US, in what appeared a tactical concession to
Beijing.
Presidential interference in Ms Meng's case would send a worse signal: that rule of law in
the US is a function of the whim of the chief executive, or that illegal behaviour can be up
for negotiation. It risks creating an impression that there is little difference between
America's judicial system and that of, say, Turkey -- or indeed China. The Huawei executive's
detention was damaging. It is, however, not for the White House, but for independent courts
in Canada and -- if Ms Meng is extradited -- the US to determine what happens next.'
It all depends on your acceptance of "legality" of American sanctions on Iran. I don't,
therefore American action against Ms Meng imo is political and nothing to do with the rule of
law. Mr Trump's opinions are irrelevant.
President Trump's comments and opinions as expressed on Twitter will become relevant in
Sabrina Meng's court case. Her legal defence could use Trump's opinions as evidence that her
arrest was politically motivated and therefore she should not be extradited.
Canadian PM Justin Bieber Trudeau sacked the Ambassador to China for saying this and
expressing other opinions, among them Canada's view as to whether the current (and new) US
sanctions on Iran are binding on Canada.
The hypocrisy of the MSM in all this is yet again. So blatant it is sickening. At the same
time as Yemen is being battered by bombs with the Wests names on them. Deliberately starved
to death. With Western MSM indifference. Not to even mention. All the other countries Western
powers have illegally devastated. The hand ringing over the plight of the Venezuelan people
under Maduro is suddenly more then they can all bare. Western sanctioning and deliberate
sabotage by the West against the country. Undermining any chance of peace. Don't get a peep
of a mention by the MSM.
Here we go again. Roll up roll up. This is the latest hypocritical propaganda media show.
Maduro is evil we must save his country from this evil. Saintly peace bringing Western
alliance must save Venezuela. All that's needed is a more pliant Western puppet or chaos and
civil war. Oil Opps sorry shh don't mention the oil. Does any one really buy into this
deranged demented narrative any more. For gods sake how many more times do we have to say. NO
NOT IN MY NAME.
$13 billion in Venezuelan assets have been stolen by Uncle Sam and his satraps over the past
few days. Why oh why oh why do countries and foreign individuals persist in keeping their
assets in the US/ UK??????. Billions were stolen from Libya in a few days in 2011. Where it
all went is one of life's big mysteries. Cameron even stole a boat load of Libyan currency
that had been printed in the UK.
A Parliamentary Committee has been set up to agitate for sanctions against China on behalf of
the "poor oppressed Uighurs" in China. Shedding buckets of tears over the lack of "yuman
rights." While supplying British sniper rifles to the Zionists to gun down Palestinian kids
with dum dum bullets and planes, cluster bombs and RAF advisors to slaughter kids in Yemen.
Trump imposed broader economic sanctions on Venezuela because;
*serious human rights abuses (by Maduro),
*antidemocratic actions, and,
*responsibility for the deepening humanitarian crisis. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IF10715.pdf
So definitely nothing to do with the oil, or international relations between Venezuela and
other powers that neocons are at war with (wars being conducted in the media, financial
markets and on the ground) while the phony who preceeded Trump (Obama) claimed Venezeula
posed an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to US national security (which is a bit like
Tyson Fury saying he is frightened by a 90 year old woman who is blind and only has one
leg). https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/12885
Isn't there just one soul at the Guardian who will stand up for what is really happening
here (as in all other parts of the world where the US has harmed so many people because of
its insatiable pursuit of oil and power) -- just one?
I must admit I am not getting my hopes up -- while the Guardian excels at drawing
attention to Maduros failings they seem to be deaf, dumb and blind to the geopolitical
context in which Venezuela is doing its utmost to escape the tentacles of US-backed neocons
in their endless quest for violent regime change.
In general those in the know loath the MSM because of the role they play in backing the
gangsters.
"Our own fate as Latin American writers is linked to the need for profound social
transformations. To narrate is to give oneself: it seems obvious that literature, as an
effort to communicate fully, will continue to be blocked so long as misery and illiteracy
exist, and so long as the possessors of power continue to carry on with impunity their policy
of collective imbecilization through the mass media. (Open veins of Latin America -- Eduardo
Galeano)
Ingwe, I started reading the Counter Punch, agreed it was not _only_ the oil so what were the
other motives for U$ Grand Theft Larceny Fraud with Violence? Got as far as this:
"It should be remembered that the Obama Administration had imposed sanctions against
Moscow in March 2014 over the Russian annexation of Crimea, and later involvement in the
civil war in Eastern Ukraine."
Could not read follow that, because I remember no such things as Russian annexation of
Crimea (at least, not since Catherine the Great), nor do I remember a civil war in Eastern
Ukraine (though quite aware that the U$-imposed Jewish Junta with their neo-Nazi stormtroops
are continually shelling Russian-speaking Eastern Ukraine).
vexarb, pity you didn't bother to read further for, if you did, you'd get a rather more
serious analysis than "USA bad and after the oil; Russia good and bringing enlightenment to
the world" .
I think the reason some of us still look at the Graun is that we can't quite believe how
appalling it's got, especially when, like me, you're old enough to remember the old newspaper
from the time when it had some principles and a lot of good writing. It has the sickly
fascination of something you know is really bad for you, like Nutella or reality TV shows.
You end up wallowing in its sheer awfulness, unlike, say, the Mail and the Sun, which you
always know from the start are going to be barking mad and have no element of surprise.
It's pretty obvious Anthony. Because the Guardian, like the BBC and C4 News, presents itself
as and is widely regarded to be an authorititative, non-biased news source. Hence it is
hugely influential in forming opinion in the corridors of power and in educated society.
Opinion that allow bad things to happen and ends up impacting lives. That is reality
regardless of comments dismissing these news sources on the internet. And it is why it is
appropriate for offguardian and others to try and highlight and expose the dangerous lies and
omissions of these wide-reaching propagandists.
It's good for cricket: the best paper in Canada for cricket news. Also for cycling. Since I
first began to read the Manchester Guardian for Neville Cardus's famous writing on cricket, I
stick with it.
As for foreign affairs, once it has been told by the Foreign Office, who the current enemies
are it goes for them. Those who recall the 'good old days' when Latin America and the Middle
East, including Palestine got reasonable coverage which sometimes was very good indeed, ought
to bear in mind that, in those Cold War days, the main enemy was the Soviet Union and it was
necessary to be equivocal about liberation struggles. After all, 'we' were pretending to be
desperately sorry about the sufferings of the Russian people, and those of eastern Europe, so
it was necessary to tone down the imperialist message.
Now the Establishment is dead set on recovering Latin America in toto, banishing alien
(Chinese Russian) influences and consolidating its base in the western hemisphere.
Here comes the Atlantic Treaty Organisation ATO.
The oft-used cliche of the kid (not brain washed yet) saying out loud that the emperor has
no clothes amongst a crowd propagandized, hypnotized and incentivized not to see and not to
know truth from falsehood.
The role of the MSM it seems is to perpetrate this mass denial. Thanks to kids like Kit
and those that support sites such as this other kids are catching on. But, alas we are just
kids after all and the grown ups have the power to spank us for such blasphemy. It is a risk
we kids take to speak the truth we see. When you see and when you know remaining silent can
make you sick (despair, anhedonia, addiction etc.). I'll take my chances with the spanking
and say as loud as I can that the emperor is a fucking war-mongering liar and thief.
I have uploaded various things to DTube and Steemit This film from the Guardian is very
good and relevant to Venezuela its on Bit CHute and survives on Youtube for now.
Thank you Kit (and others) for starting up OffGuardian. Its a very precious place to vent,
and to read the very enlightened, highly informative, and at times profound comments of all
the other commenters here. Have made numerous comments about the situation in Venezuela on
other recent stories here, so not going to keep repeating myself. Regards the state of the
World: surreal and orwellian and just plain bonkers much of the time seems to be the case. At
least Bolton was honest in stating the bleedin obvious, which anyone with even one eye open
already knew. Thanks for your work.
Indeed. I came across Off Guardian not long ago and I'm highly impressed by the quality. A
site to vent -- yes but that's just a small part of it. What is it now -- 3,000 articles
published in just nearly 4 years?. A level of committment by its founders not matched in many
places elsewhere that I can see.
What I like about this is the quality and depth of the articles -- and the fact each
attracts a large number of readers commenting.
I've been looking around various sites lately. It seems to be a mixture of those which
produce good articles but don't seem to have the following -- or at least there's a lack of
reader participation. Or sites where the analysis is not so good but attract a large volume
of comments not necessarily of great quality.
Off G seems to have struck a really good balance which I think means it has more potential
to grow further and build on its success.
I wonder (maybe this has been done before) if Off G thought about organising an event to
celebrate its next birthday. Might be a good way to raise funds and further interest.
I am surprised that the Guardian even mentioned oil and Venezuela in the same story. Did they
also say it has lots of gold, coltron, and many other natural resources. Neoliberals just
can't stand seeing all those profits going to "waste on the serfs".
Very likely McCain. Fortunately though, he already croaked. There was never a regime change
or war he did not support, or demand. The sooner his warmongering Fascist buddies follow him,
the better for mankind. I can imagine what "Bomb. bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" would have
said about Venezuela. As I said before, Venezuela is venomous to those who want to destroy
it. For all American sheeple to understand: The Bucket stops here. Exactly here.
Bolton's casual mention of U.S. oil corporations going into Venezuela and controlling
operation of the nation's oil sector, as if it's already a "done deal", goes right along with
Pompeo's focused use of the term "former president Maduro" in the psychological operation
aspect of the fully-mapped out coup's full court press. Someone famously described the
U.S.-led coup in Ukraine of February 2014 as the most blatant, obvious coup ever, but
amazingly this one involving Venezuela has even surpassed Ukraine in insane illegal boldness.
USA Inc.'s use of criminal aggressive war as a business tactic since false flag 9/11
resulted in the self-destruction of American reputation in the Middle East and North Africa
region. For that reason the attack on the Venezuelan people for their oil was not surprising.
Who will stand for peace? People might think creatively and act to prevent any repeat of
senseless violence and horror as experienced by people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria,
Ukraine and Yemen.
For the record, the "USA Inc.'s use of criminal aggressive war as a business tactic since
false flag 9/11 resulted in the self-destruction of American reputation " Globally.
Sorry to correct you, but no matter where I go, my first test of any persons intellect is
"What do you think happened to WTC 7 ?" and until you get that sorted , the USA is the
laughing stock of the 'brave new world' outside Government & MSM >>> Fact ,
clearly "you cannot be serious", nor the Guardian nor the BBC nor Die Zeit nor Swiss national
Television, nor Le Monde &&& and the whole damn network of partners in deep state
crimes against innocent people , to further corporate goals.
to even contemplate something in Venezuela is so absurd , when US Governance is so
infiltrated with Deep State Dictators & actors, bolstered by Hollywood >>> get
own house in order , before becoming guests elsewhere. This clearly applies to Britain &
France , as well, indeed all NATO partners.
Trump is gonna' have a real tough time with Xi, coz' you don't get to insult the Chinese
in public & arrest CFO's for extradition , without some form of comeback &
consequence and Chinese & Russian Military towards region Panama seems almost assured and
the USS Fitzgerald warning ? how quickly people forget the 7 dead ! from just a container
ship, lol connect the 9 Dot line -- -- --
The world does not want and never needed policing by the U$A, nor their methods of
financial control & strangulation with credit on a scale far greater than Ponzi himself.
And as for WTC 7 , this made not only the USA a laughing stock in the minds of all
intelligent people, it dragged down & outed the very IN-credibility of every single
politician in the western world , who accepted the award winning WTC 7 TonyAndyPandy story
for CHILDREN !
it's time we got adults back into politics , coz' at present all we have, without
exception, is precisely what George Carlin described in 'a few cultural issues' "Garbage in
Garbage out" !
and we can be 100% sure that they are all GARBAGE, because they cannot even recognise a
controlled explosion, let alone cooking the history books >>> not even one !
The USA has YANKed all their strings, on behalf of Zion and corporate control >>>
fact, not one politician permitted to call a spade a spade or WTC 7 a controlled demolition
let alone MSM.
Long live the revolution & evolution of political conscience !
1. Switch payment for Venezuelan oil from yuan back to dollars.
2. Confiscate Chinese and Russian oil investments in Venezuela.
3. Privatise Venezuelan oil to Wall Street at knock down prices.
Or, as the Orange Baboon himself croaked like a two bit Mafia hood, "Grab the oil! Grab
the oil! Grab the oil!!"
This interview is a whitewash for the Venezuelan government. While I don't doubt that the
described sabotage and subversion orchestrated by the US the Chavistas are clearly
incompetent and corrupt.
They had 20 years to diversify the Venezuelan economy and failed completely. Instead of
decreasing the reliance on oil exports the increased it.
Most of what was left off the venezuelan agricultural sector got destroyed by handing it to
Chavez followers. Similar with almost all other economic sectors. Even the oil production is
much lower than it was in 1998 and this is not because of sanctions. They simply didn't
invest enough into replacing equipment that got worn out. They had 20 years to build
refineries for venezuelan oil in Venezuela, China or somewhere else out of US influence, they
didn't.
@Matthias Eckert Same goes for almost anything else. Why does Venezuela still have gold
deposited in the US and Britain? it's not like these never seized (not to say stole) foreign
assets before.
Just because the Chavistas are enemies of the American oligarchy doesn't mean the aren't
oligarchs themselves.
ps. That Anglo habit to start nationalities with a capital letter even when used as
adjective is an insult to logic
@Johnny Walker Read Natural resources get its value by the knowledge to create something
useful out of them. The economy is human activities, the way we create value by using our
knowledge and talents.
As Hudson say Chavez tried to create at mixed economy. Its not an easy task, something that
takes long time, e.g. raising the general educational level, infrastructure, health and so
on.
If Chavez and PSUV did approach this task good or bad I do not know.
As I understand are Venezuela a country riddled with enormous obstacles to achieve this. It
probably needs a high amount of social capital. Add on western hostility that third world
countries do this.
The prime example of success in fairly modern times are countries in Asia with national unity
and rather authoritarian government.
@Matthias Eckert "This interview is a whitewash for the Venezuelan government They had 20
years "
-- You are not a child, aren't you? How about the industrial base in the mighty US?
There is also the US infrastructure, the improvement of which requires some $4 trillion
"They" (the richest country in the world) had how many years?
Besides, the main point of the article is in a color graph showing % of votes /% of all
registered voters .
Look again at the graph, carefully. What are the numbers for Mr. Guaido? Have not we seen
enough of "democracy on the march" and other US-led "improvements" and "humanitarian
interventions" in Iraq, Libya, and Ukraine?
These pro-U.S. policies made Venezuela a typically polarized Latin American oligarchy.
Despite being nominally rich in oil revenue, its wealth was concentrated in the hands of a
pro-U.S. oligarchy that let its domestic development be steered by the World Bank and
IMF.
No amount of needle point proof can pop the balloon that is the collective brains of
Americans that have a CIA propaganda(via the media) myth inserted in their head that "it's
because of socialism!" Venezuela is in economic turmoil.
Other CIA created myths(that happen to work):
"They need democracy restored"
"They need our help"
"They have weapons of mass destruction"
"They harbor terrorists"
"They peddle fake news"
"They hack our elections"
Etc .
Collect your own, and trade them with your friends.
At least China and Russia can provide an alternative bank clearing mechanism to SWIFT,
so that Venezuela can bypass the U.S. financial system and keep its assets from being
grabbed at will by U.S. authorities or bondholders. And of course, they can provide
safe-keeping for however much of Venezuela's gold it can get back from New York and
London.
There's a good general rule here to keep independent country assets and financial
transactions away from the US – especially making them non- US dollar based.
This would confront U.S. financial strategists with a choice: if they continue to treat
the IMF, World Bank, ITO and NATO as extensions of increasingly aggressive U.S. foreign
policy, they will risk isolating the United States. Europe will have to choose whether to
remain a U.S. economic and military satellite, or to throw in its lot with Eurasia.
Europe would have to make this choice – and it looks like the European public is in
fact already starting to make it – which greatly troubles the US's elite European
collaborators.
Refusal of England and the U.S. to pay Venezuela means that other countries realize that
foreign official gold reserves can be held hostage to U.S. foreign policy, and even to
judgments by U.S. courts to award this gold to foreign creditors or to whoever might bring
a lawsuit under U.S. law against these countries.
True. Now is reflection time for any country that holds physical gold in New York or
London. Also time to think in general about reserves held in US dollars (Treasury bonds).
Being a Roman Catholic country, Venezuela might ask for papal support for a debt
write-down and an international institution to oversee the ability to pay by debtor
countries without imposing austerity, emigration, depopulation and forced privatization of
the public domain.
Whatever happens Venezuela is going to get austerity, but it could be a difficult self
respecting and self sufficient kind, excluding the US (the primary source of its problems)
and taking assistance from any friends that it may have.
Another Saker article that ignores the elephant in the room completely
Looking ahead, therefore, China, Russia, Iran and other countries need to set up a new
international court to adjudicate the coming diplomatic crisis and its financial and military
consequences. Such a court – and its associated international bank as an alternative to
the U.S.-controlled IMF and World Bank – needs a clear ideology to frame a set of
principles of nationhood and international rights with power to implement and enforce its
judgments.
A great idea but the world banks are NOT US controlled. They are run by the Rothschilds,
and until writers like Saker face up to this fact the problems will not be resolved.
Rothschild has to be dealt with, put out of business and closed down permanently.
What Mr Hudson's answers make clear is that Putin is increasingly bogged down in yet another
fight, a fight which Mr Hudson tacitly believes to be unwinnable.
@Michael Kenny Putin does not need to win, only impose more pain on the US than he
himself suffers. If Maduro stays in power, that is a big win for Russia and further proves
their ability to stand up the US of A.
Venezuela would prove Syria was not just luck but the start of a changing tide. If Guaido
eventually takes power, it will have costed the US much more now that Russia is there.
A couple old planes and 400 Russian special forces means that the US needed to put 5000
troops in Colombia.
When you stand up to a bully, you don't need to win, but to prove it's not worth going
after you in the future.
Which means that Maduro movement is isolated within is own continent.
Notable quotes:
"... Since there can be no intervention without the presence of force or threats of its use the actions taken and threats made against Venezuela constitute the crime of aggression under international law. ..."
"... The US and Canada are now threatening the use of armed force against Venezuela. John Bolton stated that all options are on the table and has even threatened Maduro with imprisonment in the US torture chambers of Guantanamo Bay. Britain has seized Venezuelan funds sitting in London banks, and the US and its flunkies are now trying to stop Venezuela and Turkey from dealing in Venezuelan gold, and, to add to their net, accuse them of sending the gold to Iran in violation of their illegal "sanctions." ..."
"... "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations." ..."
"... "refrain from any threats or acts, direct or indirect, aimed at impairing the freedom, independence or integrity of any State, or at fomenting civil strife and subverting the will of the people in any state."' ..."
"... "1. No State has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are condemned.' ..."
"... "2. No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another state in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise of its sovereign rights or to secure from it advantages of any kind. Also, no state shall organize, assist, foment, finance, incite or tolerate subversive, terrorist or armed activities directed toward the violent overthrow of the regime of another State, or interfere in civil strife in another State." ..."
"... "refrain from armed intervention or the promotion or organization of subversion, terrorism or other indirect forms of intervention for the purpose of changing by violence the existing system in another State or interfering in civil strife in another State." ..."
"... "to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or to allow such acts to be operated from its territory." ..."
"... Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel " Beneath the Clouds . He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook." https://journal-neo.org/2019/02/04/the-lima-group-international-outlaws/ ..."
The covert and overt interventions taking place against Venezuela by the United States and
its allies are a form of aggression and a violation of the fundamental principles of the United
Nations Charter making the nations involved international outlaws.
The attempted coup against President Maduro of Venezuela may have failed so far but the
jackals that instigated it have not given up their objective of forcing the majority of
Venezuelans benefiting from the Bolivarian revolution begun by President Chavez, back to the
misery the revolution is trying to save them from. The United States and its allied governments
and media, working with American military and civilian intelligence services, are pumping out a
constant flow of propaganda about the start of affairs in Venezuela to mislead and manipulate
their own peoples so that they support their aggression and to undermine Venezuelans support
for their revolution.
We have seen this type of propaganda before, the fake stories about "human rights" abuses,
economic conditions, the cries of "democracy," the propaganda about an "authoritarian" leader,
a "tyrant," "dictator", all labels they have used before against leaders of nations that they
have later murdered; President Arbenz, Allende, Torrijos, Habyarimana, Milosevic, Hussein,
Ghaddafi are examples that come quickly to mind, so that the same threats against Maduro are
not just propaganda but direct physical threats.
We see the same pretexts for military aggression used and same euphemisms being employed,
the same cries for "humanitarian intervention," which we now know are nothing more than modern
echoes of Hitler's pretexts for the invasion of Czechoslovakia, to "save the oppressed
Germans."
We see the same smug lies and hypocrisy about the rule of law as they openly brag about
their violation of international law with every step they take and talk as if they are gods
ruling the world.
The United States is the principal actor in all this but it has beside it among other
flunkey nations, perhaps the worst of them all, Canada, which has been an enthusiastic partner
in crime of the United States since the end of the Second World War. We cannot forget its role
in the aggression against North Korea, the Soviet Union, China, its secret role in the American
aggression against Vietnam, against Iraq, Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Syria, Ukraine,
Haiti, Iran, and the past several years Venezuela.
Canada will take the lead in the aggression against Venezuela on Monday February 4
th when it hosts a meeting in Ottawa of a group of international war crime
conspirators, known as The Lima Group, a group of Latin American and Caribbean lackeys of the
United States, including Mexico and Canada which was set up by the United States at a meeting
in Lima, Peru on August 8, 2017 with the express purpose of overthrowing President Maduro.
Canada's harridan of foreign affairs, Chrystia Freeland, stated to the press recently that
"Canada needs to play a leading role in the Lima Group because the crisis in Venezuela is
unfolding in Canada's global backyard. This is our neighbourhood. We have a direct interest in
what happens in our hemisphere."
"In Canada's global backyard?" It's astonishing to read it. Canada regards the globe as its
backyard? She manages to reveal a severe case of megalomania and insult the rest of the nations
of the world at the same time. Her statement that Venezuela "is our neighbourhood" is almost a
direct adoption of the American claim to hegemony and "interventionism" in the western
hemisphere as if Canada completely identifies itself with the United States, that is, in terms
of foreign policy, has completely merged with the United States.
But, by doing so, the Canadian elite show themselves to be the enemies of progress and
economic and social justice; shows them to be the antihuman reactionaries that they are. They
also make themselves world outlaws.
Freeland claims that the Lima Group meeting will "address the political and economic crisis
in Venezuela," yet it is Canada that, along with the United States that has created the very
crisis they are using as a pretext to attack President Maduro. It is they that have tried to
topple both him and Chavez through assassination plots, threatened military invasion and
economic warfare that has the sole purpose of disrupting the social and economic life of
Venezuela, of making life as miserable as possible in order to foment unrest while conspiring
with internal reactionary forces.
The Lima Group, began its dirty work in 2017 by issuing statements condemning the Bolivarian
revolution, claimed that there was a break down of law and order in Venezuela and attempted to
cancel the elections just held which gave President Maduro a solid majority of 68% of the votes
in what all international elections observers judged free and fair.
Following the election of Maduro all of these nations withdrew their ambassadors from
Venezuela. They did all this while claiming that their actions were taken "with full respect
for the norms of international law and the principle of nonintervention" when they are plainly
violating all norms of international law and the principle of non-intervention. They are also
violating the UN Charter that prohibits any nation or group of nations from taken action
outside the framework of the UN Security Council against any other nation.
The Ottawa meeting is in fact a meeting of criminal conspirators that are intent on
committing acts of aggression, the supreme war crime against a sovereign nation and people.
Intervention is generally prohibited under international law because it violates the concept of
independent state sovereignty. All nations have the right to govern themselves as they deem fit
and that no nation could rightfully interfere in the government of another. Since there can
be no intervention without the presence of force or threats of its use the actions taken and
threats made against Venezuela constitute the crime of aggression under international
law.
The US and Canada are now threatening the use of armed force against Venezuela. John
Bolton stated that all options are on the table and has even threatened Maduro with
imprisonment in the US torture chambers of Guantanamo Bay. Britain has seized Venezuelan funds
sitting in London banks, and the US and its flunkies are now trying to stop Venezuela and
Turkey from dealing in Venezuelan gold, and, to add to their net, accuse them of sending the
gold to Iran in violation of their illegal "sanctions."
The hypocrisy hits you in the face especially when some of the same nations in the Lima Gang
recognised as far bas as 1826 at the Congress of Panama the absolute prohibition of
intervention by states in each other's internal affairs. In attendance, were the states of
Columbia, Central America, Mexico, and Peru. Led by Simon Bolivar, the Congress declared its
determination to maintain "the sovereignty and independence of all and each of the confederated
powers of America against foreign subjection."
At the Seventh International Conference of American States held in Montevideo in 1933, The
Convention on Rights and Duties of States, issued at the conclusion of the conference, to which
the U.S. was a signatory, declared that "no state has the right to intervene in the internal or
external affairs of another." The legal position of the doctrine of nonintervention was
solidified three years later at Buenos Aires with the adoption of the Additional Protocol
Relative to Non-Intervention. This document declared "inadmissible the intervention of any of
the parties to the treaty, directly or indirectly, and for whatever reason, in the internal or
external affairs of any other of the Parties." The U.S. government agreed to this treaty
without reservation as well.
The United Nations has become the primary source of the rules of International behavior
since World War II. The principle of nonintervention between states is everywhere implicit in
the Charter of the United Nations. Article 1 of the U.N. Charter sets out the four purposes of
the organization, one of which is "to maintain international peace and security," a task which
includes the suppression of "threats to the peace," "acts of aggression" and "other breaches of
the peace." Another is "to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the
principle of equal rights and self-determination of people." Article 2(1) goes on to base the
organization on "the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members."Articles 2(3) and
2(4) require Member States to utilize peaceful means in the settlement of disputes and to
refrain from the use of force.
Article 2(4) states:
"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of
force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any
manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."
Thus, Article 2(4) prohibits the use of the economic and political pressures and the
indirect subversion which is an integral part of covert action.
That covert action is forbidden under the law of the U.N. is supported
by the numerous resolutions passed by the General Assembly which assert the right to
national sovereignty and the principle of nonintervention in general, while specifically
condemning particular tactics used in covert action.
At the risk of tiring the reader, I think it is worthwhile to reiterate what the General
Assembly of the United Nations has stated over and again beginning with Resolution 290 (iv) in
1949. Referred to as the "Essentials of Peace"
Resolution, this enactment called upon every nation to "refrain from any threats or
acts, direct or indirect, aimed at impairing the freedom, independence or integrity of any
State, or at fomenting civil strife and subverting the will of the people in any
state."'
Resolution 1236(XII)passed in 1957, declared that "peaceful and tolerant relations among
States" should be based upon "respect for each other's sovereignty,equality and territorial
integrity and nonintervention in one another's internal affairs.'
The first General Assembly resolution specifically prohibiting covert action was Resolution
213 1(XX). Entitled the "Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic
Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty," this resolution
was based on proposals made by the Soviet Union, nineteen Latin American States, and the United
Arab Republic, whose draft resolution
was co-sponsored by 26 other non-aligned countries. The declaration restated the aims and
purposes of the U.N. and noted the importance of recognizing State sovereignty and freedom to
self-determination in the current political atmosphere. The eighth preambular paragraph of
Resolution stated that, "direct intervention, subversion and all forms of indirect intervention
are contrary" to the principles of the U.N. and, "consequently,
constitute a violation of the Charter of the United Nations."' The operative portion of the
declaration consists of eight paragraphs, the first of which makes clear there can be no
"intervention as of right":
"1. No State has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason
whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed
intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality
of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are condemned.'
In another paragraph the Resolution precisely defined the scope of its prohibition against
intervention, demonstrating the illicit status of covert activities:
"2. No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of
measures to coerce another state in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise
of its sovereign rights or to secure from it advantages of any kind. Also, no state shall
organize, assist, foment, finance, incite or tolerate subversive, terrorist or armed activities
directed toward the violent overthrow of the regime of another State, or interfere in civil
strife in another State."
Resolution 2225(XXI) reaffirmed the principles and rules ex-pressed in Resolution 2131 (XX),
and urged "the immediate cessation of intervention,in any form whatever, in the domestic or
external affairs of States," and condemned "all forms of intervention . . . as a basic source
of danger to the cause of world peace."
Finally, the Resolution called upon all states to, "refrain from armed intervention or
the promotion or organization of subversion, terrorism or other indirect forms of intervention
for the purpose of changing by violence the existing system in another State or interfering in
civil strife in another State."
By Resolution 2625 (XXV), the General Assembly adopted the "Declaration on Principles of
International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance
with the Charter of the United Nations." The Declaration had its origins with the first meeting
of the Special Committee on the Principles of International Law held in 1964 in Mexico City.
This document asserted seven basic principles of international law, then elaborated how these
principles were to be realized. The seven principles embodied in the Declaration were: a) the
principle prohibiting the threat or use of force in international relations;b) the principle
requiring the peaceful settlement of disputes; c)the duty of nonintervention; d) the duty of
states to cooperate with each other; e) the principle of equal rights and self-determination of
all people;f) the principle of sovereign equality of states; and g) the good faith duty of
states to fulfill their obligations under the Charter.
In its discussion of the first principle – that states refrain from the threat or use
of force – the Declaration emphasizes the duty of each state "to refrain from organizing
or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands, including mercenaries, for
incursion into the territory of another state." In addition, the Declaration insists that every
state has a duty "to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in
acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or to allow such acts to be operated
from its territory."
I can go on listing other UN resolutions stating the same. Again and again the General
Assembly hammered home the importance of the principle of nonintervention as a central maxim of
international law.
Resolution 34/103 addressed the inadmissibility of the policy of "hegemonism" in
international relations and defined that term as the "manifestation of the policy of a State,
or a group of States, to control, dominate and subjugate, politically, economically,
ideologically or militarily, other States, peoples or regions of the world."' The
resolution,inter alia, called upon states to observe the principles of the Charter and the
principle of nonintervention. By this resolution it was declared that the General Assembly,
"Resolutely condemns policies of pressure and use or threat of use of force, direct or indirect
aggression,occupation and the growing practice of interference and intervention,overt or
covert, in the internal affairs of states."'
In 1981, the "Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention and Interference in the
Internal Affairs of States" was adopted by the General Assembly through Resolution 36/103. One
of the duties imposed upon states by the Declaration was: "The duty of a State to refrain from
armed intervention, subversion, military occupation or any other form of intervention and
interference,overt or covert, directed at another State or group of States, or any act of
military, political or economic interference in the internal affairs of another State,
including acts of reprisal involving the use of force.' In addition, the Declaration called
upon states to refrain from any action which seeks to disrupt the unity or to undermine or
subvert the political order of other States, training and equipping mercenaries or armed bands,
hostile propaganda, and the use of "external economic assistance" programs or "transnational
and multinational corporations under its jurisdiction and control as instruments of political
pressure and control."'
So, there you have it; the law. The world can see that the Lima Gang, who like to use the
phrase "the rule of law" in their diktats to others, are committing egregious crimes under
international law and together these crimes are components of the supreme war crime of
aggression. The Lima Group therefore is a group of international criminal conspirators and the
every individual involved is a war criminal. So when the Lima conspirators issue their press
statement after the Ottawa meeting, planning aggression against Venezuela, calling for the
overthrow, for the head of President Maduro and dressing it up in the usual language of the
aggressor, of "human rights" and "democracy" and their fake and illegal doctrine of
"responsibility to protect" it will not be issued by nations interested in peace or who have
respect for international law but by a gang of criminals, of international outlaws.
"... Interview conducted by The Saker with Michael Hudson, a research professor of Economics at University of Missouri, Kansas City, and a research associate at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. His latest book is ..."
"... . Cross-posted from Hudson's site . ..."
"... Maduro's defensive move is showing other countries the need to protect themselves from becoming "another Venezuela" by finding a new safe haven and paying agent for their gold, foreign exchange reserves and foreign debt financing, away from the dollar, sterling and euro areas. ..."
"... The Trump administration is destroying illusion more thoroughly than any anti-imperialist critic or economic rival could do! ..."
Interview conducted by The Saker with Michael Hudson, a
research professor of Economics at University of Missouri, Kansas City, and a research
associate at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. His latest book is J is for
Junk Economics . Cross-posted
from Hudson's site .
1. Could you summarize the state of Venezuela's economy when Chavez came to power?
Venezuela was an oil monoculture. Its export revenue was spent largely on importing food and
other necessities that it could have produced at home. Its trade was largely with the United
States. So despite its oil wealth, it ran up foreign debt.
From the outset, U.S. oil companies have feared that Venezuela might someday use its oil
revenues to benefit its overall population instead of letting the U.S. oil industry and its
local comprador aristocracy siphon off its wealth. So the oil industry – backed by U.S.
diplomacy – held Venezuela hostage in two ways.
First of all, oil refineries were not built in Venezuela, but in Trinidad and in the southern
U.S. Gulf Coast states. This enabled U.S. oil companies – or the U.S. Government –
to leave Venezuela without a means of "going it alone" and pursuing an independent policy with
its oil, as it needed to have this oil refined. It doesn't help to have oil reserves if you are
unable to get this oil refined so as to be usable.
Second, Venezuela's central bankers were persuaded to pledge their oil reserves and all
assets of the state oil sector (including Citgo) as collateral for its foreign debt. This meant
that if Venezuela defaulted (or was forced into default by U.S. banks refusing to make timely
payment on its foreign debt), bondholders and U.S. oil majors would be in a legal position to
take possession of Venezuelan oil assets.
These pro-U.S. policies made Venezuela a typically polarized Latin American oligarchy.
Despite being nominally rich in oil revenue, its wealth was concentrated in the hands of a
pro-U.S. oligarchy that let its domestic development be steered by the World Bank and IMF. The
indigenous population, especially its rural racial minority as well as the urban underclass,
was excluded from sharing in the country's oil wealth. The oligarchy's arrogant refusal to
share the wealth, or even to make Venezuela self-sufficient in essentials, made the election of
Hugo Chavez a natural outcome.
2. Could you outline the various reforms and changes introduced by Hugo Chavez? What did he
do right, and what did he do wrong?
Chavez sought to restore a mixed economy to Venezuela, using its government revenue –
mainly from oil, of course – to develop infrastructure and domestic spending on health
care, education, employment to raise living standards and productivity for his electoral
constituency.
What he was unable to do was to clean up the embezzlement and built-in rake-off of income
from the oil sector. And he was unable to stem the capital flight of the oligarchy, taking its
wealth and moving it abroad – while running away themselves.
This was not "wrong". It merely takes a long time to change an economy's disruption –
while the U.S. is using sanctions and "dirty tricks" to stop that process.
3. What are, in your opinion, the causes of the current economic crisis in Venezuela –
is it primarily due to mistakes by Chavez and Maduro or is the main cause US sabotage,
subversion and sanctions?
There is no way that's Chavez and Maduro could have pursued a pro-Venezuelan policy aimed at
achieving economic independence without inciting fury, subversion and sanctions from the United
States. American foreign policy remains as focused on oil as it was when it invaded Iraq under
Dick Cheney's regime. U.S. policy is to treat Venezuela as an extension of the U.S. economy,
running a trade surplus in oil to spend in the United States or transfer its savings to U.S.
banks.
By imposing sanctions that prevent Venezuela from gaining access to its U.S. bank deposits
and the assets of its state-owned Citco, the United States is making it impossible for
Venezuela to pay its foreign debt. This is forcing it into default, which U.S. diplomats hope
to use as an excuse to foreclose on Venezuela's oil resources and seize its foreign assets much
as Paul Singer's hedge fund sought to do with Argentina's foreign assets.
Just as U.S. policy under Kissinger was to make Chile's "economy scream," so the U.S. is
following the same path against Venezuela. It is using that country as a "demonstration effect"
to warn other countries not to act in their self-interest in any way that prevents their
economic surplus from being siphoned off by U.S. investors.
4. What in your opinion should Maduro do next (assuming he stays in power and the USA does
not overthrow him) to rescue the Venezuelan economy?
I cannot think of anything that President Maduro can do that he is not doing. At best, he
can seek foreign support – and demonstrate to the world the need for an alternative
international financial and economic system.
He already has begun to do this by trying to withdraw Venezuela's gold from the Bank of
England and Federal Reserve. This is turning into "asymmetrical warfare," threatening what to
de-sanctify the dollar standard in international finance. The refusal of England and the United
States to grant an elected government control of its foreign assets demonstrates to the entire
world that U.S. diplomats and courts alone can and will control foreign countries as an
extension of U.S. nationalism.
The price of the U.S. economic attack on Venezuela is thus to fracture the global monetary
system. Maduro's defensive move is showing other countries the need to protect themselves
from becoming "another Venezuela" by finding a new safe haven and paying agent for their gold,
foreign exchange reserves and foreign debt financing, away from the dollar, sterling and euro
areas.
The only way that Maduro can fight successfully is on the institutional level, upping the
ante to move "outside the box." His plan – and of course it is a longer-term plan –
is to help catalyze a new international economic order independent of the U.S. dollar standard.
It will work in the short run only if the United States believes that it can emerge from this
fight as an honest financial broker, honest banking system and supporter of democratically
elected regimes. The Trump administration is destroying illusion more thoroughly than any
anti-imperialist critic or economic rival could do!
Over the longer run, Maduro also must develop Venezuelan agriculture, along much the same
lines that the United States protected and developed its agriculture under the New Deal
legislation of the 1930s – rural extension services, rural credit, seed advice, state
marketing organizations for crop purchase and supply of mechanization, and the same kind of
price supports that the United States has long used to subsidize domestic farm investment to
increase productivity.
Along with the USA there is a group La countries (and Canada) with the specific goal of "regime change" in Venezuela. Much
like multinational forces in Iraq. From Wikipedia: ... established following the Lima Declaration on 8 August 2017 in the Peruvian
capital of Lima, where representatives of 12 countries met in order to establish a peaceful exit to the crisis in Venezuela.[1]
Among other issues, the now 14-country group demands the release of political prisoners, calls for free elections, offers
humanitarian aid and criticizes the breakdown of democratic order in Venezuela under the Bolivarian Government of Venezuela.
Notable quotes:
"... Not everyone agreed that Guaido and his Popular Will party should be the one to be pushed forward as "Interim President" but the moment it happened, this forced the opposition to immediately unify behind him, based on the no turning back momentum created : ..."
"... The results of that fateful decision are still being played out in the streets, and on the international stage as countries line up for and against Maduro (China, Russia and Turkey among Maduro supporters, with the US and European countries backing Guaido as legitimate leader). ..."
"... However, the WSJ report closes with crucial bombshell information regarding what it took for the opposition to cross that line, and for Guaido to step out in confidence. What was the key factor in the final push? First, Canada and US allies in Latin America initiated something dramatic... ..."
"... But most importantly, Washington came calling at a key moment the opposition was fractured and still indecisive and divided , in what is a central revelation concerning the anti-Maduro movement's calculations : ..."
"... And there it is -- a stunning mainstream media admission that the political drama and crisis now unfolding in Venezuela, now quickly turning into a global geopolitical pressure spot and conflagration -- was pushed forward and given assistance directly from the White House from the very beginning . ..."
A new WSJ report asks what the Hell is going on? in Venezuela and provides new information
behind
How a Small Group Seized Control of Venezuela's Opposition to make the extremely risky move
of pushing forward 35-year old opposition leader and National Assembly head Juan Guaido to
declare himself "Interim President" -- precipitating the crisis that's seen the noose tighten
around President Nicolas Maduro's rule as over a dozen countries led by the US have declared
him "illegitimate".
For starters, the report paints current events as having started with a "big gamble" that
was largely unplanned and unexpected within even the political opposition itself, and which
further had the hidden hand of the White House and State Department behind it from the very
beginning, pushing the opposition forward at the most critical juncture . Outlining the past
difficulties of Venezuela's "notoriously fractious opposition" and the deep divide over the
question of whether to enter direct negotiations or take more aggressive action to undermine
Maduro,
the WSJ describes :
When Juan Guaidó declared himself Venezuela's interim president on Jan. 23 in front
of a crowd of 100,000 people under a broiling sun, some leading opposition figures had no
idea he would do so, say people who work with Mr. Guaidó and other top leaders . That
included a few standing alongside him. A stern look of shock crossed their faces. Some
quietly left the stage.
"What the hell is going on?" one member of a group of politicians wrote to the others in a
WhatsApp group chat. "How come we didn't know about this."
The plan was so risky -- especially to Guaido personally as he had been arrested and
briefly detained after his vehicle was rushed by secret police only less than two weeks
prior -- that the final decision of public confrontation with the Maduro regime was left
entirely up to him in the hours leading up to the Jan.23 rally.
Not everyone agreed that Guaido and his Popular Will party should be the one to be pushed
forward as "Interim President" but the moment it happened, this forced the opposition to
immediately unify behind him, based on the no turning back
momentum created :
Mr. Guaidó himself only agreed to act the day before he declared himself interim
president, his aides said. Some politicians -- including those in the traditional Democratic
Action Party, the largest opposition party -- weren't told of the plan .
"We didn't want them to mess it up," said one opposition leader who knew of the
strategy.
The results of that fateful decision are still being played out in the streets, and on the
international stage as countries line up for and against Maduro (China, Russia and Turkey among
Maduro supporters, with the US and European countries backing Guaido as legitimate leader).
The high stakes maneuver "was largely devised by a group of four opposition leaders -- two
in exile, one under house arrest and one barred from leaving the country" and was predictably
immediately denounced by Maduro "as part of a U.S.-backed coup to overthrow his government."
But as the WSJ concludes, "The act of political skulduggery paid off. The crowd reacted
ecstatically to Mr. Guaidó, and one nation after another recognized him within hours."
Among the "plotters" included Guaido's political mentor Leopoldo López, now under house
arrest in Caracas, and Edgar Zambrano, vice president of the National Assembly of power allied
opposition party Democratic Action.
Zambrano related to the WSJ that the risk was so high that
in the end the "final decision" to pull the trigger laid with Guaido:
Mr. Zambrano, one of the opposition leaders who appeared surprised on stage on Jan. 23,
said the possibility of Mr. Guaidó assuming the presidency had been discussed in the
weeks before, but that the final decision was in the hands of the young leader because of the
risks it entailed .
However, the WSJ report closes with crucial bombshell information regarding what it took for
the opposition to cross that line, and for Guaido to step out in confidence. What was the key factor in the final push? First, Canada and US allies in Latin America
initiated something dramatic...
A breakthrough came on Jan. 4, when the Lima Group of 14 Latin American countries and
Canada issued a letter calling on Mr. Maduro to hand over power to the National Assembly. The
near-bellicose nature of the letter surprised opposition leaders, reinforcing the idea they
should take action .
But most importantly, Washington came calling at a key moment the opposition was fractured
and still indecisive and divided , in what is a central revelation concerning
the anti-Maduro movement's calculations :
When Mr. Guaidó should try to assume the interim presidency was up for debate. Some
argued that it should happen before Mr. Maduro took the oath. Others proposed creating a
commission to challenge Mr. Maduro's claim to office.
As late as Jan. 22, the day before it happened, Mr. Guaidó wasn't fully convinced .
He came around after Vice President Mike Pence called to assure that, if he were to invoke
the Venezuelan constitution in being sworn in as the country's rightful leader, the U.S.
would back the opposition.
And there it is -- a stunning mainstream media admission that the political drama and crisis
now unfolding in Venezuela, now quickly turning into a global geopolitical pressure spot and
conflagration -- was pushed forward and given assistance directly from the White House from the
very beginning .
Guaido: "Gee I can't wait for all that Western oil money to fill up meh pockets.
EhhhrrMMMmm I can't wait to sell out the Venezuelan people to the FED, BoE and ECB. D'oh-
where'd my CIA handler go?"
Also, lol at the Journal for this gem " The act of political skulduggery paid off. The
crowd reacted ecstatically to Mr. Guaidó, and one nation after another recognized him
within hours. " Translation: "Wow- we're SO surprised that the Western vassal states all
followed their master's lead by kowtowing in quick succession! Gee whiz- mind BLOWN!"
The WSJ has provided the "House" plausible deniability, will the "House" take it, or will
the minions sabotage? Stay tuned folks, as we discover who's honorable, who's courageous, and
who's pragmatic...
Further proof this guy is a treasonous little bitch that needs to be arrested and
prosecuted by the Supreme Tribunal Court of Venezuela. He's a traitor to ALL Venezuelans by
colluding with foreign powers to overthrow his elected president.
Lets be honest, sending in the US military was the first choice and all the rest of this
has been setting the stage. It's been 2 years, time for Trump to start a war, by the
prevailing MIC schedule.
Oh please. Maduro the elected president? He won his election after blocking the opposition
parties to take part. Please read the Venezuelan Constitution before commenting. Not any
election is valid or democratic. Maduro should be in jail. Guaido is asking for new and fair
elections. ... OOOOH how undemocratic!!! I am against foreign intervention, but in this case
the 3 million Venezuelan real refugees (10% of the Venezuelan population and not organised
political caravans trying to reach the USA) in neighbour countries tips my view. Therefore I
support the constitutional president Guaido and any help the international community can give
him.
Idiot . The opposition boycotted the election as they couldn't win. International
observers (usa wouldn't come) say it was fairer than usa elections lol. Sure maduro isn't a
saint. He also gave out prizes to collect after voting . But that's not bribing people could
vote for anyone and still collect a few foods in a bag
That a boy Trumpy! You got the right FukWits on the job. Bibi and Sheldon are jumping for
joy with the addition of Abrams. Now you got your Zio dream team. BoltON, PompAss, and
Abram's. Just think what a murderous war mongering team for IsraHell you could have if ya
rolled **** Chenney in the mix. Now there's someone who won't **** around getting a Zio war
going.
Cheney , the virtue less, honor less, 2 time OUI conviction,electricians apprentice , went
as far as helping to murder 3,000 Americans . All so he could impress his societal status
ambitious wife . A Rumsfeld ass kissing loser . Spineless goy are 50% of the problem .
Guaido is obviously an agent of the CIA. This fact does not absolve Maduro of his crimes.
But it does show that the US is balls deep in the Venezuela problem.
@50 bobzibub... your link doesn't bring me to the article, but i suspect it is more then just
crystallix - the canuck gold mining company - that are pushing for a change in power in
venezuala.. as i understand it, there are a number of canuck mining and oil related interests
where they would like to exploit venezuala and can't seem to get around the democractically
elected gov't of maduros..
looks like
this might be related, or the article you were trying to post? an american judge says
crystallex can have citgo, lol....
" Second, Venezuela's central bankers were persuaded to pledge their oil reserves and all
assets of the state oil sector (including Citgo) as collateral for its foreign debt. This
meant that if Venezuela defaulted (or was forced into default by U.S. banks refusing to make
timely payment on its foreign debt), bondholders and U.S. oil majors would be in a legal
position to take possession of Venezuelan oil assets."
Solid proof that it was the empire who invented the practice of "debt trap" and is still
flourishing with it.
hunor, February 7, 2019 at 6:24 am GMT
Thank you ! Made it very clear. Perfect reflection of the " Values of Western Civilization ".
Reaching to grab the whole universe, with no holds barred . And never show of any interest for the " truth". They are not
even pretending anymore , awakening will be very painful for some.
Reuben Kaspate, February 7, 2019 at 2:38 pm GMT • 100 Words
Why would the U. S. based White-Protestant aristocracy care a hoot about the Brown-Catholic elites in the far off land?
They don't! The comprador aristocracy in question isn't what it seems It's the same group that plagues the Americans.
The rootless louts, whose only raison d'ê·tre is to milk everything in sight and then retire to coastal cities, i.e. San
Francisco, if you are a homosexual or New York City and State, if you are somewhat religious.
Poor Venezuelans don't stand a chance against the shysters!
"... Qatar's ambassador in Mauritania allegedly offered his Syrian counterpart an advance payment of US$1 million and a monthly salary of $20,000 over 20 years, trying to convince the diplomat to defect and voice support for the opposition. ..."
"... All they need is a couple of snipers to kill protesters and the Mighty Wurlitzer of propaganda will supply the war, to paraphrase William Randolph Hearst. ..."
"... Elliot Abrams seems to be having trouble getting this coup off the ground. He must wonder what happened to the good old days of death squads and contras.... ..."
A day after the U.S. coup attempt in Venezuela the
U.S. game plan was already quite obvious:
The opposition in Venezuela will probably use access to that 'frozen' money to buy weapons
and to create an army of mercenaries to fight a 'civil' war against the government and its
followers. Like in Syria U.S. special forces or some CIA 'contractors' will be eager to
help. The supply line for such a war would most likely run through Colombia. If, like 2011
in Syria, a war on the ground is planned it will likely begin in the cities near that
border.
The U.S. is using the pretext of 'delivering humanitarian aid' from Columbia to Venezuela
to undermine the government and to establish a supply line for further operations. It is
another attempt to pull
the military onto the coup plotter's side:
[I]f the trucks do get across, the opposition can present itself as an answer to
Venezuela's chronic suffering, while Mr. Maduro will appear to have lost control of the
country's borders. That could accelerate defections from the ruling party and the military.
Dimitris Pantoulas, a political scientist in Caracas, called the opposition's aid
delivery plan a high-stakes gamble.
...
"This is 99 percent about the military and one percent about the humanitarian aspects," he
said. "The opposition is testing the military's loyalty, raising their cost of supporting
Maduro. Are they with Maduro, or no? Will they reject the aid? If the answer is no, then
Maduro's hours are numbered."
A New York Times op-ed by a right-wing former foreign minister of Mexico, Jorge
G. Castañeda, details the
escalation potential :
According to Mr. Guaidó and other sources, $20 million in American medicines and
food will be unloaded this week just outside Venezuelan territory in Cúcuta,
Colombia; Brazil, and on a Caribbean island -- either Aruba or Curaçao -- near the
Venezuelan coast.
Venezuelan military officials and troops in exile will then move these supplies into
Venezuela, where if all goes well, army troops still loyal to Mr. Maduro will not stop
their passage nor fire upon them. If they do, the Brazilian and Colombian governments may
be willing to back the anti-Maduro soldiers.
The threat of a firefight with their neighbors
might just be the incentive the Venezuelan military need to jettison Mr. Maduro, making the
reality of combat unnecessary.
This escalation strategy is unlikely to work unless some additional provocation is
involved. The Venezuelan government blocked the border bridge between Cúcuta in
Colombia and San Cristobal in Venezuela. Its military stands ready to stop any violation of
the country's border.
The U.S. responded to the blocking of the road with a sanctimonious tweet:
The Venezuelan people desperately need humanitarian aid. The U.S. & other countries
are trying to help, but #Venezuela's military under Maduro's orders is blocking aid with
trucks and shipping tankers. The Maduro regime must LET THE AID REACH THE STARVING PEOPLE.
#EstamosUnidosVE
The U.S. government, which actively helps to starve the people of Yemen into submission,
is concerned about Venezuela where so far no one has died of starvation? The lady ain't gonna
believe that.
The Venezuelan military has shown no sign of interest to change its loyalty. The fake aid
will be rejected.
The government of Venezuela does not reject aid that comes without political interference.
Last year it accepted modest UN
aid which consisted mostly of medical supplies from which Venezuela had been cut off due
to U.S. sanctions. The UN claimed that around 12 percent of Venezuelans are undernourished.
But such claims have been made for years while reports from Venezuela (vid) confirmed only some
scarcity of specific products. There is no famine in Venezuela that would require immediate
intervention.
The International Red Cross, the Catholic church's aid organization Caritas and
the United Nations rejected U.S. requests to help deliver the currently planned 'aid'
because it is so obviously politicized:
"Humanitarian action needs to be independent of political, military or other objectives,"
UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters in New York on Wednesday.
...
"What is important is that humanitarian aid be depoliticised and that the needs of the
people should lead in terms of when and how humanitarian aid is used," Dujarric added.
Rejecting aid out of political reasons is not unusual. When the hurricane Katrina in 2005
caused huge damage along the U.S. gulf coast, a number of countries offered humanitarian and
technical aid. U.S. President Bush accepted help from some countries, but rejected aid from
other ones
:
An offer of aid from the Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, which included two
mobile hospital units, 120 rescue and first aid experts and 50 tonnes of food, has been
rejected, according to the civil rights leader, Jesse Jackson.
Mr Jackson said the offer from the Venezuelan leader, whom he recently met, included 10
water purification plants, 18 power generation plants and 20 tonnes of bottled water.
The U.S. intent to establish a 'humanitarian aid' supply line into Venezuela has a
secondary purpose. Such aid is the ideal cover for weapon supplies. In the 1980s designated
'humanitarian aid' flights for Nicaragua were filled with weapons . The
orders for those flights were given by Elliot Abrams who is now Trump's special envoy for
Venezuela.
While the trucks from Colombia are blocked at the border other 'humanitarian aid' from the
United States
reached the country .
Officials in Venezuela have accused the US of sending a cache of high-powered rifles and
ammunition on a commercial cargo flight from Miami so they would get into the hands of
President Nicolás Maduro's opponents.
Members with the Venezuelan National Guard [GNB] and the National Integrated Service of
Customs and Tax Administration [SENIAT] made the shocking discovery just two days after the
plane arrived at Arturo Michelena International Airport in Valencia.
Inspectors found 19 rifles, 118 magazines and 90 wireless radios while investigating the
flight which they said arrived Sunday afternoon. Monday's bust also netted four rifle
stands, three rifle scopes and six iPhones.
The pictures show
sufficient equipment for an infantry squad. Fifteen AR-15 assault rifles (5.56), one
squad automatic weapon (7.62) with a drum magazine, and a Colt 7.62 sniper gun as well as
accessory equipment. What is missing is the ammunition.
Where one such weapon transport is caught multiple are likely to go through. But to run a
war against the government pure weapon supplies are not enough. The U.S. will have to
establish a continuous supply line for heavy and bulky ammunition. That is where
'humanitarian aid' convoys come in.
Unless a large part of the Venezuelan military changes sides, any attempt to overthrow the
Venezuelan government by force is likely doomed to fail. The U.S. could use its full military
might to destroy the Venezuelan army. But the U.S. Senate is already quarreling about the potential use of U.S.
forces in Venezuela. The Democrats strongly reject that.
A Senate resolution to back Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido, once expected to get
unanimous support, has been torpedoed by a disagreement over the use of military force,
according to aides and senators working on the issue.
...
"I think it's important for the Senate to express itself on democracy in Venezuela,
supporting interim President Guaido and supporting humanitarian assistance. But I also
think it should be very clear in fact that support stops short of any type of military
intervention," [Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J.] told NBC News.
It is unlikely that Trump would order a military intervention without bipartisan
support.
The a clandestine insertion of a mercenary 'guerrilla' force into Venezuela is surely
possible. Minor supply lines can be established by secret means. But, as the war on Syria
demonstrates, such plans can not be successful unless the people welcome the anti-government
force.
Under the current government most people in Venezuela are still better off than under the
pre-Chavez governments. This lecture and this thread explain the
economic history of Venezuela and the enormous progress that was made under Chavez and
Maduro. The people will not forget that even when the economic
situation will become more difficult. They know who is
pulling the strings behind the Random Guy Guaido who now claims the presidency. They know
well that these rich people are unlikely to better their plight.
U.S. politicians are making the same mistakes with regards to Venezuela as they made with
the regime change wars on Iraq and Syria. They believes that all people are as corrupt and
nihilistic as they are. They believe that others will not fight for their own believes and
their own style of life. They will again be proven wrong.
Never Mind the
Bollocks , Feb 7, 2019 2:20:56 PM |
link
US now has enough bootlickers signed up to the project that there will be no move against
the US at the UNGA. 'Protecting' its diplomats will be a big enough fig leaf for the Trump
admin.
thanks b, for this and all the links to read... i liked your line here "The U.S. government,
which actively helps to starve the people of Yemen into submission, is concerned about
Venezuela where so far no one has died of starvation?" indeed and as you note in the last
paragraph - "U.S. politicians are making the same mistakes with regards to Venezuela as they
made with the regime change wars on Iraq and Syria. They believes that all people are as
corrupt and nihilistic as they are. They believe that others will not fight for their own
believes and their own style of life. They will again be proven wrong."
all these people preaching this kind of crap, must be getting good returns from who is
paying them... the other person in the usa, europe and etc - don't believe this b.s.
anymore..
Bulletin Bulletin Bulletin. This just posted on RT. According to geography challenged (!!!!!)
Pompous Pompeo = Hezbollah is now in Zenezuela. Yes. You read that right. And further more
it's an Iranian Hezbollah. Look out.
Here's the money quote: "People don't recognize that Hezbollah has active cells -- the
Iranians are impacting the people of Venezuela and throughout South America," adding that "We
have an obligation to take down that risk for America."
He also is now referring to Guido-chump as "the duly elected president of Zenezuela."
Transmutation Does exist. Amazing.
"throughout South America" Wow. A population explosion!
Is this guy Pompous Pompeo very very very confused?
Thanks for the ongoing reporting of this spinning plate of late empire.
It is encouraging to read that others are standing up to empire in their own little ways
that all add up.
From reading comments here and on other sites I am also happy to be reading less BS about
Trump being some sort of hidden savior as compared to Clinton II. He is a front for the elite
just like Clinton II is/would have been.
"Indeed ,the more America began to lose its hold on its noncommunist allies, the closer
America
and the Soviet Union drew together, precisely to threaten Europe and Asia with what
Henry Kissinger called a new condominium, that is, joint imperialism of America and
Russia against their respective satellites."
This is what Kissinger and Trump are now trying to do.
Trumps friendliness toward Russia has nothing to do with peace and goodness and
everything to do with US domination of Asia and Europe.
@mauisurfer #9: The reason your link breaks the page is that it does not have enough hyphens
in it. So it stretches the page until there's a hyphen (between "michael" and "hudson"),
whereupon the link finally wraps to the next line. This is not the first time you are ruining
the page. In fact, we've talked about this quite recently. I will repeat what I wrote then:
press "Preview" button before posting, check that everything looks right, only then press
"Post". Please respect other posters.
Bloody Canada: Cheerleading the Lima Group's Plot to Overthrow the Government of
Venezuela
by Maria Paez Victor
(María Páez Victor, Ph.D. is a Venezuelan born sociologist living in Canada).
Guaidó, a son of Spanish immigrants, is a useful idiot, a thug who will be thrown
into the trashcan of history for his treason. He does not command any type of institution,
not one policeman, not one ministry, no official agency of any sort. He is a president in
his own mind and that of the USA Embassy where he is holed out.
Are there any bounds to indecency and intellectual bankruptcy of these people? Is there a
line, however desperate, they will not cross in order to achieve their goal? the answer is
NO. This is a lost country morally, socially and economically. US is a country that needs a
direct military intervention.......by all.
At Hudson's website, he gave the interview with Saker this
title : "Venezuela as the pivot for New Internationalism?" Spread out in answer to
Saker's questions are Hudson's suggestions for the institutions and mechanisms for such a new
internationalism:
"The only way that Maduro can fight successfully is on the institutional level, upping the
ante to move "outside the box." His plan – and of course it is a longer-term plan
– is to help catalyze a new international economic order independent of the U.S.
dollar standard. It will work in the short run only if the United States believes that it
can emerge from this fight as an honest financial broker, honest banking system and supporter
of democratically elected regimes. The Trump administration is destroying illusion more
thoroughly than any anti-imperialist critic or economic rival could do!...
"Looking ahead, therefore, China, Russia, Iran and other countries need to set up a new
international court to adjudicate the coming diplomatic crisis and its financial and military
consequences. Such a court – and its associated international bank as an
alternative to the U.S.-controlled IMF and World Bank – needs a clear ideology to
frame a set of principles of nationhood and international rights with power to implement and
enforce its judgments.
"This hostage-taking [of gold and other assets] now makes it urgent for other countries
to develop a viable alternative , especially as the world de-dedollarizes and a
gold-exchange standard remains the only way of constraining the military-induced balance of
payments deficit of the United States or any other country mounting a military
attack."...
"Given the fact that the EU is acting as a branch of NATO and the U.S. banking system,
that alternative would have to be associated with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization,
and the gold would have to be kept in Russia and/or China ."...
"The best thing neighboring Latin American countries can do is to join in creating a
vehicle to promote de-dollarization and, with it, an international institution to oversee the
writedown of debts that are beyond the ability of countries to pay without imposing austerity
and thereby destroying their economies .
" An alternative also is needed to the World Bank that would make loans in domestic
currency, above all to subsidize investment in domestic food production so as to protect
the economy against foreign food-sanctions – the equivalent of a military siege to
force surrender by imposing famine conditions. This World Bank for Economic Acceleration
would put the development of self-reliance for its members first , instead of promoting
export competition while loading borrowers down with foreign debt that would make them prone
to the kind of financial blackmail that Venezuela is experiencing."...
" Two international principles are needed. First, no country should be obliged to pay
foreign debt in a currency (such as the dollar or its satellites) whose banking system acts
to prevent payment .
" Second, no country should be obliged to pay foreign debt at the price of losing its
domestic autonomy as a state: the right to determine its own foreign policy, to tax and to
create its own money, and to be free of having to privatize its public assets to pay foreign
creditors . Any such debt is a "bad loan" reflecting the creditor's own irresponsibility
or, even worse, pernicious asset grab in a foreclosure that was the whole point of the loan."
[Emphasis mine to highlight Hudson's suggestions.]
It ought to be clear that Hudson's proposing a new international financial and
political/judicial system to ultimately replace the UN and Bretton Woods created
institutions. This is certainly the minimum requirement since the Outlaw US Empire has
completely trashed the post WW2 system itself designed. Unfortunately, there's still the
issue of containing and disciplining the Outlaw US Empire and subduing it so it cannot
threaten the newly established institutions.
According to the German newspaper Junge Welt the border bridge between Cúcuta in
Colombia and San Cristobal in Venezuela, which you mentioned, has not been closed, since it
has never been open. The article says, the alleged closure of the bridge is fake news to
support the coup.
https://www.jungewelt.de/artikel/348717.kampf-um-venezuela-no-pasar%C3%A1n.html
Nevertheless, thank you for your thoughts and information and please keep up the good work!
Couldn't agree more - we are such a US flunky. Also, the cbc has become increasingly
pathetic and irrelevant - they're getting a good rogering on other sites such as Babble for
their extraordinarily biased coverage of everything imperial.
In case no one has linked to it, here's a letter sent to the EU re May 20 elections in
Venezuela:
"They know well that these rich people are unlikely to better their plight."
This is certainly correct but a terrible understatement. It should read: 'They know only to
well out of experience, that the Venezuelan Sucker class will take bloody revenge if they
succeed to gain power again.'
hope you are right, b. We will see how resilient the government is when the first public
massacre of demonstrators happen which appears to be imminent as we all have seen this so
many times.
to Zanon. # 7 Yes of course they are allies. However, you must, I hope, admit that the idea
of Hezbollah "cells" all over south america is a wee bit comical. The fact that the two
countries are allies does not necessarily translate to "we must take them down." The way His
Pomposity puts it, those cells are just sprouting up every where. It's a bit ridiculous.
B, don't forget the regime change playbook also involves bribing public officials to come
over to their side. Here's any example of how it was done Syria:
Qatar's ambassador in Mauritania allegedly offered his Syrian counterpart an advance
payment of US$1 million and a monthly salary of $20,000 over 20 years, trying to convince the
diplomat to defect and voice support for the opposition.
All they need is a couple of snipers to kill protesters and the Mighty Wurlitzer of
propaganda will supply the war, to paraphrase William Randolph Hearst. You would think that the propaganda receivers would learn by now, with the same propaganda
used time after time, year after year, war after war.
You would be wrong. I am losing sympathy for the people of the imperial countries, and their
inability to learn from experience.
@40 wagelaborer. Therein lies the challenge. Will Humanity keep listening to Ole Wurly's tune
til the end or will it learn from its mistake and abandon the old schemes? In other words,
will Man (and Woman, or course) become sovereign or will he/she stay a slave? Recent
developments in Ukraine and especially Syria give hope that Homo Sapiens Ethicus is
emerging..
According to military expert Yuri Liamin Venezuela has S-300VM Antey-2500 and Buk-M2E
long range air defenses, and Pechora-2M middle range air defenses. T-72B1V, BMP-3,
BTR-80A,
SAU Msta-S tanks. Noah-SVK, MLRS Grad and Smerch automatic propulsion arms. Su-30MK2
fighters.
Well trained ground troops with Igla-S MANPADS and ZU-23 / 30m1-4.
And thousands of armed and well trained militias, expected to grow
to over a million strong ( as per Fidel Castro instructions, haha)
Elliot Abrams seems to be having trouble getting this coup off the ground. He must wonder
what happened to the good old days of death squads and contras....
>Elliott Abrams, who leads the Trump administration's special envoy to Venezuela, said
on Thursday that several countries have offered to take in Venezuelan dictator Nicolás
Maduro.
"I think it is better for the transition to democracy in Venezuela that he be outside the
country," Abrams said. "And there are a number of countries who are willing to accept
him." "Which ones?" Bloomberg reporter Nick Wadhams asked. "He's got friends in places like Cuba and Russia," Abrams said. "And there are some other
countries actually, that have come to us privately and said they would be willing to take
members of the current illegitimate regime, if it would help the transition." "Can you name any?" Wadhams asked. "No," Abrams responded.<
Nice
graphic to support fact that "Unlike UK and most of EU - and contrary to BBC repetition -
'the international community' has not fallen into line behind Trump on Venezuela."
Victor J @44--
Pepe
Escobar posits there're "arguably 15,000 Cubans who are in charge of security for the
Maduro government; Cubans have demonstrated historically they are not in the business of
handing over power." They're likely well versed in the use of those Russian armaments. It's
also likely that there's a Russian or Chinese satellite in geosync orbit above the region
using its sophisticated sensors to detect infiltration attempts, something Central Americans
lacked during the Contra-Terror.
The embarassment of being associated with Trump must now be getting through even
to the most fanatical fascists such as Freeland. And the Europeans.
From a PR point of view statements such as Abrams' "The time to negotiate
with Maduro is long past." Or the original ultimatum demanding elections within 8 days!
Are completely over the top. And likely to be seen as such. Sanctioning members of the
Constituent Assembly- the elections to which were uncontroversial-also indicates that
what the opposition and the United States want is war, they will continue to turn down
peremptorily all offers to mediate or compromise.
If they don't end things soon they will be completely discredited everywhere outside
the political caste. Even the MSM are going to find it hard to keep up looking the other
way and pretending not to know the most elementary facts.
Yes, the corrupt Trump and his administration will be proven wrong as were Obama's and Bush's
administrations, but unfortunately Venezuelans, and perhaps Iranians soon, will be used as
pawns, and people will suffer, their lives will be destroyed as hell is being unleashed on
their lives. Meanwhile the media, damn them as well, are useful tools for the Administration,
spouting regime-change humanitarian propaganda, just like they did with the Syrian
Observatory's reports and White Helmet footage.
Debunking this avalanche of bull is what you do best as demonstrated with this article.
Let's not forget that alongside the proxy regime change civil war, a propaganda and mass
deception war is waged on the minds of Venezuelans deprived by sanctions and on all of us
sick and tired, weary, of the AZ Empire's successive wars. So pull down on to your
anti-bullshet visor cause it's just starting again, the worst is yet to come, and so far
Russia's hardly around to help with the pushback.
(I see someone unwittingly mucked up this thread misusing tags with an excessively long
link making it impossible to read comments. It's even difficult to comment. 😕)
@ bevin - i agree with @49 psychohistorian.. the msm is a huge part of the problem.. here in
canada, our national outlet - cbc - are a disgrace.. here) is
today's fluff piece on guaido and hit piece on maduro... the cbc have become so predictable
for carrying water for the empire, that many are getting ready turned off by them.. for a
national news outlet paid for by canuck taxpayers, it is truly pathetic.. they need to do hit
pieces on this fascist freeland, but instead want to turn reality upside down..
on a positive note, i am quite sure when the federal election happens in oct of this year,
as memory serves - the liberals will not remain in power and Freeland can get back to writing
George Soros memoirs..
"... There are also three or four books written by Anna Lilia Perez with regard to the sacking of PEMEX by the previous 4 presidents. She names Blackrock, the Carlyle Group and numerous Banks in the conspiracy. 60% of Mexican oil was being loaded on Tankers and sold in the Black Market. Google her name and you can get a list of her books. ..."
"... New York Times Article: Mexico could press bribery charges, it just hasn't https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/world/americas/mexico-odebrecht-investigation.html ..."
The US has been working to get to the point of invading Venezuela for a while now. They just
needed to wait for 2 things to fall into place. The election of Duque in Colombia and
Bolsanado in Brazil. Now that they have these two ultraright wing leaders to provide the
brunt of the invasion force, they can begin to execute their plan. There's a youtuber in
Florida that has been on top of this plan for a while now, informing his followers.
Here's a
link to his Florida Maquis site:
10 steps to understand what really happened in Venezuela
... ... ...
I'll attach a couple more links about Chavez talking about the Jews and the Assasination
of Chavez.
Shocking! Netanyahu
... ... ...
The Assasination of Hugo Chavez
... ... ...
Blackstone Intelligence has an interesting video that focuses on articles from The
Economists. I will also attach:
How NeoCons are helping the Bankers take over Venezuela
... ... ...
There are also three or four books written by Anna Lilia Perez with regard to the sacking
of PEMEX by the previous 4 presidents. She names Blackrock, the Carlyle Group and numerous
Banks in the conspiracy. 60% of Mexican oil was being loaded on Tankers and sold in the Black
Market. Google her name and you can get a list of her books. There is so much information in
her books, information she had to fight in court to get copies. She had to move to Germany
because of threats she received.
Today the new president shut down 26 of the 56 shell companies created under another shell
company of PEMEX, PEMEX International. The government is having a hard time investigating
these company's books because they claim to be private companies. They found a refinery in
Texas that they didn't even know existed, that is half owned by Royal Dutch Shell. 200
million dollars a year in business and none of it is shown on PEMEX's books.
Anyone with a brain always knew that Maduro is more legitimate than Trump, May, Sanchez, or
Macron. Now we have the numbers confirming that. Anyone with a brain knew that the Guaido
personage is no more than the puppet of the Empire, a nonentity with zero legitimacy.
But key point is, the US actions against Venezuela are not about legitimacy, they are
about oil and money. A robber takes your valuables not because you are not legitimate enough,
but because he is a robber. That's the whole point, the rest is hot air.
Guaido's party Voluntad Popular (VP), is the most violent and right wing opposition party
in Venezuela. One of its leaders, Maria Corina Machado was interviewed on the public Canadian
Broadcasting Company (CBC) on Feb. 1. She has openly, repeatedly, shamelessly and in front of
numerous TV and radio cameras, urged mobs to violence and she has most recently publicly
threatened the life of President Maduro. She has also been invited to speak with Ottawa
politicians.
Guaidó and his party carried out the terrible street violence of 2014, which they
named "La Salida" (The Exit). It resulted in 114 innocent people being killed. Several young
men were burned alive suspected of being "Chavistas". This was the worst street violence ever
seen on the streets of Venezuela. The leader of the party, Leopoldo López was jailed,
after a long and fair trial with the best lawyers money can buy, sentenced for his
responsibility for unleashing this terror and the ensuing 114 deaths.
Guaidó, a son of Spanish immigrants, is a useful idiot, a thug who will be thrown
into the trashcan of history for his treason. He does not command any type of institution,
not one policeman, not one ministry, no official agency of any sort. He is a president in his
own mind and that of the USA Embassy where he is holed out.
Exxon Mobil wants the oil. The international banks want the gold. Colombia wants to
control or possess the eastern oil rich area next to its border. Brazil wants carte blanche
for its big energy corporation. Guyana wants the Esequivo region on the eastern border handed
to them – that is, to Exxon Mobil, and Paraguay wants the huge debt it owes to
Venezuela to quietly disappear. And it is not a wild guess to think that Canada obtained its
recent Free Trade deal with Trump as a quid-pro-quo: lead the charge against Venezuela and
you get your deal. And the oil producers in Canada (mostly USA owned) will shed no tears over
the destruction of Venezuelan crude production. Make no mistake about it, these are the
modern carpetbaggers.
Just the kind of thing I come to Unz to read, and get a glimmer at the man behind the
curtain.
I'll share an anecdote, for what it's worth. Some years back I went into the local bank.
The (young and attractive) gal who helped me out, was -- it turned out, from Venezuela.
This was when Chavez was still alive, and after he had mocked the chimp at the UN, talking
about the smell of sulfur. I remember being impressed by his antics, and thinking 'wow,
there's a guy who not only hates Dubya almost as much as I do, but has the cajones to call
the bitch out in front of the whole world.
So I was curious what this pretty (many of them are) Venezuelan girl thought of Chavez,
and I asked her.
She did not like him. No effn' way. It turns out her father was a hard working schlep who
came from nothing, but had worked his arse off his entire life, to build a second home, and
to rent the first one out, as a retirement income of sorts.
Well, according to this gal, the Chavez regime had confiscated the rental home because it
was exploitation in their view. So I had to re-think my opinion of this guy, if her story is
true. Why don't these commies ever go after the One Percent's wealth? Why do they always go
after the working and middle class?
Just an anecdote for what it's worth.
Also glad someone posted the Economic Hit Man video.
The last sentence of this article, (in particular) made me think of that video.
But folks thinking we have designs on Venezuela are just nuts
the first thing that's necessary is to define who "we" are.
Because there are two Americas, and we should make the distinction.
First there is the America of the American people. Poor, working class, middle class, and
somewhat well-off upper-middle class. These are the "we" that had nothing whatsoever to do
with the wars, except to vote relentlessly for politicians to end them, and are always
betrayed.
Which brings us to the other "we". The Deepstate scumfucks who bomb and loot nations, when
they aren't looting the American working and middle class to fund their Eternal Wars, or
selecting cannon fodder from the working class or poor, to act as their Janissaries for
globo-domination and rapine.
Joe the Plumber is the poster boy for the first "we", and yes, there are lots and lots of
butt-hurt arseholes who would like to pin it all on Joe. He's white, CIS, American and the
perfect scapegoat for butt-hurt loser's (of all stripes) hate.
John McBloodstain in the perfect (if rotting) poster boy for the other "we". The Deepstate
scumfucks who are just as much the enemy of the American people as they are the enemy of all
who don't bow down to the Fiend.
So there are two very separate and very distinct "we"s.
The reason we can be sure the problems being caused in Venezuela are being done so by the
Deepstate 'Americans', is because Trump appointed one of the worst Deepstate scumfucks to
look after "our" interests down there; Eliot Abrams – a scumfuck of the highest order,
and an existential enemy of Joe the Plumber and all Americans of good will.
It would be good if this distinction between the two "we"s, could be made more routinely.
IMHO
"... Nixon and Kissinger, according to the notes kept by CIA Director Richard Helms, wanted to 'make the economy scream' in Chile; they were 'not concerned [about the] risks involved'. War was acceptable to them as long as Allende's government was removed from power. The CIA started Project FUBELT, with $10 million as a first installment to begin the covert destabilisation of the country. ..."
"... Emboldened by Western domination, monopoly firms act with disregard for the law. ..."
"... Unable to raise money from commodity sales, hemmed in by a broken world agricultural system and victim of a culture of plunder, countries of the Global South have been forced to go hat in hand to commercial lenders for finance. ..."
"... Impossible to raise funds, trapped by the fickleness of international finance, governments are forced to make deep cuts in social spending. Education and health, food sovereignty and economic diversification – all this goes by the wayside. International agencies such as the IMF force countries to conduct 'reforms', a word that means extermination of independence. Those countries that hold out face immense international pressure to submit under pain of extinction, as the Communist Manifesto (1848) put it. ..."
"... The migration out of Venezuela is not unique to that country but is now merely the normal reaction to the global crisis. Migrants from Honduras who go northward to the United States or migrants from West Africa who go towards Europe through Libya are part of this global exodus. ..."
"... Venezuela has faced harsh US sanctions since 2014, when the US Congress started down this road. The next year, US President Barack Obama declared Venezuela a 'threat to national security'. The economy started to scream. ..."
"... This is what the US did to Iran and this is what they did to Cuba. The UN says that the US sanctions on Cuba have cost the small island $130 billion. Venezuela lost $6 billion for the first year of Trump's sanctions, since they began in August 2017 ..."
On 15 September 1970, US President Richard Nixon and National Security Advisor Henry
Kissinger authorised the US government to do everything possible to undermine the incoming
government of the socialist president of Chile, Salvador Allende. Nixon and Kissinger,
according to the notes kept by CIA Director Richard Helms, wanted to 'make the economy scream'
in Chile; they were 'not concerned [about the] risks involved'. War was acceptable to them as
long as Allende's government was removed from power. The CIA started Project FUBELT, with $10
million as a first installment to begin the covert destabilisation of the country.
CIA memorandum on Project FUBELT, 16 September 1970.
... ... ...
US business firms, such as the telecommunication giant ITT, the soft drink maker Pepsi Cola
and copper monopolies such as Anaconda and Kennecott, put pressure on the US government once
Allende nationalised the copper sector on 11 July 1971. Chileans celebrated this day as the Day
of National Dignity (Dia de la Dignidad Nacional). The CIA began to make contact with sections
of the military seen to be against Allende. Three years later, on 11 September 1973, these
military men moved against Allende, who died in the regime change operation. The US 'created
the conditions' as US National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger put it, to which US President
Richard Nixon answered, 'that is the way it is going to be played'. Such is the mood of
international gangsterism.
Phone Call between Richard Nixon (P) and Henry Kissinger (K) on 16 September 1973.
... ... ...
Chile entered the dark night of a military dictatorship that turned over the country to US
monopoly firms. US advisors rushed in to strengthen the nerve of General Augusto Pinochet's
cabinet.
What happened to Chile in 1973 is precisely what the United States has attempted to do in
many other countries of the Global South. The most recent target for the US government –
and Western big business – is Venezuela. But what is happening to Venezuela is nothing
unique. It faces an onslaught from the United States and its allies that is familiar to
countries as far afield as Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The formula is
clichéd. It is commonplace, a twelve-step plan to produce a coup climate, to create a
world under the heel of the West and of Western big business.
Step One: Colonialism's
Traps.
Most of the Global South remains trapped by the structures put in place by colonialism.
Colonial boundaries encircled states that had the misfortune of being single commodity
producers – either sugar for Cuba or oil for Venezuela. The inability to diversify their
economies meant that these countries earned the bulk of their export revenues from their
singular commodities (98% of Venezuela's export revenues come from oil). As long as the prices
of the commodities remained high, the export revenues were secure. When the prices fell,
revenue suffered. This was a legacy of colonialism. Oil prices dropped from $160.72 per barrel
(June 2008) to $51.99 per barrel (January 2019). Venezuela's export revenues collapsed in this
decade.
Step Two: The Defeat of the New International Economic Order.
In 1974, the countries of the Global South attempted to redo the architecture of the world
economy. They called for the creation of a New International Economic Order (NIEO) that would
allow them to pivot away from the colonial reliance upon one commodity and diversify their
economies. Cartels of raw materials – such as oil and bauxite – were to be built so
that the one-commodity country could have some control over prices of the products that they
relied upon. The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), founded in 1960, was a
pioneer of these commodity cartels. Others were not permitted to be formed. With the defeat of
OPEC over the past three decades, its members – such as Venezuela (which has the world's
largest proven oil reserves) – have not been able to control oil prices. They are at the
mercy of the powerful countries of the world.
Step Three: The Death of Southern
Agriculture.
In November 2001, there were about three billion small farmers and landless peasants in the
world. That month, the World Trade Organisation met in Doha (Qatar) to unleash the productivity
of Northern agri-business against the billions of small farmers and landless peasants of the
Global South. Mechanisation and large, industrial-scale farms in North America and Europe had
raised productivity to about 1 to 2 million kilogrammes of cereals per farmer. The small
farmers and landless peasants in the rest of the world struggled to grow 1,000 kilogrammes of
cereals per farmer. They were nowhere near as productive. The Doha decision, as
Samir Amin wrote , presages the annihilation of the small farmer and landless peasant. What
are these men and women to do? The production per hectare is higher in the West, but the
corporate take-over of agriculture (as Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research Senior
Fellow P. Sainath shows) leads to increased hunger as it pushes peasants off their land and
leaves them to starve.
Step Four: Culture of Plunder.
Emboldened by Western domination, monopoly firms act with disregard for the law. As
Kambale Musavuli and I write of the Democratic Republic of Congo, its annual budget of $6
billion is routinely robbed of at least $500 by monopoly mining firms, mostly from Canada
– the country now leading the charge against Venezuela. Mispricing and tax avoidance
schemes allow these large firms (Canada's Agrium, Barrick and Suncor) to routinely steal
billions of dollars from impoverished states.
Step Five: Debt as a Way of Life.
Unable to raise money from commodity sales, hemmed in by a broken world agricultural system
and victim of a culture of plunder, countries of the Global South have been forced to go hat in
hand to commercial lenders for finance. Over the past decade, debt held by the Global South
states has increased, while debt payments have ballooned by 60%. When commodity prices rose
between 2000 and 2010, debt in the Global South decreased. As commodity prices began to fall
from 2010, debts have risen.
The IMF points out that of the 67 impoverished countries that they
follow, 30 are in debt distress, a number that has doubled since 2013. More than 55.4% of
Angola's export revenue is paid to service its debt. And Angola, like Venezuela, is an oil
exporter. Other oil exporters such as Ghana, Chad, Gabon and Venezuela suffer high debt to GDP
ratios. Two out of five low-income countries are in deep financial distress.
Step Six:
Public Finances Go to Hell.
With little incoming revenue and low tax collection rates, public finances in the Global
South has gone into crisis. As the UN Conference on Trade and Development points out, 'public
finances have continued to be suffocated'. States simply cannot put together the funds needed
to maintain basic state functions. Balanced budget rules make borrowing difficult, which is
compounded by the fact that banks charge high rates for money, citing the risks of lending to
indebted countries.
Step Seven: Deep Cuts in Social Spending .
Impossible to raise funds, trapped by the fickleness of international finance, governments
are forced to make deep cuts in social spending. Education and health, food sovereignty and
economic diversification – all this goes by the wayside. International agencies such as
the IMF force countries to conduct 'reforms', a word that means extermination of independence.
Those countries that hold out face immense international pressure to submit under pain of
extinction, as the Communist Manifesto (1848) put it.
Step Eight: Social Distress Leads
to Migration.
The total number of migrants in the world is now at least 68.5 million. That makes the
country called Migration the 21st largest country in the world after Thailand and ahead of the
United Kingdom. Migration has become a global reaction to the collapse of countries from one
end of the planet to the other. The migration out of Venezuela is not unique to that country
but is now merely the normal reaction to the global crisis. Migrants from Honduras who go
northward to the United States or migrants from West Africa who go towards Europe through Libya
are part of this global exodus.
Step Nine: Who Controls the Narrative?
The monopoly corporate media takes its orders from the elite. There is no sympathy for the
structural crisis faced by governments from Afghanistan to Venezuela. Those leaders who cave to
Western pressure are given a free pass by the media. As long as they conduct 'reforms', they
are safe. Those countries that argue against the 'reforms' are vulnerable to being attacked.
Their leaders become 'dictators', their people hostages. A contested election in Bangladesh or
in the Democratic Republic of Congo or in the United States is not cause for regime change.
That special treatment is left for Venezuela.
Step Ten: Who's the Real President?
Regime change operations begin when the imperialists question the legitimacy of the
government in power: by putting the weight of the United States behind an unelected person,
calling him the new president and creating a situation where the elected leader's authority is
undermined. The coup takes place when a powerful country decides – without an election
– to anoint its own proxy. That person – in Venezuela's case Juan Guaidó
– rapidly has to make it clear that he will bend to the authority of the United States.
His kitchen cabinet – made up of former government officials with intimate ties to the US
(such as Harvard University's Ricardo Hausmann and Carnegie's Moisés Naím)
– will make it clear that they want to privatise everything and sell out the Venezuelan
people in the name of the Venezuelan people.
Step Eleven: Make the Economy Scream.
Venezuela has faced harsh US sanctions since 2014, when the US Congress started down this
road. The next year, US President Barack Obama declared Venezuela a 'threat to national
security'. The economy started to scream. In recent days, the United States and the United
Kingdom brazenly stole billions of dollars of Venezuelan money, placed the shackles of
sanctions on its only revenue generating sector (oil) and watched the pain flood through the
country.
This is what the US did to Iran and this is what they did to Cuba. The UN says that
the US sanctions on Cuba have cost the small island $130 billion. Venezuela lost $6 billion for
the first year of Trump's sanctions, since they began in August 2017. More is to be lost as the
days unfold. No wonder that the United Nations Special Rapporteur Idriss Jazairy says that
'sanctions which can lead to starvation and medical shortages are not the answer to the crisis
in Venezuela'. He said that sanctions are 'not a foundation for the peaceful settlement of
disputes'. Further, Jazairy said, 'I am especially concerned to hear reports that these
sanctions are aimed at changing the government of Venezuela'. He called for 'compassion' for
the people of Venezuela.
Step Twelve: Go to War.
US National Security Advisor John Bolton held a yellow pad with the words 5,000 troops in
Colombia written on it. These are US troops, already deployed in Venezuela's neighbour. The US
Southern Command is ready. They are egging on Colombia and Brazil to do their bit. As the coup
climate is created, a nudge will be necessary. They will go to war.
None of this is inevitable. It was not inevitable to Titina Silá, a commander of the
Partido Africano para a Independència da Guiné e Cabo Verde (PAIGC) who was
murdered on 30 January 1973. She fought to free her country. It is not inevitable to the people
of Venezuela, who continue to fight to defend their revolution. It is not inevitable to our
friends at CodePink: Women for Peace, whose Medea Benjamin walked into a meeting of the
Organisation of American States and said – No!
The country is in deep economic crisis with rampant inflation and high unemployment rate. As such it is an easy target for color
revolutions...
Venezuela has around 32 Million population. unemployment is around total: 14.6% (2015 est.) Growth rate is negative -14% (2017 est.)
-16.5% (2016 est.). -6.2% (2015 est.) . Inflation rate is 254.4% (2016 est.) Exchange rate is 3,345 bolivars per dollar (2017 est.).
University professor salary is around US$ 27,449. The cost of living is three times lower then in the USA.
Venezuela was one of three countries that emerged from the collapse of Gran Colombia in 1830 (the others being Ecuador and New
Granada, which became Colombia). For most of the first half of the 20th century, Venezuela was ruled by generally benevolent military
strongmen who promoted the oil industry and allowed for some social reforms. Democratically elected governments have held sway since
1959. Under Hugo CHAVEZ, president from 1999 to 2013, and his hand-picked successor, President Nicolas MADURO, the executive branch
has exercised increasingly authoritarian control over other branches of government. In 2016, President MADURO issued a decree to
hold an election to form a "Constituent Assembly." A 30 July 2017 poll approved the formation of a 545-member Constituent Assembly
and elected its delegates, empowering them to change the constitution and dismiss government institutions and officials. The US Government
does not recognize the Assembly, which has generally used its powers to rule by decree rather than to reform the constitution. Simultaneously,
democratic institutions continue to deteriorate, freedoms of expression and the press are curtailed, and political polarization has
grown. The ruling party's economic policies have expanded the state's role in the economy through expropriations of major enterprises,
strict currency exchange and price controls that discourage private sector investment and production, and overdependence on the petroleum
industry for revenues, among others. Current concerns include human rights abuses, rampant violent crime, high inflation, and widespread
shortages of basic consumer goods, medicine, and medical supplies.
Location
: Northern South America, bordering the Caribbean Sea and the North Atlantic Ocean, between Colombia and Guyana
Geographic coordinates
more
territorial sea: 12 nm exclusive economic zone: 200 nm contiguous zone: 15 nm continental shelf: 200-m depth or to the depth
of exploitation Climate
: tropical; hot, humid; more moderate in highlands
Terrain.
Andes Mountains and Maracaibo Lowlands in northwest; central plains (llanos); Guiana Highlands in southeast
Elevation: 450 m elevation extremes: 0 m lowest point: Caribbean Sea 4978 highest point: Pico Bolivar
Natural resources
: This entry lists a country's mineral, petroleum, hydropower, and other resources of commercial importance, such as rare earth
elements (REEs). In general, products appear only if they make a significant contribution to the economy, or are likely to do so
in the future. petroleum, natural gas, iron ore, gold, bauxite, other minerals, hydropower, diamonds
Land use
: This
entry contains the percentage shares of total land area for three different types of land use: agricultural land, forest, and other;
agricultural land is further divided into arable land - land cultivated for crops like wheat, maize, and rice that are replanted
after each harvest, permanent crops - land cultivated for crops like citrus, coffee, and rubber that are not replanted after each
harvest, and includes land under flowering shrubs, fruit trees, nut trees, and vines, and permane . . .
more
Population distribution
: most of the population is concentrated in the northern and western highlands along an eastern spur at the northern end of the
Andes, an area that includes the capital of Caracas
Natural hazards
: This entry lists potential natural disasters. For countries where volcanic activity is common, a volcanism subfield highlights
historically active volcanoes.
subject to floods, rockslides, mudslides; periodic droughts
Environment - current
issues Acidification - the lowering of soil and water pH due to acid precipitation and deposition usually through
precipitation; this process disrupts ecosystem nutrient flows and may kill freshwater fish and plants dependent on more neutral or
alkaline conditions (see acid rain). Acid rain - characterized as containing harmful levels of sulfur dioxi . . .
more
sewage pollution of Lago de Valencia; oil and urban pollution of Lago de Maracaibo; deforestation; soil degradation; urban and
industrial pollution, especially along the Caribbean coast; threat to the rainforest ecosystem from irresponsible mining operations
Environment - international
agreements : This entry separates country participation in international environmental agreements into two levels - party to
and signed, but not ratified. Agreements are listed in alphabetical order by the abbreviated form of the full name.
party to: Antarctic Treaty, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Climate Change-Kyoto Protocol, Desertification, Endangered Species,
Hazardous Wastes, Marine Life Conservation, Ozone Layer Protection, Ship Pollution, Tropical Timber 83, Tropical Timber 94, Wetlands
signed, but not ratified: none of the selected agreements
Geography - note
: This entry includes miscellaneous geographic information of significance not included elsewhere.
note 1: the country lies on major sea and air routes linking North and South America
note 2: Venezuela has some of the most unique geology in the world; tepuis are massive table-top mountains of the western Guiana
Highlands that tend to be isolated and thus support unique endemic plant and animal species; their sheer cliffsides account for some
of the most spectacular waterfalls in the world including Angel Falls, the world's highest (979 m) that drops off Auyan Tepui
Birth rate
18.5 births/1,000 population (2018 est.) country comparison to the world:
Death rate
5.3 deaths/1,000 population (2018 est.) country comparison to the world:
187
Social investment in Venezuela during the CHAVEZ administration reduced poverty from nearly 50% in 1999 to about 27% in 2011,
increased school enrollment, substantially decreased infant and child mortality, and improved access to potable water and sanitation
through social investment. "Missions" dedicated to education, nutrition, healthcare, and sanitation were funded through petroleum
revenues. The sustainability of this progress remains questionable, however, as the continuation of these social programs depends
on the prosperity of Venezuela's oil industry. In the long-term, education and health care spending may increase economic growth
and reduce income inequality, but rising costs and the staffing of new health care jobs with foreigners are slowing development.
While CHAVEZ was in power, more than one million predominantly middle- and upper-class Venezuelans are estimated to have emigrated.
The brain drain is attributed to a repressive political system, lack of economic opportunities, steep inflation, a high crime rate,
and corruption. Thousands of oil engineers emigrated to Canada, Colombia, and the United States following CHAVEZ's firing of over
20,000 employees of the state-owned petroleum company during a 2002-03 oil strike. Additionally, thousands of Venezuelans of European
descent have taken up residence in their ancestral homelands. Nevertheless, Venezuela has attracted hundreds of thousands of immigrants
from South America and southern Europe because of its lenient migration policy and the availability of education and health care.
Venezuela also has been a fairly accommodating host to Colombian refugees, numbering about 170,000 as of year-end 2016. However,
since 2014, falling oil prices have driven a major economic crisis that has pushed Venezuelans from all walks of life to migrate
or to seek asylum abroad to escape severe shortages of food, water, and medicine; soaring inflation; unemployment; and violence.
As of October 2018,an estimate 3 million Venezuelans were refugees or migrants worldwide, with 2.4 million in Latin America and the
Caribbean (notably Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Panama, Chile, Guyana, the Dominican Republic, Aruba, and Curacao).
Asylum applications
increased significantly in the US and Brazil in 2016 and 2017. Several receiving countries are making efforts to increase immigration
restrictions and to deport illegal Venezuelan migrants - Ecuador and Peru in August 2018 began requiring valid passports for entry,
which are difficult to obtain for Venezuelans. Nevertheless, Venezuelans continue to migrate to avoid economic collapse at home.
Age structure
: This entry provides the distribution of the population according to age. Information is included by sex and age group as follows:
0-14 years (children), 15-24 years (early working age), 25-54 years (prime working age), 55-64 years (mature working age), 65 years
and over (elderly). The age structure of a population affects a nation's key socioeconomic issues. Countries with young populations
(high percentage under age 15) need to invest more in schools, while countries with older population . . .
more
urban population: 88.2% of total population (2018) rate of urbanization: 1.28% annual rate of change (2015-20 est.)
Major urban areas
- population : 2.935 million CARACAS (capital), 2.179 million Maracaibo, 1.734 million Valencia, 1.178 million Maracay, 1.189 million Barquisimeto
(2018) Sex ratio
: This entry includes the number of males for each female in five age groups - at birth, under 15 years, 15-64 years, 65 years
and over, and for the total population. Sex ratio at birth has recently emerged as an indicator of certain kinds of sex discrimination
in some countries. For instance, high sex ratios at birth in some Asian countries are now attributed to sex-selective abortion and
infanticide due to a strong preference for sons. This will affect future marriage patterns and fertilit . . .
more
Life expectancy
at birth Total population: 76.2 years (2018 est.) male: 73.2 years (2018 est.) female: 79.3 years (2018 est.) country comparison to the
world: 93
Total fertility
rate : 2.3 children born/woman (2018 est.) country comparison to the world:
87
Unemployment, youth
ages 15-24 : total: 14.6% (2015 est.) male: NA (2015 est.) female: NA (2015 est.) country comparison to the world:
92
Economy - overview
: Venezuela remains highly dependent on oil revenues, which account for almost all export earnings and nearly half of the government's
revenue, despite a continued decline in oil production in 2017. In the absence of official statistics, foreign experts estimate that
GDP contracted 12% in 2017, inflation exceeded 2000%, people faced widespread shortages of consumer goods and medicine, and the central
bank's international reserves dwindled. In late 2017, Venezuela also entered selective default on some of its sovereign and state
oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A., (PDVSA) bonds. Domestic production and industry continues to severely underperform and
the Venezuelan Government continues to rely on imports to meet its basic food and consumer goods needs.
Falling oil prices since 2014 have aggravated Venezuela's economic crisis. Insufficient access to dollars, price controls, and
rigid labor regulations have led some US and multinational firms to reduce or shut down their Venezuelan operations. Market uncertainty
and PDVSA's poor cash flow have slowed investment in the petroleum sector, resulting in a decline in oil production.
Under President Nicolas MADURO, the Venezuelan Government's response to the economic crisis has been to increase state control
over the economy and blame the private sector for shortages. MADURO has given authority for the production and distribution of basic
goods to the military and to local socialist party member committees. The Venezuelan Government has maintained strict currency controls
since 2003. The government has been unable to sustain its mechanisms for distributing dollars to the private sector, in part because
it needed to withhold some foreign exchange reserves to make its foreign bond payments. As a result of price and currency controls,
local industries have struggled to purchase production inputs necessary to maintain their operations or sell goods at a profit on
the local market. Expansionary monetary policies and currency controls have created opportunities for arbitrage and corruption and
fueled a rapid increase in black market activity.
GDP (purchasing
power parity) : $381.6 billion (2017 est.) $443.7 billion (2016 est.) $531.1 billion (2015 est.) note: data are in 2017 dollars country comparison
to the world: 47
GDP - real growth
rate : -14% (2017 est.) -16.5% (2016 est.) -6.2% (2015 est.) country comparison to the world:
222
GDP - per capita
(PPP) : This entry shows GDP on a purchasing power parity basis divided by population as of 1 July for the same year.
$12,500 (2017 est.) $14,400 (2016 est.) $17,300 (2015 est.) note: data are in 2017 dollars country comparison to the world:
126
Gross national saving
: 12.1% of GDP (2017 est.) 8.6% of GDP (2016 est.) 31.8% of GDP (2015 est.) country comparison to the world:
150
GDP - composition,
by end use : household consumption: 68.5% (2017 est.) government consumption: 19.6% (2017 est.) investment in fixed capital: 13.9% (2017 est.)
investment in inventories: 1.7% (2017 est.) exports of goods and services: 7% (2017 est.) imports of goods and services: -10.7% (2017
est.)
GDP - composition,
by sector of origin : agriculture: 4.7% (2017 est.) industry: 40.4% (2017 est.) services: 54.9% (2017 est.)
Agriculture - products
: This entry is an ordered listing of major crops and products starting with the most important.
corn, sorghum, sugarcane, rice, bananas, vegetables, coffee; beef, pork, milk, eggs; fish
Labor force
: 14.21 million (2017 est.) country comparison to the world:
40
Unemployment rate
: This entry contains the percent of the labor force that is without jobs. Substantial underemployment might be noted.
27.1% (2017 est.) 20.6% (2016 est.) country comparison to the world:
199
Central bank discount
rate : This entry provides the annualized interest rate a country's central bank charges commercial, depository banks for loans
to meet temporary shortages of funds.
29.5% (2015) country comparison to the world:
1 Commercial bank
prime lending rate : This entry provides a simple average of annualized interest rates commercial banks charge on new loans,
denominated in the national currency, to their most credit-worthy customers.
21.1% (31 December 2017 est.) 20.78% (31 December 2016 est.) country comparison to the world:
12 Stock of narrow
money : This entry, also known as "M1," comprises the total quantity of currency in circulation (notes and coins) plus demand
deposits denominated in the national currency held by nonbank financial institutions, state and local governments, nonfinancial public
enterprises, and the private sector of the economy, measured at a specific point in time. National currency units have been converted
to US dollars at the closing exchange rate for the date of the information. Because of exchange rate moveme . . .
more
$149.8 billion (31 December 2017 est.) $163.3 billion (31 December 2016 est.) country comparison to the world:
29 Stock of broad money
: This entry covers all of "Narrow money," plus the total quantity of time and savings deposits, credit union deposits, institutional
money market funds, short-term repurchase agreements between the central bank and commercial deposit banks, and other large liquid
assets held by nonbank financial institutions, state and local governments, nonfinancial public enterprises, and the private sector
of the economy. National currency units have been converted to US dollars at the closing exchange r . . .
more
Exports - partners
: US 34.8%, India 17.2%, China 16%, Netherlands Antilles 8.2%, Singapore 6.3%, Cuba 4.2% (2017)
Exports - commodities
: This entry provides a listing of the highest-valued exported products; it sometimes includes the percent of total dollar value.
petroleum and petroleum products, bauxite and aluminum, minerals, chemicals, agricultural products
Imports : This
entry provides the total US dollar amount of merchandise imports on a c.i.f. (cost, insurance, and freight) or f.o.b. (free on board)
basis. These figures are calculated on an exchange rate basis, i.e., not in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms.
$11 billion (2017 est.) $16.34 billion (2016 est.) country comparison to the world:
100 Imports - commodities
: This entry provides a listing of the highest-valued imported products; it sometimes includes the percent of total dollar value.
agricultural products, livestock, raw materials, machinery and equipment, transport equipment, construction materials, medical
equipment, petroleum products, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, iron and steel products
Imports - partners
: This entry provides a rank ordering of trading partners starting with the most important; it sometimes includes the percent
of total dollar value. US 24.8%, China 14.2%, Mexico 9.5% (2017)
"... There is a great deal of controversy about the true shape of the Venezuelan economy and whether Hugo Chavez' and Nicholas Maduro's reform and policies were crucial for the people of Venezuela or whether they were completely misguided and precipitated the current crises. Anybody and everybody seems to have very strong held views about this. But I don't simply because I lack the expertise to have any such opinions. So I decided to ask one of the most respected independent economists out there, Michael Hudson, for whom I have immense respect and whose analyses (including those he co-authored with Paul Craig Roberts ) seem to be the most credible and honest ones you can find. In fact, Paul Craig Roberts considers Hudson the " best economist in the world "! ..."
"... I am deeply grateful to Michael for his replies which, I hope, will contribute to a honest and objective understanding of what really is taking place in Venezuela. ..."
"... : Could you summarize the state of Venezuela's economy when Chavez came to power? ..."
"... : Could you outline the various reforms and changes introduced by Hugo Chavez? What did he do right, and what did he do wrong? ..."
"... : What are, in your opinion, the causes of the current economic crisis in Venezuela – is it primarily due to mistakes by Chavez and Maduro or is the main cause US sabotage, subversion and sanctions? ..."
"... : What in your opinion should Maduro do next (assuming he stays in power and the USA does not overthrow him) to rescue the Venezuelan economy? ..."
"... What about the plan to introduce a oil-based crypto currency? Will that be an effective alternative to the dying Venezuelan Bolivar? ..."
"... Trade, Develpoment and Foreign Debt ..."
"... : How much assistance do China, Russia and Iran provide and how much can they do to help? Do you think that these three countries together can help counter-act US sabotage, subversion and sanctions? ..."
"... : Venezuela kept a lot of its gold in the UK and money in the USA. How could Chavez and Maduro trust these countries or did they not have another choice? Are there viable alternatives to New York and London or are they still the "only game in town" for the world's central banks? ..."
"... Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire ..."
"... : What can other Latin American countries such as Bolivia, Nicaragua, Cuba and, maybe, Uruguay and Mexico do to help Venezuela? ..."
"... : Thank you very much for taking the time to reply to my questions! ..."
Introduction: There is a great deal of controversy about the true shape of the Venezuelan economy and whether Hugo Chavez'
and Nicholas Maduro's reform and policies were crucial for the people of Venezuela or whether they were completely misguided and
precipitated the current crises. Anybody and everybody seems to have very strong held views about this. But I don't simply because
I lack the expertise to have any such opinions. So I decided to ask one of the most respected independent economists out there,
Michael Hudson, for whom I have immense respect and whose analyses (including those he
co-authored with Paul Craig Roberts
) seem to be the most credible and honest ones you can find. In fact, Paul Craig Roberts considers Hudson the "
best economist in
the world "!
I am deeply grateful to Michael for his replies which, I hope, will contribute to a honest and objective understanding
of what really is taking place in Venezuela.
The Saker
The Saker : Could you summarize the state of Venezuela's economy when Chavez came to power?
Michael Hudson : Venezuela was an oil monoculture. Its export revenue was spent largely on importing food and other necessities
that it could have produced at home. Its trade was largely with the United States. So despite its oil wealth, it ran up foreign debt.
From the outset, U.S. oil companies have feared that Venezuela might someday use its oil revenues to benefit its overall population
instead of letting the U.S. oil industry and its local comprador aristocracy siphon off its wealth. So the oil industry – backed
by U.S. diplomacy – held Venezuela hostage in two ways.
First of all, oil refineries were not built in Venezuela, but in Trinidad and in the southern U.S. Gulf Coast states. This enabled
U.S. oil companies – or the U.S. Government – to leave Venezuela without a means of "going it alone" and pursuing an independent
policy with its oil, as it needed to have this oil refined. It doesn't help to have oil reserves if you are unable to get this oil
refined so as to be usable.
Second, Venezuela's central bankers were persuaded to pledge their oil reserves and all assets of the state oil sector (including
Citgo) as collateral for its foreign debt. This meant that if Venezuela defaulted (or was forced into default by U.S. banks refusing
to make timely payment on its foreign debt), bondholders and U.S. oil majors would be in a legal position to take possession of Venezuelan
oil assets.
These pro-U.S. policies made Venezuela a typically polarized Latin American oligarchy. Despite being nominally rich in oil revenue,
its wealth was concentrated in the hands of a pro-U.S. oligarchy that let its domestic development be steered by the World Bank and
IMF. The indigenous population, especially its rural racial minority as well as the urban underclass, was excluded from sharing in
the country's oil wealth. The oligarchy's arrogant refusal to share the wealth, or even to make Venezuela self-sufficient in essentials,
made the election of Hugo Chavez a natural outcome.
The Saker : Could you outline the various reforms and changes introduced by Hugo Chavez? What did he do right, and what did
he do wrong?
Michael Hudson : Chavez sought to restore a mixed economy to Venezuela, using its government revenue – mainly from oil, of course
– to develop infrastructure and domestic spending on health care, education, employment to raise living standards and productivity
for his electoral constituency.
What he was unable to do was to clean up the embezzlement and built-in rake-off of income from the oil sector. And he was unable
to stem the capital flight of the oligarchy, taking its wealth and moving it abroad – while running away themselves.
This was not "wrong". It merely takes a long time to change an economy's disruption – while the U.S. is using sanctions and "dirty
tricks" to stop that process.
The Saker : What are, in your opinion, the causes of the current economic crisis in Venezuela – is it primarily due to mistakes
by Chavez and Maduro or is the main cause US sabotage, subversion and sanctions?
Michael Hudson : There is no way that Chavez and Maduro could have pursued a pro-Venezuelan policy aimed at achieving economic
independence without inciting fury, subversion and sanctions from the United States. American foreign policy remains as focused on
oil as it was when it invaded Iraq under Dick Cheney's regime. U.S. policy is to treat Venezuela as an extension of the U.S. economy,
running a trade surplus in oil to spend in the United States or transfer its savings to U.S. banks.
By imposing sanctions that prevent Venezuela from gaining access to its U.S. bank deposits and the assets of its state-owned Citco,
the United States is making it impossible for Venezuela to pay its foreign debt. This is forcing it into default, which U.S. diplomats
hope to use as an excuse to foreclose on Venezuela's oil resources and seize its foreign assets much as Paul Singer hedge fund sought
to do with Argentina's foreign assets.
Just as U.S. policy under Kissinger was to make Chile's "economy scream," so the U.S. is following the same path against Venezuela.
It is using that country as a "demonstration effect" to warn other countries not to act in their self-interest in any way that prevents
their economic surplus from being siphoned off by U.S. investors.
The Saker : What in your opinion should Maduro do next (assuming he stays in power and the USA does not overthrow him) to
rescue the Venezuelan economy?
Michael Hudson : I cannot think of anything that President Maduro can do that he is not doing. At best, he can seek foreign support
– and demonstrate to the world the need for an alternative international financial and economic system.
ORDER IT NOW
He already has begun to do this by trying to withdraw Venezuela's gold from the Bank of England and Federal Reserve. This is turning
into "asymmetrical warfare," threatening to de-sanctify the dollar standard in international finance. The refusal of England and
the United States to grant an elected government control of its foreign assets demonstrates to the entire world that U.S. diplomats
and courts alone can and will control foreign countries as an extension of U.S. nationalism.
The price of the U.S. economic attack on Venezuela is thus to fracture the global monetary system. Maduro's defensive move is
showing other countries the need to protect themselves from becoming "another Venezuela" by finding a new safe haven and paying agent
for their gold, foreign exchange reserves and foreign debt financing, away from the dollar, sterling and euro areas.
The only way that Maduro can fight successfully is on the institutional level, upping the ante to move "outside the box." His
plan – and of course it is a longer-term plan – is to help catalyze a new international economic order independent of the U.S. dollar
standard. It will work in the short run only if the United States believes that it can emerge from this fight as an honest financial
broker, honest banking system and supporter of democratically elected regimes. The Trump administration is destroying illusion more
thoroughly than any anti-imperialist critic or economic rival could do!
Over the longer run, Maduro also must develop Venezuelan agriculture, along much the same lines that the United States protected
and developed its agriculture under the New Deal legislation of the 1930s – rural extension services, rural credit, seed advice,
state marketing organizations for crop purchase and supply of mechanization, and the same kind of price supports that the United
States has long used to subsidize domestic farm investment to increase productivity.
The Saker: What about the plan to introduce a oil-based crypto currency? Will that be an effective alternative to the dying
Venezuelan Bolivar?
Michael Hudson : Only a national government can issue a currency. A "crypto" currency tied to the price of oil would become a
hedging vehicle, prone to manipulation and price swings by forward sellers and buyers. A national currency must be based on the ability
to tax, and Venezuela's main tax source is oil revenue, which is being blocked from the United States. So Venezuela's position is
like that of the German mark coming out of its hyperinflation of the early 1920s. The only solution involves balance-of-payments
support. It looks like the only such support will come from outside the dollar sphere.
The solution to any hyperinflation must be negotiated diplomatically and be supported by other governments. My history of international
trade and financial theory, Trade, Develpoment and Foreign Debt , describes the German reparations problem and how its hyperinflation
was solved by the Rentenmark.
Venezuela's economic-rent tax would fall on oil, and luxury real estate sites, as well as monopoly prices, and on high incomes
(mainly financial and monopoly income). This requires a logic to frame such tax and monetary policy. I have tried to explain how
to achieve monetary and hence political independence for the past half-century. China is applying such policy most effectively. It
is able to do so because it is a large and self-sufficient economy in essentials, running a large enough export surplus to pay for
its food imports. Venezuela is in no such position. That is why it is looking to China for support at this time.
The Saker : How much assistance do China, Russia and Iran provide and how much can they do to help? Do you think that these
three countries together can help counter-act US sabotage, subversion and sanctions?
Michael Hudson : None of these countries have a current capacity to refine Venezuelan oil. This makes it difficult for them to
take payment in Venezuelan oil. Only a long-term supply contract (paid for in advance) would be workable. And even in that case,
what would China and Russia do if the United States simply grabbed their property in Venezuela, or refused to let Russia's oil company
take possession of Citco? In that case, the only response would be to seize U.S. investments in their own country as compensation.
At least China and Russia can provide an alternative bank clearing mechanism to SWIFT, so that Venezuela can by pass the U.S.
financial system and keep its assets from being grabbed at will by U.S. authorities or bondholders. And of course, they can provide
safe-keeping for however much of Venezuela's gold it can get back from New York and London.
Looking ahead, therefore, China, Russia, Iran and other countries need to set up a new international court to adjudicate the coming
diplomatic crisis and its financial and military consequences. Such a court – and its associated international bank as an alternative
to the U.S.-controlled IMF and World Bank – needs a clear ideology to frame a set of principles of nationhood and international rights
with power to implement and enforce its judgments.
This would confront U.S. financial strategists with a choice: if they continue to treat the IMF, World Bank, ITO and NATO as extensions
of increasingly aggressive U.S. foreign policy, they will risk isolating the United States. Europe will have to choose whether to
remain a U.S. economic and military satellite, or to throw in its lot with Eurasia.
However, Daniel Yergin reports in the Wall Street Journal (Feb. 7) that China is trying to hedge its bets by opening a back-door
negotiation with Guaido's group, apparently to get the same deal that it has negotiated with Maduro's government. But any such deal
seems unlikely to be honored in practice, given U.S. animosity toward China and Guaido's total reliance on U.S. covert support.
The Saker : Venezuela kept a lot of its gold in the UK and money in the USA. How could Chavez and Maduro trust these countries
or did they not have another choice? Are there viable alternatives to New York and London or are they still the "only game in town"
for the world's central banks?
Michael Hudson : There was never real trust in the Bank of England or Federal Reserve, but it seemed unthinkable that they would
refuse to permit an official depositor from withdrawing its own gold. The usual motto is "Trust but verify." But the unwillingness
(or inability) of the Bank of England to verify means that the formerly unthinkable has now arrived: Have these central banks sold
this gold forward in the post-London Gold Pool and its successor commodity markets in their attempt to keep down the price so as
to maintain the appearance of a solvent U.S. dollar standard.
Paul Craig Roberts has described how this system works. There are forward markets for currencies, stocks and bonds. The Federal
Reserve can offer to buy a stock in three months at, say, 10% over the current price. Speculators will by the stock, bidding up the
price, so as to take advantage of "the market's" promise to buy the stock. So by the time three months have passed, the price will
have risen. That is largely how the U.S. "Plunge Protection Team" has supported the U.S. stock market.
The system works in reverse to hold down gold prices. The central banks holding gold can get together and offer to sell gold at
a low price in three months. "The market" will realize that with low-priced gold being sold, there's no point in buying
more gold and bidding its price up. So the forward-settlement market shapes today's market.
The question is, have gold buyers (such as the Russian and Chinese government) bought so much gold that the U.S. Fed and the Bank
of England have actually had to "make good" on their forward sales, and steadily depleted their gold? In this case, they would have
been "living for the moment," keeping down gold prices for as long as they could, knowing that once the world returns to the pre-1971
gold-exchange standard for intergovernmental balance-of-payments deficits, the U.S. will run out of gold and be unable to maintain
its overseas military spending (not to mention its trade deficit and foreign disinvestment in the U.S. stock and bond markets). My
book on Super-Imperialism explains why running out of gold forced the Vietnam War to an end. The same logic would apply today to
America's vast network of military bases throughout the world.
Refusal of England and the U.S. to pay Venezuela means that other countries realize that foreign official gold reserves can be
held hostage to U.S. foreign policy, and even to judgments by U.S. courts to award this gold to foreign creditors or to whoever might
bring a lawsuit under U.S. law against these countries.
This hostage-taking now makes it urgent for other countries to develop a viable alternative, especially as the world de-dedollarizes
and a gold-exchange standard remains the only way of constraining the military-induced balance of payments deficit of the United
States or any other country mounting a military attack. A military empire is very expensive – and gold is a "peaceful" constraint
on military-induced payments deficits. (I spell out the details in my Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire
(1972), updated in German as Finanzimperium (2017).
The U.S. has overplayed its hand in destroying the foundation of the dollar-centered global financial order. That order has enabled
the United States to be "the exceptional nation" able to run balance-of-payments deficits and foreign debt that it has no intention
(or ability) to pay, claiming that the dollars thrown off by its foreign military spending "supply" other countries with their central
bank reserves (held in the form of loans to the U.S. Treasury – Treasury bonds and bills – to finance the U.S. budget deficit and
its military spending, as well as the largely military U.S. balance-of-payments deficit.
Given the fact that the EU is acting as a branch of NATO and the U.S. banking system, that alternative would have to be associated
with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and the gold would have to be kept in Russia and/or China.
The Saker : What can other Latin American countries such as Bolivia, Nicaragua, Cuba and, maybe, Uruguay and Mexico do to
help Venezuela?
Michael Hudson : The best thing neighboring Latin American countries can do is to join in creating a vehicle to promote de-dollarization
and, with it, an international institution to oversee the writedown of debts that are beyond the ability of countries to pay without
imposing austerity and thereby destroying their economies.
An alternative also is needed to the World Bank that would make loans in domestic currency, above all to subsidize investment
in domestic food production so as to protect the economy against foreign food-sanctions – the equivalent of a military siege to force
surrender by imposing famine conditions. This World Bank for Economic Acceleration would put the development of self-reliance for
its members first, instead of promoting export competition while loading borrowers down with foreign debt that would make them prone
to the kind of financial blackmail that Venezuela is experiencing.
Being a Roman Catholic country, Venezuela might ask for papal support for a debt write-down and an international institution to
oversee the ability to pay by debtor countries without imposing austerity, emigration, depopulation and forced privatization of the
public domain.
Two international principles are needed. First, no country should be obliged to pay foreign debt in a currency (such as the dollar
or its satellites) whose banking system acts to prevents payment.
Second, no country should be obliged to pay foreign debt at the price of losing its domestic autonomy as a state: the right to
determine its own foreign policy, to tax and to create its own money, and to be free of having to privatize its public assets to
pay foreign creditors. Any such debt is a "bad loan" reflecting the creditor's own irresponsibility or, even worse, pernicious asset
grab in a foreclosure that was the whole point of the loan.
The Saker : Thank you very much for taking the time to reply to my questions!
As the US strives to overthrow the democratic and independent Venezuelan government, the
historical record regarding the short, middle and long-term consequences are mixed.
We will proceed to examine the consequences and impact of US intervention in Venezuela over
the past half century.
We will then turn to examine the success and failure of US 'regime changes' throughout Latin
America and the Caribbean.
Venezuela: Results and Perspectives 1950-2019
During the post WWII decade, the US, working through the CIA and the Pentagon, brought to
power authoritarian client regimes in Venezuela, Cuba, Peru, Chile, Guatemala, Brazil and
several other countries.
In the case of Venezuela, the US backed a near decade long military dictatorship (Perez
Jimenez ) roughly between 1951-58. The dictatorship was overthrown in 1958 and replaced by a
left-center coalition during a brief interim period. Subsequently, the US reshuffled its
policy, and embraced and promoted center-right regimes led by social and christian democrats
which alternated rule for nearly forty years.
In the 1990's US client regimes riddled with corruption and facing a deepening
socio-economic crises were voted out of power and replaced by the independent, anti-imperialist
government led by President Chavez.
The free and democratic election of President Chavez withstood and defeated several US led
'regime changes' over the following two decades.
Following the election of President Maduro, under US direction,Washington mounted the
political machinery for a new regime change. Washington launched, in full throttle, a coup by
the winter of 2019.
The record of US intervention in Venezuela is mixed: a middle term military coup lasted less
than a decade; US directed electoral regimes were in power for forty years; its replacement by
an elected anti-imperialist populist government has been in power for nearly 20 years. A
virulent US directed coup is underfoot today.
The Venezuela experience with 'regime change' speaks to US capacity to consummate long-term
control if it can reshuffle its power base from a military dictatorship into an electoral
regime, financed through the pillage of oil, backed by a reliable military and 'legitimated' by
alternating client political parties which accept submission to Washington.
US client regimes are ruled by oligarchic elites, with little entrepreneurial capacity,
living off of state rents (oil revenues).
Tied closely to the US, the ruling elites are unable to secure popular loyalty. Client
regimes depend on the military strength of the Pentagon -- but that is also their weakness.
Regime Change in Regional-Historical Perspective
Puppet-building is an essential strategic goal of the US imperial state.
The results vary over time depending on the capacity of independent governments to succeed
in nation-building.
US long-term puppet-building has been most successful in small nations with vulnerable
economies.
The US directed coup in Guatemala has lasted over sixty-years – from 1954 -2019. Major
popular indigenous insurgencies have been repressed via US military advisers and aid.
Similar successful US puppet-building has occurred in Panama, Grenada, Dominican Republic
and Haiti. Being small and poor and having weak military forces, the US is willing to directly
invade and occupy the countries quickly and at small cost in military lives and economic
costs.
In the above countries Washington succeeded in imposing and maintaining puppet regimes for
prolonged periods of time.
The US has directed military coups over the past half century with contradictory
results.
In the case of Honduras, the Pentagon was able to overturn a progressive liberal democratic
government of very short duration. The Honduran army was under US direction, and elected
President Manual Zelaya depended on an unarmed electoral popular majority. Following the
successful coup the Honduran puppet-regime remained under US rule for the next decade and
likely beyond.
Chile has been under US tutelage for the better part of the 20th century with a brief
respite during a Popular Front government between 1937-41 and a democratic socialist government
between 1970-73. The US military directed coup in 1973 imposed the Pinochet dictatorship which
lasted for seventeen years. It was followed by an electoral regime which continued the
Pinochet-US neo-liberal agenda, including the reversal of all the popular national and social
reforms. In a word, Chile remained within the US political orbit for the better part of a
half-century.
Chile's democratic-socialist regime (1970-73) never armed its people nor established
overseas economic linkage to sustain an independent foreign policy.
It is not surprising that in recent times Chile followed US commands calling for the
overthrow of Venezuela's President Maduro.
Contradictory Puppet-Building
Several US coups were reversed, for the longer or shorter duration.
The classical case of a successful defeat of a client regime is Cuba which overthrew a
ten-year old US client, the Batista dictatorship, and proceeded to successfully resist a CIA
directed invasion and economic blockade for the better part of a half century (up to the
present day).
Cuba's defeat of puppet restorationist policy was a result of the Castro leadership's
decision to arm the people, expropriate and take control of hostile US and multinational
corporations and establish strategic overseas allies – USSR , China and more recently
Venezuela.
In contrast, a US military backed military coup in Brazil (1964) endured for over two
decades, before electoral politics were partially restored under elite leadership.
Twenty years of failed neo-liberal economic policies led to the election of the social
reformist Workers Party (WP) which proceeded to implement extensive anti-poverty programs
within the context of neo-liberal policies.
After a decade and a half of social reforms and a relatively independent foreign policy, the
WP succumbed to a downturn of the commodity dependent economy and a hostile state (namely
judiciary and military) and was replaced by a pair of far-right US client regimes which
functioned under Wall Street and Pentagon direction.
The US frequently intervened in Bolivia, backing military coups and client regimes against
short-term national populist regimes (1954, 1970 and 2001).
In 2005 a popular uprising led to free elections and the election of Evo Morales, the leader
of the coca farmers movements. Between 2005 – 2019 (the present period) President Morales
led a moderate left-of-center anti imperialist government.
ORDER IT NOW
Unsuccessful efforts by the US to overthrow the Morales government were a result of several
factors: Morales organized and mobilized a coalition of peasants and workers (especially miners
and coca farmers). He secured the loyalty of the military, expelled US Trojan Horse "aid
agencies' and extended control over oil and gas and promoted ties with agro business.
The combination of an independent foreign policy, a mixed economy , high growth and moderate
reforms neutralized US puppet-building.
Not so the case in Argentina. Following a bloody coup (1976) in which the US backed military
murdered 30,000 citizens, the military was defeated by the British army in the Malvinas war and
withdrew after seven years in power.
The post military puppet regime ruled and plundered for a decade before collapsing in 2001.
They were overthrown by a popular insurrection. However, the radical left lacking cohesion was
replaced by center-left (Kirchner-Fernandez) regimes which ruled for the better part of a
decade (2003 – 15).
The progressive social welfare – neo-liberal regimes entered in crises and were ousted
by a US backed puppet regime (Macri) in 2015 which proceeded to reverse reforms, privatize the
economy and subordinate the state to US bankers and speculators.
After two years in power, the puppet regime faltered, the economy spiraled downward and
another cycle of repression and mass protest emerged. The US puppet regime's rule is tenuous,
the populace fills the streets, while the Pentagon sharpens its knives and prepares puppets to
replace their current client regime.
Conclusion
The US has not succeeded in consolidating regime changes among the large countries with mass
organizations and military supporters.
Washington has succeeded in overthrowing popular – national regimes in Brazil, and
Argentina . However, over time puppet regimes have been reversed.
While the US resorts to largely a single 'track' (military coups and invasions)in
overwhelming smaller and more vulnerable popular governments, it relies on 'multiple tracks'
strategy with regard to large and more formidable countries.
In the former cases, usually a call to the military or the dispatch of the marines is enough
to snuff an electoral democracy.
In the latter case, the US relies on a multi-proxy strategy which includes a mass media
blitz, labeling democrats as dictatorships, extremists, corrupt, security threats, etc.
As the tension mounts, regional client and European states are organized to back the local
puppets.
Phony "Presidents" are crowned by the US President whose index finger counters the vote of
millions of voters. Street demonstrations and violence paid and organized by the CIA
destabilize the economy; business elites boycott and paralyze production and distribution
Millions are spent in bribing judges and military officials.
If the regime change can be accomplished by local military satraps, the US refrains from
direct military intervention.
Regime changes among larger and wealthier countries have between one or two decades
duration. However, the switch to an electoral puppet regime may consolidate imperial power over
a longer period – as was the case of Chile.
Where there is powerful popular support for a democratic regime, the US will provide the
ideological and military support for a large-scale massacre, as was the case in Argentina.
The coming showdown in Venezuela will be a case of a bloody regime change as the US will
have to murder hundreds of thousands to destroy the millions who have life-long and deep
commitments to their social gains , their loyalty to the nation and their dignity.
In contrast the bourgeoisie, and their followers among political traitors, will seek revenge
and resort to the vilest forms of violence in order to strip the poor of their social advances
and their memories of freedom and dignity.
It is no wonder that the Venezuela masses are girding for a prolonged and decisive struggle:
everything can be won or lost in this final confrontation with the Empire and its puppets.
Did you know this information? January 18, 2019 The US Has Military Forces in Over 160
Countries, but the Pentagon Is Hiding the Exact Numbers
The US has 95% of the world's foreign military bases, with personnel in more than 160
countries. But the Pentagon is leaving hundreds of outposts out of its official reports.
The U.S. and its allies have decided to throw their weight behind yet another coup attempt
in Venezuela. As usual, they claim that their objectives are democracy and freedom. Nothing
could be farther from the truth...
On January 23rd, 2019 Venezuela's opposition leader Juan Guaidó declared himself
acting president, and called on the armed forces to disobey the government. Very few had ever
heard of this man -- he had never actually run for president. Guaidó is the head of
Venezuela's national assembly; a position very similar to speaker of the house.
Within minutes of this declaration U.S. president Donald Trump took to twitter and
recognized Guaidó as interim president of Venezuela; writing off the administration of
Nicolas Maduro as "illegitimate". U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo followed by urging
Venezuela's military to "restore democracy", affirming that the US would back Mr Guaidó
in his attempts to establish a government. They also promised
20 million dollars in "humanitarian" aid . To put this into context, Trump is on record
saying he was " Not
Going to Rule Out a Military Option " in Venezuela.
This is roughly the equivalent of Nancy Pelosi or Mitch Mcconnell declaring themselves
president, calling on the military to overthrow Trump, and having China pledge to fund and
assist the effort.
Now if you happen to be in the camp that wouldn't actually mind seeing Donald Trump forcibly
removed from office, I would encourage you to imagine replacing Trump's name with Obama, Bush,
Merkel or Macron.
You know there have been a lot of protests in France, and the Yellow Vests have demanded
that Macron step down Why don't we restore democracy in Paris?
Let's get this straight. Trump is an illegitimate president and should be removed from
office (because of Russian interference), but you're perfectly comfortable with that same
illegitimate president toppling foreign governments via twitter?
Though support for Guaidó was quickly parroted by Washington's most dependable
allies, and lauded by virtually every western media outlet, the Venezuelan military responded
by condemning the coup, and reconfirmed
their loyalty to Maduro .
That same day Pompeo announced that Elliott Abrams -- the man who oversaw regime change wars
in Nicaragua and El Salvador , was
deeply involved in the Iran Contra scandal, and who was an architect of both the Iraq war and
the 2002 coup attempt in Venezuela (which culminated in the kidnapping of Maduro's predecessor
Hugo Chavez) -- would be in charge of the effort to "restore democracy and prosperity to their
country".
So why do you suppose Washington really wants regime change in Venezuela? You'd have to be
pretty naive to buy the "democracy and prosperity" drivel.
They talk about how the Venezuelan economy is in shambles, but by their own admission (
and according to the U.N. ) U.S. sanctions have played a significant role in creating that
situation.
"With respect to Libya I'm interested in Libya if we take the oil. If we don't take the
oil no interest. We have to have Look, if we have wars, we have to win the war. What we do is
take over the country and hand the keys to people who don't like us. I'll tell you what Iraq,
100% Iran takes over Iraq after we leave, and what really happens with Iraq is they want the
oil fields. And I have it on very good authority that Iran probably won't even be shooting a
bullet because they are getting along better with the Iraqi leaders better than we are. After
all of those lives, and after all of the money we spent. And if that's going to happen we
take the oil."
Maduro's predecessor Hugo Chavez nationalized the oil industry and used the proceeds to fund
his socialist vision for the country. Now you could make the case that this vision was flawed,
and horribly mismanaged, however he had strong public support for this mandate; so much support
in fact, that when U.S. backed coup plotters kidnapped Hugo Chavez in 2002 crowds took to the
streets en mass and he was quickly reinstated.
Which brings us back to Juan Guaidó. There's not much information available on Mr.
Guaidó, but if you look up the man who tapped him to lead the opposition party Voluntad
Popular you'll find Washington's fingerprints all over the place. Leopoldo Lopez, the founder
of Voluntad Popular,
orchestrated the protests in 2002 that led up to the kidnapping of Hugo Chavez .
Compared to who? Which paragon of good governance will we refer to as the model? Trump?
Theresa May? Angel Merkel? Macron? Take your time.
This isn't democracy, it's a neo-colonial power grab. Juan Guaidó never ran for the
office he claimed, and the fact that he directly colluded with a foreign nation to overthrow
the man who was elected president marks him as a traitor.
Juan Guaidó is a puppet. If installed, he will serve the interests who bought his
ticket. Venezuela's oil industry will be privatized, and the profits will be sucked out of the
country by western corporations.
What's happening in Venezuela right now is a replay of the 1973 U.S. backed coup in Chile,
where the democratically elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende, was overthrown, and
replaced with the military dictatorship of Pinochet. Pinochet murdered over 3000 political
opponents during his rule, and tortured over 30,000, but he was friendly to American business
interests so Washington looked the other way.
One could make the case that Maduro is incompetent. One could make the case that his
economic theories are trash. (The same can be said for the haircuts in suits calling for his
removal.) But the reality of the matter is that unless you happen to be a Venezuelan citizen,
how Venezuela is governed is actually none of your business.
Given how things turned out in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine you'd think
people would get the hint. When it comes to spreading democracy, you suck. U.S. regime change
operations have left nothing but chaos, death and destruction in their wake. If you want to
make the world a better place, maybe, just maybe, you should start at home.
Venezuelan officials have announced the seizure of a large shipment of American weapons
which they say were bound for anti-Maduro "terrorist groups" . This comes following US national
security advisor John Bolton's pledge to deliver "humanitarian aid" into the country, covertly
if need be, despite embattled President Nicolas Maduro's vow to prevent such unauthorized
shipments from entering.
Sanctions without an approval by UN are criminal and represent a war crime.
Notable quotes:
"... Russia shows no signs of abandoning its increasingly beleaguered and isolated ally. Mr. Putin has called Mr. Maduro to relay his support for the regime, and Russian officials reacted angrily to President Trump's suggestion Sunday that U.S. military action was an option to resolve the crisis. ..."
"... "The international community's goal should be to help [ Venezuela ], without destructive meddling from beyond its borders," Alexander Shchetinin, head of the Russian Foreign Ministry's Latin American department, told the Interfax news agency Monday. ..."
"... Russia has repeatedly opposed U.S. suggestions of foreign intervention to install opposition leader Juan Guaido as Venezuela 's interim president, and supported Mr. Maduro 's calls for mediation on the crisis. ..."
"... But with Mr. Maduro defying calls to step down, the Russian mission may be more extensive than reported, said John Marulanda, a U.S.-trained intelligence officer and adviser to conservative Colombian President Ivan Duque, an opponent of Mr. Maduro . Mr. Marulanda said the recent Russian arrivals are special forces -- Spetsnaz -- who are being embedded among Venezuela 's elite military units to better resist any U.S. intervention or internal coup against Mr. Maduro . ..."
Under anti-U.S. populist leader Hugo Chavez, Mr. Maduro 's late predecessor and
political mentor, Russia became one of Venezuela 's strongest allies with
economic ties including crude oil, loans and arms sales. That helps explain why Moscow has emerged as one of Mr. Maduro 's most
vocal defenders and one of the biggest critics of the pressure campaign waged by Washington and a number of
countries in Latin America.
The pressure grew Monday as France, Germany, Britain and 13 other European countries
announced that they were withdrawing their recognition of Mr. Maduro and called for new
national elections as soon as possible. The EU powers held off in joining the U.S. pressure
campaign to see whether Venezuela would agree to new
elections. "We are working for the return of full democracy in Venezuela : human rights, elections and
no more political prisoners," Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez told reporters in Madrid on
Monday.
But Russia shows
no signs of abandoning its increasingly beleaguered and isolated ally. Mr. Putin has called Mr. Maduro to relay his support for
the regime, and Russian officials reacted angrily to President Trump's suggestion Sunday that
U.S. military action was an option to resolve the crisis.
"The international community's goal should be to help [ Venezuela ], without destructive meddling
from beyond its borders," Alexander Shchetinin, head of the Russian Foreign Ministry's Latin
American department, told the Interfax news agency Monday.
Russia has
repeatedly opposed U.S. suggestions of foreign intervention to install opposition leader Juan
Guaido as Venezuela 's interim president, and
supported Mr.
Maduro 's calls for mediation on the crisis.
The arrival of 400 Russian military contractors after Mr. Trump's Jan. 23 recognition of Mr.
Guaido, the head of the National Assembly, triggered speculation that Moscow was reinforcing Mr. Maduro 's personal security
or even preparing his evacuation.
But with Mr.
Maduro defying calls to step down, the Russian mission may be more extensive than reported,
said John Marulanda, a U.S.-trained intelligence officer and adviser to conservative Colombian
President Ivan Duque, an opponent of Mr. Maduro . Mr. Marulanda said the
recent Russian arrivals are special forces -- Spetsnaz -- who are being embedded among
Venezuela 's
elite military units to better resist any U.S. intervention or internal coup against Mr. Maduro .
The strong support for Venezuela has another motive for
Moscow , analysts
say: to increase the diplomatic, economic and military cost of any campaign by Washington to oust
Mr. Maduro
.
Joseph Humire, a lecturer for the U.S. Army's 7th Special Forces Group, said in an interview
that Russia wants to
"draw the U.S. into a quagmire," which Mr. Maduro has warned that would be
"worse than Vietnam."
Venezuelan Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino recently announced that he was inviting Russian
combat pilots who fought in Syria's civil war to "share their experience" with Venezuela's air
force. Playing the long game
Mr. Marulanda said Moscow is playing a long-term game aimed at
pressuring the U.S. along its southern borders to counter NATO moves along Russia 's border with the Baltic states
and Ukraine. Recent visits to Venezuela by nuclear-capable Tupolev 106
strategic bombers represented a clear show of force and support.
" Russia wants to
at least have a 'symbolic involvement' in Latin America as payback for U.S. intervention in the
[Russian] 'Near Abroad,'" Vladimir Rouvinski, a foreign policy analyst at Icesi University in
Colombia, recently told the Al Jazeera news website.
Then there's the money aspect.
Venezuela ,
with the world's largest proven oil reserves helping fill government coffers, is Russia 's second-biggest arms
client after India, the Pentagon said. U.S. analysts calculate that Caracas has purchased more
than $11 billion in Russian hardware over the past decade.
Acquisitions include high-performance Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets equipped with cruise-type
BrahMos missiles; Mi-35m attack helicopters; surface-to-air SS-200 and Pechorev missile
batteries; T-72 tanks; and production plants for AK-103 rifles.
Russia is also
building a cyberwarfare base on the island of Orchila off Venezuela 's northern coast operated by
Cuban technicians. Through military leverage, Russia has gained major oil concessions in
mainly offshore drilling blocs between Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago.
Russia is interested
in keeping Venezuelan oil production at reduced levels to maintain high world prices for its
own oil, energy analysts say.
Russian companies also have been using Venezuela to penetrate the U.S. and other
energy markets closed off to them by sanctions. Russia 's main state oil company, Rosneft,
has lent $6 billion to Venezuela in recent years through
negotiations in which Venezuela 's state-owned oil firm, PDVSA,
offered its U.S. subsidiary, Citgo, as collateral, according to U.S. intelligence sources.
The Trump administration has tried
to head off such maneuvers by placing PDVSA's U.S.-based assets under control of the
alternative government that Mr. Guaido is trying to form.
Some say the Kremlin isn't looking for a "win" in Venezuela so much as it is trying to
entangle the Trump administration in
another long, grinding foreign policy crisis with no resolution in sight.
"It would demonstrate the failure of the American strategy of unlawful regime change and the
success of the Russian line of supporting legitimate power," Vladimir Frolov, a Russian foreign
policy analyst, wrote in a recent commentary on the Republic.ru news website.
Mr. Marulanda said Russia is building an anti-U.S. "tripod" in
the Caribbean region linking leftist governments in Venezuela , Cuba and Nicaragua. The strategy is unlikely
to please military planners in Washington .
" Russia has
taken a big gamble," said Evan Ellis, a Latin America specialist with the U.S. Army War
College.
"If Maduro falls, Moscow 's position in the Western
Hemisphere would collapse, as its other allies would soon be equally pressured by democratic
revolts."
This reminds me EuroMaydan. Poland, Sweden and Germany were very active promoters of opposition.
Notable quotes:
"... Imposing some decisions or trying to legitimize an attempt to usurp power, in our view, is both direct and indirect interference in the internal affairs of Venezuela," ..."
The UK, France, Spain, Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Netherlands,
Germany, Portugal,among a number of countries, have announced their recognition of Juan Guaido
as Venezuela's interim president Domino effect ensues as EU leaders line up to recognise
Venezuela's Guaido
Europe has begun turning its back on Venezuela's incumbent president, Nicolas Maduro, after
he missed his Sunday deadline to call for presidential elections to take place. One by one, European leaders publicly announced their recognition of National Assembly chief,
Juan Guaido, as the country's interim president. But according to Reuters , diplomatic sources said Italy blocked a joint EU position to
recognise Guido as the interim leader, as the government in Rome is deeply divided over the
issue.
Italy
vetoed EU recognition of Venezuelan opposition leader Guaido
4 Feb, 2019
Rome has effectively derailed an EU statement meant to recognize
Juan Guaido as Venezuela's interim leader if President Nicolas Maduro fails to set up snap
elections, a Five Star Movement source confirmed to RT. Italy announced the veto at an informal
meeting of EU foreign ministers that started on January 31 in Romania, the source said. The
statement, which was supposed to be delivered by EU foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini
recognized Guaido as interim president if snap elections were not held.
EU states' recognition of Guaido is 'direct interference' in Venezuela's affairs –
Kremlin
Moscow slammed EU states for trying to legitimize "an attempt to usurp power" in
Venezuela after a number of key European countries recognized opposition figure Juan Guaido as
interim president. " Imposing some decisions or trying to legitimize an attempt to usurp
power, in our view, is both direct and indirect interference in the internal affairs of
Venezuela," Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin, told the media
on Monday, while commenting on the recognition of Guaido.
The freezing of Venezuelan gold by the Bank of England is a signal to all countries out of
step with US interests to withdraw their money, according to economist and co-founder of
Democracy at Work, Professor Richard Wolff. He told RT America that Britain and its central
bank have shown themselves to be "under the thumb of the United States."
"That is a signal to every country that has or may have difficulties with the US, [that
they had] better get their money out of England and out of London because it's not the safe
place as it once was," he said.
"... This reminds me of the gerontocrats of the Soviet Politburo in the worst stagnation years who had to appoint the likes of Chernenko to top positions. ..."
"... The one thing the Mr MAGA's administration has in common with the late Brezhevian Politburo is its total inability to get anything done. My wife refers to the folks in the White House (since Dubya came to power) as the " gang that couldn't shoot straight " and she is right (she always is!): they just can't really get anything done anymore – all their half-assed pseudo-successes are inevitably followed by embarrassing failures. ..."
Remember the almost universal reaction of horror when Bolton was appointed as National
Security Advisor? Well, apparently, either the Neocons completely missed that, which I doubt,
or they did what they always do and decided to double-down by retrieving Elliott Abrams from
storage and appointing him US Special Envoy to Venezuela. I mean, yes, of course, the Neocons
are stupid and sociopathic enough not to ever care about others, but in this case I think that
we are dealing with a "Skripal tactic": do something so ridiculously stupid and offensive that
it places all your vassals before a stark choice: either submit and pretend like you did not
notice or, alternatively, dare to say something and face with wrath of Uncle Shmuel (the
Neocon's version of Uncle Sam).
And it worked, in the name of "solidarity" or whatever else, the most faithful lackeys of
the Empire immediate fell in line behind the latest US aggression against a sovereign nation in
spite of the self-evident fact that this aggression violates every letter of the most sacred
principles of international law. This is exactly the same tactic as when they make you clean
toilets with a toothbrush or do push-ups in the mud during basic training: not only to
condition you to total obedience, but to make you publicly give up any semblance of
dignity.
...Finally, these appointments also show that the senior-Neocons are frightened and paranoid
as there are still plenty of very sharp junior-Neocon folks to chose from in the US, yet they
felt the need to get Abrams from conservation and place him in a key position in spite of the
strong smell of naphthalene emanating from him. This reminds me of the gerontocrats of the
Soviet Politburo in the worst stagnation years who had to appoint the likes of Chernenko to top
positions.
The one thing the Mr MAGA's administration has in common with the late Brezhevian
Politburo is its total inability to get anything done. My wife refers to the folks in the White
House (since Dubya came to power) as the " gang that couldn't shoot straight "
and she is right (she always is!): they just can't really get anything done anymore – all
their half-assed pseudo-successes are inevitably followed by embarrassing failures.
This was true in 2015 for Syria. Now this is true for Venezuela... So one can expect iether chemical attack opposition from Madura
government or "Snipergate" in EuroMaydan style. Or may some some more sophisticated, more nasty "false flag" operation in British style
like Skripal poisoning.
It will be interesting if Madura manage to survive despite the pressute...
Notable quotes:
"... Sorry but you're wrong. The funding a training of rebel forces by the west has done exactly what is was intended to do, mainly destabilise an entire region, sell billions in extra arms, introduce extra anti-terrorism laws in the west, create more fear and panic, then destabilise Europe through the mass-migration. This was the plan and it worked! ..."
"... To the great disappointment of those of us who voted for Obama, the first time out of hope for change, and the second time out of fear for someone even worse, he is a weak and chameleonic leader whose policies are determined by the strongest willed person in the room. Recall that he was also "talked into" bombing Libya! ..."
"... This isn't Bay of Pigs; its a bloated military trying to figure out what to do with its extra cash. Financially, it doesn't matter if the program is a failure. The cost is minuscule for the budget they have. ..."
"... Bush reached the Oval Office not because he was bright, for indeed he was not, he reached the Oval Office because he was dumb enough not to realise he was clearly easily manipulated, believed in neoliberalism and was rich and rich backers and a rich Dad. ..."
"... In Iran, we have a saying which says; take off a Mullah's turban and you will find the words "Made in England" stamped on his head. ..."
"... ISIS/ISIL is a creation of the US in an attempt to remove Assad. The long-term goal being to isolate Iran before going in there for the natural resources. ..."
"... The White House statement specifically refers to the "Syrian opposition". That's the term we use to describe anti-government forces. This recruitment and training programme has gone awry because the people originally recruited would have been anti-Assad. Now the Obama administration has tried to change the same people to fighting to ISIS instead. No wonder there's only "four to five" left. This is one big fustercluck! ..."
"... The CIA has probably been the greatest destabalising force in the world since the second world war and seem like more a subsidiary of the weapons trade than a government department. ..."
Why does the US continually send deadly weapons to the Middle East, make things even more chaotic than they were before and expect
better results the next time?
As pretty much everyone who was paying attention predicted, the $500m program to train and arm "moderate"
Syrian rebels is an unmitigated, Bay of Pigs-style disaster, with the head of US central command
admitting to Congress this week that the year-old
program now only has "four or five" rebels fighting inside Syria, with dozens
more killed or captured.
Even more bizarre, the White House is
claiming little to do with it. White House spokesman Josh Earnest attempted to distance Obama from the program, claiming that
it was actually the president's "critics" who "were wrong." The
New York Times reported, "In effect, Mr Obama is arguing that he reluctantly went along with those who said it was the way to
combat the Islamic State, but that he never wanted to do it and has now has been vindicated in his original judgment."
This bizarre "I was peer pressured into sending more weapons into the Middle East" argument by the president is possibly the most
blatant example of blame shifting in recent memory, since he had every opportunity to speak out against it, or veto the bill. Instead,
this is what
Obama said at the time: "I am pleased that Congress...have now voted to support a key element of our strategy: our plan to train
and equip the opposition in Syria."
But besides the fact that he clearly did support the policy at the time, it's ridiculous for another reason: years before Congress
approved the $500m program to arm the Syrian rebels, the CIA had been running its own separate Syrian rebel-arming program since
at least 2012. It was
reported prominently by the New York Times
at the time and approved by the president.
In fact, just before Congress voted, Senator Tom Udall
told Secretary of State
John Kerry, who was testifying in front of the foreign relations committee, "Everybody's well aware there's been a covert operation,
operating in the region to train forces, moderate forces, to go into Syria and to be out there, that we've been doing this the last
two years." In true Orwellian fashion, Kerry responded
at the time: "I
hate to do this. But I can't confirm or deny whatever that's been written about and I can't really go into any kind of possible program."
Also conveniently ignored by Congress and those advocating for arming the rebels was a
classified
study the CIA did at the time showing that arming rebel factions against sitting governments almost always ends in disaster or
tragedy.
You'd think whether or not the current weapons-running program was effective – or whether any similar program ever was – would
have been a key factor in the debate. But alas, the CIA program is never mentioned, not by politicians, and not by journalists. It's
just been conveniently forgotten.
It is true that perhaps the best advocate for why we never should've armed the Syrian rebels to begin with came from President
Obama himself. He told the
New Yorker in early 2014 that "you have an opposition that is disorganized, ill-equipped, ill-trained and is self-divided. All
of that is on top of some of the sectarian divisions." Critically,
he cited that same above-mentioned
classified study:
Very early in this process, I actually asked the CIA to analyze examples of America financing and supplying arms to an insurgency
in a country that actually worked out well. And they couldn't come up with much.
He didn't mention the CIA's already-active weapons-running program. Why he didn't stick to his guns since he supposedly was weary
of getting the US military involved in yet another quagmire
it could not get out of is beyond anyone's comprehension. Instead, he supported Congress's measure to create yet another program
that sent even more weapons to the war-torn region.
Per usual, Republicans are taking the entirely wrong lessons from this disaster, arguing that if only there was more force then
everything would've worked out. Marco Rubio exclaimed
during the GOP presidential debate on Wednesday that if we armed the rebels earlier – like he allegedly wanted, before
voting against arming them when he had the chance – then the program would've worked out. Like seemingly everyone else in this
debate, Rubio has decided to ignore the actual facts.
Sadly, instead of a debate about whether we should continue sending weapons to the Middle East at all, we'll probably hear arguments
that we should double down in Syria in the coming days and get US troops more cemented into a war we can call our own (that still
to this day has not been authorized by Congress). There are already reports that there are
US special operations forces on the ground in Syria
now, assisting Kurdish forces who are also fighting Isis.
When the vicious and tragic cycle will end is anyone's guess. But all signs point to: not anytime soon.
Oliver2014 19 Sep 2015 21:27
" Why does the US continually send deadly weapons to the Middle East, make things even more chaotic than they were before and
expect better results the next time? "
Because the US doesn't understand the culture of the people it meddles with.
The US goes in with a messianic belief in the righteousness of its objective. This objective is framed in naive terms to convince
itself and the people that it's motives are benevolent - such as "we must fight communism" or "we will bring democracy to Iraq"
or "Saddam Hussein is an evil man who uses chemical weapons on his own people and hence must be ousted" or "Assad is an evil man
who is fighting a civil war with his own people".
As a superpower it feels compelled to interfere in conflicts lest it be seen as impotent. When it does not interfere, as in
WW2, things do indeed get out of control. So it's damned if it does and damned if it doesn't.
The CIA did not understand Afghan history of fighting off invaders when it was arming the Mujaheddin and that after the Soviets
were defeated it would perceive the Americans as invaders and not as liberators who were there to bring them democracy and teach
them that growing poppy was bad. (Like alcohol in the 1930s, a national addiction problem cannot be solved on the supply side
- as the CIA and DEA learnt in South America.)
Bush Sr. was right when he left Saddam alone after bloodying his nose for invading Kuwait because he understood that Saddam
was playing a vital Tito-esque role in keeping his country and the neighborhood in check. He had no WMDs but wanted his adversaries
in the region to believe otherwise. If Saddam were alive today we wouldn't have an Iraq problem, an ISIS problem, an Iran problem
and a Syria problem.
Smedley Butler 19 Sep 2015 21:12
"Why he didn't stick to his guns since he supposedly was weary of getting the US military involved in yet another quagmire
it could not get out of is beyond anyone's comprehension."
Maybe it's because he hasn't stuck to his guns on anything during the entire time he's been President. He always takes the
path of least resistance, the easy way out, and a "conservative-lite" position that tries to satisfy everyone and actually satisfies
no one.
What an utter disappointment.
DavidEG 19 Sep 2015 20:01
The Machiavellian machinations of the empire become less relevant with every passing day. It's Europeans now who are eating
sweet fruits of "mission accomplished". And they may rebel, and kick out last remnants of their "unity", and sacred NATO alliance
alongside.
PamelaKatz AndyMcCarthy 19 Sep 2015 18:33
Obama said the US would take 10,000 Syrian refugees. When I heard this, I thought surely a zero must be missing from this figure.
And what no one has publicly mentioned is the immigration process for these few will require at least a year of investigative
background checks.
PamelaKatz jvillain 19 Sep 2015 18:15
The largest manufacturers and global distributors of weaponry are the US, the UK, France, Russia and China, in that order.......
also known as the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council. One should read the UN Charter, which states the purpose and
parameters for forming this international organization. The word 'irony' comes to mind.
ID108738 19 Sep 2015 17:36
Saddam Hussein was a friend while he gassed the Iranians, then he invaded Kuwait; as long as Bin Laden fought the Russians,
he was tolerated and funded; now there's Syria. The only thing needed to take the strategy to new levels of idiocy was a compliant
nincompoop as prime minister in Britain. Will they ever learn?
Toi Jon 19 Sep 2015 17:27
The US understands how to create a market for their military hardware industry but has never understood how their interference
in the Middle East creates mass human misery.
Samantha Stevens 19 Sep 2015 17:09
Quite simply the US is breaking international law by doing this. Every time they do it the world ends up with another shit
storm. If they cannot behave responsibly they should be removed from the security council of the UN. Same goes for the Russians
and any other power abusing their position.
Syria may not have been the epitome of humanity before being destabilised but it is certainly worse now. The same is true of Iraq.
In fact have the US successfully overturned any government they deem un-American (LOL) without it leading to a civil war?
Andy Freeman 19 Sep 2015 17:06
Sorry but you're wrong. The funding a training of rebel forces by the west has done exactly what is was intended to do,
mainly destabilise an entire region, sell billions in extra arms, introduce extra anti-terrorism laws in the west, create more
fear and panic, then destabilise Europe through the mass-migration. This was the plan and it worked!
People will call for a solution, the solution will be tighter integration in Europe, the abolition of national governments,
the removal of cash to stop payments to "terrorists", more draconian spying laws, less from and eventually compulsory registration
and ID for all Europeans.
Meanwhile, we'll have a few more false flag attacks supposedly caused by the refugees and more fear in the news. Open your
eyes
Laurie Calhoun 19 Sep 2015 16:49
"Why he didn't stick to his guns..." Not the most felicitous metaphor in this case, but here is the answer to your question:
To the great disappointment of those of us who voted for Obama, the first time out of hope for change, and the second time
out of fear for someone even worse, he is a weak and chameleonic leader whose policies are determined by the strongest willed
person in the room. Recall that he was also "talked into" bombing Libya!
Sad but true. For more details on how this works, read Daniel Klaidman's book Kill or Capture: The war on terror and the soul
of the Obama presidency.
after the libya disaster the US should have abandoned plans for regim change in syria.
and the US missed a golden opportunity to recitfy what had already become a syria disaster by allowing turkey and the ludicrous
SNC to so thoroughly undermine the Geneva talks.
The U.S and U.K's commitment should be to those in Iraq. Secure, rebuild and invest in helping that Nation come with the
best solution to a, rid itself of ISIS, b, be able to stay that way, c have a government that is inclusive to the needs of
the Sunni's, Shia's and Kurds
Just as I thought that you can not surpass yourself in writing stupid comments, and you are immediately reassured me.
Thus, the US and the UK spent nearly ten years in Iraq and failed to make any of this what you write, but but the whole mess practically
they themselves have created. And now you're saying that if the US and UK troops returned again to Iraq they will be able to fix
everything that they had previously screwed and to create an "inclusive society" of Iraq. So, if the US and UK troops set foot
again on the soil of Iraq, it will be the strongest reason for Iraqi Sunnis to reject the inclusion in the Iraqi society. Iraqi
officials themselves are aware of this very well, and for that reason they are the first to oppose such an intervention.
BAGHDAD - Iraq's prime minister strongly rejected the idea of the U.S. or other nations sending ground forces to his country
to help fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, saying Wednesday that foreign troops are "out of the question."...
Al-Abadi, a Shiite lawmaker who faces the enormous task of trying to hold Iraq together as a vast array of forces threaten
to rip it apart, welcomed the emerging international effort, but stressed that he sees no need for other nations to send troops
to help fight ISIS.
"Not only is it not necessary," he said, "We don't want them. We won't allow them. Full stop."
"The only contribution the American forces or the international coalition is going to help us with is from the sky," al-Abadi
said. "We are not giving any blank check to the international coalition to hit any target in Iraq."
He said that the Iraqi military will choose and approve targets, and that the U.S. will not take action without consulting
with Baghdad first. Failure to do so, he warned, risks causing civilian casualties like in Pakistan and Yemen, where the U.S.
has conducted drone strikes for years.
Well, Well, whether i notice here distrust even of Iraqi Shiites toward the US Air Force. On the other hand, they want to strengthen
friendship with neighboring governments in Syria and Iran: ;
Al-Abadi,
however, said that Iraq doesn't have the luxury of testy relations with Damascus, and instead pushed for some sort of coordination.
"We cannot afford to fight our neighbor, even if we disagree on many things," al-Abadi said. "We don't want to enter into
problems with them. For us sovereignty of Syria is very important." The two countries, both of which are allies of Iran, appear
to already be coordinating on some level, and Iraq's national security adviser met Tuesday with Assad in the Syrian capital,
where the two agreed to strengthen cooperation in fighting "terrorism," according to Syria's state news agency.
The U.S. hopes to pull together a broad coalition to help defeat the extremist group, but has ruled out cooperating with
neighboring Iran or Syria, both of which also view ISIS as a threat. Both countries were excluded from a conference this week
in Paris that brought the U.S., France and other allies together to discuss how to address the militant threat.
Al-Abadi said that excluding Damascus and Tehran was counterproductive.
So, it is obvious that the Iraqi government is not against inclusion, but they're for such inclusion, which will exclude the US
and UK of interfering in their internal affairs. I think it is a good step towards reconciliation with their Sunni brothers because
they also seem to support such a thing. And if they managed to do it, maybe Ukrainians will also draw some lesson from it and
be able to reconcile with their brothers Russians.
Ieuan ytrewq 19 Sep 2015 14:04
ytrewq said: "USSR and China supplied a lot of support and material to N. Vietnam."
Very true.
However the Viet Minh were formed and initially supplied by OSS (later called the CIA) forces from the US. In fact Ho Chi Min
had a naive hope that the US would support him in his struggle against foreign occupation of the country after the war (French
colonialism) and made several appeals to President Truman for help (all of which were ignored).
Instead of which, the US supported the French, so Ho asked around and got help from the Russians and Chinese. The rest we know.
marginline AndyMcCarthy 19 Sep 2015 13:54
The UK and France [...], they destroyed Libya.
The causality of which led to an Islamic terror attack on June 26th, 2015 ten kilometers north of the city of Sousse, Tunisia,
where thirty-eight people; thirty of whom were British - were murdered.
sashasmirnoff JoJo McJoJo 19 Sep 2015 13:40
The US is always wrong, and always responsible for every bad thing that happens on Earth.
They are always wrong, and are indeed responsible for almost every geopolitical disaster, usually a result of overthrowing
governments and installing their own tyrant, or else leaving a vacuum that Islamists fill.
Zaarth 19 Sep 2015 13:34
This $500m program cost less than 0.1% of the US annual defense budget. When you're dealing with sums of money as obscenely
large as the US spends on its military, its inevitable that huge quantities will be wasted because you've passed the point where
there's worthwhile things to spend it on. This isn't Bay of Pigs; its a bloated military trying to figure out what to do with
its extra cash. Financially, it doesn't matter if the program is a failure. The cost is minuscule for the budget they have.
In recent years the right has been very concerned with balancing the national budget and shrinking debt. They're willing to
cut spending for social programs and research, but god forbid you take money away from the military. It just wouldn't be patriotic.
marginline -> GeneralMittens 19 Sep 2015 13:14
Great summary GeneralMittens. You have expressed in layman's terms the facts eluded to by journalist Mehdi Hasan when he quantified
the depth of the strategic disaster the Iraq war actually was – or, as the Conservative minister Kenneth Clarke put it back in
a 2013 BBC radio discussion...
the most disastrous foreign policy decision of my lifetime [ ] worse than Suez
The invasion and occupation of Iraq undermined the moral standing of the western powers; empowered Iran and its proxies; heightened
the threat from al-Qaeda at home and abroad; and sent a clear signal to 'rogue' regimes that the best (the only?) means of deterring
a preemptive, US-led attack was to acquire weapons of mass destruction. [ ] Iraq has been destroyed and hundreds of thousands
of innocent people have lost their lives, as the direct result of an unnecessary, unprovoked war that, according to the former
chief justice Lord Bingham, was a...
serious violation of international law
This leads me to the conclusion and I apologies for flogging this dead horse yet again BUT...why are Bush and Bliar not being
detained at The Hague?
Ieuan 19 Sep 2015 12:45
" I actually asked the CIA to analyze examples of America financing and supplying arms to an insurgency in a country that actually
worked out well."
Well, they (the OSS at the time) supplied arms and training to the Viet Minh. When they were fighting the Japanese. Which worked
out well, when they were only fighting the Japanese.
But when they used their expertise (and the arms they had left over) to carry on fighting the French, and later the Americans
themselves, it worked out very well for the Viet Minh, not so well for the French and Americans.
GangZhouEsq 19 Sep 2015 12:27
The first President Bush, who decided not to topple President Saddam Hussein after routing his military forces out of Kuwait,
and instead to leave him in power for the sake of the Middle East stability is, in retrospect, probably the wisest foreign policy
decision ever made by the 41st President, thanks not only to his own personal judgment but also to his foreign policy aides' wisdom.
Though it is now too late for the son to learn from his father, it is still not too late for the present administration to learn
a thing or two from the former senior President Bush.
twoheadednightingale 19 Sep 2015 12:25
Nice to read an article coming at the war from this angle, seems like people are finally starting to question the effectiveness
US foreign policy - ie bombing for peace. However the article is fairly nieve in places - like who actually believes the president
of the US has control over all its intelligence agencies? JFK told the world in april '61, not long after the CIA had set him
up over the bay of pigs and months before being assassinated exactly that. So enough of the 'blame the president' bullshit, it
doesn't get to the root of the problem
GangZhouEsq 19 Sep 2015 12:17
The last major armament, including heavy guns, tanks and armored personnel carriers, as sent by the United States to the now
notoriously incompetent Iraqi military forces is now reportedly in the hands of ISIS after these US-trained Iraqi military personnel
simply abandoned their posts of defense and deserted for their own dear lives, thus leaving the centuries-old, formerly safe haven
of Mosul for Iraqi Christians to the mercy of ISIS. See "60 Minutes", Sunday, September 13, 2015, "Iraq's Christians", at
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/iraqs-christians-the-shooting-at-chardon-high-king-of-crossfit.
pfox33 19 Sep 2015 12:04
The fact that Putin is coming to Assad's aid is a game-changer that the US was unprepared for. For one thing, it's highlighted
how inconsequential US efforts to bolster "moderate" rebels and degrade ISIS capabilities have been.
From the time it was reported that the Russians were upgrading an airbase at Latakia to the time that it was reported that
they had dispatched helicopters and jets and that the Syrians had started to take the fight to ISIS in Raqqah and Palmyra was
only a matter of weeks. The CIA's program, after a year, had produced five soldiers at a cost of 500 million.
Previously the US had free reign over Syrian skies as did Israel who would bomb what they deemed to be convoys of military
supplies for Hezbollah. Things aren't so free and easy now with the Russians in town. And both the Americans and Israelis now
realize they have to check in with them before them they make sorties over northern Syria.
It's fairly obvious, to me anyway, that the US and Israel's only endgame was the fall of Assad and that ISIS had their tacit
approval. Assad's good relations with Iran and Hezbollah meant he was a marked man. Putin, as is his wont, has complicated their
plans and the results are yet to be seen.
BradfordChild TastySalmon 19 Sep 2015 11:58
"Iraq, Libya, Syria. What do/did these countries have in common? Unfriendly leaders who want nothing to do with the US."
Actually, Gaddafi had shown an interest in engaging with the West-- happened under Bush, but was never really followed up on.
Still, it was headed in a more positive direction until Obama rather arbitrarily decided that Gaddafi had to go.
The real net effect of US intervention in the Middle East has been to destabilize Europe.
Tony Page bravo7490 19 Sep 2015 11:32
I would agree but, as a former intelligence professional, I'd remind you that there's always a story behind the story. Not
that it's a "good" story! But more must be going on there...
ByThePeople 19 Sep 2015 11:12
"Why does the US continually send deadly weapons to the Middle East, make things even more chaotic than they were before and
expect better results the next time?"
It depends on how you define better. To think that these ops take place with the intent to solve an issue is naive, they don't.
You state yourself that the CIA freely admits it's never worked.
The reason the United States funds and arms groups in the Middle East is that 9 times out of 10, these same groups are then
later labeled 'terrorists' and a new US war campaign is justified.
It's not about solving problems - unless the problem being solved is: How do we create more opportunities to half-ass justify
engaging in another war effort so the US coffers can be continuously raped.
Iraq is the perfect example of succeeding in achieving this goal. Years before the Iraq war ever began, US war planners knew
that a power vacuum, attracting the likes of Al-Qaeda and or ISIS would subsequently result. Thus, providing a for a second war,
derived from the first seemingly pointless invasion. The Iraq plan worked fabulously as not only did the newly created enemy materialize,
they also became a much more formidable enemy once they conveniently came into possession of all the military equipment we let
behind.
Point is, they wouldn't continue implementing all these operations if the goal wasn't being achieved.
I will add too - McCain and Co. clamored so hard to arm the al-Assad opposition McCain might as well have claimed that if we
did not, then America would be blown up in its entirety in 48 hours the same as all the other fear mongering done in a effort
to continue the war efforts. Who knows, maybe he did, I try not to listen to him anymore - he needs to be put out to pasture.
TastySalmon 19 Sep 2015 11:10
Iraq, Libya, Syria. What do/did these countries have in common? Unfriendly leaders who want nothing to do with the US.
To suggest that funding radicals to overthrow these governments is a "whoops" or something that will never work is completely
wrong. The plan has worked exactly as planned: destabilize the region by promoting dissent, covertly arm and fund "rebels" through
back-channels (Saudi, UAE, Turkey, etc.), create a new boogeyman (ISIS), and reforge alliances with enemies (AQ) who will then
turn on us again in the future.
The goal is to flatten Syria, and it seems to be working out very well. When you consider what the ultimate outcome will be,
it starts becoming fairly clear: push Russia into a corner militarily and economically, open new LNG pipelines, appease allied
caliphates, and put billions of dollars into the pockets of the wealthiest people.
Their policy is chaotic and consists of repeating the same thing over and over again hoping to get different results, which
is, as we all know, the definition of madness.
I think the problem may well be the bloated MIC in the US. Too many strategic game plans for to many, often contradictory ends.
There are no doubt there are intelligence analysts in the US MIC who have a genuine interest in collecting actual information
and present it honestly. The numerous leaks show us this.
The problem is, this often good information, once it's been spun through political/economic vested interests, think tanks,
cold war jar head imperialists and so forth, it (foreign policy) ends up complete fubar.
To the point where, as you rightly say imo, their foreign policy looks like nothing more than "malicious wily manipulators,
deliberately buggering up the world to make money out of the consequences."
david wright 19 Sep 2015 10:49
For a full century now, from the Balfour Declaration and the secret Sykes-Picot arrangement, the currently-top 'Western' dog
(UK; then US) has been meddling and futzing around in the Middle East, notionally in someone's 'National Interest.'
Oil, access to Empire (route to India etc) and 'national prestige' have been the usual excuses. The result has been unmitigated
disaster.
Ignoring everything up to Gulf 1 (1991) we've a quarter century century of determined scoring of own-goals. This shows no sign
of changing. This is a helter-skelter race to destruction, greatly presently aided and abetted by Asad. So far, it's lasted two-and-a-half
times longer than the combined lengths of both World Wars.
One conclusion is that by any rational assessment, we don't deserve to 'win', whatever that would constitute, any more than
did one side or the other in the 16th -17th century's European religious wars. An equally rational assessment is that we neither
have, nor can. The final rational conclusion, that we find a way to disengage - remarkably simply, by stopping doing all the things
we have been - is a fence refused by the relevant horses - again, mainly US and (as very eager, jr partner indeed) UK.All apart
from the monstrous outcomes for the people in the region, we destabilize our own security then make things worse by tightening
our own internal 'security' at the expense of civil liberties. This gives away, at no gain, the slow and scrabbling accretion
of these, over centuries. And Cameron and co remain sufficiently delusional to want to keep on bombing, but whatever toys they
have, whatever seems a good idea on the day. How can we win? the war isn't on 'terror', but ion logic. Ours. |Neither the US nor
UK governments have ever shown much interest in the fates of the millions of people their casual actions have ended, or made hell.
Of the multiple ironies (shall I count the ways?) attending all this is that Saddam, while a murderous thug, and no friend to
his own people, was doing for us, for free, what we've been unable to do for ourselves - keep Iraq al-Quaida free. AS to his murderous
propensities, clearly far fewer of his people (alone) would have been killed had we not intervened, than we have directly or indirectly
killed. Much of this stems from the fact that during the same recent period (1991 on) there has been no effective counter to Western
power and inclination, which has simply projectile-vomited its baneful influence. Ironic too that the reason we armed and greatly
helped create al-Quaida was to destabilize Russia by getting it bogged down in Afghanistan. Thus the only real fear which limited
US action, was removed when that policy was successful. We removed the brakes as the train was beginning to accelerate down the
incline. Wheeee!
teaandchocolate smifee 19 Sep 2015 10:47
Bush reached the Oval Office not because he was bright, for indeed he was not, he reached the Oval Office because he was
dumb enough not to realise he was clearly easily manipulated, believed in neoliberalism and was rich and rich backers and a rich
Dad.
As to "not having a serious mark against his name", forgive me if I laugh hysterically while crying with pain.
The least said about the moron Reagan and his jolly pal Thatcher the better. Oh how well their unregulated market shenanigans
have turned out.
Crackpots the lot of them.
LethShibbo AndyMcCarthy 19 Sep 2015 10:35
Doing nothing and minding your own business is kinda the same thing.
And the civil war in Syria isn't purely a result of what happened in neighbouring Iraq.
What you're essentially saying is 'America, you've started this fire. Now let it burn.'
pansapians DrDrug 19 Sep 2015 10:28
Well of course ISIS were miffed that the U.S. was paying lip service to not arming ISIS. If you think there was ever any serious
difference between the FSA and ISIS then I hear that the Queen having to sell Buckingham palace due to losses gambling on corgi
races and I can get you a good deal for a cash sale
IrateHarry Havingalavrov 19 Sep 2015 10:17
Make Iraq work first..
ROFLMFAO...
Iraq has been so thoroughly screwed over by the UKUSA clusterfuck, there is no chance of it working ever again.
AndyMcCarthy LethShibbo 19 Sep 2015 10:12
Sorry, the US doesn't HAVE to make a choice, do nothing or bomb. All the US needs to do is mind it's own business.
We wouldn't be having this refugee crises if the US hadn't invaded Iraq.
Tomasgolfer 19 Sep 2015 10:10
For a little insight, see "The Red Line and the Rat Line", by Seymour M. Hersh. Published in the
London Review of Books
The US (and the UK and France for that matter) has been openly arming and training the "rebels". The US had a vote in congress
to openly do just that last year. Covertly, they've been doing it since 2012, again this has been well reported and admitted to.
The problem for the US is their so called "moderates" don't exist. They either switch allegiance once back in Syria or end
up captured or killed just as quickly.
Your user name seems somewhat of a parody.
ArtofLies richardoxford 19 Sep 2015 10:00
How does that compute ?
it computes once one answers this slightly naive question from the article
Why does the US continually send deadly weapons to the Middle East, make things even more chaotic than they were before
and expect better results the next time?
surely at some point people have to realise that chaos is the result the US is looking for.
IrateHarry 19 Sep 2015 09:56
Why does the US continually send deadly weapons to the Middle East
Because that is the backbone business of America - making and selling deadly weapons. Deadlier the better, and no matter whom
they are supplied to. If foreign governments don't buy, does not matter, just supply it to "rebels", and they will be paid for
by the tax payers across the west (not just the American ones, NATO has been set up as the mechanism to tap into European tax
payers as well).
The rest of the bullshit like democracy, freedom, etc are marketeers' crap.
No wonder there's only "four to five" left. This is one big fustercluck!
There was a report in the NY Times last year by a reporter who was kidnapped by the FSA (his mission was to find them and find
out who they were) and handed straight over to Al-Nusra. Twice. He was imprisoned and tortured by them.
In his revealing report, talking of the couple of days he spent back with the "FSA", his release having been negotiated by
the west, he asked the "FSA" fighters about the training they received from the US in Jordan. The reporter put it to the fighters
that the training was to fight AN/IS. Their response? "We lied to the Americans about that".
The WSJ also recently reported that the CIA mission to arm/train "moderates/FSA" had gone totally tits up. Most of them reported
as defecting to one of the number of more extreme groups, some having been captured or killed.
It's been clear for about 2 years now that these so called "moderates" only exist in the deluded minds of western policy makers.
JacobHowarth MushyP8 19 Sep 2015 09:51
ISIS do not control that large a number of people. Many Kurds are fleeing because of IS, that's true, but for the most part
the civil war is a horror show from both sides and Syrians are - rightly - getting the hell out of there.
Or are all of those 'taking advantage of the opportunity to move to Europeans [sic] countries' proposing to do so by going
to Lebanon and Jordan?
The suspiciously unasked questions as to motives of all parties at Benghazi, by all twelve (12) members of the Select Committee,
suggests collaboration to question Hillary Clinton to make her appear responsible only for bungling security and rescue, for the
sole purpose of diverting attention from Hillary Clinton's role in the CIA and the CIA operative Ambassador Stevens' arming of
terrorists. The obvious question to ask would have gone to motives: "What activities were Stevens and the CIA engaged in, when
they were attacked at Benghazi?"
GreenRevolution 19 Sep 2015 09:10
The use of religion(Islam specifically) in politics was first employed by the British in the Middle East in the early parts
of the 20th century. In Iran, we have a saying which says; take off a Mullah's turban and you will find the words "Made in
England" stamped on his head.
nnedjo 19 Sep 2015 09:09
Even more bizarre, the White House is claiming little to do with it. White House spokesman Josh Earnest attempted to distance
Obama from the program, claiming that it was actually the president's "critics" who "were wrong."
Yes, it seems that it has become a tradition of US presidents to boast with the fact that "they do not interfere much in their
own job".
For example, in the last campaign for the GOP candidate for the US president, Jeb Bush defended his brother George for a false
pretext for war in Iraq in the form of non-existent WMD, claiming that everyone else would bring the same decision on the start
of the war, if the same false intelligence would be presented to him.
Thus, the president of the United States can not be held accountable for its decisions if the CIA deliver him false intelligence,
or deliberately conceal the true intelligence. On the other hand, since no one has heard of any person from the CIA which is held
responsible for the wrong war in Iraq, it turns out that nobody is responsible for this war.
And, to us, mere mortals, it remains only to conclude that the most powerful war machine in the world moves "without a driver",
or maybe it is "driven by some automatic pilot".
So, how tragic it is, and yet we can not help laughing. :-)
mikiencolor 19 Sep 2015 09:06
It was obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense from the beginning that the "moderate" rebel training programme would be an
utter disaster. But if the lessons you are taking is that nothing should be done at all, I'd submit you are taking the wrong lessons
from the debacle. Doing nothing at all would have condemned tens of thousands more to genocide. Doing something saved thousands
of Yezidi and saved Rojava.
Wherever the Kurds have been supported they have proved capable, trustworthy and have created functional civil societies. To
broadly and undiscerningly dismiss "sending weapons to the Middle East" is disingenuous. Something must be done, and things can
be done to help rather than harm if there is a sensible policy maker, and doing nothing certainly can be more immoral and evil
than doing something - as I thought we'd learned from Nazi Germany.
The reality is one that neither right wing nor left wing hardliners are willing to face: the Sunni Arab jihadis are the source
of most of the problems and the reason is entirely to do with their noxious genocidal and imperialistic ideology and culture.
They are a source of instability, enmity and fear, and not just in the Middle East either. And they are being supported and bankrolled
by Western allies in the Gulf. The world is a big place with many peoples and ways of thought, and many disagreements - but we
nearly all of us seem able to find a way to coexist in this new globalised technological human civilisation. The jihadis are a
barbarian throwback, a movement of violent primitivists. There is no place for jihadism in the future and they are a threat to
everyone in the world.
ID0020237 -> teaandchocolate 19 Sep 2015 09:01
Insanity I believe, not madness, but what's the difference. The CIA may get it right, but after political interference and
manipulation, they change their conclusions. We've seen this with the Iraq debacle and elsewhere. Just as political interference
in military operations, Viet Nam for example, causes imminent failure, so it is with intelligence ignored.
GeneralMittens 19 Sep 2015 09:01
So basically America invades and bombs the shit out of everywhere and the europeans have to clean up the mess and deal with
the resulting refugee crisis?
At some point America should be held accountable for their actions in the middle east. Whether thats taking their fair share
of refugees from syria or footing the bill for this clusterfuck.
At the very least, other countries should stop enabling their warmongering.
LittleGhost 19 Sep 2015 08:58
US foreign policy in the ME proves Einstein's maxim
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
GreenRevolution 19 Sep 2015 08:57
It has been 14 years since 911 and Bush's so called "war on terror". Not only barbaric wahabi terror has not been defeated
it has grown its barbarism to magnitudes unimaginable previously. Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have been allowed to arm them
to the teeth by the very states who claim to be waging "war on terror". Since Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey are close allies
of the west and one is a member of NATO, it follows that the west is in fact arming the wahabi terrorists who have turned the
Middle East into a wasteland murdering and looting at will. Millions are now refugees, countries laid to waste and yet Mr Kerry
and Hammond talk as if they have done such magnificent jobs and Russian involvement would only "complicate" things.
teaandchocolate 19 Sep 2015 08:56
I don't think they have the brightest people working in the CIA and the military in the USA. They are probably bullies, relics
from the Cold War, jar-heads, devout 6000-year-old-world Christians, neocons and fruitcakes. Their policy is chaotic and consists
of repeating the same thing over and over again hoping to get different results, which is, as we all know, the definition of madness.
smifee 19 Sep 2015 08:52
To be honest, I don't see any confusion.
Obama comes across as a (comparatively) humane person, and I am sure that his personal preference would be for there to be
no violence in the middle east. As President of the USA, however, he has to set aside his personal preferences and act in the
wider interests of his country.
The US set out to realign the political make up of the middle east. No doubt, they want to make sure Islam will never again
be able attack US interests.
Successive Administrations have controlled the funding and arming of various factions within the Middle East to ensure that
Muslims kill each other and weaken social structures. The US will fill the ensuing political vacuum and economic waste-land with
local leaders loyal to 'freedom, democracy and the American Way'. The next Administration will continue to stoke up the violence,
and the one after, and the one after that until the US is satisfied it has achieved its objective.
It seems almost all of us have to contain our personal views if we want to succeed in our place of work. Even the P of the
USA.
GoldMoney -> celloswiss 19 Sep 2015 08:51
True, in a democracy, moderates don't need bombs and assault weapons.
Consider this - how would you feel if foreign governments were arming and funding the IRA in Northern Ireland?
What if foreign governments recognised the IRA as a legitimate opposition to the Belfast government and gave them bombs to
take over the country?
MichaelGuess 19 Sep 2015 08:46
Who are the real terrorists, the group that bombs indiscriminately, the group that sells arms to both sides, the group that's
lies to its "coalition" partners, the group that spies on all its friends, the group that is happy to be starting wars everywhere
and then blame other parties for their lack of support.
These are the real terrorists.
MushyP8 19 Sep 2015 08:46
ISIS/ISIL is a creation of the US in an attempt to remove Assad. The long-term goal being to isolate Iran before going
in there for the natural resources.
Assad won 89% of the vote in a 74% turnout, how many world leaders have 65% of the population supporting them, hence why Assad
hasn't fallen. Naturally the US refuted this alongside its lapdogs, the EU and the UK, as it disproves all the propaganda they've
been feeding the west. RT news did an interview with Assad which was very insightful.
Putin seems to be the only one who's got his head screwed on in this situation, which is of course leading to hissy fits by
the US because he's proving a stumbling block. More nations need to get behind Putin and Assad, although of course the US wont.
GoldMoney DrDrug 19 Sep 2015 07:52
Moderates do, when the simple act of protesting against the mutilation of children detained by the states secret police
are met with a volley of snipers.
No such evidence has been bought to the UN security council. Even the chemical attack that the media claimed from day one was
Assad's forces doing turned out to be IS rebels actions. The two human rights groups operating in Syria are western funded NGO's
- hardly a neutral point of view given the US's long stated aim of removing Assad (even before 2011).
geedeesee 19 Sep 2015 07:25
This $500 million from June 2014 was for recruiting Syrian rebels seeking to oust President Bashar al-Assad - not to fight
iSIS.
The White House said at the time:
"This funding request would build on the administration's longstanding efforts to empower the moderate Syrian opposition,
both civilian and armed, and will enable the Department of Defense to increase our support to vetted elements of the armed
opposition."
The White House statement specifically refers to the "Syrian opposition". That's the term we use to describe anti-government
forces. This recruitment and training programme has gone awry because the people originally recruited would have been anti-Assad.
Now the Obama administration has tried to change the same people to fighting to ISIS instead. No wonder there's only "four to
five" left. This is one big fustercluck!
kingcreosote 19 Sep 2015 07:12
The CIA has probably been the greatest destabalising force in the world since the second world war and seem like more a
subsidiary of the weapons trade than a government department.
@Bill Instead of looking at this issue using a microscope, reading history about how
Empires fall lends wisdom and insight. Arrighi's book, (I believe) is called "The Long
Twentieth Century." He details how empires and huge trading giants rise and fall.
He details the rise of Italy's banking system during the Middle Ages as well as Spain's
Empire, the Dutch trading hegemonies and most enlightening how the British Empire rose and
fell.
We are seeing tell-tale symptoms of a US that's in trouble with a slow erosion of the US
$$ hegemony. The financial growth of China has begun degrading the US market with hi-tech and
other products. Thusly, you see Tim Cook of Apple apoplectic over China's Huwaii (sp?)
flooding the European market with less expensive computers, cellulars, notebooks, etc.
We see the practical nature of Exxon Mobile that views the short geographic distance
between the US (its military) to Venezuela's oil and mineral-rich soil. An easy pick, rather
than becoming further embroiled in the Middle East.
Targeting Venezuela suggests a geopolitical shift away from the Middle East (and Israel)
to countries that are less expensive to plunder yet with vast resources to be stolen. A
telling sign in the slow deteriorating US Hegemony.
Anglo Zionists have been working this scheme to take Venezuela for many years --
The Chávez Plan to Steal Venezuela's Presidential Election: What Obama Should
Do
September 19, 2012
Ray Walser
Former Senior Policy Analyst
Ray is the former Senior Policy Analyst
Abstract: On October 7, 2012, Venezuela's Hugo Chávez will stand for re-election
against opposition candidate Henrique Capriles. The Venezuelan presidential election
matters to the U.S.: Venezuela is a major oil supplier to the U.S.; Chávez's
anti-American worldview has led to alliances with Iran, Syria, and Cuba; and Chávez
offers safe havens to FARC and Hezbollah. Chávez also works to weaken democratic
governance throughout the Americas. Under the Obama Administration, the U.S. has offered no
comprehensive strategy or policy for dealing with the man who continuously demonstrates his
ruthlessness in implementing an anti-American, socialist, Bolivarian Revolution across the
Americas, but there is still time for the U.S. to support democratic freedoms before the
election. [becuz zio-bolshies luvs them their "democratic freedoms," and if that doesn't
work, bump off Chavez. Cancer. Poor guy. Prolly caught it from Arafat.].
https://www.heritage.org/americas/report/the-chavez-plan-steal-venezuelas-presidential-election-what-obama-should-do
Small counties in LA are essentially defenseless against 300 pound gorilla -- the USA. And neoliberalism still can take
revenge, as it recently did in Argentina and Brazil.
Notable quotes:
"... Agence France-Press ..."
"... As monarchs were forced to realize, they served a function to society, in order to be served by it. It was a two way street. Now finance is having a, "Let them eat cake." moment, as they become more predator than organ of society. It is the heart telling the hands and feet they don't need so much blood and should work harder for what they do get. As well as telling the head it better go along, or else. ..."
"... As this regime change process unfolds, it is difficult not to feel deep sadness for Venezuelans. Chavez failed to lift the poor into a permanent middle class, Maduro failed to protect the accomplishments that had been achieved, and now, the state seems unprepared to cope with what was inevitable. ..."
"... It's a tragic moment in Latin American history. Though Maduro has some backing from the four most Resistant of all Resistors, Russian, China, Cuba and Iran, the nation's geography is too distant for them to flex their full restraint. The lesson of Nicaragua in the 80's should have been learned. ..."
"... "The wealthy few have declared war on the many poor. They should not be allowed to lose their bet and maintain their stakes. The world doesn't work that way. " Unfortunately Bevin I think that is exactly how the world works. The real never ending war is between the haves and have nots. ..."
"... I'm a bit more pessimistic. Washington seems united on getting rid of Maduro and installing a friendly regime. While Maduro can hang in there for awhile, the economic sanctions and covert operations (including sabotage, killings, bribery etc.) will cause severe problems for the government. Maduro is not Assad and lacks friendly neighbors--in fact, Latin America has pretty much returned to direct Washington rule. ..."
"... Like with the attacks on Syria, Trump becomes presidential when he attacks the likes of Iran and Venezuela. ..."
"... I wonder how many of the pro-USA protesters, willing to take the US coin to protest on the street, are also willing to take the US coin to die on the street. ..."
"... A U.S. military incursion could have significant unintended consequences, "including a deterioration of our relationship with currently supportive countries in the region." -- Gustavo Arnavat, a former Obama administration official and a senior advisor to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. ..."
"... I don't justify intervention anywhere (except in D.C. where the Tyranny and Hegemon resides). I point to missed opportunities, failures, corruption and not taking advice from your closest friends (China, Russia, Cuba). If they had brought in the Chinese petroleum experts and Russian economic experts, much of the disaster would have been avoided. When you have a huge enemy and you are weak and relatively small, you need help. Maduro waited until too late. ..."
"... Self-evidently all the governments which have followed the US are not only agreeing but are acting in compliance with a pre-set US timetable. They all waited for the US to give the signal, then like synchronized swimmers performed according to choreography pre-determined by the US. ..."
"... Maduro to his navy --- "Today the future of Venezuela is decided: if it becomes one more star of the United States flag or if it will continue to fly its eight tricolor stars," said the president. ..."
"... As usual, the AZ regime change machine is mightily backed up by billions of puff dollars (printed out of thin air), but among the puppets, the tie-eating Saakashvili is Optimus Prime compared with the Murky Guy's leadership. ..."
"... Ha, how 40 tons of the "barbaric relic" which disappeared from Ukraine after a similar "revolution" got to be mentioned also in relation to Venezuela. ..."
"... Well, the headline of this post is kinda problematic now ("U.S. Coup Attempt In Venezuela Lacks International Support"). I think it was problematic from the start, b, because 1) several countries had already joined with USA; 2) Europe's falling in line was never really in doubt. Note: The EU poodles have toed the line on Russia, Iran*, and now Venezuela. ..."
"... Instead, Guaido called for further "pressure", which is at this point limited to a further tightening of the economic isolation of the country. Canada seems to have anticipated this position by announcing a $53 million aid package which will be focussed on assisting current and future "refugees" headed to Columbia and Brazil. ..."
"... Hugo Chavez has repatriated most of Venezeulan gold whilst still alive. This is how the CIA and the Venezuelan Central Bank could invent the story that a part of this gold is being sent to Russia by Maduro. The 41 ton of Venezuelan gold still remain in Bank of England was a necessary collateral for buying naphtha (for pre-processing oil for export) and subsidised food for the Venezurlan population. ..."
U.S. Coup Attempt In Venezuela Lacks International SupportZanon , Feb 3, 2019
12:44:33 PM |
link
There is little doubt where 'western' media stand with regards to the U.S. led
coup-attempt (vid) in Venezuela. But their view does not reflect the overwhelming
international recognition the Venezuelan government under President Nicolás Maduro
continues to have.
The Rothschild family's house organ, the Economist , changed the background of
its Twitter account to a picture of the Random Dude™, Juan Guaidó, who the U.S.
regime changers
created to run the country.
The supposedly neutral news agencies are no better than the arch-neoliberal
Economist . The Reuters ' Latin America office also changed its header
picture to Random Dude. It reverted that after being called out.
Agence France-Press stated at 11:10 utc yesterday that "tens of thousands" would
join a rally.
Cont. reading: U.S. Coup Attempt In Venezuela Lacks International Support "Lacks
international support" unfortunately doesnt matter much. Regardless, even if a majority of
nations backed the coup doesnt mean its right. Also remember Ukraine coup, majority didnt
support that - but it didnt matter.
Empire is testing the waters of support by its DazzleSpeak about the spinning plate of
Venezuela. I hope it is learning that much of the world no longer wants to live in a world
motivated by fear.
Threat of US global default on Reserve Currency is coming soon because empire is out of
ammunition to maintain and extend supremacy. It will be interesting to see what the fall back
status will be and how maintained....the last thralls of Might-Makes-Right.....one would
hope.
The Bank of England should be holding closer to 30 tonnes of Venezuela's gold, not the 14
tonnes they're holding from Marudo under U.S. orders. The Venezuelan Central Bank (BCV) just
closed a huge gold swap with someone and now should have a total of maybe 2500 gold bars in
the BoE dungeons with their original serial numbers and weights. Custodians of gold like this
can't melt it down and make new bars - that's why state depositors stamp all of them with
serial numbers and precise weights. They want to be sure THEIR gold is there and THEIR gold
is returned.
The news isn't the U.S. demand that it won't be returned. The real news is that neither
the BCV nor the BoE will show anyone the original or current gold bar inventory list.
Usually, nobody cares. But with the U.S. and BoE chosing a new, rightful owner (Random Guy),
they should at the very least provide the inventory list.
It shouldn't be a secret - there is absolutely no security risk. The gold belongs to the
(starving) people of Venezuela. Or at least it did. What are the BoE and Rothschild BCV
hiding? Did they melt it down or sell it to someone else?
I think the deeper conceptual issues need to be considered, that would place the political
and social situations going on around the world, from France, to Venezuela, in perspective.
That money is the social contract enabling mass societies to function, not a commodity to
be mined from society and stored as government debt, to finance militaries, as well as making
the entire economy subservient to the gambling addictions of Wall St.
Humanity went through s similar evolutionary process, when monarchies, as private,
hereditary governments, reached the limits of their effectiveness. As the executive and
regulatory function, government is the central nervous system of society, while finance is
its circulation mechanism, basically the head and heart.
As monarchs were forced to realize, they served a function to society, in order to be
served by it. It was a two way street. Now finance is having a, "Let them eat cake." moment,
as they become more predator than organ of society. It is the heart telling the hands and
feet they don't need so much blood and should work harder for what they do get. As well as
telling the head it better go along, or else.
As it is now, all this government debt is setting the world up for predatory
lending/disaster capitalism, when the governments cannot run up more debt and those holding
the old debt start trading it for more public properties, from mineral rights to roads.
After watching the whole central meeting in Bolívar Avenue, Caracas,live
broadcasted by RTSpanish, which extended for several hours, in which were projected images of
other regions´meetings as well, and after watching live too, broadcasted by the same
channel, the pro-Random Dude meeting only in that rich neighborhood, which extended for about
half an hour and dispersed itslef very fast, I would calculate the numbers at both meetings
just in reverse as you have done.
I would say 200-300 thousands for Maduro´s supporters ( and i would say I get it
short..) and 20-30 thousands ( in the best case )for the Random Dude....
I notice that that photo you are basing your estimations on corresponds only to the front
of the square where the tribune for speechers of the pro-Maduro rallie was placed, but other
people has showed the whole Bolívar Avenue ( the longest and largest in Caracas ) full
of pro-Maduro people as long as the sight can catch ....See for example, Abby Martin´s
capture:
Blooming Barricade , Feb 3, 2019 1:31:10 PM |
link
The European Parliament voted on the Venezuela issue a few days ago, and naturally, the
centre-right wing European People's Party (Merkel, Tusk), the Liberals (Macron), and most of
the so-called Socialists voted to recognise the US coup minion as president. The European
United Left and most of the Greens along with the far-right wing voted against this, which
just shows you that the so-called liberal democrats are bought and paid for employees of
US/NATO multinational imperialism.
With the "Electoral College" method determining winners not in current favor, perhaps the US
MSM may wish to state that by world population, Maduro beats Guaidó by a factor of at
least 4 to 1 in public opinion.
thanks b... it is interesting @5 sashas comments if they can be verified..
@3paveway - it is much as @4 john merryman says, with the additional note that the boe are
essentially stealing venezualas gold in a might makes right type of undemocratic and
undignified way.. i always thought the federal reserve was an extension of the boe... both of
them are privately run, with some minor face saving image that they belong to the respective
gov'ts.. they don't... they are controlled and run by the 1% that are quite okay starving off
venezuala, or going to the next step - military intervention.. they are one sick group of
predators only focused on the god of mammon.. we have to figure out a way to get rid of them
before they completely destroy the planet..
Other than Russia../China/Iran....practically the entire world is under uncle sham's
thumb now.
The outlook is very depressing indeed.
Don't worry, China has an enormous amount of leverage:
"
Boeing predicts China will need more than 7,200 new aircraft worth over $1 trillion in
the 20 years through 2036."
Trump slaps some tariffs, here and there, on a few billion dollars of China's products.
But this is trivial compared to what China can do to Boeing, if Trump really annoys Xi. And
Boeing is just of many US companies that the Chinese can retaliate against.
Juan Guaido enjoys legislative immunity to arrest but Venezuela's Supreme Court barred him
from leaving the country, and the court also approved a request that all of Guaido's
financial assets be frozen.
As we have seen he's rather harmless, without any real power in the country, and so the
longer he's free and obviously ineffective the better. Plus it enables Maduro to appear
reasonable and unafraid of the young man.
The 800 lb elephant in the room here is the reality of class struggle in Caracas. Those
backing the imperialists seem to constitute the majority of Venezuela's small elite of rich
people. Despite their complaints, continual sabotage of the economy and outright treason in
their collaboration with its enemies they have been allowed to hold onto their ill gotten,
and inherited, wealth.
How long is that likely to last?
On the other side of the divide are millions of poor people, their livelihoods and their
democracy at risk. Many of them are having difficulty finding food to feed their families-
the deliberate result of sanctions supported by the wealthy, and the light skinned. Many are
finding it impossible to find the medicines their sick people desperately need.
If Venezuela is to maintain its independence it will do so because the poor refuse to give
it up. Their rewards and the means of rebuilding the economy lie in the wealth of the
rich.
The wealthy few have declared war on the many poor. They should not be allowed to lose
their bet and maintain their stakes. The world doesn't work that way.
As this regime change process unfolds, it is difficult not to feel deep sadness for
Venezuelans.
Chavez failed to lift the poor into a permanent middle class, Maduro failed to protect the
accomplishments that had been achieved, and now, the state seems unprepared to cope with what
was inevitable.
To assume that the Hegemon would keep its hands off the nation, return the gold, leave the
assets in the US untouched, not use the neighboring countries to mount an insurgency, seems
naive at best. The lessons learned from Cuba's 60 year fight for dignity taught the regime nothing.
Watching the tear down of Brazil's socialist leadership (two of them) taught the regime
nothing. Stupidity atop corruption atop a blind belief in an ideology that destroyed the wealth of
the nation (or at least crippled it) has led to the moment of truth. Will enough poor people
and some middle class defend the sovereignty of the nation? And will the military leadership and rank and file remain patriots?
It's a tragic moment in Latin American history. Though Maduro has some backing from the four most Resistant of all Resistors, Russian,
China, Cuba and Iran, the nation's geography is too distant for them to flex their full
restraint. The lesson of Nicaragua in the 80's should have been learned.
Now he faces invasion of convoys of aid on three borders. He must control his borders. The
odds are very long he can.
I am not sure if anyone has posted about this, my apologies if it is redundant. I was
wondering where our Random Dude was now located and what he was up to:
"For the role of President they chose a "poster boy" who doesn't represent anything and
who shouted out something at a meeting with 30,000-40,000 protesters, and after this he
immediately ran to the Embassy of Colombia, where he still sits to this day.
This boy refuses
any contact with the authorities. But since you are being informed by "different media
agencies" and certain authors on "Aftershock" – he communicated with army Generals on
twitter however the Generals are unaware of this but he communicated "in secret". Or he
appointed a certain official from among the immigrants in the US also on twitter "
Your analysis of the economic problems is too harsh directed at Chavez/Marduro and their
"ideology". Nafeez Ahmed's piece in Medium, which has been shared on this forum, does a much
better job describing the perfect storm of coinciding events which have combined to sink
Venezuela's economy. Short of two or three of these events, and the situation could be bad
but not as terrible as it is.
The programs instituted by the government over the past twenty
years remain extremely popular, as was acknowledged yesterday when Guaido made a vague
promise of government "subsidies" to those in need.
The aid caravans will be entirely symbolic, and offer little to nothing to a population of
over 30 million people. The sponsors of the aid caravans are also the same people who have
placed harsh economic sanctions on the country, a fact which will not be lost.
"The wealthy few have declared war on the many poor. They should not be allowed to lose their
bet and maintain their stakes. The world doesn't work that way. " Unfortunately Bevin I think that is exactly how the world works. The real never ending war
is between the haves and have nots.
Why don't the coup mongers name Hillary president of Venezuela. The biggest sore loser of all
time is currently "resting", as they say of out-of-work actors, and desperately wants to be
president of SOMETHING. Not being a native Venezuelan should be no drawback in her case. She
would simply trade her old Cubs/Yankees hat for a big V and probably discover some Venezuelan
great-great-grandmother hanging on her family tree. The coup mongers' current choice, the
sock puppet "Guido" Guadio, is about as legit as a Confederate nickel. And coups are by
definition NOT legit. So haul out those unused "I'm With Her" signs and ship them down there.
In the meantime, she can head for the Venezuelan Embassy and hole up there (a la Julian
Assange?) while awaiting the moment to parachute into Caracas. Mission Accomplished!
Let's remember that the US position is that Guaido is only the interim president of a
transitional government, which suggests that (1) the US has its real choice under cover in
Miami somewhere, possibly a Rubio house guest, or (more likely) (2) the US really doesn't
have a clue about what to do next. Hey, humanitarian aid, that's a good regime change
strategy (??).
Meanwhile they can demonstrate all they want, it never accomplishes anything (MLK
attendance the exception).
I'm a bit more pessimistic. Washington seems united on getting rid of Maduro and installing a
friendly regime. While Maduro can hang in there for awhile, the economic sanctions and covert
operations (including sabotage, killings, bribery etc.) will cause severe problems for the
government. Maduro is not Assad and lacks friendly neighbors--in fact, Latin America has
pretty much returned to direct Washington rule.
I suspect the Trump admin does have a plan for Venezuela and will push it through no
matter what anybody thinks. Trump's opinion of the bobbling heads or trained seal lot that
call themselves heads of state is about the same as he showed the Iraqi's when visiting the
US base in Iraq.
Trumps plans will only be stopped by the likes of Russia, China, Iran ect. No matter how
outlandish the claims of the lies of Bolton or himself are, MSM seems to take it up with all
seriousness.
Like with the attacks on Syria, Trump becomes presidential when he attacks the likes of Iran
and Venezuela.
USAMO . Same Old. First, engineer sanctions through compliant UN, then squeeeeze the
population until they understand the changing electoral requirements and their howl reaches
pitch
-in the meantime picking a favourite pony to front the 'peoples will' regime change op;
training him/her up in latest provocateur methodology and introducing them to their master
racketeers back in DC
then,
with malevolent mercenary gangs helping stirring street protest
offer emergency security assistance and food AID thru sanctified UN allowing your chosen
one to ride the front of the food wagon, saving the day.
Democracy, Yankee Doodle Dandy style.
Scotch Bingeington , Feb 3, 2019 7:16:18 PM |
link
jayc | 33
"The aid caravans will be entirely symbolic, and offer little to nothing to a population
of over 30 million people." Yes, and also those of the 30 million who support the Anti-Maduro movement are probably
not in need of basic foodstuffs, but will want their iPhone and their Netflix account.
I think this is the guy they would like to install--Leopoldo Lopez
Yes, good chance of that, if they could work it somehow (unlikely) and it would tie into
Guaido's reference to Feb 12.
wiki--During the crisis in Bolivarian Venezuela, Leopoldo Lopez called for protests in
February 2014. López, a leading figure in the opposition to the government, began to
lead protests. . .He was arrested on 18 February 2014 and charged with arson and conspiracy;
murder and terrorism charges were dropped. Human rights groups expressed concern that the
charges were politically motivated. . .Leopoldo López, a leading figure in the
opposition to the government, began to lead protests.. .
In September 2015, he was found
guilty of public incitement to violence through supposed subliminal messages, being involved
with criminal association, and was sentenced to 13 years and 9 months in prison. He was later
transferred to house arrest on 8 July 2017 after being imprisoned for over three years.
re: Trump's state of the union speech Tuesday night.
on VZ-- from WaPo Trump will
"... actively intervene in the political upheaval in Venezuela, aides said in previewing the
speech Friday."
here
I wonder how many of the pro-USA protesters, willing to take the US coin to protest on the
street, are also willing to take the US coin to die on the street.
I suspect these protests
are paper thin at best, the poor are unlikely to support the rich without financial
inducement, but the one thing the coup organisers have is plenty of money. If these are
indeed poor people protesting (who knows) then it would be interesting to know what quantity
of cash was offered to the participants. Maybe 30 USD for half a day of protesting? Decent
money for the protesters, easily affordable to the USA.
A countries domestic issues need to be kept separate from US attacks on a country. US is
not attacking Venezuela for humanitarian reasons. This is aside from the fact as Jen pointed
out, that Venezuela's economy has been under attack from the US for some time.
The expectations that a country that is under US attack should have a leader that is far
above average in terms of ability to withstand the economic attack of a superpower with
perfect, far seeing decisions is unreasonable. People lie that are rare and only occurred
occasionally in history.
What does matter is that the Maduro government is doing the best it can for its people,
rather than working in the interests of a foreign power to the detriment of its people.
As for a better leader - one that will resist the US and provide a better economy for
Venezuela while under US sustained attack....
Bart Hansen@20 - Oil production costs are complex, secret and mostly lies. With that caveat,
Venezuela was thought to have about $10 - $15 production costs on average. That includes
their light and medium crude, and zero investment in repair of their distribution networks.
Well over half of Venezuela's reserves are Orinco extra-heavy, sour crude. Essentially tar
sands, but buried 500m - 1500m deep that require solvent or steam extraction. So (guess)
maybe $30-range/bbl for production. Those tar sand oils produced are so heavy that they need
pre-processing and dilution before they can be refined or exported. Naphtha or other refined
products are used as dilutent and cost maybe $55/bbl today, but were around $75/bbl last
October.
U.S. refineries were pretty much the only ones paying cash for their 500,000 b/d of
Venezuelan crude. Trump's sanctions not only ban those imports, but also ban the 120,000 b/d
of naphtha and other dilutents we sold them.
Interesting to note that part of Trump's beat-down of the Venezuela little people is a ban
on the 120,000 b/d of dilutent last week. That will completely shut down their exports. They
could find another source of naphtha, but that source will be looking for $6.6 million a day
hard cash for it.
Maduro needs to sell Venezuela's gold to buy naphtha to export oil for ANY revenue. The
$2.5 billion the Bank of England can't find and won't deliver is meant to hasten the food
riots and CIA-orchestrated coup. But Mercy Corps is setting up concentration camps on the
Colombian border and we're delivering food aid, so the U.S. is really the hero, here. God
bless America! Obey, or die.
expectations that a country that is under US attack should have a leader that is far above
average
I appreciate your discussion of leaders, but let's not forget the people. It has been the
goal of the US to demonize leaders and go after them. Ho Chi Minh, Saddam Hussein, Bashar
Assad, Osama Binh Laden etc. etc.
But it's the people not the leaders that have formed the most resistance. It took the US Army
little time to track down big bad Saddam Hussein, but Baghdad wasn't pacified (controlled)
for four years, and people elsewhere in Iraq fought the "liberators" like the very devil.
Apply that to Venezuela. Heck, you and me, we'd all respond the same way given a foreign
invasion, right?
There are some warnings about avoiding dialogue and pushing a Venezuelan military option. The
opposition's courting of military officers carries potential dangers. If it leads to a schism
in the armed forces, that could be disastrous for the country, said Michael Shifter,
president of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington policy anti-VZ forum.
A U.S. military incursion could have significant unintended consequences, "including a
deterioration of our relationship with currently supportive countries in the region." --
Gustavo Arnavat, a former Obama administration official and a senior advisor to the Center
for Strategic and International Studies.
Juan Guaido hopes that the United States will not use force in Venezuela, instead limiting
pressure on Maduro's government to diplomatic and economic measures, the Colombian newspaper
Tiempo reported Monday. . . here
If corruption or mismanaging a country's economy were justification for foreign
intervention to remove a leader, Israelis should be lobbying Washington DC to remove Binyamin
Netanyahu as their prime minister since he and his wife Sara have been charged by police for
fraud and bribery.
Indeed, depending on how it defines corruption, whether vaguely or narrowly, and on what
criteria, the US would have its work cut out for decades hunting down "corrupt"
politicians.
If I'm not mistaken the front page of the Washington Post, today showed a picture of a large pro-government protest, and
claimed that it was an opposition protest.
This will be something to watch and may be part of the answer to why now, why did the US go
after Venezula at this point. I think it is because Venezuela was historically captive to US
refineries, but no longer. India is capable of refining Venezuela oil and has a significant demand for it. If India
decides to do ignore the sanctions, I wonder if the US will impound tankers going to
India?
And tankers to China as China is building a refinery just for Venezula oil, it isn't
scheduled to come online until 2020, but perhaps China will push to make it happen asap?
to Paveway lV and Bart Hansen. It doesn't really matter the breakeven point for Venezuelan
oil if they can't access the money. I just read (15 minutes ago) on Seeking Alpha, that Trump
et al is blocking payments for Venezuelan oil. He is trying to force the payments into a
blocked account such that Maduro's gov cannot access it but Guido can. There are still
refineries in the US which need Venezuelan heavy crude to blend w/ the frack=crap. Volero is
stated to have two tankers which it cannot unload due to the payments issue. This is an
unusual way to provide "humanitarian aid."
Sorry I cannot give a link - the Seeking Alpha site seems to be done.
Re the Indian refineries, I believe they are currently buying Iranian oil so they may
resist sanctions against Venezuela. However, according to Paeway lV, without naphtha
Venezuela cannot pump oil. Maybe a swap with someone?
The aid caravans will be entirely symbolic, and offer little to nothing to a population
of over 30 million people.
I agree, Guaido's aid caravans will probably be something like 5% humanitarian and 95% for
smuggling arms into Venezuela.
However, China has the largest container ships in the world. Just one visit from a vessel
like the COSCO Shipping Universe could deliver more than 20,000 truckloads of stuff, which
would probably dwarf anything Guano is envisaging (even if his "humanitarian" caravans were
totally legitimate).
Would the Empire let it happen? I have little doubt that Bolton's sick enough to want to
stop a true humanitarian effort, but as I'm not as sick as Bolton is (at least I hope so), I
have a hard time imagining what excuse he could use to stop it -- especially after Guano's
caravans.
I don't justify intervention anywhere (except in D.C. where the Tyranny and Hegemon
resides). I point to missed opportunities, failures, corruption and not taking advice from your
closest friends (China, Russia, Cuba).
If they had brought in the Chinese petroleum experts and Russian economic experts, much of
the disaster would have been avoided. When you have a huge enemy and you are weak and relatively small, you need help. Maduro waited until too late.
There were many object lessons for better practices and better preparation for the
inevitable. Now, we can hope and pray that the Venezuelan people demonstrate their own will to resist
against intervention and regime change. Because if it comes, their wealth will be stolen
completely.
A sane government which really wanted the best for the people would've launched a crash
program to break free of the oil dependency which not only guarantees one remains at best a
US-colonized power, but which requires the physical destruction of one's own land and the
basis of one's future life.
I'm not just saying this about Venezuela, although destroying the Orinoco rain forest
necessary for our very lives in order to extract heavy oil is perhaps the most extreme
example on Earth of the self-destroying paradigm.
But any country afflicted with the oil curse ought to treat the deposits like very hot
radioactive waste and enforce at all costs a Chernobyl-type non-go zone. This also would
conserve critical ecological zones like the Amazon. If enough places did that simultaneously
it would prevent the US from "opening them up" by force and accelerate the collapse of the
empire and its globalization system. But any place which doesn't do this automatically
becomes a de facto colony and a target for aggression intended to turn them into a de jure
colony, as we see in this case.
From the evidence it seems that in the end a thing like Bolivarianism isn't offering any
real alternative to the US paradigm. Both equally want to burn every last fossil BTU's worth,
pump every last CO2 molecule, hack down and burn every last acre of forest. Both are on the
same mass murder-suicide ride.
Do the Venezulean people really want a better life than this? The American people sure
seem to want the worst.
It's my understanding that when Chavez was President, he did bring Chinese and Vietnamese
agriculture experts to Venezuela to study the country's potential for growing food staples.
The Vietnamese experts identified areas which originally had been considered by their former
wealthy owners as unproductive but which turned out to be ideal for growing rice.
Although Venezuela imports huge quantities of wheat from Russia, it's doubtful that
Russians can give much agricultural advice as Venezuela lies in the tropics and Russia does
not.
On the other hand, the way the Venezuelan government appears to be dealing with Juan Guaido, allowing him to shout in the wilderness and making himself look a fool, seems similar
to the way Russia treats Alexei Navalny, letting him make an idiot of himself, and might
suggest that Venezuela is taking advice from or copying Russia in this respect. Russia also
sold two S300 anti-missile defence systems to Venezuela though I do not know how often the
Venezuelans maintain them.
Thanks for the correction. I tend to skim history. I think the point still stands, that
politicians can't be left in control of the money supply. The impulse to abuse it is strong
The Maduro demo seems to have taken place on the Avenue Bolivar which is about 20 meters wide
and about 1.25 km long. The demo crowd appears to be packed so there could be 50 to 80
thousand people there. I haven't been able to locate the Guiado demo but it is possibly in
the upscale Las Mercedas district not far from the US Embassy. The photos of the Guiado are
generally close in and from a low angle which tends to exagerate the numbers. Even so, it
does not appear to be as densely packed / extensive as the Maduro event.
More disgraceful news:
Major EU nations recognize Guaido as Venezuela's acting president
Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, the Netherlands and Germany's
coordinated move came after the expiry of an eight-day deadline set last weekend for Maduro
to call a new election. Austria and Lithuania also lined up behind the self-declared
interim president Guaido.
Self-evidently all the governments which have followed the US are not only agreeing but
are acting in compliance with a pre-set US timetable. They all waited for the US to give the
signal, then like synchronized swimmers performed according to choreography pre-determined by
the US.
These European governments already were illegitimate in that they had surrendered
sovereignty to the EU. Now they're doubly illegitimate in that they've openly exposed
themselves as nothing but extensions of US policy. These are puppet governments.
So I'm not just joking when I say that any truly radical parties in Europe, "right" or
"left", should declare these fake national governments illegitimate and set up their own
shadow presidencies/premierships and governments.
Maduro to his navy --- "Today the future of Venezuela is decided: if it becomes one more star of the United
States flag or if it will continue to fly its eight tricolor stars," said the president.
"You saw the failed coup plotters yesterday ... with the gringo flag behind them. They no
longer hide, they no longer hide their identity. They no longer hide what they have inside,
they want to deliver our country, in pieces, to the gringo empire and the local
oligarchies."
Haiti is one of the countries that recognize Guano as president of Venezuela---
"Haiti's economy is reeling as unemployment & hunger is on the rise due to corruption
& mismanagement under #PHTK ruling party. On Jan. 31 many businesses shuttered in many
parts of the country as exchange rate of HT Gourd to US Dollar reached highest inflation
yet.
Exactly. They are US puppets.
Most obviously what we see is the most obvious top puppets in the EU; nordic, western europe
and the baltics. The meddling is apparent, still the corrupt EU/US governments keep on with their
aggression:
Russ: "So I'm not just joking when I say that any truly radical parties in Europe, "right" or
"left", should declare these fake national governments illegitimate and set up their own
shadow presidencies/premierships and governments."
This, so totally this, so absolutely and definitively this.
All these governments should be discarded and sued for breaching international norms.
Spain is specially ridiculous. Isn't Sanchez supposed to be "left", and not liberal scum?
I would not call the puppet character a Random Guy because he was clearly groomed for the
role over a number of years. Yet, he is obviously not a very capable guy because his claim to
fame is, for example, stringing a metal wire across the road to kill random motorbike riders
in a poor part of Caracas. Selection of such an untalented Murky Guy is another sign of the
desperation of the AngloZionist empire to grab resources after the Syrian debacle.
As usual,
the AZ regime change machine is mightily backed up by billions of puff dollars (printed out
of thin air), but among the puppets, the tie-eating Saakashvili is Optimus Prime compared
with the Murky Guy's leadership.
Ha, how 40 tons of the "barbaric relic" which disappeared from Ukraine after a similar
"revolution" got to be mentioned also in relation to Venezuela. And nobody even remembers
what happened to all the Ghadaffi's gold. You do not really think that hippo's Wooden Puppet
Guido (lol) will ever get to even touch this banksters' secret favorite? It will just
disappear into the Atlantic Ocean on the way to Guido. Just as carpenter Mastro Geppetto
carved his Pinocchio out of block of wood, so did the hippo carve his Guido out of another
block of rotting wood. This is why only the Italians, of all Europeans, could see through the
mischievous acts of the long-nosed Guido and his puppet master.
Yesterday I linked to an AP article
here on Charge d' Affaires James "Jimmy" Story who manages the US embassy in Caracas. In
the article was: "Chief among his interlocutors is Rafael Lacava, governor of the central
state of Carobobo, who presented him with a painting of two joined fists in the colours of
the U.S. and Venezuelan flags that now hangs in the entrance to Story's official residence in
Caracas."
So I looked up Rafael Lacava's twitter here which includes some glimpses of local
life in the small state of Carabobo just west of Caracas. Carabobo State was the site of the
Battle of Carabobo on 24 June 1821, a decisive win in the war of independence from Spain, and
was led by Simón Bolívar. The capital city of this state is Valencia, which is
also the country's main industrial center.
The tweets include some from Nicolas Maduro, including warnings that Trump wants another
Vietnam in Venezuela.
Russia has no choice than to boost the military to stand with Maduro. That may bring violence
including possibly the physical elimination of Guaido. That may trigger the West to intervene
militarily like in Libya without a UNSC approval.
That would rally the Venezualians around Maduro and the army.
As the american ( except the neocons) are against a war at their borders, Trump will have to
find a compromise.
Ultimately the Russians may push for a military takeover once they identified a military
leader.
Trump will have to accept that if he does not want to invade Venezuela
Well, the headline of this post is kinda problematic now ("U.S. Coup Attempt In Venezuela
Lacks International Support"). I think it was problematic from the start, b, because 1) several countries had already
joined with USA; 2) Europe's falling in line was never really in doubt. Note: The EU poodles have toed the line on Russia, Iran*, and now Venezuela.
=
* EU countries pretend to support JCPOA but have dragged their feet. Most commercial
interests will not cross USA and the EU states have done little to discourage that. It has
been announced that EuroSWIFT will be for humanitarian aid only.
It is important to remain as properly informed and nuanced as possible given the difficulties
of access to reliable information in the world of today. I, therefore, contribute this link
in which a Venezuelan sociologist presents a different view of the support Maduro has in the
country : https://therealnews.com/stories/defusing-the-crisis-a-way-forward-for-venezuela.
I have no way of knowing the de facto situation, as most of us. I do, however, have
experience of such turmoil, divisions, rallies and counter-rallies, lies, threats, etc. from
a country, my country, that, sadly, no longer exists. I would say - we should listen to the
people on the ground, always with a critical mind.
The implications of this barbaric assault for our world as whole, for South America and,
of course, for Venezuela, are far reaching. The role of the EU and its largest states in this
barbarism has been consistent and in the service of the US and European ruling class. The EU
has been supporting, promoting and awarding the Venezuelan opposition for a long time. Now it
is recognising the self-proclaimed person who wants to make Venezuela great again. Yet, my
fellow Europeans are more or less silent, more or less indifferent and very badly informed.
Being European is becoming a source of deep shame and we Europeans are starting to make
excuses when we introduce ourselves, just like the better informed Americans have been doing.
But there is a good side to this - all the masks have fallen off now. Everyone can see what
the US and the EU really are.
If not today, tomorrow their barbarism will be recognised as their defining feature. One
would think that change is then inevitable, even if long overdue.
One piece in the article you linked to does not seem to match events. Maduro was elected
president in what international observers said were a fair election. A number of opposition
figures chose, of there own accord not to run in the election.
Your article says the majority of Venezuelans do not want Maduro as president, yet on a few
weeks ago he was elected as president in a fair election.
@3 PavewayIV The Bank of England gold issue is pretty crazy to think about. If the Bank of
England can just give the Gold of a nation to a guy who just declares himself President
without running for office than their is no rule of law regarding the gold stored by BoE from
other countries. Surely any country that has assets held by other major UK, US banks should
be moving towards retrieving their gold after this fiasco. Its very scary to see the highest
parts of the banking sector; use of the Swift system; access to the US dollar and seizure of
assets by the US courts being increasingly used in the aggressions of the empire. If Maduro
is able to weather this storm and Venezuela is returned to some degree of stasis than Maduro
will ask to repatriate all of the gold held in Europe in order to prevent its future seizure
in case a Chavista is elected again next election. The BoE can't possibly just steal it based
on politics can it?
One sure sign of Maduro's popularity in Venezuela is the calls for a new election in which
Maduro is not allowed to participate. This was the same for Assad in Syria. The US know that
in any free and fair election, both Assad and Maduro would at anytime gain the most
votes.
Although Maduro was only recently inaugurated, the elections were May 2018. Maduro received
67.8 percent of the vote with a 46 percent voter turnout the next runners received 20.9 and
10.8 percent of the vote.
The wikipedia page has the vote numbers, but the article mostly goes on about Maduro blocking
opposition. If this were correct, then the US would not be vehemently opposed to Maduro even
running in another election.
What an embarrassment - Canada refused press credentials to Sputnik, RIA Novosti, and Telesur
for its multi-national celebration of "smart power".
"Richard Walker, a spokesman for Canada's foreign ministry, explained to Sputnik's
correspondent that the agency was denied accreditation because it "hasn't been cordial" with
Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs Chrystia Freeland in the past."
That is, the Russian media published factually correct information which demonstrated
Freeland as less than candid regarding her family history. Her feelings were hurt, and her
feelings apparently take precedent in her position as Foreign Minister.
The rational and sensible way forward in Venezuela - international mediation - continues
to be rejected by the "interim president", the USA, and Canada's pet Lima Group project.
Instead, Guaido called for further "pressure", which is at this point limited to a further
tightening of the economic isolation of the country. Canada seems to have anticipated this
position by announcing a $53 million aid package which will be focussed on assisting current
and future "refugees" headed to Columbia and Brazil.
Hugo Chavez has repatriated most of Venezeulan gold whilst still alive. This is how the
CIA and the Venezuelan Central Bank could invent the story that a part of this gold is being
sent to Russia by Maduro. The 41 ton of Venezuelan gold still remain in Bank of England was a
necessary collateral for buying naphtha (for pre-processing oil for export) and subsidised
food for the Venezurlan population.
Once Western sanctions are imposed on a country, the only
way anyone would trade with such credit-worthless country, is if hard assets are used as
collateral. Maduro will probably be forced to send a part of the repatriated gold to Shanghai
gold market, forcing the Venezuelan Centeral Bank by military force to dispatch, or the
Venezuelans will go hungry. Having national gold under the Central Bank control is only
second worst to having it under control of the Central Bank's foreign masters in BoE.
I cannot think of one Central Bank in all the countries of the World which is not under
the control of the international (Jewish) banking cartel. If the "revolution" succeeds, the
gold inside Venezuela will disappear just as the gold in BoE. Since 2017 Bolshevik
Revolution, the revolutions are fueled by gold.
@Peter AU 1 | Feb 4, 2019 1:28:47 PM | 85 Maduro was elected president in what international observers said were a fair
election.
The May 20, 2018 election it self was declared "free and fair" here by four independent committees who had
camped outside the polling places but (as in the US and other "democratic" countries) the
shenanigans leading up to the election called the fairness into question.
The elections were boycotted by the Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD) coalition of opposition
parties and dismissed as illegitimate by the United States, the European Union (EU), and14
Western Hemisphere nations (the Lima Group). So we can say for sure that the boycott was a
tool to later call the elections illegitimate .
[How ironic since the US doesn't even (de facto) allow "opposition parties" (plural) but
restricts the quadrennial show to two look-alike parties, which Ralph Nader referred to as
tweedledum and tweedledee. Obviously neither of the two parties would ever boycott an
election.]
UN rapporteur to Venezuela and expert on international law Alfred de Zayas:
"I believe in democracy. I believe in the ballot box. If you believe in democracy, you can
not boycott an election. The name of the game is that you actually have to put your candidate
out and expect that the people will vote for you or against you," he said, referring to the
Venezuelan opposition's decision to boycott the recent presidential election, which saw
Maduro re-elected. . . here
Secretary of state John Kerry. "During my most recent visit to Kyiv, I was deeply impressed
by all you have accomplished in the more than two years since the Revolution of Dignity."
Secretary of state Pompeo. "The United States stands with the brave people of Venezuela as
they strive for a return to dignity and democracy."
This lot haven't much of an imagination. Just reading thev lines that were printed for the
Ukraine show.
The whole US and vassal States plan was for a swift removal of Maduro, that did not happen
thus time now runs in Maduro's favor. There won't a military invasion of Venezuela, there is
no apetite for that in Latin America at all, nor the vast majority of the Latin Americans
would support any sort of military intervention, even if head of States would promote it,
thus leaving two options for the US:
1) A cruise missile attack to destroy Venezuela Military and Government building, following a
false flag prepared and conducted by CIA's and Guaidó's supporter, such an attempt
would be received worldwide as an aggression, though the false flag would be used as
justification, that would not be tolerated by many many countries and could escalate in a
ugly way, and or
2) An attempt to assassinate Maduro to be blamed on the Venezuelan Military thus leaving
Guaidó out of it to legitimize him for power.
The second is a very likely scenario and may be in progress as of now.
Seriously, Ron Paul or Tulsi Gabbard speaking of democracy is one thing, but having
gangsters and psychopathic thugs like Pompeo, Bolton or Abrams in charge really sends a message
and that message is that we are dealing with a banal case of highway robbery triggered by two
very crude considerations:
First, to re-take control of Venezuela's immense natural
resources. Second, to prove to the world that Uncle Shmuel can still, quote , " pick up some small crappy
little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business ",
unquote.
The obvious problem is that 1) nobody takes the US seriously because 2) the US has not been
capable of defeating any country capable of resistance since many decades already. The various
US special forces, which would typically spearhead any invasion, have an especially appalling
record of abject failures every time they stop posing for cameras and have to engage in real
combat. I assure you that nobody in the Venezuelan military cares about movies like "Rambo" or
"Delta Force" while they carefully studied US FUBARs in Somalia, Grenada, Iran and elsewhere.
You can also bet that the Cubans, who have had many years of experience dealing with the (very
competent) South African special forces in Angola and elsewhere will share their experience
with their Venezuelan colleagues.
"... Why does everyone make Trump out to be a victim, poor ol Trump, he's being screwed by all those people he himself appointed, poor ol persecuted Trump. Sounds like our Jewish friends with all the victimization BS. ..."
"... I think Israel is just a capitalist creation, nothing to do with Jews, just a foothold in he middle east for Wall St to have a base to control the oil and gas there, they didn't create Israel until they discovered how much oil was there, and realized how much control over the world it would give them to control it. ..."
"... It is the love of money, the same thing the Bible warned us about. Imperialism/globalism is the latest stage of capitalism, that is what all of this is about, follow the money. ..."
I heartily dislike and find despicable the socialist government of Maduro, just as I did
Hugo Chavez when he was in power. I have some good friends there, one of whom was a student
of mine when I taught in Argentina many years ago, and he and his family resolutely oppose
Maduro. Those socialist leaders in Caracas are tin-pot dictator wannabees who have wrecked
the economy of that once wealthy country; and they have ridden roughshod over the
constitutional rights of the citizens. My hope has been that the people of Venezuela,
perhaps supported by elements in the army, would take action to rid the country of those
tyrants.
Hard to take this guy seriously when he spouts Fox News level propaganda.
Why does everyone make Trump out to be a victim, poor ol Trump, he's being screwed by
all those people he himself appointed, poor ol persecuted Trump. Sounds like our Jewish
friends with all the victimization BS.
Its clear that voting no longer works folks, this is an undemocratic and illegitimate
"government" we have here. We let them get away with killing JFK, RFK, MLK, Vietnam, we let
them get away with 9/11, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria. They've made a mess in Africa. All
the refugees into Europe, all the refugees from Latin America that have already come from CIA
crimes, more will come.
We wouldn't need a wall if Wall St would stop with their BS down there!
You can't just blame Jews, yes there are lots of Jews in Corporate America, bu t not all
of them are, and there are lots of Jews who speak out against this. We were doing this long
before Israel came into existence. You can't just blame everything one one group, I think
Israel/Zionist are responsible for a lot of BS, but you can't exclude CIA, Wall St,
Corporations, Banks, The MIC either. Its not just one group, its all of them. They're all
evil, they're imperialists and they're all capitalists.
I think Israel is just a capitalist creation, nothing to do with Jews, just a foothold
in he middle east for Wall St to have a base to control the oil and gas there, they didn't
create Israel until they discovered how much oil was there, and realized how much control
over the world it would give them to control it.
Those people moving to Israel are being played, just like the "Christian Zionists" here
are, its a cult. Most "Jews" are atheists anyhow, and it seems any ol greedy white guy can
claim to be a Jew. So how do you solve a "Jewish Problem" if anybody can claim to be a Jew? I
think solving the capitalist problem would be a little easier to enforce.
All of the shills can scream about communists, socialists and marxists all they want.
Capitalism is the problem always has been always will be. Its a murderous, immoral,
unsustainable system that encourages greed, it is a system who's driving force is maximizing
profits, and as such the State controlled or aligned with Corporations is the most advanced
form of capitalism because it is the most profitable. They're raping the shit out of us,
taking our money to fund their wars, so they can make more money while paying little to no
taxes at all. Everything, everyone here complains about is caused by CAPITALISM, but nobody
dares say it, they've been programmed since birth to think that way.
We should nationalize our oil and gas, instead of letting foreigners come in and steal it,
again paying little or no taxes on it, then selling the oil they took from our country back
to us. Russia and Venezuela do it, Libya did it, Iraq did it, and they used the money for the
people of the country, they didn't let the capitalists plunder their wealth like the traitors
running our country. We're AT LEAST $21 trillion in the hole now from this wonderful system
of ours, don't you think we should try something else? Duh!
It is the love of money, the same thing the Bible warned us about.
Imperialism/globalism is the latest stage of capitalism, that is what all of this is about,
follow the money. Just muh opinion
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said "we're getting ready to defend our country" as the
U.S. presses him to cede power.
While President Donald Trump signaled he's confident a transition of power to opposition
leader Juan Guaido is under way and said the use of U.S. military force in Venezuela remains
"an option," Maduro went on Spanish television to denounce foreign meddling.
... ... ...
"Nobody in the world can come and disavow our constitution and our institutions and try and
impose ultimatums," Maduro told broadcaster La Sexta in comments aired Sunday, referring to
attempts by Spain and other European Union countries to set a deadline for an early
presidential election. Venezuela's armed forces and civilian militias are preparing for an
invasion, he said...
... ... ...
The allegiances of the military, Venezuela's most powerful institution, may determine the
outcome of the power struggle between Maduro and Guaido...
Three miles away, Maduro ... told thousands of red-clad supporters and soldiers: "Venezuela
doesn't surrender. Venezuela charges forward."
Imagine the response of the USA Goobermint if, in an obverse scenario of the Venezuelan
fiasco, the Roosians and Chai-nese decided Trump was an undemocratic dictator and declared
they are depositing all USA payments they owe into Bernie Sander's accounts?
Oh, I'm sorry, bad analogy: unlike Guaido, Sanders actually ran and would be hanging
around the oval office if we had a democracy.
I note by other sources "Acting President of The United State", John Bolton, has stated he
will send President Murado to Gitmo .....Apparently, a coup took place and Trump has been
demoted from Chief Moron to Acting Moron of the United States.
Expect the Venezuelan White Helmets to appear real soon. This "project" is being run using
the same plan as Syria. This means that shortly there will be reports that the Bolivarian
government has used chemical weapons it doesn't have against the "freedom fighters".
"... Historically those kinds of gangs are among the prime recruiting grounds for coup-supporting thugs. So the US propaganda lies about them also indicates coup planner interest in recruiting them to help Guano's usurpation attempt. ..."
Historically those kinds of gangs are among the prime recruiting grounds for
coup-supporting thugs. So the US propaganda lies about them also indicates coup planner
interest in recruiting them to help Guano's usurpation attempt.
"... This coup has entered bizarro land even for a coup. The lack of current military action suggests to me that Trump is bluffing. And by the way he will lose in 2020 if he opens up a flagrant military intervention in another country. Just Air strikes are possible but without a real ground support, I"m not sure they'll do much and I think these will also cost him 2020. ..."
"... This is almost 'destabilisation by numbers and it is so obvious and in-you-face that it is deeply offensive to any person of conscience. But therein lies the point....psychopaths have no conscience, and the team running this gig probably all got to the top leaving a trail of sh1t and corpses behind them. ..."
"... Anyone remember the notorious Operation Fast and Furious scandal about ten years ago in which the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) ran a sting operation allowing licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to buyers working for Mexican drug cartels, in the belief that tracking the guns would lead to making arrests of their ultimate owners? ..."
"... How much of the gang violence in Venezuela is associated with drugs, the US War on Drugs in other parts of Central and South America, and the United States' own involvement in selling drugs through the CIA and other agencies in those areas, and the gang networks that have benefited and allowed to grow from there into other countries in the Western Hemisphere: that would be interesting to know. ..."
"... An article published at Stalkerzone , gives a glimpse of what could be described as an informational coup, where fake news with fake images are spreaded, mainly through Twitter, and this way they the US and its puppets in Venezuela try to create and "alternative reality" in which crowds who belong to events where supporters of President Maduro take part, are presented as the crowd supporting that unknown personage till some days ago, Guaido, and assertions about alleged meetings of the US appointed new president of Venezuela with members of the FANB are also presented as facts without any graphic evidence and the very FANB denying any contact with the coupist. ..."
"... The crisis in Venezuela is not simply a matter of left wing versus right wing political and economic systems. It is also rooted in competing ideas about racial and cultural worth. The ugly truth is that for some, it is still a matter of civilisation versus barbarism ..."
"... Claiming a commitment to ending foreign wars while threatening Venezuela with a coup is the epitome of Orwellian doublespeak. Is it really necessary to get in to the semantics of "war"? ..."
"... anyone who was really committed to peace wouldn't have psycho war hawks like Bolton and Pompeo around. Even dusting off a Reagan-era war criminal speaks volumes. ..."
"... Also have to give a tip of the hat to SST/W. Patrick Lang for linking his 12 page paper "Bureaucrats Versus Artists " While it's always easy to hate the CIA and U.S. IC, he reminds me that they do or at least did have an crucial politically-neutral information gathering mission for leaders in a democratic republic, and that mission has mostly been usurped by internal forces over the years. ..."
"... The idea that government policies are a well oiled machine, well, not so much. More like psychotic many multiples of the three stooges. Galbraith comments elsewhere about the military hardliners, wanting total victory. He points out that what they are actually advocating is total annihilation. Suicide. ..."
"... "Nothing has changed." You got that wrong. Now if Hillary, the Libya destruction architect, had been elected that would be true. But Trump has been a fresh air to anarchists especially. ..."
"... Half a million children under 5 were killed in Iraq just from the sanctions. The dead, the injured, and the displaced are still dead, injured, and displaced regardless of what weapon was used. ..."
"... Since the West cannot complete its World Order project they must revitalize the war strategy into a long term cold war type. What we see is a circling of wagons and threats against any who are not "with us". I think the speed with which steps are being taken are because of the threat of questions about finance that need to be silenced with more war and fear of any sort. ..."
"... I hope what folks are seeing by the actions of the West is that Rule-Of-Law is really just Rule-Of-Power/Control begat by owning the global tools of finance with a myth cover of Rule-Of-Law just like economics is a myth cover for the elite making all the big investment decisions and those results trickling down so to speak.... ..."
"... The [Trump's] agenda is not to destroy the Empire but to transform it to meet the challenge from Russia and China. Anyone that sees those changes and reads 'disintegration' is only seeing what they want to see. ..."
"... The transformation is to a much darker place and far from anything like democracy. For those of us that don't truck in misguided fantasies, the psyops, economic warfare, and militarism tells us all we need to know. Is it any wonder that the one chosen to lead us down the garden path to dystopia is an egotistical maniac? Trump was SELECTED, not elected, by the likes of: Hillary, McCain, Brennan, Mueller, Clapper, Kissinger, and Schumer. ..."
"... Sorry but does Mr. Maduro have a fetish of repeating every step from the Maidan playbook. You just let foreigners run around Caracas inciting the coup? Remember, the very last step from that playbook, of Russian spetznatz coming to rescue your sorry ass, is not available to you because you live a bit out of the way. These regime-change "journalists" are foreign agents who must be rounded up pronto (for their own protection of course). ..."
"... I remember how Reagan started to wobble a bit towards the end of his term. Part of me suspects that Trump is himself in a bit of a decline and is thus the best vehicle for his cadre of Iagos to subvert his power into their projects. Clinton would have been even better in that respect. ..."
"... More on topic, however, is the general characteristic of South and Central American rebellion. Savage, well-armed, even if only with Machetes, and shades of evil rather than a clear moral choice. If your hobby is pouring billions of dollars into the fire to sow mayhem there is no better place. ..."
"... I would predict that given the well-orchestrated push to recognize Guaido that the plan to overthrow Maduro's government is both inevitable and long-expected. The question is how the aftermath will roll out depending on whether or not the Columbian rebel groups link up with the Venezuelan resistance and the whole region explodes. Just a question. But I would bet that such a scenario is not unforseen by the American puppeteers. ..."
"... 'Old habits die hard', or as Pindar via Herodotus opined, 'Custom rules'. Key elements of the customary process for Empires' regime change efforts are to demonize the targeted leader, economic warfare on the targeted country, make up lurid stories, infiltrate with foreign saboteurs and NED-type internal subversion. John Perkin's 'Economic Hit Man' described the process of gaining leverage via financial means, debt the key. As Perkins noted, then there are the assassination squads, and then finally the US military, which has of late been heavily supplemented with mercenaries and private armies. ..."
"... Grayzone ..."
"... Venezuelan economist Luis Enrique Berrizbeitia, one of the top Latin American neoliberal economists, is a former executive director of the International Monetary Fund... ..."
"... Elliott Abrams is notorious for overseeing the U.S. covert policy of arming right-wing death squads during the 1980s in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala. ..."
"... Historically those kinds of gangs are among the prime recruiting grounds for coup-supporting thugs. So the US propaganda lies about them also indicates coup planner interest in recruiting them to help Guano's usurpation attempt. ..."
"... They would make Venezuela the new Pinochet-era Chile. Trump is not alone in supporting Saudi Arabia and its Wahabi terrorists acting, as Lyndon Johnson put it, "Bastards, but they're our bastards." ..."
"... The proof that what the US and its appointed fake president Guaido are looking for is a civil war in Venezuela, which would dismantle the sate and transform it into a failed state, is to e found in Guaido´s beligerent speech in front of the crowd concetrated to hear him in an Eastern rich neighborhood, people who dispersed themselves quite fast, after showing so excited by what Guaido was saying, once his disapassionate and clearly anti-Venezuelan speech finished.. ..."
"... The oil part may be the selling point for Trump but the real deep state motive is to crush socialism. ..."
"... Is Bolton in charge, or is Pence? Pence certainly has been the face of much of the Venezuela policy. Is it because 1) He's modeling the office of the VP after GHW Bush's and Cheney's lead? 2)Trump has been so consumed with the congressional showdown and govt. shutdown, that he's let Pence, Pompeo and Bolton take the lead on Venezuela? 3) Trump is planning to go out in a blaze of glory -- declare Mission Accomplished on his agenda (even if he has to declare a State of Emergency to get his Wall) and resign, leaving Pence in charge (with the power to pardon him if need be). ..."
"... On thing I left out of my original coverage was that during the Q&A the Coup representatives were asked about how they would treat international agreements signed by the Maduro government and they basically said 1) that would not acknowledge any agreement signed by Maduro's government since 2015 and 2) they specifically called out Russia & China saying that if they wanted any of their agreements with Venezuelan honoured they would need to remove their support for Maduro - needless to say I don't think talking smack to the Russians or Chinese will accomplish much for the coup plotters. Nor do I think the Cuban government is threatened in the least by the latest threats to Cuba ..."
"... Finally, in regard to the coup in Venezuela, I just finished watching a documentary about the torture and murder of Victor Jara after the Chilean coup. A man who had been an 18 year Chilean Military conscript and participated in the human rights abuses after the coup said he still suffered from the guilt of his actions. He appeared very sad and old beyond his years. Meanwhile a retired CIA officer expressed no regret for his actions and looked great. It helps to be a psychopath or sociopath. I'm sure that Trump, Bolton, Pompeo, etc. will not suffer if their actions regarding Venezuela result in death and suffering. ..."
"... That's some convoluted reasoning and you are clearly very invested in it and are able to adapt it to anything Trump does. Failure isn't a strategy for success and appointments of rabid neocons isn't a strategy for peace. ..."
To demonize the President of Venzuela, Nicolás Maduro, and Venezuelan government forces, a concerted effort is made to falsely
depict gang violence, and the police reaction to it, as a confrontation between coup supporting protesters and the Maduro government.
Gang violence in the various slums in Caracas and elsewhere has been a problem for decades. The phenomenon is by far not exclusive
to Venezuela. The gangs mostly fight each other over territory, but sometimes collide with the police that tries to keep the violence
level down. This violence has nothing to do with the recently attempted coup or the anti-government protest by the mostly well-off
people who support it.
On January 29 the Washington Post , the CIA's
favored outlet ,
launched the campaign . As
detailed yesterday an incident of gang violence and the police's reaction to it was manipulated into a story of anti-government
protest.
The first three paragraph of the story told of an alleged anti-government protests in a slum in Caracas which included the arson
of a culture center. The next day the police arrested some culprits which led to more violence. Some twenty propaganda filled paragraphs
about the coup attempt follow. Only at the end of the Washington Post piece was revealed what really happened. The arson
incident took place a January 22, a day before the coup attempt. It was a gang attack:
Around midnight, neighbors say, a group of hooded boys threw molotov cocktails at the culture center.
The following day the police arrested some of the arsonists. More rioting followed:
A group set fire to barricades, threw stones and attacked an outpost of the National Guard. ... Neighbors said that criminal gangs
were among the crowd and created havoc by violently confronting the police .
The whole tit for tat incident was typical gang vs. police violence. It likely had nothing to do with the coup attempt.
BigLie Media tries again with the same old lies inside a somewhat new package. BigLie Media can't seem to make up its mind--first
it attacks Trump and his policies, then it supports Trump and his policies. How many others notice do ya think?
Lather, rinse, repeat. In France police are targeting nonviolent gilets jaunes protesters which has resulted in many serious injuries,
amputations, and loss of eyesight from rubber bullets. The plan here is to link black bloc violence with the protests as a way
of discrediting the movement and justifying a violent crackdown. One wonders to what level black bloc is acting as agents provocateurs,
as evidence shows is the case from past events. Check out Vanessa Beeley's reporting from France:
Demonization and propaganda are the normal operating mode of the US regime. If the the Washington Post is the CIA's favored outlet
then the NYT is a close second.
Many Thanks B. The garbage I am reading on MSM and sites that purport to be alternative news like zerohedge indicate war is imminent
and maybe necessary to prevent bloodshed. It's the WMD and babies killed in incubaters thing all over again. Your piece explains
the violence and gives great in depth and insight rather than drum beating.
This coup has entered bizarro land even for a coup. The lack of current military action suggests to me that Trump is bluffing.
And by the way he will lose in 2020 if he opens up a flagrant military intervention in another country. Just Air strikes are possible
but without a real ground support, I"m not sure they'll do much and I think these will also cost him 2020.
The longer this goes on, the worse Guiado looks. If it drags on he loses his legitimacy among the rather illegitimate coup
supporters. The question is what happens next?
Emmanuel Goldstein , Feb 1, 2019 4:49:13 PM |
link
This is almost 'destabilisation by numbers and it is so obvious and in-you-face that it is deeply offensive to any person
of conscience. But therein lies the point....psychopaths have no conscience, and the team running this gig probably all got to
the top leaving a trail of sh1t and corpses behind them.
I wonder what stunts they will pull in the U.K if Corbyn&Co come
to power. They really, really don't like socialism of any sort. Will they refuse to recognise Corbyn an PM and only deal through
the Maybot? That's the logical outcome of this new MO...
"...Gang violence is a huge problem in Venezuela. Like in other countries it is a side-effect of rapid urbanization and the
uncontrolled growth of new city quarters or slums. Other factors are drugs and the availability of weapons. Some six million guns
are believed to be in civilian hands and drug dealing is rampant. Youth unemployment exacerbates the problem ..."
One might want to ask where the weapons originally were made and sold, and where the drugs originally came from and who supplied
them.
Anyone remember the notorious Operation Fast and Furious scandal about ten years ago in which the US Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) ran a sting operation allowing licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to buyers working for Mexican
drug cartels, in the belief that tracking the guns would lead to making arrests of their ultimate owners? Eventually so many
guns ended up south of the US border in Mexico that the ATF couldn't track any of them. Quite a few of those guns ended up killing
US border patrol police. We would be naive to think that some version of Operation Fast and Furious hasn't been repeated elsewhere.
How much of the gang violence in Venezuela is associated with drugs, the US War on Drugs in other parts of Central and
South America, and the United States' own involvement in selling drugs through the CIA and other agencies in those areas, and
the gang networks that have benefited and allowed to grow from there into other countries in the Western Hemisphere: that would
be interesting to know.
Blooming Barricade , Feb 1, 2019 5:13:21 PM |
link
These people are completely embarrassing and just sad. Another weapons-company funded talking point, pushed out via the Foundation
for Defence of Democracies, says that Maduro is a representative of "Russian Imperialism," or even "Cuban(!) Imperialism." Such
nonsense is meant to deflect the obvious imperialism of the USA and has sadly been repeated by so-called anarchists at Libcom.
Even the Wall Street Journal is more honest about the fact that this is obviously a US-led regional coup plan. Parroting Lockheed-Martin
to own the "tankies."
Note that most real world anarchists not backed by disinfo agencies are not insane and don't believe FDD sludge
Blooming Barricade , Feb 1, 2019 5:21:35 PM |
link
The New York Slimes had a front page story on the alleged "extermination units" of Maduro, needless to say all of their information
came from "human rights and civil society groups" OBVIOUSLY funded by the National Endowment for Democracy and therefore worthy
and democratic organizations such as Exxon-Mobil, McDonald's, Goldman Sachs, Boeing, CitiGroup, the US Chamber of Commerce, Visa,
Hilton Hotels, and more. See here:
https://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2019/01/us-regime-change-in-venezuela.html
Blooming Barricade , Feb 1, 2019 5:25:16 PM |
link
Abby Martin on the beat:
"War danger is very real. Bolton threatens to send Maduro to US torture house Guantanamo if he doesn't resign in insane,
unhinged interview where he claims Russian & Cuban agents are in Venezuela assassinating peaceful protesters on behalf
of the government" https://twitter.com/AbbyMartin/status/1091443808636522496
The business of conflation of gang violence with protest is not new. See the kidnapping of Aristide in 2004 by US special forces,
and the associated coup.
The Canadian government was working with former police chief of Gonaives, turned international cocaine trader, Guy Philippe
(see the confession of 9 November 2004 in the Canadian parliament, as made by then Canadian ambassador the Haiti, Hon. Dr. Claude
Bucher re cooperation with Philippe, and Internet archive backups of DEA fugitive lists for Miami Florida circa 2013 e.g. for
Philippe's involvement in the cocaine trade; there were much earlier indications, but they have been scrubbed off the internet,
e.g. a 2007 Reuters article regarding a DEA raid on Philippe's compound).
In cooperation with the Canadian government, Philippe illegally returned to Haiti. When the leader of the "Cannibal Army" street
gang was killed in a intergang shootout, Philippe took over leadership of the Cannibal Army gang, and accused Aristide of killing
said leader, which the financial press parroted (the Cannibal Army became peaceful opposition protesters in the official propaganda),
and after the coup, former Haitian prime minister Yvon Neptune was held for two years on genocide charges (sic), regarding the
gang shootout.
When Phillipe took over leadership of the Cannibal Army gang, be renamed it several times, settling on "the national revolutionary
front for the liberation of Haiti."
The reason the press felt that they could get away with such a lie was that certain gangs had agreed not to attack the police,
including both the Cannibal Army, and the gang which killed the then leader of the Cannibal Army. The financial press (including
notoriously The Economist) had been referring for some time prior to the coup to such gangs as "Aristide supporters" and to gangs
that refused, as "political opposition."
The reason for such arrangements (police negotiating with gangs) was a Clinton law, nominally passed against the Cedras junta,
but only enforced upon Aristide's return, preventing the Haitian the government from importing automatic arms, thus putting the
police at a disadvantage relative to the gangs.
When the coup started, and the Cannibal Army started attacking the Gonaives police, said police started fighting back. When
it became obvious that the police would win, the US special forces conducted their kidnapping of Aristide. For an overview, see
Kevin Pina's Haiti We Must Kill the Bandits.
Since the coup, Canada and USA have run several fraudulent elections in Haiti, in violation of the Haitian constitution. Tactics
have included burning dumpsters full of ballots, preventing Aristide's party from running, and outright ballot stuffing, with
an attendant drop in voter participation.
One correction to my above comment: Not ballot stuffing, but giving fraudulent counts for ballot boxes. After five boxes were
checked in the last fraudulent US run Haitian election, in which the actual ballots were anti-US puppet while the official count
was in favour of the US puppet, the US corrected the totals for the examined boxes, while refusing to allow recounts of any other
boxes, thereby giving the US puppet a win.
I'm amazed that you can read through the drivel and lies published by the likes of the New York Times and Washington Post regards
Venezuela. Once the NYT, on day one of the coup, pretended there some some question regards the legitimacy Maduro's election,
I lost all patience. I watch Jimmy Dore talking to Abby Martin, someone who has been there recently.
But thank you for posting on this further spewing of idiocy and lies from the NYT and WashPost. Those publications don't even
seem to care to base their critiques of Venezuela and Maduro on some kind of verifiable reality.
Fixing Bloomberg's text to apply to events closer to home:
The capitalist regime has regularly sent the police forces racing into slums in personnel carriers. Its masked and helmeted
members, equipped with full military gear, helmets, batons, and shields, attack demonstrators with weapons including tear gas,
guns and even grenades.
By the way, Guy Philippe now
is appealing
his own plea bargain (money laundering in cocaine trade related activities). In one of the articles that was scrubbed off
the internet, an interview with "before it is news" with Philippe, Philippe protested that US puppet dictator of Haiti (and former
pole dancer / rapper, Michel Martelly aka Sweet Mickey) was far more involved in the international cocaine trade than Philippe
ever had opportunity to be. Also, Philippe has been involved in the cocaine trade since at least
1999 .
Duterte has a solution to drug and gang violence. The west protests vigorously, now why is that? Duterte learned from the events
in Haiti that the west will use the gangs to destroy him. Eh Maduro!! learn from Duterte.
Since nothing about any of this makes sense, let me run another theory past you.
Trump accused of 'stopping working' as schedule reveals he averaged one event per day in January. As the link says,
if Trump has stopped doing anything except "hate-tweeting" and watching Fox News, this would be an opening for Pence and his friends
to do whatever they please. Venezuela might be as simple as killing some time and gaining some practice while waiting for events
in the mideast to come to a boil.
I've seen claims Trump was desperately looking to get out of the Shutdown while still saving face. If being President isn't
fun anymore, he may be looking for a "heroic" way out of that position as well.
"Anyone remember the notorious Operation Fast and Furious scandal about ten years ago in which the US Bureau
of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) ran a sting operation allowing licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to buyers working
for Mexican drug cartels, in the belief that tracking the guns would lead to making arrests of their ultimate owners?"
I recall reading there was a further goal of the Fast and Furious project; when the guns eventually showed up in the US it
would be used as justification for draconian gun control as clearly regulating dealers didn't "work." I don't recall where I read
that, it was sometime ago.
It is estimated that 5 million Colombians entered Venezuela in the last two decades, some of whom brought a culture of violence
with them (a sort of Jihad)...
Thanks b, as always, you just cut right through the BS.
Jen@14 -My thoughts exactly. Drugs, money, guns, and violence. The gangs should be considered proxy forces of the Empire. Their
role is to destabilize and terrorize.
In the US, heavily militarized police forces have impunity to kill unarmed, non-threatening people of color, even children,
with barely a peep from the presstitutes. That thought leads to the white-suprematist nature of the Empire and how the genocide
and ethic cleansing of the US has been so complete that indigenous people today are less than 1% of the population and are still
viewed by the ptb as an impediment to "progress". Remember how the Standing Rock protests ended?
The hubris and hypocracy of the Empire knows no bounds.
By the way, that pinnacle of journalism the Daily Mail is blocking pro Maduro posts on its Vz stories, people are noticing it
and posting comments complaining on other stories.
Sorry, reference from 2015: 5 millones de colombianos han huido hacia Venezuela (5 million Colombians have escaped to Venezuela).
Sabemos que Semana, El Tiempo, El Espectador, Caracol, RCN (por nombrar algunos) mantienen una incesante campaña mediática
desde Colombia contra Venezuela y la Revolución Bolivariana. La matriz derrocha tinta y baba cotidianamente contra el país
mientras hace caso omiso de los problemas internos colombianos (que, por fuerza, se han impuesto por actores foráneos).
EL CIUDADANOMARCH 2, 2015
(We know that Semana, El Tiempo, El Espectador Caracol, RCN to mention only some have created an incessant media campaign
against Venezuela and the Bolivarian Revolution.)
Colombia is less violent overall than Venezuela, on a per capita basis, by about a factor of two. Colombia banned
leaded petrol in the early 1990s, although smuggling of subsidized and leaded Venezuelan petrol (until 2005) has resulted in Colombian
border towns having higher murder rates than the nearby Venezuelan towns from where the petrol was smuggled. If excessive violence
in Venezuela is being perpetrated by Colombians, they will largely be from border areas.
Oh, Come on, do you not know how the fucking empire works? Colombia is what Cuba was pre 1959, a playground for elites with prostitution
the major dollar earner.
In his latest
, Pepe Escobar gives Bolton a new moniker--"psycho killer"--which I find quite apt. An excellent addition to Hudson's essay, Pepe's
piece provides new information for us:
"Psycho killer Bolton's by now infamous notepad stunt about '5,000 troops to Colombia', is a joke; these would have no
chance against the arguably 15,000 Cubans who are in charge of security for the Maduro government; Cubans have demonstrated
historically they are not in the business of handing over power."
Brazil has said they'll be no invasion from its land. I seem to recall similar noise coming from Colombia despite the Outlaw
US Empire's having leased 8 bases. The upshot is Economic War is the worst aggression the Outlaw US Empire is capable of visiting
on Venezuela. But has Hudson details, a method of resisting/counter-attacking now exists and continues to gain strength. The old
"Core" nations are slowly being relegated to the periphery while committing treason to the principles they once sought to impose
globally. No, the Hybrid Third World War isn't yet over, but we can now discern how it will end.
"President Donald Trump will reaffirm his intention to end US involvement in foreign military conflicts when he delivers his
State of the Union (SOTU) address next week, a senior administration told reporters.
"'In terms of protecting America's national security, the president will update Congress on his diplomatic and military
efforts around the world and reaffirm his determination to protect American interest and bring to an end our endless foreign
wars,' the official said on Friday."
I learned a lot from Hudson's piece, but I fact-checked one statement of his and it seems wrong - he claims the President of the
World Bank is traditionally a post for US Secretary of Defense (presumably after being SecDef), but looking at the list of past
World Bank Presidents, I only see one secdef, and 2ish assistant/deputy secdefs. The others seem unrelated to the US Dept of Defense.
Does anyone know more about this? Is Hudson mistaken? Or is there more to it than what I found out?
@ karlof1 | Feb 1, 2019 8:04:07 PM | 41
I don't doubt that Trump wants to end foreign wars, which the US is consistently losing, a no-brainer decision, it's his lack
of sensibility that's a worry when he also supports --
>a large increase in the size of the army, which is only required for foreign wars (Mexico and Canada are quite benign).
> an Army general for Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, out of rotational order (which would have favored Air Force).
> big bucks going for Army modernization
The fact is that the US doesn't need a standing army* at all, and having one only contributes to the chance of (plans for) foreign
wars.
My guess is Trump's trying to buy loyalty, what with all the impeachment talk, which is serious, but who knows. He offers no explanation.
* Constitutional scholars out there know about Article I, Section 8 which favors a standing navy, but not a standing army:
1: The Congress shall have Power. . .
12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
13: To provide and maintain a Navy;
An article published at Stalkerzone , gives a glimpse of what could be described as an informational coup, where fake
news with fake images are spreaded, mainly through Twitter, and this way they the US and its puppets in Venezuela try to create
and "alternative reality" in which crowds who belong to events where supporters of President Maduro take part, are presented as
the crowd supporting that unknown personage till some days ago, Guaido, and assertions about alleged meetings of the US appointed
new president of Venezuela with members of the FANB are also presented as facts without any graphic evidence and the very FANB
denying any contact with the coupist.
Also, gets debunked the general message on Maduro´s incompetency to manage Venezuelan economy and state, spreaded, not only
by the US and its puppet media/governments, but also by those who are supposed to be in the "resistance" side, those whose anti-socialist
views makes them contribute to the informational coup.
On the same vein, debunking all the lies who make Maduro and the Bolivarian system and government responsible for the straits
produced by an organized harassment which started not this month but several years ago,
a Spanish professor has written a letter to Spanish president,
Sánchez , so as to, not only ashame him, but also warn him about the posible outcome of allowing this outrage to happen and
the breaking point reached with what at all ights seem the full abolishment of International Law...he is offering economic data
to defintiely debunk all the authors, "analysts", and commenters out there spreading plain lies, without offering any fact to
support their claims against Maduro
"Mr. President You, as your party has done so many times, have had the cowardice to put aside a new aggression against a
country that defends its sovereignty at all costs, aligning itself with the US guidelines in this respect.
But, Mr. President, you know very well that Venezuela is the most advanced democracy in all of Latin America, which has
held some 29 elections since 1999 (the year in which Chávez arrived at the head of state), the majority under international
supervision, and with the system of "The most advanced electoral count in the world" according to the Jimmy Carter Foundation.
In fact, the last legislative elections were won by the opposition.
You know, because in your office it is impossible not to know, that Venezuela has some of the most important achievements
of the continent. It appears as the country of the area with the greatest reduction in the percentage of poverty, which went
from 28.9% in 1998 to 19.6% in 2013; and the percentage of households in extreme poverty decreased from 10.8% to 5.5% in the
same period.
You also know, how could you not know? That Venezuela is the country in the region that has fought the most against inequality.
The Gini coefficient (according to which 0 is the maximum equality and 1 the superlative inequality) in 1998 was 0.486 and
in 2013 it reached 0.398, the lowest in Latin America.
Also, if you do not know for sure that some of the diplomats of your government did, Unesco declared Venezuela under
the Chávez government "Free of Illiteracy Territory", and this country has a net primary schooling rate of 95.90. %.
I would also have to know that the evolution of child malnutrition in children under 5 years of age went from 7.70% in
1990 to 2.53% in 2013. This country deserves recognition from the United Nations Food and Nutrition Organization. Agriculture-FAO.
While the vacancy rate went from 15.2% in 1999 to 7.1% in April 2014 (the one that the Kingdom of Spain already wanted far
away). Venezuela reached 0,771 in the HDI, which includes it in the group of countries considered with a "High Level of Human
Development", to be above the average of Latin America and the Caribbean. You also know, I am sure, that the government of
Venezuela provides housing for its population and that there are no evictions.
You must also know, how you will not know if even your party mate Rodríguez Zapatero let you see when he was a mediator
in Venezuela, that the serious crisis in this country is caused by the ruthless economic war that is perpetrated against him,
launched first of all by USA and seconded by subaltern countries as unfortunately is the Kingdom of Spain.
I remind you of some of the characteristics of that war. The unilateral closure of bank accounts of the Venezuelan State
to make it difficult for suppliers to pay essential goods and to meet other commitments. The cancellation, for exclusively
political reasons, of vital imports, as was the case of treatments for malaria. Withholding crucial currencies to purchase
basic goods (for example, in November 2017, financial services provider Euroclear retained 1.65 billion dollars of Venezuela
that were destined to the purchase of foods and medicines). The Venezuelan Executive has retained close to 2.5 billion dollars
of international operations, in different banks, either for debt or import payments, or for oil bills. Wells Fargo Bank withheld
and canceled payments of 7.5 million dollars for the sale of energy to Brazil. It also has retained foreign currency to pay
back payments to pensioners abroad. And they have been retaining food shipments for the population that were already paid (for
example, in December 2017, 2,200 tons of pork were kept for two weeks at the Colombian border, rotting during retention).
Now they also want to take away their gold reserves from foreign banks and steal the profits from their oil. To which
is added the internal economic warfare that the Venezuelan business class carries out, hoarding all kinds of products to cause
a widespread shortage, or playing with currency exchange rates to destabilize the country.
And afterwards, governments like yours that collaborate with all of this proclaim that it is necessary to send "humanitarian
aid" to Venezuela.
Size cynicism is also part of that brutal economic war to which I referred, whose steps and specific objectives I already
explained in this same medium and that seeks to cause deaths and suffering without limits in the Venezuelan population, in
order to surrender and lift up against your government. That war is accompanied by a terrible media bombardment that is almost
unprecedented. The means of mass dissemination have always been used to "soften" the consciences of societies before initiating
a war against any population. They did it recently in Iraq, in Yugoslavia, in Ukraine, in Libya, in Syria ... but what Venezuela
is suffering is already truly long and exhausting. In fact, this monotonous bombardment is so insistent that it already convinces
almost all European people that something bad has to have that government so that they persecute him so much. When in reality
they should ask themselves what a good government does so that all the powerful and the extreme-right, starting with the "crazy"
Trump, want to sink him.
And it is that the main weapon of massive destruction of the USA, that has no rival in the world, is the monopolistic
control of mass media, the dictation of world news (with the consequent systematic and planned disinformation), or which is
the same, the reality construction machine.(...)
But I suppose that if the great world powers that give instructions to your government resort to such a crude option,
it is because things go very badly for them and they must be quite desperate, enough to put the world in a new phase without
rules, where war and aggression between countries prevails over any convention. Because you, with your position, are also complicit
in a probable military intervention of unpredictable consequences in the heart of the Great American Homeland. It will make
all of Spain complicit in it.
Mr President, you know perfectly, to finish, that any European government would have reacted by totally closing the democratic
space before a threat of external interference, coup d'état or armed insurgency sponsored by third parties. Look, if not, how
the Spanish governments have reacted just because someone asks for urns in Catalonia. Or how Britain closed the "freedom of
the press" for the Falklands war that was thousands of kilometers away. All this has been faced by Venezuela, however, without
leaving a permanent path of dialogue, as again our former head of government, Zapatero, can testify.
I believe that you do not feel any remorse for your crude ultimatum to the legitimate president of Venezuela, but do
you really feel no concern before the free way that is giving to others in the Kingdom of Spain? A country, which as its name
indicates, can not choose its head of state, nor (at least not yet) has it chosen you either.
I am with you. Results given to DJT will have to be in terms measured in a tangible wind-down to these occupations. He is not
a politician who excels in Orwellian-speak as those above mention. His apolitical nature is the only true bright spot in his presidency.
His contributions have given terminology like "globalism" back its weight for the public to peruse, when of course they are not
frothing at the mouth with TDS. He deserves a lot of credit and speaking on a soapbox about this important terminology and turning-point
can truly affect the impressionable in the coming generations.
There is a racial and cultural angle to the Venezuela discord (which the US and its puppets are taking advantage of). Chavez was
and Maduro is at least partly indigenous, and that rankles some who favor the white Spanish..
. . .from a 2017 article on the web...
. . .While the Chávez government attracted international attention for its economic and political programmes, it also addressed
cultural injustices. Through new cultural policies and social programmes, such as Misión Cultura, Chavismo raised the symbolic
status of the historically excluded poor and mixed-race masses.
The opposition protests that have flared up since Chávez first came to power need to be understood within this cultural
and racial context. Radical sectors of the right wing opposition have repeatedly refused to accept the legitimacy of Chavismo
and what it represents. In 2002, they helped organise both a short-lived US-backed coup and oil strikes meant to create chaos
and bring the government down. The street demonstrations raging today are aimed at achieving regime change, but the opposition
has not indicated what policies they would introduce and how they would deal with the country's problems if they were in power.
The crisis in Venezuela is not simply a matter of left wing versus right wing political and economic systems. It is
also rooted in competing ideas about racial and cultural worth. The ugly truth is that for some, it is still a matter of civilisation
versus barbarism. . .
here
Yes, I particularly like the way he kicks in the teeth the old alliances of the
US and its world-wide puppet networks favored by the establishment which Trump has threatened and acted against. Yet they still
persist. From the news
As part of the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress required the Secretary of Defense, in concert with the
Secretary of State, to "assess the foreign military and non-military activities of the People's Republic of China that could
affect the regional and global national security and defense interests of the United States. // Wow, "regional and global
national security and defense interests of the United States" leaves nothing out.
thanks b... if we could send bolton to gitmo, that'd be the beginning of something truly relevant and worthwhile - let him go
with all the other neo cons down the line since before bush2's time too.. nyt /wapo and etc...water carriers for the same evil
empire.. no surprise.. lies are all they have and they have endless reams of them...
@don bacon and nemesiscalling.. you two are still in love with trump, lol... i suppose you figure it's all an accident and
he really does want to stop the wars of aggression on various countries and etc... give it up.. the guy is off the charts unstable
and doesn't know his ass from the hole in his head.. nothing has stopped under his watch.. it has only gotten worse and now he
threatens venezuala... he will sell what the corporatocracy wants him to sell, plain, simple and just as vacuous as it sounds..
Claiming a commitment to ending foreign wars while threatening
Venezuela with a coup is the epitome of Orwellian doublespeak. Is it really necessary to get in to the semantics of "war"?
Read that second sentence very carefully, it is a case study in obfuscation.
Very interesting, thank you. I wonder how widely noticed, read or discussed this letter will be in Spain, or outside of Spain
for that matter? I've sent a heads-up to GlobalResearch.ca re Andrés Piqueras's letter.
Interdasting! No tweets, but who THEY follow is rather telling.
Related: I hate 'list of' or 'rules for' articles, but I'll make an exception for this Jefferson Morley article published yesterday
on Salon's site. Nothing earth-shattering for the whiskey bar crowd, but certainly worth a read for the history lessons.
We have not devoted a cent to toppling Venezuela as of yet, other than the career diplomats and their salaries whose job is
to fuck with their brains down in Socialist-land.
Huge difference btw the perilous chasms in the ME and Afghanistan and those in LA. How is that for obfuscation?
No one is allowed by the USA and its poodle nations to nationalize oil or any other resources. No one is allowed to do anything
tangible for poor people. However, every country is entitled to "self-determination" as long as its resources are handed over
to multinational corporations approved of by the USA.
It is the stuff of Lewis Carroll's "Through The Looking Glass".
Like it or not, James, what I said about Trump reintroducing concepts like globalism back into the public lexicon can be laid
only at the feet of one DJT.
You don't do any service to the movement by constantly decrying his poor points and not recognizing the positive or that which
we can build off.
Fuck me! Who's this AOC? The lady who has yet to mention the term "globalism" or relate to any of those that have suffered
under its ghastly load. Yeah...heap on the green jobs or we'll be dead in 12 years!
yeah, sure... someone thinks the usa neo cons haven't
Tpent a cent on trying to topple venezuala leadership, in spite of the fact they have been trying since the era of chavez!!
lets forgot about however many 100's of millions that have been spent on this ongoing exercise, not to mention probably a whole
lot more and hey - it's only money... if a few innocent people die, whatever... trump is clean, lol...
nemesiscalling.. i am not picking a side... the whole 2 party system in the usa is fucked... and while i thought trump was a breathe
of fresh air at the time he was running for the presidency, i think we have had enough time to see him for who he is - another
person who happily rubber stamps the same bs that has been an ongoing byproduct of usa foreign policy - wars, murder and mayhem
around the world 24/7... and, as a canuck, i am just as disgusted by the shills running canada at present - tru dope and unfreeland
- 2 losers from the get go... so, i am not taking sides in any of this.. i don't see any good from trump at this point.. sorry..
Apparently james and some others would be quite pleased if only the outsider Trump coming to Washington, against a continuing
establishment resistance, would start a war (like Bush did) or send 70,000 fresh troops to an existing war (as Obama did in his
first year), killing injuring and displacing millions. Well I'll go with Trump and his ending of the Afghan and Syria commitments,
and finally ending the Korea war. Perfection in life? Doesn't exist. You gotta settle for good enough.
no don... trump hasn't stopped any wars.. that is the reality, in spite of any pretensions otherwise...and there is constant talk
of more wars... sorry, but trump has been a disaster for anyone who thought something was going to change.. nothing has changed..
NemesisCalling@56
Obfuscation? Yep, you nailed it with that sentence. Lol
Since James already responded to your claim about the money I won't, but I will point out that anyone who was really committed
to peace wouldn't have psycho war hawks like Bolton and Pompeo around. Even dusting off a Reagan-era war criminal speaks volumes.
Also have to give a tip of the hat to SST/W. Patrick Lang for linking his 12 page paper
"Bureaucrats Versus Artists
" While it's always easy to hate the CIA and U.S. IC, he reminds me that they do or at least did have an crucial
politically-neutral information gathering mission for leaders in a democratic republic, and that mission has mostly been
usurped by internal forces over the years.
You are wrong because you fail to see that his actions are paving the way. Every minor concession now will not be able to be
won back by the neocon estab. Not unless they want to start WW3. With a Trump presidency, for the neocon/neolib estab, it is death
by a thousand cuts. Lickily DJT has the patience and wisdom to realize this. Like I have said many times before, he clearly idolizes
Putin and his long-game strat.
The reason there has always been a fever pitch about toppling Trump is because the estab is aware of this slow, impending death
under DJT. Hell, I have even conceded that he may not even be mindful of his own role in this slow-mo disintegration. But an ignorant
harbinger of death I would take anyway.
Sometimes, imo, we lose sight of how many different cliques and cults and agendas and interests and inertia and customs and
stupidities etc go to make up a government.
Here is a quote from J.K. Galbraith, from 1961, when he was serving under JFK as ambassador to India.
"It is hard in this job not to develop a morbid dislike for the State Department. It is remote, mindless, petty, and above
all pompous, overbearing, and late."
The idea that government policies are a well oiled machine, well, not so much. More like psychotic many multiples of the
three stooges. Galbraith comments elsewhere about the military hardliners, wanting total victory. He points out that what they
are actually advocating is total annihilation. Suicide.
Often brainy people seem especially geared to inflict massive destruction and mass murder. It has been pointed out that the
carnage the US inflicted on Indochina in the nineteen sixties and seventies was presided over by a bunch of Rhodes Scholars and
other brainy folk.
Sometimes very pleasant and good people can combine conventional success with extreme deficits in knowledge. A person of some
accomplishment once asked me if there was gravity on the moon. I checked for a moment to see if he was serious, and he was. I
answered, yes, but less than we have on Earth. On the moon, I explained, people can leap like kangaroos and kangaroos are in danger
of achieving escape velocity. But I think my humor went over his head.
So Donald Trump may not be the worst thing to happen to us. We'll have to see how this develops.
"Nothing has changed." You got that wrong. Now if Hillary, the Libya destruction
architect, had been elected that would be true. But Trump has been a fresh air to anarchists especially. Talk about a bull
in a china shop, or a tweet in a twitter shop, nothing is the same any more. Wake up and smell the coffee, james!
It's Friday night, so I bet most barflies are out at their local watering holes given the paucity of responses to Trump's planned
announcement. Smacks of Owrellianism to be sure. Ending "neverending" wars to begin anew? IMO, the Economic Wars being waged against
Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, and others count as neverending endeavors.
Most of us realize the degree of Evil deeply bound-up within the Outlaw US Empire and its network providing domestic support.
It's been several generations since the entire edifice faced a concerted push-back effort; but within the public at large, several
factions not yet coalesced are trying differing approaches--although we hear/read little thanks to BigLie Media's blackout. Much,
as we read, is happening internationally since not all sources of information are censored or blacked-out. And the push-back on
that level is very serious indeed. The point is that little victories are far better than none--history shows Paradigm Changes
do not occur rapidly--so patience is required as is a Long Game strategy. IMO, much about the Outlaw US Empire is exposed to light
now than ever before thanks to the efforts of many and advances in technology. We must keep working on our push-back-- everywhere
, in Europe most especially to get it turned from West to East, and from EU back to the European Family of Sovereign Nations.
Duterte has a solution to drug and gang violence. The west protests vigorously, now why is that? Duterte learned from the events
in Haiti that the west will use the gangs to destroy him.
Not sure where you are sourcing your information from, perhaps the MSM? Duterte is just another filipino gangster/politician.
I used to think that Philippine politics was just like American politics, but a cruder version. America has now caught up with
the Philippines. Oh, and there has been no solution to the drug and gang violence. Just a lot of dead poor sods who had done nothing
wrong other than buy from the wrong dealer. In the dead of night, the back alleys are still swarming in a fog of Shabu, and gang
violence in the Philippines is almost exclusively an activity of police and military gangs fighting over turf.
Ending "neverending" wars to begin anew? IMO, the Economic Wars being waged against Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, and others
count as neverending endeavors.
Nothing economic compares with dropping one ton exploding bombs on buildings full of people, leaving them dead injured and
displaced. Nothing. And it has gone uninterrupted for too many years.
I expect the reason that the aforementioned incident of gang violence is getting so much coverage is because it was organized
by team Guaidó, as it seems a little too convenient that the corporate media and people like Bolton can now reference it as an
example of what they claim to be the repressive nature of the Maduro government towards the poor. It wouldn't take much to pay
off one of the gangs to create an incident like this in order to provoke a police crackdown, and none the gangs would have any
loyalty to the Maduro government, given that gangs consider the police to be the enemy and the police work for the government.
Yes, Prof Hudson made a few errors in his hastily written essay, but some of his observations have simmered for awhile:
"This break has been building for quite some time, and was bound to occur. But who would have thought that Donald Trump would
become the catalytic agent? No left-wing party, no socialist, anarchist or foreign nationalist leader anywhere in the world could
have achieved what he is doing to break up the American Empire. The Deep State is reacting with shock at how this right-wing real
estate grifter has been able to drive other countries to defend themselves by dismantling the U.S.-centered world order. To rub
it in, he is using Bush and Reagan-era Neocon arsonists, John Bolton and now Elliott Abrams, to fan the flames in Venezuela. It
is almost like a black political comedy. The world of international diplomacy is being turned inside-out. A world where there
is no longer even a pretense that we might adhere to international norms, let alone laws or treaties.
"The Neocons who Trump has appointed are accomplishing what seemed unthinkable not long ago: Driving China and Russia together
– the great nightmare of Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski. They also are driving Germany and other European countries into
the Eurasian orbit, the 'Heartland' nightmare of Halford Mackinder a century ago....
"Trump's agenda may really be to break up the American Empire, using the old Uncle Sucker isolationist rhetoric of half a century
ago. He certainly is going for the Empire's most vital organs. But is he a witting anti-American agent? He might as well be
– but it would be a false mental leap to use 'cui bono' to assume that he is a witting agent. [My Emphasis]
"After all, if no U.S. contractor, supplier, labor union or bank will deal with him, would Vladimir Putin, China or Iran be
any more naïve? Perhaps the problem had to erupt as a result of the inner dynamics of U.S.-sponsored globalism becoming impossible
to impose when the result is financial austerity, waves of population flight from U.S.-sponsored wars, and most of all, U.S. refusal
to adhere to the rules and international laws that it itself sponsored seventy years ago in the wake of World War II."
IMO, what prompted Hudson to write was the publication of Bolton's threats to the ICC justice that forced him to resign that
I provided an article about several threads back. Note that he devoted an entire section of his essay to that topic and more generally
on Law. Plus, the essay's not nearly as well edited as his usually are. So, I forgive his tiny errors as they don't detract from
his essay's main thrust.
One thing about Trump I believe we'd all agree upon: He certainly isn't a rabid Neoliberalcon like the person he defeated for
POTUS. That and he's roiled domestic and international politics more than anyone would have imagined on 8 November 2016.
We both want the carnage to cease ASAP, along with all the other damage being inflicted. You've read enough of my views to
know how I feel, and vice-versa. Have you heard of Dr. Francis Boyle?
Here's a link to a review
of one of his many works and one that's as germane today as it was in 2008. I mention him because IMO the only surefire way to
defeat the War Party is through the courts as what they've been doing since 1945 is unconstitutional and illegal, and IMO can
be easily proven as such.
Don Bacon@72 Half a million children under 5 were killed in Iraq just from the sanctions. The dead, the injured, and the displaced are
still dead, injured, and displaced regardless of what weapon was used.
I have some big picture thoughts I want to share. China is a growing threat to the existence of the Western way because it seems
to be successfully mostly socialist and is projecting that win-win around the world. Empire has used the ME and SE Asia for war
focus until now but are stymied there and need to have an "enemy" (real of made up) to continue fueling the war economies.
Since the West cannot complete its World Order project they must revitalize the war strategy into a long term cold war type.
What we see is a circling of wagons and threats against any who are not "with us". I think the speed with which steps are being
taken are because of the threat of questions about finance that need to be silenced with more war and fear of any sort.
I hope what folks are seeing by the actions of the West is that Rule-Of-Law is really just Rule-Of-Power/Control begat
by owning the global tools of finance with a myth cover of Rule-Of-Law just like economics is a myth cover for the elite making
all the big investment decisions and those results trickling down so to speak....
I hope folks also grok that the elite have known about the power of "intelligence" long before countries created groups to
gather such information. To think that those who run our world do not have access to the intelligence of all Western country's
governments is in error. Look at for how many centuries the elite have maintained control and ask yourself how.....they own the
leadership.....money buys access.
I'm not sure which is worse, the Trump apologists or the Empire detractors that spin every apparent set-back or assumed over-reach
into a hopeful "this too shall pass" fantasy. Now we have the twisted conspiracy theory of Trump as "unwitting agent" of the Empire's
demise.
The [Trump's] agenda is not to destroy the Empire but to transform it to meet the challenge from Russia and China. Anyone
that sees those changes and reads 'disintegration' is only seeing what they want to see.
The transformation is to a much darker place and far from anything like democracy. For those of us that don't truck in
misguided fantasies, the psyops, economic warfare, and militarism tells us all we need to know. Is it any wonder that the one
chosen to lead us down the garden path to dystopia is an egotistical maniac? Trump was SELECTED, not elected, by the likes of:
Hillary, McCain, Brennan, Mueller, Clapper, Kissinger, and Schumer.
A very unanticipated announcement: (Trump's intention to end US involvement in foreign military conflicts) ... Reactions
from the bar?
Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 1, 2019 8:04:07 PM | 41
The world dodged a bullet when Trump won the 2-horse race from that lazy, demented old nag, Crooked Hillary. I couldn't believe
she'd be dopey enough to pretend that she didn't know about the Electoral College factor.
Trump must thoroughly enjoy uphill battles. How else to explain his Drain the Swamp declaration as the hallmark of his first
term? I took it to mean that he's putting them on notice and there's not much, short of JFK-ing him, that they can do to stop
him. And that's the way it's panning out.
I hope he's as smart as he thinks he is because his Drain the Swamp promise, and self-preservation, guaranteed that the course
of his Presidency would be hard to follow and impossible to predict. I'm in the Open Slather demographic i.e. ANYTHING he decides
to do is OK EXCEPT start a new war.
I'm expecting his SOTU to be as ambiguous as everything else he says because he's the only one with a Drain the Swamp plan
and he hasn't explained which ducks have to be lined up, in which sequence, before he'll be ready to deliver the coup de grâce.
I don't understand why there's so much anti-Trump bitching. The Swamp was winning and the Little People were F**ked financially
and peace-wise long before Trump came along. He's already done some unusually and comparatively sane things and I expect him to
do more of the same.
Sorry but does Mr. Maduro have a fetish of repeating every step from the Maidan playbook. You just let foreigners run around
Caracas inciting the coup? Remember, the very last step from that playbook, of Russian spetznatz coming to rescue your sorry ass,
is not available to you because you live a bit out of the way. These regime-change "journalists" are foreign agents who
must be rounded up pronto (for their own protection of course).
Then once this is over, Washington can have them back in exchange for the stolen billions. Remember, impunity is the Dark Throne's
greatest weapon; give them some skin in the game, and suddenly it's their side that has to think twice.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Feb 2, 2019 1:50:06 AM |
link
I remember how Reagan started to wobble a bit towards the end of his term. Part of me suspects that Trump is himself in
a bit of a decline and is thus the best vehicle for his cadre of Iagos to subvert his power into their projects. Clinton would
have been even better in that respect.
If you consider the size of potholes and mass suicide by opiate to be indicators, the decline of the USA is well underway.
More on topic, however, is the general characteristic of South and Central American rebellion. Savage, well-armed, even
if only with Machetes, and shades of evil rather than a clear moral choice. If your hobby is pouring billions of dollars into
the fire to sow mayhem there is no better place. The miraculous banana that is stocked in every grocery store even up in
Calgary or Alaska may well get there by the grace of tribute paid to local warlords. The cocaine that is sniffed in Hollywood
and New York by the ton comes from Colombia or Peru. Worldwide, restaurants thrive on beef from Argentina... as well as horse
meat from Mexico.
I would predict that given the well-orchestrated push to recognize Guaido that the plan to overthrow Maduro's government
is both inevitable and long-expected. The question is how the aftermath will roll out depending on whether or not the Columbian
rebel groups link up with the Venezuelan resistance and the whole region explodes. Just a question. But I would bet that such
a scenario is not unforseen by the American puppeteers.
Invoking Auschwitz liberation, and the anti-semitism of Maduro, Venezuela 'president' Juan Guaido WELCOMES Israel recognition!!
Referring to Soviet troops' victory, Juan Guaido thanks Netanyahu for supporting him 'just as our country is also fighting for
its freedom' Trump's special envoy for international negotiations, (((Jason Greenblatt))), applauded Jerusalem for its "courageous
stand in solidarity with the Venezuelan people." Israel takes a courageous stand in solidarity with the Venezuelan people!
https://t.co/9i8z9NOHA1
-- Jason D. Greenblatt (@jdgreenblatt45) January
27, 2019
While Venezuela once had one of the largest Jewish communities in the region, numbering some 25,000 in 1999, only about 6,000
Jews are believed to remain in the country, with many of the rest having fled to Israel, Canada, the US and elsewhere.
Maduro and his predecessor Hugo Chavez, who broke off ties with Israel in 2009, have both been strident critics of Israel,
and some Jewish community leaders have expressed fears of the government stoking anti-Semitism.
At the United Nations on Saturday, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged all nations to end Venezuela's Auschwitz "nightmare"
and support Guaido.
"Now is the time for every other national to pick a side," Pompeo told the Security Council.
"No more delays, no more games. Either you stand with the (((forces of freedom))), or you're in league with Maduro and his
anti-semitic mayhem."
'Old habits die hard', or as Pindar via Herodotus opined, 'Custom rules'. Key elements of the customary process for
Empires' regime change efforts are to demonize the targeted leader, economic warfare on the targeted country, make up lurid stories,
infiltrate with foreign saboteurs and NED-type internal subversion. John Perkin's 'Economic Hit Man' described the process of
gaining leverage via financial means, debt the key. As Perkins noted, then there are the assassination squads, and then finally
the US military, which has of late been heavily supplemented with mercenaries and private armies.
What has changed in recent
years has been the context in which this customary process takes place. Some of that: Russia and China are now stronger militarily,
and their presence and technology is spreading, the ability of the Empire to bomb with impunity is being reduced. Countries are
setting up alternative financial arrangements. The lurid story routine has lost some of its punch and audience.
The false nature of the self-congratulatory advertisements of the Empire are widely recognized. Its 'might is right' doctrine
and repudiation of common law and and common decency and common sense and common honesty is palpable.
Then along comes Donald Trump, and here it is very important to distinguish between the real character, real motives, real
plans of someone, and what actually occurs or is actually strengthened or weakened.
So, for example, one can accurately designate someone as a dishonest criminal, and still applaud that criminal's act of catching
a child as he is tossed from three stories up out of a burning building to the criminal below.
As Hudson points out, it is Trump's actual impact that is the important matter. As I've pointed out previously, Trump, Putin
and Hitler are arguably the three most frequently and harshly denigrated public figures over the last century. I don't think Stalin
and Mao are in the same league, when it comes to sheer quantity of denigration. And why has Trump been so harshly targeted: Trump
was viewed as ideologically anti-Empire, a nationalist, and Trump's effect has been to accelerate the weakening of the Empire's
full spectrum domination ways and means and ambition.
And among the many loud howls of outrage vs Trump, his stated preference/intention of removing American troops from Syria,
and his musing over vaccines and autism, are two examples.
Now note again that this is not a discussion about his 'real' motives. I'm not a mind reader. But in the case of the vaccine
and autism issue, Trump handed something of a baton to Robert Kennedy Junior, who was recently given the opportunity to speak
on the subject for five minutes on I think it might have been FOX. Kennedy said it was only the second time in ten years that
he had been given the opportunity in MSM to do do so. Trump deserves some credit here. Note that in Italy recently a common vaccine
was found to be a phony gimmick, though any reference to this in mass media was along the lines of the Italian government being
anti-science, etc.
In so far as Trump's getting out of Syria statement is concerned, the point is that by saying that Trump created a new dynamic
of sorts. It for example opened a slight door/opportunity for Tulsi Gabbard to advance her anti-war theme. Trump's statement also
made it necessary for the outraged responders to attempt to assemble some kind of rationale for leaving American troops in Syria.
They didn't come off looking all that wonderful. "So why are we in Syria again?' became part of the discussion. The best they
could do was if we leave (our ISIS) creation might metastasize, and Russia and Syria and Iran will have 'won'. In other words,
Trump's sudden 'we're getting out of Syria' declaration had to some extent a 'lancing of a boil' effect, irregardless of whether
or not it actually happens or to what extent.
First: to personne #83. In fact, the zionists have a long history of involvement in coups in central america. Read up on Sam Zemurray
and United Fruit, and also his practice run in Honduras. Second, to Sasha #47. Thank you very much for posting that letter. It
is amazing (!!!!) that the gov of Spain can be so hypocritical regarding "democracy" in Venezuela, having ruthlessly crushed the
Catalan Independence movement and Jailed (!!) it's leaders.
Finally, regarding the press and the Lima group: the mainstream press seems to be touting the same line as the US press. Trump
et al are the heroes, "Guido" is the new savior, and Maduro is a "dictator." I am not going to provide links, but I will give
examples and websites for those who wish to check. Example: the Mercurio in chile, which mostly reprints NY Times. AP and Wall
Street Journal stories portraits the coup as a done deal, with photos of "Giuido" kissing babies. Please to remember that "it's
just business." The family of chile president, Pinera, has large holdings in Latam and MasterCard. Other major chilean interest
are mining and lumber. There is already much salivating over the prospect of clear cutting the Amazon rainforest in Brazil. Venezuela
has great riches in natural resources. Qui bono? I think is the expression. website: www.emol.com. There is push back. the Tercera
has printed a two full page interview with Jorge Arreaza, Canceller de Venezuela, denouncing Pinera. "El Presiente Pinera vendio
su soberania y su autonomia a Estados Unidos." President Pinera sold his sovereignty and autonomy to the united states.
www.latercera.com edition of friday, 1 february.
It's difficult to know where this patently illegal - well - crime against humanity, in the sense that starving people to "free"
them is criminal - will end. If you strip off the expensive suits, it just looks like a gang rape to me.
On subject of Venezuela and propaganda - Excellent article about pattern of propaganda from NYT.
Article at TruthDig
But the above article is limited in background -
WIKI article on Yellow Journalism
Pulitzer himself was know for/sort of invented "Yellow Journalism".
Individuals (as in author of the 1st article) may speak contrary to the status quo, but no organization can for long and no
idividual within an organization. I've tried speaking against my boss on occassion - did not pan out well career-wise.
In short, it's not a bug, it's a feature. It's not to express dismay about but to know and understand and proceed accordingly.
The alt media does well to educate the public on this issue but also needs to present a positive alternative.
Great post, sir. You eloquently examine the effect of a DJT presidency, which many can not realize has shifted the full spectrum
dominance doctrine of the empire and rendered it gasping for air in a ditch.
We don't like DJT because he is president that models himself after Kant's Categorical Imperative. We like Trump because he
is not a true believer and that because of his inaction, unlike the last 30 years of Prezs who have taken it upon themselves to
blow up at least one country, his presidency has been marked with frequent threats of withdrawing from the ME entirely and rendering
our presence there ineffectual while also sparring with the IC community which has consistently gone on record spouting the BS
that Trump is a dangerous hand at the wheel of our FP, which has been part and parcel of the smearing attempt by the MSM to make
DJT look like an imbecile who is leading us to ruin.
But for those of us in the know, this is a good thing that we should be applauding DJT for. I will watch his SOTU with keen
interest.
After a single phone call from from U.S. Vice President Mike Pence, Guaidó proclaimed himself as president of Venezuela...
CANVAS is funded largely through the National Endowment for Democracy...
CANVAS "turned its attention to Venezuela" in 2005 after training opposition movements that led pro-NATO regime change operations
across Eastern Europe...
Venezuelan economist Luis Enrique Berrizbeitia, one of the top Latin American neoliberal economists, is a former executive
director of the International Monetary Fund...
Milton Friedman was the godfather of the notorious neoliberal Chicago Boys who were imported into Chile by dictatorial
junta leader Augusto Pinochet to implement policies of radical "shock doctrine"-style fiscal austerity...
Leopoldo López is a Princeton-educated right-wing firebrand heavily involved in National Endowment for Democracy programs
and elected as the mayor of a district in Caracas that was one of the wealthiest in the country...
Elliott Abrams is notorious for overseeing the U.S. covert policy of arming right-wing death squads during the 1980s
in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala.
@Posted by: Robert Snefjella | Feb 1, 2019 10:07:51 PM | 54
@Posted by: mourning dove | Feb 1, 2019 10:59:07 PM | 65
@Posted by: Grieved | Feb 1, 2019 11:12:04 PM | 69
Thanks to you all for reading and, obviously, indulging on my poor translation ( in which I have detected several grammar and
spelling mistakes...), but, you must know that I did it at wee hours here in Europe, with my eyes falling from sleep over the
keyboard...I was almost incapable of proofread the last paragraph of the letter which I added to the previous part i had selected
to translate.
Related to this I must say that I did not translate the whole letter, but almost all, leaving without translation some few
less relevant parts in the fear the comment would be banned here because of its longitude.
The letter was originally published at Spanish newspaper Público.es , which I found republished at Spanish site Rebelión.org
, both sites I fear with wide readership at least amongst Spanish, European left and of the world too .
I would only wish to be able to express myself better in English than I do, anyway, only I would wish you get to understand
me. You can contribute by spreading amongst your network of friends and relatives, and may be, even perfectioning my clumsy translation
to get it better shaped to be psublished at other media.
I do as much as I can, many times sacrifying too much hours of sleep to be healthy to just post comments, the reason why i can
not engage in long discussions here, or responding every one who adresses me here, since many times i have not time availale at
all to read all the comments and so your adressing may get without response. So sorry, but I prioritize forwarding the message
or the interesting article/information over discussion, for which I regrettably have not time, and which, in any way, should not
get us without the time to direct the fight to where is most needed, directly adressing our representatives on responding for
their clear transgressions of International and National Laws and the basic principles and values we deem mandatory to assure
a dign human existence on planet Earth.
Finally, I would wish saying that I do this only for solidarity and compassion towards my Venezuelan comrades, but the reality
is that I do it out of selfish interest since what is being built in front of our very eyes is the "New Totalitarian Order", where
any human right known to this date will be abolished in the benefit of transnational capital and corporations.
Historically those kinds of gangs are among the prime recruiting grounds for coup-supporting thugs. So the US propaganda lies
about them also indicates coup planner interest in recruiting them to help Guano's usurpation attempt.
In an interview with Russia's RIA Novosti news agency that aired Wednesday, Maduro said he has sent letters to the governments
of Bolivia, Mexico, Russia and Uruguay to involve them in a new process of dialogue with the opposition. Russia, which has been
Maduro's most vocal international supporter and is a major investor in Venezuela, applauded his willingness to negotiate. "The
fact that President Maduro is open to dialogue with the opposition deserves high praise," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told
reporters in a phone call. . .
here
Mexico calls for "peace and dialogue" in Venezuela -- The Mexican government recognizes Nicolas Maduro as Venezuela's president
and sees dialogue as the answer to political strife blamed for 13 deaths, Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard said Thursday, citing
his country's tradition of not interfering in the affairs of other nations.
"Mexico will maintain its stance. In synthesis: no intervention and a readiness to contribute however we can to any process that
leads to peace and dialogue," he said during President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's daily morning press conference. .
here
UN chief urges dialogue in Venezuela to avert 'disaster' --
DAVOS, Switzerland: UN chief Antonio Guterres on Thursday (Jan 24) appealed for dialogue to stop Venezuela's political crisis
spiralling out of control, after opposition leader Juan Guaido declared himself interim president. "What we hope is that dialogue
can be possible, and that we avoid an escalation that would lead to the kind of conflict that would be a disaster for the people
of Venezuela and for the region," he said at the World Economic Forum in Davos. . .
here
Canada joins efforts by the Venezuelan right-wing opposition, the United States, and right-wing governments in Latin America
to oust democratically elected President Nicolas Maduro, Canada's Labour Congress, representing over three million Canadian workers,
issued a statement Wednesday calling on the Justin Trudeau government to promote dialogue instead of intervention and a military
coup. "Venezuelans need to resolve their differences through constructive dialogue and democratic processes without resorting
to violence," said CLC President Hassan Yussuff. .. .
here
"Let's be clear," [Pence] said. "This is no time for dialogue. This is time for action. And the time has come to end the
Maduro dictatorship once and for all." . .
here
I have just returned from Germany and seen a remarkable split between that nation's industrialists and their political leadership.
For years, major companies have seen Russia as a natural market, a complementary economy needing to modernize its manufacturing
and able to supply Europe with natural gas and other raw materials. America's New Cold War stance is trying to block this commercial
complementarity. Warning Europe against "dependence" on low-price Russian gas, it has offered to sell high-priced LNG from
the United States (via port facilities that do not yet exist in anywhere near the volume required). President Trump also is
insisting that NATO members spend a full 2 percent of their GDP on arms – preferably bought from the United States, not from
German or French merchants of death.
The U.S. overplaying its position is leading to the Mackinder-Kissinger-Brzezinski Eurasian nightmare that I mentioned above.
In addition to driving Russia and China together, U.S. diplomacy is adding Europe to the heartland, independent of U.S. ability
to bully into the state of dependency toward which American diplomacy has aimed to achieve since 1945.
The World Bank, for instance, traditionally has been headed by a U.S. Secretary of Defense. Its steady policy since its
inception is to provide loans for countries to devote their land to export crops instead of giving priority to feeding themselves.
That is why its loans are only in foreign currency, not in the domestic currency needed to provide price supports and agricultural
extension services such as have made U.S. agriculture so productive. By following U.S. advice, countries have left themselves
open to food blackmail – sanctions against providing them with grain and other food, in case they step out of line with U.S.
diplomatic demands.
They would make Venezuela the new Pinochet-era Chile. Trump is not alone in supporting Saudi Arabia and its Wahabi terrorists
acting, as Lyndon Johnson put it, "Bastards, but they're our bastards."
Venezuelan general recognises opposition leader Guaido as president: Twitter video. A high-ranking Venezuelan air force general
said he had disavowed President Nicolas Maduro and now recognised opposition leader Juan Guaido as interim head-of-state, according
to a video circulating on Twitter on Saturday. In the video, General Francisco Yanez, a member of the air force's high command,
called on other members of the military to defect. He also reportedly claimed that 90 percent of the armed forces no longer support
Maduro.
The high command's web page lists Yanez, along with a photo, as the air force's head of strategic planning.
On its Twitter account, the high command of the military accused the general of treason.
Yanez is the first active Venezuelan general to recognise Guaido since he proclaimed himself president on Jan. 23.
Al Jazeera's Latin America editor Lucia Newman, reporting from Caracas, said the defection of the first active general is "another
blow" to the Maduro administration.
"Juan Guaido has been publicly appealing to the armed forces to defect, to abandon Nicolas Maduro, whose main support comes
from the military. Without it, he would have a difficult time to stay in power."
But the question now is whether Yanez commands a number of troops, and orders members of the armed forces to follow him, our
correspondent said.
F
Twitter report of a supposed Air Force general defecting to Guaido. Abrams was surely bound to be able to corrupt a few officers
but I doubt it will be enough to tip the scales..
https://twitter.com/oulosp/status/1091697589307797504?s=21
There is theory being bantered about that goes like this:
Trump is leaving Syria and Afghanistan. The move on Venezeula signals a turn toward neighborhood concerns. And Trump is so
foolish that he is helping to bring down the Empire (which he hates because he's an "America First" nationalist).
This "paper tiger" hopium has the feel of other false assertions such as: "Erdogan is turning east!" and "Putin is a Zionist!"
The reality is:
Expect lies/fibs/misleading statements/distracts The establishment has a long history of deceit that MSM works hard
to smooth over, cover-up, and memory-hole. They litterally think you're stoopid.
Trump 'good intentions' haven't produced anything concrete We have, in fact, only seen 'back-tracking' on the 'good
intentions' announcements. US is still assisting the genocide in Yemen. Trump's "immediate" Syrian troop withdrawal was delayed.
And the rumored reduction in US forces in Afghanistan was nothing more than a rumor.
Furthermore: It's clear that IF THERE IS any US 'pull-out' from Syria, the territory will not be returned to Syria. That
means US would likely provide support for whatever proxy forces take their place and that could lead to increasing US involvement
in Syria over time.
There is no evidence that Venezuela represents a 'turn' by the AZEmpire Venezuela has long been on their radar.
Trump is a faux populist front man for the Deep State He is the Republican Obama. We are seeing the same sort
of duplicity from Trump as we saw from Obama. What I call the 'Obama psyop' embodied peace via inclusiveness but that was a
smokescreen for covert war. The 'Trump psyop' embodies peace via anti-interventionalism but that is also a smokescreen. It
masks economic war; propaganda war; increased belligerence (INF treaty) and militarism (space force); etc.
Welcome to the rabbit hole.
Blooming Barricade , Feb 2, 2019 11:46:29 AM |
link
@104
@105
Isn't it lovely how they are now making their coup appeals right out in the open? Not hidden, and yet no condemnation, only
cheers from the corporate/government media NYTimes, BBC, CNN, Guardian, which I say should be renamed the counterinsurgency media
as they (attempt to) act to sway hearts and minds of neocolonial subjects (Read: everyone not in the elite class) backed by the
multinational imperialists Exxon, Jair Bolsonaro, Israel, etc and their mouthpieces. We really need to work on reestablishing
basic norms that this sort of thing should not be backed. In the Vietnam/Chile era this would be shameful...here we are listening
to the songs of the mockingbirds...
Blooming Barricade , Feb 2, 2019 11:48:44 AM |
link
Again, they are calling for a MILITARY COUP. How is the opposition frontman even allowed to walk free and solicit attacks on the
people of his country, backed to the hilt by the forces of ecocide and greed.
>Gen. Francisco Yañez (controls nothing) - A high-ranking Air Force general announced his support for Mr Guaidó in a video
message posted online.. . here . In response,
the Air Force's high command called him accused him of treason.
"No se podía esperar menos del TRAIDOR GD Francisco Esteban Yanez Rodriguez, sobrino del corrupto Gral Yanez Mendez que por cierto
tiene un expediente en la Contraloría General de la #FANB por corrupto!" . .
here
google translation: "You could not expect less from the GD TRAITOR Francisco Esteban Yanez Rodriguez, nephew of the corrupt Gral
Yanez Mendez who incidentally has a file in the General Comptroller's Office of the #FANB for corrupt!"
>MIAMI -- Hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans are preparing massive protests in cities worldwide today to pressure the country's
president, Nicolás Maduro out of office. Venezuelans are planning to fill the streets in more than 70 cities around the world,
including Caracas, Miami, Madrid, Milan, Frankfurt, Melbourne, Athens, and Beirut.
>Canada to convene Lima Group and other countries about Venezuela crisis Monday -- The Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Minister
of Foreign Affairs, today announced that Canada will host the 10th ministerial meeting of the Lima Group in Ottawa, Ontario on
February 4, 2019. The Lima Group was established in August 2017, in Lima, Peru, to co-ordinate participating countries' efforts
and apply international pressure on Venezuela until democracy is restored. The group's meetings have included representatives
from Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru
and Saint Lucia. -- Canada rules the world on anti-Venezuela as a US stooge to avoid the "Yankee go home" and 'stupid gringo"
tags.
Trumps statements about the endless or the expensive wars must be balanced against his military build up and his statements
on taking the oil in countries the US has attacked. According to a current piece in Sputnik, Raytheon began building facilities
for short and medium range missiles shortly after Trump came to power.
https://sputniknews.com/us/201902021072066039-satellite-images-inf/
Production of low yield nuclear warheads or tactical nukes has begun, with the intention of having sufficient numbers for military
use (operational capability) by September of this year.
It is useful to look at this situation through the perspective that Hudson offers in his article. The petrodollar which has buttressed
US power since 1971 is crumbling. The ability of the US Treasury to print inflation proof dollars and buy anything it wants is
coming to an end. So is US domination over the world financial system, SWIFT etc.
The card game is ending with the US ruling class as the loser. But, instead of throwing in its hand, smiling and returning to
the serious business of real life (climate change, pollution, ecocide, famine etc) it decides on one last gamble. A desperation
move. (You don't let Bolton retrieve Elliot Abrams from his tomb for anything less.)
And that is where the sudden decision to
change course in Venezuela, from the slow steady squeezing of sanctions and full spectrum pressure to a coup, literally a devastating
blow, aimed at leveling the regime in Caracas because America's last chance requires a dictatorship over Latin America.
Already it looks, according to Pepe Escobar, as if Bolsonaro is being pushed aside to serve as a figurehead and nothing more,
for a military dictatorship. He will welcome that. Honduras is already under such a dictatorship. Ecuador is doing what it is
told again. My guess is that Argentina, falling apart under neo-liberal fanatics is going to return to military rule too. Chile
is not far from it.
In short the US response to losing its reserve currency monopoly is going to be to strengthen its own bloc-in which its currency
will rule- and, soft power having failed, turn to brutal military measures.
That's not to suggest that such a lunatic plan will succeed. I don't think it can. But that is no reason to believe that narcissistic
Washington, drunk on its own propaganda, its ruling class completely invested in exceptionalist, militaristic projects, won't
give it a try.
And kill a few tens of millions, maybe billions if things go nuclear, in the attempt. Fascism generally ends in the way that
it did in Hitler's bunker. La lutte finale may be coming.
Concentration pro-coupist
Guaido aleardy dispersing , once concluded theri well payed duty, after a speech composed of one line slogan after another,
hailed in a crazy shouting way by the crowd concetrated in an obviously very rich neighborhood...( one wonders why is that they
have complaints agaisnt Maduro when they are doing so well already ) all seasoned with high-sounding hymns like "Odd to Joy"
( all very Venezuelan..) and the so worn-out of so much use, "Sí se puede" ( "Yes, we can" if more was needed to show that
this stooge is pretended to remind Obama...)
Maduro asks the astonishing crowd concentrated in Bolivar Avenue now for ours already if they want new elections to reinforce
the power of the people and the people answers "Yes"...!
This disarticulates clearly the EU position....and the Pence´s position on non negotiation under any circunstances.... The
plotters, looters and undemocratic forces at work, left bottom up unveiled before the whole world to see.... Now he is claiming
to all workers and employers to continue the path of development and recovering.....
The strategy of calling in new parliamentary elections once Guaido has been unmasked as foreign agent is the best to clean the
National Assembly from traitors sold to foreign actors and capital.
Venezuelans take to streets in push to force Maduro from power Demonstrators say they are close to achieving objective
of forcing president to step down Tens of thousands of Venezuelan protesters streamed on to the streets of the nation's
capital on Saturday for what they described as the final push to force Nicolás Maduro from power.
There are not enough of them on the street. If the report mentioned hundreds of thousands or millions, then I'd say that Maduro
might be deposed but as it is no.
If they want more bottom-feeders to turn out for their fake rallies, why are they being so stingy with the freebees? They ought
to offer free booze. The US coupsters got the money for it. It worked for George Washington, and various Roman politicians.
Can someone tell me (despite tag I am not North American based) what the average Trump voter thinks of all this? Is this a vote
winner amongst his support base?
"We have decided to steal Venezuela's oil and gold" - maybe a lot of Americans support him? Please someone enlighten me.
Hudson overstates his case, mostly by making Trump central to his thesis.
1) Russia and China were driven together long before Trump.
2) Virtually all countries looking to de-dollarize were already at odds with USA (before Trump)
3) The number of countries that have supported USA's Venezuelan coop attempt actually demonstrates the strength of the AZEmpire.
4) European SWIFT is a nothing burger. The European poodles complain but go along with USA on anything that USA cares about.
Example: Europe now says that they will EuroSWIFT only to trade in humanitarian goods for Iran.
5) USA 'meddling', duplicity and hegemonic intentions have been long known by other countries. What has changed is NOT that
countries have 'woken up' to this, but that China and Russia offer an alternative.
6) IMO the move to the right in the West has been long anticipated. And Trump has co-opted the right in the US as effectively
as Obama co-opted the left. Expect the right in other countries to be co-opted also.
A backlash against the left's support and encouragement for large immigrant populations has been building for two decades.
Cui bono? Western society is increasingly resembling Israel and Saudi Arabia which have large population of poor service workers
with few rights (Palestinians, "guest workers").
7) Hudson ignores the fact that AZEmpire has woken to the threat posed by Russia and China to their hegemonic NWO plans -AND-
ignores the real failure of neocon asshats: that they 'lost the peace' after the Cold War by their abusive treatment of Russia
as they hoped for Russia's total capitulation. This failure was magnified by the fact that they NEEDED Russia to join with the
West so that China could be isolated. Assisting China's "peaceful rise" without isolating her was a recipe for disaster: a disaster
that is now playing out.
@ Sasha | Feb 2, 2019 12:44:02 PM | 114 "Yes, we can" if more was needed to show that this stooge is pretended to remind Obama...)
I saw the boy wonder Guaidó walking with some people in a video today, and his mannerisms reminded me of Obama. . . Could it be?
Hugo Chavez was sworn in as Venezuela president twenty years ago today, Feb 2 1999. The anti-US presstitutes, especially NBC's
Carmen Sesin, are predicting large demonstrations today: "Venezuelans are planning to fill the streets in more than 70 cities
around the world, including Caracas, Miami, Madrid, Milan, Frankfurt, Melbourne, Athens, and Beirut." . . .and of course the "news"
can be predictive also, so the headline reads "Venezuelans take to the streets worldwide calling for an end to Maduro's presidency."
.
here . . . . We'll see.
1. Why tell me? All I did was describe the lay of the land under your capitalism and your general authoritarian political system.
People are right to distrust it in general. If that leads some to make objectively incorrect decisions (and I'm not saying non-vaccination
in any particular case is right or wrong), blame your leaders and cadres who systematically destroyed all bonds of social trust.
If some epidemics become more likely because more and more people find it impossible to trust doctors, scientists, and government
officials who all are clearly corporate shills, that's the fault of your system, not of the people who don't trust. Don't blame
the people. You sound like a specimen of the exact boot-licking conformist authoritarian yahoos I was talking about.
2. In spite of the best rigged efforts of your corporate researchers, non-vaccinators have never been found to have caused
an epidemic. Meanwhile your globalization, your climate change, and your forcing tens of millions of people off their land and
into immiseration camps (shantytowns) all are driving new epidemics and reviving old ones. A handful of non-vaccinators could
never injure the public health remotely as much even if they deliberately tried for a thousand years.
3. If you really care about public health (in my experience members of the lynch mob are invariably frauds), what have you
done to help put a stop to the systematic campaign of corporations and governments to destroy antibiotics as a medically effective
treatment? Through systematic abuse of antibiotics in factory farms, genetic engineering, and the slathering of the environment
with herbicides (the most used herbicides like glyphosate are also broad-scale antibiotics), industrial agriculture is deliberately
and massively generating a pandemic of antibiotic resistant pathogens. This is guaranteed to generate lethal pandemics among humans.
By orders of magnitude this is a vastly worse campaign against the public than a handful of ad hoc non-vaccinators could ever
be. So if you have such venom left over for this fugitive handful, your actions against the corporate/government campaign to destroy
the efficacy of antibiotics must be extraordinary. Please direct me to your record here. I want links. Otherwise you're a total
fraud, like every other mobber I've encountered.
4. I have no doubt if you were handed a gun and ordered to be part of a firing squad you'd wet your pants and start crying.
Most people in US could not find Venezuela on a map even with the current news cycle. Most Trump supporters are interested
in jobs. Most are not war hawks. Anti war Trump supporters hope he is draining the swamp. Exposing, disgracing and getting rid
of neocons. (From the political scene)
Scotch Bingeington , Feb 2, 2019 3:14:26 PM |
link
I have yet to read about a halt in Venezuelan crude-oil shipping to the US. And whatever became of the request for US-embassy
personnel to leave the country? Is anything actually being followed through?
More and more I get the feeling that the Maduro administration is just not up to it. War has been declared on them, but what do
they do? If you challenge the US – and that's exactly what they did, by circumventing the dollar, by trying to increase business
with the US's minions in the Caribbean, by inviting Russia to get a foothold in the USA's mainland oil business, by doling out
free heating oil to charitable institutions and families in need across the US, by publicly aligning with Syria and China and
so on – surely you would have contingency planning in place? Trying to foresee the USA's reaction and how to respond to it, in
turn?
So I recon CITGO is still being supplied by PDVSA. Imagine that. Possibly employees are still getting their pay checks by cash-deprived
Venezuela, too. It's insane. Guiado still free and able to diligently follow his script.
Crude shipments to CITGO should have been stopped completely two weeks ago. Non-domestic staff at CITGO should have been laid
off asap. Venezuelans among staffers should have been offered to return home or be expatriated. Given the current volatility in
Western economies and especially the impending doom coming for the US shale business, such measures might have put considerable
further strain on the West, might even have sent us on a downward spiral towards a full-blown economic crisis.
In the meantime, the embassy in Washington plus the various (!) consulates across the US should have seen to it that business
is wound down. Then leave. After that, expel diplomats at the US embassy in Caracas – by all means. Also sever ties with any other
country that has supported Guiado's blatant act of high treason. I wonder how the Netherlands would have reacted, given its vulnerability
in Curacao.
Guiado should simply have been deported, GDR-style. Why bother with him in a trial? Just get rid of him. Let him move to Miami,
to follow in Marco Rubio's footsteps.
As a reciprocal step in light of what the Bank of England did with Venezuela's gold, one or two of Royal Caribbean's flagship
cruisers should be captured, or "forfeited". Disrupt the happy-go-lucky cruising business in the Caribbean a little. Now, any
further gold transport, to the UAE or wherever, should only be conducted by the Navies of the two countries involved.
Finally, spread the word that any country volunteering to become the staging ground for a US invasion will be considered an enemy
at war. That should make at least some people in Colombia, Brazil, Aruba and Curacao gulp.
The Washington regime won't let go. So for Maduro to try and just sit it out is a patently insane idea. Because for now, time
is on the US side.
And what about firing squads for those who have murdered untold millions by giving them cancer by poisoning the food, water, air,
and general environment? I missed the part where you already joined those firing squads, or called for them to exist.
I can say w/o fear of contradiction that Trump feels like me, that this Venna-zwala thing will fail, providing another opportunity
to fire some more old guard neocons and Make America Great Again. Maybe all three: Pence, Pompeo and Bolton. Package deal. Like
it was fun doing Mad Dog.
"I have yet to read about a halt in Venezuelan crude-oil shipping to the US. And whatever became of the request for US-embassy
personnel to leave the country? Is anything actually being followed through?
More and more I get the feeling that the Maduro administration is just not up to it. War has been declared on them, but what
do they do?"
If a nation has committed itself to (1) a de facto colonized extraction-based economy (which also involves physically destroying
your own country, just as much as if it were from an external military attack), (2) which is at the mercy of a global commodity
system, (3) which is controlled by vastly more powerful forces which are aggressive, militarist bullies under the best of circumstances
and are irrationally hostile toward that nation in particular; then I don't see any way to exist other than at the mercy of such
hostile forces.
I don't know what possible way out Venezuela has within the framework of the globalized extreme energy civilization.
@ Scotch Bingeington | Feb 2, 2019 3:14:26 PM | 133 . . .Because for now, time is on the US side.
Why? This exercise is actually about more than Maduro, as the Wall Street Journal published
here , shortened by paywall:
U.S. Push to Oust Venezuela's Maduro Marks First Shot in Plan to Reshape Latin America
The Trump administration's
broader aim is to gain leverage over Cuba and curb recent inroads in the region by Russia, Iran and China
WASHINGTON -- The Trump administration's attempt to force out the president of Venezuela marked the opening of a new strategy
to exert greater U.S. influence over Latin America, according to administration officials.
In sight isn't just Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro, but also Cuba, an antagonist that has dominated American attention in the
region for more than 50 years, as well as recent inroads made by Russia, China and Iran.
Russia and China especially have lots of money invested so we can bet that Maduro is listening very closely to what they are telling
him, and acting accordingly. So far, it's working. There is no indication that the US efforts will be successful, is there? Meanwhile,
it seems to me that time is on Maduro's side.
Following your recommended script would be serving US wish for war/military invasion in a silver plate. What Maduro is doing,
as got clear during his speech at Bolivar Avenue in front of the crowd concentrated there to celebrate the 20 anniversay of Bolivarian
Revolution, is following a similar path Russian is doing, by keeping in the side of law abiding countries, while unveiling the
real thuggish character of the US, most naked than ever....
He stated that the fight to recover Venezuelan assests seized y the US and UK will e claimed at the corresponding tribunals,
he claimed for time for things to develop and fall by their own weight.
He most probably finds no point in harming other countries populations, including those of the countries who are openly participating
in this outrage and assault on the Venezuelan people. By doing so, he will be behaving like the warmonger scoundrels currently
ruling in the US/UK/Canada/EU/Colombia/Brazil/Peru/Argentina, and so on....Most of them are most probably going off in the next
elections at heir respective countries....due their approvation ratings... Why rush at all?
He called the Venezuelan people to continue working hard without falling into provocations, and took the opoortunity to dismantle
part of the plot y calling for new parliamentary elections...That he did not follow the path and script wished by the US and his
minion Guaido does not mean he is succumbing to threats.
"The Washington regime won't let go. So for Maduro to try and just sit it out is a patently insane idea."
Madero isn't sitting it out: he has called for new elections, is getting vote in Parliament and is asking a people's referendum
on it as well The wannabe President didn't run in the election because polls indicated that they would lose badly. This is a sensible
tactical move on Madero's part IMO, both the call for elections and the people's referendum
Its not sensible to call for elections for Maduro. The oppostion will reject the elections again along with the US/EU. Does anyone
really believe west will somehow accept Mauduro if is there was an election (how many is necessary? They just had one!) one is
naive as Maduro seems to be himself.
The proof that what the US and its appointed fake president Guaido are looking for is a civil war in Venezuela, which would
dismantle the sate and transform it into a failed state, is to e found in Guaido´s beligerent speech in front of the crowd concetrated
to hear him in an Eastern rich neighborhood, people who dispersed themselves quite fast, after showing so excited by what Guaido
was saying, once his disapassionate and clearly anti-Venezuelan speech finished..
The regular parliamentary elections were expected to be held in Venezuela in 2020. However, Maduro said that the body needs
to be "re-legitimized" as he addressed a large crowd of his supporters during a rally in Caracas.
The president said that he would consult the Venezuelan Constituent Assembly – a body elected in 2017 to draft the new constitution
– on the issue. If the assembly backs the proposal the vote will be scheduled for some time this year. Earlier, Venezuela's
Supreme Court declared all acts of the National Assembly, headed by Guaido, as null and void.
Meanwhile, Venezuela continues to witness both pro and anti-government rallies. Tens of thousands of people took to the
streets of the Venezuelan capital on Saturday to join a pro-government demonstration to celebrate 20 years since the late Venezuelan
president, Hugo Chavez, launched the Bolivarian revolution.
A sea of people can be seen flooding a kilometers-long stretch of Bolivar Avenue in downtown Caracas to listen to Maduro's
speech. Crowds were waving Venezuela's national flags and holding placards with portraits of Chavez.
Tens of thousands of people also gathered in the eastern part of the capital for a rally organized by the opposition. The
national flag-waving crowds also occupied a long stretch in the city as they came to listen to Guaido.
In his speech, Maduro hailed the determination and "deep loyalty" of the people as demonstrated over the last 20 years,
and called on Guaido-led opposition to engage in a dialog.
The president appealed to the reason of the opposition politicians and said he is ready to meet them "the day they want."
He also said economics and "national peace" would be the focus of the conversation .
The opposition leader's statements were more belligerent, however. He declared that the upcoming month would become a
"breaking point" in the opposition's struggle for power and called for new massive protests on February 12. He also claimed
that 90 percent of Venezuelans "want change" and "no one here fears a civil war ."
I saw the boy wonder Guaidó walking with some people in a video today, and his mannerisms reminded me of Obama. . . Could it
be? Posted by: Don Bacon | Feb 2, 2019 2:19:46 PM | 126
Hmm. The suggestion being that both politicans are barbaric products of a God-forsaken and eternally-damned CIA laboratory factory-farm?
That is a far-fetched thesis, I think. Still, this Guaidó character is a certifiable doppleleganger for the richie Crassus
who led the Roman Legions into one of their most humiliating defeats against the Parthians.
IS it within the realm of possiblity
that the ghost of Crassius, stuck in the desert out there in what is now West Iran, can't locate the golden ray, so he is animating
Obama and Guidó? Inquiring minds want to know. As the big-shots always say: nothing is off the table, so...
See minutes 0:22 and 1:00 and tell me that Crassus is not Guidó. And at 1:22: Do eyes deceive? does the young Bolton appear
in the Guidó's royal entourage?
Repy to: Zanon 143
"It's not sensible to call for elections for Maduro. The opposition will reject the elections again along with the US/EU. Does
anyone really believe west will somehow accept Mauduro if is there was an election (how many is necessary? They just had one!)
one is naive as Maduro seems to be himself."
I respectfully disagree. This fellow wants to be president, fine go for it, apply for the job; run for office. Does he feel
the election will be stolen, fine have election observers from all over the world. If he still says no, then he shows himself
to be a fraud to the world.
The UN will back Maderos on this; Maderos is using the Russian playbook, stay calm, stay sane, call for the rule of law.
A far-left faction within Germany's socialist Left Party goes briefly where no one is allowed to go, concerning Venezuela...
then gets reminded of all those revisionists who are imprisoned in Germany
so they instantly reverse themselves, grovel on their knees, apologize profusely...
When will they ever learn who you are not allowed to criticize or even make fun of?
German Left Party group slammed over "anti-Semitic" Venezuela cartoon
The Cuba Si Hessen group posted the image on Facebook on Wednesday. It shows a grim reaper cloaked in a United States flag
and holding a bloody scythe painted to resemble the flag of Israel.
The figure knocks at a door titled "Venezuela." Blood spills out of other opened doors marked "Iraq," "Libya," "Syria" and
"Ukraine."
The group captioned the image with: "We stand on the side of the legitimate Venezuelan president, Nicolas Maduro, and oppose
any form of intervention. Yankee go home!"
Why have elections if you arent sure you will win?
Maduro would likely win, yes - but its not sensible since Guiado and other will not participate since they will risk losing,
besides election observers from EU/US will say the election result is a fraud.
For US/EU Guaido, the issue isnt with "elections", the issue is Maduro/socialist party.
UN and have no power when the bullets, chaos is ignited by US/EU.
Call for the rule of law, why? Neocons dont give a damn about it.
This is the reality. Maduro should play hard too, not appease anyone with "elections" or "dialogue", not because that is wrong,
but because it doesnt work with the parties (US/EU Guiado) involved.
I appreciate your thoughtful analysis of the vaccination crisis. It's bitterly amusing that pro-vaccination orthodoxy purports
to have sole, exclusive ownership and occupancy of both the scientific and ethical high ground, and superciliously denounces and
condemns any rational skepticism of the current state of the Big Pharma (as opposed to "medical science") driven Total
Vaccination imperative as mad or bad heresy.
I don't have children, but my experience in recent years 1) avoiding dubious "flu shots", and 2) dutifully, and so far unsuccessfully,
submitting to the vexing, Kafkaesque ordeal of getting the newest shingles vaccine is more than enough to make me a proud
heretic.
If vaccinations were developed and marketed with the same exemplary scientific and ethical standards manifested by Jonas Salk,
the horror-story "side-effects" and abuses (e.g., the CIA using vaccination programs as a cover for black ops) wouldn't exist--
at least on a scale that causes some of the public to rightly doubt their virtue and efficacy.
The Stern Adult "their blood is on your hands" j'accuse is pathetic. Moderate progressives who loyally supported the
abominable "Obamacare" health-corporation bailout used the same shrill invective: "Obamacare saved my granny's life! If you dare
to criticize it, why, you're either expressing self-absorbed 'privilege' or sociopathy!"
Age of Autism, a very useful compendium of vaccine issues.
Just viewed a segment on Sharyl Attkisson's show how Paraguay has all but eradicated malaria since 2011. To bring back towards
topic, you can bet that Big Pharma is itching to get back into Venezuela to roll out its vaccine programmes. Ask India how that
has been going.
Zanon
where do you get this crap about an presidential election for Venezuela. Maduro has called for a parliamentary election, not a
presidential election.
Parliament members like this Guiado have now shown their colors. most will be booted out of the parliament if an election is held
now.
@Peter that would be a great maneuver, sure to be torpedoed by the Opp/US as it wont bring the desired results. If & when sniper
fire starts we'll get a clear understanding of Venezuela's ennemies resolve. Until then, I dont think this putch attempt is working
very well..
History proves that you can't appease this kind of aggressor. For those who think Maduro needs to make every kind of concession,
I don't know who the target audience for that is supposed to be.
Meanwhile, judging from how you froth at the mouth and spew death threats upon hearing mention of a small group engaged in
civil disobedience, you're definitely in need of the Big Pharma Medication Regime you so ardently worship. Just pray you never
need those antibiotics you're content to see destroyed!
I've had bad experiences with doctors myself, and heard horror stories from many other people. Not involving vaccines in my
case, but the same principle and enough to make me regard all doctors as not just corporate agents but effectively extensions
of the police state.
As for my corporate troll here, as I demonstrated his type doesn't really care about public health at all. That's why I call
them "proxxers", because their hysteria over the non-vaccinators is clearly a proxy for something else. Part of it is that they
regard this type of civil disobedience as an intolerable affront to their cult of scientism and statism.
Maduro/his party will likely win such an election, but no point since the other side - EU/US Guaido will reject that, they
have already shown their real colors in not reconizing Maduro/his party, they have nothing to lose now unfortunately.
>>>>: NemesisCalling | Feb 2, 2019 3:39:12 PM | 140
Besides the measles being relatively innocuous
Tell that to the one hundred and fifty thousand people who die from it each year
In 2011, the WHO estimated that 158,000 deaths were caused by measles. This is down from 630,000 deaths in 1990. As of 2013,
measles remains the leading cause of vaccine-preventable deaths in the world . In developed countries, death occurs
in one to two cases out of every 1,000 (0.1–0.2%). In populations with high levels of malnutrition and a lack of adequate healthcare,
mortality can be as high as 10%. In cases with complications, the rate may rise to 20–30%. In 2012, the number of deaths due
to measles was 78% lower than in 2000 due to increased rates of immunization among UN member states.
For comparison:
The death rate from diarrhoeal diseases decreased by almost 1 million between 2000 and 2016, but still caused 1.4 million deaths
in 2016. Similarly, the number of tuberculosis deaths decreased during the same period, but is still among the top 10 causes
with a death toll of 1.3 million. HIV/AIDS is no longer among the world's top 10 causes of death, having killed 1.0 million
people in 2016 compared with 1.5 million in 2000.
So, measles has 10% of the lethality of tuberculosis. Please go and peddle your anti-vaccine conspiracy theories elsewhere.
Parliamentary elections will not appease the US, but for Venezuela they will clean out the crap that has shown its colors.
This will put Venezuela in a stronger, more united position to resist the US.
I agree with you, that would work in a normal world yes, but they arent interested in elections. They already have the backing
of their neighbous, EU, US. All this saying about they will look like fools is long overdue by now. Its not about "looks" but
who gains the power by any means. Simply, they play dirty and so shall also Maduro play IMO.
What conspiracy theory pray tell am I peddling?
That people should have a choice as to how they want to approach a relatively innocuous disease. Yes I highly doubt your WHO stats.
Sanitation has been the prime mover with regards to disease eradication the world over. I am speaking as an American for Americans.
Go peddle your compulsory vaccine agenda for 3rd worlds elsewhere.
The US have been very public about trying to buy the Venezuelan military, hoping, as in the early days of Syria, many will swap
sides. An election that kicks out of parliament all those flying the US flag will make it much more difficult for the US to cause
defections in the military.
Russia has done a good job (although still a work in progress) of reuniting Syria and I can see Russia's hand in Maduro's call
for parliamentary elections.
I think the people who are discussing here about vaccines should wait for the possible imminent Open Thread of every weekend here
to discuss there that topic, so as to not derail the important discussion about Venezuela here at this thread.
Just thinking about the folks who credit Trump for not starting any wars. Seems to me the the empire starting wars kinda hit a
brick wall when Russia stuck its nose in Syria and that precedes Donald by a couple of years.
I hope it (your first link) was picked at random, because this author is not doing his cause any favors:
As it turns out, all it takes to find out what is really in the vaccines is to break rank, seize a sample of what is being
injected into the children, put it in a real lab that is not compromised by kikes , and VOILA!!! suddenly it is known that
the vaccines are not at all what they are claimed to be.
I think a Vz parliament vote on having parliament elections early and a citizens referendum on such a vote helps Maduros rally
his base and shores up Russian calls for the rule of law to be upheld.
Sure the US and co will disparage the effort but it would not be done for them but for the Vz people.
If he holds the people, he wins the war.
And my apologies, I thought the proposed election would include the office of President, I was wrong.
The call by Maduro for elections is brilliant IMO.
This was one of the Empire's demands--
'Spain, France, Germany and Britain have given embattled Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro an ultimatum, saying the nations
would recognise opposition leader Juan Guaido as president unless he calls elections within eight days."
At this point, the pro-vaxxers are a Mengele death cult. The vaccine schedule amounting to dozens of vaccinations, before infants
even have a developed immune system, is creating generations of cretins and invalids. Just the hpv vaccine alone has caused horrific
injuries, including total debilitation and paralysis,just like the polio vaccines in India caused 100s of thousands of cases of
paralysis. It is probable that the mortality from vaccinations exceeds the mortality from the contagious diseases themselves,
but the pro-vaxxer cult think they have the right to play god.
The pro-vaxxer cult has the blood and suffering of countless individuals on their hands, and the people who cover up the deaths
of infants from vaccinations with fancy sounding syndromes like shaken baby syndrome and SIDS should be hanged form lampposts.
My South American friends say that most with money and critical skills have left and are living in other South American countries
until the mess clears itself up. I have worked with a few of key types of workers kicked out in the early days by Chavez for not
being sufficiently Marxist. According to them it was a be one of us or die proposition. That type of expertise is critical, not
easy to replace, and not prone to lean Marxist. It takes 15 to 20 years to earn your bones in those types of businesses.
As the Marxists grabbed all the means of production the economy collapsed. Their enemies have deep pockets and are experts
at regime change. A propaganda war to soften the hearts and minds of the taxpayers is usually the first step. The people suffer,
the empire howls, the people suffer. If the Empire wins; the people suffer, the Marxists howl, the people suffer. Not many options
there but to leave.
Don Bacon@135
Re: Pence, Pompeo, and Bolton
Trump picked all 3 of them, nobody forced them on him. He can replace Pompeo and Bolton today if he wants to, he doesn't need
an excuse or an opportunity to do that. His appointments are a much clearer expression of his intentions and policy that anything
he says or tweets.
The Pretender has a cunning plan; free money, free food and if you like your oil co, you can keep your oil company:
from a zerohedge commenter:
"President Guaidó Unveils Giant Government Program to Fix Venezuela
The plan consists of three key elements: social renewal, economic renewal, and control of petroleum supplies. First, the government
would create 11 social programs, all part of a larger social security plan, that would help Venezuelans back on their feet. The
economic plan would consist of government subsidies to "every family that needs them," as well as heavy investment in government
education and health care.
The petroleum plan saw Guaidó's government vow to return Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the state-run oil company, to pre-socialist
production levels. The opposition team promised not to privatize the industry, but to return it to the hands of capable oil experts
who can adequately find and process the crude oil.
key takeaway "..return it(the oil co) to the hands of capable oil experts." That would be Exxon et al. At the old rates of
70% US and 30% Vz is my guess, and didn't Vz have to repay the US for all upfront costs before they ever saw the 30%??
Is Bolton in charge, or is Pence? Pence certainly has been the face of much of the Venezuela policy. Is it because 1) He's
modeling the office of the VP after GHW Bush's and Cheney's lead? 2)Trump has been so consumed with the congressional showdown
and govt. shutdown, that he's let Pence, Pompeo and Bolton take the lead on Venezuela? 3) Trump is planning to go out in a blaze
of glory -- declare Mission Accomplished on his agenda (even if he has to declare a State of Emergency to get his Wall) and resign,
leaving Pence in charge (with the power to pardon him if need be).
The Venezuelans taking to the streets worldwide today as promised by NBC
here didn't happen. Even CNN "breaking news" couldn't find a few Venezuelans loitering on the street somewhere in any city
besides Caracas.
Guaido has his marching orders from Washington, refusing mediation from Mexico and Uruguay.
tweet
Ratificamos a los gobiernos de México y Uruguay nuestra posición de restituir el orden constitucional en Venezuela. Tenemos una
ruta clara:
1. Cese de la usurpación
2. Gobierno de transición
3. Elecciones libres
¡Únanse a nuestro llamado democrático! . . here
google translate
We ratify to the governments of Mexico and Uruguay our position of restoring the constitutional order in Venezuela. We have a
clear route:
1. Cessation of usurpation
2. Transitional government
3. Free elections
Join our democratic call!
Maduro called his bluff with his snap election suggestion.
Guaido is obeying Pence: "Let's be clear," [Pence] said. "This is no time for dialogue. This is time for action. And the time
has come to end the Maduro dictatorship once and for all." . .
here
I posted a comment in the prior thread's comments (venezuela-coup-attempt-part-of-a-larger-project-military-intervention-likely-to-fail
#173), that is relevant to this discussion, I won't repost in full but the gist is last Thursday I watched the Atlantic council's
livestream of their "Supporting the New Venezuelan Interim Government" forum, featuring two representatives of the Guaido Coup
(Carlos Vecchio & Julio Borges) as well as The Ambassadors of the EU, Paraguay & Chile. All of whom were extremely hostile to
the true Venezuelan government and stressed the new for a rapid response to drive Maduro and that this coup was just the first
step in a larger mission and that the entire region must go through a "fall of the Berlin Wall" process [their terminology) ending
the influence of Cuba throughout Latin America. This the process must be irreversible and redefine the ideological prism of the
economic and human rights, a historic change in the direction of Latin America. This was openly and bluntly stated at the forum.
On thing I left out of my original coverage was that during the Q&A the Coup representatives were asked about how they
would treat international agreements signed by the Maduro government and they basically said 1) that would not acknowledge any
agreement signed by Maduro's government since 2015 and 2) they specifically called out Russia & China saying that if they wanted
any of their agreements with Venezuelan honoured they would need to remove their support for Maduro - needless to say I don't
think talking smack to the Russians or Chinese will accomplish much for the coup plotters. Nor do I think the Cuban government
is threatened in the least by the latest threats to Cuba
Juan Guaido, Venezuela's self-proclaimed president, has been recognized by president Trump and the European Parliament as interim
president of Venezuela, but on his twitter account here Guaido still
calls himself the president of the national assembly of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Such humility by the boy wonder!
@ mourning dove, Rusty Pipes
President Trump's MO is that for him to succeed others have to fail. So he set up Mattis to fail in Afghanistan and Syria, which
he did, and was fired. Now we're onto a new generation of failures, including Pence Pompeo and Bolton. Clever, what?
El Cartero Atómico , Feb 2, 2019 8:32:07 PM |
link
I have no position in the pros and cons of the vaccine discussion but laws such as the one below make me wonder. If vaccines are
safe why is this law in place and did the pharmaceutical companies lobby for this.
U.S. Code Title 42. THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE (1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising
from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or
death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper
directions and warnings.
After doing research about other drugs such as statins I think the secrecy and misleading actions of Big Pharma can lead people
to lose faith in them.
Finally, in regard to the coup in Venezuela, I just finished watching a documentary about the torture and murder of Victor
Jara after the Chilean coup. A man who had been an 18 year Chilean Military conscript and participated in the human rights abuses
after the coup said he still suffered from the guilt of his actions. He appeared very sad and old beyond his years. Meanwhile
a retired CIA officer expressed no regret for his actions and looked great. It helps to be a psychopath or sociopath. I'm sure
that Trump, Bolton, Pompeo, etc. will not suffer if their actions regarding Venezuela result in death and suffering.
I think it had to do with the protests in so far that the thugs saw a chance to commit their violence under the cover of wider
protests. Much like the fringe violent elements of the Gilets Jaunes.
I am going to assume that the coup in Venezuela is going to fail given the early movements by both parties. So that plate of empire
becomes maybe like the Ukraine spinning plate. What comes next? We can't be out of plates and spinners for money.
On the road
to a multi-polar world will there be a time of total breakdown in trade and border porosity? Will there be 2 global internet backbones
and traffic between each will be restricted and monitored? Maybe we even get 2 UN organizations which would be a hoot if there
was any sort of transparency.
Guaido is an Apprentice that is about to be fired by the Venezuelan people in the election he called for....after lots of money
spent on the spinning plate.
That's some convoluted reasoning and you are clearly very invested in it and
are able to adapt it to anything Trump does. Failure isn't a strategy for success and appointments of rabid neocons isn't a strategy
for peace.
These things are self evident, but ultimately irrelevant if you are committed to maintaining an untenable position.
"EU lawmakers voted 439 in favor to 104 against, with 88 abstentions, at a special session
in Brussels to recognize Venezuelan congress head Guaido as interim leader. In a statement
with the non-binding vote, the parliament urged the bloc's 28 governments to follow suit and
consider Guaido "the only legitimate interim president""
"lawmaker" aka the EU pseudo-parliament.
In Venezuela the people can trigger a recall referendum on the government/president (is
there any country in EU where the people can do this?)
The process to instigate a recall referendum in Venezuela:
The image we are getting from MSM are that almost all Venezuelans hate Maduro
"dictatorship", how hard could it be to get 20% of the voters for a referendum?
INSTEX seems to be set up to fail. US-poodle UK as its supervisory board. It was UK that
refused to ship gold to Venezuela just this week.
No way the EU misleadership will do something to make life better for its citizens.
"to promote an unconditional transition in Cuba to democracy, the rule of law and the free market." is code words for the
neoliberal coup and stealing resources of the country. just look at Ukraine.
Notable quotes:
"... So how does the "Merkelization" concern relate to the US plans to start nation-breaking in Latin America? ..."
"... Now to the main points of the Journal article . It stresses that Cuba and Venezuela have been aiding each other, with Venezuela donating oil to Cuba and Cuba providing support to Venezuela's military and security forces. ..."
"... The U.S. strategy carries major risks. If the administration's support for opposition leader Juan Guaidó in Venezuela fails to unseat Mr. Maduro, or if it fails to weaken ties between Caracas and Havana, the desperate conditions in Venezuela could worsen and tether the U.S. more closely with the crisis. An estimated three million Venezuelans have fled their country. ..."
"... Mr. Cutz laid out options to escalate pressure on the Maduro regime, including a financial strike at Venezuela's oil exports. At first, the administration held back, fearing such an action would allow Mr. Maduro to blame the country's woes on Washington. ..."
"... Mr. Bolton, named national security adviser last year, has long taken a tough line on Cuba and Venezuela. He was later joined by Mr. Claver-Carone, who took over western hemispheric affairs at the National Security Council and shared Mr. Bolton's view. ..."
"... An archived edition of Capitol Hill Cubans described Mr. Claver-Carone as the co-founder and director of U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, a donation vehicle for House and Senate members. It was founded in 2003 "to promote an unconditional transition in Cuba to democracy, the rule of law and the free market." ..."
"... The story describes in detail how the US perceived that, "The decision by two of Venezuela's major opposition parties and past rivals -- First Justice and Popular Will -- to join forces a year ago provided for the first time a potential alternative to the Maduro regime." ..."
"... The US decided to leverage street protests at the time of the inauguration for Maduro's second term, on January 10. Other plans: ..."
"... The imposition of sanctions on Venezuela's oil company, PdVSA, announced by the U.S. on Jan. 28, could be worth as much $11 billion in U.S. crude oil sales. ..."
"... Among the next steps, U.S. officials said, are proposed new measures against Havana, such as restoring Cuba's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism. That could hit financing and investments from countries outside the U.S. that now do business there, as well as the funds the country gets from international tourists. ..."
"... I am similarly depressed. I don't think we'll see any real improvement in the situation until the last of the neo-cons die off (hopefully slow, painful deaths.) ..."
"... There is an appalling scene in Fahrenheit 119 where Obama rips his mask off to the people of Flint. Far too many of today's leaders are sociopaths. ..."
"... Link to Bolton's statement about US wanting Venezuela's oil: ..."
"... "Russian President Vladimir Putin, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, also announced the settlement of their country's oil exports would be in euros. Was this not a stab in American backs?" ..."
"... "It's been depressing to be an American for a very long time." That really is an understatement. I came across this yesterday and it just blew me away. https://grayzoneproject.com/2019/01/29/the-making-of-juan-guaido-how-the-us-regime-change-laboratory-created-venezuelas-coup-leader/ This is not the type of thing that I want to read about my country's doings .but you feel like you need to know. ..."
"... why are so many people fleeing their home countries? ..."
The Wall Street Journal has
just published an important, disheartening story,
U.S. Push to Oust Venezuela's Maduro Marks First Shot in Plan to Reshape Latin America .
The Trump Administration has apparently decided to embark on a large-scale interventionist
campaign to reverse supposed undue influence of Russia, China, and Iran in Latin America.
Venezuela and Cuba are the first targets, and Nicaragua is next on the list. John Bolton, in
too obvious a nod to Bush's "axis of evil" has called them the "troika of tyranny".
One would think the fact that our "remake the world in our image" plans worked out so well
in the Middle East might curb US adventurism. And it isn't just that we made a mess of Iraq,
failed to break Iran, and failed to install new regimes in Afghanistan and Syria. The New
American Century types are deep in denial that this geopolitical tussle not only cost the US
greatly in terms of treasure, but it also wound up considerably enhancing Russia's
standing.
Consider another bad outcome from US war-making in the Middle East: the rise of the radical
right in Europe. American nation-breaking had produced a flood of refugees trying to enter
Europe. In a misguided show of humanitarianism, European countries welcomed the over one
million migrants that arrived in 2015, with the upsurge due mainly to the civil war in Syria.
Angela Merkel in particular backed the idea of taking in the refugees, in part because German
has a lower-than-replacement birth rate, and Syrian has a high level of public education.
However, the EU members had patchy and generally poor programs for helping the migrants
assimilate and find jobs. The result was what one hard core left wing political scientist who
has spent a considerable amount of time in Germany calls "Merkelization": a rise of nativist
right wing parties like AfD in response to large-scale, poorly-managed migrant inflows.
Consider how this tendency might play into US nation-breaking near our borer. Many readers
have pointed out that the "caravans" from Central America are heavily populated with people
from countries like Honduras that our tender ministrations have made much worse. My colleague
was warning of Merkelization of the US even before the US launched its coup attempt, that it is
one thing to have an immigration process that is generous towards asylum-seekers, and quite
another to have open borders when political and economic conditions in countries to the South
are unlikely to get better.
Bernie Sanders was browbeaten into holding his tongue after pointing out early in his
Presidential campaign that "open borders" is a Koch Brothers position, and that the top 10%
professional class that has become the base of the Democratic party are now heavy employers of
servants, in the form of nannies and yard men. When I was a kid, even the few times we lived in
middle/upper middle class suburbs full of senior corporate managers and professionals, no one
had servants. Men worked full time and wives did the housework; the most you'd see would be a
housekeeper in once a week to give the wife some relief.
In 2005, a left-leaning blogger wrote, "Illegal immigration wreaks havoc economically,
socially, and culturally; makes a mockery of the rule of law; and is disgraceful just on
basic fairness grounds alone." In 2006, a liberal columnist wrote that "immigration reduces
the wages of domestic workers who compete with immigrants" and that "the fiscal burden of
low-wage immigrants is also pretty clear." His conclusion: "We'll need to reduce the inflow
of low-skill immigrants."
That same year, a Democratic senator wrote, "When I see Mexican
flags waved at pro-immigration demonstrations, I sometimes feel a flush of patriotic
resentment. When I'm forced to use a translator to communicate with the guy fixing my car, I
feel a certain frustration."
The blogger was Glenn Greenwald. The columnist was Paul Krugman. The senator was Barack
Obama.
Prominent liberals didn't oppose immigration a decade ago. Most acknowledged its benefits
to America's economy and culture. They supported a path to citizenship for the undocumented.
Still, they routinely asserted that low-skilled immigrants depressed the wages of low-skilled
American workers and strained America's welfare state. And they were far more likely than
liberals today are to acknowledge that, as Krugman put it, "immigration is an intensely
painful topic because it places basic principles in conflict."
A larger explanation [for the change] is political. Between 2008 and 2016, Democrats
became more and more confident that the country's growing Latino population gave the party an
electoral edge .
Alongside pressure from pro-immigrant activists came pressure from corporate America,
especially the Democrat-aligned tech industry, which uses the H-1B visa program to import
workers .
According to a comprehensive new report by the National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine, "Groups comparable to immigrants in terms of their skill may
experience a wage reduction as a result of immigration-induced increases in labor supply."
But academics sometimes de-emphasize this wage reduction because, like liberal journalists
and politicians, they face pressures to support immigration.
Many of the immigration scholars regularly cited in the press have worked for, or received
funding from, pro-immigration businesses and associations.
I suggest you read the Beinart piece in full; it makes clear that immigration is a thorny,
complex problem, which is not something you'd infer from either party now.
So how does the "Merkelization" concern relate to the US plans to start nation-breaking in
Latin America? Republicans may feel they can tolerate the risk of increased levels of refugees
seeking to enter the US because it could work out in their favor. Right now. Trump looks
screechy to anyone but true believers when he tries to whip up fears about border security. But
what happens if the levels of arrivals were to increase three or four fold, as they did from
2014 to 2015 in Europe? You have realistic odds of a backlash with high migration levels
overwhelming systems that already were doing only a so-so job of handling them.
Now to the main points of
the Journal article . It stresses that Cuba and Venezuela have been aiding each other, with
Venezuela donating oil to Cuba and Cuba providing support to Venezuela's military and security
forces.
Interestingly, it isn't all gung ho for the Trump plans. It points out, for instance, that
while the US has some international support for mixing it up in Venezuela, the US won't find
backers for getting aggressive with Cuba. Similarly:
The U.S. strategy carries major risks. If the administration's support for opposition
leader Juan Guaidó in Venezuela fails to unseat Mr. Maduro, or if it fails to weaken
ties between Caracas and Havana, the desperate conditions in Venezuela could worsen and
tether the U.S. more closely with the crisis. An estimated three million Venezuelans have
fled their country.
Failure also would hand both countries a David-and-Goliath diplomatic victory and
potentially strengthen the hand of China, Moscow and Iran in the region. The chief reason
President Obama pursued an entente with Cuba was his administration's conclusion that decades
of tough measures had failed to topple the Castro regime to make way for a democratic
alternative.
The article presents US allegations against a key Maduro official, including ties to
Iran:
One of the Trump administration's first actions after the election was to dust off an
unused plan from the Obama administration to sanction Tareck El Aissami, Mr. Maduro's vice
president until last year:
U.S. law-enforcement officials say they have evidence Mr. Maduro directed state resources
to create what they allege has become one of the most powerful international
narco-trafficking operations in the world, and with links to Hezbollah, the Lebanese group
designated by the U.S. as a terror organization.
Part of why U.S. officials express concern about Iran's influence in the region is that
Iran is a major backer of Hezbollah, and its South American operations are a significant
source of cash
Among the first officials to lay out options for the Trump administration was Fernando
Cutz, a career USAID foreign-service officer, who had previously worked on the rapprochement
with Cuba for the Obama administration
Mr. Cutz laid out options to escalate pressure on the Maduro regime, including a financial
strike at Venezuela's oil exports. At first, the administration held back, fearing such an
action would allow Mr. Maduro to blame the country's woes on Washington.
Mr. Bolton, named national security adviser last year, has long taken a tough line on Cuba
and Venezuela. He was later joined by Mr. Claver-Carone, who took over western hemispheric
affairs at the National Security Council and shared Mr. Bolton's view.
Mr. Claver-Carone, an adviser to the Trump campaign, rose to prominence in foreign-policy
circles for running a blog called the Capitol Hill Cubans.
An archived edition of Capitol Hill Cubans described Mr. Claver-Carone as the co-founder
and director of U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, a donation vehicle for House and Senate members. It
was founded in 2003 "to promote an unconditional transition in Cuba to democracy, the rule of
law and the free market."
The PAC has raised and spent about $4.7 million since its inception. It contributed
$20,000 to Mr. Rubio's Senate campaign since June 2016 and gave Diaz-Balart's campaign $5,000
in February 2018, records show.
Mr. Claver-Carone also led the nonprofit group Cuba Democracy Advocates from 2004 to 2017.
And he ran a small lobbying firm called the Cuba Democracy Public Advocacy Corp for about 10
years, ending in 2016.
True believers in the driver's seat is not a good sign.
The story describes in detail how the US perceived that, "The decision by two of Venezuela's
major opposition parties and past rivals -- First Justice and Popular Will -- to join forces a
year ago provided for the first time a potential alternative to the Maduro regime." The US
opened up communications with Juan Guaidó. Over the New Year break, Secretary of State
Mike Pompeo met with senior officials in Brazil and Colombia to develop plans. The US decided
to leverage street protests at the time of the inauguration for Maduro's second term, on
January 10. Other plans:
The imposition of sanctions on Venezuela's oil company, PdVSA, announced by the U.S. on
Jan. 28, could be worth as much $11 billion in U.S. crude oil sales.
Among the next steps, U.S. officials said, are proposed new measures against Havana, such
as restoring Cuba's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism. That could hit financing and
investments from countries outside the U.S. that now do business there, as well as the funds
the country gets from international tourists.
Also on the list: new sanctions on Cuban officials and their networks and ending a waiver,
known as Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, signed by every U.S. administration since its
inception in 1996.
Ending the waiver would allow U.S. citizens to sue individuals and companies in U.S.
courts for property seized by the Cuban government. Its impact would likely be to freeze
billions of dollars worth of foreign investment in Cuba including hotels, golf courses and
other projects.
The Trump administration is expected to announce new measures against Cuba in coming
weeks, with the goal of crippling Havana's ability to bolster the Maduro regime.
I had really hoped that Trump would tire of Bolton's aggressiveness and need for the
limelight, but that clearly isn't happening fast enough, if at all. In the meantime, kicking
small and poor countries who pose no threat is not the behavior of a confident superpower. And
grabbing Venezuela's oil because we can is theft. It's been depressing to be an American for a
very long time, and there's no prospect for improvement.
I'd like to prefrece my comment by saying that I am very angry about this coup and the US
messing about in its "back yard".
What is one of the most depressing aspects of this saga is that we are literally replaying
what we have been doing for the past 20 years. And it's never worked. Never. We won't get the
oil. People will needlessly die in awful deaths. People will be torn from their home and do
desperate things. And we will continue to punish them, hurt them for their attempts to live.
Perhaps this is what always happens to US Presidents since Truman – "Now I am become
Death, the destroyer of worlds." (Oppenheimer quoting the Bhagavad Gita) And they must
transform totally into Death.
I will end with Dr. Thompson again (in this instance discussing our invasion of Iraq by
Dubya)
"We have become a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world – bullies and bastards
who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are whores for power and oil with hate and
fear in our hearts."
Dr Hunter S. Thompson, Kingdom of Fear: Loathsome Secrets of a Star-Crossed Child in the
Final Days of the American Century
I am similarly depressed. I don't think we'll see any real improvement in the situation
until the last of the neo-cons die off (hopefully slow, painful deaths.)
Thanks for these comments (and thanks Yves for highlighting this latest adventure in
imperialism). I'd only add one point. We've been doing this for much longer than 20 years,
and it predates the existence of the neocons (at least as an official entity). As a long time
observer, if there is one tiny positive I take from this, it is that the internet allows
critics of the Empire to follow its offenses in nearly real time today. The Mighty Wurlitzer
is more powerful than ever, but it no longer takes months, years, or even decades for the
truth to trickle out for those who know where to look.
Many Americans have had, and will continue to have, their eyes wide shut, as Ives alluded
to in her post and that includes both the credentialed 10-20%ers (WHERES MY CHEAP FOREIGN
INDENTURE !!) and many lowly shlubs as well ( AMERICA – F#UKIN A .. Let's Kick some
Romulan Ass !!!)
So, the only eventual outcome I see .. is where the Romulans kick ours back, good-n-hard
!
Maybe after such an event, we'll come to our senses. I believe more likely that that's when
secession, in its various forms, makes a strong appearance.
This saga has been going on since the end of WW2. For 70 years. In 1948 we were headed for
recession and Truman sent us off to fight the Korean War. Before WW2 it was a similar story
but less brutal, as I read it. Maybe not. But the last 20 years has been astonishing brutal,
I'll give you that.
And add to the obvious failures (or depending how you look at it, successes) Libya where
slaves are today for sale at knockdown prices: the conduit for African migrants to Europe,
courtesy of the UK, France and, 'very discretely', the USAians Barack Obama and Hillary
Clinton (Wasn't that something about 'leading from behind'?, maybe one of the all-time acmes
of doublespeak. I'd nearly forgotten how Obama was such a master at uttering deceptive
inanities with a straight face, yet tinged with a shadow of a smile.)
Saw that the night before last. Didn't Moore go on to say that black voter turnout dropped
off a cliff in 2016 in numbers that would have made all the difference for Clinton in that
State? I saw how he kept his lips closed and the water level stayed the same. Probably even
had Vaseline on his lips too for protection. I hope that people will never forget that
performance.
Just so you know, reported reserves are not a good metric. Matt Simmons wrote about this a
ton when he was alive. OPEC member would regularly increase them by not-credible amounts.
Why? OPEC quotas based on a country's reported oil reserves. I don't doubt that Venezuela has a lot of oil. But consider this view:
The U.S. holds more oil reserves than anyone else in the world, including Saudi Arabia,
Russia, and Venezuela.
That conclusion comes from a new independent estimate from Rystad Energy, a Norwegian
consultancy. Rystad estimates that the U.S. holds 264 billion barrels of oil, more than
half of which is located in shale. That total exceeds the 256 billion barrels found in
Russia, and the 212 billion barrels located in Saudi Arabia.
The findings are surprising, and go against conventional wisdom that Saudi Arabia and
Venezuela hold the world's largest oil reserves. The U.S. Energy Information
Administration, for example, pegs Venezuela's oil reserves at 298 billion barrels, the
largest in the world. Rystad Energy says that these are inflated estimates because much of
those reserves are not discovered. Instead, Rystad estimates that Venezuela only has about
95 billion barrels, which includes its estimate for undiscovered oil fields.
Moreover, Rystad argues that there are not uniform ways of measuring oil reserves from
country to country. Some countries report proven reserves, using conservative estimates
from existing oil fields. Other countries, like Venezuela, report undiscovered reserves.
But Rystad applied similar metrics to all countries in its report to make comparisons
easier. "
Completely agree. Canada is a case in point since a large part of those reserves are in
tar sands if I am not mistaken. I am not particularly fond of the argument that the US wants
Venezuela's oil but the US oil companies might like the idea of going back in after if the
1976 nationalization policy is canned a very likely price for US support to oust Maduro
Bolton said so on TV this week. Quite a few tweets with the clip.
Due to the hour I'm not going to track it down now but hopefully an obliging reader also
saw it and won't find it hard to provide a link. Otherwise I will come back and give the
link, but I desperately need to turn in and have non-blog stuff I must attend to when I get
up, so it will be a while for me to deliver the evidence.
Indeed, Venezuela oil is sweet, probably the best quality in OPEC, and better than most
USA oil. Many refineries on the Gulf can't run Sands (or Alaskan) Oil, which is why much is
exported to China, who can run Saudi Oil (among the worst quality).
Venezuela has both "sweet" and "heavy" oil, which the latter is predominately shipped to
only a few refineries (many in the US) which are set up for "heavy" oil.
Expanding on my earlier comment, last week I posted a link to John Pilger's excellent
documentary film The War On Democracy – https://vimeo.com/16724719
While John's focus in the film is primarily on Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, and the Bolivarian /
Chaveznista Revolution the film also presents deep background on US interventions in Chile,
Nicaragua, El Salvador, ect.
Pilger's style of interview reminds of Det. Columbo. The complete film is worth watching,
but if you're in a hurry / too busy at least watch the interview segment (57:00 > 1:07:00)
with
Duane Clarridge, Head of CIA Latin America Division from 1981 to 1987. Mr. Clarridge puts the
UGLY in Ugly American. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Clarridge
It would not be a stretch to think that Duane Clarridge and Elliot Abrams were close
associates back then.
My father worked in Riyadh for 21 years, after the RAF, and never believed any of the
stats coming out from there. He worked for the ruling family and military and in public
health and academia. He often tells the story about the kingdom's AIDS stats to the WHO. The
kingdom denied it had any problem, a problem often incurred by wealthy men visiting
"Natashas" in the Gulf playgrounds and Thais on their home ground. There was one hospital
ward in Riyadh dedicated to AIDS patients alone. The other stats not kept, or kept under lock
and key, were about the tiny Jewish and Christian communities along the Red Sea coast. Dad
imagined that the oil stats were similarly mythical.
The recent DeGolyer and McNaughton report on Saudi Arabia is probably accurate. There is
more oil there than they thought. D and M are not going to sell themselves out, I don't
believe. So that means SA remains the giant we thought it was.
Hmm. Venezuela is one of only 16 countries to recognize Taiwan. Taiwan is about the same
distance from mainland China as Cuba is from mainland US. Qiao Liang specifically mentioned
Venezuela in ' One Belt One Road ':
"Russian President Vladimir Putin, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Venezuelan
President Hugo Chavez, also announced the settlement of their country's oil exports would be
in euros. Was this not a stab in American backs?"
Not a prediction, but Venezuela and Cuba look like excellent spots to park wei qui stones.
Just sayin'.
The interventions in favour of the coup by "plucky, little" Belgium, la France perfide and
Spain were timely reminders that after Brexit neo con and neo liberal "racaille" remain in
the EU27. It's too convenient to blame the UK for the neo con and neo liberal plague in
Europe and imagine that things will be better after Brexit.
With regard to servants, it's not just the US. Last year, some figures were published that
there are as many people "in service" in the UK as there were in 1860. Another study
suggested that there were more people in service than in the UK armed forces.
With regard to Germany, my employer and some of its clients have recruited some of the
refugees. Some of the stories have been published on the intranet. Our team PA mentors one
recent recruit, a Syrian of Palestinian origin. It has suited much of the German business
elite and its political puppets (CDU, CSU, FDP and, let us never forget, the SPD and Greens)
to import workers and keep German workers from getting uppity. The chief economist of the IMF
recently commented on how little many Germans earn, how much pay has stagnated this century
("Danke vielmal, Herren Hartz, Schroeder und Eichel!") and how she was not surprised by the
rise of the AfD.
A couple of days ago, when discussing Brexit with a Frankfurt based colleague, a German,
he said that a German exit from the EU was not inconceivable. There's a lot of discontent and
any EU related vote risked being influenced by other matters, just like Brexit. I have heard
a lot of this from German banksters, officials and academics in London since last summer.
French and Italians, too.
I forgot to mention that one commentator on the BBC said that Hizbollah and Iranian
Revolutionary Guards were in Venezuela, supporting the government crackdown and also in
business. It was all part of the UK MSM messaging before a military intervention. It's not just American oligarchs salivating. The Vestey family, "Victorian millionaires,
not one of our old families" (Agatha Christie about someone else), are itching to get their
own back and more.
According to the rousing song I once sang along to with such shared gusto and near-tears
credulity, "This land is your land, this land is my land, from California to the New York
Island," and all that -- well, he had the "bicoastal" part right, but as we mopes are maybe
starting to recognize, "this land," that was "settled" by genocide, theft and corruption,
does not and never has "belonged to you and me." You and I are "American" by accident of
birth, that's all. And are just along for the ride, chivvied and herded by the few who
actually, "legally," own it all, and control and mandate all the "policy," that undefined
term that is the reality of "rule of law."
Bushie used the term "rule of law" and fooled a lot of people. Most people don't realize
that the more money you have more you can exercise the "rule of law".
Very well researched article by the always insightful Max Blumenthal. The page also
publishes polling data showing huge numbers of Venezuelans opposed to military intervention
and sanctions, something both sides making their case about what to do in Venezuela routinely
ignore.
I have been making it a habit to (quite literally) troll my congress-critter on a daily
basis for the past couple of years, and those along with the Elliott Abrams profile were
today's contributions to the cause. These people really do disgust me, and never let it be
said that I have not made it my project to say so.
An excellent, if somewhat sickening, long-form article on the lead-up to what we are now
witnessing. It seems there is no limit to the lengths the U.S. government will go to in order
to destroy any government that refuses to acquiesce to U.S. hegemony and implement a
neoliberal economic system. Thanks for the link.
Canada has supported Guaido so I sent the grayzone article to the PM and the Minister of
Foreign Affairs. It is very depressing to read about how countries are destabilized by
others. If only we respected each other's aspirations instead of imposing ideology on each
other.
You have to see:
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised: Chavez – Inside the Coup.
It's free on YouTube. From 2002.
I saw it back in 2002ish when it came out.
A British (or Aussie?) film crew was covering the election of Chavez.
Then they ended up being on the ground capturing the coup from the streets to inside the
palace.
Watch as millions of Venezuelans, largely poor, give a lesson in Big D Democracy.
They hit the streets in such large numbers and the miltary turned on the coup leaders.
You have to see it.
And I fear for them. The USA will probably send troops this time.
Is it naive to think that Bolton and Pompeo are playing on Trump's crude insecurities and
he is enabling them to act out theirs? That this is a crucial aspect in addition to greed? I
always thought that a key motivation for the Iraq war was Cheney playing on Bush's fragile
male ego. I think leadership factors for good or ill are important if not exclusively so.
It's the same in the industry where many NC commentators and I work. "Bid 'em Bruce" got
his name from that ability to play on fragile male egos. Mr Botin at Santander and his
adviser Andrea Orcel played the same trick on Fred Goodwin at RBS.
You are getting insider-y even for Americans, or at least non-investment bankers, and even
then of a certain age.
"Bid 'em up Bruce" = Bruce Wasserstein, one of the top M&A bankers of the 1980s (in
the 1990s, he was still a big player, but corporate preferences move to greyer technocrats).
He was famed for amping up CEOs to keep fighting to win competitive bids for companies with
his "Dare to Be Great" speeches.
The term "Merkelization" should be used with caution. While an uncontrolled flood of
illegal aliens inciting racist rhetoric may indeed be a threat to the USA, also because it
has in fact happened over many years, it did not happen in Germany 2015. In 2015 masses of
refugees, many of them originally displaced by the catastrophic failure of the American
invasion of Iraq, trekked across southeastern Europe seeking safety and opportunity in
Western Europe. The vast majority of those who entered Germany entered legally, were
identified and registered by German immigration authorities and were given support by German
federal and state offices. The vast majority of those who remain in Germany remain legally in
Germany. There are surely some unregistered refugees living underground in Germany but the
number is effectively zero. The refugees are used by neo-Nazi groupings to win support among
the not insignificant racist demographic in Germany, and they are in Germany legally. I
understand that relatively few of them have real prospects of remaining permanently in
Germany. The majority live tenuous and legal existences in Germany, and accordingly enjoy a
degree of security and comfort that was not available to many of them in countries of origin
after the cascade of disasters that began with the American invasion of Iraq.
Often forgotten in American discussions of immigration is that the American way of doing
immigration is not the only way of doing immigration. In fact it is deeply flawed. Many
leading first-world democracies use citizen registration. Accordingly travellers can enter,
in some cases with a visa, and if they want to stay they must register with the local
authorities. Access to essential residential services and privileges is dependent on this
registration. Every change of address requires a new registration. Accordingly what happens
at points of entry is relatively unimportant because local authorities are responsible for
who is in fact using services and enjoying privileges.
This system is in contrast to the American model in which effectively the only control on
entry is at legal points of entry. If travellers can avoid the legal points of entry or can
enter as tourists then there is effectively no further tracking of their presence.
With all due respect, you are missing the point my colleague made, who reads the German
press daily, spent years studying in Germany, has many professional and personal contacts
(including individuals at a high level in government, the party structures and academia), and
he also wind up going to Europe for typically 2-3 months a year, a lot of that in Germany. In
other words, he's extremely well plugged for a non-German.
His point was that Merkel was naive and idealistic about Germany's ability to integrate so
many foreigners, with no language skills. This has nothing to do with legality of the
process. It has to do with the capacity of a society to help large numbers of people
assimilate (language, culture, work place norms), give them additional training if needed,
and help match them with employers.
Even if a program of this scale were developed and implemented successfully, which it
wasn't, you then run into second order problems: resentment. "Why are we spending so much on
foreigners when we have all these domestic needs [list]?"
Or put it another way: differences of degree become differences of kind. I don't know
where the tipping point is, but there are operational and political issues when annual
immigration levels exceed a certain point. Blaming it on neo-Nazis is simplistic. The US had
precisely the same issue with the big immigrant wave around the turn of the 20th century and
a very contentious political debate. Tell me how that had anything to do with neo-Nazis or
fascists.
I didn't mean to seem harsh, and I may not have given a long form enough explanation of
the idea. Merkel was operating from both noble motives as well as pragmatic ones, but badly
misjudged what she was taking on, and even if the #s had been more manageable, neglected to
address the huge challenge of integration and making sure the refugees wound up getting jobs.
It was a deadly mistake for her and the EU.
Agree that Merkel's rationale was complex. Did she make a deadly mistake? Interestingly
the UK does not have citizen registration.
To clarify: under citizen registration regimes, for example in many continental European
countries, all residents, non-natives as well as natives, are required to register with the
local authorities whenever they change address.
The UK does not have citizen registration and it experienced, as a result of agreeing to
EU treaties that guarantee freedom of movement, a larger influx of foreigners than Germany
did in 2015. In other words decades of neoliberal deregulation and the arrival of 3 million
EU citizens did enough damage to the living standards of registered voters in the UK to
produce a simple majority in favor of Brexit. While the lack of citizen registration in the
UK was not the cause of Brexit, this abscence of practical controls may have contributed to
the present crisis.
In contrast Germany did not surrender completely to deregulation of the labor market
– though there has been liberalization particularly in unskilled sectors, wages in
major industries continue to be governed by collective bargaining agreements that extend
across employers. And the influx of foreign labor is tracked and controlled through the
citizen registration regime.
I think that it's more likely that Blair et al. made a deadly mistake in not establishing
greater controls in the wake of both EU as well as native liberalization fantasies. I think
Germany and the EU will survive and Merkel, though a lame duck chancellor today, will go down
in history as a great European.
That all depends on who writes the history books. An honest assessment of Merkel would
admit, though, that she was one of the last truly savvy European politicians and demagogues.
This a woman, who even in a weakened position, staved off three consecutive coup attempts
from the hard-right of her party in as many years, and still managed to get her pick of
replacement on the way out of the party leadership. So to characterize her as in anyway naive
is to my mind is not really fair. That she misjudged the situation may be closer to the mark.
It was definitely the key factor in her downfall. Regardless of her motives or the perceived
results of her policy, allowing asylum, even to so many, was absolutely the right thing to
do! And one has to remember that when she had taken enough heat from the long racist right of
her party she shut that policy down. As someone who stood out in the cold at large
pro-refugee rallies here in Munich, I'm loath to believe it was a waste of my time.
A remark about Merkels rationale: It was to a great extent a marketing- (or propaganda)
driven decision from Merkel and her entourage: After making Greece more or less
single-handedly into a debt colony, Merkel was looking for an improvement of her damaged
image; a journalist from the german newspaper DIE WELT, Robin Alexander, showed in his book
about the migration crisis that all the necessary administrative arrangements were in place
to close the german border in September 2015 but home secretary de Maizière was
overruled by Merkel and her advisors – they did not want to have ugly pictures because
of Merkels still damaged image from the mishandling of Greece.
Thanks for the insightful article about the US & Latin America and the great
discussion!
thanks but bitte – it wasn't vanity that opened the doors to a million refugees.
Like Greece, Brexit is a lesson in the incoherencies of the EU. The truly disturbing
evidence tends to turn up after the shit has hit the fan. Greece had (still has?) a deeply
dysfunctional public purse. They had (still have?) no objective and reliable public record of
private property ownership, which for example could serve as the basis for property taxation.
They should never have been allowed to enter the monetary union. Similarly England
liberalized its labor market and then took little or no action to defend it when the EU
expanded to eastern Europe allowing millions of talented and energetic if not highly
qualified, low-wage (from the perspective of the British labor market) workers to enter and
compete. The Germans were a little better at defending their labor market. The point is that
every EU member should have been prepared appropriately for the consequences of EU expansion
to the east and the availability of effectively underpriced human resources.
We have occasional interest pieces in the local media following some refugee immigrants
and the paths they have followed since arriving. They are quite eye-opening in terms of
describing the challenges involved, which can include cultural dislocation, finding
employment and social connections, and trauma and ongoing issues around the situation they
were escaping. Kids and teens especially seem to have a hard time, as they have frequently
lost siblings or family members or been separated from them, have had traumatic or disturbing
experiences that they struggle to process, and find little that's familiar about their new
environment and living situation.
You also get to see the support structure and community resources at their disposal to
help them manage, which can be substantial. New Zealand only takes a relatively small number
(1000 or so) of refugees per year and it's easy to see why.
FWIW Moon of Alabama blogger Bernhard, who lives in Germany, has said that Merkel's policy
was at least in part about depressing wages.
And Dimitri Orlov gives his take on the US coup attempt.
Here's the real problem: the fracking bonanza is ending. Most of the sweet spots have
already been tapped; newer wells are depleting faster and producing less while costing
more; the next waves of fracking, were they to happen, would squander $500 billion, then $1
trillion, then $2 trillion The drilling rate is already slowing, and started slowing even
while oil prices were still high. Meanwhile, peak conventional (non-fracked) oil happened
back in 2005-6, only a few countries haven't peaked yet, Russia has announced that it will
start reducing production in just a couple years and Saudi Arabia doesn't have any spare
capacity left.
A rather large oil shortage is coming, and it will rather specifically affect the US,
which burns 20% of the world's oil (with just 5% of the world's population). Once fracking
crashes, the US will go from having to import 2.5 million barrels per day to importing at
least 10 -- and that oil won't exist. Previously, the US was able to solve this problem by
blowing up countries and stealing their oil: the destruction of Iraq and Libya made
American oil companies whole for a while and kept the financial house of cards from
collapsing. But the effort to blow up Syria has failed, and the attempt to blow up
Venezuela is likely to fail too because, keep in mind, Venezuela has between 7 and 9
million Chavistas imbued with the Bolivarian revolutionary spirit, a large and well-armed
military and is generally a very tough neighborhood.
"FWIW Moon of Alabama blogger Bernhard, who lives in Germany, has said that Merkel's
policy was at least in part about depressing wages. "
Don't know tons about Germany's economy. But I will point out that Costas Lapavitsas, in
his book "Profiting Without Producing", makes the argument that a big factor in Germany
realizing such large surpluses relative to other countries in the EU is Germany being able to
minimize nominal unit labor costs. According to the data in the book, the nominal unit labor
costs have flatlined in Germany, while they increased in a number of peripheral countries. He
talked about how German capitalists have been able to also successfully exploit non-unionized
labor forces. It wouldn't surprise me if that was at least one of the motivations.
But if we were rational (we being the US collectively), if our government weren't a
bi-partisan train wreck, we would be figuring out ways to compensate countries like Venezuela
for keeping the oil in the ground. It has a market value, but the environmental damage isn't
obviously included in the market price. If it was, if we could truly price such a thing, I
think it would clearly show a net aggregate cost for humanity on the whole. Instead of
stealing and consuming Venezuela's oil, we would be paying them and countries like them to
keep it in the ground, and then radically change the structure of the domestic and
international economic system to deal with the environmental crisis. I think in some ways
that liberals are just as deluded about the changes needed as many on the right. Trump,
though, is doing things horribly wrong on every level in Venezuela, and previous presidents
were great either. Ecuador at one point asked the world to pay it to leave the oil in the
ground. We didn't, of course. We could pay Brazil to not cut its forests down too, but kind
of problematic, given who now runs the country, and I don't know whether we would devote
enough resources to monitor the forests thereafter anyway.
FWIW Moon of Alabama blogger Bernhard, who lives in Germany, has said that Merkel's
policy was at least in part about depressing wages.
I believe that this is generally recognized as a deliberate part of an effort to maintain
export competitiveness. Iirc they were able to pull the feckless SPD into collaboration after
the Soviet bloc collapse led to an influx of labor, some of it quite skilled, that was
already lowering wages.
On another note, we're talking about an increase an immigration in a way that slides over
what a coup would set off. My impression is that Chavista support among working class
Venezuelans and both strong and armed. At worst, the army will be divided, though writers
like Moon of Alabama think they are pretty much behind Maduro. (It's not for nothing that the
Times ran a piece a couple of days ago playing up divisions in the army.) I don't think this
will be a "put tanks in the streets, kill some demonstrators, send in the death squads to mop
up" kind of deal.
> differences of degree become differences of kind
uh, the source on that, in a paragraph about nazis, umm
"so also has the European boy inherited an aptitude for a certain moral life, which to the
Papuan would be impossible." ["Hereditary Influence, Animal and Human", 1856]
Maybe a joint China-Russia deployment of their most advanced first strike missiles
stationed in Cuba and aimed directly at America would do the trick of slamming the U.S back
to reality. Let America feel what China and Russia feel, when they see the U.S. massing arms
along their border.
Well, the US is not alone. The European Parliament, in its plenary session today, voted
the recognition of 'Guido' as the legitimate president of Venezuela. One reason they invoke
is article 233 of the constitution. But that article says that when the presidency is vacant
(not true!), the vice-president takes over, not some US-selected dimwit. (the full text as
adopted is here ).
And in other news, Israel is "aligning" with autocratic regimes in Africa and other
regions, indicating, as an aside for the mopes, its "distaste" for having to do so "to
preserve the nation and its democracy," and prove that the Likud rule really has yuuuge
international support.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/netanyahu-is-welcoming-authoritarians-to-israel-sparking-debate-1.6242028
Another kind of Bernaysian log-rolling, akin to the works of the trio of troubles, Bolton,
Pompeo and Abrams, and their adherents.
"Democracy," like "war," has become an undefined, maybe undefinable, shibboleth. What does
anything mean, any more? All there appears to be is power and wealth and domination, serving
up sacrifices to Moloch to extend and expand the rule of the destroyers of course the
neo-neos would just note that it has always been thus, for humankind, those who eat, and
those whose destiny it is to serve, die, and be eaten
I worked in and with "Brussels" from 2007 – 16 and know how venal many of that lot
are.
From the behaviour that I observed on Thursday evenings in Brussels (as the European
Parliament does not sit on Fridays and MEPs are encouraged to visit their constituencies) and
their away weeks in Strasbourg, I suspect that spooks are active and keeping an eye out for
material to enable "chantage".
The European Parliament did but they still have to urge their members to go along with
them. I have seen this Parliament in action before and remain seriously unimpressed-
One would think the fact that our "remake the world in our image" plans worked out so
well in the Middle East might curb US adventurism. And it isn't just that we made a mess of
Iraq, failed to break Iran, and failed to install new regimes in Afghanistan and Syria. The
New American Century types are deep in denial that this geopolitical tussle not only cost
the US greatly in terms of treasure, but it also wound up considerably enhancing Russia's
standing.
Should any of these things really be perceived as failures for the New American Century
types? They've been conducting an incredibly successful looting project, as Kelley Vlahos has
documented in The American Conservative.
They may be in denial about the moral virtues of what they do, or any ostensible benefits
to regular Americans, but it's tough to deny the material success that it has brought to war
profiteers and their enablers, measured in terms of things like real-estate values in DC
suburbs.
The 'grow or die' mantra needs oil to keep on keeping on, and the Venezuela gambit came as
news that fracking wasn't all that was made public. Interesting intersection.
The only actions a bully responds to is force. Russia and China especially will need to
become more aggressive even if that means the end of the human race via nuclear war. The
current situation perpetuated by the nihilists that run things is so painful to watch given
the loss of life of millions of innocents that ending the whole thing quickly sometimes seems
merciful.
I think that there are some people in Washington that have really not thought this all the
way through. Look, it is one thing to blow up countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria but apart
from all the blood and treasure lost, America has two things in its favour shielding it from
the worse effects – the Pacific and the Atlantic Oceans. America has never had to deal
with the waves of refugees released that Europe has had to deal with. A side effect of this
is the rise of right wing movements in response to tone deaf governments as well as local
terrorist attacks.
But, if America now starts to blow up countries in South America, the effects will not be
limited to just those countries alone but will ricochet around the whole continent and up the
isthmus. Then you will see not caravans of refugees but human waves. Is this why Trump is so
gung-ho on building a wall? To keep all those fleeing refugees out of America to warp the
politics there like it has in Europe? Is America ready for a bunch of Vietnams in South
America? Look, Vietnam in size is about the same size as California but the Vietnamese were
never defeated there. How about something similar throughout a whole continent? Do they
really want to find out?
The U.S. blew up a string of South and Central American countries in the 1960-70s –
Brazil, Argentina, Chile and others. Much as I would like to believe there will be negative
effects on the U.S. this time around I can't say I remember hearing of any then. In the
1990-2000s there was a backlash against U.S. control and this is what is being rolled back
now.
Americans have been wreaking Central and South America since William Walker temporarily
took over Central America using private American armies in the 1840s. The aim was to
establish slave plantations. Southern style Manifest Destiny.
All of the present day coups and embargoes is normal for the United States even
when we didn't have an army we had the navy, the marine, and banks.
Vietnam might be a different case. Seems to me there was more of a sense of peoplehood
there than in a lot of the central and South American places, with their colonial histories
and geographic and demographic divides. Not so sure if there would be resistance to invasion
and subversion on the scale of Vietnam's in a lot of those places, where the "legitimate
authorities" are in the bag already, have a long schooling in oppression and looting, and the
Empire has done so much groundwork and homework prepping the military and police forces (and
various militias and of course the narco sub-governments) to pile on to any popular unrest
and solidarity notions. What are the Guatemalan and Venezuelan and Colombian and Brazilian
etc. equivalents of the Gilet Jaune? What is the life expectancy of a peasant or labor
organizer in a lot of those places, or of a determined investigative reporter?
And let us remember that the Empire has been kicking a$$ and taking names in "our
backyard" since the commercial classes declared (many of them at least) that the Divine Right
of the English King, at least, did not float across the Atlantic in their little wooden
ships.
Recall the observations of that old guy, Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler, regarding the nature of
what he reduced to a simplification, "war," and explained from his long experience as a thug
for the Empire that all the stuff the Marines and Navy and the rest were doing through the
latter half of the 19th and his part of the 20th Centuries was "nothing but a racket." (Note
that the Marines still nominally "revere" Butler as a successful general officer, the
quintessential multiple-Medal-of-Honor-holding Marine, but completely obfuscate his
"sedition" in exposing the real nature of all that Valorous Glorious Victorious "carrying of
guns to every clime and place "
Human waves which will strengthen right-wing politicians and their police state, while
depressing wages. I'm sure Trump and the PNAC crowd would never want anything like that. How
silly of them.
An interesting article on the aftermath of oil rich Ecuador adopting the US$ as their
currency. It brought stability to a country wracked by hyperinflation, but the knock-on
economic effects make for a nasty hangover.
Every day since 2015, thousands of Ecuadorians have crossed the bridge from Tulcán,
Ecuador to the border town of Ipiales, Colombia to go shopping. Goods they purchase in
Colombia include food, cars, television, and even bulldogs. On a holiday weekend between
May 27 and 29, more than 50,000 Ecuadorians crossed the border to Ipiales. Some shoppers
come from as far as Quito, a five-hour drive south of the border. Ecuadorians purchase
goods in Colombia en masse due to a simple fact: prices in Colombia have become
significantly cheaper. For example, a 50-inch TV costs $1,300 USD in Ecuador, but less than
$800 USD in Colombia.[2] The situation has become of such concern to the Ecuadorian
government that last year, President Rafael Correa issued a "call of conscience" to
Ecuadorians, asking his compatriots to "offer support to the national production" by buying
Ecuadorian products.
In addition to Panama and El Salvador, Ecuador is one of the Latin American countries
that uses the U.S. dollar as the only official currency. Ecuador does not print its own
bank notes. In recent years, the U.S. dollar has continuously appreciated against other
currencies in Latin America, making the price of goods in Ecuador higher than that in
neighboring Colombia and Peru. Ecuador abandoned its old currency, the sucre, during a
severe economic crisis in 2000 and has been using U.S. dollars ever since. With the
appreciation of the U.S. dollar, doubts have emerged regarding the fate of dollarization. A
recent Wall Street Journal article stated that Ecuador "has the misfortune to be an oil
producer with a 'dollarized' economy that uses the U.S. currency as legal tender."The
appreciation of the U.S. dollar against other currencies has decreased the net exports of
non-oil commodities from Ecuador, which, coupled with the fall in oil prices, has
constrained the country's potential for economic growth.
I don't think Guaidó has any plan to sell PDVSA to foreign countries. So far
his plans are to replace Chavistas in the company and put his own guys in charge. The
same has occured during any government change in Venezuela after oil nationalization. (sorry
link in spanish )
As Karl Rove famously said "we're an Empire now ."–I think people continually miss
this simple statement of fact. The USA is an Empire and like the period of Augustus still has
the old republican institutions including "elections" that we all would have to admit are not
particularly democratic. The ideals those of us from the baby-boom generation grew up with
were only partially bullshit then and are completely bullshit now. Washington sees its
opportunity to open Venezuela up for "bidness" and is taking steps to get rid of a weak
President of a democratic country and, by now, we should understand that the official
Washington does not like democracy abroad or domestically. Immigration from Venezuela and
other countries is always good, as many people above have pointed out, because it depresses
wages, eliminates workers ability to bargain with bosses, makes working conditions worse and
so on. All good things for the rulers. Just face the fact that we are ruled by oligarchs and
we have, really, no say in what they do and haven't had any say for some decades. They do
what they want to do whether we think it is moral or not.
The people at the top are gangsters–some of them just like hurting people for fun,
most just do it for profit which comes in many forms usually outside public scrutiny.
Americans have a tendency to hide in illusions–particularly on the left we believe that
the System is reformable–it isn't. As for Europe following along, they are vassal
states and, when it's important, and it's no skin of their asses they'll step into line.
Though European leadership has some concern for the average citizen (unlike American
leadership of both parties) Europeans (ruling elites and citizens) love the comfort and
security of the Empire as did people in other great empires of Rome and the Ottomans. At any
rate, European firms can descent on Venezuela and loot to their heart's content when the US
takes it.
On the other hand, if the US fails at taking Venezuela then the Empire is on its way
out.
Poverty has a cost. And this cost is always paid by the workers. Massive (and possible
artificially organized) immigration is the price rich countries' workers pay for poverty
everywhere else. It seems they are targeting the wrong responsible.
What depresses me about all this is the propaganda push isn't even trying to make sense
anymore. We are supposed to believe that they had a invalid election and want genuine
democracy but then just pick a guy who never even ran for president and pretend that he's
legit.
And that we are so concerned for the suffering of its people, but the first thing we do is
cut off all their oil money.
It reminds me of violent cops who continue beating a suspect when he's down and then wonder
why he's not cooperating.
Just sick beyond words.
I see the US move against Venezuela as having a domestic political agenda as well.
Look at how democratic socialism is being demonized by the MSM and leaders of both
parties.
How long before AOC and Bernie are labeled as Bolivarian sympathizers?
I agree. How soon until we see adjacent images of AOC and Maduro in some media context or
other? Odds are you can already find this somewhere on ZeroHedge, perhaps sourced from The
Mises Institute.
It's already happening. A writer for the conservative Lake County Journal yesterday
referred to Illinois as "the Venezuela of the Midwest," apparently referring to the new
governor and his (fairly) progressive agenda.
I want to give this title again – free doc on YouTube.
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised: Chavez Inside the Coup.
From 2002 shows the first coup attempt against Hugo Chavez. How it failed. You don't see
any "authoritarianism" but you will get a big dose of Democracy in action as the storm the
streets and get their President back.
Okay, I took a look. Massive street demonstrations effectively turned the tide. No
doubt.
Now imagine that happening in the US. Oh, wait. It did happen. In the Sixty's and then
again in 2000's, in an attempt to stop the genocide in Vietnam and more recently the
Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Livable wages for the American Working Class and open borders are incompatible.
What would be less expensive and quicker to implement? Building the wall?, or making
E-Verify mandatory if a business wants to write off an employee's wages against income?
If the government can administer Medicare and Social Security, they can make E-Verfiy
work.
Of course Medicare fraud of all descriptions is a constant challenge to "government
administration." We got a new FL senator who managed to walk away "Scott-free" after
presiding over the looting of Medicare and MEdicaid of some what, $4 or was it $5 billion?
https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2010/11/rick-scott-alex-sink-florida/
Social Security might be a better exemplar, though a lot of people are harmed by the way
benefits are ruled on by the administrative processes and institutionalized tight-fistedness
there. https://thinkprogress.org/paul-ryan-legacy-toward-the-poor/
"We could do better." Will the Empire ever "do better," at anything other than chaos and
exploitation and corruption of the sort that lets the California ag cartel keep on using
virtual slave labor from south of the border? And the 10% having their house slaves and yard
workers?
If there is such a plan to remake america (I doubt it) it is clear that Venezuela was the
weakest piece in the move. The least we can say about Maduro is that he has grossly
mismanaged the best resource of the country and nobody outside Venezuela likes him.
It is not Maduro's fault that the oil price stumbled between 2014-2015, and it is not his
fault that more
than 80% of Venezuelan exports are Oil and oil-derived products . It is not probably
Maduro's fault that 2,5 million venezuelans migrated after the fall in oil prices.
Nevertheless, they blame Maduro. But it is Maduro's fault that oil production in Venezuela
has been reduced making a big problem bigger (and now US sanctions make it even worse). But
this is not all.
Most Venezuelan oil exports go to China to repay the enormous debt that Venezuela
accumulated (I believe during Chaves tenure mostly) So, the real income that Venzuela obtains
from oil has decreased dramatically due to 1) oil price crash 2) repay chinese debt with oil
and 3) lower pproduction, and now we add 4) US sanctions. Maduro was already in a very weak
position before the sanctions. Anyway I wonder if Guaidó can do anything except pray for
oil price rise.
Venezuela exports to China account to about 5% of China Oil imports and I was thinking if
Trumps move was just an indirect move to put China in jeopardy, and by the way, get rid of a
leftist government that doesn't get along with the US. The fact is that China has motives to
be angry with Maduro but migth take bigger losses with Guaidó. Anyway 5% is not a big
share of imports.
I'm hesitant to comment on this with any criticism of Maduro or challenging the narrative
that he is a 21st century Allende for fear of being called the Blob (as commenters have been
doing), but it is undeniable that Maduro has far less support than Chavez did, and I would
add that there are real doubts as to the legitimacy of the 2018 constitutional convention
elections. Of course, Guaidó has even less legitimacy and popular support.
Here is an
interview (in English!) with a chavista development expert I actually got to meet in
person years ago whose opinions I still trust. His take: the Venezuelan right wing+US-led
international neoimperialist forces are a big part of the crisis. However, the biggest issue
is the collapse in the price of oil and Venezuela's dependence on oil (partly the fault of
chavismo) and official corruption. In the face of this, Maduro cracked down on dissent both
legally and illegally, buying temporary power at the cost of sacrificing support.
With the ebbing of progressive forces of the region, we see the right staging violent
protests in 2014 and 2017, rejecting election results in 2013, and sabotaging the economy.
Then comes a covert blockade and then later an open one together with interference by the
United States and other right-wing governments. All this has made [Maduro's] government
very weak since its coming into being in 2013. The government manages to stay in power, but
it fails to overcome the crisis, to say nothing about maintaining the program of a
democratic transition to socialism.
A part of the Chavez leadership took control of the state apparatus and the PSUV
[Maduro's party]. It closed ranks and carried out purges, opting for a strategy that
implies the progressive elimination of democratic spaces. That group legitimizes its
actions by pointing to the economic war and the conspiracy of the right – which are
very real – and then its proceeds to limit various forms of expression of the popular
will.
This takes place in relation to questions of state. Examples include cancelling the
recall referendum promoted by the opposition, delaying by one-year the elections for
governors, deciding not to do a popular referendum to convene the constituent assembly. But
it also takes place in popular organizational spaces. In 2016, they suspended the elections
of the Communal Councils throughout the country, and, in 2017, the new line was that only
PSUV members could head up these institutions.
In one way there is, if not a silver lining, at least something new in this current bout
of dollar diplomacy in Venezuela: Trump and Bolton getting on the TV in all their piggish and
crass glory showing the nation exactly what drives US foreign policy. Perhaps it will be an
education for some of our less informed citizens helping to recast previous gory
interventions "for democracy" in their proper light. Truthfully its not like the US
government is doing anything different than any other state does: wielding the violent,
brutal power it has on behalf of its ruling class. Perhaps now we can do away with the
pretense of spreading freedom and democracy once and for all. The incessant duplicity and
false righteousness is almost as sickening as the death dealing. At least from afar.
1. We should be also talking about how we do support in the region. Say Venezuela's
neighbor, Colombia. Deadliest place in the world for union organizers, among the deadliest
places for journalists and human rights workers. Thousands of politicians and activists on
the left have been killed in recent decades, over 80 priests killed since the 1980's. The US
government event admits that violent death squads (which the CIA helped to create and which
are responsible for most of the human rights abuses in the country) have been eliminating
dozens of indigenous groups through violent land grabs. The country has among the largest
number of internally displaced people in the world, and many politicians in the government
have strong ties to death squads and cartels. As of a few years ago, millions of Colombians
were living in Venezuela, and the CIA data on net migration flows shows massive amounts of
people fleeing Colombia. Does the media talk about this? Have we attacked the country like we
have Venezuela? No, Colombia has gotten more US aid than any country in the world, not named
Egypt and Israel. And Colombia is helping to overthrow the government in Venezuela right now,
the media just calls the country an "ally" of ours. Bush gave Uribe, the former right wing
president, a Presidential Medal of Freedom, and Uribe was identified in the early 1990's by
the DEA as being among the worst offenders in Colombia's government regarding connections to
cartels, there is evidence that hits were planned on his ranch with death squads, his family
has ties to these groups too. Obama, as many know, also signed a "free trade" deal with the
country. So, take that activists in the US trying to organize unions and places like car
factories in the South.
2. Chomsky and Herman had two books on the political economy of human rights, and they
showed the strong correlation between US financial and military support, and human rights
abuses. We support the overwhelming majority of the world's dictatorships right now, and
William Blum has a great book (Killing Hope) showing the CIA's role in supporting coups,
dictatorships and destabilization in the last half of the 20th century. The NED and USAID are
right there too, as are private organizations like the Atlas Network (which gets money from
the NED), the AFL-CIO and the International Republican Institute. This is to say nothing of
our murderous wars, going back decades. We are in no position to lecture anyone on democracy
and human rights, and it is absurd to accept those things as the reasons we are doing this to
Venezuela.
3. Venezuela's economic situation is complex. Maduro is corrupt, the Venezuelan government
has failed to diversify the economy, and there has been mismanagement. However, the economy
shrank by 26% in the decades leading into Chavez taking over, a majority of the country was
in extreme poverty as of the mid-1990's, and as the country became increasingly under the
control of the IMF, riots and coups ensued. Inflation was high under Chavez, but it was much
higher in the years before he took over than it was most of his time in office, and the
hyperinflation started years after he died, when the economic war intensified. Venezuela also
suffers from many problems other major oil producers struggle with and other developing
countries struggle with.
4. The economic war has been devastating, and is in violation to international law,
domestic law and the OAS charter. Cut off needed exports, cut off access to foreign capital,
barred it from re-negotiating its debt with creditors, stolen gold, among other things. The
opposition controls key markets and produces many of the basic products working people depend
on, and they have intentionally cut back production to cause harm, which has also contributed
to the hyperinflation. The opposition has set up many companies that steal state subsidized
goods and sell them at a mark-up in places like Colombia.
5. The US developed behind what was among the largest industrial tariffs among what are
now OECD countries in the 19th and early 20th century. We were highly protectionist
thereafter, and still have a highly protectionist agricultural system. Ha Joon Chang has
written a lot about how countries like the US rose up with certain policies, like that, but
when they got to the top, they kicked away the ladder, so other countries couldn't implement
those very policies. China has also developed by radically violating the types of policies
that the WTO and the IMF force on countries, it is responsible for the overwhelming majority
of the decline in worldwide poverty in recent decades (directly and indirectly), but it is an
exception, not the rule, on policy. Raul Prebisch wrote about infant industry protection in
places like Venezuela, and he talked a lot about the overdependence of developing and
underdeveloped countries on raw material exports, which generally have poor terms of trade.
The IMF has said that about two thirds of developing countries rely on a small handful of raw
material exports for at least 60% of their export revenue, and other developing countries
with comparable oil reserves (like Saudi Arabia and Iran) also heavily rely on oil export
revenue. So, to the extent that Venezuela hasn't diversified, all previous governments failed
to do this, and it is hard for countries like Venezuela to actually diversify their
economies, especially in the modern economy with the way it has been set up.
7. If I were to go on TV and threaten John Bolton, I could get thrown in jail. He, on the
other hand, can threaten entire countries, and pushed for a war in Iraq that has killed
millions, and destabilized an entire region. Over 80% oppose the US militarily intervening,
and over 80% oppose the sanctions. However, in 2004, polling Iraq showed that a similar
number of people there opposed the privatization of the country's oil, and our leaders and
fascists like Bolton didn't care. Both Kerry and Bush at the time essentially supported the
privatization, and so did horrible people like Abrams and Bolton. There really is no justice
in the world if immoral people like him and Abrams can not only remain free, but continue to
be re-hired by this government of ours. Bolton is even given space by our media to call for
violence against countries like Iran that pose no threat to us.
Wow Great article about a complex subject with long term historical roots and more recent
causes that have been only superficially plumbed. Wouldn't know how to even begin a
conversation about this emotionally laden and complicated topic. Thank you.
Perceptive take on the neocons' current view of the involvement of other foreign nations
in the region and Venezuela's oil. Have had questions about the extent to which US engagement
in the MENA presented China et al with a strategic opportunity given a perceived US policy
focus vacuum in Latin America (other than looting by the usual suspects); as well as the
historical and current involvement and roles of US military and contractor elements and
training in various countries; that of transnational banks and corporations (palm oil and
other agricultural products, money laundering) that may have indirectly contributed to the
emigration issues; as well as the rise of criminal cartels and gangs and the emergence of
near narco-states against a backdrop of the Whys of U.S. demand. How is the imposition of
sanctions against Venezuela a constructive policy measure? Setting aside the damaging effects
on the nations' people and other considerations, It has not been notably successful as a tool
to impose regime change.
Hard not to agree with the concluding paragraph of this post and many of the comments.
FWIW Moon of Alabama blogger Bernhard, who lives in Germany, has said that Merkel's
policy was at least in part about depressing wages.
I believe that this is generally recognized as a deliberate part of an effort to maintain
export competitiveness. Iirc they were able to pull the feckless SPD into collaboration after
the Soviet bloc collapse led to an influx of labor, some of it quite skilled, that was
already lowering wages.
On another note, we're talking about an increase an immigration in a way that slides over
what a coup would set off. My impression is that Chavista support among working class
Venezuelans and both strong and armed. At worst, the army will be divided, though writers
like Moon of Alabama think they are pretty much behind Maduro. (It's not for nothing that the
Times ran a piece a couple of days ago playing up divisions in the army.) I don't think this
will be a "put tanks in the streets, kill some demonstrators, send in the death squads to mop
up" kind of deal.
The fact that the entire establishment is behind this coup is not altogether surprising
but the level of hypocrisy on display is absolutely family bloggin insane.
The Russiagaters and their media partners, who have been screaming for the last two years
about the Russkies "meddling" in our election and Trump "colluding" with Putin, do not even
blink as they brazenly advocate the overthrow of a sovereign government and the
destabilization of a country (a move that could well lead to civil war).
The blatant doubles-standard at play here and the public's wholesale acceptance of it is
just one more sign that as a society we are moving away from "reality based" thinking and
letting emotions and tribal affiliation (which are,of course, manipulated by TPTB) guide our
actions and reactions.
At some point people will have to learn how to think critically again and how to socialize
and communicate without an intermediary layer of tech, and the people who control it,
observing their every thought, word and action and using this god's eye view to run psyops on
them.
And we will all have to make the shift from compulsivey consuming information, and hoping
that we can elect our way to a more just and sane society, to taking decisive action in the
real world. If/when a revolution happens or we reach a critical mass of discontented and
angry citizens desiring real change we will realize just how deeply the establishment has
hooked into our brains and our lives via the tools and toys they so generously provide us
with.
When the family blog hits the fan, the sinister, and totalitarian, nature of the Facebook,
Amazon, Palintir etc. partnership with the CIA/NSA and state and local LEAs will suddenly be
very real indeed. Here's hoping that day comes soon so we can start working on the next
level.
Do the people who advocate for open borders and unlimited immigration ever stop and think
about how many people actually want to leave their homes, friends and families
behind and risk their lives and well-being escaping to the United States or Europe to work
thankless low-paying Jobs in societies that are doing away with upward social mobility?
How many Syrians, Afghans, Guatemalans, Malians, Mexicans would rather be able to make a
respectable living in their home countries? With the IMF/World Bank/gobalized capitalism,
NATO, a belligerent dying empire and a few of its shame inhibited lackeys, rigging their
nations economies to make corrupt leaders and western businesspeople rich and richer (while
consigning their governments to never ending debt peonage) or raining bombs and shells on
their heads and/or fomenting social chaos and civil war it is no wonder many thousands of
people are heading north to try their luck in the lands of freedom, liberty and
"Enlightenment values." But these are desperate people fleeing death, chaos and
grinding poverty not "emigrants" from stable societies deciding to live somewhere else for a
while.
Many western leftists have a wholly warped and unrealistic view of crisis immigration.
They don't ask the most obvious questions such as why are so many people fleeing their
home countries? and who benefits from that situation? And many are so afraid of
being labeled racist (a fate worse than death) they don't dare move past the virtue signaling
stage.
Ideally the internationalist left would be forging partnerships with parties and
organizations in the global south to build a bulwark against western imperialism – both
economic and military – and putting pressure on their own governments to stop these
practices. But that requires more than slinging around self-righteous rhetoric and would
involve actual work and stuff. So
Likewise, the demagoguery from the anti-immigrant right is willfully disingenuous in that
the root causes of mass migration are ignored and the most desperate and powerless people are
scapegoated and made into lightning rods for all the bigotry and projected existential angst
of people living in failing societies of their own.
Meanwhile those responsible for the current upheaval – i.e. the captains of
industry, "wealth creators", generals, heads of state who champion overt and covert
imperialism – are left largely unscathed.
The amount of BS, "fake news" and wildly contradictory and irrational nonsense that gets
pumped out by TPTB and the media with nary an incredulous peep from the weary or braindead
citizenry indicates that there will likely have to be some sort of crisis before more people
begin to take notice of their surroundings and let the scales fall from their eyes.
I think preventing the current order from dragging us into a dark abyss will be an
incredibly difficult slog. But so was every fight against unjust power in the history of the
world. Now all we have to do is organize as a group/class/whatever and come up with a battle
plan to put into action when the crisis hits ;-)
Jason Raimondo's hopes that the tide slowly was turning against the War
Party with Trump's appointment of Tillerson are dashed for good with the appointments of
Abrams, Bolton and Pompeo. The thugs for Wall Street have taken DC. Trump might as well go
home. Raimondo wrote of Abrams in 2017 in "The End of Globalism":
Excerpt:
Oh yes, the times they are a changin', as Bob Dylan once put it, and
here's the evidence :
"Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has ordered his department to redefine its mission and
issue a new statement of purpose to the world. The draft statements under review right now are
similar to the old mission statement, except for one thing – any mention of promoting
democracy is being eliminated."
All the usual suspects are in a tizzy .
Elliott Abrams , he of
Contra-gate fame , and one of the purest of
the neoconservative ideologues , is cited in the
Washington Post piece as being quite unhappy: "The only significant difference is the
deletion of justice and democracy. We used to want a just and democratic word, and now
apparently we don't."
Abrams' contribution to a just and democratic world is
well-known : supporting a
military dictatorship in El Salvador during the 1980s that slaughtered thousand s, and then
testifying before Congress that massive human rights violations by the US-supported regime were
Communist "propaganda." US policy, of which he was one of the principal architects, led to the
lawlessness that now plagues that country, which has a higher murder rate than Iraq: in Abrams'
view, the Reagan policy of supporting a military dictatorship was "a fabulous achievement." The
same murderous policy was pursued in
Nicaragua while Abrams was Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian
Affairs, as the US tried to overthrow a democratically elected government and provoked a civil
war that led to the death of many thousands . In
Honduras
and Guatemala
, Abrams was instrumental in covering up heinous atrocities committed by US-supported
regimes.
And, now, Venezuela. The economic hit man has arrived.
" 'I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I
spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the
bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and
especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
decent place for the National city Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of
half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify
Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light
to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras
right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that
Standard Oil went on its way unmolested." --
Smedley Butler
Brazen Heist II, 4 hours ago (Edited)
...The Orange Buffoon might as well open the door to Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and Perle. Hell even get Scooter Libby in some
cameo. You know, keep them enemies closer and all that.
napper, 4 hours ago (Edited)
He will, if he gets a second term!!!
Abrams' appointment is no accident or mistake. By now even the most casual (but intelligent) observer should have seen
through Donald Trump's contemptuous disregard for legal institutions and a criminal propensity for lawlessness.
Brazen Heist II, 4 hours ago(Edited)
And most American sheeple are dumb as a pile of rocks. The few good people left are largely powerless and have to deal
with so much BS in all directions. I hope they will get through the coming implosion with their sanity intact.
Glad I left that shithole. I saw it coming. What's coming won't be pretty.
CananTheConrearian1, 3 hours ago
OK, Great Mind, name a populace that is as smart as Americans. Europeans? Chinese? We're glad you left, ********.
"... with minor exceptions the 5 eye countries are no different.. ..."
"... His History has often been applied as analogous to the post-cold war era, with the US empire usually compared to the arrogant, bullying, tyrannical, over-stretched Athenian empire. The speeches of the Corinthian and Theban ambassadors trying to convince Sparta to join them in war could be transposed almost word for word to anyone who fiercely opposes the empire today. ..."
"... Interesting times, or as one source said today, an Arch Duke moment could well be here. ..."
"... Why Venezuela? Why now? We've looked at these questions before. The answer to the first is, I think, most interesting: It represents a return of the Empire to its natural sphere of influence. It is as untenable for Russia to control Venezuela as it is for the US to run Ukraine. Or Syria. Or Afghanistan, for that matter. ..."
This article at https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/01/29/the-empires-propagandists/
may be of interest to some. Not saying that any of it is new to readers here nor is it
exhaustive but imo a decent piece that pulls together a lot and might be interesting to those
who mainly follow MSM.
An extract:
"The ruling class of the US imperium will simply not tolerate any government that opposes
its financial and geopolitical dominance, attempts socialism, or transfers its nexus to
another powerful state entity, like Russia or China for instance. If one chooses to do so it
is instantly targeted for assault either by crippling economic sanctions or embargoes, which
make governance nearly impossible and primarily harms the general population, or covert
subversion, or by direct and indirect military intervention. And the corporate media, when it
chooses to cover these issues, generally parrots State Department and Pentagon talking points
and obfuscations about the intentions of the US government, the role of corporations and
global capitalism, and the character of the governments the US happens to be opposing at the
time. And all of this is done with virtually no historical analysis. But of course none of
this is new."
It is interesting, the seeming rush to mess with Venezuela.
I guess whether it was in fact rushed, depends on how much we want to believe the data we are
fed.
I believe it was and suspect that that was the reason for resumption of operation of the
government - to support the intervention in Venezuela. Otherwise, it seemed like too sudden a
reversal by Trump.
I think in their analysis of where to intervene next, they look at an array of
factors:
Venezuela is weak
Venezuela espouses something like socialism
Venezuela has been associating with unsavory "competitors"
Venezuela is nearby (and very nearby our asset, Colombia)
Venezuela can be portrayed as in need of humanitarian intervention
Maduro has said some unkind things about U.S. government (Bush)
Venezuela holds a grand prize
In there discusions, I assume the issue of right/wrong is not mentioned.
Imagine someone attempting to raise the issue:
- But what will the media say?
- But what will the U.N. say?
- But what will the Pope say?
- But what will the voters say?
- But what will the other party say?
- But is it really the moral thing to do, what would God say?
with minor exceptions the 5 eye countries are no different..
i suppose the main
difference is not being served up a regular diet of 'we are the greatest' bs, accounts for
some of it.. the general curiousity about what the fuck is going on outside of the usa seems
sorely lacking in people who live in the usa... maybe the media can be blamed for a chunk of
this... generally canucks know a lot more about the usa, then the usa people know about
canada.. that is something i have witnessed in my life.. but, the simple answer to your
question is there isn't a lot of difference.. and yes - trudeau senior must be really
disappointed in tru dope jr... he is nothing compared to his dad... canada is on a downhill
trajectory and fast with this buffoon.. i expect worse in the next election too.. we will get
our trump as we are one cycle behind..
His History has often been applied as analogous to the post-cold war era, with the US
empire usually compared to the arrogant, bullying, tyrannical, over-stretched Athenian
empire. The speeches of the Corinthian and Theban ambassadors trying to convince Sparta to
join them in war could be transposed almost word for word to anyone who fiercely opposes the
empire today.
Also, similar to some who get impatient with the seeming over-conservatism of Russia and
China today, so the aggressive, hot-headed Corinthians and Thebans often get frustrated with
the more conservative Spartans.
I wonder when/if there'll be an American version of the Athenians' disastrous Sicilian
expedition.
Attached to that Venezuelanalysis.com that CE linked to @ 2 was this odd piece of
information:
"EREPLA deal "unusually favourable to foreign company"
... [A] 25-year deal was signed with unknown US based firm EREPLA in November 2018,
which has been described by financial firm Argus as "unusually favourable" to the US
company.
Little is known of EREPLA or its board of directors, with Reuters claiming that Harry
Sargeant III, magnate and ex-Financial Chairman of the US Republican Party, is one of their
owners. The small company, which was only legally registered in the US on November 8,
2018, a mere day before signing the PDVSA deal, has managed to extract a contract from PDVSA
which revives a number of practices, previously eliminated in the Chavez-era, of oil
so-called service contracts. PDVSA is yet to make any official comment on the deal, and analysts have already expressed concern that the deal violates Venezuela's 2001
Hydrocarbons Law.
The deal, which is extendable for a further 15 years, is due to bring US $500 million
of investment to the Tia Juana, Rosa Mediano fields in Maracaibo Lake and the Ayacucho 5
field in the Orinoco Belt. It assigns 49.9 percent of the new mixed company to EREPLA, and
passes 100 percent of the output to the US firm, which is expected to repatriate 50.1 percent
of sale profits back to PDVSA.
Day to day running, purchasing, exporting, and the sale of the oil produced is to be
completely controlled by EREPLA, except in the case of fulfilling PDVSA's hefty oil quota to
China, which will be agreed upon by both parts.
Whilst EREPLA is due to supply the rigs and crews for the fields, other costs will be
split between the two partners, whilst the US firm find themselves exempt from Venezuelan
labour laws under the Service Contract clause, as well as from paying its share of the 30
percent oil royalty which PDVSA is due to cover.
"We believe that the new model created in this agreement is in the national interest of
the United States," stated a Harry Sargeant Oil Management Group lawyer who signed the
documents on behalf of EREPLA.
An EREPLA statement on the deal describes how it looks to "revitalise" Venezuela's oil
industry. It goes on to explain that new terms and conditions have been applied as previous
contracts "fermented corruption and bad management." EREPLA also argued that the deal will
help prevent "US adversaries" such as Chinese and Russian firms from gaining further ground
in the oil-rich country.
It is unclear at this point how the new deal will function in light of US financial
sanctions against Caracas, as a license from the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
is still pending, but the statement assures that the company's work "will be carried out in
accordance with the economic sanctions enforced by the U.S. Treasury Department."
Oil deals in Venezuela were notoriously favourable to foreign firms until 2001, in
terms of profit [repatriation], labour laws, running costs, and local accountability, until
Hugo Chavez' Hydrocarbons Law broke the tradition, ensuring Venezuelan control over joint
ventures. Another Chavez decree in 2007 capped foreign participation in oil deals at 40
percent. However, in December 2017 the National Constituent Assembly approved a "Foreign
Investment Law" meant to improve conditions for foreign capital investments in
Venezuela.
A company that is incorporated only a day before it signs a major oil extraction and
production deal (parts of which violate Venezuela's own laws governing working conditions and
pay for Venezuelan workers and national control over joint ventures) with Venezuela? Does
anyone else not smell a rat?
What could PDVSA have been thinking? Did it not enter their
heads that EREPLA could be a front acting for elements in the US government?
Venezeula has become the tipping point for loss of GRC for the USD.
Venezeulan oil is being shipped to India, refined by the new Rosneft refinery then being
sold in anything but USD.
Added to the now over 100 country's that are rejecting the USD by using bi-lateral trade,
KSA already selling in yuan, the desperation of Uncle Scam is palpable.
Interesting times, or as one source said today, an Arch Duke moment could well be here.
Why Venezuela? Why now?
We've looked at these questions before. The answer to the first is, I think, most
interesting:
It represents a return of the Empire to its natural sphere of influence. It is as untenable
for Russia to control Venezuela as it is for the US to run Ukraine. Or Syria. Or Afghanistan,
for that matter.
It seems to me that the major blocs might be pulling back, and settling for easy gains.
Not that this coup is likely to be easy, it may prove to be impossible. It may even prove to
be the spark that sets Colombia, Ecuador, Brazil and the rest of Latin America alight.
But the way the clowns in the White House- who haven't had a new idea since 1981-see it all
resources will be mobilised to make the region safe for imperialism: Venezuela, Cuba,
Nicaragua and Bolivia: in the proverbial cross hairs.
The second question |Why now?) could be a reflection of the fact that the neo-conservative
axis has only recently re-established full spectrum domination over the White House. As the
Hitler Youth Freeland has been hinting: the running in this matter has been made by the Lima
Group in which Canada has been playing a leading and thoroughly despicable role. It was they
who did the pseudo legalistic groundwork for the coup. No doubt Bolton et al found it
convenient to have the Lima group demands presented to it on a plate. That meant that even
Ponce, who together with Bolton and Pompeo takes the role of the Three Weird Sisters in this
tragedy, could trigger the crisis with a phone call to Guido. Whose role is clearly to be
martyred, probably by a CIA sniper, so that he can die, if not for his country at least for
its corrupt elites.
We've seen this movie before.
Melians. As we think, at any rate, it is expedient--we speak as we are obliged, since
you enjoin us to let right alone and talk only of interest -- that you should not destroy
what is our common protection, the privilege of being allowed in danger to invoke what is
fair and right, and even to profit by arguments not strictly valid. And you are as much
interested in this as any, as your fall would be a signal for the heaviest vengeance and an
example for the world to meditate upon.
Athenians. The end of our empire, if end it should, does not frighten us: a rival
empire like Lacedaemon, even if Lacedaemon was our real antagonist, is not so terrible to the
vanquished as subjects who by themselves attack and overpower their rulers. This, however, is
a risk that we are content to take. We will now proceed to show you that we are come here in
the interest of our empire, and that we shall say what we are now going to say, for the
preservation of your country; as we would fain exercise that empire over you without trouble,
and see you preserved for the good of us both.
Melians. And how, pray, could it turn out as good for us to serve as for you to
rule?
Athenians. Because you would have the advantage of submitting before suffering the
worst, and we should gain by not destroying you.
Melians . So that you would not consent to our being neutral, friends instead of
enemies, but allies of neither side.
Athenians. No; for your hostility cannot so much hurt us as your friendship will be
an argument to our subjects of our weakness, and your enmity of our power.
Melians. Is that your subjects' idea of equity, to put those who have nothing to do
with you in the same category with peoples that are most of them your own colonists, and some
conquered rebels?
Athenians. As far as right goes they think one has as much of it as the other, and
that if any maintain their independence it is because they are strong, and that if we do not
molest them it is because we are afraid; so that besides extending our empire we should gain
in security by your subjection; the fact that you are islanders and weaker than others
rendering it all the more important that you should not succeed in baffling the masters of
the sea.
Melians. But do you consider that there is no security in the policy which we
indicate? For here again if you debar us from talking about justice and invite us to obey
your interest, we also must explain ours, and try to persuade you, if the two happen to
coincide. How can you avoid making enemies of all existing neutrals who shall look at case
from it that one day or another you will attack them? And what is this but to make greater
the enemies that you have already, and to force others to become so who would otherwise have
never thought of it?
Athenians. Why, the fact is that continentals generally give us but little alarm;
the liberty which they enjoy will long prevent their taking precautions against us; it is
rather islanders like yourselves, outside our empire, and subjects smarting under the yoke,
who would be the most likely to take a rash step and lead themselves and us into obvious
danger.
Melians. Well then, if you risk so much to retain your empire, and your subjects to
get rid of it, it were surely great baseness and cowardice in us who are still free not to
try everything that can be tried, before submitting to your yoke.
Athenians. Not if you are well advised, the contest not being an equal one, with
honour as the prize and shame as the penalty, but a question of self-preservation and of not
resisting those who are far stronger than you are...
Looks like Trump is counting that "slam dunk" color revolution will lift his reelection
chances. Will it?
Notable quotes:
"... First parallel to today comes from Oberholtzer's brief description of Cleveland in Volume 5 of his History of the United States Since the Civil War. "His horizons were narrow. His mind had not been enlarged by travel." "It was only necessary to implant in his mind" a notion to "stir him to a moral fury". Ring any bells? ..."
"... Cleveland drifted along on the international front until he installed Richard Olney as Secretary of State. Olney did his damnedest to provoke a conflict with Britain about a boundary issue in Venezuela by sending that nation the dumbest and most most arrogant declaration of American Exceptionalism ever seen till then. Likely Olney was an arrogant bonehead, but 2019 Secretary of State Michael "Pompous" Pompeo is all of that and a Rapture Fan as well. Maybe this time Jesus will finally get off the can . ..."
Mini Rant: I propose to attempt a comparison of the situation in 2019 Venezuela with the
Crisis of 1895 – also involving Venezuela. From what I can tell both are/were as fake
as a stack of $3 bills. (This is a slightly modified version of a post which disappeared
elsewhere in "moderation".)
The Republican elites of the earlier era seem to have been a bunch of wealthy
industrialists who had been coasting along as the Morally Superior "Party of Lincoln". They
had spread a wide and tightening net of tariffs to protect their enterprises, and the
Voters were getting tired of the situation. But the election of Democrat Grover Cleveland
turned out badly for those Voters (don't ask me why!) and having nowhere else to go
they returned to the Republicans in 1888. Benjamin Harrison was a wishy-washy nobody and
the Republicans raised the tariffs to astronomical levels during his "administration". By
the midterms of 1890, the rage of the Voters was such that the Republicans were crushed in
the House and Senate.
Here is where it gets interesting. Harrison's slimy but brilliant Secretary of State
James Blaine understood something must be done. His solution was to distract the Voters
with Foreign Adventures so they'd have something to talk about besides the tariffs. So he
began raising a ruckus in the nations of Hawaii and Chile. But before the new program could
get very far along, those same furious Voters returned Cleveland to the White House.
First parallel to today comes from Oberholtzer's brief description of Cleveland in
Volume 5 of his History of the United States Since the Civil War. "His horizons were
narrow. His mind had not been enlarged by travel." "It was only necessary to implant in his
mind" a notion to "stir him to a moral fury". Ring any bells?
Cleveland drifted along on the international front until he installed Richard Olney
as Secretary of State. Olney did his damnedest to provoke a conflict with Britain about a
boundary issue in Venezuela by sending that nation the dumbest and most most arrogant
declaration of American Exceptionalism ever seen till then. Likely Olney was an arrogant
bonehead, but 2019 Secretary of State Michael "Pompous" Pompeo is all of that and a Rapture
Fan as well. Maybe this time Jesus will finally get off the can .
Cleveland was immediately on board with the intervention. Congress was overjoyed in a
bipartisan way. Mostly the US people loved it too – We're Number One! The News Media
of the day - even the Republican papers - were delighted with Cleveland's truculence, just
as the likes of the Bezos' Blog Washington Post is thrilled with Trump's new 2019 nuttery.
Naturally when Cleveland left office and the warmongering Republicans returned to office,
the Kingdom of Hawaii was taken over, the USS Maine "somehow" got itself sent to Cuba and
sunk there by mysterious villains, a whole lot of Spanish islands were grabbed, and a few
hundred thousand Philippine folks ended up dead. Will bullying 2019 Russia/China work out
as well as kicking around 1895 Britain? And what are they trying to distract us from this
time?
BTW, this is cut/paste stuff from some of my history books, and I may be quite off base.
Feel free to tear these remarks to itty bitty pieces if that's what they deserve.
:)
"... it seems that crystia freeland is working directly for soros, or something like that... perhaps soros is still young enough to profit from another try at disaster capitalism on venezuala? ..."
"... Canada to host Lima group in effort to find solution to Venezuela crisis .. what a friggin witch she is! and this will be on the lima groups meeting agenda too.. ah yeah.. give it a human rights, humanitarian type twist.. ..."
CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela's opposition-run congress on Tuesday issued a resolution
calling deals between state-run oil company PDVSA [PDVSA.UL] and U.S. and French companies
announced this week illegal, since they had not been sent to lawmakers for approval.
The body said the oilfield deals with France's Maurel & Prom (MAUP.PA) and little-known
U.S. company Erepla violated article 150 of Venezuela's constitution, which requires that
contracts signed between the state and foreign companies be approved by the National
Assembly, as Venezuela's congress is known.
"They are giving concessions that violate the law," said lawmaker Jorge Millan, mentioning
the two contracts.
Congress, largely stripped of its power since the opposition took it over in 2016, is
unlikely to be able block the deals from going forward. But the rejection could create legal
complications under a future government. " more at link... i don't fully understand it, or
necessarily believe the way it is being presented in the reuters article, but it is worth
reading and might reflect some of the reality on the ground..
@46 bevin and @58 mandrau...
it seems that crystia freeland is working directly for soros, or something like
that... perhaps soros is still young enough to profit from another try at disaster capitalism
on venezuala?
"... Here's an article written by a self-professed Progressive and published on a self-professed Progressive website espousing "A Progressive Alternative to Trump's Dangerous Venezuela Policy." Yet the writer fails to even mention two salient facts of the utmost importance: First, that Trump's actions are Illegal, and second that they're Unconstitutional, both of which provide grounds for Impeachment of Trump, Pence, Bolton, and Pompeo at minimum. ..."
Here's an article written by a self-professed Progressive and published on a
self-professed Progressive website espousing "A Progressive Alternative to Trump's Dangerous
Venezuela Policy." Yet the writer fails to even mention two salient facts of the utmost importance: First,
that Trump's actions are Illegal, and second that they're Unconstitutional, both of which
provide grounds for Impeachment of Trump, Pence, Bolton, and Pompeo at minimum.
Thus the writer unwittingly provides an excellent example of what I described on the
previous thread as Civic Illiteracy. So far, I know of no public figure who has stood up and
said: Trump, you can't do what you're doing as it's illegal and unconstitutional!
Now I know why Dean Acheson called his book Present at the Creation as it was
during his tenure at the State Department when Illegal and Unconstitutional acts by the
executive become the norm.
The US, we have been repeatedly told, is the chief repository of democracy in the world, and
seeks to promote democracy everywhere.
from the US State Department:
Democracy and respect for human rights have long been central components of U.S. foreign
policy. Supporting democracy not only promotes such fundamental American values as
religious freedom and worker rights, but also helps create a more secure, stable, and
prosperous global arena in which the United States can advance its national interests. . .
here
And what is the US definition of democracy? Reading further to see its ultimate
meaning:
Identify and denounce regimes that deny their citizens the right to choose their leaders in
elections that are free, fair, and transparent.
So democracy mainly consists of choosing leaders, and has nothing to do with affecting
governmental policy, war and peace, aid to the poor and disadvantaged, etc. In the US that
means an occasional choice between two people, bad and worse, then sit down and shut up.
For foreign countries this mainly works in the negative for the US government, with a
determination that selected foreign leaders have not measured up to US standards.
Personalizing the enemy in order to gain control of the country is the way it's done. Saddam!
Assad! Maduro! These leaders according to Washington were not properly selected (not true in
most cases) and that justifies US military and/or economic warfare against that country,
mostly including its citizens of course. Kill them! Destroy their "human rights!" The
citizens were deprived of a free vote so let's deprive the citizens with sanctions and death!
. . . It makes no sense, but that's how it is done.
Jason Raimondo's hopes that the tide slowly was turning against the War
Party with Trump's appointment of Tillerson are dashed for good with the appointments of
Abrams, Bolton and Pompeo. The thugs for Wall Street have taken DC.Trump might as well go
home. Raimondo wrote of Abrams in 2017 in "The End of Globalism":
Excerpt:
Oh yes, the times they are a changin', as Bob Dylan once put it, and
here's the evidence :
"Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has ordered his department to redefine its mission and
issue a new statement of purpose to the world. The draft statements under review right now are
similar to the old mission statement, except for one thing – any mention of promoting
democracy is being eliminated."
All the usual suspects are in a tizzy .
Elliott Abrams , he of Contra-gate fame , and one of the purest of
the neoconservative ideologues , is cited in the
Washington Post piece as being quite unhappy: "The only significant difference is the
deletion of justice and democracy. We used to want a just and democratic word, and now
apparently we don't."
Abrams' contribution to a just and democratic world is well-known : supporting a
military dictatorship in El Salvador during the 1980s that slaughtered thousand s, and then
testifying before Congress that massive human rights violations by the US-supported regime were
Communist "propaganda." US policy, of which he was one of the principal architects, led to the
lawlessness that now plagues that country, which has a higher murder rate than Iraq: in Abrams'
view, the Reagan policy of supporting a military dictatorship was "a fabulous achievement." The
same murderous policy was pursued in
Nicaragua while Abrams was Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian
Affairs, as the US tried to overthrow a democratically elected government and provoked a civil
war that led to the death of many thousands . In Honduras
and Guatemala
, Abrams was instrumental in covering up heinous atrocities committed by US-supported
regimes.
And, now, Venezuela. The economic hit man has arrived.
" 'I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I
spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the
bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and
especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
decent place for the National city Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of
half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify
Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light
to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras
right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that
Standard Oil went on its way unmolested." --
Smedley Butler
The plan might be is to unleash Venezuelan civil war and install pro-US regime by force, using uprising as a ram to depose the
current governmnet. Which looks somewhat neoliberal to me with some deals with foreign companies what probably harm long
term Venezuelan interests, so it might be credible to attach it for corruption like they did with Yanukovich. With full
understanding that the next. more neoliberal Venezuelan government will be even more corrupt and top 1% oriented.
In other work Venezuela looks like Ukraine in 2014 but with oil as a huge price. Discontent with the current government
is real and can be exploited.
Notable quotes:
"... A Venezuelan civil war would result in mass death and even more economic misery!" CashMcCall, 2 hours ago Ron Paul used to be the darling of ZH. But with Trumptards, now RP is discredited because he doesn't support Trump's Tariffs, bullying, economic sanctions, weaponizing the dollar reserve, bombing Syria, or any of the rest of the Trump bullying **** head garbage. ..."
"It's ironic that a president who has spent the first two years in office fighting charges
that a foreign country meddled in the US elections would turn around and not only meddle in
foreign elections but actually demand the right to name a foreign country's president!
" According to press reports, Vice President Mike Pence was so involved in internal
Venezuelan affairs that he actually urged Guaido to name himself president and promised US
support. This is not only foolish, it is very dangerous.
A Venezuelan civil war would result in
mass death and even more economic misery!" CashMcCall, 2 hours ago Ron Paul used to be the
darling of ZH. But with Trumptards, now RP is discredited because he doesn't support Trump's
Tariffs, bullying, economic sanctions, weaponizing the dollar reserve, bombing Syria, or any of
the rest of the Trump bullying **** head garbage.
The Thrust of Trumptards is the ruder the US Acts the better. Bullying everyone is the way
to doe it. Trump is a punk, a draft dodging punk and he is wrecking the country.
But his self dealing is the underlying root. His phony work vacations. He fills rooms at
Trump resorts with secret service. Last year alone Trump Organization was paid half a billion
dollars for these phony work vacations.
Trump claims he works for free. But he donates his salary and deducts the full amount off
his taxes. He is being paid Trumptards. He is a self dealer. He is a slime and a con artist.
That is all Trump is.
Who is next? Paul
Wolfowitz now would be the most logical choice. Id the invasion of Venezuela decided already,
like Iraq war under Bush II.
That means that Rump can say goodbye to independents who votes for him because of his
anti-foreign wars noises during previous election campaign
Notable quotes:
"... Abrams, who had served in the Reagan State Department, faced multiple felony charges for lying to Congress and defying U.S. law in his role as a mastermind of the Iran-Contra debacle. Abrams' dishonesty almost destroyed Ronald Reagan's presidency and put Reagan in jeopardy of impeachment. Abrams was allowed to plead guilty to two reduced charges and later was pardoned by George H.W. Bush, who feared impeachment because of his own role in Iran-Contra. ..."
"... Abrams was even more consequential as nation-wrecker. He was one of the principal architects of the invasion of Iraq. He is an inveterate advocate of "regime change" against countries whose policies he doesn't like. He has a track record in attempting to overthrow foreign governments both by covert action and outright military invasion. ..."
"... At the beginning of the Trump administration, foreign policy establishment types lobbied clueless Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to accept the convicted criminal Abrams as deputy head of the department - the person running all day-to-day affairs at State. ..."
"... Abrams suddenly appeared deus ex machina at the side of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who said in a news conference that Abrams was appointed, "effective immediately" as special envoy to deal with resolution of the situation in Venezuela in a way that supposedly would advance U.S. interests. ..."
"... Abrams' special envoy post will be far more powerful than that of an ordinary ambassador or assistant secretary of state -- offices that require Senate confirmation. Should the Senate acquiesce in letting Abrams work without Senate confirmation? ..."
"... Abrams is a close friend and constant collaborator of Bill Kristol and Max Boot, both of whom are waging campaigns to impeach Trump or deny him re-election. There are no -- repeat, no -- policy differences between Abrams, Kristol, and Boot. ..."
"... If the appointment is supposed to be a sharp move to "hug your friends close and your enemies closer," then the test of its efficacy would be that Kristol, Boot, Jonah Goldberg, David French et. al., would halt their anti-Trump campaigns. One would think that if the Abrams appointment is one side of a shrewdly calculated transaction, then silencing Team Kristol would be a necessary condition. ..."
"... The Orange Buffoon might as well open the door to Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and Perle. Hell even get Scooter Libby in some cameo. You know, keep them enemies closer and all that. ..."
On Friday, following the dramatic arrest of a prominent Trump supporter on charges of lying
to Congress, President Trump gave one of the nation's most sensitive national security and
diplomatic posts to another controversial figure who already had been convicted of lying to
Congress.
Has the NeverTrump Republican echo chamber gone berserk over this irresponsible
appointment?
Have Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio taken to the Senate floor to speak out against the
president's defiance of honesty in government? Have they demanded hearings and a confirmation
vote?
Has House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned that Trump's action is so egregious it might call for
an article of impeachment?
Not at all. Turns out, the appointee is one of the president's worst enemies, a man
forcefully opposed to almost all of Trump's policies and campaign promises, a man who
repeatedly has said Trump is morally unfit for his office. He is Elliott Abrams, the
71-year-old éminence grise of the NeverTrump movement.
Abrams is the pre-eminent prophet and practitioner of hyper-interventionist approaches to
destabilize or overthrow governments - of foes and friends alike - that do not pass his
democracy-is-the-end-all-and-be-all litmus test. His closest friends and associates, from whom
his political positions are indistinguishable, include some of President Trump's most rabid
enemies, false-flag "conservatives" Bill Kristol and Max Boot.
Abrams, who had served in the Reagan State Department, faced multiple felony charges for
lying to Congress and defying U.S. law in his role as a mastermind of the Iran-Contra debacle.
Abrams' dishonesty almost destroyed Ronald Reagan's presidency and put Reagan in jeopardy of
impeachment. Abrams was allowed to plead guilty to two reduced charges and later was pardoned
by George H.W. Bush, who feared impeachment because of his own role in Iran-Contra.
After having expressed antagonism towards nation-building during the 2000 campaign, newly
elected President George W. Bush appointed Abrams as deputy national security adviser, where
Abrams' role was essentially nation builder-in-chief. Abrams was even more consequential as nation-wrecker. He was one of the principal architects
of the invasion of Iraq. He is an inveterate advocate of "regime change" against countries
whose policies he doesn't like. He has a track record in attempting to overthrow foreign
governments both by covert action and outright military invasion.
At the beginning of the Trump administration, foreign policy establishment types lobbied
clueless Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to accept the convicted criminal Abrams as deputy
head of the department - the person running all day-to-day affairs at State. Trump, who would
have had to sign off on the nomination, rejected Abrams when he learned of Abrams' background.
The truth about Abrams, while not by any means a secret,
came to Trump's attention from Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.). Paul, who held a deciding vote in
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he would block Abrams if he were nominated.
Abrams already knew then what Trump took nearly a year to discover, that Tillerson was
hopelessly unprepared to serve as the nation's chief diplomat and indeed was, as Trump
colorfully put it, "dumb as a rock." Nothing about Abrams, the NeverTrumper who believes Trump cannot govern effectively without
him, has changed since then.
Following his rejection by Trump, Abrams wrote a sour-grapes article for
Politico , disparaging the president, along with Vice President Pence and Abrams' erstwhile
patron Tillerson, for not having international human rights policies identical to Abrams' own
views.
Abrams has been outspoken against sensitive Trump international policies right up to the
moment of his surprise appointment. He is unapologetic about his role in masterminding the Iraq
war. He has opposed Trump concerning American troops in Syria and America's relationship with
Saudi Arabia. As recently as January 14, 2019, he published a withering
attack on Trump's Middle East policies and diplomacy.
As events in Venezuela last week reached a crisis with rival claimants to the nation's
presidency, Abrams suddenly appeared deus ex machina at the side of Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo, who said in a news conference that Abrams was appointed, "effective immediately" as
special envoy to deal with resolution of the situation in Venezuela in a way that supposedly
would advance U.S. interests.
Immediately? An appointee to a sensitive post needs a background investigation and security
clearance. These investigations can take months. If he indeed has a valid clearance, that means
his appointment was decided long ago.
Abrams' special envoy post will be far more powerful than that of an ordinary ambassador or
assistant secretary of state -- offices that require Senate confirmation. Should the Senate
acquiesce in letting Abrams work without Senate confirmation?
What is Pompeo thinking? Has Pompeo read Abrams' anti-Trump articles? In particular, has he
read Abrams' January 14 anti-Trump article that mocks Pompeo with a hugely unflattering photo
of the secretary of state?
What is going on?
Abrams is a close friend and constant collaborator of Bill Kristol and Max Boot, both of
whom are waging campaigns to impeach Trump or deny him re-election. There are no -- repeat, no
-- policy differences between Abrams, Kristol, and Boot.
If the appointment is supposed to be a sharp move to "hug your friends close and your
enemies closer," then the test of its efficacy would be that Kristol, Boot, Jonah Goldberg,
David French et. al., would halt their anti-Trump campaigns. One would think that if the Abrams
appointment is one side of a shrewdly calculated transaction, then silencing Team Kristol would
be a necessary condition.
So far there are no signs of this.
What did Trump know about the new Abrams appointment, and when did he know it?
It's amazing seeing the holdout Trump supporters continually writhe in mental contortions
to support his every move..as I've said all along..TDS affects the sheep on both right and
left equally.
Brazen Heist II 4 minutes ago (Edited)
... The Orange Buffoon might as well open the door to Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and Perle. Hell even get Scooter Libby in
some cameo. You know, keep them enemies closer and all that.
uhland62, 5 minutes ago
This guy is just picking up a couple more paychecks. He may think he can whip up Trump for more wars, Trump may think he
can control this guy because 'I am President and you are not'. The main thing is that the military can make more wars and
destroy more countries.
The-Post, 15 minutes ago
Trump loves those Bush criminals.
readerandthinker
Venezuelan army defectors appeal to Trump for weapons
Caracas, Venezuela (CNN)Venezuelan army defectors are calling on the Trump administration to arm them, in what they call
their quest for "freedom."
Former soldiers Carlos Guillen Martinez and Josue Hidalgo Azuaje, who live outside the country, told CNN they want US
military assistance to equip others inside the beleaguered nation. They claim to be in contact with hundreds of willing
defectors and have called on enlisted Venezuelan soldiers to revolt against the Maduro regime, through television broadcasts.
"As Venezuelan soldiers, we are making a request to the US to support us, in logistical terms, with communication,
with weapons, so we can realize Venezuelan freedom," Guillen Martinez told CNN.
"... War with Russia will be the agenda just as the left wanted to begin with. The " pick sides" is the warring cry of the old Bush regime of " either you're with us or against us" theme. ..."
"... Radical capitalism on the left and conservative traditional capitalism on right.... Both fighting for the same select few who run the show generation after generation. ..."
"... He's not really attacked by anyone. Its a bipartisan play to distract the gullible from the sick and subhuman policy they enact while you are distracted with the wall or fantasizing bout his tiny mushroom. ..."
"... So Trump jerks a couple of gators from the swamp, but only to make room for the T-Rex. Amazing. And why the hell is Bolton still involved in our government? He penned an article during the bush admin explaining why the posse comitatus doesn't really mean what it really says. Scary sob ..."
"... Trump is Zahpod Beeblebrox. Anyone remember the Hitchhiker's Guide? The role of the galactic president was not to wield power, but to distract attention away from it. Zaphod Beeblebrox was remarkably good at his job. ..."
"... When he bombed Syria in the first weeks of his presidency, giving the MIC, a $100 million of bomb sales ( to a company he had shares in, raytheon) was enough for me that tRump is what he always has been, a bankrupt, loud mouth yankee puppet who the plutocrats chose to continue the usual US empire evil ****. ..."
"... I had my suspicions prior with his choice of vp, mad eyes pence, a protege and smoker of **** cheney. Then pompous pompeo, 150% arsehole bolton and now this official pos. Only a trumptard or patriotard would accept this ****. ..."
"... it's just too much to keep track of it all. My scorecard booklet was all used up about the 1st week in after all the neocons and bankster slime who galloped into the WH on Trump's coattails. ..."
"... After having expressed antagonism towards nation-building during the 2000 campaign, newly elected President George W. Bush appointed Abrams as deputy national security adviser, where Abrams' role was essentially nation builder-in-chief. ..."
Abrams is obviously a Bush plant from left over CIA Bushys.
Abrams lied to Congress twice about his role with the Contras. He pleaded guilty to both counts in 1991 but was pardoned
by George H.W. Bush just before the latter left office.
A decade later, while working as special Middle East adviser to President George Ws Bush, Abrams was an enthusiastic advocate
of the disastrous Iraq invasion.
Abrams was also in the Bush White House at the time of the abortive coup in 2002 against the late Venezuelan President
Hugo Chávez.
Abrams helped lead the U.S. effort to stage a coup to overturn the results of the 2006 Palestinian elections, complete
with murder and torture.
War with Russia will be the agenda just as the left wanted to begin with. The " pick sides" is the warring cry of the old
Bush regime of " either you're with us or against us" theme.
This is the precise crap people were hoping to avoid with Trump, but the left has put Trump administration in a vice by having
constant fires to put out and disyractions with FALE RUSSIAN COLLUSION
... It's a psychological ploy to wear down the President and search for legitimate excuse to gain public opinion to go against
Russia and they found it. Venezuela is a **** hole from socialism which AOL and dems are embracing now. Of course having sorry
liberal advisors like Kushner doesn't help... That is a huge mistake to have the opposition ( democrate Kushner and wife) in the
hen house with great pursasive power over an overwhelm Trump... Strategy working.
But politics as it is run mostly out of " The City of London" and old lynn Rothschild wanted puppet Hillary in ( Rothschild's
play dirty to get what they want and hold a full house of cards with the financial tools to " persuade people to their way of
thinking"... A battle us penny picker uppers must live with.... It's the only change we get.
Radical capitalism on the left and conservative traditional capitalism on right.... Both fighting for the same select few
who run the show generation after generation.
He's not really attacked by anyone. Its a bipartisan play to distract the gullible from the sick and subhuman policy they
enact while you are distracted with the wall or fantasizing bout his tiny mushroom.
So Trump jerks a couple of gators from the swamp, but only to make room for the T-Rex. Amazing. And why the hell is Bolton
still involved in our government? He penned an article during the bush admin explaining why the posse comitatus doesn't really
mean what it really says. Scary sob
Abrams was convicted of lying to congress meanwhile congress lies to us all day everyday and what happens to those bastards?
They vote themselves raises and sit on their *** all day taking bribes from their paymasters and writing laws and regulations
to control their chattel. Yes I hate politicians because they're ******* criminals and all of them and the useless bureaucrats
that infest that cesspool in D.C should be out of work permanently.
Trump is Zahpod Beeblebrox. Anyone remember the Hitchhiker's Guide? The role of the galactic president was not to wield
power, but to distract attention away from it. Zaphod Beeblebrox was remarkably good at his job.
When he bombed Syria in the first weeks of his presidency, giving the MIC, a $100 million of bomb sales ( to a company
he had shares in, raytheon) was enough for me that tRump is what he always has been, a bankrupt, loud mouth yankee puppet who
the plutocrats chose to continue the usual US empire evil ****.
I had my suspicions prior with his choice of vp, mad eyes pence, a protege and smoker of **** cheney. Then pompous pompeo,
150% arsehole bolton and now this official pos. Only a trumptard or patriotard would accept this ****.
You're excused...it's just too much to keep track of it all. My scorecard booklet was all used up about the 1st week in
after all the neocons and bankster slime who galloped into the WH on Trump's coattails.
Seriously though, it's interesting that ZH has said nothing about the big corruption scandal going on now in Brasil. The guy
who won on platform of anti-corruption has been exposed within a month of taking office, surprise...surprise, as part of one of
the worst. Talk is vp taking over with the backing of the military. "soft-hard" coup you could say.
I too, got very angry about the exact things you mention. However, I perspective is something that keeps me grounded. Remember
what was happening in 2016, and what the options were. Remember BLM, march's in like every city, and Cops getting ambushed every
few weeks?
Remember, "We came, We saw, he died", from Queen Hillary? Or how about Queen Hillary calling Putin a Thug, and saying we had
to stand up to him in Ukraine, and Syria?
dude, we all know she is part of the same ****. The ******** election is over, the plutocracy chose their puppet. Think of
it, sure Killary would have done the same, but she wouldn't have been able to get away with it and the schizoid msm would have
had a breakdown trying to sell the same ol, same ol us empire games. People don't like surprises. Repubelicans as aggressive warmongers
doesnt surprise. Sadly they think they cant do anything about it. But they can, and not by talking **** on ZH.
See Ralph Nader's, How the Rats Re-Formed the Congress for tips.
It's 10 dimensional to the fifth power chess right? Just kidding. It's a big club and you ain't in it. Trump is not going to
save you. Did you really think one guy defied the odds and overcame the voter fraud and beat Hillary? Puhleez. All by design.
You're watching a movie...
After having expressed antagonism towards nation-building during the 2000 campaign, newly elected President George W. Bush
appointed Abrams as deputy national security adviser, where Abrams' role was essentially nation builder-in-chief.
Didn't W run on a 'bring the troops home and world leave us alone' platform in 2000?
when i think about what Trump did so far I think about that mandatory Obama care tax that I had to pay if I* didn't get Obama
care Well it's gone and that was a big deal for me cause I've got four kids that would have to pay it and that would be six thousand
out of pocket every year that's for starters with out Trump running interference in the FL house and senate elections we'd have
Obama lite new and antique Bill still that makes a huge difference in things like taxes and EPA enforcement in this state I really
think he has made the general public more aware of the Mexican invasion cause I see less and less Latinos on the jobs sites around
here He has really caused the Dems to lose it Trump did that not any other politician he has exposed election fraud he has exposed
the deep state like never before
Yes I'm a Trump supporter a thoughtful one I consider the options and will go with this till it impacts me negatively on an
economic personal level not an emotional one brought on by pundits and MSM never Trump ilk
why don't you ask me if I think he is perfect I think his wife is pretty much ok however I hate that he is from NYC and acts
like it his friends are not much to be proud of and his social skills are lacking but I think he showers regularly and has good
hygiene and moral habits except for golf but that's just me He's a bossy kind of guy and I might not get along with him He doesn't
do things country folks do and wouldn't fit in around here his hair sucks and is a narcissistic affectation for sure but i like
his foreign policy so far how am i doing think I'm being killed slowly I liked Ike but he was weak and I liked Buchanan bur preferred
Goldwater and on and on they are politicians and deserve the loyalty they give and " that's all I have to say about that"
Trump is a psychopath and he loves to hire even bigger psychopaths. Your whole admin is a swamp of sociopaths, psychopaths
and other sick deranged people.
Tell me who is your friend and I will tell who you are. With friends like Pompeo and
Bolton...
Notable quotes:
"... Trump-bashing Iraq war architect Elliott Abrams to lead US regime change in Venezuela ..."
"... Abrams is already not well-liked in El Salvador and Nicaragua, so I can't imagine the Venezuelans welcoming him with open arms. ..."
"... Elliot Abrams, George W. Bush lackey and arch-Neocon: (1) senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at Council on Foreign Relations (2) core member of Project for the New American Century (PNAC) along with such greats as Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, and John Bolton. ..."
Ever since the Trump administration announced that it was
no longer recognizing the legitimacy of the elected government of Venezuela I've been
arguing with people on social media about this president's brazen coup attempt in that
country.
The people arguing with me in favor of Trump's interventionism are almost exclusively Trump
supporters, with leftists and antiwar libertarians more or less on my side with this issue and
rank-and-file centrists mostly preferring to sit this one out except to periodically mumble
something about it being a distraction from the Mueller investigation.
... ... ...
this one is easily the most common and most stupid of all the arguments i've been receiving.
i'm not familiar enough with pro-trump punditry to be able to describe how the maga crowd got
it into their heads that attacking venezuela has something to do with fighting socialism, but
it's clear from my interactions over the last couple of days that that is the dominant
narrative they've got swirling around in their collective consciousness. most of my arguments
on this issue have either begun as or very quickly spun into an attempt to turn the debate
about us interventionism in yet another south american nation into a debate about socialism vs
capitalism.
Which is of course absurd. The campaign to topple Venezuela's government has nothing to do
with socialism, it's about oil and regional hegemony. The US has long treated South America as
its personal supply cabinet and destroyed anyone who tried to challenge that, and the fact that
Venezuela has
the most confirmed oil reserves of any nation on the planet makes it all the more central
in this agenda. Yes, the fact that large sectors of its economy are centrally planned means
there are fewer hooks for the corporatocracy to find purchase to manipulate it with, but that
just helps explain why the US is targeting it with more aggressive measures, it doesn't excuse
the aggressive targeting. Venezuela does not belong to the United States, and attempting to
control what happens with its resources, its economy and its government is an obscene violation
of its national sovereignty.
Trying to turn a clean-cut debate about US interventionism into a debate about socialism is
like if your family found out that your sister had just been raped, and you all started
bickering about the pros and cons of feminism instead of focusing on the crime that had just
happened to your loved one. It wouldn't matter what kind of economic system Venezuela had;
trying to overthrow its government is not okay. The narrative that this has something to do
with championing capitalism is just a hook used to get Trump's base on board with another
unconscionable foreign entanglement.
... ... ...
Oh yes it is interventionism.
Crushing economic sanctions ,
CIA covert ops , illegally occupying embassies ,
and a
campaign to delegitimize a nation's entire government are absolutely interventionism, and
that is happening currently . It's stupid to make "boots on the ground" your line in the sand
when, for example, vast amounts of US resources can easily be poured into fomenting a "civil"
war that could kill hundreds of thousands and displace millions as we saw with Syria. And from
today's news about the Trump administration's appointment of bloodthirsty psychopath Elliot
Abrams as the special envoy to Venezuela, it's very reasonable to expect things to get a whole
lot bloodier. Modern warmongering isn't limited to the form of "boots on the ground", and
making that your litmus test is leaving yourself open to all the same disasters ushered in by
the Obama administration.
... ... ...
Again, that's not the argument. The argument is whether it's okay for the US government and
its allies to violate Venezuela's sovereignty with starvation sanctions, CIA covert ops, an
active campaign to delegitimize its government, and possibly much worse in the future in order
to advance the agenda of overthrowing its political system.
Of course there are people in Venezuela who don't like their government; that's true in your
own country too. That doesn't make it okay for a sprawling imperialist power to intervene in
their political affairs. You'd think this would be obvious to everyone, but over and over again
I run into people conflating Venezuelans sorting out Venezuelan domestic affairs with the
US-centralized empire actively meddling in those affairs.
The US government doesn't give a shit about the Venezuelan people; if it did it wouldn't be
crushing them with starvation sanctions. It isn't about freedom, and it isn't about democracy.
The US backs 73 percent of the world's dictatorships because those dictators facilitate the
interests of the US power establishment , and a leaked State Department memo in 2017 spelled
out the way the US government coddles US allies who violate human rights while attacking
nonconforming governments for those same violations as a matter of policy. Acting like Trump's
aggressions against Venezuela have anything to do with human rights while he himself remains
cuddly with the murderous theocracy of Saudi Arabia in the face of intense political pressure
is willful ignorance at this point, and it's inexcusable.
5. "You don't understand what's going on there! I talk to Venezuelans online!"
Do you now?
First of all, this common argument is irrelevant for the reasons already discussed here;
sure there are Venezuelans who don't like their government, but their existence doesn't justify
US interventionism. Secondly, it's a known fact that online trolls will be employed to help
manufacture support for all sorts of geopolitical agendas, from Israel's shill army to the MEK
terror cult's anti-Iran troll farm to the Bana Alabed psyop for Syria. And here's this example,
just for your information, of a Twitter account talking about how much fun she's having in
Paris and then a few days later claiming she's in Venezuela waiting in "5+ hour queues to buy a
loaf of bread."
Be skeptical of what strangers on social media tell you about what's happening inside a
nation that's been targeted by the empire, please.
And that's about it for this article. Let's all try and talk about this thing with a little
more intelligence and sanity, please.
* * *
Thanks for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece
please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter,
throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise,
buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my
previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. The best way to get around the internet
censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my
website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Bitcoin
donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
I'm surprised ZH hasn't posted anything about this yet! Abrams is already not well-liked
in El Salvador and Nicaragua, so I can't imagine the Venezuelans welcoming him with open
arms.
Elliot Abrams, George W. Bush lackey and arch-Neocon: (1) senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at Council on Foreign Relations
(2) core member of Project for the New American Century (PNAC) along with such
greats as Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, and John Bolton.
Elliott Abrams was born into a Jewish family [6] in New York in 1948.
His father was an immigration lawyer. Abrams attended the
Little Red School House in New
York City, a private high school whose students at the time included the children of many of
the city's notable left-wing activists and artists. [7] Abrams'
parents were Democrats .
[7]
British Playwright Harold Pinter says 1980s chaos in Nicaragua was for to protect "Casino"
interests - - https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2005/12/pint-d09.html
- Jews control the casinos in Central America (think Meyer Lansky in Cuba) - throughout the
80's, our media warned us of a communist threat in Central America -- there was no goddam
threat -0 our media was protecting Jewish interests in Central America -- Eliott Abrams was one of the ringmasters back then
in the Central American conflict ...
that oil belongs to the usa fair and square. the dictator maduro stole it from exxon. the
usa is jusr returning the oil to its rightful owner. you christian people out to understand
that concept.
The U.S. trained and financed opposition has tried to create violent chaos
in the streets but failed to gain traction with the majority of the people.
The only support it has inside the country is from the richer bourgeois in the
major cities which despises the government's social justice program. Workers
and farmers are better off under the social-democratic policies of first Hugo
Chavez and now Nicolas Maduro. The coup attempt as step one of a U.S. takeover
of Venezuela has failed.
Last month a new constitutional assembly was voted in and it is ready to
defend the state. The opposition
boycotted the election to the assembly but is now complaining that it has
no seats in it. One of the assemblies first moves was to fire the renegade General
Prosecutor Luisa Ortega Diaz. She had condemned the government for its resistance
to the coup attempts. She now has fled the country together with her husband.
The Miami Herald
admits that she is on the U.S. payroll:
Ortega, a longtime government insider who became chief prosecutor in 2007,
is likely safeguarding some of the administration's most damning legal secrets.
And she's thought to be working with U.S. law enforcement at a time when
Washington is ratcheting up sanctions on Caracas.
Word is that Ortega's husband was blackmailed by the U.S. after he was involved
in large illegal transactions.
U.S. President Trump
threatened to use military force should the dully elected President Maduro
not give up his position. The CIA head Pompeo recently
visited countries neighboring Venezuela "trying to help them understand
the things they might do". Did he suggest weapon supplies to some proxy forces
or an outright invasion?
Today the Trump administration
imposed severe sanctions on Venezuela:
The sanctions Trump signed by executive order prohibit financial institutions
from providing new money to the government or state oil company PDVSA. It
would also restrict PDVSA's U.S. subsidiary, Citgo, from sending dividends
back to Venezuela as well as ban trading in two bonds the government recently
issued to circumvent its increasing isolation from western financial markets.
Venezuela was prepared for at least some of these sanctions. A few moth ago
the Russian oil giant Rosneft acquired a share of PDVSA and at least some oil
sales
are routed through that company:
Russian oil firm Rosneft has struck deals with several buyers for almost
its entire quota of Venezuelan crude for the remainder of the year, traders
told Reuters on Wednesday, the first time it has conducted such a large
sale of the OPEC member's oil.
...
Venezuela's oil deliveries to the United States have declined in recent
years amid falling production, commercial issues, and sanctions on Venezuelan
officials.
The White House statement calls Maduro a "dictator" and his Presidency "illegitimate".
Both descriptions are laughable. Maduro was elected in free and fair elections.
The former U.S. president Jimmy Carter called the election system in Venezuela
the best in the world . The new sanctions will likely increase the support
for the current government.
The White House
hinted at further economic measures:
In a call to brief reporters on the measures, the [senior Trump] official
said the United States has significant influence over Venezuela's economy
but does not want to wield it in an irresponsible manner that could further
burden the already-struggling Venezuelan people.
Venezuela will now have some troubling times. But unless the U.S. launches
an outright military attack on the country -by proxy of its neighbors, through
mercenaries or by itself- the country will easily survive the unjust onslaught.
With 300 billion barrels the proven oil-reserves of Venezuela are the largest
of the world. They are the reason why the U.S. wants to subjugate the country.
But neither Russia nor China nor anyone else wants to see those reserves under
U.S. control.
Posted by b on August 25, 2017 at 02:21 PM |
Permalink
Treacherous, slimy Uncle Sam in its relentless mission for world domination
.. the unfortunate price that Chavez and Maduro have had to pay for telling
Uncle to F*ck Off.
Tronald probably thinks, a Venezuela war could be a better possibility for
a decisive turning point in his presidency than one in North Corea or Syria
or Ukraine. Not as risky. For that reason it is tremendously important that
China and Russia react swiftly in favor of Venenzuala making clear the costs
would be high and the outcome uncertain.
I know that elections can be boring, but calling someone "dully elected"
is a bit too much.
BTW, once I asked in Germany if I could get a savings account with interest,
and the young clerk could not understand why I am bored with my account
with zero "zinsen".
Inflation in Venezuala has reached Weimar Germany levels. US policies undoubtedly
a key reason. But whatever the cause no government can last long unless
hyperinflation bought under control.
As much as I want the US intervention to fail, it will be tough going for
Venezuela given Maduro's heavy-handed and incompetent governance. His finger-pointing
at the merchant class is a sure sign of a demagogue. Pure command economies
don't work, that's why both Russia and China reformed theirs. The best thing
that could happen would be a coup from the center left to reboot the currency,
free up the economy and make peace with the upper classes. And yes, ally
with Russia.
Thank you for keeping this part of the whirling dervish of late empire in
focus b.
I agree that Venezuela needs to buddy up to the China/Russia alliance
and continue to follow their anti-oligarch direction.
Any here who have not read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein should do
so as background to the R2P that the US continues to do to South America....and
the rest of the 3rd world.
thanks b... the usa will do anything for exxon... they have the full backing
of all the important industries - financial and military.. same story everywhere..
Poor Venezuela. US machiavelism is at work to undermine it.
Will the Venezuelians realize that the USA policy in South America is dictated
by greed and only greed.
It is only idiots who think that this is about America caring for the freedom,
democracy,and well-being of Venezuelans. Such idiots should update themselves
on the history of American foreign policy in Latin America. As b correctly
points out: pay attention to the Grand Chessboard.
It would seem that with the collapse of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, combined
with the prospect of ISIS takfirists returning to their countries of origin,
that the US and the EU would opt to use these people as mercenaries and
fly them to Colombia, Brazil and Guyana to form a base of terrorists to
undermine Venezuela. These people could be trained to attack or hold hostage
indigenous groups or rural communities in Venezuela. These would be some
of the most vulnerable groups in that country and their treatment would
certainly attract the attention of the Western MSM news propaganda networks.
It is tragic to see so many idiots fall for the American and western canards
about promoting "freedom", "democracy" and "human rights". My fellow barflies,
please I recommend you go to medium.com and read Nassim Nicholas Taleb's
blockbuster essay "Intellectual-Yet-Idiot" to understand the stupidity of
the American neo-imperialists who are blinded by imperial hubris to even
understand their long term objective interests.
The recent election of the Constituent Assembly tends to confuse people--particularly
Outlaw US Empire Neoliberalcons plus Trump, who just falsely accused Maduro
of being a dictator--and what it's designed to accomplish. This article
explains it all very clearly--it's potential power is potent and has the
US-backed opposition backed into a deep hole since it boycotted the election
and has no delegates, which is why Trump just upped the sanctions and aggressive
rhetoric,
https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13313
In counterpoise to that explanatory article, we have an analysis of the
Outlaw US Empire's Propaganda System's coverage of what is in fact a very
small d democratic act that's mandated by the current constitution,
https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13329
As you'll see, the rhetoric hasn't changed one iota since Bu$hCo and Obomber.
The article's parent site--TelesurEnglish--and republication site--Venezuelanalysis--IMO,
are the two best English language sources for following events there. Yes,
there are others, but they tend to be slower in reporting current events.
The point of the war is to do to Spanish South America what was done to
the Middle East, that is to plunge the region into perpetual chaos and make
it impossible for any government to emerge that is able to resist the will
of the Empire.
b-thank you, very timely!
I found an excellent and relatively short video on ZeroHedge(in the comments)
just done onsite in Venezula re truth/hype on food shortages, political
activism, food shortages, black market. It is really good, recommend to
all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHc7yegaCmc
And another hands in his resignation to Trump – over foreign policy -
Sebastian Gorka is resigning his post as Deputy Assistant to President
Trump, multiple sources familiar with the situation have told The Federalist.
In a blunt resignation letter, the national security and counterterrorism
expert expressed dissatisfaction with the current state of the Trump
administration. "[G]iven recent events, it is clear to me that forces
that do not support the MAGA promise are – for now – ascendant within
the White House," Gorka wrote. "As a result, the best and most effective
way I can support you, Mr. President, is from outside the People's House."
Gorka's letter expressed unhappiness with the direction the Trump
administration's foreign policy has taken, as signaled by the president's
recent speech on Afghanistan: [.]
"Just as worrying, when discussing our future actions in the region,
the speech listed operational objectives without ever defining the strategic
victory conditions we are fighting for. This omission should seriously
disturb any national security professional, and any American who is
unsatisfied with the last 16 years of disastrous policy decisions which
have led to thousands of Americans killed and trillions of taxpayer
dollars spent in ways that have not brought security or victory."[.]
The loss of Sebastian Gorka and Steve Bannon are making Trump's position
very weak. If Trump continues to be the puppet of the neo-cons and the zionists
then they will keep him on, otherwise they will kick him out.
Gorka and Bannon will fight against these forces outside the WH, it is yet
to see if they will succeed.
It's beginning to look like Chinese for sure and hopefully Russian assets
on the ground in a real big way ASAP might be the only way to put a stop
to this nonsense.
If this Yankee plot were to be boiled down to its basics it could be articulated
as...
AmeriKKKa's Greedy Idle Rich bought and own the US Govt. Venezuela's
Greedy Idle Rich, being too cheap and unimaginative to buy Venezuela's Govt,
have now accepted a US Govt offer to help them to steal it; at gun point
if necessary.
Sorry Moon of Alabama but this article is full of lies and propaganda.
Maduro is a murderer, tyrant, corrupt and totally inept. The National
Constituent Assembly is fraudulent and illegitimate, as only one million
people (out of 16 million) voted for it. 90% of Venezuela people hate Maduro,
the only reason he is still in power is that the regime corrupted the Army
and most of the patriotic officers are in prison or in exile. The role of
cuban agents/spies is also well known as they are the ones controlling the
upper level of the Army. I welcome anything that helps defeat the thugs
that control Venezuela government, they only brought misery to my people.
During the (s)election process Trump said multiple times that to the
victor go the spoils. How will the rest of the world react if the US takes
over Venezuela like Hawaii and says the oil now belongs to the US?
Venezuela's Greedy Idle Rich will be the caretakers.
Well, well; as the worm turns, we here in LOS live under a military junta,
just like you, there in the U.S..
And both soft coups; little blood shed, mostly in the U.S..
Interesting, this article (link) says SAA is on the verge of winning
Deir Ezzor.
Jon Hellevig is the writer at Russia Insider; http://tinyurl.com/ydxx7w8j
SAA will take Deir Ezzor city, but the US are going for the Omar oilfiels
east of the Euphrates in Deir Ezzor province. The US need this to finance
their Kurdish state, and Syria needs it for their own needs plus some export
income. The Omar fields are the main developed oilfields in Syria.
This link to wikimap should show it.
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.005253&lon=40.806656&z=11&m=b
@24 Miguel
Sorry my friend you are delusional, maybe you should migrate to South Carolina
and get a job as a cleaner and live the American dream, isn't that what
most uninformed Venezuelans do when they are against their own country.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Aug 26, 2017 2:23:26 AM | 28
Yeah, well if you think the US and the Kurds are going for the Omari
oil-fields (as indeed b himself recently said on Sic Semper Tyrannis), there's
a small wrinkle which you and he may not have noticed (and almost certainly
not the US commanders). The report says that it is 7 Arab tribal units of
the SDF who are doing the job. Of course, because the area is inhabited
by their relatives. But they are a numerically weak element of the SDF.
Rather more significantly, I remember a videoed interview with one of their
leaders a year or two back, in which he said quite clearly that the reason
they were joining the SDF was to end up reuniting Syria under Bashshar al-Asad!
They may have conveniently forgotten to mention this to the Yanks; I know
I would have done, had it been me. So the real issue may be, if they do
succeed in taking the oil-fields before the Syrians get there (not certain),
will they hand them over to the Kurds or the Syrians?
Sanctions and their increases are economic warfare, and war is war. The
government of Venezuela needs to declare a national emergency of overt economic
warfare against the nation and its people. Once on a war footing the state
can move to clamp down on sedition while ensuring that at the least the
minimum needs of the people are met. Medicines, food, clothing shelter and
that normal life carries on as much as possible, schooling, law and order
and that any hoarding, the warehousing of goods, by the oligarchs and black
marketing of essential and vital goods is stamped out as much as possible.
Venezuela must also reach out to any allies it has in seeking assistance
under some mutual defense treaty such as NATO's clause 5 as together they
are stronger and not as liable to be picked off separately. Russia has her
hands full so China needs to step up to the plate, but will she?
Venezuela is a repeat of the same US playbook, especially in the CIA era.
Too many examples to list.
1) Fund an opposition or exploit an existing fault line
2) Find some civilian shock-troops (contras, neoNazis in Ukraine, street
gangs in Venezuela)
3) Count on the US media to promote your faked events.
4) Make neighboring countries knuckle under or bribe them.
5) Provoke government over-reaction
6) Intervene forcefully or trigger a prepared military coup
7) Walk away
8) Rinse and repeat
Suddenly the guarimbas (violent protest) stopped. because the money payments
stopped? So much for ¨popular protests¨. Also Trump´s threats had the opposite
effect; the opposition now cannot hide their real intentions.
These numbers explain so much.. about wars, sanctions and regime changes. Leadership exploitation [LE] model Where a nation forces[taxes] its
hard working citizens (taxpayers) to finance corporate access, control,
and possession of resources-natural[AC_PORN] [oil, gas, precious metals,
etc. ], the leadership directs needed TAX PAYER funds from personal and
homeland needs to subsidize corporation activities . These subsidies
lower cost of obtaining, producing and marketing resources-natural (COPM]
and such subsidies make the task of establishing competition-free, corporate-owed
monopolies EASY. Hence, corporations have come to expect national leaders
to use the wealth of the people of the nations they lead, to guarantee corporate
owners "monopoly powers" and subsidized flows of capital. LE subsidies are
usually well hidden in war, regime change, and sanction activities, but
subsidy form does not change the corruption. It allows the leadership
of a nation to fund and license corporations to be stronger than the host
nation itself/>.
I believe it is time to stop being surprised by what it was said actually
happened, and instead, to devise a model that allows to detect and predict
wrongful government subsidy and government leadership self-serving support
of corporate monopoly power.
A method needs to be developed to allow the public to uncouple its
leadership from corporate subsidy activity and corporate monopoly support.
It will take a lot of people from all over the world to evolve that model
but in this era of false flag propaganda, fake news, denial of speech, and
information hiding, nothing else seems to have a chance to restore citizen
level democracy.
"...Maduro is a murderer, tyrant, corrupt and totally inept..."
I agree 100! But he's an amateur compared to our Bushes and Obama. Trump?
Give him time... Ridding your country of Maduro will change NOTHING. Explain
to me how you're going to prevent the next power-seeking psychopaths (and
their relatives) from exploiting Venezuela?
"...The National Constituent Assembly is fraudulent and illegitimate,
as only one million people (out of 16 million) voted for it..."
So you're arguing illigitimacy and fraud based on what? Broken voting
process? Check. No state will to enforce the law when breaking it benefits
them? Check. Violating the terms or spirit of your consitution? Check. So
the next psychopaths running Venezuela are going to magically obey the constitution,
hold the powerful to the same laws as the little people and not exploit
'voting' to legitimize the people they select anyway? You sound just like
an American now!
"...90% of Venezuela people hate Maduro..."
Just think of what a paradise your country will be when that bastard
Maduro is gone! Ask any Ukrainian about the euphoria they are experiencing
after booting that rat, Yanukovyych. What Libyan would still want to live
under the cruel dictatorship of that nutjob Ghadaffi rather than the blissful
utopia Lybia has become after 'freedomization'? Iraq was an oil-rich country
like yours run by the corrupt, murdering despot Saddam Hussein - it is now
the shining jewel of stability in Middle Eastern liberty and democracy.
Iraqis are thrilled! The US is still working on Assad, but don't all Syrians
deserve the nirvana that the US will create by getting rid of him? Or are
you suggesting an indigenous Venezuelan do-it-yourselfer project without
foreign backers? You know it never works like that!
If nothing else, any opposition that appears to be "US-backed" should
be a red flag that you're not ever getting anything close to what they're
selling and there will always be strings attached.
"...the only reason he is still in power is that the regime corrupted
the Army and most of the patriotic officers are in prison or in exile..."
a) See above
b) This will be the exact same situation under any new Venezuelan leader
that replaces him, and the next on that replaces the replacement, and on
and on and on.
c) Armies are meant to protect the interests of the leadership and ruling
elite. It's just a happy coincidence that - at times - those interests occasionally
seem to involve protecting the little people.
"...The role of cuban agents/spies is also well known as they are
the ones controlling the upper level of the Army..."
Just the Army? Let me tell you about how the real pros do it: Israeli/Saudi
influence on the US Congress, the Department of Defense, US Intelligence
Community, Department of Homeland Security,...
"...I welcome anything that helps defeat the thugs that control Venezuela
government, they only brought misery to my people..."
Same here! We call the fronts for the biggest ones 'Democrats' and 'Republicans'.
Tell me how you're going to prevent a new flavor of psychopaths from replacing
the current ones besides worshipping the magical (but non-existent) powers
of your intentionally broken tools of democracy - 'voting' and 'the law'?
We repeatedly try this in the US and it doesn't seem to fix anything. Us
little people seem delighted with the
little red steering wheel , but it only seems to take us in the direction
we turn it some of the time - and that seems pretty random at best.
The old one we had with the blue steering wheel worked the same way - what
the hell is up with these things?
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
When Naomi Klein published her ground-breaking book The Shock Doctrine (2007), which compellingly demonstrated how
neoliberal policy makers take advantage of overwhelming crisis times to privatize public property and carry out austerity programs,
most economists and media pundits scoffed at her arguments as overstating her case. Real world economic developments have since strongly
reinforced her views.
Using the unnerving 2008 financial crash, the ensuing long recession and the recurring specter of debt default, the financial
oligarchy and their proxies in the governments of core capitalist countries have embarked on an unprecedented economic coup d'état
against the people, the ravages of which include extensive privatization of the public sector, systematic application of neoliberal
austerity economics and radical redistribution of resources from the bottom to the top. Despite the truly historical and paradigm-shifting
importance of these ominous developments, their discussion remains altogether outside the discourse of mainstream economics.
The fact that neoliberal economists and politicians have been cheering these brutal assaults on social safety-net programs should
not be surprising. What is regrettable, however, is the liberal/Keynesian economists' and politicians' glaring misdiagnosis of the
plague of austerity economics: it is all the "right-wing" Republicans' or Tea Partiers' fault, we are told; the Obama administration
and the Democratic Party establishment, including the labor bureaucracy, have no part or responsibility in the relentless drive to
austerity economics and privatization of public property.
Keynesian and other liberal economists and politicians routinely blame the abandonment of the New Deal and/or Social-Democratic
economics exclusively on Ronald Reagan's supply-side economics, on neoliberal ideology or on economists at the University of Chicago.
Indeed, they characterize the 2008 financial collapse, the ensuing long recession and the recurring debt/budgetary turmoil on "bad"
policies of "neoliberal capitalism," not on class policies of capitalism per se. [1]
Evidence shows, however, that
the transition from Keynesian to neoliberal economics stems from much deeper roots or dynamics than pure ideology
[2];
that neoliberal austerity policies are class, not "bad," policies [3];
that the transition started long before Reagan arrived in the White House;
and that neoliberal austerity policies have been pursued as vigorously (though less openly and more stealthily) by the Democratic
administrations of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as their Republican counterparts. [4]
Indeed, it could be argued that, due to his uniquely misleading status or station in the socio-political structure of the
United States, and equally unique Orwellian characteristics or personality, Obama has served the interests of the powerful financial
oligarchy much better or more effectively than any Republican president could do, or has done - including Ronald Reagan. By
the same token, he has more skillfully hoodwinked the public and harmed their interests, both in terms of economics and individual/constitutional
rights, than any of his predecessors.
Ronald Reagan did not make any bones about the fact that he championed the cause of neoliberal supply-side economics. This meant
that opponents of his economic agenda knew where he stood, and could craft their own strategies accordingly.
By contrast, Obama publicly portrays himself as a liberal opponent of neoliberal austerity policies (as he frequently bemoans
the escalating economic inequality and occasionally sheds crocodile tears over the plight of the unemployed and economically hard-pressed),
while in practice he is a major team player in the debt "crisis" game of charade, designed as a shock therapy scheme in the escalation
of austerity economics. [5]
No president or major policy maker before Obama ever dared to touch the hitherto untouchable (and still self-financing) Social
Security and Medicare trust funds. He was the first to dare to make these bedrock social programs subject to austerity cuts, as reflected,
for example, in his proposed federal budget plan for fiscal year 2014, initially released in April 2013. Commenting on this unprecedented
inclusion of entitlements in the social programs to be cut, Christian Science Monitor wrote (on April 9, 2013): "President Obama's
new budget proposal ... is a sign that Washington's attitude toward entitlement reform is slowly shifting, with prospects for changes
to Social Security and Medicare becoming increasingly likely."
Obama has since turned that "likelihood" of undermining Social Security and Medicare into reality. He did so by taking the first
steps in turning the budget crisis that led to government shutdown in the first half of October into negotiations over entitlement
cuts. In an interview on the second day of the shutdown (October 3rd), he called for eliminating "unnecessary" social programs and
discussing cuts in "long-term entitlement spending". [6]
Five days later on October 5th, Obama repeated his support for cutting Social Security and Medicare in a press conference, reassuring
congressional Republicans of his willingness to agree to these cuts (as well as to cuts in corporate tax rates from 35% to 28%) if
the Republicans voted to increase the government's debt limit: "If anybody doubts my sincerity about that, I've put forward proposals
in my budget to reform entitlement programs for the long haul and reform our tax code in a way that would ... lower rates for corporations".
[7]
Only then, that is, only after Obama agreed to collaborate with the Republicans on ways to cut both the entitlements and corporate
tax rates, the Republican budget negotiators agreed to the higher budget ceiling and the reopening of the government. The consensus
bill that ended the government shutdown extends the automatic across-the-board "sequester" cuts that began last March into the current
year. This means that "the budget negotiations in the coming weeks will take as their starting point the $1 trillion in cuts over
the next eight years mandated by the sequestration process". [8]
And so, once again, the great compromiser gave in, and gave away - all at the expense of his (unquestioning) supporters.
To prepare the public for the long-awaited attack on Social Security, Medicare and other socially vital programs, the bipartisan
ruling establishment has in recent years invented a very useful hobgoblin to scare the people into submission: occasional budget/debt
crises and the specter or the actual pain of government shutdown. As Sheldon Richman recently pointed out:
"Wherever we look, there are hobgoblins. The latest is … DEFAULT. Oooooo.
Apparently the threats of international terror and China rising aren't enough to keep us alarmed and eager for the tether.
These things do tend to wear thin with time. But good old default can be taken off the shelf every now and then. It works like
a charm every time.
No, no, not default! Anything but default!". [9]
Economic policy makers in the White House and the Congress have invoked the debt/deficit hobgoblin at least three times in less than
two years: the 2011 debt-ceiling panic, the 2012 "fiscal cliff" and, more recently, the 2013 debt-ceiling/government shutdown crisis
- all designed to frighten the people into accepting the slashing of vital social programs. Interestingly, when Wall Street
speculators needed trillions of dollars to be bailed out, or as the Fed routinely showers these gamblers with nearly interest-free
money through the so-called quantitative easing, debt hobgoblins were/are nowhere to be seen!
The outcome of the latest (2013) "debt crisis management," which led to the 16-day government shutdown (October 1-16), confirmed
the view that the "crisis" was essentially bogus. Following the pattern of the 2010, 2011 and 2012 budget/debt negotiations, the
bipartisan policy makers kept the phony crisis alive by simply pushing its "resolution" several months back to early 2014. In other
words, they did not bury the hobgoblin; they simply shelved it for a while to be taken off when it is needed to, once again, frighten
the people into accepting additional austerity cuts - including Social Security and Medicare.
The outcome of the budget "crisis" also highlighted the fact that, behind the apparent bipartisan gridlock and mutual denunciations,
there is a "fundamental consensus between these parties for destroying all of the social gains won by the working class over
the course of the twentieth century". [10] To the extent there were disagreements, they were mainly over the tone, the temp,
the magnitude, the tactics, and the means, not the end. At the heart of all the (largely contrived) bipartisan bickering was how
best to escalate, justify or camouflage the brutal cuts in the vitally necessary social spending.
The left/liberal supporters of Obama, who bemoan his being "pressured" or "coerced" by the Tea Party Republicans into right-wing
compromises, should look past his liberal/populist posturing. Evidence shows that, contrary to Barack Obama's claims, his presidential
campaigns were heavily financed by the Wall Street financial titans and their influential lobbyists. Large Wall Street contributions
began pouring into his campaign only after he was thoroughly vetted by powerful Wall Street interests, through rigorous Q & A sessions
by the financial oligarchy, and was deemed to be their "ideal" candidate for presidency. [11]
Obama's unquestioning followers should also note that, to the extent that he is being "pressured" by his political opponents into
compromises/concessions, he has no one to blame but himself: while the Republican Party systematically mobilizes its social base
through offshoots like Tea Partiers, Obama tends to deceive, demobilize and disarm his base of supporters. Instead of mobilizing
and encouraging his much wider base of supporters (whose more numerous voices could easily drown the shrill voices of Tea Partiers)
to political action, he frequently pleads with them to "be patient," and "keep hope alive."
As Andre Damon and Barry Grey have keenly observed, "There was not a single mass organization that denounced the [government]
shutdown or opposed it. The trade unions are completely allied with the Obama administration and support its policies of austerity
and war". [12]
Obama's supporters also need to open their eyes to the fact that, as I have shown in an earlier essay, [13] Obama harbors ideological
affinities that are more in tune with Ronald Reagan than with FDR. This is clearly revealed in his book, The Audacity of Hope,
where he shows his disdain for
"...those who still champion the old time religion, defending every New Deal and Great Society program from Republican encroachment,
achieving ratings of 100% from the liberal interest groups. But these efforts seem exhausted…bereft of energy and new ideas needed
to address the changing circumstances of globalization". [14]
(Her own shortcomings aside, Hillary Clinton was right when, in her bid for the White House against Obama, she pointed out that
Obama's economic philosophy was inspired largely by Reagan' supply-side economics. However, because the Wall Street and/or the
ruling establishment had already decided that Obama was the preferred choice for the White House, the corporate media let Clinton's
comment pass without dwelling much on the reasons behind it; which could readily be examined by simply browsing through his own book.)
The repeated claim that the entitlements are the main drag on the federal budget is false - for at least three reasons. To begin
with, the assertion that the large number of retiring baby-boomers is a major culprit in budgetary shortfalls is bogus because while
it is true that baby-boomers are retiring in larger than usual numbers they do not come from another planet; before retiring, they
also worked and contributed to the entitlement trust fund in larger than usual numbers. This means that, over time, the outflow and
inflow of baby-boomers' funds into the entitlement trust fund must necessarily even each other out.
Second, even assuming that this claim is valid, the "problem" can easily be fixed (for many years to come) by simply raising the
ceiling of taxable income for Social Security from the current level of $113,700 to a slightly higher level, let's say, $140,000.
Third, the bipartisan policy makers' hue and cry about the alleged budget/debt crisis is also false because if it were true, they
would not shy away from facing the real culprits for the crisis: the uncontrollable and escalating health care cost, the equally
uncontrollable and escalating military/war/security cost, the massive transfer of private/Wall Street debt to public debt in response
to the 2008 financial crash, and the considerable drop since the early 1980s in the revenue side of the government budget, which
is the result of the drastic overhaul of the taxation system in favor of the wealthy.
A major scheme of the financial oligarchy and their bagmen in the government to substitute the New Deal with neoliberal economics
has (since the early 1980s) been to deliberately create budget deficits in order to justify cuts in social spending. This sinister
feat has often been accomplished through a combination of tax cuts for the wealthy and spending hikes for military/wars/security
programs.
David Stockman, President Reagan's budget director and one of the main architects of his supply-side tax cuts, confirmed the Reagan
administration's policy of simultaneously raising military spending and cutting taxes on the wealthy in order to force cuts in non-military
public spending: "My aim had always been to force down the size of the domestic welfare state to the point where it could be adequately
funded with the revenues after the tax cut". [15] That insidious policy of intentionally creating budget deficits in order to force
neoliberal austerity cuts on vital social needs has continued to this day - under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
Although the bipartisan tactics of austerity cuts are subtle and obfuscating, they can be illustrated with the help of a few simple
(hypothetical) numbers: first (and behind the scenes), the two sides agree on cutting non-military public spending by, let's say,
$100 billion. To reach this goal, Republicans would ask for a $200 billion cut, for example.
The Obama administration/Democratic Party, pretending to represent the poor and working families, would vehemently object that
this is too much ... and that all they can offer is $50 billion, again for example. Next, the Republican negotiators would come up
with their own counter-offer of, let's say, $150 billion. Then come months of fake haggling and passionate speeches in defense of
their positions ... until they meet eventually half way between $50 billion and $150 billion, which has been their hidden goal ($100
billion) from the beginning.
This is, of course, an overly simplified hypothetical example. But it captures, in broad outlines, the essence of the political
game that the Republican and Democratic parties - increasingly both representing big finance/big business - play on the American
people. All the while the duplicitous corporate media plays along with this political charade in order to confuse the public by creating
the impression that there are no alternatives to austerity cuts, and that all the bipartisan public bickering over debt/budgetary
issues vividly represents "democracy in action."
The atmosphere of panic and anxiety surrounding the debt/deficit negotiations is fabricated because the central claim behind the
feigned crisis that "there is no money" for jobs, education, health care, Social Security, Medicare, housing, pensions and the like
is a lie. Generous subsidies to major Wall Street players since the 2008 market crash has lifted financial markets to new highs,
as evinced by the Dow Jones Industrial Average's new bubble above the 15000 mark.
The massive cuts in employment, wages and benefits, as well as in social spending, have resulted in an enormous transfer of economic
resources from the bottom up. The wealthiest 1% of Americans now own more than 40% of the entire country's wealth; while the bottom
80% own only 7%. Likewise, the richest 1% now takes home 24% of the country's total income, compared to only 9% four decades ago.
[16]
This means that there really is no need for the brutal austerity cuts as there really is no shortage of financial resources. The
purported lack of resources is due to the fact that they are concentrated largely in the deep coffers of the financial oligarchy.
Ismael Hossein-zadeh is Professor Emeritus of Economics, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa. He is the author of
The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave-Macmillan 2007) and Soviet Non-capitalist Development: The Case of Nasser's
Egypt (Praeger Publishers 1989). His latest book, Beyond Mainstream Explanations of the Financial Crisis: Parasitic Finance
Capital, will be forthcoming from Routledge Books.
Think of the new Libya as the latest spectacular chapter in the Disaster Capitalism series. Instead of weapons of mass destruction,
we had R2P, short for "responsibility to protect". Instead of neo-conservatives, we had humanitarian imperialists.
But the target is the same: regime change. And the project is the same: to completely dismantle and privatize a nation that was
not integrated into turbo-capitalism; to open another (profitable) land of opportunity for turbocharged neo-liberalism. The whole
thing is especially handy because it is smack in the middle of a nearly global recession.
It will take some time; Libyan oil won't totally return to the market within 18 months. But there's the reconstruction of everything
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) bombed (well, not much of what the Pentagon bombed in 2003 was reconstructed in Iraq
...).
Anyway - from oil to rebuilding - in thesis juicy business opportunities loom. France's neo-Napoleonic Nicolas Sarkozy and Britain's
David of Arabia Cameron believe they will be especially well positioned to profit from NATO's victory. Yet there's no guarantee the
new Libyan bonanza will be enough to lift both former colonial powers (neo-colonials?) out of recession.
President Sarkozy in particular will milk the business opportunities for French companies for all they're worth - part of his
ambitious agenda of "strategic redeployment" of France in the Arab world. A compliant French media are gloating that this was "his"
war - spinning that he decided to arm the rebels on the ground with French weaponry, in close cooperation with Qatar, including a
key rebel commando unit that went by sea from Misrata to Tripoli last Saturday, at the start of "Operation Siren".
Well, he certainly saw the opening when Muammar Gaddafi's chief of protocol defected to Paris in October 2010. That's when the
whole regime change drama started to be incubated.
Bombs for oil
As previously noted (see "Welcome to Libya's 'democracy'",
Asia Times Online, August 24) the vultures are already circling Tripoli to grab (and monopolize) the spoils. And yes - most
of the action has to do with oil deals, as in this stark assertion by Abdeljalil Mayouf, information manager at the "rebel" Arabian
Gulf Oil Company: "We don't have a problem with Western countries like the Italians, French and UK companies. But we may have
some political issues with Russia, China and Brazil."
These three happen to be crucial members of the BRICS group of emerging economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa),
which are actually growing while the Atlanticist, NATO-bombing economies are either stuck in stagnation or recession. The top four
BRICs also happen to have abstained from approving UN Security Council resolution 1973, the no-fly zone scam that metamorphosed into
NATO bringing regime change from above. They saw right through it from the beginning.
To make matters worse (for them), only three days before the Pentagon's Africom launched its first 150-plus Tomahawks over Libya,
Colonel Gaddafi gave an interview to German TV stressing that if the country were attacked, all energy contracts would be transferred
to Russian, Indian and Chinese companies.
So the winners in the oil bonanza are already designated: NATO members plus Arab monarchies. Among the companies involved, British
Petroleum (BP), France's Total and the Qatar national oil company. For Qatar - which dispatched jet fighters and recruiters to the
front lines, trained "rebels" in exhaustive combat techniques, and is already managing oil sales in eastern Libya - the war will
reveal itself to be a very wise investment decision.
Prior to the months-long crisis that is in its end game now with the rebels in the capital, Tripoli, Libya was producing 1.6 million
barrels per day. Once resumed, this could reap Tripoli's new rulers some US$50 billion annually. Most estimates place oil reserves
at 46.4 billion barrels.
The "rebels" of new Libya better not mess with China. Five months ago, China's official policy was all ready to call for a ceasefire;
if that had happened, Gaddafi would still control more than half of Libya. Yet Beijing - never a fan of violent regime change - for
the moment is exercising extreme restraint.
After a Libyan "rebel" official warned that Chinese oil companies could lose out after the ousting of Muammar Gaddafi,
China urged Libya to protect its investments and said their oil trade benefited both countries.
Wen Zhongliang, the deputy head of the Ministry of Trade, willfully observed, "Libya will continue to protect the interests
and rights of Chinese investors and we hope to continue investment and economic cooperation." Official statements are piling
up emphasizing "mutual economic cooperation".
Last week, Abdel Hafiz Ghoga, vice president of the dodgy Transitional National Council (TNC), told Xinhua that all deals and
contracts agreed with the Gaddafi regime would be honored - but Beijing is taking no chances.
Libya supplied no more than 3% of China's oil imports in 2010. Angola is a much more crucial supplier. But China is still Libya's
top oil customer in Asia. Moreover, China could be very helpful in the infrastructure rebuilding front, or in the technology export
- no less than 75 Chinese companies with 36,000 employees were already on the ground before the outbreak of the tribal/civil war,
swiftly evacuated in less than three days.
The Russians - from Gazprom to Tafnet - had billions of dollars invested in Libyan projects; Brazilian oil giant Petrobras and
the construction company Odebrecht also had intrests there. It's still unclear what will happen to them. The director general of
the Russia-Libya Business Council, Aram Shegunts, is extremely worried: "Our companies will lose everything because NATO will
prevent them from doing business in Libya."
Italy seems to have passed the "rebel" version of "you're either with us or without us". Energy giant ENI apparently won't be
affected, as Premier Silvio "Bunga Bunga" Berlusconi pragmatically dumped his previous very close pal Gaddafi at the start of the
Africom/NATO bombing spree.
ENI's directors are confident Libya's oil and gas flows to southern Italy will resume before winter. And the Libyan ambassador
in Italy, Hafed Gaddur, reassured Rome that all Gaddafi-era contracts will be honored. Just in case, Berlusconi will meet the TNC's
prime minister, Mahmoud Jibril, this Thursday in Milan.
Bin Laden to the rescue
Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu - of the famed "zero problems with our neighbors" policy - has also been gushing praise
on the former "rebels" turned powers-that-be. Eyeing the post-Gaddafi business bonanza as well, Ankara - as NATO's eastern flank
- ended up helping to impose a naval blockade on the Gaddafi regime, carefully cultivated the TNC, and in July formally recognized
it as the government of Libya. Business "rewards" loom.
Then there's the crucial plot; how the House of Saud is going to profit from having been instrumental in setting up a friendly
regime in Libya, possibly peppered with Salafi notables; one of the key reasons for the Saudi onslaught - which included a fabricated
vote at the Arab League - was the extreme bad blood between Gaddafi and King Abdullah since the run-up towards the war on Iraq in
2002.
It's never enough to stress the cosmic hypocrisy of an ultra-regressive absolute monarchy/medieval theocracy - which invaded Bahrain
and repressed its native Shi'ites - saluting what could be construed as a pro-democracy movement in Northern Africa.
Anyway, it's time to party. Expect the Saudi Bin Laden Group to reconstruct like mad all over Libya - eventually turning the (looted)
Bab al-Aziziyah into a monster, luxury Mall of Tripolitania.
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
euro is beginning to look like a credible rival to the dollar.
© AP Photo / Ariana Cubillos Montevideo Calls Venezuela's Guaido 'More Non-Legitimate' Than Maduro's Gov't
