Your browser does not support the HTML5 canvas tag.
Εγχειρίδιο χειρισμού κρίσεων λόγω πολιτικών ΔΝΤ από τη CIA! / Already confirmed: Civil liberties under attack! / Greece's creditors gone completely insane! / How the global financial mafia sucked Greece's blood / ECB's economic hitmen / Η Μέρκελ επιβεβαιώνει τα σχέδια των γραφειοφασιστών! /Greece: the low-noise collapse of an entire country/ How the neoliberal establishment tricked the masses again, this time in France / Ενώ η Γερμανία προετοιμάζεται για τα χειρότερα, η Ελλάδα επιμένει στο ευρώ! / Ένας παγκόσμιος "proxy" πόλεμος κατά της ελευθερίας έχει ξεκινήσει! / McCarthyism 2.0 against the independent information / Ο επικεφαλής του "σκιώδους συμβουλίου" της ΕΚΤ επιβεβαιώνει ότι η ευρωζώνη είναι μια χρηματοπιστωτική δικτατορία! / Venezuela case as an emphatic example of why the mainstream media propaganda in the West was so successful in previous decades / Δημοψήφισμα για Grexit: η τελευταία ευκαιρία να σωθεί η Ελλάδα και η τιμή της Αριστεράς / Populism as the new cliche of the elites to stigmatize anyone not aligned with the establishment / Δεν γίνεται έτσι "σύντροφοι" ... / Panama Papers: When mainstream information wears the anti-establishment mask / The Secret Bank Bailout / The head of the ECB “shadow council” confirms that eurozone is a financial dictatorship! / A documentary by Paul Mason about the financial coup in Greece / The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century / First cracks to the establishment by the American people / Clinton emails - The race of the Western neo-colonialist vultures over the Libyan corpse / Επιχείρηση Panama Papers: Το κατεστημένο θέλει το μονοπώλιο και στις διαρροές; / Operation "looting of Greece" reaches final stage / Varoufakis describes how Merkel sacrificed Greece to save the Franco-German banks / France officialy enters the neo-Feudal era! / The US establishment just gave its greatest performance so far ... / A significant revelation by WikiLeaks that the media almost ignored / It's official: the US is funding Middle-East jihadists! / Οι αδίστακτοι νεο-αποικιοκράτες του 21ου αιώνα / How to handle political unrest caused by IMF policies! / Πώς το νεοφιλελεύθερο κατεστημένο ξεγέλασε τις μάζες, αυτή τη φορά στη Γαλλία / The international usurers return to the crime scene called Greece!

17 August, 2017

How anti-Communist propaganda was used to restore US corporate colonialism in a banana republic


The award-winning documentary Harvest of Empire unveils a moving human story that is largely unknown to the great majority of citizens in the US. “They never teach us in school that the huge Latino presence here is a direct result of our own government’s actions in Mexico, the Caribbean and Central America over many decades - actions that forced millions from that region to leave their homeland and journey north,” says Juan González, award-winning journalist and author of the book upon which the documentary is based.

The 1954 CIA-orchestrated coup in Guatemala

Robert White, former US ambassador to El Salvador reveals that “If you had to pick one date where US foreign policy towards Latin America went wrong, the date would be 1954 and the place: Guatemala. That was the beginning of this terrible, terrible attitude that the United States developed towards Latin America and, particularly, towards Central America, where change became our enemy.

From the documentary we also learn that Guatemala was one of the few countries in Latin America that, after World War ll, actually experienced a period of democratic rule. President Jacobo Arbenz was determined to reduce widespread poverty by effecting major land reform in Guatemala. Only 2% of the owners controlled 75% of the arable land. Out of all of those, the United Fruit Company was the largest, with some 600,000 acres of property.

In the US Government, John Foster Dulles, who was the Secretary of State under president Eisenhower; his brother Allen Dulles, who was the head of the CIA - had both been law partners in the main law firm that represented United Fruit Company. Melvin Goodman, former CIA division chief says that “The feeling was we could very easily overthrow this progressive government and make it a lot easier for the United Fruit Company and other American businesses to operate in Central America.

The CIA got heavily involved in managing public opinion. It created the image of Arbenz as a crazy radical. And it was a systematic effort, mobilization and financing of opposition forces, until the Arbenz government was overthrown.

A vicious repression of all progressives and supporters of the Arbenz government ensued. Guatemala really began to establish a new pattern whereby the United States government used covert operations, employed local proxies to destabilize and overthrow governments in the region. A civil war erupted in the county that lasted 20 years. The brutality of the US-backed regimes forced many people to flee to the United States. That common US policy nearly to all the Latin America, in order to promote the interests of the US big capital, created massive waves of immigrants towards the US soil.

How the coup was designed with anti-Communist propaganda as basic tool

Adam Curtis, through his documentary The Century of the Self, goes deeper inside that story, exploring the method and the man who actually designed the coup for the CIA and the United Fruit. The man was Edward Bernays, the father of modern propaganda, or, public relations, if you prefer.

In 1953, the Soviet Union exploded it's first hydrogen bomb and the fear of nuclear war and Communism gripped the United States. Those in power became concerned about how to reassure the population. Committees were set up and public information films made appealing for calm in the face of new threats like nuclear fallout.

At this point, Edward Bernays was living in New York. In the 1920s he had invented the profession of Public Relations and was now one of the most powerful PR men in America. He worked for most of the major corporations and advised politicians, including President Eisenhower. Like his uncle, Sigmund Freud, Bernays was convinced that human beings were driven by irrational forces. The only way to deal with the public was to connect with their unconscious desires and fears.

Bernays argued that instead of trying to reduce people's fear of Communism, one should actually encourage and manipulate the fear. And in such a way that it became a weapon in the cold war. Rational argument was fruitless.


One of Bernays' main clients was the giant United Fruit Company. They owned vast banana plantations in Guatemala and Central America. For decades, United Fruit had controlled the company through pliable dictators. It was known as a 'banana republic'. But in 1950, a young officer, Colonel Arbenz was elected president. He promised to remove United Fruits' control over the country, and in 1953 he announced the government would take over much of their land. It was a massively popular move but a disaster for United Fruit, and they turned to Bernays to help get rid of Arbenz.

In reality, Arbenz was a Democratic Socialist with no links to Moscow, but Bernays set out to turn him into a Communist threat to America. He organized a trip to Guatemala for influential American journalists. Few of them knew anything about the country, or its politics. Bernays arranged for them to be entertained and to meet selected Guatemalan politicians who told them that Arbenz was a Communist controlled by Moscow.

During the trip, there was also a violent anti-American demonstration in the capital. Many of those who worked for United Fruit were convinced it had been organized by Bernays himself. He also created a fake independent news agency in America called the Middle America Information Bureau. It bombarded the American media with press releases saying that Moscow was planning to use Guatemala as a beachhead to attack America. All of this had the desired effect.

But what Bernays was doing was not just trying to blacken the Arbenz regime. He was part of a secret plot. President Eisenhower had agreed that America should topple the Arbenz government, but secretly. The CIA were instructed to organize a coup. Working with the United Fruit Company the CIA trained and armed a rebel army and found a new leader for the country called Colonel Armas. The CIA agent in charge was Howard Hunt, later one of the Watergate burglars.

As planes flown by CIA pilots dropped bombs on Guatemala City, Edward Bernays carried on his propaganda campaign in the American press. He was preparing the American population to see this as the liberation of Guatemala by freedom fighters for Democracy. He totally understood that the coup would happen when conditions on the public and the press allowed for a coup to happen and he created those conditions. He was totally savvy in terms of just what he was helping create there in terms of the overthrow. But ultimately he was reshaping reality, and reshaping public opinion in a way that is undemocratic and manipulative.

On June 27th, 1954, Colonel Arbenz fled the country and Armas arrived as the new leader. Within months, Vice President Nixon visited Guatemala. In an event staged by United Fruit's PR department, he was shown piles of Marxist literature that had been found it was said in the presidential palace.

Bernays had manipulated the American people but he had done so because he, like many others at the time, believed that the interests of business and the interests of America were indivisible. Especially when faced with the threat of Communism. But Bernays was convinced that to explain this rationally to the American people was impossible. Because they were not rational. Instead, one had to touch on their inner fears and manipulate them in the interest of a higher truth. He called it The Engineering of Consent. He was doing it for the American way of life to which he was sincerely devoted. And yet, he felt that the people were really pretty stupid.

Hamas pledges to ‘crush’ Israel if Gaza attacked

The Palestinian Islamic resistance movement, Hamas, has pledged to “crush Israel in case it wages another war on the besieged Gaza Strip.

Israeli media reports on Wednesday cited Hamas leader in Gaza Yahya Sinwar as saying that while the movement was not looking to start a war, it was well prepared to take on the Tel Aviv regime’s military forces at any time. “We do not seek confrontation with the Israelis, but if the confrontation happens, we will crush them,” Sinwar was quoted as saying on Tuesday.

The Hamas chief, who was appointed in February to succeed Ismail Haniyeh to head the movement’s political office in Gaza, said any “stupid steps” by Israel against the coastal enclave would be met with a response greater than the one the movement gave to the 2014 Israeli invasion.

July marked the third anniversary of the 51-day Israeli war on Gaza that left more than 2,200 people dead and over 11,000 others injured. Gaza stood its ground and was able to repel the ruthless invasion.

"Israel is not launching a new war against Gaza, which stresses Tel Aviv's fear of the unknown that awaits it in Gaza," the Palestinian leader asserted.

The Gaza Strip has been under an Israeli siege since June 2007. The blockade and recurrent airstrikes has caused a decline in living standards as well as unprecedented unemployment and poverty.

Sinwar said there was hope for better living standards following a series of breakthroughs in negotiations with Egypt to reopen the Rafah crossing to the southern neighbor. According to him, Cairo had committed itself to let goods and passengers through the gate since the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha.

He also noted that "there is talk about improving the electricity situation" in Gaza, which is hit by daily blackouts of about 17-18 hours.

Sinwar was the most senior figure to be released with over 1,000 other Palestinian prisoners in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier kept in Gaza for more than five years.

Before being appointed to his new post, Sinwar was a senior commander of the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas’ armed wing.

Source:

US-led airstrikes kill 38 civilians in Syria

At least 38 civilians have been killed in airstrikes conducted by the US-led coalition, purportedly fighting the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group, on the Syrian city of Raqqah in the past 48 hours, a pro-opposition monitoring group says.

The so-called Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said 17 people, including five children and two women, had been killed and 30 others injured in the airstrikes on the Old City neighborhood and other areas in the center of Raqqah on Wednesday.

The report said the latest casualties bring the number of people killed in such airstrikes in the past 48 hours to 38.

According to the Britain-based group, the death toll is expected to rise as several of the wounded are in critical condition and a number of people are still missing.

The observatory said the aerial attacks also damaged infrastructure.

The coalition has been conducting airstrikes against what are said to be Daesh targets inside Syria since September 2014, without any authorization from the Damascus government or a UN mandate.

The Western military alliance has repeatedly been accused of targeting and killing civilians. It has also been largely incapable of fulfilling its declared aim of destroying Daesh.

In July, the Pentagon admitted that the coalition airstrikes had killed over 600 civilians in Syria and Iraq between August 2014 and May 2017. Independent monitors, however, have time and again challenged such reports and revealed that the US-led campaign has caused far more civilian casualties.

Source:

Έλλην νεοφιλελεύθερος και ολίγον Τραμπαρίφας

Κατά της βίας απ’ όπου και αν προέρχεται τάχθηκε ο Τραμπ, μετά τα επεισόδια στο Σάρλοτσβιλ της Βιρτζίνια. Δεν συμβαίνει μόνο σε έλληνες νεοφιλελεύθερους και Μενουμευρώπηδες, αλλά αποτελεί τελικώς ίδιον των απανταχού θιασωτών της ελευθερίας των αγορών και των παραγωγών, να είναι με την ελευθερία και τα δικαιώματα με προαπαιτούμενα. Να δίνουν στη βία γενικά χαρακτηριστικά και στην αντιμετώπισή της γλυκερές συνταγές, όπως το «αγάπη μόνο» και «θετική ενέργεια».

του Κώστα Βαξεβάνη

Η βία έχει αιτίες, το άδικο επίσης και ο επιπόλαιος (ναι πολλοί έλληνες νεοφιλελεύθεροι είναι θλιβερά επιπόλαιοι που θέλουν να έχουν άποψη) ισαποστασίτης σύμμαχος των άδικων και ισχυρών. Φταίνε τα δύο άκρα. Οι ακροδεξιοί φασίστες στην Αμερική και απ’ την άλλη οι διαδηλωτές της Δημοκρατίας. Οι οπαδοί του στρατηγού της δουλείας Ρόμπερτ Έντουαρντ Λη και όσοι έχουν το θάρρος να πουν πως στον 21ο αιώνα δεν μπορούν να υπάρχουν δούλοι.

Από τη μία ο Χίτλερ με τη βία των κρεματορίων και από την άλλη οι εβραίοι με τη βία της άρνησής τους να καούνε στους φούρνους. Και στη μέση όσοι είναι κατά της βίας απ’ όπου και αν προέρχεται και από το θύτη και από το αμυνόμενο και αδύναμο θύμα. Μην κοιτάτε που η παγιωμένη ιστορική καταγραφή και η παγκόσμια κατακραυγή δεν αφήνει τους σύγχρονους ισαποστασίτες να ψελλίσουν την καταδίκη τους για τη «βία των Εβραίων» στο Ολοκαύτωμα. Απλώς δεν τολμάνε.

Κουβέντα δεν άρθρωσαν οι εν Ελλάδι οπαδοί του φιλελεύθερου κόσμου για όσα έγιναν στη Βιρτζίνια. Τα πολύ φιλελεύθερα sites, δεν έβαλαν καν τη φωτογραφία της Heather Heyer που δολοφονήθηκε από το νεοναζί, ούτε φυσικά έγραψαν το όνομα μιας άγνωστης ακτιβίστριας που (όπως και για τους έλληνες διαδηλωτές) ενδεχομένως τα ήθελε και τα έπαθε. Έτσι όμως συμβαίνει εδώ και καιρό. Λίγο αφότου έληξαν το θέμα της εκλογικής (και όχι κοινωνικής και πολιτικής) επικινδυνότητας με τη Χρυσή Αυγή, τα κόμματα και τα κομματίδια του Συνταγματικού τόξου, επέστρεψαν στη γνωστή υποκρισία. Ο Μαδούρο είναι ένας επικίνδυνος δικτάτορας που εξ αντανακλάσεως ενοχοποιεί και τον Τσίπρα και οι διαδηλωτές της αντιπολίτευσης βαριοί δημοκράτες που δεν ανέχονται την αδικία.

Στο ενδιάμεσο βέβαια διαφεύγουν μερικές λεπτομέρειες, πως για παράδειγμα η Βενεζουέλα είναι η πρώτη χώρα σε αποθέματα πετρελαίου η οποία πολύ ενδιαφέρει τους Αμερικάνους που δεν μπορούν να τα εκμεταλλευτούν εξαιτίας του Μαδούρο, είτε είναι, είτε δεν είναι δικτάτορας. Εν ολίγοις η Βενεζουέλα είναι το Ιράν ή το Ιράκ της Λατινικής Αμερικής και δυστυχώς δεν είναι η Σαουδική Αραβία στην οποία μπορεί να κόβουν κεφάλια και χέρια, αλλά είναι όσο πρέπει συνεργάσιμοι, πράγμα που σαφώς δεν θέτει θέμα δικαιωμάτων, καταδίκης και άλλων διαμαρτυριών.

Οι έλληνες νεοφιλελεύθεροι, Τραμπαλίζονται στο ρυθμό της συντηρητικής αθλιότητας που γεννά νέους διαχωρισμούς και βία κρυμμένα κάτω από την υποκρισία για την ελευθερία και τη Δημοκρατία. Ανήκω στην κατηγορία αυτών που υποστηρίζουν πως ο νεοφιλελευθερισμός είναι ο φασισμός με ανθρώπινο πρόσωπο. Η καθιέρωση των κανόνων του κυνισμού και των ανισοτήτων και η τροποποίησή τους με τρόπο που να εμφανίζονται ως λειτουργίες φυσικής επιλογής. Δεν είναι τυχαίο που ο Μίλτον Φρήντμαν και η Σχολή του Σικάγου, οι θεμελιωτές του νεοφιλελευθερισμού, υπηρέτησαν χωρίς τύψεις τον δικτάτορα της Χιλής, Αγκούστο Πινοσέτ και τη Μάργκαρετ Θάτσερ.

Φυσικά όταν μιλάμε για έλληνες νεοφιλελεύθερους, μιλάμε για έναν συντηρητικό συρφετό που επικαλείται την τυποποίηση του νεοφιλελεύθερου για να καλύψει τις θεωρίες που ντρέπεται να πει φωναχτά, όπως: οι Αριστεροί είναι σκουλήκια, η πολύ ελευθερία βλάπτει, η Χούντα πέτυχε οικονομική ανάπτυξη, δεν υπάρχουν νεκροί στο Πολυτεχνείο και άλλα τέτοια. Με αυτή την έννοια οι εγχώριοι νεοφιλελεύθεροι είναι περισσότερο Τραμπαρίφες παρά οτιδήποτε άλλο.

ΥΓ: Για να τελειώνουμε με τις θεωρίες περί μαύρου και κόκκινου φασισμού. Ο φασισμός, είναι μια απάνθρωπη αυταρχική θεωρία που αποδέχεται ανωτερότητα κάποιων ανθρώπων και εθνών έναντι άλλων, προβλέποντας μάλιστα τη συνειδητή εξόντωση των υποδεέστερων και κατώτερων. Ο κομμουνισμός είναι μια κοσμοθεωρία ισότητας και κοινωνικής δικαιοσύνης που δεν προβλέπει στη θεωρία της ανωτερότητα και εξόντωση ανθρώπων. Το αν υπήρξε στρεβλή εφαρμογή με μέτρα βίας δεν κάνει τη θεωρία του κομμουνισμού, φασισμό, αλλά αυτούς που την εφάρμοσαν με αυτό τον τρόπο υπόλογους. Εν ολίγοις ο έλληνας κομμουνιστής που σκοτώθηκε για να απελευθερωθεί η Ελλάδα, δεν είναι το ίδιο πράγμα με τον φασίστα συνεργάτη των γερμανών Ναζί που κάρφωνε και σκότωνε συμπατριώτες του και στη συνέχεια έγινε εθνικόφρονας πατριώτης με σύνταξη. Τα άλλα είναι για να ξαναγράφουν βολικά την ιστορία διάφοροι «επιστήμονες» και αγγούρια Καλυβιώτικα.

Πηγή:

Right-wing extremists condemned in Charlottesville, funded and armed in Ukraine and Syria

Having backed a right-wing coup in the Ukraine and right-wing terror groups disguised as “moderate rebels” in Syria, U.S. leaders now confront rising right-wing terror at home. They duly condemn it, but seem blind both to their own hypocrisy and to the domestic reverberations of their cynical foreign policies.

by Whitney Webb

Part 2 - The U.S.-backed fascist-nationalist takeover of Ukraine

Nowhere in recent years has U.S. political support for right-wing fascists, and even neo-Nazis, been more florid than in Ukraine. In 2014, after the successful ouster of the country’s democratically-elected president in what leaked phone calls later confirmed was a U.S.-backed coup, Ukraine came under the rule of a new administration led by billionaire oligarch Petro Poroshenko. Despite the U.S.’ assertion that the change in Ukraine’s government in 2014 was not a coup, Poroshenko himself has labeled it as such.

Poroshenko’s administration contained several high-level officials with direct links to neo-fascist groups. As FAIR reported in 2014:

The new deputy prime minister, Oleksandr Sych, is from Svoboda; National Security Secretary Andriy Parubiy is a co-founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Party, Svoboda’s earlier incarnation; the deputy secretary for National Security is Dmytro Yarosh, the head of Right Sector. Chief prosecutor Oleh Makhnitsky is another Svoboda member, as are the ministers for Agriculture and Ecology.

Svoboda, in particular, is undeniably fascist. Their leaders consistently make anti-semitic and racist statements and they have called for those opposing their brand of ultra-nationalism, whom they derogatorily label “Ukrainophobes,” to be criminally prosecuted. Ukraine’s Right Sector, which also boasts high-ranking officials in the Kiev-based government, is an openly neo-Nazi militia known for their skinhead style of dress and glorification of street violence.

Although the coup gave unprecedented power to Svoboda and its ilk, U.S. politicians – instead of condemning the fascist nationalists that had taken over Ukraine – openly supported them. They exhibited no qualms about putting them into power despite that fact that the far-right is a tiny fraction of the Ukrainian electorate.

Indeed, Sen. John McCain, who was quick to condemn such groups in Charlottesville, shared a stage, in the early days of the coup, with Oleh Tyahnybok, the leader of Svoboda, who once called for the liberation of Ukraine from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.”

McCain’s appearance was followed by a more discreet visit made by then-director of the CIA John Brennan to Kiev. In addition, the leaked recording of a phone call made at the time between Victoria Nuland, then-assistant Secretary of State, and Geoffrey Pyatt, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, revealed that the U.S. effectively selected who would replace Ukraine’s deposed president Viktor Yanukovych.

In addition, every Senator named above, along with the Obama administration, pushed to fund the new, openly fascist regime, to the tune of $1.3 billion in 2014 alone. Even as evidence has emerged that the Ukrainian government has been actively targeting ethnic minorities, the U.S. political establishment – now with Donald Trump at the helm – continues to openly support the fascist government in Kiev.

Source, links:


[1]

ExxonMobil, Kochs, Israel pushing Washington to partition Iraq and Syria

The currently stateless Kurds sit astride the Iraq-Syria border on land blessed/cursed with oil, other resources, and geopolitical significance. Is it any wonder that mega-corporations and their client states are looking to use the Kurds, stoke conflict, and exploit the situation?

by Whitney Webb

Part 3 - Creating the divisions needed to justify partition

The big problem for the partition plan, however, was the simple fact that these diverse groups had coexisted with minimal sectarian violence in Iraq for centuries. This meant, of course, that the sectarianism that was needed to justify partition had to be engineered. The U.S., in its invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq, happily obliged, sponsoring sectarian violence through the military training – including torture techniques – it gave to Iraqi militias, police and military forces that divided along particular ethnoreligious lines.

Many of these organizations have been found to be repeat human rights offenders and have targeted particular ethnoreligious groups within Iraq. Despite their egregious track record, the U.S. continues to financially support these armed groups.

The U.S. has also worked to create and strengthen ethnoreligious divisions within the country by promoting Iraqi organizations founded on religion or ethnicity rather than along political lines.

Though some analysts believe that the biggest winners in the U.S.-created environment of Iraqi sectarianism were the Iraqi majority population of the Shi’a – which, after all, was given control of the post-invasion government – it was really the Kurds who gained the most as a result of the U.S.’ machinations to divide and conquer Iraq.

The Kurds are the largest group of nomadic people in the world and have long existed without their own state. As journalist Sarah Abed has noted, “This fact has allowed Western powers to use the ‘stateless’ plight of the Kurdish people as a tool to divide, destabilize and conquer Iraq and Syria, where colonial oil and gas interests run deep.” Although the most powerful Kurdish political parties in these countries do not see themselves as pawns, history shows that Western colonial powers have used them that way in the past and continue to do so, often with their willing cooperation.

In recent decades the U.S. government and military have openly supported Kurdish separatist elements, though they have stopped short of recognizing “Kurdistan” as a state completely independent of the Baghdad-based government. This role fell instead to U.S. corporations, such as ExxonMobil, a major force in the fossil fuel industry. In 2011, ExxonMobil unilaterally brokered an oil deal with the Kurdistan region, bypassing Iraq’s central government in the process.

According to ExxonMobil, the move was partly motivated by problems it was having contracting with Iraq’s central government regarding oilfields in southern Iraq. However, the promise of oil reserves in Kurdistan said to be “one of the world’s most promising regions for the future [of] hydrocarbon discovery,” was also a clear motivator. As a result, ExxonMobil sided with the Kurdish separatists over the central government, giving clout to Kurdish goals of greater regional autonomy – and thus furthering their shared goal of a divided Iraq.

Other oil corporations – including Chevron and Gazprom, among others – followed Exxon’s lead..

By 2014, more than 80 foreign energy corporations had struck deals with Kurdistan. Oilman Ray Hunt, whose Hunt Oil Co. signed its own unilateral agreement with Kurdistan in 2007, has consistently heaped praises upon Kurdistan and has also made clear his vision for the future of Iraq: “In the end, you’ll end up with a soft partition of Iraq.

Source, links:


[1] [2]

When Washington decides Democracy is dangerous: stoking opposition in Venezuela and Syria

by Ramiro S. Fúnez

Part 4 - Syrian & Venezuelan opposition both engage in terrorism

Perhaps one of the most striking similarities between the Venezuelan and Syrian opposition, and an inconvenient truth for their apologists, is their use of terrorist acts. These acts, intended to strike fear in the minds of those who oppose their interventionist agendas, are rarely reported in corporate news outlets.

Not only has the Venezuelan opposition utilized “guarimbas,” or street blockades created with ignited trash, to wreak havoc in cities across the country; they have also torched public buses, incinerated tons of government-subsidized food intended for hungry citizens, launched grenades over government buildings, attacked hospitals and nurseries, and, perhaps most disturbingly, immolated supporters of the socialist government.

The last example is epitomized by the case of Orlando Figueroa, a 21-year-old Afro-Venezuelan who was drenched in gasoline and lit on fire on May 20 by a white Venezuelan opposition protester for “being Chavista.” Enzo Franchini Oliveros, identified as Figueroa’s murderer, was assisted by other demonstrators who have not yet been detained.

Figueroa, who worked as a parking attendant and came from humble working-class roots, died several days later. At least 23 people have been burned alive by opposition protesters, according to Red58.org, a Venezuelan watchdog media group that exposes right-wing violence.

Similar terrorist tactics have also been used in Syria by the Wahhabi-linked militants. Like their Venezuelan counterparts, Syrian opposition protesters have torched public infrastructure and killed civilians accused of “being Assadists.” Their violent military campaigns against pro-government, anti-imperialist citizens have also claimed hundreds, if not thousands, of lives.

Two terrorist acts committed by the Syrian opposition, however, stand out as the most gruesome.

The first involved Abu Sakkar, a former FSA fighter who cut out the heart of a fallen Syrian Arab Army soldier in 2013 and ate it in front of other “moderate rebels.” The incident was recorded on video. The second involved members of the U.S.-funded terrorist group Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement, which beheaded a young child near Aleppo in 2016. This act was also recorded on video.

These incidents, to the discomfort of pro-imperialist liberals who defend these criminals as “freedom fighters” and “revolutionaries,” demonstrate that both the Venezuelan and Syrian opposition commit acts of terrorism that are largely overlooked.

Source, links:


[1] [2] [3]

Related:

16 August, 2017

The underground war between Venezuela and the US big oil cartel confirmed through WikiLeaks

The WIKILEAKS Public Library of US Diplomacy (PlusD) holds the world's largest searchable collection of United States confidential, or formerly confidential, diplomatic communications. As of April 8, 2013 it holds 2 million records comprising approximately 1 billion words. The collection covers US involvements in, and diplomatic or intelligence reporting on, every country on earth. It is the single most significant body of geopolitical material ever published. The PlusD collection, built and curated by WikiLeaks, is updated from a variety of sources, including leaks, documents released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and documents released by the US State Department systematic declassification review.


A document under the title VENEZUELA: AMERICAN OIL AND SERVICE COMPANIES ENGAGE AMBASSADOR, from July, 2009, depicts the agony of the US oil corporations to stay in Venezuela, as they had already lost control over country's rich reserves.

The summary is quite enlightening as gives the impression that the US companies were afraid that could be completely thrown out of the Venezuelan oil industry in the close future by then Chavez administration:

           Executives representing U.S. companies involved in Venezuela's oil sector briefed the Ambassador on the status of the industry, highlighting problems all face in securing payments from PDVSA[*]; difficulties maintaining positive relationships with PDVSA, the Ministry for Energy and Petroleum (MENPET), and the GBRV [Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela] in general; and the challenge of working in this environment. They extrapolated their experiences to all oil companies, including the politically expedient national oil companies, such as CNPC and PetroPars. All agreed that current working conditions in Venezuela, including the recent round of service company expropriations, would have a short to medium term impact on Venezuelan crude production. They also agreed that aside from current challenges, their long-term goal is to find a way to stay in Venezuela as the potential of its reserves outweighs short-term challenges.

There are also other interesting parts in the document, proving that the underground war between the Venezuelan government and the US big oil cartel, was reaching its highest levels. For example, it appears that the US corporations were acting also as 'strict inspectors' on the Venezuelan crude oil production and that the state-run oil company of Venezuela, was trying to escape from OPEC's tight scrutiny by trying to produce the quantities needed to relief the Venezuelan economy. As described characteristically, “industry participants have confirmed that PDVSA has quietly re-activated production from fields where production was curtailed.

Indeed, as described previously, the importance of Venezuela due to its oil reserves is also significant. When Maduro tried to approach Russia in order to strengthen the economic cooperation between the two countries, he must had set the alarm for the neocons in the US. Venezuela could find an alternative in Russia and BRICS, in order to breathe from the multiple economic war that was set off by the US. It is characteristic that the economic war against Russia by the US and the Saudis, by keeping the oil prices in historically low levels, had significant impact on the Venezuelan economy too.

Other key points from the document:

  • Carlos Tejera pointed out constitutional difficulties arising from the GBRV's oil service sector expropriations in May and June. He noted that in apparent contravention of the Venezuelan constitution and standing laws, the May 7 oil service sector law allows MENPET (1) to expropriate companies and assume control over operations prior to providing fair market compensation, (2) to pay for expropriated assets with instruments other than cash (e.g., PDVSA bonds/debt issuance), and (3) to pay book value rather than fair market value for seized assets. Finally, Tejera added that the May 7 law appears to be vague enough to be applicable to sectors other than hydrocarbons. Others, however, noted that the constitutionality of the law is irrelevant in the current Venezuelan legal environment. In fact, Halliburton,s Castenada added that he no longer believes Halliburton is too large for PDVSA to seize, but rather that some elements of its operations in Venezuela are now vulnerable.

  • The business representatives agreed that no one knows the real level of Venezuelan crude production but that it is not over 3 million barrels/day as claimed by the GBRV. PDVSA claims that it implemented fully the September 2008 and December 2009 OPEC quota cuts of over 300,000 barrels/day, but industry participants have confirmed that PDVSA has quietly re-activated production from fields where production was curtailed.

  • Chevron,s Ron Lubojacky added that PDVSA and MENPET need to understand that they are sending all the wrong messages to the private sector at a time when the GBRV is clearly trying to court new investment in the Carabobo heavy oil bid round. Tejera stated that the USG [United States Government] should not adopt a narrow strategy of defending particular companies in particular cases, because the GBRV cares little for the private sector. Rather, the USG should point out that the GBRV's actions have consequences and that its actions run counter to its stated goals. The representatives disagreed whether U.S. firms were specifically targeted, but agreed that other foreign oil companies (including politically expedient national oil companies, such as CNPC and PetroPars) confronted similar challenges. They also agreed that all companies in the sector are facing payments problems with PDVSA.

  • Chevron,s Ron Lubojacky added that PDVSA and MENPET need to understand that they are sending all the wrong messages to the private sector at a time when the GBRV is clearly trying to court new investment in the Carabobo heavy oil bid round. Tejera stated that the USG [United States Government] should not adopt a narrow strategy of defending particular companies in particular cases, because the GBRV cares little for the private sector. Rather, the USG should point out that the GBRV's actions have consequences and that its actions run counter to its stated goals. The representatives disagreed whether U.S. firms were specifically targeted, but agreed that other foreign oil companies (including politically expedient national oil companies, such as CNPC and PetroPars) confronted similar challenges. They also agreed that all companies in the sector are facing payments problems with PDVSA.

  • This was the first opportunity U.S. oil production and services companies have had to discuss the current situation since the Ambassador returned to post. They used this meeting to underscore the on-going difficulties of doing business in Venezuela and their long-term commitment to finding a business model that will permit them to stay to support Venezuela's exploitation of its abundant oil reserves. The companies understand that they need to align their economic interests with the stated political goals of the Chavez administration in order to survive here in the long-term. That said they hope the USG can convey to the GBRV that its actions will likely erode production levels and not just affect private sector profits. The GBRV's actions demonstrate its belief that the business community will continue to work in Venezuela under nearly any condition. The question remains how long companies will continue operating in this environment given on-going difficulties, all in the hope of future profits.

This is another evidence for the fact that the real target of current US threats and provocative actions against Venezuela, is to secure the oil fields for the US big oil cartel.

As already described:

The US real agenda concerning Venezuela is so obvious that there is no need for further investigation on the issue. But if you still want further proof that oil is the real game, here is another piece of evidence, provided by Miguel Tinker Salas, an expert on Latin America, who explained on RT why the US has held off on sanctioning crude oil:

           So far, the sanctions have been against refined Venezuelan oil products and against individuals in the Venezuelan government. They have not been for the importation of crude. And the fact that they are not including crude, speaks to that interdependence and the fact that US oil producers and exporters don't want to upend the market. And potentially, that 10% extraction of Venezuelan oil, could spike US gasoline prices as well.

It other words, the US hypocrites attempt to suffocate Venezuela, but only as much as needed to overthrow Maduro, without risking a boomerang effect against US oil market. It seems that we have a carefully arranged wave of sanctions on behalf of the US empire that aim to bring a right-wing puppet in power, and therefore, the achievement of the final target: re-capturing Venezuela's oil resources by the US big oil cartel.

* At the start of the 21st century, Venezuela was the world's fifth largest exporter of crude oil, with oil accounting for 85.3% of the country's exports, therefore dominating the country's economy. Previous administrations had sought to privatise this industry, with U.S. corporations having a significant level of control, but the Chávez administration wished to curb this foreign control over the country's natural resources by nationalising much of it under the state-run oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PdVSA). In 2001, the government introduced a new Hydrocarbons Law through which they sought to gain greater state control over the oil industry: they did this by raising royalty taxes on the oil companies and also by introducing the formation of "mixed companies", whereby the PdVSA could have joint control with private companies over industry. By 2006, all of the 32 operating agreements signed with private corporations during the 1990s had been converted from being primarily or solely corporate-run to being at least 51% controlled by PdVSA.

Former top US official: Pompeo needs to shut up and go back to his hole at Langley!


Criticizing statements by CIA's director, Mike Pompeo, concerning Venezuela, the former Chief of Staff for Secretary of State, Lawrence Wilkerson, appeared furious about the amateurism and audacity that characterizes many US officials under Trump administration.

Pompeo had stated:

           If, any time you have a country as large and with the economic capacity of a country like Venezuela, America has a deep interest in making sure it is stable and as democratic as possible. So we're working hard to do that. I'm always careful when we talk about South and Central America and the CIA. There's a lot of stories. I want to be careful what I say, but suffice it to say, we are very hopeful that there can be a transition in Venezuela. We, the CIA is doing its best to understand the dynamic there so that we can communicate to our State Department and to others. The Colombians, I was just down in Mexico City and in Bogota, week before last, talking about this very issue, trying to help them understand the things they might do, so that they can get a better outcome for their part of the world, and our part of the world.

Speaking to Aaron Mate and The Real News, Wilkerson responded:

           First thing Mr. Pompeo needs to know is it's Bogota, accent on the last syllable, not Bogota. The second thing he needs to know is CIA directors need to keep their traps shut, their mouths shut. They don't talk about policy. They don't even intimate about policy. They should not even be on camera. He needs to shut up and go back to his hole at Langley.

       The third thing is that the last thing we need is somebody from the Central Intelligence Agency talking about Venezuelan policy period, or any Latin American policy. This is a region where the United States ought to issue apologies, not threats. We have done so much to damage Latin America. If we're talking about a relationship, as Mr. Pompeo was just doing, the relationship has always been, and I would submit we want it to be again, a relationship between American business and American leaders and oligarchs.

         Oligarchs is whom we have liked and loved from Brazil to Santiago. From Argentina to Peru. That's whom we like and love because they're conducive to American commercial interests and ultimately conducive to American security interests. It's time we fell out of love with oligarchs and started liking others who represent the people and true and real democracy. That's what Mr. Pompeo ought to know, but of course like most of the Trump administration, he's ignorant as hell.

Συλλέγουν στοιχεία όσων επισκέπτονται ιστοσελίδες που ασκούν κριτική στον Τραμπ

Τα στοιχεία 1.3 εκατομμυρίου χρηστών του ίντερνετ, που επισκέφθηκαν ιστοσελίδα που ασκούσε κριτική στον Ντόναλντ Τραμπ, ζήτησε το υπουργείο Δικαιοσύνης από τον πάροχο φιλοξενίας.

Όπως ανακοίνωσε η εταιρεία DreamHost, το υπουργείο Δικαιοσύνης εξέδωσε ένταλμα με το οποίο ζητά όλα τα στοιχεία των διαχειριστών της ιστοσελίδας disruptj20.com αλλά και τις διευθύνσεις IP όσων χρηστών την επισκέφθηκαν.

Μέσω του site disruptj20.com οργανώνονταν οι διαδηλωτές την ημέρα της ορκωμοσίας του Ντόναλντ Τραμπ.

Το ένταλμα εντάσσεται στις ουργουελικού τύπου διώξεις και καταδίκες που έχουν ήδη επιβληθεί σε άτομα που συμμετείχαν στις διαδηλώσεις – μεταξύ άλλων και πολυετείς ποινές κάθειρξης.

Παρά το γεγονός ότι οι διευθύνσεις IP δεν αντιστοιχούν σε φυσικά πρόσωπα οι αμερικανικές διωκτικές αρχές έχουν τη δυνατότητα να συνδέσουν κάθε δικτυακή διεύθυνση με πραγματικές διευθύνσεις κατοικίας.

Ο Τραμπ ουσιαστικά χρησιμοποιεί νομικά εργαλεία τα οποία δημιουργήθηκαν από προηγούμενες κυβερνήσεις με πρόσχημα την πάταξη της πειρατείας και άλλων παράνομων ενεργειών στο ίντερνετ.

Πηγή:

Η Χρυσή Αυγή είναι το πρότυπό μας λένε οι ναζιστές στις ΗΠΑ

Την Χρυσή Αυγη παρουσιάζουν ως πρότυπο της επιχειρησιακής τους δράσης οι νεοναζιστικες οργανώσεις που συγκεντρώθηκαν τις τελευταίες ημέρες στο Σαρλοτσβιλ της Βιρτζίνιας.

Μιλώντας σε δημοσιογράφους του Vice σημείωσαν ότι ευρωπαϊκές οργανώσεις όπως η Χρυσή Αυγη βρίσκονται στην «πρωτοπορία» της δράσης σε διεθνές επίπεδο.

Στο μίνι ντοκιμαντέρ μέλη της οργάνωσης Alt-Right παρουσιάζουν τον οπλισμό και υπόσχονται να καθαρίσουν τις ΗΠΑ από αριστερούς και Εβραίους.

Πηγή, βίντεο:


Right-wing extremists condemned in Charlottesville, funded and armed In Ukraine and Syria

Having backed a right-wing coup in the Ukraine and right-wing terror groups disguised as “moderate rebels” in Syria, U.S. leaders now confront rising right-wing terror at home. They duly condemn it, but seem blind both to their own hypocrisy and to the domestic reverberations of their cynical foreign policies.

by Whitney Webb

Part 1

Though rising tensions between the Trump administration and North Korea had dominated headlines for much of the past week, the chaotic events in Charlottesville swiftly replaced concerns about imminent nuclear war with concerns about the white nationalist movement and other associated groups.

On Saturday, white nationalists and counter-protesters dramatically clashed within the Virginia city, prompting a state of emergency to be declared after a young woman was killed by a car that plowed into a group of pedestrians. Since Saturday’s tragic and alarming events, a chorus of U.S. politicians from both parties have expressed their outrage, labeling the hit-and-run crash an act of domestic terrorism and condemning white nationalists as unpatriotic and “enemies of freedom.”

Among those professing their disdain for Saturday’s events were numerous senators, including Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and John McCain (R-AZ).

They, along with a host of other congressmen and former presidents, condemned the white nationalists as un-American and against American values, with some specifically labeling the car crash a terror attack. Other notable political figures, such as former Secretary of State and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama, also condemned the attacks via social media.

While the chorus of condemnation against Charlottesville was near-unanimous, taken in a broader perspective, it seems that the outrage at and disgust with right-wing racism and religious extremism expressed by U.S. politicians is rather myopic, if not outright hypocritical. Indeed, many of the U.S. congressmen who spoke out against the activities of such groups in Charlottesville have supported – and in many cases still support – similar or even worse groups abroad, in countries such as Syria, Ukraine, and Venezuela, among others.

Apparently, such ideologies are condemnable only when they occur on U.S. soil.

Source, links:

ExxonMobil, Kochs, Israel pushing Washington to partition Iraq and Syria

The currently stateless Kurds sit astride the Iraq-Syria border on land blessed/cursed with oil, other resources, and geopolitical significance. Is it any wonder that mega-corporations and their client states are looking to use the Kurds, stoke conflict, and exploit the situation?

by Whitney Webb

Part 2 - The geopolitical and economic motives for a partitioned Iraq

The corporatist, neoconservative dream of partitioning Iraq has been around for well over a decade, first materializing a year before the U.S.’ ill-fated 2003 invasion of that nation. The plan, drafted by former Vice President Dick Cheney and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, contemplated the division of Iraq into three autonomous, sectarian “statelets” for Iraqi Muslim Sunnis, Muslim Shi’as, and ethnic Kurds, who are also predominantly Muslim. This partition, it was believed, would allow the U.S. and its regional allies to more easily dominate Iraq and its important fossil fuel resources, along with conferring other “strategic advantages.”

As U.S.-based private intelligence firm Stratfor noted in 2002, the invasion and destruction of Iraq would pave the way for partition and thus greater U.S. control over Iraq and the entire Middle East:

After eliminating Iraq as a sovereign state, there would be no fear that one day an anti-American government would come to power in Baghdad, as the capital would be in Amman [Jordan].

Current and potential U.S. geopolitical foes Iran […] and Syria would be isolated from each other, with big chunks of land between them under control of the pro-U.S. forces.

Equally important, Washington would be able to justify its long-term and heavy military presence in the region as necessary for the defense of a young new state asking for U.S. protection – and to secure the stability of oil markets and supplies.

That, in turn, would help the United States gain direct control of Iraqi oil and replace Saudi oil in case of conflict with Riyadh.

Source, links:


[1] [3]

When Washington decides Democracy is dangerous: stoking opposition in Venezuela and Syria

by Ramiro S. Fúnez

Part 3 - Doing the dirty work of Washington and Wall Street

Contrary to popular belief, Venezuelan and Syrian opposition leaders are not impoverished, working-class activists who act on their own will. They are well-funded saboteurs armed and trained by bureaucrats in Washington and their wealthy handlers on Wall Street.

Let’s start with Venezuela.

Since 2009, the U.S. Department of State has allocated at least $49 million to the South American country’s right-wing opposition, according to publicly-available budget documents released by the State Department.

Washington has claimed the funds support “democracy practitioners” and help “efforts to preserve and expand democratic space through programs that strengthen and promote civil society, citizen participation, independent media, human rights organizations, and democratic political parties.

Yet almost all of those funds have gone directly to opposition parties like Primero Justicia (Justice First) and Voluntad Popular (Popular Will), both of which helped organized violent protests that resulted in the deaths of at least 43 people in 2014 and 124 people this year.

Now, Syria.

Four years ago, former U.S. President Barack Obama secretly began funding Wahhabi-linked Syrian opposition militants, whom he described as “moderate rebels.” The allocation of funds, which Obama claimed would be used to “degrade and destroy” the Daesh terrorist group (ISIS), didn’t become public until 2014, when the U.S. Congress gave final approval to train and arm the FSA.

According to Foreign Policy magazine, ironically one of many mainstream media publications that blindly supported the so-called Syrian “revolution,” the United States has spent over $500 million on financing the opposition since Obama took office in 2009.

WikiLeaks, however, reported that Washington has financed Syrian opposition members and institutions since 2006 under former President George W. Bush.

Source, links:


[1] [2] [4]

Related:

15 August, 2017

Donald Trump has just ruined establishment common practices ... through Venezuela

Donald Trump is like a puppet which, from time to time, escapes and makes its own maneuvers, bringing pressure to its masters who run an already deeply discredited, to the eyes of the audiences, show.

by system failure

This may sound strange, but the recent open and direct threat of Donald Trump against Venezuela provides another evidence for the fact that he has been an option of necessity for the US neocon/neoliberal establishment against its favorite, Hillary Clinton.


The establishment usually promotes someone that will come straight from its 'factories', a person that fulfills some minimum standards. Someone who could 'elegantly' spread the US brutality under the noses of the manipulated, always with the help of the mainstream media propaganda, in order to maintain business as usual: complete and global domination of the US banking/corporate neofeudalism.

Someone so 'elegant', that could conduct proxy wars, ruin entire countries, run out of bombs, send drones to kill people around the globe, and yet, be already awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize! Does this remind you of someone?

Trump doesn't know how to be 'elegant'. He is a kind of 'cowboy' who express directly the neoliberal cynicism. His zeal to serve his plutocratic class is so obvious that has already done almost everything that satisfies its interests, contrary to his pre-electional rhetoric. As a consequence, his popularity already reached unprecedented lowest levels.

And if Trump's open threats against North Korea could be considered justifiable by the establishment apparatus, the open threat for military action against Venezuela has probably gone too far, even for the standards of the US deep state. The US most common intervention practice concerning Latin America, is civil wars, or, orchestrated coups. Direct invasion nowadays would be costly in many ways, and quite obvious. It could spark massive resistance, even inside the US by the tired-from-endless-wars American citizens. Barack Obama realized that, and that's why he decided to contact proxy wars against Syria and Libya.

So, we reach now a very interesting point where Trump, probably without realizing it, brings a lot of additional anxiety and embarrassment to the establishment apparatus. Because until now, the US warmongering circus was using its 'elegant' puppet, which was elected according to a carefully designed schedule, for the purpose of being able to conduct bloody wars and interventions, while maintaining a superficial progressiveness.

Barack Obama was a perfect puppet for that purpose, at least during his first term. And - as scheduled - Hillary Clinton would be perfect for that role too, if Bernie Sanders wouldn't have come from nowhere to ruin the original plans, forcing the establishment to turn to Donald Trump, as the choice of last minute.

Donald Trump is like a puppet which, from time to time, escapes and makes its own maneuvers, bringing pressure to its masters who run an already deeply discredited, to the eyes of the audiences, show.

So, one moment he decides to play the game and hire Goldman Sachs to run the country, deregulate Wall Street, and bomb Syria. The establishment apparatus praises him for becoming truly presidential. But then, he refuses to condemn directly the racist violence that caused the death of a woman recently in Charlottesville, forcing the White House to run behind him to fix things. After a lot of - we imagine - pressure, finally, Donald Trump was dragged to condemn racism, on the context of this horrible incident. And in the meantime, he expresses an exaggerating zeal to go after Venezuela and Nicolas Maduro, with a direct threat of invasion.

The embarrassment of the establishment concerning Venezuela was emphatic. The various mouthpieces didn't know what to do. Yes, they want Venezuela for the US big oil cartel, but Trump's statement was too sloppy. The mouthpieces couldn't condemn it - as their propaganda has painted Maduro as a 'dictator' - neither approve it. In fact, Trump didn't use the phrase 'military option' even against North Korea.

As things were going out of control, even Mike Pence was 'recruited' to restore previous status quo. It seems that the US Vice President has appeared with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos in an attempt to calm the outrage that followed Donald Trump's surprising threat to use military force against neighboring Venezuela. As the TeleSur reported, "Santos, who's courted Washington's stance toward Venezuela, put on the brakes after Trump's threat of military intervention in a Latin American country. During the press appearance with Pence he said, 'We must do everything possible so that democracy is re-established in Venezuela.' However, he confessed, 'but as friends, we must tell each other the truth and I told Vice President Pence that the possibility of military intervention must not be contemplated.'

The elites see Trump as a necessity that terrifies them every time he opens his mouth to unleash another straight threat. For these snobbish plutocrats, who know very well how to screw the majority, Trump is the 'dirty cowboy' who hate, yet need at this moment. He is the expendable who came for four years to do the job for the elites and leave. It doesn't matter if his popularity eventually reach zero levels.

Yet, the anxiety of Donald Trump to satisfy his plutocratic class depicts establishment's anxiety to retain the neoliberal status quo. And as the mainstream media propaganda becomes increasingly ineffective, it seems that, the establishment representatives are not only running out of time. They are also running out of tricks and options ...