Category Archives: Articles in English
by Dean Andromidas
Why would anyone want to join the European Union? The only sane reason to join an association of nations would be to enjoy expanded economic benefits and democratic rights. Well, the EU offers neither. It is not only its moribund economy, with high unemployment, collapsing living standards, etc., but it is now implementing a policy of mass murder. The most obvious case is Greece, where the EU has turned a debt crisis into a humanitarian catastrophe. In 2010, Greece had a debt to gross domestic product ratio of 125%. The EU bureaucrats declared this to be unsustainable, and Greece was forced into a bailout. At the end of the third quarter 2013, that ratio had risen to 183%. The government’s gross debt stands at EU339.6 billion. At least EU270 billion is now held by foreigners. Between the first quarter of 2008, and the third quarter of 2013, it has paid EU67 billion in interest alone.
The over EU200 billion bailout has exclusively gone to pay off creditors, and in the process, created ever-expanding new debt. Despite the widely held belief that German taxpayers will foot the bill for the bailout, the fact is that the individual countries of the euro group issue a guarantee for the bonds that are floated by the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), the bailout fund. The bonds are bought by banks and other institutions, and the Greek government pays off the bonds. Only if there is a default will the non-Greek taxpayers lose. For the banks, such as Deutsche Bank, the bonds are all but free, since once purchased, the bank goes to the European Central Bank (ECB) and receives new liquidity. This arrangement if great for the banks, but lethal for the people of Greece. Since signing the bailout agreement and implementing its memoranda, Greece has been put under the tutelage of the infamous Troika of experts, or more precisely debt collectors, from the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. Their policy has destroyed the economy, and is killing off the population by creating a humanitarian catastrophe. Some of the evidence:
• Official Greek unemployment has increased from an average of around 10% to 28%, but in reality, it is closer to 50%. Youth unemployment is an impossible 65%. Of the officially registered unemployed, only 16% are receiving any unemployment benefits. Nominal and real wages have been reduced respectively by 23% and 27.8%.
• One-third of the population lives below the poverty line. While no hard figures exist, the number of Greeks who have left the country seeking work is between 500,000 and 1 million. These are not the poor peasants of the 1950s and 1960s, but highly educated young people—doctors, engineers, academics, and scientists— the future of the country.
• The balance of trade has improved only because of a collapse of imports, while exports increased only marginally. In fact, there has been no real increase in exports since the nominal increase, given in euros, represents the petroleum products from the country’s refineries. There was no increase in the volume of petroleum exports, but only an increase in price. In point of fact, exports to the EU continue to decline. In the 1990s, 61% of Greek exports went to the EU; in 2012, the figure was 29.8%. The entire economy has shrunk by more than 25%, the official figure.
The Troika-run Greek Health Minister Adonis Georgiadis is denying lifesaving medical care to cancer sufferers, and others. Here Georgiadis (left) is confronted by an angry Greek audience in London, March 16, 2014.
• There is virtually no liquidity in the country. Despite that fact that banks get liquidity from the ECB for virtually nothing, retail interest rates are a usurious 8.3%, the highest since Greece joined the Eurozone.
• Greek banks are loaded with non-performing debts, while companies, including those in the tourist industry are being starved of credit.
The EU Flu Massacre of 2014
Mass murder is occurring in Greece as you reads these words. It is being done very efficiently by taking down the health system, on orders of the Troika. Use of the term “mass murder” is not rhetorical, as the following examples show. Look at the death toll during this year’s flu season. As of this writing, at least 110 people have died of influenza just in the last several weeks. This is not only the highest rate in Europe, but the second-highest absolute number. The Athens Medical Association (ISA) revealed on March 26 that by contrast, 155 people had died of flu in Spain, whose population is 46 million, four times that of Greece’s 11 million. In France, which has a population six times larger, 52 people died from the virus; while in Romania, which has twice as many citizens as Greece, and is officially the poorest country in the EU, just four people succumbed to the flu. There were also only four deaths in Sweden, which has a comparable population to Greece. Britain reported no deaths from the virus.
Under “normal” conditions, Greece would have had perhaps 25 flu deaths. The balance of 85 deaths must be viewed as
murder, since it is admitted by the government that it did not purchase enough flu vaccine, and did not conduct an annual fluvaccination campaign for the most vulnerable, a fact that the ISA rightfully termed “criminal.” In a statement, the Medical Association charged that the cause of the flu deaths was the lack of vaccinations, and noted that pharmacists had reported a shortage of flu jabs and doses supplied to health centers of the state insurance fund, EOPYY. “It is tragic and criminal that people are dying for a vaccine that costs EU6 each,” the statement said.
EU Promotes Fascists
It is not surprising that the Greek Health Minister, Adonis Georgiadis, is a well-known ideological fascist who was recruited into the ruling New Democracy Party from the right-wing Laos party. He is a publisher and book dealer. Among his favorite authors, whose books he sells, is Konstaninos Plevris, the number-one fascist ideologue in Greece. His son, Thanos Plevris, is also in the ruling party, and serves as legal advisor to the Health Minister. Georgiadis, under orders of his Troika masters, is implementing a policy that kills. The British medical journal, Lancet has published a study in which it reports that the Greek government and the Troika are in a state of “denial” over the catastrophic consequences of their policy. It’s worse than “denial”—it is intentional: Georgiadis, asked by the Washington Post about the fact that the massive cuts in health care left an alarming number of cancer sufferers with having to pay for their own medications and even surgeries which they cannot afford, replied that, while there is a special fund (only EU17 million!) for emergency aid for those without insurance, “Illnesses like cancer are not considered urgent, unless you are in the final stages.” While the exact number of deaths from cancer is not available, it is widely known that hundreds, if not thousands, of cancer patients have no access to medical insurance. And, it is not just cancers; the same conditions apply to those suffering from most serious diseases, while the severely handicapped have seen their benefits cut dramatically.
Unprecedented death rates have been accomplished, according to Lancet, through savage cuts in funding of health care. The report showed how uninsured cancer patients are left to pay for their own lifesaving treatment as a result of losing their social security coverage due to long-term unemployment. It reports that the health-care budget has been cut by 25% since 2009, and the number of uninsured has increased from 500,000 in 2008, to at least 2.3 million today. Greece now spends less on health care than any of the pre-2004 EU members. For example, the public hospital budget was cut by 26% between 2009 and 2011; in the last two years it has been cut even more. The budget for medicines was slashed from EU4.7 billion in 2010, to EU2.88 billion in 2012, and then to EU2 billion for 2014. Doctors at the country’s hospitals have not been paid for six months, prompting strikes throughout the hospital system. Mental-health care has been savagely cut. Funding for the sector was cut 20% between 2010 and 2011, and by a further 55% between 2011 and 2012. Cases of depression have risen by 250%; suicides, by 45% between 2007 and 2011. Cuts in mosquito spraying have led to the resurgence of malaria, which was virtually wiped out 40 years ago. Thousands of pregnant women no longer have access to health care. The result is infanticide by decree of the Troika: Poor nutrition and lack of medical checkups have contributed to infant deaths, which had previously births, according to figures from the Greek National School of Public Health.
Under the guidelines established by the Troika, Georgiadis has shut down major sections of the national health-insurance program. Under the previous program, general practitioners worked for the national health insurance company, while maintaining their private practice. This gave the patient the choice of keeping the same primary doctor, which is the only way a competent general health system works. This system was closed down, essentially overnight, and all 8,000 doctors dismissed. The new system involves general clinics where doctors are hired on contract for as little as one month. Its implementation has been so slow that most of the country is left without access to general health care. Not surprisingly, Georgiadis has become a hated figure in Greece, and enters public places with caution. His reputation followed him recently to a public event in which he was the keynote speaker at Imperial College in London, where Greek students and academic staff had made it clear before the Minister’s appearance that they opposed his invitation to speak there. “The Minister has repeatedly bullied doctors and medical staff on national television, putting the blame on them for the existing problems, while advertising the need for budget cuts,” they said in a statement. They added, “The rise of Mr. Georgiadis in Greek politics is a symptom of the authoritarian, far-right turn of the Greek government.”
The EU’s Lawlessness
While the European Union ideologues never stop criticizing countries for not failing to adhere to the “rule of law,” the reality is that the EU itself is the biggest violator of the law, even its own treaties. Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Member of the European Parliament representing the Free Democratic Party of Germany, but of Greek descent, charged that the cuts in the Greek health-care system have set the country back decades. Speaking at the European Parliament in Brussels on March 5, Chatzimarkakis charged that what the EU allows the Troika to do in Greece goes against fundamental human rights. Slamming German Chancellor Angela Merkel and European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, Chatzimarkakis said, “There are a lot of legal studies that tell us that the legal security of human rights, basic civil rights, are not given anymore. Mrs Merkel and Mr Barroso present to us another Greece, and not the real Greece.” The United People’s Front (EPAM), a new Greek political party calling for Greece to drop the euro and return to the drachma, detailed in its election program for the European Parliamentary elections how the Troika’s policies violate EU treaties. Am ong a long list of violations they include the following:
• Treaty on European Union: Article 2 on human dignity, freedom, democracy and human rights; Article 3 on peace and well-being; Articles 145-150 on employment and 151-166 on social policy.
• The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU: Article 1 on human dignity; Article 14 on the right to education; Article 17 on the right to property (people have had their property confiscated because they were unable to pay the dramatically higher taxes, especially the property tax); Article 26 on the rights of the elderly; Article 28 on the integrity of persons with disabilities; Article 34 on the right to social security and social assistance.
And of course, Article 35 on the right to health care. In addition to EPAM, the other opposition parties—Syriza, Independent Greeks, Drachma 5, and Plan B— are demanding the suspension of the Troika’s Memorandum, cancellation of the majority of the debt, a Glass-Steagall banking reform, and other emergency measures to deal with the humanitarian catastrophe. In addition, EPAM, Drachma 5, and Plan B are calling for returning to the drachma.
The U.S. government’s latest attempt to topple Cuba using social media is just the tip of the iceberg, but what’s really interesting is how connects to the Ukrainian crisis.
On April 2nd the Associated Press released an report exposing how the U.S. government recently attempted to topple the Cuban government yet again. This time the plot hinged on the creation of a communications network called “ZunZuneo” which was essentially a primitive version of Twitter. The plan, which was cooked up by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the U.S. State Department, was to build up a large following of users and then push them towards revolt. The network was built using shell companies and financed through a foreign bank to hide their connection to Washington. The Obama administration defended the program saying that it “had disclosed the initiative to Congress”.
Of course we all know that attempting to topple a foreign government is perfectly fine as long as you let congress know a bit in advance.
How does a global financial crisis permeate the spaces of the everyday in a city? Our final 35′ documentary film traces the multiple transformations of crisis-ridden Athenian public space and those who traverse it.
Future Suspended is divided in three sections. “Privatised” explores the legacy of mass privatisation projects that preceded the 2004 Olympics, placing them in the context of present day privatisation schemes. “Devalued” gazes at the ever-shrinking spaces of migrants in the city and the devaluation of their lives that comes as a result. “Militarised” shows how, in face of the crisis, this devaluation turns into a generalised condition.
Through its cinematic traversal of today’s Athens, “Future Suspended” traces the rise of the authoritarian-financial complex and how this shrinks public space in the city, fuelling social despair and anger in return.
Future Suspended is part of the research project at crisis-scape.net. The research team consists of Christos Filippidis, Antonis Vradis, Dimitris Dalakoglou, Ross Domoney and Jaya Klara Brekke. All music for Future Suspended was composed by Giorgos Triantafyllou.
This film is released under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
Details here: creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en_GB
Πώς διεισδύει η παγκόσμια οικονομική κρίση στους καθημερινούς χώρους της πόλης; Το τελικό μας ντοκυμαντέρ, διάρκειας 35 λεπτών, ιχνηλατεί τις πολλαπλές μεταμορφώσεις του Αθηναϊκού δημόσιου χώρου σήμερα.
Το ντοκυμαντέρ χωρίζεται σε τρία μέρη: το πρώτο μέρος, με τίτλο “Ιδιωτικοποίηση”, διερευνά τις συνδέσεις ανάμεσα στην ανάπτυξη που χαρακτήρισε την περίοδο της Ολυμπιάδας του 2004 και τα σύγχρονα προγράμματα ιδιωτικοποίησης που λαμβάνουν χώρα μέσα στο πλαίσιο της οικονομικής κρίσης. Το δεύτερο μέρος, με τίτλο “Υποτίμηση”, εξετάζει τους τρόπους με τους οποίους συρρικνώνονται, σήμερα, οι αστικοί χώροι για τους/τις μετανάστες/ριες, και την επακόλουθη υποτίμηση της ζωής τους. Το τελευταίο μέρος, με τίτλο “Στρατιωτικοποίηση”, καταδεικνύει πώς με αφετηρία την κρίση, η υποτίμηση μετατρέπεται σε μια γενικευμένη συνθήκη—πώς η άνοδος του οικονομικο-αυταρχικού συμπλέγματος συρρικνώνει το δημόσιο χώρο στην πόλη, τροφοδοτώντας ως αποτέλεσμα την κοινωνική απόγνωση και οργή.
Μέσω κινηματογραφική διάσχιση της σημερινής Αθήνας, “Το Μέλλον Ανεστάλη” παρακολουθεί την άνοδο του αυταρχικού-οικονομικό συγκρότηματος και πώς μεσο αυτό συρρικνώνεται ο δημόσιος χώρος στην πόλη, τροφοδοτώντας την κοινωνική απελπισία και θυμό σε αντάλλαγμα.
Η ταινία αυτή υπό την άδεια CreativeCommonsBY-NC-ND. Πληροφορίεςεδώ: creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en_GB
03.23.2014 :: Latin America
Introduction: Captain Jose Guillen Araque, of the Venezuelan National Guard, recently gave President Maduro a book on the rise of Nazism, warning that “fascism has to be defeated before it’s too late”! In retaliation for his prophetic warning, the patriotic young captain was shot by a US-backed assassin on the streets of Marcay in the state of Aragua on March 16, 2014.
This raised the number of Venezuelan soldiers and police killed since the fascist uprising to 6. The total killed is 33. The killing of a prominent, patriotic officer on a major street in a provincial capital is one more indication that the Venezuelan fascists are on the move, confident of their support from Washington and from a broad swath of the Venezuelan upper and middle class. They constitute a minority of the electorate and they have no illusions about taking power via constitutional and democratic means.
Captain Guillen Araque had stepped forward to remind President Maduro that the road to power for Nazi and fascist totalitarian groups has been littered with the corpses of well-meaning democrats and social democrats throughout contemporary history because of their failure to use their constitutional powers to crush the enemies of democracy.
The History of the rise of Fascism under Democracies
The term “fascist” in Venezuela is appropriately applied to the organized violent political groups currently engaged in mass terror in a campaign to destabilize and overthrow the democratically-elected Bolivarian government. Academic purist might argue that the Venezuelan fascists lack the racist and nationalist ideology of their German, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese predecessors. While true, it is also irrelevant. The Venezuelan brand of fascism is highly dependent on, and acts as a proxy for, US imperialism and their Colombian warlord allies. In one sense however, Venezuelan fascism’s racism is directed against its multiracial African-Amerindian Venezuelan working and peasant classes – as demonstrated by their vitriolic racism against the deceased President Hugo Chavez. The essential connection with earlier fascist movements is found in its (1) profound class hostility to the popular majority; (2) its visceral hatred of the Chavista Socialist Party, winner of 18 of the last 19 elections; (3) its resort to the armed seizure of power by a minority acting on behalf of the domestic and US imperial ruling classes; (4) its intention to destroy the very democratic institutions and procedures which it exploits in order to gain political space; (5) its targeting of working class institutions – communal councils, neighborhood associations, public health and dental clinics, public schools, transport, subsidized food stores, political meeting places, public credit unions, trade union organizations and peasant co-operatives; (6) and its support of capitalist banks, huge commercial landed estates and manufacturing firms.
In Germany, Italy, Spain, France and Chile, fascist movements also began as small terrorist groups, who gained the financial backing of the capitalist elite because of their violence against working class organizations and democratic institutions and recruited primarily among middle class university students, elite professionals (especially doctors) and active and retired higher military officers – united in their hostility to the democratic order.
Tragically and all too often, democratic leaders, operating within a constitutional government, tended to regard fascists as “just another party”, refusing or unwilling to crush the armed thugs, who combined terror in the streets with elections to gain state power. Constitutionalist democrats have failed or were unwilling to see the political, civilian arm of the Nazis as part and parcel of one organic totalitarian enemy; so they negotiated and debated endlessly with elite fascists who meanwhile destroyed the economy while terrorists pounded away at the political and social foundations of the democratic state. The democrats refused to send out their multi-million mass supporters to face the fascist hordes. Worse, they even prided themselves on jailing their own supporters, police and soldiers, who had been accused of using ‘excessive force’ in their confrontation with fascist street thugs. Thus the fascists easily moved from the streets to state power. The elected democrats were so concerned about criticism from the international and capitalist media, elite critics and self-appointed ‘human rights’ organizations, that they facilitated the takeover by fascists. The people’s right to the armed defense of their democracy had been subordinated to the pretext of upholding ‘democratic norms’ – norms that any bourgeois state under assault would have rejected! Constitutional democrats failed to recognize how drastically politics had changed. They were no longer dealing with a parliamentary opposition preparing for the next election; they were confronted with armed terrorists and saboteurs committed to armed struggle and the seizure of political power by any means – including violent coups-d’états.
In the lexicon of fascism, democratic conciliation is a weakness, a vulnerability and an open invitation to escalate violence; ‘peace and love’ and ‘human rights’ slogans are to be exploited; calls for ‘negotiations’ are preambles for surrender; and ‘agreements’ preludes to capitulation.
To the terrorists, the democratic politicians who warn about a “threat of fascism” while acting as if they were engaged in ‘parliamentary skirmishes’, become an open target for violent attack.
This is how the fascists came to power, in Germany, Italy and Chile, while the constitutionalist democrats, to the last, refused to arm the millions of organized workers who could have throttled the fascists and saved democracy and preserved their own lives.
Fascism in Venezuela: A Mortal Threat Today
The martyred hero, Captain Guillen Araque’s warning of an imminent fascist danger in Venezuela has a powerful substantive basis. While the overt terrorist violence ebbs and flows, the underlying structural basis of fascism in the economy and society remains intact. The subterranean organizations, financing and organizing the flow of arms to fascists-in-waiting remain in place.
The political leaders of the opposition are playing a duplicitous game, constantly moving from legal forms of protest to sub-rosa complicity with the armed terrorists. There is no doubt that in any fascist putsch, the political oligarchs will emerge as the real rulers – and will share power with the leaders of the fascist organizations. In the meantime, their ‘respectability’ provides political cover; their ‘human rights’ campaigns to free incarcerated street thugs and arsonists earn ‘international media support’ while serving as ‘intermediaries’ between the open US funding agencies, and the clandestine terrorist underground.
In measuring the scope and depth of the fascist danger, it is a mistake to simply count the number of bombers, arsonists and snipers, without including the logistical, back-up and peripheral support groups and institutional backers who sustain the overt actors,
To ‘defeat fascism before it is too late’, the government must realistically assess the resources, organization and operational code of the fascist command and reject the overly sanguine and ‘upbeat’ pronouncements emanating from some ministers, advisers and legislators.
First, the fascists are not simply a small band confined to pounding on pots and attacking municipal workers in the upper-middle class neighborhoods of Caracas for the benefit of the international and corporate media. The fascists are organized on a national basis; their members are active throughout the country.
They target vital institutions and infrastructure in numerous strategic locations.
Their strategy is centrally-controlled, their operations are decentralized.
The fascists are an organized force; their financing, arming and actions are planned. Their demonstrations are not ‘spontaneous’, locally-organized actions, responding to government ‘repression’ as depicted in the bourgeois and imperial media.
The fascists bring together different cross currents of violent groups, frequently combining ideologically-driven right-wing professionals, large-scale smuggling gangs and drug traffickers (especially in border regions), paramilitary groups, mercenaries and known felons. These are the ‘frontline fascists’, financed by major currency speculators, protected by elected local officials, offered ‘sanctuary’ by real estate investors and high-level university bureaucrats.
The fascists are both ‘nationals’ and internationals: They include locally paid thugs and students from upper-middle class families; paramilitary Colombian soldiers, professional mercenaries of all sorts, ‘contract killers’ from US ‘security’ outfits and clandestine US Special Forces Operatives; and fascist ‘internationalists’ recruited from Miami, Central America, Latin America and Europe.
The organized terrorists have two strategic sanctuaries for launching their violent operations – Bogota and Miami, where prominent political leaders, like ex-President Alvaro Uribe and US Congressional leaders provide political support.
The convergence of highly lucrative criminal economic activity and political terrorism presents a formidable double threat to the stability of the Venezuelan economy and the security of the state . . . Criminals and terrorists find a common home under the US political tent, designed to overthrow Venezuela’s democratic government and crush the Bolivarian revolution of the Venezuelan people.
The backward and forward inter-linkages between criminals and terrorists inside and outside the country, between Washington senior policymakers, street drug pushers and contraband ‘camels’, provides the international elite mouthpieces and the muscle for street fighters and snipers.
Terrorist targets are not chosen at ‘random’; they are not products of an enraged citizenry protesting social and economic inequities. The carefully chosen targets of terrorism are the strategic programs which sustain the democratic administration; first and foremost the mass social institutions forming the base of the government. This explains why terrorists bomb health clinics for the poor, public schools and centers for adult education in the barrios, the state subsidized food stores and the public transport system. These are part of the vast, popular welfare system set up by the Bolivarian government. They are key building blocks in securing massive voter support in 18 out of the last 19 elections and popular power in the streets and communities. By destroying the social welfare infrastructure, the terrorists hope to break the social bonds between people and government.
Terrorists target the legitimate national security system: Namely, the police, National Guard, judges, public prosecutors and other authorities in charge of safeguarding citizens. The assassinations, violent attacks and threats against public officials, the fire-bombing of public buildings and public transport are designed to create a climate of fear and to demonstrate that the state is weak and incapable of protecting the everyday life of its citizens. The terrorists want to project an image of ‘dual power’ by seizing public spaces and blocking normal commerce… and by ‘governing the streets through the gun’. Above all the terrorists want to demobilize and curtail popular counter-demonstrations by blocking streets and sniping at activists engaged in political activity in contested neighborhoods. The terrorists know they can count on their ‘legal’ political opposition allies to provide them with a mass base via public demonstrations, which can serve as a shield for violent assaults and a pretext for greater sabotage.
Fascism, namely armed terrorism directed at violently overthrowing a democratic government, is a real and immediate threat in Venezuela. The day-to-day, ups and downs of street fighting and arson are not an adequate measure of the threat. As we have noted, the in-depth structural and organizational supports underlying the rise and growth of fascism are far more important. The challenge in Venezuela is to cut-off the economic and political basis of fascism. Unfortunately, up until recently the government has been overly sensitive to hostile criticism from overseas and domestic elites who rush to defend fascists – in the name of “democratic freedom”. The government of Venezuela has enormous resources at its disposal to root out the fascist threat. Even if firm action causes an outcry from overseas liberal friends, most pro-democracy advocates believe it is incumbent upon the government to act against those opposition officials who continue to incite armed rebellion.
Most recently, there have been clear signs that the Venezuelan government, with its powerful democratic and constitutional mandate, is moving with awareness of the fascist danger and will act with determination to stamp it out in the streets and in the suites.
The National Assembly has voted to strip Congresswoman Corina Machado of her immunity as a deputy in the National Assembly so she can be prosecuted for inciting violence. The President of the National Assembly Diosdado Cabello has presented detailed documentary evidence of her role in organizing and promoting armed rebellion. Several opposition mayors, actively involved in promoting and protecting snipers, street thugs and arsonists, have been charged and arrested.
The majority of Venezuelans confronted by the rising tide of fascist violence support the punishment of these high officials engaged in or supporting sabotage. Without firm action, Venezuelan intelligence agencies as well as the average citizen agree that these ‘opposition’ politicos will continue to promote violence and provide sanctuary for paramilitary assassins.
The government has realized that they are engaged in a real war, planned by a centralized leadership and executed by decentralized operatives. Legislative leaders are coming to grips with the political psychology of fascism, which interprets Presidential offers of political conciliation and judicial leniency as weakness to be exploited by further violence.
The most significant advance toward stopping the fascist threat lies in the government’s recognition of the links between the parliamentary and business elite and the fascist terrorists: financial speculators, smugglers and big-time hoarders of food and other essential commodities are all part and parcel of the same fascist drive for power together with the terrorists who bomb public food markets and attack the trucks transporting food to the poor neighborhoods. One revolutionary worker said to me after a street skirmish: “Por la razon y la fuerza no pasaran!”(Through reason and force they will be defeated)…
03.20.2014 :: Latin America – Analysis
Introduction: The two paths to 21st century empire-building-via-proxies are illustrated through the violent seizure of power in the Ukraine by a US-backed junta and the electoral gains of the US-backed Colombian war lord, Alvaro Uribe.
We will describe the ‘mechanics’ of US intervention in the domestic politics of these two countries and their profound external effects – that is how they enhance imperial power on a continent-wide basis.
Political Intervention and Proxy Regimes: Ukraine
The conversion of the Ukraine into a US-EU vassal state has been a prolonged process which involved large scale, long term financing, indoctrination and recruitment of cadres, organization and training of politicos and street fighters and, above all, a capacity to combine direct action with electoral politics.
Seizing power is a high stakes game for empire: (1) Ukraine, in the hands of clients, provides a NATO with a military springboard into the heart of the Russian Federation; (2) Ukraine’s industrial and agricultural resources provide a source of enormous wealth for Western investors and (3) Ukraine is a strategic region for penetrating the Caucuses and beyond.
Washington invested over $5 billion dollars in client-building, mostly in ‘Western Ukraine’, especially in and around Kiev, focusing on ‘civil society groups’ and malleable political parties and leaders. By 2004, the initial US political ‘investment’ in regime change culminated in the so-called ‘Orange Revolution’ which installed a short-lived pro-US-EU regime. This, however, quickly degenerated amidst major corruption scandals, mismanagement and oligarchical pillage of the national treasury and public resources leading to the conviction of the former-Vice President and the demise of the regime. New elections produced a new regime, which attempted to secure ties with both the EU and Russia via economic agreements, while retaining many of the odious features (gross endemic corruption) of the previous regime. The US and EU, having lost thru democratic elections, relaunched their ‘direct action organizations’ with a new radical agenda. Neo-fascists seized power and established a dictatorial junta through violent demonstrations, vandalism, armed assaults and mob action. The composition of the new post-coup junta reflected two sides of the US-backed political organizations: (1) neo-liberal politicos for managing economic policy and forging closer ties with NATO, (2) and neo-fascists/violent nationalists to impose order by force and fist, and crush pro-Russian Crimean ‘autonomists’ and ethnic Russians and other minorities, especially in the industrialized south and east.
Whatever else may ensue, the coup and the resultant junta is fully subordinated to and dependent on the will of Washington: claims of Ukrainian ‘independence’ notwithstanding. The junta proceeded to purge the elected and appointed government officials affiliated with the political parties of the previous democratic regime and to persecute its supporters. Their purpose is to ensure that subsequent managed elections will provide a pretense of legitimacy, and elections will be limited to two sets of imperial clients: the neo-liberals, (self-styled “moderates”) and the neo-fascists dubbed as “nationalists”.
Ukraine’s road to imperialist power via a collaborator regime illustrates the various instruments of empire building: (1) the use of imperial state funds, channeled through NGOs, to political front groups and the build-up of a ‘mass base’ in civil society; (2) the financing of mass direct action leading to a coup (‘regime change’); (3) the imposition of neo-liberal policies by the client regime; (4) imperial financing of the re-organization and regroupment of mass direct action groups after the demise of the first client regime; (5) the transition from protest to violent direct action as the major backdrop to the extremist sectors (neo-fascists) organizing the seizure of power and purge of the opposition; (6) organizing an ‘international media campaign’ to prop up the new junta while demonizing domestic and international opposition (Russia) and (7) political power centralized in the hands of the junta, convoking “managed elections” limited to the victory of one or the other pro-imperial pro-junta candidates.
In summary, empire-builders operate on several/levels: violent and electoral; social and political; and with selected incumbents and rivals committed to one strategic aim: the seizure of state power and the conversion of the ruling elite into willing vassals of empire.
Columbia’s Deathsquad Democracy: Centerpiece of the Imperial Advance in Latin America
In the face of a continent-wide decline of US influence in Latin America, Colombia stands out as a constant bulwark of US imperial interests: (1) Colombia signed a free trade agreement with the US; (2) provided seven military bases and invited thousands of US counter-insurgency operatives; and (3) collaborated in building large-scale paramilitary death squads prepared for cross border raids against Washington’s arch enemy Venezuela.
Colombia’s ruling oligarchy and military have been able to resist the wave of massive democratic, national and popular social upheavals and electoral victories that gave rise to the post-neo-liberal states in Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay and Uruguay.
While Latin America has moved toward ‘regional organizations’ excluding the US, Colombia strengthened its ties to the US through bilateral agreements. While Latin America reduced its dependence on US markets, Colombia expanded its commercial ties. While Latin America reduced their military ties to the Pentagon, Colombia tightened them. While Latin America moved toward greater social inclusion by increasing taxes on foreign multinational corporations, Colombia lowered corporate taxes. While Latin America expanded land settlements for its landless rural populations, Colombia displaced over 4 million peasants as part of the US-designed ‘scorched earth’ counter-insurgency policy.
Colombia’s “exceptional” unwavering submission to US imperial interests is rooted in several large-scale, long-term programs developed in Washington. In 2000, President ‘Bill’ Clinton committed the US to a $6 billion dollar counter-insurgency program (Plan Colombia) which greatly increased the brutal repressive capacity of the Colombian elite to confront the popular grass roots movements of peasants and workers. Along with arms and training, US Special Forces and ideologues entered Colombia to develop military and paramilitary terror operations – aimed primarily at penetrating and decimating political opposition and civil society social movements and assassinating activists and leaders. The US-backed Alvaro Uribe, notorious narco-trafficker and the very personification of a ruthless imperial vassal, became president over a ‘Death-Squad Democracy’.
President Uribe further militarized Colombian society, savaged civil society movements and crushed any possibility of a popular democratic revival, such as were occurring throughout the rest of Latin America. Thousands of activists, trade unionists, human rights workers and peasants were murdered, tortured and jailed.
The ‘Colombian System’ combined the systematic use of para-militarism (death squads) to smash local and regional trade union and peasant opposition and the technification and massification of the military (over 300,000 soldiers) in fighting the popular insurgency and ‘emptying the countryside’ of rebel sympathizers. Large-scale multi-billion dollar drug trafficking and money laundering formed the ‘financial glue’ to cement a tight relationship among oligarchs, politicos, bankers and US counter-insurgency advisers – creating a terrifying high-tech police state bordering Venezuela, Ecuador and Brazil – countries with substantial popular mass movements.
The same state terror machinery, which decimated the pro-democracy social movements, has protected, promoted and participated in ‘stage-managed elections’, the hallmark of Colombia as a “death squad democracy”.
Elections are held under a vast overlapping network of military bases, where death squads and drug traffickers occupied towns and villages intimidating, terrorizing and ‘corrupting’ the electorate. The only ‘safe’ protest in this repressive atmosphere has been voter abstention. Electoral outcomes are pre-ordained: oligarchs never lose in deathsquad democracies, they are the empire’s most trusted vassals.
The cumulative effects of the decade and a half-long bloody purge of Colombian civil society by Presidents Uribe and his successor, Santos, have been to eliminate any consequential electoral opposition. Washington has achieved its ideal: a stable vassal state; a large-scale and obedient military; an oligarchy tied to US corporate elites; and a tightly-controlled ‘electoral’ system that never permits the election of a genuine opponent.
The March 2014 Colombian elections brilliantly illustrate the success of US strategic intervention in collaboration with the oligarchy: The vast majority of the electorate, over two-thirds, abstained, demonstrating the absence of any real legitimacy among the eligible voters. Among those who ‘voted’, ten percent submitted ‘spoiled’ or blank ballots. Voter abstention and ballot-spoilage was especially high in the rural regions and working class areas which had been subject to state terror.
Given the intense state repression, the mass of voters decided that no authentic pro-democracy party would have any chance and so refused to legitimize the process. The 30% who actually voted were largely urban middle and upper class Colombians and residents in some rural areas completely controlled by narco-terrorists and the military where ‘voting’ may have been ‘compulsory’. Of a total of 32 million eligible voters in Colombia, 18 million abstained and another 2.3 million submitted spoiled ballots. The two dominant oligarchical coalitions led by President Santos and ex-President Uribe received only 2.2 million and 2.05 million votes respectively, a fraction of the number who abstained (14 million). In this widely scorned electoral farce, the center-left and left parties made a miserable showing. Colombia’s electoral system puts a propaganda veneer on dangerous, highly-militarized vassal state primed to play a strategic role in US plans to “reconquer” Latin America.
Two decades of systematic terror, financed by a six-billion dollar militarization program, has guaranteed that Washington will not encounter any substantial opposition in the legislature or presidential palace in Bogota. This is the ‘acrid, gunpowder-tinged smell of success’ for US policymakers: violence is the midwife of the vassal state. Colombia has been turned into the springboard for developing an US-centered trade bloc and a military alliance to undermine Venezuela’s Bolivarian regional alliances, such as ALBA and Petro Caribe as well as Venezuela’s national security. Bogota will try to influence neighboring right and center-left regimes pushing them to embrace of the US Empire against Venezuela.
Large-scale, long-term subversion and organization in Ukraine and Colombia, as well as the funding of paramilitary and civil society organizations (NGO) has enabled Washington to: (1) construct strategic allies, (2) build ties to oligarchs, malleable politicians and paramilitary thugs and (3) apply political terrorism for their seizure of state power. The imperial planners have thus created “model states” – devoid of consequential opponents and ‘open’ to sham elections among rival vassal politicians.
Coups and juntas, orchestrated by longstanding political proxies, and highly militarized states run by ‘Death Squad Executives’ are all legitimized by electoral systems designed to expand and strengthen imperial power.
By rendering democratic processes and peaceful popular reforms impossible and by overthrowing independent, democratically elected governments, Washington is making wars and violent upheavals inevitable.
03.17.2014 :: United States – Latin America
Introduction: Protest, dissent and the destructive terror of war are obviously very distinct forms of expressing opposition and bringing about change. The Obama-Kerry regime support the opposition in Venezuela as a ‘protest movement’ composed of ‘peaceful democratic opponents’ expressing their discontent with economic conditions, while they denounce the democratically-elected Maduro Administration as an ‘authoritarian regime’ violently repressing legitimate dissent.
Washington disingenuously claims to have played no part in the actions of the Venezuelan opposition and that its pronouncements are merely directed at promoting democratic freedoms.
The overwhelming evidence show that the Venezuelan opposition has engaged in prolonged and extensive violence, including terrorist acts, assassinations, arson, and destruction of public property. Most recently this includes the murder of military officers and civilian supporters of the government. Widely circulated photographs, even in Washington-controlled media outlets, show opposition activists throwing Molotov cocktails at police and counter-demonstrators and building barricades for bloody street confrontations.
The Obama-Kerry Administration denies any involvement in the ongoing violence while unconditionally defending the opposition gangs of thugs. At the same time it demonizes every legitimate government action to defend its citizens, uphold the Constitution and enforce internationally recognized norms of law and order. The Obama-Kerry regime’s political intervention and its escalating rhetoric is designed to incite the opposition to further violent activity in order to destabilize the country for ‘regime change’.
US Secretary of State John Kerry’s vitriolic rhetoric is timed to counter the recent ebb of opposition activity, assuring the opposition that Washington supports its campaign of ‘warfare in the streets’. President Obama’s propaganda, the regime’s economic sanctions and the channeling of financial and military resources to the violent opposition groups is designed to reinvigorate the campaign of terror and sabotage against the Venezuelan government. The Kerry- Obama sanctions and their war of words provide external support for violent terrorists operating inside Venezuela.
Kerry-Obama Rely on the Big Lie
Secretary of State Kerry’s accusation that the Venezuelan government is conducting a ‘campaign of terror’ against the peaceful opposition is a naked lie: The Bolivarian government, which had been the target of two months of street violence sabotage, is itself accused of the crimes committed by the US-backed proxy opposition. This is a favorite ploy of the empire in preparing the ground for ‘regime change’. Washington is intent on the violent overthrow of a democratic government and the establishment of another satellite regime in Latin America.
Washington’s proxy terrorist power grab is evident everywhere. The opposition is openly authoritarian in its demands. It raises economic and social issues as pretexts to undermine of the democratic, constitutional government by force and violence. They seek to weaken the government and have no interest in negotiations or signing any agreement on specific sets of issues. Government offers to meet and establish dialog have been rejected outright. Each government concession has been exploited as a sign of weakness. When the government released dozens of thugs arrested for throwing Molotov fire-bombs, they returned to the streets to burn more property and attack the police.
The opposition has been given every chance to win over Venezuela’s voters in dozens of Presidential, state and local elections. Refusing to accept the will of the majority in lawful elections, they have launched their violent assaults to undermine the people’s rule. Opposition mayors have worked with street thugs who block normal commerce while assaulting individual supporters of the national government.
The opposition has accumulated vast stores of arms and munitions in preparation for an armed uprising. It has trained snipers to assassinate military and police officers upholding the rule of law and have attacked municipal workers and citizen volunteers engaged in clearing streets of debris.
In terms of means, goals and ideology the opposition fits the description of an imperial-financed terrorist minority organized to seize power, destroy majority rule and impose an autocratic dictatorship which would serve as a proxy for US imperial power.
Democratic Politics or Terrorist Putsch?
In the 8 weeks up to March 15, 2014, the terrorist opposition committed 500 violent actions throughout the country. At least 68 members of the Venezuelan National Guard have been injured, shot, or killed by Secretary Kerry’s “democratic protestors”. On May 13, government officials were attacked with high powered rifle fire and seven snipers were arrested with arms and explosives. Paramilitary terrorists have been openly trained and housed at two or more elite universities (Carabobo University and UCV in Caracas). Phony claims of “autonomy” have been used to shield the fact that these privileged campuses are used to stockpile weapons, set up training bases and shelter for paramilitary gangs and snipers.
The economic impact is immense: Business revenues, salaries and wage losses run in the tens of millions. Sniper fire has prevented civil servants, pro-government workers and ordinary citizens from shopping, going to work and participating in pro-government counter demonstrations. The terrorists have sown fear and insecurity, primarily in middle class neighborhoods where they mostly operate – not daring to enter the militant poor and working class barrios.
The government is seen by the masses as extraordinarily tolerant (or excessively conciliatory) in their dealings with these violent opposition gangs, considering the scope and depth of mayhem: As of March 15, only 105 street thugs out the 1,529 violent demonstrators arrested remain in jail facing charges.
Many concerned Venezuelan and international democrats and experts on terrorism believe the Maduro government’s restraint has given the terrorists plenty of time and opportunity to arm, recruit and distribute US funds channeled through phony NGO’s, in preparation for even bigger and more destructive acts of terror, such as bombing bridges, power stations and clinics, as well as assassinating top civilian and military officials. Their assessment of the Maduro government’s security policy is that it is too narrowly focused on the ‘lowest level’ of activists – those caught with Molotov cocktails or engaged in other acts of violence – rather than the political and financial networks which extend deep into the major opposition political parties and business elite who provide funding, political cover and ideological justifications for the growing war of terror against ordinary Venezuelan citizens. Moreover, the ‘revolving door’ judicial system simply emboldens the thugs and saboteurs — since a day in jail is a very small price for having blown up a community health center or engulfed a National Guardsman in flames.
The government, in its efforts to secure agreements with a section of the opposition, appears to have tied the hands of its security forces: small groups of National Guardsmen have become especially vulnerable to acts of terror from thugs protected by highly-placed opposition political leaders.
In the past two months over a thousand public buildings have been destroyed or damaged, mostly fire-bombed by what US Secretary of State John Kerry has called the “democratic and peaceful opposition”. Most of the arson is directed at buildings closely associated with the government’s popular and effective social welfare programs. These include neighborhood centers for adult education and training; free public medical and dental clinics; public banks providing low interest loans for micro-economic projects; primary and secondary public schools in poor neighborhoods; publicly-owned food-stores providing subsidized food and groceries as well as the trucks carrying subsidized food and essential goods to working-class neighborhoods; public transportation, municipal sanitary workers, community radio stations, pro-government media centers and local Socialist Party headquarters.
Recently large scale caches of arms, including automatic rifles and mortars were discovered in the underground parking lot owned by an opposition-controlled municipality. Another cache of 2,000 mortars and other weapons were found in the opposition stronghold, Táchira State, which borders Colombia, across which arms, drugs and mercenaries enter freely. Many of the National Guardsmen injured were shot by opposition snipers. On March 16, a National Guard captain was assassinated by a sniper shooting from a high rise apartment. The assassin was captured and turned out to be a Chinese mercenary hired by the opposition and part of a para-military hit team
Kerry-Obama’s claim that the protestors are mostly peaceful students is refuted by the fact that nearly two-thirds (971) of the total arrestees (1,529) are not students; many are self-styled street fighters receiving outside material support and funds.
Kerry’s claim that the US is ‘not involved’ and the State Department’s ludicrous effort to portray Venezuela’s charges of US intervention as “paranoia” have been refuted by official US documents showing a continuous annual flow of tens of millions of dollars to opposition organizations linked to the terror networks, including $15 million disbursed during the first two months of this year. The even greater extent of ‘covert’ material aid, including weapons, is unknown.
Top security experts knowledgeable about the subject of external funding for destabilization and terrorism, have reviewed the scope and depth of the ongoing damage and casualties in Venezuela. They have urged the Maduro government to allow the loyal Venezuelan armed forces to participate in quelling the violence. Their recommendations include a declaration of martial law and military sweeps into opposition strongholds to round-up and disarm the violent street thugs and terrorists; unlimited detention, pending trials, for suspected snipers and arsonists and military trials for those suspected of murdering soldiers, police and guardsmen. Opposition mayors, governors and university officials who have provided sanctuaries, training bases, funds and arms to the mercenaries should no longer be immune from prosecution. In recognition of the recent huge demonstrations by ordinary citizens and soldiers supporting a greater role for the Venezuelan Armed Forces and demanding firmer measures to end terror, President Maduro issued an ultimatum to the opposition to end their violence or face the full force of the state.
In addressing the Kerry-Obama regime, President Maduro, once again, demanded it stop aiding the violent opposition and denounced Washington’s threats to further undermine the Venezuelan economy with trade sanctions. He has called on Washington to join a tri-partite commission, including top representatives from the US, Venezuela and the Union of South American states (UNASUR), to discuss peace and sovereignty. While UNASUR is willing to support Maduro’s proposal for dialogue and his peace initiative, US Secretary of State Kerry is moving ahead with economic sanctions against Caracas in support of the US terror war by proxy.
The time for political conciliation is running out: the Venezuelan Armed Forces may finally be given their chance to end this imperial war by proxy.
Hopefully, the arm-chair revolutionaries and chattering classes in North America and Europe, who have been so quick to criticize the Venezuelan government, will set aside their ‘reservations’ and organize a solidarity movement to protest the Kerry- Obama imperial war by proxy against Venezuelan democracy. To date they have spent too much time in internet chatter and not enough time in the streets.
Germany is pushing for changes to EU treaties “as soon as possible” after the May European elections, in an overhaul to fuse eurozone economic governance behind a budget chief and euro area parliament.
In interviews, speeches and articles, Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, has given urgency and political impetus to Berlin’s longstanding ideas for a refashioned and more centralised eurozone.
Asked when he envisaged agreeing the treaties, he said “today is better than tomorrow” and called for negotiations to start straight after the European parliament elections in May.
These reforms to integrate the eurozone, he added, must be paired with measures to ensure those countries outside are not “systematically disadvantaged” – an approach that will be welcomed by Britain.
In a joint Financial Times article with George Osborne, the UK chancellor, he wrote that future treaty change “must include reform of the governance framework to put euro area integration on a sound legal basis, and guarantee fairness for those EU countries inside the single market but outside the single currency”.
Mr Schäuble’s intervention to restart the reform debate highlights Berlin’s determination that the EU should build on the eurozone’s fragile economic recovery from the financial crisis by creating institutions strong enough to withstand future turmoil.
The veteran finance minister’s pledge to fight for reform comes after the joint declaration in January from German chancellor Angela Merkel and French president François Hollande, pledging to work for closer economic and monetary union.
But the German government has now gone a step further, arguing in the FT that treaty change must also address one of key negotiating demands of Mr Cameron, the UK prime minister, before his planned 2017 referendum: the protection of the interests of euro “outs”.
Mr Schäuble, a long-term advocate of reform, wants to establish an institutional architecture for a common fiscal and economic policy, with a parliament, finance minister and budget to support countries in crisis and encourage reform.
He said it was “nonsense” to suggest the power for a eurozone commissioner to reject national budgets would impinge on sovereignty. “To stick to the rules is not a violation of budget sovereignty . . . of national sovereignty. We have moved sovereignty to the European level,” he said.
Germany’s renewed appetite for treaty reform will rattle some eurozone member states, which fear the centralisation of budget power would potentially trigger national plebiscites that could not be won.
Big gains for more radical, eurosceptic parties in the May elections could undermine efforts by mainstream parties such as Ms Merkel’s CDU to build a political consensus for strengthening the eurozone.
Acknowledging the populist threat in an interview with Handelsblatt, the business daily, Mr Schäuble said that the performance of France’s National Front in the recent local elections and the growth of eurosceptic parties elsewhere was “not a good development”.
But he took comfort from hopes that the Ukraine crisis could boost voter support for European integration, saying: “Europe always advances in a crisis . . . the crisis in Ukraine will make people in Europe more confidence about the value of European integration again, and motivate them to vote. Then the turnout would rise, and the eurosceptic forces would likely perform worse than many fear today.”
The finance minister forecast that the effect of the crisis for the German economy would be “manageable”. As for sanctions, German industry had made clear that if they were imposed it would be ready. “You have to convince Russia with diplomacy and economic pressure. Compliance with the rules and principles is not only in the interests of the west but also Russia.”
26.Mar.2014 | SCG
You might have noticed that immediately following a speech Obama made at the G7 meeting yesterday, virtually every single mainstream news outlet faithfully parroted out the same handpicked one liner: “Obama says Russia ‘acting out of weakness’” and Russia is a “regional power”. This is revealing on a number of levels.
Controlling the narrative is key. In the world of media, politics and public relations, the facts are not nearly as important as the way those facts are interpreted.
The first thing we can gather from Obama’s statement, and the way it was promoted by the corporate media, is that they are not at all happy with the fact that Washington’s so called “sanctions” on a handful of Russian politicians are being widely interpreted as toothless, or that Putin is being depicted as having outmaneuvered the Obama administration yet again (the first time of course being in the Syrian crisis of 2013). They are attempting to distract the public from their own weakness by projecting it onto Putin.
The second thing we can gather here, is that the corporate media is losing its ability to control the narrative. The media campaign to demonize Putin and to imbue Obama’s new threats with gravity over the past week has been frenetic, and yet it utterly failed. Putin’s approval rating skyrocketed to its all time high, while Obama’s approval rating hit a new all time low. More importantly, they utterly failed to alter the perception that Putin is fundamentally stronger and better at diplomacy than anyone in the Obama administration.
That perception of weakness is dangerous. Especially for an empire that is less and less capable of projecting physical power. Though the United States has used its military and covert operations to bring down non-cooperative governments many times since World War II, most of the time this hasn’t been necessary. The U.S. government and its NATO satellites have been running the world like a mafia runs a neighborhood: with a little bit of force and a lot of intimidation. Most of the time just a threat is enough to bend a nation to their will, but that’s changing.
What Putin did in the Syrian crisis and again in the Ukrainian crisis was historic; not because of the specifics of either situation, but because for the first time since the fall of the Soviet Union a nation has stood up to the U.S. and won. Not once, but twice. Russia set an example that others might copy.
Since their attempts at bringing Russia to heal with threats and petty punishments has failed, they are now in damage control mode. They are attempting to downplay the importance of this showdown in a desperate attempt to save face.
The jab about Russia being a “regional power” is significant as well. This is the precise wording used by Obama’s mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski in his analysis of Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However Zbigniew himself was the first to say that this “regional power” status hinges directly on Russia’s relationship with Ukraine:
“Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire. Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status, but it would then become a predominantly Asian imperial state, more likely to be drawn into debilitating conflicts with aroused Central Asians, who would then be resentful of the loss of their recent independence and would be supported by their fellow Islamic states to the south. China would also be likely to oppose any restoration of Russian domination over Central Asia, given its increasing interest in the newly independent states there. However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as its access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia.” From “The Grand Chess Board” by Zbigniew Brzezinski
So again, Obama’s statement is trying to convince to persuade the rest of the world (or at least the political figureheads) that the game hasn’t changed at all, and that the balance of power is still the same as it was back in 1991.
BBC’s ‘total fabrication from beginning to end’ of Syria ‘atrocity’; call to revoke visas for intel agents posing as reporters in NATO targets; CIA caught infiltrating CNN, and Operation Mockingbird is back.
Seek truth from facts with UK Member of Parliament George Galloway, Illinois University Professor of International Law Francis Boyle, investigative reporter John Helmer, ordinary Syrians and Ukraine covergirl – ‘Julia’.
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
RT: “Stunning fakery” in alleged chemical weapons attack according to a former UK ambassador. Coming up…
Announcer: The British Broadcasting Corporation is accused of staging chemical weapons attack.
The CIA admits planting CNN reporters.
And international lawyers call for journalists inciting violence to be expelled.
RT: August 2013 – NATO leaders can’t get the public on side for the imminent bombing of Syria. Suddenly the BBC says it was filming a small rural hospital and a game-changing atrocity happened right there, the moment they were filming.
BBC report: We were filming the doctors working at this hospital when victims of an incendiary bomb attack on a school playground started pouring in.
BBC interview: Absolute chaos and carnage here. It must be some sort of napalm.
RT: But a highly sceptical public stayed hostile to military intervention. Exactly one month later the leaders are trying to pin a chemical weapons attack on Syria without success.
The BBC airs exactly the same footage, but digitally alters the word “napalm” for “chemical weapons”, hoping no one will notice.
BBC interview: Absolute chaos and carnage here. It must be some sort of chemical weapon.
RT: Not only did folks notice but it unleashed a massive public investigation which made some extremely disturbing findings.
Robert Stuart: This is the total fabrication, from beginning to end, of an atrocity, with BBC “reporter” Ian Pannell standing amidst a tableau of very bad actors. This is completely beyond the pale.
RT: This audio analysis by media investigator Robin Upton shows both versions are identical and from the same speech. The BBC then digitally altered the words from “napalm” to “chemical weapon”, the exact justification NATO was finding difficult to prove.
That game-changing allegation was made by two doctors that had travelled with the BBC, who claimed the number of sudden casualties is “overwhelming”.
What kind of doctor, notes media investigator Robert Stuart, gives interviews when she is surrounded by supposedly seriously burned and dying teenagers?
Nurse: Get anyone who isn’t a patient out of here.
RT: When a nurse does finally start to help, her order to “get anyone who isn’t a patient out of here” doesn’t apply to the cameramen. Even worse, notes Stuart, is the bizarre acting, which starts when the man in the centre gives the sign.
RT: Doctor Rola, on whose sole claim the BBC sends the napalm/chemical weapons allegations round the world, is actually the daughter of Syrian rebel Mousa Al-Kurdi.
The parallel to the Gulf War and “Nurse Nayirah” is stunning. Congressmen said the nurse’s tearful testimony that Iraqis were killing children swung their vote in favour of war.
“Nurse Nayirah” testimony: They took the incubators and left the children to die on the cold floor. (weeps).
RT: “Nurse Nayirah” became the mainstream’s darling, but once the vote had safely passed, she admitted inventing the whole thing, and was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington, lying to get the public to back war.
UK Member of Parliament George Galloway joins us, thank you very much for coming on. Why do we get almost identical claims before each war, which then prove lies?
George Galloway, UK Member of Parliament: Well, the Bush and Blair Corporation, as it became in the run-up to the Iraq war, has almost entirely lost its reputation for journalistic integrity.
A full inquiry must be launched into why the BBC used a piece of material which was not just wrong but was falsified, and falsified with the purpose of propelling our country into war. That’s not what the British public pays its BBC licence fee for, so that it can be tricked into a war.
RT: In a statement, the British Broadcasting Corporation says it stands by its report. The Syrian opposition denies the allegations. Investigators such as Robert Stuart note their many questions sent officially to the corporation remain unanswered. There are also numerous such precedents both in this war and previous invasions.
“Brilliant” is how a top Western official called tricking the public through routine faking of atrocities and commonly aired on mainstream bulletins. Nightly News show just a few cases of what happened next after mainstream cameras ended their reports.
Nightly News: It shows people putting on fake wounds, it shows some guys there, look there’s their head wounds “Peace everybody!You know we’re doing the right thing, we’re creating fake propaganda!” I mean it’s not even real atrocities.So there they’re lined up. There’s another video that shows some guy kicking his leg, with a fake blood wound.
Here’s a guy who wakes up from his funeral! Watch this. Oh, wait there, he’s awake, he’s not even really dead! So I mean this is just crazy what goes on. There was another video that was shot of a supposed massacre and you don’t see the whole thing.When you go to the Al Jazeera footage it shows real quick clips of a guy kicking his leg and he’s got blood coming out. It turned out to be fake blood.
RT: The so-called “activists” behind the fakes are by far the most popular source, despite them never being verified, and regularly disproved as fabrications to justify more NATO arms. The term “activist” may sound like a well-meaning Western campaigner or charity, but the Foreign Policy Journal notes it’s just Newspeak for “insurgents”.
The “official” source on Syria casualties, or what mainstream claims is “official”, is impressive-sounding organization The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Reuters exposed the fact three years ago it was not an organization at all, or even working in Syria. It’s a single pro-insurgent supporter living in Coventry – England.
Here pictured at the Foreign Office, after instructions from Britain’s Foreign Minister himself.
In leaked footage, ordinary Syrians told the BBC they’re tired of its lies and the insurgents they’re cheerleading are a tiny minority led by foreign gangs.
BBC reporter: You don’t like the BBC?
Syrian citizen: BBC? No. Tell her. Tell her.
BBC reporter:Huh? Why?
Syrian: Because you’re talking very bad about Syria. Everybody when they hear BBC Arabic they can hear the lies about Syria – also Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya.
BBC: But what? But maybe Syria is like any country, some people support and some people don’t support?
Syrian: No-no, everybody support.
BBC reporter: So Syria is different?
Syrian: Very little people, maybe 10,000 like that but most people, 22 million, 23 million, support Bashar al-Assad. And we have not “demonstrations” – we have armed gangs.
RT: Pro-war media’s forced to resort to colossal lies since intelligence chiefs revealed to America’s top investigative reporter Sy Hersh that“Obama’s cronies are making it up”. All the evidence actually points to the jihadis staging the chemical attacks.
Sy Hersh, author, Whose Sarin?: The attack ‘was not the result of the current regime’, the high-level intelligence officer wrote in an email to a colleague. ‘The guys are throwing their hands in the air and saying, “How can we help this guy” – Obama – when he and his cronies in the White House make up the intelligence as they go along?’, said a former senior intelligence official. The distortion, he said, reminded him of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident.
Wag The Dog movie: – The president wants a white one.
- He wants a white one? The white? Let me talk to him.
- He’s mobilizing the sixth fleet.
RT: The thought a US president would start a horrific foreign war by staging a pretty female front as a victim made people laugh.
Wag The Dog: The young Albanian national fleeing in this video is attempting to escape terrorist reprisals in her village.
RT: Meet Julia, if that’s her real name, the celebrated face mass media call the “creator” of a viral video asking the US to help Ukraine. It was actually created by the State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy, to mask the fact Washington joined Ukraine’s thugs and murdered their way to power.
A leaked phone call with EU Foreign Minister Ashton revealed the opposition planned and executed the infamous sniper violence of Kiev, shooting both the police, and their own supporters in the back.
Studies found a total of 250 mainstream sources lied that the snipers belonged to Yanukovich. Only seven of the entire mass media even mentioned the bombshell leak and those that did framed the report to suggest it couldn’t possibly be true.
Former Wall Street Journal Editor Paul Craig Roberts calls the coverage of Ukraine a new low in the history of the mainstream, which is now simply what he describes as a “Ministry” of lies. Investigative reporter John Helmer’s uncovered the mainstream staging demonstrations, and attempts to provoke disorder.
He joins us, great to speak to you. One US scholar notes the coverage has now become “Orwellian”, what’s going on?
John Helmer, investigative reporter: So the weaker your government the more interested the leader might be in threatening Russia to look strong at home when it’s obvious he’s not strong at home, and couldn’t get re-elected. That’s particularly true of, let’s say, the French president or the prime minister Cameron at the moment, and arguably President Obama is not only a lame duck, but having great difficulty in putting together a winning coalition for the Democratic Party’s next candidate for president.
When you’ve got weak political leaders you need to look stronger than you are in public opinion in the media, so there’s this process of misleading and disinforming.
RT: A Senate Committee inquiry revealed CIA running mainstream media in the vast operation known as Mockingbird. More than 400 journalists and media chiefs claiming to watchdog the government were the exact opposite joining to mask US government crime at home and abroad.
The operation continues despite agency denials, Counterpunch discovered CIA imposing agents on firms like CNN. Former CIA exec Michael Scheuer notes British media are even closer to intel targets.
BBC report: Big pieces of wood, metal to use as barricades.
RT: Scheuer adds the BBC now takes the lead in regime change operations that cause “anarchy and violence”.
Let’s speak to Francis Boyle, Professor of International Law at Illinois University, great to talk to you. How can nations stop war media that now perform the CIA’s covert operations?
Francis Boyle, Illinois University Professor of International Law: Certainly have their visas revoked and sent packing home, because I really don’t understand why some of these countries keep European journalists, certainly the United States,why they let them into the countries, because they’re just using their coverage to provoke war and military intervention.
In addition, the Bush Jr. administration lifted what was supposed to be the previous prohibition that intelligence agents were not supposed to infiltrate the media. You know, you have to be very careful certainly dealing with US reporters whether or not they’re intelligence agents.
RT: Banning active units of the military, also known as “warstream media”, shows how serious the situation now is. Their policies aren’t popular with their own viewers, mainstream audiences are in freefall. CNN and MSNBC have shed half their entire viewership in the last year alone. The question is how many more coups will they stage or help before they lose the public’s trust altogether. Seek truth from facts. This is The Truthseeker.
President Obama, Wake Up America!
Full Page Open Letter As Published In The New York Times on Monday, November 1, 2010
They’ve Done It Before – They Try It Again Today!
The goal of the special corporate interests – namely the Oil and Drug Cartel – in the US today is to transform democratic society into a corporate dictatorship, thus enabling multi-trillion dollar corporate interests to exert direct control over the political executive and the country.
Towards this end they are instigating the radicalization of society and financing the election campaigns of their political stakeholders. This strategy is an exact copy of the Oil and Drug Cartel’s takeover of Germany in 1933 – a strategy executed with the help of the Cartel’s political and military stakeholders, the Nazis.
America at the Crossroads
Over the past two years, the social and political life in America has been radicalized and polarized in an unprecedented way. What appears as a’grass-root’ movement articulating anger towards the current government is, in fact, a strategically implemented campaign by special interests, namely the Oil and Drug Cartel, to regain control over the White House and the country.
Worse, fighting a battle for survival of its outdated technologies, these special interests can no longer survive in a democracy and must seek dictatorial powers. In this historic situation, the only way to protect democracy is to expose the historic record of the Cartel.
n Open Letters on July 16 and September 13, 2010, I have exposed in this newspaper the historical parallels between the political escalation in Germany in the 1930’s and that of the US today. Then and now, the Cartel financed the political destabilization of democracy, with the goal of replacing it with a corporate dictatorship.
In Germany, then, the Cartel succeeded in seizing power and launching WWII because people and politicians around the world ignored the early warning signs. In the USA, today, the Cartel has launched an all-out psychological war. Organizations like the ‘Tea Party’ are radicalizing society. The only way to derail their plan of destroying democracy is to expose the criminal history and the motives of these special interests.
Global Dimension of this Threat
New technologies in the area of energy and health threaten the multi-trillion dollar global monopolies of the Oil and Drug Cartel. The Cartel’s giant markets of outdated technologies are no longer compatible with democracy and can only be maintained in a global dictatorship of corporate interests.
A first step in the direction of establishing such a global corporate dictatorship has already been taken. The recently founded so-called ‘European Union’ in Brussels (the ‘Brussels EU’) is not a democratically elected or legitimized body. The so-called ‘EU-Commission’ – 27 technocrats appointed by Cartel interests – preside over the lives and fates of 500 million people across Europe by means of dictatorial ‘directives’ and ‘regulations’.
Largely unbeknown to the rest of the world, the so-called ‘European Parliament’ has no independent right of legal initiative and serves merely as a fig-leaf for this ‘Cartel Commission’.
Even more appalling is the fact that the entire ‘Brussels EU’ structure is the implementation of plans conceived before and during WWII by the Oil and Drug Cartel and their Nazi stakeholders. The goal then and now was to cement their economic rule by means of a ‘Central Cartel Office’ that determines essentially every aspect of life in Europe and, eventually, the rest of the world.
The historical facts and documents are available online at www.Nazi-Roots-Of-Brussels-EU.org.
The Strategic Role of the USA
The key country in the Cartel’s ‘survival strategy’ is the USA. Not only is the US the home base of most Oil and Drug corporations, it is also the strongest military power to defend these special interests.
A major setback for the Cartel was the fact that in 2008 the American people elected a President on a platform of ending the ‘tyranny of oil’ and of reforming health care, including a focus on prevention.
In order to reverse this vote, the Cartel must not only regain control of the US government but must try to fundamentally ‘reprogram’ the American people by financing the dissemination of doubt and deception. Towards this end, the Cartel has been mobilizing an army of stakeholders in the media and politics.
Lessons of History: From 1933 to 2010
The blueprint for this strategy of radicalizing society in preparation for war was pre-WWII Germany. The unobstructed implementation of this strategy in 1933 led to the overthrow of democracy, the installation of a dictatorship on behalf of the Oil and Drug Cartel and, eventually, to a military attempt to expand its global markets during WWII.
The records of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal and of the US Congress unequivocally document that WWII was launched in the interest – and with the financial as well as technical support – of the German-based Oil and Drug Cartel (Bayer, BASF, Hoechst). Its goal was to seize control of the multi-trillion dollar global markets of oil, patented chemicals and drugs.
The psychological preparation of German society for this military conquest was the launch of a ‘racial war’ against Jewish and other non-Aryan people and the elimination of any political opposition. The key vehicle to execute this plan was the Nazi/Cartel-financed ‘grassroots’ movement – the ‘brownshirts’.
The systematic instigation of hatred, aggression, racism and other forms of psychological terror by the ‘brownshirts’ in pre-war Germany was the precondition for the next stage: the mass murder across the globe by the SS and German Wehrmacht in the Cartel’s attempt to control the world.
After WWII, the German Oil and Drug Cartel was dismantled and its shares transferred to US- and UK-based multinational oil and drug corporations. The Cartel’s criminal past was deliberately hidden from the public for one main reason: not to endanger its future attempts at world control.
1933 and Today: The Cartel Manipulates Public Opinion
- In the 1930s, the radicalization of German society and growing physical violence against religious minorities and political opponents of the Nazi regime strategically prepared the seizure of power by the Coalition of the Oil and Drug Cartel with the Nazis.
- In WWII, the Cartel and their Nazi accomplices dressed millions of German soldiers in a uniform that carried the allegedly devine blessing for the Nazi/Cartel global conquest. Harnessed with a belt buckle showing the Swastika and the slogan ’God With Us’ (‘Gott mit uns’), the Nazi/Cartel Wehrmacht inflicted death on tens of millions of people.
- Today, the political climate in the USA is strategically poisoned by the stakeholders of the same special interests, namely the Oil and Drug Cartel. Physical violence against political opponents is increasingly replacing the political and social dialogue.
- Today, the stakeholders of the Oil and Drug Cartel in politics and media are trying to lure the American people with deceptive slogans like ‘restoring honor’ and under the pretext of acting in the name of God. In the course of history, no name has been more abused to mask the greed of special interests than the name of ‘God’.
President Obama, you have the responsibility to disseminate this historic parallel to the American people in order to enable them to actively defend freedom and democracy.
The Goals of this Publication
- This information alerts the people of America that the radicalization of society and the polarization of political life is organized and financed by the Oil and Drug Cartel – with the goal to regain control over the White House and the country.
- It exposes the ‘Tea Party’ and other so-called ‘grassroots’ movements as agents of the Oil and Drug Cartel.
- It reveals the strategic aim of these groups: destabilization of the democratically elected government via the instigation of civil unrest – under the pretext of defending constitutional rights and carrying out the will of God.
- It exposes the frenzied attacks against the Obama health care plan – that promotes preventive and community-based health – as a maneuver to protect the economic privileges of the Drug Cartel and its multi-trillion dollar health care monopoly based on patented pharmaceutical drugs.
- It exposes all these tricks and maneuvers as blatant copies of the Oil and Drug Cartel’s take-over of Germany in the 1930s – with the help of their political stakeholders, the Nazis.
- Sharing these historical parallels with the American people, will allow them to recognize the criminal historic record of the Oil and Drug Cartel, as well as the deceptive stragtegies it has used throughout history. The message: ‘They’ve done it before!’
- With this knowledge, the American people have a clear choice for the coming elections.
- It gives the Republican party a choice too: stay committed to democracy – or go into oblivion as political puppets of the Cartel’s corporate dictatorship plan.
- It allows the people and governments of the world to focus their resources on the development and construction of a modern world, based on affordable renewable energy and science-based natural health.
- The dissemination of this message is a precondition for protecting democracy in America and lasting peace!
Dr. Matthias Rath
Dr. Rath has become a voice of conscience exposing the plans of the Oil and Drug Cartel behind recent global military conflicts and crises. Attacked by Cartel media the world over (www.wiki-rath.org), Dr. Rath and his Foundation have received prestigious awards for civil courage. The ‘Relay of Life’ Award (www.relay-of-life.org) from survivors of Auschwitz and other Nazi concentration camps was conferred with a clear mandate: