.
US will kill your country if you don’t allow their bankers to take over. In Feb. 2015 Obama launched a failed attempt to assassinate Venezuela Pres. Maduro. In 2002, Bush #2 backed an attempted coup against Venezuela. In 2019 Trump falls in line. US elections are obviously meaningless.
………………………
4/29/19, “CODEPINK Activist Ariel Gold on Defending Venezuela’s Embassy,” AntiWar.com, Dave DeCamp
“Far from Caracas a group of American activists have been defending the sovereignty of Venezuela from inside its embassy in Washington. The state department ordered all Maduro loyal staff to leave the building by April 24th to make way for Guaido’s diplomats. Juan Guaido declared himself president of Venezuela on January 23rd with full support from the United States but most Venezuelan diplomats and military officials have remained loyal to Maduro. According to Ariel Gold, National Co-Director of the antiwar activist group CODEPINK they have been maintaining a 24/7 presence at the embassy since April 14th to prevent Guaido’s appointed diplomats from taking over the embassy.
“We’ve been working with the embassy staff ever since the coup began. As they started to reduce the staff we’ve had some educational events here then we finally made a decision that we should be there. And they said to us you are welcome, you are there with our permission.” Gold told me over the phone Monday night from the embassy.
Maduro’s diplomatic officials were all expected to be out of the embassy by April 24th and
the activists were prepared for a confrontation, “That was what they
said to the diplomatic officials, we assumed it would apply to us and we were prepared to have them come in. It’s my understanding that it did apply to us but we had a huge turnout of people that showed up to lend their support and lend their bodies. And after that they decided not to show.”
Eliot Abrams, Trumps Venezuelan regime change point man called the sit in a “violation of law“, when asked about Abrams comments Gold called out his hypocrisy,
“Well what a farce that Eliot Abrams would tell us that we’re breaking
the law, he’s a convicted criminal and has been involved in war crimes.
If Eliot Abrams did say that he is in fact entirely wrong. We are completely within our legal rights, we are here legally with permission from the Venezuelan government. Under the Vienna convention even if two countries lose diplomatic relations the embassy remains the property of that government, so for the secret service or US police would in fact be illegal.”
Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Treaties states, “The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.”
Gold and other CODEPINK activists have called on antiwar Americans from around to country to help them. Anybody is welcome at the embassy and this Saturday May 4th a rally will be taking place there. For those who cannot make it in person, they can donate directly to
the activists at the embassy online or send meals from local
restaurants. CODEPINK always encourages people to speak out on social
media and other platforms they have. You can also send a letter to the state department here.”
“Dave DeCamp is a freelance journalist based in Brooklyn NY, focusing on US Foreign policy and wars. He is on Twitter at @decampdave.”
…………………………
Added:
4/30/19, “Venezuelans clash with pro-Maduro Code Pink activists in tense scene outside DC embassy,” Fox News, Alex Pappas, Washington
“Dozens of supporters of opposition leader Juan Guaido converged Tuesday on the now-shuttered Venezuelan embassy in Washington, clashing with pro-regime activists who have been camped out at the building for weeks in support of [US coup of] embattled Nicolas Maduro.
The tense scene in D.C.’s tony Georgetown neighborhood played out as Maduro’s [so-called] socialist government faced perhaps its biggest challenge yet, with [US stooge] Guaido calling for a military uprising — and the Trump administration voicing support from afar.
Amid clashes on the streets of Caracas and global uncertainty over how
the escalating challenge to Maduro’s grip on power would resolve,
dramatic footage from Venezuela’s capital showed a military armored
vehicle plowing into a crowd of protesters.
In Washington, flag-waving and national-anthem singing demonstrators,
many of whom were born in Venezuela, quickly outnumbered those from the
anti-war group Code Pink gathered to support Maduro’s regime.
“Today is the day the Venezuelans are taking over the country,” one pro-Guaido protester, Giuliano Gandullia, 40, who was born in Venezuela, told Fox News outside the embassy.
The gathering of protesters forced
city police in Washington to close down 30th Street. Barricades
separated the two sides, with at least 10 uniformed Secret Service
officers standing between the Maduro and Guaido protesters.
“This group – the Code Pink – has taken the embassy,” Gandullia said. “We want to enter. We want to take over. And demonstrate that it belongs to us.”
Activists from Code Pink, which protests U.S. support for Guaido, have been living and protesting at the embassy for weeks. On Tuesday, the organization asked supporters to “join us to uphold international law and protect the Venezuelan embassy from a hostile takeover.” Elliott Abrams, the U.S. envoy for Venezuela, has said the group is breaking the law.
Two Code Pink protesters standing at the door of the embassy on
Tuesday held a sign that said: “Hands off Venezuela.” Another sign
hanging from the building read: “Nicolas Maduro is the president.”
“The Venezuela coup attempt is the Trump administration
trying to overthrow the government of Nicolás Maduro in order to steal
Venezuelan oil,” Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin tweeted Tuesday. [I hope she said something similiar in Feb. 2015 when Obama tried to assassinate Maduro.]
Meanwhile, pro-Guaido protesters came to confront the Code
Pink activists, holding signs like “Venezuela wants Democracy, not
another Cuba.” In interviews, these protesters emphasized that they are from Venezuela – unlike many of the Code Pink protesters.
“Those people right there, they’re not Venezuelan. They don’t have a
passport. They don’t have our IDs,” said 32-year-old Clemente Pinate,
who said he is from the country and came to the United States when he
was 12.
“They are communists, socialists with Maduro,” he added. “I’m anti-Maduro. And I’m here representing my people.”
The Guaido protesters called on Code Pink to the leave the embassy, which was officially closed by Maduro earlier this year.
“We’re here today to denounce the trespassing of Code Pink,” said
Carla Bustillos, 39. “This is a property of the people of Venezuela.
It’s an asset of the nation, and the nation is now facing a transition, a transition to democracy.” [Wrong, pal. A transition to certain bankers.]
Guaido, the 35-year-old leader of the opposition-led National
Assembly, and a small contingent of heavily armed soldiers appeared in
an early morning video promoting the “final phase” of his bid to oust
Maduro. The United States, which has [created and] supported Guaido’s
claim as interim president of Venezuela, offered its support for the opposition and its followers.”
………………………….
Added: Venezuela’s “days were numbered” when it made clear it wanted no part of IMF or World Bank:
August 2001-Venezuela asked the US to close its military missions there:
“In August 2001, Venezuela’s government asked the American military mission to leave the Fuerte Tiuna site it had occupied for more than 50 years. But [as of May 2004] the US mission continued to operate there, even through the coup the following year [2002] that briefly ousted Mr. Chávez. Asked why the new request to vacate the offices had been made, Mr. García said,
“Because they are still there.”” May 13, 2004, “Venezuela is Evicting US Attaches from Bases,” Reuters, Caracas
…………………………..
April 2002-Chavez survives coup attempt, US admits to talks at White House with groups supporting a coup in weeks and months leading up to the 48 hour event:
“The Bush administration was under intense scrutiny yesterday for its role in last weekend’s abortive [48
hour] coup in Venezuela, after admitting that US officials had held a
series of meetings in recent months with Venezuelan military officers
and opposition activists. The White House yesterday confirmed
that a few weeks before the coup attempt, administration officials met
Pedro Carmona, the business leader who took over the interim government after President Hugo Chavez was arrested on Friday. [Chavez returned to power 48 hours later].
The US defence department also confirmed that the Venezuelan army’s chief of staff, General Lucas Romero Rincon, visited the Pentagon in December and met the assistant secretary of defence for western hemispheric affairs, Roger Pardo-Maurer.”…4/17/2002, “US ‘gave the nod’ to Venezuelan coup,“ UK Guardian, Julian Borger, Alex Bellos
…………………………..
April 2002 Venezuela coup attempt: Elliott Abrams was “crucial figure” on Bush White House coup team:
“The crucial figure around
the coup was [Elliott] Abrams, who operates in the White House as
senior director of the National Security Council for ‘democracy, human
rights and international operations‘. He was a leading theoretician of the school known as ‘Hemispherism’, which put a priority on combating Marxism in the Americas.”…4/22/2002, “Venezuela coup linked to Bush team,“ UK Guardian, Ed Vulliamy
…………………….
April 2002: Just hours after overthrow of Venezuela’s democratically elected government, the IMF stated publicly it was ready to support new dictator, Carmona:
“On April 12, 2002, just hours after Venezuela’s democratically elected government was overthrown in a military coup, the IMF stated publicly that it was “ready to assist the new administration [of Pedro Carmona] in whatever manner they find suitable."
This instantaneous show of financial support for a newly installed dictatorship –
one which immediately dissolved the country’s constitution, general
assembly, and Supreme Court – was unprecedented in the IMF’s history. Typically the IMF does not react so quickly, even to an elected government. It is no wonder that this move was seen in Venezuela and elsewhere as an attempt by the IMF to support the coup itself.“...May 10, 2007, “IMF and World Bank Face Declining Authority as Venezuela Announces Withdrawal,” McClatchy, Mark Weisbrot
………………………
April 2002: New York Times happy about undemocratic removal of Chavez:
“On 4/13/2002: “The
New York Times penned its own love note to the new government. In an
editorial, the paper stated: “Venezuelan democracy is no longer
threatened by a would-be dictator … [because] the military intervened and handed power to a respected business leader.””
……………………………….
2004: Chavez was against globalization so “his days were numbered” as they say:
“Hugo Chávez is against the excesses of US foreign policy and globalization and has let the world know this, which makes it plain to Washington that he’s not of suitable client material.
For the empire to let him get away with this would be to set a very bad example for other non-believers.
Since the debacle of 2002, Chávez’s natural enemies at home and in Washington have not relaxed their crusade against him. Opponents have been trying to unseat him through a recall referendum, a drive that is funded in part, if not in full, by, yes, [US group] The National Endowment for Democracy. NED gave a grant of $53,400 to an organization called Sœmate, which appears to be running the referendum campaign. The NED grant document, after castigating Chávez
for polarizing Venezuelan society, specifies that Sœmate will “Develop a
net of volunteers and [apartidistas] trained to work in elections and
in a referendum … [and] promote popular support for the referendum.””
“Financing the [2002 Venezuela] coup,” from 2004 book, “Freeing the World to Death,” by William Blum. The presence of oil wasn’t necessary: “Washington
has opposed governments and movements throughout Latin America and
elsewhere in the world with equal determination, without oil or any
other resource being a factor.”
……………………….
May 2007: Venezuela withdraws from IMF and World Bank . “Chavez began loosening ties with them in 1999:”
“Venezuela’s decision this week to pull out of the IMF and the World Bank will
be seen in the United States as just another example of the ongoing
feud between Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and the Bush
Administration. But it is likely to be viewed differently in the rest of the world, and could have an impact on both institutions, whose power and legitimacy in developing countries has been waning steadily in recent years.”…May 10, 2007, “IMF and World Bank Face Declining Authority as Venezuela Announces Withdrawal,” McClatchy, Mark Weisbrot
Added: Founded in 1944, the
World Bank and IMF “are twin intergovernmental pillars supporting the
structure of the world’s economic and financial order.“
………………………………..
June 2012-Venezuela and 5 other Latin American countries request expulsion of USAID for interference in internal politics of ALBA countries under the excuse of “planning and administering economic and humanitarian assistance:”
6/22/2012, “ALBA Expels USAID from Member Countries,” VenezuelaAnalysys.com, via DiarioGranma
Signed by: Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Dominica Island, Cuba
………………………………..
Feb. 2015-Obama orders assassination of Venezuela Pres. Maduro:
2/24/2015, “Obama failed his coup in Venezuela,“ Voltaire Network, Thierry Meyssan
“Once again, the Obama administration has tried to force the change of a political regime that resists it. On February 12, [2015] an Academi (formerly Blackwater) plane disguised as an aircraft of the Venezuelan army was supposed to bomb the presidential palace and kill President Nicolas Maduro. The plotters had planned to place former MP María Corina Machado in power….
President Obama had given a warning. In his new doctrine of Defence (National Security Strategy), he wrote: “We stand with citizens whose full exercise of democracy is in danger, as the Venezuelans.” Yet, Venezuela is, since the adoption of the 1999 constitution, one of the most democratic countries in the world….
Washington was finishing developing the plan for the overthrow of the democratic institutions of Venezuela. The coup was planned for February 12.”…
…………………………………..
Feb. 2019: Humanitarian Aid Is Used as a Weapon against Venezuela’s government:
2/21/19, “When Humanitarian Aid Is Used as a Weapon to Bring Down Regimes,“ The Atlantic, Dylan Baddour, Cucuta, Colombia
……………………………….
March 2007: There’s no such thing as humanitarian intervention:
“There is no such thing as humanitarian military intervention distinct from war or counterinsurgency.
Intervention and occupation should not be confused with classic
peacekeeping, which is difficult enough even with a ceasefire agreement
and the consent of the parties.
If we want an intervention to overthrow a tyranny, protect citizens
from their own government, or deliver humanitarian aid during an ongoing
conflict, we should be honest with ourselves – we are arguing for a
just war. And if we wish to make this case, let us be clear that the war is political
(and must be very smartly political to succeed); that military logic
will dictate what happens (including probable escalation and various
unpredictable factors); and that it will entail bloodshed including the killing of innocent people.…Chasing the chimera of humanitarian intervention distracts us and impedes the search for real solutions to crises such as Darfur.”
March 21, 2007, “No Such Thing as Humanitarian Intervention,“ Harvard International Review, hir.harvard.edu, Alex De Waal
…………………….
Added: US decrees death of nations:
.........
......
Image above from TheTechnocraticTyranny.com, published 2/27/2016, “State Department’s Mission: Coup d’etat“
…………………………………..
Comment: The main focus of the Endless Unwinnable War Industry is US taxpayers. They need us to be enslaved from birth.
The “peace” movement was loud and strong until Nov. 2008. It abruptly ended when Obama was elected. During his 8 years Obama transformed the Democrat Party into the home of the Endless US Taxpayer Funded Foreign War Industry.
He remade government into something about which everything was said to
be “classified.” Should a rube dare ask a question about why this was
happening, the rube was told, “That information is classified, national
security, you hick.” This must be one those “US values” we hear about that you have to share if you don’t want to be executed or bombed by the US.
.................
.
In 1990s Bill Clinton admin. led “economic genocide” of fragile, newly independent Russia, with especially catastrophic results for children and the elderly, laughed about “stuffing shit down Yeltsin’s throat.”…US elites thought Russia was theirs for the taking, “ours to lose.”
4/23/19, “The European Union is obliged to participate in US wars,” Voltaire Net, Thierry Meyssan
“When the Pentagon delegates the economic headquarters of the countries it wishes to destroy to the US Department of the Treasury (USDT), all members of the European Union and NATO are obliged to apply US sanctions.
After having lost his majority in the House of Representatives during the mid-term elections, ["lost" with major help from GOP E: 38 U.S. House races did not have a Republican candidate on the ballot] President Trump has found new allies in exchange for his discharge by prosecutor Mueller of the accusation of high treason [1]. He now supports the objectives of his generals. US imperialism is back [2].
In less than six months, the foundations of international relations have been « rebooted ». The war that Hillary Clinton promised to start has been declared, but not only by military force.
This transformation of the rules of the game, without equivalent since the end of the Second World War, immediately forced all actors to rethink their strategy, and therefore all the plans for alliance upon which they were based. Those who turn up late will pay for it.
Economic War has been declared
Wars will always be mortal and cruel, but for
Donald Trump, who was a businessman before becoming President of the
United States, it is best that they cost as little as possible. It is thus preferable to kill with economic means rather than by the use of arms. Given that the United States no longer share trade agreements with most of the countries they attack, the real «
economic » cost of these wars (in the genuine sense of the term), is in
effect supported by third-party countries rather than by the Pentagon.
Thus the United States have just decided to lay economic siege to Venezuela [3], Cuba [4] and Nicaragua [5]. In order to mask real killing wars, these actions are presented by the media apparatus as « sanctions », without giving us any idea of what law Washington is basing them on.
They are deployed with explicit reference to the « Monroe Doctrine » of 1823, according to which no foreign power shall intervene on the American continent, while in exchange, the United States will refrain from intervening in Western Europe.
Only China, which felt targeted, pointed out that the Americas are not the private property of the United States.
However, everyone is aware that this doctrine has evolved rapidly to
justify Yankee imperialism in the South of the continent (the «
Roosevelt Corollary »).
Today, US sanctions concern at least twenty countries –
Belarus, Myanmar, Burundi, North Korea, Cuba, the Russian Federation,
Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nicaragua, the Syrian Arab Republic, the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Central African Republic (CAR),
the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Islamic Republic of Iran,
Serbia, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Ukraine, Yemen and Zimbabwe. That gives us a very precise map of the conflicts led by the Pentagon, assisted by the US Department of the Treasury (USDT).
These targets are never in Western Europe (as specified by the « Monroe Doctrine »), but exclusively in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, the Caribbean Basin and Africa. All these regions were listed as early as 1991 by President George Bush senior in his National Security Strategy as being flagged to join the « New World Order » [6]. Considering
that that they had been unable or unwilling to do so, they were
sanctioned in 2001 by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his
advisor for the transformation of the armed forces, Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, and doomed to chaos [7].
The expression « economic war » was waved about for decades to indicate heightened competition. This is no longer true today – we are now talking about a real killing war.
The reactions of the targets and those not appropriated by the Allies
The Syrians, who have just won an eight-year
military war against NATO’s jihadist mercenaries, are destabilised by
this economic war, which imposes strict rationing of electricity, gas
and oil, and provokes the closing of factories which had only just been reopened. At best, they can be relieved that the Empire did not inflict these two forms of war at the same time.
The Venezuelans are now discovering with horror what economic war actually means, and are realising that with the tinhorn Juan Guiado as much as with President Nicolas Maduro, they are going to have to fight to maintain their state (in other words a ’Leviathan’ capable of protecting them [8]).
The strategies of the targeted states are themselves plunged into confusion. For example, since
they are no longer able to import medicines for its hospitals,
Venezuela has signed an agreement with Syria, which was, before the war
of 2011, a very important producer and exporter in this sector.
Factories which had been destroyed by Turkey and the jihadists were
rebuilt in Aleppo. But although they had just been reopened, they now had to close again, since they had no available supply of electricity.
The multiplication of theatres of war – and therefore of the pretended « sanctions » – began to cause serious problems for the allies of the United State, including the European Union. The EU did not appreciate the threats of seizure aimed at companies which had invested in Cuba, and, remembering the actions engaged to forbid them access to the Iranian market,
reacted by threatening in their turn to seize the Arbitration Committee
of the World Trade Organization (WTO). And yet, as we shall see, this
revolt by the European Union is doomed to failure, since it was anticipated 25 years ago by Washington [ie, US permanent political class].
The European Union – trapped
[Bush #1] Anticipating the current reaction of the European
Union, worried about not being able to trade with whomever it saw fit, the administration of Bush senior elaborated the « Wolfowitz Doctrine », which was concerned with making sure that the Western and Central Europeans would never have an independent defence system, but only a system which was autonomous [9]. This is why Washington castrated the European Union at its birth by imposing a clause to be inserted in the Treaty of Maastricht – the suzerainty of NATO. I am writing here about the European Union, not the Common Market.
We should remember the total support offered by the European Union to all of the Pentagon’s adventures, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen. In all these cases, without exception, the EU marched along in step with its suzerain, NATO.
This vassal condition is in fact the only reason that the Western European Union (WEU) was dissolved, and it is also why President Trump gave up the idea of dissolving the Atlantic Alliance’s permanent military organisation – without NATO, the European Union would gain its independence, since it is only to NATO – and not the United States – that these treaties refer.
Of course, the treaties stipulate that all this must be implemented in conformity with the United Nations Charter.
But,
for example, on March 2019, the United States questioned the
resolutions it had approved concerning the sovereignty of Golan. Without
warning, they changed their minds, provoking the de facto collapse of International Law [10]
Another example – the United States this week took position in Libya for General Khalifa Haftar, with whom President Trump shared a telephone call to assure his support against the government created by the UNO [11], and we are now seeing members of the European Union, one by one, following his lead.
Because of the consecutive treaties, it would be impossible for the EU to free itself from NATO, (which means the United States),
and declare itself a power in its own right. Protests against the
pseudo-sanctions which were yesterday decided against Iran and today
against Cuba are doomed to failure in advance.
Contrary to a commonly-held belief, NATO is not governed by the North Atlantic Council, in other words the states which are members of the Atlantic Alliance. When, in 2011, the Council, which had approved an action intended to protect the Libyan population against the alleged crimes of Mouamar Kadhafi, declared itself in opposition to a « régime change », NATO attacked without consultation.
The members of the European Union, which formed a single bloc with the United States during the Cold War, discovered with stupefaction that they do not have anything like the same culture as their trans-Atlantic ally. During this parenthesis, they had forgotten both their own European culture and the « exceptionalism » of the USA, and believed wrongly that they were all in agreement with one another.
Whether they like it or not, they are today co-responsible for Washington’s wars, including for example the famine in Yemen,
consecutive to the military operations by the Saudi Coalition and to US
sanctions. They now have to choose either to assume these crimes and
participate in them, or to leave the European treaties.
Globalisation is finished
International commerce is beginning to decline. This is not a passing crisis, but a deep-rooted phenomenon. The process of globalisation which defined the world from the dissolution of the USSR to the mid-term elections of 2018 is now ended. It is no longer possible to export freely all over the world.
Only China still has this capacity, but the US State Department is currently developing methods forbidding it access to the Latin-American market.
In these conditions, debates on the respective advantages of free-exchange and protectionism are no longer pertinent, because we are no longer at peace and we no longer have a choice.
In the same way, the construction of the European Union, which was imagined at a time when the world was divided into two irreconcilable blocs, is
today completely inadapted. If they want to avoid being dragged by the
United States into conflicts which are not their own, its members will
have to free themselves from the European treaties and the integrated
command of NATO.
Therefore it is completely off-subject to look at the European elections as opposing progressives and nationalists [12]. This is not the point at all. The
progressives affirm their desire to build a world governed by
International Law, which their godfather, the United States wants to
eradicate, while certain nationalists, like the Poland of Andrzej Duda,
are preparing to serve the United States against their partners in the
European Union.
Only certain British subjects have sensed the current storm. They have attempted to leave the Union, but without managing to convince their parliamentary representatives. It’s said that « to govern is to foresee », but most members of the European Union have foreseen nothing.”
Thierry Meyssan
Translation
Pete Kimberley
"[1] Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III, March 2019.
[2]
As soon as he took place in the White House, Donald Trump transformed
the National Security Council by taking away the permanent seats of the
CIA and the Pentagon. “Presidential Memorandum : Organization of the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council”, by Donald Trump, Voltaire Network, 28 January 2017. “Donald Trump winds up “the” organization of US imperialism”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Voltaire Network, 31 January 2017.
[3] “US Treasury Sanctions Central Bank of Venezuela and its Director”, Voltaire Network, 17 April 2019.
[4] Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Libertad) Act of 1996 of which the worst dispositions will soon become applicable.
[5] “US Treasury Targets Finances of Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega’s Regime”, Voltaire Network, 17 April 2019.
[6] National Security Strategy of the United States 1991, George H. Bush, The White house, 1991.
[7] “The strategy of controlled chaos”, by Manlio Dinucci, Translation Pete Kimberley, Il Manifesto (Italy) , Voltaire Network, 18 April 2019.
[8] Reacting to the English civil war, the philosopher Thomas Hobbes theorised, in his work Leviathan,
the necessity of supporting a state, even if it is authoritarian and
abusive, rather that having no state and being plunged into chaos.
[9] « US Strategy Plan Calls For Insuring No Rivals Develop », Patrick E. Tyler, and « Excerpts from Pentagon’s Plan : “Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival” », New York Times, March 8, 1992. « Keeping the US First, Pentagon Would preclude a Rival Superpower », Barton Gellman, The Washington Post, March 11, 1992.
[10] “The UNO destroyed by US « exceptionalism »”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 2 April 2019.
[11] « Washington et Moscou unis contre l’Onu en Libye », Réseau Voltaire, 20 avril 2019.
[12] “For European renewal”, by Emmanuel Macron, Voltaire Network, 4 March 2019."
..................
.
Mrs. Clinton presumes to advise a US that doesn’t exist. The “democracy, sovereignty, and security” she
speaks of don’t exist in the US today. Even if Putin had the time and
inclination, he couldn’t harm US institutions that have already been
removed by the US political class. Without providing evidence of a reason for doing so (saying things like “everyone knows” isn’t evidence), she wants all Americans in the non-existent US to unite for one purpose, to effectively complete economic genocide of Russia. Living in a failed state without “democracy, sovereignty, and security,” Americans need to focus entirely on their immediate safety, have no time to lecture other countries. A failed state is “a state that is unable to perform the two fundamental functions of the sovereign nation-state in the modern world system: it cannot project authority over its territory and peoples, and it cannot protect its national boundaries.…State failure manifests itself when a state can no longer deliver physical security.“…The US Military either sees legal problems in defending us, doesn’t like doing it, and/or has “much bigger fish to fry” than preventing foreign invaders from crossing the 2000 mile US southern border. The US military is concerned with everything except what is supposedly the US “Homeland.” Meaning US taxpayers are slaves. “For the last 70 years, the obsession of US strategists has not been to defend their people, but to maintain their military superiority over the rest of the world.” The US “homeland” has zero “security.” Bill Clinton admin. led “economic genocide” of fragile, newly independent Russia, in 1990s with especially catastrophic results for children and the elderly, laughed about “stuffing shit down Yeltsin’s throat.”…US elites thought Russia was “ours to lose,” theirs for the taking.
4/26/19, “Hillary Clinton’s McCarthyite rant,” Worldwide Socialist Website, Joseph Kishore
“The legacy of McCarthyism is now being revived by the campaign led by the Democratic Party and summed up in a hysterical screed published Wednesday [4/24] in the Washington Post by Hillary Clinton, the self-professed former “Goldwater girl,” under the headline, “Mueller documented a serious crime against all Americans. Here’s how to respond.”
According to [Mrs.] Clinton, “Our election was corrupted, our democracy assaulted, our sovereignty and security violated. This is the definitive conclusion of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report.” The perpetrator again is Russia, which Clinton, citing the Mueller report, claims has carried out a “sweeping and systematic” attack on the United States.
The Clinton narrative, which is the official line of the Democratic Party, is a monumental lie.
Responsibility for Clinton’s defeat in the 2016 elections is attributed
entirely to the operations of Russian bots and “Guccifer 2.0,” the
persona of the individual who supposedly hacked Democratic Party emails.
Her campaign, Clinton writes, was the “target of a Russian plot,” directed by President Vladimir Putin, who “seeks to weaken our country.”
And what did this new “conspiracy so immense” actually involve? According to the Mueller report itself, organizations associated with Russia allegedly spent $100,000 on Facebook ads.
This is 0.12 percent of the $81 million spent by the Democratic and
Republican election campaigns themselves on Facebook ads, in a campaign
dominated by the $5 billion spent by the billionaire backers of the two
parties to buy the election.
As for the release of Democratic Party emails, even if one accepts the unsubstantiated claim that it was Russian operatives who turned them over to WikiLeaks, what the emails revealed were true facts about the operations of Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC)—facts that the electorate had every right to know. Among the documents released were Clinton’s speeches to Goldman Sachs and other banks, for which she was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars. Other leaked emails exposed the corrupt efforts of the DNC to rig the primaries against Bernie Sanders.
Clinton lost in the 2016 elections because the Democratic Party, in line with the class interests it represents, made a calculated decision not to raise any social issues or make any appeal to the working class
in its campaign against Trump. Do Clinton and company really expect the
public to believe that Facebook ads put out by Russian agents were
behind the collapse in voter turnout in working-class areas of Michigan, Wisconsin and other states?
The victory of the billionaire demagogue Trump was the
result of widespread disillusionment with the Democratic Party after
eight years of the Obama administration, which broke every campaign
promise and exposed as lies the empty prattle about “hope” and “change.” Obama focused his energies on bailing out Wall Street and shoring up the wealth of the corporate and financial elite.
In her column, Clinton goes on to call for an alliance between the Democratic Party and the Republicans.
The situation calls for “clear-eyed patriotism, not reflexive
partisanship,” she writes. She urges Republicans to work with Democrats in an intensified campaign against Russia—with or without the Trump administration. She writes: “It’s up to members of both parties to see where that road map [provided by the Mueller report] leads—to the eventual filing of articles of impeachment, or not. Either way, the nation’s interests will be best served by putting party and political considerations aside and being deliberate, fair and fearless.”
Clinton wants a bipartisan foreign policy that is “fearless” in its aggression against not only Russia, but also China. “Unless checked, the Russians will interfere again in 2020, and possibly other adversaries, such as China or North Korea, will as well,” she warns. Unless Trump is “held accountable, the president will likely redouble his efforts to advance Putin’s agenda [which is what?], including rolling back sanctions, weakening NATO and undermining the European Union.”
Changing what needs to be changed, such words could have been penned by Robert Welch [John Birch Society] himself. Confronting a fascistic president, the Democrats have managed to frame their entire opposition around a right-wing narrative. If the Democrats had their way and Trump were removed—to be replaced, don’t forget, by the ultra-right Vice President Mike Pence—it is almost certain that the immediate consequence would be war with nuclear-armed Russia.
Inextricably connected to the conflicts over foreign policy
is the escalation of the attack on democratic rights within the United
States. Reprising the ravings of Dies, social discontent is attributed to the nefarious efforts of Russia to “sow discord” within the United States.
Significantly, Clinton cites as a model the actions of the ruling class after the September 11, 2001 attacks, when “Congress established an independent, bipartisan commission to recommend steps that would help guard against future attacks.” She concludes, “We need a similar commission to help protect our elections.”
The September 11 attacks—a terrorist atrocity that killed nearly 3,000 people—were followed by the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Department, the Northern Command, domestic spying, Guantanamo Bay, the institution of torture and drone assassinations as government policy, and other crimes. The campaign of the Democrats over the Russian “attack”—a lie fashioned from whole cloth—has been accompanied by far-reaching moves to censor the internet under the guise of combating “fake news.”
The Democrats’ warmongering and attack on democratic rights come together
in the persecution of WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, whose
enduring contribution to the population of the world was the exposure of the crimes of American imperialism. For this, Assange is currently imprisoned in Britain,
facing imminent rendition to the United States. The courageous
whistleblower Chelsea Manning is in jail for refusing to testify against
him.
Such is Clinton’s defense of “our democracy.”
All of this further demonstrates that in the conflict between Trump and the Democratic Party there is no progressive or democratic faction. The anti-Russia narrative has not been challenged by any section of the Democratic Party, including Bernie Sanders, who is again seeking to cover up this warmongering party with a thin veneer of social reforms that it has no intention of implementing.
The conflict between the Democrats and the Trump administration is a conflict between two reactionary factions of the ruling class. All those political organizations and groups that are seeking to direct social opposition behind the Democratic Party are playing the most criminal role. They
are no less terrified than Trump and the Democrats of the development
of a genuine socialist movement of the working class, which will oppose
American capitalism and its wars….
In the days of the Cold War, the narrative of the arch-reactionaries and anticommunists revolved around a conspiracy theory according to which the United States had been infiltrated at the highest levels by agents of the Soviet Union.
In the early 1950s, Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy led the anti-Soviet campaign, alleging that Russian spies occupied top positions in the government, in universities, in Hollywood
and even in the military. According to McCarthy, “a conspiracy so
immense and an infamy so black as to dwarf any previous venture in the
history of man” implicated not only the Soviet Union but was also
responsible for the “loss of China” in the 1949 Chinese Revolution.
The “Red Menace” was the pretext
for attacking and delegitimizing all manifestations of social and
political opposition, including the Civil Rights movement, as the work of “outside agitators” who received their orders from Moscow.
It was Martin Dies, the Democratic congressman from Texas and initiator
of the witch-hunting House Un-American Activities Committee, who
declared in his 1940 book The Trojan Horse in America that Moscow had “envisioned an unusual opportunity to create racial hatred between the white and Negro citizens of the United States.”
In the late 1950s, after the heyday of McCarthy, the political thread was taken up by the John Birch Society, founded in 1958 by Massachusetts businessman Robert Welch, who notoriously declared that President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a “dedicated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy.”
In 1964, Welch backed the ultra-right Republican candidate Barry Goldwater, whose failed presidential campaign”…
[Ed. note: Re: "Failing" in 1964: Everyone was going to "fail" in 1964 except LBJ
with beloved JFK’s Nov. 1963 assassination fresh in voters' minds. JFK's VP LBJ was sworn in as US president in Dallas, a blood-spattered Jackie Kennedy beside him.
Further, sore loser GOP E didn't want Goldwater, so Nelson Rockefeller "criss-crossed the nation" in 1964 warning people of the danger of "extremists" like Barry Goldwater. GOP E exists only to run interference for democrats, has exactly the same open borders, endless war agenda as democrats.]
(continuing): “was heavily influenced by John Stormer’s book None Dare Call It Treason. “Will America continue to aid the communist enemy,”
Stormer asked, “to disarm in the face of danger, to bow before
communist dictators in every corner of the earth? The decision is
yours.”
Nothing is dead in politics.”…
…………………………………………..
4 among comments
………………………………….
Zalamander • 2 days ago
“The neoliberal capitalist torch is being passed from Obama to H. Clinton to Biden. Biden’s family financial interest in Ukraine will fuel his McCarthyite Russophobia and pose a danger to the entire planet.”
………………………….
Charlotte Ruse • 3 days ago
“For more than two years the intelligence agencies deployed the mainstream media news to conduct their nonstop security state “infighting.” The
centerpiece of this infighting was over foreign policy, and how to
ensure that the military/security state would continue its aggressive
militarist agenda towards Russia and China.
After the 2016 election, the intelligence agencies concluded that fabricating reasons behind Trump’s astounding election victory would be the way to attack Trump. That
was the genesis of Russia-gate–it would be a way to propagandize
against Russia and also question the legitimacy of Trump’s Presidency,
but more importantly Trump’s foreign policy. In other words, building anti-Russian sentiment was the centerpiece of the security state’s campaign against Trump.
Unfortunately, this fabricated bubble burst badly when Mueller’s two year investigation could not conclusively say that Trump colluded with Putin to win the 2016 election.
However, the military/security/surveillance/corporate/state never
gives up and they intend to keep using the Democratic party and its
leadership to ensure that nothing threatens their imperialist agenda or
the status quo— enter Joe Biden. If you didn’t like Hillary
in 2016, perhaps you’ll like “Uncle Joe” in 2020.
The corporate
mainstream media news will do its best to push the candidacy of Biden
with the message that only he can beat Trump in 2020.
The two year campaign by the intelligence agencies against Trump will be continued by pushing Hillary’s shape-shifter Joe Biden. This is how the “security surveillance state” will respond to the former “Goldwater Girl’s” statement that Mueller documented a serious crime against all Americans.
The ruling class is determined to sustain the status quo and even a pseudo socialist like Bernie Sanders is too threatening for the military/corporate state–they’re not interested in giving any concessions to the working-class. Nothing will be allowed to compromise the surveillance state’s power, money, and hegemony. The survival of the ruling class is the only thing that’s considered significant, even if that survival results in planetary ecocide.”
………………………………..
Kalen • 3 days ago
“Hillary is a delusional psychotic and needs to be locked in psychiatric hospital to snap out of it.
In 2017 a book was published by NYT journalists (as I
euphemistically call them) about Hillary campaign and defeat after
Russia-gate allegation by CIA were made public in January 2017 and
believed by MSM like divine truth.
In the book journalists reported massive
and desperate calls from Midwest states campaign managers asking
Hillary to heavily campaign there in September/October 2016 as they knew that they were in big trouble.
Hillary ignored them all and
trusted 100 million dollar FB acquired massive electoral/personal data
based supercomputer simulations of electoral patterns that assured
Clinton 90%+ chance to win presidency.
Desperate managers called Bill behind Hillary back and explained the data they based their worry, simply about Hillary unpopular in Midwest agenda and
none of them mentioned any foreign or otherwise coordinated attack or
clandestine manipulation of social media against Hillary but simple quite lame attacks of Trump’s regular campaign.”…
………………………………………
Carolyn Zaremba • 3 days ago
“Excellent article. Clinton
makes my skin crawl. This neo-McCarthyist spew of filth from a virulent
warmonger who got a good laugh out of the destruction of Libya and the
murder of Ghaddafi is disgusting. It goes along with the barbarity of
the Saudi regime that gave so much money to the Clinton Foundation. Bloodthirsty all together.”
………………………………..
Added: “Failed State,” two sources:
“If
a nation cannot defend its border, it ceases to exist in any meaningful
way….We give up certain freedoms in order to secure others. But if that
transaction no longer works…it ceases to have power over us.“…”Return
of the city-state. Nation-states came late to history, and there’s
plenty of evidence to suggest they won’t make it to the end of the
century,” aeon.co, Jamie Bartlett, 9/5/2017
…………………………….
Added:
“Failed state,
a state that is unable to perform the two fundamental functions of the
sovereign nation-state in the modern world system: it cannot project
authority over its territory and peoples, and it cannot protect its
national boundaries.…State failure manifests itself when a state can no longer deliver physical security.…Failed states are known to be hospitable to and to harbour dangerous nonstate actors such as…groups that commit terrorist acts.”…“Failed State,” Britannica.com, by Naazneen H. Barma (Biography: Assistant
Professor of National Security Affairs, Naval Postgraduate School,
Monterey, Calif. Director, Bridging the Gap Project. She contributed an
article on “Failed State” to SAGE Publications’ Encyclopedia of Governance (2007))
The US Military either sees legal problems in defending us, doesn’t like doing it, and/or has “much bigger fish to fry”
than preventing foreign invaders from crossing the 2000 mile US
southern border. Obviously, it should no longer receive US taxpayer
funding. The US military is concerned with everyone and everything except what is supposedly the US “Homeland.” Forcing US taxpayers to fund a military that can’t or won’t protect them is slavery.
11/5/18, “The Pentagon is resisting Trump’s most controversial military requests for the border,” Vox.com, Alex Ward
“The military won’t do everything Trump wants them to.”
“Resistance to President Donald Trump’s strong-handed military
proposals to counter a caravan of immigrants headed toward the
US-Mexico border is coming from a surprising place: the Pentagon.
“According to official documents obtained by the Washington Post, troops are allowed to use deadly force to protect “all persons, foreign or domestic, who are faced with imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm, and where lesser means have failed or cannot be reasonably employed.”…
It’s so striking that Trump continues to say the military will take actions it likely won’t….
…………………………..
Comment: All homeless foreigners from violent cultures who
take one step onto US soil receive immediate gifts of all expenses paid
lives via US taxpayers. The US military is
happy to use heavy weapons to defend borders all over the world but has
no interest in providing the same service to the US Homeland. “Deadly force” wouldn’t be needed and wouldn’t
be an issue if the US simply had very high, thick walls. But the US
doesn’t exist to the US political class and its donors. They’re
adamant on open borders for the constant pool of essentially slave-wage,
non-English speaking workers they provide. As the US political class
engineers the merger of Latin America with the former US, effectively genocide of the US,
overwhelmed local and state governments require more money to take care
of the flood of homeless people from violent cultures. Financially
stressed public schools encounter new expenses that can only be met by
diverting funds carefully budgeted for the needs of children already
here.
...............
