“The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new version is the past and no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia, but to keep the very structure of society intact.” ― George Orwell
I was watching C-SPAN’s Washington Journal and their guest was
Benjamin Gedan of the Wilson Center commenting on Trump’s plan to cut aid to
Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. He
was adamantly opposed to cutting foreign aid to these countries as the funds go
to good causes like “addressing the root causes” of the mass migration from
these countries.
He was spewing the usual think tank talking point of “getting
to the root causes” of the immigration crisis and how cutting off the foreign
aid to those countries will jeopardize all the progress made. But what progress has been, or will be
made? You have the CIA, the Department
of Homeland Security, the State Department and a myriad of NGO’s ensuring
continued destabilization, even though it is in America’s interest to have
safe, secure, financially stable countries in South America.
If continued foreign financial aid just exasperates the violent
situation then I agree with Donald Trump, cut it off, all gone. From ABC News:
Excerpt:
Trump cuts all direct assistance to Northern Triangle countries
Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala
The
stunning development came late Friday night.
In a stunning about-face, State Department officials said that President
Donald Trump is cutting off all direct assistance to the so-called Northern
Triangle countries of El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala.
“At the Secretary’s instruction, we
are carrying out the President’s direction and ending FY [fiscal year] 2017 and
FY 2018 foreign assistance programs for the Northern Triangle,” a State
Department spokesperson told ABC News, referring to U.S. Secretary of State
Mike Pompeo. “We will be engaging
Congress as part of this process.”
These three countries are the primary source of migrants to the U.S.,
but for years the U.S. has worked with
them to stabilize their political environments and economies and end
violence and corruption so that migrants wouldn’t leave in the first place.
Trump hinted at the cuts earlier on
Friday, telling reporters, “I’ve ended
payments to Guatemala, to Honduras, and to El Salvador. No money goes there anymore.” While the president has threatened these cuts
before, this time the administration is actually following through.
Trump said the funds totaled $500
million, but it wasn’t clear Friday if that figure was accurate. The State Department announced in December
that the U.S. would mobilize $5.8 billion in public and private American
investment to these three countries.
“We’re not paying them anymore because they haven’t done a thing for
us,” he added. His senior-most advisers, however, have carried a very
different tune, talking very often
about the importance of this assistance to stem the flow of illegal
immigration.
Homeland Security Secretary
Kirstjen Nielsen was in Mexico and Honduras this week meeting with their
leadership to sign new partnership agreements. Pompeo testified before the
House of Representatives on Wednesday about the administration's efforts,
saying the president had instructed him
and Nielsen to use U.S. funding to "develop a set of programs that reward
effective outcomes, that reward good leadership, that get us to a place where
we actually achieve the outcomes…"
Trump's previous threats to pull
the plug, however, had often left U.S.
officials scratching their heads and straining to explain why these funds
described as key to stemming migration would be cut off -- as punishment
for not stemming migration.
Wow, I bet that came as a shock to the think tanks that have
been suckling off the foreign aid teat for years. Watching this think tank representative on
C-SPAN challenging President Trump’s decision to cut off the spigot of foreign
aid for the violent, Northern Triangle in South America made me wonder. Just
what has our foreign aid done? After 10
years of pouring money to the Northern Triangle, why has there been no
improvement? Before we pour any more money into foreign aid, let’s look at
where it is really going and who is benefitting from foreign aid. My search for the answers took me to an
article published in the New York Times in 2014.
Excerpt:
Foreign Powers Buy Influence at Think Tanks
WASHINGTON — The agreement signed
last year by the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs was explicit: For $5
million, Norway’s partner in
Washington would push top officials at the White House, at the Treasury
Department and in Congress TO DOUBLE SPENDING ON A UNITED STATES FOREIGN AID
PROGRAM.
But the recipient of the cash was
not one of the many Beltway lobbying firms that work every year on behalf of
foreign governments. It was THE CENTER FOR GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT,
a nonprofit research
organization, or THINK TANK, one of
many such groups in Washington that
lawmakers, government officials and the news media have long relied on to provide
independent policy analysis and scholarship.
More than a dozen prominent
Washington research groups have received tens of millions of dollars from
foreign governments in recent years while pushing United States government officials to adopt policies that often
reflect the donors’ priorities, an investigation by The New York Times has
found.
The money is increasingly transforming the once-staid think-tank
world into a muscular arm of foreign
governments’ lobbying in Washington. And it has set off troubling
questions about intellectual freedom: Some scholars
say they have been pressured to reach conclusions friendly to the government
financing the research.
The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements they have
reached with foreign governments. And they have not registered with the
United States government as representatives of the donor countries, an
omission that appears, in some cases, to be a violation of federal law, according
to several legal specialists who examined the agreements at the request of The
Times.
As a result, policy makers who rely on think tanks are often unaware of the role of
foreign governments in funding the research…
“It is particularly egregious because with a law firm or lobbying
firm, you expect them to be an advocate,” Mr. Sandler added. “Think tanks have this patina of academic
neutrality and objectivity, and that is being compromised.”
The arrangements involve
Washington’s most influential think
tanks, including the Brookings Institution, the Center for Strategic and
International Studies, and the Atlantic Council. Each is a major
recipient of overseas funds, producing
policy papers, hosting forums and organizing private briefings for senior
United States government officials that typically align with the foreign governments’ agendas…
Qatar, the small but wealthy Middle East nation, agreed last year to
make a $14.8 million, four-year donation to Brookings, which has helped
fund a Brookings affiliate in Qatar and a project on United States relations
with the Islamic world. Some scholars
say the donations have led to implicit agreements that the research
groups would refrain from criticizing the donor governments.
“If a member of Congress is using
the Brookings reports, they should be aware — they are not getting the full
story,” said Saleem Ali, who served as a visiting fellow at the Brookings Doha
Center in Qatar and who said he had been
told during his job interview that he could not take positions critical of the
Qatari government in papers. “THEY
MAY NOT BE GETTING A FALSE STORY, BUT THEY ARE NOT GETTING THE FULL STORY…”
Several legal experts who reviewed
the documents, however, said the tightening relationships between United
States think tanks and their overseas sponsors could violate the Foreign Agents
Registration Act, the 1938 federal LAW THAT SOUGHT TO COMBAT A NAZI
PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN IN THE UNITED STATES. The law requires groups that are paid
by foreign governments with the intention of influencing public policy to
register as “foreign agents” with the Justice Department.
Foreign Government Contributions to
Nine Think Tanks
Foreign governments and state-controlled or state-financed entities
have paid tens of millions of dollars to dozens of American think tanks in
recent years, according to a New York Times investigation.
Small countries are finding that
they can gain big clout by teaming up with American research organizations.
Perhaps the best example is Norway. As
one of the world’s top oil producers, a member of NATO and a player in
peace negotiations in spots around the globe, Norway has an interest in a broad range of United States policies.
The country has committed at least $24 million to an array of
Washington think tanks over the past four years, according to a tally by
The Times, transforming these
nonprofits into a powerful but largely hidden arm of the Norway Foreign Affairs
Ministry.
Documents obtained under that
country’s unusually broad open records laws reveal that American research groups, after receiving money from
Norway, have advocated in Washington
for enhancing Norway’s role in NATO, promoted its plans to expand oil drilling in the Arctic and pushed
its climate change agenda…
Norway has also funded Arctic
research at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, at a time when
the country was seeking to expand its oil drilling in the Arctic region… Norway’s
government soon began sending checks to the center for a research program
on Arctic policy. By 2009, after the new Norway-supported Arctic program was up
and running, it brought Norway officials together with a key member of
Congress to discuss the country’s “energy aspirations for the region.”
IN A MARCH 2013 REPORT, SCHOLARS FROM THE CENTER URGED THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION TO INCREASE ITS MILITARY PRESENCE IN THE ARCTIC CIRCLE, TO
PROTECT ENERGY EXPLORATION EFFORTS THERE and to increase the passage of
cargo ships through the region — the exact moves Norway has been advocating…
But three lawyers who specialize in
the law governing Americans’ activities on behalf of foreign governments said
that THE CENTER FOR GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT
AND BROOKINGS, in particular, appeared to have taken actions that merited
registration as foreign agents of Norway. The activities by THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL
STUDIES and the ATLANTIC COUNCIL, they added, at least raised questions.
“The Department of Justice needs to be looking at this,” said
Joshua Rosenstein, a lawyer at Sandler Reiff.
Ona Dosunmu, Brookings’s general counsel, examining the same documents,
said she remained convinced that was a misreading of the law.
Norway, at least, is grateful for
the work Brookings has done. During a speech at Brookings in June, Norway’s foreign minister, Borge Brende,
noted that his country’s relationship with the think tank “has been mutually
beneficial for moving a lot of important topics.” Just before the speech, in fact, Norway signed an agreement to
contribute an additional $4 million to the group.
C-SPAN also has that same “patina of academic neutrality and
objectivity” that these stink tanks enjoy.
It’s all a façade. We are told
C-SPAN is funded by a few pennies added to your cable bill each month. That is probably true, but C-SPAN covers
every Think Tank event, white paper, every editorial, every cause, every meeting,
every debate, every war rally and everything else 24 hours a day, seven days a
week. C-SPAN introduces their “fellows”
as experts in foreign policy.
C-SPAN played a huge roll in selling the Iraq War. Twenty-four hours a day, stink tanks from the
American Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, Brookings, Council on
Foreign Relations, Wilson Center, the Atlantic, RAND Corporation, Mercatus
Center and countless others spewed their
lies on C-SPAN unchallenged.
But setting aside the think tanks’ total control of C-SPAN
it is frightening to know that none of the foreign policy decisions being made
are in America’s interests. How can
supporting fascist oligarchies in South America be good for America? From Strategic Culture:
Excerpt:
Bienvenidos PROSUR: a Return to Fascist Oligarchies in South America
With more than a “wink and a nod”
from their collegial “caudillo del Norte,” Donald Trump, seven right-wing South American leaders have launched the Forum for the
Progress of South America (PROSUR), which aims to eradicate all vestiges of
Venezuela’s late president, Hugo Chavez, and Brazil’s wrongfully-imprisoned
past president, Inacio Lula da Silva.
PROSUR seeks to replace the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR),
which was created by Chavez and Lula in 208 to
counteract traditional American hegemonism in Latin America enforced by the neo-colonial
Organization of American States (OAS).
Leaders from seven right-wing South
American governments – Chile, Brazil, Colombia, Argentina, Paraguay, Ecuador,
Peru, and Guyana – recently gathered in Santiago, Chile, under the auspices of billionaire Chilean president Sebastian Pinera,
to sign an accord creating PROSUR.
One of the goals of the new bloc is
to integrate the defense, security,
and crime prevention infrastructures of the members. If that sounds
like an embryonic recreation of the infamous Operation CONDOR of the 1960s and
70s, it very much has such potential.
CONDOR was an alliance of the intelligence and security services of South
American military dictatorships, nurtured by the CIA, that is believed to
have been responsible for 60,000 murders, 30,000 “disappeared,” 400,000
wrongful imprisonments, and countless acts of torture.
Bolivia and Uruguay, members of UNASUR that support Chavez’s successor,
Nicolas Maduro, against the Central Intelligence Agency-groomed and -installed
presidential pretender, Juan Guaido, did not join PROSUR, and, instead,
elected observer status in the group.
Pinera and Colombia’s right-wing and narco/paramilitary-backed
president, Ivan Duque, were the architects behind PROSUR. Seeing
a chance to bury the legacies of Chavez and Lula, the two presidents invited
all but Maduro’s government to join the pact.
Ecuador, which joined PROSUR,
served as the headquarters of UNASUR. In 2014, Ecuadorian President Rafael
Correa opened the $65 million headquarters in Quito. Today, with right-wing governments and, as with the cases of Brazil and
Colombia, far-right wing governments, taking over most of South America, the
UNASUR headquarters sits largely abandoned.
Moreno ordered UNASUR to abandon the building and promised to turn
it into a university. After UNASUR Secretary General Ernesto Samper left his
post in 2017, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Paraguay, and Peru suspended
their membership in the bloc, dealing it a fatal blow.
Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno quickly abandoned his commitment to
the ideals of Correa, Lula, and Chavez and embraced the caudillo politics of
the right-wing South America presidents. Moreno, whose first name is in
honor of Vladimir Lenin, plunged a knife into UNASUR when he said it was the
creation of “perverse politicking of the self-styled 21st-century socialists.”
After Argentina, Brazil, Colombia,
Chile, Paraguay, and Peru withdrew from UNASUR, with the obvious prodding of the Trump administration, the stage was
set for creating a new right-wing and pro-US alliance of neo-fascists,
grifters, and oligarchs.
Moreno, who served as Correa’s vice president, has abandoned the socialist policies of his
predecessor. Moreno not only welcomed US Vice President Mike Pence to
Ecuador with open arms but sought the re-opening of the former US intelligence airbase
at Manta, which had been closed by Correa in 2009.
Moreno’s defense minister announced that what would replace the Manta
airbase would be a “Security Cooperation Office.” In 2018, Moreno withdrew
Ecuador from one of Chavez’s most-prized creations, the Bolivarian Alliance for
the Peoples of Our America (ALBA).
Ironically, Moreno, who bears the first name of the founder of the world’s
first Communist nation, reversed many of
Correa’s policies aimed at reducing the influence of Ecuador’s oligarchs and
banks. Correa, who now lives in exile in Belgium, faces imprisonment
in Ecuador in a political jihad launched by Moreno that is not unlike that of
the Brazilian right-wing that targeted Lula and his successor, Dilma Rousseff.
Present at the inauguration of
PROSUR in Santiago was Argentine president Mauricio Macri, the one-time
business partner of Donald Trump, who
has done everything possible to imprison his predecessor, Cristina Fernández de
Kirchner. Now an Argentine senator, Kirchner and her husband, the late
President Nestor Kirchner, were partners of Chavez, Lula, and Correa in
creating UNASUR…
Presidents Mario Abdo Benitez of Paraguay Martin Vizcarra of Peru have
also steered their countries firmly into the right-wing camp. Both
presidents joined their colleagues in Santiago for the PROSUR summit.
One surprise leader who signed on to PROSUR in Santiago was David
Granger, the president of Guyana. Granger, as a former Brigadier General in
the Guyana Defense Force, likely felt at home with individuals like Brazil’s
Jair Bolsonaro, a former Brazilian paratrooper whose spoken Brazilian
Portuguese reflects that of an uncouth Army veteran combined with a street
thug.
Granger has made common cause with ExxonMobil
to lay claim to oil reserves in Guyana’s Exclusive Economic Zone, which are
also claimed by Venezuela. GRANGER HAS BRANDISHED HIS RIGHT-WING
ALLEGIANCES BY IGNORING GUYANA’S CONSTITUTION AND POSTPONING A MARCH 19, 2019
REQUIRED ELECTION TO 2020.
It was the defection of Granger’s coalition government’s
parliamentary backbencher, Charrandas Persaud, to the opposition in a
no-confidence vote that originally triggered the election. Rather than
comply with the Constitution, Granger’s government, accused Persaud of being a
US citizen, not eligible to sit in parliament. Persaud also received death
threats. Yet, according to the Western
corporate media, Guyana is being threatened by an “undemocratic” Maduro
government in Venezuela.
Just as PROSUR seeks to eliminate
the vestiges of Chavez, Lula, Correa, and Kirchner in South America, there has
been an attempt by Washington to also
wipe out two other Chavez regional projects, ALBA and the Community of Latin
American and Caribbean States (CELAC).
Both organizations include
Venezuela’s allies in the Caribbean region. Trump recently invited the leaders of five Caribbean nations –
Bahamas, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, and Saint Lucia – to his Mar-a-Lago billionaires’ club in
Palm Beach to seek their commitment to isolate the Maduro government of
Venezuela AND SUPPORT THE
GUAIDO PUPPET REGIME.
In order to entice the leaders to sever all financial links with
Venezuela, including their participation in the PetroCaribe program that
provided them with subsidized Venezuelan gasoline and oil, Trump offered nebulous loan guarantees
through the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), a Wall Street contrivance with major
national debt pitfalls attached.
Trump has a major real estate
project in the Dominican Republic. Allen Chastanet, the prime minister of Saint
Lucia, is the incoming chairman of the Caribbean Community. He will be expected to wean away from
Venezuela its last remaining allies in the organization.
Trump and his team of neocons, including national security adviser
John Bolton and Venezuela regime change envoy Elliott Abrams, who was convicted
in the Iran-Contra scandal and who benefited from a cover-up bolstered by
Attorney General William Barr, will now
concentrate their efforts on overthrowing Maduro and subjecting his last
remaining allies, Mexico, Nicaragua, Cuba, Bolivia, Uruguay, Antigua and
Barbuda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Grenada to regime change
operations.
Gee, what a conundrum, what to do. Should you stick with Maduro and enjoy all financial
links with Venezuela, “including their participation in the PetroCaribe program
that provided them with subsidized Venezuelan gasoline and oil” or should you
take Trump’s offer of “nebulous loan guarantees” (probably from Wall Street Vultures
like Paul Singer) through the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), a Wall Street contrivance with major
national debt pitfalls attached.
Oh so torn. So if the
Bahamas, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, and Saint Lucia refuse Trump’s
offer of “nebulous loan guarantees” instead of subsidized Venezuelan gasoline
and oil” they will be targeted for “regime change” operations. Also, Mexico, Nicaragua, Cuba, Bolivia,
Uruguay, Antigua and Barbuda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Granada are
already on the regime change list. How
the hell is that lunacy in America’s best interests?
If anyone has any delusions that the Democrats are going to
step in and stop this madness they are sorely wrong. From Stephen Lendman:
Excerpt:
US VERDAD Act: Senate Support for Regime Change in Venezuela
Seeking dominance over all other nations is imperialism’s defining
feature – by brute force if other tactics fail. That’s how the US has operated throughout the
post-WW II era – beginning with naked aggression against North Korea from 1950
– 1953, followed by a decade of Southeast Asia war from the mid-1960s to
mid-1970s, the rape of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, things greatly escalated
post-9/11.
The mother of all false flags launched endless US wars of aggression
against nations threatening no one – continuing with no prospect for
resolution in line with Washington’s
permanent war on humanity agenda.
When it comes to endless wars and other imperial tactics, Republicans
and undemocratic Dems are on the same page, raping and destroying one
country after another for nearly 75 years.
With no end of it in prospect, they continue on the phony pretexts of
humanitarian intervention, responsibility to protect, and democracy building
– a notion US policymakers revile, tolerating it nowhere, especially not at home
and in oil-rich Venezuela, Bolivarianism considered the threat of a good
example.
It’s why four US regimes sought to
eliminate it, beginning with the Clinton co-presidency, greatly escalated by
Trump hardliners, going all-out to replace Bolivarian social democracy with US
controlled fascist tyranny. Their eyes are on two prizes -gaining
another vassal state, along with control over Venezuela’s oil and its other
valued resources, its people exploited as serfs.
On Wednesday, 15 bipartisan
neocon Senators introduced the so-called Venezuela Emergency Relief, Democracy
Assistance and Development (VERDAD) Act (sic) – supporting regime change in the hemisphere’s preeminent democracy they
want eliminated.
The bipartisan gang of 15 includes
John Barraso, Michael Bennett, Ben Cardin, Bill Cassidy, Chris Coons, John Cornyn, Ted Cruz, Dick Durbin, Lindsey Graham, Josh Hawley, Tim Kaine, Marco Rubio, Jeanne
Shaheen, and Todd Young.
The measure calls for
providing another $200 million for regime change efforts, $200 million more to
Colombia and Brazil, blood money for hardening their support for the
scheme, on the phony pretext of providing support for Venezuelan “refugees”
in their countries.
THE MEASURE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH
“RESTOR(ING) DEMOCRACY AND PROSPERITY” in Venezuela (sic), nothing to do with
humanitarian aid (sic), everything to do with supporting the
Trump regime’s diabolical coup plot.
Other provisions call for
revoking visas for relatives of illegally sanctioned Venezuelans and removing sanctions from others willing to
recognize designated puppet/usurper in waiting Guaido.
The legislation urges nations
complicit with the coup plot to act against Maduro’s legitimate government the
same way. It requires support from international
financial institutions to fully go along with the scheme. It calls for
State, Treasury and Justice Departments to wage toughened financial war on
Venezuela…
Passage of the measure in both houses overwhelmingly and signed into
law by Trump is virtually certain. Menendez said the following about the
legislation: “(T)he United States
Congress is coming together in a bipartisan manner to put teeth behind our
support for the Venezuelan people (sic) as they seek to restore democracy (sic)
and address a humanitarian catastrophe of unprecedented proportions in our
hemisphere (sic).”
Rubio has been waging near-daily Twitter war on Venezuela,
conducting his own campaign for regime change, notably pushing for US military intervention. He turned truth on its head,
saying:
“As Maduro and his gang of narco-terrorists thugs (sic) continue
holding the Venezuelan people hostage (sic) under their failed socialist
regime (sic), the United States Senate is sending a clear bi-partisan
message by introducing the VERDAD Act…”
Other co-sponsors issued similar
remarks. The measure is the latest US effort to increase pressure on Maduro.
Everything thrown at him so far
failed, this measure likely to fare no
better, as long as Russia is committed to preserving and protecting Bolivarian
social democracy – key to defeating the Trump regime’s coup plot.
If Maduro and his administration really were
“narco-terrorists thugs” they’d be the US’s most favored trading partners. But they are not and that is why Maduro must
go, he was elected by the people, the poor people who outnumber the
oligarchs. The main thing Maduro has
going for him, is the gross incompetence of the “US Cabal of Criminals” in
charge of executing the Venezuela coup as laid out by Stink Tanks. From Lew Rockwell:
Excerpt:
The US Tried to Isolate Venezuela. It has Only Isolated Itself
Alan MacLeod examines how Trump team's increasingly hare-brained
schemes at trying to overthrow the government are backfiring.
It is no secret that the United States has long been plotting regime
change in Venezuela. For over 18 months President Trump has been publicly
floating a military invasion of the country. At a speech in Florida President
Trump recently announced “the days of
socialism and communism are numbered in Venezuela” ominously stating “one
day soon we are going to see what the people will do in Caracas.”
Vice President Mike Pence declared President Nicolas Maduro a
“dictator” and reiterated that self-declared
president Juan Guaidó had the “unwavering support” of the American people.
In an attempt to destroy the economy and force Maduro out of power, the US has
leveled multiple rounds of punishing (and illegal) sanctions on the country,
and encouraged and intimidated others to do the same in an effort to isolate
Venezuela politically and economically.
The US managed to convince a number
of Western European and Latin American states to back their version of events. However, despite the best attempts from an
extraordinarily compliant international media to present Venezuela as an
isolated nation on the brink of collapse, the US plan is failing badly.
In reality, the international community has rejected the US and its
candidate Juan Guaidó, with around 75
percent of countries expressing support for Maduro. Completely unreported
in the media was the decision by the UN
Human Rights Council to unequivocally condemn the US sanctions, noting that
they are targeted at the poorest and most vulnerable Venezuelans.
The
UN called on all member states to break them and even discussed the reparations
the US should pay to Venezuela. The American Special UN Rapporteur
Alfred de Zayas described the sanctions as akin to a medieval siege and accused the US of possible crimes against
humanity. This startling news has been widely reported internationally but
has been virtually completely ignored
by the mainstream Western press. The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post nor
any other national American publication has reported it.
Trump’s regime change strategy has been nothing short of comically
incompetent.
Marco Rubio’s constant calls for the Venezuelan military to defect and
overthrow Maduro have fallen completely flat as the military has remained
steadfastly loyal. The UN and Red Cross refused to participate in the
charade of American “humanitarian aid” to Venezuela, noting it did not meet
the minimal requirements to be considered aid while Maduro’s government has
been only too happy to work with those agencies to receive genuine assistance.
The US attempt to force its “aid” through the border and provoke a bloodbath failed, as the
supposedly pro-democracy aid workers appear to have set fire to their own aid
trucks. Meanwhile, billionaire celebrity Richard Branson’s Venezuela Aid
Live concert, headlined by massive stars like Luis Fonsi and Maluma garnered an
attendance of barely a few thousand.
Part of the problem is that the group around Trump lacks the discipline
and polish of Obama administration and continue to let the mask slip, making it
crystal clear none of this is about democracy and human rights. The
appointment of Elliot Abrams, a man infamous in Latin America for his role in
regime change and genocide was a clear signal to all what was about to happen.
Trump’s special advisor John Bolton said the quiet part loud,
letting slip that he saw Venezuela a
“big business opportunity” for American companies, noting that “it would make a
big difference to the US” if American companies could take over Venezuela’s oil
production. Bolton also revealed he was considering sending President
Maduro to the Guantanamo Bay torture camp. Meanwhile, Marco Rubio shocked
the world by tweeting out pictures of Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi’s mutilated
corpse, taken on all sides to be a crude statement of intent for Venezuela.
Another embarrassing incident
occurred just after Elliot Abrams, a man known for smuggling weapons to
Nicaragua under the guise of aid, was appointed. The McClatchy DC Bureau
revealed that an American plane from
Miami was caught smuggling weapons and ammunition into Venezuela. The plane
had made over 40 round trips that year alone. None of this did anything to
convince the international community of the good intentions of the US
government.
For his part, Washington’s
handpicked president Guaidó has not been able to hide his more bloodthirsty,
sociopathic side. The man who over 80 percent of Venezuelans had
never heard of in January appalled the country by callously labeling the deaths from the clashes “not as a cost” but
an “investment in the future”.
The naked brazenness of the coup
attempt is a primary reason Guaidó has failed to win over the public. A recent poll showed that over 80 percent
of Venezuelans opposed the US sanctions, and even more were against a
military intervention.
The international community is
increasingly rounding on the US. At the recent UN Security Council hearing on
Venezuela, the US was excoriated by
South Africa for “trampling upon the law and constitutional rights of
Venezuela” and for “taking away the basic right of the people [of Venezuela] to
determine their own future”.
Bolivia accused the US of breaking the most fundamental laws of
non-intervention in other countries and violating
Venezuela’s national sovereignty. Russia
summed up the mood, describing Guaidó as an “imposter” and that the US was
making a “mockery” of the constitutional rights of Venezuela, noting
that the US’ humanitarian aid stunt would “IN
ANY OTHER PART OF THE WORLD BE CLASSED AS TERRORISM.”
Worse still for the US, even the
resolve of the Lima Group – and
organization of right-wing Latin American countries set up by the Trump
administration with the express goal of bringing about regime change in
Venezuela – is beginning to crumble.
Brazil’s fascist president Jair Bolsonaro, who previously claimed
he would do “everything” to get rid of Maduro, has backed away from the US; Brazil declared that under no
circumstances would it be any part of an invasion. Other key partners
Colombia, Chile and Peru made similar statements. Many of the strongest
European critics of Maduro, such as Spain and Germany, have also categorically
rejected the military option the US is now preparing for.
This is hardly the first time that the US has isolated itself while
trying to isolate Venezuela. As I cataloged in my book Bad News From
Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting, the US was completely
alone in the world casting aspersions on the 2013 election result and calling
for a recount. What is remarkable
about this time is how badly the hare-brained scheme is backfiring.
The
Bank of England’s extraordinary decision to freeze over a billion dollars in
Venezuelan gold was a clear signal to the world that the UK could not be
trusted as a neutral arbiter. Italy
has reportedly begun discussions to repatriate their gold in Britain. If an allied state such as Italy has done
so, the likes of China, India and Russia must be thinking the same.
One of the few industries the UK
has left is finance, and this decision
could have huge ramifications for Britain’s economy. Furthermore, the
government’s acceptance of the Trump
regime change plan has sparked a massive uprising across Haiti that threatens
to bring down a US-client government.
As a result of the hare-brained incompetence and the naked audacity
of the Trump/Abrams/Bolton regime change gambit in Venezuela, the US now
finds itself almost completely isolated in the world. This does not
necessarily mean the end of the US attack. The US is the world’s only
superpower and can act unilaterally whenever it pleases. But the battle for
world opinion has been lost. The battle for Venezuela continues.
All of these plans to overthrow the elected government of
Venezuela are the tax payer paid for and foreign entity paid for product of the
think tanks. Naturally the illegal coup
and terrorist tactics taking place in Venezuela in the name of the American
people aren’t going well. Fortunately
for the think tanks and their spawn residing in the Trump Administration’s
Homeland Security, State Department and CIA can count on their think tank
dominated media to create their own reality.
From RT:
Excerpt:
‘Weaksauce’: State Department tries ordering media how to cover
Venezuela
With regime change in Caracas going
poorly, the State Department is trying
to create reality by browbeating reporters into following the official line.
Veteran AP reporter Matt Lee was not amused, calling the effort “weaksauce.”
At the press briefing on Tuesday, spokesman Robert Palladino objected to
news coverage describing Juan Guaido as opposition leader or self-proclaimed
president, rather than “interim president” as Washington has declared him to
be.
“Millions of Americans and more
than 50 countries recognize Juan Guaido as interim president of Venezuela,”
Palladino argued, so to refer to him
otherwise “falls into the narrative of a dictator who has usurped the position
of the presidency and led Venezuela into the humanitarian, political, and
economic crisis that exists today.”
This is, of course, the official
line of the State Department, which accuses President Nicolas Maduro of being a
“usurper” and claims that Guaido is the legitimate leader of Venezuela. AP diplomatic correspondent Matt Lee would
have none of it, however.
“You consider him to be the interim
president, and as you say, 50 other countries… recognize him as the interim
president. But there are more than 190
members of the United Nations. So your 50 countries is not even close to half
of that. Is that correct?” Lee asked.
Palladino’s response was to repeat the “feeds into the rhetoric” talking
point and mumble something about those 50 countries being “democracies.”
Pathetic State Department propagandist demands the US media line in
lock-step behind the neocon regime change in Venezuela. Totalitarian! (Plus
he is objectively wrong about what happened in Venezuela). Liar.
Lee has a reputation of being a
no-nonsense reporter, known for legendary battles of wits with a long
succession of State Department spokespeople. He did the world another favor this time, exposing the complete
disrespect of US diplomacy for international law – namely, the division of
the world into “democracies” and others.
Later on in the briefing, Palladino
is asked about the number of countries that recognize Guaido, and he tries to
spin it thus:
You know the number of countries.
But we’ve gotten major support in the Western hemisphere, and I would just
point that out, as well as Europe. And if
we look at the democracies, we’re doing pretty well as well. Okay?
So much for the fancy talk about
“rules-based world order” and even President Donald Trump’s proclamations about
“sovereignty,” made in last year’s address to the UN General Assembly. Simply
put, the US and its allies count as “real” countries, and everyone else
doesn’t. And oh by the way, it’s
Washington that decides what’s “democratic,” not you – got that?
If US is all for sovereignty, it
should stop meddling in other countries’ affairs – Lavrov
To make this even more absurd, Palladino’s key argument for Guaido’s
legitimacy is that he invoked the Venezuelan constitution – except that
constitution only envisions a 30-day period for an “interim president,” and
only in case the normal chain of succession is disrupted, which it manifestly
was not. Guaido declared himself president on January 23. His “mandate” has long since expired – on the very day he tried to
force the border from Colombia with US “aid” trucks, in fact.
Weak sauce indeed.
But the most important thing is, that we keep plowing more and more
foreign aid money into these think tanks who have keep pushing the regime
change agenda to enrich themselves and their foreign benefactors while
destroying the lives of ordinary Americans.
From Stephen Lendman:
Excerpt:
Trump’s Dystopian Budget Proposal
Trump’s dead on arrival budget proposal to Congress is all about
funding greater militarism and belligerence, along with serving corporate
interests and high-net worth households – while gutting vital social programs.v It’s a proposal only Wall Street,
the military, industrial, security complex, Big Oil, and monied interests could
love.
Totaling $4.75 trillion,
Trump wants an increase of $34 billion
in war spending, euphemistically called “defense” – at a time sharp cuts
are needed. Washington’s only enemies are invented ones. No real ones
exist. He wants $8.6 billion more for wall construction along the southern
border with Mexico.
His priorities include slashing Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps,
housing assistance, student loans, and other essential social programs – along
with big cuts in environmental protection programs.
He wants about $1.5 trillion cut from Medicaid spending in the next decade, $845
million less for Medicare over the same period, $25 billion from Social
Security and disability spending, a 9% reduction in non-defense spending across
the board – funds shifted to
“defense” priorities, corporate handouts, and other initiatives benefitting
high-net worth households.
Other proposed cuts over the next
decade include $220 billion less for
food stamps, $21 billion from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF),
$207 billion less for student loans, along with billions more cut from housing
assistance and other social programs.
NOTE: IN FEBRUARY 2017 DURING HIS
FIRST ADDRESS TO A JOINT CONGRESSIONAL SESSION, TRUMP PLEDGED “NO CHANGES” TO
SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE.
He said “America must put its own
citizens first…Above all else, we will keep our promises to the American
people…Our obligation is to serve,
protect, and defend the citizens of the United States.”
He broke virtually every positive
promise made to ordinary Americans, serving monied interests exclusively. His
FY 2020 budget proposal calls for more of the same, disdainful of the general welfare he doesn’t give a hoot about.
He wants funding for renewable energy initiatives slashed by 70% –
from around $2.3 billion to $700 million. He favors eliminating the Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy altogether, wanting energy innovation left entirely to the private sector at its discretion…
The type society Trump and hardline ideologues in his regime favor is
all about serving privileged interests exclusively, wanting ordinary
Americans left on their own sink or swim – social safety net spending abolished
in their ideal world.
One way he aims to increase
military spending for warmaking is by
increasing a so-called overseas operations (slush) fund from $69 billion this
year to $165 billion in 2020. The
budget includes $33 billion in greater
“defense” spending to counter the “malign influence” of Russia China, Iran,
North Korea, and other sovereign independent states…
According to a senior regime
official, his budget proposes “more
reductions in spending than any (previous US) president in history” – taking
pride in what demands shame.
Looking at the Trump Administration’s budget proposal leaves
no doubt whose interests are being promoted by these think tanks, “their own.” It is they who prosper from the finanacial
devastation of America, for it is they who call the shots in congress. It is the Think Tanks that decide if and when
America will go to war, and for whose benefit.
Remember the words of George Orwell:
“The war is not meant to be won,
it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical
society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new
version is the past and no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always
planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by
the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over
either Eurasia or East Asia, but to keep the very structure of society intact.”
Welcome to the Think Tank Utopia, endless war, endless poverty
and endless subjugation. That is Think
Tank’s America. Meanwhile American’s are
left with The Workingman’s Blues.
