Afgelopen maandag in het BBC World Service radionieuws van 23.30 u. het bericht dat Kamala Harris, tijdens haar bezoek in Guatemala, de bevolking daar heeft voorgehouden niet naar de VS te vertrekken….. (ze weigert deze mensen uiteraard vluchteling te noemen)
Het grootste deel van de Guatemalteekse bevolking zucht al jaren onder de terreur van doodseskaders met o.a. (ex-) leger- en (ex-) politiepersoneel….. Terreur die zich vooral richt op de oorspronkelijke bewoners (Maya’s) en het verarmde deel van de rest van de bevolking, dit is dan ook de oorzaak voor het op vlucht slaan van deze mensen……
Harris sprak alleen over het aanpakken van corruptie in Guatemala en de rest van Midden-Amerika, volgens deze helleveeg is dat de reden dat men het heil elders zoekt, logisch dat ze niet over de doodseskaders spreekt daar ze anders de mensen die vertrekken vluchtelingen moet noemen…… (en daarvoor zijn VN regels, zoals het VN Vluchtelingenverdrag, dat overigens door westerse landen als de VS [en Nederland] met voeten wordt getreden………… Vandaar ook dat ze de bevolking voorhield dat ze teruggestuurd zullen worden als ze toch de grens met de VS bereiken…….
Hare inhumane kwaadaardigheid Kamala Harris tijdens haar waarschuwing aan het Guatemalteekse volk…..
Er is dan in tegenstelling tot beloften van oorlogsmisdadiger en mensenrechtenschender Biden, niets veranderd met diens aantreden, het inhumane schoftenbeleid t.a.v. vluchtelingen door de Trump administratie wordt in feite gewoon voortgezet……. Waar ik nog aan toe moet voegen dat onder president Obama (en Biden als vicepresident) er ook grote aantallen vluchtelingen werden gedeporteerd, o.a. mensen uit Honduras waar Hillary Clinton (minister van BuZa onder Obama) samen met de CIA een staatsgreep organiseerde en regisseerde, waarna de door de VS geparachuteerde juntaleider (‘president’) een waar schrikbewind begon onder de bevolking en wel zo dat men massaal op de vlucht sloeg richting…. VS!! En ook toen werden kinderen van vluchtelingen afgenomen en werden vastgezet in wat je niet anders dan als concentratiekampen kan zien…..
De VS heeft een dikke vinger in de Guatemalteekse terreurpap en het is dan ook een grote schande wat Harris uit haar smerige strot durfde op te lepelen…. Harris zei verder dat de VS en de Guatemalteekse regering samenwerken om de situatie voor de grote onderlaag te verbeteren, dit door de corruptie aan te pakken, terwijl juist de grote bedrijven uit de VS profiteren van deze corruptie en deze in stand willen houden……. Het is zeker dat er niets tegen de doodseskaders zal worden ondernomen, immers deze hebben voor het overgrote deel goede banden met VS terreurorganisatie CIA, bovendien profiteert ook die organisatie van de corruptie in Guatemala….
De VS heeft trouwens aan de zuidgrenzen van landen als Mexico militairen die moeten helpen bij het voorkomen dat vluchtelingen verder naar het noorden, richting VS vluchten….. Nogmaals: mensen die op de vlucht zijn geslagen voor terreur waar de VS deze ofwel steunt, dan wel zelfs een staatsgreep heeft georganiseerd zodat een ‘VS vriendelijke’ dictator de belangen van de VS behartigt, iets dat altijd ten koste gaat van de grote onderlaag in die landen…….
Nogmaals: niets van Harris over de terreur waaronder deze mensen moeten leven, terreur die wordt gesteund door de CIA, immers onder de arme bevolking en de oorspronkelijke bevolking bevinden zich velen die zich verzetten tegen het smerige neoliberale beleid van de grootste regeringspartijen, die via smerige trucs de verkiezingen keer op keer winnen…… En ja daar zitten veel mensen tussen die (volkomen terecht) het socialisme aanhangen en als de VS ergens de pest aan heeft zijn het wel socialisten….
Ongelofelijk
dat men werkelijk denkt dat met Biden de situatie voor veel landen
zal verbeteren als het gaat om mensenrechten en misdaden tegen de
menselijkheid >> waarom zou men dat denken als je ziet dat Biden tot
de weinige VS presidenten behoort die al voor diens presidentschap
aangemerkt moet worden als oorlogsmisdadiger…… Deze
‘twijfelachtige eer’ verwierf Biden al onder ‘vredesduif’ Obama, als
diens vicepresident is hij mede verantwoordelijk voor de illegale
oorlogen die de VS aanging en de oorlogen die de VS veroorzaakte tijdens de administratie van Obama…… Dit
nog naast medeverantwoordelijkheid voor het ingrijpen in landen middels het organiseren van
opstanden en zelfs staatsgrepen, zoals die in het Honduras van
2009….. Deze coup werd door Hillary Clinton, destijds VS minister van buitenlandse zaken, georganiseerd en samen met de CIA geregisseerd….. (nogmaals: onder medeverantwoordelijkheid van Joe Biden en Barack Obama….)
Sinds
die tijd is er een waar (beter: zwaar) terreurbewind gaande in
Honduras, waarvan al velen het slachtoffer zijn geworden en milieu-
en mensenrechtenactivisten als Berta Cáceres vogelvrij zijn
verklaard……… Een aantal van hen zijn als Cáceres vermoord en niet zelden
op een vreselijk barbaarse manier……. Ondanks dat de verkiezingen
die sinds de staatsgreep in Honduras werden gehouden en die
overduidelijk waren gestoken, werd er geen kritiek geleverd door de
VS of de rest van het westen, dit in sterke tegenstelling tot andere
landen in Latijns-Amerika, die niet als een hond achter de VS
aanlopen en waar de westerse landen na elke verkiezing stellen dat
deze werden gemanipuleerd (hoewel internationale waarnemers ze wel
als eerlijk beoordeelden, zoals de laatste verkiezingen in
Venezuela)……
Het gaat
de VS en de rest van het westen dan ook om het veiligstellen van
grondstoffen en belangenbehartiging van westerse bedrijven in die landen,
zo heeft de NAVO nu ook 2 bases in Colombia……. Over Colombia
gesproken: gisternacht op BBC World Service het bericht dat de regering
van Álvaro
Uribe Vélez,
veelal aangeduid als (Álvaro) Uribe, die het land regeerde van 2002
tot augustus 2010, verantwoordelijk is voor massamoorden, dit door de vondst van massagraven waarover men
bekend maakte dat daar 6.500 burgers werden gevonden, vermoord door
regeringstroepen…… (eerder ging men uit van rond de 2.000 moorden) Uribe, de fascist die goede banden onderhield met zowel
George W. Bush als ‘vredesduif’ Obama……
Trump
sloot een verdrag met Honduras en Guatemala, om
vluchtelingenkaravanen richting VS uit elkaar te slaan (mensen die
vluchten vanwege overheidsgeweld en de uitzichtloze situatie voor de
sterk verarmde grote onderlaag). Je zou verwachten dat Biden
onmiddellijk een streep heeft gezet door dat misselijkmakende
verdrag, gezien zijn woorden in aanloop van de verkiezingen, maar
niet is minder waar >> Biden laat Honduras en Guatemala gewoon doorgaan
met de zware repressie en het uiteenslaan van vluchtelingen
karavanen, die na het verdwijnen van Trump weer zijn ontstaan en
waarvan er een paar alweer op weg zijn naar de grens tussen Mexico en
de VS, waar al 25.000 vluchtelingen wachten om te worden toegelaten
tot de VS, of die ten einde raad de gevaarlijke illegale overgang van
de grens zoeken, waar velen het leven laten in de woestijn……
Roberta
Jacobson, Bidens hoogste ambtenaar die de opdracht kreeg om een
nieuwe, veilige en humane migratie politiek te vormen, heeft Biden
gevraagd geduldig te zijn en heeft er bij hem op aangedrongen
geen nieuwe migranten toe te laten…… (nogmaals terwijl er al
25.000 mensen aan de grens wachten om te worden toegelaten, mensen
die daar vaak al langer dan een jaar wachten, terwijl zij op de vlucht zijn voor door de VS veroorzaakte terreur…)….
Overigens is het de vraag wat Biden en Jacobson achter gesloten
deuren hebben besproken, daar het bepaald niet ondenkbaar is dat deze
woorden van te voren door Biden werden ingefluisterd, immers de man
is een enorme hypocriet….)
Bidens
immigratie politiek houdt o.a. in dat de VS 4 miljard dollar zal
spenderen aan Honduras, Guatemala en El Salvador, om met dat geld de
reden voor het vluchten tegen te gaan, waarbij de Biden administratie
ervan uitgaat dat dit puur economische redenen zijn, wat ze duidelijk
niet zijn en dat moet hij gezien zijn geschiedenis weten!!! Volkomen terecht dan ook dat John Perry, de schrijver
van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, stelt dat geld pompen in landen
waar de regering voor enorme ellende zorgt niet zal helpen, sterker
nog dat kan het probleem alleen maar verergeren (en nogmaals: totdat
de foute machthebbers weg zijn, al is dat zelfs geen garantie zoals
Perry opmerkt, daar het systeem erop is gericht om de belangen van
het westen veilig te stellen….. Een ‘Catch 22’ situatie, immers
Biden en zijn administratie zullen op zeker niets doen tegen deze
belangenbehartiging…..
Perry
schrijft in zijn artikel dat eerder op London Review of Books werd
gepubliceerd en dat ik overnam van Information Clearing House (ICH), o.a. over
de in feite onwettige president van Honduras, Juan
Orlando Hernández (JOH), dat deze van Honduras een narcostaat heeft
gemaakt en dat een laboratorium voor cocaïne, onder zijn verantwoording beschermd door het
leger, verantwoordelijk is voor de maandelijkse ‘export’ van honderden
kilo’s cocaïne naar Miami (Florida)…… Terwijl organisaties die
verantwoordelijk zijn voor herstel na bijvoorbeeld orkanen amper of
niet werken, de hulpgelden verdwijnen voor een groot deel in
‘bepaalde zakken’, vandaar ook dat men in Honduras zegt dat wanneer
deze organisaties drugslaboratoria waren geweest, de boel wel zou
werken…..
Onder het ICH artikel kan je klikken voor een ‘Dutch vertaling’, dat kost je wel enkele tientallen seconden aan tijd:
If it were a narco
lab, it would be working
By
John Perry
February 18, 2021
“Information
Clearing House”
– On the day he was inaugurated, Joe Biden halted the construction of
Trump’s Mexican border wall. A few days earlier, 1500 miles to the
south, a new ‘caravan’ of at
least eight thousand Honduran migrants had set off northwards,
partly in the hope that by the time they tried to cross into Texas,
Biden’s promised softening of immigration policy might have taken
effect.
Obstacles left by
Trump still stand in their way. Agreements he made with Honduras and
Guatemala led to police attacking and dispersing the refugees.
Scattered groups are still heading towards the Mexican frontier at
Chiapas – according to one
Trump-era official, ‘now our southern border’ – where they
will face Mexican troops. If they eventually reach the Rio Grande,
they’ll join 25,000 asylum seekers in camps, waiting to be
processed by US border officials. Roberta Jacobson, Biden’s
official charged with forming his new ‘secure, managed and humane’
migration policy, has asked
them to be patient and pleaded for no new arrivals.
Why do people take
these risks? The truth is that Honduras is a failed state and, unless
US policy towards it changes radically, many thousands more will head
north. Since the military
coup in 2009 there have been three corrupt elections. The last,
in 2017, which saw Juan Orlando Hernández (JOH) re-elected when
he had clearly lost, led to even more repression. Persecution of
human rights defenders is unceasing, even after international
condemnation of the murder
of Berta Cáceres five years ago. Seven were killed in 2020, and
four young leaders from Garifuna communities, abducted in a single
night seven months ago, are still
missing.
Curfews during the
Covid-19 pandemic appear to have worsened the day-to-day violence:
eleven corpses were found in the street in one week in January;
bodies are being chopped up and left wrapped
in plastic. Perhaps the most emotive case occurred earlier this
month: a doctor and student nurse, who had been working with Covid
patients, were arrested for breaching the 9 p.m. curfew. The doctor
was freed, but the nurse died in police custody. Protests erupted.
Five people were arrested, tortured
by the police and forced to confess to crimes they didn’t
commit.
In November, two
hurricanes hit
a country totally unprepared for them, destroying 6000 homes and
seriously damaging 85,000 more. By December, JOH was touring
financial institutions in Washington looking for money. He collected
more than $3 billion in aid for hurricane victims, despite
well-publicised corruption in the disbursement of funds donated
earlier to tackle Covid-19. Shortly after his visit, federal
prosecutors in New York –who a year ago established that JOH had
created a narco-state
– filed documents in a new
drugs case. After quoting JOH saying he would ‘shove the drugs
right up the noses of the gringos’ by flooding the US with cocaine,
they accuse him of ‘embezzling aid money provided by the United
States through fraudulent non-governmental organisations’. A
Honduran narcotics lab, protected by the military on JOH’s orders,
had been sending hundreds of kilos of cocaine to Miami every month.
The massive disruption
caused by the storms provoked a fresh peak of Covid-19 infections:
1100 new cases on a single day in mid-January, the highest so far.
Weakened by corruption and underfunding, the health service is
overwhelmed. At least 75 doctors and dozens of nurses have died, many
as a result of overcrowded wards and poor equipment. ‘We have to
wait until someone dies to give their bed to someone else,’ a
doctor said.
To fill the gaps, seven mobile hospitals were ordered last March but
only two are working properly. The head of the agency which made the
$47 million deal, accused of corruption, was sacked. People protested under
the banner: ‘If it were a narco lab, it would be working.’
Biden’s immigration
policy includes spending $4 billion in El Salvador, Guatemala and
Honduras to address the problems that spur migration. It should be
obvious, not least from the evidence accumulated by New York
prosecutors, that the ruling party in Tegucigalpa is unfit to govern,
even if JOH is replaced in elections in November. But the problems go
much deeper than that: the whole governing system serves the needs of
big business – often North American companies – as it exploits
both the land and the workforce, destroying the environment and
maintaining the
second biggest gap between rich and poor in Latin America.
Throwing money at the problems could simply make them worse unless
Biden makes the fundamental changes in US policy that both Obama and
his secretary of state Hillary Clinton refused to contemplate.
Perhaps aware that this won’t be achieved quickly or easily, Biden
officials appear to have quietly asked
Mexico and its neighbours to continue to deter migrant caravans, even
as a new one is said to be forming.
JOH meanwhile faces
not only political rejection but possible extradition if the US turns
against him. He’s reported
to be ‘trying to figure out how to refashion himself from a Trump
ally into a Biden one’. He tweeted a photo
of himself with Biden in 2015: ‘I hope we can work together,’ he
wrote, ‘like in the past.’
Desiree
Hellegers heeft een uitgebreid artikel geschreven over de door de
VS georganiseerde en geregisseerde coup tegen het socialistische
bewind van Salvador Allende op 11 september 1973 (de eerste 9/11).
Hellegers
begint haar artikel met de vraag op Facebook van haar vriendengroep waar zij zich bevonden
gedurende belangrijke gebeurtenissen als de 9/11 aanvallen op de Twin
Towers en de moord op John F. Kennedy in 1963. Ze vraagt zich af of
ze later op de huidige tijd zal terugkijken als een korte pauze in
het afzakken van de VS naar een ‘full blown’ fascistische staat (het
aantreden van Biden als VS president ziet ze dan als pauze*). Als dat gebeurt
zal ook de klimaatverandering verder worden aangejaagd door de VS,
wat overigens ook gebeurde onder Obama, die zelfs toestemming gaf
voor de bouw van een enorme kolencentrale aan de rand van een uiterst
belangrijk natuurgebied de Sundarbans dit over de grens met India in dit natuurgebied, op de kant behorend tot Bangladesh………
Onder Obama werd de
VS de op één na grootste steenkoolexporteur, de absolute nummer 1 is het als de VS zo
door de klimaatverandering geteisterde Australië dat nu nog 1
miljoen ton steenkool per dag exporteert en daar binnenkort nog een
fikse schep bovenop doet, als de nieuwste en grootste
steenkoolterminal ter wereld wordt geopend, waarvoor een zeekanaal dwars door het Groot
Barrièrerif werd gegraven…… Het is maar de vraag of Biden inderdaad een andere koers zal inslaan, immers ook hij is een marionet van de oliemaatschappijen, het militair-industrieel complex en de financiële maffia…….*
Ook
besteedt Hellegers aandacht aan de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen
het Noord-Vietnamese volk en bijvoorbeeld de rol van Henry Kissinger,
een uitermate smerige oorlogsmisdadiger die al lang in Scheveningen
gevangen had moeten zitten (na te zijn berecht door het
Internationaal Strafhof >> ICC)… Echter deze schoft, die
schunnig genoeg ook de Nobelprijs voor de Vrede kreeg, zal gewoon in
een bed buiten de gevangenis sterven, zoals zoveel witte
oorlogsmisdadigers……
Hellegers wijst o.a. op de triomf van het huidige Chileense volk dat in een
referendum eiste dat de grondwet die door Pinochet in 1980 werd
opgesteld wordt vervangen door een nieuwe grondwet en waarmee men nu
bezig is deze op te stellen.
‘Terug
naar Chili van 1973’ en de bloedige coup van fascist,
massamoordenaar, verkrachter en martelbeul Pinochet, die zoals gezegd
werd gesteund door de VS (ofwel de CIA, zonder deze hulp was de coup mislukt!!).
Hellegers spreekt veel over de politiek activist, protestzanger en
schrijver Victor Jara, die eveneens werd vermoord na de bloedige
staatsgreep in 1973, samen met minstens 3.000 anderen, o.a. bestaande
uit intellectuelen, studenten, professoren, advocaten en politiek activisten.
Lees
het uitgebreide artikel van Hellegers en zegt het voort, de reguliere
media hebben amper aandacht voor de enorme invloed van de VS die
zoals gezegd ook de grondslag was voor de coup in het Chili van
1973….. (overigens heeft de VS voor en na die coup nog meer staatsgrepen
met wapens, organisatie en regie gesteund in Latijns Amerika, zoals
die in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazilië en die tegen de socialistische president
Morales van Bolivia….) In het artikel verder een vergelijking van Victor Jara met Martiun Luther King en een korte beschuwing over het ijskoude inhumane neoliberalisme, geïntroduceerd door de duivels Margareth Thatcher, de Britse ex-premier en C-acteur en VS president Ronald Reagan, een politieke ideologie die de meeste westerse landen schunnig genoeg nog steeds volgen….. (‘onze’ huidige valse premier Rutte stelt wel dat hij het neoliberalisme niet meer als leidraad neemt, echter dat is de zoveelste leugen van deze aartsleugenaar!!)
You can easily carbon
date your friends on Facebook based on where they were during any
major milestone in U.S. history. As a university professor teaching
now for decades at what we euphemistically call a “land grant”
university, many of my students these days were born after 9-11–into
the U.S.’s seemingly endless “War on Terror.” It’s a war that
some of their family members died in, but one that few of them seem
to know much about.
Last month, older
friends on Facebook who came of age in the 1960s were busy reflecting
on what they were doing when they heard the news that JFK had been
assassinated. Personally, I had only recently graduated from diapers
to plastic pants and was likely occupied with important matters like
trying to do the twist in front of the TV while my grandmother
clapped and sloshed Scotch all over her TV table. But like most
Americans who have not washed down decades of Rush Limbaugh with
great swigs of QAnon Kool-Aid, I can’t help but wonder how we will
look back at this moment in history. Is this the moment we turn the
tide, or is it a brief respite from the country’s descent into
full-blown fascism? The latter scenario would mean, of course, full
speed ahead into climate collapse, given that the U.S. military is
hands down the single largest carbon emissions machine on the planet,
and our collective dust speck is already close to the boiling point.
May you live in
interesting times. You got that right. These times are so interesting
that we’ve had a lame duck president holed up in the White House
consulting with his legal team from the Island of Malevolent Misfit
Toys about the possibilities for declaring martial law to overturn
the results of the election and it’s not the top story.
That stands to reason,
I guess, when you’ve got a pandemic death count equivalent of a
hundred 9-11s, and across the country bodies stacking up like
cordwood in overstuffed mobile morgue units.
It’s hard to sustain
the level of national alert so many of us felt during the run up to
the election and the vote count, when Trump’s
automatic-weapon-waving goon squads were busy battering on windows at
voting precincts or sky-writing “Surrender Gretchen” over the
Michigan State House. A meme was making the rounds at the time on
Facebook: American politics as Night of the Living Dead. Personally,
I was starting to feel like an insomnia-addled Lady Macbeth who’d
been mainlining Halloween candy or days, and as in all things, I
blamed my lovely spouse, who had shopped for Halloween candy like he
was stocking up for Y2K.
Like me, my spouse
knows how to brace for the worst, a skill we bonded over when we met
organizing against the second Gulf War. One of the biggest
misconceptions about the anti-war “movement,” if such a thing
exists right now, is that peace activists somehow hate veterans.
Since well before the war in Vietnam, the U.S. military has given
veterans critical insight into the American war machine, along with
heavy helpings of trauma and self-loathing. Some of my favorite peace
activists are veterans, my spouse chief and foremost among them. We
bonded organizing protests and staging a die-in in front of the
Portland federal building. It was one of those “what are you doing
after the die-in?” kinds of courtships.
I don’t remember
exactly when I began thinking of Victor Jara’s hands and how they’d
been crushed by Chilean soldiers in the early days of the
U.S.-sponsored Chilean coup in 1973. I do know, though, that as my
spouse and I took a left turn to drop our ballots off at our local
library, Victor Jara had been on both our minds. It wasn’t a total
coincidence, given that only a day or two before, on October 25,
Chileans had voted overwhelmingly in favor of drafting a new
constitution.
The referendum was a
concession wrenched from President Sebastian Piñera following a year
of street protests and civil unrest. The vote was a definitive kiss-off
to the Chilean constitution of 1980, enacted under the regime of
General Augusto Pinochet.
Living in the U.S.,
you’d never know that Chile had had its own national disaster on
September 11, nearly three decades before the U.S.
Not many Americans can
define neoliberalism, let alone know that on September 11, 1973, it
was ushered into Chile by U.S.-made tanks and at the butt of
U.S.-made guns—automatic weapons of the sort Trump’s “very
fine” friends never seem to tire of waving. And not at all unlike
the militarized Portland Police, and the BORTAC and Homeland Security
armies that spent all summer pounding and traumatizing friends of
mine in the streets of Portland, and spraying them with chemical
weapons long ago judged too dangerous to use in war, the health
effects being so severe and long term.
It was on September
11, 1973, that Richard Nixon and his henchman Henry Kissinger swept
Pinochet to power as the front man for the U.S.-sponsored
“experiment” in neoliberalism. A folksinger-songwriter, often
referred to as “Chile’s Bob Dylan,” Victor Jara would be the
most visible of more than 3,000 Chileans executed by Pinochet’s
death squads in September, as the coup began. You can get a quick
overview of the horrors that the U.S. helped unleash on Chileans in
the 1970s by watching the 2019 Netflix documentary Massacre
at the Stadium.
Shortly after
Pinochet’s reign of terror began, an estimated five thousand were
detained at a Santiago stadium—then named Estadio Chile, and since
renamed Estadio Victor Jara—and another twenty thousand at the
Estadio Nacional across town. Professors, students, musicians, farm
and factory workers were crowded shoulder to shoulder and sorted into
lines to live or die, to be interrogated, beaten, tortured, and/or
murdered. At Estadio Chile, more than seventy were executed on site,
while others were “disappeared.” Today a quote painted on the
back of the Estadio Nacional reads: “Un
pueblo sin memoria es un pueblo sin futuro” – “A people
without memory are a people without a future.”
Jara grew up poor, in
a family of farmworkers, but went on to become a theater director and
teacher, and to achieve international visibility with songs like
“Manifesto,” which speaks to Jara’s understanding of art
as a critical tool in struggles for justice, as an instrument of
decolonizing resistance, of spiritual, material, and ecological
liberation.
“I don’t sing for
the love of singing, /or because I have a good voice,” sang
Jara, “I sing because my guitar/has both feeling and reason. It
has a heart of earth/and the wings of a dove….”
Jara’s music was
inspired by his mother Amanda Martínez’s love of folk music rooted
in her Indigenous Mapuche heritage; his music was also shaped by a
Catholic education that included a brief period in the seminary.
Jara’s music was embraced in the 1960s and ‘70s by American folk
heavies like Pete Seeger and Joan Baez. Arlo Guthrie and Holly Near
are among the American songwriters who have since written tribute
songs. In the run-up to the election of Allende, Jara’s version of
the song “Venceremos” or “We Will Overcome,” became the
anthem of Allende’s Popular Unity Coalition, and also figured
centrally in eyewitness accounts of Jara’s death. Pinochet’s
U.S.-supported forces beat and tortured him, smashing his wrists.
At
some point in the stadium, Jara reportedly sang to the other
prisoners “Venceremos,” a song he’d adapted with new lyrics
that had egged Allende on to victory. Before he was executed, shot
more than 40 times by Pinochet’s U.S.-funded forces, Jara wrote his
final song: “What horror the face of fascism creates!/They carry
out their plans with knife-like precision./Nothing matters to
them./To them, blood equals medals,/slaughter is an act of
heroism./Oh God, is this the world that you created?”
No human cost was too
high to pay to usher in neoliberalism, to eviscerate the gains that
labor had made under Allende’s Popular Unity Coalition, and to
maintain a steady flow of cheap copper, fruit and fish to the U.S.
under the auspices of “trade liberalization.” The new
constitution passed under Pinochet’s dictatorship rolled back the
reforms instituted under Allende. It expanded the power of the
presidency and enshrined private property and corporate profits over
social needs; Pinochet rolled back taxes on corporations and the
wealthy, and eliminated a host of government services. State-owned
companies, public housing, education, health care, and pensions were
all privatized, turned into profit centers for corporations and the
wealthy. The constitution written under Pinochet limited reforms,
and the gap today between rich and poor in Chile is one of the
highest in Latin America.
Jara may be
technically dead, but if you do a bit of digging around on the
internet, you’ll see evidence of his long afterlife; hence the
title of a documentary about his impact on musicians in particular: The
Resurrection of Victor Jara.
Tens of thousands of hands have gone on playing Jara’s songs in the
nearly fifty years since his torture and murder in the stadium. Jara,
says Chilean musician Horacio Salinas, in the documentary, “could
create a ceremonial effect with his music.” On youtube, you can
find countless videos of musicians playing Jara’s songs, and songs
written in tribute to him, including my personal favorite, “Victor
Jara’s Hands,” by Joey Burns of the Tucson-based indie-rock
band Calexico, sung alternately in Spanish and English: “Songs of
the birds like hands/ call the earth to witness/ Sever from fear
before taking flight.”
And for the past year,
as across the streets of the U.S. Black Lives Matter activists have
demanded justice for George Floyd and the defunding of police
departments that consume the lion’s share of city budgets across
the country, Jara has been resurrected again and again–in an
all-star Chilean studio recording–and on the streets of Chile.
At an October 25, 2019 march in Santiago with a crowd estimated at
more than a million, people sang together Jara’s anti-war anthem
“El Derecho De Vivir En Paz,” or “The Right to Live in Peace,”
while countless
people played along on the guitar.
This past year,
workers in Chile have risen up again to demand a world in which
workers do more than just struggle to survive, one in which everyone
has a right to not just bread, but roses, music, and art.
Over the past year,
Chilean women have created their own distinctive, woman-centered
actions on the streets of Chile, with thousands collectively
performing the song “Un
Violador en Tu Camino,” or “A Rapist in Your Path,” in a
public rite of resistance to rape culture and femicide.
The song was inspired
by the work of the renowned Argentinian-Brazilian feminist
anthropologist/bioethicist Rita
Laura Segato. The song calls out the role of police and the
courts in perpetrating and perpetuating sexual violence that repeats,
on a smaller scale, the systemic rape and torture of women that
happened under Pinochet, and that is a central feature of fascism.
If the goal in
Chile—as it would be later in Iraq—was, as Naomi
Klein has argued–to disorient or “shock” the country into
submitting to a radically different and patently exploitative
economic system, the system that was imposed was also more rigidly
patriarchal. Sexual violence and degradation were integral
parts of Pinochet’s fascist playbook. But as Chileans battle the
legacy of Pinochet, this rite of feminist resistance, together with
other longstanding organizing, is propelling Chile to break new
ground internationally: Chile will be the first country in the world
with a constitutional assembly comprised equally
of women and men.
I turned twelve the
month that Pinochet came to power, and I have no memory whatsoever of
hearing about the murder of Jara, the mutilation of his hands, or the
thousands of Chileans who were tortured or disappeared. Looking back,
I find this fact stranger for the fact that I grew up within miles of
the White House. And when I look back on growing up in two very white
suburbs on the edge of Washington D.C., it might as well have been
Apartheid South Africa, the lines of demarcation between the Black
inner city; Georgetown, where my father was a professor; and the
white suburbs, were so clear and stark.
My first inklings of
the Chilean coup came in 1976, when the political violence of the
Pinochet regime erupted in Washington, D.C. I was fifteen, and a
friend of my older sister was dating Pablo Letelier, the son of
Orlando Letelier, when the latter was blown to pieces in a
car bombing, along with his co-worker Ronni Karpen Moffett.
Orlando Letelier had been a close associate of Allende and remained
until his death an outspoken critic of Pinochet, who was eventually
pegged for the bombing, though a fat lot of good that did.
By the age of fifteen
in 1976, I was not a complete newbie when it came to assassinations.
Just months before the Chilean Coup, in July of 1973, Colonel
Yosef Alon, a 42-year-old an Israeli Air Force pilot and military
attaché, whose daughter Yael rode the bus with us to school in the
morning, was assassinated in their driveway.
But Alon’s
assassination was not the first to have entered the sphere of my
privileged white childhood. My guess is that would have been the
Yablonski murders on New Year’s Eve, 1969.
We attended a
parochial school at the time called The Little Flower School, which
made the news not too long ago as the grade school alma mater of
Brett Kavanaugh. I was eight and my sister was seven when we learned
that the in-laws of one of the teachers at Little Flower—“Mrs.
Yablonski”—had all
been mowed down in their Pennsylvania home: Chip Yablonski, the
President of the United Mine Workers Union, his wife Margaret, and
their daughter Charlotte Yablonski.
I imagine this was
around the time I came home one day from school to find myself locked
out of the house, and when I banged on the window and peered inside,
I found my two older siblings had staged their own murder, knives
lying on the floor, a theatrical flourish of ketchup here and there.
Perhaps I’ve coped with my third-grade trauma by picturing myself
as a stony-faced critic who found the scene unconvincing, their
characters lacking in development.
The field of
Epigenetics assumes that stress is genetically transmitted. I don’t
need to know that my genetic fibers are somehow entangled in my
parents’ to understand that I’ve carried some of their trauma
into my own life. I grew up listening to—and, at times taking notes
on—my parents’ stories of trauma. My mother’s stories were
about growing up the child of a working-class single mother too poor
to raise her. She told stories about kids who accidentally jumped off
trains onto chainsaws, and about her experience dressing dead bodies
as a young student nurse on a deserted ward.
My father’s trauma
centered around the May 10, 1940, Nazi invasion of the Netherlands.
Barely a month short of his fourteenth birthday, he ended up lying in
a ditch next to his eighty-year-old grandmother, mortars flying,
trees bursting into flames overhead. His family narrowly made it
across the border before it closed. My father had four brothers,
including twins, one of whom, my Uncle Pierre, had suffered brain
damage from oxygen deprivation during delivery. My father lived with
the knowledge throughout his life that something as small as a hand
visibly shaking as a man pockets his papers, and they might have
landed in Westerbork or Auschwitz rather than in England, and his
brothers might have been medically tortured and dissected.
I know exactly where I
was when my father’s life ended on May 8, V.E. Day, 1979, just
outside Amsterdam. I was accompanying him on his lecture tour, the
chance to see Europe a high school graduation present. I was at my
uncle’s house, my father’s body still warm on the couch before
me, where he’d reclined after diagnosing his own heart attack. He
died just two days before the thirty-ninth anniversary of the Nazi
invasion of the Netherlands in 1940. The last destination I visited
with my father was Anne Frank’s “Secret Annex.” War, as I
learned on that trip, throws out shockwaves and unexploded
ordinance—both physical and emotional—that explode across
generations, and can shave decades off a single life.
While the “Neoliberal
Experiment” began in Chile in 1973 with tanks and guns—and on a
smaller scale in New York City with the manufactured financial crisis
of 1975—Reagan would become its American figurehead, its
presidential mad social scientist. I was in my second year at
Georgetown when Reagan was inaugurated, and I can remember exactly
where I was when Reagan was elected 40 years ago, on November 4,
1980. I was at the Republican election watch party at some tony D.C.
hotel, the details documented somewhere in a newspaper article buried
deep in my office closet.
In the fall of 1980, I
was in my second-year writing for the more liberal of Georgetown’s
two student newspapers, The
Voice.
Whether the story was assigned to me or I chose it out of some
perverse curiosity or out of an unshakeable conviction that
Republicans had better hors d’oeuvres, I can’t quite remember.
While I wasn’t the most savvy reporter at the time, I can say that
voting for Reagan was as unthinkable to me then as now. And if memory
serves, I covered the election party with all the rhetorical gravitas
of a monkey throwing shit at their new zookeepers.
I would go on to
attend the inauguration in D.C., again out of the kind of curiosity
that one might feel toward newly–landed
Martians walking the red carpet from their space capsule. I was a
sophomore and busy running from one panicked deadline to the other,
but Reagan’s inaugural speech got my attention. “[A]mong all the
nations of the earth,” as Reagan
would have it, “[The U.S. was] special…The freedom and the
dignity of the individual have been more available and assured” in
the U.S. “than in any other place on Earth,” Reagan claimed.
What I missed the
first time around, though, was his distillation of neoliberal
principles: The one barrier to the “individual liberty” of
citizen/workers in a country “without ethnic or racial divisions”
was government itself. “It is time,” Reagan proclaimed, “to
check and reverse the growth of government which shows signs of
having grown beyond the consent of the governed.” While Reagan
deftly tipped his hat to working people—to “men and women who
raise our food, patrol our streets, man our mines and our factories,
teach our children,” and on and on—for Reagan, as for Trump, the
joke was on working people.
The years I spent at
Georgetown in the wake of my father’s death provided a crash course
in the importance of the social safety net that Ronald Reagan was
hell bent on gutting. At the time, if I was somewhat oblivious to the
nuances of Reagan’s political agenda, it was likely because I was
occupied a good bit of the time with trying not to have a nervous
breakdown. My personal social safety net at the time consisted of
Social Security Survivor’s Benefits, four years of free tuition to
Georgetown–where my father had taught for more than a decade–and
something I never thought very much about having: white skin. My
father’s death sent my mother off her fragile rails, and within six
months of Reagan’s inauguration, during the summer of 1981, my
sister and I were homeless.
My sister and I
learned that summer that with white skin, student I.D.’s, and a
keen eye out for security guards, there are ways of getting by on a
college campus rent-free. At the time, I didn’t think much about
the role that whiteness played in stopping us from falling any
further. I was oblivious to the fact that the safety net we found in
sleeping in vacant dorms would not have been available to us had we
been Black or brown. As it was, there would be no cops, no Karens
staring skeptically at our student I.D.’s, no guns pointed in our
faces, no one asking if we were enrolled or if we’d paid summer
rent for the dorm rooms. That experience, together with my father’s
death, would radically remap my life for decades to come.
+++
When neoliberalism
arrived in Chile, Victor Jara and working class supporters of
Socialist President Salvador Allende were under no illusions about
whose benefits the coup would serve.
If neoliberalism was
brought into Chile with guns and tanks, in the U.S., it was done with
smoke and mirrors. Reagan was inaugurated forty years ago this
January on a platform based on the self-interested lies and
deceptions crafted by the so-called “Chicago Boys”––the
architects of neoliberalism. Reagan greased his personal path to the
White House on the neoliberal snake oil of “Trickle Down Economics”
and Free
Market Fundamentalism. And while Jimmy
Carter had already gotten the ball rolling, Reagan would jump
start the neoliberal bait and switch transfer of funds from public
housing, education, and welfare, to policing, prisons, and endless
war.
Ronald Reagan was as
eager to shill for trickle-down economics and gutting
the social safety net as he’d been for the House Unamerican
Activities Committee and the warmongers at General Electric.
Meanwhile, in the UK, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was happily
breaking the glass ceiling for women intent on dropping bombs on
babies and exploiting working families. On opposite sides of the
pond, Thatcher
and Reagan were simultaneously slashing corporate taxes,
deregulating the financial industry—and setting the stage for waves
of future financial crises. And both of them were intent on breaking
labor.
Though my siblings and
I were all given four years of free tuition, in the 1980s, you didn’t
have to have a scholarship—or a parent who was a professor—to
walk away from a four-year degree debt-free or close to it. In 1983,
the year I graduated, tuition at a public university barely topped a thousand
a year.But public universities had already been on Reagan’s hit
list in the 1960s when he was governor of California, and students at
Berkeley were busy mobilizing for free speech, civil rights, and an
end to the Vietnam War.
To Reagan, Berkeley
students were nothing more than unruly “welfare bums”; free
tuition was their dole, and Reagan was hell bent on sending them
“back
to work.”
Defunding higher
education and slapping students with debt was, Reagan understood, a
path to reign in “beatniks, radicals and filthy speech advocates….”
Today California spends more money incarcerating people than it does
educating them—from K-12 through university. In the U.S.
today, tuition at public universities is ten
times higher than it was when I graduated in 1983. Inflation
counts for less
than a third of the increase.
Over the past forty
years, public universities have been steadily transformed into
student debt delivery machines operated on the backs of debt-strapped
adjuncts. University presidents, who routinely make five times more
than governors, sell students—as “customers”—on the fiction
that History–along with Literature, Women’s Studies, Comparative
Ethnic Studies, Philosophy, and the Arts–are frivolous luxuries we
can no longer afford to fully fund. The Gipper might be pleased today
to see 18-22-year-olds signing off on documents they’d need MBAs in
finance to understand and then emerging as desperate and pliable
indentured servants for corporations. Even pre-COVID, 48% of
university students in the U.S. were at risk of, or already,
experiencing houselessness.
Historian Howard Zinn
observed, “If you don’t know history, it’s as if you were born
yesterday,” and that lack of knowledge is convenient for corporate
interests intent on red-baiting and enlisting workers to rail against
social programs and benefits that their own grandparents struggled
mightily for. I may have learned nothing while I was at Georgetown
about the U.S.’s role in the Chilean coup that killed Victor Jara,
but I did learn a few things about what can happen to white American
nuns who are labeled Communist sympathizers for getting too cozy with
Indigenous farmworkers in Central America struggling for some very
basic forms of justice.
In 1981, I stumbled
across a talk Daniel Berrigan was giving on campus. Berrigan, I’ve
long since learned was a rock star of the American peace movement. By
the early 1970s, Berrigan,
a Jesuit priest, poet, playwright, and professor, had made the FBI’s
Most Wanted List for burning draft files in the parking lot of the
Catonsville, MD draft board with homemade napalm in 1968, and then
going underground to dodge the charges so he could keep organizing
other actions.
“Apologies, good
friends, for the fracture of good order, the burning of paper instead
of children,” Berrigan famously said of the action. The American
banality of evil in a nutshell.
On this particular day
in 1981, though, I knew nothing about Berrigan, who quickly
surrendered the floor anyway to a middle-aged Catholic couple, the
parents of one Jeanne Donovan, a “Maryknoll lay missioner.” And
the story the couple told went something like this: on December 2,
1980, this nice, idealistic young Catholic woman was raped
and murdered, executed at close range—along with three nuns,
Ita Ford, Maura Clarke, and Dorothy Kazel. And suddenly Donovan’s
parents had a chilling political awakening, as they began to
understand the role that U.S. military advisors and U.S.-funded and
-trained death
squads played throughout Central–and much of Latin–America in
repressing labor organizing and movements for social justice.
Donovan’s parents were extremely convincing. I couldn’t come up
with any plausible communist plot that would explain these two
straight-laced Catholic squares having to talk about the rape and
murder of their daughter.
If the 1980 crimes
against the nuns and Donovan occurred in the final month of Carter’s
administration, the perpetrators knew that it would be left to Reagan
to answer for it. It would be Reagan’s job to rationalize the rape
and murder of nuns as acceptable collateral damage in the U.S.’s
holy war against Communists. The chief spinner of malevolent tall
tales about Donovan and the nuns would be a professor of political
science at Georgetown, Reagan’s newly appointed ambassador to the
U.N.: Jeane Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick is remembered as a “principal
architect” of the bloodbath the U.S. helped fund and unleash
throughout Central America.
Questioned by
reporters, Kirkpatrick was eager to put the matter to rest, to drive
rhetorical nails into coffins that held the bodies of Donovan and
nuns that had been dragged out of the ground by ropes around their
ankles. The nuns, Kirkpatrick told TheTampa
Tribune,
“were not just nuns. The nuns were also political activists.”
They were aligned, she
claimed, with guerillas of the Farabundo Marti National
Liberation Front—the FMLN.
I have another
somewhat fonder Kirkpatrick-related memory from that same Spring
semester at Georgetown, one in which Kirkpatrick is standing at a
podium delivering a commencement address and, slowly graduating
seniors begin to rise and quietly turn their backs on her. Their
message was clear, impressive, and unapologetic: Kirkpatrick didn’t
deserve an honorary degree, and Georgetown had done them a disservice
by pretending otherwise. What Kirkpatrick did, in fact, deserve–the
student action clearly conveyed–was to be tried as a war
criminal at the Hague.
There’s a famous
quote from a Brazilian archbishop named Dom Helder Camara that
encapsulates the distinction between charity and social justice:
“When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint; when I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a Communist.” Union organizing,
demands for the redistribution of stolen Indigenous lands, and
anything else that threatened the profits of U.S. corporations would
be labelled—and battled– under Reagan as part of an international
Communist threat orchestrated by Cuba and the Soviet Union.
By the Fall of ‘81,
having had my own brief and very privileged run-in with
houselessness, I started volunteering at shelters in D.C. That
experience gave me a small window into the
ways in which poverty
served up daily reminders to D.C.’s Black residents of just how
disposable they were to the city’s white elite and any god they
might construct in their own image. Forty years of neoliberalism and
gentrification have only intensified Black poverty in D.C. And
poverty, coupled with the daily toll of racism in the U.S., can shave
years–or decades–off a life. Today white privilege in
Washington, D.C. translates into seventeen additional years of
living. Seventeen
years.
In 1981, the “Great
Communicator” was busy cranking up his racist propaganda machine to
rally low income white voters against their own best interests.
Reagan managed to sell a sizable portion of the white working class
on the patently obvious lie that the majority of welfare recipients
were not only Black but living as “queens.”
It turns out that all kinds of white folks would happily collaborate
in slashing benefits they were desperately going to need in the
future that Reagan’s administration was setting in motion–one in
which jobs would become the U.S’s main global export.
“The Gipper”
happily picked up the mantle of Nixon’s War on Drugs and ran with
it. He stoked terror at the prospect of Black crack “fiends”
running amok in inner city war zones, and SWAT teams began invading
and terrorizing Black neighborhoods. As Michelle Alexander explains
in The
New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Color Blindness,
Reagan put the U.S. squarely on the path to becoming the global
leader in locking people up. Prisons and militarized policing at home
and abroad would begin sucking up enormous amounts of money that
could have gone to housing, health care, and public education.
As expensive as
in-state college tuition is these days, the annual cost of a prison
bed in most states is equivalent to four
years of in-state college tuition.
In 2017 in California, the cost of a
single prison bed exceeded the cost of a year’s tuition and
living expenses at Harvard.
Prisons and immigrant
detention facilities generate huge profits for a tiny elite, while
brutalizing everyone else, including the people
who work there. But Nixon, Kissinger, and Pinochet were all
well aware that once people caught on to the swindle, the bait and
switch trickle-down-free-market government-for-the-corporations game,
there was a good chance they would need guns, tanks, and plenty of
tear gas to hold back the rebellion.
Predictably one of the
first casualties of the “neoliberal Experiment” would be people
living in public housing. They would increasingly land on city
streets and sidewalks, and the lucky ones in shelters like the ones I
worked at in Seattle in the mid ‘80s. Between 1978–midway through
the Carter administration–and 1983, midway through Reagan’s first
term, the HUD budget was slashed by nearly three quarters. It went
from “$83
billion
to a little more than $18
billion
(in 2004 constant dollars) and shelters opened throughout the United
States.”
No administration to
date–Democrat or Republican–has made a serious move to
restore the budget to its level in 1978, which is why today,
prisons—along with military bases—are now by far the country’s
largest supplier of public housing.
And so, decades into
the U.S.’s “neoliberal experiment,” it’s not unusual in
Portland, LA. or Seattle to see walkers and wheelchairs next to tents
on the street. And the real human misery—the economic and housing
fallout–from COVID-19 has yet to fully register. In 2019, 117
people shuffled off their mortal coils on the streets and
sidewalks of D.C. In L.A., 1039
died on the street, no bed to cushion their aching bones, no roof
overhead, no privacy, no sanitation, no dignity.
If speeches by Martin
Luther King, Jr. were high school seniors, hands down, the one voted
least likely to be read by American school children would be his 1967
sermon “Beyond
Vietnam: A Time to Break the Silence.”
As radical as the
“military industrial complex” might sound the first time
Americans hear it, the term wasn’t the demon spawn of Karl Marx, or
the Weather Underground. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s speech
writer coined the term in the
farewell speech he wrote for him.
This was in 1961, back
when the orderly succession of putatively democratically elected
presidents was a given in the U.S., no matter how many coups
Eisenhower and the
Dulles Brothers had busied themselves orchestrating in Guatemala,
Iran, Indonesia, the Philippines, and God–and historians–only
know where else. Jack and Jackie and their Camelot myth-making
press machine were about to sweep into the White House, followed by
more military advisors and troops into Vietnam.
MLK would paint the
consequences of the military industrial complex in far starker, more
vivid, human and urgent terms than Eisenhower. The U.S., Dr. King
seems to have suggested, was a war junkie–and it was a given that
war and racism went hand in hand. The Vietnam War, King argued, was
poisoning the country with racism and hatred:
This business of
burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes
with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into
the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark
and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically
deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love.
The sniper fire that
cut King down exactly a year later to the day—on April 4, 1968 in
Memphis—likely said as much about his 1967 speech as it did his
support for Memphis Sanitation workers. In his 1967 speech King
famously compared the war in Vietnam to a “Demonic destructive
suction tube” that vacuumed up funds that might have otherwise gone
to LBJ’s “War on Poverty.”
If you want to get a
really good idea of how much war just cost the U.S. in the time it
took you to read this article, check out the National Priorities
Project. The military budget for 2020 alone at $738
billion, , would be enough to provide “24.6 million [year-long]
Hospital Stays for COVID-19 Patients,” “20.96 million [four year
] Scholarships for University Students,” or “23.65 million People
receiving $600 weekly unemployment insurance payments for 1 Year.”
There’s plenty of money. It’s just helping the super-rich, who
are profiting at all our expenses.
King condemned in no
uncertain terms the massive aerial spraying of the defoliant Agent
Orange as akin to Nazi medical experimentation. “What do [the
Vietnamese] think as we test out our latest weapons on them,” asked
King, “just as Germans tested out new medicine and new tortures in
the concentration camps of Europe?” Today in the U.S., the test
subjects are the kids in Detroit drinking water contaminated
with lead, while Nestles is pumping, bottling, and profiting to
the tune of 400
gallons a minute of fresh Michigan water; the Water Protectors at
Standing Rock drenched for months with pepper spray, tear gas, and
reportedly other chemical agents, along with water in freezing
and subzero temperatures; the Black Lives Matter activists
sprayed—sprayed along with hundreds of houseless people—all
summer on the streets of Portland with chemical
weapons banned for use in war; the BIPOC, elderly, and people
with disabilities, dying
at vastly higher rates of COVID-19.
And meanwhile, Vietnam
is witnessing the third generation born with Agent Orange-related
health effects, from missing eyes and limbs to spinal bifida and
severe intellectual disabilities. The Middle East is littered with
depleted uranium, cancer rates are soaring, and babies are born with
a wide range of “congenital
anomalies.”
By 1967, King had
struck up a friendship with the Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thich Nhat
Hanh. And by ‘67, King, like every other major organizer in the
Civil Rights Movement, had been pegged by the FBI as a Communist.
Make of it what you will, it seems likely to me that given enough
time on earth, King and Jara might have had long talks, written songs
together, formed a fast and deep friendship. In his song “Derecho
De Vivir En Paz”–or “The Right to Live in Peace”–released
on his 1971 album, Jara wrote of “Indochina… the place/beyond the
wide sea,/where they ruin the flower/ with genocide and napalm.”
He and King were
definitely on the same page about the Vietnam War and so much more.
Feminists, in
particular, have aptly spoken of our collective relationship to Trump
as akin to domestic or intimate partner violence, with Trump a
gaslighting batterer. But as metaphors go, battering and gaslighting
are also fitting descriptions of the Chicago Boys’ neoliberal Magic
Trick— brought into Chile, and later the Middle East, with guns and
tanks. It’s the magic trick ordinary Americans have watched this
year, as we’ve been fleeced of taxes that have gone to fatten the
unimaginable wealth of a handful of billionaires, and to endless
weapons and wars that have made the U.S. the hands down leader of the
global arms trade. Martin Luther King, Jr. warned us in 1967 that “A
nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military
defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual
death.” Fifty years later, at the end of the Trump presidency, we
seem to be rapidly approaching garlic and wooden stake territory.
Still too many
Democrats are breathing a sigh of relief now that the
Batterer-in-Chief has been handed his eviction papers, and they are
looking to Biden as our collective white knight, our national pater
familias.
But anyone who knows anything about the dynamics of battering will
tell you that the myth of the White Knight is a racist and
patriarchal set up for repeating the cycle of abuse. We’re sitting
now on the razor’s edge of fascism, and fascism isn’t interested
in electoral cycles. We can’t count on having another four years to
sort the situation out.
The RootsAction “No
Honeymoon for Biden” campaign, embraced by Nina Turner,
recognizes the urgency of the situation and would go a long way
toward undoing the damage done by fifty years of neoliberalism. It
would shift funds from militarism and mass incarceration to universal
healthcare and a more inclusive, multi-racial “Green New Deal”
that would fund free higher education. The campaign also calls for a
$15 federal minimum wage and for Biden to cancel student debt across
the board. Research has shown that wiping out existing student debt
would be shot
in the arm for the economy. We need to pull back from our
domestic and global cycle of battering and make government work for
working people if we are going to stop a free fall into fascism and
climate chaos.
Finally, there are a
lot of lessons the U.S. could draw from the Chilean fight against
fascism and the legacy of Pinochet. The global spark that Las Tesis
set off this past year with street performances that drew thousands
of women to witness collectively to their shared experience of sexual
harassment and assault is a testimony to the power of art to mobilize
resistance and speak truth to power. And the immortal life of Victor
Jara–his presence this past year on the streets of Santiago,
where thousands of hands fluttered across guitars–testifies
to the power of art to preserve history even in the face of guns,
tanks and bullets bent on wiping it out.
Now, more than ever,
we need to demand reinvestment in the arts—from K-12 to higher
education. To paraphrase the quote Woody Guthrie famously scrawled
across his guitar: we need art to kill fascism. What better reminder
than the hollow man in the White House of the frustration life
without art generates? We need art to foster empathy, to remind us of
our collective humanity, to preserve in our national memory records
of those who stood for justice, and those who collaborated to
undermine it. We need art to preserve history, to sustain and
energize us, to give us courage for the long struggle ahead.
Dedicated to the
memory of Roxane Elizabeth Roberts (November 5, 1952-December 24,
2018).
Desiree Hellegers
is a co-founder and affiliated faculty of the Collective for Social
and Environmental Justice at Washington State University Vancouver.
and a member of the Socialist-Feminist Old Mole Variety Hour
Collective on KBOO, Portland, Oregon’s community-supported radio
station.
=====================================
*
‘Beetje dom’ om te geloven dat de situatie in de VS en haar
buitenlandbeleid zal veranderen met oorlogsmisdadiger en
mensenrechtenschender Biden…… Bovendien zit Biden in de zak van
de financiële maffia en daarmee in die van de oliemaatschappijen,
het militair-industrieel complex, de farmaceutische maffia en andere
grote misdadige bedrijven >> hoe kan je ook maar enige
verandering verwachten van zo’n figuur??!!! Toevallig werd vanmorgen op de BBC gemeld dat een aantal grote bedrijven en banken hun steun stoppen aan republikeinen die achter Trump blijven staan, ofwel deze bedrijven kopen de politiek niet alleen voorafgaand aan de verkiezingen, maar doen dat doorlopend, hoe kan je dan nog spreken van een democratie, als de politici volledig in de zak zitten van bedrijven….?? (om nog maar te zwijgen over het belemmeren van de stembusgang voor een groot aantal VS burgers)
‘Chili, de protesten en de verslaggeving‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht, o.a. over het Amazonewoud en de strijd van burgers tegen oliemaatschappijen, maar ook over de situatie in Brazilië en Venezuela)
Voor meer berichten over de steenkoolcentrale in de Sundarbans, vul deze naam in op het zoekvlak rechts bovenin deze pagina. Dat geldt ook voor andere namen en instanties die genoemd woorden in het artikel van Hellegers (de ruimte voor labels is wat mij betreft te klein, t.w. 140 tekens)
Tamara
Pearson doet vrijwilligerswerk voor een opvang van daklozen in Mexico stad, deze
opvang is gesloten vanwege het Coronavirus……. Aan de hand van
haar ervaringen heeft ze een artikel geschreven met de strekking dat
de maatregelen die de rijke landen hebben genomen tegen het virus,
desastreus zijn voor arme landen en ronduit een ramp voor arme en/of
dakloze mensen in die landen…… (aan het eind van mijn schrijven nog een opmerking over het voorgaande, die ook voor de rijke landen geldt)
Pearson
begint haar artikel met het voorbeeld van een 72 jarige dakloze man
die buiten de opvang zit waar zij werkt, maar waartoe ook hij geen
toegang meer heeft…… De man heeft diabetes en is door zijn
voorraad insuline heen en zal daardoor niet lang meer hebben te
leven……..
Terecht
merkt Pearson op dat de mensen die afhankelijk zijn van opvang voor
het overgrote deel bestaan uit vluchtelingen, die geweld zijn ontvlucht in
hun moederland, geweld dat voor het overgrote deel is ontstaan door
ingrijpen van de VS, dus staatsgrepen tegen democratisch gekozen
regeringen, die niet in het door de VS gewenste gareel lopen….. Het
laatste land dat dit overkwam is Bolivia, waar de president Evo
Morales, met grote meerderheid werd gekozen. Hij was de eerste
president die uit het overgrote deel van het volk komt, ofwel de
oorspronkelijke bevolking, die vanaf het moment dat de eerste witte
psychopaat hun land betrad zijn vervolgd en het slachtoffer werden
van de grootste genocide ooit, die in de 3 Amerika’s…….
Ongelofelijk
genoeg heeft de VS de afgelopen 2 weken 7.000 vluchtelingen het land
uitgezet, tijdens een crisis waar landen als Mexico het land op slot
hebben gezet en men in feite geen kans heeft te overleven anders dan
via de liefdadigheid, echter ook deze vorm van hulp ligt op haar gat.
In de stad waar Pearson woont heeft de helft van de bevolking weinig
of geen toegang tot water, waar 65% van de bevolking werkloos is
geworden door de maatregelen tegen het virus en dat in een land waar
geen werkloosheidsuitkeringen worden betaald, ofwel het zal niet lang
duren voor deze mensen op straat worden gezet…… Van de ouderen in
Mexico en de rest van Midden-Amerika heeft maar zo’n 20% een
pensioen…..
De
Mexicaanse regering heeft zoals gezegd het land voor een groot deel
op slot gedaan en alleen bedrijven die van cruciaal belang zijn,
zoals supermarkten zijn open….. Helaas kan de straathandel het zich
niet permitteren thuis te blijven, waardoor deze handel gewoon
doorgaat, ofwel de maatregelen van de regering hebben in feite geen
zin……
Pearson
noemt ook Zuid-Afrika, waar afstand houden niet eens mogelijk is in een groot
aantal arme sloppenwijken, waar men in 1 zo’n wijk 380 toiletten heeft voor 20.000
mensen….. De Centraal Afrikaanse Republiek heeft zegge en schrijve 3 beademingsapparaten op een bevolking van 5 miljoen mensen…..
Het beleid moet drastisch omgegooid worden, als we een virus als het huidige Coronavirus (COVID-19) echt willen bestrijden zullen we arme landen op grote schaal moeten helpen, immers als we dat niet doen zal zo’n virus slachtoffers blijven eisen, ook in de witte rijke landen, vergeet niet het volgende cliché: een virus trekt zich niets aan van grenzen!!
Pearson stelt terecht dat grote bedrijven en regeringen verantwoordelijk moeten worden gehouden voor het creëren van ongelijkheid, met als gevolg dat er grote aantallen mensen zullen sterven, daar deze niet van belang zijn voor die bedrijven en regeringen….. Arme landen hebben door de Corona hamsterzucht van de rijke landen geen of amper toegang tot medische middelen als tests en medische apparatuur, deze medische hulpmiddelen zijn door de grote vraag van rijke landen zo duur geworden dat deze arme landen daar geen geld voor hebben, een schande van enorme proporties en dan maar elkaar veren de reet steken met termen als ‘saamhorigheid en solidariteit’, zo vals als de pest!!
Lees het
artikel van Pearson en zegt het voort, tijd dat het rijke westen
eindelijk eens echt wat doet aan de enorme armoede in zoveel landen,
armoede die de grote westerse bedrijven in de kaart speelt en die
door hen in stand wordt gehouden….. Als er dan een figuur als de Boliviaanse president Morales
opstaat die de grote bedrijven nationaliseert, is dat een alarmsignaal voor
de VS, die daarop middels smerig handelen van de CIA de boel op scherp zet, waar de
eerste stap van VS terreur het organiseren is van een opstand, zoals in Bolivia gebeurde….. Het
voorgaande terwijl Morales een uitstekend economisch beleid voerde,
een groot aantal mensen uit de armoede trok, alfabetisering met
succes op touw zette en goede gezondheidszorg plus woningbouw ook voor de arme
Bolivianen toegankelijk maakte……
I’m squatting on a round piece of
concrete, and a 72-year-old man is sitting in the gutter, his walking
stick beside him. He tells me that after being deported from the
United States, he has been hiking the streets of Mexico City trying
to find somewhere to stay. But all the refuges are closed due to the
pandemic, including the one we’re sitting outside of, where I
volunteer. He has run out of insulin for his diabetes and says he
can’t walk any more.
I’m aware that he may not survive
much longer. He’s the fifth person that day that I have to turn
away and I can’t stand it.
Back in the migrant refuge, we
organize working groups and events to add structure to the empty days
and try to prevent tension building up. It’s bad enough that many
of the refugees here have fled violence, only to wait months for
their visas, to now be stuck inside because of the quarantine, unable
to work, even informally.
Over a period of less than two
weeks, some 7,000
migrants have been deported from the US, with the virus as the
excuse. And here too, Mexico is deporting
refugees and migrants to the Guatemalan border, even though it is
closed and there’s no interstate transport operating there.
Hondurans and others are stranded, with nowhere to stay and no way to
return to their country. Many may be killed if they do return. So
far, the contingency measures seem to be doing more harm than good.
Here, we watch the videos of people
cheering for health workers in London, and they are inspiring, but
they don’t really connect. We know our health system won’t be
able to handle much. We also know that with 65% of the workforce
being informal and with no such thing as unemployment benefits, the
economic impact of quarantining will be devastating to us.
Already,
in my city of Puebla, half the population has no access to water, or
not enough. Soon, people will get kicked out of homes, and hunger –
already on their minds – will likely become common.
The national government has
declared that only essential shops and services can stay open. Those
who can, are taking the quarantine seriously. But so many people
aren’t able to stay at home that it is a bit futile. The woman with
the mole stall outside the Oxxo shop near my house is still serving
food, the street stalls selling phone cases and gadgets on 8th
street are still there, the indigenous woman who sits on the ground
selling beautiful Mexican “rag” dolls, is still there. I estimate
that around 60% of shops and stalls are still going.
In Central America and Mexico, only
20% of old people have a pension. Many are still working, in close to
slave-like conditions.
And in South Africa, distancing is impossible when settlements can
have just 380
toilets for 20,000 people. Risk, fear, and violence, are part of life
for many in poor countries. Poverty is a never-ending war, and being
defenseless and unsafe – health wise and economically, means life
is up for grabs all the time. It’s understandable then that people
react with some self-preserving indifference to the quarantine. And
that’s why it isn’t reasonable to take the Chinese and European
models for responding to the pandemic and transplant them on to
poorer countries.
When I see tweets about “these
sad times” I feel frustrated. Yes, these are tough times, but
things have been horrific for a long time now for the majority of the
world – for poorer people and for brown people. But the mainstream
media, history books, and movies, teach us to see the world through
the eyes of the white first world. That’s where the heroes come
from, where news matters.
It has never been considered urgent
to update the world on the daily deaths from starvation (24,600)
or on the numbers of people working in forced labor or marriage (40.3
million).
Awareness of the savage impact of the US’s war on
Afghanistan is low. In 2018, there were an estimated 228 million
cases of malaria, globally, and 405,000 deaths from it – mostly children. But the people dying are the
poorest of the poor, in African countries and in India. Malaria,
starvation, exploitation, femicides, slum cities and more are crises
that the world won’t stop for.
The so-called “third” world is
the dispensable world. The year 2008 was a “financial crisis,”
but the ongoing global inequality that leaves over half the world
living in undignified conditions is not a crisis, it is acceptable.
Meanwhile, the economic and social
consequences of the pandemic contingency measures will be much more
severe in poorer countries and poorer communities. Already, some 2,500
people are murdered each month in Mexico, and violent crime is only
likely to increase as more and more people lose their incomes. Sexual
assault rates are also likely increasing.
Add to this the huge global
resource inequality which means that most poorer countries can not
respond to the virus in the same way as Europe and parts of Asia,
even if they want to. The Central African Republic, for example, has
just three
ventilators for its population of 5 million people. While the US has
around 160,000
ventilators – and that isn’t enough, Mexico has just a few hundred.
The US and Europe are hogging
access to medical equipment, masks, and testing materials. The New
York Times reported
that African and Latin American countries have been told by
manufacturers that orders for testing kits won’t be filled for
months, because almost everything they produce is going to the US and
Europe. Prices on these goods have also skyrocketed, making it harder
for poorer regions to acquire them. So far, the numbers of confirmed
cases in poorer countries are lower, but analysis of those numbers
should bare in mind that such countries don’t have access to the
reagents used for testing and are stuck doing nothing, unable to test
even health care workers.
While the #StayAtHome movement is
an incredible display of human solidarity and of our ability to
actually work together for the common good, it also puts the onus of
the solution to the pandemic on individual people. And indeed, we are
part of the solution. But governments and corporations should be held
accountable for the inequalities they have perpetuated and that are
decisive in who lives or dies, and how many.
In this world, where suits and
window dressings and hotel lobbies are designed with the utmost care,
but health and poverty prevention plans are not, it is pointless to
talk about beating this virus without addressing the context it is
flourishing in. Along with measures like rent freezes and
guaranteeing workers’ rights, really addressing a global pandemic
involves public health planning that cross borders and confronting
global inequality and the climate crisis.
In
het hieronder opgenomen artikel van Alexander Rubinstein beschrijft
hij hoe de partij van Guaidó, een nog voor dit jaar onbeduidende oppositiepartij, nu al
wordt geplaagd door verregaande corruptie…. Dit terwijl deze partij
door de VS en de rest van het westen werd gebombardeerd tot de
grootste oppositiepartij en daarmee werd Guaidó gebombardeerd tot
oppositieleider……
Zoals gezegd: voordat
de VS en haar hielenlikkende westerse partners Guaidó tot interim president uitriepen (alsof de VS, Canada, de EU en anderen daartoe gemachtigd zijn…..), was deze figuur bij het grootste deel van het
Venezolaanse volk niet bekend….
Na
alle leugens over Maduro die zijn volk zou uithongeren door zijn
‘desastreuze economisch beleid’, waarbij men hem zelfs beschuldigde
van corruptie (zonder enig bewijs), blijkt nu dat de partij van
Guaidó, Voluntad Popular (‘de wil van het volk’) zich nu al schuldig maakt aan grootschalige corruptie, terwijl het geen regeringsverantwoordelijkheid draagt…..*
Lees
het volgende artikel, eerder op MintPress News en door mij
overgenomen van Anti-Media, waarin Rubinstein o.a. schrijft over het
popconcert (behoorlijk mislukt overigens) door Richard Branson georganiseerd en dat net over de Venezolaanse grens in Colombia. De
opbrengsten werden gebruikt voor o.a. hotels, prostituees, verdovende
middelen, dure kleding en auto’s….. Opvallend trouwens hoe weinig
reguliere westerse mediaorganen dit nieuws brachten, e.e.a. vooral in een paar regels
ver weg in de krant……
Tja,
als je al maanden leugens verkondigt en Guaidó afschildert als een
held, is het natuurlijk niet leuk om te zien dat de partij van deze
fascistische psychopaat nu al is verwikkeld in corruptie…. Men zegt
nu als verdediging dat het maar een paar figuren uit de partij van
Guaidó zijn, echter reken maar dat dit weer het spreekwoordelijke
topje van de ijsberg is, gezien de manipulaties en het enorme aantal leugens…….
Het volgende artikel werd geschreven door Alexander Rubinstein, werd eerder gepubliceerd op MintPress News en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media:
Massive
Embezzlement Scandal Threatens Juan Guaido’s Political Future
(oplichter Guaidó misbruikt zijn kind voor politieke doeleinden……)
(MPN) — The
political party of Juan Guaido — Voluntad Popular (Popular Will) —
was never all that popular to begin with. The sixth
largest political
party in Venezuela, Popular Will is heavily financed by
the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Now,
a recently exposed embezzlement scandal in Colombia risks to further
alienate the party from the Venezuelan people.
What
was supposed to be Guaido’s watershed moment has instead turned out
to be a public-relations failure far worse than his quickly quelled
attempted military coup, which MintPress
Newsreported caused
even the New
York Times to
describe Guaido as “deflated.”
What
happened in Colombia appears to be so damning that not only is the
Colombian intelligence service leaking documents exposing wrongdoing
by Popular Will representatives appointed by Guaido, but the
Organization of American States (OAS) — which is typically just as
pro-opposition as the Colombian government — has called for an
investigation.
In
a tweet issued
June 14 at 10:47 p.m. Venezuela time, Guaido called on his ambassador
to Colombia — whom he had shut out of the aid event — to formally
request an investigation by Colombian authorities, whose
already-existing investigation is the reason the story came out in
the first place. That was more than four
hours after
Secretary General of the OAS Luis Almagro called for an investigation
that would clarify the “serious charges,” identify those
responsible and effectuate accountability.
But
Guaido had already been well aware of the charges, having dismissed
his appointees who appear to be ringleaders of the embezzlement
scheme. According to the report, he was contacted by the journalist
who exposed the scandal 30 days before the story was published.
What
happened in Cúcuta isn’t staying in Cúcuta
There’s
barely a peep about the scandal in the Western press. A Google News
search for “Juan Guaido scandal” and “Popular Will scandal”
turned up nothing of relevance at the time of this article’s
writing. But on Latin America social media, everyone is buzzing about
it. American journalist Dan Cohen appears to be the first to
highlight the scandal to an English-speaking audience.
It
started with a request from Juan Guaido to billionaire investor
and regime-change
enthusiast Richard
Branson.
Associates of Venezuelan coup frontman Juan Guaidó embezzled funds raised in Cúcuta, Colombia for humanitarian aid and lavishly spent it on hotels, nightclubs and expensive clothes. This is a monumental scandal! Great work by @OrlvndoA. https://twitter.com/PanAmPost_es/status/1139651223387344896 …
The
stated purpose of the concert was to help raise funds for
humanitarian aid and spotlight the economic crisis. At least that’s
how it was billed to Americans. To Venezuela’s upper class, it
was touted as
the “trendiest concert of the decade.”
It
was to be a congregation of the elite with the ostensible purpose of
raising funds for the poor.
One
director of Popular Will toldVice
News in
2014 that “the bulk of the opposition protesters are from the
middle and upper classes and are led by Venezuela’s elite.” The
class character of the opposition has not changed since.
Meanwhile,
USAID was to coordinate the delivery of aid alongside Guaido; and
Elliot Abrams, who in Guatemala used “humanitarian aid” as cover
for the delivery of weapons into the country, is running the White
House’s policies toward Venezuela. And so the aid was widely
criticized, even by the International Red Cross, as politicized. By
others, it was called a Trojan Horse.
The
concert was held in Colombia across a bridge linking the country to
Venezuela. International media had claimed Venezuelan President
Nicholas Maduro had the bridge shut down to prevent the delivery of
aid, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo demanded that the “Maduro
regime must LET THE AID REACH THE STARVING PEOPLE.” But the bridge,
in fact, has never
been opened for
use.
Nonetheless,
Richard Branson sought to raise $100 million and promised that Guiado
“will be coming to the other side of the bridge with maybe a
million of his supporters.” In the end, it was a little more than
200,000 who came.
Meanwhile,
Guaido told the President of Colombia, Ivan Duque, that more than
1,450 soldiers had defected from the military to join them. But that
figure was also inflated. A new report by PanAmPress, a
Miami-based libertarian newspaper, reveals that it was just 700. “You
can count on your fingers the number of decent soldiers who are
there,” one local told the outlet.
Despite
the low turnout, organizers lived it up in Colombia. Representatives
from Popular Will, which rejects the socialist leadership of
Venezuela, found themselves living like socialites across the border.
There
were earlier signs of excess and debauchery. One Popular Will
representative was hospitalized and his assistant found dead after
overdosing while taking drugs with prostitutes, although Senator
Marco Rubio (R-FL) claims they were poisoned.
The
inflated soldier count meant more funds for the organizers, who were
charged with putting them up in hotel rooms. Guaido’s “army was
small but at this point it had left a very bad impression in Cucuta.
Prostitutes, alcohol, and violence. They demanded and demanded,”
the report said.
They
also left a bad taste in the mouth of the authorities. The Colombian
government was supposed to pay for some of the hotels, the UN High
Commissioner for Refugees was to cover the costs of others, while
Guaido’s people were only going to pony up the cash for two of the
seven hotels.
But
Popular Will never paid, leaving one hotel with a debt of $20,000.
When the situation became completely untenable, the hotel kicked 65
soldiers and their families to the curb. One soldier anonymously told
the outlet that the party was not taking care of their financial
needs as promised.
Guaido’s
ambassador to Colombia took money out of his own pocket to try to
resolve the dispute, but the check bounced.
The
responsibility of taking care of the needs of the defectors went to
Popular Will militants Rossana Barrera and Kevin Rojas, as decreed by
Juan Guaido in a signed statement. They were also charged with
overseeing the humanitarian aid.
Barrera
is the sister-in-law of Popular Will member of Congress Sergio
Vargara, Guaido’s right-hand man. She and Rojas were managing all
the funds.
But
the pair started to live well outside their means, a Colombian
intelligence source told the outlet. “They gave me all the
evidence,” writes PanAmPress reporter Orlando
Avendano. “Receipts that show excesses, some strangely from
different check books, signed the same day but with identical writing
styles.”
Rojas
and Berrera were spending nearly a thousand dollars at a time in the
hotels and nightclubs. Similar amounts were spent at times on
luxurious dinners and fancy drinks. They went on clothes shopping
sprees at high-end retail outlets in the capital. They reportedly
overcharged the fund on vehicle rentals and the hotels, making off
with the extra cash. Berrera even told Popular Will that she was
paying for all seven hotels, not just the two. And they provided
Guaido with the fake figure of more than 1,450 military defectors
that needed accommodation.
In
order to keep the funds flowing, Rojas and Berrera pitched a benefit
dinner for the soldiers to Guiado’s embassy in Colombia. But when
the embassy refused to participate, Berrera created a fake email
address posing as a representative of the embassy, sending
invitations to Israeli and U.S. diplomats. They canceled the event
after Guaido’s embassy grew wise to the scheme and alerted those
invited.
“The
whole government of Colombia knew about it: the intelligence
community, the presidency, and the foreign ministry,”
writes PanAmPress,
calling it an “open secret” by the time Guaido dismissed the
pair. But that was after Guaido had been defending them staunchly,
trying to avoid a firing by transferring responsibilities to the
embassy.
Berrera
was called to the embassy for a financial audit, represented by Luis
Florido, a founding member of Popular Will. She turned in just a
fraction of the records uncovered by Colombian intelligence,
accounting for only $100,000 in expenditures. “The [real] amount is
large,” the outlet reports, citing an intelligence agent who says
far more was blown.
Meanwhile,
“at least 60 percent of the food donated” by foreign governments
“was damaged.”
“The
food is rotten, they tell me,” the PanAmPress reporter
said, adding that he was shown photographs. “They don’t know how
to deal with it without causing a scandal. I suppose they will burn
it.”
It
isn’t yet known exactly how much was embezzled by Popular Will, but
it is likely the truth will come out in due time, and more
investigations are likely underway. On Monday, Venezuelan defectors
said they will hold a press conference in Cucuta, showcasing more
corruption by Popular Will. For now, however, the fallout remains to
be seen.
Guaidone?
One
thing is certain: the scandal threatens to end Juan Guaido’s 15
minutes of fame. The de facto opposition leader had little name
recognition inside Venezuela and never won a political position with
more than 100,000 votes behind him. But the overnight sensation never
had a lengthy life expectancy anyway.
Though
he received so few votes (Venezuela’s population is nearly 32
million), Guaido became the president of the National Assembly
because the body is controlled by a coalition of opposition groups,
despite President Nicolas Maduro’s PSUV Party being the largest in
the country. That was in January, and the length of the term lasts
only one year. In 2015, the opposition coalition decided that after
each term, the seat would be rotated to a representative of a
different opposition party. While there is no law barring Guaido from
being appointed president of the National Assembly again, tradition
runs counter to it and another party may want to seize on a chance to
get into the limelight.
Supporters
of the coup — and Guaido’s self-declaration as interim president
— claim that Maduro is derelict of his duties, which justifies a
transition of presidential power according to the constitution. But
the article that allows for such a transition in certain cases
stipulates that ”a new election by universal suffrage and direct
ballot shall be held within 30 consecutive days.”
To
date, Guaido has run 145 days past his deadline to have elections
held, and the opposition has made
it clear they
are not willing to accept new elections if Maduro runs.
This,
of course, makes little dent in Guaido’s legitimacy in the eyes of
the U.S. and other countries that have recognized his presidency.
U.S. allies in Latin America have shown over the past few years that
they have little regard for the sanctity of their constitutions. In
2017, a U.S.-backed candidate in Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernandez,
ran for re-election in explicit violation of that country’s
constitution and only wound up winning through fraud. Last week,
Ecuador made the decision to allow the U.S. military to operate from
an airfield in the Galapagos Islands despite a constitutional
provision stating that the “establishment of foreign military bases
or foreign facilities for military purposes shall not be allowed.”
*
De VS heeft de partij van Guaidó waarschijnlijk uitgekozen daar de
rest van de oppositie zich al schuldig had gemaakt aan corruptie en
er over de onbeduidende partij van Guaidó, die zoals gezegd amper
bekend was, veel minder misdadig gedrag vertoonde en zelfs al zou
deze partij zich daar schuldig aan hebben gemaakt, men kende Guaidó
en zijn partij niet en berichten over corruptie zouden daarom al snel verdwijnen naar ‘pagina 80’ van de landelijke media……
Vannacht in het BBC World Service radionieuws van 1.00 u. (CET) het bericht dat de VN Veiligheidsraad er niet uitkwam wat betreft handelen tegen Venezuela.
Oorlogsmisdadiger Abrams, is de speciale gezant van de VS voor Venezuela, een schoft die een uiterst bedenkelijke reputatie heeft in Latijns-Amerika als figuur die veel militaire acties van de VS heeft begeleid en staatsgrepen in dat deel van de wereld heeft geregisseerd (in samenwerking met de CIA)…… Staatsgrepen al dan niet voorafgegaan door door de VS georganiseerde opstanden….. (zoals middels een boycot, waarmee men probeert het volk van een VS niet welgevallig land in opstand te laten komen….)
Massamoordenaar en oorlogsmisdadiger Abrams
Voorts hielp Abrams bloedige dictators in Latijns-Amerika, zoals Rios Montt in Guatemala (Montt kwam in 1982 overigens ook met hulp van Abrams aan het bewind….), deze Abrams wordt ook verantwoordelijk gehouden voor meerdere massamoorden op de oorspronkelijke bewoners van Guatemala……
Abrams liet gisteren na afloop van de zitting in de VN Veiligheidsraad weten dat een meerderheid van de raad, voor een vreedzame regeringswisseling is in Venezuela……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Je snapt het al: het woord ‘vreedzaam’ in combinatie met de naam ‘Abrams’ is een gotspe!!
Het is meer dan duidelijk dat de VS een gewelddadige omwenteling wil in Venezuela, daar heeft deze gestolen vereniging van staten geen geheim van gemaakt en dat bepaald niet alleen onder Trump….. Immers de VS heeft al jarenlang een geheime economische oorlog gevoerd tegen Venezuela, waarbij VS levensmiddelen ketens, met winkels in Venezuela en farmaceuten in de VS, onder druk te verstaan werd gegeven niet langer hun voorraden in Venezuela aan te vullen of dit alleen mondjesmaat te doen, dan wel orders aan te nemen uit Venezuela……..
Intussen heeft de VS middels een enorme leugenbrei een deel van de wereld weten te overtuigen dat Maduro een bloedig bewind voert en schijt heeft aan zijn burgers, waarna ook de EU sancties heeft opgelegd aan Venezuela……
De woorden van Abrams doen denken aan die van VS minister van BuZa, hare kwaadaardigheid en oorlogsmisdadiger Hillary Clinton en haar baas Obama, na een zitting van de VN Veiligheidsraad, waar Libië niet werd veroordeeld en de VS geen toestemming kreeg om op humanitaire gronden in te grijpen in Libië. Echter Clinton, Obama en anderen zagen de meerderheid van stemmen als een groen licht voor oorlogsvoering……. E.e.a. op basis van een aangenomen resolutie, die de VS dusdanig verdraaide en men daar hardop stelde het recht te hebben een land voor 70 jaar in de tijd terug te bombarderen…… (al werd dat laatste uiteraard niet gesteld, ook al is het nu geschiedenis…)
In een
vergadering over de politiek ten aanzien van Venezuela heeft
Democratisch congreslid* Ilhan Omar het oorlogsmonster Abrams het vel
over de oren getrokken. Abrams is de oorlogsmisdadiger die is
aangesteld door de Trump administratie om de VS acties tegen de democratisch gekozen president van Venezuela te coördineren als speciaal gezant voor de VS……
Abrams is bekend van zijn bloedig acties tegen voormalige regeringen in Latijns-Amerika en het in stand houden van dictaturen die de VS welgevallig waren, zo is de schoft mede
verantwoordelijk voor een genocide in Guatemala en voorts in diverse Latijns-Amerikaanse landen: moord, verkrachtingen, martelingen en
ontvoeringen………
Lees en
zie (video) hoe Omar Abrams op een geweldige manier te kakken zet en
zie de smerige reacties van schoften die achter Abrams staan. Abrams
zou nu een mensenrechtenactivist zijn, althans als je het geteisem
moet geloven, dat dit gelul van een dronken aardbei is, blijkt wel
uit het feit dat de Trump administratie deze smerige schoft heeft
aangesteld om de coup in Venezuela in de juiste VS banen te leiden……..
Moet je nagaan, het voorgaande nadat de VS de laatste 10
jaar het volk van Venezuela steeds dieper in de ellende heeft
gestort met een smerige economische oorlog……..
Overigens
was Omar onlangs al in opspraak over haar uitlatingen t.a.v. AIPAC**
(CJ Opinion) — Days
after being smashed with a vicious
establishment smear campaign to
paint her as an antisemite for accurately criticizing AIPAC,
Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar is already back on the horse
aggressively disrupting the establishment
narrative matrix that
our rulers have worked so hard to construct for us.
Elliott
Abrams is a monster. The atrocities
that he has facilitated,
covered up and whitewashed in Panama, El
Salvador, Gaza, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Iraq are
utterly unforgivable, and the fact that he has been appointed
as special envoy to Venezuela by
the Trump administration completely invalidates the US government’s
Venezuela narrative all by itself. Even without the blatant
lies,
the known
oil agendas,
the CIA
ops,
the mounting
evidence of
US arms smuggling to right-wing militias, and America’s extensive
history of utterly disastrous regime change interventionism, the fact
that this administration would appoint such a ghoulish individual to
spearhead its Venezuela interventionism alone is
enough to show you that the US government has nothing but malevolent
intentions for that nation.
So
it was nice to see someone in that government calling him what he is
right to his face in front of everybody.
At
a House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) hearing on US Venezuela policy,
Abrams was
presented with
the only line of questioning that is appropriate for such a beast by
the very congresswoman the Democrats threw to the wolves just two
days ago. Someone had to do it, and they left it to Ilhan Omar.
“In
1991, you pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding information
from Congress regarding your involvement in the Iran-Contra affair,
for which you were later pardoned by President George H.W. Bush,”
Omar accurately stated. “I fail to understand why members of this
committee, or the American people should find any testimony that you
give today to be truthful.”
“If
I could respond to that-” Abrams began.
“That
wasn’t a question,” Omar responded, cutting him off.
“It
was an attack! It was an attack!” Abrams exclaimed, visibly upset.
“I
reserve the right to my time,” said Omar.
“It
is not right that members of this Committee can attack a witness who
is not permitted to reply,” Abrams said, talking over Omar.
“That
was not a question; thank you for your participation,” Omar
continued. “On February 8th, 1982, you testified before the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee about US foreign policy in El Salvador.
In that hearing, you dismissed as communist propaganda a report about
the massacre of El Mozote of which more than 800 civilians, including
children as young as two years old, were brutally murdered by
U.S.-trained troops. During that massacre, some of those troops
bragged about raping 12 year-old girls before they killed them. You
later said that the U.S. policy in El Salvador was a ‘fabulous
achievement.’ Yes or no, do you still think so?”
“From
the day that President Duarte was elected in a free election, to this
day, El Salvador has been a democracy,” Abrams said angrily.
“That’s a fabulous achievement.”
“Yes
or no, do you think that massacre was a fabulous achievement that
happened under our watch?” Omar asked.
“That
is a ridiculous question and I will not respond to it,” Abrams
replied. “I’m sorry Mr. Chairman, I am not going to respond to
that kind of personal attack which is not a question.”
“I
will take that as a yes,” Omar said. “Yes or no, would you
support an armed faction within Venezuela that engages in war crimes,
crimes against humanity, or genocide if you believe they were serving
US interests as you did in Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua?”
“I’m
not going to respond to that question,” Abrams again answered. “I’m
sorry, I don’t think this entire line of questioning is meant to be
real questions, and so I will not reply.”
“Whether
under your watch a genocide will take place, and you will look the
other way because American interests were being upheld is a fair
question,” Omar said. “Because the American people want to know
that any time we engage a country that we think about what our
actions could be and how we believe our values are being furthered.
That is my question: Will you make sure that human rights are not
violated and that we uphold international and human rights?”
“I
suppose there is a question in there, and the answer is that the
entire thrust of American policy in Venezuela is to support the
Venezuelan people’s effort to restore democracy to their country,”
Abrams responded. “That’s our policy.”
“I
don’t think anybody disputes that,” Omar said. “The question I
had for you is that does the interests of the United States include
protecting human rights and include protecting people against
genocide?”
“That
is always the
position of the United States,” Abrams lied.
“Thank
you,” concluded Omar. “I yield back the rest of my time.”
There
is no legitimate reason for Elliott Abrams to ever find himself
before a group of people who are ostensibly concerned with
accountability and responsibility without being asked such questions.
But that didn’t stop all the world’s worst people from crawling
out of the woodwork to his defense.
“Disgraceful
ad hominem attacks by @IlhanMN on my @CFR_org colleague Elliott
Abrams,” tweeted Iraq-raping
neocon Max Boot. “She doesn’t seem to realize he is a leading
advocate of human rights and democracy — not a promoter of
genocide! More evidence of the loony left I caution Democrats about.”
I
worked for Elliott Abrams as a civil servant,” tweeted Kelly
Magsamen, Vice President of National Security for
the plutocrat-backed
liberal think tank Center
for American Progress (CAP). “He is a fierce advocate for human rights
and democracy. Yes, he made serious professional mistakes and was
held accountable. I’m a liberal but I’m also fair. We all have a
lot of work to do together in Venezuela. We share goals.”
“I
am not greatly sympathetic to Rep. Omar (surprise
surprise),” tweetedNational
Review senior
editor and former George W Bush speech writer Jay Nordlinger. “But
really, someone ought to have given her a clue who Elliott Abrams is.
The guy has been championing freedom and human rights his entire life
(and taking unholy sh** for it from the illiberal Left and Right).”
Conservative
pundit Michael Knowles tossed his two cents into the campaign to
purge the concept of antisemitism of any meaning by tweeting,
“One wonders why @IlhanMN seems to harbor such particular contempt
for Elliott¹ Abrams² (¹ from the Hebrew ‘Elijah,’ meaning ‘My
God is Yahweh’ ² the father of the Jewish people).”
This
is the bipartisan establishment orthodoxy that is guiding your
foreign policy, America. One which claims Elliott Abrams is a saint,
which claims criticism of US warmongering is antisemitic, and which
throws a bold Somali-American woman under the bus for speaking the
truth after years of paying lip service to the need to get more women
of color elected to the leadership of the Democratic Party. This
whole Abrams incident happened, by the way, at the same time Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deleted
a tweet in
which he accidentally acknowledged the agenda to start a war with
Iran, but you probably won’t see Omar commenting on this because
she knows she’ll be smeared as an antisemite for it.
US
warmongering is the most aggressively protected part of the
establishment narrative matrix, because US warmongering is the glue
that holds the unipolar empire together. Without it, our rulers
cannot rule, so you’ll see imperial lackeys fiercely attacking
anyone who draws attention to America’s bloodbaths around the
world, even if they are good servants of the empire in other areas.
The
difficulty for our rulers, though, is that warmongering is a very
difficult thing to paint a pretty picture of, especially with our
newfound ability to quickly share ideas and information around the
globe. I mean, look at Elliott Abrams. Seriously, just watch
him talk.
That demonic grimace is the prettiest face they could find to put on
their Venezuela agenda. I find that very encouraging.
The
reason they work so hard to manufacture our consent for warmongering
agendas is because they need that
consent. They wouldn’t propagandize us so aggressively if they
didn’t need us all trusting them and believing their stories, so
the best way to fight establishment warmongering is to circulate
disbelief in their stories. Whenever you see someone like Ilhan Omar
drawing attention to the gaping plot holes in agendas like regime
change interventionism in Venezuela, go ahead and help draw attention
to it.
Things
are only shitty because a few extremely powerful people do very
shitty things. The only reason powerful people get away with doing
very shitty things is because the majority allows them to. The
majority only allows them to because they’ve been propagandized to.
The weakest link in this chain is the propaganda. Attack there.
* Ter verduidelijking: Ilhan Omar, heeft sinds 2017 een zetel in het lagerhuis van Minnesota voor de Minnesota Demcratic-Farmer-Labor Party (toegevoegd op 10 maart 2019)
(de opgeblazen oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger Pompeo beweert dat Hezbollah werkzaam is in Venezuela en daar een leger heeft dat gezien zijn woorden amper onder doet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen… ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging…)
De
vicepresident van de VS, Mike Pence heeft vorige week persoonlijk het
fiat van de VS aan ‘oppositieleider’ Juan Guaidó gegeven voor de staatsgreep in Venezuela ……. Guaidó is de leider van een
kleine oppositiepartij, die bij de afgelopen verkiezingen nooit de meerheid van stemmen had kunnen behalen…..
Jake Johnson, de
schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, eerder gepubliceerd op Common Dreams(door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media), was gezien de kop op
zijn artikel verbaasd over het
telefoontje van Pence aan Guaidó, terwijl toch al lang bekend is dat
de VS al jaren geleden een economische oorlog startte tegen
Venezuela…… Een beproefd recept van de VS om ontevredenheid te
kweken in het land dat men ten gronde wil richten voor eigen
gewin……
Die
ontevredenheid moet dan tot een meestal door de CIA georganiseerde en
geregisseerde staatsgreep leiden….. Al onder Obama werden de VS
supermarktketens, die winkels in Venezuela hebben, onder druk gezet de
voorraden niet langer aan te vullen…… Hetzelfde geldt voor de
grote farmaceuten in de VS, waar dezen al een aantal jaren geleden de
bevoorrading afknepen voor Venezuela…. Ofwel het verhaal dat de economisch slechte toestand in Venezuela alles te maken
heeft met het beleid van Maduro, is een dikke vette leugen……
Echter ook door andere handelingen was duidelijk dat de VS met de vieze poten de boel manipuleerde in Venezuela, e.e.a. blijkt wel uit het achterlijke telefoontje van Trump aan Guaidó, waarin hij als
president godbetert een couppleger feliciteert, (nogmaals) alsof Guaidó ook maar
één kans had de verkiezingen te winnen…..
Ben Norton (zie Twitterberichten in het hieronder opgenomen artikel) stelt volkomen terecht dat de VS niet alleen achter de coup in Venezuela zit, maar deze zelfs leidt, niet voor niets heeft de VS Maduro gedreigd mocht hij het besluiten Guaidó te laten arresteren……
Onbegrijpelijk
dat de VN niet al lang Guaidó en zijn buitenlandse steun* de wacht heeft aangezegd, immers het gaat hier overduidelijk alweer over een door de CIA voorbereidde en geregisseerde coup…… (de zoveelste in een lange rij, althans wat betreft Latijns-Amerika, daarbuiten zijn er nog veel meer te vinden, zowel gelukte als mislukte staatsgrepen, neem Syrië als voorbeeld voor een mislukte VS coup……)
Een land dat meermaals heeft bewezen fascisten aan de macht te
hebben geholpen kan zelf niet anders dan als fascistisch worden
gezien……. (overigens ook de omgang van de VS met haar eigen
burgers doet sterk aan een fascistisch regeringsbeleid denken……)
Uiteraard is de door
de VS beoogde juntaleider, Guaidó een fascist van de eerste orde,
niet voor niets dat de Trump administratie zo in haar nopjes is met de situatie in Venezuela…… Immers Guaidó werd door de VS zelf
gecontracteerd om het bewind over te nemen, zodat de olie van
Venezuela in feite onder het beheer van de VS valt, zoals het geval is met de grondstof coltan dat dan weer een belangrijk is voor onderdelen van smartphones…..
Over Guaidó wordt gezegd dat hij oppositieleider is, echter hij is zoals gezegd de leider van een kleine politieke partij en waar hij werkelijk voor staat is niet bekend, behoudens de versleten retoriek tegen het socialistische beleid van Maduro, valse beloften voor de aanpak van de corruptie, aangevuld met de niet na te komen belofte de misdaad in het land uit te roeien….. Het feit dat hij door de VS werd geselecteerd ‘doet (op z’n zachtst gezegd) sterk vermoeden’ dat hij een politicus als Bolsonaro is, ofwel een fascist…….
Wat betreft de toegenomen misdaad >> juist door de illegale economische oorlogsvoering van de VS, waardoor grote tekorten zijn ontstaan in Venezuela en dat doet de misdaad overal goed…. Verder kan je wijzen naar de VS oorlog tegen drugs, ook al een recept voor heftige misdaad…… Voorts zijn er nog de gewapende ex-militairen uit andere landen, die als het even kan optreden tegen de politie en die de arme bevolking te lijf gaan, veel van die figuren zijn geronseld door de VS, zo bleek na de grote demonstraties van meer dan een jaar geleden……** Demonstraties in de welgestelde wijken, waar deze figuren schoten op zowel politieagenten als demonstranten, om zo Maduro zwart te maken, ofwel het betrof hier false flag operaties…….
Juist Maduro en zijn voorganger Chavez hebben de grote onderlaag hoop gegeven op een beter leven, o.a. door huizenbouw en deze tegen voor de armen betaalbare prijzen te verhuren, of wat dacht je van de alfabetisering van de bevolking, naast scholing, twee zaken die voortvarend werden aangepakt door Chavez en Maduro….. Hetzelfde geldt overigens voor de toegang tot de gezondheidszorg……
Lees het hieronder opgenomen artikel van Jake Johnson en geeft het ajb door, tijd dat de wereld gaat inzien dat staatsgrepen door de VS geïnitieerd en geregisseerd alleen kunnen leiden tot enorme ellende onder de bevolking van dergelijk landen, zoals de geschiedenis laat zien…….
Het
kan niet vaak genoeg gezegd worden: Yankee go home!!
Pence’s
Key Phone Call to Venezuelan Opposition Confirms US Orchestration
Vice
President Mike Pence called Guaido the night before his announcement
and “pledged” that the Trump administration would support him.
(CD) — As
U.S. lawmakers,
civil society leaders, and Latin America experts continue
to warn against American
intervention in Venezuela’s internal political affairs, the Wall
Street Journal on
Friday confirmed suspicions that opposition leader Juan Guaido’s
move to declare
himself “interim
president” of Venezuela this week was highly coordinated with the
Trump White House and Republican lawmakers.
Secretary
of State Mike Pompeo arrives at a meeting of the Permanent Council of
the Organization of American States (OAS), on January 24, 2019 in
Washington, D.C. (Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
According
to the Journal,
Vice President Mike Pence called Guaido the night before his
announcement and “pledged” that the Trump administration would
support him “if he seized the reins of government from [elected
President] Nicolas Maduro by invoking a clause in the South American
country’s constitution.”
“That
late-night call set in motion a plan that had been developed in
secret over the preceding several weeks, accompanied by talks between
U.S. officials, allies, lawmakers, and key Venezuelan opposition
figures, including Mr. Guaido himself,” the Journal reported,
citing an anonymous administration official. “Almost instantly,
just as Mr. Pence had promised, President Trump issued a statement
recognizing Mr. Guaido as the country’s rightful leader.”
A Call From Pence Helped Set an Uncertain New Course in Venezuela
The night before Juan Guaidó declared himself Venezuela’s interim president, the opposition leader got a phone call from U.S. Vice President Mike Pence, who pledged that the U.S. would back Mr….
wsj.com
Guaido’s
move and U.S. President Donald Trump’s rapid endorsement
were quickly
decried as
a dangerous intervention—or the beginnings of a coup d’etat—which
progressives argued would dramatically worsen the country’s
economic and political crisis. As Common
Dreamsreported,
over 70 academics and experts signed an open letter demanding that
the U.S. “cease encouraging violence by pushing for violent,
extralegal regime change.”
At
the center of the push to oust Maduro and replace him with Guaido,
the Journal reports,
were some of the most hawkish congressional Republicans and members
of Trump’s cabinet, including national security adviser John
Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Sen. Marco Rubio
(R-Fla.), as well as officials from the right-wing governments of
Brazil and Colombia.
According
to the Journal,
a “decisive moment” in the behind-the-scenes planning came on
Tuesday, Jan. 22, when Trump met with top White House officials and
Republican lawmakers the day before scheduled street protests by
the opposition.
“Other
officials who met that day at the White House included… Pompeo and
Bolton, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, and Treasury Secretary Steven
Mnuchin, who presented Mr. Trump with options for recognizing Mr.
Guaido,” the Journal reported.
“Mr. Trump decided to do it. Mike Pence, who wasn’t at that
meeting, placed his phone call to Mr. Guaido to tell him, ‘If the
National Assembly invoked Article 233 the following day, the
president would back him.’”
Responding
to the Journal‘s
reporting on Friday, Ben Norton—reporter for The
Real News—noted
in a series of tweets that it is now clear the “U.S. is not just
‘behind’ this coup; the U.S. is openly leading the coup.”
The US had been planning this coup in Venezuela. It was the Trump administration that told the little-known opposition leader Juan Guaidó to declare himself (unelected) “president.”
A Call From Pence Helped Set an Uncertain New Course in Venezuela
The night before Juan Guaidó declared himself Venezuela’s interim president, the opposition leader got a phone call from U.S. Vice President Mike Pence, who pledged that the U.S. would back Mr….
wsj.com
While
the specifics of the attempt to oust Maduro were worked out behind
the scenes, the Trump administration has never been quiet about its
desire for regime change in Venezuela.
As Common
Dreamsreported,
Trump declared in September that the Venezuelan government “could
be toppled very quickly” and warned that “all options are on the
table” with regard to U.S. actions in the country.
“The
strong ones and the less than strong ones, and you know what I mean
by strong. Every option is on the table with respect to Venezuela,”
Trump said.
The
president and Pompeo both reiterated this warning on Wednesday, with
the secretary of state threatening “appropriate
actions”
if the Venezuelan military does not protect U.S. diplomats, who
Maduro has ordered to leave the country.
Progressive
organizations, lawmakers, and advocacy groups in the U.S. have
denounced the Trump administration’s decision to recognize Guaido,
arguing that American interference only increases the likelihood of
violence and demanding peaceful negotiations.
In
a statement on
Friday, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) argued that
“[b]oth the increasingly top-down Venezuelan government as well as
the fractious Venezuelan opposition, which has at times resorted to
anti-democratic methods, bear significant responsibility for the
current crisis and there are important critiques to be leveled
against both.”
The
organization concluded by calling on “the U.S. government to
immediately cease and desist all attempts to intervene in the
internal politics of Venezuela and break with its shameful legacy of
imperial control in the region.”
Sen.
Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) echoed this demand in a series
of tweets late
Thursday, highlighting
the
United States’ “long history of inappropriately intervening in
Latin American countries” and declaring that “we must not go down
that road again.”
“The
Maduro government in Venezuela has been waging a violent crackdown on
Venezuelan civil society, violated the constitution by dissolving the
National Assembly, and was re-elected last year in an election that
many observers said was fraudulent,” Sanders wrote. “But we must
learn the lessons of the past and not be in the business of regime
change or supporting coups.”
* Steun voor de staatsgreep, naast de VS: de fascist Bolsonaro van Brazilië, de junta in Honduras, ook door de VS aan de macht geholpen in 2009 onder regie van Hillary Clinton en de CIA, waar de fascist Hernández sinds 2014 een schrikbewind voert, vandaar ook alle vluchtelingen uit dit land, die naar de VS trekken en tot slot Guatemala, dat eveneens wordt geregeerd door een fascist, t.w. Morales (what’s in a name?) die de mensenrechten keer op keer op grove wijze schendt en dat is nog zacht uitgedrukt……. Dit bericht heeft iets te lang gelegen, immers intussen heeft ook de EU deze antidemocratische misdaad goedgekeurd door achter Guaidó te gaan staan…… (waar de EU eerder al sancties tegen Venezuela nam, ofwel ook wij zijn verantwoordelijk voor de deplorabele toestand van de Venezolaanse economie en daarmee met de destabilisatie van een soeverein land…..)
(de opgeblazen oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger Pompeo beweert dat Hezbollah werkzaam is in Venezuela en daar een leger heeft dat gezien zijn woorden amper onder doet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen… ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging…)
BlackAgenda Report plaatste gisteren een boekbespreking van Danny
Haiphong over een nieuw boek van Dan Kovalik, schrijver, arbeids- en
mensenrechtenadvocaat, maar vooral een anti-imperialist. In zijn
derde boek ‘The
Plot to Control the World: How the US Spent Billions to Change the
Outcome of Elections Around the World’,
gaat Kovalik in op het beïnvloeden door de VS van verkiezingen
elders, een zaak die de VS belastingbetaler al vele miljarden heeft
gekost*. Terwijl de VS nu juist Rusland beschuldigt van dergelijk gedrag (daarover zo meer)……
(foto bij het originele artikel op Black Agenda Report)
Mochten
de resultaten van dergelijke smerige beïnvloeding door de VS niet naar wens
zijn, kan je er bijna zeker van zijn, dat de VS een
staatsgreep in een dergelijk land zal organiseren, het liefst via een opstand,
zodat men haar smerige machinaties kan legitimeren……. Veelal gebeurt dit door eerst een ‘stille’ economische oorlog tegen zo’n land te beginnen (door sterke druk uit te oefenen op grote bedrijven die bijvoorbeeld winkelketens in zo’n land hebben en hen te dwingen de winkels niet langer te bevoorraden, zie wat dit betreft Venezuela….), ‘stil’ daar de VS dit uiteraard niet aan de grote klok hangt, gevolg is dan wel dat de bevolking de straat op zal gaan uit ontevredenheid over de persoonlijke (financiële) omstandigheden…..
Wat betreft directe staatsgrepen: neem
Honduras in 2009, destijds hebben Hillary Clinton en de CIA daar een staatsgreep
georganiseerd tegen de democratisch gekozen linkse regering…… Een
staatsgreep die intussen aan duizenden het leven heeft gekost,
daarnaast zijn er veel Hondurezen verdwenen, ofwel ook vermoord door
de Junta die de VS daar parachuteerde….. Voorts zijn een enorm
aantal mensen op de vlucht geslagen, o.a. richting VS (zoals het
grootste deel van de Karavaan die al op weg was naar de VS, vóór de
midterm verkiezingen in dat middels een genocide gestolen
land…….)
Kovalik
noemt ook Rusland als een land waar de VS de verkiezing van de
corrupte alcoholverslaafde Jeltsin in 1996 veiligstelde met een
slordige miljard dollar….. Je zou zelfs kunnen stellen dat de VS
mede verantwoordelijk is voor de ‘oligarchen’ die Rusland destijds hebben
leeggestolen…..
Hoe
durven politici in de VS en de rest van het westen, alsmede de
reguliere massamedia in het westen, nog met de vieze vingers naar
Rusland te wijzen als grote manipulator van de VS
presidentsverkiezingen, terwijl er geen enkel bewijs werd en wordt
geleverd voor deze leugen en de VS zelf overal waar het haar
uitkomt opstanden (zoals gezegd gevoed met een stille economische oorlog), staatsgrepen en illegale oorlogen organiseert,
waar overigens honderden meters aan dossiers met bewijzen voor zijn
te vinden, neem alleen al WikiLeaks en dan m.n. de Vault 7 en 8 documenten op deze (echte) klokkenluiderswebsite……..
Hier de
boekbespreking door Haiphong, door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media:
How
the US Spent Billions to Change the Outcome of Elections Around the
World
(BAR) — The
U.S. military state overthrows democratically-elected governments
that it deems to be a threat to corporate interests.
“There
is plenty of evidence that the United States is the most depraved and
dangerous “meddler” in the affairs of other nations that history
has ever known.”
Dan
Kovalik is a labor and human rights lawyer, but most of all he is an
anti-imperialist and an author of three books. Kovalik’s first two
books tackled the specific US war drives against Russia and Iran. His
third installment, The
Plot to Control the World: How the US Spent Billions to Change the
Outcome of Elections Around the World,
addresses the broad scope of US election meddling abroad. The book
provides much needed political and ideological life support to an
anti-war movement in the U.S that has been rendered nearly invisible
to the naked eye.
The
Plot to Control the World is
as detailed in its critique of U.S. imperialism as it is concise. In
just over 160 pages, Kovalik manages to analyze the various ways that
the U.S. political and military apparatus interferes in the affairs
of nations abroad to achieve global hegemony. He wastes no time in
exposing the devastating lie that is American exceptionalism,
beginning appropriately with the U.S. imperialist occupations of
Haiti and the Philippines at the end of the 19th century and
beginning of the 20th. The U.S. would murder millions of Filipinos
and send both nations into a spiral of violence, instability, and
poverty that continues to this day. As Kovalik explains regarding
Haiti, “While the specific, claimed justifications for [U.S.]
intervention changed over time- e.g., opposing the end of slavery,
enforcing the Monroe Doctrine, fighting Communism, fighting drugs,
restoring law and order — the fact is that the interventions never
stopped and the results for the Haitian people have been invariably
disastrous.”
“Kovalik
wastes no time in exposing the devastating lie that is American
exceptionalism.”
US
expansionism has relied upon the ideology of American exceptionalism
to silence criticism and weaken anti-war forces in the United States.
American exceptionalism claims that the U.S. is a force for good in
the world and completely justified in its wars of conquest draped in
the cover of spreading “democracy and freedom” around the world.
Kovalik challenges American exceptionalism by showing readers just
how much damage that US expansionism and militarism has caused for
nations and peoples in every region of the planet.Russia, Honduras,
Guatemala, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Vietnam and many
other nations have seen their societies devastated by U.S. “election
meddling.” In Honduras, for example, a U.S.-backed coup of
left-wing President Manuel Zelaya in 2009 made the nation one of the
most dangerous places in the world to be a journalist, indigenous
person, or trade-union/environmental activist. Thousands of
Hondurans have been displaced, disappeared, or assassinated since the
coup.
Another
important aspect of The
Plot to Control the World is
its exposure of U.S hypocrisy surrounding the subject of “election
meddling.” Since the end of the 2016 Presidential elections, the
U.S. military, political, and media branches of the imperialist state
have accused Russia of virtually implanting Donald Trump into the
Oval office. The U.S. public has been fed a steady dose of
anti-Russia talking points in an apparent effort on the part of the
elites to beat the drums of war with the nuclear-armed state. No
evidence has been presented to prove the conspiracy, as a
recent National
Public Radio (NPR) analysis states
plainly. However, there is plenty of evidence that the United States
is the most depraved and dangerous “meddler” in the affairs of
other nations that history has ever known.
“The
author shows readers just how much damage that US expansionism and
militarism has caused for nations and peoples in every region of the
planet.”
Just
ask the much-vaunted Russians. Kovalik devotes an entire chapter to
the 1996 Presidential election in Russia that re-elected the wildly
unpopular Boris Yeltsin. The fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 began
an era of “shock therapy” in the newly erected Russian
Federation, a euphemism for the wholesale theft and transfer of
socialized wealth into the hands of oligarchs and multinational
corporations. Millions would perish in Russia from an early death due
to the sudden loss of healthcare, housing, jobs, and other basic
services. In 1996, President Bill Clinton ensured that Yeltsin
maintained his near total grip on state power in Russia by providing
the Russian President with a team of U.S. political consultants and
over a billion dollars’ worth of IMF monies directly to the
campaign. U.S. political and monetary support allowed Yeltsin to rig
the election in his favor despite his dwindling popularity. Kovalik
shows that if anyone should worry about election meddling, it should
be the people of Russia and not the US elites that control
Washington.
The
Plot to Control the World takes
readers into the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the CIA’s coup
of revolutionary Patrice Lumumba continues to haunt the resource rich
nation in the form of endless US-backed genocide. It travels to
Guatemala, where the CIA overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz led to a
U.S.-backed slaughter of a quarter million Guatemalans under the
auspices of several military dictatorships. Kovalik shows us that the
election of the fascistic Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil was no aberration,
as the U.S. was primarily responsible for the rise in fascism in
Brazil through its direct role in placing the nation under the
control of a military dictatorship in 1964. The military dictatorship
predated the CIA’s ouster of Chile’s Salvador Allende in 1973,
which handed the once socialist state to Augusto Pinochet’s
murderous and repressive leadership.
“The
mission is always the same: to destabilize independent nations that
refuses to bow down to the dictates of U.S. imperialism.”
The
entire skeleton of the U.S. military state is on full display in The
Plot to Control the World.
The U.S. military state utilizes an array of tools to overthrow
democratically-elected governments that it deems to be a threat to
corporate interests. These tools include the U.S. intelligence
agencies, so-called Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) such as the
National Endowment for Democracy, and the various branches of the
military itself, to name a few. Regardless of the tools employed, the
mission is always the same: to destabilize independent nations that
refuses to bow down to the dictates of U.S. imperialism. Thus, while
Nicaragua, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Vietnam may possess
unique histories, their economic and political development has been
shaped by the destructive interference of the United States.
Dan
Kovalik is not likely to be reviewed in the New
York Timesor
other corporate outlets. That’s because Kovalik unapologetically
speaks out against U.S. empire and all that upholds it. In doing so,
Kovalik’s The
Plot to Control the World walks
in the footsteps of anti-imperialists such as Michael Parenti and
William Blum. Blum, a former State Department employee, spent his
post-State Department life providing humanity with knowledge about
how US imperialism operates on the global stage. The New
York Times wasted
no time in slandering
Blum in their obituary .
This showed the great lengths that the ruling elites will go to
discredit, defame, and condemn critics of the military industrial
complex and how important it is for those who oppose war let go of
any expectation that the corporate media will cover Kovalik’s work
or anyone else who speaks out against war.
“White
supremacy is the biggest lie of all and is completely embedded in the
ideology of American exceptionalism.”
With
that said, one of the reasons that the left in the U.S. is so weak is
because it has been numerically and politically isolated by the lies
of the Empire. White supremacy is the biggest lie of all and is
completely embedded in the ideology of American exceptionalism.
Despite the ruthlessness of the austerity and incarceration regimes,
many Americans continue to be convinced that the U.S. is the most
exceptional nation in the world and do not balk when its military
wages wars abroad at the expense of U.S. tax dollars and civilian
lives. U.S. imperialism has made sure that Americans feel that they
are special colonizers who see the victims of the U.S. military state
as savages worthy of slaughter. The
Plot to Control the World is
based on a different premise: internationalism. The book links the
struggle against US imperialism to the needs of the oppressed and
working class living in the heart of empire, making it an essential
read for those who are sick and tired of the prevailing narrative of
American exceptionalism and want to be armed with knowledge that is
essential toward changing it.
*
Zo heeft Hillary Clinton als minister van buitenlandse zaken onder
‘vredesduif’ Obama 4 miljard dollar uitgegeven voor het organiseren
van een opstand in Oekraïne, de bloedige opstand die moest leiden tot
de coup tegen het democratisch gekozen Janoekovytsj regime, een beproefde VS methode die ook in dit geval lukte (in Syrië liep het spaak)….. Daarmee is de VS dan ook
verantwoordelijk voor de oorlog die de door haar geïnstalleerde
neonazi-junta, o.l.v. de zwaar corrupte schoft Porosjenko, voert tegen de
bevolking van Oost-Oekraïne…… Een bevolking die volkomen terecht hun democratisch
gekozen president terug wilden en zich derhalve hebben afgescheiden van
Oekraïne….. Wie met een gezond verstand wil er onder een fascistisch regime leven?? Een
dergelijke coup in het westen van Europa had tot grote consternatie
geleid, maar niet in Oekraïne, hoewel alle EU staten weten dat er een
dictatoriaal fascistisch regime regeert in Kiev, doet men graag ‘zaken’ met deze junta, puur en alleen daar deze junta anti-Russisch is…….. (van de miljarden die Oekraïne als hulp kreeg van de EU en de VS is niets meer over, voor het grootste deel verdwenen op de buitenlandse bankrekeningen van de Porosjenko junta, voorts werd een deel uitgegeven aan oorlogsvoering tegen de bevolking van Oost-Oekraïne….)
Zie waartoe de VS, de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde, in staat is: