THE JOKE OF THE YEAR: Press Laughs After U.S. Spokeswoman Claims We Do Not Support Coups


THE JOKE OF THE YEAR: Press Laughs After U.S. Spokeswoman Claims We Do Not Support Coups

So as you can see the United States is famous for backing coups or changing sovereign governments when ever it suits their purposes….. by denying it, it only makes you laugh so hard that tears come to your face, with their audacity that reporters and anonymous readers would believe such a blatant lie. Here is a small preview of the above table which I got it from this article and I suggest you read the whole article maybe some people will wake up from their lethargic sleep and do something

COMMON THEMES

Some common themes can be seen in many of these U.S. military interventions.

First, they were explained to the U.S. public as defending the lives and rights of civilian populations. Yet the military tactics employed often left behind massive civilian “collateral damage.” War planners made little distinction between rebels and the civilians who lived in rebel zones of control, or between military assets and civilian infrastructure, such as train lines, water plants, agricultural factories, medicine supplies, etc. The U.S. public always believe that in the next war, new military technologies will avoid civilian casualties on the other side. Yet when the inevitable civilian deaths occur, they are always explained away as “accidental” or “unavoidable.”

Second, although nearly all the post-World War II interventions were carried out in the name of “freedom” and “democracy,” nearly all of them in fact defended dictatorships controlled by pro-U.S. elites. Whether in Vietnam, Central America, or the Persian Gulf, the U.S. was not defending “freedom” but an ideological agenda (such as defending capitalism) or an economic agenda (such as protecting oil company investments). In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship–such as in Grenada or Panama–they did so in a way that prevented the country’s people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new democratic government more to their liking.

Third, the U.S. always attacked violence by its opponents as “terrorism,” “atrocities against civilians,” or “ethnic cleansing,” but minimized or defended the same actions by the U.S. or its allies. If a country has the right to “end” a state that trains or harbors terrorists, would Cuba or Nicaragua have had the right to launch defensive bombing raids on U.S. targets to take out exile terrorists? Washington’s double standard maintains that an U.S. ally’s action by definition “defensive,” but that an enemy’s retaliation is by definition “offensive.”

Fourth, the U.S. often portrays itself as a neutral peacekeeper, with nothing but the purest humanitarian motives. After deploying forces in a country, however, it quickly divides the country or region into “friends” and “foes,” and takes one side against another. This strategy tends to enflame rather than dampen a war or civil conflict, as shown in the cases of Somalia and Bosnia, and deepens resentment of the U.S. role.

Fifth, U.S. military intervention is often counterproductive even if one accepts U.S. goals and rationales. Rather than solving the root political or economic roots of the conflict, it tends to polarize factions and further destabilize the country. The same countries tend to reappear again and again on the list of 20th century interventions.

Sixth, U.S. demonization of an enemy leader, or military action against him, tends to strengthen rather than weaken his hold on power. Take the list of current regimes most singled out for U.S. attack, and put it alongside of the list of regimes that have had the longest hold on power, and you will find they have the same names. Qaddafi, Castro, Saddam, Kim, and others may have faced greater internal criticism if they could not portray themselves as Davids standing up to the American Goliath, and (accurately) blaming many of their countries’ internal problems on U.S. economic sanctions.

One of the most dangerous ideas of the 20th century was that “people like us” could not commit atrocities against civilians.

  • German and Japanese citizens believed it, but their militaries slaughtered millions of people.

  • British and French citizens believed it, but their militaries fought brutal colonial wars in Africa and Asia.

  • Russian citizens believed it, but their armies murdered civilians in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and elsewhere.

  • Israeli citizens believed it, but their army mowed down Palestinians and Lebanese.

  • Arabs believed it, but suicide bombers and hijackers targeted U.S. and Israeli civilians.

  • U.S. citizens believed it, but their military killed hundreds of thousands in Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere.

Every country, every ethnicity, every religion, contains within it the capability for extreme violence. Every group contains a faction that is intolerant of other groups, and actively seeks to exclude or even kill them. War fever tends to encourage the intolerant faction, but the faction only succeeds in its goals if the rest of the group acquiesces or remains silent. The attacks of September 11 were not only a test for U.S. citizens attitudes’ toward minority ethnic/racial groups in their own country, but a test for our relationship with the rest of the world. We must begin not by lashing out at civilians in Muslim countries, but by taking responsibility for our own history and our own actions, and how they have fed the cycle of violence.

and here is the rest of the article with the joke that America is not involved in any coups:

Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro has publicly accused the United States of trying to foment a coup in Venezuela. The accusations come as the Obama Administration has bizarrely labeled Venezuela a national security threat to the United States despite that obviously not being true.Maduro’s accusation stems not just from being labeled a national security threat but from a plot Venezuelan security services uncovered which was publicly detailed by Maduro on Venezuelan TV.

According to Maduro the plot involved Carlos Manuel Osuna Saraco who operates out of New York and Miami, allegedly with the help of the US government. There is audio of Osuna dictating a statement rebel leaders should read after the coup.

If the plot is true it will be the second attempt by the US to foment a coup in Venezuela this century. The first being an amazingly blatant attempt in 2002 against President Hugo Chavez which the White House itself publicly supported before the coup was reversed and Chavez was returned to power.

Which brings us to the laughing stock State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki became yesterday when she claimed [VIDEO] in response to Maduro’s accusations:

As a matter of long standing policy the United States does not support transitions by non-constitutional means. Political transitions must be democratic, constitutional, peaceful, and legal.

We’ve seen many times that the Venezuelan government tries to distract from its own actions by blaming the United States or other members of the international community for events inside Venezuela. These efforts reflect a lack of seriousness on the part of the Venezuelan government to deal with the grave situation it faces.

The Associated Press reporter, Matt Lee, immediately jumped in with quite reasonable incredulity saying “I’m sorry. Whoah, whoah, whoah. The US has a long-standing practice of not promoting [coups] – how long-standing would you say?” Lee continued audibly scoffing and laughing “In particular in South and Latin America that is not a long-standing policy.”

Advertisements

Castro calls out Obama for genocide in Libya


Castro calls out Obama for genocide in Libya

Published time: September 26, 2011

Fidel Castro (AFP Photo / Adalberto Rooue)

Fidel Castro (AFP Photo / Adalberto Rooue)

 

Fidel Castro is calling out US President Barack Obama for his words before world leaders last week at the United Nations in New York City.

According to Castro, Obama misrepresented the wars America has involved itself in, calling his speech before the United Nations last week gibberish and blaming the US and NATO for the mass murders of the Libyan people.

“In spite of the shameful monopoly of the mass information media and the fascist methods of the United States and its allies to confuse and deceive world opinion, the resistance of the people grows, and that can be appreciated in the debates being produced in the United Nations,” Castro wrote over the weekend on the cubadebate.cu website.

Speaking before the UN’s General Assembly last week, President Obama called the dictatorship of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi a “mass atrocity” that went unchallenged throughout his rule, but said that the United Nation was able to bring to help bring it to a halt.

“The Security Council authorized all necessary measures to prevent a massacre,” said Obama. “The Arab League called for this effort; Arab nations joined a NATO-led coalition that halted Qaddafi’s forces in their tracks.”

Castro, however, believes that Obama and NATO orchestrated an assault on the Libyan that is being skewed through the commander-in-chief’s own explanation. “Who understands this gibberish of the President of the United States in front of the General Assembly?” the former Cuban leader asks in an editorial published to the governmental website. “What position to adopt about the genocide of NATO in Libya? Does anyone wish it recorded that under their direction, the government of their country supported the monstrous crimes by the United States and its NATO allies?”

Castro isn’t the only one to question America’s intentions, too. The United State Congress has previously attacked Obama over his insistence on going to Libya. Earlier this summer, lawmaker Dennis Kucinich called out the president for heading overseas without congressional approval. “Since when does NATO trump the Constitution of the United States?” asked Kucinich. Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York similarly proposed “Shall the president, like the King of England, be a dictator on foreign policy?”

Counter Intelligence – The Company


Counter Intelligence – The Company

A film by Scott Noble of Metanoia Films (2013)

“An extraordinary work by a gifted filmmaker, ‘Counter-Intelligence’ shines sunlight into the darkest crevices of empire run amok. The film vividly exposes a monstrous and unconstitutional ‘deep state’ in which multiple competing chains of command — all but one illegalhijack government capabilities and taxpayer funds to commit crimes against humanity in our name. Anyone who cares about democracy, good government, and the future will want to watch all five segments of this remarkable film.” 

Counter-Intelligence is a 5 part series that explores in-depth, the vast, sprawling and secret National Security State that operates throughout the United States–and indeed the world. The series examines the foundations of the Military-Industrial-Intelligence Complex, charting through to the myriad consequences in today’s world where secret intelligence organisations continue to hijack governments, manipulate elections and commit heinous crimes against humanity–all under the cloak of “National Security”. In the wake of the continued revelations of the NSA PRISM program, this series is now more important than ever to provide a solid historical context to the workings of the rapacious and ever-expanding National Security State…

This first episode lays out the structure of the modern intelligence agency, using the evolution of the CIA and the creation of the concept of ‘plausible deniability’ to show how the continued rapacious spread of the clandestine National Security State has been built up over time, to the complex network it is today. Examples of previous operations by secret agencies show election tampering; assassinations; the setting up of NGO’s and front companies for ‘economic hit-men’; creation of mercenary groups and paramilitaries; the clandestine modern military-intelligence bureaucracy, including JSOC and NSA; as well as illustrating the emergence of The Panopticon–the vast National Security surveillance network. This network is more powerful than even governments–with examples in Australia showing how Gough Whitlam is expelled for wanting to shut down Pine Gap and other top secret US military bases…

The Deep State

The Strategy of Tension

The Strategy of Tension examines the history of false flag operations used for war, propaganda and psychological operations–or ‘psy-ops’. Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio are examples used to illustrate the nature of clandestine operation planning and execution; as well as shedding light on the intent and extent to which the National Security apparatus manipulates events and manufactures outcomes to suit its goals. This programme also looks at the issues that spin off from the history of false flag operations–such as how conspiracy theories are used to discredit inquiry and investigative journalism; and also how the cultural preconditions around dismissing false flag operations serve to protect their continuation and ‘plausible deniability’…

Necrophilous

This episode investigates how torture and extensive demonstrative violence have been used as tools throughout clandestine operations, intelligence gathering and also outright war. Recent examples covered are the abuses by the United States military in Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay, as well as the workings of covert operations involving torture and organised violence. Also discussed are attitudes towards civilian casualties in modern war, as well as recent framing conditions of propaganda such as Islamophobia–the driving force behind warmongering and mainstream media manipulation.

 

Drone Nation

On New Years Eve 2011, Barack Obama signs into law (without much opposition) the NDEAA Act–a law that allows the government to detain its own citizens without charge indefinitely, and even murder its own citizens without due process. Case in point was the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen in 2011. This new law then leads to further secret drone strikes throughout Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq directed by Obama and institutions such as the CIA. What direction are we heading in from here?

EU In Total Horror As Russia Prepares New “Nazi Law”


EU In Total Horror As Russia Prepares New “Nazi Law”

By: Sorcha Faal

wtw1

 

A stunning report prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) circulating in the Kremlin today states that European Union (EU) foreign diplomats were left in “total horror” this past week after being alerted by their Russian counterparts to the catastrophic effects upon the NATO Alliance due to a proposed Federation Council (FC) law outlawing the sale of energy supplies to any nation that is now/or has been engaged in Nazi-like torture of prisoners of war or its own citizens.

According to this report, the Federation Council (the upper house of the parliament of the Russian Federation) began the adoption of this new “Nazi Law” under orders given by President Putin after the United States refused to heed Russia’s 14 December warning of retaliation against the imposition of additional sanctions by President Obama’s signing of a new Russian sanctions law on 18 December.

wtw2

The proposed new “Nazi Law” being written by the FC, this report continues, would specifically forbid the sale of Russian natural gas, oil, oil by-products (and other such natural resources of the Federation) to any nation, or military alliance of nations, that: 1.) Has failed to support the United Nations resolution condemning attempts to glorify Nazism ideology and denial of German Nazi war crimes; 2.) Has used Nazi torture techniques against POW’s and/or civilians; and 3.) Has conducted mass executions of unarmed civilians.

To the first count, MoFA experts in this report say, the United States, Canada, and Ukraine, would be subjected immediately to this new laws harshest provisions due to their being the only three nations in the world to vote against the United Nations 21 November resolution that condemned any form of denial of Nazi war crimes, including the Jewish Holocaust.

wtw3

To the second count, these same experts say, the United States, UK, Australia, and 51 other Western allied nations would, likewise, be sanctioned due to their complicity in the torture of prisoners-of-war using methods utilized by the Nazis during World War II, and which this past week caused the New York Times editorial board to call upon the Obama regime to prosecute former Vice President Dick Cheney for his crimes against humanity for his masterminding of.

To the third count, these MoFA experts state, there exists “substantial evidence” to indict the United States and Ukraine for the mass execution of unarmed civilians in the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, which killed 239, and Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, which killed 298.

The Council for Civil Society and Human Rights (CCSHR) appointed by President Putin to investigate the crimes involving both of these Malaysia Airlines disasters, the MoFA in this report states, has also received new evidence regarding these tragedies which include: 1.) Testimony and evidence from a Ukrainian officer stating that on the date of the shooting down of Malaysia Flight 17 one of his nations fighter jets landed after having fired its missiles with its pilot stating he had shot down the “wrong plane.; 2.) Two senior airline executives (Proteus Airlines CEO Marc Dugain and Emirates Airlines president and CEO Sir Tim Clark) publically stating that Malaysia Flight 370 was, likewise, shot down by the United States.

wtw4

The most catastrophic effect of this “Nazi Law” being implemented, the MoFA in this report states it warned its EU counterparts about, would be the immediate cessation of natural gas flows to Europe which would, in effect, cripple them economically and subject their citizens to war-like rationing of heating supplies.

Important to note, this report continues, is that the MoFA had previously told the EU and US that their collective punishment” against the citizens of Crimea would not be accepted and would be responded to in kind.

Also to be noted, MoFA analysts in this report say, is that due to the Obama regimes creation of a permanent war zone” around the Federation, and the continued large-scale cyber espionage campaign against Russia, its government and businesses, only the harshest of penalties can even been considered against such a lawless and rogue nation the United States has become.

Critical to note too is that when this MoFA report is combined with last weeks Ministry of Economic Development (MED) report outlining Putin’s “Samson Defense” strategy to collapse both the US and EU economies, China this week aligned itself with Russia against the Obama regime and its allies in an economic war many experts are predicting could soon erupt into total global warfare.

And as to what the Obama regimes “grand strategy” toward Russia really is, this report queries, no one seems to really know, including the esteemed international award WINNING journalist Patrick Smith, who in writing this week about the catastrophic fallout occurring in the EU due to Obama’s policies stunningly wrote that the information he received from Washington D.C. insiders stated that these “Obama Kidiots” are “making it up as they go along.”

And on the road where “lunacy meets sheer audacity”, this report concludes, the West is also now crying that they need more MONEY to counter Russia’s news services…which, mind you, have a budget of $120 million…compared to the BBC’s $370 million and Obama regimes staggering $716 million these nations spend on spreading their propaganda around the world.

As to how much more MONEY the West really needs before their lies are believed is anyone guess, Russia seems to do just fine by telling the truth.

December 23, 2014 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.

[Ed. Note: Western governments and their intelligence services actively campaign against the information found in these reports so as not to alarm their citizens about the many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagrees with in believing that it is every human beings right to know the truth. Due to our missions conflicts with that of those governments, the responses of their ‘agents’ against us has been a longstanding misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit and which is addressed in the report “Who Is Sorcha Faal?”.]

Libya, ALBA and the West: Humanity’s Choice Between Cooperative Solidarity and Murderous Competition


In September 2013, the Belfer Center of Harvard University published a study confirming that NATO’s war on Libya was based on downright falsehoods. In June this year the US authorities announced data indicating that the economy contracted 2.9% in the first quarter. In the same month Facebook admitted accusations that it had abused its system so as to carry out an unauthorized experiment in mass psychological manipulation of its users

But no one in the NATO countries concerned is facing trial in the International Criminal Court for the criminal aggression against Libya. Stock market prices continue at high levels and the financial media say, six years after the international financial system collapsed in 2008, that the recovery is “gaining traction”. The millions of Facebook users continue to use that social network as if nothing has happened presumably because it has become such an integral part of their daily routine.

The connection between these diverse apparently unrelated events is that they show the integral corruption of the criminal system of Western capitalism. No matter where one looks. In international relations, in the United Nations, in the economy, in the financial system, in intellectual life, in the communications media, in sports bodies like FIFA or the International Olympic Committee, corruption is everywhere. Virtually every area of public policy is perverted so as to benefit corporate elites.

In Western media, innumerable liberal and progressive analysts express an almost neurotic longing for change. The academic and media phenomenon of Thomas Piketty’s study of capitalism openly acknowledges the social and economic injustice of capitalism. The media phenomenon of Edward Snowden explicitly recognizes the routine abuse on a massive scale about which many other people before Snowden had raised the alarm for decades.

Few have noted the paradox that these media phenomena are generated by the self-same inert broken system that Snowden and Piketty criticize. Far from being a virtuous demonstration of democracy, essentially what Piketty and Snowden and their promoters are saying comes down to something like, “Sure, the system’s broken but if we tighten a nut here and a bolt there the machinery will work again just fine”. Or perhaps, if the Princess could only overcome her revulsion and kiss the toad everyone could live happily ever after. Real human history has been very different.

Human history prior to 1945 was one of a century and a half of bitter struggle by untold millions of women and men around the world against the sadistic cruelty and injustice of genocidal Western capitalism. That long history of struggle achieved a few positive results at end of the Second World War, including the start of decolonization and recognition of the right to self-determination. One can argue that those changes have helped the majority world to resist in some degree since 1990 the persistent surges of aggression by the Western powers trying to defend their residual global domination.

In recent years, Libya has been the most representative case of North American and European sadism and hypocrisy. The opportune study in 2013 by Alan Kuperman of Harvard University’s Belfer Center concludes : “Libya’s 2011 uprising was never peaceful, but instead was armed and violent from the start. Muammar al-Qaddafi did not target civilians or resort to indiscriminate force.” Kuperman adds, “NATO’s action magnified the conflict’s duration about sixfold, and its death toll at least sevenfold, while also exacerbating human rights abuses, humanitarian suffering, Islamic radicalism, and weapons proliferation in Libya and its neighbors.

While there has been wide recognition of the deceit-based failure of the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, not for nothing have few admitted the disastrous failure of the war against Libya. More than any other recent conflict, the sadistic aggression against Libya revealed the falsity not just of Western governments and corporate media but also of Western alternative media, progressive intellectuals and progressive movements. Along the whole length of the Western political spectrum the most distinguished political academic and intellectual leaders were mistaken in the most humiliating and shameful way.

The destruction of Libya shows the completely rotten reality underlying the false claims to moral and intellectual superiority of Western political culture. The contagion of baseless prejudices and rumours glibly treated as fact also extended to many majority world intellectuals. It was truly remarkable how many supposedly cultured, sophisticated individuals, knowing practically nothing about Libya, expressed an irrational antipathy against both the Libyan Jamahiriya and its architect Muammar al-Gaddhafi.

Only a few leaders, notably Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro, showed the necessary wisdom to accurately assess what was happening. This is indisputable. So one obvious conclusion is to question the judgment of all those Western political leaders, intellectuals and many supposedly progressive movements, whatever their political label may be. The aggression against Libya has proven to be the graveyard of the credibility of public political and intellectual life in North America and Europe.

The UN showed itself yet again to be a reliable accomplice of aggression violating its most fundamental principles. Almost alone, it was the governments of the Bolivarian Alliance of the Americas who maintained a consistent and correct position based on an accurate assessment of the facts. When almost all other world political leaders failed so grossly on Libya, it is indeed interesting to look at why Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chávez, Fidel Castro and their ALBA colleagues got things right.

More than anyone those leaders and their colleagues like Nicolas Maduro, Evo Morales and Rafael Correa understand the meaning of the true history of mass struggle against the Western imperialist powers throughout the majority world. They were right about Libya and they are right now in their defence of Cuba, Venezuela and Argentina in Latin America and, elsewhere, of the people and government of Syria and the people of eastern Ukraine. Last week they again showed the strength of their anti-imperialist political vision in two very important events for Latin America and the Caribbean.

Firstly, last week saw the first meeting of the Administrative Council of the long delayed Bank of the South, a South American alternative to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Secondly, last week also saw unanimous solidarity with Argentina from Latin American and Caribbean countries in the Organization of American States against US court judgments favouring predatory vulture funds. Both cases indicate the influence and prestige achieved in recent years of the ALBA countries’ vision of solidarity based regional integration.

As the economic and political crisis in the NATO countries deepens, the challenge to its global political and economic domination increases. The West promotes a vision based on greed and competition rigged via unfair trade, manipulative development cooperation and unjust debt. The increasingly influential ALBA vision, of solidarity and cooperation based on fundamental respect for nations’ self-determination is also the vision of the Libyan Jamahiriya. In Latin America, the deep moral battle between this vision and the destructive corporate greed of the West plays out mainly in the continuing vicious blockade of Cuba, the violent destabilization of Venezuela and, now, the wanton legal attack on Argentina’s economy.