Tag: scf

Wikileaks: Brazil’s New Unelected President a US Informant

A US State Department cable that Wikileaks published on 5 March 2011 and that concerns the newly appointed President of Brazil but that has nonetheless been ignored by Western ‘news’ media (such as The New York Times, Washington Post, Guardian, CNN, BBC, etc.), reported the latest inside information that the US government’s secret Brazilian agent in Sao Paulo had just supplied.

Since the agent, Michel Temer, is now Brazil’s appointed ‘interim’ leader, the context of that cable is important to understand – especially because the situation here is similar to other recent examples in which the US President has, essentially, selected the leader of a foreign government after a US-backed coup has occurred there:

After an American coup overthrowing the existing democratically elected President in Ukraine, Arseniy Yatsenyuk was the interim leader of Ukraine from 27 February 2014 till April 2016, chosen by the US President (via his agent Victoria Nuland); and after an American-backed domestic-aristocracy-perpetrated coup overthrowing the existing democratically elected President of Honduras, Roberto Micheletti was the interim leader of that country from 28 June 2009 to 27 January 2010, chosen by the US President (in conjunction with Honduras’s 12 aristocratic or «oligarchic» families). In both instances, only candidates who were acceptable to the US President were allowed to compete in the subsequent ‘election’, and massive propaganda was issued to the local public, with US government approval, for each of those candidates. That operation then produced the ‘non-interim’ regime, which still rules each of these now-dictatorships.

Brazil: US Special Services Behind the Turmoil

No doubt, US special services are behind the crisis in Brazil. Now they continue to control the events. Compromising evidence against the leadership of the Workers’ Party, the top officials of Petrobras, a state-owned oil company, and the inner circles of President Dilma Rousseff and former President Lula da Silva has been leaked as part of an operation to undermine the «hostile regime».

In the eyes of President Barack Obama and his administration, the largest Latin American country is a hostile state because it dares to implement independent policies. The US goal is to subjugate the ruling elite of Brazil and make it dance to the US tune.

This turn of events has been predicted by a number of Latin American presidents, including Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, Evo Morales of Bolivia and Tabaré Vázquez of Uruguay among others. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro put it bluntly saying the events in Brazil are nothing else but a coup d’état staged by the US. According to Maduro, the attack against Dilma Rousseff threatens democracy in Brazil. It is also directed against such regional organizations as Celac (the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States), Unasur (the Union of South American Nations), as well as public and political movements protecting people’s interests. Maduro called on all left-wing movements in Latin America to join together and protest against the smear campaign against Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff. The Venezuelan leader believes they must act to protect peace and prosperity on the continent.

How Obama Aims to Conquer Crimea

When US President Barack Obama perpetrated his coup d’état in Ukraine in February 2014, and even had his agent Victoria Nuland select the person who was to rule Ukraine after the coup, it was with the expectation that the new government would renegotiate, and soon end, the Russian lease of the naval base at Sebastopol in Crimea, which wasn’t due to expire until 2042. (Up until 1954, that base had been in Russian territory because Crimea was part of Russia; but, after the Soviet dictator Khrushchev in 1954 arbitrarily transferred Crimea to Ukraine, and then the Soviet Union itself broke up in 1991, Russia was keeping its navy there by paying a lease on it from Ukraine.)

However, instead of the US winning control of Crimea as had been planned, the racist-fascist anti-Russian «Right Sector» forces, which Obama’s people had hired to carry out the coup in Kiev under the cover of ‘democratic’ demonstrations against the democratically elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych (who had received over 75% of Crimeans’ votes in the Presidential election, prior to being overthrown), terrorized Crimeans during the coup, and this terrorizing of them, simply added insult to their injury. On February 20th, Right Sector forces massacred Crimeans who were escaping from Ukraine’s capital, fleeing the rabid sentiments in Kiev against supporters of Yanukovych. Right Sector caught up with them at the town of Korsun, burned some of their buses, and murdered some of the escaping Crimeans, though most survived — some of them severely injured.

Also, early in March of 2014, shortly prior to Crimea’s referendum on whether to remain within Ukraine, a Crimean who had served in Kiev as a prosecutor in the democratically elected Ukrainian national government that had just been overthrown, and who had likewise escaped from Kiev, was now safely back home in Crimea, and did a Crimean TV interview. This former prosecutor, Natalya Poklonskaya, took questions from the live TV audience. The interview was posted to YouTube on 12 April 2014, and, as I described it, linking to the YouTube, she proceeded there to «inform her fellow Crimeans what she had seen happen during the overthrow, and why she couldn’t, in good conscience, remain as a Ukrainian official in Kiev, and swear loyalty to the new Ukrainian Government. She had heard the chants of the Maidan protesters and smelled their piles of burning tires, and seen their marches in Kiev with Nazi symbols and salutes, and she didn’t want to become any part of that. So, she quit and was now unemployed back home in Crimea at the time of this interview».

NATO’s Reluctant Two-Percenters

According to the 2014 US-NATO declaration of confrontation with Russia, all member countries are supposed to commit 2 percent of their GDP to military expenditure. But as with most NATO plans and endeavours, this one has failed to meet expectations.

Following dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991 there ceased to be any reason for existence of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The Pact had been formed in 1955 in response to inclusion of a rearmed West Germany in the US-NATO military alliance whose main objective was to: «settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means… and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations».

All disputes between the US-European alliance and the Soviet Union had indeed been settled by peaceful means. There had been a diplomatically-facilitated, non-violent end to the Cold War, and 1992 was the ideal time for NATO members to begin to withdraw their offensively-tasked troops, missiles and aircraft from the hundreds of bases surrounding the borders of the former Soviet Union. Politically, socially, militarily – and especially economically – the disbandment of NATO made sense. It was a clumsy grouping that, for all the propaganda, was almost entirely dependent on the US for offensive capability.

A Showdown in Venezuela

In order to understand the current plight of Venezuela, one has to go back to the parliamentary elections of Dec. 6, 2015. For the first time, the base of President Nicolás Maduro’s support, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), took a beating.

Supporters of the Bolivarian regime won 55 seats in the legislature. The opposition bloc, the Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD), won 109 out of 167 seats, plus another three that were awarded to representatives from Indian organizations who are also members of the opposition coalition.

Their opponents were euphoric over the Bolivarians’ misfortune: it seemed as though the «hated regime» was on the verge of collapse. The leaders of the opposition were sure that Maduro’s government would be gone within six months at most. But those predictions did not come true. President Maduro, as well as the politicians loyal to him who were schooled by Hugo Chávez, are holding the line.

Washington Likes Wars. So Where Next?

US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter has ended yet another global war-trot, having visited India, the Philippines, Iraq, and one of the two US nuclear-armed aircraft carriers in its enormous fleet in and around the South China Sea.

He missed out Afghanistan, site of one of America’s recent catastrophic wars, probably because it’s even more dangerous to visit than Iraq, but went to Saudi Arabia on 20 April (along with President Barack Obama), and told his opposite numbers of the Gulf nations that the US has «an enduring commitment» to all of these dictatorships. Then he gave a media conference at which he declared that «the US military remains committed and capable of responding to Iranian malign and destabilizing activities».

USS Donald Cook: Mission in Baltic Sea

«It is reckless. It is provocative. It is dangerous», said US State Secretary John Kerry describing the incident when the guided missile destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) was buzzed by a pair of Sukhoi Su-24 Fencer fighters in the Baltic Sea on April 11, 2016.

On April 14, Russian Defense Ministry said that the jets were on a training mission in the area and operated «in strict compliance with international laws».

Erdogan as a Litmus Test for European Policy

Until recently, we thought that Europe stood firmly on European values and that these values were not for sale. Just think of the European media’s mockery of Islam. It seems that this popular pastime is justified by the fact that there is a long-established culture of court satire in Europe, where jesters were permitted to make fun of the crowned heads with impunity…