theduran--2019-02-01--Venezuela Coup Attempt Part Of A Larger Project Military Intervention Likely To Fail

Venezuela – Coup Attempt Part Of A Larger Project – Military Intervention Likely To Fail

Venezuela - Coup Attempt Part Of A Larger Project - Military Intervention Likely To Fail The Trump administration has launched a large political project to remake several states in Latin America. The Wall Street Journal headlines: U.S. Push to Oust Venezuela’s Maduro Marks First Shot in Plan to Reshape Latin America   The Trump administration’s broader aim is to gain leverage over Cuba and curb recent inroads in the region by Russia, Iran and China The plan includes regime change in Venezuela, Nicaragua and eventually Cuba. The removal of any Russian or Chinese interest is another point. It is a multiyear project that has bipartisan support. It will likely require military force.   The targets: Raúl Castro of Cuba, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela.  bigger The project seems to echo the "New Middle East" plan then Secretary of State Condeleeza Rice launched in 2006. It largely failed due to U.S. incompetence but left behind severely damaged states. That the U.S. is going for such a wide ranging plan in the western hemisphere might explain why Trump is pressing to end the other military projects in the Middle East and Afghanistan. The starting shot for the new plan, the U.S. led coup attempt in Venezuela, is already in trouble. The U.S. selected puppet Juan Guaidó had called for demonstrations in support of his coup that were supposed to take place yesterday. But even the NYT, which propagandizes for each and every regime change operation the U.S. undertakes in Latin America, could find only little evidence of support: Mr. Guaidó also took part in protests on Wednesday at the Central University of Venezuela in Caracas, where he was swarmed by international reporters. Wearing a white lab coat, he linked arms with medical students and marched with them up a roadway, before speeding off on the back of a motorbike. The demonstration was one of a handful in the city on Wednesday, though on a smaller scale than some recent demonstrations. Some workers walked out of their jobs for hours in protest against Mr. Maduro and his government, gathering on corners through the capital. Videos from Venezuela showed a crowd of some hundred people in the better off quarters of Caracas. Meanwhile pictures of several pro-Maduro demonstrations in various cities showed much larger crowds. New demonstrations will be held on Saturday and are likely to show similar results. The Washington Post claims that anti-government protests took place in two of the more destitute areas of Caracas. But the report contradicts itself. It starts: As the opposition campaign to oust President Nicolás Maduro dramatically escalated, the warren-like streets of the Puerta Caracas slum filled with pot-banging, anti-government demonstrators. A culture center run by Maduro loyalists was burned down. Hungry, beaten-down residents felt a rush of hope. Then night fell, along with the boot steps of government forces. Maduro called the arsonists “fascist criminals,” and residents in the western Caracas enclave paid the price. Mask-wearing special forces, locals said, swarmed the neighborhood last week, kicking in doors, rounding up young people and imposing an effective curfew. Twenty propaganda filled paragraphs later we learn that the described arson of a culture center took place before the coup attempt happened and likely has nothing to do with it: The uprisings began the night of Jan. 22, with residents of Puerta Caracas banging pots and lighting dumpsters on fire. Around midnight, neighbors say, a group of hooded boys threw molotov cocktails at the culture center. Early Wednesday, family members said, Abel Pernia, 19, was heading to a doctor’s appointment when armed intelligence police officers grabbed him, shoved him against a wall and handcuffed him.  ...  ... [more] protests erupted in Petare last Wednesday and continued until dawn. A group set fire to barricades, threw stones and attacked an outpost of the National Guard. Security forces repelled them with tear gas as residents chanted “we don’t want food boxes! What we want is for Nicolas to leave!” Neighbors said that criminal gangs were among the crowd and created havoc by violently confronting the police. The response was immediate. The coup attempt was launched on January 23. The arson incident took place on January 22. The following day the police came and arrested people involved in it. More gang riots followed. The whole story has nothing to with the coup attempt or with general protests against Maduro. It is about gang crime in some slum quarters. Gang fighting has long been a problem in Caracas. A special police force, the FAES, was set up in 2017 to get it under control. That the Washington Post has to use an unrelated incident to proclaim that the poor people support the coup attempt shows how little real evidence it has to support that propaganda claim. The public in Venezuela is evidently not supporting the foreign induced coup attempt. A recent poll shows that more than 80% of the people are against sanctions and other international interventions to remove President Maduro. 80% also support talks between the government and the opposition which Maduro repeatedly offered but which the coup plotters reject.   It is very unlikely that civil disobedience or demonstrations will be able to remove the government of Venezuela. The opposition simply does not have enough people on its side to create more than inconveniences. It is obvious that the U.S. wants a violent conflict. Either the Venezuelan military will have to launch a coup or the violence will have to be brought in from the outside. The military has for now declared that it is not willing to do anything against the government. Other measures will have to be taken. That the Trump administration selected Elliott Abrams, Ronald Reagan's "Assistant Secretary of Dirty Wars", as special envoy to its puppets is telling: The choice of Abrams sends a clear message to Venezuela and the world: The Trump administration intends to brutalize Venezuela, while producing a stream of unctuous rhetoric about America’s love for democracy and human rights. Combining these two factors — the brutality and the unctuousness — is Abrams’s core competency. An oped by the U.S. selected dude, who was created by the U.S. regime change machine, was published in today's New York Times: Juan Guaidó: Venezuelans, Strength Is in Unity  To end the Maduro regime with the minimum of bloodshed, we need the support of pro-democratic governments, institutions and individuals the world over. Notice the "minimum of bloodshed"? One wonders how many thousands of dead will do. Guaido explains the murky legal foundation for his claims to presidency: I would like to be clear about the situation in Venezuela: Mr. Maduro’s re-election on May 20, 2018, was illegitimate, as has since been acknowledged by a large part of the international community. His original six-year term was set to end on Jan. 10. By continuing to stay in office, Nicolás Maduro is usurping the presidency. My ascension as interim president is based on Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution, according to which, if at the outset of a new term there is no elected head of state, power is vested in the president of the National Assembly until free and transparent elections take place. This is why the oath I took on Jan. 23 cannot be considered a “self-proclamation.” It was not of my own accord that I assumed the function of president that day, but in adherence to the Constitution. The early election in May 2018 was held on demand of the opposition parties some of which, urged by the U.S., did not take part in it. There is no evidence of fraud that lets one doubt the results. Maduro won among several candidates with more than 60% of the votes. One might argue that has more legitimacy than some other elected people. Not liking the outcome is not a reason to declare an election illegitimate. If Maduro's first term ended on January 10 why did it take it Guaido, as head of the National Assembly, thirteen days to find that Maduro's second term was 'illegitimate'? Moreover, if article 233 is used as justification to temporarily usurp the presidency then Guaido has the duty to hold new elections within 30 days. So far he has not even called for them. His reasoning is not convincing at all. Guaido goes on to say that he needs support of the military. But this does not sound like he has it: The transition will require support from key military contingents. We have had clandestine meetings with members of the armed forces and the security forces. We have offered amnesty to all those who are found not guilty of crimes against humanity. The military’s withdrawal of support from Mr. Maduro is crucial to enabling a change in government, and the majority of those in service agree that the country’s recent travails are untenable. He further claims, like the Washington Post above, that the gang violence before the coup attempt shows that Maduro has lost all support: Mr. Maduro no longer has the support of the people. Last week in Caracas, citizens from the poorest neighborhoods that had been Chavista strongholds in the past took to the streets in unprecedented protests. They went out again on Jan. 23 with the full knowledge that they might be brutally repressed, and they continue to attend town hall meetings. Guaido ends by calling for external support for his endeavor. What he needs are billions of dollars to build up some mercenary army that will help him to overthrow the government. The U.S. seized Venezuelan assets but will have trouble handing them to Guaido. The main asset is CITGO, which owns refineries and gas stations in the United States. But CITGO is deep in debt. Its refineries depend on the heavy oil from Venezuela. If might well go into bankruptcy in which case the debt holders will take it over. At least 49.5 % will go to the Russian company Rosneft. The legal process will take years. So how much U.S. money is Trump willing to invest in his plan?   Venezuela will have trouble defending itself against a foreign military attack. The Maduro government is not the most competent, the military is quite corrupt, and money is scarce. China and Russia may support it with some additional loans, but are otherwise unlikely to come to its help. Cuba and Nicaragua may be willing to send troops but have little else to offer. But the Bolivarian movement in Venezuela has millions of supporters. Most are poor people who would lose out under a new rightwing government. While the Venezuelan military may be corrupt and not very willing to fight, many people will surely take up arms to defend the gains they made under Maduro and Chavez. It might be relatively easy to invade Venezuela and to defeat its regular military. But the following occupation would be a very difficult endeavor. The Pentagon has seen how this worked out in Iraq. It will likely warn against the use of any U.S. troops in Venezuela. Other countries will likewise be careful not to get into such a mess. The CIA and the coup plotters can hire thousands of throat cutting thugs to do some extreme damage to Venezuela. But they have little chance to win more than a completely destroyed country. Might that be the real aim? Is the project for the New Latin America one of complete destruction? Posted by b on January 31, 2019 at 01:59 PM | Permalink


theduran--2019-05-01--Maduro congratulates military for defeating coup attempt as Guaido calls for more protests

Maduro congratulates military for ‘defeating’ coup attempt as Guaido calls for more protests

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has congratulated the military for “defeating” the plotters of a coup after a day of protests called for by opposition leader Juan Guaido.  Maduro called the opposition supporters a “small group that tried to fill the country with violence” and confirmed his government has faced several “modalities” of a coup d’état.  He pinned Tuesday’s violence on the US, who the president believes masterminded the failed attempt to overthrow his government.  The president also announced the appointment of “three special prosecutors” to examine “criminal” actions by the opposition, noting that “we have colonels wounded by bullets and in intensive care.”  Some of the protests were peaceful and others led to intense skirmishes, yet fatalities were avoided throughout the day. A few dozen people were injured by rubber bullets, tear gas and – allegedly – live ammunition. An armored vehicle was also recorded ramming into a cluster of Guaido supporters.  At least five soldiers and two colonels were also injured in the clashes after being shot by coup plotters, Maduro claimed. At the onset of the violence, Venezuela’s defense minister warned early in the day that the army would resort to force if necessary.  Guaido called for more protests on Wednesday, as part of what he titled ‘Operation Freedom’. He insisted once again that the opposition is supported by the military.  Maduro stated that 80 percent of troops involved in the mutiny attempt had abandoned Guaido, with only a small group of about 20 officers “handing over their souls to the coup-mongering far right.” Those military officers who answered Guaido’s calls for regime change in the country, Maduro noted, were lured by the opposition “under false pretenses,” but once they came to their senses, they “left the coup leaders alone” and surrendered.  The Venezuelan leader also refuted opposition claims that the military base of La Carlota, in the east of Caracas, was captured, stressing that the facility “was never taken.”  “As of now, there is no indication of any military support outside of this very small detachment of troops,” reporter Lucas Koerner told RT America from Caracas, claiming that many officers had been deceived into believing that Tuesday’s events were a “drill led by the government.”  “None of them are ranking officers that command troops of any standing, therefore they are largely irrelevant,” Koerner added.  Maduro defended the use of force, saying the opposition planned to lead the country into a “civil war.” The president also vowed that Venezuela would stay on the course of the Bolivarian Revolution and fight the interventionist Monroe Doctrine of the US.


thegatewaypundit--2019-04-30--Developing Military Coup Underway in Venezuela Maduro Regime Fires Tear Gas at Guaido Protest VI

Developing: Military Coup Underway in Venezuela – Maduro Regime Fires Tear Gas at Guaido Protest (VIDEO)

On Tuesday morning Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido called on the the military to rise up and oust the Socialist Maduro regime.  Guaido appeared with activist Leopoldo Lopez who was freed from house arrest by members of the military.  Later in the morning the Maduro Regime supporters fired tear gas on the Guaido protesters.  Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó took to the streets with activist Leopoldo Lopez and a small contingent of heavily armed soldiers early Tuesday in a bold and risky call for the military to rise up and oust socialist leader Nicolas Maduro. “I want to tell the Venezuelan people: This is the moment to take to the streets and accompany these patriotic soldiers,” said Lopez, who had been detained since 2014 for leading anti-government protests. “Everyone should come to the streets, in peace.” Lopez said he has been freed from house arrest by members of the military responding to an order by Guaidó, whom the U.S. and dozens of other governments recognize as Venezuela’s rightful leader. As he spoke on a highway overpass, troops loyal to Maduro sporadically fired tear gas from inside the adjacent Carlota air base as the crowd of a few hundred civilians, some of them brandishing Venezuelan flags, scurried for cover. The crowd was growing as people sensed what could be their strongest opportunity yet to overthrow the government after months of turmoil that has seen Maduro withstand an onslaught of protests and international pressure with the support of the top military command and allies such as Russia and Cuba.


theguardianuk--2019-05-02--Venezuela Maduro thanks military and denounces senseless coup-mongers and traitors

Venezuela: Maduro thanks military and denounces 'senseless coup-mongers and traitors'

Nicolás Maduro has thanked Venezuela’s military for resisting what he branded a treacherous “imperial” plot to topple him this week by sparking a conflict that would justify foreign military intervention.  “Loyalty is a value that you either have or you don’t … I know you will not fail the homeland,” Maduro told troops during an early-morning parade in Caracas that was broadcast on state television.  “How many deaths would there be if a civil war started here because of the senselessness of the coup-mongers and traitors? How much physical destruction would there be and how many years of war would we face?” Maduro asked. “Because we will never surrender.”  The parade – which state TV called a “march to reaffirm the absolute loyalty of the armed forces” – was designed to buttress Maduro’s position after Tuesday’s botched pre-dawn attempt to overthrow him.  At shortly before 5am that day, opposition leader Juan Guaidó appeared outside a key military airbase in Caracas – just six miles from the presidential palace – and urged the country’s armed forces to turn on Maduro.  But that call went largely unanswered despite reports that opposition leaders had spent months locked in secret talks aimed with top Maduro officials, including Venezuela’s head of military intelligence, Iván Rafael Hernández, and defence minister, Vladimir Padrino López.  US officials claimed that a detailed draft plan had been agreed upon between those officials and the opposition, by which Maduro would be able to leave, to be replaced by Guaidó as interim president. The supreme court and military command would remain in their positions, and elections would be held within a year.  Padrino López appeared alongside Maduro at Thursday morning’s parade and hinted at those claims, berating what he called the opposition’s attempts to buy Venezuela’s military “as if we were mercenaries”.  In a high-profile show of support for Maduro, Padrino López said Venezuela’s “anti-democratic, fascist, extremist and far-right” opposition had nothing to offer the country or the armed forces.  “Always loyal, never traitors!” he shouted in conclusion, using what has become the maxim of Maduro’s three-month battle to retain power.  At least four people died, more than 230 were injured, and 205 were detained during demonstrations and clashes between protesters and security forces this week, according to Venezuelan human rights groups.  Thursday’s parade came hours after Guaidó’s most powerful international backer, Donald Trump, said Washington would do everything short of “the ultimate” to force out Maduro, who he called a “tough player”.  “It’s an incredible mess … The place is so bad and so dangerous … so something is going to have to be done,” Trump told Fox News in a rambling 10-minute discussion of Venezuela’s crisis.  Asked what the United States’ options were, Trump replied: “Well, some of them I don’t even like to mention to you because they are pretty tough.  “A lot of things will be going on over the next week and sooner than that. We will see what happens.”  Elliott Abrams, the US envoy for Venezuela, claimed the US did not take part in the negotiations between the opposition and members of the regime, but insisted an agreement laying out terms of a political transition had been ready to sign.  “There is a document,” Abrams told the Venezuelan channel, VPITV. “The US was not involved in the negotiations, but they tell me it is a long document – there are 15 points I think – it mentions guarantees for the military, a dignified exit for Maduro, Guaidó as interim president, the supreme court and the high command stay in position, free elections within 12 months.”  Abrams called it “a good plan for the recovery of a stable democracy in Venezuela”.  The US national security adviser, John Bolton, said that under the plan: “The [Venezuelan] supreme court would declare Maduro’s constituent assembly illegitimate. That would clarify for everybody, if anybody needed clarification, the legitimacy of the national assembly led by Juan Guaidó.”  Bolton told Hugh Hewitt, a radio talkshow host, on Wednesday, that the court decision “would have allowed the military to cover themselves in a way – defence minister Padrino and others – to take action. Now for reasons that are still not clear, that didn’t go forward yesterday.”  Maduro reportedly became aware of the plans on Monday, forcing Guaidó to bring forward his plan by a day and, perhaps, contributing to its failure.  There is also speculation that the opposition may have been tricked by Padrino and others into thinking they had a deal, in order to portray them as coup-plotters.  Bolton said a meeting of Trump’s top national security and foreign policy aides on Venezuela was held at the White House on Wednesday. The acting defence secretary, Patrick Shanahan, cancelled a trip to Europe because of the crisis. According to the Washington Post, Bolton and his team have clashed with US military leaders over their reported reluctance to put forward military options for Venezuela.  In his remarks on Wednesday, Bolton appeared to goad military leaders into taking an aggressive stance.  “Adm Faller [head of Southern Command] had a great line a couple of days ago referring to the Southern Command which he’s in charge of. He said we’re on the balls of our feet ready to go. And that’s the kind of attitude we need,” Bolton said. The national security adviser also seemed to make a pitch to his own boss for tougher action.  “We’re at a time for choosing here,” Bolton said. “And I just don’t believe President Trump is prepared to see foreign governments effectively take over the control of Venezuela, and which possesses the largest reserves of petroleum in the world.”

Tom Phillips Latin America correspondent and Julian Borger in Washington


theguardianuk--2019-11-13--Many wanted Morales out. But what happened in Bolivia was a military coup | Gabriel Hetland

On Sunday, the head of Bolivia’s military called on Evo Morales to resign from the presidency. Minutes later, Morales was on a plane to Cochabamba where he did just that. These facts leave little doubt that what happened in Bolivia this weekend was a military coup, the first such event in Latin America since the 2009 military coup against the Honduran president Manuel Zelaya. (The 2012 and 2016 impeachments of Paraguay’s Fernando Lugo and Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff are widely viewed as “parliamentary coups”.)  The mainstream press has bent over backwards, and tied itself in more than a few tangled knots, to avoid drawing this conclusion. The Wall Street Journal celebrates Morales’ ouster as “a democratic breakout”. The New York Times is characteristically more circumspect, hemming and hawing about how “the forced ouster of an elected leader is by definition a setback for democracy” but might also “help Bolivia restore its wounded democracy”. This head-spinning rhetoric does not prevent the New York Times from swiftly dismissing left-of-center politicians’ “predictable” claims that what happened was a coup.  The Trump administration has unsurprisingly welcomed Morales’ fall. The White House says “Morales’s departure preserves democracy,” and argues: “These events send a strong signal to the illegitimate regimes in Venezuela and Nicaragua that democracy and the will of the people will always prevail.” The foreign minister of Brazil’s far-right government has similarly declared: “There is no coup in Bolivia.”  It is hardly surprising that conservative governments and powerful media outlets applaud Morales’ forcing out and dismiss the claim it constitutes a coup. More surprising is that leftist commentators, including Raquel Gutiérrez and Raul Zibechi, have taken a similar stance. Zibechi attributes Morales’s fall to a “popular uprising”. This claim cannot be lightly dismissed. It points to the massive popular demonstrations that confronted Morales in the weeks after the 20 October election. Protesters rallied around two main claims.  The first is that Morales should not have been on the ballot at all in 2019 because he lost a February 2016 referendum on indefinite presidential re-election, which a slight majority of voters rejected. Morales overcame this hurdle when Bolivia’s electoral court declared in 2017 that not allowing Morales to run for indefinite re-election violated his “human rights.” Many Bolivians disagreed with this controversial decision, including some who previously supported Morales.  The second is that the 20 October election was fraudulent. Suspicion centered in particular around a 24-hour suspension of the live transmission of “rapid-count” results of the election. At the time of the suspension, on election night, the count showed Morales leading by less than 10% over his nearest rival, Carlos Mesa. This would have triggered a December runoff election, but when the transmission of the vote count resumed a day later, Morales had the requisite 10% lead needed to avoid a runoff. Suspicion that this change was due to fraud led to large and growing protests in the week after the vote, with Morales eventually agreeing to a binding audit of the vote by the Organization of American States. Mesa also initially agreed to the OAS audit, but withdrew his agreement under pressure from far-right leaders, who rejected the elections entirely, and began to call for Morales’s resignation.  On Sunday, the OAS delivered the results of its audit, which found irregularities in the vote process extensive enough that the OAS said it could not certify the vote as accurate. As promised, Morales accepted this finding, and immediately called for new elections. This is what protesters had initially demanded. But in the weeks after 20 October, the principal demand changed from a new election to Morales’ resignation.  This demand was initially voiced by Bolivia’s far right, centered in the lowland department of Santa Cruz. Yet, in the days before Morales’ fall, the demand for his resignation was also voiced by popular movements, including the miners’ union and the Bolivian Workers’ Central, which on November 10 somewhat tentatively called on Morales to “reflect on resigning if doing so would be for the good of the country”.  For Zibechi, Gutiérrez, and other leftists, popular movements’ calls for Morales to resign prove his fall was not a coup. This view, however, ignores the critical timeline by which Morales resigned only after he was pressured to do so by the military. Unlike all other actors in Bolivia, when the military “suggested” Morales leave office he had no choice but to say yes, or risk tremendous violence. Unfortunately, events of the last several days suggest that the coup will not end the violence and chaos gripping Bolivia.  Since Morales resigned, many MAS elected officials have also resigned their posts, claiming that they are doing so for fear of their own and their families’ safety. Video shows Morales’s house being ransacked on Sunday and chilling instances of police abuse of power in the last several days. On Tuesday night, the far right vice president of Bolivia’s Senate swore herself in as president, to a nearly empty legislative chamber. MAS senators boycotted the proceedings, with at least some saying they did so for fear of their safety.  Whatever the broad array of forces that contributed to Morales’s downfall, the fact that the military pushed him out has emboldened the worst elements of Bolivian society. It may also embolden popular movements to strike back, as has occurred so often in Bolivia’s history. Indeed, predominantly Indigenous protesters in El Alto, La Paz, and elsewhere are in the streets denouncing the burning of the Indigenous wiphala flag and growing military repression of the populace. Some protesters are now calling for civil war.  The debate over whether or not Morales’s ouster constitutes a coup is revealing. Those who deny that there has been a coup – Trump, Bolsonaro, and mainstream press – express the predictable and longstanding animosity of the powerful towards leftist governments that challenge the status quo and offer the powerless hope for an alternative. For those in this camp, Morales’ fall is fully (or largely) legitimate and something to be welcomed as the return of democracy, regardless of how it occurred. The denunciation of Morales’s ouster as a coup – the position of leading leftist figures in Latin America, the US, and UK – reveals an equally longstanding, and yes predictable, concern with military intervention in the political process, particularly when this is hitched to the type of oligarchic rightwing revanchist racism now on display in Bolivia.  But the Bolivian conflict is not black and white. What we need at this moment is not a simplistic condemnation or uncritical defense of Morales and the MAS. We need to recognize the multiplicity of forces, including popular movements, which challenged Morales in recent weeks (and often for much longer).  We also need to recognize that, right now, it is not popular movements that have taken charge in Bolivia, but a Bible-thumping racist right that has burned the wiphala, promised that “Pachamama will never return to the [presidential] palace” and chillingly called on the military and police to “pacify” Bolivia’s streets. The sad result of this is chaos and violence by state security forces and at least some MAS supporters. At the end of the day the most important question may not be whether or not this was a coup, but what comes next? The picture so far is decidedly grim. • None Gabriel Hetland is an assistant professor of Latin American, Caribbean and Latino Studies and Sociology at University at Albany, SUNY


theindependent--2019-01-23--Thailand set to hold first general election since military coup in 2014

Thailand is set to hold its first general election since the military seized power in a coup in 2014.  Having not held elections for five years, the country’s royal palace has now issued a decree authorising the vote to be held on 24 March.  Election laws that were drafted by the current military government, which has kept tight control over political activities in the country, have now come into force.  Initial promises of holding elections had been pushed back and the most recent date of 24 February had to be abandoned because the decree giving the go-ahead was not issued in time to allow for the necessary preparations.  Election commission chief Ithiporn Boonpakong said the 24 March date was "flexible enough and should be beneficial to everyone concerned".  Anti-government protesters have staged sporadic demonstrations on Bangkok's streets in recent months, demanding no further delays in holding elections.  The office of the prime minister, Prayut Chan-ocha, said with the laws in place, the decree "should end any further doubts on the holding and timing of general elections".  The military has already overseen the drafting of a new constitution that will limit the power of future elected governments, shifting oversight to unelected bodies.  Any new government will also be required to follow a 20-year "national strategy" drawn up by the military government.  Several parties seen as serving as proxies for the military have been established and Mr Prayut could run with one or he could become a so-called "outsider prime minister" under new rules that don't require the premier to be a member of parliament.  Some parties already have announced their support for Mr Prayut to stay in power and for several months he has been active in making public appearances around the country in what resembles a political campaign.


theindependent--2019-03-24--Thai elections latest Military-backed party takes the lead in Thailandaposs first vote since coup

Thai elections latest: Military-backed party takes the lead in Thailand's first vote since coup

A military-backed party has taken the lead in Thailand’s first election since a coup in 2014, preliminary results showed, suggesting junta leader and prime minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha could stay in power.  With 89 per cent of votes counted on Sunday, the Palang Pracharat party was first with 7 million votes. Pheu Thai, which was the governing party ousted by the coup, was next with 6.6 million votes.  A new party, Future Forward, which became popular with young voters, had scooped up nearly 4.8 million votes. Voters deserted the Democrat Party, Thailand’s oldest political party, and its leader resigned.  Thais voted for a 500-member parliament, which along with a 250-member junta-appointed senate will decide the next prime minister.  The election was the latest chapter in a nearly two-decade struggle between conservative forces including the military and the political machine of Thaksin Shinawatra, a tycoon who upended tradition-bound Thailand’s politics with a populist political revolution.  Mr Thaksin was ousted as prime minister in a 2006 military coup and now lives in exile abroad to avoid a prison term, but parties allied with him have won every election since 2001.  His sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, who led the Pheu Thai government that was ousted in 2014, also fled the country after what supporters said was a politically motivated prosecution.  Mr Prayuth, the blunt-speaking army chief who led the 2014 coup, was hoping to extend his hold on power after engineering a new political system that aims to stifle the influence of big political parties not aligned with the military.  About 51 million Thais were eligible to vote. Leaders of political parties opposed to military rule urged a high turnout as the only way to derail Mr Prayuth’s plans, but many voters stayed at home.  Thailand’s powerful king, Maha Vajiralongkorn, issued a statement on the eve of the election saying the role of leaders is to stop “bad people” from gaining power and causing chaos. It was also broadcast on Thai television stations minutes before voting started.  Invoking a speech by his father, the previous Thai king who died in 2016 after reigning for seven decades, King Vajiralongkorn said not all citizens can be transformed into good people, so leaders must be given support in ruling to create a peaceful nation.  He urged government officials, soldiers and civil servants to look after national security.  It was the monarch’s second notable intervention in politics recently. Last month, he demanded his sister Princess Ubolratana Mahidol withdraw as a prime ministerial candidate for a small Thaksin-allied party within 24 hours of her announcement.  When it seized power in 2014, the military said it was to end political unrest that had periodically turned violent and disrupted daily life and the economy.  The claim has been a selling point for Mr Prayuth, who according to critics has overseen a period of growing inequality and economic hardship in Thailand.  After the coup, political party gatherings were banned and pro-democracy activists and other dissenters were regularly arrested, interrogated and imprisoned. Just days before Sunday’s election, Pheu Thai said the houses of party officials and its campaign canvassers in some provinces had been searched by military personnel in an act of intimidation.  We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view.  At The Independent, no one tells us what to write. That’s why, in an era of political lies and Brexit bias, more readers are turning to an independent source. Subscribe from just 15p a day for extra exclusives, events and ebooks – all with no ads.


theindependent--2019-04-30--Venezuela news Police vehicles drive at opposition supporters as Maduro forces try to put down Guaid

Venezuela news Police vehicles drive at opposition supporters as Maduro forces try to put down Guaido's 'military-backed' coup

Venezuela has seen a day of tumult and protests as the country's opposition leader Juan Guaido began what he described as the "final phase" of his plan to take wrest control of the Venezuelan government from president Nicolas Maduro.  The day of unrest began on Tuesday with Mr Guaido appearing in a video surrounded by troops who he said had put their weight behind the opposition leader's claim to leadership — a claim that Mr Guaido would make repeatedly throughout the day at several locations in Caracas.  As the day progressed, Mr Maduro described the effort to remove him from office as a "coup" dreamed up in Washington, and claimed that he had been assured of "total loyalty" to his cause by military leaders in the country. In a later interview, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo indicated that Mr Maduro was prepared to flee the country on Tuesday morning, but had been talked out of doing so by Russian officials.  But, as images and videos of violence broadcast around the world from Caracas, several officials in countries around the world weighed in on the events, including John Bolton, the national security adviser in the White House. Mr Bolton told reporters at the White House that no options had been taken off the table for the United States, including military action, even though a peaceful transfer of power was preferable.  During those remarks, Mr Bolton suggested that the Cuban government and military was propping up thee Maduro regime. Later, in a tweet, Mr Bolton tagged several senior aides to Mr Maduro to tell them "your time is up."  "This is your last chance," Mr Bolton wrote. "Accept Interim President Guaido's amnesty, protect the Constitution, and remove Maduro, and we will take you off our sanctions list. Stay with Maduro, and go down with the ship."  Back in Venezuela, Mr Guaido called for Venezuelans and the military to back him to end Mr Maduro's "usurpation", declaring: "The moment is now."  There is some expectation that demonstrations — which included reports of gunfire, and military vehicles driving into crowds of demonstrators — would last through the night and into Wednesday.  Thanks for reading along as we watched the situation in Venezuela


themoscowtimes--2019-04-12--Russians Not Under Threat in Sudan Following Military Coup Embassy Says

Russians Not Under Threat in Sudan Following Military Coup, Embassy Says

An estimated 140 Russian citizens are registered as residing in Sudan, where a military coup overthrew President Omar al-Bashir, a close ally of Russia, after 30 years of autocratic rule on Thursday. The U.S. State Department has warned Americans against traveling to Sudan due to "crime, terrorism, civil unrest, kidnapping and armed conflict."  Russians traveling in Sudan are not in danger after the ouster of the African nation’s longtime leader and ongoing unrest, the Russian Embassy in Khartoum said Thursday.  “Despite the declared emergency measures, the situation in the country remains calm. There is no threat to Russian citizens in Sudan,” Vladimir Tomsky, the Russian Embassy’s press attache, told the state-run RIA Novosti news agency.  Tomsky said the embassy plans to continue its operations amid the unrest, including protests demanding military leaders to hand over power to civilians.  Thousands of Sudanese demonstrators who have been holding almost daily anti-Bashir protests rejected the decision to set up a transitional military council to run the country for two years and vowed to continue protests until a civilian government is established.  Canada shut its embassy doors and urged Canadians to avoid travel to Sudan.  The United States said it was suspending talks with Sudan on normalizing relations and the State Department has ordered non-emergency U.S. government employees to leave the country.


activistpost--2019-05-13--US Special Forces School Publishes New Book on Overthrowing Governments

(ANTIWAR.COM) — US Special Operations Command can now be said to have literally written the book on US-imposed regime change, with the book Support to Resistance: Strategic Purpose and Effectiveness released this week by their official school.  The official study covers 47 distinct cases of US special forces trying to intervene in various countries from 1941-2003. It did not include some of the more famous US-backed coups, as the study said they did not involve “legitimate resistance movements.”  This meant a few pages covering each incident, attempts to sort them into various categories, and determinations if they were successful or failures. Overwhelmingly, they determined their own interventions were successful.  Apparently anticipating the problems in years to come, the study also addressed mounting unrest across the Middle East in its early portion, and waved this away by arguing that it was generally the fault of the Soviet Union, and would’ve happened no matter what the US did.  Provide, Protect and Profit in unstable times! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


globalresearch--2019-01-22--US-Gate Overthrowing Other Peoples Governments The Master List of US Regime Changes

“US-Gate”? Overthrowing Other People’s Governments: The Master List of U.S. “Regime Changes”

This incisive list countries by the late William Blum was first published in 2013,  posted on Global Research in 2014.  In relation to recent developments in Latin America and the Middle East, it is worth recalling the history of US sponsored military coups and “soft coups” aka regime changes.  In a bitter irony, under the so-called “Russia probe” the US is accusing Moscow of interfering in US politics.  This article reviews the process of overthrowing sovereign governments through military coups, acts of war, support of terrorist organizations, covert ops in support of regime change. Needless to say, while “US-Gate” is not an issue, this list in nonetheless revealing.  In recent developments, the Trump administration is supportive of a US sponsored regime change in Venezuela and Cuba  Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)  Q: Why will there never be a coup d’état in Washington?  Global Research Editor’s note: To this list published in February 2013, we must add Ukraine, where Viktor Yanukovych was successfully ousted in February 2014.


globalresearch--2019-02-11--The Cynicism of Empire Sen Rubio Tells Venezuelans to Overthrow Their Governmentor Starve

The Cynicism of Empire: Sen. Rubio Tells Venezuelans to Overthrow Their Government…or Starve!

There is a sad disregard for human life among the neocon regime-changers. The devastation of Iraq, with its million dead, was a mere stepping stone to a “re-making” of the Middle East. A Libya turned into a modern day slave market after neocon-backed “liberation” is off the radar screen. Who cares, right?  Syria suffered a half million dead after a US backed jihadist insurgency – strongly backed by the neocons – and not a word of remorse.  In fact, in a remarkable act of chutzpah, neocons have taken to blaming the victims in Syria, with the Washington Post’s Josh Rogin branding Assad, who fought and ultimately defeated US-backed terrorists (and in so doing saved Syria’s ancient Christian community) an “enemy of humanity.” One need not join the Assad fan club to come to the easy conclusion that an al-Qaeda-controlled Aleppo, for example, was a living hell while an Aleppo liberated by Assad very soon was on its feet again as a multi-confessional and multi-cultural center of Syria.  The sick disregard for human life as Washington gins up the regime change machine is on display again, bolder and more sadistic than ever. Witness the neoconservative Senator from Florida, shown above, who Tweeted this week that as hunger is growing in Venezuela, that country’s military must make a choice whether to support the US-backed overthrow of its government or allow the people to starve. Clearly threatening war, Rubio wrote, “military leaders should make a choice, before a choice is made for them.”  Other neocons behind this regime change operation are showing signs of desperation as after more than a week of their backing the US-selected “interim president” – who had never run for the office – there are not yet any major signs of the Maduro government crumbling under the pressure.  National Security Advisor John Bolton, who has spearheaded this idiotic operation (as he helped spearhead the idiotic 2003 invasion of Iraq), is almost begging the Venezuelan military to change sides. He is no doubt frustrated that the “cake walk” he likely promised Trump is to this point looking like no such thing.  Translation: “Want some money? Help us overthrow your government!”  The cynicism goes even deeper than that, however. After supporting the most brutal and aggressive sanctions against Venezuela for years – a policy that no doubt contributed to the misery they now pretend to seek to ameliorate – the regime changers are now dangling US “humanitarian” aid in front of Venezuelans if only they come over to the pro-rebel side and help overthrow their government.  A US convoy of “humanitarian” relief trucks has set out in Colombia all the way to the Venezuelan border. After trying to starve Venezuelans for years, suddenly the US government dangles food in front of them. For a price.  But the US “aid” convoy to Venezuela was so obviously a political move to use food as a weapon that even the UN and other NGOs refused to take part in the charade. Unsurprisingly, the Venezuelan government did not allow the US convoy to enter its territory and deliver aid to any rebels that might be eager to receive it.  Another example of how paranoid and unstable the Venezuelan government really is? No, actually just a couple of days earlier another “aid” shipment was found to contain a cache of weapons slated for delivery to the rebels.  Maybe they were just “moderate” rebels”?  You don’t believe the US government would make such a dishonest and dangerous move as to hide a cache of weapons inside a “humanitarian” aid shipment? Ha! For Bolton and his new/old comrade in charge of regime change in Venezuela, Elliot Abrams, this was a return to the “good old days” where such practice was all in a day’s work.  As an article in the 1987 Los Angeles Times informs us:  Boltlon, Abrams, and the rest of Trump’s neocons aren’t even trying to make this original. They have pulled the old 1980s “support Latin American dictators” playbook off the shelf and are blatantly plagiarizing themselves! And the tens of thousands of innocent dead littering the scorched earth of their murderous policies? Don’t expect an apology: they are panting for more death and destruction!  The US “aid” convoy to Venezuela was a farce from the beginning. Delivering humanitarian aid was the last thing on the neocon mind. Much more important was to deliver a message. And thanks to the slavishly compliant mainstream media in the US and among its allies, that message was amplified to all corners of the globe. As German government mouthpiece Deutsche Welle put it, “Maduro rejects humanitarian aid as nation starves.”  Score that headline a major win for the CIA and other psy-op masters.  Except unlike in Yemen, where the Germans and other “allies” back the US and Saudi genocide of the population amidst plenty of concrete evidence of horrific starvation, there is no evidence of anything remotely resembling a Yemen-like starvation nightmare in Venezuela. If there was, we’d see it in full livid detail. And again, Yemen doesn’t count because it’s the US and its allies doing the starving and blocking the humanitarian relief.  The neocons still have not broken up the Venezuelan government but they are not out of weapons. Secretary of State and top neocon dog Mike Pompeo may be about to go nuclear. In the face of a stalled regime change Pompeo came out yesterday with the outlandish claim that the Venezuela is now a central battle ground in the “War on Terror”! He told FoxNews’ Trish Regan that Venezuela is full of “active Hezbollah cells.” And that, “The Iranians are impacting the people of Venezuela and throughout South America.”  He added, ominously: “We have an obligation to take down that risk for America.”  Having over decades established Hezbollah as the ultimate bogeyman (despite their not targeting Americans or the US and in fact being primarily focused against Israeli expansionism and aggression), the neocons are now doing their best to use raw fear of terrorism to motivate Americans to support a US invasion of Venezuela.  And if Americans are not sufficiently propagandized that the Venezuelan government is the new Hitler and must be deposed before it throws more babies from incubators and distributes more Viagra to its troops? Breitbart is always good for a few low-IQ chunks of red meat to the feverish masses. Today they breathlessly report – PROOF of the depravity of Maduro – that…”Nicholas Maduro Threatens to Kill American Troops if They Invade Venezuela.”  What a revelation! Has there been country in history that actually welcomed a hostile invasion?  What is next for Venezuela and the neocon regime change plan? Well it is not going to plan at present, but as with all of these operations it is the neocons holding the cards (and the cash). The “correlation of forces” are definitely on their side. The neocon regime changers must only hit the target once, while the legitimate government of Venezuela must parry each blow.  As for the obligatory disclaimer (this is getting tedious): No, we do not “support” Maduro or socialism or all the really bad things he is accused of in Venezuela. Our opposition is as American patriots: We do not want a global US empire that arrogates to itself the authority to decide who is and who is not acceptable to govern a foreign country. No sanctions, no meddling, no “regime change”. A sound defense of this country and a passionate dedication to leading not by force or subterfuge, but by example.  The neocons have been given carte blanche by a seemingly lazy or uninterested President Trump. Will we rise to the occasion and defend real American values against their obsessive, failed attempts to conquer the globe? Will we hold our representatives in Congress accountable to real American values? There is some wavering in Congress about an implied authorization for the use of force in Venezuela. It is a unique opportunity for us to make our preferences known in a way that might make a difference. What do you say? It’s not that hard.  Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.


globalresearch--2019-02-26--Canadian Aid to Venezuela Part of Plan to Overthrow Government

Canadian ‘Aid’ to Venezuela Part of Plan to Overthrow Government

If more people understood that “aid” often goes hand in hand with military intervention there would be less uncritical support for it.  An important, though little acknowledged, principle of Canadian ‘aid’ policy is that military intervention elicits international assistance. Or, in the case of Venezuela ‘aid’ is a tool being used to stoke military conflict.  In fact, a long-standing element of foreign policy is that wherever Canadian and US troops kill Ottawa provides ‘aid’. This military-intervention-equals-aid pattern dates back at least to the 1950-53 Korean War when the south of that country was a major recipient of Canadian assistance. Canadian ‘aid’ flowed  to south Vietnam during the U.S. war there and to Grenada after the 1983 US invasion. During the 1990-91 Iraq war Canada provided $75 million in assistance to people in countries affected by the Gulf crisis. Hundreds of millions of dollars flowed into Haiti after Canadian troops helped overthrow the country’s elected government in 2004. In the years after the invasions, Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti were the top three recipients of Canadian ‘aid’. A sizable proportion of the $2 billion in ‘aid’ Canada spent in Afghanistan was a public relations exercise to justify the war.  The intervention-equals-aid pattern is an outgrowth of the primary objective of Canadian overseas assistance, which is to advance Western interests, particularly keeping the Global South tied to the US-led geopolitical order (as articulated  in 1950 when Ottawa began its first significant non-European allocation of foreign aid through the Colombo Plan).  Justin Trudeau announced Canada would deliver $53 million in ‘aid’ to Venezuelans at the most recent “Lima Group” meeting. The Ottawa gathering also called on the Venezuelan military to oust  the elected president and urged the military not to impede humanitarian assistance from entering the country. The US and self-appointed interim president Juan Guaidó have made delivering ‘aid’ central to their campaign to oust Maduro. US military planes have transported hundreds of tons of ‘aid’ to the Colombian border City of Cucuta. To test the military’s loyalty to the government, Guaidó announced plans to force ‘aid’ into the country.The US and Colombia clearly aimed exploit this moment to intervene.  Whether it reaches the point of armed confrontation, the ‘aid’ gambit is a public relations strategy. The aim is to exaggerate the scope of the economic downturn and to portray Nicolas Maduro as indifferent to the population’s (real) hardships.The public relations campaign even included a “Live Aid” style Venezuela fundraiser put on by billionaire Richard Branson in Cucuta last night before Guaido said he will seek to force ‘aid’ into the country. The concert fizzled with only about 5,000 people showing up and some artists pulling out at the last minute.  For their part, the International Red Cross and UN have refused to participate in the US led ‘aid’ endeavor. A UN spokesperson called Washington’s ‘aid’ plan “politicised”.  The politics driving the ‘aid’ deployment is obvious, but some progressives have been seduced by the label. In an internal memo responding to media backlash over their principled criticism of Ottawa’s regime change efforts in Venezuela, the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) said it supports the federal government’s decision to increase humanitarian assistance to Venezuelans. But, the slow-moving coup attempt and Canadian ‘aid’ disbursements can’t be separated. They are simply different parts of a single plan.  It’s not uncommon for progressive organizations to support ‘imperial aid’ as a way to soften their criticism of international policies. At their 2006 convention, for instance, the NDP leadership sought to temper the “troops out” of Afghanistan demand pushed by activists by including language in the resolution that called for “support[ing] the continuation of development assistance to Afghanistan.” But, the ‘aid’ there was obviously designed to support Canada’s military occupation.  In the academic literature it’s understood that the Canadian International Development Agency was “not a policy maker, but a policy taker.” The dissolution of CIDA into Global Affairs Canada in 2013 further subordinated aid policy to foreign policy objectives.  Far and away the largest contribution announced, Canada’s humanitarian assistance to Venezuela is not designed to alleviate suffering. Its aim is to overthrow the government, which may spark and/or require war. If that disastrous situation develops, we need to add the ‘aid-leading-to-military intervention principle’ to our critical foreign policy lexicon.  Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.


globalresearch--2019-05-14--US Special Forces Command Issues New Guide for Overthrowing Foreign Governments

No kidding – this is not our headline, but Newsweek’s: “US Special Forces School Publishes New Guide For Overthrowing Foreign Governments” – and as far as we can tell they are the only major mainstream outlet to have picked up on the fact that the US military is now essentially openly bragging on past and future capabilities to foster covert regime change operations.  The 250-page study entitled “Support to Resistance: Strategic Purpose and Effectiveness” was put out by the Joint Special Operations University under US Special Operations Command, which is the Army’s official unified command center which overseas all joint covert and clandestine missions out of MacDill AFB, Florida.  The study examines 47 instances of US special forces trying to intervene in various countries from 1941-2003, thus special attention is given to the Cold War, but it doesn’t include coups which lacked “legitimate resistance movements” — such as the case of ‘Operation AJAX’ in 1953 which overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh.  Though infamous disasters such the abortive CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba are highlighted, the US military report (perhaps predictably) finds that among those nearly fifty covert interventions surveyed, most interventions were “successful”.  “One thing common to all 47 cases reviewed in this study is the fact that the targeted state was ruled either by an unfriendly occupying force or by a repressive authoritarian regime,” the author, Army Special Forces veteran Will Irwin wrote. The study focuses on historical regime change operations but in parts hints at the future, saying, “Russia and China have boldly demonstrated expansionist tendencies.”  Success vs. Failure data from the new US military study published earlier this week entitled Support to Resistance: Strategic Purpose and Effectiveness  It also asserts that unrest across the Middle East since the fall of the Soviet Union should ultimately be blamed on the legacy of past Soviet policy and failures, rather than on the United States.  And further another interesting element involved the failure of operations which intervened in countries “under peacetime conditions”:  Other major findings included observations that most operations “were carried out under wartime conditions, with those being nearly twice as successful as cases conducted under peacetime conditions” and “support to nonviolent civil resistance seems to be more likely to succeed than support to armed resistance.” At the same time, they were also “most effective when conducted in direct support of a military campaign rather than as an independent or main effort operation.”  The report identifies about half a dozen governments from Indonesia to Afghanistan to Serbia to Iraq that were “successfully” overthrown by US operations, but in many more cases identifies covert “disrupt” operations for a desired outcome.  The study did not include within its scope current US involved proxy wars which have unfolded in the past decade, such in Syria or Libya or Ukraine, but only mentions these in passing.  In concluding remarks the author acknowledges that the study could help “explore ways the timely application of SOF capabilities” can influence “resistance movements” which are becoming increasingly violent, “thereby possibly helping to prevent the next Syria”.  Whether this means swifter action would have resulted in quick regime change in Syria or if the study author believes US support to the “rebels” was doomed from the beginning remains unexplored.  Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.  All images in this article are from ZH


globalresearch--2019-11-13--Bolivia: The OAS and US Help Overthrow Another Latin American Government

His resignation has yet to take effect, as it must be approved by the legislature. This did not stop opposition party member Jeanine Añez, the Senate’s second vice president, from declaring herself interim president, further proving that what’s happened is a coup. MAS legislators, who have a majority in both chambers, have been unable to attend parliamentary sessions as security forces have not guaranteed their safety.  Currently, indigenous and labor movements are on the streets in several Bolivian cities, demanding that President Morales be reinstated. Meanwhile, police forces are ripping the Wiphala flag (a flag that represents the indigenous peoples of the Andes) from their uniforms and from government buildings. Coup leader Luis Camacho entered the government palace with a Bolivian flag and a bible; upon leaving, one of his supporters, a Christian pastor, declared that “Pachamama will never return to the palace… Bolivia belongs to Christ.” (Pachamama is an Andean goddess representing Mother Earth.) The coup and its aftermath are not just a rejection of President Morales, but of Bolivia’s indigenous majority and the social gains of the last 13 years.  Morales’ resignation came hours after the head of the armed forces and the chief of Bolivia’s police “suggested” that he resign. The head of the army, General Williams Kalimán Romero, was Bolivia’s military attaché in Washington from 2013 to 2016. The chief of police, General Vladimir Calderón, was Bolivia’s police attaché in Washington until December 2018. As attachés they would have been in constant communication with the Pentagon and other agencies; it is no stretch of the imagination to wonder if they were still in contact with their U.S. counterparts as the overthrow of the Morales government unfolded.  The coup was carried out over three weeks after the October 20 elections, but it was months, if not years in the making. The United States first began targeting Evo Morales in 2001 – five years before being elected president – when the US Embassy in La Paz warned that his political base needed to be weakened. Afterwards, USAID began funding right-wing political parties and “civil society” organizations that would feature heavily in attempts to overthrow President Morales.  The first such attempt came in 2008, two years after Morales was first elected president and days after he survived a recall referendum with 67.4% of the vote. On that occasion, coup plotters in eastern Bolivia, a region rich in minerals where the white minority population is concentrated, attempted to secede from the country. According to the International Federation for Human Rights, the opposition in eastern Bolivia “promoted separatism and ethnically and socially based hatred through the Civic Committees (Comités Civicos), in particular the Pro-Santa Cruz Civic Committee.” Luis Camacho, the millionaire coup leader with ties to paramilitaries, is the current president of this committee, which has received U.S. funding in the past.  The desire to overthrow Morales has existed for years, but more immediate plans were finalized in the weeks before the election. Bolivian media outlet Erbol published leaked audio of conversations held from October 8 and 10 between civic leaders, former military officials and opposition politicians who discussed “a plan for social unrest, before and after the general elections, with the aim of preventing President Evo Morales from remaining” in office. One opposition politician mentioned being in close contact with Senators Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Bob Menendez.  The OAS also played an important role in stoking protests and ensuring that the coup was successful. On October 21, a day after the election, it issued a statement casting doubt on the process due to an “inexplicable” change in the trend of the vote count. This statement was thoroughly debunked by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), which found that trend did not change and that Morales widened the gap over his rivals due to late reporting rural precincts, where he enjoys a tremendous advantage. A later statistical analysis by CEPR found that there was “no evidence that the election results were affected by irregularities or fraud.” However, the damage was done: protestors took to the streets decrying electoral fraud. These claims were echoed by the State Department and Senator Rubio on Twitter.  After being invited by President Morales to conduct an audit, the results of which he promised to respect, the OAS instead opted to destabilize the country. The full electoral audit was initially due by November 12, but on November 10, a day after Morales announced that a coup was taking place and amid political violence throughout the country, the OAS decided to issue a preliminary audit. This report, which did not include data that could be independently verified, repeated the false claims of the October 21 statement and called for new elections. In response, Morales agreed to new elections and to replacing the board of the electoral body, yet this offer was rebuffed by coup leaders.  Rather than denounce the coup and insist that Morales be allowed to finish out his term (which ends in January), the OAS held a vote that refused to call it a coup, although several countries dissented. Mexico criticized the OAS for being “surprisingly quiet” given the violation of constitutional order, while Uruguay condemned the body’s “double standard depending on antipathy or sympathy” for the government in question. Earlier in the day, Argentinian president-elect Alberto Fernández said “what happened in Bolivia is a shame, the behavior of the OAS is shameful because the audit the OAS held is significant in its flimsiness and has conclusions that are absolutely manipulated.”  It should be noted that the 2008 coup was neutralized in part because of the role played by UNASUR, the Union of South American Nations. This regional bloc has been severely debilitated in recent years as a direct result of State Department pressure and the willingness of right-wing Southern American presidents to give up on long-term regional integration plans for short-term political benefits. The decline of UNASUR and CELAC (the Community of Latin America and Caribbean States – another target of the State Department), coupled with the OAS’s bias, leaves the region with no credible multilateral organization.  This is important, because the only way forward for Bolivia is to hold new elections, which will require independent electoral observation. Given that the OAS is unfit for such a role, the region should insist that the United Nations send an electoral mission. It is the only body that can carry this role out in an impartial manner.  Bolivia is at a flash point and measures have to be taken to reduce tensions. Its legislature must be allowed to function normally, which in practical terms means that the safety of MAS legislators and their families must be ensured. A gesture for MAS supporters would be to reinstate the president and vice president of the Senate and the president of the Chamber of Deputies (should they desire to be reinstated); all three resigned under duress during the weekend of the coup. Only then can the legislature decide whether to accept Morales’ resignation. Finally, the MAS presidential candidate, whoever that ends up being, needs to receive guarantees for their safety and assurances from the international community that a MAS victory will be respected.  Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.


mediamattersforamerica--2019-02-20--Lou Dobbs says McCabe confessed to FBI plans to carry out what was and is nothing less than the att

Lou Dobbs says McCabe confessed to "FBI plans to carry out what was and is nothing less than the attempted overthrow of the U.S. government"

LOU DOBBS (HOST): McCabe today claimed he informed the top congressional leaders of both parties about FBI plans to carry out what was and is nothing less than the attempted overthrow of the U.S. government.  In May of 2017, President Trump had been in office less than six months when the conspiracy to carry out a so-called soft coup reached the Democratic and Republican leadership of both the House and the Senate.  And no one in the so-called gang of eight denies McCabe's account or their awareness of the corrupt deep state's efforts to overthrow the president of the United States.  Here tonight we take up McCabe's shocking admissions and the fearful silence and refusal of Republican lawmakers to support the president and to defend the government against the lawless, reckless treachery of the politically corrupt FBI and Justice Department.  House Freedom Caucus members Congressman Jim Jordan, Congressman Mark Green among our guests tonight with their perspectives on what has been from the beginning, clearly, a plot to subvert this president. With the complicity of the left-wing national media. And it turns out, with the knowledge of the leaders of both parties in both houses of Congress.


rferl--2019-02-06--Court Acquits Kazakh Activist Charged With Calling To Overthrow Government

AQTAU, Kazakhstan -- A court in Kazakhstan's western city of Aqtau has acquitted activist Aigul Aqberdieva in a high-profile case that stemmed from her social-media posts.      Aqberdieva’s lawyer, Zhanar Sundetqalieva, told RFE/RL that the court on February 6 also ruled that investigators violated Kazakhstan's Criminal Procedural Code while investigating the case.      The 39-year-old Aqberdieva was accused of using social-media accounts of the banned Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan (DVK) movement to call for the “forceful overthrow of the government."      On January 31, a prosecutor asked the court to convict Aqberdieva and sentence her to five years of "freedom limitation" -- a suspended sentence with parolelike restrictions.      Aqberdieva went on trial in September, four days after her 45-year-old husband, Ablovas Zhumaev, was found guilty of the same charge and sentenced to three years in prison.      Both Aqberdieva and her husband pleaded not guilty and called their cases politically motivated.      The couple has four children, the youngest of whom is 2 years old.      Kazakhstan deemed the DVK an extremist organization and banned the group in March 2018.      The political movement was founded by fugitive former banker Mukhtar Ablyazov, who has been a vocal critic of President Nursultan Nazarbaev.      In November, Ablyazov was sentenced in absentia to life in prison by a Kazakh court for murder. He has denied the charge and called it politically motivated.      Opponents and rights groups say that Nazarbaev, in power since before the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union, has taken systematic steps to suppress dissent and sideline potential opponents.


sottnet--2019-01-05--Yellow Vests demand reduction in taxes Macrons spokesman claims they want to overthrow the govern

Yellow Vests demand reduction in taxes, Macron's spokesman claims they want 'to overthrow the government'

The Yellow Vest movement has become full of agitators who only want to "overthrow the government," a spokesman for President Emmanuel Macron's government said of the protests that gripped France since November.Benjamin Griveaux made the comments following the government's first Council of Ministers meeting of 2019 on Friday, as cabinet members returned from their two week Christmas break.He addressed those "still mobilized among the Yellow Vests," saying the movement has "become the act of agitators who want insurrection and to overthrow the government."Griveaux added that the government was "ready to discuss with sincere people who do not turn the difficulties of fellow countrymen into a political instrument."Starting last November, the leaderless Yellow Vest movement started as a series of protests against a proposed hike in fuel prices. The clashes between the police and protesters resulted in thousands arrested and hundreds injured. In early December the fuel tax increase was ditched, but the movement has since broadened its agenda to include opposition to wider policy changes proposed under Macron's reform agenda, which critics say favor the rich while the standards of living for the majority of French citizens continue to decline. Macron promised small salary increases, but insisted the government would not yield to the pressure and continue with its course.


sottnet--2019-02-13--Revolution is the new black How Western money is funding overthrow-your-government classes

Revolution is the new black: How Western money is funding overthrow-your-government classes

"Let the Little Critters' Anger Grow"  Everyone at this gathering in Yerevan is young, hip and determined, and they're learning how to stage a revolution. RT Russian managed to get inside the protesters' camp, funded by US cash, and see what is being taught.And it's no coincidence Armenia was chosen to host the camp. After large-scale protests forced Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan to resign, protesters from all over the Commonwealth of Independent States started flocking to Yerevan for more inspiration.A total of 150 people participated in the forum; most were sponsored by the organizers from Prague. Local participants were hailed as heroes, and visiting young men and women from other ex-Soviet republics got their own injection of inspiration from their triumph. If Armenia could, they can, too.The focus in CampCamp is on new technologies, on all things young and hip."Fighting the authorities must be the cool thing to do, it must be trendy," teaches Nikolay Artyomenko, head of the opposition Vremya (Time) movement from St. Petersburg.His portfolio is quite impressive. He put up banners on St. Isaac's Cathedral protesting against the Orthodox Church taking over the museum. He ran a copy of the country's constitution through a shredder, Banksy style, co-organized anti-corruption protests with rubber ducks; distributed "Dictator" prints where Putin was depicted like Obama in his "Hope" posters.Nikolay teaches others to be creative and invent new ways to protest that should take over the old-school crowd with picket signs format."You have to stretch your imagination; there's quite a problem on the protesting market these days. Protesting has become very expensive", he shares. But Zhenya, an activist from Siberia, knows how to cut costs.He just turned 18, yet he has already risen to stardom on the activist scene: his one-man protests have made front-page headlines in his city more than once. Each of Zhenya's demonstrations is like a theatrical performance. He carefully selects props and plans according to the country's Administrative Penal Code: "You have to make sure you violate different laws to avoid being double-fined."He's locked in a long debate with Sasha from St. Petersburg about what kind of a public protest will get the smallest fine, and how to cut the "expenses". Sasha is the more experienced of the two: he is already a law student and knows how to protest with minimal charges.The CampCamp 2018's most active group is the one from Kyrgyzstan. It's a crowd of young journalists led by Bektour Iskender, founder of opposition web portal Кloop.kg.Bektour sees no harm that this "festival of democracy" is sponsored by foreign money. During the break, he confirms that his project is financed by the Prague Civil Society Centre."They treat me as an equal. They don't try to be my boss, and I'm good with it", he says.Step number two: think of a solution to the problem you've indicated using something you enjoy doing. Zhenya from Siberia and Boris from Dushanbe spend the next 15 minutes thinking of how they can overthrow the government while "sky gazing in the trees." Sounds downright comical, but the guys admit freely that they don't mind using falsification and manipulation for the right cause, if necessary.Artist Dasha Sozanovich goes on to explain in her workshop how to use cool visuals for protest purposes."Pictures work for both good and evil," she says. "The Islamic State's (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) visual campaign is an example of how pictures served evil."Dasha's own project called "Khabarstan" is, on the other hand, an example of how pictures serve the "good guys." Her presentation makes Kazakhstan funding state TV channels much more exciting. Dasha points out that it was the Prague Civil Society Centre that united all those who collaborated on this project.Two young artists are working away on their whiteboards creating stylish animations of the presentations they see, instead of taking notes the traditional way. That looks very cool, too."I decided to be an activist 11 years ago. It all started at a police station." That's a comic strip, where one of the artists captured the essence of what another star of the Armenian Revolution David Sansaryan was saying.One more piece of advice young activists get here is that they should focus on social media, like Russian social networks OK.ru and VK.ru, as well as Facebook, since they can't really compete with real media. The main goal is to elicit a response, get people to repost and comment on their publications."It's like something out of this world for us," says a girl from Kazakhstan.There are also young people from Russia and Belarus here, "dreaming to repeat Yerevan's success." Vanya from Perm confesses to the supportive audience that he came here to "export the revolution." That's exactly what our "friends" from Prague, Europe's partisans of democracy are going to be teaching them all four days of the forum. However, the excitement he created gets killed by a word of reason from head organizer Maria Sereda. She reminds all those present about security and requests them to refrain from tweeting this catchy slogan, "or we'll have Russian cameras all over the place in no time."The forum also offers a handful of workshops on techniques that can be used to increase protest sentiment in society. One workshop uses the theme of Russian folk tales. In one of the cases, a "forest community" learns to interact with the government, i.e. the "Big Bad Wolf." Speaking of overthrowing the "Big Bad Wolf of Belarus," the head organizer says that there is only one to do it - to let the little critters' anger grow over the years."You'll have to let the little critters' anger grow till you impeach the Big Bad Wolf," Maria Sereda says cheerfully. "This case will work great for Belarus. And it has already worked for Ukraine!""They work quietly and softy", Ms Sereda says. "They settle issues with the local governments very delicately."Overall, СampСamp is very reminiscent of school summer camps: fun activities by the day and get-togethers "by the fire" with a potluck in the evenings. "The most experienced revolutionaries"(from Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, both "as stagnating as Russia") have the best food. Many participants have met before, at the Boris Nemtsov Summer School in Prague. The "camp leaders" also know each other well. The more experienced participants are very friendly to all newcomers. I see Nick (Nicholas Detsch) from the United States give a warm welcome to a journalist from Kazakhstan.Nick introduces himself as an OSCE officer and recounts his rich experience working in Central Asia.He takes the most interest in talking to those who came on their own initiative. He meets all the new people and takes notes in his little book.Nick does not mention the fact that he works for the US Russia Foundation for Economic Advancement and the Rule of Law (an organization that was declared "undesirable" in Russia). His website profile, however, does mention the fact that Nicholas Detsch was one of the foundation's first observers dispatched to Ukraine in 2014.


sottnet--2019-02-15--BEST OF THE WEB Yellow Vest spokesman hints at next stage Paramilitaries are ready to overthrow t

BEST OF THE WEB: Yellow Vest spokesman hints at next stage: 'Paramilitaries are ready to overthrow the government'

Perhaps only people who are capable of real togetherness have that look of being alone in the universe. The others have a certain stickiness, they stick to the mass.


thehill--2019-12-09--Trump: Watchdog report shows FBI 'attempted overthrow' of government

President Trump Donald John TrumpLawmakers prep ahead of impeachment hearing Democrats gear up for high-stakes Judiciary hearing Warren says she made almost M from legal work over past three decades MORE on Monday hailed a new report from the Justice Department inspector general, claiming it showed FBI officials attempted “an overthrow of government” by investigating his 2016 presidential campaign.  “This was an overthrow of government, this was an attempted overthrow and a lot of people were in on it and they got caught, they got caught red-handed,” Trump said in the Cabinet Room at the White House during a roundtable event on education.  “I think I'm going to put this down as one of our great achievements. Because what we found and what we saw — never, ever should this happen again in our country,” Trump continued.  Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s lengthy report issued Monday, however, said that FBI agents were not motivated by political bias in deciding to open investigations into Trump campaign associates and aides during 2016 as part of the probe into Russia's election interference, undercutting a key talking point put forth by Trump and his Republican allies.  Horowitz also found that the FBI had an “authorized purpose” to launch the investigation, a conclusion that Attorney General William Barr William Pelham BarrFive things to watch in Russia probe review Trump, GOP shift focus from alleged surveillance abuse to Durham Russia probe Trump: Giuliani to deliver report on Ukraine trip to Congress, Barr MORE disagreed with on Monday in a public statement.  Horowitz’s report also criticized the FBI’s handling of applications for warrants to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.  The watchdog outlined seven “significant inaccuracies and omissions” in the FBI’s application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to monitor Page, some of them related to the FBI’s assertions or omissions regarding information they received from ex-British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who authored the Trump-Russia dossier.  Republicans have seized on those revelations as evidence of wrongdoing by top officials at the FBI, while Democrats have described the report as bucking Trump’s long held claim that the Russia investigation was a politically driven “witch hunt” against him.  Trump, who said he had just been briefed on the contents of the report, said Monday afternoon that details of the report were “far worse than anything I would have even imagined.”  "Well, they fabricated evidence and they lied to the courts and they did all sorts of things to have it go their way,” Trump said at the White House. “And this was something we can never allow to happen again.”  The president also invited new White House hire Pam Bondi, a former Florida attorney general, to speak about the report briefly during the roundtable event. Bondi claimed career law enforcement were “outraged” by its contents.  “It’s a horrible day for the country that this could happen to the president of the United States,” Bondi said, alleging that agents fabricated and falsified emails, lied and omitted exculpatory evidence in order to “continue this witch hunt” against Trump.


theindependent--2019-02-17--Israel aposlooking for warapos as US seeks to overthrow our government says Iranian foreign min

Israel 'looking for war' as US seeks to overthrow our government, says Iranian foreign minister

Iran cannot “leave itself defenceless” by halting missile production, because of the ever-increasing risk of war in the region, the country’s foreign minister has said.  Israel is looking for conflict and the US is actively seeking regime change in Tehran, claimed Mohammad Javad Zarif, who urged the international community to do much more to prevent an outbreak of disastrous violence.  “Certainly some people are looking for war ... like Israel. The risk of war is great and that risk will be even greater if people continue to turn a blind eye to severe violations of international law,” said Mr Zarif at the Munich Security Conference.  The foreign minister accused the US of having a “pathological obsession” with Iran ever since the Islamic revolution four decades ago and “that animus is now reaching new extremes”. Senior members of Donald Trump’s administration, he maintained, were seeking to overthrow the Iranian government.  Mr Zarif wanted to point out that national security adviser John Bolton had told an Iranian exile group, the Mujahedin Khalq (MEK) – once designated as a terrorists in the US and Europe – that the Trump administration should fully back their goal of immediate regime change and recognise the group as a viable alternative.  “John Bolton is now angry because he said he would celebrate with MEK in Tehran in 2019 and that is not going to happen,” said the foreign minister.  Iran needed to manufacture defence equipment because it does not get supplies from elsewhere, said Mr Zarif, while the US was selling billions of dollars of arms to Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Gulf states.  “Mr Trump talks about them as ‘beautiful weapons’, now these beautiful weapons are falling, as we know, on the people of Yemen. The only time we ourselves have used our missiles have been against Isis,” he said.  Huge instability is being caused meanwhile, said the minister, by the Trump administration pulling out of the nuclear agreement between Iran and international powers.  Mr Zarif added that Europe must resist Washington’s pressure to also jettison the deal.  Other signatories to the nuclear deal (Germany, Britain, France, Russia and China), as well as the UN Atomic Energy Authority, stress the deal was working in preventing Iran developing a nuclear arsenal and Tehran was abiding by its obligations.  On Saturday, speaking in Munich, US vice president Mike Pence attacked western allies for not supporting the US on the agreement. “The time has come for our European partners to withdraw from the disastrous Iran nuclear deal and join with us as we bring the economic and diplomatic pressure. The time has come for our European partners to stop undermining US sanctions against this murderous revolutionary regime,” he said.  Mr Zarif charged Mr Pence of “arrogantly demanding that Europe must join the United States in undermining its own security and breaking its obligations.”  European countries have organised a payment mechanism under which businesses and banks would, in theory, be able to trade with Iran without incurring American sanctions. The European states must do more, however, to protect the agreement, Mr Zarif held.  The payment mechanism, he said, “falls short of commitments by the E3 (France, Germany, Britain) to save the nuclear deal. Europe needs to be willing to get wet if it wants to swim against the dangerous tide of US unilateralism.”  We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view.  At The Independent, no one tells us what to write. That’s why, in an era of political lies and Brexit bias, more readers are turning to an independent source. Subscribe from just 15p a day for extra exclusives, events and ebooks – all with no ads.


thewashingtonexaminer--2019-12-09--'This was an overthrow of government': Trump rips Russia investigation 'disgrace' after FISA report

President Trump tore into the 2016 investigation into his presidential campaign and allegations of Russian collusion following Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse by the Justice Department and FBI.  Speaking with reporters at the White House on Monday, the president called the investigation a "disgrace" and an "overthrow of government."  "It is incredible, far worse than I would’ve ever thought possible, and it's an embarrassment to our country," he said. "It's dishonest. It's everything that a lot of people thought it would be except far worse. So, I’m going to get some very detailed briefings, but it’s a very sad day when I see that, a very sad day when a lot of people see that."  He continued, "It was concocted, and you say what you want. It was probably something that has never happened in the history of our country."  Counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway also weighed in on the findings, saying, "You can’t blame people for feeling that it was unfair and that the fix was in. And to think that, perhaps, people lied and spied and tried to subvert democracy just because they wanted someone else to win or just because they have a different political point of view, that is not the way the world's greatest democracy has been formed and can survive and at a time such as this."  She continued, "I will just repeat something that Attorney General Barr said today, Mr. President, that this was an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions, and that is chilling language for any of us who want our government to work for us and not against us. I only wish they had come and informed us, and we would’ve had the knowledge and the wherewithal to act at that time and not put the taxpayers through two-plus years of nonsense."  "They fabricated evidence, and they lied to the courts, and they did all sorts of things to have it go their way, and this was something that we can never allow to happen again," Trump said. "The report when you’re looking at it and the details of the report are far worse than anything I would’ve imagined ... This was an overthrow of government, an attempted overthrow, and a lot of people were in on it, and they got caught. They got caught red-handed, and I look forward to the Durham report, which is coming out in the not-too-distant future."  Horowitz's highly-anticipated report found no political bias against the president by top DOJ and FBI officials. It did, however, find 17 instances in which officials made "significant errors or omissions" in the FISA applications to surveil one-time Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.  After the report's release, U.S. Attorney John Durham, who is conducting a separate investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation, disagreed with the inspector general's determination that the opening of the Trump-Russia investigation was justified.


activistpost--2019-12-02--63 Percent Of All U.S. Jobs Created Since 1990 Have Been Low Wage Jobs

If you have a good paying job, you should probably try to hold on to it as hard as you can, because those types of jobs are steadily becoming rarer. Since 1990, the U.S. economy has produced millions of jobs, but as you will see below nearly two-thirds of them have been low wage jobs. Of course this is one of the biggest factors causing the systematic erosion of the American middle class. Today, half of all U.S. workers make less than $33,000 a year, but meanwhile the cost of living has been steadily increasing. Housing costs, health insurance and other basic necessities have been rising much faster than our paychecks have, and this has put an enormous amount of financial stress on hard working American families.  A job making making chicken sandwiches at Popeye’s is not equivalent to a structural engineering job. In other words, the quality of the jobs that we create is perhaps even more important than the number of jobs that we create.  Yes, the U.S. has been creating a lot of jobs in recent years, but meanwhile the overall quality of our jobs has degraded rapidly…  In fact, if you go back to 1990 about half of all jobs in the U.S. were good jobs.  But since that time, a whopping 63 percent of the jobs that have been created have been “low-wage, low-hour jobs”…  So what is the answer?  In the past, you could make good money in America even if you just had a high school education. There were millions upon millions of high paying manufacturing jobs in this country, but at this point most of those high paying jobs have been shipped to other nations where wages are far, far lower.  See: 177 Different Ways to Generate Extra Income  Today, our young people are being greatly encouraged to get a college education so that they can compete for the dwindling number of good paying jobs. Of course there aren’t enough good paying jobs for all of our college graduates, but at least with a college degree you have a better chance of landing one.  Unfortunately, getting a college education has become oppressively expensive, and our young people have been taking on enormous amounts of debt as a result.  In fact, Time Magazine says that the total amount of student loan debt in the United States is now over 1.5 trillion dollars…  Sadly, that number has almost doubled over the past decade. We have never seen a student loan debt bubble of this magnitude in the entire history of this country, and student loan debt delinquency rates are soaring.  And even though there has been a national uproar about this, the cost of a college education continues to rise much faster than the overall rate of inflation…  At this point, you are probably asking one very important question.  Where in the world is all of that money going?  Well, one recent study discovered that “administrative bloat” is the biggest factor that is driving up costs…  So as you pay off your student loan debt for decades to come, you can be comforted by the fact that the associate provost for diversity and inclusion at your college is bringing home more than $100,000 a year.  And perhaps that is the solution for the U.S. economy as a whole. If we just create enough “diversity” and “inclusion” administrative jobs, then we can all make six figures a year and the U.S. middle class will be restored.  Of course I am being facetious. The truth is that if we ever want to restore the U.S. economy to greatness, we need to start making things in this country again. We need jobs that add real value to our society, and we need an economic environment that respects and encourages innovation.  Unfortunately, what we have today is just the opposite. We are consuming far more wealth than we are producing, many of our “good paying jobs” are administrative or government jobs that add very little value to our society, and our small businesses are being strangled to death by rules, regulations and oppressive levels of taxation.  The only way that we have been able to maintain our debt-fueled standard of living is by piling up the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world, and if we continue on the path that we are on there is no way that our story is going to end well.  We desperately need a return to common sense economics, but unfortunately common sense appears to be in short supply in America today.  About the Author: I am a voice crying out for change in a society that generally seems content to stay asleep. My name is Michael Snyder and I am the publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe. I have written four books that are available on Amazon.com including The Beginning Of The End, Get Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned) By purchasing those books you help to support my work. I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but due to government regulations I need those that republish my articles to include this “About the Author” section with each article. In order to comply with those government regulations, I need to tell you that the controversial opinions in this article are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the websites where my work is republished. This article may contain opinions on political matters, but it is not intended to promote the candidacy of any particular political candidate. The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial or health decisions. Those responding to this article by making comments are solely responsible for their viewpoints, and those viewpoints do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of Michael Snyder or the operators of the websites where my work is republished. I encourage you to follow me on social media on Facebook and Twitter, and any way that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.  Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.