Donald trump. what is your take on him?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I had no idea those statues would bend over so easily.

The Man Who Japed is a science fiction novel by American writer Philip K. Dick, first published in 1956. Although one of Dick's lesser-known novels, it features several of the ideas and themes that recur throughout his later works. The "japes" or practical jokes of the novel begin with a statue's unconventional decapitation.

The Man Who Japed is set in the year 2114. After a devastating twentieth century limited nuclear war, a South African ("Afrikaans Empire") military survivor named General Streiter launched a global revolution in 1985 that ushered in a totalitarian government. In one example of the carnage Dick has his protagonist Allen Purcell visit Japan's northern island, Hokkaidō. The location is still a desolate wasteland that has not recovered from nuclear bombardment in 1972, the last year of the global war referred to within this book.

This regime - Moral Reclamation ("Morec") - rules a post-apocalyptic world under its strict ideology. One of Streiter's lineal descendants, Ida Pease Hoyt, is in charge. Morec has created an ultra-conservative and puritanical society that is oppressive and judgmental of its fellow citizens. Punishable offenses include mild public cursing, kissing a non-spouse, absenteeism from community meetings and the commercial display of neon signs. A thriving black market exists, however, where one can purchase the Decameron, James Joyce's Ulysses, chablis wine and pulp fiction detective novels from the twentieth century.

Earth people also occupy several other planetary systems. There are human colonies on Bellatrix (Gamma Orionis), Sirius 8 and 9, and "Orionus." On these worlds, intensive labour is required to provide agricultural and industrial products for survival. One of the planets is used as a "Refuge" for the rehabilitation of social misfits or "nooses".

The "japery" alluded to in the title is Allen Purcell's wanton destruction of a statue of General Streiter. But Purcell has only vague, distorted and disjointed memories of the act and doesn't understand his own motivation for doing it. Ironically he is up for an appointment to a high-level position as a guardian of public ethics.

Purcell later intentionally concocts a history of General Streiter for a live televised broadcast that falsely claims Streiter had a policy of having his enemies butchered and served as meals to his family and himself. Hoyt is accused of continuing the practice of cannibalism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Japed

.
 

Attachments

  • confederate memorials.jpg
    confederate memorials.jpg
    97.1 KB · Views: 4
Fox News Quietly Deletes Article Cheering ‘Plowing Through Protesters’

Fox News once published an article advocating that cars drive into liberal protesters attempting to block traffic.

And only after a woman was killed Saturday in Charlottesville, Va.—when a car allegedly driven by white-supremacist activist James Alex Fields plowed through a crowd of anti-racism demonstrators—did Fox decided to delete it.

On January 29, 2017, the cable outlet’s unabashedly conservative opinion site Fox Nation published an article titled, “Here’s A Reel Of Cars Plowing Through Protesters Trying To Block The Road.”

“Here’s a compilation of liberal protesters getting pushed out of the way by cars and trucks,” wrote the article’s author. “Study the technique; it may prove useful in the next four years.”

Fox quietly deleted the article on Tuesday, three days after Heather Heyer, 32, was killed in the violent incident. Instead of an editor’s note or a statement explaining the deletion, the article was simply replaced by an error page.

The Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine indicates that the article was live as late as early Tuesday.

Reached for comment, the network sent a statement, via Fox News Digital’s new editor-in-chief Noah Kotch: “The item was inappropriate and we’ve taken it down. We regret posting it in January.”

more

http://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-quietly-deletes-article-cheering-plowing-through-protesters?source=twitter&via=desktop
 
Sad!

https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/897612532386607104

 

Attachments

  • DHT2ntzVYAACYSF.jpg
    DHT2ntzVYAACYSF.jpg
    147.8 KB · Views: 5
https://twitter.com/lovebscott/status/897143951483781120

.
 

Attachments

  • DHR3eCaUQAE9-Ml.jpg
    DHR3eCaUQAE9-Ml.jpg
    98.4 KB · Views: 17
Waiting to discuss until facts come out rather than the media spin, because speculation is bad, in this case.

...probably.

I think this is an improvement, the ability of the occupant to act is essentially nonexistant 9 months in, which would not have been the case with Clinton . Neoliberals are rapidly losing credibility in the left. Racists just did more damage to their cause than anyone could have wished.
 
tands said:
Waiting to discuss until facts come out rather than the media spin, because speculation is bad, in this case.
Probably.
I think this is an improvement, the ability of the occupant to act is essentially nonexistant 9 months in, which would not have been the case with Clinton . Neoliberals are rapidly losing credibility in the left. Racists just did more damage to their cause than anyone could have wished.
Clinton would have had a non-existent ability to act, with Republican's blocking and obstructing carte blanche. Handing over the reins to Trump and the Republicans - as awful as it had the potential for - is showing people the true colors of the conservative party. Trump is too dumb and impulsive to mislead people on the dog whistle type exclusion that Republicans have used to rally their base and let them implement policies to hoard wealth and power. He is making everyone aware of the true colors of the Republican party. If this leads to a trouncing at the polls of Republicans, a cleaning up of Congress, and a lifetime long reality check for millennials and GenXers, we will see something good come from this dumpster fire of a President. His character failures will severely hurt the conservative movement for decades.

I agree the 'third way' or neoliberalism of centrist liberals is looking weak due to the extreme wealth inequality and boom-bust harm it has caused the middle class and especially poor. Hopefully a new direction can emerge that doesn't sacrifice (or crush) personal freedom.  Curtailing the power of wealth in politics, strongly regulating business for a level playing field, totally disbanding the finance system that has become focused on excessive risk with a Fed put, putting power back into the hands of workers to see wage increases (at the expense of corporate profits). The market has failed the majority of people since the Reagan revolution, so there can be no more rational calls for fiscally conservative, market solutions.

The country is similar to where it was at the last turn of the century. What followed was severe inflation (which moderated great wealth inequality) and a crushing depression. Hopefully it won't be as bad this time, but with the direction the powers-that-be have been steering the ship, I'm not optimistic.
 
dmp said:
Clinton would have had a non-existent ability to act, with Republican's blocking and obstructing carte blanche. Handing over the reins to Trump and the Republicans - as awful as it had the potential for - is showing people the true colors of the conservative party.

Great. I'd still be waiting for the next cycle, then, but with TPP, TISA, war in Syria and an invigorated neoliberal dem party. 8 years.

::)
 
mattiasNYC said:
And another 15 back....

what is today´s excuse by his supporters? 
The russian's did it...?  :eek:  I remember when calling someone a nazi meant the argument was over. Now it is the opening gambit.

JR

PS: This will not help my empathy score around here but I feel empathy for the two police officers who died while working that day (helicopter pilots).  This pin the tail on POTUS looks like team politics, with a dose of never-trump from the political elite of both parties.  Hate is never acceptable including political hate.

PPS: New news on the DNC hack indicates the transfer rate of data files taken was too fast to be done over the WWW, i.e. the files were taken in person by a person with physical access to the server. Still doesn't say who did it, but the current theory seems pretty weak.
 
JohnRoberts said:
The russian's did it...?  :eek:  I remember when calling someone a nazi meant the argument was over. Now it is the opening gambit.

Wow, so much for the 'tolerant left'. There's 'fine people' on both sides of the 'jewish question' then, right John?

8)

 
JohnRoberts said:
The russian's did it...?  :eek:  I remember when calling someone a nazi meant the argument was over. Now it is the opening gambit.

JR

PS: This will not help my empathy score around here but I feel empathy for the two police officers who died while working that day (helicopter pilots).  This pin the tail on POTUS looks like team politics, with a dose of never-trump from the political elite of both parties.  Hate is never acceptable including political hate.
If it looks like a duck and goose-steps like a duck...

I don't think anyone is personally blaming Trump for the police officer's killed in the crash, but more a critique of the non-reaction-then-reaction-then-back-to-non-reaction.  The fault of the deaths lie with the hate-groups talking about "the f**king Jews!" (aka. a group who were there that voted for him): Trump is just the useful idiot who isn't dealing with this particularly well.
 
Trump's a racist, I think it's pretty clear. That doesn't mean he's not a useful idiot to some, as you said.

He is becoming less useful by the day though.  Gonna be a bit difficult to go take the Venzuelan's oil, for instance.

https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/897658130737377281

.
 

Attachments

  • trump chief of staff kelly.jpg
    trump chief of staff kelly.jpg
    66.6 KB · Views: 5
;D

A new study by nonprofit Integrity Florida ranks the Sunshine State as the country's most corrupt.

According to the "Corruption Risk Report: Florida Ethics Laws," 1,762 of Florida's public officials have been convicted of public corruption since 1976. From 2000 to 2010, there have been an average of 71 convictions each year -- and 107 convictions in 2000 alone, the worst year on record.

Along with recent conviction rates, the study cites a C- grade on ethics enforcement from the State Integrity Investigation and the fact that three Florida cities ranked on Forbes' “Most Miserable Cities” thanks to polticial corruption.

Florida was followed in the rankings by California, Texas, New York and Pennsylvania. The findings come on the heels of a February 2012 study which found Florida to be the fourth most corrupt state in the country, with New York taking the dubious honor at the top. That study used records as far back as 1976, while Integrity Florida used data from 2000 to 2010.

“In the modern era (2000-2010), there has been an upward trend towards more federal public corruption convictions in Florida,” read the Integrity Florida report.

...

READ: Integrity Florida's study on the state's corruption:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/07/florida-most-corrupt-in-country_n_1577571.html

 
No problem.

The Pre-Coup Show

In recent weeks, though, the simulators of the mass media controlled the microphone.

Narco News, Vheadline.com and other reputable online news agencies warned of a coup in progress. Those reports were ignored by the commercial press, and even by the "alternative" press.

But a whisper did begin among commercial journalists that eventually grew into a crescendo of shrieks, planting the seeds to harvest later: If there was to be a coup d'etat, it would not be called a coup, but, rather, a "popular" revolt.

It was on March 19 that there came a decided shift in the message portrayed by propagandists who call themselves journalists, led by Juan Forero of the New York Times, who was, by now, installed in Caracas. (Narco News, last year, reported that Forero allowed U.S. officials in Colombia to monitor his interviews with private-sector U.S. mercenaries there, without having disclosed that fact in his reports.)

It was no longer sufficient to call Venezuela's president "left-wing" or point out his disagreements with Washington over Plan Colombia, OPEC or other policy matters.

The big lie, orchestrated and sung in harmony by the mainstream media, was floated by Forero of the NY Times on March 19th: That Chávez's "autocratic style and left-wing policies have alienated a growing number of people."

"Although he promised a 'revolution' to improve the lives of the poor, Mr. Chávez has instead managed to rankle nearly every sector -- from the church to the press to the middle class -- with his combative style, populist speeches and dalliances with Fidel Castro of Cuba and the Marxist rebels of Colombia," claimed Forero.

Forero, along with other official "journalists" also began pushing heavily the spin that the "military forces" of Venezuela had turned against the Chávez government. It was then, in mid-March, that a slow drip of military brass was trotted out before the media. Forero quoted one colonel as saying that Chávez "has said the military forces were with him. I wanted to tell people they were not.''

"Mario Ivan Carratu, a retired vice admiral with close contacts in the military," wrote Forero, "said some active-duty officers had spoken of playing a more aggressive role. He said a few had even privately spoken of a need to stage a coup to oust Mr. Chávez."

''I have been in contact with many active officers, and they are of the belief that if society does not organize to take steps, then they are going to have to take control,'' said Mr. Carratu.

Forero, true to form, added the now-obviously fictional chestnut that the dissident military brass "are well aware that the United States has said it will not support a coup."

(As the Washington Post reported on Saturday, there had been a constant march of businessmen, media moguls and military officials in and out of the US Embassy in Caracas in the days before the coup.)

But this was Forero's story, and he reported:

    ''The armed forces do not want to gain a place in history with a coup,'' said one high-ranking military officer, who asked to remain unidentified. ''If they want to pass into history, then what they want to do is support civil society in its protests.''

From that moment on it was clear to the close observer: A simulation of "Civil Society" and "popular revolt" would be staged to "justify" a military coup d'etat.

The "Revolt" of the Spoiled Brats

By last Tuesday, April 9th, the ducks were all lined up. Forero, again, led the media charge when he wrote about the strange plans for a "labor" strike, supported by management and the national Chamber of Commerce and Industry, to shut down Venezuela's major cash cow industry - that of oil:

    ''This can only end with the president resigning,'' Humberto Calderon Berti, a former minister of energy and mines, told a throng of protesting executives from the oil company Petroleos de Venezuela in Caracas. ''All Venezuelans from all walks of life, from all social strata, from all the political and ideological sectors, must take part in the stoppage. This is about him or us. It is a choice between democracy or dictatorship.''

How many "protesting executives" makes a "throng"? It's going to take years to disassemble every slight-of-hand piece of rhetoric wielded by the mainstream media in trying to make The Revolt of the Spoiled Brats seem like a "popular uprising." (See the Q & A with Narco News by journalist Jules Siegel from our reports last weekend for details on the ingredients of the "astro-turf" that the inauthentic journalists tried to pass off as a grassroots rebellion.)

Forero's source, the oil executive quoted above, was right about one thing: The drama that unfolded would indeed become "a choice between democracy or dictatorship."

The journalistic crime of the new century was the mass media's Orwellian misrepresentation of which side of the conflict represented which D-word.

THURSDAY, APRIL 11, 2002:

DEMOCRACY HELD HOSTAGE, DAY ONE

Last Thursday, April 11, the coup was officially launched.

Forero, by now, had left all pretext of journalism behind to become Minister of Propaganda for an illegal coup d'etat that almost turned the clock back 30 years on democracy in Latin America. He wrote in that morning's edition of the New York Times:

    "Much of the opposition is rooted in widespread displeasure with Mr. Chavez's policies. White-collar workers view him as a left-wing autocrat. Unions resent his attempts to impose his control on them."

Forero and the rest of the official media chorus - including AP and Reuters upon which most daily newspapers, radio and TV stations rely on for international news coverage - did not explore the details of the oil workers union's real gripe with the Chavez government: That the union bureaucracy had been in direct disobedience of new laws requiring fair and free elections for union leadership. Does insisting on free elections constitute "imposing control"? Or does it constitute a necessary part of the democratization of a nation?

And what of the other vested interests of the Five TV chains, the national dailies, the Catholic Church, the military brass and the Chamber of Commerce and Industry who mixed themselves up into a Molotov cocktail of a coup? What of the role of the United States? These questions were never asked by the commercial media, much less answered.

Coup Central:

The CIA Bunker in Caracas

https://www.narconews.com/threedays.html
 

Attachments

  • DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    43.3 KB · Views: 4
But back to Thursday, for a moment: With the five TV chains running free advertisements every ten minutes urging the citizenry to join the march, the 40,000 member oil workers union, the National Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the Catholic Church hierarchy pulling out all the stops to create the illusion of a popular revolt, they only got between 50,000 and 150,000 people into the streets of Caracas to protest against Chavez. (Caracas has more than two million citizens and Venezuela, 24 million.)

The demonstration, purportedly in support of the business-backed oil workers strike, was initially advertised to march to the state oil agency's offices.
But once the leaders - with the help of the TV stations (upset with Chavez, as we reported on Saturday, over having to pay taxes like any other business for the first time in their history) - had the crowd assembled, they switched the parade route and marched their own lambs to a pre-plotted slaughter.

The march - puny in size compared to the multitudes that would take to the streets to oppose the Coup in coming days - was detoured by the coup plotters to head to the presidential palace known as Miraflores, where several thousand supporters of the Chavez government were already assembled.

As universally reported by the English-language media - including the Four Horsemen of Simulation; AP, Reuters, the NY Times and CNN - shots were fired, between 10 and 30 people died, and another 100 or so wounded. The question of where those shots came from looms explosively.

Eyewitness in Caracas Greg Wilpert reported on Friday in an article for commondreams.org - and linked immediately by Narco News - that the majority of killed and wounded were Chavez supporters. Wilpert has subsequently reported that, now that the Constitutional government of Chavez is restored, he expects the list of martyrs to finally be released (interesting, how the coup never released the names of the dead), and the list will show that the majority of those killed were Chavez supporters. Wilpert also comments that he expects videotapes to be released in the coming days that show the true culprits behind the shooting provocation: an extreme anti-Chavez group titled "Bandera Roja."

But AP, Reuters, the NY Times, CNN and many other English-language media sources reported, without sourcing their claim, that the shots came from the Chávez government. They repeated that unsubstantiated speculation as fact over and over and over again. And White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer claimed that Chavez "ordered" the shootings. All of this will come out in the wash in the coming days. Suffice to say, the mainstream media got the story wrong, intentionally wrong, to blame violent acts by Chávez opponents on Chávez.

Chávez Never Resigned

The Four Horsemen of Simulation - AP, Reuters, the New York Times and CNN - and virtually the entire commercial press reported that Chavez had "resigned" from office after the shootings.

All have subsequently been forced to change their stories, because the clearest fact that has emerged from this entire drama is that President Chávez never resigned.

They did not source their claim. They simply stated it as fact.

Some major media outlets went as far as to invent more extreme fictions, aimed at portraying Chávez as a coward and buffoon. On Thursday night, the Dow Jones Newswire reported a story titled "Venezuela President Chavez Seen Leaving Country-Report." The coup leaders had gone so far as to circulate a lie, repeated endlessly by the US press, that Chavez had behaved timidly, and had pled permission to flee to another country (many reports presumed it was Cuba.)

The Dow Jones Newswire - the press agency of the Wall Street Journal - repeated that headline NINE times before the night was done. Even after reporting that Chavez was under arrest in Venezuela, Dow Jones (knowing full well that local radio newscasters throughout the U.S. read the headlines aloud the next morning) persisted in titling the story: "REPEAT - Venezuela President Chavez Seen Leaving Country - Report."

Thursday night was a dark hour for journalism in our América. It's cynicism and simulation would only be surpassed by what was to come… on Friday.

FRIDAY, APRIL 12, 2002:

DEMOCRACY HELD HOSTAGE, DAY TWO

New York Times readers awoke on Friday morning to read what should herald, in retrospect, Juan Forero's resignation from a career as a so-called journalist. Forero wrote:

    "Mr. Chavez, 47, a firebrand populist who had said he would remake Venezuela to benefit the poor, was obligated to resign in a meeting with three military officers about 3 a.m. today…"

Forero was, by now, in full disinformation mode. He claimed that Chavez, during his presidency, had "seized control of the legislature," neglecting to clarify that Venezuela's electorate voted fair and square, the American way, at the ballot box for members of Congress who supported the Bolivarian Revolution of Chavez.

On Friday, the military junta that had arrested and imprisoned the President at gunpoint without having legally charged him with any crime, installed national Chamber of Commerce and Industry chairman, oilman, and number-one coup leader Pedro Carmona as "president."

Among Carmona's first acts: He abolished the elected national congress, disbanded the constitutionally established Supreme Court, and even changed the name of the country from the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to the plain old Republic of Venezuela.

Thus, in the name of stopping an "autocrat," a "dictator," an "authoritarian," a "strongman," and other epithets thrown by Forero and the Horsemen of Simulation, the coup installed a real dictator, Pedro Carmona: un-elected, mentally unstable, so mercurial as to demand the abolition of Congress, and who began a house-by-house witch hunt to round up cabinet members, congressmen and political leaders in Venezuela.

''We cannot allow a tyrant to run the Republic of Venezuela,'' said Navy Vice Adm. Hector Rafael Ramirez according to Forero. The Admiral was spouting those words... at the precise moment that he was installing a tyrant to run the Republic of Venezuela.

It was on this day that the owning class of the commercial media reared its true face as a vested enemy of democracy.

The Inter-American Press Association, dominated by the oligarch owners of newspapers in América whose definition of "press freedom" is their liberty run their commercial fiefdoms at maximum political and economic profit, issued a statement on this date:

    "President Robert J. Cox said today that political developments in Venezuela demonstrate to nations throughout the world that there can be no true democracy without free speech and press freedom."

As with Forero's inverted dialectic of "democracy or dictatorship," the IAPA press release was positively Orwellian. Repeating its prior complaints that Chávez's "belligerent and intolerant attitude towards journalists and the news media" (read: the President's speeches criticizing the simulation by a media that serves only the wealthy and denies voice to the majority) somehow constituted interference with press freedom, the IAPA showed its true fangs in endorsing a military dictatorship over a democratically elected government.

"This is a classic example for the new government headed by Pedro Carmona, which hopefully will turn things around, respect freedom of the press and encourage the independence of the judiciary, and thus, ensure restoration of true democracy," Cox added.

Cox and his group of Inauthentic Journalists inverted the question of the day. In declaring "there can be no true democracy without free speech and press freedom," it forgot the inverse: There can be no free speech and press freedom without true democracy."

The IAPA lost all the illusory credibility it had with that savage endorsement of a military coup. The IAPA, instead of defending democratic values, became part of the coup.

As Mexican newspaper publisher and editor Mario Menéndez Rodríguez - the founder of the term "authentic journalism," the most experienced American journalist covering revolutions and counter-revolutions in this hemisphere, and our victorious co-defendant in the New York Supreme Court decision that established First Amendment rights for online journalists - said, "You will know the true character of a journalist by how he behaves during a crisis."

IAPA President Robert J. Cox - like many others - revealed his true character in these Three Days that Shook the Media. In a meritocracy he would be immediately demoted to beat reporter to learn the ropes all over again. We recommend that he and the others like him who turned their backs on the most important value of any free society - the protection of electoral democracy over military imposed dictatorship - go back to square one. Cox and the others can begin by reading our 24 Coup Questions for Journalists, and by doing the gumshoe work to answer those questions. After all, he'll have the time now: nothing he does as IAPA boss will have any credibility from this date forward.

In these Friday hours, the situation seemed hopeless. Absolute Power had strangled democracy in our América, and the commercial media had become handmaiden to a military junta.

And then, miraculously, the cavalry arrived.

The Counter-Coup

by Authentic Journalism

Then, on Friday night, what history will call "the counter-coup by authentic journalism" began, as the Vheadline.com online newspaper and its editor Roy S. Carson, news editor Patrick J. O'Donoghue and 14 reporters throughout Venezuela began to break the information blockade.

Among many authentic journalists who turned the tide, Carson deserves the democratic medal of valor. At 11 a.m. on Thursday, before the coup occurred, his Vheadline.com website had gone into the shop for maintenance. When it rains it pours: Carson woke up Friday morning recovering from pre-ocular surgery he had received on Thursday, but upon learning of the coup he rose from his bed to change the history of América. His website was inoperative, but Carson, undaunted, began filing email alerts which were published by Narco News, Indy Media, and many others of the Authentic Journalism Renaissance.

At 7:30 on Friday night, Vheadline.com translated and distributed, via email the first decrees of the military-installed regime of oilman Pedro Carmona.

The global distribution of the "Transitional Junta Decree" on the Internet erased, in one fell swoop, all the fictions repeated in the mass media about who was the real dictator:

    Caracas, Friday, April 12, 2002 -- 7:30 p.m.

    Article 1 - Pedro Carmona Estanga is designated president of the Republic of Venezuela.

    Article 2 - The name of the Republic of Venezuela is re-established.

    Article 3 - Principal and substitute legislators of the National Assembly (AN) are suspended from their posts…

The decree also delayed new presidential elections until up to a year from now and stated:

"The President in Cabinet will be able to remove and transitionally designate the officials of national, state and municipal agencies to guarantee institutional democracy and the adequate functioning of the stated… The reorganization of public agencies is decreed for the purpose of regaining their autonomy and independence and to ensure a peaceful and democratic transition, "thus dismissing from posts illegitimately held by the president and magistrates of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ), Comptroller, Attorney General, OfficialOmbudsman and members of the National Electoral College (CNE)."

The decree also suspended 48 laws passed Constitutionally by the Chavez government and Congress in 2001

Dictatorship vs. Democracy, indeed.

The Vheadline.com archives of its email alerts from April 11th to 13th is now online (the website was back in action by Saturday afternoon) at:

http://www.vheadline.com/p1

The updates are archived in reverse chronological order (in other words, for a blow-by-blow account, scroll from the bottom up). Historians of the coup, and scholars of the Authentic Journalism Renaissance, will consult those Vheadline.com archives for years to come.

Then came Saturday, and the turning of the tide.

SATURDAY, APRIL 13, 2002:

Collapse of a Coup

While New York Times readers awoke to a puff piece by Juan Forero about the new dictator - titled, incredulously, "Manager and Conciliator - Pedro Carmona Estanga" - in which Forero repeated the lie that Chavez "was forced to resign," the independent online media had begun to take back the microphone.

Among the factors that, in retrospect, caused news consumers from throughout the world to turn toward online news sources was that the official reports by Forero, AP, Reuters, CNN and others had become so obviously one-sided. Indeed, they had a gloating quality about what they errantly called Chávez's downfall. And the Times and others committed the faux pas of arrogance: They underestimated the public and overestimated its capacity to swallow their Selling of a Dictator - Carmona - as a legitimate "president."

Forero wrote:

    ''Carmona is not a mega-industrialist in his own right,'' a political consultant, Eric Ekvall, said. ''Carmona is a man who's always worked in and been involved in the business sector, but always as a manager. He's not one of the landed elite, with his own fortune, his own bank.''

(Here in the Narco Newsroom, we thought Forero's trotting out of Ekvall was shameless, though predictable: Ekvall - father of the former Miss Venezuela and an eccentric species of political consultant who is hostile to basic democratic values - had been one of the readers who had sent us hate mail after our February 20th report predicting the coup. He raged at us, and at author Kim Alphandary, and mocked our description of Alphandary as an authentic journalist. And now, during the coup, here he was, on the pages of the New York Times doing spin-control for an authoritarian dictator and a coup that seven weeks ago he swore would never happen, trying to portray the sleazy oilman Carmona as some kind of humble man of the people.)

While Forero and other English-language commercial reporters were relying on Embassy sources, oligarchs like Ekvall, and the slanted Venezuelan TV "coverage" of events, Vheadline.com and its team of reporters was driving a stake through the official censorship.

At 1:50 p.m. on Saturday, Vheadline.com broke the story that the Speaker of the National Assembly had rejected the dictator Carmona's decree abolishing the elected legislative branch of government (the "abolished" legislators later announced that come Sunday, they would hold a formal session anyway). Moments later, Vheadline.com reported that protests had erupted in the slums of Caracas against the military-installed dictatorship. (A polemic would later ensue because the five big TV chains of Venezuela had made a concerted decision to not report demonstrations against the coup; Vheadline.com was getting its information directly from the streets.)

Later that afternoon, Vheadline.com translated a statement by the major human rights organizations of Venezuela condemning the coup and the illegal arrests of elected and political leaders by the Carmona dictatorship.

And so it went: 4:38 p.m., disturbances break out in the popular neighborhoods of the capital. 4:56 p.m., a military junta leader admits on the radio that Chávez never resigned. 6:40 p.m. "Two national dailies and a private TV station have imposed an absolute news blackout."

And, the most crucial turning point of all: rank-and-file soldiers and officers at the nation's largest Army Base in Maracay reject the military junta and begin the counter-coup (Maracay is the base where Venezuela's F16 fighter planes are hangared, and a nervous Washington began worrying about the oil fields that supply 15 percent of the United States' imported oil.)

In the streets of virtually every city and town in Venezuela, the poor, as Chávez had predicted the day before the coup, "came down from the hills."

The ocean of bodies placed itself between the dictatorship and history. Carmona's troops began firing upon crowds indiscriminately, the very behavior it had accused the Chávez government of undertaking in creating a pretext for the military coup. Morgues and hospitals filled with the dead and wounded civilians. Rank-and-file soldiers throughout the country broke ranks with the brass, reclaimed the presidential palace for the Bolivarian Revolution, and forced the high military commanders to begin to backpedal from their imposition of Carmona.

"Oh, how the poor love each other," John Reed wrote in his early 20th century classic, "Ten Days That Shook The World." The poor majority of Venezuela, unseen and unheard by the English-language media, blacked-out by the five TV stations of the oligarchs in Venezuela, had come forward to make a lie out of months of disinformation by the establishment media, which had claimed that Chavez had lost popular support.

https://www.narconews.com/threedays.html
 

Attachments

  • DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    43.3 KB · Views: 0
Clinton in Honduras.

On March 3, Berta Cáceres, a brave and outspoken indigenous Honduran environmental activist and winner of the Goldman Environmental Prize, was gunned down in her hometown of La Esperanza. Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas director for Amnesty International, noted how "For years, she had been the victim of a sustained campaign of harassment and threats to stop her from defending the rights of indigenous communities."

She is just one of thousands of indigenous activists, peasant leaders, trade unionists, journalists, environmentalists, judges, opposition political candidates, human rights activists, and others murdered since a military coup ousted the democratically elected president Manuel Zelaya in 2009.

Despite being a wealthy logger and rancher from the centrist Liberal Party, Zelaya had moved his government to the left during his four years in office. During his tenure, he raised the minimum wage and provided free school lunches, milk for young children, pensions for the elderly, and additional scholarships for students. He built new schools, subsidized public transportation, and even distributed energy-saving light bulbs.

None of these were particularly radical moves, but it was nevertheless disturbing to the country’s wealthy economic and military elites. More frightening was that Zelaya had sought to organize an assembly to replace the 1982 constitution written during the waning days of the U.S.-backed military dictator Policarpo Paz Garcia. A non-binding referendum on whether such a constitutional assembly should take place was scheduled the day of the coup, but was cancelled when the military seized power and named Congressional Speaker Roberto Micheletti as president.

Calling for such a referendum is perfectly legal under Article 5 of the 2006 Honduran Civil Participation Act, which allows public functionaries to perform such non-binding public consultations regarding policy measures. Despite claims by the rightist junta and its supporters, Zelaya was not trying to extend his term. That question wasn’t even on the ballot. The Constitutional Assembly would not have likely completed its work before his term had expired anyway.

The leader of the coup, Honduran General Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, was a graduate of the notorious School of the Americas, a U.S. Army training program nicknamed “School of Assassins” for the sizable number of graduates who have engaged in coups, as well as the torture and murder of political opponents. The training of coup plotters at the program, since renamed the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, isn’t a bygone feature of the Cold War: General Luis Javier Prince Suazo, who played an important role in the coup as head of the Honduran Air Force, graduated as recently as 1996.

More: Catholic groups write John Kerry to urge US scrutiny of Honduran activist's death​

There is no evidence to suggest that the Obama administration was behind the coup. However, a number of U.S. officials -- most notably then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- played an important role in preventing Zelaya’s return to office and the junta consolidating its power in the face of massive nonviolent protests.

Clinton insisted the day after the coup that "all parties have a responsibility to address the underlying problems that led to yesterday’s events." When asked if her call for "restoring the constitutional order" in Honduras meant returning Zelaya himself, she didn’t say it necessarily would. State Department spokesperson Ian Kelly evaded reporters' questions as to whether the United States supported Zelaya's return, placing the United States at odds with the Organization of American States, the Rio Group, and the U.N. General Assembly, all of which called for the "immediate and unconditional return" of Zelaya.

U.S. Ambassador to Honduras Hugo Llorens, reflecting the broad consensus of international observers, sent a cable to Clinton entitled "Open and Shut: The Case of the Honduran Coup," thoroughly documenting that "there is no doubt" that Zelaya’s ouster "constituted an illegal and unconstitutional coup." Similarly, Ann-Marie Slaughter, then serving as director of Policy Planning at the State Department, sent an email to Clinton strongly encouraging her to "take bold action" and to "find that [the] coup was a 'military coup' under U.S. law." However, Clinton's State Department refused to suspend U.S. aid to Honduras -- as required when a democratically-elected government is ousted in such a manner -- on the grounds that it wasn’t clear that the forcible military-led overthrow actually constituted a coup d'état.

Emails released last year by the State Department also show how Clinton rejected calls by the international community to condemn the coup and used her lobbyist friend Lanny Davis -- who was working for the Honduran chapter of the Business Council of Latin America, which supported the coup -- to open communications with Micheletti, the illegitimate interim ruler installed by the military.

Leaders of Latin American nations, the U.N. General Assembly and other international organizations unambiguously demanded Zelaya’s immediate return to office. However, in her memoir Hard Choices, Clinton admits that she worked to prevent restoring the elected president to office: “In the subsequent days [after the coup] I spoke with my counterparts around the hemisphere, including Secretary Espinosa in Mexico. We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot.”

The elections, held under military rule and marred by violence and media censorship, were hardly free or fair. The Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) declared they would not recognize elections held under the de facto government and the Organization of American States drafted a resolution that would have refused to recognize Honduran elections carried out under the dictatorship, but the State Department blocked its adoption.

In the subsequent six years, the horrific repression and skyrocketing murder rate -- now the highest in the world -- has resulted in tens of thousands of refugees fleeing for safety in the United States. Ironically, as Secretary of State, Clinton rejected granting political asylum and supported their deportation.

Clinton’s role in supporting the coup in Honduras is a reminder that the Middle East is not the only part of the world in which she is willing to set aside principles of international law and human rights to advance perceived U.S. economic and strategic interests. Indeed, it may be a troubling indication of the kind of foreign policies she would pursue as president.

https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/us-role-honduras-coup-and-subsequent-violence
 

Attachments

  • DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    43.3 KB · Views: 1
In 2012, as Honduras descended into social and political chaos in the wake of a US-sanctioned military coup, the civilian aid arm of Hillary Clinton’s State Department spent over $26 million on a propaganda program aimed at encouraging anti-violence “alliances” between Honduran community groups and local police and security forces.

The program, called “Honduras Convive,” was designed by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) to reduce violent crimes in a country that had simultaneously become the murder capital of the world and a staging ground for one of the largest deployments of US Special Operations forces outside of the Middle East.

It was part of a larger US program to support the conservative government of Pepe Lobo, who came to power in 2009 after the Honduran military ousted the elected president, José Manuel Zelaya, in a coup that was widely condemned in Central America. In reality, critics say, the program was an attempt by the State Department to scrub the image of a country where security forces have a record of domestic repression that continues to the present day.

“This was all about erasing memories of the coup and the structural causes of violence.” —Adrienne Pine, American University

“This was all about erasing memories of the coup and the structural causes of violence,” says Adrienne Pine, an assistant professor of anthropology at American University who spent the 2013-14 school year teaching at the National Autonomous University of Honduras. “It’s related to the complete absence of participatory democracy in Honduras, in which the United States is deeply complicit.”

“With the coup, Clinton had a real opportunity to do the right thing and shift US policy to respect democratic processes,” added Alex Main, an expert on US policy in Central America at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, after being told of the program. “But she completely messed it up, and we’re seeing the consequences of it now.”

Honduras Convive (“Honduras Coexists”) was the brainchild of the Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI), a controversial unit of USAID that operates overseas much like the CIA did during the Cold War.

Sanctioned by Congress in 1994, OTI intervenes under the direction of the State Department, the Pentagon, and other security agencies in places like Afghanistan, Haiti, and Colombia to boost support for local governments backed by the United States. Sometimes, as it has in Cuba and Venezuela, its programs are directed at stirring opposition to leftist regimes. Clinton gave the office a major boost after she became Secretary of State; its programs are overseen by an under secretary of state as well as the top administrator of USAID.

OTI’s activities, the Congressional Research Service noted in a 2009 report, “are overtly political” and based on the idea that “timely and creative” US assistance can “tip the balance” toward outcomes “that advance U.S. foreign policy objectives.”

more

https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/us-role-honduras-coup-and-subsequent-violence
 

Attachments

  • DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    DG5P2I5UAAEMtNj.jpg
    43.3 KB · Views: 0
Back
Top