US Refuses to Recognize Venezuela’s Election Results, New Sanctions Already Planned

Donate

Written by Emma Fiala; Originally appeared at MintPress

Despite strict oversights and the presence of international observers, the US dismissed Venezuela’s presidential elections as illegitimate before they even took place. Now, with the polls closed and Maduro the declared victor, the US is already planning a fresh round of sanctions.

US Refuses to Recognize Venezuela’s Election Results, New Sanctions Already Planned

(AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)

Before Venezuelans finished casting their votes Sunday, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan announced that the U.S. would not recognize the result of Venezuela’s presidential election. Sullivan was in Buenos Aires on Sunday, leading the U.S. delegation to the G-20 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting.

Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro was elected to his second presidential term on Sunday. With 92.6 percent of the votes counted, Maduro accumulated 5.8 million votes. His nearest challenger, former governor Henri Falcón, received only 1.8 million votes.

International observers from over 40 countries were present on Sunday and have confirmed the transparency of an electoral system put in place in 2015 when the opposition won a majority in the National Assembly. In March, the opposition requested the U.N. not send observers out of fear it would legitimize an election they called on supporters to boycott. Nevertheless, Venezuela’s election results will be discussed on Monday at a G-20 meeting.

Watch | Election results are called in Venezuela

With 46 percent of eligible voters participating in Sunday’s election, according to Venezuela’s election board, voter turnout was less than that of the 2016 presidential election in the United States, but not shockingly so considering the opposition’s call to boycott the election completely. Despite the turnout coming close to the previously projected 48 percent, Western media has been quick to trumpet that Sunday’s election had unusually low voter participation, in an ongoing effort to delegitimize Venezuela’s government and election process.

While the United States is currently considering imposing oil sanctions on Venezuela, Sullivan reminded reporters that the goal “is to target corrupt regime officials and not the people of Venezuela.” However, sanctions have historically impacted ordinary citizens more than the leaders of the sanctioned country. Venezuela accused the U.S. on Saturday of using sanctions to sabotage the election.

Western media and U.S. officials have not been shy in highlighting what they see as failures of Venezuela’s Chavismo movement, repeatedly claiming the election would be rigged, with votes cast in exchange for food. Senator Marco Rubio has been consistently outspoken, having called Venezuela’s entire political process into question.

Conversely, Bolivia’s Evo Morales has been open in his criticism of U.S. involvement in Venezuela.

Translation: We denounce that the US and the OAS implemented a plan to defeat #Venezuela: Before the elections, they carried out violent actions supported by the media and after the elections, they will try a military invasion with the Armed Forces of neighboring countries.

In 2017, American journalist Abby Martin visited Venezuela during a period of major political unrest to investigate a variety of U.S. claims including a widespread lack of food and why Venezuela is a threat to the U.S.

Martin also delved into the role of the U.S.-backed opposition movement. In this Empire Files episode, Professor Chris Gilbert details the history of Chavismo and ongoing threats it faces from the U.S. and the opposition movement.

Watch | The Birth of Chavismo & Its Fight to Survive in Venezuela

MintPress reached out to Martin and she had this to say in response to Sunday’s election results and the expected U.S. response:

Before the elections, the U.S. imposed devastating sanctions aimed at hurting the Venezuelan people, which is an act of war. They’ve made clear that they will not recognize the results of this election, although it is a more transparent and democratic process than the voting system in the U.S., [one in which] every vote can be audited to disprove claims of fraud.

We expect more debilitating sanctions to be slapped on to the country that will further exacerbate the economic crisis. The U.S. empire will continue to do everything in its power to crush Chavismo and install a reactionary right-wing puppet regime that will roll back the revolutionary gains and open the country’s natural resources for a neoliberal fire sale.”

All eyes are on Venezuela and the Trump Administration’s response to Sunday’s election. Latin America is often seen as the U.S. empire’s backyard with Venezuela being a political trendsetter.

The U.S. has budgeted $49 million to support Venezuela’s right-wing opposition forces since 2009, owing to concern over what Washington calls Maduro’s “increasingly authoritarian tendencies.” While Americans continue to be bombarded by claims that their own presidential election was interfered with by a foreign actor, there is no question when it comes to election interference in Venezuela.

Alexánder Schetinin, director of the Latin American Department of the Foreign Ministry, admitted that “in addition to the two traditional participants — that is, the Venezuelan people, the electors, on the one hand, and on the other the candidates who presented their programs — … there was a third participant: the governments who openly called for a boycott of the vote,” which includes the U.S. and its right-wing allies.

Top Photo | Supporters of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro gather at the presidential palace in Caracas, Venezuela, May 20, 2018. Election officials declared the socialist leader the winner of Sunday’s presidential election. (AP/Ariana Cubillos)

Emma Fiala is MPN’s Editorial Assistant and social media guru. She is also a documentary photographer, mom of two, and an independent journalist. Her stories have been featured on MintPress News, the Anti-Media, Media Roots, and Steemit. Find her on Twitter.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Ciccio Serry

    USA is responsible of many mass protester, this is only one of these. The pay the political opposition in order to put in their “democracy”.

    • Siegfried

      CIA-circus, they still try that CIA-coup like against Iranian MOSADECH in the ’60s
      George Soros even organized “Orange-revolutions” /aka BILDERBERG coups, having the orange-Holland-flag /The Bilderberg-Hotel, where this Mafi@ was born, is in Holland

  • Michał Hunicz

    I must figure that although Venezuela should be independent, Maduro is a terrible leader. Since the start of his presidency, around 1 million people each year escape to Colombia and Brazil, millions are starving thanks to his anarchosocialist policy.

    • Siegfried

      Why do you lie like a Jew?
      Not even Theresa May couldn’t challenge you by this

      • Barba_Papa

        Why he bites in that hook? Because even without US sanctions the Venezuelan economy was a shambles. Chavez and now Maduro have ruined the economy with their socialist exoeriments, because, sadly enough, I wish it was differently, but socialism doesn’t work. Every country that tried it plunged itself into chaos and disorder at best and famine and terrible repression at worst. Only one socialist country managed to turn its economy into success, and it did so by economically going fully capitalist. More even then the West. And that was China. USSR? Failure. Communist Eastern Europe? Ditched socialism at the first chance it got. Cuba? Failure. North Korea? Incredible failure. Venezuela? Failing as we speak. Socialism has killed more people then fascism. And yet its still fashionable to wear the symbols of socialism, the sickle and star, and Karl Marx still gets statures.

        • Michał Hunicz

          There were probably few more socialist countries that were successful, for example Gaddafi’s Libya.

        • Brian Everill

          It could argued, that in fact, ‘Capitalism’ has killed more people than any other system? It could also be argued that ‘Materialism’ and ‘Consumerism’ is actually killing the planet? If we accept your premiss that ‘Socialism’ is a failure and we can see that ‘Capitalism’ is failing for the great majority, while destroying the planet as a side effect, then it looks like most of the population of the planet is doomed? At least with ‘real’ socialism we will all be doomed together, rather than in a capitalist system where the elites will continue to enjoy their advantage in the interim, while poor people suffer?

        • #’~A*Q@Xm(>NRmm]w?dU4v!=^%

          So what? The Venezuelans do what they want, the US has absolutely no right to interfere/meddle. And, despite their massive financial support of the opposition, the Venezuelan people elected Maduro.

          • Barba_Papa

            Of course the US does not have a right to interfere. But lets not pretend that Maduro’s re-election was fair and that Venezuela’s woes are ALL the fault of the US. To Maduro, leftists and every other US hater all over the world the US is a convenient scapegoat to divert attention that the socialist experiment doesn’t work. It has never worked and will never work because the basic theory on which it is based, the works of Marx, are utterly flawed. Utopias don’t work, and trying to implement one have always created massive human misery. Venezuela will continue to go down the crapper, because Maduro and his thugs will see to that. Just like Mugabe and his thugs did the same in Zimbabwe. And probably Maduro will get booted from power the same way Mugabe did, when in his hubris he pisses off the very institution that keeps him in power, the army. Not by the poor people of Venezuela, who have no real say in whoever governs them.

          • #’~A*Q@Xm(>NRmm]w?dU4v!=^%

            Whether what you say about socialism in Venezuela is true or not true, it is totally irrelevant. The Venezuelan people have spoken, therefore the only right the US has to to accept the choice of the people. Period. All else is bullsh*t and amounts to meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign country.

          • Barba_Papa

            To say that the Venezuelan people have spoken is bullcrap. How can you speak if you cannot speak freely? How can you vote freely if the government threatens to take away the food handouts that keep you alive? There is no freedom in Venezuela and the vote for Maduro reflects that. Less then half of the people bothered to vote. Which, like in the US, shows that most people knew their vote wouldn’t have mattered.

            And why are we even arguing because I have said from the start that the US should not meddle in the affairs of other countries. We are in full agreement about this. So I reckon we ARE arguing over Venezuelan socialism.

          • AlexanderAmproz

            There is an interesting different analyse about it
            —————————————————————
            https://www.counterpunch.ORG/2018/05/23/maduros-win-a-bright-spot-in-dark-times/

            Maduro’s Win: A Bright Spot in Dark Times

            by NICK PEMBERTON

            The U.S. backing of Israel’s massacre of Palestinians and Donald Trump’s death threats to Kim Jong-Un prove that the United States’ imperialism is alive and well. The government has been taken over by sadistic Republicans and useless Democrats. Corruption abounds when it comes to the United States foreign policy, as oil giants have their hands all over the Trump administration. Rex Tillerson of Exxon Mobil ran the whole state department. Trump is obvious, we will give him that.

            Of particular interest to the United States is Venezuela, who is full of oil. They want the oil and anyone who doesn’t give it to them is illegitimate. But there are people in Venezuela too. And they have been wonderfully resilient in response to U.S. power.

            This was why it was such good news that Nicolás Maduro won reelection in Venezuela. The name Nicolas by the way means “victory for the people.” But when one listens to the U.S. government and media, you would think that Mr. Maduro is just the opposite. Across the country the press tells us that Venezuela is failing because of socialism. The U.S. left has not been much better, often painting the situation as a complicated two way fight to the bottom between the Venezuelan government and U.S. sanctions. While it certainly is fine to be critical of any government, it seems odd that journalists such as Abby Martin who have actually been to Venezuela are so often ignored.

            The problem that is shared across the political spectrum is that it is consistently the Venezuelan government, not the U.S. sanctions upon it, that result in the so-called failed state. If one is a socialist, Venezuela is failing because Maduro is a capitalist. If one is a capitalist, Venezuela is failing because Maduro is a socialist. The reality is that under the crippling sanctions of the United States the Venezuelan government has a tremendously uphill battle, no matter who is in charge. And hey, look at the poll results. Venezuelens actually think Maduro is doing a pretty good job.

            Maduro rightly called his victory a win against imperialism. The U.S. failed to get him out of office. Now further sanctions from the Trump administration will come. Trump is no worse than his predecessor Barack Obama who absurdly called Venezuela an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to national security. Obama’s reasons for sanctioning Venezuela were: “erosion of human rights guarantees, persecution of political opponents, curtailment of press freedoms, use of violence and human rights violations and abuses in response to anti-government protests, and arbitrary arrest and detention of anti-government protestors, as well as the exacerbating presence of significant government corruption.” All of these claims are blatantly anti-government and without basis. It was John Kerry who called Venezuela’s government a “terror campaign”.

            If one were to look at the way the U.S. treats protestors and prisoners you could easily see the hypocrisy. And listening to Martin’s reporting one would find that the protestors in Venezuela get away with a whole lot more than U.S. protesters do. Sanctions against a government for corruption also seems completely backwards. Not only because of the obvious corruption in the U.S. and the (relative) socialism in Venezuela. On a broader note we must ask how exactly is weakening the government going to help fight corruption? Isn’t the whole point of a government to regulate, if not to control, the market? How is a government supposed to do its job when it is sanctioned? Does anyone think about what will happen to the people of Venezuela when making these decisions? Does anyone ever consider that sanctions kill people as easily as bombs do? Trump meanwhile is upping the ante after Maduro’s win with oil sanctions (a global drop in oil prices is another challenge for oil rich Venezuela). Trump is also banning the purchase of Venezuela’s debt.

            But the U.S. sanctions and their support of the opposition to Maduro have the same goal: destabilize the government, privatize the state, divide the people. They want to get their way one way or the other. So when one hears that sanctions are used to hold a government accountable, one can immediately see how ludicrous this logic is. Sanctions weaken the government, encouraging corruption. Just starve the people out until they take whatever leader the U.S. wants to put in. But despite promises of increased sanctions, the people have not given in.

            Abby Martin’s reporting in Venezuela contradicts many of the corporate media’s myths. She notes that the opposition was quite violent and often comparatively quite well of in comparison to Maduro’s base. The food shortages, to the extend that they exist, have more to do with the sanctions and private market than the failures of Maduro. The U.S. has close ties to the opposition, including notably the death squads in Columbia. But these things are ignored. By both the left and the right here in the U.S. We do not seem to want to grapple with the fact that the U.S. remains at the heart of the problems in Venezuela.

            Although I would argue that it is not allegiance with imperialism that is the left’s number one blinder when it comes to Venezuela. It is the remarkable pessimism we have in the U.S. that clouds us from the truth that a community of people can actually organize and rebel. Despite all the zeitgeist about “revolution” and such, the left here simply cannot believe that the revolution that happened in Venezuela can be sustained. The United States, on the left and the right, is a divided, narcissistic, and angry culture that cannot grasp that a communal revolt is possible. Ironically it is those most opposed to U.S. imperial power that are in denial of the fact that this power can and has been countered. This is why the U.S. left is blind to Russia’s imperialism and why it fails to recognize that U.S. hegemony can be countered in Venezuela.

            Many leftists do recognize that the U.S. has no right to interfere in Venezuela. On the right and center there is a deep hypocrisy when they whine about the Russiagate scandal, there is no doubt about that. What Russia did in the U.S. is nothing compared to what the U.S. has done in Venezuela (or Russia, for that matter).

            But being against intervention shouldn’t be enough. We should also be honest about what is going on in the region. There is so much timidity behind the “it’s complicated” narrative that pervades. Maduro may not be perfect, but he remains the best option, clearly. He remains, if one follows at all what is going on, the people’s choice, clearly. Is it that hard to be pro-government? All governments are at different processes and at different stages. One who is sanctioned this hard should be given proportional expectations.

            There should be expectations proportional to the U.S. involvement in Venezuela, which is high. From 2000-2016, 90 million has been funneled into the opposition. Did I mention we love oil? A working government is the last thing the U.S. wants in Venezuela. It is remarkable then that Maduro scored such a huge victory. People in Venezuela knew they would be punished for supporting Maduro, but they did so anyways.

            Dating back to Hugo Chavez, Venezuela has been a bright light of people’s triumph against U.S. control. Maduro may not be Chavez, but he is also quite simply the winner of this democratic election. There will continue to be problems in Venezuela, largely because of the U.S. In fact, Venezuela’s disobedience will make the sanctions against them worse. But what else is there to do but resist United States control? What Venezuela’s election proves is that democracy is possible and that imperialism can be resisted. With a Maduro win, the Venezuelan people have spoken. It is time for the companies, government and people of the U.S. to give Maduro and all Venezuelans a fair shot this time around.

            When it comes to government back home, it may be healthy to take a different approach. As long as the United States government spends more on military than social programs, it makes a whole lot of sense to be against the United States government. Democrats and Republicans alike head a regressive world order that must be stopped. Proof of the duopoly can be found in Maduro’s words. When he was asked about Donald Trump he said: “He won’t be worse than Obama, that’s all I dare say. Obama has left the world plagued by terrorism. In Latin America, he will be remembered for three coups.”

            Sadly, Americans are still focused on condemning the governments of other countries when ours remains the greatest purveyor of violence in the world. If we could overcome our own pessimism and self-absorption we would find that a people’s resistance is possible. We should look to Venezuela for guidance. For once, there is good news. Will Americans of all stripes continue to grumble or will we use Venezuela as a source of inspiration and hope in these dark times?

          • Barba_Papa

            Yeah, that sounds exactly what a socialist would say. During the Cold War many socialists in Europe were highly apologetic of the USSR and the communist dictatorships in Eastern Europe. Not to mention they basically slept with Mao’s little Red Book under their pillows.

            Again, the US should butt out regardless. It has no business whatsoever to interfere anywhere. But lets not pretend that Venezuela would then magically fair better, because socialism just does not work.

        • AlexanderAmproz

          Most developed European Countries Socialism is Good.

          For the US, I do believe Swiss Democracy is an ultra left Horror
          if compared with America and their NeoColonial Empire !
          But the Swiss System is Center right for the Swiss,
          free Public School Quality is better than the excellent Privates,
          some Universities almost free too are among the World Best !

          Nobel Prizes/Population ratio is the World best !
          ———————————————————
          https://www.counterpunch.ORG/2017/10/26/the-simulacra-democracy/

          The Simulacra Democracy

          by JOHN STEPPLING

          … a nation in which 87 percent of eighteen- to twenty-four year olds (according to a 2002 National Geographic Society/Roper Poll survey) cannot locate Iran or Iraq on a world map and 11 percent cannot locate the United States (!) is not merely “intellectually sluggish.” It would be more accurate to call it moronic, capable of being fooled into believing anything …”

          — Morris Berman

          I cannot remember U.S. culture ever being quite so compromised by ruling class control. Hollywood turns out one jingoistic and militaristic and racist film and TV show after another. Corporate news is completely controlled by the same forces that run Hollywood. It is the complete capitulation of the liberal class to the interests of the increasingly fascistic U.S. elite. And this didn’t start with Donald Trump. Certainly in its current incarnation it goes back at least to Bill Clinton, and really it goes back to the end of World War Two. The ideological trajectory was formed under the Dulles brothers and military industrial complex — representing U.S. business interests and exhibiting a demand for global hegemony. But once the Soviet Union collapsed, the project was accelerated and intensified.

          Another starting point might well be the 1960 Bay of Pigs fiasco, or the 1961 CIA (and MI6) assassination of Patrice Lumumba. Or Kennedy’s 1962 speech at American University calling for the end of Pax Americana. We know what happened to Kennedy soon after that. Pick any of these incidents. But it was the fall of the U.S.S.R. that signaled to the governing class, the proprietor class, that the last real obstacle to global domination had been removed. In the interim, one finds the Iran/Contra affair, and the invasion of Iraq. The real and the symbolic meaning of the Soviet Union is forgotten today, I think. Its meaning for the developing world, especially.

          The next conscious trial balloon was Clinton’s attack on the former Yugoslavia. A test run for expanding NATO. And it worked. The propaganda machine has never been as successful as it was when it demonized the Serbs and Milosevic. Then came 9/11. And the well honed PR machine spewed an endless barrage of hyper-patriotic rhetoric and disinformation. American exceptionalism was given full credibility. And remember Colin Powell and his cartoon visual teaching aids at the UN? Nobody was going to argue. Certainly not the white liberal class. And Hollywood upped its game in churning out military fantasies. And in just churning out fantasies. A genre that lent itself to obvious neo-colonial messages. By 2007, when Barack Obama announces he will run for President, the master narrative for America was firmly entrenched. The biggest hit from Hollywood in this period is Avatar (2009), a neo-colonial fable that fit seamlessly with Obama’s reconquest of Africa.

          Dan Glazebrook recently wrote:

          The year 2009, two years before Gaddafi’s murder, was a pivotal one for US-African relations. First, because China surpassed the US as the continent’s largest trading partner; and second, because Gaddafi was elected President of the African Union. The significance of both for the decline of US influence on the continent could not be clearer. Whilst Gaddafi was spearheading attempts to unite Africa politically, committing serious amounts of Libyan oil wealth to make this dream a reality, China was quietly smashing the West’s monopoly over export markets and investment finance. Africa no longer had to go cap-in-hand to the IMF for loans, agreeing to whatever self-defeating terms were on offer, but could turn to China – or indeed Libya – for investment. And if the US threatened to cut them off from their markets, China would happily buy up whatever was on offer. Western economic domination of Africa was under threat as never before.

          The US response was to increase base building, upgrade AFRICOM, and then murder Gadaffi. Hollywood hits from this period include The Hurt Locker and The Dark Knight. Meanwhile domestically Obama was giving the OK for militarizing of police departments across the country. On another front….Danny Haiphong wrote…

          What isn’t discussed often enough is how Obama has worked tirelessly to protect and fulfill the interests of the corporate healthcare system. In 2009, he collaborated with the monopoly health insurance industry and its pharmaceutical counterparts to repress the demand for single payer healthcare. The conditions at the time appeared ripe for a single payer system. Popular discontent with Republican Party rule was at its highest point. A relatively organized movement for single payer care was represented by organizations such as Healthcare Now. The Democratic Party possessed a majority in both the House and Senate.

          Obama came to power as Wall Street went into meltdown, 2008. But instead of hope and change we got almost 5 trillion dollars moving to the top 1% of the financial elite. Poverty increased every year under Obama, as did inequality. Social Network came out in 2010 and Wolf of Wall Street in 2013. Both were big hits. The message from Hollywood never changed. And part of that message is that wealth is its own justification and a symbol of virtue. Hollywood, and U.S. liberals just naturally gravitate toward the rich.

          Obama attacked Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and Yemen. And it is perhaps that last venture that will prove to be his most significant. Arming, training, and coordinating the Saudi aggression (and now that has escalated to boots on the ground) against the helpless Yemen has resulted in the largest humanitarian catastrophe in five decades.

          The U.S. now has all but formally criminalized dissent, especially if that dissent is aimed at Israel.

          None of this is to create exact corollaries between political action and studio product. But rather that the overriding message of Hollywood in both film and TV is to validate U.S. exceptionalism. And to hedge criticism with faint token protest. But its not just Hollywood, its theatre and fiction and all the rest of the arts. The erasure of the working class is the most pronounced truth in American culture today. There are no Clifford Odets (a high school drop out) anymore; they have been replaced by a steady stream of well groomed compliant MFA grads. Mostly from elite and expensive schools. Hemingway and James Baldwin were not college grads, nor was Tennessee Williams, the son of a traveling shoe salesman. Even more recent authors such as Thomas Pynchon were college drop outs (to join the Navy), but the point is that today mass culture is carefully controlled. Dreiser was a college drop out, and Twain was a typesetters apprentice. Others like Faulkner, went to University, but also worked. In Faulkner’s case as a postman. Same profession as Henry Miller and Charles Bukowski. Stephen Crane and Hemingway worked as journalists, when that was an honorable profession.

          The decision makers in mass culture are mostly firmly entrenched in the Democratic Party ethos (witness stuff like House of Cards, Madame Secretary, or Veep). If one only gets one’s news from MSNBC or FOX or CNN then one will take away mostly pure propaganda. Rachel Maddow has a career based on craven parroting of DNC approved talking points and conclusions. Bill Maher, whose show is on HBO, is of late pimping for war. Sunday news talk shows do not invite radical voices, not ever. Michael Parenti isn’t on those shows, nor are Ajamu Baraka or Glen Ford Mike Whitney or Ed Curtin or Dan Glazebrook or Stephen Gowans. No, but there are plenty of retired generals and politicians. This is a media that exerts absolute control of message.

          The loss of the working class, of class diversity, has been a far bigger blow to the health of the culture than anything else. One might argue that culture has always been, in the modern era, a province of the bourgeoisie, and that’s true. But there is still a rather pronounced change that has taken place. But Americans are discouraged from thinking in terms of class. They see individualism and identity. Get me more women directors they cry….which would give us more versions of Zero Dark Thirty, I guess. Gender equality matters, something every single socialist country in history has emphasized. Something Chavez saw fit to write into the Bolivarian constitution on day one. Chavez, who liberal avatar Bernie Sanders dismissed as a “dead communist dictator”. Chavez, who feminist avatar Hillary Clinton worked overtime to oust from power.

          People are shocked…shocked I say…that US soldiers are killed in Niger. Darn that Donald Trump. When it is pointed out that it was Obama who sent troops there in his pivot to Africa, one is met with blank stares. The concern over U.S. soldiers dying is simply mind numbing in its hypocrisy and blinkered exceptionalism. I mean just count the numbers of dead civilians due to U.S. drone strikes from just one year. Pick any year you like.

          Under Obama, the US African Command (AFRICOM) has penetrated every African country but Zimbabwe and Eritrea. AFRICOM has locked African nations into military subservience. In 2014, the US conducted 674 military operations in Africa . According to a recent Freedom of Information Act request by Intercept, the US currently has Special Forces deployed in more than twenty African nations.

          Danny Haiphong

          People are terrified today lest they be called conspiracy theorists. No single pejorative term has exercised such disproportionate power. There is a subterranean subject position associated with this, too. A masculine identity that connects with the presentation of those accepting of the official version of things. It is ‘no nonsense, mature, and sort of tough guy’ pose. Only weak and muddled (feminine you see!) would bother to question official narratives of…well, anything. It is staggering, really, why so few ask why is it OK to assassinate people without due process? Why is it whistleblowers, truth tellers, are being locked away and shunned? Why are there 900 plus US military bases around the world. Why, given the growing poverty in the U.S. do we need an updated nuclear arsenal that will cost trillions? In fact why is the defense budget over 4 billion a day? The liberal educated class seem not to ask such questions. Let alone ask is the U.S. arming takfiri jihadists in Syria? Most of what people call conspiracy is just perfectly reasonable skepticism. Given a history that includes COINTELPRO, Operation Northwoods, Gladio, MKUltra, and Operation AJAX. This is also relevant in terms of the coming war on *fake news*. An idea put forward by Obama and now in enthusiastic Orwellian operation by Facebook, YouTube, and Google. In the U.K. Theresa May proudly announces the government SHOULD control what one can see on the internet. Censorship is pitched as protection.

          And then we come to NATO and Europe. Why does NATO even exist one might ask? I mean the USSR doesn’t exist anymore. Well, the answer has been under construction for a few years now, and that answer is the extraordinary anti Putin propaganda of the U.S. The “Russian Threat” is now an accepted trope in public discourse. Or the anti Iranian disinformation. In fact Iran is far more democratic and less a global threat (actually its NO global threat) than U.S. boon allies Israel and Saudi Arabia. Which brings us back to Yemen. The utter destruction of Yemen, poorest Arab country in the world, and now one with the largest Cholera outbreak in history, posed no threat to ANYONE. Certainly not to the United States. Are we to believe the House of Saud is worth supporting? They behead homosexuals and witches in Saudi Arabia. The leader of KSA is a 32 year old psychopath named Mohammed Bin Salman. Someone please explain the U.S. support for this country?

          Or Venezuela. The U.S. has waged various campaigns against this sovereign nation for over a decade now. A democracy. But a disobedient one. Where is the outcry? When people are going on about Harvey Weinstein, a troglodyte movie producer that literally everyone knew was a serial abuser, I wonder that the women of Venezuela seem not to count. Or of Libya, or Haiti, or Puerto Rico, or hell, the women of Houston right now. Poor women. Ah, but that is class again. Now perhaps the Weinstein affair will yield good results and some form of collective protection and maybe even unionizing will take place to limit the power of rich white men. I doubt it, but maybe. Still, given that the liberal class today applaud the idea of making it OK for women to bomb defenseless villages in Afghanistan or Iraq or Yemen, just like men, and given that most of these horrified by Weinstein were and are solidly behind Hillary Clinton and the DNC, and laud adulation on figures like Maddie Albright, it seems hard to imagine.

          David Rosen:

          Sexual abuse and violence in the U.S. is as old as the country. America’s patriarchal culture long legitimized sexual abuse and violence toward women — and children — whether conducted at the workplace, at home, a nightclub or on a deserted street. During the nation’s earliest days, the custom of sexual abuse and violence was legitimized through the notion of “chastisement.” This was a feature of Anglo-American common law that recognized the husband as master of “his” household and, thus, permitted him to subject “his” wife to corporal punishment, including rape, so long as he did not inflict permanent injury upon her. Sexual abuse was institutionalized in the rape of African and later African-American female slaves. As the legal scholar Adrienne Davis notes, “U.S. slavery compelled enslaved black women to labor in three markets – productive, reproductive, and slavery – crucial to the political economy.”

          One need only note the sexual violence that takes place in the U.S. military (See Kirby Dick’s The Invisible War). But that is not the military you see in this season’s TV shows such as SEAL Team or Valor or The Brave. The current Tom Cruise film American Made is a sort of comedy about Barry Seal who worked as a pilot for the CIA, and with various cartels in South America. Yeah, nothing funnier than squashing a socialist government like in Nicaragua. There is not a single Spanish speaking character who is not either a drunk, a sadist, or just incompetent. This stunningly racist revisionism was called “jaunty and bouncy” by the Hollywood Reporter.

          The liberal class will always side with the status quo. Always. They do not care if the status quo is fascist. And its suits them much more to lay out bromides about male abuse of women, as long as this doesn’t mean having to untangle the complexity of women in unfamiliar non tourist visited nations like Yemen or Libya or Honduras. Just like the fact that U.S. domestic police departments murdered over a thousand black men in 2015. And continue to do so, along with increasing numbers of black women. That’s just not a jaunty bouncy story, I guess. Obama has never been comfortable talking about or to black people. He did manage to scold Colin Kaepernick recently though, about the pain he, Kaepernick, might be causing. The pain of white billionaire sports team owners I guess. The Uncle Tomism of what Glen Ford called black misleadership has never been greater. And that’s another crime we can lay, largely, at the feet of Barack Obama.

          The U.S. House voted unanimously to sanction Iran and North Korea, an absurdity and a crime, and yet one that barely registered on the media Richter scale. What has Iran or North Korea ever done to hurt anyone in the United States? It is Saudi Arabia and Israel that fear a democratic nation like Iran and the influence they wield in the region. Iran is accused of fomenting instability but evidence is never given. Russia is said to control U.S. public opinion, but evidence is never given. The U.S. doesn’t even bother to really try and make claims about Venzeuela, because its just part of inherited wisdom that they are *bad*. Like Castro was bad, like Gadaffi, like Aristide, like anyone exhibiting independence. The world according to media entertainment is made up of bad guys and good guys. Mike Pompeo, head of the CIA, recently stated that his agency would become a “much more vicious agency” in fighting its enemies. Its actually hard to imagine what that might look like given CIA history. More vicious than rendition, drone killing and black site torture? Remember it was the U.S. and its School of the Americas that trained those death squads in Central America. Hollywood makes comedies about this.

          In any event nobody in Hollywood complains. Just as none of the actresses assaulted by Weinstein (and countless others) said anything lest they lose career opportunities. Just as nobody complains about the racism and demonizing of Muslims or Serbs or North Koreans or Russians lest they not get the job. Coercion is silent and a given. It is also absolute. Most actors and directors simply don’t think about it, and most know little beyond what they hear on corporate news or read in the NYTimes. But I understand. People have to eat, have to feed their families. The real problem is that power is ever more consolidated. Distribution of films is monopolized. And for most Americans, foreign policy remains a giant black hole about which they know very little. Tell someone Milosovic was actually a good guy and they will laugh at you (this still happens on the left, too, rather depressingly). Tell them Russia is not threatening the U.S. or Europe, and they will laugh at you. Try to explain what Imperialism is and means, and you get that bored look of irritation. A good rule of thumb is if the U.S. targets a country or leader, then its worth questioning the western generated propagated propaganda in mainstream media about said country or leader (think Syria, Gadaffi, Aristide, Milosovic, Iran, North Korea). The U.S. does not go after countries who welcome western capital.

          One of the things I’ve noticed about Hollywood film is the extraordinary amount of self pity from most characters. Self pity, entitlement, and sarcasm. The people who produce and make film and TV today, by and large, tacitly censor themselves. Some don’t have to, of course. But there is a general group think at work. And it extends to the way characters are written. The problems of affluent white people is the template here. Few examine the wider world, and mostly when they do it is seen as a world of threat and menace. An uncivilized place in need of guidance from the civilized white West (The Lost City of Z comes to mind, which made all the approved anti colonial notes while still creating a colonial narrative anyway.). But it is even more narrow than that. Everything resembles a studio; political discussions, even if they take place in outer space, resemble studio executives discussing opening weekend profits, or Neilson ratings. And since Hollywood itself ever more resembles Wall Street, or some corporate headquarters, that is increasingly what the world looks like. It is a profound loss of imagination. Westerns look and sound the same as melodramas set in Santa Monica or New York. Fantasy worlds resemble corporate headquarters or corporate motivational weekends. It is a world created by writers under thirty, largely, and certainly under forty. These are worlds created by people who themselves know very little of the world. They know even less about having to work for a living. The entire universe of film is absent any class awareness. History is simplified the better to appeal to a wider audience. Everything feels and sounds the same. And it is stultifying. There are films and TV from Europe, even from the U.K. that have merit, have heterogeneous sensibilities, but not from Hollywood. Like White House press conferences, the idea is to stay on message. Black characters sound white (or are given caricature *black* dialect and dialogue), brown characters sound white (or are given caricature barrio dialects), and Muslims sound dangerous and devious. Asians seem lifted from Fu Manchu serials or Charlie Chan. Strange when I hear people make fun of ethnic cliches from the 1940s, because it is really no different today (and check the recent TV incarnation of the venerable Star Trek franchise where the Klingon villains are very dark, live in dark spaceships and utter a guttural invented language all of which suggests something oddly racist and like nothing so much as colonial portraits of savages from darkest Africa).

          Fixation on Trump’s crimes distracts from a system in which crime is a built-in factor. Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump. They are only the figureheads that carry water for the system. And the system is the property of the ruling class. People vote as if it crucially matters, and they vote for who they like. Not for policy because mostly they have no idea of policy. Trump is an obvious target, but that’s the problem in a sense. America didn’t become racist and violent overnight. The forces of social unrest have been building for decades. Trump was inevitable. His lack of basic literacy mirrors the nation he nominally heads, and his vulgarity mirrors the vulgarity of America, as does his misogyny and racism. The same advisors are in place and if Hillary had won, those openly fascist thugs applauding Trump would still be committing hate crimes. Has Trump empowered them? To a degree, yes. But an HRC win would likely have provided motivation of a different sort and the same violence would be taking place. You cannot sustain, as a country, this level of inequality. And as more super hurricanes descend on us, as the bio-sphere collapses, none of this may end up mattering. There is something disturbing, actually, about the relentless attacks on Trump. Its like beating up a special needs kid. Where was this hatred and outrage before? I mean Trump’s America, a term I hear a lot, is just America. We have over 2 million people in prison in the U.S. Far and away leaders in the world. Infant mortality however puts the U.S. between 26th and 51st, depending on who is counting. There is no Universal Heath Care, no union protection for workers, no maternity leave, no free education. What is there to feel so special about, exactly? Trump was very popular on his moronic reality TV show. I’m guessing more than few now outraged by this buffoonish reactionary watched that show. I mean it did last fifteen years I believe. Who did they think he was? There is nothing wrong with identifying the crimes of Trump’s administration. But there is something deeply wrong in not recognizing it as a continuation of prevailing policy. Yes, it is worse in many areas. The environment for one. But then again, 47% of the world’s pollution is caused by the military. And the U.S. has a military bigger than the next ten largest militaries in the world. And every president since the first Bush has increased the military budget. The nightmare did not begin with the swearing in of Donald Trump. But nobody likes him. They liked Obama. And that is why he was able to do so much harm. Trump is dangerous not because of what he thinks (he mostly doesn’t) but because of his ignorance and weakness (and fear). And that weakness generated his welcoming hand to the Pentagon. Foreign policy is really in the hands of a man nicknamed ‘Mad Dog’. One cannot blame this catastrophic situation on one man. This is the creation of American history.

          • Barba_Papa

            What Western Europe had was social-democracy. A leftwing political movement inspired by Socialism to raise living standards for the poor and middle classes by curbing the excesses of capitalism. A lot of realism and compromises went into social democracy to the point that it had little left in common with socialism, even though it did use the label to sell its policies to the masses. Which is probably why social democracy generally succeeded in raising living standards and not tanking the economy. And why I feel much sympathy with social democracy and its policies. Often social democrats have been some of the most staunch opponents of radical socialists and communists. Many of the governments that were at the creation of NATO in 1949 were social democratic. A lot of the success of social democracy by the way can be explained that many European conservative and christian democrat leaders realized that in order to stave off communism the living standards of the poor had to be addressed and raised. So there was room for compromise.

            Its only in communist countries and countries sympathetic to communism that we see full implementation of socialist ideology not tempered by realism and compromise, often backed with state sanctioned violence in the form of state run militias and/or secret police. And in each and every case it has only brought us failure and misery at worst and stagnation and bureaucracy at best.

          • AlexanderAmproz

            NATO is an unwelcome US/UK/ZIONIST Army occupying Europe since 1949
            with the “Gladio” Terrorism, loge P-2 in Italy, P-26 in Switzerland, etc.
            Your Hollywood and MSM viewpoint is one thing, the reality is an other !

            I am used to live around Europe, Russia, China, Asia and the World since the fifties.
            Even for free, I wouldn’t like to live in the US, Central and South America,
            their Food, Racism, Fascism, and discrimination spirit isn’t my cup of tea.
            If I will have to chose a place, it would be probably in Italy, France, Holland,
            Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Turkey or some Mediterranean Place
            —————————————————————————————
            http://www.voltairenet.ORG/article190171.html

            Seventy years of harassing political establishment and people of Europe

            by Andrey Fomin

            Contrary to appearances, the decision of the United States to investigate a possible Russian aid to anti-European parties is not intended to protect Europeans from foreign interference. This is quite the opposite. For 70 years, Washington controls the West European politics prohibiting all forms of genuine democracy.

            According to a “sensational” article by The Telegraph, the US director of National Intelligence was recently instructed by Congress to “conduct a major review into Russian clandestine funding of European parties over the last decade.” [1] This disclosure —a classic “controlled leak”— is intended to warn disobedient yet popular political entities across Europe to scale back their ambitions to rebalance the roles and weight of their nation states within the European Union. Hungary’s Jobbik, Greece’s Golden Dawn, Italy’s Lega Nord, and France’s Front National are explicitly included in the US “warning list,” while other unnamed “parties” in Austria, the Czech Republic, and the Netherlands are being advised that they are “under a US security probe.” Even the new British Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, is suspected of flirting with the Russians. So, according to the sponsor of The Telegraph’s story, any European politician who dares to question NATO’s eastward expansion, the policy of anti-Russian sanctions, or the current European stance on the Ukrainian conflict is essentially a witting or unwitting tool of “Russia’s hybrid warfare.”

            Well, that would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous. In fact, any impartial observer would pose some simple questions: Why the hell do US intelligence agencies care about challenges to Europe’s internal security? Aren’t they the same agents who finance, recruit, and control countless political organizations, individuals, and media outlets on the European continent? Why are they so brazenly revealing their dominion over Europe?

            A politically correct challenger would argue that the United States saved Europe from the “Communist threat” after the end of WWII, facilitated its speedy economic recovery, and is still safeguarding the continent under its nuclear umbrella. Perhaps. But a review of the historical background should not begin with the Marshall Plan. First of all, that was launched in April 1948. Since the Nazis capitulated in May 1945, a misinformed reader might deduce that the United States had been drafting a massive investment program for Europe for as long as three years, and … he would be wrong. At the Second “Octagon” Quebec Conference in September 1944, President Roosevelt and US Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr. submitted to the British PM Winston Churchill their Post-Surrender Program for Germany [2]. That strictly confidential document envisaged the partition and complete deindustrialization of the German state. According to the plan, Germany was to be divided into two independent states. Its epicenters of mining and industry, including the Saar Protectorate, the Ruhr Valley, and Upper Silesia were to be internationalized or annexed by France and Poland. Following are a few excerpts:

            • The [US] military forces upon entry into [German] industrial areas shall destroy all plants and equipment which cannot be removed immediately.

            • No longer than 6 months after the cessation of hostilities, all industrial plants and equipment not destroyed by military action shall either be completely dismantled and removed from the area or completely destroyed.

            • All people within the area should be made to understand that this area will not again be allowed to become an industrial area. Accordingly, all people and their families within the area having special skills or technical training should be encouraged to migrate permanently from the area and should be as widely dispersed as possible.

            • All German radio stations and newspapers, magazines, weeklies, etc. shall be discontinued until adequate controls are established and an appropriate program formulated.

            That was the original postwar recovery program for Germany, known as the Morgenthau Plan. The notorious Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive 1067 (JCS 1067) addressed to the Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Occupation Forces in Germany, which was officially issued in April 1945, was fully in line with that document [3].

            GIF – 89.6 kb

            Partition of Germany according to Morgenthau Plan, 1944

            The Morgenthau Plan very quickly proved to be a strategic mistake. The United States underestimated the ideological and cultural impact the Soviets would have on European societies. Left to their own judgment, American strategists failed to understand the attraction that a socialist system held for the majority of the population of the liberated nations. A vast spectrum of pro-socialist and pro-communist politicians began winning democratic elections and gaining political influence not only in Eastern Europe, but also in Greece, Italy, France, and other European states (Palmiro Togliatti and Maurice Thorez are just a few who could be named here). Thus Washington came to understand that its forced de-industrialization of Europe could result in Soviet-style reindustrialization and eventual Russian dominance of the continent… Therefore the US had to promptly replace the Morgenthau Plan with one named after Secretary of State George Marshall… Over the course of four years it provided Europe with $12 billion USD in credits, donations, leases, etc., for the purpose of buying … American machinery and other goods. Although the plan undoubtedly revived the economies of Europe, its biggest positive effect was on … the US economy itself! Simultaneously a wave of political repression was launched throughout Europe, most notably in Germany.

            The media has largely forgotten about a Soviet initiative, proposed in 1950, to withdraw from the GDR and to reunify a neutral, non-aligned, demilitarized Germany within one year of the conclusion of a peace treaty. As a matter of fact, the resolution adopted at the Prague meeting of the foreign ministers of the Soviet Bloc on Oct. 21, 1950 proposed the establishment of an all-German Constituent Council, with equal representation from East and West Germany to prepare for the formation of an “all-German, sovereign, democratic, and peace-loving provisional government.” Needless to say, the US government and West German administration in Bonn strongly opposed the initiative [4]. While a plebiscite on the issue “Are you against the remilitarization of Germany and in favor of the conclusion of a Peace Treaty in 1951?” was announced in both halves of the divided state, that referendum was held and officially acknowledged only in East Germany (with 96% voting “yes”).vtek The authorities in US-controlled West Germany failed to respond in a truly democratic manner. They refused to recognize the preliminary results of the referendum that had been held since February 1951 (of the 6.2 million federal citizens who had taken part by June 1951, 94.4% also voted “yes”) [5] and introduced the draconian cautious Criminal Law Amendment Act (the 1951 Blitzgesetz) on July 11. According to that legislation, anyone guilty of importing prohibited literature, criticizing the government, or having unreported contacts with representatives of the GDR, etc. was to be prosecuted for “state treason,” which was punishable by 5 to 15 years in prison. Consequently, between 1951 and 1968, 200,000 charges were brought against 500,000 members of the Communist Party and other left-wing groups in Germany under this law. Ten thousand people were sent to prison, and most of those who were “cleared” of charges never resumed their political activities. Additional legal amendments in 1953 actually abolished the right to freely hold gatherings and demonstrations, and in 1956 the Communist Party of Germany was banned.

            More details can be found in Daniel Burkholz’s 2012 documentary “Verboten – Verfolgt – Vergessen” (Forbidden-Followed-Forgotten. Half a Million Public Enemies), which is surprisingly unavailable on YouTube.

            JPEG – 35 kb

            The political repression that occurred in Germany from the 1950s to the 1980s, compared to similar events in other European countries during the same period, is a very taboo topic. Operation Gladio in Italy, the crimes of the regime of the Black Colonels in Greece, and the controversial assassinations of realistic European politicians who openly advocated for historical compromise with the Soviet bloc – such as Italian PM Aldo Moro (1978) and Swedish PM Olof Palme (1986) – all received far more media attention. The revelations made by a former correspondent for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Udo Ulfkotte, in his book Gekaufte Journalisten (“Purchased Journalists”) about the mechanism of media control in Germany (remember the Morgenthau Plan?) represent only the tip of the iceberg.

            JPEG – 45.8 kb

            The almost complete lack of reaction seen in Berlin after Edward Snowden’s disclosure of the blanket electronic espionage routinely conducted against German leaders by the NSA means that in reality, Germany has acknowledged its loss of sovereignty over its own country and thus has nothing to lose.

            So, after taking all these facts into account and rereading the article in The Telegraph, are you still so sure that the United States is truly the guardian of Europe’s sovereignty? Is it not more likely that by using the alleged “Russian threat” to control and harass the political establishment and civil society in Europe, Washington is making headway toward a simple and primitive goal – that of merely keeping its sheep within the fold?

            Andrey Fomin

            [1] «Russia accused of clandestine funding of European parties as US conducts major review of Vladimir Putin’s strategy. Exclusive: UK warns of “new Cold War” as Kremlin seeks to divide and rule in Europe», Peter Foster & Matthew Holehouse, The Telegraph, January 16, 2016.

            [2] “Suggested Post-Surrender Program for Germany”, F. D. Roosevelt, September 1944.

            [3] “Directive to the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Occupation Forces (JCS 1067)” (April 1945)

            [4] “Notes for Eastern Element’s Briefing of General Mathewson”, February 15, 1951. Published in Foreign Relations of the United States 1951, Volume III, Part 2, European Security and the German Question (Document 341).

            [5] “Flusslandschaft 1951. Frieden”, Protest in München.

      • Michał Hunicz

        Are you against Alt-Right? You must be some Judeo-Christian PragerU-afilliated spy.

        • velociraptor

          Alt right is white trash. I have a video, where your white shit compadre asks an indian (navajo), whether he is immigrant?
          such shitbrains are you :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

  • Bru

    To protect themselves from the economic and political destabilization organized by the US regime, they should cut all ties to the dollar. Have they started selling their oil in Chinese currency or still with the (masonic, see the pics on it) dollar?

    • Michał Hunicz

      Petro-Yuan deserves a Noble Prize.

      • Siegfried

        After so much garb@ge that got the Nobel, the Prize is obsolete and dirty.

    • Siegfried

      Yep but first should CLOSE the US and British Embassies.
      That is the place where coup d’etats are organized

  • RichardD

    Many Americans watch these hypocrites in our government in bed with Israel and the Gulf States condemning what they claim is a flawed election. And then look at China, Russia and most of the rest of the non NATO international community that almost never behaves like this. And think, what is wrong with these two faced liars that the US government is full of, and why is our political system like this when others aren’t?

    The answer of course, which increasing numbers of Americans are coming to realize, is Jews and Israel, and the stranglehold that they have on the US government. The US and our planet need to be dejudified to create a Jew free world that will be much better for humanity.

  • Brian Everill

    I have a question? Does Venezuela recognize the abortion of an election procedure that takes place in the United States of Hypocrisy every four years? I think only an idiot would accept the manipulation of the US electoral process and call it ‘democracy’? Maybe Venezuela and Maduro should start questioning the validity of the US election? I myself think it is nothing more than a pantomime, one gigantic charade, and to underline that fact look at the pantomime horses ass who is elected as President? Lol…

  • Siegfried

    “US Refuses to Recognize Venezuela’s Election Results, New Sanctions Already Planned”
    And who TF are these USA to decide about elections in other countries? And in fact who cares what that oxym0r0ns in the White-House want? Who asked their opinion? Since when does somebody need the USA-OK to an Election-legitimacy?
    Look at this f*king Washington-DC ==>> one side they make there noise about some “Russian Collusion” (??????!!!!) in the 2016-US elections and that ex-FBI-cr@p Robert Mueller looks and looks and doesn’t find anything… and on ten other side, THE USA push their nose in Venezuela-elections.

    Venezuela should stop any OIL-shipments to the USA and ask RUSSIA and CHINA to bring each 10 or 20 thousand troops in BASES to the Atlantic. Simple..
    If the Russians sh*t in their trousers like in Syria, the CHINESE DON’T..

  • Tudor Miron

    US doesn’t seem to be able to solve their own election “problems”, yet they think that someone cares about their recognition.

    • velociraptor

      us has no problems with their election system.

      russia yes.

  • Russie Unie

    Fuck USA ! Our legitimate king in France, Louis XX, supports Maduro ! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e055e9feff44d4f93655546912a094045ea6ae105470f57f1f1c7e04d9cef816.jpg

  • Russie Unie
  • gustavo

    USA: Ohh, our puppet did not win ? Let us start a Venezuela spring with our mercenaries and payed people inside.

  • Trovak

    So what? They US can not even seem to recognize their own regime’s election result. Russian meddling😅😅. I believe more in zionist meddling, quite obvious actually…

    • AlexanderAmproz

      Maybe you will like this…

      ——————————————————

      http://www.voltairenet.ORG/article201254.html

      The US Deep State and the Trump Campaign

      According to NBC, the FBI informant on Russian interference in the US Presidential electoral election is no other than Stefan Halper. Today, this former CIA agent is a professor at Cambridge (United Kingdom) and heads a private intelligence company.

      Halper is the son-in-law of Ray S. Cline, an eminent personality in the CIA during the sixties and seventies. During the election campaign in the 1980s, Halper worked for George H. Bush (father), a former Director of the CIA who went on to become Vice President to Ronald Raegan. Halper infiltrated the campaign team of the President Jimmy Carter, succeeding in extracting information on Carter’s relations with the new Iranian authorities. It was on the basis of this that Bush and Raegan obtained the support of the Islamic Republic and negotiated the “October surprise” (the liberation of CIA spies who were being held prisoners in the US embassy in Teheran) [1].

      According to The Intercept, in 2016, i.e., during Donald Trump’s electoral campaign, Stefan Halper has on several occasions received substantial sums of money from the Obama Administration.

      Translation

      Anoosha Boralessa

      [1] The Western imagination wrongly conceives these spies as “hostages”. The fact of the matter is that they had been caught red-handed in a secret section of the Embassy. Naturally, the US never accused Iran of violating their diplomatic privileges, for it was the spies that had been self-destructive and violated their own diplomatic status.