Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label CIA

Planning to normalise relationships but sticking to the myths.

  http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/magazine/it%E2%80%99s-not-the-us-embargo-that-keeps-cuba-poor-it%E2%80%99s-the-brothers-castro/ar-BBgUYpV?ocid=U142DHP It’s not the US embargo that keeps Cuba poor, it’s the brothers Castro Celebrations in Havana for US and Cuba plans to restore ties.   The headline from this MSN, introduces an article which, ostensibly, is to report on the American initiative to "normalise" the relationship between Havana and Washington.The article of course does nothing of the sort, and soon sinks to the depth of yet another criticism to add to the list of criticisms leveled at Cuba and Fidel Castro in particular, over the last 56 years.The piece of journalistic nonsense, goes the way of all the rest and seeks to explain away the Cuban revolution as just another failed exercise in the "Marxist" experiment of economy management and ignores, as is often the case with American versions of history, the "Why" and the "How...

United States tried to manipulate the outcome of Afghan presidential election in 2009.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/10/us-hamid-karzai-afghan-elections-robert-gates US 'tried to oust Hamid Karzai by manipulating Afghan elections' Robert Gates, former Defence Secretary   A little ironic. Hamid Karzai was a "consultant" for Halliburton, a contractor for the CIA and was a close friend of the Bush family for many years prior to being "elected" with massive American support, as President of Afghanistan in 2004, having been effectively filling the post since the  "Loya Jirga" or "Grand Assembly" of 2002, again with American support.  Strange then that Robert Gates, former Defence Secretary, should now reveal that the US tried to remove Karzai in the 2009 elections. President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan   Perhaps it is an example of the falling out of thieves.

Democratic elections are only acceptable if the result is what the USA agrees with.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/cia-admits-role-1953-iranian-coup CIA admits role in 1953 Iranian coup    "The military coup that overthrew Mosaddeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government,"     Mohammad Mosaddeq democratically elected prime minister of Iran CIA admits to engineering the coup of 1953 in Iran and with British assistance. An admission to what everyone has known for years. The CIA has yet to admit to its role, with British help, of engineering the coup's in Guatemala 1954, Argentina 1966, Libya 1969, Chile 1973, Iraq, Afghanistan and a few hundred other places around the world. Their role in the Middle east will presumably be revealed and admitted to, in another sixty years.

Secret Service agent "accidentally shot the president" !

  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/28/jfk-second-shooter-documentary_n_3667317.html?utm_hp_ref=uk JFK Second Shooter? New Documentary Makes Radical Claim JFK arrives in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963 More smoke and mirrors to confuse and confound what really happened in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963. We shall never know who the second and third marksmen actually were, (anyone who still believes that Lee Harvey Oswald "acted alone" is living in a make believe world), who else was involved in the conspiracy and who created the subsequent cover up. This article describes a fairy tale more suited to the plot of second rate Hollywood "B movie". Phrases such as, "his first time holding the assault weapon he was using" and "Hickey accidentally discharged his weapon" and "a tragic accident in the heat of the moment." them selves generate derision. The article and the "research" that produced it are, along with its conclusions...

Who's who? Who the hell cares!

  http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/13/petraeus-scandal-whos-who   Petraeus scandal: who's who? David Petraeus shakes hands with Paula Broadwell in July 2011  Who's who? Who the hell cares! Sordid little affairs of a couple of American Generals hardly rate wall to wall news coverage in the British media and on television. With all the scandal of the child abuse inquiries and the individuals now being exposed as part of the conspiracy, and revelations of potentially criminal activities of privatised industries, our media should have something more newsworthy to analyse. Petraeus and the others may rate a few lines on page 23 but that's about all.

Reaping the whirlwind.

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.440380919337034.90945.145097112198751&type=1 Anti American protest grows. There is a growing anti American mood sweeping through the Middle East, which will prompt the United States into re evaluating their relationships with new, less subservient regimes. There is anger in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya.  Clearly, the Americans are not surprised. Nor should they be. They have been sowing the wind for more than 80 years, and now they are beginning to reap the whirlwind.

A film, made to provoke.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/yemen/9542014/Turmoil-spreads-across-Muslim-world-over-controversial-Mohammed-film.html     It should come as no surprise to anyone that there are protests against this film and incidentally no surprise, that these protests will continue and spread. The Innocence Of Muslims, depicts Mohammed as a fraud and shows him having sex and calling for massacres. The makers, supporters and financiers of this film care nothing about the "Freedom of speech" argument. Their motive was to be provocative and to generate hostility amongst Muslims throughout the Middle east and perhaps elsewhere, which in turn would result in mass protest. Their other objective was to promote reaction in the west against such protests, and to encourage the growing hostility in many people towards Islam and its followers. In this, the film makers and supportive politicians, have been encouraged by a generally Islamophobic western media w...

Romney seeking the Jewish American vote.

  http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/after-a-day-meeting-israel-s-leaders-romney-gives-speech-in-jerusalem-1.454386 After a day meeting Israel's leaders, Romney gives speech in Jerusalem  Romney's staff picked the 150 guests carefully. Religious American immigrants dominated the crowd; secular Jews and native-born Israelis were few and far between. Those present included Jewish-American millionaires, settler leaders like the former chairman of the Yesha Council of settlements Israel Harel, and former Netanyahu aides such as Dore Gold, Naftali Bennett, Ayelet Shaked and Yoaz Hendel. This was not a speech. It was a crass and blatant pitch for the Jewish American vote at the November election, in exchange for the promise of American support for Israel actions against Iran, Palestine and its people and anyone else who criticises or opposes Israeli aggression and barbarism. In other words, Romney said that Israel can do whatever it likes to anyone...

A very one sided "special relationship".

http://news.sky.com/story/961071/us-security-agents-at-heathrow-for-olympics US security agents are to be based at Heathrow and some other UK airports for the duration of the Olympic‬ Games. How many will be in uniform and how many in plain clothes? Why? No other nation would be allowed the same facilities.These "specialist agents", probably armed to the teeth, and probably containing a good number of CIA operatives, will do what American "security" people always do. A law unto themselves and responsible to no one. Yet another example of another British government kow-towing to  America in the very one sided "special relationship".