Archive for the ‘War’ Category
|WRITTEN BY CHRIS FLOYD|
|SATURDAY, 28 JUNE 2014 16:15|
This month, the world has marked significant historical milestones: the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landing (and unmarked, except in Russia, the 70th anniversary of the Red Army’s Operation Bagration, the largest battle in world history, in which the Soviets broke the back of the Nazi army); and the 100th anniversary of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo, the spark that led to the First World War.
But this week saw the anniversary of another major turning point in modern history, a campaign that became — and remains — the enduring template of foreign policy for the world’s most powerful nation. We speak, of course, of the 60th anniversary of Washington’s “regime change” operation in Guatemala, overthrowing a democratically elected government.
It was not the first such American “intervention,” of course (and was preceded in the previous year by a more indirect role in overthrowing democracy in Iran), but it set in train more than six decades of violent attacks on democracy by the “leader of the free world.” (A fine tradition carried on by Barack Obama in Honduras.) In fact, a hatred of democracy — a genuine, visceral revulsion at the idea of people choosing their own leaders and their own form of society — has been a driving force in American foreign policy for generations. Democracy and freedom are only allowed if they lead to outcomes that advance whatever the agenda of the American elite happens to be at any given time. They hate democracy abroad; they hate it at home; they hate it everywhere, all the time. The historical record is remarkably consistent on this point.
The Guatemala regime change was noted at the London Review of Books, however, in a piece by John Perry. Below are some excerpts:
Over ten days in June 1954, a decade after the D-Day landings, the CIA sent twelve planes to drop bombs and propaganda on towns in Guatemala in support of a coup against the elected government of Jácobo Arbenz …. …
In the last raid on 27 June, the SS Springfjord, a British merchant ship that had survived capture by the Nazis in 1940, was attacked in the port of San Jose. It was alleged to be unloading arms. After a warning pass – the ship’s captain gave the pilot a friendly wave – a 500lb bomb was dropped down its chimney. It turned out to be loading coffee and cotton.
Guatemala was one of the first countries in the region to emerge from military dictatorship. Arbenz was the second democratic president, elected in 1951 with 65 per cent of the vote. A strongly nationalist military officer, he was convinced that the central problem in a mainly agricultural country was land: 70 per cent of it in the hands of only 2 per cent of the population, of which only a quarter was being cultivated. In 1953 he decreed the takeover of more than 200,000 acres of unused land belonging to the United Fruit Company. The company responded with a propaganda campaign to convince Eisenhower not to be ‘soft on communism’.
It worked. Arbenz, realising that a coup was being plotted, bought a secret shipment of arms from Czechoslovakia. Uncovered by the CIA, this enabled Eisenhower to warn of a possible ‘communist dictatorship’ and support Arbenz’s rival, Carlos Castillo Armas. His insurgents invaded on 18 June, but failed to take control of the towns they targeted. The coup could easily have been a flop. But the CIA raids that culminated in the bombing of the Springfjord unnerved the Guatemalan army command, who withdrew their support from Arbenz. By the evening of 27 June he’d resigned.
Within a month, military dictatorship had resumed under Castillo Armas, with a new government recognised by Eisenhower. After a visit in 1955, Vice-President Nixon said that Guatemala was the ‘first instance in history where a communist government has been replaced by a free one’. US-backed military regimes ruled until 1996. By then some 200,000 people had died in civil war, most at the hands of government forces.
Our 21st century intervention in Iraq has killed far more people much more quickly, of course. But as we gear up for yet another round of slaughter in the country we have recently demolished, it’s good to be reminded that none of this is new or unusual; it is, very simply — and quite horribly — the way the bipartisan American elite do business. Violence is their profession, their religion, their guiding light. They use violence to advance their agenda, then use more violence to deal with the inevitable horrific consequences spawned by their violence, on and on in an endless cycle.
The deadly Brownshirt Trolls are hard at work spreading their lying filth and disease-ridden innuendo wherever someone will let them. Blogger Brownshirts are self-defined by their actions that equate to their predecessors’ historical murderous conduct; THEY PERSONALLY ASSAULT PEOPLES’ CREDIBILITY, INTEGRITY, HONESTY AND LEGITIMACY to shut them up permanently.
On April 15, 2014, I included the following thoughts in another re-posted article. In view of the current situation manifesting in local blogs, it appears it needs to be reemphasized:
If you don’t know, “Brownshirts are a collection of thugs who get quite annoyed at those who oppose” them, their judging, their propaganda, wanton personal hyperbolic attacks and their sick never-ending filthy lies they believe they have the god-given right to assault with anyone they want. In the real world of yesterday they were nothing more than a gang of bullying political murderers that paraded around in all their glorious self-righteous impunity. Today, none of them are of the 1% oligarchic plutocracy, but they serve them just the same as their modern-day “Brownshirts.”
When you censor and block dissenting commenters you reveal yourself as a sponsor, enabler and protector of these vicious Brownshirt Trolls.
So far I’ve identified five of blogs providing a safe-haven for two chapters of Brownshirts.
One of these blogs I’ve already identified and written about. The others, not wanting at this time to provide easy access or advertise in their behalf, I won’t post any links. Just know that when you see these pictures where you are.
If you read Eric Kirk and His Brownshirts – Called Out Again below, you can easily recognize the Brownshirt Trolls’ method of operation as Eric Kirk provides a perfect demonstration. First, should you choose to make a dissenting comment about the blog article or any of it’s affirming commentary, you will be challenged by the most personal and vilifying diatribe, hyperbole, innuendo, and out right lies such as: “Only an idiot or a crazy lunatic would say that or take that opinionated position.” Those kinds of filthy personal accusations are directed at the credibility and integrity of the person making the comment and NOT at the substance of the comment. But not so in Eric Kirk’s mind.
In his mind the opinion or idea – the position – is idiotic or crazy. But that is NOT what he said and wrote.
Should the hapless victim try to defend him or herself, they have just proved Kirk’s assertion (accusation) that they are either an idiot, crazy or both. Who but such people would conflate themselves with their “position” or worthless opinions rattling around in their empty heads and be “personally” offended? Score another one for the Brownshirts.
The problem when entering one of the Brownshirt Havens is you are stepping into a maze of quicksand totally in the dark. Most of the blogs never post any kind of guidelines or rules for making comments on their blogs. Those that do post something use them to discriminate against anyone they don’t like. Clearly, in the example above, Kirk’s personal accusation deviates from the blog article or it’s theme no matter what it might be. Yet, it is the defender that the rule, oftentimes unspoken “rule,” is used against should that person dare object to the personal off-theme attack.
In the world of blogging I would consider these thug, bullying Brownshirt’s antics incidental and irrelevant. Between the gossip-mongering, hatemongering, ridiculing, and lying about what people say, most of these blogs are nothing more than Troll Dens serving as home-bases for a Brownshirt Chapter. They possess NO credibility whatsoever. I’ve learned over a lifetime that when these kinds of people raised their viperous heads and began spewing their dishonest vitriol and it was generally passed off by the decent folk as a fad — well lets just say, they lived to regret their amorphous judgments. Taken literally, the original Brownshirts, their political and general philosophy for existence; what guided and justified their actions as compared to these local Brownshirts, is a mere bullet.
Everything, all creation, starts with an idea. Once that idea becomes accepted commonplace it materializes into reality. These Blogger Brownshirts are only one bullet away from that reality.
[UPDATE :: Friday, May 23, 2014]
I’ve identified another Haven. This comment is another good example that the blog owner affirms and lets go unchallenged for blatant bald-faced lying. Brownshirts’ purpose is to SILENCE all dissenters – people that don’t bow down and worship the Plutocratic Oligarchy they support, empower and defend. I, frankly do NOT give a rat’s ass who agrees or does NOT agree with me.
May 22, 2014 at 12:13
There’s some guy out there who lately has taken to calling everyone who disagrees with him “Brown Shirts.” It would be very disappointing to find out Mr. Berg and this other fellow were one and the same.
For the record, no one is “evil” (except puppy abusers) and no one is a saint. We are just a bunch of folks trying to figure out the best way through this mess called life.
(Who made this scummy bastard God? “For the record” that statement is just his worthless opinion, and I do mean worthless. The fact that he presumes to speak for everyone belies his wannabe truth – what makes him illegitimate.)
When someone disagrees with us (Progressive, Regressive, Conservative, Liberal) it does not mean someone wants to get the trains going so they can ship their opponents to the Death Camps. It’s supposed to be a civil discussion, where consensus is reached and we make policy for ourselves we can all live with.
(No, in his case, they just put a bullet in your head – they censor you, they block you the moment you reject their lying false accusations and disease-ridden innuendo – see above. In that he mirrors his true father, and He is truly the Evil Father of the Lie. “Civility” died with the first lie. The Brownshirts turned it all into war.)
It starts with listening. [Emphasis Mine.]
[UPDATE Below :: Brownshirt’s at Work]
As noted before, Blogs are a good measure of a community. You get mostly unfettered articles on subjects that interest the blog owner and often enough, a whole panoply of commentary from visitors that sets the community tone – from the mundane nonsense, racist, bigoted, biased, prejudiced, moronic, ignorant, stupid, baseless, filthy lies, innuendo, false accusations and other hate-filled mongering blather, ad hominem, hyperbole to enlightening, inspirational, intelligent, commonsense instructional and fun reading. Occasionally, you get a replica of what if feels like to live in a totalitarian, authoritarian Elitist State when you visit one of these blogs and make a comment. The Nazi Brownshirts that possess an IQ of a pig come out in droves fully blessed and empowered by the Blog owner and moderator to attack and verbally assault, bully and ridicule. All the time proclaiming their right as a free American to wage verbal warfare on the unsuspecting visitor. They wait with baited breath for you to try to defend yourself so they can justify their “right” to assault you as a hate mongering Troll.
Like most houses of ill repute, they look nice on the outside, are inviting and full of promises, the beauty they offer is breathtaking, but deliver a slow death. That is why they cater to the intellectually adolescent, the brainwashed 5 year old, full of feel-good propaganda that only knows what they believe. Consequently, they are incapable and unable to accept or handle the truth. To them, truth becomes hate speech.
When I start the Joe Blow Report I determined to be inclusive and list all the local blogs. My interest in Southern Humboldt garnered me an introduction to Eric Kirk and his SoHum Parlance II. Occasionally, he would introduce a subject of interest and I would comment on an observation or two. The end result, well — his latest comment pretty much says it all — his true feelings about me and my commentary.
Is the U.S. Government UNDER reporting their war dead? If you’re shot on the battlefield, but only die on the way to a medical treatment center or post evacuation you’re NOT counted. So says this report:
Department of Veterans Affairs Reports 73 Thousand U.S. Gulf War Deaths
By Gary Vey for viewzone
This is the report’s supporting this article:
I know you probably will think this is another conspiracy theory — I did when I first heard about this — so please read the original report for yourself. [Source: http://www1.va.gov/rac-gwvi/docs/GWVIS_May2007.pdf Note: Sometimes this link is not active so we have posted the pdf file on viewzone 393 kb.]
Just a note: The release date of this report was June 30, 2007 – FOUR YEARS AGO! Interestingly, there is no publish date on the web article either. Make one wonder if this is, as posted, just another “CONSPIRACY THEORY.”
The real cost of war always seems to be the truth.
I just couldn’t pass this one up.
It’s been my opinion for some years now, that at some point the world population will get over their governments love affair with America and will stop tolerating the American assault on sovereign rights and begin to enforce the American-style (Osama bin Laden) Justice on individual Americans. Probably why I think the cartoon is so appropriate. The question is, was this the match that lights that fire?
When I first looked to see what Dave Stancliff had written in his Sunday As It Stands opinion column I thought,
“here he goes again – preaching more lawless, mob rule.” After reading the article I decided not to make any observations – the whole thing was way too trite.
So, what changed my mind? You don’t suppose I could pass up another golden opportunity to excoriate Dave Stancliff, do you?
Actually, no. What griped me is the constant drum-beat for more laws to deprive everyone of what freedom, justice and accountability remains in our corrupt society. “Frivolous lawsuits” are just that, FRIVOLOUS.
When every deck there is, is totally stacked against the average working and retired man and woman in this country, using one Mickey Mouse lawsuit to fill newspaper space railing against “frivolous lawsuits” does everyone a disservice. Rather than denigrate the injured, he would have better served everyone had he spent the time and word dealing with the real cause of the problems: greedy, self-serving and amoral lawyers.
Let’s set the matter right – right up front, I don’t have any use for lawyers. First, its been my experience, that they all believe they are better than everyone else. If for no other reason than they are in a position to victimize the people that are forced to use them. The judges in this country think they are too good to speak to or recognize the “common” man. So they breed this special class of royalty that judges will accept past their Bar. Second, if you don’t have the money to pay their exorbitant fees, despite the fact that they are employed by you, the “fee” payer, they exercise their right to betray you, to the detriment and harm to you, your business and your family’s best interest. Even if you have the money, where “money” is no issue, they still treat you like some sub-human, low-class pile of dog crap.
Since that’s pretty much the bottom line when it comes to lawyers, for me personally today, whenever I have a problem, rather than look to a lawyer to purportedly speak in my behalf, I deal directly and personally. Since the gutless, effeminate paranoid have passed so many laws today restricting speech, the safe possibility to personally resolve ANY matter by simple speech (communicating by letter, email, telephone or personally) – actually talking to one another, I realize this is a rather precarious solution. That’s the way people used to settle their problems. So, what’s happened?
Well, in Mr. Stancliff’s case, the “shoe’s on the other foot.”
It wasn’t too long ago that Dave Stancliff was threatening to take me to court for writing an observation or two about his newspaper column. Despite the fact that he was making all kinds of outlandish accusation, from where I stand, that was about as “frivolous” as it could get. His “threats” were not “frivolous,” but the basis he set forth certainly was.
What have we recently learned about how we are justified in dealing with people that makes threats? What was the justification President Obama gave for going to war with Muammar Gaddafi and Libya? His, Gaddafi’s “threat.”
There’s another lesson learned here and that is when you don’t communicate, and I am not talking about arbitrary ultimatums either, the only other way to resolve issues is WAR. The choice: either talk peacefully or act violently. When people refuse to recognize your legitimate rights to exist same as them and then act on that belief refusing to talk to you, they are at de facto war with you.
The best solution is to work out the problems personally – peacefully – one on one. Whenever you bring in a surrogate to speak for you or act in your behalf, you are ostensibly at war. No one ever wins at war. Yet, it seems, that is a lesson few if any wannabe elitist Americans have learned.
April Fool’s Day today, right?
(Reuters) – The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that members of a fundamentalist church have a free-speech right to hold anti-gay protests at military funerals to promote their view that God hates America for tolerating homosexuality.
Personal responsibility is something that applies to everyone, even those that voluntarily go to war.